Youtube comments of TIKhistory (@TheImperatorKnight).

  1. EDIT: I've had to remove a clip at 45 mins 31 seconds due to a request from the original creator of the clip. She's self-censoring now thanks to the United Kingdom government's crack-down on free speech. Our Fascist government in the UK is NOT listening. I have been personally impacted by the violence and riots over this past week. I, and my friends and family, are distraught over the murders in Southport, and the subsequent propaganda, censorship, police brutality and government totalitarianism has made a lot of people extremely worried for the future. Well, I’ve had enough. I know this isn’t my usual content, but there’s no way I could continue to do my work this week within this whirlpool of government enabled violence. Also, someone made this and I think it’s absolutely brilliant. He is the FIRE STARMER! The twister FIRE STARMER! https://x.com/addicted2newz/status/1820204294861373479
    5300
  2. How has someone disliked the video already?? I've given you tanks, what more do you want!?!?!
    1900
  3. Couple of points. Please don’t go to ODS’s channel to mass-downvote his videos or anything like that. Don’t call him names etc. I want to persuade him (and others) to take this more seriously, not turn them hostile. And I know this isn’t my usual video format, and I wasn’t going to release it on a Monday… but then I thought, no, this deserves to be a Monday video. I actually think there’s something for everyone here. My haters will love it because I get “owned”. My supporters will love it because… (no spoilers). And that final 10 minutes is one of my favourite pieces of video I think I’ve ever made! You may not think so, but I certainly do! Regardless, I hope you enjoy the video. Let me know what you learned. I may actually upload the final 10 minutes as a separate video later this week, because I think it’s brilliant. Seriously, how close can you be to seeing the light!? Cheers!
    1600
  4. SOURCES AND NOTES Good luck trying to find information about the "shrinking markets" concept in relation to National Socialist ideology online, because it's simply not discussed (in English at least). As of the publication of this video, I don't think Wikipedia even mentions it in relation to Nazi ideology, and I'm fairly certain it's rare to find discussion of it even in the historiography. So welcome to the forefront of historical discussion! Let me know if you want me to discuss why the “shrinking markets” concept is not as well known as it should be. If I do create a follow up to this video, I’ll also endeavour to answer as many questions that you raise in the comments related to this topic, since I think this may prove to be a popular topic of discussion. Here's an alternative translation of the quote of the one I read from Hitler’s Second Book, this time from the fantastic book by Zitelmann ‘Hitler: The Politics of Seduction’ which I highly recommend - “The market of today’s world is not an unlimited one. The number of industrially active countries has constantly increased. Almost all of the European nations suffer from the insufficient and unsatisfactory ratio of their territory to their population, and are therefore dependent on world exports. In recent times they have had the Americans union added on, in the east Japan. With this, a fight for the limited markets begins automatically, which will become all the sharper the more numerous the industrially active nations become, and on the other hand the more limited the markets become. Because while, on the one hand, the number of nations fighting for the world market increases, the market itself gradually shrinks, in part due to self-industrialization under their own power, in part by a system of branch companies which are increasingly being set up in such countries out of purely capitalistic interests… The more purely capitalistic interests begin to determine today’s economy, especially the more general financial and stock market considerations gain a decisive influence, the more this system of the foundation of branches will expand, but with this also the industrialization of former markets… artificially carried out and, in particular, restricting the possibilities of export of the European mother countries… The greater the difficulties of export become, the harsher the fight for the ones remaining will be waged. And if the initial weapons in this battle lie in price structures and the quality of the goods with which one tries to compete each other into ruin, the final weapon here too ultimately lies in the sword.” - Zitelamann, P277 quoting Hitler's Second Book. Technically I should have done a Q&A video this week, but given that we’ve just had the anniversary of D-Day, I thought I’d best do something a bit more special. I’m planning on answering most of the remaining Q&A questions in the next Q&A video coming in two weeks time (it’s Courland Part 9 next Monday). Sources Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1922). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) https://youtu.be/7EnHeZXLzTc For a list of all my books on WW2 and similar, please visit this link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    1600
  5. EXTRA NOTES LINKS and SOURCES The point of this video is to strike a more balanced view of the events. Considering that the balance has been mostly pro-German and anti-Soviet, presenting a more neutral case can make it seem that I’m favouring the Soviets over the Germans. Yes, this isn’t 100% unbiased since our perception history is based on sources and no source is truly unbiased, plus I am human and thus make mistakes, but it’s certainly not pro-Soviet. If you think it is based on the first couple minutes, wait until the end. And if you didn’t, and posted a comment complaining about my bias, shame on you for not watching the full video ;) Imagine a gauge (like a speedometer in a car), if the arrow has been pointing to the right mostly (favouring the Germans), then if we move the arrow to the centre we’re also moving more to the left, which people assume is favouring the Soviets. But in actuality, we’re striking a balance between the two sides. We’re being neutral. It’s just, because we’re so used to the arrow pointing to the right, any move left is interpreted as bad. But it’s not. We have to try and reach that midpoint, and keep the arrow there. If not, we’ve not got a balanced view of the events. The book “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed” was used for a lot of the quotes throughout this video. I highly recommend it! And the population statistics came from the book Harrison, M. “The Economics of World War II: Six great powers in international comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle Edition, 2000. Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be. I’m highly reliant on your support, which is why I’m going to say another big thank you to my current Patreons. THANK YOU! Got another Patreon update coming tomorrow, a poll, and a few posts too, so look forward to that ;) link to my Patreon https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Also, it was great to see some of you at TankFest yesterday! Just got home in time to publish this :) Links All my History videos in one playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhMtb3bsJkJmtECxS_mm_QM Your Perception of the Eastern Front is WRONG https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL video https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Fall Blau https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY Sources/Bibliography Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Chuikov, V. “The Beginning of the Road.” Panther Edition, 1970. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn.” University of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. “Zhukov’s Greatest Defeat: The Red Army’s Epid Disaster in Operation Mars, 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 1999. Harrison, M. “The Economics of World War II: Six great powers in international comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle Edition, 2000. Hill, A. “The Red Army and the Second World War. (Armies of the Second World War.” Cambridge University Press, 2017. Jones, M. “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed.” Pen & Sword Military, 2016. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Matthews, R. “Stalingrad: The Battle that Shattered Hitler’s Dream of World Domination.” Arcturus Publishing Limited, 2014. Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Books, 1999. Overy, R. “Why the Allies Won.” Pimlico, 2006. Shakespeare, C.” Stalingrad: Struggle in the East.” 2014. Zaitsev, V. “Notes of a Russian Sniper.” Frontline Books, 2017. Thanks for watching!
    1300
  6. Hey guys, I’m back! Just want to say thank you for allowing me to take a break, and a big THANK YOU to those of you who sent me extra tips on SubscribeStar and Patreon so I could buy a beer, a meal and so on. Most notably: Firebird, Sergeant Major Zero, and User#9ff70389, but there were a few others too. I can confirm that I did have a couple of ales and went out for meals with friends during my time off, so cheers! 🍻 The break was much needed, and apparently “well deserved” according to Razorfist/Rageaholic. (Just in case you don’t know who that guy is, here’s the link to his channel https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRageaholic ) I started work on Tuesday again, even though many of you said I should have had more time off. I agree, I probably should have had more time off since I’ve not fully recovered. But the two weeks has allowed me to rest, and re-focus, and it’s changed my perspective a little as well. I’d been working so long that I was fatigued and unable to concentrate. Then that was causing me to fall behind with the work, which was then stressing me out, and then causing me to lose sleep and then not be able to focus, which was then making me exhausted, which was causing me to fall even further behind... But then, being able to stop, I’ve realized that the channel hasn’t died, you’ve all not disappeared, the world’s not ended, and I’ve not had to go back to working in retail - thank Manstein! The lesson here is that I need to give myself permission to take the odd week off here or there, and take more days off in general, because it turns out that most people don’t work 7 days a week for a reason. Surprisingly, working solidly for four years without more than the odd day or two here or there isn’t healthy for both the body or the mind. Wish I had realized this sooner. It’s also made me realize that the combination of the Monday videos and the Stalingrad stuff is killing me. If it wasn’t for Stalingrad, I think I’d have no problem doing Monday videos forever. And if it was just Stalingrad videos, I could maybe publish a video every two or three weeks. But the combination of the two is just not sustainable indefinitely. So, for this reason, I’m going to have to figure something out. Not sure what though yet. The next episode of Battlestorm Stalingrad will not be out next week, which is technically when it should have been. Because of the break I’ve just taken, I’m now not in a position to actually get it done in time. So it will be out the week after - Monday 6th of December. And because I can’t work every day over Christmas, the Stalingrad video after that will be out on Monday 10th of January. So it’s a bit stretched out, but from then on I’ll try and get back to the 4 weekly Stalingrad schedule. There will be videos every Monday going forward though (until my next break). Cheers!
    1100
  7. Just so you know, YouTube has decided to "limit" this video. Be sure to give the video a thumbs up to show how wrong censorship is
    1100
  8. Ignorance is their strength. My advice is not to channel the establishment. Nod your head, get the grades, think for yourself. Once you're out of prison school, then you can try to educate others.
    1100
  9. Sources Can’t wait to get put on “Bad History” again on Reddit to be ‘refuted’ by an inter-Nazi using two sources, one of which is Wikipedia… or to be told to “read a book” by other Nazis... Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1922). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) https://youtu.be/7EnHeZXLzTc For a list of all my books on WW2 and similar, please visit this link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing
    1000
  10. Notes Even the figures for the food Sixth Army received are disputed, with one source saying one thing, and another saying something else. So you have to take the ration numbers with a pinch of salt (ha!). That said, the official figures indicate that they were on half rations from the first day of the siege, and things only got worse as time progressed. The weight loss calculations in the video could be challenged too - and I don’t dispute that! I’m not a diet expert, however there are websites out there (some listed below) that do state though that a reduction of 500 calories does equal a loss of 1 pound of weight per week. These claims are challenged by the story at the time (stated by Speer and Beevor), which says that Zeitler lost 26 pounds in 2 weeks on a similar diet to Sixth Army, even though they should have been losing around 4 pounds a week by the 500 calorie deficit idea. So clearly 500 calories = 1 pound of weight loss per week, is probably incorrect. Either way though, the troops in Sixth Army were severely malnourished by the time the battle ended. Existing on two and a half slices of bread, and some horse meat and cigarettes is not a particularly healthy diet to have. I did make a few mistakes in the video regarding the numbers (mostly just mis-reads). It’s likely some will complain about this and use it as an example of me being “untrustworthy”. As I keep telling people, do your own research. Don’t just rely on mine. I encourage you to go out there and read the sources (listed below) and form your own conclusions. You should see my videos as an introduction to the topic, not as the start and end of it. Links Link to my “Why Germany Lost the War - Oil” video https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Link to my “The BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth” video https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M Link to my “Paulus’s 6th Army ORDER OF BATTLE - Before Stalingrad” video https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw Link to my ‘Stalingrad’ video playlist with lots of Stalingrad-related videos https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhLd1zG3MeeRSbIei6lHhxO Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Selected Sources (Sauces!) Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Collingham, L. “The Taste of War, World War Two and the Battle for Food.” Penguin Books, 2011. Forczyk, R. “Demyansk 1942-43, the Frozen Fortress.” Osprey Publishing Group, 2012. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Calories come from the back of a pack of Warburtons Bread, plus several websites listed below. NHS Website  “What should my daily intake of calories be?” 13/10/2016, accessed 20/03/2018. https://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/1126.aspx?categoryid=51 HealthLine Website “How Many Calories Should You Eat Per Day to Lose Weight?” Accessed 20/03/2018. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/how-many-calories-per-day?floorType=lowestByBidder Thanks for weight watching, rye for now
    964
  11. Timestamps + Links + Notes + Biography/Sources 00:00 Hook 01:09 Introduction 02:20 Part 1: The Age of Oil 06:12 Part 2: Crisis 1940-41 11:28 Part 3: Decision to Invade the Soviet Union 17:13 Part 4: Heading to Moscow? 24:40 Part 5: 1942 - The Last Chance 31:37 Part 6: No Economic Collapse 1943-1945 33:52 Part 7: Hitler’s ‘Stand Fast’ Orders! 39:56 Part 8: Dunkirk 44:20 Conclusion As a follow up to this video, I highly recommend the Toprani video “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918--1941” which can be found here - https://youtu.be/RgxEBGAXNRU Also check out my BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth video if you haven’t seen it already https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M And my “filthy detailed and super accurate” WW2 ‘Battlestorm’ documentaries https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y Next Battlestorm Documentary will be Operation Crusader 1941-1942 and I am still working on my Stalingrad Documentary (research from March 2017-present). Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory And thank you again to all my Patreons - you guys are awesome! Special mention goes to Richard Stokes for providing several articles about this topic (listed below) as well as supporting my on Patreon. Thank you Richard! Notes and Additions : German tank numbers come from Enduring the Whirlwind. Peiper driving over mines comes from Page 351 in Snow & Steel. From Too Little Too Late by Hayward - “...on 21 November, [Göring] presided over an oil conference in Berlin. Maikop, which had yet to produce oil for Axis troops (and never would, except a few dribbles), remained at the forefront of his mind. "I'm fed up," he exclaimed. "Months have passed since we captured the first oil wells, yet we still aren't getting any benefit."29 He astounded his audience of technical experts when, referring to the concrete plugs dropped down the bores, he naively demanded to know: "Can't you just drill them out with something like a gigantic corkscrew?" This was the same conference where Göring was when Jeschonnek indicated to Hitler (who was then convinced this was the right course of action) that the Sixth Army could be supplied by air at Stalingrad. The situation was so bad for Germany that their tank training schools were forced to use gas-powered tanks. See this website for more details - http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/gas-powered-fahrschulwanne-tanks.php The term “Revisionist Historian” makes no sense. A historian should question every source he reads, weighing up the reliability of each source, and looking for biases. This applies to both primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. If you do not do this, you are a bad historian. People are using the term as a weapon against those who are questioning the “traditional narratives” of history. The problem isn’t that historians and history buffs are questioning the old out-of-date narratives (because that’s what historians are supposed to do when new evidence or new perspectives comes to light) but that some people think that the old narratives were somehow indisputably correct and are completely unwilling to consider new evidence, claiming that it’s “biased” or “propaganda”. I have news for you: all evidence is biased and the old narratives are equally filled with propaganda. This is why you should not completely trust any source and be willing to change your opinion when new evidence emerges. Evidence and new sources are constantly being discovered or reconsidered that will have an impact on the “accepted” narrative. This is good! This is what’s meant to happen. If this doesn’t happen, then we’re not doing history right. Selected Biography Books - Caddick-Adams, P. “Snow and Steel: The Battle of the Bulge 1944-45.” Arrow Books, 1988. Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2007. “Germany and the Second World War Volume IV/I: The Attack on the Soviet Union.” Oxford University Press, 2015. [Referred to as the “German Official History” in the video.] Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: Nemesis 1936-1945.” Penguin Books, 2001. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company, 2016. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. Overy, R. “Why the Allies Won.” Pimlico Edition, 2006. Shirer, W. “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” Pan Books, 1960. Stahel, D. “Operation Barbarossa and Germany’s Defeat in the East (Cambridge Military Histories).” Cambridge University Press: 1st Edition, Kindle Edition, 2009. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Articles - Hayward, J. “Too Little Too Late.” From Journal of Military History 64 (July 2000): 769-94. Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012. Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854. Toprani, A. “Germany’s Answer to Standard Oil: The Continental Oil Company and Nazi Grand Strategy, 1940-1942.” From the Journal of Strategic Studies 37 (December 2014): 949-973. Thank you all for watching! Share this video and let people know about it!
    962
  12. People asked for a condensed and updated version of my 5 hour Hitler’s Socialism video, so here it is. A lot’s been cut out, but it also has new evidence, so enjoy and please share with others! The script and source list can be found in this PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D76xf4yemsN25A21jpw-GokPq47IijPd/view?usp=share_link
    955
  13. Does anyone know any modern capitalist corporations that are staffed with governmental political party members dressed in military style uniforms? I seemed to have missed that part of modern day capitalism
    884
  14. I read three entire books in less than a week for this video, so I'd appreciate if you give the video a thumbs up 👍 (it's the reason I look so tired in the video) In addition, you know full well that the National Socialists will be in the comments spouting nonsense about this topic, so be careful not to believe everything you read down there.
    745
  15. Great comment! And of course they haven't watched it! They also complain when I tell them to actually watch the video before making responses, since everything they're saying has been answered in the video 🙄
    724
  16. TLDR: the Kohlenklau was running around stealing all the coal and turning it into butter
    705
  17. I’ve not even attempted to monetize this video… Once you’ve watched the video, let me know if I need to explain anything in more detail. When it comes to the quotes towards the end, I’m happy to go through them line by line if needed to solidify your understanding of the idea presented. A second video will be up later this week talking about the definition of Gleichschaltung, as many of you responded to me about the definition in a recent post, so I want to update everyone. I’m also planning on reading up on more modern “third positionism”, so if any of you have any questions or suggestions regarding that, let me know.
    672
  18. The poll didn't go live at the same time as the video for some reason, but it has now. Sorry about that. Thanks for your feedback so far.
    671
  19. Just to clarify, the frustration presented in this video isn’t directed at the normal critics who are questioning whether history is objective or subjective, you guys are right to question things. My frustration is with the so-called Experts™ who presume they’re always right and therefore have no clue about how wrong they are.
    656
  20. This video has been copyright claimed by the band "Whipping Boy" (never heard of them). So any money this video gets from the ads you see goes to them... Apparently a punk rock band owns the "melody" of the standard 12 bar blues progression. EDIT: They've dropped the claim!
    641
  21. As stated previously, YouTube is auto-deleting comments, including my own. In case this video or my channel gets deleted for standing up for Science, History, Logic and Truth, please bookmark my Bitchute channel https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/ EDIT: Thank you to all those who did actually bother to watch this video in its entirety (a significant number have dismissed it without watching it fully, as their own comments confirm) and I’m glad to see that the majority of people understood it and realized how “huge” (to quote one person) it is. I’ve read your comments, and my interpretation of the two ‘P’ words hasn’t changed for reasons I will explain in an upcoming follow-up video to this one. Cheers!
    632
  22. Well, r/BadHistory is: "A place for the most uninformed, naive, and wrongheaded comments about history." (That's how they describe themselves in their About section) You can't be that uninformed, naive, and wrongheaded without censoring the opposing viewpoints. As I said in this video, without the debate there's no way to judge the value of an argument. Well, the people on BadHistory are in a bubble of their own ignorance because they refuse the debate.
    628
  23. Yes, that's exactly how I saw it too when I was plugged in. You automatically assume that Hitler can't be like you, because Socialism is so wonderful... if only we can make them see that it's not as wonderful as people imagine when they buy into the ideology
    626
  24. A couple of notes: First, if you’ve read books on this topic from the 1960s and 70s that contradict what I mentioned in this video, you should know that many of the books from that era were flat out wrong. In fact, historian Goodrick-Clarke states this in the opening of his book (The Occult Roots of Nazism). He states while there are a couple of exceptions, most of the authors were writing sensational nonsense just to sell books, so I would disregard them and read a more up-to-date book instead. And this leads to my second point. I would like to clarify my book recommendation that I stated at the end of the video. Most of the references in the video were from Goodrick-Clarke’s “The Occult Roots of Nazism” and that’s with good reason! It’s a great book on the topic, and while it is academic in nature (which might put people off), I still think it should be your first choice unless you really insist on reading something lighter. If you prefer an easier read, then Hale’s “Himmler’s Crusade” is the book you should get. And Anthony’s “The Horse, the Wheel, and Language” is only on the Proto-Indo-European history NOT the Nazis, but is really interesting in its own right if you want to dive into the Ancient Aryans. Finally, I should point out that this is not a sponsored video or post; I’ll only ever recommend books for people to do their own follow-up reading if I genuinely think the book is worth picking up, and in this case I think these three are. This video is also not monetized and doesn’t have adverts on it because YouTube’s “Community” Guidelines are deliberately vague on what “controversial topics” are or aren’t. So this video could only have been made possible thanks to my Patreons and SubscribeStars. Therefore I’d like to say a BIG THANK YOU once again to all of your who have chosen to support my work. You guys are awesome!
    624
  25. PLEASE READ I’ve replaced my original pinned comments in BOTH videos because people either ignored them completely (pinned comments is where I list my sources, not the description as many of you claimed) or because I wanted to address many of the criticisms that people had about these videos. Since comments can only be so long, I’ve had to split this into sections. So please make sure you check out the comments below this one. Sources will be listed in the following post, as are links to a couple of videos etc. First of all, the National Socialist economy and society in Germany was absolutely not capitalist (no matter how much people scream at me that it is). After crushing imports and exports in 1933-1934 in order to promote Autarky and rearmament, party officials were basically in every shop and business, providing them with goods or foreign currency, and dictating policy etc. On top of this, Autarky crushed imports and exports, causing the end of trade, helping to isolate Germany from the globalized economy. All this caused a massive economic crisis in 1934, but to quote Tooze's Wages of Destruction - "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - P112 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 And this was 1934. So this was absolutely not capitalism. And if it's heavy state intervention, with a planned centralized economy, without being capitalism, what could it be? A commenter critical of what I was saying (Adrian Mahon) said that my definition of socialism was wrong, and that - "It's about power relationships and shifting these to the workers" Ok, I absolutely agree with what he’s saying there. From an ideological perspective of what was defined by Marx, that's a fair assessment. And I don't disagree - I never have done. But, there's an issue with this definition historically. And people have given other definitions (revolutionary vs non-revolutionary, “seizing the means of production” etc). In fact, socialism doesn’t have “one” definition because as Evans wrote - “When an intellectual historian reads Hobbes’s Leviathan or Marx’s Das Kapital, it is not in order to use their writings to reconstruct something outside them, but in order to construct an interpretation of what they mean or meant. There are indeed many interpretations of these thinkers’ ideas, not least because the systems of thought Hobbes and Marx established were so wide-ranging that they never became completely closed.” - Evans, R. “In Defence of History.” Granta Books, Kindle. So, let’s not pretend that socialism is a fixed definition. Now, some of you also have this concern - "We are seeing a rise of fascism; to 'revise' the meaning of socialism plays to a particular audience that (I'm hoping) you don't want." - Adrian Mahon. I agree, and I absolutely don't want to see a rise in fascism or National Socialism. I cannot stress this enough. I've already said a couple videos back that I'm doing a Holocaust documentary because I'm sick to death of people preaching Holocaust (and Holodomor) denial. It's sickening. So, do not think I'm at all promoting either ideology. Several people claimed I was ‘redefining socialism’ so I could deny the Holocaust. No idea where that came from. And actually, by saying that National Socialism wasn't socialism - this actually plays into the National Socialist and denialist hands. Now, at first you might think - why? Well, let me explain with a bit of history - Hitler genuinely believed in his version of 'socialism', and thought it was a form of 'socialism'. It doesn't matter if you think that it's socialism or not at this point, just run with it. So, when Hitler comes to power in 1933, he 'socialized' the German economy by removing the Jewish influence from government etc and imposes his version of 'socialism'. And this actually caused an economic crisis by 1934 as a result. This was due to Autarky and armaments spending (see the previous quotes in my above comment which are linked to this). With the 'socialization' of the people, he removed Jews from society, and heavily restricted trade, ending capitalism. And he geared up for war. Military spending was less than 1% of the budget in 1933, and was 10% in 1935. This was “- a bigger and quicker increase than ever seen before in peacetime in a capitalist state.” from Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. Page 92. Now, why would he do this? Is it just for military conquest? Or is there some sort of underlying motive? And yes, there's an underlying motive. Going back to Mein Kampf, what he see is his version of Nationalism (which is entwined with his 'socialism'). As a brief explanation - he thought that the species shouldn't mix breeds. And that Aryan peoples built nations. However, the reason he thinks nations collapsed in the past had nothing to do with war etc; it was all because the Aryans interbred with the lesser races. In Hitler's mind, the dilution of Aryan blood would weaken the race, and bring down the nation. Yes, complete lunacy, but there's little doubt he thought this. And he honestly thought that the Jews were the absolute worse race, and the fact they didn't have a nation of their own (at the time) proved his theory right. In Mein Kampf, Hitler says that the Jews were like parasites who would latch onto Aryan nations and dilute Aryan blood with their own blood by interbreeding. Therefore Hitler thought that the Jews had to be removed from society to prevent the Aryan German blood from being diluted, and thus causing the downfall of the German race. However, there's the Marxist problem too. In Hitler's mind, the Jews were championing Marxism. The reason was stated as: if they made everything equal and classless, this would give the Jews the best chance to interbreed with everyone and thus bring about the fall of humanity. Yes, it's ridiculous, but that's where he went with it. So, you can see why he hated Bolshevism so much. He thought that international communism would allow the Jews to destroy the Aryan races. He therefore decided to take action and beat the Jews before they beat the Aryans. This is why he wanted to go East. He viewed the Slavs as slaves owned by the Jews. But if they conquered the Soviet Union, rid the Jews from society, the Slavs would serve the master German Aryans for a 1,000 years. Now, Adrian Mahon said "Can we agree agree on what 'socialist' means (hint: it's not state intervention). It's about power relationships and shifting these to the workers" Ok, but let's look at what Hitler thought for a moment. Hitler thought that 'socialism' was about power relationships too. The difference was that he thought the way to solve the issue wasn't by having the workers rise up. But actually by removing the Jews. (I know this isn't socialism as Marx defined it, but stick with me for a bit longer) If he removed the Jews, then the power relationships wouldn't happen. The Aryan race would all work together as a collective to better the German nation - the elites would help their fellow men, and the workers could rise to the top. Hitler does say that the ladder still exists because individuals should be able to climb up if they're better than others. That would actually help the race because supposedly the better elements of the race would rise upwards. (And you do have quite a bit of social movement in the National Socialist era of Germany, so it's not completely correct to say he was just saying this stuff.) Now, this Hitler-version of 'socialism' is actually mixed with his Nationalism. Hitler redefined this to mean that the state was the absolute embodiment of the race (his 'Nationalism'). However, the two are intermixed. You can't have one without the other. The state/people need to remove the Jews, and the state/people need to work together. Now, if you keep this idea in mind - that the Nationalism and the Socialism element are equal and the same - look what happens when we consider the history of the time: When you think of the trains taking people to the forced labour camps, the concentration camps, the death camps etc, what you have to remember is that, this absolutely wasn't free-market forces doing this. This was a systematic industrial mass-killing, controlled by the state (hence my "intervention in economy and society" bit), and I would absolutely argue that this could not have happened to this extent in a free-market capitalist economy. How would a business market "Murder of Racial Minorities on a Mass Scale" in any capitalist society? It just wouldn't happen to this extent. Yeah, you have persecutions and murder during wartime etc, but not mass-industrial-scale-murder.
    610
  26. I love the back and forth going on in the comments. It's good to consider alternative perspectives. Some are saying Churchill was right to keep fighting during WW2 and not surrender or make peace. I'm generally against war (there's an argument for defensive action, but even then it should be avoided at all costs), so I think there's an argument to be had that he should have made peace after Dunkirk. However, Britain making peace would have had massive repercussions. The blockade of Germany would stop. Hitler would have more fuel for his armies going East, which may have tipped the tide against the Soviets. Millions more people may have been killed as a result, and a terrible Empire would have dominated Europe. It's hard not to be persuaded that this was a "just war" on the part of Britain, even if Britain ended up having 3 million subjects starve to death in Bengal... Honestly, I'm conflicted. I can also understand the argument that once the war has started you're in a struggle for survival and therefore all (or most) bets are off. But this makes me think that humanity is one good declaration of war away from losing its humanity, and that "humanity" is just a synonym of "barbarity". What do you think? Am I being too nihilistic?
    608
  27. It was my birthday last week so I fancied a change of pace with this video. Plus, I still get comments every day saying that Manstein didn’t lie ( https://youtu.be/uzAzpIdDNcI ) and that I absolutely have to listen to what the German generals said because they were there and know what happened, whereas I wasn’t there and didn’t know what happened. Ok then… we’ll go along with what Manstein said 100% and see where we end up. Also I’ll be honest, Wesley asked this question several months ago, and I only realised last week that I had completely missed his question out (I’m really sorry Wesley). So this was a very quick last-minute video, which is why I didn’t go into the super-detail (divisional level) which I think Wesley wanted. That said, I’m currently working on Battlestorm Stalingrad behind the scenes, and I absolutely want to do the Third Battle of Kharkov as a Battlestorm series after that, because then that will lead nicely to the Battle of Kursk. So if you’re wanting me to go into great detail on it, start demanding that I hurry up with Stalingrad. And just to be clear, the sarcasm in the video is not directed towards Wesley, but is directed towards the idea that the Third Battle of Kharkov was a “miracle”. I’m not convinced that you can trust what the German generals (or any generals) by what they claim at all. The number of German troops was more than often stated, the number of Soviet troops was less than implied, and the Red Army was stretched thin and exhausted after months of advancing. The Soviet divisions were depleted, running out of ammunition and fuel, and weren’t concentrated. The Germans struck at the very moment the Red Army offensive was on the verge of coming to a halt anyway, and they had air superiority. Manstein had gathered substantial forces (either fresh or experienced) for his attack, and hit the Soviets in the flanks. They took on the Red Army in pieces rather than all in one go, and they only took a small amount of territory. If you call taking back a couple of miles after losing 100 miles a “miracle” then I guess this really was a great victory for the Wehrmacht. Sources Glantz, D. "After Stalingrad: The Red Army's Winter Offensive 1942-43." Helion & Company, Kindle 2011. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glanz, D. "From the Don to the Dnepr: Soviet Offensive Operations December 1942-August 1943." Routledge, Kindle 2013. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book One: November 1942..” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. Melvin, M. “Manstein: Hitler’s Greatest General.” Orion, Kindle 2010. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    600
  28. Yes, that would have been a good way of putting it
    591
  29. Bit of an update guys. I’m debating whether or not to publish a video next Monday in order to free up a few extra days for me to do research for future videos. As I’ve said a few times now, Stalingrad is killing me. It’s taking up so much of my time that it’s a struggle to do enough research for the other videos, and now I’m at a point where I desperately need time to study. Therefore, if there’s no video next week, or it’s just a short one, you’ll know why. Stalingrad will be the week after that though regardless. And my new editor is coming along, but isn’t up to speed yet. They’re still creating more work for me at the moment, not less. There will be an inflection point but that hasn’t happened yet. Them struggling to learn the animation process in Blender has made me realize that I have more skills than I originally thought.
    579
  30. A big thanks to Adobe Premiere Pro for all the technical glitches. Apparently your extremely expensive and clunky software can't even do simple fade transitions, and I gave up trying to sort it so they remain in the video. Adobe is so great and expensive that I'm beginning to consider the possibility of doing all the editing inside Blender, a free 3D animation software that's actually extremely versatile. Please, Adobe, continue to encourage me to cancel my subscription to Adobe!
    570
  31. "It is about time that Hitler's speeches were translated into english." They have been, and they have been for years. There's a PDF of them online. - "then those against what he is saying, need to up their game and explain why he shouldn't be listened to." People should be armed with critical thinking, knowledge, and the counter arguments, so that they're not going in blind. Sadly, because of all the sensorship, people have been blinded to the truth, resulting in them being swayed by Hitler's bad arguments.
    570
  32. PLEASE READ It would be almost impossible for me to cover events on the Eastern Front without talking about the regimes and the atrocities. For example, ~180,000 civilians at Stalingrad alone are shipped off to the slave labour camps in the Reich. This is part of the battle, it is part of the Axis-Soviet War, and it’s something that cannot be ignored. The reason Hitler wanted to go East in the first place is all tied into this, so this was a topic I was going to end up discussing at some point anyway. That said, the hateful comments and downvotes on my videos (both recent and historic) have spurred me to move in this direction early. I can confirm that the battles and campaigns will absolutely remain the priority for this channel. And only on occasions will videos be on these topics in particular. However, I will now cover them. My goal is not to persuade denialists or far-right and far-left commenters to change their minds (I’m fully aware that some people would rather believe in fiction or belief, than reality). The point is to make people conscious of the problem, and to not get suckered into believing in a distorted view of history. And I’m fairly certain that a good portion of you reading these words right now have read up on the subject, or are not falling for their tricks. And that’s fine. But there are also people reading this who, for various reasons, do not know, are not so widely read, and who may have the seed of doubt planted already or in the future. And I don’t want any of you sliding into the extreme denialist camp. So when I do create these videos, I want to produce highly detailed documentaries (as usual) so everyone can learn from them. But I also want to provide videos where we can assure people who maybe do have doubts, or are on the fence, that the views they’re hearing from the denialists are incorrect. As mentioned in the video, here is a link to the +300 page document by a British Judge against David Irving making clear all the distortions that Irving made in his book http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/judgment-00-00.html To take one quote from it - “13.51 For the reasons which I have given, I find that in most of the instances which they cite the Defendants' criticisms are justified. In those instances it is my conclusion that, judged objectively, Irving treated the historical evidence in a manner which fell far short of the standard to be expected of a conscientious historian. Irving in those respects misrepresented and distorted the evidence which was available to him.” Video Links The Alt Right Control YouTube https://youtu.be/583X6DGjits (mirror) https://youtu.be/LtHNmV-Wtbs Behind the lies of Holocaust denial | Deborah Lipstadt https://youtu.be/0ztdofPc8Rw Confronting Holocaust Denial: A Strategy https://youtu.be/1CLKptQmUR8 "History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving," Deborah Lipstadt, 9/14/2005 https://youtu.be/t7zSR7BGbuQ (note the number of downvotes) The Origins of Mass Killing: the bloodlands hypothesis https://youtu.be/fXrqGlgufCA What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg (this video actually has timestamps!) Potsdam Agreement Lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ft4Tb_k1NI Questions answered in the video [Mario] What are the most ridiculous and/or hilarious conspiracy theories you have heard of around WW2? [Jen] Have you thought about doing a detailed debunking video on Holocaust Denial? It's started to become more and more common, and their arguments are just patently false, but no one is actually taking the time to debunk their lies in detail. [Kirin] 1) will we see more social history? 2) I feel even distorians David Irving and the anarcho-Stalinist Grover Furr have their place because in their desire to defend indefensible positions they uncover a lot of important and before unseen documents. How do you feel about that? 3) will we see things on the Communist Partys role in the Soviet defence structure? How about the Nazis in the occupation one? This is partially social history but it interests me. It both would disprove the Clean Wehrmacht myth but also show us what the Party was doing things like organizing Partisans and the like. [Craig] - We see in the American army segregated troops black/white. Did the Soviets have any such qualms regarding their far eastern soldiers? I know they persecuted Volga Germans and forcibly migrated them eastwards. Was similar action taken elsewhere? Thanks for watching, by for now.
    569
  33. Pinned Comment If you did ‘marathon’ this video (watch it all the way through in one go) you get the right to boast about it in the comment section! The script for this video was ~84,300 words. YOUTUBE SUBTITLE ISSUE - I spent 8 hours wrestling with technical glitches whilst trying to put subtitles into this video. Every time I “saved” the subtitles, some sentences would be replaced by random other subtitles, and it was almost impossible to edit anything due to extremely heavy jittering and stuttering on the subtitle editing page. It’s definitely because of the length of the video. If you want to see this series with subtitles, please check out the individual Crusader videos, which do have subtitles. I’ve fixed numerous minor issues, added a few bits, and pieced everything together as neat as possible. Didn’t get everything right though, mainly because I actually ran out of time getting this video prepared, so it is what it is. At 01:52:00 I forgot to change “battleships” to “warships” because the Italians were using warships to ship supplies. Many were asking me to show more of the logistical side of the battle, but the sources simply don’t allow it. Many were asking about the air-war, and all I can say that this was a battle fought in winter, and so the aircraft were grounded fairly often. And even when they weren’t, the confusing mess of the battle prevented them from intervening as often as they would have liked. Air power therefore played a minor role in this battle overall. People have stated over and over that I should have put front lines in this video. But that’s the point - THERE WERE NO FRONT LINES IN THE BATTLE. There was just total confusion. Imagine blobs of units moving around and you’ve got a more accurate representation of the situation. Chapter 7 - 15th Panzer Division’s clash with 4th Armoured Brigade - I’m fairly confident I have the 4th Armoured Brigade’s and 8th Panzer Regiment’s correct, however I don’t have any information about the position of their battalions. I’m fairly confident with the British battalion positions, but the German battalions could be in an incorrect order. British tank loss statistics for the 27th of November 1941 - 7th Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 165 Remaining tanks = 28. Losses so far 137 (83%) 4th Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 141. Remaining tanks = ~97. Losses so far ~44 (31%) 22nd Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 155. Remaining tanks = ~100. Losses so far ~55 (35%) Total tanks in 7th Armoured Division at start = 461. Remaining tanks ~225 (source says 209). Losses so far ~236 (~51%) It’s worth noting that 21st New Zealand Battalion is from the 5th New Zealand Brigade but cooperated with 6th New Zealand Brigade at Sidi Rezegh. 27th New Zealand Machine Gun Battalion was not assigned to any brigade, but was a separate unit in the division, and cooperated with 19th Battalion. And yes, the Maori flag wasn’t used at the time, but I think it looks cool and I wanted to distinguish the unit (there’s nothing else to it than that). The picture I used for the Afrika Division wasn't actually Sümmermann, but a guy from the division. The reasoning was because I wanted to make the division look unique, but didn't have a good picture of Sümmermann (still don't). I realise now that that was a mistake and I should have just left it blank because people missed me saying why I used that picture and people think it's him. I've learnt my lesson though and won't be doing that sort of thing again, however I decided to keep him in this ‘Complete’ video for continuity. Anyone disagreeing with me about the Pienaar situation should check out my in-depth video on the Pienaar Debate (link in the description). Yes, “Adolf Hitler” is a genuine Patreon of mine. Clearly it’s a joke, but whoever it is is supporting the channel, so I’m not removing him from the list. I know there’s a “Patreon Crisis” at the minute (and I support anyone who doesn’t want to support me through Patreon), but if you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! You made this possible because YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY If you want to read more on this battle, I highly recommend Pitt’s “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Pitt’s series is definitely the best volume to pick up out of all the books, although I’d obviously suggest you read a few of the others too. But if you can only pick up one, Pitt’s series is the the one I recommend. Agar-Hamilton, J. & Turner, L. “The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941.” Oxford University Press, 1957. Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. “The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943.” 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Bender, R.J., & Law, R.D., “Uniforms, Organization and History of the Afrikakorps.” R.J.Bender, Publisher, USA, 1973. PDF: “German Kampfgruppe In North Africa 1941 through 1943”. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Badia Garrison from “The British Capture of Bardia (December 1941 - January 1942): A Successful Infantry-Tank Attack (Information Bulletin No. 21, U.S. War Department, WWII)” http://www.lonesentry.com/bardia_intel/index.html As for the Sollum/Halfaya Garrison and Savona positions, I’ve tried to piece them together using various maps and forums online (mainly https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=177538 especially map at bottom of first page). I suspect the German positions are correct, but not sure on the Savona positions. If anyone has any more information, let me know. The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    566
  34. As someone pointed out, I put "Operation Barbarossa 1942"... yes, that's because Stalingrad is drilled into my brain at the moment! It was 1941 And at around 22:25 I accidentally put a "£" symbol rather than a "$" symbol. I noticed when doing the subtitles, but it was too late to sort it
    560
  35. Their counter-argument will be "capitalism isn't a free market, bro!" 😂
    560
  36. You know what, I've pinned the comment because more of the 'critics' need to see it
    553
  37. At least logistics aren't an issue in HOI4... since they basically don't exist 😂
    548
  38. They should have quit the game when it was obvious that they were losing so as to avoid the embarrassment. That would have annoyed the other players too
    537
  39. Some have asked, so just to confirm, this is Episode 1 of a series on the Weimar Hyperinflation. This video covers the period from the pre-war to 1918, and the rest of the series will go from 1918 to 1923 (and beyond). Once I've done the Weimar Hyperinflation, I will do more on other economic topics, which is why I've called it "BankWars".
    527
  40. Hi everyone! A lot of you complained that I didn't give statistics to back up my point, which led a lot of you to believe I was wrong. Therefore I've made a second video which gives the statistics and examples to back up the argument made in this video. Here's the link to the new video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds The purpose of this 10 minute video was to introduce you to the concept. As shown in the second video, it wouldn't have been possible to back up the argument in a 10 minute video. It took 44 minutes to make the same argument with statistics, data and examples. So, if you're not convinced by the point made by this video, and you'd like to go into a lot more depth, please check out the second video. Thank you
    525
  41. YouTube should be ashamed for its regressive actions
    499
  42. Sorry the video was late! Had a few rendering and uploading issues. I have decided to include the links in the description, so we'll see how that goes... The video isn't monetized for obvious reasons.
    493
  43. Notes and Sources It took me most of the week to render this video - so I hope you’re happy with it! The script was approximately 47,500 words long! I corrected a handful of minor mistakes, but essentially 99% of it is the same as the stand-alone episodes. There was also major issues trying to get the front lines to render in parts 5 and 6, and I’ve not been able to correct the issue, so I’ve left those parts as they are. I was also ill when I recorded the 4th part of this video, so please forgive me for the lack of ‘energy’ in my voice in that episode. The sources are vague and limited on this topic. But I did the best I could with what was available. Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Paterson, L. "Steel and Ice: The U-Boat Battle in the Arctic and Black Sea 1941-45." The History Press, Kindle 2016. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm Inflation in Germany https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany I’ve also used some maps and information from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/ A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    493
  44. So completely by coincidence, James Lindsay has just republished his lecture "The Negation of the Real" on his own New Discourses channel. Originally it was on another channel. So here's the link to the new video https://youtu.be/Lk_w2-8snWk (He released this an hour and a half after I published this video! What are the odds!)
    489
  45. I've decided to pin your comment because I think more people should see the poor behaviour of my critics. It's intellectual dishonesty to refuse the debate and censor people like this.
    485
  46. History has been made today! If you like history, be sure to give the video a thumbs up! As regular viewers will see, I do cover some parts in this video that I've mentioned in other videos. I'm assuming the viewer is new to my channel, and I'm bringing them up to speed. However, I've tried to present these parts a little differently so that regular viewers are getting additional information. EDIT: Lots of people are commenting about the 53 degrees temperature on the 22nd of July 1942, saying it's too high. I've double checked, and Beevor definitely says 53 degrees in the sun on Page 87 of my edition of his "Stalingrad" book. He's quoting from Helmuth Groscurth, chief of staff of XI Army Corps, who recorded that temperature. It could still be a false reading, or Beevor/Groscurth may have got the numbers wrong, but that's what it says. See my Addendum video which discusses this https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s Some of you may have noticed that I’ve released this video half an hour earlier than usual (at 1630 hours rather than 1700 hours). The reason why I decided to do that is to emphasize the fact that this battle started earlier than many of the books and authors of this battle like to start it. For example, Wikipedia currently says that the Battle of Stalingrad started on the 23rd of August 1942. Well, once again, Wikipedia is wrong. The city fighting may have started then, and the German generals wanted to push the date back to then to push their narrative that this period of the battle wasn’t important, but the Battle of Stalingrad actually started in late July. Some Russian authors say it started as early as the 16th of July, but I’m starting it on the 21st which is roughly when the main fighting got going. The reason the German generals pushed it back into August will become blatantly clear in the first three videos of this series. Also, without Glantz & House’s “Stalingrad” series of books, a video on this period of the battle would be impossible to create because (again) many authors miss this period of the fighting out. Glantz and House do not miss this period of the battle out. So if you’re looking for a great book to read about Stalingrad in even more detail than I can present in the videos, I’d highly recommend Glantz & House's "Stalingrad" book. If you’re not reading Glantz, you’re doing it wrong! A big thanks goes to Historian Anton Joly, who helped with the research for this series - check out his YouTube channel “Stalingrad Battle Data” (link in the description)! Another big thanks goes to my current Patrons, and my previous ones, who have supported me since 2017 which was when I first started doing the research for this Stalingrad series. Many many books have been purchased with their support, and the research is well over 400,000 words (I lost count). If you would like to see your name in the future videos of this series, please support my channel and make these videos happen. You can support me here https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory or https://www.subscribestar.com/tikhistory The first Season of this series will be three episodes (including this one), and the next two videos will be released on the 21st of October 2019 and the 4th of November 2019. After Season 1 I will then break from releasing Stalingrad videos to prepare for Season 2. All sources relating to Stalingrad are listed in the “specific Battlestorm Stalingrad bibliography” link in the description! Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    483
  47. That's the spirit!
    477
  48. Video Sources (all 80 of them) Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Berkoff, K. "Harvest of Despair: Life and Death in Ukraine under Nazi Rule." Harvard University Press, 2004. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Folson, B. "The Myth of the Robber Barons: A New Look at the Rise of Big Business in America." Young America's Foundation, 5th Edition, 2007. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Fustel de Coulanges, “The Ancient City: A Study of the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome.” Pantianos Classics, Kindle 2017, first published in 1877. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hazlitt, H. "Man vs The Welfare State." PDF, 1970. https://mises.org/library/man-vs-welfare-state-0 Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Higgs, R. “Depression, War, and Cold War: Studies in Political Economy.” Oxford University Press, 2006. Hirschfeld, G. “The Policies of Genocide: Jews and Soviet Prisoners of War in Nazi Germany.” Routledge, Kindle 2015 (original 1986). Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Kobrak & Hansen. “European Business, Dictatorship, and Political Risk, 1920-1945.” Berghahn Books, 2004. von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, E. "Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse." Arlington House Publishers, PDF 1974. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, The History of Rome, Kindle P22. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. & Engels, F. "Manifesto of the Communist Party." PDF 1969, original 1848. Menger, C. "Principles of Economics." Ludwig von Mises Institute, PDF 2007. (Originally written in 1871.) https://mises.org/library/principles-economics Mises, L. “Human Action: A Treatise on Economics.” Martino Publishing, 2012. (Originally 1949) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1932). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Overy, R. “The Nazi Economic Recovery 1932-1938.” Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 1996 (original 1982). Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Reisman, G. "Why Nazism was Socialism and why Socialism is Totalitarian." Kindle 2014. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. "The Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume III: Total War Economy, Society and Culture." Cambridge University Press, 2017. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) https://youtu.be/7EnHeZXLzTc TomWoodsTV - Ep. 1474 What Is Fascism? Published on 21 Aug 2019 https://youtu.be/qOsVqXMFAdg Woods, The Forgotten Depression of 1920, https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920 Cambridge Dictionary https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/public Online Latin-Dictionary http://www.latin-dictionary.net/definition/32212/publicus-publica-publicum Online Etymology Dictionary https://www.etymonline.com/word/public Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010.
    465
  49. This has to be one of the shortest videos I've ever made 😂
    458
  50. It would be a very short video where I say: "Working in retail. Thanks for watching, bye for now."
    457
  51. NOTES, LINKS and SOURCES This video touches on many subjects which I couldn’t possibly go into fully today. However I will be coming back to many of these later for a more in-depth discussion. The thing to take away though is that the failure of the Blau Campaign results in a definite “turning point” in the war for several reasons. Hopefully by the end of the video, you will have a clearer picture as to why. Another aspect which is touched on, but which perhaps needs further discussion (and its own video) is that of Hitler’s “madness”. Some claim Hitler was a madman, and that he should have listened to his generals. This actually stems from Halder and several other leading German generals who survived the war, who were trying to show that their dismissal from command positions within the army were not rational decisions because they were great generals. This view was made with the purpose of covering up their own mistakes or failures, and by saying Hitler was mad, gives them an excuse for being sacked which doesn’t say they were in-fact bad. What we have to remember is that, while the actions of the main players of this giant game (e.g. Hitler) may at first glance seem irrational, the reality was that these players were making rational decisions when placed within the context of the time. The problem with many accounts is that the actions made have not been placed in the wider context, and so they seem irrational to us in hindsight. What I didn’t mention in this video was that the plans for Blau actually fell into the Soviet hands prior to the battle. But Stalin dismissed them as a deliberate ploy by the Germans to draw forces away from the Moscow area. Hitler though was not amused. This was the so-called “Reichel Affair”. And it further convinced Hitler that his generals were not obeying his orders, since Reichel shouldn’t have been in a plane with the full Blau plans anyway. Hitler dismissed the commander of the 23rd Panzer Division (where Reichel was from), plus his superior at 40th Motorized Corps, and his chief of staff. Halder wrote in his diary for the 24th of June 1942 - “In OKW, which returned today, the campaign against the General Staff is in high gear again. The unfortunate Reichel affair (Ia, 23d Armoured Division) seems to have crystallized ill feelings of apparently long standing. We only have to brace ourselves now for the explosion.” Again, a seemingly irrational decision. However, if we consider that Hitler had been at loggerheads with his generals for quite some time, it all makes sense. And if we consider that his generals were not considering the strategic picture (as mentioned in the video) then again, it adds weight to the idea that Hitler was actually making rational decisions. Hitler may have been evil, but he was not mad, nor stupid. He was on a whole making very good decisions - even better than his generals at times - and was frustrated when his generals failed to obey his commands because they were tunnel-visioned by training and philosophy into looking at the tactical or operational level. Again, given the context, it makes sense. I absolutely recommend Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht” book, which goes into this campaign and the whole ‘traditional German way of war’ element. It’s a very well written book and good read for anyone interest in Blau or the German military in WW2. Someone said last video that “Operation Blau” is actually “Fall Blau” or “Case Blue” and not an operation. However, while it’s name was Fall Blau, it was an operation, so for this reason, I use the term “Operation Blau” occasionally. But yes, technically it should be Fall Blau. I also mistakenly say “1940” twice in the video rather than “1941”. This was purely a slip of the tongue. Video Links The MAIN Reason Why German Lost WW2 - OIL https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Why No German Reinforcements at Stalingrad? https://youtu.be/VQ3-TqeZqeA Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942” https://youtu.be/UNDhswF1GKk SELECTED SOURCES Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University of Kansas, 2007. Gerasimova, S. “The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army’s Forgotten 15-Month Campaign against Army Group Center 1942-1943.” Helion & Company, Kindle, 2013. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Halder, F. “The Halder War Diary 1939-1942.” Presidio Press, 1988. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Stahel, D. “Operation Barbarossa: Germany’s Defeat in the East.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle, 2010. Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012. Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. “Führer Directive 41” From: World War II Database site. https://ww2db.com/doc.php?q=419 Thanks for watching!
    456
  52. I gathered that after Googling "Mefo Bills" to see if there were more sources about it online and realizing that most of the results were from sites dedicated to HOI4.
    455
  53. The German people were upset by this too, considering that most of the civilians were losing weight during the war
    453
  54. Thank you for all your messages of support last week. I was very tempted to take a week off after many of you suggested that I should, but I decided to plod on and do this video anyway. It felt ‘wrong’ for me to make a short video for a Monday like this, but as I explained last week I needed to do it. Also, there wasn’t enough room to put the Patron list into the video, so I apologize to my Patreons and SubscribeStars for that. The list of names will, of course, return in the future EDIT: As many people have pointed out, I said 1938 instead of 1939 at 9:20 in the video. It was 1939, not 1938. Sorry about that.
    453
  55. It appears that this ban is only for Amazon in the UK... (and maybe Canada?) Note: if you're a racist and want racist texts, you can still buy Karl Marx’s Das Kapital on Amazon - “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” (Karl Marx, Das Kapital Volume 1, P107.)
    445
  56. How can Socialists know what Socialism isn’t if they cannot define what Socialism is? EDIT: ALL SOCIALISM IS ANTI-SEMITISM https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    442
  57. Of course! Italy did a good job with the whole war thing... Thanks Wikipedia!
    435
  58. Merry Christmas (in July)! This video is two weeks early, and it’s only been two weeks since the last Stalingrad episode. It’s only meant to be every 4 weeks, so why is this? Well it’s because my editor did extra overtime to get it done early so they could go away on holiday this week. Thus, the next Stalingrad video will be out in 5 weeks time, not 4.
    432
  59. Two things: 1, yes I’m knackered again. I’ve been working almost constantly since my last break in November, and the last three videos were difficult to make, so I’m behind with next week’s Stalingrad video. I needed a quick and easy video to do this week, so this one is what it is. 2. Also, I’ve got a second video coming out this week. It’s on a topic that impacts the history videos I’ve been making, and I’ve been meaning to talk about it for months, but kept putting it off. I think many of you will find it useful, and I could do with some answers to the questions I pose at the end of that video, so please let me know.
    430
  60. That's why it's important to actually define it 👍
    429
  61.  @kwestionariusz1  Yes, or as I described it "racial socialism". Of course, the Marxist Socialists and similar were not happy with that, but the truth hurts when your ideology detaches you from reality.
    428
  62. “I could hear German voices around the dugout. I was afraid the Germans would [R] me. I pulled out my revolver and put the muzzle to my temple. I could already feel the touch of the steel when I realized that it was preposterous for a strong, healthy person to end her own life... I put my revolver back in its holster. Then a German officer jumped into the dugout. He started picking up map-cases, weapons and compasses. When he spotted me, his eyes widened. ‘Weib? Weib? Woman?’ he said, and made a grab at my chest. I pushed his hands away. ‘Weib,’ I said, and told him to stop touching me. I took off my map-case and handed over my revolver. He was especially pleased with the map-case.” Anna Andreyevskaya, from Bastable, “Voices from Stalingrad,” P79.
    426
  63. Well, nobody is a "real" socialist, according to the "real" socialists
    424
  64. Hi all! Timestamps are available in the description, and subtitles are available. Some fun statistics: the video length is 2 hours 50 minutes, the script length is 27,318 words, contains 742 citations, from 57 sources, and the final render took 6 hours and 45 minutes. In total, all the files amount to 870 GBs of hard drive space. This video has been in the works for the past 6 to 7 months, with my editor/animator (Gigz) deserving a big thank you for all her hard work! I also pulled an all-nighter last night to get it to you on time, so I really do hope you all enjoy it. A big thank you to Gigz, as well as Terri (who made the map and the thumbnail), and another a big THANK YOU to my Patreons and SubscribeStars for making this video possible. For further reading, I highly recommend the series “The Crucible of War” by Barrie Pitt, which is probably the best all-round account of the North African Campaign. The South African “Crisis in the Desert” is another good book, but can be difficult to get a hold of, is biased towards Pienaar, and is a bit out of date. Playfair’s Official British History is also recommended, even if it’s out of date and biased towards Auchinleck. Carver’s “Dilemma’s of the Desert” is a necessary read if you’re interested in the debate about whether Ritchie “went rogue” in this battle or not. Forczyk’s “Desert Armour” is also a decent modern source for this battle and others.
    412
  65. Yes, WW2 didn't get America out of the Depression
    409
  66. I was tempted to put more into this video, but unfortunately I was ill for most of last week, so it's not as "full" of sources as it normally would be. That's why I said I'll do some follow-up videos on this topic in the future. Let me know what you think about all this. It's honestly a new concept to me too - I had never thought to see the Third Reich in this way before.
    409
  67. This is the point. Halder was the lead war historian advisor to the U.S. Army Historical Division after the war, where he tailored the German general's opinions to his own. This is why he casts Hitler in a bad light - calling him mad. When the reality was that Halder had schemed behind his back and failed to do his job several times. But in the light of history, Halder is actually praised by some - Shirer constantly used Halder's diary and opinion to write his well-known "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Despite everything I've said and hinted about Halder, I will say that he was very good at manipulating people. Intrigue level 101.
    406
  68. Update: The scripts for the Stalingrad Season 6 are done, and the editing process has begun. I’m not sure when exactly the Season will start, but probably in 2-3 weeks time. I know you’re all eager for the next episode, but these things take time. Also, I’m actually ill right now. Not sure if you can tell in the video because I did my best to hide it… but the pace has slowed as a result. The show must go on!
    399
  69. THOSE WHO DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT YouTube suppressed yesterday’s video on the plight of Greece under Fascist and National Socialist rule during WW2. Fight Fascism by watching it here: https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk Not only did they age restrict it and not send it out to non-subscribers, but subscribers have reported not getting notified about the video, and the video wouldn’t play for some of those who managed to find it. You have to be logged into the platform in order to even see it. Views are currently 63% lower than unusual. Not sure if it’s country-blocked either, but apparently you must be 18 years or over to learn about the Holocaust now... This is why you should ALWAYS check back at 5pm on Mondays for new videos. If I’m going to miss a video, I’ll let you know in advance. And before someone cries “but YouTube is a ‘private’ platform and can do what it wants”, it’s time for you to learn the words you speak https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (Public vs Private)
    390
  70. I know it may not seem like it, but I had to do an all-nighter to get this done. There’s several reasons why… But this is why I won’t be replying to your comments this evening. I’d appreciate it, though, if you could Like the video. It’ll help me sleep easier tonight! Also, the world map was a new addition, and so it’s not 100% accurate yet, especially at the beginning of the video. The island of Sakhalin is split between Japan and the Soviets, but I only showed this part way through. There’s other errors as well; the borders could be more accurate; and the map itself is squished. But if you ignore all the errors it looks okay! ;)
    386
  71. Extra Notes, Links and Sources Despite the evidence given in the video, I have no doubt that some of you will still argue that the Germans couldn’t, or indeed, didn’t replace their losses suffered in 1941 by the summer of 1942. Some will probably complain that Germany was (by as early as 1942) at the bottom of the manpower barrel. But this was simply not the case. The following quote from Liedtke explains that Germany actually squandered her available manpower - “Regardless of the heavy losses sustained over the previous year, the Wehrmacht as a whole had witnessed a net increase of about 1.1 million personnel by 1 July 1942. However, despite the urgency of defeating the Soviet Union as quickly as possible, which should have resulted in a ruthless prioritization towards meeting the needs of the Army, large consignments of personnel were still allocated to the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine.” - Enduring the Whirlwind, Page 209 This, and the evidence presented in the video, points us firmly in the direction of mismanagement and poor staff-work. Germany had the manpower, but didn’t use it correctly. Also to note, the Germans created an additional 22 divisions in 1942. This was at a time when their other divisions weren’t at full strength. This fact is often used as a point against the explain why they didn’t have enough manpower. In reality, with an almost 3,000 kilometer front, which was about to expand to 4,100 kilometers, Germany needed both to reinforce her existing divisions, and create more divisions. So to say that they were wrong to create 22 new divisions is the wrong conclusion to come too, especially when you consider some of these divisions were made from elements of other veteran divisions. Either way, why is Army Group Centre being prioritised in terms of reinforcements over Army Groups A and B? This does not make any sense, regardless whether you agree or disagree with the manpower situation. I’d love to hear your thoughts so let me know. If you would like book recommendations for further reading, the two books I suggest you pick up are Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht” and Liedtke’s “Enduring the Whirlwind” - both of which cover the Operation Blau period quite well. Links Citino’s lecture on the “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns in 1942.” https://youtu.be/UNDhswF1GKk My “Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong” video https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs My “The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front” video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Another thank you goes out to my Patreons. If you would like to support me in creating these videos, please take a look at my Patreon page https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Selected Sources/Bibliography Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University of Kansas, 2007. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Thanks for watching, and thanks for commenting!
    384
  72. Many have complained about the length of this video. Therefore I've created a newer condensed and updated video that's 43 minutes long. Check it out here https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    379
  73. LOL
    364
  74. Some commenters have asked why I’m so “obsessed” with defining things. Oh, I don’t know. Maybe because rubber cat three omnipotent red singularly.
    364
  75. I enjoy dark humour, have a heart
    361
  76. A Stalingrad episode every 4 weeks until it's done!
    353
  77. Technically they said they could go a few hundred kilometers into the Soviet Union, but no further, so the battle had to be won and the Soviet Union would have to collapse before this point, otherwise they'd be doomed. That's why the German generals planned to win in the first few weeks/months, but failed
    352
  78. Hey everyone, I know it may not seem like it in the video, but I am, in fact, still ill. Never before have I been so tempted not to publish on a Monday. I thought I was getting better, but it got worse. I was only able to get this video done by fighting through the headaches. And because the parts I appeared on camera were short, I was able to clear my throat between them to make it appear like I wasn’t as ill as I actually was. So I apologize that the video is so short, and not on “tanks”. And I also apologize for not having the list of Patreons and SubscribeStars in the video, but it’s too short to list it. I deliberately chose an easy question which I had already done the research for a while ago so that it was quick and easy to produce (“tanks” type content isn’t always easy to produce). Thank you Santtu Mäenpää for asking an easy question! I’m still aiming to get Stalingrad out next week, but the headaches are bad. So if it’s not out on time, or there’s no video next week, you’ll know why. Note: I know Santtu Mäenpää asked a slighty different question to the title of the video, but I thought I'd answer his question and this one too, since Hitler's opportunity to restore the monarchy reveals his views on the German monarchy.
    351
  79. If you want to know how to undermine National Socialist ideology, see 01:24:54 of my “Hitler’s Socialism” video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Edit: A lot of comments are being auto-hidden by YouTube. I've just approved a bunch now. I'm NOT the one deleting your comments. Fact 1: There are ~196 countries in the world. Fact 2: Holocaust Denialism is only illegal in ~17 countries. Most of these countries are European because Europe never embraced Classical Liberalism (of the John Locke variety: free speech, free markets, free trade etc). Fact 3: Both Richard Evans and Deborah Lipstadt, as well as many historians (including myself), oppose laws against Holocaust Denialism because they don’t work and just give ammunition to the deniers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial#Prosecutions_and_convictions
    350
  80. You are correct. Thank you. It wouldn't be a TIK video if there wasn't at least one mistake in it 🤦‍♂️
    347
  81. You would be on to something if I hadn't already openly declared that Justin Trudeau is Fidel Castro's son 😂
    345
  82. Let's see if the moron that's been reporting and & deleting my comments does the same this time 😂 I'm practically daring him at this point - go on, delete all my comments, see if I care!
    342
  83. The biggest issue isn't YouTube's guidelines, it's the people enforcing it. Some of them are sensible, and some of them are not. It just seems luck of the draw whether you get a free pass or are purged from existence.
    339
  84. Clarification for 32:04. Some Hermeticists call the Christian God the ‘demiurgos’ (the Artisan), while others call the true immaterial God the ‘demiurgos’... you know, just to confuse us. Well, for the purposes of this video, the name isn’t important. What matters is that, as a Hermeticist, Marx is looking to overcome the ‘material’ God and get to the true ‘immaterial’ God. So if in doubt, just ignore where I said “and they call him the Demiurgos”. While I did criticise Francis Wheen in the video, I actually found his book to be very in-depth, and would still recommend it for anyone interested in doing further reading. Jone’s book on Karl Marx is very apologetic and is, therefore, less of a priority. Kengor’s book (The Devil and Karl Marx) is good if you’re interested in the Christian perspective of this topic. For any socialist or communist who has realised that there may be a problem with the Marxist or socialist ideology and would like further help in understanding the problem, I’d recommend the following books (in this order): Muravchik’s “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism”. Henry Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson”. Leonard Peikoff’s “The Cause of Hitler’s Germany”. (Yes, it is relevant.) Thomas Sowell’s “Basic Economics”. L.K. Samuels’s “”Killing History”. Murray Rothbard’s “America’s Great Depression”. Ludwig von Mises’s “Omnipotent Government”. Ludwig von Mises’s “Socialism”.
    337
  85. Hope you guys are doing well. I know I've covered this subject before, but I wanted to specifically tackle the part about the National Socialists selling stocks as "privatization", which I haven't actually addressed directly. Plus, having a separate video on it allows for easy sharing when someone makes the claim that Hitler "privatized the industries".
    333
  86. Couple of notes: I've changed the channel name to "TIKhistory". This was because "TIK" wasn't coming up in search thanks to "TIKTOK", so hopefully TIKhistory will. I needed a quick and easy video with it being the run-up to Christmas, so here it is. And if you didn't watch last week's video on the Weimar Hyperinflation, you really should. In fact, the "stick to tanks" people are EXACTLY the people who need to watch that video. Link: https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    332
  87. Yep, and this is why I've lost my faith in humanity. I still have hope in individuals, but no longer the majority.
    331
  88. Can't wait for the Marxists pRedditors will deploy their mental gymnastics on this one 😂
    330
  89. And this video has been deemed advertiser unfriendly, and is currently listed as "Limited or no adds". Given the fact I've chosen to put the Swastika in the video, I'm not going to argue it because there's no way it'll get accepted.
    326
  90. On a similar note, I would recommend to you the book "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. It actually explains what caused the depression, which history books don't do either.
    321
  91. Hey everyone, I think Terri did a good job with the thumbnail! However, there’s a couple of errors in the video (both mine). I completely forgot to put in the 129th Panzer Battalion in 29th Motorized Division’s area. And the 3rd Battalion of the 544th Infantry Regiment was “hidden” in Blender, so it doesn’t appear in 16th Panzer Division’s area as it should... As you can see, though, going down to battalion level was the reason why this video was delayed. For the same reason, the next video may not be out on schedule either, but I’ll let you know nearer the time. Please check out the community tab on the channel for updates if I miss a week.
    321
  92. A few graphical errors again (thank you Premiere Pro) and I also messed up the bit where I quoted Fritz (showing the Official German History). Sorry about that. Hope you enjoy the video though!
    319
  93. Yes! I also recover and then lose it again later Edit: for anyone reading this, I think it's worth watching the full video so you get the context because otherwise it would be like receiving the punchline without the setup to the joke
    317
  94. Stick to tanks! But fun fact, this is my third-ever tank video. There's the one on Soviet tanks, and the Q&A video asking what makes a good tank. Other videos mention tanks, but this is the first one to talk about a specific tank. I'm also not counting the two "stick to tanks" videos. So I guess my haters are wrong. They should stick to banks!
    313
  95. The reason I’m even covering this is because the argument is that “Hitler bad, therefore he must be a capitalist”. And, since socialists think I’m arguing for capitalism, they think they can “debunk me” on the Hitler being a socialist argument by stating “privatization of the UK railways is worse than nationalisation”. It’s literally “you’re wrong about Hitler because of the UK railways”. Obviously, this is a ridiculous argument, which is why I’ve not bothered to address it until now, but people have been saying this nonsense for years. However, as I explained in a recent video, I’m working on a more important video on eugenics, so this is just a filler video to allow me to get that one done https://youtu.be/rOySICBQ_1s
    310
  96. I think part of the problem is that the campaign is so long that historians have been compelled to whiz through the entire thing in one book, which means that several days get condensed into a couple of sentences at best. The result is "the Romanian lines collapsed", which is technically true, but in reality it was more complicated than that.
    299
  97. "This is exactly how the mainstream historians behave when it comes to the holocaust. Most famously, Deborahl Lipstadt, a star among the mainstream holocaust historians, is infamous for refusing to debate. Could it be that the mainstream "are in a bubble of their own ignorance because they refuse the debate." the holocaust?" - Bhigr Bond @Bhigr Bond - The Holocaust happened, and I agree with Lipstadt over Irving. Irving manipulated the evidence to suit his agenda. He misquoted and claimed the sources said things when they didn't - and he did these things on a grand scale (see the book "Telling Lies about Hitler" by Evans). That's a BIG no no. That said, I don't agree with the State-sponsored censorship (which, for Holocaust Denialism, exists in only ~17 countries out of ~196 countries around the world) because if Marxist Denialist Historians didn't deny Hitler's Socialism it wouldn't be necessary to suppress freedom of speech at all. But since they refuse to recognize Hitler's Socialism, they must also refuse to accept the ideological motivation for the Holocaust. This gives Holocaust Deniers and Nazis the opportunity to keep pushing their agenda, and the censorship gives them a further claim to legitimacy. It also puts academic historians in a poor position to combat Holocaust Denialism because they're not directly debating with the Holocaust Denialists, and aren't willing to even consider what they're saying - seeing them as a joke. As a result, they don't know the Denialist arguments very well and are impotent in their counter-arguments against Denialism. So, for these reasons, while I do think people shouldn't be denying the Holocaust or denying any history for that matter, I also refuse to accept the idea that ANY argument should be outright censored.
    294
  98. Since this is an important video, I’ve provided a link to the PDF of the script in the description for you to download and share.
    286
  99. PINNED COMMENT - Notes, Quotes and Sources “Winston Churchill (who is talked of as the likely leader of a Fascisti party in England) says Fascism is the shadow of Bolshevism, and that if we must be ruled by one or the other, he would rather be ruled by Fascisti than by Bolshevik violence.” - Clare Sheridan, In Many Places, 1923 “If I had been an Italian, I am sure I should have been wholeheartedly with you from start to finish in your triumphant struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism. But in England we have not yet had to face this danger in the same deadly form. We have our own way of doing things. But that we shall succeed in grappling with Communism and choking the life out of it - of that I am absolutely sure… the great mass of the people love their country and are proud of its flag and history. They do not regard these as incompatible with a progressive advance towards social justice and economic betterment.” - Churchill, statement to Journalists in Rome on 20 Jan 1927 “The Roman genius impersonated in Mussolini, the greatest law-giver among living men, has shown to many nations how they can resist the pressures of Socialism and has indicated the path that a nation can follow when courageously led. With the Fascist regime, Mussolini has established a centre of orientation from which countries which are engaged in a hand-to-hand struggle with Socialism must not hesitate to be guided.” - Churchill Feb 1933 Although Italy had signed the Pact of Steel, Mussolini had told Hitler that Italy would not support Germany in their Invasion of Poland. At this point, Mussolini was trying to remain neutral, and Italy’s joining of the war on Hitler’s side was not necessarily guaranteed. Mussolini only joins the war on Hitler’s side when it appears that Germany is winning. If they had started losing, perhaps Mussolini may have remained neutral, or even possibly joined the Allies. “One final point of similarity between Nazi and Soviet policies should be noted, although its meaning is far from clear. Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” - Temin, P582-583 “In brief definition, Capitalism is the system by which capital used the Nation for its own purposes. Fascism is the system by which the Nation uses capital for its own purposes. Private enterprise is permitted and encouraged so long as it coincides with the national interests. Private enterprise is not permitted when it conflicts with national interests. Under Fascism private enterprise may serve but not exploit. This is secured by the Corporative System, which lays down the limits within which industry may operate, and those limits are the welfare of the Nation.” - Mosley, Fascism 100 Questions P22 Thoughts? Sources Recommended reading: Farrell’s “Mussolini: A New Life”. (Note: many of these sources are in relation to the nature of Socialism, Nazism, Fascism, Capitalism, and Marxism in order to fully understand the differences, plus general economics and politics books. They’re not all specifically related to Mussolini alone.) Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    284
  100. (1) Battlestorm Gazala will be out next Monday, 20th May 2024 (or another day that week if there’s unforeseen problems in the meantime). (2) This video has been “Limited” by the Google Archipelago. Thanks YouTube Gestapo! (3) The fact that the modern United Kingdom looks very similar to the Third Reich is not just “a coincidence”. Paying people to be “victims”, paying them not to work, or putting a uniform on the unemployed and calling them “government”, is nothing more than financially incentivising degeneracy. Altruism is a race to the bottom, and this is just one reason why I’m not an advocate for the welfare state. The other reason I’m against the welfare state is because socialism doesn’t work. It doesn’t work thanks to what’s known as the “knowledge problem” and the “Socialist Economic Calculation Problem”. Watch this short video (6 mins) by Learn Liberty which explains the problem https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4?si=Zgj-dbhZABhjERJx I also explain this problem in my video on German logistics https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ (32 mins)
    283
  101.  @AFGuidesHD  That's a false dichotomy. It's not internationalism vs nationalism, but collectivism (which is both national and international) vs the individual. It's the individual getting crushed, not the "nation" (that's what Starmer is - Starmer is the nation crushing the individual).
    280
  102. The reason I was able to get this out only a week after the previous Stalingrad video is because this video is focused on the Vinnitsa Conference and then showing the status of the units on the 12th. So doesn’t contain as many battle-animations, and thus didn’t take forever and a day to animate. Correction: I displayed the name “Kempf” as the author of the final quote, but it was Hoth, not Kempf. I put the correct unit card in, and the reference is correct. It’s just the name under the quote :( when I noticed it was too late to go back and sort it.
    278
  103. Is it a coincidence that the ideologues who despise ‘money’ and want to abolish it were also the people who set up the conditions for the Weimar hyperinflation to happen? Unlike many of the books on the Weimar hyperinflation, I think it’s a mistake to skip or skim over what was one of the most important factors regarding the Weimar hyperinflation - the 1918 Revolution and the people who came to power in its aftermath. This Revolution founded the Weimar Republic, and put the ‘money-haters’ in charge. So, while this video focuses on the politics rather than the economics, it’s important to know what was happening on the political scene so that we have context to why the financial situation turned so sour. I think this will end-up being the most politics-focused video in the series, so we will return to the economics next time. Note: just because they hate ‘money’ doesn’t mean they hate ‘currency’.
    278
  104. Sources In response to someone yesterday, I don’t believe there’s a “grand conspiracy” going on in academia where historians are denying Hitler’s socialism. I do think that 99% of historians are not trained in economics, and do not understand what socialism is (the socialization of the means of production - read Mises’s “Socialism” for more info). And I do think that the majority of historians have been influenced by the Marxist narrative as a result of this ignorance of basic economics. The Marxist-Socialists are denying Hitler’s socialism - Stalin himself painted National Socialism as the end-stage of capitalism, and modern Marxists say nothing is REAL socialism, not even Soviet socialism - so there is plenty of evidence that the Marxists themselves are pushing this particular agenda. There’s obviously a lot more to National Socialist Holocaust Denialism than outright denying the entire Holocaust, and I will be covering more of this in the future. But once you grasp the ideological reasons for what the Deniers are doing and why, it becomes a lot easier to tackle them. By denying the Holocaust, they’re undermining the ideology of National Socialism itself - the very thing that they believe in. Saying the Holocaust didn’t happen is equivalent to saying Hitler wasn’t a racist and didn’t hate Jews. It’s simply ridiculous. Many of the sources are listed because they prove that Hitler was a socialist. For more information about this, see my “The REAL Reason why Hitler HAD to start WW2” video (link in the description) and the follow-up “Why they don't tell you about Hitler's "Shrinking Markets" problem”. Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1922). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) https://youtu.be/7EnHeZXLzTc For a list of all my books on WW2 and similar, please visit this link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    277
  105. SPOILER ALERT! ... ... ... ... ... Despite working several 13-15 hour days this week, I wasn’t able to get the entire video done in time. It turns out that it’s impossible to script, shoot and edit an entire Battlestorm episode in one week, even if the research was already done in advance. It was so bad, that even though I had done the research, I had to leave a lot of the references out because I didn’t have time to put them all in. Therefore I had no choice but to split into two parts. I wasn’t intending to do so, but I had no choice. The entire video would have been 42 minutes long, and I only had about 20 minutes of it edited in time.
    275
  106. "Let people make their own choices without bias or propaganda" Hitler's speeches are both biased and propaganda, that's the problem.
    274
  107. "We Communists always beat you dirty fascists." Marxists like you are one step away from Fascists and Nazis. Communists are international-class-socialists. Fascists are national-socialists. And Nazis are National (race) Socialists.
    273
  108. Recorded this in December, and got Terri to edit it then, and was hoping to get it out before the next recession... but I didn't want to release it until after the "Hitler's Socialism" and "Stick to Tanks" videos, for obvious reasons. And while I did use several sources for this video, the main one I'd recommend is Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which explains the causes of recessions and depressions amazingly well. Great book. Also for books on basic economics, I'd recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson", and after that Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics". I've been following the current 'historic' economic situation, so if you'd like me to talk about it, let me know. Cheers!
    268
  109. Well, it's a mix of Norse mythology and Hegelianism, so him and the Marxists are related.
    267
  110. Well, they're technically not denying it. They're just saying "we're something that's collectivist and not collectivist at the same time". It's a typical tactic that all Socialists do to deny what they are - which is the core concept. By denying what they are, it makes us look like we don't understand them. They can just deny whatever it is we say about them or their position, and therefore 'prove' how stupid we supposedly are for not knowing what they 'truly' are, even though we know precisely what they are, and they never give us any definitions or explanations. It's the strategy of an idiot.
    267
  111. Those who rule want more power to rule. And the people have no choice, but are fooled into thinking they do.
    266
  112. I wish I could Like this video ten times over.
    266
  113. Yes Aiden, you and the others keep bringing up points that have been refuted in the video, and then can't figure out why I'm not wasting my time refuting you individually. You then moan that I (and others) are pointing out to you that the exact same points you keep bringing up have been refuted in the video and that your comments don't address anything that's been said. For some bizarre reason, you can't seem to figure out why I keep telling you to ACTUALLY WATCH THE VIDEO. Well, if you WATCH THE VIDEO you would understand why.
    260
  114. So, according to YouTube analytics, this video didn't get a single view (not one) between 1.5 and 2 hours after it went live. But it says there's no restrictions on the video! Somehow I don't think YouTube is being honest with me here. This is looking very similar to the Greek video 😟 views have started to come through now, but only about 200. This is a terrible performance by any standard. Can you let me know if you got notified, or if you found this in you 'Browse features' or suggestions etc.
    258
  115. If it wasn't for that madman Hitler, German panzers could have Blitzkrieged to America!
    258
  116. A lot of people enjoyed my Pirate Voice last video, aaargh!
    258
  117. Just in case anyone is wondering, the next Battlestorm Stalingrad video (Episode 30) should be out next week. Also https://youtu.be/SkUkiZBWOlc
    257
  118. The next Battlestorm Stalingrad video will be out next Monday! Hanson’s “The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Economy: An Economic History of the USSR 1945 - 1991 (The Postwar World).” is a great book on this topic. I come to slightly different conclusions from Hanson, but he’s still a recommended source. Another great source is Higg’s “Depression, War, and Cold War”, which discusses the USA during the aftermath of WW2, showing why the Great Depression only came to a halt in 1945.
    256
  119. Hey guys, HITLER WAS A BOX https://youtu.be/RxBOlEzlJY4 Also, I had major issues editing this video, so there’s some glaring editing mistakes within it even though I spent quite a while trying to fix them in post. Taking steps to sort this though, including new lighting (arrived today) and contemplating a new camera setup too.
    254
  120. No guarantees, but I'm trying to get the first episode of Battlestorm Stalingrad out for next week. The editing is taking an absolute age to do, and I'm not sure I'll get it done in time. So it will either be next week, or the week after. Hope you're looking forward to it! Specific Sources Bormann, M. “Hitler’s Table Talk.” Ostara Publications, 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Gentile, G. “Origins and Doctrine of Fascism: with Selections from Other Works.” Routledge, 2017. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Kleinfeld, G. & Tambs, L. "Hitler's Spanish Legion: The Blue Division in Russia in WWII." Stackpole Books, 1979. Moradiellos, E. “Franco: Anatomy of a Dictator.” JCS Publishing Ltd, Kindle 2018. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Payne, S. "Franco and Hitler: Spain, Germany, and World War II." Yale University Press, 2008." Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Zitelmann, R. "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction." London House, 1999. The Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume II: Politics and Ideology." Cambridge University Press, 2017. Full list of all my sources https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Cheers!
    252
  121. IMPORTANT: There will now be a gap of a few weeks before the next Season of 3 episodes comes out. I will be working on the script, more research, and then editing the videos behind the scenes. I know most of you will understand that all this takes time, but some people do not. So, to those of you who do not seem to grasp this: please do not complain that the next few weeks are not Battlestorm Stalingrad videos, or keep requesting that I “get on with it”. Next season’s script are simply not ready, and I’m already working a hell of a lot behind the scenes to get these videos out. I’m not “slacking”; it’s simply more complicated than clicking my fingers and having a Battlestorm video appear out of thin air, which apparently some people think is all I do. Next Monday’s video will either be a Stalingrad Addendum video or another history video (I haven’t decided yet). An Addendum video will come soon though regardless. Errors or issues in this episode - When doing the subtitles, I realised that I hadn’t updated the front lines on the map at roughly 8 minutes in order to show the Kalach Pocket. Sorry about that. Also I’m still struggling to say “Hoth”. Viewers have told me it’s not pronounced “Hoth”, but is pronounced as “Hot”. However, according to Forvo it’s pronounced something like “Hort” https://forvo.com/search/Hoth/ so I have no idea… I did mention the ‘Gulags’ in this video, and there’s usually a couple of people who complain that they’re technically not called ‘Gulags’, because that was the system that got them there, not the camps themselves. Great. But I’m still calling them Gulags because that’s how they are known in the English speaking world, and I’m not calling them “The Soviet forced-labour or corrective labour camps” because that’s too unwieldy. Thanks for watching!
    252
  122. My videos should come with a disclaimer saying - "this is for your knowledge only, don't repeat this in front of the ideologically-motivated idiots running your school." Also the 'diversity' officer is a Marxist. They're teaching Critical Race Theory, which is Marxist racist ideology https://youtu.be/rSHL-rSMIro
    252
  123. Not really, since the main foe was the Soviet Union. To quote Glantz from the video I linked "The German Army literally perished in the East".
    250
  124. Probable error: I’m not convinced I got the front lines correct when referring to the fighting around the Central Railway Station from around 35:18 in the video onwards. Thinking about it, I now suspect that the lines should have stopped after the Germans took the station, allowing the Soviets to retake it a couple of times at that point, before the lines moved on towards the Volga and the Fallen Fighters Square. Thus, when the 10th NKVD Division (and the dogs) retake the station in the video (e.g. at 42:30 ), the Germans probably weren’t in the buildings on their right flank. I mean, it could have happened this way, but it seems unlikely. I only realized this issue yesterday (the day before publishing), which was too late to change everything around… which is why I probably need more time to edit these videos than I do... I’ll talk about this in a future addendum video.
    249
  125. It's refreshing to see how the comments for this video are far more civil than they were in my previous "the REAL Reason why Hitler Had to go to war" video. That video currently has over 4,250 comments, with probably around 85% of them an insult to reasonable discourse. Many of you say that I deserve many more subscribers... I'm not so sure. I actually prefer the quality subscribers I already have - people who are reasonable, calm, collected, and interested in engaging in civilized debate with other human beings. We may not always agree, but at least we're not resorting to barbarity, insults or blatant ideological propaganda. So thank you all for being great subscribers and viewers, and I hope (if this channel does become more popular) these videos will attract more reasonable people like you.
    248
  126. I've got rid of the 'traditional' pinned comment. What do you think?
    247
  127. The video was too short to put the Patreon and SubscribeStar lists in, so I just want to say thank you to everyone who supports this channel. It's you guys who make all my videos possible 👍
    244
  128. Timestamps, Notes, Links, and Sources 00:00 Introduction 02:05 Context 04:15 Requirements at Stalingrad 06:51 Planes 11:12 Supply 13:57 Last Orders Please 23:37 Rations 26:30 Stalingrad vs Demyansk 29:17 Reason for Failure Links Without the support of my Patreons, this video would not have been possible. My Patreons are AWESOME!!! Please consider supporting me on Patreon if you can, thank you https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Link to my “Why Germany Lost the War - Oil” video https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Link to my “The BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth” video https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M Link to my “Paulus’s 6th Army ORDER OF BATTLE - Before Stalingrad” video https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw Link to Military History Visualized’s video “Letters from Stalingrad” video https://youtu.be/ql-yeDWm04Q Notes The most amount of tons delivered to Demyansk in a single day was 544. The most tonnes delivered to Stalingrad in a single day was 258 (19th of December 1942). They delivered 24,303 tons to Demyansk. Divide that by 82 and you get 296.37 tons per day. To compare this with Stalingrad, 6536.3 divided by 71, is 92 tons per day. The figures for the number of tons that are shipped by the airlift varies on each and every source. I think this is because of numerous difference primary sources, plus the difference between ‘tons’ and ‘tonnes’. I didn’t mention this difference in the video because it’s makes things even more complicated. However, regardless of whether it’s tons or tonnes, the Luftwaffe was still not supplying enough on each of the days of the airlift. Of course there are other issues - The Official German History of the War states that between the 18th and 22nd of December the 6th Army received roughly all the food it needed, stating that the amount flown in was 450 tonnes. But in the statistics table it provides, the number of food tonnes calculated brings us to 562.5 tonnes. Even if you take the three biggest days, 19th to 21st, this totals 509 tonnes, according to its own statistics! In fact, some of the sources can’t even be sure how many days the airlift went on for, with some saying 71 days, and others saying 73. It was 71. The final day (72nd) they were parachuting supplies to the Soviets. The highest figure I’ve come across for the amount of tons delivered to the Sixth Army was 8,500. The official German history states 6536.3, and lists the tons per day and also the amounts of tons for food, fuel, ammunition and ‘other’ (which the other sources do not). Even if it was 8,500, that’s still not as much as Demyansk. The ration at Leningrad ended up sinking lower than I mentioned in the video. And some of the population (possibly half a million) didn’t receive a ration at all. The ration then recovered later. Selected Sources / Bibliography Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Forczyk, R. “Demyansk 1942-43, the Frozen Fortress.” Osprey Publishing Group, 2012. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Thanks for watching
    241
  129. Did Napoleon actually say that? But technically it's not quite correct. A more accurate statement would be: "History is a set of flawed accounts agreed upon."
    241
  130. I'm not a fan of Churchill, but it would be wrong to call him a 'Nazi' or a 'Fascist' as our Modern Monetary Racists like to call him. At one point he was the only leader in Europe actively fighting against Fascism and Nazism. That's not to say that he didn't have Fascist leanings (he did), or that he didn't do bad things (he absolutely did), just that we need to be precise in our language and not paint with broad brushstrokes.
    240
  131. Hi everyone! Historian Nigel Askey made an article responding to this video. I have now responded to his response. Please see this video https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g I also highly recommend the video "How the Red Army Defeated Germany: The Three Alibis" by Dr. Jonathon House which is a nice follow up to this video. Link https://youtu.be/zinPbUZUHDE A big thank you to my Patreons - Empichu, Tomislav Trlin, nvgrod, Aaron Keogh, Andreas Peter Larsen, John Brown, Sergiu C, Jicksaw, Jeff Baker, Kevin Paulson, James Bellinger, Shane, Bjorn Torseth, and Davide Pessach. - You guys are awesome! Please consider supporting me on Patreon. It costs a small fortune to get the amount of books required to make this content, so your support will go a long way. Link https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Also, check out my other History videos here https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhMtb3bsJkJmtECxS_mm_QM Sources - *Citino, R. Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942. University Press of Kansas, 2007. *Glantz, D. with House, J. When Titan’s Clashed. University Press of Kansas, 2015. *Glantz, D. with House, J. Armageddon in Stalingrad. The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. University Press of Kansas, 2009. *Glantz, D. with House, J. To the Gates of Stalingrad. The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. University Press of Kansas, 2009. *Kavalerchik, B. The Price of Victory: The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War. Pen & Sword Military, 2017. *Liedtke, G. Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943. Helion & Company LTD, 2016.
    240
  132. I just don't like liars. Politicians always lie - that's their job. Yet people stupidly just accept them at their word. Wake up people!
    240
  133. You're welcome :) all film producers should be banned from making historical films unless they intend to get it right. Making stuff up, like this film does, should not be allowed.
    238
  134. I'm afraid there isn't even an S+ tier 😢
    237
  135. NOTES and SOURCES Racism is the glue that bounds National Socialism together. And traditionally, people think that racism is a Right or conservative idea. And it is - keep the country pure is a conservative attitude. But, it’s also a Left or socialist idea too. In this instance, the idea of ‘purifying society’ of the bad elements is actually a socialization of the people. So, getting rid of the Upper Classes for a socialist paradise, is the same as getting rid of the minority races for a different socialist paradise. Purifying the race is the socialization. National (keeping the country conservative) Socialism (purifying the people of the ‘bad’ elements) are the same thing. And people do not seem to grasp this. There really is no difference between the Right-Nationalism and the Left-Socialism in National Socialism. So, when you see racism in the Nazism of WW2 (the killings, the death camps etc), what you’re seeing is the evidence for socialism in National Socialism. “In the People's State the army will no longer be obliged to teach boys how to walk and stand erect, but it will be the final and supreme school of patriotic education.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P375 The “People’s State” sounds very much like something you’d hear on the communist side. The “People’s Republic of China” or “People’s Republic of North Korea” to give a couple of examples. In Hitler’s case, the socialist state education system would teach boys about the national “community”. With all members of the Aryan race educated to be pure Aryans, they would be ready to rule over the inferior races of the East (see below). Again, this is a socialist policy. I don’t want to bring modern politics into this since this is a history channel, but I know that some of you will say I’m wrong here. The reason you’ll do that is because your judgement will be clouded by modern politics. So, let me explain - The Left and the Right both have their reasons to say that Hitler and National Socialism were not on the Left of the political spectrum. The Right do not want to be stigmatized as ‘commies’, and many of their members don’t realise that socialism is even a factor. They think that racism is the main element (which it is) and that the word ‘socialist’ is just there by accident (or they haven’t realised the significance of the word). Because of this, many people think that National Socialism is actually conservative capitalism, which it absolutely isn’t. But, if people think that it is a conservative capitalism, they can gain support from business leaders and so on, which is exactly what Hitler did in the 1920’s and 30s. Therefore, it benefits the Nazis in the current political climate to claim that National Socialism wasn’t socialist. And the Left obviously do not want to associate themselves with Hitler and National Socialism, since it’s bad press for socialist policies. They will downplay the atrocities committed by Stalinist Socialism, and say that Hitler and National Socialism was on the Right (and wasn’t socialist). But the reality is, it was socialism. Just like the Marxists want to rid society of the undesirables (the upper class and the bourgeoisie), National Socialists want to rid society of the undesirables (the other races). If they persuade people that there’s a conspiracy, and that the evil-other race are in positions or power (upper class and bourgeoisie), then there’s no difference between the two ideologies. However, it’s worth noting that socialism is a wide spectrum, and I do not want you to come away with the idea that ALL socialisms are evil. When talking about the 1930’s and 1940’s, yes the National Socialists and Stalinist Socialist regimes are bad. However, when looking at other socialisms, like the Labour movement in Britain (as an example), things like State Pensions, National Insurance policies, a National Health Service and so on - these policies are fine. You may not agree with these policies (and there are pros and cons to them), but they’re not inherently evil just because they’re socialist policies. There is definitely a distinction to be made here between the extreme Left, and more moderate socialisms. Just because you’re communist doesn’t mean you’re also a Nazi, or being conservative does not make you a racist. The reality is that National Socialism is socialism - and thus, this video will no-doubt annoy a lot of people. Now, there are counter-arguments. People often say (see Telegraph article below) that the Nazis purged the socialists during the Night of the Long Knives, and therefore Hitler and the National Socialists weren’t socialist. This is untrue. They only purged the ‘wrong’ socialists (up to a 1,000 of them, but probably less, depending on source), since socialism is a spectrum - as I said in the video and above. The SA continued to exist after this event, going on to commit Kristallnacht in 1938, and existing until the end of the war. Hitler also killed anti-Nazis and conservatives in the Night of the Long Knives - so the same argument that says he therefore wasn’t socialist could also be made to say that he wasn’t right-wing either. This also fails to grasp the idea that, if Hitler had to purge the socialists from his own party, then there were socialists in the party. If there were socialists in the party, that might have something to do with the idea that the party was socialist. There were over 3,000,000 SA members in the early 1930’s. Taking out their socialist leader (Ernst Rohm) and up to 1,000 others, does not equate quashing the socialist movement. Hitler being socialist also explains why he has a hatred for the traditional army elite (he disliked Prussian officers) and why he put so much emphasis on the SS (which you should see as a fanatically racist and socialist army). His Marxist-worldview also explains why he wanted the resources, food, oil and slaves of East. Only with sufficient resources and slaves could he build his Germanic-socialist utopia. It’s also tied in with the atrocities committed in the East - such as the killing of the elites in Poland. The Polish intelligentsia were all eliminated - including teachers, priests, professors, doctors, lawyers, officials, business owners and landowners. This was very similar to a socialist revolution. In fact, the Soviets did exactly the same in the Eastern portion of Poland, since they occupied that half of the country. So yes, it actually makes a lot more sense for Hitler to be socialist, and for National Socialism to be socialism, than for it not to be. Looking at the history of WW2 with this in mind, several pieces of the puzzle now fit correctly… (Selected) Bibliography These books are directly in reference to the above topic. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. For a complete list of books I own on WW2 and similar, see this link - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Links to interesting articles that claim that National Socialism was not Socialism - “Hitler was not a socialist, even if he did stash champagne” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/11655230/Hitler-was-not-a-socialist-even-if-he-did-stash-champagne.html A good example as to why you shouldn’t trust the traditional media for your information. “An entirely Americentric argument, spurred on by certain batty ideologues and infamous websites, claims that Adolf Hitler was not the far-right, anti-communist nationalist that everyone else remembers him to be, but rather an egalitarian socialist.” https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_socialism [This page was last modified on 8 August 2018] Hitler was anti-communist, so not sure where the author of this page got that idea from. But being anti-communist does not make him an anti-socialist. “Man says Nazis were socialist, gets schooled by history writer” https://www.indy100.com/article/nazi-socialist-right-wing-white-supremacists-history-twitter-mikestuchbery-7900001 Yes, except the history writer in this case thinks fascism and national socialism are the same thing. They are not. Thanks for watching and reading!
    236
  136. Next Monday is Boxing Day, so to allow me to actually have a day off for Christmas, I'm going to do a behind-the-scenes video showing you all how I do my Battlestorm animations etc. This is actually answering two Patreon questions from like 4 years ago which I've delayed answering... But if you've got any questions regarding the scripting, editing or animation process, ask me below and I'll see if I can fit in some answers for you in that video. Cheers!
    236
  137. PINNED COMMENT I highly recommend Henry Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson” as a good, straightforward and accessible introduction to economics. Effectively, I removed ‘cost’ in this video in order to get the point across about production being the principle that increases the living standards of the whole of society, not money. However, if you add it back in, the fundamental principle still applies. Cost would have needlessly complicated the explanation, even though the outcome would have been the same. Also, the production and scarcity principles are the reason why an economy is not finite (there will always be more to do, and the economy can always expand) and that economics is not a “zero-sum game”. And before anyone says it - I am not advocating “trickle down economics”, since this is a term invented by the Left and doesn’t actually exist, as Thomas Sowell points out here https://youtu.be/nZPDpk8NA-g It’s clear when there’s only 10 people in an economy that production is what matters most. But when there are millions, or billions of people, this factor gets lost. The reality is, if we all hypothetically produced twice as much, we’d have twice as much, without needing to increase the money supply. Yes, individuals who have more money in our society have more access to more resources. However, if you want to improve the lives of ALL the citizens of a nation (or the globe) the only way to do it is to increase production, not money. Moving wealth down to the poor earners does not increase living standards. Higher production does. This is a fundamental concept of economics, and is the element that has caused the industrial revolution and subsequent explosion of living standards. The graphs in the article I’m about to give (especially the third graph) are an indication of the drop in global poverty over the previous two centuries as a direct result of this boom in production, innovation and technology https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty There are two important schools of thought that theorize how a product gets valued (there are more but again, simplicity). The older one (going back many centuries) is known as the “Labour Theory of Value”. This is the idea that the amount of work put into a product by a labourer will determine the product’s price. The more modern “Subjective Theory of Value” put this idea to bed. An item is worth what the purchaser is willing to pay for it. So, which is correct? Well, you can buy shirt for a couple of pounds/dollars because they’re dirt cheap to produce. And yet, Manchester United shirts cost tens of dollars. Why is that? Is it because the workers who make Manchester United shirts spend many more hours crafting the shirts? Or is it because you have a bunch of Manchester United fans who really really really want to support their team and so are willing to pay more for their shirts? That’s right, an item is worth what the purchaser is willing to pay for it, and the Subjective Theory of Value wins hands down. If only one loaf of bread was baked in an economy, the price of that loaf of bread would be very high because of the scarcity/supply principle - again, nothing to do with labour. Second hand goods sold on Amazon are determined by the rarity and the willingness of the purchaser to pay for them. A thirsty guy in a desert would really want a drink of water, which someone who’s got access to a tap. Again, nothing to do with labour, and everything to do with the subjective value of the items. At ~07:45 in the video, when talking about the extra clothes factory, I forgot to mention that the price of the goods would have to come down as well because of the excess amount of goods in the economy (supply and demand). But the excess food means that a second factory can be supported by the food produced. Then any innovation in either factory would either decrease the price of goods or spur another factory to be produced. And the cycle repeats. The only issue is if the economy has enough workers (especially new ones via population growth), which I also didn’t include in my super-simply scenario because it would complicate things. This is also the reason why Universal Basic Income doesn’t work. You’re effectively just increasing the cost of items, by reducing the supply of those items (since there’s only so many to go around). You’re also decreasing production across the economy as workers choose not to work. Worse, you’re directly taxing the rich (preventing investments into production), and taxing everybody’s savings through inflation (preventing investments again). It also stands to reason that even if the robots did come and produce 100x more stuff than a human worker could, it would still be beneficial for humans to work, because even if they only produced 1% of the goods, they’d increase living standards by 1%. Everyone would be better off. Plus, much like health, there will always be more things to produce since there is no limit to the amount of goods that we can produce. We could always have more food, clothes, roads, cars, houses, laser rifles... What the goods being produced will depend on future technologies, or perhaps humans will simply no longer produce raw materials but stick to service sector jobs, or entertainment jobs (like YOUtube) etc. But ultimately, it’s in all our best interests if we all continue to work. The Housing Crisis in the UK (now referred to as a “bubble on a bubble”) is caused by the centralised state “Planning Permission” and height restrictions, but also several other issues like government “first time buyer” loans and grants, and “Help to Buy” schemes are giving taxpayer money to people who banks won’t lend money too (because they’re not trustworthy and therefore a definite risk, plus the government has crippled the banking industry) in order for them to buy their first property. Therefore, they government has tried to fix the problem they created in the first place, and now are causing a further increase in the demand of housing (since these people wouldn’t have been able to afford to buy a house normally anyway due to their poor credit scores), thus deepening the Housing Crisis. In the future when higher interest rates return, these people will default on their mortgages and usher in a bigger recession in the housing market than would have normally happened. And in the meantime, the taxpayer is subsidising the whole crisis. It’s a colossal waste of resources which is hurting everyone and hindering the economy. Similarly, the same principle - government causing a problem, then sending in someone else to fix the problem - is applied throughout the economy. When talking about US housing, Thomas Sowell said in ‘Housing Boom and Bust’ - “A fundamental misconception of the housing market existed both during the housing boom and after the bust. That misconception was that the free market failed to produce affordable housing, and that government intervention was therefore necessary, in order to enable ordinary people to find a place to live that was within their means. Yet the hard evidence points in the opposite direction: It has been precisely where there was massive government intervention, in the form of severe building restrictions, that housing prices skyrocketed. Where the market was more or less left alone - places like Houston and Dallas, for example - housing prices took a smaller share of family income than in the past.” Friedman - “Government is necessary to preserve our freedom, it is an instrument through which we can exercise our freedom; yet by concentrating power in political hands, it is also a threat to freedom.” (From ‘Capitalism and Freedom’) and he also said - “Collectivist economic planning has indeed interfered with individual freedom.” A capitalist isn’t necessarily someone who’s rich. You can just have some savings and start a business with them. Here’s a video explaining how to start a business for under $500 https://youtu.be/rKAAzZFLPEs Also, please see Academic Agent’s video on “Understanding Inflation”, link in the description. His video on the Origins of Money is also good. SELECTED RELEVANT SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY I have read and watched more than this (videos in the description), but these were the books and videos that are most relevant to this particular video. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    235
  138. Sadly, I won’t be able to reply much tonight because I’m aiming to get the next Stalingrad video out next Monday and I’m behind with it... Therefore, I’m off to edit it! Hope you enjoy the video 👍
    235
  139. It'll be lonely this Christmas Without the Führer to blame...
    234
  140. Hope you all had a good Christmas! Due to time constraints, I wasn’t able to put the Patreon/SubscribeStar list in the video, so I apologize for that. Subtitles aren’t available yet, but I will put them in as soon as I can. Due to Christmas, the next Stalingrad video will not be out next week. I’m aiming to get it done for the week after (10th of January). I’m sorry for the delay.
    233
  141. Some notes - The reference at 19:47 wasn’t actually the full reference because I couldn’t fit it all in the reference box. Here’s the full reference - Courtois, Werth, Panne, Paczkowski, Bartosek, Margolin, "The Black Book of Communism," P71-126. Engelstein, “Russia in Flames,” P560. Gellately, “Lenin, Stalin and Hitler,” P63, P65, P72, P75. Marx, & Engels, "Manifesto of the Communist Party," P67. Zamoyski, A. "Warsaw 1920: Lenin's Failed Conquest of Europe." Harper Press, 2008. (all of it) The FULL list of sources is available in the description. In case you didn’t see last week’s pinned comment - the editing for next Season of Stalingrad is currently underway. My current target for the release of episode 16 is the 23rd of November 2020. (Turns out that aiming for next Monday was a bit too ambitious.) Next week’s video will probably be about General Patton…
    233
  142. 2 girls 1 cup is REAL socialism!?!
    232
  143. Can't do it! YouTube limits a video to 12 hours long, while this series will be approximately 35 hours long
    231
  144. Hey all! I've made a mistake in this video. The Volga Germans were evacuated in 1941, not 1942. The source I used (Popov) randomly jumps back to 1941 for one page just to talk about the Volga German evacuations, then jumps forward again to 1942, and I somehow missed the year change. (Totally my fault, but this also reinforces my belief that history books shouldn't be written out of chronological order...) A big thank you to William Kidney for pointing out my error! I will probably make a quick video about this later this week to make sure everyone it brought up to speed about it
    230
  145. Disagree? Would love to see your counterargument. No timestamps because it’s not that type of video. It requires you to watch it from start to finish. Would also recommend you don’t read this comment fully until AFTER watching the video… but I know some of you won’t wait for that, so don’t say you weren’t warned :) Notes - For those that will no doubt come back and say that “nobody ever says the T-34 and the KV’s were war winning tanks”. No, people do. I’ve had quite a few comments claiming this, and there are sites out there that do say this. For example, https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-t-34-was-a-war-winning-tank-662ba112774f https://www.warhistoryonline.com/guest-bloggers/soviet-t-34-tank.html Some very interesting quotes from Iseav on the Dubno battle you guys may find interesting - “Anyone who has not limited themselves to merely studying the initial period of the history of the war would be struck by the abundance of infantry divisions on the site of the tank battles in the triangle formed of Brody-Lutsk-Dubno. This was never subsequently repeated. In the advance outside Kursk in the summer of 1943 German tank divisions were forced to plot the route in front of them independently and from the first few days, or even hours of the battle, they were ‘gnawing through’ the Soviet defence. In this same location outside Kursk there was no amiable breaking in the defence as had happened in the case of the ‘Molotov Line’ in Ukraine in the first half of the day on 22 June 1941. Between 1944-1945 the operational support for tank formations by infantry was very poor and unregulated. Moreover, as the number of infantry formations decreased that had fought in the battle, between 1943-1945 the quality of the infantry deteriorated considerably.” -From Isaev, P192-193 “Naturally such a multifaceted phenomenon as a week-long battle of a large number of tanks is not just limited to a clash of tanks and infantry. The enemy divisions that were armed with tanks unavoidably clashed on the battlefield. Complex factors determined the winner in these battles, but first and foremost it was the organisational structure of the tank forces on both sides. Here the Wehrmacht’s infantry and artillery, though this time they were motorized, were a match for the tanks of the Red Army. This enabled the pulverisation of enormous numbers of light tanks and the attacks by T-34s and KVs to be countered.” -From Iseav P193-194 This next quote is from the Staff of Strategy and Tactics Magazine. Page 122 (see sources below) “1942-45 Soviet Motorized Anti-Tank Regiment - “This is the unit that destroyed the German "panzerblitz" in the East. Based on their experience, the Soviets calculated that 12 rounds of 45mm or six of 76mm gun fire were needed to destroy one medium tank. Based on the calculation, each 76mm gun was expected to put 2 or 3 medium tanks out of action before being destroyed. Heavier tanks (Panther and Tiger) cut the 76mm gun's effectiveness by about half. But the Soviets were producing more 76mm guns than the Germans were producing tanks. In the 1944 the Soviets produced 23,800 76mm anti-tank guns (some 20 percent more than 1943) as well as 16,500 45mm guns (then being replaced by the 57mm gun). The Soviets employed their 76mm guns in batteries of four guns, all concentrating their fire on one target at a time.” From the Rommel Papers talking about tanks in North Africa - “[The Mark II Matilda tanks] were also only supplied with solid, armour-piercing shell. It would be interesting to know why the Mark II was called an infantry tank, which it had no H.E. ammunition with which to engage the opposing infantry. It was also, as I have already said, far too slow. In fact, its only real use was in a straight punch to smash a hole in a concentration of material.” What’s interesting is the Rommel’s main concerns about the British tanks were their speed and guns. He notes that the Matilda had heavy armour, but was too slow and that it’s gun was not capable for firing HE, meaning it wasn’t a very effective infantry-fighting machine, and was easy to take out with the 88mms. Heavy tanks therefore can be vulnerable. He also praises the Crusader tank for being very fast, but says its gun (2-pdr, the same gun as the Matilda) had too short a range. He says if only it had a heavier gun “it could have made things extremely unpleasant for us.” He even says this gun therefore did not make up for the “heavy armour it carried”. For Rommel at least, armour protection alone is not as important as speed, maneuverability, and firepower. “The armoured units which they threw against our striking force in the area north of Sidi Omar failed to prevent the advance of the 5th Light Division and 15th Panzer Division, and thanks to the excellent co-ordination between our anti-tank, armoured and A.A. forces, were themselves destroyed.” - again from the Rommel Papers. Last week, GM4ThePeople said “For this reason, mass-produced light vehicles, with a de-emphasis on protection, & an emphasis on mobility & firepower were indicated. Doctrine should have more closely adhered to the strategic reality. Motorised infantry, not armoured halftracks. The Pz II chassis was the solution, not the problem.” The Panzer II part aside, as shown in this video, the role of the tank does not require it to have overly thick armour. Therefore it could be argued that medium tank designs are the most suitable sort of tank. I do think that Panzer IIs were a little too weak in this, since they couldn’t fit a decent enough gun in their turret. Panzer IIIs also have limited turrets - which is why the StuG design was very good. But the Panzer IV is a great tank which, perhaps with the adoption of sloped armour, could have been focused on, even in the late war. It could, and often has, be argued that the production of Panthers and other heavy tanks (Tigers were good for morale purposes, but beyond that, there were too few to make a difference) was a waste. If you consider tanks to be used as exploitation vehicles, then heavier tank designs are a waste. Then again, the Germans didn’t have the fuel to fight the war of movement anyway so perhaps it’s a mute point. Perhaps heavier tanks were the best option for the Germans, given the circumstances. Would love to know your thoughts on these points. I also want to point out that the Soviet mortar numbers are the only weapon number that increases by that much. Most other weapons either increase somewhat or decrease somewhat, but not multiply by that amount. The conclusion in this video will play an important part in explaining both the Crusader and Stalingrad battles - both of which I’m still working on creating “Battlestorm” documentaries for. Next week’s video will be Stalingrad-related… Selected Sources Butler, Daniel Allen. Field Marshal: the Life and Death of Erwin Rommel. Casemate Publishers, 2015. Clark, L. “Kursk: The Greatest Tank battle Eastern Front 1943.” Kindle, Headline Publishing, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Glantz, D. When Titan’s Clashed. University Press of Kansas, 2015. Kavalerchik, B. The Price of Victory: The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War. Pen & Sword Military, 2017. Liedtke, G. Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943. Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Isaev, A. Dubno 1941. The Greatest Tank Battle of the Second World War. Helion & Company, 2017. Healy, M. Zitadelle: The German Offensive Against the Kursk Salient 4-17 July 1943. Kindle edition, 2016. Hart, L. The Rommel Papers. 1953. War in the East, Staff of Strategy and Tactics Magazine (this section on order of battle by James F. Dunnigan), Simulation Publication s Inc., NY, 1977. Page 122 Link to Purges video - https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ Please consider supporting me on Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Thank you all for watching!
    226
  146. Notes and Sources It’s the end of the series! I hope you’ve enjoyed it! The next BATTLESTORM series will 100% definitely be Stalingrad. I can’t put a firm date on it at the moment because the maps aren’t finished for it and I’m still working on parts of the script, but it is coming in the near future. But I’m planning on doing a bit of an update about it next week where I’ll go into more detail of where I’m at with it. Let me know what you think about the Traditional Narrative, Dönitz and Madman Hitler. Was I correct in my assessment? Was I wrong? Most of the authors spend barely a paragraph on the 6th Battle of Courland, which is why I couldn’t go into much detail with it. I can promise a lot more detail in the Stalingrad series though… :) Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Paterson, L. "Steel and Ice: The U-Boat Battle in the Arctic and Black Sea 1941-45." The History Press, Kindle 2016. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm Inflation in Germany https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany I’ve also used some maps and information from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/ A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    225
  147. "It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that is life." - Jean-Luc Picard (Don't tell the Germans that, Captain, you'll give them an excuse!)
    221
  148. Haha what is sleep!?
    218
  149. Thank you for your response. I agree that the subjects covered are obscure by nature, and it does appear you know a lot about these subjects. Here's a partial reply: 1) Yes, this was a mistake. I pinned a comment stating this. 6) Giovanni Gentile was the philosophical founder of Fascism. So Fascism was National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism (Actual Idealism). Thus, Gentile was responsible for the Actualism. Sorel would be responsible for the Syndicalism part. In the updated video I will do on this in the future (once I've done a lot more reading), I'll hopefull remember to include him. 7) I've never heard of Rudolf Jung until now. Thank you, and I'll have a look at what he said. 8) I don't know if I agree with you. The modern Third Positionists are all over Evola. And as you said, he was inspired by what the National Socialists were on about. Perhaps it would be better to say he was Third Positionist-adjacent?
    215
  150. I'm glad you're happy with the content! I feel guilty because I've not done a "tank" video in a couple weeks...
    212
  151. The Federal Reserve will bail you out soon
    212
  152. Please do remove yourself, Aiden. Nothing of value would have been lost. I respect people who actually have valid counter points and counter arguments, but you (and some of the others - like Mike Mcwhatever his name is) have presented ZERO valid counter points, since everything you've said has been refuted in the video.
    212
  153. PLEASE READ I’ve replaced my original pinned comments in BOTH videos because people either ignored them completely (pinned comments is where I list my sources, not the description as many of you claimed) or because I wanted to address many of the criticisms that people had about these videos. Since comments can only be so long, I’ve had to split this into sections. So please make sure you check out the comments below this one. Sources will be listed in the following post, as are links to a couple of videos etc. First of all, the National Socialist economy and society in Germany was absolutely not capitalist (no matter how much people scream at me that it is). After crushing imports and exports in 1933-1934 in order to promote Autarky and rearmament, party officials were basically in every shop and business, providing them with goods or foreign currency, and dictating policy etc. On top of this, Autarky crushed imports and exports, causing the end of trade, helping to isolate Germany from the globalized economy. All this caused a massive economic crisis in 1934, but to quote Tooze's Wages of Destruction - "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - P112 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 And this was 1934. So this was absolutely not capitalism. And if it's heavy state intervention, with a planned centralized economy, without being capitalism, what could it be? A commenter critical of what I was saying (Adrian Mahon) said that my definition of socialism was wrong, and that - "It's about power relationships and shifting these to the workers" Ok, I absolutely agree with what he’s saying there. From an ideological perspective of what was defined by Marx, that's a fair assessment. And I don't disagree - I never have done. But, there's an issue with this definition historically. And people have given other definitions (revolutionary vs non-revolutionary, “seizing the means of production” etc). In fact, socialism doesn’t have “one” definition because as Evans wrote - “When an intellectual historian reads Hobbes’s Leviathan or Marx’s Das Kapital, it is not in order to use their writings to reconstruct something outside them, but in order to construct an interpretation of what they mean or meant. There are indeed many interpretations of these thinkers’ ideas, not least because the systems of thought Hobbes and Marx established were so wide-ranging that they never became completely closed.” - Evans, R. “In Defence of History.” Granta Books, Kindle. So, let’s not pretend that socialism is a fixed definition. Now, some of you also have this concern - "We are seeing a rise of fascism; to 'revise' the meaning of socialism plays to a particular audience that (I'm hoping) you don't want." - Adrian Mahon. I agree, and I absolutely don't want to see a rise in fascism or National Socialism. I cannot stress this enough. I've already said a couple videos back that I'm doing a Holocaust documentary because I'm sick to death of people preaching Holocaust (and Holodomor) denial. It's sickening. So, do not think I'm at all promoting either ideology. Several people claimed I was ‘redefining socialism’ so I could deny the Holocaust. No idea where that came from. And actually, by saying that National Socialism wasn't socialism - this actually plays into the National Socialist and denialist hands. Now, at first you might think - why? Well, let me explain with a bit of history - Hitler genuinely believed in his version of 'socialism', and thought it was a form of 'socialism'. It doesn't matter if you think that it's socialism or not at this point, just run with it. So, when Hitler comes to power in 1933, he 'socialized' the German economy by removing the Jewish influence from government etc and imposes his version of 'socialism'. And this actually caused an economic crisis by 1934 as a result. This was due to Autarky and armaments spending (see the previous quotes in my above comment which are linked to this). With the 'socialization' of the people, he removed Jews from society, and heavily restricted trade, ending capitalism. And he geared up for war. Military spending was less than 1% of the budget in 1933, and was 10% in 1935. This was “- a bigger and quicker increase than ever seen before in peacetime in a capitalist state.” from Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. Page 92. Now, why would he do this? Is it just for military conquest? Or is there some sort of underlying motive? And yes, there's an underlying motive. Going back to Mein Kampf, what he see is his version of Nationalism (which is entwined with his 'socialism'). As a brief explanation - he thought that the species shouldn't mix breeds. And that Aryan peoples built nations. However, the reason he thinks nations collapsed in the past had nothing to do with war etc; it was all because the Aryans interbred with the lesser races. In Hitler's mind, the dilution of Aryan blood would weaken the race, and bring down the nation. Yes, complete lunacy, but there's little doubt he thought this. And he honestly thought that the Jews were the absolute worse race, and the fact they didn't have a nation of their own (at the time) proved his theory right. In Mein Kampf, Hitler says that the Jews were like parasites who would latch onto Aryan nations and dilute Aryan blood with their own blood by interbreeding. Therefore Hitler thought that the Jews had to be removed from society to prevent the Aryan German blood from being diluted, and thus causing the downfall of the German race. However, there's the Marxist problem too. In Hitler's mind, the Jews were championing Marxism. The reason was stated as: if they made everything equal and classless, this would give the Jews the best chance to interbreed with everyone and thus bring about the fall of humanity. Yes, it's ridiculous, but that's where he went with it. So, you can see why he hated Bolshevism so much. He thought that international communism would allow the Jews to destroy the Aryan races. He therefore decided to take action and beat the Jews before they beat the Aryans. This is why he wanted to go East. He viewed the Slavs as slaves owned by the Jews. But if they conquered the Soviet Union, rid the Jews from society, the Slavs would serve the master German Aryans for a 1,000 years. Now, Adrian Mahon said "Can we agree agree on what 'socialist' means (hint: it's not state intervention). It's about power relationships and shifting these to the workers" Ok, but let's look at what Hitler thought for a moment. Hitler thought that 'socialism' was about power relationships too. The difference was that he thought the way to solve the issue wasn't by having the workers rise up. But actually by removing the Jews. (I know this isn't socialism as Marx defined it, but stick with me for a bit longer) If he removed the Jews, then the power relationships wouldn't happen. The Aryan race would all work together as a collective to better the German nation - the elites would help their fellow men, and the workers could rise to the top. Hitler does say that the ladder still exists because individuals should be able to climb up if they're better than others. That would actually help the race because supposedly the better elements of the race would rise upwards. (And you do have quite a bit of social movement in the National Socialist era of Germany, so it's not completely correct to say he was just saying this stuff.) Now, this Hitler-version of 'socialism' is actually mixed with his Nationalism. Hitler redefined this to mean that the state was the absolute embodiment of the race (his 'Nationalism'). However, the two are intermixed. You can't have one without the other. The state/people need to remove the Jews, and the state/people need to work together. Now, if you keep this idea in mind - that the Nationalism and the Socialism element are equal and the same - look what happens when we consider the history of the time: When you think of the trains taking people to the forced labour camps, the concentration camps, the death camps etc, what you have to remember is that, this absolutely wasn't free-market forces doing this. This was a systematic industrial mass-killing, controlled by the state (hence my "intervention in economy and society" bit), and I would absolutely argue that this could not have happened to this extent in a free-market capitalist economy. How would a business market "Murder of Racial Minorities on a Mass Scale" in any capitalist society? It just wouldn't happen to this extent. Yeah, you have persecutions and murder during wartime etc, but not mass-industrial-scale-murder.
    211
  154. As a viewer has just pointed out, there's an editing mistake. The date in the corner doesn't update and stays the 31st of January. Sorry about that. Obviously the 6th Army surrendered on the 2nd of February.
    211
  155. Yeah, I know, I simply misspoke. Sorry
    210
  156. In case you didn't notice, yes I am now (up to) 2 years behind with the Q&As... I have answered some more recent questions, but yes, I'm way behind. Not sure how I'm going to catch up either, so I think I need to apologize to everyone who has asked a question but has yet to receive a reply. I'm really sorry, but I am going as fast as I can!
    210
  157. And I don't think the oil situation is as bad for Germany in HOI4 as it actually was in reality
    210
  158. And the Austro-Hungarian Empire had an air force before airplanes were invented.
    209
  159. There is substantial evidence that suggests that Peorhum eats babies and kicks puppies
    208
  160. Common Questions and Opinions I get in pretty much every video at the moment, plus specific ones that probably relate to this video Q: Why don’t you just stick to tanks? A: https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8 Q: Why do you quote Hitler? Is it because you love him!? A: Absolutely not https://youtu.be/lj7bHzW0V6c Opinion: I don’t see the purpose of this video!? Me: Then watch something else. Q: But Mises was in favour of democracy! A: So? I don’t “believe” in Mises like the way a Marxist believes in Marx; economics is not a religion, it is a science. If only Marx understood that https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U Opinion: You’re biased! And you have an agenda! And you’re not objective! Me: Learn basic history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Opinion: You don’t know the true definition of Socialism! Me: Yes I do https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Opinion: Hitler’s not a REAL Socialist! Me: Yes he is https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Opinion: Some of your videos get a lot of dislikes! It must be because they suck! Me: This isn’t a popularity contest. Upvote or Downvote the video all you like. See if I care. All that matters is the best evidence and interpretation. Q: When’s the next Stalingrad video coming out? A: When it’s finished https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY And, if you haven’t seen these videos of mine, you really should: Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Hitler's Socialism | Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 FASCISM DEFINED | The Difference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko History Theory 101 https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    207
  161. The term "Liberal" used to mean for Liberty - meaning the Right. However, the socialists started appropriating the terms. First they took the term "scientific", even though the ideology comes before the truth. Then they took the term "democracy", even though the individual has no power under the boot of a socialist society. Then they took the term "Liberal", even though slaves of the group-state cannot be free. So I am still a Liberal. I'm a Classic British Liberal.
    204
  162. Halder could drive his panzers across water, and turn non-Aryan blood into fuel
    204
  163.  @Alte.Kameraden  yes, he did just delete them himself. To confirm, I had nothing to do with it, and he's still got A LOT of comments elsewhere in here, so he's going to have trouble deleting them all. I do have the ability to delete all comments from one user in an instant across the entire channel, and (unless it's genuine spam or similar) I avoid using it because I'm pro-free speech. I would happily click that button if someone else asked me to do it, but since Aiden has spent 100 hours commenting about how he hasn't got 5 hours spare to 'waste' watching this video, I would actually like to see him sweat a little trying to delete all his previous comments himself.
    203
  164. Notes It’s 9 corps, not 8. And it’s also 4 panzer divisions, not 3. Only noticed when I was editing and too late to go back. Yes! I can’t count! Map shown is actually for the 24th of July rather than the 23rd, simply because it turns out I don’t have an accurate map for the 23rd of July. The reason for doing the order of battle on the 23rd of July is because I will be following the events in detail from the 24th of July 1942 to the 2nd of February 1943 in my upcoming Stalingrad documentary. When’s it coming? Well, considering it’s taken me 55 minutes just to tell you which units are in the 6th Army, I think we can confidently say “in a bit”. https://youtu.be/PMEXIocRfOg I do not know if 44th Infantry Division had a reconnaissance battalion. If it did, I don’t know which one it is. I also don’t know the artillery unit for 60th Motorized Division - let me know if you know! Several other units don’t have unit symbols or generals, and I don’t know the leaders for a lot of them. If you can help me out, please do! Important Links Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make more videos like this possible https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Link to MHV video “Organization & Structure of a German Infantry Division in World War 2” https://youtu.be/_tiH5YCa8Qs Link to my “The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL” video https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Link to my “Croatian Legion” video https://youtu.be/bVbqdD6CmOI Link to Don't Buy This Book! "With Paulus at Stalingrad" https://youtu.be/51_6olyYPDo Link to “Death of the Leaping Horsemen Book Review” https://youtu.be/sPNhk7ForPw Selected Bibliography/Sources Adam, W. Rühle, O. “With Paulus at Stalingrad.” Pen and Sword Books, 2015. Beevor, A. “The Second World War.” Phoenix, 2012. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book One: November 1942..” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mark, J. Obhodas, A. “Croatian Legion: The 369th Reinforced (Croatian) Infantry Regiment on the Eastern Front 1941-1943.” Leaping Horsemen Books, 2010. Mark, J. “Death of the Leaping Horsemen: The 24th Panzer Division in Stalingrad 12th August - 20th November 1942.” Stackpole Books, Kindle 2003. Mark, J. “Panzer Krieg: Volume 1: German Armoured Operations at Stalingrad.” Leaping Horsemen Books, 2017. Thanks for watching!
    202
  165. It's a good thing that you question what you hear, so don't feel like you're a "smart-ass" or anything. History lies in the heart of the debate after all. So, it's a bit more complicated than this, but essentially Jones is using the primary sources, most of which have been verified by Anton Joly and Egor Kobiakov. But a few days ago, Egor let me and Anton know that there were a couple of issues with the evidence which may cast doubt on Jones's interpretation. It was too late for me to alter the script for this video to mention this, so this video is what it is. However, I'm thinking of doing a follow-up Addendum video to discuss this further. That said, some people are arguing that I spent too much time discussing this in this video, so perhaps people won't want to hear more about it 🤔
    202
  166. Here's a quick hotfix (version 001.01) that corrects a few of the more obvious mistakes in the original map and timeline https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lHY2Q4Kpmy63Pzpz0Imhb5dfndKl9YQy/view?usp=sharing And yes, I intend to update and improve this timeline map as I continue to work on these topics 👍 The most obvious mistake in the video is that Plotinus was not a Christian. Thank you to those pointing that out.
    202
  167. I sort of agree, but we do have evidence of one group of gnostics influencing other people or even breaking away and creating their own branches, so it's not like these individuals are randomly coming to this conclusion.
    200
  168. I just want to point out - some of the people who expressed their dissatisfaction were quite reasonable with their comments. But a lot were not. I'd prefer it if people didn't swear or call me names etc, or accuse me of lying or being "intellectually dishonest" etc. If you disagree with me, please just say something like "Hey TIK, could you elaborate more on this point?" Also, Patreons and Subscribestarians - I'm going to be posting an update soon on the sites, and replying to your messages in the next couple days. I'm a bit behind with things, so sorry about that. But thank you for your continuing support!
    199
  169. PINNED COMMENT The three books listed in the video - Richard Overy’s “Russia’s War” - short sharp and sweet Stephan Fritz’s “Ostkrieg” David Glantz and Jonathan House’s “When Titan’s Clashed” The other recommended books for the Eastern Front - (these are not in any particular order) Your best bet is to pick up anything by David Glantz or Jonathan House if you liked the style of “When Titan’s Clashed”. For example, his single-volume book on “Stalingrad” (he’s done a 5-book, 4 volume “trilogy” on it, but that’s even more ridiculous) is pretty much the greatest account of the battle ever. Robert Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942” is a decent account of the events of 1942 - Hitler’s last chance for victory. In fact, anything by Citino is good, but just remember that this guy is talking about things from the German perspective. Joel Hayward’s “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943” - great for anyone looking into the air war, or also Stalingrad. Gregory Liedtke’s “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943” - shows that many of the old myths about the Eastern Front from the Cold-War era are incorrect, or at least questionable. The statistics provided are also fantastic. David Stahel’s “Operation Barbarossa: Germany’s Defeat in the East” is a good place to start if you want to look at the beginning of the war. Stahel is an expert on the 1941 campaign, and his books are definitely recommended reading. Books you should avoid for now - Any and all MEMOIRS Seriously, avoid memoirs until you understand the topic. People lie or twist the truth in memoirs, and you want to avoid them until you’ve got a grasp of the conflict. Manstein’s “Lost Victories” and Guderian’s “Panzer Leader” will drown you in a false perception of the conflict. For example, Manstein just so happens to not mention any of the war crimes he committed on the Eastern Front which he went to prison for. Would you believe the logic of a known criminal? No, yet people read his popular memoirs and believe him without question. This is why it’s probably best you avoid memoirs for now. In addition, Shirer’s ancient “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” should also be avoided because he’s heavily reliant on the German general’s memoirs, specifically Franz Halder’s. Halder basically scored a natural 20 in intrigue and has manipulated most of the post-war literature on the Eastern Front to his way of thinking. The German generals went along with him because it gave them a way of wriggling out of their prison cells. Again, be wary of texts written in the Cold War, and aim for more modern books. In addition, please avoid some of the ‘hostile’ comments that will no doubt come up in the comment section below because of my recommendation to avoid the memoirs of the German generals. A lot of people are of the opinion that the Germans did nothing wrong in WW2 - and this is simply ridiculous, as you will see in the three books I recommended. Here’s a spreadsheet with all the books I currently have about WW2 (and related) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Link to my Patreon https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Please consider supporting me if you can and make these videos be as good as they can be! Happy reading! And thanks for watching, bye for now!
    199
  170. This is the first time I’ve done a specific video on the air war. What do you think? Want me to do more? Or should I “stick to tanks”? Still not sure on a date with Stalingrad, but the map is almost done so I will let you know. If you like Stalingrad, you should check out and subscribe to Anton Joly's YouTube channel - "Stalingrad Battle Data". Link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA Sources Drabkin, A. "The Red Air Force at War: Barbarossa and the Retreat to Moscow." Pen&Sword, Kindle 2007. Glantz, D. “Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. & House, J. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Group, 1999. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Hill, A. "British Lend Lease Aid and the Soviet War Effort, June 1941 June 1942." Article from The Journal of Military History,Vol. 71, No. 3 (Jul., 2007), pp. 773-808. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Suvorov, V. "Icebreaker. Who Started the Second World War?" PL UK Publishing, Kindle 2012. (this book is not recommending reading) van Tuyll, H. "Feeding the Bear: American Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945." Greenwood Press, 1989. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    199
  171. Be right back. Just going to listen to John Lee Hooker and blow my nose
    198
  172. You're correct. I'd also be happy with a few grenades right now...
    197
  173. Huh, two people posted the same quote at the same time
    197
  174. This video was demonetized by YouTube after manual review without any explanation as to why. The conclusion we must assume is that YouTube clearly doesn’t want to promote videos talking about military history or events like the Hunger Winter (is YouTube Denialist?). For this reason, I am 100% reliant on my Patreons for support, who really are allowing videos like this to be made. Thank you! All questions are from Patreons donating $5 or more on my Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Please consider supporting me and allow this channel to continue. Dutch strikes gripped the country in response to Arnhem being evacuated. This was the excuse used by the Germans to cut food and supplies to the Netherlands. The Hunger Winter was the result. It seems that some blame the Allies for not advancing into the Netherlands quicker to relieve them from the hunger. But Allied strategy was focused on knocking the Germans out of the war, which would then solve the starvation issue by itself. Was this a right strategy? Could the Allies have done more to help the Dutch? And I’m curious to hear your thoughts on the board front vs narrow front strategy, and whether you think either was right or wrong. There are clearly flaws to both. But which was the better strategy? And, once again, who’s really to blame for how Market Garden turned out? Let me know in the comments! Selected Bibliography / Sources (I have more books on the Battle of Arnhem and Operation Market Garden, but these were the most relevant to this particular discussion) Beevor, A. “Arnhem: The Battle for the Bridges.” Penguin Books, 2018. Ambrose, S. "Band of Brothers: E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler's Eagle's Nest." Simon & Schuster, Kindle 2001. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Eisenhower, D. "Crusade in Europe." Doubleday, Kindle 1948. Hunt, V. "Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket." Helion & Company, 2017. Middlebrook, M. “Arnhem 1944: The Airborne Battle, 17-29 September.” 2009. Montgomery, B. "The Memoirs of Field-Marshal Montgomery." Pan & Sword Military, 2014. Neillands, R. “The Battle for the Rhine 1944.” Kindle, 2014. Internet sources - http://www.pegasusarchive.org/arnhem/RepPegasus.htm http://www.pegasusarchive.org/arnhem/depth_aftermath.htm Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    196
  175. They did keep fighting them during "The Blitz", which lasted until May 1941. Then their attention turned to the East.
    196
  176. Edit: YouTube has Age Restricted this video! Thanks YouTube! Hey all! I highly recommend Mazower’s book “Inside Hitler’s Greece” if you’d like to read more on Greece in WW2. It’s a very good read, and a lot of information for this video came from his book. Aly’s “Hitler’s Beneficiaries” explains the wider German occupation of Europe, but describes the situation in Greece from 1943-44 very well. Highly recommended if you want to understand the food and economic crisis of Axis-Europe, and why they proceeded to loot the Continent. Lecoeur’s “Mussolini’s Greek Island” is a specific look at the plight of the island of Syros and is very detailed. Good if you want to get a micro view of the events in Greece. Cheers!
    196
  177. It's strange that, isn't it :)
    194
  178. "I have to wonder about the Kotluban casualty figures. 80:1 is ridiculous, and losing 33% of your men in a single blunted offensive? This sounds hard to believe." You're right to be suspicious about it. And everyone questioning me about this has made me double-check the numbers, which has led me into a rabbit-hole over the past couple of hours... I'll get back to you guys on this in the next Addendum video because things are complicated to say the least. I know I've made a mistake, but it looks like David Glantz has too
    194
  179. Normally I wouldn’t do a Battlestorm-like video for a Patron Q&A. However, I needed to try out a new method of creating Battlestorm animations before returning to the Stalingrad series, and this question was ideal for that because it was both small and short, with limited sources. So what I’m trying to say is that this was more of a one-off, and I can’t promise to do Battlestorm-like videos for future Q&As, even if Patrons asked me to do that
    194
  180. You would be correct. They also didn't watch the follow up where I spent 18 months using 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and notes etc to destroy their counter arguments https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And I know they didn't watch it because I've got video proof of them even admitting it https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    193
  181. Really? How barbaric! (sarcasm)
    192
  182. The Nazis are beginning to hate already. Surprised the Communists aren't here yet
    191
  183. Yeah, I'm not against the idea of freedom etc, I just don't think "democracy" is what people think it is. The American Founders created a Republic for a reason, not a democracy. And interestingly, Mises was pro-democracy (at least in his early books). People accuse me of "just believing Mises", but this is one element of Mises that I do disagree with.
    190
  184. You ain't seen nothing yet. We're mostly at division and regiment level at the moment. Once we get into the city, we're going to attempt to go down to battalion level or lower
    190
  185. Surprisingly, this isn't the first time I've done this. I think I did the same in the Order 227 video, and the reason why is because all I'm thinking of right now is STALINGRAD STALINGRAD STALINGRAD
    186
  186. NOTE: Due to technical issues related to Bandicam, I had to use Sony Vegas Pro to edit this video, and Vegas has a massive issue with text scrolling in videos as I discovered to my horror... So I was unable to put Patron names in this video. This is a one-off issue, so your names will appear in future videos.
    186
  187. Notes “...as everyone says, that the [Soviet] divisions are so weak that this character is making a huge bluff with his so-called “divisions.” That’s what’s being said on all sides. He’s counting on his artillery. He is concentrating it. Apart from this, his divisions are so weak - just a few thousand men… We’ve had pockets with 7 divisions inside, where we took 2,000 prisoners and killed another 2,000. But where are the rest? And then it is said that he attacks with huge crowds of infantry. But if we ever made such an encirclement, there was never anything in it. But if has always been like this. It was like this already in 1941. Except for a few major attacks ,the results have been very meager in general.” - Hitler, 6 Nov 1944. [From “Hitler and his Generals” P511-512] When reading many of the books - especially those written from the German perspective - it quickly becomes evident that they are trying to downplay the mistakes made by the German generals and soldiers, and emphasise Soviet atrocities and Hitler’s meddling. They also point out how vastly outnumbered they are by “waves” of Red Army troops by pointing out how many divisions the Soviets have compared to them. The statistics don’t support such a thesis, and you can’t compare German divisions to Soviet divisions because size-wise they are not the same. Soviet divisions are much smaller than German divisions, as Hitler points out in the quote above. Unfortunately, being unable to read German or Russian, I’m limited to the German perspective (since a lot of German books have been translated into English). As you will see from the listed sources below, I have limited amounts of sources written from the Soviet-side. This is a major issue, so I will attempt to compensate where possible, but I’m acutely aware that this series will be rendered out of date as soon as some Russian-sources are made available in English, or someone who can read Russian makes a documentary on the same period. So, if and when that does happen, I encourage you to change your perspective. That said, I’m fairly confident this first episode is accurate for the most part, since we’re not talking about the unit positioning on the battlefield yet. To clarify: the German U-boats are technically just boats, not submarines, because they weren’t able to stay submerged. Only with the fitting of the new snorkel were the new generation of U-boats classed as submarines. In the video, I said the snorkel came from the Dutch, but I should have said Danish. The snorkel came from the Danish. Next week, we will look at the tragic circumstances that the Baltic States were in. If nothing else in this series, we must remember the innocent lives of those caught in the middle of this conflict. Then we will begin looking at the combat itself in episode 3. Sources/Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Some gun penetration statistics from - https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Video Links Why the Germans had the Tactical Advantage early in WW2 | Tank and Anti-Tank Warfare https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74 The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2 https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2 https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    186
  188. Yeah, some Marxist said I was lying and misleading people, and 'refuted' me with two sources, and basically rejected everything I said... except he completely missed the elephant in the room - the socialist shrinking markets problem.
    186
  189. I'd recommend a drink of salty socialist tears ;)
    186
  190. Due to one Patron asking me a related question about Hitler, I’ve decided that next week’s video will be the “Public vs Private” video, which I’m hastily putting together now. For the first time on this channel, we’ll be going back all the way to ancient Greece and Rome, and then forward in time all the way to WW2. As you can imagine, it’s going to be quite a long video, so be ready for that. The Stalingrad map is finished! It looks amazing! So once the “Public vs Private” video is made, I’m going to get editing Stalingrad :) I’ll also be creating a behind the scenes Stalingrad editing video for Patrons pledging over £5 where I show how I move the units on the map and put in effects etc. As soon as I have a hard date for Stalingrad, I will let you know, but it’s going to be very soon. In the meantime, check out historian Anton Joly's YouTube channel "Stalingrad Battle Data". Link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA There’s no real need to list sources this time, so I will just link to my full list of WW2 and related books https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Cheers!
    186
  191. It was a nightmare to render, a nightmare to upload, and there were that many YouTube glitches that I couldn't even do the subtitles despite 8 hours attempting to put them in
    184
  192. That's a very good point!
    183
  193. Just a reminder that this series couldn’t have been made without Anton Joly! If you haven’t already, check out his YouTube channel “Stalingrad Battle Data” (link in the description). Had a few technical issues rendering this video, and had to rerender it a few times. This final render of the video has annoyingly caused a couple of quotes to resize in Part 3, making parts of some of the words to go off the screen, or the references to be slightly hidden by the book in the right hand corner, or go off the screen again. Not sure why it’s done that because they were positioned correctly in the edit, but worth pointing out that I am aware of the issue.
    183
  194. I guess you could say... he sucked
    181
  195. Little Lord von Manstein always tells the truth. He is the light at the heart of the universe. The love in all our hearts. Praise be.
    180
  196. It's not "your" country, Rusty. You don't "own" it - it's "owned" collectively. In other words, the State owns the country and owns you too.
    179
  197. WAS HITLER’S REGIME TOTALITARIAN? Yes or no? Let me know. Standard “utopian” socialism : common control of the means of production. Marxist socialism : class control of the means of production. National Socialism : race control of the means of production. Fascism : nationality control of the means of production. Markets : people, individuals. [A market is two people who trade. So do you want to have "Free Markets"/free people, or "planned economy"/non-free people?] Means of production : people, individuals. [A factory/building/tool cannot operate without a human, so humans are the means of production. Therefore do you want to control your own life, or have someone else control it?] Capitalism : private control of the means of production. [private individual (you) control over your own life] Classic Liberalism : people are individuals and should be judged as such. Freedom of speech, equal rights, and people are free to do as they please (spend their money the way they want). --- Notice how the Left will change the terms of those above to hide the meaning of following - Standard "Utopian" socialism : common-control of the means of production. [a group / other people / another authority controls your life - you're no longer free. You are not allowed to own property, and your possessions, money and lives are not your own.] Marxist Socialism : class-control of the means of production. [the "workers" unions are in control, anyone else should be enslaved and murdered] National Socialism : race-control of the means of production. [the "Aryan" race should be in control, everyone else should be enslaved and murdered] Fascism : nationality-control of the means of production. [e.g. the "Americans" (nationality, not race) should be in control, everyone else should be enslaved and murdered] --- Some random Leftist terms that don't make sense - State Capitalism : a contradiction in terms, since you cannot have non-free free individuals. Either the individual is free, or is controlled by the state. Capitalism is freedom from the state, so you cannot have state-controlled free-people. Anarcho-syndicalism : a contradiction in terms, since if you have workers unions (or federalism etc) you cannot also have anarchy at the same time. This is actually based on a deliberate postmodernist revision and misquotation of Das Kapital Volume 3 (and yes, I checked the original German). --- Clearly, socialism is built on both killing and enslavement, no matter which form it is. Enslavement and killing are fundamental to the very core ideology itself, which is that some people should be excluded from society because they are part of a social group that another social group doesn't like. Totalitarianism requires total control of the people, in terms of politics, society and economy. You cannot have totalitarianism without a dictator who is in control of the people/economy. And since capitalism is non-control of the people/economy, then if Hitler is capitalist, he cannot be a totalitarian. If Hitler is totalitarian, that must mean he has an economic policy that controls the people/economy. Since socialism is control of the people/economy, it makes sense for him to be labeled a socialist. However, the counter-argument is made that Hitler “privatized” the industries, proving his capitalism. Ok, well now we have a problem. Either he did “privatize” the industries and wasn’t a totalitarian dictator, or he was a totalitarian dictator and something is wrong with the narrative being pushed by Marxists about Hitler’s “privatization” policy. Turns out there’s something wrong with the Marxist narrative, and I’m going to set the record straight in a future video.
    179
  198. Notes, Links, and Sources Is there something about Stalingrad/Fall Blau that you want to know more about? Let me know what that is and I’ll see what I can do. And also, what’s more important to you - individual stories like Pavlov and his House, or the big picture (units, positions, strategies etc)? Let me know in the comments below. Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Links Other videos of mine you may be interested in - The Myth and Reality of Joseph Stalin’s Order No. 227 “Not a Step Back!” https://youtu.be/JOKAIDpOY80 6th Army's Rations at Stalingrad https://youtu.be/occOOTk6OKY The BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M Stalingrad video playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhLd1zG3MeeRSbIei6lHhxO Confusing My Ex Girlfriend with Random History Facts! Honey, Spies... https://youtu.be/cTEYY5P0QbM Selected Sources Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Chuikov, V. “The Beginning of the Road.” Panther Edition, 1970. Craig, W. “Enemy at the Gates” Kindle, 2015. Glantz, D. House, J. “Stalingrad.” University Press of Kansas, 2017. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Jones, M. “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed.” Pen & Sword Military, 2016. Many sources do not even mention Pavlov’s House and therefore aren’t relevant in this instance. Thanks for watching, bye for now! Lewis
    178
  199. The Stalingrad 'Battle' is 7 months - from 24th July 1942 to 2nd February 1943*. There are wars that are shorter than this https://youtu.be/NRqaveOD8TU *Note, these dates are the ones I class as the Battle of Stalingrad based on my research. Wikipedia and others say it began in late August (by missing out the crucial fighting outside the city).
    178
  200. Notes As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. Socialism is common control of the means of production, which is different to Marxist Socialism which is class-socialism. Fascism is nationality-socialism and National Socialism is racial-socialism. Essentially, when you divide society into social-groups (race, class, gender, nationality, etc), people become caricatures of the evils of their social-groups, and people lose their individuality. Having lost their individualities, they become little more than statistics, and lose their humanity. At this point it becomes very easy to ‘remove’ these ‘undesirables’ from society. This is why socialism results in things like the Holocaust or the Killing Fields of Cambodia - it strips people of their rights, freedoms and of their humanity. Today, the Russian Federation and their pro-Marxist internet trolls claim that the Baltic States were Nazi states, or that the Baltic people deserved what happened to them, or that they were at war, or it was all part of the revolution… Basically they’re trying to justify the actions of the Soviet Union as being somehow legitimate. I’ve actually had commenters claim this was the case. Well, no - the Soviets invaded and destroyed those states. Their annexation was not a legitimate act; it was an aggressive move by Stalin and the Soviet Union in much the same way that invading Poland was for National Socialist Germany. Some National Socialists denialist-trolls claim that when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, the people welcomed the Germans with open arms. And at first, yes they did. But it is a distortion of history to then not acknowledge the fact that soon afterward this first period of occupation, the people were then subjected to a rule of terror which they weren’t happy with. Millions were shipped off to die in the Reich’s slave labour camps. Millions were starved to death (this wasn’t the Holodomor of the 1930s, this was the Hunger Plan of the 1940s). And, of course, we have the Holocaust. I know some deny it, but we cannot take them seriously, since denying the Holocaust is denying Hitler’s socialism, which is to deny his racism, his nationalism and his entire reason for existing. In short, denying the Holocaust is not possible from a National Socialist ideological perspective, which is why those that do it can safely be called denialist-trolls. No doubt some will complain that I used pictures which are “fake” or “disputed”. From what I’ve read, they seem pretty legit. Besides, it’s not like the Nazis and Marxis took selfies as they were going about their enslavement and murder of the conquered territories, so there’s not a bountiful number of pictures available. The main factor is the events themselves - which are confirmed. I didn’t mention Finland much here because I’ve covered them separately in previous videos (links in the description) and they weren’t actually conquered. I also want to cover Poland in a separate video at some point in the future. Also, since my "National Socialism was Socialism" videos were targeted by Marxist trolls, he's another good video called "Why Nazism is Leftist" by John Doyle https://youtu.be/FNJzqqh-jRw And again, YouTube decided to limit the ads on this video. Given the sensitive nature of the topic, I’m (again) not going to request a review. Personally, I don’t think it’s YouTube’s fault (they’re being careful). But I do question the motives of advertisers who don’t want to advertise on historical videos that discuss events like the Holocaust. Why would you advertisers not want to advertise on such topics? Is it because you don’t want to people to be educated about the Holocaust? Are you trying to deny it? By not supporting videos like this, said advertisers are essentially preventing people being education on the topic, preventing distortions from being corrected, and are therefore supporting historical distortions. Remember that next time you see an advert somewhere else on the internet or TV. Sources/Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    178
  201. NOTES and SOURCES I’m fully aware that the armour thickness of the tanks and the gun penetration values vary per make and model. I’m also aware that the exact millimeters may be out depending on which book you use. I’m also aware that every single shell is different - since that’s how the universe works. However, it doesn’t affect anything, since the difference between 51mms and 50mms is irrelevant if you have a gun which can defeat it. And this is why armour thickness is not really as important as some people may think. There’s many ways to disable a tank. Disabling a tank is a kill, so long as you win the overall fight. This is why having more ‘alright’ tanks is better than having fewer good tanks, and why light tanks are absolutely important on the battlefield. They’re still relevant and can do a lot of damage to infantry and anti-tank guns. But of course, anti-tank guns and infantry are super-important too. It may not be glamorous, but a big gun hidden behind a bush is just as deadly as a gun mounted in a tank turret. It’s also significantly cheaper too. Yes, they have their downsides, but so do tanks if used incorrectly. Overall, I’m of the opinion that tanks are not as important as the tactics used, and are only part of the whole combined-arms process. If you don’t have all your weapons working in sync with one another, the enemy has the advantage. This is one of the big reasons why the Germans had an advantage early war - their enemies hadn’t figured out combined arms warfare. So, I guess the lesson here is: don’t bring just rocks to a rock, paper and scissor fight. The early war German tanks were also very effective. They weren’t “superior”, but the 75mm gun on the Panzer 4 gave them the advantage. Same with the 50mm Pak guns. This is why early German mobilization was so important and was the main reason why they had the advantage in the early war. The Germans started mobilizing in 1935, but had actually pumped a lot more money into their armament production since 1933. Military spending went from 1% of national income in 1933 to 10% in 1935. “- a bigger and quicker increase than ever seen before in peacetime in a capitalist state.” Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. Page 92 Also, it’s worth saying that I’m not a Wehraboo. The Germans are not “superior” just because they have one or two advantages due to them mobilizing earlier than the other powers. If anything, this proved that the Germans weren’t just inherently better, because once the Allies learnt their lessons, the Germans lost those advantages. Some pictures in the video come from Bovington Tank Museum (TankFest 2018). Links to other videos mentioned in the video are in the video description. The Battlestorm Operation Crusader Script is currently 74,319 words. Have been working on it today, and hope to have the script finished in a matter of days. Then it’s time to start editing the video. Don’t worry, it is coming. Sources Fletcher, D. "British Tanks: British-Made Tanks of World War II." Osprey Publishing, Kindle. Fletcher, D. "Crusader and Covenanter Cruiser Tanks 1939-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Henry, C. "British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45." Osprey Publishing, 2004. Henry, C. "The 25-pounder Field Gun 1939-72." Osprey Publishing, 2011. Isaev, A. "Dubno 1941: The Greatest Tank Battle of the Second World War." Helion & Company, 2017. Newsome, B. "Valentine Infantry Tank 1938-45." Osprey Publishing, 2016. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen III Medium Tank 1936-44." Osprey Publishing, 2009. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War Volume 1: Wavell’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War." Cassell & Co, 2001. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War Volume 2: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War." Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. "The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume I, The Early Successes against Italy." The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1954. Playfair, I. "The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]." The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Zaloga, S. "BT Fast Tank: The Red Army's Cavalry Tank 1931-45." Osprey Publishing, 2016. Zaloga, S. "M3 & M5 Stuart Light Tank 1940-45." Osprey Publishing, 2009. Zaloga, S. "T-26 Light Tank: Backbone of the Red Army." Osprey Publishing, 2015. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Some gun penetration statistics from - https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Thanks for watching!
    178
  202. I can’t stick around to comment today because I’m way behind with the Stalingrad scripts. Next Stalingrad episode is due for Monday 10th July, and I’m worried I may not finish it in time. So, there may not be a video next week. If there is, it may be a short one, or one where I answer some random/easy Q&A’s so that I don’t have to do much scripting or editing. Alternatively, I may have to delay the next Stalingrad video by a week. Not sure yet, but I thought I’d better let you know now. And I know some of you have been begging me to take a week off, but it’s not happening. I don’t want to let everyone down. Even if there’s no video next week, I will be working behind the scenes on the next Stalingrad. Question: do I give too much detail in my videos, or not enough?
    178
  203. Oh wow, I hadn't heard that take on Japan! It actually fits well with the ideology I discussed in this video, though. Everything must be blamed on "white" (Jewish) people in order for our overlords to divide us and exploit us.
    177
  204. It's curious why this dynamic is all-but-forgotten.
    176
  205. Oh I know
    176
  206. Slight error: I realized (too late to change it) that the Patron list covers up Lopatin’s unit card. Sorry about that. Next episode (video 5) will be out in two week’s time (Monday 20th January 2020). Also, I apologize for the delay with this second season. December was a very busy month, upgrading my PC has been a nightmare (mainly due to software issues), and I’ve only just got over a period of both burnout and illness.
    175
  207. Yes, exactly!
    175
  208. Romans were REAL fascists!
    174
  209. They should throw that teacher out of class. Actually no, keep them there and just don't send your kids to the "schools", aka socialist indoctrination camps.
    173
  210. Yes, the entire Establishment is responsible.
    172
  211. By the way, defending the historical definition of words is "redefining them" now. Don't argue. The mob has spoken.
    172
  212. You can never know everything :)
    172
  213. Some people watching now have no idea how hard it was to make! They're like "can't you just push a button and it pops out a video?" ಠ_ಠ
    170
  214. I was going to talk more about squad tactics (which is why I said I would at the beginning of the video). However, when I dived into the editing, I decided that it would be better to do this in another video. So this video will lead onto a video about squads and platoons, and possibly companies. Then I can answer a Patreon question regarding the ability of the Allies and the Axis to coordinate all arms in an attack. As always, if you guys have book recommendations regarding these topics, let me know!
    169
  215. lol
    168
  216. According to Mr Hoggan in "The Forced War" - “Yet, in 1938, Hitler liberated ten million Germans who had been denied self-determination by the peacemakers of 1919.” (page 53) Because apparently Austrian Germans were living under the oppressive Austrian-German regime of Austria... HOW DREADFUL!?!?! ... It's literally impossible to make this stuff up!
    166
  217. Yeah there's a double standard. But considering I'm talking about Mosley and the Jews towards the middle of the video, I think the statement that I'm not a racist or a fascist is necessary, especially when my critics are looking for any excuse to call me these names.
    166
  218. Generation Z...ero-Attention-Span
    166
  219. I've also pinned your comment so that people can see how warped our miseducation system is right now
    166
  220. Notes, Quotes and Sources/Bibliography “Krupp’s firm [armaments] profited more from the armament boom than any other industrial enterprise in Germany. Yet even Herr Krupp is grumbling because he is no longer the absolute master he used to be.” - Günter Reimann Vampire Economy P126 “The position of the manager or “factory leader” is contradictory in theory and in practice. On one hand, he has more authority than before within his factory; he can rule his business by issuing orders which must be obeyed by all his “followers.” On the other hand, he himself is only an infinitesimal part of a gigantic State and military machine. Party and military authorities will interfere with his management, while at the same time making him responsible for difficulties in fulfilling his production program and for dealing with labor troubles, should they arise. He may even be declared unfit for “leadership” if he is not on good terms with Party authorities.” - Günter Reimann Vampire Economy P118 The industrialists were part of the State. Class had been ‘abolished’, and replaced by “factory leaders” and “followers”. Reimann misunderstands this because he doesn’t understand Nazi ideology. However, The Vampire Economy is a very important primary source document and I recommend you all pick it up (especially because you can get it online for free, PDF). Also, another quote for you - “For Mussolini there was no contradiction between Socialism and what would become Fascism. Its was the Socialists who had, for him, betrayed Socialism, not he. In fact, he continued to think himself as a Socialist to the end of his life.” - Farrell, Mussolini A New Life. “Fascism’s big idea was the corporate state - the so-called Third War between Capitalism and Communism - which would abolish the class war. Both Capitalism and Communism meant class war. In the class war, Capitalism, via the free market, gave the bosses the upper hand, and Communism, via the state, the masses. Fascism, via the corporate state, would incorporate both bosses and masses inside the state and so abolish class war.” - Farrell, Mussolini A New Life. I absolutely will be following this up in the future because it is necessary to understand how the war was fought, and how the Holocaust happened. The “war socialism” of National Socialist Germany (starting from 1933) has been ignored for long enough. It’s time for historians and history-buffs to take the National Socialist ideology and economy more seriously (see Zitelmann above for more detail on the historiography). For those who want me to “stick to military history” don’t waste your breath. This is my channel and I’m the one who decides what type of history I will be publishing or not. For those who think I don’t know what I’m talking about so it’ll be good to hear your alternative theories on how the Free Market economy resulted in the policy of Lebensraum (hint: it doesn’t). And for those of you who think Socialism isn’t state-control of the economy, or somehow misinterpret that to mean that any State at all is socialist (which is NOT what I’m saying), you have a choice: unsubscribe and live in ignorance, or wake up before you sleepwalk into a dystopian nightmare. Non-private (non-Capitalism) means it’s public. Public means State (as discussed in the video). A group is a public. Any group in charge of the means of production is socialism. Therefore socialism is State-control of the economy. Sources The books I highly recommend for this topic (in order I recommend you read them) - Günter Reimann’s “The Vampire Economy” Tooze’s “Wages of Destruction” (great on the National Socialist economy) Zitelmann’s “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction” (very good for National Socialist ideology, economy and society, and historiography surrounding it. THIS BOOK IS AMAZING.) Sources used for the video - Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 John Maynard Keynes, "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm For my full list of WW2 and related books, please see the link - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching, and supporting, and the abuse… bye for now.
    165
  221. I had great feedback from many of you in the first episode, so thank you all for that. I hope you all enjoy this video too! If you’re questioning why the 196th Rifle Division has “disappeared” between the first and second video and then reappears later on in this video, the reason why was explained in my Stalingrad Addendum 1 video. Here’s the link to that https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s I wanted to say thank you to those of you who were helping me with the pronunciation of the Russian words/names in the comments of the addendum video. It was too late to change the audio for this video, but I will use your audio to (hopefully) improve my pronunciation of the names for the next episode. I did change the way I pronounced “Chuikov” though! I’ll be doing another “Addendum” video after the end of the first Season, and I encourage you all to watch it (and the first Addendum video, if you haven’t already). The purpose of the Addendum videos is give additional information, to correct the mistakes I’ve made, debate some of the issues that come up, and allow me to respond to some of your comments. The final video of this Season will be released on the 4th of November 2019. After Season 1 I will then break from releasing Stalingrad videos to prepare for Season 2 and answer some Patron Q&As. A big thanks goes to my Patrons. Without you, this series would not be possible. If you would like to see your name in the future videos of this series, please support my channel and make these videos happen. You can support me here https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory or https://www.subscribestar.com/tikhistory Another big thanks goes to Historian Anton Joly, who helped with the research for this series - check out his YouTube channel “Stalingrad Battle Data” (link in the description)! All sources relating to Stalingrad are listed in the “specific Battlestorm Stalingrad bibliography” link in the description! Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    165
  222. Considering Mussolini was in power for 23 years, a 1 hour explanation of that plus his pre-power politics is short.
    164
  223. Not if they keep giving you cigarettes!
    164
  224. To be honest, considering all the options that could have happened, that's no a bad outcome.
    161
  225. I just want to clarify a couple of bits in the video. (See the first reply to this message for the second point.) The first point is on the way that the Leftist only gives two ways out of the system: Peaceful Reform or Violent Revolution. Well, a conservative or right-winger might say “why not just work your way out of poverty?” And the answer is: because it’s all to do with the Labour Theory of Value. For a Leftist, the only way to create wealth is by working. So, if all the landlords and business owners have all the labour, then there’s no way to work your way out of the system because they will just skim the excess labour off the top. And this brings me to the fun part! To a conservative, someone sitting on the dole (state benefits) is a lazy good-for-nothing who is milking the hard working people of their wealth. But to a Leftist, since labour value is being stolen by the landlords and business owners, then it is the landlords and business owners who are the lazy ones. In their mind, landowners and business owners don’t work - they just sit there and let the money roll in. Therefore, a person sat on state benefits isn’t lazy because all they’re doing is receiving the money that was originally stolen from them by the landlords and business owners in the first place. Yes, in the Leftist world-view (Weltanschauung), the landlords and business owners are the lazy people. The hard workers cashing cheques from the government are not lazy people - they would work if the system wasn’t rigged against them. So yes, it’s the complete opposite to the way that a capitalist or conservative would think. The problem, of course, is that value is not derived from labour. The Labour Theory of Value was debunked in the 1800s by Carl Menger, shortly after Marx wrote Das Kapital. Value is SUBJECTIVE, meaning that something derives value by individual preferences. https://mises.org/library/subjective-value-theory Therefore, the capitalist doesn’t get his value from the people under him, but by selling products that people want to buy. If value is derived from labour, then no business would ever make a loss. Clearly they do, so value has nothing to do with labour. Also, the landlords and businessmen do work, and they work a lot harder than most minimum-wage employees realize. It’s only when you rise through the ranks of a corporation, or actually become a landlord, that you realize how hard these guys work, or how much of a risk these guys take with their wealth. It’s stressful, they work long hours, and usually skip holidays or don’t get days off… It’s a nightmare! And the main point is this: THEY ARE WORKERS TOO. Yes, the “capitalists” are often other workers. A worker can be a capitalist simply by having a bank account with some savings in it. But again, all this is foreign to a Leftist. Finally, Leftists don’t realize that self-employment exists. If the system is rigged against them, then they don’t have to work for the system, and instead could become self-employed. Most don’t think of this, and it’s partly because they believe that they have to be trained or educated in order to become self-employed. And in some respects, this is true. However, they also hold a false belief that the only way to be educated is to be educated by someone else. They think pieces of paper with a grade on it is “education”. Whereas learning things by yourself, or buying books and reading them, is just impossible. You can’t possibly learn things from a book!?! It’s all predicated on this faulty belief that value only comes from labour, and it simply doesn’t.
    161
  226. I actually quite liked the OOB system in HOI3... It looks really nice until a war starts and then spaghetti
    160
  227. Some people don't like the look of the WW2 era French flag but I think it's all white
    160
  228. In some ways, no, because I enjoy picking on him!
    159
  229. Yes. It sucks for Poland, but this is true
    159
  230.  @IrelandVonVicious  Where did I say that Marx was a "Lutheran Jew"? I never said he was that. I said that his father converted to Christianity (which is true), and that Marx was anti-Semitic (which is also true). I said those things here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    158
  231. For just £3 a month, you can help a starving soldier
    158
  232. FIRST!
    156
  233. You know what I meant!
    156
  234. TILK with headphones
    154
  235. Yeah yeah, very funny, you know what I meant
    154
  236. In these crazy times, this is a good idea
    154
  237. Being in Soviet captivity doesn't allow you to defend your case and point the finger at others. It also discredits you in the eyes of the generals who told you to stand fast and then failed to break through to you.
    153
  238. Wehrabouts are they? Normally they're here by now, overwhelming us with their mechanized hordes
    153
  239. Full of worthless paper currency?
    153
  240. Current length of series = 25 hours and 23 minutes Current word count = 219,784 And we've got a way to go yet!
    152
  241. Well, he wasn't a serial killer until WW2. He was a "playdoh" though (you know what I mean). So this is what happens when you put a "playdoh" in power during the chaos of war. So let's hope our western governments don't go to war any time soon...
    152
  242. Plus the fact that 62,400,000 Soviet people fell under Axis rule by 1942, meaning that the USSR only had 104,600,000 of the original 167,000,000 people it had before the war (source, Table 1.2. from - Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000.). And another 26.6 million civilians died as well (according to "The Price of Victory" chapter 8). Yes, the price of victory was VERY high.
    152
  243. Given the sensitive nature of this topic, I was playing it safe at the beginning by making it clear that I wasn't a Nazi (even though it should be obvious). Such is the world we live. But yes, you are correct
    152
  244. Yes, exactly. But the naysayers won't accept this because only their religion is what counts as "real" socialism.
    151
  245. Yeah, that definitely makes more sense
    151
  246. Specific Sources used in the video (for the benefit of the students out there) - Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Bellamy, C. "Absolute War: Soviet Russia in the Second World War." Pan Books, 2009. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Glantz, D. & House, J. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hirschfeld, G. “The Policies of Genocide: Jews and Soviet Prisoners of War in Nazi Germany.” Routledge, Kindle 2015 (original 1986). Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1922). Overmans, R. “Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg.” Oldenbourg, 2004. Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Group, 1999. "The Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume I: Fighting the War." Cambridge University Press, 2017. Cheers!
    151
  247. They must attack in summer; they're weak in the winter.
    150
  248. I have, but Stalingrad must come first, simply because I'm so far into it now
    150
  249. Bit of an update: I ‘successfully’ upgraded my computer this week just gone. And by ‘successfully’ I mean, it was a real pain in the neck, took a lot longer than I thought it would, and isn’t quite finished (lots of bugs with Windows 10 I’m trying to figure out, plus waiting for another part to arrive). This is why I didn’t publish more videos last week. But I’m going to publish another video on Wednesday, and possibly another later in the week to try and catch up with the Q&As and other things. I’m also still working on the ‘big response’ video, got to work on the Stalingrad Season 2 script, got to do more research for Q&As and catch up with them, need to do a long-overdue behind-the-scenes Patron-only video on how I edit videos, and Corporate YouTube and the US government are being a pain at the moment too as many of you probably already know about… Basically, there’s no rest for the wicked! :)
    149
  250. The more people complain that I'm not good at history, the more I'll give it to them.
    149
  251. I'm glad to hear she agreed! It's a shame but she's got to do what's best for her. And the book is on Amazon Kindle for £7.87, or physical for £16, so I'd say that's a good bet.
    149
  252. That can be arranged
    148
  253. Thank you House! The script is 158 pages in google Docs, Arial font at side 11 (plus some titles and subtitles)
    148
  254. I do consider these topics to be the more important stuff. It's got to the point where I find it much easier to focus when working on this sort of stuff than I do the tank topics, and I think that's because of the way the world has gone. Anyone ignoring the events since 2008 is just living with their head in the sand. I won't abandon the tank content (the next Battlestorm is being worked on), but my main interest is currently on figuring out these ideologies.
    148
  255. "U gotta stop thinking left vs right. There's no left,, there's no right. There's authoritarians and there's libertarians. There's people who support state-controlled economies and there's people who support private controlled economies." Exactly. The Left and the Right https://beyondthecusp.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/political-spectrum-taught-versus-actual.jpg
    148
  256. Video Timestamps Q1 [Jen and Aaron] Can you talk a bit about the Russian Winter of 1941? And why has so little been written about the 1941-42 Soviet winter offensive? 00:35 Q2 [Semih Sander] What if the German Army retreated to the pre-Barbarossa positions upon failure to take Moscow, maybe as early as November 41? 09:10 Q3 [Olaf] Assuming that an important objective of Barbarossa was to secure access to raw materials, such as oil and grain; how did the Nazi's initially try to accomplish that? 12:13 Q4 [Ken Goss] How did the Soviets have enough fuel for their 42-45 offensives? 16:10 Q5 [Aaron again] Why do you (TIK) say the Germans replenished their losses when Glantz says Hitler was told they were a million men understrength in 1942? 19:27 Q6 [SparkyBoomer and Craig] Can you further elaborate about their issues with logistics and the apparently long suffering logistics officers who were seemingly constantly ignored? And who were the people responsible for rear echelon logistical security? 26:07 Q7 [Dekabr] Is this blog http://tankarchives.blogspot.com trustworthy. And what would be your thoughts on the soviets "lying" on purely internal documents? 35:09 Q8 [Alexandre] Did the Battle of Stalingrad impact the theory of Urban Warfare? And how much did the Battle of Berlin owe to the Battle of Stalingrad in terms of Urban Warfare doctrine? 43:17 Q9 [Milan] Are you going to further specialize on the eastern front, especially bringing russian sources to the english-speaking audience? 48:34 Q10 [Kirin] What do you think of Budyonny? 52:50 Q11 [Timo] How is your German coming along? What is the first German source you want to use once you master the language enough? 57:33 Q12 [Ricky] What books would you recommend for the North African theater in WWII? 59:26 Q13 [Gregory Mackay] Were you able to find any good books or papers on tanks, and if so what were they? 01:01:53 Q14 [Jen] What's your opinion on Alternate History and self-described "Educational" channels? 01:03:37 Books used/referenced in the video Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War Volume 1: Wavell’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War." Cassell & Co, 2001. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War Volume 2: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War." Cassell & Co, 2001. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War Volume 3: Montgomery and Alamein. The Definitive History of the Desert War." Cassell & Co, 2001. Pöhlmann, M. "Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Ein deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945." Schöningh, 2016. Stahel, D. “The Battle for Moscow.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle, 2015. Stahel, D. “Operation Barbarossa: Germany’s Defeat in the East.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle, 2010. Wette, W. & Ueberschär, G. "Stalingrad: Mythos und Wirklichkeit einer Schlacht." 2013. Wette, W. "The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality." Harvard University Press, 2006. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume IV/I, The Attack on the Soviet Union.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. The books on tanks (and guns) that I said weren’t great - Fletcher, D. "Crusader and Covenanter Cruiser Tanks 1939-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Henry, C. "British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45." Osprey Publishing, 2004. Henry, C. "The 25-pounder Field Gun 1939-72." Osprey Publishing, 2011. Newsome, B. "Valentine Infantry Tank 1938-45." Osprey Publishing, 2016. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen III Medium Tank 1936-44." Osprey Publishing, 2009. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Zaloga, S. "BT Fast Tank: The Red Army's Cavalry Tank 1931-45." Osprey Publishing, 2016. Zaloga, S. "T-26 Light Tank: Backbone of the Red Army." Osprey Publishing, 2015. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "M3 & M5 Stuart Light Tank 1940-45." Osprey Publishing, 2009. Thanks for watching!
    147
  257. Sorry. I want to say I’m sorry to all of you. I’ve been struggling to reply to a lot of comments in recent videos and I feel guilty for not replying to each and every one of you. I’m simply overwhelmed by the volume of them. Just know this - I do read every single comment. So I absolutely get your message even if I don’t reply to you. I’m not ignoring you, I just have to be selective. I’ll be around for a few hours after this video releases, so be sure to comment and I’ll try get back to you asap. My time is limited (who’s isn’t?). Working a full-time job and these videos - it feels as though I have two full-time jobs. But I’m determined to bring you videos every Monday, and I’m working very hard behind the scenes on Battlestorm Operation Crusader, and videos on Stalingrad (including the BIG one), and others. And I want to do more. I am grateful to every single one of you who have watched my videos, even if you’re critical of them! Whether you agree or disagree, like or hate me, I hope you all can relate to my goals expressed in the video. My ‘agenda’ is to simply learn from the lessons of history. Having a bias towards a certain country or person or language is not ideal, and I’m fully aware of my biases (do you know yours?) and I want to work on them. I keep one eye on my biases at all times, questioning if I’m letting them affect my judgement. This is why my next big task is to learn German, which is actually the next goal on Patreon. If I get more support, I’ll hire a tutor and get practicing properly. Then I want to learn Russian. And then I want to dive into the sources in those languages. And I want to go to the next step, and then to the one after that, until eventually I really can give you something that currently no other channel on YouTube brings - the full perspective of WW2! This is perhaps ambitious, but it’s not impossible. I’m determined to work hard, and I want us all to grow and learn together. Thanks for watching. Let me know what got you into history and why you’re still into it. I want to hear your story, and know your history! Cheers! :)
    146
  258. Because taxation and central planning are enacted under the barrel of a gun... (for those who don't understand)
    145
  259. You are absolutely correct
    145
  260. It appears that some people aren't getting notified by YouTube about video releases, so be sure to check back every Monday at 5pm GMT (check for daylight savings time) The first video in this Stalingrad series: https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag The Stalingrad series playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledi9jQeOzCUtBP2pxYdCYiXX
    145
  261. Except that's not true.
    144
  262. Pinned Comment Not a great deal to say this time because I pretty much covered everything in the video. No timestamps because this video really requires you to watch from start to finish. Be sure to check out my Operation Crusader series, links in the description. And yes, videos are out every Monday, regardless of whether it’s Christmas Eve, or New Years Eve, or my birthday (which falls on a Monday this year). No rest for the wicked! Due to it being Christmas Eve, I won’t be around much to reply to comments this evening, or tomorrow. But I’ll try to catch up over the week. Thanks for all your comments! Current video plan (subject to change) 31/12/2018 Economics video 01/12/2018 New Year’s Resolutions video (Tuesday) 07/01/2019 Operation Crusader ‘Complete’ 14/01/2019 A video on ‘History’ as a concept (no title yet) 21/01/2019 A video on Primary and Secondary Sources 28/01/2019 ?? (Not sure yet, but got several ideas) 04/02/2019 The First video of BATTLESTORM The Courland Pocket 1944-45 I’m actually worried that I won’t get Operation Crusader ‘Complete’ rendered in time, so that’s definitely subject to change. That’s why it’s taking up a Monday-slot, simply because it’s going to take an age and a day just to render out, plus it will allow me to do other work behind the scenes. It’s going to be 9 hours, 12 minutes, and 22 seconds long! I also want to throw in a couple of Patreon Q&A videos in the mix too, since I’m well behind with them (sorry). These may be done on some of the Mondays if I run out of time. The focus in January 2019 is to get all the prep ready for Battlestorm Courland, starting in February. So I’ve chosen video-content for January that is less work-intensive to allow me to get that prep done behind the scenes (plus give me a break from too much editing). While the videos in January may not be specifically on WW2, I’ve been meaning to make the ‘History’ and ‘Sources’ videos for a long time now, and I think everyone will benefit greatly from watching them. I see so many misconceptions about the practice of history itself (and historians) that I feel compelled to clear them up. In the current climate, many people feel like they can’t trust anything they read, or are quick to point out ‘bias’ and ‘agendas’ and accuse others of being this or that… the world is a mess! And worse, people have ‘attacked’ me in the comments, saying “I’m doing history wrong”, or that “I need to go back to school”, or that I’m not allowed to give my opinions, or that history is purely about fact and nothing else. They’re also quick to condemn me for doing or saying things that they don’t agree with, saying that this is the “wrong way to do history”, and their reaction is to instantly unsubscribe. The comments sections have also become worse and worse over time, with arguments turning into hate, or wild statements/accusations being thrown about... Well, I’m going to set the record straight. SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Sources are the same as the Crusader videos - Agar-Hamilton, J. & Turner, L. “The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941.” Oxford University Press, 1957. Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. “The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943.” 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Bender, R.J., & Law, R.D., “Uniforms, Organization and History of the Afrikakorps.” R.J.Bender, Publisher, USA, 1973. PDF: “German Kampfgruppe In North Africa 1941 through 1943”. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Badia Garrison from “The British Capture of Bardia (December 1941 - January 1942): A Successful Infantry-Tank Attack (Information Bulletin No. 21, U.S. War Department, WWII)” http://www.lonesentry.com/bardia_intel/index.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    144
  263. My thoughts exactly. Just like every other government program, censorship only makes the problem worse, not better.
    144
  264. Of course! It all makes sense now!
    144
  265. "This comment deserves a responce from TIK" "Very well written insights! TIK should definitely respond to this" Okay okay... if you insist :) 1. Let's take the Kar 98k as an example. The Kar 98k has "98" in the name, meaning 1898. But the Kar 98k was created in 1935. This is because, like the British rifle, and others, they had been updated (usually reduced in size) either in or post WW1. My source refers to the fact that the Swedish rifles were still from the previous century, meaning they had not been updated like the other powers had done with their rifles. 2. My source doesn't mention the Motorized Brigade or the Local Defense forces, which is why I didn't mention them. Thank you for explaining that there were more units. 3. My source must have got the numbers wrong. 4. My source must have got the numbers wrong. 5. If I said Sweden got "most" of her equipment from abroad, then I was wrong to use that word. Sweden did make weapons domestically. However, there were some weapons that she didn't make domestically. 6. Again, if I used "gave" when referring to other powers giving arms to Sweden, I apologize. I meant it in the sense "the seller then gave them to her in exchange for the money Sweden gave to them". I probably should have been more specific in my language and said "Sweden purchased arms abroad". 7. Yes, I agree. 8. My source specifically says - “...the ‘Per Albin Line’ on which millions had been spent was garrisoned with a few barely-trained conscripts who had only 50-80 per cent of the required weaponry of machine-guns and anti-tank guns that most did not know how to operate.” Gilmour, “Sweden, the Swastika and Stalin,” P213. 9. That could be true, but my source says Narvik. 10. My source specifically says 85,000 Home Guardsmen were raised for 1940 - but perhaps it was 110,000. 11. Yes, that could be true. 12. Yes, I said that in the video. 13. My source doesn't mention two panzer divisions, but does say that most of the units (or equipment) that were called for never arrived, and the plan didn't get off the drawing board anyway. 14. Exactly. 15. I have no reason to doubt your numbers. 16. My source says it did fear a Communist take over. Gilmour, “Sweden, the Swastika and Stalin,” P101-103. 17. My source calls them "grenade-launchers", and since there's not many sources on Sweden in English, I couldn't verify if it meant grenade-launchers or mortars, so I stuck to the language used. Thank you for clarifying that they were mortars.
    144
  266. Because I kept showing the books, or other graphics, I wasn't able to put the Patreon and SubscribeStar list in this video. But don't worry, the list will be back next week. Also, if you didn't see the pinned comment last week, I now have an Instagram https://www.instagram.com/tikhistory/
    143
  267. I couldn't find the other ones, but yes, I do think find it funny how they quickly abandoned him. It reminds me of all my old socialist viewers who abandoned me when I left the faith, and now I'm the devil.
    143
  268. It's the Battle of Gazala next, and the script is currently 30,000 words! A little behind where I wanted to be, but should have an update out some time next week
    142
  269. @Wallyworld30 It's not about convincing others, and it's not about "credibility", it's about presenting the facts. I refuse to lie to my audience just because the majority don't like the truth. If they don't accept the evidence, I will shove it in their face. And if they still don't accept it, then there is no more conversation. Besides, this isn't a waste of time, I have gotten through to some people. And, in addition, it's good for me too. I gained additional knowledge working on this video, as I have on previous ones. The evidence is mounting, and that's a good thing by itself.
    142
  270. There's a reason why traditional media is dying ;)
    142
  271. I don't think history is written by the victors. I think it's written by the survivors.
    142
  272. Thank you for sharing. It's anecdotal evidence, but important nonetheless
    141
  273. There was a government that said it would cost $65,000 to build some steps. A guy decided to make the steps for $550, but the government came and tore it down. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/20/americas/man-steps-trouble-trnd/index.html
    141
  274. Couldn't agree more
    139
  275. Don't worry, I'm ready
    139
  276. It's because the majority of their viewers are not passionate about history, that's why. Most people sat watching tv aren't the types of people who have a mountain of history books in their back bedrooms. Their not the type of people who gather evidence and come to their own conclusions. They're the type of people who will believe anything. The type of people who are suspicious enough of things to buy into big conspiracies, but not suspicious enough to question the "facts" they're being given. And I want to just to point out that not all of the viewers are like that, but most are. It's also because their producers and their network bosses want a steady stream of income. Imagine if someone on TV came out with a documentary that said "General Gavin was the reason Market Garden failed". If you've seen the backlash on some of my videos - even when the evidence is there - you can imagine that TV networks wouldn't have the backbone to stand up and say "the truth comes before your feelings". I'm passionate about history. And while I fully admit I get things wrong, at least I'm trying to get things right. And I'm backing up every point I have with hard evidence too.
    139
  277. It's certainly understandable given the fact that the empire he spent almost his whole life trying to create started crumbling around him
    138
  278. I'm curious what it would take for your brother to accept this idea. I'm also curious to know if he thinks free market guys are all fascists, or trying to trick him somehow? I know when I was a Lefty, I feared that the evil secret-Right-wingers were trying to trick me, so I didn't listen to their arguments. It makes me wonder if all the Left are like that.
    138
  279. I've pinned your comment so people can see your questioning, and my response 👍
    137
  280. Once upon a time, in a make-believe Reich...
    137
  281.  @jancz357  "democracy leads inherently to socialism" I've heard this a few times, but I'm not so sure. The reason democracy currently leads to socialism is because the majority of people want socialism. Why do they want socialism? Because socialism is popular and has 'won' the argument. Socialists have successfully made the case that their ideology is 'moral' and the alternative is 'immoral'. They can do this because the opposition is branded as 'fascism' or 'nazism', and deny all the failings of their system, or even the very definition of their system. The reality though is quite different. As I am showing, the Marxists are actually quite immoral. They're exactly the same as Nazis and Fascists, just a different variation. Marxist Socialists are arguing that murder and theft of the bourgeoisie is moral. Ok, but if killing Jews and stealing their possessions is bad, why is killing and stealing from the bourgeoisie good? Turns out that it isn't. Murder and theft is immoral no matter who's being killed or robbed, and socialists are the ones arguing that murder and theft is good, and that judging people by their 'class' 'race' and 'sex' is also the moral thing to do. And they don't like it when people call them out for judging individuals by their supposed social group. If people understood what socialism was, and understood why it is immoral, then less people would advocate it. More would look into actual economics, and more people would call out those who make socialist arguments. The debates would be won. Thus, fewer people would vote for the theft and murder of the bourgeoisie and more people would vote against it. Democracy is designed to provide a weak government. It is also designed to provide time for society to win the arguments by those who advocate more state control. Democracy isn't perfect, but it's better than more state control (a dictatorship by the masses or by a monarch etc). To stop socialism, the argument needs to be made - not from a logical stand point, but by an emotional and moral stand point. That, unfortunately, is not happening, and thus we are sleepwalking into totalitarianism.
    136
  282. Thank you for commenting! I've just pinned your comment so that more people can see it. I'll also let people know in the next video (just released) to come back and read what you've written
    136
  283. Yes, one of the pictures in this video is one I took when I visited Turkey. The country is very hilly to say the least
    135
  284. It doesn't surprise me. I actually had a similar idea a while back (but I won't say it in case I end up doing it)
    135
  285. Good! Stalingrad will hopefully be next week
    135
  286. That's typical. In the 43 minute Hitler's Socialism video, they couldn't even be bothered to watch 60 seconds of it before trying to counter the whole video with an argument I countered 60 seconds into the video 🤦‍♂️
    134
  287. A big thanks to both Anton Joly https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA And Egor Kobiakov https://warspot.net/users/201-egor-kobyakov/published for helping with this episode. They clarified several elements of it and definitely deserve another shout-out 👍 And, of course, my Patreons and SubscribeStars, and everyone who's been watching this series. I should say that Paulus wasn't the only one running out of men...
    134
  288. Yeah, and I've heard so many say how he was either "conservative", or in with the conservatives, or that his movement was a conservative movement, but this is totally incorrect.
    134
  289. You should comment more often! My goal is to get you to think, and by challenging you, that makes you think. Thank you for your support 👍
    133
  290. Ahh yes, I forgot about that teleportation device! It was one of the miracle weapons, along with their secret plan to lower New Zealand housing prices. I'll do better next time
    133
  291. The deeper you dive, the more rewarding it becomes. Most people though only read 1 book on a given topic, then call it a day. In my opinion, you need to find a subject you really really find interesting, then read at least 20 books on it. Specialize. That's where you start getting into the real interesting stuff, and the more you read beyond that, again you're going to find interesting stuff.
    133
  292. The British in WW2 fought a multi-front war, and they didn't cry about it.
    133
  293. Yeah, I'd love to hear from all those people saying I wouldn't talk about Allied crimes. I wonder what they'll say now.
    133
  294. Heroes that are perfect are called Mary Sue's. They're not good heroes. The best heroes are those with flaws and character. Chuikov was definitely a character, and he was also human.
    132
  295. Bit of an update regarding Stalingrad. Historian Anton Joly has agreed to help me out with the Stalingrad series, and has already provided me several Russian sources and other information. The script is looking better already! If you like Stalingrad, check out and subscribe to Anton Joly's YouTube channel - "Stalingrad Battle Data". Link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA Also, Season 1’s Stalingrad script is currently 14,924 words long, split into three episodes. I’m still tweaking it here or there, but it’s pretty much the greatest thing I’ve ever written. Map is not finished yet but nearly is so it shouldn’t be too long now. I will let you know as soon as I can confirm a release date. This Q&A video was more of an opinion piece so I’m not sure which specific books to reference. However, if you want to know more about the concept of “Bewegungskrieg” and the evolution of the German military tradition, Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht” goes into it as it describes the campaigns of 1942. Highly recommended book in general if you’re interested in Fall Blau, Stalingrad, or El Alamien. Cheers!
    132
  296. Haha true! Thanks for watching!
    132
  297. NOTES, LINKS and SOURCES I’ll be discussing the “tank heavy” problem that the British suffer from during my upcoming Operation Crusader video. But in a nutshell, Major General Percy Hobart thought that tanks could win battles on their own. This meant that when he created 7th Armoured Division, he didn’t really think much about the infantry or artillery aspects. He advised Auchinleck, Norrie, and Cunningham for Crusader, which is why they split their tanks from their infantry into two separate corps. In the end, it was the infantry corps (13th) that won the day. The 1st UK Armoured Division did have an extra brigade (4th Armoured) prior to 2007, but this was dropped. Even so, the ratio of tanks to infantry remains the same. There are variances, but in general - Binary divisions have two regiments; Triangular divisions have three regiments; Square divisions have four regiments; And Pentomic divisions have five battlegroups (going off the US version, since they’re the only ones to make this type of division ever as far as I’m aware). Not all German divisions in 1941-42 went from 9 to 6 battalions, so the numbers shown in the video are rough estimates. That said, we know that the Germans replaced their losses, and we know that they increased the number of their divisions. And what we find is that the number of men on the Axis-Soviet Front actually grown in the summer periods of 1941-1943. It is only post Kursk that the Germans have manpower issues and difficulties filling their ranks. Prior to Kursk, they did have shortages (what army doesn’t), but these were usually in the Winter months. The reduction in the size of German divisions in the period 1941-1943 therefore cannot be explained by manpower shortages as usually stated. I highly recommend the book “Enduring the Whirlwind” by Liedtke (listed below) for a decent discussion on German unit manpower and tank strengths, as well as replacements, in the period 1941-1943. It’s essential reading for anyone interested in the Axis-Soviet Front. Not a lot has been written on this topic, and most of what has been written doesn’t specifically state why the triangular division concept was the dominating one at the time. House’s book does talk about it, but I’d like a second opinion. I suspect it’s not really an interesting subject for non-military personnel, but it is a topic I’m now interested in. If you have any recommendations for books on the topic of division composition and the transition to a more combined-arms organization, please let me know. And as you can see from the source list below, I’m needing a lot of books (let alone other equipment) to make these videos. Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be. I’m highly reliant on your support https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory And a big thank you goes to my current Patreons for your ongoing support, for which I am super-grateful. As always, you guys are awesome! VIDEO LINKS You may be interested in the following videos after watching this one - How BIG were Soviet Armies and Divisions in 1942? And what impact did this have? https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI Why No German Reinforcements at Stalingrad? https://youtu.be/VQ3-TqeZqeA Operation Compass 1940-41 (where 20k British troops under O’Connor beat 150k Italians under Marshal Graziani in North Africa, prompting Rommel to be sent to Libya) https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk FALL BLAU 1942 - Examining the Disaster https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Stalin’s Purge of the Red Army and Its Effects on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ Kampfgruppen in WW2 https://youtu.be/zKWczZkQ130 And various Order of battle videos - Paulus's 6th Army ORDER OF BATTLE - Before Stalingrad https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw The Axis Order of Battle for Operation Crusader 1941-42 WW2 https://youtu.be/LwPJWb2BUj4 The British Order of Battle for Operation Crusader 1941-42 WW2 https://youtu.be/QCNDEoRDp6I SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY - Books: Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Christie, H. “Fallen Eagles: The Italian 10th Army in the Opening Campaign in the Western Desert, June 1940.” Pickle Partners Publishing, 2014. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Heyman, C. “The Armed Forces of the United Kingdom 2006-2007.” R & F Defence Publications, 2006. Hill, A. “The Red Army and the Second World War. (Armies of the Second World War.” Cambridge University Press, 2017. House, J. “Toward Combined Arms Warfare: A Survey of 20th-Century Tactics, Doctrine, and Organization.” University Press of the Pacific, 2002. Isaev, A. “Dubno 1941: The Greatest Tank Battle of the Second World War.” Helion & Company, 2017. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Mark, J. “Death of the Leaping Horsemen: The 24th Panzer Division in Stalingrad 12th August - 20th November 1942.” Stackpole Books, Kindle 2003. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Internet Sources: Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German Army Official Website http://www.deutschesheer.de/ Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    131
  298. "Germany among other things, had become heavily reliant on exports to US and loans mainly from US to get foreign capital, to pay reperations and remain liquid/competetive." I would argue that it wasn't Versailles that did this. They didn't pay the reparations (or very little) and so this wasn't a factor. What was a factor was that many countries had financed WW1 through currency printing. This resulted in a drain of gold reserves and capital from places like France and Britain to the United States. The world needed dollars and gold to pay back their loans, which is why these countries (Germany, France and Britain) were all heavily reliant on exports to the US and took out US loans. Then the US decided to print a ton of dollars and lower interest rates throughout the 1920s, creating an artificial boom, which then resulted in the Wall Street Crash of 1929. That's what led to a major crisis in the 1930s, and the abandonment of the Gold Exchange Standard.
    131
  299. I want my videos to stand the test of time. So I made the decision years ago that I didn't want sponsors in the video (or merch) because I was thinking long-term. Yes, these videos will be outdated in a few years as new evidence and theories emerge, but people can look back on them and enjoy they for what they are. In 50 years time, today's bars of soap and pay-to-win RPGs will be completely forgotten, but Stalingrad won't be, and hopefully this series won't be either.
    130
  300. FIRST!
    129
  301. Actually I want everyone to come together. And the best way to do that is by annoying everyone at the same time, so that they're all united against me ;)
    129
  302. Just imagine the size of that one! (actually YT has recently limited the length of a video to 12 hours, so it'll be numerous compilations for Stalingrad)
    129
  303. I want to finish the North African Campaign, Torch, Tunisia, Sicily, Italy, then Normandy, whilst probably doing more on the Eastern Front. The reason I want to go back to North Africa is because we're nearly at Gazala, and then, shortly after, El Alamein, so makes sense to do more on it and get it finished.
    128
  304. I know some people will complain that this isn't another episode of Battlestorm Stalingrad, so I just want to remind you all that the Stalingrad series is bi-weekly because I can't physically edit the videos quick enough to get one out each week. The gap between the series is to allow me to do the scripts and additional research. Cheers!
    128
  305.  @crimson6952  Absolutely! If the communists would just go join a commune and leave the rest of us alone, that would be great
    128
  306. You are correct, that was my mistake. Sorry about that
    128
  307.  @calumdeighton  I've spent most of my adult life realizing that everything I was taught in school, college and university was either badly done, or totally incorrect and had to be relearned. There's no way this systematic failure to teach over multiple generations is 'by accident'.
    128
  308. lol
    127
  309. I think it was deliberate, as an insult. But I'm not sure what it refers too.
    127
  310. Timestamps I don’t think you should skip ahead, but here you go anyway - 00:00 Hook 00:20 Introduction 01:35 Context 02:35 Viktor Suvorov’s Thesis 06:20 Keitel at Face Value 17:02 Keitel under the Critical Eye 36:15 Questioning Suvorov 43:50 Summary and Conclusion Links Please consider supporting me on Patreon and makes these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory A great follow up to this video is “5 tips to improve your critical thinking”. Link: https://youtu.be/dItUGF8GdTw My previous video on Critical Thinking here - https://youtu.be/_IYPoa0poXQ Link to Soviet “War-Winning” Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2 https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 Link to my “The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL” video https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Notes I know the irony of telling people to question everything is that you’ll question the very advice I’m giving to that says to question everything. But it’s true, you should even be questioning what I’m telling you. You should even be questioning what I’m saying. Do your own research and find these things out for yourself. SPOILER! STOP READING NOW IF YOU HAVEN’T WATCHED THE VIDEO. No know because of technicalities some people will say what I said about the yellow circle isn’t true. So here’s the technicalities I missed out of the explanation. It’s actually your eyes/retina that see things in blue, green and red. In fact, these are all the primary colours in the color spectrum (that we can see), and are known as the “Additive Colours”. Using certain quantities of red, green and blue light, you can create all of the colors in the visible spectrum, including white light. So, the reason the RGB colour model (RGB= Red Green and Blue) is that used in your electronic devices is because that’s all the colours that are needed. For more information on this subject, see this TED-Ed video https://youtu.be/l8_fZPHasdo Selected Bibliography/Sources Gorlitz, W. “The Memoirs of Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel: Chief of the German High Command 1938-1945.” First Cooper Square Press edition, 2000. Macdonald, A. “The Nuremberg Trials: The Nazis Brought to Justice.” Arcturus Publishing Ltd, Kindle, 2015. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Glantz, D. When Titan’s Clashed. University Press of Kansas, 2015. Kavalerchik, B. The Price of Victory: The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War. Pen & Sword Military, 2017. Liedtke, G. Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943. Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Suvorov, V. “Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?” PL UK Publishing, Kindle Edition, 2012. Such a long video, and I didn’t even include a Wilhelm scream... Thanks for watching!
    127
  311. Post uploading, I think a good alternative word to “Volkisch” is “Racialism”, which I’ve heard one Third Positionist use. And due to the nature of this video, I wasn’t able to fit the Patreon and SubscribeStar lists into it. So I apologise about that. I’m hopefully going to make another video this week, and if I manage to do so I’ll make sure the names are in there.
    127
  312.  @Paul_Maurone  Okay, but what about gaslighting, lying about what I said, smearing and slandering, and generally trying to destroy my reputation? This isn't just an insult, these cretins deserve to be called out for their actions.
    126
  313. Hey everyone! As we all know, the Stalingrad pocket relief attempt (Operation Winter Storm) didn’t go so well, and Paulus’s 6th Army suffered the consequences. Well, I’ve narrated Anton Joly's latest video, in which the primary source documents give some interesting clues to what happened… especially about the state of the 6th Army, and Manstein’s inability to issue the order for the breakout. Check it out: https://youtu.be/OmiNtVTF1Z4 Also, subscribe to Anton Joly because I’ll be doing more narrations and things on his channel in the future. Cheers!
    126
  314. The main source I used here was Cornelius’s “Hungary in World War II” which I highly recommend if you want more details on Hungary. If anyone has any good books on why Italy was on the Eastern Front, let me know, because I’m still not certain why they went East. Sources Axworthy, M. "Third Axis Fourth Ally: Romanian Armed Forces in the European War, 1941-1945." Arms and Armour Press, pdf 1995. Cornelius, D. “Hungary in World War II: Caught in the Cauldron.” Fordham University Press, Kindle 2011. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book One: November 1942..” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hamilton, H. "Sacrifice on the Steppe: The Italian Alpine Corps in the Stalingrad Campaign, 1942-1943." Casemate Publishers, 2016. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Trigg, J. "Death on the Don: The Destruction of Germany's Allies on the Eastern Front, 1941-44." The History Press 2017. von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, E. "Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse." Arlington House Publishers, PDF 1974. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    126
  315. You know, if anyone wants to hire me for such a role, I would do it.
    126
  316. "Is it fair to consider the words "Nazi" and "National Socialist" as synonyms outside of Germany?" Good question, but I would say so, yes. There's enough distinction between Italian, Spanish and British Fascism to say they were not the same, yet we call them all Fascist. So just because the Czechs had a non-racist National Socialism doesn't mean they weren't 'real' Nazis because the core tenants of nationalism and socialism were there, which is where the word "Nazi" comes from.
    126
  317. Yep, it's ridiculous. And yet people read it and don't see any of the discrepancies
    125
  318. In Soviet Russia, road forks you (ref: Family Guy)
    124
  319. I'm not denying that it all fell apart in the final days or weeks, but even then Himmler seeking peace with the West could be explained by seeing the Soviets as the bigger threat. There was also the idea that the "Anglo-Saxon" nations would join with Germany to fight the Soviets. So this isn't necessarily a counter to the case.
    124
  320. Probably another two episodes, maybe three
    123
  321. For a low cost price of £1 doubled, then doubled again, 64 times! That's right, you can get all this for just £18,446,744,073,709,551,615
    123
  322. Whoopi's real name is Caryn, so...
    123
  323. Seriously! They dumped it in the ocean!?
    122
  324. Great! Do you have sources for all that information?? The sources I used didn't mention most of that
    122
  325. Yeah, I'm annoying both groups, yet their only comeback is to say that I'm a member of the other side. If only they would look in the mirror.
    122
  326. Wow, spot on! :D
    122
  327. They are the products of the welfare state
    122
  328. Dunkirk would require me to do the entire Fall of France first, which I'm happy to do, but that would definitely have to be after Stalingrad
    121
  329. That's it. The common response though is "but how do you explain the losses". At which point, they stop listening. It turns out these people don't want to know the truth. They'd rather believe the myth.
    121
  330. This is a big topic. I had to miss tons of evidence out just to keep it as it is
    121
  331. Inter-National Socialist (Marxist)
    121
  332. @Parabellum  "common knowledge in italy" - Yeah, this is the issue, I can't speak or read Italian, and there's preciously little written on it in English. I will take your word for it though, thank you! 👍
    120
  333. But Halder said Madman Hitler was to blame, so why would Halder be sacked?
    120
  334. No pressure (but you'd better watch it again all the way through or you'll make me cry)
    120
  335. My favourite chat-up line is "Hi, I'm Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz von Groß-Zauche und Camminetz"
    119
  336.  @Ciborium  That's why everyone hated Germany after the First World War!
    119
  337. 3 to 1 is not a "horde". You don't play Left4Dead and go "here comes the incredible horde of 12 zombies!"
    119
  338. All these classic hits for just £88mm
    119
  339. Haha I've thought about writing a book on a battle, but it would take away from this channel
    118
  340. Yes, Polish resistance was thought to be on the side of the West, but the line that the British hoped to have gotten too (which would have been a miracle) didn't even include Warsaw. This was because it wasn't realistic for the west to fight the Soviets in 1945, as the planners quickly realized.
    118
  341. I complain a lot about the trolls, but honestly the vast majority of you guys are quality 👍
    117
  342.  @dustincarnes214  One that understand's YouTube's Marxism!
    117
  343. What is it about these Western leaders falling in love with evil dictators!? Talk about being attracted to the 'bad boys' 😂
    117
  344. I mean... the southern half of Italy did!
    117
  345. It's funny because when I've said this sort of thing in the past, people have mocked me for it. But anyone who's actually done it has agreed.
    117
  346. Glad to have you on board! Yes, YouTube really doesn't like this channel for some reason... I think it's because I'm covering some topics that they don't want on the platform, even though they don't outright say that they don't want them on the platform.
    116
  347. At least the Roman Empire built roads, the USSR failed to do that sufficiently. “Even when they had appliances and TVs most country people in 1980 still lived without paved roads, indoor plumbing, central heat, or telephones.” (Eaton, K. “Daily Life in the Soviet Union.” Greenwood Press 2004, P124.)
    115
  348. EDIT: The error has cleared, and English subtitles are now available! There’s technical errors behind the scenes with YouTube which are preventing me putting the subtitles in at this moment in time. Sorry for the inconvenience. I’ll put them in as soon as it lets me.
    115
  349. NOTES, LINKS, and SOURCES The number of Axis divisions in Glantz’s table does not list German security or Luftwaffe Divisions (some of which actually took part in the fighting), and so might explain the discrepancy between the 72 German divisions I read elsewhere, and the 68 listed here. Glantz does say that most Soviet divisions usually had 2,500 to 5,000 men in the field, and that Soviet brigades had 4,000 to 5,000 men. This suggests that the Soviet brigades were newer formations than the divisions, since they were filled to capacity more percentage-wise vs the divisions, and (since they’re roughly the same size as divisions in the field) perhaps this is why they’ve been called “demidivisions”. Glantz does say this - “As a result, in the late summer and fall of 1941, the People’s Commissariat of Defense (NKO) truncated the organizational structure of its rifle divisions and began forming smaller rifle brigades, in reality, demi (light)-divisions, in their stead. Although their reduced size made them ideal vehicles for training Red Army command cadre in how to command and control forces at division-level and below, these weak rifle divisions lacked firepower and mobility sufficient to conduct or sustain high-intensity mobile defensive or offensive operations, and, as a result, they often suffered catastrophic losses at the hands of the more experienced and stronger Wehrmacht. “Therefore, in the spring of 1942, the NKO ceased forming rifle brigades, began converting rifle brigades into full divisions, and slowly but progressively increased the rifle divisions’ firepower and logistical support by adding new weapons and supporting subunits to the rifle division’s organizational structure.” - Glantz, “Colossus Reborn” P180 So, this was a deliberate policy from the Soviet high command, which effectively handicapped their own forces. When you hear about how the Germans were able to run rings around the Soviet forces in 1941 (after the first couple weeks, when the Germans destroyed the original Red Army units at the border) and cause heavy casualties on them, then this is one of the big reasons why. Soviet divisions and generals clearly couldn’t go toe-to-toe with a German division, not because they were bad, but because they were outnumbered on the tactical level. This begs the question - would it have been better to just keep producing normal divisions rather than independent rifle brigades? Would the inexperienced Red Army officers have been able to manage in combat better with full divisions compared to demidivisions? And why would the Soviet high command deliberately handicap themselves like this, even bearing in mind the lack of experience in the officer corps? As I said in the video, this is a topic that needs to be looked into in further detail. But I’d love to hear your thoughts on this below. LINKS Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory VIDEO: Stalin’s Purge of the Red Army and Its Effects on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ VIDEO: Fall Blau 1942 - Examining the Disaster https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY VIDEO: Paulus's 6th Army ORDER OF BATTLE - Before Stalingrad https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw Coming soon - the Soviet Order of Battle for pre-Stalingrad (i.e. 62nd and 64th Armies) SELECTED SOURCES / BIBLIOGRAPHY Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University of Kansas, 2007. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Jones, M. “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed.” Pen & Sword Military, 2016. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Sokolov, B. “Marshal K.K. Rokossovsky: The Red Army’s Gentleman Commander.” Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. As noted in the video, I need to learn German and Russian asap! Thanks for watching
    115
  350. "this raises a key question: just how many Stuka attacks did he actually survive?" It does! Perhaps this was another exaggeration... Luckily, unlike Hoffman's entries regarding the Grain Elevator, Chuikov's constant Stuka menace doesn't significantly alter the events, it's more like a side-note. And thank you for supporting the channel and making these videos possible!
    115
  351. Wait until they realise that it is the state that creates the monopolies in the market!
    114
  352. Hey guys! Robert Kellner (grandson of Friedrich Kellner) has just posted a comment in last week's video, and I've pinned it so all of your can go read it https://youtu.be/gP0WxmqDg5s He's talking about the authenticity of the diary 👍 thought you might want to check it out!
    114
  353. I would also point out that (and I probably should have mentioned this in the video) Britain could only hold on thanks to Lend Lease from the USA. Britain was on the verge of bankruptcy in mid-1941, and if she had been forced to peace out then, the oil from America could have come to Germany, thus potentially enabling her to win Barbarossa.
    113
  354. I agree with him on this point. Given what's just happened in the past few years, at least 80% of the population are already willing to commit murder in the name of "social justice" (which is definitely not National Socialism or anything).
    113
  355. There's a 9.5 hour Crusader video too ;)
    113
  356. Thanks guys, this is the first time I've noticed my own comments getting automatically deleted by YT. My original comment mentioned a certain amendment to a certain constitutional agreement from the USA relating to the ownership of certain things... It must have triggered the bots
    112
  357. This is one of the reasons I wanted to do this video. Many of my critics say I should "stick to tanks" because I'm no good at tank videos. Yet the vast majority of those saying that have no idea about economics or politics, and I've done my homework
    112
  358. It's horrifying that it's happening, and that there's a large portion of society (socialists) who actively support this
    112
  359. I did originally say this would be 24 hours long... But I may have underestimated :)
    112
  360. Hey everyone, more videos are coming this week (including tomorrow). As I said in the community post I made earlier, I’ve decided last-minute to not publish the original video I was going to publish today. It was a ‘tank’ WW2 video on a sensitive topic, but given our current climate, I don’t think it would be wise to publish it in its current form. So I’m going to ‘sleep on it’ and maybe rewrite it (again) for a release at some point in the future. Instead, I published this one, which is probably the shortest video I’ve ever made. And I’m going to publish several short quick-fire videos this week (and possibly next) on a variety of topics, some Q&A’s, some not. Also, this video isn't fully monetized by YouTube for some reason. I’ve no idea why, but yes, even this one has been ‘Limited’. You can’t make this up.
    112
  361. I need to do a video on the Holodomor. I fear YouTube will suppress it like it did my Greek video though
    112
  362. Don't laugh. The Aryan super-saiyans are very serious.
    112
  363. So if food
    112
  364. Got to have that org, man. Got to have that org
    111
  365. Yeah, they were already fighting a war, it just hadn't been made official yet
    111
  366. On point 4, the reason I seem a bit reluctant to commit to the idea that Stalin thought that Hitler wouldn’t risk a war on two fronts is because this was one of the things I was challenged on in the previous video. Some viewers didn’t think Stalin thought this, even though I presented a direct quote about it in the previous video... So it looks like I’m going to have to do a video on what Stalin’s pre-Barbarossa thoughts were and how he was shocked by the invasion, just to solidify what actually happened, because if Stalin wasn’t shocked by Barbarossa (as some claim) or if Stalin didn’t fall for the two front war thing (as some claim) then this entire theory can be thrown out, as can most of the current history books that talk about Barbarossa or Stalin. If anyone has any source recommendations specific to Stalin being shocked or not, or about the two front war idea, let me know below so I can compare and contrast the various theories. Thanks! Also, I didn’t include the Patreon list in this video because it would have been longer than the video (I’m only half joking...) but it will be back in on Monday’s Stalingrad video.
    111
  367. Pinned Comment Part of the reason I wanted to look into this topic was because I’m working on a Courland Pocket 1944 documentary, which will be out very soon. Finland realises the game is up in late 1944 as Army Group North struggles to hold onto the Baltic. Finland may, or may not, be one of the reasons Army Group North gets trapped in the Courland Pocket, so I thought it was worth exploring the reasons why Finland went to war in the first place. I have begun editing Courland, and I’m hoping to have the first episode out either next Monday or the Monday after. Currently all my focus and effort is going into making that series as good as it possibly can be. Selected Sources (These were the most relevant) Lunde, H. "Finland's War of Choice: The Troubled German-Finnish Coalition in World War II." Casemate Publishers, 2011. Trotter, W. "The Winter War: The Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40." Aurum Press Ltd, 2003. Wuorinen, J. “Finland and World War II, 1939-1944.” Pickle Partners Publishing, 2015. Ziemke, E. “The German Northern Theatre of Operations: 1940-1945.” Pickle Partners Publishing, Kindle 2014 (original 1956). Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume IV/I, The Attack on the Soviet Union.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. The full list of my history books (currently 333) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    110
  368. BIG Announcement! Because the script is finally done (75,423 words) and because I’m having Battlestorm-withdrawal symptoms, I have decided that Battlestorm Operation Crusader must come out NOW. And, because the laws of space-time dictate that I can’t create Monday videos and Battlestorm at the same time, I’m committing 100% to Crusader. I didn’t want to do it like this, and the script is not set up for it to be released like this, and I’m not sure if I can actually do it in such a short space of time, but I’m biting the bullet and releasing Crusader in weekly episodes, starting from next week. In theory, it will be the same as I did with Battlestorm Operation Market Garden where I published several episodes and then put them together into one long video at the end. The only problem is that I actually had Market Garden finished when I started releasing episodes; with Crusader that will not be the case. So any and all mistakes made in the script will have to be ironed out on the fly… which means that if I notice a mistake half-way through that impacts a previous episode - tough luck! However, the benefits will hopefully outweigh the cons. I’m expecting Crusader to be 7-8 hours long, and I’ll never get it finished if I carry on creating Monday videos. Therefore the only way to finish it is to supplant the normal Monday videos for Crusader. Now, practically the script was not designed for this, so I’m having to improvise massively. I also don’t know how long each episode will be, nor how many episodes there will actually be. It will be at least 11 episodes, but probably several more. Each of these will vary in length, simply because certain days of the operation are much longer than others etc. But regardless of the logistical issues the offensive must continue! And by that, I mean, Crusader is happening whether we’re ready for it or not. Thanks for watching!
    109
  369. By pointing out that this only applies to the leader of the tribe, not to everyone in the tribe.
    109
  370. Personally, I think hyperinflation was a huge factor in the collapse of the Roman Empire. Debasing your money and turning it into fiat currency is never good
    109
  371. In light of the pro-censorship stance our beloved Collectivist-Corporations are currently taking, I’ve started backing up my videos on BitChute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/ Please consider subscribing to me on there. I couldn’t get BitChute to work on Chrome, so if Chrome blocks you too, I’d recommend the Brave browser (which also blocks 3rd Party trackers). All new videos will be uploaded on BitChute, and I’m slowly reuploading my old videos there as well. YouTube will continue to be the main focus unless the censorship-hammer pays a visit. And yes, Corporations originally came from the Marxist Revolutionary Syndicalist movement, as I explained in my Mussolini and Fascism video https://youtu.be/06vJY9nLMXU Given that this was more of a random opinion piece episode, a list of sources is not really relevant. However, the source on Lend Lease which talked about the amount of food and munitions consumption of the American and Soviet soldiers and the Molotov-Roosevelt meeting was Tuyll’s “Feeding the Bear: American Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945.” Next week will be Courland episode 10, and in two weeks time will be the update to the “The REAL Reason why Hitler HAD to start WW2” video where I’ll explain why the shrinking markets isn’t taught in relation to Hitler’s ideology. Don’t expect a Q&A that week because I expect another Collectivist backlash like I’ve had on the previous video. Yes, that “Hitler HAD to start WW2” video and others have been brigaded by Collectivists who are of the opinion that “Churchill started WW2” and “Hitler didn’t want war” and that I “should try reading Mein Kampf” (even though I did quote from Mein Kampf in the video). That video received 95% likes in the first 48 hours, but since then has slowly degraded to 83.8% as a flood of Holocaust Denialists have come from neo-Collectivist websites. Several of you (notably b52gf16c) were in the comments questioning the logic of the Denialists and hitting hard with some heavy truths. Thank you for your vigilance in the fight against totalitarians. For a full list of all my WW2 books, check out this list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    109
  372. It's funny because when I did my video on Franco's Spain, I was criticised for my stance, and told I didn't know what I was talking about. But as you've just said, it's true! Stalin (a socialist) killed Trotsky (a socialist). That doesn't mean Stalin wasn't a socialist. You can hate others of your own ideology, and that's fine. Men hate other men - doesn't mean they're not men. So Franco might have been anti-Communist or anti-Socialist, but that doesn't mean that his regime wasn't socialist in nature.
    108
  373. That's partly why I wanted to do this video - the ideology that's trying to divide us needs to be exposed, and many have no idea that they've fallen into a trap
    108
  374. Precisely!
    107
  375. Not under lockdown you weren't
    107
  376. Good to see you still around 👍 I miss the gaming days. Close Combat, Panzer Corps... Simpler times.
    106
  377.  @LucVNO  "We are all on the same internet with the same access to the near total sum of all human knowledge." That is actually untrue. The internet doesn't have anywhere near the total sum of our knowledge. Most of the knowledge is in books, and that which finds itself onto the internet is just the tip of the iceberg, and usually biased propaganda (e.g. Wikipedia)
    106
  378. It does confirm to me that Hitler needed to take out Poland, otherwise the map just would look silly with a pink blob in the middle of a grey blob. Just wrong.
    105
  379. NOTES and SOURCES Part 2 will be next week. And no, you’re going to have to wait. Yes, I did mispronounce Weichs. I realised during editing but not enough time to go back. More like “Viche” or “Vy-shhh”. I mispronounce it next week too since that was recorded the same time as this video, but I’ve learnt my lesson and I won’t be mispronouncing it during the main Battle of Stalingrad documentary. And that’s the benefit of doing these Monday videos. I get a chance to fix my mistakes in preparation for the big videos. Because they are coming. Operation Crusader is getting there now, with a lot of the research and a lot of the units having been made already. The main Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary is also coming together, thanks to these videos. And yes, it will happen. It’s just a question of time. If you haven’t seen my in-depth Battlestorm documentaries, see this playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y And please consider supporting me on Patreon to make these videos as good as they can be. If you become a Patreon now, your name will be included in all future videos! Link https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory The fantastic video "The Soviet-German War, 1941-1945: Myths and Realities" by COL (Ret) David M. Glantz https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU SOURCES (Selected) Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. [referred to as the “Official German History” in the video] Thanks for watching! :)
    105
  380. Don't worry, I have no intention of stopping :)
    105
  381. More like HOI doesn't do logistics correctly!
    105
  382. It really does highlight how ridiculous the situation had become
    105
  383. They're already doing that!
    104
  384. Exactly! That's what makes me concerned. He's built his reputation on a foundation of lies
    104
  385. My question is, if you didn't know, how many other people didn't know either?
    103
  386. @Demjansk1942 Asked about Erickson's "Road to Stalingrad" which I have but forgot to talk about in the video. Erickson was good when he came out, but is sadly out of date now. Could be a nice alternative to Beevor or Craig as a starter, but again, you can't read him alone; you'd have to follow up with Glantz.
    103
  387. Hey kids! Are you ready to drink some salty tears? Here’s some more quotes from comments on my previous videos which get this wrong for various reasons. It’s even better now that you know the difference between a good and bad ‘revisionist’ historian. Note that most of these are just insults because very few people who dislike my videos know how to construct valid counterarguments. Also note, I’ve taken snippets from some of the comments because they proceeded to drone on and on with more of the same rubbish - “** tier revisionist history who thinks he is so smart. Goering still told Hitler that it could be done so you didn't disprove anything. Clickbait/fakenews title.” - That’s not what the definition of clickbait is. If you’d clicked on the video expecting to hear about the Stalingrad airlift, but instead it was just some guy walking down the street, that’s clickbait. My videos are not that. Also “fakenews” doesn’t makes sense considering this is a history channel talking about events from 80 years previously. Nor was it fake. Plus, you didn’t disprove the Jeschonnek didn’t tell Hitler that the 6th Army could be supplied by air, so the argument stands. From ‘The BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth’ https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M “I'm sick of revisionist who want to understate the American roll in the war.” - by saying the Soviets did the majority of the fighting? 8 out of 10 Germans died on the Eastern Front. Saying that the US won the war is actually understating the role of the USSR during the war, which is equally as bad. Also, the video this comment is from had nothing to do with USA! From ‘Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong’ https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs “This is a terrible analysis by TIK. It is basically completely wrong. TIK has been reading way too much Glantz who is a well known revisionist.” - so reading the latest analysis of the Stalingrad Campaign in addition to all the old narratives which have been disproven over and over again is a bad thing? No, it’s only bad because you’re wrong and don’t actually have a counter-argument. From ‘The BIG Stalingrad Airlift Myth’ https://youtu.be/feeYOqQkr3M “This Revisionist Video attempts 2 lay the blame at General Manstein's feet.” - yep! It sure does. And it succeeded in doing so because the only counter-arguments made were people calling me a “revisionist”, or people ignoring the argument I made and insisting Manstein’s biased memoirs were still right - even though they’re wrong. From ‘Manstein is LYING! Breakout at Stalingrad Part 2’ https://youtu.be/uzAzpIdDNcI “This video is possibly the worst one that TIK has done . Just hopeless. It is totally wrong. This guy has to stop reading revisionist historians like Glantz.” - great counter-argument you have there. I think your argument is wrong, and your comment is wrong. See? Very easy for me to counter you too. Oh, and I guess we all may as well start burning books, since anything written post-1945 is going to be wrong, according to this guy. From ‘FALL BLAU 1942 - Examining the Disaster’ https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY “Argument 1: True (duh). Argument 2: True (also duh). Argument 3: Revisionist ****, you could make claims like these at any level of the failures of this operation [Market Garden]. Ultimately this is not a British vs American vs Polish failure. The buck stops with Eisenhower and Montgomery.” - No, Gavin of the 82nd Airborne is at fault for not capturing the Nijmegen bridge on day 1, which lead to the failure of the operation. Call it what you want, but unless you present a valid counterargument, you’ve not disproven anything. From ‘The REAL Operation Market Garden’ https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc “Typical revisionism. Gavin had to secure his drop zones for re-supply, or he would have wound up like the British Paras. Out of supply and forced to capitulate to the Germans. Apparently the people who make these revisionist videos have never been paratroopers, or in combat.” - yes, because unless you’ve been a super-elite-sniper-ex-marine-navy-seal-SAS-one-man-army-warrior you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Also, you do realise that the video you watched where you commented this was about what COLONEL JOHN FROST said about who was to blame for Market Garden. He was in the military, and he was there! He said the blame should be laid at Nijmegen, and was one of the first to do so. And absolutely nobody was claiming Gavin had to leave the drop zone undefended. Gavin sent Warren’s battalion later on in the day, so clearly he could have done it six hours earlier. From ‘Who to Blame? John Frost on Operation Market Garden's Failure WW2’ https://youtu.be/7C_HoMVhKAI “I'm very suspicious of revisionist history but this is a very decent piece of work which makes a whole lot of sense to me.” - Finally a positive comment! Don’t be suspicious of revisionist history. Be suspicious all all history. From ‘Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong’ https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs “revisionist ** ** deiged to place on the Americans instead of the cowardly Brits... America bashing, the current popular pastime of all hisotry revisionists” - this comment got several likes. Nobody was bashing the Americans. Just because General Gavin happens to be from the US, doesn’t mean we have to resort to a childish “US vs Brits” argument. Nobody cares who’s country is better that who’s. That’s an argument for children. Get over it. From ‘The REAL Operation Market Garden’ https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc “Interesting how most white millennials of European heritage have such guilt of that (such as this typical British great- grandchild of the British who fought and died against a terrifying German war machine) that they want to lie about and rewrite history to redeem and glorify themselves.” - drink up those salty tears everyone! I like the fact that the video had absolutely nothing to do with anything this guy was talking about. Honestly, I’ve got nothing, except ‘racism’ is a synonym of ‘ignorance’. From ‘Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong’ https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs “Utterly appalling revisionism. You sound like a communist sympathiser..” - Great counter-argument there. I was called a fascist on my Croatian Legion video. I can be a lot of things, but I can’t be both! From ‘Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong’ https://youtu.be/B-ZHH770WLs “This is typical "Bail Monty out revisionism".” - who was bailing out Montgomery? You can still blame Montgomery for the failure of Operation Market Garden, even if Gavin messed up at Nijmegen. From ‘Who’s to Blame for the Failure of Operation Market Garden?’ https://youtu.be/SkZIAhpbW7I Now for some ‘great’ counter-arguments - “your concluson doesn't fit the numbers.” - really? How does it not fit the numbers? Care to explain? Apparently not. This was his entire comment. Talk about a terrible counter-argument. If you’re reading this and you’re in education, this is how not to present a counter-argument. Stating “you’re wrong” is not a counter-argument. And yet somehow this comment got 10 likes. Ten people liked this comment!?!?!? What were they thinking!? From ‘The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front’ https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Right, final comment, and it’s a special one. I have always considered this to be the most stupid comment on any of my videos ever. It was posted about a year and a half ago, and I have never forgotten it. Drum-roll please - “I get a sense of anti-Americanism here especially when describing the 82nd AB crossing the river and the reference to old men and young boys were overwhelmed. Being a veteran, that stuff really disappoints me.” This comment has always stuck with me because it highlights the problem people have with history. If you’re unwilling to let go of your patriotic-pride (or your political/economic/social/racial/sexual/religious/or-whatever pride), and get offended when someone presents evidence that you don’t like, you’re going to have a bad time. This “veteran” was offended that I said in the video that the 82nd Airborne crossed the Waal in boats against old men and young boys who were firing at them. This was clearly anti-Americanism… apparently. Well, no. No it wasn’t. Here was my reply - “The unit facing the 82nd was SS-Captain Schwappacher's training regiment of artillerymen. "Many of the German defenders were 15-year-old teenagers, or 60-year-old previous exemptions from service. They were totally unprepared to meet those enraged paratrooper veterans rushing at them." - Kershaw, R. 'It Never Snows in September' Surry, 2007. p197. “If anything, that's a compliment to the 504th. They crossed a river in boats like marines which they weren't trained for, lost unit cohesion in the ensuing chaos and yet still had the tenacity to individually overwhelm the unit facing them on the far bank that had been ruthlessly killing them moments before. Despite being old men and young boys, the Germans did have machine guns and 20mm cannon. Half the boats didn't make it. And as I said in the video, this was probably one of the most heroic acts of the war. “I made this documentary to dispel the myths of the battle and tell exactly what happened. Everything is based on the facts given in the sources listed in the video description. Even the conclusion at the end is based on arguments that historians have made and are making - which I do agree with as that conclusion makes more sense to me than the others. Feel free to debate it with me.” Needless to say, he never replied. Thank you for watching and reading. Please think twice before getting offended at things.
    103
  388. Which is interesting because most of those accusing me of being a Nazi or Commie are themselves Nazis or Commies
    102
  389. Don't forget to have 9 security divisions as well (which weren't included in that graph and which didn't participate on the front line - at least not initially)
    102
  390. I give up. Some of the 'counterarguments' that are already in the comments of this video haven't watched the video and are saying the exact same thing that the in-video comments made. But they're claiming that I've been 'refuted' (one guy calling this video 'propaganda'). Pointless.
    102
  391. Exactly! It's basic stuff. I think the only reason Halder ignored him was because they expected to win the war by the time they got that far into the country. How wrong that assessment was.
    102
  392. Haha this is why Stalingrad is taking so long - I'm trying to find out the direction of every bullet, and the placement of every blade of grass...
    101
  393. Yes, I did misspell a word... but when I spotted it I didn't have time to re-render, so it is what it is
    101
  394. He was promoted
    101
  395. Do you have the time, to listen to me whine, About Hitler and Manstein both at once?
    100
  396. I've already said that about Churchill. Check out my first Battlestorm Crusader video
    100
  397. hE WaSn'T ReAlLY hiTLeR!?!
    100
  398. NOTES and SOURCES Part 1 “Paulus in NOT to blame!” is here https://youtu.be/USCyLcjdH4s Yes, I did mispronounce Weichs again. These two videos were recorded at the same time. It’s Vikes! Please consider supporting me on Patreon to make these videos as good as they can be. If you become a Patreon now, your name will be included in all future videos! Link https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory The fantastic video "The Soviet-German War, 1941-1945: Myths and Realities" by COL (Ret) David M. Glantz https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU Fact - Manstein never once issued the order to breakout, but claims several times that he and his Army Group (Don) gave the order. Here are some of the claims and suggestions that the order was given - “The immediate problem - that is, from 19th till 25th December - was whether Sixth Army would actually be able and willing to carry out the order issued to it.” - Manstein P337 “Although the Army Group strove by its order to absolve him of that responsibility, he still felt unable to acquit himself of it, either vis-a-vis Hitler or before his own conscience.” - Manstein P342 “In the week that followed the Army Group’s order for an immediate break-out, the fate of Sixth Army was decided.” - Manstein P342 Full order from Manstein to Sixth Army which supposedly gave the order to breakout - “ 1. Fourth Pz. Army (57 Pz. Corps) has beaten enemy in area Verkhnye Kimsky and reached Myshkova at Nizh Kimsky. Attack launched against strong enemy grouping in area Kamenka and north of here. Hard fighting still expected. Situation on Chir front does not permit forces west of Don to advance on Kalach. Chirskaya in enemy hands. 2. Sixth Army will begin ‘Winter Tempest’ attack earliest possible. Aim will be to link up with 57 Pz. Corps, if necessary by advancing beyond Donskaya Tsaritsa, for purpose of getting convoy through. 3. Development of situation may make it necessary to extend task in para 2 up to Myshkova. Code-word ‘Thunderclap’. In this case the aim must likewise be to establish contact with 57 Pz. Corps in order to get convoy through, and then, by covering flanks on the lower Karpovka, to bring army forward towards the Myshkova simultaneously with sector-by-sector evacuation of fortress area. It is essential that Operation ‘Thunderclap’ should immediately follow ‘Winter Tempest’ attack. Supply by air must be carried out in the main without advance stockpiling. Important to hold Pitomnik airstrip as long as possible. All weapons and artillery which can be moved, primarily guns needed for the fighting and also any weapons and equipment which are difficult to replace, will be taken along. To this end they will be moved in good time to the south-west of the pocket. 4. All necessary preparations to be made for action laid down in para. 3. Only to be implemented on express issue of ‘Thunderclap’. 5. Reports day and time on which you can attack in accordance with para. 2. ” -- end of quote Clearly, that does not say “Breakout now please, Paulus.” No, the reality is that the code-word ‘Thunderclap’ never came. SOURCES (Selected) Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. [referred to as the “Official German History” in the video] Thanks for watching!
    100
  399. This is actually true. By keeping the price low, I do allow more people to ask questions for Q&As (demand) but this is also why I'm a year behind with the questions because I can't keep up (supply). In theory, I should increase the price of the Q&A questions at least. And some patreons have commented saying they're astounded that I don't charge more, since other YouTubers definitely charge more.
    99
  400. 'Cause he's had a bad day He's taking one down He sings a sad song just to turn it around
    99
  401. Private property + markets + state intervention in the economy = socialism. Luke, there's a difference between communism and socialism. And gnet, there's a lot of different versions of socalism. This is one of them.
    99
  402.  @hany-k95  You not only work less hours than me, but you get one day off a week! I wish I could have as much time off as you do, slacker! And physical work is not the same as mental work. I can run around a warehouse dealing with idiots all day long (I know, I've done it). But this is something else. If my Patreons wish to stop supporting me because I'm not publishing Stalingrad for a couple of months, that's on them. They're grown-ups and I respect their decision. But in the mean time, I'll be doing other topics like the Battle of the Bulge (hopefully for next week). If they don't want that, fair enough, but I'm doing it regardless because a Patreon of mine paid me to do it.
    99
  403. Oh, and Chuikov
    98
  404. Pinned your comment so more can see your additional info
    98
  405. Currently it has 3,117 likes and 90 dislikes, so that's a 97.2% like to dislike ratio. YouTube still allows creators to view the dislikes, and I wish there was an option to show dislikes again because I prefer them to be public
    98
  406. I was hoping you and others could help me. If you could let people know what's happening, maybe on message boards and forums, it could get the word out. The problem here is that it's not just me who's affected, but several other channels too, and this guy is scamming his audience.
    98
  407. Politicians are more than unemployed - they're thieves in nice suits
    97
  408. I’ve officially fallen out with my camera. The auto focus doesn’t work (people have been complaining about that in previous videos), and it’s not really possible to use manual focus with the setup I have. So I’ve ordered a new one. Won’t be here for a couple weeks though… Thus, sorry about the video quality here. I’m taking steps to improve it, but it may remain an issue for a little longer
    97
  409. 1. If you're new here, you may want to check out Episode 1 of this Battle of Stalingrad series: https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag 2. If you're not new, should Paulus and Wietersheim have gone to the Volga north of Stalingrad? Or gone southeast towards Hoth's 4th Panzer Army? Let me know!
    97
  410.  Minister of Propaganda  The British government currently abuses its own subjects. I know because I am one. It wasn't the British "white man" doing all that, it was Parliament and the elites.
    97
  411. Exactly, it makes zero sense, even in 40k.
    96
  412. Hey everyone, I’m going to have another video up this week talking about Günter Reimann’s “Vampire Economy” (primary source document published 1939) as part of another Patron Q&A. It’ll probably be up on Thursday. You can get this book online as a free PDF if you want to do some reading beforehand. I would highly recommend it because it’s a great source for understanding Nazi Germany, even if it does have a few flaws… as I’ll discuss in the next video. I am behind with the Q&As (as usual) so I apologize to those who have asked questions and haven’t yet had them answered. I’m currently reading up on Mussolini and Italy for a future video on them, as well as the German economy, and I’m trying to find information on chemical weapons in WW2 in order to answer some more. Was Finland part of the Axis of WW2? Or was it a co-belligerent? Let me know what you think below. I’m willing to change my mind on the subject if your evidence/interpretation is superior than the counterarguments. Sources Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Dix, A. "The Norway Campaign and the Rise of Churchill 1940." Pen&Sword, Kindle 2014. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Glantz, D. "The Battle for Leningrad 1941-1944." University Press of Kansas, 2002. Glantz, D. "The Siege of Leningrad 1941-1944: 900 Days of Terror." Brown Partworks Ltd, 2001. Lunde, H. "Finland's War of Choice: The Troubled German-Finnish Coalition in World War II." Casemate Publishers, 2011. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Wuorinen, J. “Finland and World War II, 1939-1944.” Pickle Partners Publishing, 2015. For a full list of all my WW2 books, check out this list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    96
  413. "My question was: What is your opinion on Lipstadt's refusal to debate so called "deniers"? You didnt respond to that. Does that lend her opinion on the holocaust any credence?" She should debate them. I understand why she doesn't, since they're anti-Semites and she's Jewish so they'll just be attacking her racially rather than coming up with decent arguments, but she should debate them. As far as your other points, individuals get things wrong all the time. Now I don't know about that particular debate, but assuming she was wrong, that doesn't prove that the Holocaust didn't happen or that she's lying - she may have just been mistaken. I get things wrong from time to time. Unless you're a god, you're not perfect and will make mistakes. That mistake doesn't prove that the Holocaust didn't happen, nor does it prove that Lipstadt is lying on a whole. In fact, Evans in his book explains that Lipstadt did make some mistakes in her original book, but no where near the same number as Irving did, and she was correct to call Irving out for his deliberate distortion of the evidence.
    96
  414. Yeah, I mean the Marxists are keen to call me all sorts of names, including an anti-Semite, despite the fact I've called out their own anti-semitism. Karl Marx was an anti-semite after all https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    96
  415. Sources All of them. No seriously, if you’re not using all of them, you’re doing it wrong ;) … And yes, it’s kinda hard to list my sources for this video, considering that this lesson was learnt at college/university. The point of the video isn’t really to discuss Manstein’s dates being wrong (but if you insist, see Glantz, D. “Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942 - February 1943. The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3.” University Press of Kansas, 2014.)... ...or if the term “Dark Ages” is truly defunct or not (or even if the Dark Ages were a “Phantom Age” ~ whoooooo ~ scary stuff - see Scott, E. “A Guide to the Phantom Dark Age.” 2014.)... ...or if Caesar was born of cesarean (Goldsworthy, A. “Caesar.” Orian Books, 2007.). “Although the procedure would later bear his name, there is no ancient evidence to suggest that Caesar was delivered by Caesarean section, although the procedure was known in the ancient world. In fact, it is extremely unlikely, since the operation was usually fatal for the mother and Aurelia lived on for decades.” P42 The point of the video is to say why “revisionist historians” are good. The term “revisionist historian” has two meanings - one good, and one bad. People do not seem to realise this and use the term for the negative more often than the positive. Well, revisionism is necessary for history. Without it we’d never learn the truth, and we’d never correct the mistakes historians have made in the past. So there needs to be a split between the good revisionism and the bad revisionism. Therefore, revisionist historians are good. Distorians are bad. And all modern historians should be revisionists. Disagree? Let’s see a compelling counter-argument that explains why you should just believe the words of early-historians. And why you shouldn’t question everything you read, see or hear. I’d love to hear it. Thank you to my Patreons - you guys are awesome! Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Thanks for watching, bye for now.
    96
  416. Thank you! I'm glad you're enjoying the series! It was only a two-week break, and definitely helped, although I will admit that I could have done with a longer break... Maybe I'll have another break next year or something
    95
  417. I'm sorry it's taken this long!
    95
  418. How could I forget! People are currently asking me to make response videos to Marxist YouTubers who are calling me all sorts of names, but honestly their arguments suck and I just don't see the point. They're not honest, they're not listening, and they're talking complete Hegel.
    95
  419. Maybe. But logistics and fuel is also a factor on the Eastern Front too.
    95
  420. I wasn't taught it in college or university. It's something I had to research myself, and it's closely related to the study of knowledge (epistemology). Richard Evans in "In Defence of History" also says history students and historians are not taught the theory behind what they do, and just concentrate on the practical side of it. It's a serious issue and leads to a lot of problems, but people don't like "theory" so ignore it
    95
  421. Tell me about it.
    95
  422.  @drakmatheism  To be fair, the very first video I made on this subject sucked because I addressed it to the Nazis, leaving it open to the subsequent Marxist backlash. I've only left it up because I own my mistakes, and I want to point back to it and say "this was the point when I swapped from the left". But most of the videos since then have been backed by a substantial amount of evidence, and the so-called counter-arguments to these videos have been absolutely terrible. They're a waste of time for me to even watch, let alone respond to.
    95
  423. I'll be honest, ideally I'd like to keep everything on one channel, but YouTube's algorithm doesn't like mixed-channels. So with this being a completely different style of content, it may not go with the rest of the videos. If I create a second channel, this sort of video, updates, and other behind the scenes type content could go on that, reserving this channel for the fully-sourced and referenced content.
    95
  424. I'm tempted to do a video on them, exposing their own opinions and policies, especially since their users are clearly all Marxists themselves
    95
  425. Yeah, it's good to look at the strategic, operational and tactical levels of a war, but we should also remember to view the personal level too. There were so many layers to this conflict
    94
  426. Sorry to say that I've had to remove that guy you were replying to for harassment. He's been mass-flagging my videos and accusing me of Holocaust Denialism, despite the fact that I've done several videos on the Holocaust that counter Holocaust Denialism. I don't like banning people from the channel (he is the 4th person ever), but when he's trying to get the videos and channel banned via false and baseless accusations, I think he's crossed the line.
    94
  427. They don't realise how far they have set us back with their denial of evidence, reason and logic
    94
  428. Oh yes, of course! I'll go and set an alarm
    94
  429. Notes and Sources Sorry again that the video was not out on time. Everything was fine until it took an absolute age to render. I suspect it’s the size of the map I’m using. I’ll know for next time. The sources are vague on Operation Doppelkopf, including the one German source I have on it (although the maps were pretty good). I’m fairly confident that the German unit positions in this episode are correct for the most part, but I’m not 100% certain about corps-level and below on the Soviet side. The sources I have do not speak much about the Red Army, and those that do don’t go into detail. I found one source that shows the Red Army unit positions for the beginning of the operation, but that’s it. This is why I was able to show the divisional positions at one point, and then they disappeared. The German accounts are also vague about their own unit positions and don’t place many units below divisional level on the map - with the exception of 14th Panzer Division. I could not find information on which “German and Latvian” forces fought at Jelgava. It could be the 81st or 93rd Infantry Divisions, but that’s purely at a guess. I do find it interesting that several panzer and motorized division were used in this operation, but weren’t able to break through Soviet lines. The Red Army units (mostly rifle divisions from what I can find) were able to block the elite divisions of the German Army, despite reaching the Baltic Coast and being stretched out and exhausted after weeks of advancing and fighting. This is partly why I suspect the Warsaw Uprising was a little premature. If the Soviets couldn’t hold onto the Baltic Coast at this point, then it does lend credibility to the idea that they also couldn’t get to Warsaw due to their logistical overstretch. Thoughts? Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    93
  430. The lie is that Labour were ever for the "working class" (which doesn't even exist). There are no groups, only individuals. Socialists were never for the poor - they only said they were, and many people fell for their lies
    93
  431.  @zumurudlilit  The free market health care system in the USA was better than the state-Obama-care system you currently have https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ?si=jkvPHfW1En-YHN-L
    93
  432. If you come across that, please let me know because I would also want to see it
    93
  433. Me too. That's why doing this is necessary
    93
  434. I'd much rather just talk openly about the crimes and so on... but I've obviously got to toe the line with YT otherwise they'll take action against the channel.
    93
  435. FIRST! And is that a HOI reference?
    93
  436. That's definitely something I should cover, along with ideas like "Building a strawman" and other ridiculous logical fallacies. Thank you for the suggestion!
    93
  437. Exactly. They despire money and want a Granny State because they fear independence and don't understand the concept of wealth creation.
    93
  438. Exactly
    92
  439. Not if you disobey Manstein, Jeschonnek, Hitler and Göring, and break out before it's too late!
    92
  440. You make a very good point. Same applies with vehicle losses. Graebner at Arnhem took the wheels off his half-tracks so he could claim they weren't fit for transport elsewhere. This is the only reason he had any trucks at all on day one of Market Garden (being the only unit in 9th SS Panzer Division that had armoured fighting vehicles). It's not hard to imagine this was going on all over the place.
    92
  441. Thank you! Please link to more materials, and I'll check out Larken Rose. If we had voluntary taxation, and this "non-State" entity grew large, I think we would still call it a "State" simply because a State is a Public hierarchy. (I outlined this idea in the Public vs Private video.) But I do understand what you're saying.
    92
  442. You are correct about it being an easier weapon for a less-trained soldier. The books I used mentioned that too.
    92
  443. Sorry it took a while to get to your question!
    91
  444. I'm very much aware that that's how some of them 'think'. But I remain optimistic that I can clarify the situation and make some of them realize just how evil and damaging the ideology they subscribe to is.
    91
  445. And yet, despite having the best economic arguments in over 100 years, socialists are not listening to those championing the free market because they automatically assume those people are the devil.
    91
  446. That's actually what I'm hoping for! Sadly, many subscribe to the German (Leopold von Ranke) philosophy of history where you "just present the facts" and there is no debate. That's why you get the "ultimate truth" outlook. Unfortunately, history theory shows us that 'history lies in the heart of the debate'. Without the debate you can't figure out the truth because the "facts" are all over the place and don't necessarily lead us to the correct interpretations. That's why debate is necessary, so we can figure out the truth through argument and counter-argument (testing the thesis like you would do in science). I've been over this concept in my history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Plus you must bear in mind that many YouTubers are playing it safe as a result of the current political culture and YouTube's terms of service. They'll discuss tanks, weapons and training - stuff where the debate is limited to "what's your favourite tank", which isn't controversial. I totally understand why they do this, but it does mean that the audience is not seeing the potential benefits of a serious academic debate over a more important topic (like this video, or the Hitler's Socialism debate). They also present themselves as a-political or non-political, which I know for a fact is untrue. They hide their political beliefs, deceiving people into thinking they're impartial and therefore trustworthy. I know why they're doing this (partly Ranke, partly so as not to rock the boat), but in their quest to be trustworthy, all they've done is hidden their cards up their sleeves, which actually makes them untrustworthy if you think about it. People may not agree with my stance on certain topics, but at least they know what that stance is. For all you know, one of these other YouTubers could be a secret [insert-whatever-bad-person-you-like-here]. Of course, it's more difficult to get into these debates, and people aren't mature enough to stop themselves from getting emotional and insulting each other. But in theory, everybody would benefit from a serious and academic debate on more 'controversial' topics. And for this reason, I think a debate would be good for the community here on YouTube, and would be entertaining for everyone. Plus, I want someone who's actually mature (unlike my current critics) who can take an opposing stance to my work, so that I can see if my arguments hold up to scrutiny, or if I need to clarify certain points, or do more research on certain things to back up my points. It's not easy to do that without someone with an opposing view.
    91
  447. Here’s the full quote from the German official history of the war - “What is certain, however, is that Hitler had been closely considering the question of supplying Sixth Army from the air while he was still on the Obersalzberg, and that he had arrived at a positive assessment of that option. At any rate, he had discussed the subject a few hours prior to his departure with Colonel-General Jeschonnek, Chief of the Luftwaffe General Staff, who was present at Berchtesgaden. It seems that Jeschonnek - aware of Richthofen’s pessimistic attitude, but possibly misjudging the basic conditions - did at least not dispute the possibility of temporary aerial provisioning in principle. “This was enough for Hitler to settle on the solution to the crisis which was to him the most attractive psychologically - holding on to Stalingrad.” - “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. The question now becomes - why was this lie accepted by academic historians? Why did no one check the facts? And how can we prevent such myths in the future? Let us know in the comments below. Main Sources used - Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Glantz, D. and House, J. “Endgame at Stalingrad, Book One: November. The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: Nemisis 1936-1945.” Penguin Books, 2001. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. Overy, R. Russia’s War. Penguin Books, 1999. Shirer, W. “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” Pan Books, 1964. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Wikipedia. “Hermann Göring. Decline on all fronts.” 07/01/2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_G%C3%B6ring#Decline_on_all_fronts Thank you again to my Patreons! Here they all are - aaron young Aaron Keogh Andreas Peter Larsen Ben Palmer Benjamin Waterhouse Bjorn Vegar Torseth bob Bob Lansdorp David Collins David Olie Davide Pessach DrStaletti Empichu Fury Mancuso gregory mackay Ian Desmecht ian evans James Bellinger Jeff Baker Jicksaw John Brown Kevin Paulson Mark Lahan Norbert Purcell nvgrod Patrick ray dunnett Ricky Torres Robert Biggin Sean P Sergiu C stuart hale Tomislav Trlin Tony Gill Consider supporting me and make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory
    91
  448. vs "The Red Army won"
    91
  449. A negative response to this video? There's a few people who dislike it, but this isn't one of my more controversial videos. Those people calling me a 'revisionist' have a poor concept of what history is and don't understand that revising history is what historians do. This is why I made my Revisionist video, to help explain the concept https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    91
  450. This is the main reason why I don't watch other YouTubers very often. If you're not citing your sources, of if you're just using a Wikipedia article (like one of my lecturers at university did), then I'm not going to trust what you say.
    91
  451. The best bit is that the Commies think I'm a Nazi, and the Nazis think I'm a Commie. The fact that they themselves can't see the difference between Commies and Nazis should probably be a clue to them that they have more in common (socialism) than they realize...
    90
  452. Nobody thinks of themselves as "evil". We all think they're doing the "right thing". Hitler was no exception to that... which is probably the biggest lesson in all of history.
    90
  453. I'll be honest, I was worried people wouldn't like the impression
    89
  454. I don't want to be harsh on the couple of people who responded to the scammer because it probably didn't occur to them that there was anything nefarious going on, but yeah I think there's a lack of common sense if you think I'd randomly start promoting something I've never talked about before, plus hand out a number
    89
  455. By working until 7.30 am this morning to make sure it was done in time 🙈
    89
  456. Since this is an important video, I have provided a PDF of the script. Link in the description.
    89
  457. Actually... I may have to take a day off tomorrow. Absolutely knackered right now
    89
  458. "There are so many people who think adult life works like a high school popularity contest." That's the problem - people think that 'democracy' (aka popularity contest) is the answer to everything. In reality, if everyone thinks the moon is made of cheese, that doesn't make it so. I can be the most hated person ever, but it doesn't matter if I have the best argument (the one based on reason and evidence, rather than emotion).
    89
  459. History isn't written by the winners, it's written by the survivors.
    89
  460. Well, you shouldn't be living paycheck to paycheck. You need to ration your resources, be efficient with what you have, and save up for future consumption. You can also take on debt, but I wouldn't recommend that.
    88
  461. That's just what a fascist would say!
    88
  462. This video was almost as long as some of my Battlestorms...! But I had fun making it. I enjoy tackling flawed arguments
    88
  463. No worries! :) good luck on the stream, and let me know what you think when you've finished watching it
    88
  464. No idea! But YouTube now limits videos to 12 hours in length, so Stalingrad is already beyond that, meaning it can't be condensed into one video
    88
  465. Yes, the comments in my previous video made that abundantly clear.
    88
  466. Please do, just in case
    88
  467. Notes (Remember - Timestamps are in the description!) Good old Halder. We’ve seen Halder do this sort of thing before in previous battles in the North African Campaign, and during Fall Blau (links to these videos are in the description). And his manipulation of the historiography after the war has clouded our perception of the Second World War. So yes, the Halder Hate is strong. What do you think? A couple of interesting points - Gause would later go on to be the Chief of Staff of German troops in the Courland Pocket. According to the British official history, the HQ unit of Oberstleutnant Knabe’s 104th Schützen Regiment, but the infantry battalions were not provided with lorries. I can’t be sure if that’s true or not, or if he was just referring to Bach’s battalion at Halfaya? Considering that this division was very mobile throughout Crusader, and Operation Sommernachtstraum (as we’ll see next week), it’s unlikely that the infantry didn’t have lorries. I’ve decided to keep the Afrika Division as “the Afrika Division” throughout this series. One source says it changed names on the 28th of November 1941. Oberst Mickl, who has a kampfgruppe, but is also in charge of the 155th Schützen Regiment is the same Mickl who would later commander 11th Panzer Division at Kursk in 1943, and later still, the 392nd Croatian Infantry Division. Do you think the Italian M13/40 tank should be classed as a medium tank or not? Let me know below. And finally, please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    88
  468. The updated timeline used in the video is here and in the description too https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IJkAYcN9w0G9Hy5V6PacYLb4hMlHitCW/view?usp=drive_link There's a lot more I need to add to it, so expect periodic updates! If you didn't see the original timeline video, it's here https://youtu.be/v7_J_daQkSU
    88
  469. That, plus the fact I work every day and never take time off, and the insanity of the responses ("no, you're wrong and lying because my feelings say so!")
    87
  470. I think he would argue that he's a more reliable source than someone else. However, by his own logic if a new more reliable historian came along, then Nilsson would also be dismissed.
    87
  471. This is why I'm for free speech. Yes, it means that the Nazis get a voice, but it also means non-Nazis get a voice too, which will allow the side with the overwhelming evidence too prevail.
    87
  472. I was tempted to do an April Fools, but I'm ill so didn't feel like it.
    87
  473. Who cares for victory points, just go all the way to the Pacific! Oh, and overrun British ME and India from the north while you're at it
    87
  474. Absolutely agree! O'Connor as well
    87
  475. I will concede that point ;)
    86
  476. And then when you're not persuaded, they accuse you of "doubling down"
    86
  477. Wow, is this true? They need to study a little more history
    86
  478. Good luck with your exam!
    86
  479. STICK TO BOTS!
    86
  480. Sticks and stones. None of the stuff they're saying is right. In fact, most of them didn't watch past the first five minutes because they're bringing up points I addressed in the video.
    86
  481. It was a good question 👍
    86
  482. And that "unofficial say" was exactly what happened. Instead of nationalizing the industries outright, they "synchronized" them into the state under a policy of Gleichschaltung. So any "privatization" that might have actually occurred was only nominal at best because the Nazi Party retained almost complete control over the businesses.
    86
  483. I was not aware of Armchair's demonetization until your comment... damn... this is bad
    86
  484. They can rest easy this week... but only this week!
    85
  485. I know, I know... SHAMEFUL
    85
  486. It wouldn't surprise me at this point. The lamestream media can't be truthful if they tried
    85
  487. I don't understand your point. Surely, you of all people should be agreeing with me, unless you think Soviet soldiers were inferior to German soldiers? Because that wasn't the the case. Red Army soldiers were as good as their German counterparts. The issue was that they weren't fully mobilized, weren't fully equipped, and were hit by a surprise attack in 1941 by an army that was prepared for war. This is why the Germans got to the gates of Moscow. Once the Red Army recovered, it fought back. Red Army soldiers were at equal strength to the Germans by 1943 - as they were now better equipped and prepared than their 1941 counterparts. And Wehrmacht soldiers weren't somehow "superior" to Red Army soldiers, as some historians have suggested. This, if anything, shows that the Soviet soldiers who died for their Motherland were good soldiers, not poor ones as the old history books suggested.
    85
  488. I see a Sabaton lyric, I heart
    85
  489. "TIK I haven’t seen you ever address your criticisms on BadHistory." Well, if you had bothered to watch this video you would have seen me tackle those criticisms.
    85
  490. The reason for the war, the Holocaust, and pretty much any question you ask about WW2, depends on the answer to this question. It HAS to be resolved one way or another. Otherwise it's impossible to do ANY history of WW2.
    85
  491. As James Lindsay said (and I encourage you to watch his video if you haven't), they change the words to suit their meanings, which often can lead to confusion. So when John says "nothing", he means nothing. But the Gnostics see "nothing" as everything that exists in the material realm! It's just really interesting how they're able to flip the script like that.
    85
  492. The guy with the constant 😑 smilies 😑 throughout his comments was definitely a child 😑
    85
  493. Yes, I don't think they're helping. There's a book out there about Stalingrad which looks just like a history book, but is completely fiction, and Amazon doesn't make it clear what it is in the description.
    84
  494. I've not read that book, but it does sound as though Robert Citino is taking up where Machsey left off. Have you read Citino? I generally agree that Hitler wasn't wrong about his generals not understanding the strategic and economic aspects of the war. They were trained to view it as an operational and tactical art, not a grand strategic campaign, which Hitler certainly viewed it as, and which lead him into conflict with his generals (most notably Halder, which shaped his post-war leanings, and thus our understanding of the war).
    84
  495. Unless I was doing 4D chess, in which case, it was to fool you into thinking that I was a Nazi, when in reality I am not a Nazi, in order to get you to accuse me of being a Nazi, proving that you're secretly a Nazi, because only a real Nazi would know the tactics of clever Nazis!
    84
  496. Hey all! Three things: 1. I'm aiming to get the next video in the Stalingrad series out next week. It will be a struggle... but fingers crossed it'll be out on time. 2. YouTube will probably censor this video since I mention "Hitler", "the Holocaust", "Goebbels", "murder" and more... so please share the video if you can. 3. And in case you miss every other link, here's the other video I mentioned in this video about the German Austrian in the Third Reich https://youtu.be/TEcQS9GDtK8 Highly recommended watching! Cheers!
    84
  497. Yeah, they are the worst.
    84
  498. According to Google, a PhD is usually 70,000 to 100,000 words (or "book-length"). So I've done 3-4.5 PhDs worth of words in this series. However, not many PhDs would have to speak the entire thing, create tons of graphics, animate and editing it into a documentary, so factoring all that in, it's more like 6 to 9 PhDs worth of work. Edit: and I did it in 4 years, 2 months. A full-time PhD in the UK is only 3 to 4 years. So I've done 6 to 9 PhDs in the same time as 1 PhD! Edit 2: But then again, I started the research a lot earlier, so it's not right, plus there's breaks. So I guess factoring all that in it's not quite as impressive as my previous edit.
    83
  499. It's weird. There were three army group commanders (Monty, Bradley and Devers), yet people just haven't heard of Devers. He really was overshadowed by the other two.
    83
  500. It's true though. Most 'Leftists' aren't actually Socialists.
    83
  501. "Your comments section is literally full of people like me presenting you arguments which you ignore. Hypocrite" The arguments they present have been debunked in the video. If they had bothered to watch the video, they would know not to present arguments I've already debunked.
    83
  502. Of course it's true! Manstein was undefeated in his holy brilliance. Praise be.
    83
  503. The new government steps cost $10,000 (supposedly) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tom-riley-park-stairs-rebuilt-1.4227365
    83
  504. I guess you're going to watch the full video to find out why it's over an hour long ;)
    83
  505. *is
    83
  506. You joke, but that's how socialism works. Take from those who have and give to those who don't. So if some people are hungry, some other people must die, and their food can be redistributed to the others. This is the problem of socialist economics: the economy is fixed, they can't grow it, so the only way for some to have more than others must because they've stolen ('exploited') more resources off the others. Therefore they justify the killing of those who have more. Utter stupidity.
    82
  507. If you're interested to know, the map in the background is a map from David Glantz' Stalingrad (5 book, 4 part) Trilogy
    82
  508. Thank you Anton! I've put a link to your video series about Paulus and the generals in the prisoner of war camps in the description and at the end, so hopefully people go watch it because it would be a good follow up to this 👍
    82
  509. As someone who is extremely tired right now, I can completely understand him
    82
  510. Yeah I could definitely see that working more than pure anarchy. But doesn't that mean it's not "anarchy" any more?
    82
  511. Nothing that can beat a Chuck Norris joke... except Chuck Norris
    82
  512. Probably more healthy than eating bread to be honest.
    82
  513. "Socialism is when the workers own the means of production, NOT the state." Nope, that's Marxism. Socialism predates Marxism and has nothing to do with the workers. There's an entire section on the definitions in this video.
    82
  514. Yeah, to be fair, they weren't "incompetent", just not the living Gods that some people think they are. They also twisted the narrative and lied to paint themselves as modern Sun Tzu's, which is clearly not the case.
    82
  515. There's no point responding to their emotions. I wanted to make it clear that I only respond to their points, nothing more. Obviously, I wasn't 100% calm throughout the video, but the frustration isn't because of their insults - it was over their morally superior ignorance.
    81
  516. I was up until 3am last night working on this
    81
  517. Yeah, that's not a call I'd want to answer
    81
  518.  @shangri-la-la-la  Some people argue that philosophy is religion, and I'm currently leaning in that direction. I didn't mention it in the video (I intend to in the near future), but there is a book people recommended me called "The Cause of Hitler's Germany" by Peikoff. I'm about half way through and it's absolutely amazing so far. But Peikoff describes it as the philosophy of Platonism, which is basically a religion. He doesn't mention the Gnosticism, but knowing the argument about Gnosticism, I think it enhances Peikoff's argument, and Peikoff enhances my argument too. So I would recommend you and others to check out the book.
    81
  519. I fully agree. I'm not sure what the modern military does, but records like this are super-valuable, as are diaries and other reports made at the time. Anyone doing anything important should be writing everything down! Memoirs are less useful for obvious reasons.
    80
  520. When I was in college, I was taught that spending money would get nations out of recessions, and that's why the British government was so bad during the Great Depression because they didn't spend enough... I literally couldn't have been taught more wrong than that. There's a difference between school and education. Here you get educated, not schooled. Keep questioning things!
    80
  521. Aiden (the troll) has had plenty of opportunities to refute the arguments, but he insists on calling me names and accusing me of being a bad man... Turns out that he only has opinions and no evidence, and certainly hasn't watched the video even though he claims over and over again that he has. Don't waste your time arguing with Aiden, and thank you for your comments Douglas 👍
    80
  522. Not just both sides, all sides. Beevor's a British historian, and he doesn't escape the bashing either
    79
  523. Aye! He put on a pirate's voice, but it's really him, me mateys!
    79
  524. :)
    79
  525. Yeah, I was debating adding it to it, but Chuikov was in a bunker and wasn't in direct danger, so I thought I'd skip this one. He will be in danger soon though
    79
  526.  @johnwolf2829  You're right, that's what they would argue. There's no way to win with their Hegelian emotionalism. Doomed if you do, doomed if you don't...
    79
  527. Mabus, I don't use Wikipedia (except for pictures, or if I want to see what sources they use)
    78
  528. Franz Halderp
    78
  529. Wow, thanks!
    78
  530. Season 1 of an unknown number of seasons :D
    78
  531. Makes you wonder if the people saying that have even heard of Greece, or Poland, or the Hunger Winter in the Netherlands
    78
  532. Guys I just want to say a big thanks to all of you! This has only been out 3 weeks and the response has been is fantastic! It's inspiring me to make the Fort Eben Emael video even better. The months of hard work was definitely worth it, so thank you :) A Behind the Scenes video will be coming relatively soon as I know a lot of you really want to know how I made these. Not sure when it'll be, but it'll be coming
    78
  533. @Mark - perhaps you don't realize what Schwab (who is a Marxist, calling for world Fascism) is actually saying. Like a typical Marxist, he's lying to your face - saying one thing when he means another. The Nazis called it the "Final Solution", the Marxists call it the "Great Reset". The concept of "stakeholder capitalism" is just Revolutionary Syndicalism (aka Fascism/Marxism) by another name. They want to collectivise the farms and prevent you from eating meat and other things they deem wrong (which, if nothing else, will weaken you and make you sick, and that's assuming the farms output doesn't drop to zero due to the collectivisation, which it probably will, resulting in mass starvation). They are calling for the abolishment of private property, which as Mises explained undeniably in 1922, will bring about the collapse of the economy and civilization https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis There are more crossovers than that but the point is that the words he uses are hiding their true meaning. And if you aren't concerned by Fascism, Marxism or Nazism taking over the world, then I would suggest it is you who doesn't understand politics and economics, or you don't value individual freedom and liberty and would rather see the world enslaved to the elites and the corporation (the State).
    77
  534. Thank you for sharing. Is there anything you can think of that would have helped you question things sooner?
    77
  535. The reality doesn't fit the dream
    77
  536. Yeah, that's another ancillary reason. There's quite a few more too
    77
  537. NOTES and SOURCES Yes, most sources do not even factor-in the civilian population. Many talk about the civilians themselves, but not about their fate, or the numbers. There are many stories (like the baby that was born in Pavlov’s House), yet this is not the centre of attention. This is understandable, but it gives a twisted version of history. The Wehrmacht is “clean” only because most scholars are not willing to talk about the atrocities committed by the German Army. Well, the German Army was absolutely not innocent, as the video shows. Be sure to check out the 6th Army’s Rations video I created a while back (link in the description) to hear about the fate of the 6th Army and the starvation of the Stalingrad concentration camp (yes). And, I have to state this before I get accused of being a “commie” again. I am not favouring the Soviet Union. They committed atrocities too. But the simple fact remains that both the National Socialist and Soviet Socialist regimes were terrible for the innocent civilians and peoples caught between them. Selected Sources (Bibliography) Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Glantz, D. House, J. “Stalingrad.” University Press of Kansas, 2017. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book One: November 1942..” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Hellbeck, J. "Stalingrad: The City that Defeated the Third Reich." PublicAffairs, Kindle 2016. Jones, M. “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed.” Pen & Sword Military, 2016. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Full list of my WW2 history books - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Reichenau / Severity Order - “Secret Field Marshal v.Reichenau Order Concerning Conduct of Troops in the Eastern Territories.” from - https://web.archive.org/web/20091227042100/http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/ussr2.htm Commissar Order - “Directives for the Treatment of Political Commissars (“Commissar Order”) (June 6, 1941).” from http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English58.pdf Thanks for watching!
    77
  538. Notes and Sources I had MAJOR issues over this weekend trying to get this video rendered. I had to re-render the video several times (well over 30 hours of rendering in total) because of a “compiling movie error”. This prevented the software from finishing the render. To cut a long story short, one of the front-line animation png files is corrupt. However, it would take me a week to figure out exactly which particular png file it is and fix the issue. So, in order to get this video out in time, I had to bulk-delete several sections of the front-lines. This is why there are no front lines in numerous parts of the video. I have made them and animated them, but because of this error, I had to then delete them again. To say I’m frustrated with this particular issue is an understatement. But it is what it is. At 05:49 in the video I said “50th Army Corps couldn’t stop the Soviets…” but it should be Gollnick’s 28th Army Corps. I’ll correct this mistake for the future all-episodes-in-one video. I used the Finnish National Anthem for the Estonians, because I couldn’t get a free-to-use rendition of the Estonian National Anthem. Technically they are the same tune, but the ending and lyrics are different. Something to think about - the Soviets are deliberately attacking towards Memel, and hoping to push Army Group North into Courland. Perhaps this is an indication that, instead of aiming to destroy them, their plan was to encircle Army Group North in Courland, neutralize it, and keep it there while they raced off to Berlin? Sounds reasonable to me. What do you think? Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    77
  539. People don't seem to realise that I'm not favouring any side. They accuse me of being fascist or communist or pro-British or anti-American or whatever but the reality is I pride myself on not taking sides. For example, Beevor is a British historian, and here I am highlighting his mistakes.
    76
  540. Spot on. I will admit that it's hard sometimes, and tiring, but you've got to think as objectively as humanly possible.
    76
  541. Yeah, I've given up trying to persuade them. I'll still fire off the odd broadside, but the videos are now made for those who wish to listen, not those who cannot.
    76
  542. hahaha that's so true
    76
  543. Then why would I repin another comment which argues the point stronger?
    76
  544. Incorrect. Until recently, even the Wikipedia page for Prokhorovka stated it was the largest tank battle ever. Now it's changed to "one of the largest".
    76
  545. I have never heard of this tank until now. Thank you. I am ... impressed
    76
  546. Pinned Comment / Notes The first episode of “Battlestorm The Courland Pocket 1944-45” will be out next Monday (25/02/2019 - at 5pm GMT). I was hoping to get it done this week, but ran out of time, so quickly made this video instead. For several practical reasons, I may do the Courland series bi-weekly rather than weekly, but will decide on that this week and let you know. I didn’t want to talk about the cannibalism in the video itself because I didn’t know how YouTube will take it. Personally, I don’t think YouTube should restrict any historical content, but that’s just me. Others think they should restrict historical content though. Some people don’t like my videos and want them removed, so I can imagine talking about cannibalism in the video itself would just give those people ammunition to use against me. There’s also a lot of pro-Soviet and pro-Russian people out there who will take offense because I’ve even brought this subject up, as if somehow I’m anti-Russian for stating what happened and discussing historical events. No doubt they will accuse me of being biased again for relying on (shock) sources that I can read, rather than sources that I can’t read - either because they’re in a different language, or because they’ve been censored. Well, tough. If you have evidence that proves no cannibalism happened, please provide it. I mentioned the fact that Reid’s book talks about it, but Jones’ book covers the cannibalism in detail too, so either would be recommended for further information on this gruesome subject. Officially, some 2,015 cannibals had been arrested during the siege. Of these, 64% were female, 44% were unemployed and over 90% had just a basic education or were illiterate. Take those statistics any way you want, but I would make an educated guess and say that the reason there were more women cannibals was either because more women survived longer during the siege (many of the men died earlier in the siege or were sent to the front) or because more of the women were on the “dependants” rations, which brought them to starvation-level much quicker. The 90% being illiterate or basic education is probably because the better educated people were employed or part of the state, rather than being unemployed or on “dependants” rations. Really, those “dependants” rations at 125 grams of bread is what did them in. These were the official statistics though, and since the police and many of the services collapsed during the siege, it’s likely that more cannibals weren’t caught. Or the crimes didn’t get reported. I’m not sure, but it seems that many of the cannibals that were caught were shot. Sources/Bibliography Beevor, A. “The Second World War.” Phoenix, Kindle 2012. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Glantz, D. "The Battle for Leningrad 1941-1944." University Press of Kansas, 2002. Glantz, D. "The Siege of Leningrad 1941-1944: 900 Days of Terror." Brown Partworks Ltd, 2001. Jones, M. "Leningrad: State of Siege." John Murray Publishers, Kindle 2008. Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Group, 1999. Reid, A. "Leningrad: Tragedy of a City Under Siege, 1941-44." Bloomsbury Publishing, Kindle 2011. "U.S. soldiers in Iraq face battle of the bulge | The Seattle Times." 10 Jul. 2007, https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/us-soldiers-in-iraq-face-battle-of-the-bulge/. Accessed 16 Feb. 2019. "What should my daily intake of calories be? - NHS." https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/food-and-diet/what-should-my-daily-intake-of-calories-be/. Accessed 16 Feb. 2019. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    76
  547. You can, but you have to be very careful. It's best to read several other books on a battle before going anywhere near the memoirs, so that you have the context and have more chance to spot the inconsistancies and the agenda. I'll be covering this a little more in an upcoming video. All I'll say for now is that just because it's a primary source, doesn't mean it's not reliable. Question everything.
    76
  548. Because we all know that Dentz was the REAL desert fox!
    75
  549. So, if the Germans lost 4 million men, and the Soviets lost 8 million men... then that means the average German soldier killed twice as many men as a Soviet soldier. That doesn't sound to me like the German Army was "superior" to the Red Army, especially when you consider that the Germans had initial suprise right at the beginning, and then fought a defensive war for the final 2-3 years. Something doesn't add up.
    75
  550. Third Positionists are opposed to liberalism, which they think is behind both capitalists and Marxists. They believe that individuals should be subservient to the collective (be that national or racial). So to call Fascists "liberals" is simply incorrect.
    75
  551. I prefer quality subscribers over quantity subscribers
    75
  552. Pass me the Luftwaffles
    75
  553. TIMESTAMPS! QUESTION 1 Time 00:33 swe420den + trinimac + Darren Martin - Did America supplies beat the Nazis in Russia, or is that just cold war propaganda? What were the Lend Lease Routes QUESTION 2 Time 08:56 Kevin Dragos - If oil was the thing that forced Germany to invade the Soviet Union by 1941, why would Germany have to invade if they were getting a steady supply of oil from them? QUESTION 3 Time 11:47 Jim Land - How much difference would it have made had the Germans been able to cut and hold the Volga for longer? QUESTION 4 Time 16:18 Elijah Rose - Did the Axis exploit the rich supply of coal in the Donbas? QUESTION 5 Time 23:28 Wojciech Prokop - Were the Axis aware that the Soviets relocated their industry further into the Soviet heartland? Were any significant efforts made to stop the relocation? QUESTION 6 Time 26:07 Craig B + Joseph Keenan + Craig Marshall - In your opinion was there a better way the Germans could have effectively used populations they controlled? What about those races/peoples who fought for the Wehrmacht or SS? QUESTION 7 Time 33:05 Craig Marshall - Could you explain German plans for the Eastern Territories? QUESTION 8 Time 35:58 Stéphane Adam - At what point did German civilians realized the war was essentially lost? QUESTION 9 Time 38:31 Jim Land - Why weren’t the Allies and Soviets punished under the war crimes trials after the war, since they committed war crimes too? QUESTION 10 Time 42:25 Claus Adler - How did the Germans and Italians lose the Battle of Sicily? And why did the offensive at Kursk needed to be halted because of it? QUESTION 11 Time 45:49 Craig Marshall - What was the general tier of command within Commonwealth troops? Did a colonel in the Raj have equal sway to a colonel from the Home Islands? Did the protectorates willingly give control to the War Ministry or was it implied force? QUESTION 12 Time 51:54 Craig Marshall + Ratty - What are the future Battlestorm videos? And will you cover battles like Breslau, or wars like the Falklands or Iraq/Afghanistan QUESTION 13 Time 56:44 Nico - Will you ever talk about the engineering of machinery and weapons used in WWII and Secret Weapons? QUESTION 14 Time 01:00:16 Daniel Falch + shab249 - What was the difference between Axis and Soviet Infantry Divisions ability to apply firepower at the beginning of the war? And anti-aircraft weapons in units. QUESTION 15 Time 01:05:01 Patrick Bang - Should Germany have shared their technology more with their allies like Italy? Would this have changed the North African Campaign? QUESTION 16 Time 01:14:27 Grimbert - Did the Soviets not produce spare parts for the T-34 and just cannibalise for parts for them? QUESTION 17 Time 01:17:29 Serafim Mihai - Which qualities do you think make a good leader? Who are the people from history that you think embody these qualities? QUESTION 18 Time 01:23:14 Afflickted - Was Patton known to the Germans? QUESTION 19 Time 01:27:25 Afflickted - Why did Hitler consistently ignore the advice of his advisors and draft up obnoxiously large tanks that at best were a massive waste of resources and engineering man-hours? QUESTION 20 Time 01:32:30 Walter Thomas - Can you imagine future historians seeing both WW’s as one conflict? - Sources (Not sure, but may have missed some out) Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vangard, Kindle. Edgerton, D. "Controlling Resources: Coal, Iron ore and Oil in the Second World War." Pdf. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Hill, A. "British Lend Lease Aid and the Soviet War Effort, June 1941 June 1942." Article from The Journal of Military History,Vol. 71, No. 3 (Jul., 2007), pp. 773-808. James, L. "The Rise & Fall of the British Empire." Abacus, 1998. Kennedy, P. "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000." William Collins, Kindle 2017. Khan, Y. "The Raj at War: A People's History of India's Second World War." Kindle, 2015. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Toprani, A. "Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941." Georgetown University, 2012. Dissertation, Pdf. Toprani, A. "The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942." The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854. For a list of all the books and sources I have, please check out this link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Want to help me buy more? Please consider supporting me on Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Alternatively, you can now send me books using this address: PO Box 795, Southport, PR8 9RE If you do send me books, please leave me a message to let me know so I know to thank you and go check :) Thanks for watching!
    75
  554. NOTES, QUESTIONS AND TIMESTAMPS I’ll be doing future Q&A videos similar to this, and Patreons who pledge $5 or more on my Patreon will be able to submit questions for these videos https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Please consider supporting and make these videos as good as they can be! Even $1 will go a long way! And obviously, thank you to my current Patreons - you guys make this channel possible! THANK YOU! I’m also committed to doing a video on the Treaty of Versailles, and also a video where I play guitar. Not sure when these will be, but it will happen at some point. Still working on Operation Crusader - don’t worry, it’s happening! Next week’s video will be on Pavlov’s House :) TIMESTAMPS Q1 by Serafim Mihai Hi Lewis! What do you think about The Treaty of Versailles in relation with the start of WW2? 00:40 Q2 by Alex Bujnicki What is your opinion on the widely held belief that one of the main reasons for Germany's defeat was the failure to fully mobilize until 1944? Is this just more playing the blame game by German generals in their memoirs, or is their some merit to this view? 03:37 Q3 by Craig Marshall What made the Sturmgeschütz the so called "war winning tank" in terms of the individual engagements? 09:40 Q4 by Craig Marshall, Afflickted, and Jen'ari-asha (all related questions) Are you ever planning covering Imperial Japan? Any plans to cover naval warfare? Do you think you could get around to some of the battles such as Iwojima, Okinawa, and Guadalcanal? You used to upload quite a few videos about Historical Topics that aren't the Second World War - is there anything specific that has caused the shift to go from History in general to the Second World War specifically? 14:48 Q5 by Jen'ari-asha You've talked a lot about the issues facing the Red Army during 1941 and 1942 - A truly awful organisation of the Army that overburdened commanders, bad morale and discipline, the fact that the Red Army was in the middle of a mobilisation when Germany attacked, the fact that Germany had essentially had a "head start" in growing their army, etc. Do you think that these factors alone explain the huge Soviet losses? One thing I've noticed is that the Soviets seem to, quite consistently, suffer a lot of losses due to disease? However, this is not something that seems to get mentioned in a lot of books. Maybe that helps explain just why the casualties were so enormously different, even during some of the Red Army's greatest triumphs, like Bagration or Uranus? 25:28 Q6 by Jen'ari-asha 3) What is your opinion of Rommel and his historiography? 32:09 Q7 by Jen'ari-asha Why has Zhukov managed to escape the propaganda of the Cold War and the Nazi Generals intact, when those things have either tainted, or straight up erased, equally adept generals like Vatutin, Konev, Chuikov, Rokossovsky, and Vasilevsky? 42:25 Q8 by Stephen Besley What books can you recommend about the very early Middle Eastern campaigns in Iraq; Ethiopia up to and including the Keren campaign? 47:48 Q8 by George Holdstock What is it that has drawn you to history and specifically WW2? What’s your personal story of how you came to this point with your YouTube videos? Have you studied history or is it purely a hobby? 49:31 Q9 by George Holdstock Market Garden! How did the only major defeat of the allies post D-Day not become surrounded in negativity? 53:14 Q10 by Robert Boutet Has there ever been any thought about making a movie about Alan Brooke? 57:23 Q11 by Robert Boutet Why didn’t the Americans help Britain to develop the atomic bomb? Was Churchill an influence on the USA’s reluctance to help Britain? 59:47 SOURCES I can’t really list the sources for this video, since it was off-the-cuff. But I will list some that I mentioned. Books Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “The Companion to Colossus Reborn.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Shirer, W. “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” Pan Books, 1964. Articles Hayward, J. “Too Little Too Late.” From Journal of Military History 64 (July 2000): 769-94. Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012. Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854. Toprani, A. “Germany’s Answer to Standard Oil: The Continental Oil Company and Nazi Grand Strategy, 1940-1942.” From the Journal of Strategic Studies 37 (December 2014): 949-973. If I missed any out and you want to know which ones I was referring to, let me know. LINKS Patreon again https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Why Germany Lost the War - Oil https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Revisionist Historian https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 BATTLESTORM Rommel’s First Offensive in North Africa https://youtu.be/wMv9YN11xkY Greatest British Land Victory of the War (Operation Compass 1940) https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk Why I'm Passionate about HISTORY and What Got Me Into it https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    74
  555. While it's in Samaan's book, it wasn't relevant to the Nazis, and I had to leave a lot of stuff out just because the video was getting long
    74
  556.  @Edax_Royeaux  It could be the 77th Brigaders, but it's more likely to be a Marxist.
    74
  557. You'd be smashed within five seconds!
    74
  558. Yes, and the battle for the city hasn't even begun yet! There's an entire series of battles outside the city we'll get to soon which you'll also have probably never heard of, that highlight just how desperate the situation was for the Soviets... This was an epic battle
    74
  559. That's an awesome story. Definitely believable, since there were really some ridiculous things going on in the Soviet Union due to no market system. Another is that Soviet chandeliers often fell from the ceilings because they were made too heavy (the state paid more for heavier chandeliers, so the makers made them heavier)
    74
  560. You'll probably be graduated by the time this series ends!
    74
  561. Well, I hope it meets your expectations!
    74
  562. Short answer - I'm struggling to keep up... Luckily this wasn't a difficult video to make
    73
  563. @General Alan Cunningham #BothVotesDank  You're in this video, so stop complaining 😉
    73
  564. And they wonder why I sometimes come across as "arrogant" and "condescending". It's because I have half a class of children who won't listen - I'm just trying to get through to them that they're the ones who need to listen, not me
    73
  565. Commando trait would probably be the most appropriate for Paulus :)
    73
  566. @Michals - hadn't thought of that, but I could do it
    73
  567. Not just logistics, no.
    73
  568. I would say I'm sorry, but losing Facebook is actually a blessing.
    73
  569. I don't get notified on translations so I didn't know about it. However, I will go accept it now. Thank you for doing the translation!
    72
  570. Once you've been in the retail trenches, you never forget
    72
  571. The reason is because, even though I had thought of the "collective control of the means of baby production", I somehow hadn't thought of the word "reproduction"... But I will be using your phrasing in future! :)
    72
  572. Seven, it isn't "modern propaganda". It's a well known and documented event.
    72
  573. I know that feeling
    72
  574. Off top of my head, it was Dutch. I somehow said Danish because I'm an idiot... I'll have to correct that in the "complete" episode
    72
  575. It's all about perspective. Demons think angels are bad...
    71
  576. Absolutely!
    71
  577. I also wish there were more of this sort of thing!
    71
  578. It's impossible to be truly unbiased, however I'm certainly trying to be as unbiased as possible. I think you may enjoy my 'extra' video that'll be out on Thursday :)
    71
  579. Yes, that's the conclusion I came too. There's always a reason behind something that appears stupid, even if the answer isn't obvious at first glance. What is seen, and what is not seen. Soviet generals probably weren't so stupid to send their men in counter-attacking waves as we have been led to believe. Given the circumstances, it may have been the best (or only) option for them.
    71
  580. If nothing else, I hope you get through it! And then proceed to watch my 6 hour video on the Courland Pocket, and my 9.5 hour video on Operation Crusader (I'll give you a medal if you get through that one) 👍
    71
  581. That would help, but then that would be less visually appealing, and I've created Battlestorm to be my best work on the military stuff. So if it's not the best I can make it, then it's not Battlestorm. And I don't think the animations are good as they are; I actually think they need to be improved, not reduced.
    71
  582. I'm anti-political, remember 😉
    70
  583. And, if it's going to make stuff up, it should be set in a fictional universe, not on a real historical event.
    70
  584. Yeah, HOI is a great game/series, but there are important flaws in it like this, and the logistics in general
    70
  585. It's always Halder's fault
    70
  586. That's exactly why I've decided to try it out. The amount of people who say I'm just making stuff up or that "I should read a book" is getting on my nerves, so this is probably going to be a thing from now on
    70
  587. This is why I'm not backing down on this issue. By being a state-controlled racist-socialist entity, events like the Holocaust can absolutely be explained. A racist free-market-capitalist entity actually gives the Holocaust deniers more room to deny the event, because they can say "there's no way they systematically murdered this many Jews". Under the traditional 'let's see National Socialism as a capitalist regime' mentality, you can't explain it because the markets wouldn't create it, and no individual human being could possible murder people like that. So in this scenario, the denier-argument reasoning sparks as true (at least, to those who haven't done research). But if you turn around and say, actually it does make sense because these guys weren't just racists in a free-market society, but they believed in different collective groups, and that (in this outlook) individual human beings have no meaning (since we're all a collective of groups), so murdering groups is alright. And then you realise that these National Socialists didn't think for themselves because they were part of a collective group. So if they're ordered to kill, they will! Because who are they to question anything? Why would they go against their Aryan group? And if they don't view other human beings as individuals but as ants to be crushed, or just pure numbers, or even barcodes... then it's much easier to see why, in a state controlled collectivist society, why systematic industrial murder is actually possible. At that point, it becomes much harder to deny the events in question. Now, onto what socialism was by people’s definitions in the comments. The ‘socialism’ they’re championing never actually happened in practice. They talk about ‘real’ socialism, often saying that “well, ‘real’ socialism never happened”. But looking back on history, the theory of socialism as Marx said it was never happened, but numerous attempts to create socialism did occur. To say they’re not socialism is not fair to history. The Soviet Union wasn’t a ‘socialist revolution’. The Bolshevik Party seized the means of production; the workers didn’t. They didn’t solve class conflict - the Party or the state employees became the new upper classes of society - and there was definitely not equality. They also introduced the New Economic Plan (limited capitalism), but also, even when they attempted to ‘socialize’ the people in the collectivisation of the 1930s (inside the famine that was a direct consequence of the state ‘taxing’ the produce off the peasants in the fields) the state was the controller of the economy and society, not the workers. You also have a slave economy in the Gulag system, which is similar in some ways to the forced labour camps and the concentration camps of National Socialist Germany, which clearly indicates that the equality and liberty that Marx was aiming for wasn’t a reality. So, by the definition used by everyone else ‘in theory’, the Soviet Union wasn’t socialist. When you consider that Venezuela was socialist - again people say this wasn’t ‘real’ socialism. But it existed. When you consider the socialist policies of the Labour Party in Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Western Europe, Cambodia, China and so on, you can certainly make the case that these weren’t ‘real’ socialist countries or policies. However they existed, and they tried to implement the ‘theory’ of socialism, and they instead created a version of socialism that is very much real in history. You can say these weren’t ‘real’ socialisms, and that’s great for a political debate, but from a historical debate, these were real and they were socialisms - by the historical viewpoint of history. And, since I’m looking at history not theory, I’m interested in defining socialism as what actually happened, not discussing the theory of it. Hitler’s version of socialism isn’t Marxist Socialism, and I’m not saying it is, but it is (by historical standards) a version of socialism. Hitler’s socialism variant is: directly influenced by what Marx said; he changes this to come to a different conclusion; he implements it in history; it is not capitalism; it shares many of the same traits as the other ‘socialisms’ that existed in history; and it supports the Holocaust and other National Socialist policies that, on the surface, don’t make much sense because they’re being viewed from the ‘they’re capitalist’ viewpoint. Is the National Socialist Party left-wing or right-wing? That’s up to you to decide. I would suggested they’re a mix between the two sides, and I avoided creating a different political spectrum in the videos for this reason (although I split it up into different categories). Did National Socialism ‘work’? Not really. As the two quotes I quoted from Tooze show, the economy by 1934 was in the gutter, which is another reason war was on the cards because they had to conquer more territory and resources, and enslave a lot of people, in order to make it work. Now, what does this mean for ‘real’ socialism (Marxist Socialism)? Well, this is absolutely not an attack on socialism. Nothing I have said has been against socialism in general. Just because Hitler was a socialist, doesn’t make all socialism bad. That would be like saying “Hitler was a politician, therefore all politicians are bad”, which is clearly not a logical way of looking at it. And I’m absolutely not implying that socialism doesn’t ‘work’, by bringing up the ‘failed’ socialisms of the 20th Century. Looking to the future, there’s no reason to think that because socialism didn’t work so great in the 20th Century that it couldn’t work in the future. Yes, some of what I said in the videos was wrong - the liberalism/conservatism bit in the 19th Century in the second video were flipped around (it’s been over a decade since I last studied that stuff and the video was off the cuff). I also mentioned Manstein as being a star general. This is true, but he was actually the exception, and was really the only “von” (aristocrat) that Hitler trusted (until 1944, when he was dismissed). Generals like Model and Zeitzler were favoured over the Prussian officers because these represented the new generation of ‘socialists’ that had worked their way up the ranks. But again, that was in the quick off-the cuff response video. Overall, the points I raised about National Socialism being a version of socialism still stand. And, to those who say that “I’m not listening” or have gone out of their way to suggest that I shouldn’t cover politics again because I’m “ignorant” (which is a polite word compared to what some have used), you’re not being fair. When covering WW2, battles and the Holocaust etc, it’s impossible to stay out of politics, economics and society, since they’re all linked. Plus, I have studied this stuff, and will continue to do so. I’ve now re-read Das Kapital (after a decade) and it hasn’t changed my view on all this at all. (Selected) Bibliography Notice the word “selective”. I studied this in college and university, and therefore don’t have access to all the books I used back then. The books listen below are directly in reference to the above topic, and below them is a link to the list of books I have on WW2 and the surrounding period. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Evans, R. “In Defence of History.” Granta Books, Kindle. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. For a complete list of books I own on WW2 and similar, see this link - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing
    70
  588. Correct. The actual policy wasn't Privatisation (as the Marxists will claim) but Gleichschaltung - synchronization of the economy with the State.
    70
  589.  @danielpincu6030  Yes, read the first 50 pages of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which you can find online for free.
    69
  590. That is why I'm making these videos - because this is the type of content I wanted when I was a kid
    69
  591. "You sound energized and much refreshed; the break clearly served it’s purpose" There hasn't been an actual break, I've been working my ** off! In fact, I worked until 3.30 am last night getting this video finished. But I'm glad I paused Stalingrad because I think I would have had to do so anyway
    69
  592. Remove Axis Allies and the German Panzers wouldn't be able to roll forwards. Luftwaffe couldn't fly. Numerous divisions wouldn't have supported the Germans on the Eastern Front...
    69
  593. I think it is. The other one that was super-short was the Libyan Oil video, but that was just over 3 minutes.
    69
  594. Looks like Wehraboos are already down-voting this video
    69
  595. FIRST! I made HOI4 more immersive?
    69
  596. Glad to hear it! And you should comment more often. Join the discussion!
    69
  597. Technically they just think the attacker always has the advantage. But logically that then implies that the defender always has a disadvantage, which then means that, yes, defending isn't a valuable strategy. The "math" "proves" this "correct", of course...
    68
  598. Yeah, I actually went back and forth about this one, because if Samaan's narrative was true, it would fit with the idea of National Socialism being a religion really well. At first I thought I was onto a winner. But Samaan's narrative fell apart the closer it went back to Darwin, and that's where I suspect he wrote it backwards, because the evidence doesn't really support him when it comes to Darwin, but the unsuspecting reader may be convinced since the early parts of the book are fairly well done.
    68
  599. Maybe that's it... Maybe I'm wasting my time trying to educate those people, and should focus on those who do want to be educated. The problem is that my videos get swamped with Leftists, and it derails what could otherwise be a decent discussion in the comments sections.
    68
  600. ERROR: The Soviet casualty numbers for the 2nd Kotluban Offensive are incorrect! It's quite complicated to explain why, so please see this addendum video for the correct numbers https://youtu.be/e3RbcNbMUtk And thank you to all of you who questioned me about this. When I went back and checked the numbers, I realized that the numbers were wrong. I'll be putting a warning up at the beginning of next episode too 👍
    68
  601. Or if they've heard of our Lord and Saviour, Manstein
    68
  602. Thanks for your comment :)
    68
  603. Of course I remember you Aiden. You're one of the trolls who constantly and rapidly spam hundreds of comments in this comments section, none of which are worth reading, and this is the reason I "threatened" to shut you up (or, in reality, warned you to stop spamming). Everything you've said is refuted by the information contained within the video that you still haven't watched. This is why you still haven't provided a single relevant argument - everything you've said is either just insults and opinions, or refuted by the video. So to say I haven't addressed anything you've said is wrong because this video does address what you say, and this is why I know you haven't watched the video because otherwise you wouldn't bother to make such arguments. You waste most of your time insulting my viewers, or trying to turn them against me by insulting me and claiming that my arguments have been refuted (which they haven't). Just like with others (e.g. this other video https://youtu.be/ws3p6uWW19U ) if you or anyone else had come up with an actual argument that wasn't just a bunch of crybaby opinions, or an argument that didn't appear to be refutable to others on the face of it, then I would address it. And if you came up with an argument that refuted mine, then I would happily make a video saying "congratulations" to you for helping me get to the truth about the matter. But you haven't done that. And the best part is - I've told you this before! But you don't listen, just like you and "mike mcmike" above you won't watch the video, because you're not here to learn, you're here to cry in the comments like the losers you are. Oh and the only reason I haven't banned you from commenting is because your spammy comments actually help the video. If it wasn't for that fact, or the fact I actually find dumb comments written by unthinkers amusing to read, you would have been silenced long ago.
    68
  604. Yeah, thinking about it, this might be necessary. I mean, they're close enough where I would say that syndicalism is just another variant of socialism, but I know that explanation won't be good enough for some people.
    68
  605. It's a combination of two factors. I'm working 70+ hours a week for this channel (today's been a 14 hour day, and this will be my last comment for the evening) so you can imagine what work is going into Battlestorm Crusader... and on top of that, I once had a stye in my eye. Ever since then it's drooped. But I'm glad you noticed and care :)
    68
  606.  @grandmastersreaction1267  Yeah, in the comments of that video, a lot of Nazis realized just how close they were to the Marxist stance. You see, Marxism is just the same as National Socialism, except they're smart enough to pretend not to be racist, when in fact they are.
    68
  607. The sad part about it though is that this series will be out of date by the time its finished because new material is constantly being released. But yes, this is a culmination of all the research that's been going on since the war, and I'm not going to take credit for much of it. As Newton said, I can only do this because I'm standing on the shoulders of giants. Yes, I put it all together into a video series, but really it was every other historian and writer (good or bad) that made this possible.
    67
  608. Censorship backfires eventually. Best not to come out and say it so directly but ask questions like "how can Hitler be a totalitarian dictator if he doesn't have total-control of the means of production?"
    67
  609. Doh! I guess you could call that a mis-steak
    67
  610. As I've said to others, I'm not pro-Soviet. As I said to someone else - The issue is that the Germans had a free-hand at writing WW2 history after the war (due to Cold War politics). So, thanks to more modern historians who have gained access to the Soviet archieves, I'm now presenting a more balanced accuont of the events. This comes across as pro-Soviet at times, but that's not really the case. It's just not quite as pro-German as the old popular histories (what I refer to as the "traditional narrative") used to be.
    67
  611. Perhaps. But then, some argue that Germany would have been too
    67
  612. @soulknife20 The Hippocratic Oath literally says: "I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion." There are various different translations, but they all convey this point clearly. And I'm not arguing for nor against abortion, but it is against the Hippocratic Oath. In theory, those performing abortions shouldn't be called "doctors", if the whole idea of a doctor is to heal people.
    67
  613. Great post! I'm going to pin this because it's well written
    67
  614. True. But they're not just anti-Christian they're anti-Semitic too https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    67
  615. Hey everyone! I hope you had a good Christmas! And happy new year in advance! I'm currently ill and burnt out :( so, while I'm hoping to get Stalingrad episode 4 out for next week, t it will be touch and go if I can. IF I don't manage to get it done for next week, it WILL be out the week after
    67
  616. It's a shame that the sources become more vague in this period as everything became chaotic
    67
  617. 100% agree
    66
  618. It's actually for the YouTube censors, not the audience. I don't really care what my critics call me anymore. I've given up with them.
    66
  619. They depress me too, because I feel like I'm preaching to the choir. The people who desperately need to hear this stuff, won't listen to it, and then accuse me of "lying" and "tricking" my audience - the same audience that buys the books to cross-reference the information I'm citing at the bottom of the screen. If there's a way to get these people to listen, let me know, because I'm all out of ideas at this point.
    66
  620. Your wife is going to hate me... (Some of these may seem obvious, but I've included them just in case they're pronounced different than I'm imagining. Sorry for any repeats.) Places - Kletskaia Nizhne-Chirskaya Lipovskii Pristenovskii Gromoslavka Ventsy Selivanovo Plantinov Rybkin Sirotinskaia Yablonskii Lozhki Lipologovskii Surovikino Vertyachii Peskovatka Kachalinskaia Pan'shino Kremenskaia Veshenskaya Gromoslavka Askay (river) Verkhne-Kurmoyarskaya Kotelnikovo Dubovskoye Zhutov Vtoroy Shelestovo Abganerovo Tsatsa (Lake) Zety Vernkne Tsaritsinkskii Ivanovka Krasnoarmeysk Beketovka Krasnaya Sloboda Rasoshka (river) Svetlyy Yar Dubovyy Ovrag Tsatsa Malyye Derbety Obilnoye Vasil'yev Grachi (river) Verkhne-Tsaritsynskii Serafimovich Verkhne-Buzinovka Verkhne-Golubaia People - Averin Zhuravlev Lyudnikov Kuropatenko Voskoboynikov Sologub Yermolkin Ivanov Goginascvili Zhitnev Stytsyuk Radkevich Novikov Martsinkevich Zakharchenko Guriev Koyda Strebkov Pokhodzeev Skornyakov Pastrevich Zholudev Onufriev Kolobutin Biryukov Griaznov Semenov Nikitin Bogdasarov Khopko Zaporozhchenko Kashliaev Eremin Tikhonchuk Ovcharenko Beloborodov Penkovsky Tsinichenko Lipin Shevchenko Tavartkiladze Monakhov Lagutin Afonin Valiugin Chuvashev Ovsienko Tolbukhin Safiulin Silin Filatov Pesochin Travnikov Sazhin Sologub Skvortsov Nevzhinsky Udovichenko Kriuchenkin Moskalenko Pliev Khasin Tanaschishin Egorov Berniakov Korobitsyn Ilyin (ilyin) Bystrik Semianischev Kodenets Denisenk
    66
  621. It's all thanks to my Patreons!
    66
  622. I'm not doing a Battlestorm Bulge yet (although this video turned into a mini-Battlestorm). I'm not willing to jump ahead because of the way that the British and American commanders interacted from the start. That's why I want to go through the North African Campaign, then Sicily, Italy and Normandy before Market Garden 2.0 and the Bulge. If we don't get the full context and background with the rivalries then I think it won't be as good, if that makes sense.
    66
  623.  @ParabellumStoria  Thank you! And good luck with your channel. I wish I could understand Italian because the Polish-Soviet War and the Battle of Warsaw is a war I'd like to know more about (I've only read one book on the topic)
    66
  624. Once we actually get to the city, the sources become much more detailed. So the pace of events might actually slow down!
    66
  625. "Has TIK finally gone of the deep end and become a full-blown ancap?" As I replied to someone else - I'm a capitalist, and I'm close to the anarchist camp, but I understand that States (hierarchies of society, e.g. corporations) will emerge naturally. So rather than being anti-State, I'm anti-coercion. A State can exist, so long as all involved are cooperating with the State. Once force (e.g. taxation) is involved, it becomes a criminal entity in my view, which is why I'm against all current governments, and corporations using the "law" to gain an unfair advantage in the unfree market If you haven't seen it, here's my "Public vs Private video" which you may find interesting https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    66
  626. Yes. The Germans only complained of Russian "hordes" when they were losing, not when they were winning. The numbers show that the Germans could both win and lose when facing the "hordes", and yet they ultimately lost. Somehow, that fact has annoyed a lot of people.
    66
  627. I'm currently working on big videos for the inter-war period, and WW2 will probably be the focus for quite a while, but WW1 is definitely on the agenda some day.
    66
  628. Or just a cover of 'Blitzkrieg Bop'
    66
  629. If it is I wouldn't know because I can't open it - there's a bookcase in the way!
    66
  630. No, I'm not a machine... beep
    66
  631. Videos on certain subjects (like war crimes) can be taken down randomly without any real reasoning behind it, while others suspiciously remain up.. suggesting that YouTube's very arbitrary with their Communist Guidelines.. There's also swearing in this video (quotes from Patton) which I've had to change because YouTube is also against naughty words...
    66
  632. True, it may have been the Soviet authorities rather than Chuikov that changed the memoirs. But this doesn't get around the fact that his memoirs are compromised, so we should continue to remain suspicious.
    66
  633. (And I'm NOT saying that the Soviets were 'angels' - it's just an analogy)
    65
  634. Trust me, I don't intend to
    65
  635. I initially lost a few hundred subscribers as a result of my stance on Hitler's Socialism. It's hard to judge because YouTube only lists the cumulative total of subscribes and unsubscribes, not the individual amounts. So I lost 150 or so, but it could have been more like 200. I could also be losing a small amount of subscribers each day as a result of this, but the number of subscriptions outweighs the number of unsubscribes. There's only been a few days in the history of my channel where I've lost subscribers, and most of those have been when YouTube deleted spam accounts. Interestingly, I lost more to YouTube deleting spam accounts than I did for my stance on Hitler's Socialism. I did lose a lot of Patreons as a result of the first National Socialism is Socialism video in 2018. Many messaged me instantly to tell me how I had "betrayed" them, and how I should be ashamed of myself for spouting "blatant lies". I had only just gone full time, and the hate I received and the loss of this Patreon base made me worry that I was going to have to go back to working in retail. I then got angry, and this is what drove me to quietly do my homework behind the scenes and create the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video. I wanted to show that I hadn't just come to this view based on lies or propaganda, but on hard evidence and solid interpretation, and that the people who were ignoring me or slandering me were wrong or ideologues themselves. I think I've achieved my aim with that regard.
    65
  636. Or just simply - don't attack anyone in winter!
    65
  637. Yes, exactly. Every single day I get called a Nazi and a Communist by pro-German or pro-Soviet fanboys. They're then shocked when I produce evidence to the contrary
    65
  638. I think that's how it's sold, but I would point out that Churchill won in 1940, and Roosevelt won in 1941. If the reward is about the most influential person, why on earth did Hitler not win in either 1940 or 1941?
    65
  639. Eastory is a great channel. I know the animations on other channels are far superior to what I'm doing, but like I said to the new animator - I don't have time to do anything fancy, I just have to get it done. But this is where her skills come in. I think once she's up to speed, she'll take things to the next level. She's already offering suggestions to improve things.
    65
  640. @Dewitt - you're effectively arguing that all three Baltic states deserved to be occupied by foreign powers. But if the foreign powers hadn't occupied those states, those crimes wouldn't have been committed in the first place. The occupations caused those crimes to occur. Plus, you cannot judge an entire country (or 3 in this case) based on the actions of individuals. This would be like me finding out the worst criminal in your country and going "yep, all people from that country are as bad as him". Yes, some individuals committed crimes, but as I said in the video, the countries were torn apart by two ideological enemies, and few of them wanted that. Jews were persecuted, but so were the Baltic peoples themselves. They were not in a nice place.
    65
  641. Did you know that I have a new Instagram? https://www.instagram.com/tikhistory/ Also, I can't help but think that the Soviets must have known that the Latashanka operation was a complete waste of time. Anyone else think that?
    65
  642. I could tell by the comments in other videos that a lot of people have no idea what happened in Axis occupied Europe
    65
  643. Yes, this was a lesson learnt the hard way. But I have learnt it. Fun fact though, the maps in the new videos are still 3D. You're just seeing them from a bird's-eye point of view.
    65
  644. Thank you for your awesome comment, it's put a smile on my face :) I'm not sure what happened to the History Channel, but I think they need to rename it at the very least. I got sick of seeing tv documentaries about Arnhem that didn't go into any detail at all about what actually happened, which was why I wanted to make this. The units and events are as accurate as I could make it given the sources. The conclusion is debatable, but the rest is right at least. And I'm still working on more docs like this. Have you seen my Operation Compass video and my more recent (and 3D) Desert Fox 1941 video? Here's a link to the playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y :)
    65
  645. I'm glad you're enjoying it! Personally I don't know what's worse, this series being at 30 episodes long, or knowing that there's probably going to be another 30 after that. It's killing me!
    64
  646. I'm more than happy to accept your title suggestions!
    64
  647.  Imperion  I'm better at planned content. Even though this was a 'reaction video', I still took a few days to consider my response. And I also was able to put sources in the video, which I can't do live.
    64
  648. Their panzers will blot out the sun!
    64
  649. @YeOldVisigoth - yes, the starvation and murder of millions of Soviet PoWs was because Stalin refused to arrange a postal service... /s The reality is that the moral responsibility for the treatment of the prisoners of war was the Wehrmacht's and National Socialist Germany's. It doesn't matter what a governmental power does - you should treat other human beings like human beings.
    64
  650. 100% correct statement, and the evidence for this is overwhelming.
    64
  651. Exactly
    64
  652. Ok?
    64
  653. Are we the bad guys?
    64
  654. Probably not. From what Glantz says in that video I linked to at the end, there are entire forgotten campaigns on the Ostfront that we don't even know about.
    64
  655. Bias confirmed! (But no, I think the Italians did well in that encounter - and the British did poorly. It's just difficult to sum it up in a handful of words)
    63
  656. Able was I ere I saw Elba!
    63
  657. You're right, but don't forget that the reason it's called the "Eastern Front" in the west is because our history of the conflict has been written by the German generals. They called it that, so we now call it that. The Soviet archieves were not open, and the west did not trust Soviet accounts because of the politics during the Cold War. So we call it the Eastern Front. You're right though. Technically it could be called the "German-Soviet Front", although that's a little long-winded. I may have to come up with a phrase that's more suitable because a quick google search does not come up with many alternatives.
    63
  658. Yes, absolutely. That was part of the argument I made in the "Did the Soviet Union EVER Recover from WW2?" video
    63
  659. Can't wait to start Stalingrad tbh. Once Courland is done, it's Stalingrad-time
    63
  660. Yes. The Russian Federation still maintains that they freely joined the Soviet Union... which is worrying, since they're intent on expansion (e.g. Ukraine/Crimea)
    63
  661. I didn't know that! Thank you for informing me. I believe that TIK is also a swear word in one of the Scandinavian countries though, so it probably balances out. I explain the real reason I chose TIK here https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    63
  662. It's no wonder commanders on both sides made mistakes
    63
  663. My pleasure, and more to come on this topic. That said, I don't want to be seen as just 'picking on' the Wehrmacht. I'm conscious that all sides committed crimes and I do want to examine those incidents too.
    63
  664. Great! It's not a hill that I'm willing to die upon by the way, I'm just pointing out what the sources I used said. If they're wrong, fair enough.
    63
  665. I'll try not to evolve into covering alien conspiracy theories and showing awful reality tv series like Pawn Stars. No guarantees, but I'll try.
    63
  666. I know. I should stop reading comments for my mental health
    62
  667. Notes and Sources A reminder: this video series is bi-weekly, but I do publish videos every Monday at 5pm GMT (double check for British Summer Time) so be sure to check back on Mondays! I decided not to animate the front lines this time due to the issues I faced last time with the render, and the fact that I couldn’t find any good maps on the Memel Offensive, so using front lines for it wouldn’t have been possible anyway. I do like the idea of the front lines, but I think I should only put them in when I’m certain a front line exists and where it actually is, not when the front lines have been shattered and there’s no coherent front (such as in this case). As a bit of an interesting fact, on the 7th of October, 11th Infantry Division “borrowed” buses from Riga and used them to move through Kuldīga, and then south towards Memel. But when they arrived in the area south of Liepāja, the road was blocked by advancing Soviet troops, so 11th Infantry Division just joined the line there. While some may argue that it was “justified” by the situation in the war, the fact was that this is another example of the German Army (not SS) stealing property from the local inhabitants in the east to further their own gains. I’m honestly not sure how 7th Panzer Division went from 39th Panzer Corps’ area to getting trapped in Memel. I’m assuming they were pulled out of the line at some point (possibly when 14th Panzer Division arrived) but I’m not sure. Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    62
  668. Thank you so much! The feedback so far has been great
    62
  669. Thank you! Sometimes it's best to get out, although unfortunately Italy (and the rest of the western world) may shortly follow Argentina... Best to start preparing for that if you can
    62
  670. That's a good point! Hadn't thought of that before, but that could be a factor
    62
  671. You don't know how very very tempted I was to show Halder's picture in the intro when asking who was to blame...
    62
  672. I hate Halder
    62
  673. Yes, although I would also say that ownership and control are two sides of the same coin. If you don't control something, you obviously don't own it. So if you "own" a business, but someone else can dictate to you that you must operate it in a certain way (regulations) or that you have to hand over the profits of that business to them (taxation), then clearly you don't own it or control it - the State does.
    62
  674.  Ra's Al Ghul  "Why so gae?" Don't be scared of super-sexy Göring
    62
  675. At least you answered the question!
    62
  676. I can understand why. I genuinely wanted to avoid talking about religion because I didn't want to step on any toes... However, I've realised that I have to do it because this is incredibly important. Once you realise what National Socialism is, it explains EVERYTHING. From the Volkssturm to Hitler's charisma, to why everyone seemed to be in a trance with him, to why nobody was thinking... It all makes sense.
    62
  677. Yes, you're absolutely right, this does happen a lot. This is why it's important to constantly revise history and reexamine the evidence. I also didn't know about fact about Anne of Cleves, so thank you for that!
    62
  678. Also, check out the pinned comments on my videos for the source lists.
    61
  679. Thank you for your comment! Yeah I was a little skeptical of the people saying it was just an electrical term, or that we shouldn't interpret it within the historical context. That's why I made a comment about that in the video. We must remember though that the (German) Rankenean school of history says "just stick to the facts bro" and disallows interpretation, so they're shutting down their critical thinking and just looking at things literally, which is problematic to say the least.
    61
  680. You know what, I think I should pin this comment because maybe other YouTuber's might see it
    61
  681. Very interesting story about your 'friend', because when I was a Leftist, I probably would have agreed with him. They get so focused on the idea that the "Capitalist" has stolen from them, that they feel entitled to "rise up" and steal the wealth back. Therefore, because this idea consumes them, they're willing to ignore or excuse all other facts and logic. They think you're trying to trick them, or convert them somehow, and that you're secretly a "far right" "conspiracy theorist". This is why I've exhausted myself trying to think of ways to get through to them. It's a religious curse that's infected them, poisoning them, and blinding them to the fact that they hold a completely wrong world-view.
    61
  682. I'm glad you enjoy them! I also wish others would listen. Many won't even click on them, and this video has lost me at least 50 subscribers so far.
    61
  683. I've collected a few in recent videos. Hopefully they sit there watching this one because I offer an argument about half way through which counters their entire ideology.
    61
  684. Hahaha a missed opportunity
    61
  685. Glad I could be of help! Working from home nowadays, I don't see much of a difference from my usual routine. However, I can imagine it's a bit strange for a lot of people
    61
  686. I do have an INTEREST in them
    61
  687. Manstein didn't understand it either, surprisingly enough
    61
  688. I'm so sorry you're being affected by this. Legitimate YouTubers like you are being hurt by his poor behaviour, and I'm confident that you (and others) can use this opportunity to call him out on it. More than anything else, trust is at the heart of all human interaction (as Eric Voegelin said). Without honesty and trust, nobody will believe your history or support you, so I'm confident that this fraud will lose support if honest channels like yourself talk about it. On the flip side, you can benefit from this by showing others how honest you are. Cite your sources and be better than your illegitimate competition.
    61
  689. Yeah, I agree. The treatment of Poland throughout WW2 by all sides was terrible.
    61
  690. Cheers! My editor/animator, Gigz, is currently working on Tobruk, so it's all in motion :)
    60
  691. They did do bits of this video, but they're not up to speed yet. It took me 5 months to learn Blender, so it'll take them a while to get used to it
    60
  692. Exactly! It just screams that National Socialists don't have a backbone to stand up for what they believe in.
    60
  693. Exactly, and I don't think it's fair to judge Paulus for not having 20/20 vision
    60
  694. Thank you, I'm glad you think that - I do too. This has been a massive learning curve for me
    60
  695.  @karolgajko  Fantastic! Thank you. I've watched the video you listed in your original comment and it's fantastic. I'm going to pin your comment so more people can see this and also watch that video. (Don't edit your original comment because that will unpin it.)
    60
  696. You realise I got called a neo-fascist is my Croatian Legion video, right? I can't be both.
    60
  697. Yes, I don't think it's right to purely focus on the front line fighting. Doing that gives a warped perspective of the conflict.
    60
  698. They say you get the heaviest amount of flak when you're over target 👍 cheers! I hope you enjoy my other videos too
    60
  699.  @XHitsugaX  Alfried Krupp was a member of the Nazi Party. So the business was run by the Nazis.
    60
  700. Yep, and this old video by ReasonTV explains this beautifully https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ?si=tIDEJuK1Z9Lb1Kfn
    60
  701. Perhaps. Either way though, they weren't even getting 2,500
    60
  702. That's my plan - gather more and more sources and information on these people (and more), then do an updated one.
    60
  703. Hey all! Time stamps 00:00 Intro 01:07 Browning's Life 12:44 Frustration 17:57 Market Garden 28:52 Criticisms of Browning 29:28 Criticism 1 31:06 Criticism 2 32:30 Criticism 3 33:33 Criticism 4 35:36 Criticism 5 38:24 Browning's Defence is Flawed 43:45 Decision Bibliography (Sources) Brereton, L. The Brereton Diaries: The War in the Air in the Pacific, Middle East and Europe, 3 October 1941-8 May 1945. Kindle, 2014. John Frost, A Drop Too Many. 2009. Max Hastings, Armageddon. London, 2004. Robert J. Kershaw, It Never Snows in September. Surry, 2007. Mead, R. General Boy: The Life of Lieutenant General Sir Frederick Browning. Kindle, 2010. Martin Middlebrook, Arnhem 1944: The Airborne Battle, 17-29 September. 2009. Robert Neillands, The Battle for the Rhine 1944. UK, 2014. Poulussen, R.G. Lost at Nijmegen. 2011. Cornelius Ryan, A Bridge Too Far. USA, 1974 Major General R E Urquhart, Arnhem. 1958. Major General S Sosabowski, Freely I Served. Great Britain, 1982.
    59
  704. But if he became a monk, I'd have to pick on someone else
    59
  705. This is what's getting me down. It's seriously getting me down. What's the point of working so hard if it's just all going to be dismissed :(
    59
  706. Yes, because that is turned out well for them in the end!
    59
  707. For further reading on this battle, the book "Bruneval" by Oldfield is probably my top recommendation of the sources I used. It has decent maps, pictures, and gets most of the events right. Ford gets a few things wrong, as does the book Night Raid (although this is largest and probably detailed source on this raid). Frost's account is good, but doesn't provide good maps or the full picture. There are a few older books about the raid that I couldn't get my hands on. If anyone knows if these are any good, let us know.
    59
  708. That's the plan. I've been working on this when I get spare time since my original NS was S videos (and the horrible backlash I got). I'm determined to correct the distortions now, or at least get us heading in the correct direction.
    59
  709. Thanks for helping out Anton! Let's remind people to go watch your Suzdal Camp series, link: https://youtu.be/dqOuwrMSdjw
    59
  710. I'm just the 'oil guy' 😢🛢️
    59
  711. Oh, and for the benefit of my American viewers - by "quite" I mean "lots". I was told that "quite" means something else in American English.
    59
  712. This is why I originally selected that phrase, because it applies to more than just history, and provokes critical thinking. It forces the asker to look at things from another angle, or find the evidence to support a previous claim. It's surprising how many people don't think critically.
    59
  713. @Ferenc, Because I'm committed to accurate history. The history comes first. I have never changed a video based on people's feelings, and on principle, I won't. Besides, as I pointed out in yesterday's video, ad-revenue isn't much anyway. The vast majority of my income (probably 80 or 90%) comes from my Patrons anyway. This is why their support is vital. I'd rather put out correct and accurate history videos than pretend that National Socialist Germany's flag was not National Socialist Germany's flag for a few more $$$. Having Patrons allows me to deliver that accuracy in more ways than one.
    59
  714. Tell me about it.
    59
  715. It's not delusion, it's ignorance. As an ex-Socialist, I can tell you that they believe that they're right because 'there has to be a safety net, and we need to help the poor, and we have to spend money to get out of a recession... Anyone who disagrees is a Fascist/Nazi/Evil Bad Man and must instantly be wrong'. What they do not realize is that they've got it completely backwards. But because they're so wrapped up in the idea that 'Socialism good', and 'Capitalism bad', they can't see it. They're arguing from a place of total ignorance, yet think they're 100% correct.
    59
  716. Yeah, and they wonder why nobody who has seriously listened to the evidence is convinced by their arguments. They've simply not listened, and didn't even watch the 48 minute condensed version of this video, so they've got no excuse
    59
  717. So, a central theme for each episode rather than a random mash like this one was? That sounds sensible
    59
  718. Actually it was Google translate that let me down, because I would have pronounced it as Lu-lee-ah, but the computer said no
    59
  719. Yes, that's probably a good way of summing it up. I'm looking into next week's video at the moment on Soviet artillery, and the same thing comes up over and over - not enough trucks. I think that's where Lend Lease really helped.
    59
  720. I'm not sure how the Germans could claim a tactical victory on this one. They did get some of their men out of the pocket, but they failed to prevent the Soviets breaking through the lines, failed to resupply their pocket, failed to relieve the pocket, and mostly failed to breakout. The only way this is a victory is if you remember that Manstein always wins, because he is the god-emperor of Aryan-kind, and retreating to Berlin is the best way to advance.
    58
  721. I don't mind people disagreeing with interpretations, and I encourage that, so long as everyone is civil and trying to get to the truth. Fine, I get things wrong from time to time (like yesterday's video which wasn't great) but my intention is always to get to the truth, and you can't do that any other way than by having an open and honest discussion. However, when it comes to throwing out the facts and evidence just because it hurts feelings, and then insults start flying around, that's where I draw the line. And unfortunately, there's so many people in my comments sections who are screaming at me and firing off a million accusations, saying I never respond to them, or am "insane" and so on... it's just depressing.
    58
  722. Back in the day, I used to believe my school teachers too. This is why it's so important to think critically and do your own reading.
    58
  723. Incorrect. As I said in the video more than half of the Red Army was in the Far East or was positioned internally, at least up until mid-November 1942. And while most of its army was in the east, the Germans did have sizable numbers in the west. Also, Germany wasn't operating alone. It had many allies itself - e.g. Finland, Romania, Hungary, Croatia... even one division from Spain. It was one alliance vs another, and the Soviets did defeat that alliance, almost by itself (yes, with a crucial contribution from the other powers, but it paid out the most in blood).
    58
  724. Absolutely. This is one of the currently agreed-upon arguments in the books - that Hitler was thinking about Case Red
    58
  725. Thank you! I feel guilty right now because Stalingrad is taking up so much of my time that I'm not able to devote as much as I would like to for the other videos, so I always wish I could do more
    58
  726. Good old Haupt, Exclamation Man!
    58
  727. Listening!?!? But you can't see what's going on!
    58
  728. FIRST!
    58
  729. NOTE: I failed to change the date in the reference bar to the 9th of September at 10:30 and continued to display the 8th. Sorry about that, and thank you to those of you who pointed this out
    58
  730. Yeah, there's no such thing as "trickle down economics" https://youtu.be/nZPDpk8NA-g?si=KNG44PJUyZ-HmN--
    58
  731. It's mainly because they don't know what happened and are just viewing the military perspective. This is why I'm not going to just "stick to tanks"
    58
  732. Thank you! I'm shocked by how pervasive this practice is over there. Load of people are saying something similar about how many channels are doing this. Frustratingly, the guy is even outcompeting me! He's gained 30,000 subs this last 30 days, and I've gained 3,000. But he has removed several videos from the channel in response, and is deleting comments, so he knows what he's doing is wrong.
    58
  733. Yep, that's exactly it. I can't go back and redo everything I've already done, but I can issue a correction. In some ways, this is the correction (to a mistake I didn't make but has affected my work). It's frustrating to say the least, but this is why history is always being re-written and revised, to improve it.
    58
  734. In case you were one of the people not notified about Thursday’s video on Karl Marx, here’s the link https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Thank you to all those who did watch it and I’m glad to see that the majority of people understood it and realized how “huge” (to quote one person) it is. I’ve read your comments, and my interpretation of the two ‘P’ words hasn’t changed for reasons I will explain in an upcoming follow-up video to that one. Cheers!
    57
  735. This is awesome. Thank you! I've also lost a significant portion of my Patreons as a result of this, and I support them 100% for cutting the funding, even though it's concerning for me personally on the financial side since Patreon is the only way I'm supporting myself right now. There needs to be a viable alternative.
    57
  736. Yes. Unfortunately it's got to be done this way simply due to the scale of the thing. We should remember though that every digit is lives lost - a brother, a sister, a daughter, a son, a father, a mother, an uncle... This is why I do want to try give some personal stories, like with Wüster in this episode
    57
  737. You can't just dismiss all the evidence presented in the video by simply saying Hitler ridiculed the worship of Wotan. He did not ridicule the worship of Wotan. He actually said: "It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund." And he is correct. It would have been foolish of him to re-establish the faith of Wotan when 95% of Germans were Christians. He doesn't ridicule the worship of Wotan here, and merely points out it would be foolish to come out as Wotan/Odinists.
    57
  738. Myth-buster number 1045: Zaitsev didn't fight a famous German sniper from an elite sniper school. It was just some random German sniper. (Now the question is, why did I deliberately use the number 1045?)
    57
  739. That's a very good idea! Thank you!
    57
  740. They were struggling to say the least. I've already hinted at this a few times, but it's getting worse and I think it's a major reason why their performance started declining
    57
  741. I feel bad for constantly picking on Halder... but only slightly. He deserves it
    57
  742. Exactly, this is why I'm not backing down on the Socialism issue, because denying the Socialism is denying the Holocaust. I just wish more people would realize this.
    57
  743. See, this is exactly what I'm dealing with. People aren't watching the video, are bringing up the exact sources I use in the video not realising that the sources debunk their own theory, and then refuse to see the truth. I explain this in the first minute, yet Royeaux is so convinced that he knows the truth that he can't even open his eyes.
    57
  744. It's actually Greater Manchester Police, but it applies to Scotland Yard too
    57
  745. When was the turning point of WW2? Yes.
    57
  746. Is the final 5 minutes and 20 seconds of that the time you'll spend reflecting on how great the previous 6 hours 24 minutes and 40 seconds were?
    57
  747. I just want to give another big shout out to my Patreons for your continuing support. Thanks to you guys, one of the many books I have purchased recently was the (quite expensive) "Halder Diaries", which arrived a couple days ago. Oh yes, a video on Halder will be coming at some point and the planning for Barbarossa will be explored in greater detail. Perhaps it'll be more than one video... Got to digest it all first, but I do have some more videos planned in the meantime. Either way, your support has been critical to the research of these videos so honestly, thank you all very much. You're awesome!
    56
  748. You can't motorize the infantry without fuel, and there was barely enough of that for the motorized elements that were there already. So fuel was the problem.
    56
  749. Honestly, my policy now is to recommend that people not to use Wikipedia at all when it comes to history, unless you're fairly well-read on the topic, or want to see what books (references) other people are using for a particular topic. Wikipedia is written by social consensus. It's in fundamental contradiction with the theory of history, which requires a debate by individuals over their interpretation of history. Only through debate and revision brought about by solid arguments (evidence + interpretation) can we reach a consensus ("this is the best argument that beats all the others"), not by all agreeing what is or is not an acceptable version of history ("this one pleases the most people").
    56
  750. Haha that deserves a heart
    56
  751. Does Richard Evans mention it in his book "Coming of the Third Reich"? I must have missed that part. He talks about the two Soviets, but I didn't see the bit he mentioned Hitler in relation to them, but I will admit that his book was a last minute addition to the video. Weber's book "Hitler's First War" talks about it towards the end. I haven't read the one you mentioned though, but will check it out.
    56
  752. For anyone who doesn't get the reference https://youtu.be/pAZsANgpOVw
    56
  753. I like how people say I've said things I haven't said as a way to disprove the things I say. Socialism is public ownership or control of the means of production. A family is not a public - it's private - and therefore isn't socialist. A kingdom may exist but not own or control the means of production, and therefore wouldn't be socialist unless it did own or control the means of production. I made this clear in the Public vs Private video, yet people don't listen.
    56
  754. Adam, no I'm not. I'm learning the German language right now, and I state happily that British history is filled with evil people and events. So yes, I'm clearly not what you claim.
    56
  755. Links to other people’s videos that are interesting: The Irish Marxist Leninist’s “The Nazis Were NOT Socialist - Response to TIK” video. https://youtu.be/vaA_hix9E9k this was good, but fails to understand that the National Socialists weren’t capitalist, and doesn’t grasp that this isn’t Marxist Socialism. Blitz of the Reich’s “Nazism is not Capitalist nor is it Socialist... it's something else (TIK Video Response)” https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I this was very good. I don’t necessarily agree that it wasn’t socialism, but he makes a very good argument for it being neither capitalism or socialism. Highly recommend his channel. Hitler and Economics | Thomas E. Woods, Jr. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0 This is a “conservative” institution talking about the National Socialist economy. Yes, it’s biased (just like all sources), but it makes it clear that this wasn’t capitalism. There were other response videos too, but these pretty much covered all the points. Links to interesting articles that claim that National Socialism was not Socialism (which I linked in the original pinned comment, but nobody seemed to see that and thought I wasn’t taking in what other people were saying) - “Hitler was not a socialist, even if he did stash champagne” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/11655230/Hitler-was-not-a-socialist-even-if-he-did-stash-champagne.html A good example as to why you shouldn’t trust the traditional media for your information. “An entirely Americentric argument, spurred on by certain batty ideologues and infamous websites, claims that Adolf Hitler was not the far-right, anti-communist nationalist that everyone else remembers him to be, but rather an egalitarian socialist.” https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_socialism [This page was last modified on 8 August 2018] Hitler was anti-communist, so not sure where the author of this page got that idea from. But being anti-communist does not make him an anti-socialist. “Man says Nazis were socialist, gets schooled by history writer” https://www.indy100.com/article/nazi-socialist-right-wing-white-supremacists-history-twitter-mikestuchbery-7900001 Yes, except the history writer in this case thinks fascism and national socialism are the same thing. They are not. Thanks for watching and reading!
    56
  756. I don't! I wish he'd let us tell history as it should be - uncensored!
    56
  757. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact allowed the Soviets to annex Finland. They aimed to do that, just like they did with the Baltic States. But the FInns resisted, and in the end they failed to take Finland, and got battered taking the ground they did. I'd say that failing to annex Finland was a loss overall.
    56
  758. That's actually the most logical explanation so far. I should have mentioned that!
    56
  759. Village socialism was a thing. Look up Robert Owen's "New Harmony" or read the book "Heaven on Earth" by Muravchik
    56
  760. Yes, this was because I fell behind with this video. I was hoping to get it out last week, but piecing it all together, recording it and editing it took WAY longer than expected. It was a case of "don't get it right, get it done". I think I'll be doing a follow-up once I've covered a few more relevant topics, at which point I'll add to it, put the times on it, and just do a better job overall.
    56
  761. It's my favorite fiction book of all time. Read it numerous times
    55
  762. Pretty much, yes. All actions can be rationalized. Usually, if we can't rationalize them, it means we're missing something - either evidence or context or perspective.
    55
  763. Thanks for the recommendation! I've had it on my reading list for a while, so I do intend to get it at some point. I'm more confident about the usefulness of the source after your comment though
    55
  764. Ok, just to clarify, I'm not trying to say that the German soldiers were bad at fighting. But I am saying that they weren't miles ahead of the Soviets, as some people suggest. Instead, I'm saying that both sides fought hard - roughly equally on an individual level - but that the Germans held a lot of the tactical, operational, and strategic cards in 1941, which explains why they did so well. It wasn't because the Germans were "superior" to anything the Soviets had, but that they held the initiative, had the element of surprise, concentrated their forces and so on...
    55
  765. Absolutely, plug away!
    55
  766. And I'm eternally grateful to each and every one of them. As I keep saying, they're making this entire thing possible, especially now I have Terri editing the videos
    55
  767. Royeaux, it wasn't private ownership. There wasn't a transfer of state property to private control. Your evidence is totally flawed. Read the quote properly - they transferred the property into the hands of the NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS' PARTY, which was the State.
    55
  768. If you think about it, everyone who's watching this video must have had an interest in the subject matter, otherwise they wouldn't have clicked on it. And each have done their own readings, or viewings, and have different perspectives on the same subject. This is different to say school or university where you might get students who like one historical topic, but not the other, or are only doing it to get a degree
    55
  769. Yes, and the reason why is because they didn't want to be in school in the first place, they think it's incredibly boring, and have no reason or incentive to learn the stuff. If the kid doesn't want to be there, it doesn't matter how great the teacher is, that kid is not learning anything. This is why I said it's a babysitting operation. This is also why I said self-education is more valuable than official education. If you're curious or have an interest in a particular subject, that's when you'll go out to read or study the topic, and ultimately learn it. Education starts with curiosity, and ends in incentives. If you got paid to learn to do something, you'd definitely be more motivated to learn it. The irony is that school kids would probably learn to write properly if they played computer games, because they'd be on the internet and reading articles or forum posts on how to play, and would naturally pick up how to string a sentence together. Same with paragraphs or anything else. I personally didn't learn to read, write or do math in school, and I didn't even take history in school because I thought class was boring (even though I loved watching documentaries and playing historical computer games).
    55
  770. Hi all, I just wanted to clarify the rating system I'm using. A book starts off with 5 stars. I will then simply deduct full stars, half-stars, and quarter-stars (depending on severity of the faults) off the 5 stars. So, in theory, we could end up in negative-star territory. This is the most simple and fair method I can think of.
    54
  771. I really need to do a video to explain what the unit symbols mean
    54
  772. Haha yes, probably. His second question is long too. Although, it does depend, because he did put in quotes and things like that, which is fine. He basically presented an argument against my oil-video, then asked me to reply to it, which is fine
    54
  773.  @fuckfannyfiddlefart  Note when that video was published. Then note when my Hitler's Socialism video was published. Then watch this video fully. If nothing else, I hope you will then realize why the video you posted doesn't address my argument in any way shape or form. Thank you.
    54
  774. Good question! Thanks for the idea, and I'll make a video about it soon, since it deserves one. Also, it was my favourite map in Call of Duty 1 (yes, the original and still best COD)
    54
  775. I agree. As much as Messervy and Ritchie made mistakes, the overall situation was not favourable to them due to Auchinleck and Churchill. I don't think any one person can be blamed entirely for Gazala, it was just a whole host of bad decisions that were made during and prior to the battle that contributed to the defeat. That said, it's understandable why certain individuals did receive the blame.
    54
  776. The Ruhr Occupation didn't cause the hyperinflation, but certainly escalated the situation. I'll explain it when we get to it in the Weimar series.
    54
  777. Don't trust Wikipedia. The main Nazi economy page talks about privatization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany Yet doesn't link to or even mention the Gleichschaltung (synchronization) page, probably because it completely undermines the idea that the Nazis privatized the economy, which is what the socialists who write the major articles are pushing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung
    54
  778. Already seen your video, sir 😉 I'll pin your comment because your (wife's) channel is highly under-subscribed. I also think this other video of yours is the best you've made so far https://youtu.be/vZKIyJeHlhU EDIT: Also, is that your channel or not? I know TruthOverFacts has a book out called "unlearning communism" which is why I assumed it was the same person at first. EDIT 2: It's his wife's channel, so changed some words above
    54
  779. Thank you, although I do have a degree in history (see the bottom of the description). It's true though, the degree is completely pointless and it's not needed at all in order to study history or work in the field. I've also never needed to show my degree to anyone, and I don't recommend that people get history degrees because they aren't worth the inflated tuition fees.
    54
  780. I agree! It's one thing to read a book, but it's another to see it all flow from a birds-eye view. That's actually a big reason I do these Battlestorms myself
    54
  781. Here is one positive aspect of the free market. Just hear me out. The free market would compell bums like this to get a job - work that benefits the consumer rather than the state.
    54
  782. Many of them who've commented so far haven't actually watched it. Or if they have, they're keeping very quiet
    54
  783. This is exactly my point. Anyone who's not already a Nazi is not going to be converted to the Nazi faith by Mein Kampf. It's a terrible book
    54
  784. Notes and Sources I couldn’t give the page number for Dönitz’s memoirs because I’m using the Kindle version which doesn’t use page numbers for some stupid reason. But I’m really interested to hear what you think about Dönitz’s contradictory claims. Is he directly to blame for this? Are Haupt and Kurowski manipulating the evidence somehow? Is Dönitz guilty or innocent? Let me know. The 4th and 5th Battles of Courland aren’t talked about in much detail in the sources - probably because the German lines held pretty firm. The argument that they were launched just to burn through German supplies has some merit, and I currently subscribe to that view, since most of the ‘good’ Soviet formations were transferred from the two Baltic Fronts to the west. What remained weren’t the ‘best’ that the Soviets had to offer, and it does make sense that they were actually trying to use up German supplies and keep the Germans tied down in Courland. But the opposite could be argued - that they were trying to destroy Army Group North/Courland, but were rubbish. Your thoughts? Not a lot more to say on this one. Just a reminder, next week’s video will be the follow up to the Why Hitler HAD to go to War video. I expect a backlash on it (as I had on the original video). So I won’t be doing a Q&A that week because I don’t want the backlash to spill onto a Q&A video. Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Paterson, L. "Steel and Ice: The U-Boat Battle in the Arctic and Black Sea 1941-45." The History Press, Kindle 2016. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm Inflation in Germany https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany I’ve also used some maps and information from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/ A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    54
  785. Excellent! Nice to hear the green-line trenches were actually real rather than just lines on the map, because that's further evidence that supports the idea that the Germans were taking the evacuation seriously. Thanks for your comment
    54
  786. It's not just Reddit though, loads of people weren't happy with "my conclusions" and most of them hadn't listened and had just jumped to conclusions. And it's not just this topic - it's all topics, from Market Garden to Stalingrad to Hitler's ideology - people are accusing me of saying things that I haven't said because their ears are open but they're not listening. They're willing to write essays "explaining" to me and other viewers how "wrong" I am for stuff I didn't say, and other viewers will agree with them! I don't understand how hard it is for so many people to just stop and listen.
    53
  787. History is being made ;)
    53
  788.  @arthurviolin  Probably. Apparently Blender can be used to make videos, but I haven't looked into it. It makes sense to use blender because I'm already using that for the battle animations.
    53
  789. I did https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    53
  790. Hi all, here’s the timestamps for the video, and the bibliography as well as some notes to video below them. Also I would recommend turning on subtitles for this video (and any Battlestorm videos). Timestamps Video Intro 00:00:00 Act 1 - Pre-Battle Chapter 1 - Introduction 00:00:46 Chapter 2 - Context Section 1 - Finding the Würzburg 00:05:10 Section 2 - Intelligence Gathering 00:07:51 Chapter 3 - Preparation Section 1 - German Forces Part 1 - Order of Battle 00:11:44 Part 2 - Positions 00:14:37 Section 2 - British Forces Part 1 - Pre-Raid 00:18:22 Part 2 - Order of Battle 00:21:28 Part 3 - Equipment 00:26:06 Part 4 - The Plan 00:29:37 Act 2 - The Bruneval Raid Chapter 4 - The Flight 00:33:37 Chapter 5 - The Drop 00:40:24 Chapter 6 - The Attack Begins 00:45:21 Chapter 7 - Stealing the Würzburg 00:49:02 Chapter 8 - Decision Time 00:53:00 Chapter 9 - Fire Fight 01:00:41 Chapter 10 - Stalemate 01:04:26 Chapter 11 - Turning Point 01:08:12 Chapter 12 - The Ruddy Navy 01:16:03 Chapter 13 - Aftermath 01:23:31 Chapter 14 - Science! 01:28:27 Chapter 15 - Epilogue 01:34:07 Notes to the video 04:09 It wasn't the 22nd of June 1941, it was the 22nd of February 1941. Only noticed my mistake as I was creating the subtitles for the video. 09:29 Ford says it was the "ocean" which is why I said it (because it's stupid if it is), but other sources say the agents did in fact refer to it as the sea. Either way, the sentry was an idiot. 14:40 This section talks about the map and the area around Bruneval. This took me ages to figure out. A big thank you goes to Jeff Baker for helping me figure this out. On Google Maps Le Presbytère is a small village, but in 1942 it was where Theuville is now. La Poterie seems to be displayed as La Mairie for whatever reason. 01:32:16 This system was called "Window" by the British, and was also known as "Chaff" by the US, and Düppel by the Germans. Sources/Bibliography Downing, T. Night Raid: The True Story of the First Victorious British Para Raid of WWII. Kindle, 2013. Ford, K. The Bruneval Raid: Operation Biting 1942. Kindle, 1st Ed, 2012. Frost, J. A Drop Too Many. Kindle, 2009. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II. London, 1985. Oldfield, P. Bruneval. Pen & Sword, Kindle, 2013 Other Videos My video on the Assault of Fort Eben Emael by German Fallschirmjäger paratroopers - the fall of strongest fortress in the world https://youtu.be/IFP4-dwTMQ0 Forgotten Weapons video on the Sten gun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-PmLxkOmaM My documentary on the REAL Operation Market Garden https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc Who John Frost blames for the failure of Operation Market Garden https://youtu.be/7C_HoMVhKAI The History of the Long Range Desert Group https://youtu.be/8u2yq5tRN9U Final Message Thank you for all your support, and your patience recently. These videos take a long time to make, and until I diverted attention to Bruneval I’ve really been concentrating on the Stalingrad Documentary behind the scenes. Even though I don’t upload many videos, it’s rare that a day goes by where I’m not working on Battlestorm videos. Back to Stalingrad! Lewis
    53
  791. You'd better get working on it
    53
  792. I stand corrected
    53
  793. Yes, absolutely
    53
  794. The second point. In the video I said I was burning out again. This isn’t burnout because I’ve worked long hours though (although I have). But is different. Let me explain. If I was presenting a video to non-ideological people, I would just say “Lenin destroyed the Russian economy”, and probably wouldn’t even have to back it up, or if I did, I’d just give one source for it and move on, because everybody knows that Lenin destroyed the Russian economy. But because the Leftists refuse to accept this due to ideological reasons, I then get challenged on it. I have to defend myself by providing a source or two, but that’s not good enough for the Left, and gets dismissed somehow. So in the next video I then back up my statements with even more evidence, usually from multiple authors, only for that to get dismissed as well. So I do it again with even more evidence, and the same happens again. What’s happening is that I’m constantly going to greater and greater lengths to explain every detail and back up every single point in my videos with multiple sources (regardless of how insignificant the point might be), which is causing me to work needlessly long hours, and then burn out. And what for? It’s all going to be dismissed anyway, and then I’m called “crazy” and “insane” to top it off. To give a concrete example, I originally planned to just cover the 1918 Revolution and Spartacist Uprising in the first third of the second video in the Weimar Hyperinflation series. But when I came to do it, I realized that I couldn’t just state that it was a Socialist revolution and that Weimar was a Socialist Democracy, because I’d get ridiculed for just stating it (backed by several sources). I realized that I would have to take up the whole of the second video, going into great detail, providing more sources, including reading extra sources that I knew were a load of rubbish (like the Marxist historian - Sewell’s - book), just to show that this was the case and that I knew what I’m talking about. It’s slowing me down, it’s needless extra work, and it’s frustrating because the response I get from the Left was: “Tik should stick to history and keep his bizarre anti socialism theories to himself.” (This was a genuine response.) Obviously, this is incredibly disheartening, and that’s why I’m burning out. It’s impossible to defend history or the truth from such nonsense. And I understand why people are reacting this way, but as I explained in the video, there’s no way to get the Left to realise that they have been deceived by a faulty world-view (Weltanschauung). They’re not stupid, they’ve just been tricked. Even the smartest people can be deceived, and that’s what’s happened here. It happened to me too, but I was lucky enough to accidentally “Red-Pill” myself.
    53
  795. People don't like it when I talk about non-military history, even though understanding the concepts in this video will explain why the German economy (as well as some others) in WW2 was self-imploding
    53
  796. Most of the time, if someone calls someone else 'crazy' for doing something, it's because that someone doesn't understand the other person's reasoning or perspective. Very rarely are they actually crazy.
    53
  797. MADMAN CONFIRMED
    53
  798. Considering that they apparently only won because they sent "wave after wave" to take every German position and lost hundreds doing so each time... Yeah, 2.5 or 3 to one isn't that high. And especially since a good portion of those losses occurred in the first few months when the Soviets were outnumbered by the Germans.
    53
  799. Also, revising history is good https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    53
  800. First they call me fascist. Then they call me pro-Soviet. When I make a video where I'm no where near either extreme, apparently I'm "desperately" trying to seem apolitical. Keep believing what you want to believe. I'm sticking to the facts.
    53
  801. Yes, people hear Russia and think "cold", but southern Russia is basically a desert. Did you see camels when you went? Apparently there are camels in the area
    53
  802. We're definitely moving into a new age. Thanks :)
    53
  803. I explain this in the video. Keep watching.
    53
  804. One day I probably will. But I've got to get Stalingrad out the way first!
    53
  805. Also, I've pinned your comment to show others that this isn't just about me. This is affecting other legitimate channels as well. EDIT 1: and maybe some other Portuguese speakers will check out your channel :) EDIT 2: I've had to unpin your comment because Historiou wrote a reply
    53
  806. Well, you might be interested to know that I'm working on a huge 24+ hour video on Stalingrad right now. Over 270,000 words of research done at the moment. When that comes out, it will blow these videos out the water.
    53
  807. I think this was an exception... Actually, I hope it was an exception. I don't want them to say anything else that's stupid, but I know they will because it's baked into the cake
    53
  808. Yes, that's basically the argument that Richards gives in his book, which I explain in the video. The problem is that the logical next step to what Darwin explained is that humans can decide who gets to survive, which is why Darwin's brother in law, Sir Francis Galton, coined the term Eugenics, and why Charles Darwin's son (Leonard Darwin) championed eugenicism.
    52
  809. That's my view too. Thanks for your comment!
    52
  810.  @Edax_Royeaux  If you had ports and facilities making ships/u-boats, would you just stop everything? Or would you use that capacity to keep building U-boats that could continue to hurt the enemy and sink ships and supplies? It makes sense to keep sending out U-Boats just to raid and hurt the enemy, even if there was no chance of forcing them to surrender.
    52
  811. I made bazillions by retreating to Berlin! You can too! All you need to do is sign up for the Volkssturm...
    52
  812. "Everyone already understands this already, TIK.. the title is a bitt clickbaity." Except you don't know what clickbait is. Clickbait is when I promise to talk about why Hitler declared war on the USA, but then you click on the video and I'm there talking about what I had for lunch. That's clickbait. This video wasn't clickbait, it was clickable, and it does answer the question, even if you missed the answer.
    52
  813. Exactly
    52
  814. @Bhigr Bond - I will debate Holocaust Deniers when I'm fully ready to do so. But I have other priorities right now. I'm not running away from the debates - I just don't want to enter that particular ring until I'm properly prepared and have my arguments properly formulated and backed by substantial evidence (like I did in this video). I'm sure you can understand that.
    52
  815. The Vampire Economy is a fantastic source on the grassroots economy of the Third Reich. Schacht's "Confessions" book is a bit more problematic, so read it with a critical eye. In fact, I would encourage you to read Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" first if you haven't already.
    52
  816. Ok
    52
  817. Yes, I started putting the references in because lots of people were accusing me of "making stuff up" and telling me I should "read the books" that I'd already used and it was them who hadn't read them properly. Doing that stopped those comments instantly. It also allows viewers to check my points if they doubt what I say, and I can even double check if someone questions a point - I can quickly find the page reference and provide further info or quotes. Time consuming in the editing process but worth it.
    52
  818. Yep. It's depressing. But you just try to get people to realise this - they immediately put their fingers in their ears. Copious amounts of evidence will never persuade them that state intervention in the economy is the root of the problem.
    52
  819. Thank you for your comment! It definitely helps! Although, with the other evidence presented, I would still argue that Marx was applying these words in the way I explained them - as anti-Semites. For example, Marx was clearly referring to the anti-Semite "German Socialists" when he said they weren't "True" Socialists, and he used the word "Philistine" in reference to them. So yes, maybe the word does literally mean "narrow minded person", but clearly it has historic anti-Semitic-roots (coming from Israel area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines ), which Marx seems to have realized since he's applying the term to German anti-Semites. Otherwise, why would he use the word in reference to the German anti-Semites?
    52
  820. Now you know where the smart Nazis are - hiding within the Left. The dumb Nazis haven't read Marx, which is why they're saying that.
    52
  821. @Charles Yuditsky - technically not, since Anton Joly's helped out a lot, so has Terri (editing parts of the series and doing thumbnails and making maps), and obviously a lot of historians have written books which I've used. But the majority of the actual script-writing and editing and similar is all me.
    52
  822. I haven't heard about the meme, but I can certainly see why. Leftist authors seem to compete with each other to write as much purple prose as possible in order to overwhelm the reader with boring nonsense. Then, about 500 pages in, they actually get to the point. And yet, people call them "intellectuals". No, they need to go back to school and learn to write properly.
    52
  823. "I believe his goal is to exploit the ignorance of viewers who don’t have a strong grasp of the subjects he discusses" I may not know everything, but my goal is not to exploit the ignorance of my viewers. I provide my sources for a reason - so people can double-check. Not only did I make mistakes in this video (e.g. Plotinus being Christian, because he wasn't), but my "ignorant" viewers pointed these out. Some of them know more than I do, and are helping me find more sources of information so I can learn more, and then give that knowledge to my audience. If I was lying, my audience would be the first to call me out. My intention is not to mislead, and I'm not sure why you came to this conclusion. In the first minute or so, I even admit that some of my older statements in previous videos are now obsolete based on the knowledge I've discovered more recently. This is a continuous evolution on my part, and a building of knowledge over time.
    52
  824. Bit of a warning guys, if the pinned comment gets reported and deleted again, all your comments will be wiped too. So if you want to ask me a question or say something you want to survive, best make your own comment rather than reply here
    51
  825. Thank you for your support. I do intend to continue the Weimar series at some point.
    51
  826. Very true. Horses cannot support tanks
    51
  827. Notes PC is working again now though! Sorry for a day late upload. Timestamps will be in the description shortly! Regarding the “3 battalions” of 8th Bersaglieri Regiment at Bir el Gubi, it seems there’s a contradiction in the source material. I have two sources saying that there wasn’t a “7th Battalion” of this (in their view) two-battalion regiment. However, the book “Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts” states clearly that there were three battalions in this regiment at Bir el Gubi, and mentions the 7th Battalion specifically during this action, even though it doesn’t list a 7th Battalion in its (poor) Order of Battle at the end of the book. There could be a couple of explanations for this - 1. that there really was a 7th Battalion. 2. that the Young Fascists Battalion (not listed in the OOBs, but was there too) was designated the “7th Battalion”. 3. It was 7th Armoured Battalion from 132nd Armoured Regiment (unlikely since this was in the north). 4. It didn’t exist, Iron Hulls was wrong. 5. Since it was overrun in this action, it could have been disbanded, which might be why nobody bothered to list it in their Order of Battles. Either way, since Iron Hulls is the only book that describes the Italian actions at Bir el Gubi in any detail, I’ve gone with its version of events. Also, I’m not sure if the 5th and 12th Battalions were in positions as shown. They could have been swapped around. Also, Pasquali’s 4th Artillery Group was from the Corps, and it had just one battalion in support, not the whole regiment, but I wanted to make it clear in the video which unit it was part of. It has come to my attention (I found this out myself a few days ago) that Franz Kurowski is a far-right-wing “revisionist historian” (a Distorian, to use my own term https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 ) who has been very liberal with the facts written in his accounts on other subjects (e.g. Dresden). Luckily, I’ve only actually used his “Das Afrika Korps” book sparingly, mainly to confirm the positions of units or other cosmetic information, such as the quote about the Germans noting British radio silence, as shown in the video. Notably, he was also the only author talking about “Kampfgruppe Wechmar”, with other accounts just referring to it as the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion etc, so I’m hopeful that any ‘damage’ done is not substantial. My current system of reference makes it quite easy to go back and see where I’ve used his book, so I’m going to double check any part of the script where I’ve used him to ensure that his ‘facts’ aren’t counter to any of the other books (yay, extra unexpected work). So far though, everything seems alright. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    51
  828. To be fair, I don't think it's possible for historians to write books saying "I've made a mistake". Not good marketing. YouTube is a bit different
    51
  829. Yes. True horror is discovering that Hitler was a human being, and that human beings are capable of such things if you have a distorted view of history (in his case, the racial theory of history).
    51
  830. That's probably the only thing you need to know about this order of battle :D
    50
  831. Of course not, Halder is the one true god
    50
  832. Then why do the Soviets (Russians etc) call it the western front? Clearly it should be the Axis-Soviet Front, which makes sense.
    50
  833.  @ParabellumStoria  Yep, these videos can take a long time to research! I get the impression that a lot of viewers don't realize how much reading and whatnot has to go into our videos. And I'm glad to hear you've been watching for so long! In some ways I miss the old Close Combat days. Simpler times
    50
  834. Yes, they view everything the Germans did in rose-tinted glasses. They don't see the crimes, because their literature doesn't talk about it, and if it does, it dismisses it in one way or another.
    50
  835. "Yeah, anyone who reads this - please don't read the books he mentioned and think you understood economics." Hint to everyone reading this: if someone tells you not to do something, this is an indication that you really should do it.
    50
  836. I am onto a sketchy subject, and I know they are. But their reaction so far has been priceless
    50
  837. ​ @alexfilma16  Aber ist das wirklich der Fall?
    50
  838. That would be correct
    50
  839. That would definitely get my channel taken down...
    50
  840. It's actually a fundamental contradiction in Nazi/Leftist ideology (to do with the theory of race and social-Darwinism) I plan to explain in full in the future, but I'm having to get the basics down first - Hitler was a socialist - before I explain the ideological problems Hitler struggled with. In a nutshell: Hitler believed in survival of the fittest, which means individuals who are fit can survive, and therefore he wanted individuality in with his race (group) ideology. Well, it's impossible to do that - if you're a group, you're not an individual. If the individual is important, then your race is not as important etc. But he tried to balance the two somehow in his ideology. I'll go into more detail in the future video, but he actually had this problem his entire life and died having not resolved it.
    50
  841. Very true
    49
  842. Interesting... I can't see my response I made to this comment before... Can anyone else see it?
    49
  843.  @emperorofwends8875  A bit like Rudolf Hess
    49
  844. Sending them to the penal battalions is too lenient. Let's make them do their tax returns again instead!
    49
  845. No timestamps because there’s only one question this time, so the video requires a full-watch to understand. Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make more videos like this possible! All questions are from Patreons donating $5 or more on my Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Also, thank you again to my Patreons - you’re making these videos (and the upcoming Battlestorm ones) happen! An interesting quote to spark debate - “Clark and Lucas therefore were clearly concerned first to establish and consolidate a beachhead, and then to leave offensive operations from it to an undefined second phase.” - Molony, British Official History, P646 Was that really what they were doing? Is the British official history right?? Let me know your opinions. Bit of an update regarding Battlestorm Courland 1944 - still not going to put a hard date on it, but it will be coming in February (2019) regardless. All that’s left to do is the script and the map. So, if push comes to shove, I’ll get the map done first, then release it bi-weekly so that I can finish the script in the in-between weeks. But we’ll see. Selected Bibliography / Sources Blackwell, I. "Anzio: Italy 1944 (Battleground Europe)." Pen & Sword Books, Kindle 2006. Churchill, W. "Memoirs of the Second World War." Mariner Books, 1987. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Clark, L. “Anzio: The Friction of War.” Headline Publishing, Kindle 2013. Molony, C. "The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume V, The Campaign in Sicily 1943 and The Campaign in Italy 3rd September 1943 to 31st March 1944." The Naval & Military Press LTD 2004, first published in 1973. Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    49
  846. And Call of Duty 1 (the original)
    49
  847. Wait, you mean they couldn't?
    49
  848. It could be :) cheers burgers!
    49
  849. While I agree that the Ukrainians had it bad under the Soviet regiment, the event you're describing happened a decade before WW2. They weren't starving when the war began, but began starving again once German troops took their food, burned their houses down, and carted off the populace to the slave labour camps in the Reich.
    49
  850. Well, once Gazala is done, there will be Tobruk, the retreat to El Alamein, the Battles at El Alamein, then Rommel's retreat, Tunisia, and then Sicily and Italy. So the point of doing the North African Campaign was to give everyone the background for Monty and the British, so that when the Americans land in North Africa we have the full context for the rivalries that develop.
    49
  851. @Parabellum  Also, every time you edit your comment it unpins it, so I have to keep repinning it 😂 but feel free to keep editing it, I'll be watching
    49
  852. We need a little controversy
    49
  853. Was experimenting 😁
    49
  854.  @adamjaquay4279  Yes, tank losses are spot on, which is good. But if you look at Glantz on page 177, he says the losses were 88,000 for the 2nd Kotluban Offensive (18th to 19th). This was my mistake, because I said they were for the 18th only, but it was for two days... However, Glantz has made a mistake here because he then points to the table on page 178, which you rightly says is for the 1st to 20th of September. This chart therefore includes the 1st AND 2nd Kotluban Offensives. Glantz says this 88,000 is for the 18th and 19th though! BUT his source for this chart is Isaev's book (which is quoting from the Russian archives), however Isaev is writing about the 2nd Kotluban Offensive, implies in his wording that this chart was for the 2nd Kotluban Offensive, but the chart does say the 1st to 20th. So Glantz didn't notice this (his mistake). But I'm not sure if Isaev is right here because of the way he's worded things? It's understandable why Glantz made this mistake. And if this chart is correct, then this leads to other problems... In fact, it renders the figures for the 1st Kotluban Offensive wrong too. So yes, this is a bit of a mess.
    49
  855.  @ninjaengine1471  By 'liberal' I'm assuming you mean 'Left leaning liberal'? In which case I prefer the communists because at least they didn't steal the name of their movement from a philosophy that means the exact opposite of what they stand for. "We are so liberal we demand that the State take away the liberties of people who don't abide by the States' rules and also demand the end for free speech, free movement, free markets..." - yes, that's really not what the word 'liberal' means.
    49
  856. Good point. I have just requested this now 👍
    49
  857. This is true. Didn't get a chance to say that in the video
    49
  858. That's Alexander Suvorov I think. This is Viktor Suvorov, the author of "Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War".
    49
  859. +Sam H yes, I couldn't believe it when I read that either
    49
  860.  @sbevexlr848  Yes, and as many of my viewers have pointed out, it's not worth responding to, so I won't.
    49
  861. Selected Bibliography/Sources Brereton, L. “The Brereton Diaries: The War in the Air in the Pacific, Middle East and Europe, 3 October 1941-8 May 1945.” Kindle, 2014. Frost, J. “A Drop Too Many.” Kindle, 2009. Hastings, M. “Armageddon.” Pan Books, 2004. Robert J. “Kershaw, It Never Snows in September.” Ian Allan Publishing, 2007. Mead, R. “General Boy: The Life of Lieutenant General Sir Frederick Browning.” Kindle, 2010. Middlebrook, M. “Arnhem 1944: The Airborne Battle, 17-29 September.” 2009. Neillands, R. “The Battle for the Rhine 1944.” Kindle, 2014. Poulussen, R.G. “Lost at Nijmegen.” Kindle, 2011. Ryan, C. “A Bridge Too Far.” Kindle, 1974 Urquhart, R. “Arnhem.” Kindle, 1958. Sosabowski, S. “Freely I Served.” Kindle, 1982. Links My “REAL Operation Market Garden” documentary https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc “The BAD BOY of Operation Market Garden” A video on General 'Boy' Browning https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU The “Who to Blame? John Frost on Operation Market Garden's Failure” video https://youtu.be/7C_HoMVhKAI My discussion of Market Garden’s True Purpose using Monty vs Eisenhower’s Memoirs https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM A video on Kampfgruppen where I talk about some of the Market Garden Kampfgruppen https://youtu.be/zKWczZkQ130 My Book review of “It Never Snows in September” https://youtu.be/-RRdWCyHpG8 My “A Bridge Too Far Book Review” video https://youtu.be/D6vDlbsOkQE Add me on Twitter @TIKhistory Thanks for watching, bye for now!
    49
  862. I've not looked into that era, but that's awesome! Didn't know that either
    49
  863. Mine too! I like the war stuff, but this is even more interesting to me. Learning more about how the Nazis screwed their economy up is eye-opening
    49
  864. I'll be honest, when I was making this series I wasn't sure if I would display the Swastika or not, and decided to place the EU's flag over the Swastika instead (since they're all about censorship). It was around that time that I made this unit picture file, and so I placed the EU flag over the Swastika in the unit's logo. Then later on I decided "screw it" and that I'd display the Swastika and accept demonetization and potential political censorship in Germany etc. I then forgot to change this unit back to the original and didn't notice in the editing. I'll correct it for the all-in-one Courland video... or not, since a few people found it funny.
    49
  865.  @Vingul  I don't understand. What policies from Hitler have I provided reasons for being good? Because as far as I'm concerned, none of them were good.
    49
  866. Very true. It would have been like the siege of Leningrad - neverending
    49
  867. Wow, thank you! Honestly though, I'm standing on the shoulders of giants. Yes, I've put it all together, but without giants like Beevor, Craig, Glantz, Jason D Mark, Anton Joly, Egor Kobiakov etc this series wouldn't be possible. So I hope, in addition to watching my videos, you pick up their books too, which it sounds like you have done with regards to Beevor and Craig :)
    49
  868. I don't disagree with you. This is why I say I'm a free market guy, rather than a Capitalist. However, it is true that there was a freer market within Britain in the late 1800s than anything we've had since.
    48
  869. I know Marxists were reporting some of my other videos for wrongthink, so it's only a matter of time.
    48
  870. "I was so shocked at how personal & viscous TIK was to me... But the obvious lies & personal nature of the attack was amazing." You asked a question, and I answered it. It wasn't "vicious", or 'lies' or 'personal' - it was the answer to your question. It may not have been the answer you wanted, and it may have shown you that your question was deliberately provocative, but it wasn't "vicious", "lies", or "personal".
    48
  871. "Who cares, look at my user name. Imagine the amount of name calling I get from the Communist." It can't be that bad. Name: "FASCIST NATIONALIST MOVEMENT" Oh.
    48
  872. This comment is biased
    48
  873. Students of the world will be inspired
    48
  874. Thank you! I'm glad you think so
    48
  875. Merry Stalingrad! wait
    48
  876. Thanks guys! I think I've shot myself in the foot trying to do too much at once - Stalingrad, Weimar Hyperinflation, Korsun, the Q&As... I always do this to myself!
    48
  877. 2nd. And don't worry, I'm working on Stalingrad
    48
  878. Yes, although the same could be said for the Soviets... (I won't spoil it)
    48
  879. I just wish more people would actually listen. Too many people are happy to stick to what FEELS right, rather than what is right. That's our main issue right now.
    48
  880. Notes Timestamps are in the video description! They’re not really necessary for this video (since it’s short) but I think it’s worth including them simply for convenience, and so you can easily find the relevant bits. The current plan is to release a Crusader video every Monday from now on until it is finished. The script (+75k words) is done but none of the editing is done, so this is going to be a tall order to get them finished weekly to say the least. Therefore, I’m going to be realistic and say that I’ll probably end up throwing in an emergency video or so into the mix (Patreon Q&As and possibly even a gaming video if I get stuck). So I think it’s best to warn you now, and ask you not to be upset if/when this happens. I’m only human! Also, I still plan to upload the full series in one 7-8 hour video at the end (after fixing any mistakes I make). Once Crusader is all finished, we’ll be going back to the Eastern Front for both Courland and Stalingrad. After they’re done, we’ll probably return to the North African Campaign to see Rommel’s second offensive, then Gazala and so on. Eventually progressing to Torch, Tunisia, Sicily, Italy and then D-Day. Next week’s video is going to be about the British preparations prior to Crusader (but not the plan - that’ll be the week after). This includes a brief look at the commanders, the British units and doctrine, and British tanks and equipment. I’ve covered some of this before in previous videos, but there will be corrections (like the fact the British used battalions but called them “regiments” because… yes). SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing And finally, please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! Thanks for watching!
    48
  881. I don't have the production figures for binoculars, but it would be interesting to see them
    48
  882. No, TIK was not saying that at all.
    48
  883. Exactly
    48
  884. Exactly!
    48
  885. Yeah, why not? As I said in the pinned comment, this isn't a popularity contest 😂
    48
  886. His last words, I believe
    48
  887. As a kid I was always disappointed with the old TV documentaries, which just didn't go into enough detail for me. That's why I made Market Garden the way I did - as detailed as I thought I could get away with - to make the type of documentary I wanted to see when I was younger. And it actually worked, and I wasn't the only one who wanted that type of video! Fast forward to now, and I think it's funny how one guy (in this case, with some research help from Anton Joly and a part-time graphic designer who made the Stalingrad-region map - but before this video it's all been 100% my own work) can produce similar (if not better) quality history documentaries than whole TV organizations can. As you said, I have fewer resources, time or expertise at this. It shouldn't be possible! And yet it is... Others are doing the same sort of thing too. It's very interesting times! Cheers!
    48
  888. Yeah, I really don't understand why my critics think I'm wrong on this particular issue. EVERY source says what Socialism and Capitalism are, but for some reason 'my' definitions are wrong. It makes no sense.
    48
  889. Notes I did mispronounce “Servizio Informazioni Militare” and “Cesare Amè”, but I tried really really hard not to! I’ve probably also mispronounced “Gabr Saleh” and other places, so please be nice to me in the comments… I’m also assuming Colonel Bonner Fellers was pronounced “Boh-ner” rather than “Bone-er”, which would be unfortunate. Thank you to a few of you who told me how to pronounce “Freyberg” correctly (it’s Fry-berg). Also, a quick shout-out and a thank you to David Olie, who sent me a picture of Alexander Gatehouse, and I’ve updated the unit card. At 20:38, I quoted from Pitt, but somehow missed this when editing. So, this part of the narrative is from Pitt, Page 35. “Not only did this affect their efficiency for the coming battle but it obviously affected the morale of men who had volunteered for active military duties, and now found themselves continually employed as static labourers.” Piecing together how the plan was actually formed isn’t easy with the current secondary sources. I’d love to dive into the primary sources to figure out the evolution, but I’m unable to do so. Cunningham seems to have been concerned about 13th Corps’ flank, so to blame Godwin-Austen and Freyberg entirely would probably be wrong. Should Cunningham take the blame for the plan? Was it a collective effort or not? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Norrie complained about the plan after the battle, but it’s not super-clear if he was genuinely unhappy before the battle. I’ve run with the idea that he was, simply because of the war-game rehearsal shows that he convinced Cunningham to accompany him in the drive to Gabr Saleh. He wouldn’t have done this if he was entirely happy with the plan. This video was so graphically intensive (I know it doesn’t look like it is, but it is) that it took 5 hours to render out. That’s a bit ominous for future videos, since there’s going to be a lot more units on the field of battle when we get into the action. Next week’s video will be talking about Axis forces, and Halder’s scheme to stop Rommel. I think it’ll be about 40 minutes long :) SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Same as last week (they probably won’t change now) - Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing And finally, please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! Thanks for watching!
    48
  890. I'm not ending it now. We've come too far to give in completely. I just need to do other things for a while, catch my breath, and then dive back in.
    48
  891. Roses are red This poem sucks If you read it all You owe me 100 bucks
    48
  892. Thank you for making me laugh
    48
  893. It is definitely another form of Gnosticism.
    48
  894. Well that explains why I got so many likes that day
    47
  895. Technically, it begins next episode haha
    47
  896. Haha yup! Just wait until I do my next Hitler and Nazism video - that'll be a lot longer ;)
    47
  897. Wow, thank you for commenting! And for citing sources! "You said Lenin supported the war, but this was a little bit more nuanced." Yeah, looking at it I probably shouldn't have said 'Lenin' and should have been more specific. International Socialism really was fractured at this stage. This is the problem when doing an unscripted video - errors creep into the narrative. Thank you for pointing out and correcting my mistake!
    47
  898. Samaan mentions that book in his book
    47
  899.  @mediatool9596  I was one of them. I was someone who believed in socialism. It was only when I accidentally took the Red Pill that I woke up from my ignorance. So these guys are ignorant based on their beliefs, not stupid. My hope is to get through to them. And I don't think they understand my argument at all. It has become clear to me that they're just ignoring what I'm saying, and assuming that they're right. That's why I emphasized in the video that they're wrong - the evidence is overwhelming on my side, but they don't realize this because they're automatically believing themselves to be right.
    47
  900. He says Poland has "annexationist plans" that were only stopped by Hitler.
    47
  901. I like dark humour
    47
  902. Good point about the Wehrkreis system. Thanks for commenting :)
    47
  903. I already have https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    47
  904. It's a shame to hear about your injury. I hope, at the very least, you're making improvements??? And you must look after yourself before you can look after others, so don't be apologizing for cancelling your Patreon subscription. In fact, I will thank you for pledging when you originally did because you have helped me and this channel grow 👍
    47
  905. Again, as I said in the video, and even put words up on the screen: the source I used says that back in Marx's day, that's what the word meant. It doesn't mean it now, just back then.
    47
  906. Thanks for your additional comment Aiden, really helping me out there. Loving the insults as usual. Perhaps you could spice them up a bit, because you keep using the same old ones and I'm getting a bit bored of them. Instead of "balding", why not call me "ugly"? That's a bit different! And never have I admitted that you're right. Keep telling yourself that though, if it makes you feel better about yourself 👍
    47
  907. It wasn't real socialism, of course ;)
    47
  908. Oh that? That's the No Sense Door. It has a postcard stuck to it from Berlin, even though it wasn't sent through the post and I've never been to Berlin, because that also makes no sense.
    47
  909. Yeah it's difficult to imagine everything when you're reading from a book, especially when they describe things out of order, which most of them do for some reason.
    47
  910. Thank you! I shall order a copy now
    47
  911. I was playing it safe rather than leaving it to chance. We live in a world where speech can physically murder snowflakes (apparently), so you've got to be careful
    47
  912. Yeah... I don't get it
    47
  913. You're right that it's complicated, and I did suspected the numbers would turn out to be biased. I definitely need more sources on the topic. Apart from Sokolov, have you got any recommendations?
    47
  914. But is it? Really?
    46
  915. Why do you have to hit me with those negative waves so early in the morning, dude?
    46
  916. Exactly! That's the myth the Germans built after the war to say that Hitler was a madman for not allowing the German generals to win, or the Blitzkrieg to work. In reality, the Blitzkrieg broke down, and the German generals can't entirely blame Hitler for this - a lot of it was their fault.
    46
  917.  @zxbzxbzxb1  You laugh, but my original intention was to go right down to company or platoon level, but the sources simple don't allow it
    46
  918. Did he really say that? I despise him more now
    46
  919. Don't forget our beloved friend Halder
    46
  920. Since everyone complained in the 6th Army Rations video, I think you'll find his name is actually ManKilogram
    46
  921. A mid-Stalingrad crisis? :D
    46
  922. @Bond - Nazis can't cry wolf when it comes to freedom of speech. You guys don't advocate for freedom of speech. In fact, you burned books (and people) and punished those who spoke their mind. You even banned forms of music (e.g. Jazz). If you guys were in power again, you'd take away freedom of speech in a heartbeat. So complaining that you don't have freedom of speech is hypocritical on your part.
    46
  923.  @OlmoVonHabsurg  Perhaps, but in WW2 the blockade was self-imposed. Hitler wanted Autarky after all.
    46
  924. Yes, it was a lot less demanding than normal videos. No script, just totally off my chest, and I'd already done all the prep (I'd already read the books). The video hasn't done so well performance-wise, but it's definitely something I'd like to do again in the future when (just like this week) I haven't got time to prepare a full video.
    46
  925.  @Raskolnikov70  You can still call for mass slaughter (the Revolution), so long as you're Marxist and believe in your overlords in Chinafornia
    46
  926. Oh wow, thank you for your comment, I appreciate it
    46
  927. I haven't read that. I've just searched around and couldn't find a physical copy anywhere. Do you know where I could get a copy?
    46
  928. Thank you! And yes, it's a different perspective, but one that challenges the old idea of "Hitler' the madman" that the German generals promoted after the war. I've been doing more videos challenging the same notion, and I've also been planning on expanding on the oil-view presented in this video. Hopefully I'll have another video on it soon :)
    46
  929. It didn't. As shown in the video, the Germans lose by 1941 (or 1942 at the latest). In 1941, when the Germans and Axis invade the Soviet Union they outnumbered the Red Army. There were 3,957,910 Axis troops (3,118,910 German plus 839,000 Axis Allies) vs 2,743,000 Soviet troops on the 22/06/1941. Yes, the Soviets sent in reinforcements, but that doesn't mean on day 2 the Germans suddenly faced a billion Soviets. On the 11/09/1941 the Soviets had 3,463,000 men, vs 4,215,147 Axis troops (3,382,000 German and 833,147 Allied). And between the 22nd of June and the 30th of September, Soviet losses amounted to 2,817,303. So effectively, they had taken losses equivalent to their border army, and now had 3,463,000 troops at the front, vs 4,215,147 Axis. So yes, during this initial period of the war, the Germans and Axis outnumber the Soviets. The Axis are only outnumbered for the first time in December 1941, which is coincidentally the first time they're thrown back. German casualties on the Eastern Front for 1941 were 312,600, plus Axis allied losses of 81,500, for a total of 384,100 total Axis losses in 1941. For the whole of 1941, the Soviets lost 4,791,300 men. On the 1st of December 1941, they had 4,197,000 men at the front. Add them together, gives you 8,988,300 (admittingly, we're a month out from 1st of December to January, but you get the point). During this vital time on the Eastern Front - June to October/November - the Germans outnumber the Red Army. Yet they are not able to achieve strategic victory. In fact, their offensive grinds to a halt through lack of oil (as the main factor, though there are other factors). We can therefore conclude they are not outnumbered. And outproduced? The Soviets are busy transporting their industries to the Urals. Production does not catch up until late 1942. I'm planning on doing a video on this, but it's hard to see how between June 22nd 1941 and October 1941 how the Soviets out-produced and outnumbered the Germans, when in reality their army was smaller at any one given moment in time than the Germans. Yes, they eventually outnumbered the Germans, but by that point the war is arguably lost. Only Hitler's last gamble to take the Caucasus is what could save him, and while the Soviets do outnumber the Germans at this point (5,313,000 Red Army vs 3,578,000 Axis troops on the 07/06/1942) along the whole front, the Germans concentrate their forces in the south, achieving local superiority. In fact, at Stalingrad, Paulus's 80,000 men who took part in the initial assault on the city, outnumber Chuikov's army, which never exceeds 54,000 men. It's not until after the campaign becomes static that the Soviets are truly able to gather the resources needed to outnumber and thus defeat the Germans (Operation Uranus, Little Saturn etc). But as I said, it's arguable that the war was already lost by October 1941 (if not earlier) when the Axis enjoyed superiority in numbers.
    46
  930. Me too! If I'm honest, I'm finding it hard to do anything else other than work on the next Stalingrad video at the moment :)
    46
  931. Unfortunately, YouTube now limits video lengths to 12 hours, so there's not chance of this any more
    45
  932.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  yeah, I'll accept that. That's why I started this whole thing - to be better than the Alien Conspiracy Channel, so I'm glad you think it's better 😂
    45
  933. I script most of the videos, and YouTube has an automated subtitles feature, which isn't 100% but gets it close enough, so it doesn't take too long to go through it and correct any mistakes. My main gripe is that YouTube allowed other users to contribute to the subtitles, and people used to put in Chinese, German, Spanish and more subtitles. But YouTube recently took that feature away :(
    45
  934.  @Chud_Bud_Supreme  Yeah because a lot of people associate "socialist" with "Marxist". So even the Third Positionists that say he was a socialist will clarify by saying he wasn't a Marxist and that his version of socialism was the "correct" version.
    45
  935. I heard he got them from a Shih Tzu
    45
  936. That may be the case in a feudalistic, barter or slave economy. But in a market economy, the man earns wealth through the fruits of his own productivity, and uses that to EXCHANGE the fruits of labour from the other men in the market. Ergo, his property and prosperty are his own, and shouldn't be "shared" altruistically with slothful benefit scrounging preachers.
    45
  937. I think the reason is because people think in absolutes. "If the Soviets did better, this must mean the US didn't do as well!?!?" No, it doesn't work like that. There's not a finite amount of praise. Praising one nation does not take away from another. It just adds to the total amount of praise.
    45
  938. The thing is that I don't like letting people down :(
    45
  939. Wow, someone who survived both the Concentration Camps and the Gulags? Hats off to him
    45
  940. Yep, I laughed out loud. Take a heart
    45
  941. Interesting how she claimed it was American propaganda, and not German propaganda. Also interesting that she said it didn't happen at all, although as you say, she probably wasn't unbiased
    45
  942. Almost! I'd phrase it more like this: they never got to the bank of the Volga in the city because each week they were getting infinitely closer to it, and then the Soviets counterattacked outside the city.
    45
  943. It does take into account that Soviets could concentrate their forces. That was kinda the point. I was making the distinction that the Germans weren't vastly outnumbered on the strategic scale - which they weren't. And the only reason they were outnumbered in certain battles is because the Soviets concentrated their forces there, just like when the Germans concentrated their forces at the beginning of the war. The Germans didn't complain when they outnumbered the Soviets, only when they were outnumbered.
    45
  944. I could be wrong, but this may be the longest video on Karl Marx on the internet
    45
  945. "Hyperinflation was certainly a large part of it. Then we had other factors such as agriculture exhaustion (expect Egypt), multiple waves of plauge, 'barbarian' invasions, the lack of competency of the Roman Emperors, the undermining of civil institutions vis-à-vis military institutions, multiple civil wars, declining administrative efficiency and so forth." True. But which came first, the chicken or the egg? Hyperinflation or all these other factors? Did the hyperinflation lead to these, or the other way around? Or both!
    45
  946. "Fascist and Nazi economic models is based on corporatism. Everything is brought into the orbit of the state via the guilds, i.e. corporations or syndicates or in Hitler’s case a single national trade union." Exactly. It's Socialism.
    45
  947. The Great Depression was caused by government spending, as all recessions are. Again, basic economics.
    45
  948. And we never went there because the Nazis were there. See! The evidence is overwhelming!
    45
  949. Just download some more RAM and you'll be fine
    45
  950.  @MinhVo-ig7no  I'm glad I've done this series and I want to do the best with it, but at this point I am looking forward to the end so we can go on to other Battlestorms in other theatres (Gazala is next). Considering I've spend the past two weeks working on E45 and E46, and have to continue to do more screenplays this week (preventing me from doing a video next week), I'm itching to do other things.
    45
  951.  @CedarHunt  I'm not "defending the position that Britain should have handed all of Europe to the literal Nazis after a single battle didn't go [their] way." I'm not sure what gave you that impression. The point is that war is bad. But are there any "just" wars? And was the destruction of the British Empire, the starvation of 3 million Indians, and numerous other casualties on both sides worth it to save Eastern Europe, only for the Soviet Union (and many Russians today) to turn about and say that they didn't need Britain at all?
    45
  952. Two of my sources specifically state that John was a Gnostic, and if you read about the 'Apocryphon of John', you'll see that he directly receives gnosis from Jesus, giving him the power to predict the future.
    45
  953. Wow, thank you! That's kind of you to say that, and is fantastic considering this was my first history video too
    45
  954. Good question! One day I hope to look into the Korean war properly
    44
  955. @Aiden B. Socialists and Communists THINK that they're calling for non-State worker or collective control of the means of production. But they're not. What they haven't realized (some have) is that when an individual worker owns his means of production, then that's Capitalism. And when a group of workers owns the means of production, they own it Publically, meaning Politically. Even if just on a factory level, a group of workers (an organized community) Politically owning/governing a piece of territory. Well, as the Oxford English dictionary makes clear, they have become a State. The definition of a State is a politically organized community with one government. That's precisely what they've become. So it doesn't matter what Socialists believe or say. Their actions will always result in the same thing: State control. Why? Because a politically organized group of people in charge of territory is a State.
    44
  956. Apparently they were all subs, also known as u-boats
    44
  957. At this point it may as well be a Russian tradition
    44
  958. There are massive parallels!
    44
  959. Exactly. Both sides exaggerated the losses the opposition took because they didn't want their own losses to look bad
    44
  960. That's how I see it too
    44
  961. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Next week’s video will be the last in the Crusader series. We’ll see the final part of the action, plus do a lot of debating. The plan is still to fix all the minor issues (plus add in more miles/km measurements) and release the +8 hour complete Crusader video on Monday 7th of January 2019. And I will be doing a follow-up Crusader video the week after (which probably won’t be included in the ‘complete’ Crusader video) talking about Pienaar and the debate surrounding it, since I’ve been accused of being biased. Now that I’ve got the official South African history, I can wade into that debate fully. The sources are terribly weak when it comes to the events on the Frontier, so I was compelled to use internet sources to fill out the details for these sections. I also couldn’t fit all the units on the map, so the Axis forces located at Bardia (according to http://www.lonesentry.com/bardia_intel/index.html ) were - GERMAN: 10th Oasis Company, 200 Pioneer Battalion, Administration Services. ITALIAN: 3rd Battalion from 40th Infantry Regiment (from the BOLOGNA Division), 2nd Battalion from 15th Infantry Regiment (SAVONA), 4th Genoa Cavalry Armoured Car Battalion, 1 Company of the 5th Light Tank Battalion, plus additional units. The Genoa Battalion may not be armoured cars, but I have them listed as armoured cars elsewhere. As for the Sollum/Halfaya Garrison and Savona positions, I’ve tried to piece them together using various maps and forums online (mainly https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=177538 especially map at bottom of first page). I suspect the German positions are correct, but not sure on the Savona positions. If anyone has any more information, let me know. While not mentioned in the books yet (probably later), Churchill’s order for Auchinleck to send troops to the Far East resulted in the 70th Division going to the Far East. From what I can tell, most of the 70th Division remained in Tobruk and began departing in December 1941 or January 1942. Kopanski’s Polish Brigade remained with Eighth Army during this time though. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Bender, R.J., & Law, R.D., “Uniforms, Organization and History of the Afrikakorps.” R.J.Bender, Publisher, USA, 1973. PDF: “German Kampfgruppe In North Africa 1941 through 1943”. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Badia Garrison from “The British Capture of Bardia (December 1941 - January 1942): A Successful Infantry-Tank Attack (Information Bulletin No. 21, U.S. War Department, WWII)” http://www.lonesentry.com/bardia_intel/index.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    44
  962. Awesome! Let's debate it :) I would point out that Paulus isn't to know that the airlift wasn't going to work for at least a week if not longer. So to say that he had first-hand evidence that it isn't working is not quite true. Just like at Demyansk, it takes a while for an airlift to get going. So at this moment, he wouldn't know that it's not going to work. His best opportunity is to pack up and leave before the encirclement closes, or breakout immediately after it (the first week) while his army is still strong physically and also has a good chunk of supplies. The issue is that by this point, he's been ordered to stand firm,be resupplied by air and wait for Manstein (who's also reassuring him) to come get him out. So, not knowing that the airlift was going to fail, and not knowing that the future relief attempt by Germany's greatest contemporary general (if you believe Manstein), why would you order your army to break out? The only reason you would argue that is because you're seeing this from the benefit of hindsight, because you know the outcome. At the time, Paulus would have had to have defied Hitler and his immediate superior (Manstein), and would have had to abandon a lot of his equipment since his army didn't have all of their horses needed to pull their guns (they were moved into winter-quarters and weren't trapped with 6th Army). And the longer he waits to find out if the airlift works or not, or if the relief attempt is coming or not, the weaker his army becomes and the more horses it eats. By the time mid-December rolls around, when the relief attempt is making ground, his army can't go more than 30kms. It could if it was a "every man for himself" roll of the dice, but that's a tough decision to make, especially when Manstein is still telling you he'll reach you soon. So no, I do think Paulus is not to blame for this. He should have broken out (hindsight), but he can't be blamed for not breaking out. In my opinion, that blame goes to Hitler, Jeschonnek, Göring and Manstein. Hope that makes sense :)
    44
  963. The video has English subtitles? Or do you mean provide them to you in text format? In which case: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sELOViN-rLv0H1PTOmLs4f6K-QTqweBwcz66dltJgmo/edit?usp=sharing
    44
  964. Yes, very much so, and I'm going to talk about that rock and hard place in detail in the next episode
    44
  965. Correct! It's dishonest to the core.
    44
  966. The battles will remain the priority, don't worry. But even at Stalingrad it's hard to get away from the fact that the civilians ended up German slaves, so these topics would have come up eventually anyway
    44
  967. Lots of banks in here... River banks
    44
  968. It wouldn't be a true British plan if it wasn't held together by shoelace and sellotape.
    44
  969. Yeah I realise now that a lot of the negative comments I've received have come from these two groups rather than my own viewers. I need to ignore them.
    44
  970. Well I didn't know that. But I do now! Thank you! (and normally I suck at German names, so to only get Hoth wrong is a good thing!)
    44
  971. It's good to hear that you turned away from Fascism! What specifically caused you to reconsider your beliefs?
    44
  972. Ahhh but the Nazi historians say that Hitler's views in 1923 had changed by 1938-9 and that there's no evidence that Hitler wanted to be aggressive in the 1930s... except that Hitler rearmed the military from 1933, marched into the Rhineland, made it clear in the the Hossbach Memorandum of 1937 that he wanted to invade other countries, he Anschluss'd Austria, and took over Czechoslovakia... but there's no evidence of course!
    43
  973. Killing enemy soldiers in battle is one thing. Killing innocent civilians, stealing their food, packing the men off for slave labour duties in the Reich, and burning down houses not occupied by enemy troops is also just wrong. A good portion of the population of Stalingrad was deported to Germany, with very few surviving the war. So no, I was correct in my assessment. And, what is interesting is that there's no SS units in 6th Army. These were Wehrmacht units committing these acts.
    43
  974. It also gives a nice prelude to Operation Crusader since Cunningham was there, as were several units that took part in Crusader.
    43
  975. Notes and Sources A reminder: this video series is bi-weekly, but I do publish videos every Monday at 5pm GMT (double check for British Summer Time) so be sure to check back on Mondays! @ 20:35 Haupt definitely lists the “29th Infantry Division” as being in the Courland Pocket, which I assumed was a mistake, but have left it in the video because I was going to ask you guys if you knew what he was talking about. The 29th Infantry Division was a motorized division that got destroyed at Stalingrad, so it couldn’t have been that. But I realised too late to change it that it could have been the 329th Infantry Division, which was in the Courland Pocket at this time. This makes sense, so I’ll be changing it for the all-in-one video. The sources are incredibly vague about this period of the campaign, which is why I wasn’t able to go into a lot of detail. As mentioned in Part 2, the Soviet histories on the battle just gave up on it, so the German perspective starts to take over from now on. Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    43
  976. I have replied to your other message explaining (again) why Order 227 wasn't how you think it was S S. And I intend to rewrite history. Revising history is not a bad thing https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    43
  977. I'm not sure because he's not specific, but it could be an old report. If so, that just gives further weight to the idea that the High Command was out of touch with what was happening in real time
    43
  978. I absolutely do. And I'll be honest with you too, it's because I'm trying to balance a full time job and this. What happened was I actually ran out of time, so the editing was rushed (I would have cut it down and made it slicker, if that makes sense). Another hour at it and it wouldn't be like this. Thank you for the feedback though, and I'll do my best not to let this happen again.
    43
  979. Thank you! Yeah some people are asking me to SKIP AHEAD to Operation Uranus, which I think is just stupid.
    43
  980. If you learn something while watching these videos, then I am your professor
    43
  981. I hope so, but I'm personally never happy with unscripted videos, so I'm kicking myself because it's both late and it's unscripted
    43
  982.  @QuizmasterLaw  "Money is defined by state power as a medium of exchange." Money existed before governments did. Money is commodities traded as a means of exchange. Currency is what fiat is. Fiat is not a money.
    43
  983. "TIK who works 70 hours a week and barely gets a minimum wage has to make a 32 min. video defending the status quo" It's my choice to work that many hours a week. I need just enough money to get by and a little extra to buy books and equipment etc. Beyond that, what would I do with all the money? I want to recruit a worker (an Editor) to help me make more videos, but beyond that, money is not the end goal. My passion is the videos, and the knowledge I'm gaining by studying and teaching history. I choose to work 70 hours a week, because I'm a worker at heart. If you want more resources, get a better job.
    43
  984. I don't know if this will be considered an "epic" or "classic", but from my perspective, a 'painting' like this requires a lot of hard work, concentration and time to mold. And, in the end, if people appreciate it and are happy with it, then that'll do for me. Cheers!
    43
  985. Hey Mike Mcmike, have you seen my latest video? I think you'll like it, since you're in it! https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    43
  986. Without more sources, it comes down to your interpretation. Given the context, I think they didn't want to broadcast to their civilians that they'd messed up. They couldn't say there was no casualties (because of the bombing), but they didn't want to say just how many were killed by the Germans, in case it produced panic in other cities.
    43
  987.  @rndompersn3426  Again, I didn't just use the dictionary. I don't know how many times I have to say this. Please pay attention.
    43
  988. "But if Google Marx's philosophy you'll soon discover that Marxism is based on materialism, which is literally the opposite of idealism (Hegelian or any)." In that very video, I quoted Marx in the video saying this. You don't need to "Google it" because I literally quoted the exact passage where he says this. Try to actually watch the full video before commenting. - What you've missed is that Marx is a dialectical materialist. Dialectical, meaning "transcendence". And "materialism" being the belief that reality is fake. Thus, Marx believes in the transcendence of the fake reality. This is, practically speaking, no different that what Hegel said. The only difference is that Marx things reality shapes the mind, which then produces God, whereas Hegel things God shapes the mind and that produces material reality. It's not "literally the opposite" - it's reliant on the exact same principle: the idea that reality is fake. - "So either he is simply stupid or he is a liar." Neither. You're the ignorant one here, not me. - "Well, the food is a PRODUCT unless it's deliberately made for profit and is ought to be selled on the market, then it's a commodity. And he doesn't know that)) He is just a f.o.o.l." Since you love Google so much, a quick search will show you that both a product and a commodity can be bought and sold. A commodity is merely a raw material, whereas a product is usually the end product. Without commodities you don't have products. So, my point still stands. Without commodities you do not have food, and therefore a commodity-less society is a food-less society.
    43
  989. Sorry...I think :D
    43
  990. Yes, pretty much. I mean, you can get more specific than that, but yes
    43
  991. Four legs good!
    43
  992. There was a case of plagiarism I heard about where someone took an essay and re-wrote every sentence in their own way. The lecturer said it must have taken them longer to do that than actually do the work from scratch, and in the end it didn't work because they caught him and expelled him.
    43
  993. The third rule of history club is two men per fight.
    43
  994. Timestamps to the different questions are in the description. I know this is a sensitive topic, so please keep the discussion civil. There was some audio issues with the recording (you can occasionally hear the sound skip in the video) which is partly why the lip-sync goes out. I didn’t have time to go back and reshoot, so it is what it is. Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make more videos like this possible! All questions came from Patreons donating $5 or more on my Patreon. Thank you to my Patreons! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Selected Bibliography / Sources Bishop, P. "Fighter Boys and Bomber Boys: Saving Britain 1940-1945." William Collins, 2017. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Grayling, A. "Among the Dead Cities: Is the Targeting of Civilians in War ever Justified?" Bloomsbury, Kindle 2006. Ivanova, G. "Labour Camp Socialism: The Gulag in the Soviet Totalitarian System." Routledge, Kindle 2015. Murray, W. “Strategy For Defeat: The Luftwaffe 1933-1945.” Pickle Partners, Kindle 2019. Overy, R. “Why the Allies Won.” Penguin Random House, 2006. A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    42
  995. Notes and Sources A reminder: this video series is bi-weekly, but I do publish videos every Monday at 5pm GMT (double check for British Summer Time) so be sure to check back on Mondays! I got most of the economic information regarding inflation from https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany which did use German sources, but it’s not ideal because it’s a wikipedia-source. I will be searching for more sources on this because I want to cover the Third Reich’s economic crisis going through WW2. If you know of any sources that talk about Germany’s inflation during WW2, or its deficit spending (excluding “Wages of Destruction” or “Hitler’s Beneficiaries” because I already have them), please let me know. Many of you have requested that I do more videos on Germany’s economic situation and I am more than happy to do that. Thanks to my AWESOME Patrons, I’ve recently purchased “The Taste of War”, which talks about the WW2 food crisis. Sadly, nothing specific on Courland otherwise I would have mentioned it. Otherwise, not a lot to say this time. Hope you enjoy the video! Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm Inflation in Germany https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany I’ve also used some maps and information from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/ A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    42
  996. This is exactly the point.
    42
  997. It has confirmed that I need to take a few days off in a row every so often. My productivity has definitely increased, even though I didn't 100% recover from the burn out
    42
  998. Corneliu Dragalina: "We'll huff, and we'll puff, and we'll keep crossing the Aksay in the same place over and over so you can keep beating us back!"
    42
  999. "One question I have to ask you is why did almost everybody call Hitler fascist?" When you censor your political opponents, you no longer understand what they stand for. For example, the notes on many of Hitler's speeches are still under lock and key. The reason is probably because if they were leaked it wouldn't do the currently establishment much good. "Such as Stalin's speech declaring victory over Germany" Stalin wanted to paint his enemies as non-Marxists and non-Socialists. Since the meaning of Fascism was (and still is) unknown to a lot of people, a good name to call people who are your ideological enemies is Fascist. That, in a nutshell, is it. One of my current goals is to correct this distortion.
    42
  1000. They'd make good politicians
    42
  1001. Actually it's not really related to that
    42
  1002. That's a good redemption story, thank you for sharing. It's great to hear you're working for yourself and having your life in order! And it's true that the people who remain socialist have that fixed mindset and never truly become successful in life. Yet, they can't see it.
    42
  1003. Oh yes, I'm well jel
    42
  1004. Yeah, it's not going to happen. Tanks really aren't that interesting to me. They're a bit like cars - they get you from A to B. The noise of the engine or the hypothetical speed it could go if there weren't any road pirates just doesn't interest me.
    42
  1005. Notes Timestamps are in the description! I can now confidently inform you that there should be two more Crusader videos after this video. And the plan is to fix all the minor issues and release the +8 hour complete Crusader video on Monday 7th of January 2019. It seems that I’ve made a mistake somewhere: Lieutenant Colonel Drew commands 5th Royal Tank Regiment, even though I had him listed as commanding the 8th Hussars earlier in the battle. Not sure if there’s a source that lists him as commanding 8th Hussars somewhere or if I’ve just misread it, but either way he was commanding 5RTR now. No idea who was commanding 8th Hussars at this time, but they were supposed to have been destroyed earlier in the battle, so I’m also not sure how or why they’ve reappeared. Apart from 11th Indian Infantry Brigade, the exact movements of the 4th Indian Division during this time are unknown. 5th Indian Brigade was at Sidi Azeiz, but it’s unclear when exactly they moved west. After the action at Libyan Omar and Sidi Azeiz, both 5th and 7th Indian Brigades aren’t heard of again until the 15th of December, so are presumably just moving west during this time. If anyone knows if there’s an official 4th Indian Division history out there, please let me know. Just a bit of a footnote which I’ve just stumbled upon, 44th Royal Tank Regiment (part of 1st Army Tank Brigade at Sidi Rezegh) ended up being attached to the US 101st Airborne Division during Operation Market Garden in 1944. Thought it was worth mentioning :) If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Bender, R.J., & Law, R.D., “Uniforms, Organization and History of the Afrikakorps.” R.J.Bender, Publisher, USA, 1973. PDF: “German Kampfgruppe In North Africa 1941 through 1943”. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    42
  1006. I was concerned that I would be targeted by the State or suspended from YouTube, but I am so outraged by the government's response that I felt it was my duty to stand up to the tyranny.
    42
  1007. Oops! Yes, you're absolutely right! I did look it up, then forgot when it came to recording the video. Derpy derp
    42
  1008. Yes, although those 95% get more views than me 😂👍 I think this is the first proper time that this battle has ever been covered online. There are a couple videos about it, but they're super-vague. There's one or two maps, and they're inaccurate. So yes, I think this might be the first time this battle has been covered in any depth online.
    42
  1009. Not if you have someone who makes it fun - "ok kids, let's talk about amortisation!" :D
    42
  1010. Check out Liedtke's Enduring the Whirlwind book. I think you may enjoy it 😊
    42
  1011. I actually agree - and I mention this in the video. Paulus does spread his forces out, and I think it's because of the Kotluban Offensive. In hindsight, he probably didn't need to do this. Did it cost him the battle? Not sure, but it definitely had an impact.
    42
  1012. Thank you for caring! I've still got the cough, but it's easing. It was a struggle to get this video done, but thankfully I recovered enough in time to crunch it in the last couple days. I feel that the video was rushed as a result though and not up to the usual standards... Maybe people won't notice the faults as much as I do, but I can tell.
    42
  1013. Yes, the casualties are ridiculously high already, and it's only going to get worse. Hopefully I'll be able to give more examples of the losses from individual soldier accounts once we get to the city fighting itself, which has been covered in more detail
    42
  1014. YouTube has restricted ads on this video, probably because of this, or because of the quote from Hitler later on...
    42
  1015. If only that game modeled logistics better, and went down to battalion level ;)
    42
  1016. I am genuinely gobsmacked by how unbelievably blind Royaeux is being here. All he has to do is realise that the Nazi Party was the State (it wasn't the private sector) and then read this bit again: "transferred to the private sector, mainly to several organizations within the Nazi Party" In other words: "transferred to... several organizations within the Nazi Party" It wasn't "privatisation"
    42
  1017. You are correct
    42
  1018. True. Worse, you can quote Karl Marx to the Marxists and show them clearly what his definition of socialism was, and they still deny it! You can't win with these postmodernists
    42
  1019. Hahaha to be fair, the Bren was more accurate. Combined with the sniper-rifle that was (supposedly) added into the rifle squad, I get the impression that British squads tended to go for accurate fire rather than suppression fire like the Germans and Americans. But I could be wrong.
    42
  1020. I certainly didn't expect anything else. They just dismissed my 5 hour video on Hitler's Socialism without watching it, or even reading the title of it
    42
  1021. My thoughts in a nutshell
    42
  1022. Now you know why there's so many friendly-fire incidents
    42
  1023. As I just said to you elsewhere, I'm more concerned about Brazillians being deceived into financially supporting this guy, even though he's not the one writing the scripts. Plagiarism is bad for numerous reasons, and do you really want to be giving money to someone who is passing off other people's work as his own?
    42
  1024.  @Paul_Maurone  I'd also point out that we're living in a world where saying the wrong thing on social media can get you put in jail (at least here in the UK). So if these "trolls" (which they're not, they're ideological propagandists) are lying about me and spreading false information, it's dangerous. These types of lies could get me cancelled. There's another YouTuber (I'm not even saying which one, because I refuse to drive traffic to him) announced to his sizable audience that I was a secret anti-semite and a Nazi, obviously with zero evidence to back up that claim. Again, this is serious stuff thanks to cancel culture.
    41
  1025. That was a very good video
    41
  1026. I think he was still shocked by the war, but overwhelmed because of the workload, not the surprise attack. I think everyone can understand being overwhelmed by a heavy workload
    41
  1027. Notes Timestamps are in the description! If you want to read more on this battle, I highly recommend Pitt’s “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Turns out that there’s a “2nd Queen’s Own” Battalion at Tobruk, not a “4th Queen’s Own”. It appears that 3rd Battalion of 155th Schützen Regiment is near the Trig Capuzzo on the morning of the 21st of November, but by noon ceases to exist. It isn’t mentioned again in the sources, it’s not displayed on any maps that I have after this point, and disappears from the OOB after this point as well. Plus the fact that the 6th Royal Tank Regiment and the 1st Battalion, King’s Royal Rifle Corps, took 600-700 German and Italian prisoners plus another 400 killed in the area where 3rd Battalion were meant to be at, leads me to think that this 3rd Battalion was either wiped out or so badly damaged that it was withdrawn from the fighting. Apparently it later went on to form the 2nd Battalion of the 200th Schützen Regiment, so perhaps it wasn’t destroyed. Either way, I showed it ‘disappearing’ in the video because it’s clear that it was no longer a factor in the battle. In regards to the action at Sidi Rezegh at 18:45 onwards, the sources are vague to say the least. Not one of them describe the action in sufficient detail, leaving me to piece together the action from snippets of information. 2nd Battalion of the Royal Tank Regiment appear to be on the left flank, and get into trouble,losing several tanks in the action. But the sources also say that the panzers went towards Sidi Rezegh airfield. Well, if the panzers did go that way, how did they also hit 2nd RTR? Taking an educated guess, I think 15th Panzer Division (maybe not all of it) moved in their direction, allowing 21st Panzer Division (and possibly elements of 15th Panzer Division) to concentrate on Sidi Rezegh. The positions of Giorgis’ 55th Savona Division’s brigades or battalion is just pure guesswork, since none of my sources (or any source I could find online) mention them at all. So I’ve opted to start using the Italian flags to represent positions held by them. Same applies for the Bardia garrison. It appears that EVERY historian on this battle calls the three Escarpments something different. Stewart says they’re “1st, 2nd, and 3rd”. Pitt says the top one is the “Main Escarpment”, then the middle one is the “Northern Escarpment”, and the bottom one is the “Southern Escarpment”. Ford says there’s only two - “Northern” and “Southern”. You know it’s bad when people can’t agree on what the terrain features are called. It’s hard to tell where units are simply because they even contradict themselves, plus their maps suck and don’t actually display the names. So I’ve displayed it the way that I think makes the most sense. British tank loss statistics for the 27th of November 1941 - 7th Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 165 Remaining tanks = 28. Losses so far 137 (83%) 4th Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 141. Remaining tanks = ~97. Losses so far ~44 (31%) 22nd Armoured Brigade Tanks at start = 155. Remaining tanks = ~100. Losses so far ~55 (35%) Total tanks in 7th Armoured Division at start = 461. Remaining tanks ~225 (source says 209). Losses so far ~236 (~51%) The British command’s misinterpretation of the facts at hand is a great example of why history is important. It teaches us to always question what you’re hearing and never assume things are what they are. This is a big lesson of history and why we should be prepared to change our interpretation of the situation at a moment’s notice. Regarding the events of the 22nd of November at Sidi Rezegh, I only have three reference maps, all of which contradict each other. In addition, the historians writing about the morning’s events didn’t make it clear what was happening in the slightest. Kampfgruppe Wechmar appears to be in two places at once. I removed this part of the script at 41:00 because I didn’t have a way of showing it in the video. So I’m going to put it here - “Much like Campbell, Second-Lieutenant Gunn of the 3rd Anti-tank Regiment Royal Horse Artillery drove around the battlefield in his unarmoured car encouraging his men. When all but one of the guns of his troop had been taken out, Gunn leapt from the car and got a second one back into action. All of it’s crew had been killed, except for the sergeant, but the gun was intact. So, under intense fire, Gunn aimed the gun, as the sergeant loaded it. Even though the anti-tank ammunition was in a burning vehicle, they avoided the fire and grabbed the shells. Together they shot many rounds off, hitting a load of enemy tanks, and setting at least two on fire. Gunn was hit in the forehead and died. He was awarded a Victoria Cross for this action.” If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    41
  1028.  @calumdeighton  It's not clickbait. Clickbait is when you promise something and then don't deliver on that promise. E.g. if you clicked on the video and I started talking about what I had for dinner, that would be clickbait. But since I discuss what I believe to be the best book I've ever read on Hitler and National Socialism, then the title of the video directly corresponds to the video title. It is therefore clickable, not clickbait.
    41
  1029. Yeah, my only regret is not separating the channels and keeping the old videos up... I do miss the gaming days
    41
  1030. I just wish there were more sources on it. There's literally about 3 books on the subject in English, and they're all vague, even though I suspect an in-depth book on the subject would answer 99% of the unanswered questions about the Eastern Front :(
    41
  1031. Good point. I guess a video on the various different factions would be useful in the future
    41
  1032. tstocker, you're really looking to start an argument aren't you :D
    41
  1033. Thank you for the recommendation!
    41
  1034. Thanks! You'll be happy to know that I managed to have one day off, and a couple of half-days. Feeling more refreshed (not 100%). I'm hopeful I can fit in another full-day off this week though if I play my cards right ♣️♠️♥️♦️
    41
  1035. Sorry for slight delay in pinned comment! BIG Announcement! Yes, I announced this the other day, but I had to take the video down, so only about 2,000 of you saw it. Plus not all of you saw my apology video the other day, therefore I’m announcing it again. Because the script is finally done (75,423 words) and because I’m having Battlestorm-withdrawal symptoms, I have decided that Battlestorm Operation Crusader must come out NOW. And, because the laws of space-time dictate that I can’t create Monday videos and Battlestorm at the same time, I’m committing 100% to Crusader. I didn’t want to do it like this, and the script is not set up for it to be released like this, and I’m not sure if I can actually do it in such a short space of time, but I’m biting the bullet and releasing Crusader in weekly episodes, starting from next week. In theory, it will be the same as I did with Battlestorm Operation Market Garden where I published several episodes and then put them together into one long video at the end. The only problem is that I actually had Market Garden finished when I started releasing episodes; with Crusader that will not be the case. So any and all mistakes made in the script will have to be ironed out on the fly… which means that if I notice a mistake half-way through that impacts a previous episode - tough luck! However, the benefits will hopefully outweigh the cons. I’m expecting Crusader to be 7-8 hours long, and I’ll never get it finished if I carry on creating Monday videos. Therefore the only way to finish it is to supplant the normal Monday videos for Crusader. Now, practically the script was not designed for this, so I’m having to improvise massively. I also don’t know how long each episode will be, nor how many episodes there will actually be. It will be at least 11 episodes, but probably several more. Each of these will vary in length, simply because certain days of the operation are much longer than others etc. But regardless of the logistical issues the offensive must continue! And by that, I mean, Crusader is happening whether we’re ready for it or not. Notes to this video I was actually going to show the evolution of Soviet artillery in this episode but ran out of time… plus Crusader. But here’s a bit of information to think about - Soviet anti-tank gun numbers dropped to 1,188 guns on the 31st of December 1941. And because Soviet factories were being shipped to the East in 1941, production was curtailed. Therefore, mortars became the cheap man’s artillery weapon, since they were easy to build and inexpensive to form units out of. The Soviets then formed many independent mortar regiments. And later (late 1942 onwards), formed Artillery Divisions… Why? Because by the end of 1941 the Soviets were relying on their centralized artillery reserve force (RVGK) rather than their force artillery. Therefore, comparing a Soviet division to a German division is somewhat pointless. In the video I mentioned the ammunition chart had changed so here’s the explanation for that (and if you go watch my previous edition of this video you can see the old version of the chart - link in the description). It’s fairly simple really, and actually I’m glad I had to redo this video because I was able to spot it. The table I got the statistics from (Table 6.6 in Stumbling Colossus) lists the Soviet ammunition supply in the table as the “percentage of required”. I took this to mean, if the Soviets required 7.5% of their 37mm AA gun ammunition, then they had 92.5% of their ammunition fulfilled, because the “percentage of requirement” for their ammunition is 7.5%. This was wrong. Reading through the text again, I noticed that Glantz makes the point of saying that they were running out of 37mm AA gun ammunition - which was contradicted by the stats in the chart. I then reread the chart title - “Level of Supply of Artillery Ammunition in the Western Military Districts, 22 June 1941 (percentage of required)” and realized that the chart was showing the level of supply for the ammunition, not the requirement of the ammunition. The “percentage of requirement” should have been written as either “as a percentage of the level of supply” or more simply “percentage of fulfilment”, or just “percentage”. So yes, I got beat by poor English. Selected Sources Glantz, D. “Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Hogg, I. "German Artillery of World War Two." Greenhill Books, Kindle 2013. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. For a full list of my books, check out this link - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    41
  1036. Animated maps certainly help everyone visualise the battle, including historians. There are flaws in my series, so maybe a future historian or two can come along and improve upon it. I've given them the foundations. But yes, historians should be using both primary and secondary sources. If they're ignoring one or the other, they're not doing history right. History lies in the heart of the debate, and you can't have a debate if you don't engage with the secondary sources.
    41
  1037. You were second!
    41
  1038. You would be correct. The Left have muddied the waters in their attempt to paint everything bad as Right Wing. They even said Trotsky was a Right-wing Fascist during the 1930s.
    41
  1039. The answer is probably no, we don't. Certainly not for the period 1941-1945. And most of the generals calling Hitler mad by the end are the one's who were sacked. Those still fighting in 1943-1945 weren't alive after the war to write their memoirs. And even if they were, they had to get past Halder.
    41
  1040. You know what, that's as good a theory as any other right now... I'm hoping it's just a comedy
    41
  1041. Haha I know that reference
    41
  1042. Absolutely! Back in the day it was worth going to university because few people did. It's supply and demand. And it's not surprising that a socialist didn't understand this, increased supply to the moon without increasing demand by the same amount, resulting in wages going down. This also proves that the Labour Theory of Value is bunk because according to their theory, wages shouldn't be affected in this scenario.
    41
  1043. I am going to have Christmas Day off at least! And Merry Christmas to you too!
    40
  1044. I concur, liver and onions are fascist
    40
  1045. It makes no sense, but it's true!
    40
  1046. Unfortunately, it was entirely my error. I'm kicking myself because it was such a stupid thing to do, and if I hadn't been editing until 4am, and if I hadn't had other things going on today, I would have caught it
    40
  1047. Can confirm, this is the last episode of this Season. I've got to work on the script for the next Season, so it may take a few weeks before you see another Battlestorm Stalingrad
    40
  1048. Yes, I know. However, Darwin had his influence
    40
  1049. That is an interesting fact! If I was to do this video again in as much depth as possible (not saying it won't ever happen) then I'd be as straight as needed on Mannerheim. Even if it was controversial and angered everyone, and got a million dislikes, I'd still put it out. In my opinion, nobody should hide the truth in case if offends someone. If you get offended by a film or video that's giving you the facts in as unbiased a way possible, tough. I'm not willing to (willingly) distort history. I'm not going to work on them just yet, but the two Polish generals/leaders I'd really like to cover in one of these videos are Sosabowski and Pilsudski. They're both on my to-do list. If you have any recommendations for sources, I'm all ears. And yes, the language barrier is an issue... I'm not sure a way around that as people can't be translating entire books for me haha
    40
  1050. As an ex-socialist myself, I can say they're probably not aware of any of what I said in the video. Also, just to point out, Freud and Carl Jung were both Hermeticists. After learning this fact, I no longer view their opinions so highly.
    40
  1051. A better question is: why do you have exams during Stalingrad season? ;)
    40
  1052. You're correct. I'll be discussing this sort of thing an upcoming video because I discovered something else that's similar to the "races = spiritual" idea.
    40
  1053. Thanks for your comment. The idea that the State can protect us from the worst of the free market is an assumption that many make, but I want you to ask the question: But is this really the case? Would the free market really "eat the poor" if it was allowed to do so? And this is where I'd recommend the books "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt, "Basic Economics" by Sowell, and "America's Great Depression" by Rothbard, because these will seriously challenge that assumption. I also know there's a lot of left wing people who watch the videos who also like what I do. Unfortunately, a lot of them ignore the economics videos, which I understand, but I think it will come to hurt them in the long run. That's partly why I wanted to make this video, to get those people to understand that I'm trying to help them, not hurt them.
    40
  1054. I'm sorry for your loss as well Vass. It's awful, especially when you're close to the person
    40
  1055. "quarantines work if you weld the sick in their apartments" Yeah, I was telling my friends about China last night and they couldn't believe it. Nor could they believe that they have concentration camps and are harvesting organs from their prisoners. Socialism certainly sounds appealing
    40
  1056. I'll take it
    40
  1057. State run privatization, for the greater good of the Aryan race, which has been socialized so that no other enemies of the state were part of it. Welfare, political rhetoric, or intentionality does show the reality of what socialism is.
    40
  1058. I didn't present enough evidence in that video. My intention was to lay out the theory (with the bit of evidence I had), see what people thought, see what the counter-arguments were, then go away and gather as much evidence as possible to present it later. By doing it this way, I can see exactly what the counter-arguments are, and address them. Otherwise, if I spend 6 months doing research for a theory without knowing what the counter-arguments are, there's a danger that it will be a colossal waste of time, and I'd have to start again from scratch. And before anyone calls me out on that, history theory says that this method is perfectly fine ( see https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc ). Because if it turns out the evidence doesn't exist, or the evidence for the counter-arguments overwhelm the evidence for the theory, then the theory will be disproven.
    40
  1059. Thank you! You should comment more often
    40
  1060. That's the bad side of revisionism. And that's why I'm making the distinction. Revising history is good. Deliberately manipulating evidence to fit your own agenda, is bad.
    40
  1061. They're already trying to use quotes from Marxist historians to debunk me... and it's not working because I'm using the primary sources and they're not, or are trying to twist the words to mean things they clearly don't.
    40
  1062. I think most historians aren't watching YouTube videos and are generally dismissive of the internet. They know Wikipedia is terrible, and technically YouTube is a social media platform, so it's understandable why they hold this view. They also have a financial and legal incentive to stick to "peer review" literature. But I think video is far superior to books, and I think a future generation of historians will see the value of video-based history narration. Not only is it a better way to entertain and inform, it's also a great way to interact with your audience. I'm chatting to you right now! It's a direct engagement between historian and viewer/reader. The debates happen instantly, and there's also instant feedback for us. It's win-win. We're already seeing the shift from books to video format - Anton Joly, for example. But we're still in the early days of this, and have a long way to go.
    40
  1063. "To call Edvard Beneš Nazi WTF. He was NASO (Nnárodní Socialista) not NAZI (nationalsozialistische)." Yes, and "Národní" means "National" in Czech. It was the Czech National Socialist Party, so these are Nazis.
    40
  1064. NOTES, LINKS and SOURCES What are your thoughts on Kampfgruppen? An effective, innovative concept, or a desperate necessity for desperate times? Let me know! I personally don’t think enough has been written on this subject (in English at least). I’ve scoured the internet in search of information, and most of the books I have, or can get my hands on, do not give details on this topic. Even Wikipedia fails to provide much information on Kampfgruppen. I would love to give you a detailed background on how the Kampfgruppe concept came into being and why, but no, I simply don’t have enough information to do that. I guess it’s another reason to learn German. I know that I messed up Pieper’s kampfgruppe (it should have the “Armoured” circle symbol). A little too late to go back and fix now :) Next week’s video will be the Axis Order of Battle for Operation Crusader 1941-42, and will be mentioning several kampfgruppen in that too. 👍 I’m becoming obsessed with the size and structure of divisions, and how this impacted the performance of either side. Crusader really does provide several examples of how size differences, and I’ll be exploring them next week (as I have done with the British Crusader Order of Battle https://youtu.be/QCNDEoRDp6I ). LINKS Please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos as good as they can be https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory My Operation Market Garden documentary https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc My review of Robert Kershaw’s book “It Never Snows in September” https://youtu.be/-RRdWCyHpG8 How BIG were Soviet Armies and Divisions in 1942? And what impact did this have? https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI Paulus's 6th Army ORDER OF BATTLE - Before Stalingrad https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg (Selected) SOURCES / BIBLIOGRAPHY Caddick-Adams, P. “Snow & Steel: The Battle of the Bulge 1944-1945.” Arrow Books, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Hastings, M. “ Armageddon: The Battle for Germany 1944-45.” Pan Books, 2005. Kershaw, R. “It Never Snows in September: The German View of Market Garden and the Battle of Arnhem 1944.” Ian Allan Publishing, 2007. Lucas, J. “Battle Group! German Kampfgruppen Action of World War Two.” Arms and Armour Press, 1994. Mark, J. “Death of the Leaping Horsemen: The 24th Panzer Division in Stalingrad 12th August - 20th November 1942.” Stackpole Books, Kindle 2003. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Widder, W. “Auftragstaktik and Innere Führung: Trademarks of German Leadership.” Web Archive, 2007. https://web.archive.org/web/20070612045335/http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/CAC/milreview/English/SepOct02/SepOct02/widder.pdf Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm Thanks for watching, and supporting!
    40
  1065. I didn't say there was no economic growth. I said that socialist economics doesn't factor that in, since in their ideology, economics is a zero-sum game.
    39
  1066. Mussolini played the violin. But no, I'm pretty sure he wasn't Johnny Cash lol
    39
  1067. I would also like to know this.
    39
  1068.  @doughboyjr9418  What the hell is "white"? You mean the lager-louting benefit scroungers who vote for the Labour-servatives? The reason every city is crime ridden is because of the state that these so-called "white" people vote for. The state taxation, the state gestapo, the state welfare system, the national-socialist hell service, the state immigration, the state corruption... The solution is personal property and wealth, not more state, bootlicker.
    39
  1069. The amount of people in the comments here who are still trying to say that Hitler wasn't a Socialist is unreal. They didn't even watch this video, let alone the other one! I don't get it... I can't get through to them because they have an attention span that's lower than zero.
    39
  1070. And I'm glad you found it :)
    39
  1071. All Wehraboos are armed with radios, that's why they're superior
    39
  1072. Notes Timestamps are in the description! I realise that the Patreon Company itself is currently going through a bit of a political storm at the moment, and I know many of you in the past couple weeks have voiced your concerns to me (or have voted with your wallets, which is absolutely the right thing to do and I support your decision 100%, even if it hurts me too). I do hear what you’re saying and I am concerned as well. I’m looking into possible solutions for the issue at the moment and will let you know when I have something to share… But I do want to say thank you to everyone who is supporting and anyone who has supported me in the past, because without you, these videos could not be made. I cannot make weekly videos without your support, so THANK YOU - You’re all AWESOME! If you still want to help me make more videos in the meantime (despite the political issues which, again, a solution needs to be found), please consider supporting me on Patreon. Link: https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory As I was doing the subtitles I noticed that part of the measurements are over the unit at around 14:00 in the video. I’ll fix that for the ‘Complete’ Crusader video coming out on the 7th of January (2019). For those of you wondering what was happening in the air during the retreat - from the 23rd of December 1941, RAF fighters were beginning to operate from Msus. British bombers were operating from Gambut, Sidi Rezegh, and Bu Amud, and were hitting the retreating Axis columns. They focused on the coastal roads near Derna, and later the roads running west from Lamluda. The road between Mechili and Charruba was also harrassed, and then the main road north and south of Benghazi as the Axis retreated. These attacks were on a limited scale though, and were not enough to turn the Axis retreat into a rout. In fact, bombers on both sides had trouble with the poor weather, and it seems both sides bombed their own troops on several occasions. But the main problem for the British was that, as Playfair puts it “the enemy’s retreat came at a time when the British were at full stretch in the air as well as on the ground.” Part of the script I deleted but think you’ll like to read (24th Dec 1941) - “At Jalo, Reid was joined by three Patrols of the Long Range Desert Group and a detachment of the Special Air Service Brigade. They all did their best to harass the enemy on the coast road north and south of Agedabia. They also raided Tamet airfield twice and Agedabia airfield once in the second half of December, destroying a number of German and Italian aircraft.” BOOK RECOMMENDATIONS! I cannot recommend Barrie Pitt’s trilogy “The Crucible of War” enough if you want to read more on this battle, or the North African Campaign as a whole. The first half of the second book is all about Operation Crusader. It definitely has the most detail for any of the books that cover the entire battle, and is a great read. Highly recommend and should be a first purchase in my opinion. The Official British History does an exceptional job at explaining this battle, whilst also remaining neutral for the most part on sensitive issues (like Pienaar). If in doubt, I always referred back to Pitt or Playfair, so I’m going to recommend it too. The Official British history talks about Crusader in “The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]” so I’d recommend that. Plus it covers a lot of other battles and campaigns in this area, including operations at sea and in the air. The Official New Zealand histories are also available for free online. Again, great reads. Here’s the index - http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html For books on Rommel, my current recommendation is Butler’s “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” which seems to do a decent job. I haven’t read ALL the billions of books on Rommel out there, but Butler’s is quite detailed, so I’d recommend it. If you want one on Gott, Nash’s “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” is the only one available. It’s good and fun to read, but clearly biased in favour of Gott. Sadly there are no books on Crüwell (in English at least), Norrie, Godwin-Austen, or really any of the other commanders in this battle, which is a shame. I can’t recommend books on the Italians because the two that are listed aren’t very good and miss out most of the important elements so you’re not going to get much use out of them if you’ve watched this series. And finally, Barnett’s “The Desert Generals” is a controversial book, but also one I’m going to recommend because of how damning he is of the British officer corps, and because of how much me recommending this book will annoy several people reading this sentence. Barnett is someone you either love or hate, and while it’s clear he has an agenda, it’s extremely obvious (as shown in this video). Plus, I think it’s good practice for anyone to read an alternative viewpoint, and Barnett offers that alternative viewpoint. SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Agar-Hamilton, J. & Turner, L. “The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941.” Oxford University Press, 1957. Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. “The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943.” 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Bender, R.J., & Law, R.D., “Uniforms, Organization and History of the Afrikakorps.” R.J.Bender, Publisher, USA, 1973. PDF: “German Kampfgruppe In North Africa 1941 through 1943”. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Badia Garrison from “The British Capture of Bardia (December 1941 - January 1942): A Successful Infantry-Tank Attack (Information Bulletin No. 21, U.S. War Department, WWII)” http://www.lonesentry.com/bardia_intel/index.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    39
  1073. Yes, I've actually been working on a video about it :)
    39
  1074. I think they came close in 1942. I'm not sure the Soviets would have survived 1943 if it wasn't for the Uranus and Little Saturn counterattacks, or the massive help from the USA (especially food). That said, had the Germans entered 1943 with the land they'd taken by September 1942, I don't think the war would have been "won" in the East, but I think the Germans would have still held the advantage (unlike in real 1943). But that's just my opinion based on the fact that the Soviets were running low on food in late 1942, plus the loss of Stalingrad would have been a big morale loss too.
    39
  1075. Oh no, it's Exclamation Mann!
    39
  1076. Due to the way British armoured doctrine was at the time, I'm not so sure it would have made much difference. Yes, a better commander would have helped, but the issue here was that the British treated their tanks like cavalry, and the way the British officer corps was set up meant that the 'cavalry' weren't being commanded by armoured officers. They were being sent piecemeal into battle as that was what their doctrine said - and Auchinleck agreed with that policy (as indicated later during the retreat to El Alamein).
    39
  1077. Notes Elements of this video have been seen in previous videos, however I’ve updated and improved these parts. For example, British “regiments” were battalions (how was I supposed to know that!? Thank you to whoever it was who pointed that out). Another viewer mentioned in a previous video that Percy Hobart (also nicknamed ‘Hobo’) may not have been advocating a splitting of the infantry and the tanks. The sources I used say yes, but it seems that at least one source out there (which I do not have) says no. Therefore, we can safely assume that this is up for debate and should not be instantly dismissive of a source that says otherwise. That said, I’ve kept the view in the video because this is the best explanation I’ve seen as to why Cunningham decided to split the tanks from the infantry. FYI, I only finished this video at 11pm last night after spending about 70 hours on it (including lunch breaks). And some people were complaining that I only release one video a week... Next week’s video will be talking about the Crusader Plan itself, which is also flawed (wouldn’t be proper British if it wasn’t). I predict it will be about 25 minutes long, so don’t be upset by the length of the video as I’m warning you now ;) SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Same as last week (they probably won’t change now) - Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing And finally, please consider supporting me on Patreon and make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! Thanks for watching!
    39
  1078. Military History Visualized is a big one. And Blitz Of The Reich is a small but good channel who's just starting out.
    39
  1079. I think you've misunderstood. A lot of people are saying that the Germans were "superior" in every way to the Soviets, and could take out many times their number. This video shows that's not the case. Most Soviet losses were in 1941, when they were hit by a surprise attack during the middle of an unfinished mobilization program while they were transitioning to new doctrines and had only just decided to create tank divisions (which were lacking many support structures as a result). They were outnumbered on day one too, and would only outnumber the Germans for the first time in December (coincidentally when the Germans stopped advancing). The rest of the war, the Soviets fought back hard and got the ratio back down to reasonable levels considering the ratio in 1941. I'm saying, if the Germans are so "superior" like some claim they are, why are they not able to deal with a ratio of just two to one? Now, I know perfectly why they can't deal with that ratio (because they're not superior), but this has annoyed so many Wehrmacht fan-boys that any serious discussion of the topic is out of the question. The reality is (as this Monday's video will show) that the Germans do have more men and tanks in 1943 than they do in 1941. This flies against the idea that the Germans weren't able to replace their losses - which people say, if they had, it would have been a different story. Well sorry, but they did replace their losses. They say the Germans were outnumbered. Not until December 1941. AND in 1942, the Axis European alliance (Germany, Italy, Finland, Romania, Hungary...) actually outnumbered the Soviet Union's remaining population. Again, the perception of the Eastern Front, as presented by the German generals after the war under Halder's supervision, is simply wrong.
    39
  1080. "I'm just a white trash yankee from Massachusetts" I'm glad my video made you think, but don't speak down of yourself, even if tongue-in-cheek! You must look after your self-esteem. And I'm not the first to deliberately separate "capitalism" from "the free market", but I'm maintaining this stance now because, like you, it makes people think. As soon as someone says they're a "capitalist", people immediately think they're for the current system, since the current system is capitalist. But when I say "I'm against capitalism, and we need a free market", that takes people off guard, and they start questioning the narratives they've been hearing, which is precisely what they need to be doing.
    39
  1081. I do need more sleep... ☹️
    39
  1082. Thank you Anton! I haven't decided yet what I'm doing regarding the video, but you're right that there's no such thing as perfection! There's also no need to apologize, you and Egor have corrected more errors than have slipped through the gaps. In fact, I should be thanking both of you again for helping me correct the mistake because I couldn't have done it without you!
    39
  1083.  @Adiscretefirm  Keynes' economic theories are shocking. For example, Shrinkflation isn't meant to be a thing, according to Keynes. That's why many Keynesians today aren't Keynesian, but "neo-Keynesian" because his theories don't hold up.
    39
  1084. Cheers Lenin! (sounds really weird saying that)
    39
  1085. They claimed it before the video went live 🤔
    39
  1086. There's a reason I've been doing videos recently where the economy was locked up and everything fell apart... Sadly, the videos haven't performed well. But that's probably because most people don't want to be even more depressed right now.
    39
  1087.  @sabhishek9289  I'll be honest, I don't know enough about Darwin personally to really comment on that. I do know that "Social Darwinism" was a twisted version of what Darwin's evolution theory was actually about, and that's not the same thing. You can't conflate what Darwin wrote to "Social Darwinism" because they're not the same theory.
    39
  1088. Dubno/Brody is a bit like the Battle of Warsaw in 1920, in the sense that had it gone the other way, the world would have known about it. But sadly, because of the way these two battles went, they're almost forgotten today (although Warsaw 1920 is certainly known in Poland at least).
    39
  1089. "Hitler was not interested in any pure economic model, be it corporatism, capitalism, socialism etc ... He simply wanted Lebensraum for his Volk . Economy was just a tool..." Yes, that is what he wanted you to think. As I briefly mentioned in the video, and as I've pointed out before in the Hitler's Socialism video, Hitler hid his economic policies so as not to offend anyone. But he was definitely a Socialist (non-Marxist of course). That's what the "Volk" part is about, and the "Lebensraum" bit. Both of them are fundamentally socialist in nature. A people/Volk is a social group.
    39
  1090. MHV is great! And yes, the reason for the short-sightedness is because everyone is biased and trying to make themselves look good. There's not many people who rise up to the top levels of command/management who are humble and honest. Therefore they want history to remember themselves as being right and everyone else being wrong. Same with the guys writing the history. They have books to sell, so they'll write them in the ways that will sell. Publishers are reluctant to publish non-conforming viewpoints because they want trust and sales. They don't want controversy. They also don't want books on unpopular battles, which is why there's loads written on Rommel but barely anything written on other commanders. Entire campaigns have been "forgotten." In some instances there's not even a Wikipedia page. This is why it's our job to question everything. And why I don't care if I'm controversial or not. I'd rather know what actually happened.
    39
  1091. That would have been an interesting tactic. Get the 6th Army to move out of its trenches and bunkers, then hammer them out in the open. Honestly, I can see it working very well. However, I can also understand why they didn't allow it, the Soviets needed the roads and logistics networks in the area for their armies, so having a bunch of Germans running about in their rear-areas might have disrupted the flow of supplies, causing bigger issues.
    39
  1092. Also, I've pinned your comment because I think everyone deserves to see it :) history lies in the heart of the debate!
    39
  1093. "Although one thing I really dislike about your position is that you seem to think that anyone who believes in one aspect of socialism believes in them all." No, I don't. Socialism is the umbrella term that I'm using to cast a net over the entire movement, since socialism itself is at the heart of all the various factions. I understand that there's minor differences between the factions, but ultimately I can't sit there listing every faction every time I want to talk about them. - "While their support of socialism may inherently support antisemitism if you look at it from the most top-down perspective, I think that it is very possible to agree with some aspects of socialism while abhorring others." Right, but the reason people are socialist is because they think the (Jewish) "free market" doesn't work. But that assumption itself is born out of anti-Semitism. So to be a socialist is to accept that anti-Semitic arguments are correct. If you agree that the (Jewish) "free market" is bad, then you have no counter when a National Socialist argues this. Why are you any different to a Nazi? They were saying the same thing! - "Or would you still call them socialists and continue to lump them in with the antisemites and extremists?" No no, they are one and the same. Whether individual socialists realize it or not, anti-Semitism is fundamental to the idea of Socialism, because their dislike of the "capitalist free market" is the same thing as anti-Semitism, due to the fact that the Jews were (historically) so closely tied to the bourgeoisie, capitalism and the free market.
    39
  1094. You're right that Browning does factor in most of the bad decisions. His blaming of the Poles is definitely unforgivable. Personally, I think blaming Browning instead of Gavin is a valid argument :)
    39
  1095. Hey all, someone asked me to upload the music to my documentaries, so thought I'd go one further and upload a new track I've made for my upcoming Operation Crusader video. Research is currently on the go but it's going good! Let me know if you want to hear more music of mine (or not). Cheers everyone!
    38
  1096. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Some people have been asking - when are my next videos coming out? My videos are out every Monday at 5pm GMT (be wary of British summer time because that changes this coming weekend). Typically, tonight I may not be around 100% because next week’s video is a long one so I’m trying to get some editing done this evening, but normally I’m around for the first few hours after a upload in order to respond to your messages. In regards to 15th Panzer Division’s clash with 4th Armoured Brigade, I’m fairly confident I have the 4th Armoured Brigade’s and 8th Panzer Regiment’s correct, however I don’t have any information about the position of their battalions. I’m taking an educated guess with 4th Armoured Brigade because 8th Hussars were on the left flank the day before, and 3rd RTR was near Sidi Azeiz, so I’m assuming 8th and 5th Battalion would still be in those positions (likely), and therefore 3rd RTR would be on the right flank (possibly). As for Cramer and Zintel’s battalions, other than knowing that the two panzer battalions were in the middle and the infantry were on the flanks (according to Ford, but Pitt says “two infantry regiments” were on the left flank - which seems wrong because they were battalions), I have no other information. Therefore, the German battalion numbers and positions could be completely wrong. I also have zero information regarding 4th Armoured Brigade’s infantry or artillery units, which aren’t mentioned at all in the narrative, so I haven’t included them. During Sümmermann’s attacks on Sidi Rezegh, I’m not entirely certain on the battalion positions. One source mentioned a “engineer battalion” which I mentioned in the video, but does specify. There is no engineer (pioneer) battalion of the Afrika Division at this time, so I’m assuming it was 900th Pioneer Battalion. The position of the infantry battalions of both 155th of 361st Regiments are located based on their later positions, but could also be incorrect. Kurowski mentions the 605th Panzerjäger Battalion in there somewhere too, but I couldn’t fit them in and I don’t know exactly where they were located. I also have no idea which battalion number the Italian unit is. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    38
  1097. I agree. It is an important tank, if out of date by 1941
    38
  1098. I would (eventually) like to redo the Market Garden documentary. The quality of the animations could be improved, and I'd love to put even more details in it, especially in the Nijmegen sector
    38
  1099. First! Congrats!
    38
  1100. "you can't pull someone out of socialist thinking" Yeah, this is a hard lesson I've only just learnt... I feel bad for not being able to help them, but I've got to let it go.
    38
  1101. Never underestimate the opposition.
    38
  1102. "In terms of the whole Eastern Front theater, the only nation I can really find myself rooting for is Finland in the winter war." You say all that about the other Baltic States, but then don't mention the concentation camps in Finland.
    38
  1103.  @julianshepherd2038  Karl Marx said Capitalism was Jewish. I've been over this https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    38
  1104. It's actually a cupboard, but yes I've blocked one of the doors 😂
    38
  1105. Since you've said this twice, I will also reply twice to you. You are incorrect. As I said in the video more than half of the Red Army was in the Far East or was positioned internally, at least up until mid-November 1942. And while most of its army was in the east, the Germans did have sizable numbers in the west. Also, Germany wasn't operating alone. It had many allies itself - e.g. Finland, Romania, Hungary, Croatia... even one division from Spain. It was one alliance vs another, and the Soviets did defeat that alliance, almost by itself (yes, with a crucial contribution from the other powers, but it paid out the most in blood).
    38
  1106. Great! Hope you enjoy the rest of the video. Once you get to the privatisation section, the facts come through like a floor. But I had to set the scene first, of course
    38
  1107. One a week is killing me. Not recommended 😂😭
    38
  1108. They would reject that definition because they don't believe in jobs, money, or gender.
    38
  1109. "A little planned laziness is often a good idea." This is definitely something I need to get my head around. I need to accept the fact that I can't just work 10 hours a day EVERY day of the year 😣
    38
  1110. No, because Typhoon was in the October. So there's a three month period between late June and the beginning of October which is where historians are saying the Germans lost. They're not saying they lost battles, but the problems that happened during that period is what caused them to lose. Arguably though Operation Barbarossa was a terrible plan, as I said in the video.
    38
  1111.  @slaterslater5944  Just so everyone knows, in the new video, Slater Slater asked: "Are you sure it isn't the Jews?" Slater is a anti-Semite socialist. And no Slater, the Jews are not running academia. Stop with your conspiracy theories please.
    38
  1112. Also, I was in a similar position to OP's sibling. It is brainwashing - you're told that capitalists are bad and are trying to trick you somehow, so don't fall for their tricks and read their works! This is why he's reluctant to read or watch anything that goes against what he believes. He thinks it's going to trick him into being a fascist, when I'm reality he's close to being a fascist now, but doesn't realize it.
    38
  1113.  @johnwolf2829  Yes, it was this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    38
  1114.  @Vingul  "Germany decoupling themselves from the international financial system did a massive amount of good to their economy, to the extent that it’s been called an «economic miracle», not without good reason. Unemployment dropped sharply, etc etc." You do realise that this is the old narrative that's been debunked? Not by myself, but by other historians. Richard Overy has a book on this subject, and the "economic miracle" didn't happen. Yes unemployment went down because that was the central idea of the policies, but the distortions it created in the economy were huge. Götz Aly explains in "Hitler's Beneficiaries" that Hitler had to invade Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland when he did, and if he had delayed, the economy would have collapsed. Then we have all the shotrtages... Honestly, if you haven't seen my video on "The Paradox of Germany’s WW2 COAL Problem" https://youtu.be/O3JaxXK25qo or the numerous other videos I've made on the German economy, you really should, because I've addressed this numerous times.
    38
  1115. Hahaha okay I won't tell them 😂
    38
  1116.  @seahamdesigner  It's there deliberately 😂
    38
  1117. Notes and Sources A reminder: this video series is bi-weekly, but I do publish videos every Monday at 5pm GMT (double check for British Summer Time) so be sure to check back on Mondays! There wasn’t much room on Saaremaa to place all the units on the landmass, but you get the idea. The exact positions of the Soviet units on Saaremaa is also mostly guess-work, due mainly to the absence of decent maps or descriptions of the fighting there. I’m confident that German unit positions in Courland itself are more or less correct, although there are some contradictions, and units tend to just zip around the front with little or no explanation. Many German divisions were compacted into a small area, which helped the defence, but hinders my ability to show you where they all are, since I’m having to jam them all together in one small area. Here’s a link to a map that may help you http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Korps/Karte/I1144.jpg The fighting is degenerating into tactical-level skirmishes and stalemates. This is bad because the sources I have don’t talk about the tactical-level fighting, and are from the divisional level up, which prevents me from showing you the ins and outs of the battles. So as a bit of a warning, the upcoming videos on the battles in Courland may be more vague, and the combat lines may not change much. Therefore the focus is going to shift to figuring out who was the blame for not withdrawing Army Group North from Courland. Bibliography Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Battistelli, P. "Panzer Divisions 1944–45." Ospery Publishing, Kindle. Byrd, R. "Once I Had a Comrade: Karl Roth and the Combat History of the 36th Panzer Regiment 1939-45." Helion & Company, Kindle 2006. Buttar, P. "Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II." Ospery Publishing, 2013. Citino, R. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand: The German Campaigns of 1944-1945.” University of Kansas, 2017. Dönitz, K. "Memoirs: Ten Years and Twenty Days." Frontline Books, Kindle 2012. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. Haupt, W. "Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945." Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1997. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. Hillblad, T. "Twilight of the Gods: A Swedish Volunteer in the 11th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland" on the Eastern Front." Stackpole Books, Kindle 2009. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hunt, V. “Blood in the Forest: The End of the Second World War in the Courland Pocket.” Helion & Company Limited, 2017. Kurowski, F. "Bridgehead Kurland: The Six Epic Battles of Heeresgruppe Kurland." Fedorowicz Publishing, 2002. Larsson, L. "Hitler's Swedes: A History of the Swedish Volunteers of the Waffen-SS." Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Lunde, H. “Hitler’s Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic.” Casemate Publishers, 2013. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Megargee, G. "Inside Hitler's High Command." University Press of Kansas, 2000. Michaelis, Rolf. "The 11th SS-Freiwilligen-Panzer-Grenadier-Division "Nordland"." Schiffer Publishing, 2008. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Newton, S. “Retreat from Leningrad: Army Group North 1944/1945.” Schiffer Military History, 1995. Niepold, G. “Panzer-Operationen Doppelkopf und Cäsar: Sommer ‘44.” Mittler & Sohn, 1987. Perrett, B. "Panzerkampfwagen IV Medium Tank 1936-45." Osprey Publishing, 2007. Raus, E. "Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945." Kindle. Rees, L. "The Holocaust: A New History." Penguin Books, 2017. Snyder, T. "Blood Lands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin." Vintage, 2011. Számvéber, N. “Illustrated History of the Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 202.” PeKo Publishing Kft, Kindle 2016. Tieke, W. "Tragedy of the Faithful: A History of the III. (germanishes) SS-Panzer-Korps." Fedorowicz Publishing Inc, 2001. Wilbeck, C. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II." Aberjona Press, Kindle 2015. Wilbeck, C. "Swinging the Sledgehammer: The Combat Effectiveness of German Heavy Tank Battalions in World War II." Fort Leavenworth, PDF 2002. Zeimke, E. “From Stalingrad to Berlin: The Illustrated Edition.” Pen & Sword, Kindle 2014. Zaloga, S. "T-34/76 Medium Tank 1941-45." Osprey Publishing, 2010. Zaloga, S. "T-34-85 Medium Tank 1944-94." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2010. Finnish and Soviet Treaty 1944 - the “Moscow Armistice” http://heninen.net/sopimus/1944_e.htm Inflation in Germany https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany I’ve also used some maps and information from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/ A full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching! Bye for now!
    38
  1118. "ČSNS was mostly communist and anarcho-communist." Ah, but the communists constantly scream at me that you can't be communist and nationalist at the same time, since according to them, communism is international. So could you square that circle for them? Also, while the ČSNS may have become communist later, it certainly wasn't communist prior to the 1940s.
    38
  1119.  @FelipeOliveira-fj6hl  Fantastic! I'm more concerned about Brazillians being deceived into financially supporting this guy, even though he's not the one writing the scripts.
    38
  1120. I believe you've got a video on this topic too? I only noticed after I was finished the editing of this video and need to watch it. I wonder if you came to a different conclusion?
    37
  1121. Yep, that's it. Even if you are pro-something, you're doing yourself no favours assuming there's nothing wrong with your side. You'd be much better off keeping a critical eye, even if you do still support a faction.
    37
  1122. It feels good to know I'm not the only one saying some of this stuff, especially when there are many critics. Not that I'd stop saying something that I knew was right (based on evidence and interpretation) just because I was the only one saying it and everyone was against me, but it's nice to have some verification.
    37
  1123. Or that all statistics created when the economy isn't free are pointless - which they are. Current GDP and GNP numbers are massively manipulated, as are the inflation and other stats
    37
  1124. My pleasure, and I'm glad you enjoyed the video :) I agree, the biggest problem is the propaganda which distorts the truth. Without the truth we cannot make informed decisions.
    37
  1125. Do you mean for this particular video, or do you mean all the books I've read on WW2? For this video, just the three I mentioned because I didn't see the need to read further once the answer became obvious. And here's the (incomplete) list of history books I've got https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing There's a few books that I haven't added to the list yet for various reasons. I noticed not too long ago that I hadn't added some of the Stalingrad books on there! I don't read biology, physics or chemistry books. I do read history, economics, politics and similar. I also don't read everything to do with history (I believe in specialization, and I should have a video coming soon explaining that and why). I'm also not big on fiction because I have the view that I may as well learn something practical, or learn something real. So don't read fiction often, but Orwell is my favourite fiction author because I don't think Orwell was really writing fiction, more of a warning.
    37
  1126. I agree. And the Battle of Gazala is interesting and will be next in the series, and El Alamein won't be long after that. Not sure when I'll get to these battles because it takes a while to do the research between everything else, but hopefully not too long.
    37
  1127. Correct. I screwed up. They were Ju 88's, not Stukas.
    37
  1128. Loading the gold. Shots fired.
    37
  1129. Thanks for the recommendation! I have already got that book on my reading list, and it is a priority. People have recommended so many books that it's going to take me months to get through them!
    37
  1130. I don't know. In this case, I spent half the video teaching Christians what Christianity is 🤦‍♂️
    37
  1131. Fantastic! Glad to hear it! Especially that you're doing your own research and not just believing what I (or anyone else) is saying :)
    37
  1132. Your subjective feelings? 😂
    37
  1133. Of course, a Commissariat is not a REAL Commissariat! I should have known...
    37
  1134. Thanks dronfim!
    37
  1135. "but this stuff is the only thing keeping me sane at home" Do you work from home, or have you been quarantined?
    37
  1136. Don't worry, I will be completing it. There's no way I'm abandoning it now. Episode 43 has actually already been recorded, and my new editor can now slowly work on it in the background without any pressure. I just need a bit of a break from it before diving back in
    37
  1137. I didn't bother monetizing this one for obvious reasons
    37
  1138. Yes, for people who are not immersed in philosophy, it can be very difficult, which is why I spoke slowly and went through it the way I did in the hopes that people would be able to grasp it. Of course, someone has criticsed me saying "you could have said it all in 10 minutes", but my goal is to reach the widest audience as possible, so I had to spend the time to make sure it was all clear.
    37
  1139. Sorry for the delay. It does take time though for me to do the scripts and get everything edited and prepared
    37
  1140. I honestly can't tell if it's a troll or if the guy is serious. As I say in the video, I really hope this was posted as a comedy
    37
  1141. Ahhh that explains why the video is performing so poorly. It's currently the worst of my last 10 videos. YouTube also seems to have censored my David Irving video, making me question which sort of Socialism they're advocating exactly...
    37
  1142. I can understand why they waited until you were older. When it comes to these videos, I have to miss out some of the more... frightful stories
    37
  1143. I mean, technically yeah, but also it's worse than that. The entire channel in question is made up of scripts he's stolen off other people's videos.
    37
  1144. I'm super-tempted to redo my Market Garden documentary at some point, and redo everything - the maps, the scripts, the units, and go into a lot more detail... But that's a far-off future project.
    37
  1145. Thanks for all your great comments! Lots of good points being made. I've made more BattleStorm videos since this - check out my BATTLESTORM playlist using this link https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y I'm also working on more BATTLESTORM videos so be sure to Subscribe :)
    37
  1146. This is why I'm not backing down on this issue. By being a state-controlled racist-socialist entity, events like the Holocaust can absolutely be explained. A racist free-market-capitalist entity actually gives the Holocaust deniers more room to deny the event, because they can say "there's no way they systematically murdered this many Jews". Under the traditional 'let's see National Socialism as a capitalist regime' mentality, you can't explain it because the markets wouldn't create it, and no individual human being could possible murder people like that. So in this scenario, the denier-argument reasoning sparks as true (at least, to those who haven't done research). But if you turn around and say, actually it does make sense because these guys weren't just racists in a free-market society, but they believed in different collective groups, and that (in this outlook) individual human beings have no meaning (since we're all a collective of groups), so murdering groups is alright. And then you realise that these National Socialists didn't think for themselves because they were part of a collective group. So if they're ordered to kill, they will! Because who are they to question anything? Why would they go against their Aryan group? And if they don't view other human beings as individuals but as ants to be crushed, or just pure numbers, or even barcodes... then it's much easier to see why, in a state controlled collectivist society, why systematic industrial murder is actually possible. At that point, it becomes much harder to deny the events in question. Now, onto what socialism was by people’s definitions in the comments. The ‘socialism’ they’re championing never actually happened in practice. They talk about ‘real’ socialism, often saying that “well, ‘real’ socialism never happened”. But looking back on history, the theory of socialism as Marx said it was never happened, but numerous attempts to create socialism did occur. To say they’re not socialism is not fair to history. The Soviet Union wasn’t a ‘socialist revolution’. The Bolshevik Party seized the means of production; the workers didn’t. They didn’t solve class conflict - the Party or the state employees became the new upper classes of society - and there was definitely not equality. They also introduced the New Economic Plan (limited capitalism), but also, even when they attempted to ‘socialize’ the people in the collectivisation of the 1930s (inside the famine that was a direct consequence of the state ‘taxing’ the produce off the peasants in the fields) the state was the controller of the economy and society, not the workers. You also have a slave economy in the Gulag system, which is similar in some ways to the forced labour camps and the concentration camps of National Socialist Germany, which clearly indicates that the equality and liberty that Marx was aiming for wasn’t a reality. So, by the definition used by everyone else ‘in theory’, the Soviet Union wasn’t socialist. When you consider that Venezuela was socialist - again people say this wasn’t ‘real’ socialism. But it existed. When you consider the socialist policies of the Labour Party in Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Western Europe, Cambodia, China and so on, you can certainly make the case that these weren’t ‘real’ socialist countries or policies. However they existed, and they tried to implement the ‘theory’ of socialism, and they instead created a version of socialism that is very much real in history. You can say these weren’t ‘real’ socialisms, and that’s great for a political debate, but from a historical debate, these were real and they were socialisms - by the historical viewpoint of history. And, since I’m looking at history not theory, I’m interested in defining socialism as what actually happened, not discussing the theory of it. Hitler’s version of socialism isn’t Marxist Socialism, and I’m not saying it is, but it is (by historical standards) a version of socialism. Hitler’s socialism variant is: directly influenced by what Marx said; he changes this to come to a different conclusion; he implements it in history; it is not capitalism; it shares many of the same traits as the other ‘socialisms’ that existed in history; and it supports the Holocaust and other National Socialist policies that, on the surface, don’t make much sense because they’re being viewed from the ‘they’re capitalist’ viewpoint. Is the National Socialist Party left-wing or right-wing? That’s up to you to decide. I would suggested they’re a mix between the two sides, and I avoided creating a different political spectrum in the videos for this reason (although I split it up into different categories). Did National Socialism ‘work’? Not really. As the two quotes I quoted from Tooze show, the economy by 1934 was in the gutter, which is another reason war was on the cards because they had to conquer more territory and resources, and enslave a lot of people, in order to make it work. Now, what does this mean for ‘real’ socialism (Marxist Socialism)? Well, this is absolutely not an attack on socialism. Nothing I have said has been against socialism in general. Just because Hitler was a socialist, doesn’t make all socialism bad. That would be like saying “Hitler was a politician, therefore all politicians are bad”, which is clearly not a logical way of looking at it. And I’m absolutely not implying that socialism doesn’t ‘work’, by bringing up the ‘failed’ socialisms of the 20th Century. Looking to the future, there’s no reason to think that because socialism didn’t work so great in the 20th Century that it couldn’t work in the future. Yes, some of what I said in the videos was wrong - the liberalism/conservatism bit in the 19th Century in the second video were flipped around (it’s been over a decade since I last studied that stuff and the video was off the cuff). I also mentioned Manstein as being a star general. This is true, but he was actually the exception, and was really the only “von” (aristocrat) that Hitler trusted (until 1944, when he was dismissed). Generals like Model and Zeitzler were favoured over the Prussian officers because these represented the new generation of ‘socialists’ that had worked their way up the ranks. But again, that was in the quick off-the cuff response video. Overall, the points I raised about National Socialism being a version of socialism still stand. And, to those who say that “I’m not listening” or have gone out of their way to suggest that I shouldn’t cover politics again because I’m “ignorant” (which is a polite word compared to what some have used), you’re not being fair. When covering WW2, battles and the Holocaust etc, it’s impossible to stay out of politics, economics and society, since they’re all linked. Plus, I have studied this stuff, and will continue to do so. I’ve now re-read Das Kapital (after a decade) and it hasn’t changed my view on all this at all. (Selected) Bibliography Notice the word “selective”. I studied this in college and university, and therefore don’t have access to all the books I used back then. The books listen below are directly in reference to the above topic, and below them is a link to the list of books I have on WW2 and the surrounding period. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Evans, R. “In Defence of History.” Granta Books, Kindle. Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. For a complete list of books I own on WW2 and similar, see this link - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing
    36
  1147. The word was "Penguin"
    36
  1148. That was the idea! I wanted to go more in-depth but the sources I have don't allow it 😟
    36
  1149. "But be careful that TIK doesn’t like Socialism and Authoritarianism , his political standpoint is clearly visible in his judgments and conclusions." Sorry, not sorry, for not liking slavery and totalitarianism...
    36
  1150. "None of your economic stuff ever seems to use any of the regularly used definitions and ideas." Give me the 'regularly used definition' of socialism then (socialized control of the means of production). And give me the 'regularly used definition' of capitalism (private control of the means of production). "By your definitions Bismarck's Germany would be considered a socialist state because the central government did things." Yes. "Or every modern state is socialist because they have some form of welfare system, central bank, or planned professional army." Yes.
    36
  1151. That's great to hear! My ultimate goal is to get people interested in history, reading it and debating it, so I'm glad to see that you (and others) are doing just that
    36
  1152. Explaining why autarky doesn't work is a bit complex because there's a few different factors to it. In the first instance, it should be obvious why implementing autarky when you don't have the resources to actually implement it won't work. If you don't have access to oil (or enough of it), implementing autarky won't magically make oil appear. Hitler implemented autarky when Germany didn't have sufficient access to raw materials, and thus imploded his economy for that reason. But that wasn't the only reason. Let's say you owned a house and decided to implement autarky - so you don't trade with anyone outside your own house. This would be a disaster. Even if you had a garden and were able to grow food, would you be able to grow enough? You'd be spending all day growing food rather than creating something else, and the land might not be good enough for you to grow food anyway. Do you produce enough fertilizer? Would you have access to medicine, energy, water etc.? Clearly, implementing autarky on such a small scale is silly, but it highlights the problems with autarky. In a free market, you can trade with other people. So let's say your land isn't great for farming, but is great for growing a load of trees that you can chop down. No worries, you can go to a farmer and trade your wood for food. And obviously, you have an incentive to produce as much wood as possible to maximize the amount of food and other resources you need, and the land gets used optimally because you're not trying to grow food on land that's poor for growing food, but is good for growing trees. So the benefits of trading are that everyone can only focus (specialization) on producing goods that their local area is good at producing, and not produce goods that the land or climate etc aren't good at producing. Then they can trade with others who optimally produce goods that they need, thus making a very specialized but also efficient economy. If we scale this up to a national level, Britain might be good at producing wool, and South Africa might be good at producing diamonds. It makes sense for Britain to optimize its wool production and trade with South Africa, since Britain doesn't have access to diamonds and South Africa's weather isn't suitable for sheep. The result is that both countries and their consumers have access to all the goods and everyone benefit as a result. Autarky strips these benefits away and you're left with a huge disaster. Mises explains perfectly why talk of Autarky in post-WW1 Germany was silly here https://mises.org/library/autarky-and-stockpiling There are more factors here, but I think this comment is getting too long. Hope this helps.
    36
  1153. They weren't outnumbered at Stalingrad either.
    36
  1154.  @michaelkovacic2608  "Your channel won't burn down if you leave it unattended for some short time." That's my biggest worry, along with my content suffering because I won't have as much time to work on it if I take time off, which would lead to the channel burning down.
    36
  1155. I have been keeping tabs on what's happening of course, and I'm more concerned about the Leftist violence than the election. The election will just be the trigger for more Leftist violence, regardless who wins, or if it's contested. I just hope that non-Leftists don't get hurt, and actually stand up to these racists.
    36
  1156. A fact so obvious a child could understand. And yet I have people telling me that building bombs improves our living standards... I can't tell if I'm arguing with bots at this point 🤔
    36
  1157. That's why Churchill was made Man of the Year 1940, not Hitler... wait.
    36
  1158. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Another reminder that If you want to read more on this battle, I highly recommend Pitt’s “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Pitt’s series is definitely the best volume to pick up out of all the books, although I’d obviously suggest you read a few of the others too. But if you can only pick up one, Pitt’s series is the the one I recommend. I want to answer the question that several of you keep asking - where was the RAF during all of this? Well, according to the sources, throughout Totensonntag, the RAF did dominate the sky. The Germans could do little more than take on stragglers and lone planes. Despite this, British medium bombers weren’t so effective during the main battles, since they couldn’t tell friend from foe. They picked on vehicles on the fringes, and tried to help as best they could. In fact, many of the RAF aircraft were kept on call to give support for the British Army. The problem was that the call simply didn’t come that often. It seemed that the British combined arms doctrine had neglected to include air support. The experience learnt during and after Crusader was that there had to be a better system of communication between the army and the air force. Although, to be fair, this was an exceptionally complicated battle, so the RAF would have struggled regardless. But, definitely food for thought. At 1300 hours on Totensonntag, 2/3rds of the Ariete Division went north with Crüwell’s force. This was a Battlegroup like unit under Barlotta’s deputy commander - General Di Nisio (couldn’t find a picture of him). It consisted of four companies of M13/40 tanks 80 in total, “a battalion of 8 Bersaglieri Regiment, a battalion of 65mm guns mounted on trucks [Milmart Battalion?], and two batteries of artillery” - according to Iron Hulls. But, since this description is vague, I’ve decided to just create a battlegroup-unit to represent this force. Iron Hulls mentions that the Germans tried to blame the Italians for the Ariete Division falling behind during their advance towards 5th South African Brigade, thus pinning the blame for their losses on the Italians. However, Iron Hulls points out that there was a confusion over the plans, and that Crüwell changed the plans last minute. Iron Hulls concludes by saying the blame ultimately rests with Crüwell. Given that the British and German literature also supports this conclusion, it seems unreasonable to blame the Italians for the issues with Crüwell’s tactics, and that German losses cannot be blamed on the Italians. The positions of 5th South African Brigade’s battalions is another educated guess. I’m fairly certain 3rd Transvaal Scottish Battalion was north of Armstrong’s HQ because Cramer’s panzers rolled into them after taking Armstrong’s HQ unit. 1st and 2nd Battalions could be swapped around though. That said, there are a few maps online that show them in these positions so I don’t think I’m far off the mark. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    36
  1159. Seriously?? I mean, I can understand why the Abrams would be best sitting back and firing from afar in that scenario, but to hear that the military with the most money spent on it today has straight up neglected combined arms warfare is insane.
    36
  1160. Wouldn't have been possible without your help, sir!
    36
  1161. All recessions/depressions have the same cause. The specific details will be different (e.g. we have a virus to contend with right now, which is making things worse) but they all have the same central cause. If the State Central Bank wasn't issuing currency and manipulating interest rates etc, then our current virus crisis probably wouldn't have destroyed the economy (it would have had an impact, but nothing like what we're seeing now).
    36
  1162. Yes, as I mentioned in the Courland video, local fishermen would sail soldiers and civilians out of the pocket, but only if paid in hard money (gold and silver). They understood that the currency supply was either inflating away or was about to be rendered worthless once the Soviets took over
    36
  1163.  @AFGuidesHD  "and yet also Hitler in his speeches says "we are determined to tear down the hinderances that are placed on the individual striving to fulfil his potential". So, this is the rhetoric he gives, both collectivist as well as individualist at times." Yes, and I've got an explanation for this lie in my videos. If only you'd watch them instead of dismissing them. - "As you point out that National Socialism promotes collectivism, but also respects private property." It abolished private property. Again, if only you would watch my videos instead of dismissing them, you would have known this.
    36
  1164. “This, of course, leads to the third reason that German commanders cited to explain their defeat: the idea that the Wehrmacht was simply overwhelmed by hordes of robotic opponents. Such an image appealed to both the German veterans and their postwar American allies, who hoped, like the Germans, to use superior training, tactics, and motivation to overcome a larger foe. Again, however, this is only a half-truth. Germany knew from the moment it attacked in 1941 that it was outnumbered two to one, but numerical ratios at first appeared unimportant given the German tactical and operational advantages. The enormous losses that the surprised Red Army absorbed only confirmed the Germans’ belief in their own racial and tactical superiority. The defeats of 1941-1942 reinforced the stereotype of the inflexible peasant soldier who displayed no initiative, perhaps because the Germans were unaware of the penalties that initiative often provoked. “As the war dragged on, the Red Army became increasingly proficient in planning and executing its own complex form of mechanized warfare, while the level of training among German troops declined quickly in the face of heavy casualties. Those German officers who made their names in the glory days of 1941-1942 often failed to recognize this shift in the relative training and ability of the opposing armies. Indeed, their contempt for their supposedly primitive foe only made them more vulnerable to the maskirovka efforts of 1944, such as the Soviet deception efforts at Korsun’-Shevchenkovskii and prior to Operation Bagration. More than one of the “hordes” that defeated Germany were populated by phantoms.” Glantz When Titan’s Clashed P355-356
    36
  1165. I hereby declare that I won't be committing Sudoku
    36
  1166. I know what I'm talking about. Here's an exercise for you: assume that the Nazis are socialist for half an hour. Imagine they're the same socialists you see in the USSR. Just assume it. Now look at their policies, look at the events. Because that's what I'm doing, and I can't see a problem with the Nazis being socialist. It's not a contradiction.
    36
  1167. None of the comments are particularly negative so far. And it is a lot of dislikes in a short period (40 mins since release), meaning people aren't watching the video and are disliking. This suggests they either expected a different topic (e.g. Stalingrad), or are unhappy with the choice of topic (Finland), or are judging this based on my previous videos (e.g. people coming from my Hitler's Socialism video)
    36
  1168. If you speak to him, tell him I said: Thank you for writing such a great book on Stalingrad
    36
  1169. I could, but I'm not sure I would do that on this channel. I have been debating making a second channel for more off-the-cuff type content, so this is one possibility
    36
  1170. The same happened to me. Discovering that Nazism was a version of Socialism forced me to change my perspective of the world, and it was scary for a while, but that was until you realise that everything comes down to you. You're not being "oppressed" by some unseen entity, and you don't "deserve" more just for showing up. It turns out that other individuals (not groups) are standing in your way - and they can be pushed aside by you if you work hard. You're poor because you're not creating/producing something that the rest of society values. Once you realise that, all you have to do is figure out what the rest of society really needs, work hard to produce it and sell it, and prosper. Some videos (not mine) that will hopefully make you think :) probably best to watch them in this order https://youtu.be/m6pWEzkbnDE https://youtu.be/0PbjZ01ObLA https://youtu.be/G6S5c6xhXTY https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA
    36
  1171. Yeah, the world's gone crazy over the past few weeks. No need to let it get you down though - there's always Stalingrad :)
    36
  1172. I will no doubt get a lot of hate from this video. But to be fair, I get hate in every video, so it's business as usual.
    36
  1173. Race is a Social Group Racism is Socialism
    36
  1174.  @SergeantAradir  You obviously haven't ever lived in Manchester, nor heard about their antics... which I won't repeat here because I don't want to get my channel purged from the internet by the 77th Brigade
    36
  1175. Of course it did! That's why there won't be a video next week as I'll need time to recover once I get E46's screenplays done over the next few days.
    36
  1176. Shirer's book was the first one I read on the topic, as it was my grandad's copy and he gave it to me. But that doesn't stop people from saying "if only you read Shirer, TIK, you would understand how the war REALLY went down!" 🤨
    36
  1177. I only made one comment that entire series, so the fact you saw it means you watched it all :) I found out there was a follow-up series by Peikoff on the Modern History of Philosophy. It's not on YouTube though, so I've linked to it in the description.
    36
  1178. Exactly.
    36
  1179. Do you think I was a little harsh? I might have made them run to their safe space
    35
  1180. This is a very underrated comment 😂
    35
  1181. But Franco wasn't a reactionary. He held a revolution in 1936, which he ultimately won. A counterrevolution is a revolution. That's not reactionary.
    35
  1182. True, although knowing which baker battalion was attached to each unit is not necessary for that. Interestingly, with the Ukraine overrun, the Soviet population was suffering badly from a food shortage. There's a few accounts of Soviet civilians joining the Red Army in the hope that the food situation at the front was better... to find that it actually wasn't. But yes, this is a subject that is often overlooked
    35
  1183. I agree, but Nietzsche's followers are adamant that he had zero influence on Fascism or National Socialism, so they're likely to criticize us if they see these comments.
    35
  1184. Finland lost, twice. And technically Russia didn't exist at this time.
    35
  1185. There were also a lot of sackings of British and US generals too. The difference was that many of them got reassigned so that they had a chance to learn from their mistakes.
    35
  1186. @M J - I thought you National Communists didn't like academia because it was full of interNational Communists?
    35
  1187. Yep, and the result was higher healthcare costs from the employees https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ And instead of learning from their lesson, people are now calling for more state intervention and a National Hell Service. You can't make this stuff up!
    35
  1188. Maybe. I also think they're attracted to it because it 'feels' right. It 'feels' right to "help the workers". It 'feels' right that everybody should be forced to be "equal". It's the prioritization of emotions before evidence and logic.
    35
  1189. Glad to hear it! And yes, this video got swamped with Wehraboos (people who excessively think the Wehrmacht is the best and all powerful army in history - didn't even know this term existed before this video). They didn't watch the full video and continued to turn the comment section into a whirlpool of hate and lies.
    35
  1190. When it comes to the Battlestorm series, I pull no punches. In my opinion, without the details, presented in chronological order, it's hard to appreciate what happened, and it's easier to come to false conclusions.
    35
  1191. Guard: Ah gut! You can answer me zis question: Why are we speaking in English?
    35
  1192. They do this several times throughout the battle, and I've honestly no idea. It makes no sense to me either.
    35
  1193. ImaxNZ is now the CEO of CLOSE THE GATE R US
    35
  1194. For context, I've been working on Stalingrad E45 and E46 non-stop for two weeks and still have more to do on it.
    35
  1195. I could, but I don't just want the odd video taking down when the guy is stealing other people's scripts too.
    35
  1196. Honestly, I'm suspicious of anyone who doesn't list their sources now. I used to let it slide because everyone was doing it when I first started, but now I've realised that there's so much wrong with it. If you're saying stuff, how are we meant to know you're not making it up, or relying on outdated or debunked material, or just relying upon one biased source? It's very questionable at the least.
    35
  1197. FIRST!
    35
  1198. Yeah, people have asked me to respond to him in the past, but it's pointless because he just restated all the regular arguments I've already refuted in my "Hitler's Socialism" video. There's not point repeating myself
    35
  1199. I think you're going to enjoy my video on Gnosticism (once I've got it all together) because you'll see just how far back this tactic of dismissing everyone and calling everyone names goes.
    35
  1200. Took Terri months to do it and she did a great job. And it's technically not finished yet. Anton Joly and Egor Kobyakov are putting the place names onto it right now. I'll update everyone about the map in an upcoming video
    34
  1201. Yes, the half yellow ones are cavalry units
    34
  1202. True... unfortunately
    34
  1203. A quick note - Browning may not have actually said 'I think we might be going a bridge too far' at all, which is why I said "supposedly". It is disputed, and apparently the evidence for it came after the battle, which is why it probably wasn't said. However, it is a cool phrase.
    34
  1204. Indeed it is! I've been doing the screenplay and helping my editor today in fact. Not sure when it'll be out yet because I'd rather take the time now to get the editor up to speed, but rest assured that I've certainly not abandoned it
    34
  1205. Precisely
    34
  1206. You've made me want to play a WW2 roleplay game, if only I had the time these days :) And it's surprising how often this sort of thing happens in D&D. I had to call for a break once to consider a way of not breaking the entire storyline I was trying to forge, all thanks to the roll of a natural 20.
    34
  1207. I can tell you watched this on x2 speed! I don't necessarily think Bradley screwed up, but I do think he misunderstood what was going on and tried to protect his own reputation.
    34
  1208. It's bad out there. All I can say is good luck on that front line
    34
  1209. Fine by me. If they've not got the skill or capability to do it right, they shouldn't do it at all.
    34
  1210. Haha thanks for that
    34
  1211. You've got to remember that Harris was saying this stuff after the war and was trying to clear his name. He was trying to pin the blame on Churchill, and the "I was just following orders" excuse doesn't hold up. Also, as I mentioned in the video, Harris's account of him being so shocked by the order to attack Dresden that he drove the Whitehall to clarify this doesn't make any sense. He knew that Dresden was a target months before, and we have plenty of contemporary evidence that indicates that he wanted to bomb cities. This is why memoirs and accounts written much later are dangerous and should be scrutinized. While they are classed as "primary sources", I am of the opinion that memoirs and interviews conducted years after the events in question should be viewed as secondary sources at best. They're often not reliable.
    34
  1212. "TIK: Says Hitler wasn't mad after all... Also TIK: proceeds to ramble on about Hitlers batshit, crazy ideologies, paranoia, psuedo-science, conquests, etc etc" But Hitler's ideology, paranoia, psuedo-science etc are all logical consequences of the initial flaws in Hitler's understanding. If you believe economics is a zero-sum game, you come to logically wild and silly conclusions.
    34
  1213. Apparently, some did get taught this. But I didn't, and I think the majority didn't either. This is why I now say there's a difference between 'school' and 'education'
    34
  1214. NOTES, LINKS and SOURCES Hey all! I want to make everyone aware of my plans going forward. My aim is to get Operation Crusader out as soon as possible, then (with only minor interruptions) go back to the Eastern Front until Stalingrad is out. So those of you waiting for more Eastern Front history, don’t worry, we will be going back pretty soon. Frustratingly, I interrupted the video to announce the issue with the camera focus. Not sure how, but it progressively gets more out of focus as the video goes on, even though I didn’t touch the settings or move the camera. I am disappointed I couldn’t go back and reshoot, but my New Years Resolution ( https://youtu.be/YHvY9jOR0tU ) was to do a video every week, and I’m not failing that just because of a out-of-focus camera. Oh well, lesson learnt. For anyone curious, I’m using a Canon PowerShot SX700 HS camera to shoot these videos. For those of you complaining about the length of my videos. Next week’s video will be a short ~7 minute video about “Revisionist Historians”, so look forward to that. Some of the Italian units in the video are still shown as being motorized, even though technically they’re not. I’m not sure whether to change the symbols or not, which is why I’ve left them as motorized. I also covered a couple maps at the end (poor editing). Sorry about that. LINKS Please consider supporting me on Patreon so I can smash my camera to pieces and get a new one… (joke, it’s actually a pretty good camera) https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory The British Order of Battle for Operation Crusader https://youtu.be/QCNDEoRDp6I For an explanation on what “Kampfgruppen” are https://youtu.be/zKWczZkQ130 My other videos in the North African Campaign https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamain: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ Thanks for watching!
    34
  1215. "I think that minimum wages are necessary Becouse we can't thrust employers to invest the money that they obtain by reducing wages" That's not how that works. As I explained, wages go down during a recession, but purchasing power goes up. Secondly, minimum wage actually hurts the workers, as you can see here https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ "Employers in time of crisis would try to save as much money as possible in case they must close their activity" Yes, and saving is what allows growth. Think about it. If you have no money, how do you start a business? If you have a million dollars/pounds/euros or whatever, then it'll be easier to start a business. If employers are cutting back, then they're saving - which they then can use to start up businesses or invest in other businesses which grown an economy. But as I said in the video, the 'crisis' you're referring to is the recession which was caused by government manipulation. If that didn't happen, you wouldn't have everything in a crisis at the same time. "Also the idea that if an employee isn't satisfied with is pay, he should go and search a new job, is based on the assumption that there is a job that would give him a better pay witch in most countries isn't a reality." Or he could set up his own business, create wealth for his community, and receive the benefits of doing that. The problem is that he doesn't realize that he has the ability to create wealth. He thinks he must work for someone else. That's because there's a difference between education and schooling. He was schooled, not educated. He doesn't know how to reach his own potential. "Also are you sure that the gold standard is a solid standard Becouse gold can be found, lost etc in this way changing his value." There's a very small amount of inflation with gold as a result of more being dug out of the ground. The difference is that gold can be used for things other than currency, which counteracts it, and the inflation is ridiculously low. That's why there are sometimes periods of deflation with gold. "I think that the government should set some limitations in the field of economy or else things would go like in Africa, rich of natural resources, but with governments to weak or corrupt to make their citizens benefit from them." Africa is poor because their governments have control over their citizens. If they freed up their own economy, they'd boom, just like Europe did when they abolished serfdom and slavery in the Classical Liberal era.
    34
  1216. To clarify the point I was making about Montgomery. Anyone can have their say on any leader from any nation. I'm looking forward to the day that I can turn around and say "I've done my research and can conclude that Monty wasn't a great general" because I'll have no shame in saying that (if it is indeed true). I'm reserving my judgement of Monty until I've read up on him more, but the point stands that just because I'm British doesn't mean that I love every British leader and criticise leaders from other nations. There were good and bad leaders from every nation, and I think it's good practice for everyone to think critical of the leaders of our own nations - especially those we admire the most.
    34
  1217. 100% agreed. I've seen that Glantz lecture, and he's right, the Western Front (while still important) is simply not on the scale of the Eastern Front.
    34
  1218.  @romanempire4495  "No, it isn’t that. It’s a battle of tribes vs tribes, and tribes can be national, ideological, or anything, but there is no battle between the individual and the collective." Yes, there absolutely IS a battle between the individual and the collective. The individual is being crushed by the collective in multiple ways, including taxation, regulation, inflation, price controls, wage controls, the stripping of individual rights, two-tier policing and law systems, ideological and philosophical assault... the list goes on. - "For 75+% of people, there is no such thing as the ‘self’. For most, there is only the tribe." 1. So you admit that there is an attack on the individual. 2. The fact that 75% of the people don't have a 'self' might explain why all those things I listed above are happening. It may also explain why anxiety, depression, poverty, hopelessness, criminality, and numerous other social issues are occurring right now. If you have no concept of self, you have no aim in life, no purpose, nothing to strive or work for. Why help yourself out of a bad situation if you don't have a self? When nothing is in your control, it's no wonder you're paralysed with fear. So the problem with our society IS because of the philosophical and ideological assualt upon the individual's concept of 'self' that's been going on for millennia.
    34
  1219. Yes. Except, it turns out that modern audiences are agreeing with him, because they didn't know what National Socialism actually was, and their beliefs already align with Hitler's. So instead of fighting the ideology, they're wrongly coming to the conclusion that Hitler wasn't as bad as they thought.
    34
  1220. Yeah, I genuinely think this was one of the most important videos I've done too. I couldn't do another history video without doing this first, as without the objective truth there's no point in doing history at all.
    34
  1221. That was pretty quick then!
    34
  1222. Thank you! Glad you liked it, and Merry Christmas to you too! 🎄🎸
    34
  1223. "Stalin openly rejected nationalism" What about Stalin's "Socialism in One Country" policy? The thing is, when Marxist Socialism (international socialism) fails to become international, it simply becomes national socialism (Fascism, or nationality socialism).
    34
  1224. But historians are now saying they lost before Typhoon
    34
  1225. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Not sure why it happened, but at roughly 3 minutes in, the map goes dark. It fixes itself after a few seconds though, luckily. I would have liked to have gone into more detail regarding Sommernachtstraum, but sadly, not a lot has been written on it. At the time of publication, there currently isn’t even a Wikipedia page in English for Sommernachtstraum! El Hamra is actually a little bit further down than where I showed the unit to be, but I suspect it doesn’t arrive there until the 15th, and the source I used didn’t specify the dates, which is again why more needs to be written on it. I only showed 3 commandos enter the villa for Operation Flipper, but it was more than that. I’m not entirely sure how many though. If you want to learn more about this raid, I’d recommend the book "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941" by Gavin Mortimer. I DON’T recommend the Kindle version though, because the maps are too small to read. Get the physical copy if you do get it. I’m also not really going to recommend reading more on the first raid by the SAS (Squatter), since there’s not a lot more to it than what I said. The mission was aborted, so its significance (other than being the first SAS mission) is limited. The Luftwaffe’s impact on Crusader was minimal anyway, not because of the British, but simply because of the weather. Therefore, the failure of the SAS’s mission didn’t really impact Crusader too much anyway. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    34
  1226. I mentioned the 30,000 to 40,000 French troops who got left behind at Dunkirk in the video.
    34
  1227. That's probably the safest approach
    34
  1228. First! And good quote
    34
  1229. Now imagine what it was like on the Soviet side
    34
  1230. Yes, but somehow, despite doing this, people continue to call me "pro-German" and whatnot... I don't get it
    34
  1231. I do prefer comments that are made after watching the full video, but "FIRST" is a nice exception :)
    34
  1232. Very true!
    34
  1233. Yes, Holl's account "An Infantryman at Stalingrad" is a genuine German memoir. It's still flawed (as all memoirs are), but I would say it's way more reliable than the Hoffman diary. It can be hard to get a hold of a copy, but it's sold on Jason D Mark's website which I've linked in the description.
    34
  1234. That's a good point!
    33
  1235. The only people who can't define it are people who can't accept that it is Socialism on a national level.
    33
  1236. Seriously!?
    33
  1237. Very good. I should have mentioned that in the video!
    33
  1238. Oh there are those in here doing the name calling thing... But yes, I'm grateful that most of my audience are good people.
    33
  1239. I understand the hatred of Monty, but at the same time, I think historians let their blatant NATIONALIST views cloud their judgement. Yes, Monty's attitude sucked, and he himself was "pro-British". But it's okay to give credit to someone you dislike when they do something right. Monty did make mistakes, but he also did good things. They're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    33
  1240. It's already starting. People telling me how wrong I am... I think they're going to be a little embarrassed once they watch for more than 5 mins
    33
  1241. Some people think that if they understand National Socialism that they would get converted into being a Nazi, or that they would somehow glorify or justify the ideology. No, when I read the joke of a book that is Mein Kampf, it made me despise the ideology even more than I did before. You quickly realize that Hitler was intelligent, but his false belief in racial socialism undermined that intelligence. The guy also wrote a book consisting of nothing more than long meandering garbage, a lot of which can be proven false. For example, he hid that he had been a Communist in 1918-1919 and had attended the funeral of the Jewish Communist revolutionary Kurt Eisner, something he and his National Socialist faithful are keen to dismiss in any way they can.
    33
  1242. At the end of this episode, this series is at 106,000 words!
    33
  1243. That one's in the pipeline, but I need a bit more time to figure a few things out.
    33
  1244. Ah Mr Halder, we meet again
    33
  1245. Nice! Congratulations Jim! You're right about the supplies, although if they had won Crusader that would have bought them time enough to sort out their logistical issues before the British attacked again.
    33
  1246. Yes, there's the Public Records Act of 1958 and the Freedom of Information Act of 2000. But under the Official Secrets Act, the Royal Archives and the Secret Service archives are exempt from these other acts for "national security" reasons.
    33
  1247. He got kicked out of a pub too during lockdown!
    33
  1248. I didn't realize they knew each other! Both good historians, although Mierzejewski hasn't got as many books on the market I don't think, which may explain the issue
    33
  1249. Thank you, glad to hear you're enjoying the videos!
    33
  1250.  @erozionzeall6371  "Capitalism requires a massive impoveished underclass to function." NO IT DOESN'T. I don't know much more I have to scream this from the rooftops. You don't know what capitalism is! Yes, your professors and your books and your family and friends have all said that capitalism is bad for reasons, but you have a warped conception of what it actually is. - "In my communist mind, the capitalist ideology is absolutely horrendous. Private property is just the next iteration of feudalism and slavery. " No, that's socailism/communism, not capitalism. Again, you don't know what capitalism is. - "You have to keep in mind that we leftists are fighting for the entirety of humanity and future." No, you think you are, but you're actually not. You have been deceived. The capitalists are the ones fighting for humanity and the future. Socialism has tricked you into thinking that you guys are the "progressives", but you're not. You are the regressives. Your heart is in the right place, and what you and I want are the exact same thing, but your policies will send us back into the feudal age, yet you have been deceived into thinking that it's good. It's not good.
    33
  1251. I can reach a lot more people here than I can in a lecture hall :) thank you for your kind comment
    33
  1252. "But I'm gonna say again as I said in one of your past videos I don't think it is right saying the Great Depression in the US lasted until 1945. 1941 or 1942 is from what I have seen the absolute latest it can be said until the US got back to 1929 levels." As Higgs explains, the GDP figures are completely manipulated. In fact, I have a video planned in the future which will show just how bad they are manipulated. Might be a while off, but yeah, you can't trust those statistics at all.
    33
  1253. Beep boop - It was Halder!
    33
  1254. Most of the early part of the text is really bad. The important stuff comes about a third of the way in. You'll note that most of the quotes I take from it are usually from pages 250 onwards.
    33
  1255. You haven't seen my Operation Crusader documentary https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    33
  1256. Someone else pointed this out too, saying that they never get recommended my videos. Could just be coincidence, but they suggested that the channel had been shadow banned. Considering the fact I know someone is mass reporting my comments and videos, it's likely that someone at YouTube has flicked a switch.
    33
  1257. Hey all! First off, the timestamps - Timestamps: Introduction 00:00:00 Strategic picture  British 00:01:00  German 00:02:04 Skorpion 00:02:48 Preparing for Battleaxe  Tiger Convoy 00:05:02  Rommel’s Fuel Crisis 00:11:19 The Forces at Battleaxe  German Forces 00:13:31  British Forces 00:19:23 The British Plan for Battleaxe 00:23:09 German Preparations For Battleaxe 00:27:18 The Battle - Battleaxe  Day 1    Pre-Battle 00:32:09    Tobruk 00:32:37    Halfaya 00:33:06    Capuzzo 00:35:30    Desert Flank 00:38:22    Situation at End of Day 1 00:41:37  Day 2    British Plans for Day 2 00:43:15    German Plans for Day 2 00:44:40    Capuzzo 00:46:59    Desert Flank 00:48:38    Situation at End of Day 2 00:52:23  Day 3    Rommel’s Strike 00:53:18    British Reactions 00:53:53    Endgame 00:56:51  Results of Battleaxe 00:58:00  Reasons for the failure of Battleaxe 00:58:18 Strategic Consequences 01:02:45 Outro 01:05:37  Sources 01:05:42 (Pause the video or you'll miss them)  Patreons 01:05:45 --- Second off, the bibliography - BIBLIOGRAPHY Books: Anderson, T. Tanks of the Second World War. Pen & Sword, 2017. Beevor, A. The Second World War. Phoenix, 2014. (Does Mention Brevity, but no details) Bierman, J. & Smith, C. Alamein: War Without Hate. Penguin Books Ltd, 2003. Butler, D. Field Marshal: the Life and Death of Erwin Rommel. Casemate Publishers, 2015. Dimbleby, J. Destiny in the Desert. The Road to El Alamein - the Battle that Turned the Tide. Profile Books Ltd, 2013. Hart, L. A History of the Second World War. Pan Books, 2015. Kindle version. Hart, L. The Rommel Papers. 1953. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps. Stackpole Books, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Neillands, R. Eighth Army, From the Western Desert to the Alps, 1939-1945. John Murray Publishers, 2004. Nash, N. Strafer Desert General : The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott. Pen and Sword Books Ltd, 2013. Neillands, R. The Desert Rats, 7th Armoured Division 1940-45. Aurum Press Limited, 2005. Pitt, B. The Crucible of War: Wavell’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Raugh, H. Wavell in the Middle East 1939-1941: A Study in Generalship. USA, 2013. Urban, M. The Tank War: The Men, the Machines and the Long Road to Victory. Hachette Digital, 2013. Williamson, Gordon. Afrikakorps 1941-43 (Elite). Osprey Publishing, 2009. Articles: "Mr. Churchill's Review of the War, June 10." Bulletin of International News 18, no. 13 (1941): 813-19. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25643049. "Mr. Churchill's Broadcast on the German Attack on Russia." Bulletin of International News 18, no. 13 (1941): 820-21. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25643051. --- Third off, I’ve provided full English captions for this video which will come up if you click the little symbol near bottom right hand corner of the video. I also want to thank every one of you for watching these videos, as well as for being very patient with me. It takes me months to make these videos (in this case, it took 5 weeks to do the presentation, animation and editing, and more weeks before that to write the script) so a new BATTLESTORM video is definitely not something you’ll see every day… However, I hope the quality of the video will make up for that. Any and all feedback is great, so let me know! I want to doubly thank my patreons for their support. You lot have already contributed massively to this, and to the future Stalingrad video. I’ve neglected some of the promised videos as a result of concentrating on Battleaxe, so I’ll aim to catch up in the next couple weeks https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory And I also I want to thank Simon Baker for helping me with the articles for this video. THANK YOU SIMON! From a behind-the-scenes perspective, Battleaxe has been a massive success and I learnt a lot of stuff that will shave off weeks (if not months) from the time it’ll take to make Stalingrad. So while I do feel guilty for taking a quick break from Stalingrad, I think it’s been well worth it. I’ll make a video soon discussing this and some of the things I’ve learnt. And finally, as a bit of an update, the research for BATTLESTORM STALINGRAD is now well over 100,000 words, and it’s nowhere near complete yet. To put this into context, Battleaxe was 10,395 words. As you can imagine, it’s taking a LONG time to make, but they say patience is a virtue or something… I don’t know, but if you stick around it will eventually come out. In the meantime, check out my other Battlestorm Videos if you haven’t done so already (link) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y Thanks everyone! Hope you enjoy the video :)
    33
  1258. Wesuck12. You realize that the corporates aren't capitalism, right? Corporations are socialist by nature. The lie is that they're not.
    33
  1259. Huh, two people posted the same quote at the same time
    33
  1260. I think the reason is because they've tailored their shows to a broad audience, purely for profit and also not get negative press. The result is a mixture of non-historical programs (Ice Road F) and diluted military history programs that keep repeating the popular opinions so as not to rock the boat. Whether you agree with the things I say or not, it's nice to have a debate about whether it was Göring's fault or Jeschonnek's for the decision to do the airlift. You won't see that debate on TV because the TV channels putting these programs out are too scared of negative ratings. I'm not though. I'm more interested in the debate, giving tons of information and helping others. Downvote my videos to oblivion and see if I care (hint: I won't)
    33
  1261. You'll definitely have a Merry Christmas if you do that!
    32
  1262. Choose to do the work guys
    32
  1263. "You keep making ideological explanations. Hitler said that, hitler thought this." Yes because this is relevant to what National Socialism was. Marxist doctrine was not relevant to National Socialism. I don't know why this is so hard for people to grasp. It's as simple as that. "Capitalism is a real economic system, socialism is a different and separate economic system, social-democracy are certain government regulations under capitalism to smooth out existing class struggle." Here we are: your definition of what constitutes socialism does not include democratic socialist countries. The Labour Party in Britain did not get rid of private property. However, they were socialist. Similarly, the National Socialists in Germany did not get rid of private property for the Germans, but they were still socialists. Bismarck introduced socialist policies - these were socialist policies. But not by your definition. People have defended the Soviet Union (even though they had private property and the capitalist New Economic Policy) because they're willing to make exceptions for that, for some reason - that reason being they're willing to defend the USSR's un-socialism because it fits into their Marxist Socialist ideology. This is the problem: I'm not discussing history with people who are interested in history, I'm discussing history with people who are talking specifically about the ideology of Marxism. This isn't about Marxism - this is about National Socialism and the wider-socialist movement, not Marxism. If I said "Hitler and Marx shared the EXACT SAME ideology" then you have a point. But I've NEVER once said that at all. Socialism is not just Marxism. "So tik, nazi germany was capitalist and anti-capitalist at the same time?" It's not capitalist. I've not said it was. You're trying to make out that it is 100% capitalism, but you're not considering the historical reality. "So nazism is marxism and not marxism at the same time?" No. It's not Marxism. I'm not trying to say it's Marxism. I am saying it's a form of socialism, that isn't Marxism. We know that 'socialism' as a concept came before Marx - he didn't invent it. So when you say "but Marx said" - it's completely irrelevant. This isn't capitalism. It isn't Marxist Socialism. It's National Socialism, which is historically a form of socialism, just like the Labour Party in Britain, the socialist parties in every other country in the world, and so on. They may not be "real" socialism to a Marxist, but historically they are still socialism. "What you are suggesting is to water down definition of socialism as much as anyone has abused that word in his interests or due to his ignorance." I'm saying what it is historically. THIS is the point. This is a history channel; I view things from a historical perspective. Definitions evolve, and I absolutely do view National Socialism as an evolution of Marxist Socialism, just like Christianity was an evalution from Judaism. To say Christianity is not part of the Abrahamic religions would be to deny the historical reality. Similarly, to say National Socialism wasn't a form of socialism is to deny the historical reality.
    32
  1264. Many of the "fluid" battles would end up like that. Operation Crusader is a big example, which was why I didn't bother with animating front lines because there basically wasn't any
    32
  1265. "Damn TIK, that bibliography is amazing. Congrats and keep your great work!" It's only going to get bigger when it comes to National Socialism and Fascism. I want there to be no room for people to say I haven't done my research on this topic (which some are still saying is the case, but their argument is obviously hollow).
    32
  1266. Well, you've convinced me that I need to learn Russian more than German. Damn it
    32
  1267. There's a word limit, so I can't
    32
  1268.  @TruetoCaesar  It wouldn't surprise me at this point
    32
  1269. My grandparents said the same thing - rationing was worse after the war than during it. The country remained nationalized (or became even more so - e.g. the NHS) and was bankrupt after two wars, plus the inflation issue.
    32
  1270. It's probably all of the above. Very few of my critics have bothered to actually watch it and just continue to spout the same old counter-arguments that I directly addressed in the video. I think the length of it doesn't help, and I have been meaning to make a shorter version of it. That said, you're correct that attention spans are an issue. People are happy to waste their lives playing computer games and watching football, or scrolling on Reddit, but they can't read a book or watch an educational video.
    32
  1271. That. He would do anything but That. Now the question is, who is That?
    32
  1272. Yes, you cannot separate the war into categories. War is the extension of politics, which is an extension of economics. Ignore one, and you're going to get a messed-up perception. Beevor's Arnhem book was very well done! I just wish wish wish he had at least mentioned the damn Nijmegen debate, or gave a clue as to why he doesn't think the operation was lost at Nijmegen. If he had done that, it honestly would have been the best single-book source on Market Garden
    32
  1273. It's both the end of the beginning, and the beginning of the beginning
    32
  1274. A great comment. I completely agree. Thank you!
    32
  1275. You're right about the perspective thing, and I knew that before publishing. However, to rework it would have meant more delays as I'd have to animate another map and perhaps more action, or even redo the entire audio. This video was already into its 6 month of production, and since everyone was complaining about a lack of videos and I was getting a little impatient, I decided to leave it out. I also left out a historiography for similar reasons. I'm hopeful though that anyone coming across this will already know the significance of Fort Eben Emael... or read your comment and then understand how important it really was. And the fall of Fort Eben Emael and the attack into Belgium had a bigger impact than just Belgium's chance of survival. Here's the original conclusion to the video that I had to cut - "The fall of Fort Eben Emael caused panic in Belgium, as well as in France and Britain. Rumours spread of paratroopers falling from the skies dressed as nuns, dropping poisoned sweets for children, and generally caused confusion behind the lines. And whilst none of these rumours were true, what is certain is that the fall of Fort Eben Emael, the bridges nearby and the attack from the Sixth Army convinced the Allied high command that the main German offensive was coming from the Belgian front, just like in 1914. They also believed their countermeasure of sending their armies into Belgium was correct. In the end, they were wrong."
    32
  1276.  @iffler2542  Yep, I've just seen them 🙈
    32
  1277. I've only just checked who won. So many people were just completely disinterested in the election, with many of my friends choosing to spoil their ballots (even before I started encouraging them to do so). Labourshites, Commie-servatives, Fibtard Femorats, Red-Green divs... They're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    32
  1278. That's the frustrating thing. There is a clear pattern with them all, yet people were quick to dismiss it. Sure, there may be flaws in my argument, but there's no denying that some kind of pattern exists. Yet, people were flat out denying it, saying I was wasting my time to even point it out. I don't get it.
    32
  1279. Whahahahahar! Get back to work, wage slave!
    32
  1280. I don't care what anybody says - having a good lecturer or teacher is vital. And I may be a little controversial here, but I don't think a lot of history teachers/lecturers are good. Too much tweed, not enough charisma. And I think this needs to change because history is seen as a boring topic to many, and this really comes down to the people who have been teaching it. I was lucky that I had two very good history teachers in college (UK). They strengthened my passion for the subject. But most of the lecturers I had at university were poor. One we actually complained about because he was reading off Wikipedia.
    32
  1281.  @NiallBoggins  "We have the most individualistic society that has every existed, and we're (probably) the most unhappy one too." This is contradicted by the other poster, who correctly pointed out that 75% of society have no concept of 'self'. You cannot have an "individualistic society" without an individual, and most people are not individuals, but sheep in the herd. We actually DON'T have the most individualistic society that has ever existed, we have a very predominantly altruist society, and that's the reason why most people are unhappy.
    32
  1282. Yeah, a lot of what the philosophers said could easily be boiled down into simple language, but often they say things like "do not immanentize the eschaton" and lose 99% of the audience.
    32
  1283. It's almost like we should question all narratives that come from the State and the Lamestream Media
    32
  1284. You do realise I have people calling me a "commie" in my recent videos, right? I can't be both.
    32
  1285. @Dewitt "As in, being enthusiastic allies of the Germans in the war of extermination so they hardly innocent." Wow........ I'm so stunned by what you're saying I don't even know where to begin. Have you read anything on the topic at all? Highly recommend you pick up "Blood in the Forest" by Hunt and read that before commenting any further. "@TIK The Balts during and after the war glorified those who, with little or no encouragement from the Germans, initiated mass murder against people based on their ethno-religious identity not on 'was this person in the NKVD or not'?" You fail to mention the fact that the Soviets antagonized the situation because they promoted Jews from the Baltics to the ranks of their administration when they annexed their countries, causing the Baltic peoples to blame the Jews for what was happening to their countries. This was exactly why National Socialist (racist-socialist) propaganda worked so well back then - the Jews were a scapegoat and could be blamed for anything. If the Soviet Union hadn't invaded, the Jews in those countries wouldn't have been promoted, wouldn't have been blamed, and wouldn't have been persecuted once the Germans arrived.
    32
  1286. "That being said, this video sadly doesn't live up to the high standards I have come to expect of your channel." I didn't do this randomly. This video will lead into my Holocaust, Lend Lease, Holodomor, Nazi and Soviet economy videos that I'm going to make. I had to make this first in order to nail some basic economics down. The backlash received from my NS is S videos has forced me to go back to basics (not for my sake, but for the viewer's sake), that's why I essentially went back to basics here. "makes it seem like you have a political agenda rather than just trying to inform." My agenda is to tell the truth, backed by hard facts and evidence. I have the data and evidence to back up my claims. E.g. 28th of February 1933, the Nazis abolished private property, making all the subsequent privatizations meaningless as the paper they were written on. However, some people won't accept this fact even when I drown them in a convergence of evidence to support it. The reason is because they don't accept evidence, because they have their ideology. And this is the tactics of postmodernism. They just want to slander, which is why I'm fighting back in the comments. So, essentially, I'm committed to fighting against Nazis and Marxists on ideological grounds just to prove that the Holocaust, Holodomor, and numerous other atrocities in or around WW2 (plus the war itself) did actually happen. I'm sorry you don't enjoy these occasional videos, but I'm now fighting against political and ideological pressure to not cover the Holocaust, Holodomor, Lend Lease, the Nazi and Soviet economies etc.
    32
  1287. Monopolies are only created by governments. They do not form naturally in free markets without government intervention, as competition is always there or ready to snap the market up if the big businesses make mistakes. I do have a business, and my previous job was also a manager in a company, which I worked up the ladder from the bottom. This 'theory' works in practice. However, I'm hindered in making it work because of heavy taxation which I'm forced to pay for poor services that aren't required, and regulations that prohibited productivity, as mentioned.
    32
  1288. Maybe :)
    32
  1289. That's a good way of putting it!
    32
  1290. I mean, I could, but I think it would be better to outline what "currency" and a "free market" is before I do that. For some reason, people hear "free market" and instantly think of the world we have today... you know, because when I hear "free market" I think "forcing the gyms and other businesses to close and destroying the livelihoods of millions of people around the world" "lockdown".
    32
  1291. Well, he got that wrong, much like a lot of things
    32
  1292. I wish more people would put aside national boundaries and realise there's more important ideas to stand up for
    32
  1293. The old narrative really makes it sound like they had no trouble until they got to Stalingrad, but that really isn't the case.
    32
  1294. Nothing in this comment actually disputes the argument presented in the video. If you actually watch the video, you'll understand why.
    32
  1295. They have their excuses. Did you see the video where someone "debunked" me? He hadn't watched the video and even admits it https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    32
  1296. Interestingly a few people in the comments have asked for the same thing! As I said to them, I could do this, and I have been debating making a second channel for more off-the-cuff type content, so this is a possibility. I will consider it.
    32
  1297. Awesome! I'm glad you liked it! This one's more condense, but hopefully just as useful
    32
  1298. The ghost of Halder still haunts the archives to this day, crying out - "It vas all Madman Hitler's fault, not mein!"
    32
  1299. That's actually what I think too. I was really passionate at the beginning, but that feeling has dropped off over time... I was worried I was losing my passion for everything I was doing, but it's not. I'm really eager to do other subjects, so I know it's just the intensity of the workload for Stalingrad that's getting me down.
    32
  1300. Thank you for that, it does help the algorithm kick in :)
    32
  1301. @Marti Grey - yes, the UK is sleepwalking into totalitarianism. Currently British citizens can be kidnapped (arrested) and locked away (imprisoned) for 90 days for no reason (to 'protect' people) under the "Terrorism Act of 2006". Of course, they'd only arrest "terrorists" under that law... nobody else at all...
    32
  1302. Take a heart
    32
  1303. Thank you very much for laying that all out! I agree with your assessment and explanation, even if I disagree with the Marxist world-view. As you said, Marx wanted an economic system where the worker was in power, calling that "democracy". But it isn't democracy. Yes, in their mind, the Soviet dictatorship is a democracy, but in the real world it isn't. So what I'm calling out is the Hegelian emotionalism (I refuse to call it "logic") that allows them to lie. In Marx's idea of how the economic super-structure would work, that would be totalitarianism, because the workers being in control of the means of production is totalitarian, and the reason why is that the politics is required to dictate the economics. You cannot get to worker control without the political structure. So yes, in their mind, they don't see it that way. But in reality, that is how it is. Socialism = totalitarianism.
    32
  1304. There are loads of Socialists who never had a job. Marx barely worked (can't remember but I'm fairly sure he never had a job as well, or just a quick one), and it was Engels that supported him. He begged off his mother, and Engels, and his other friends, yet had a wife and kids to support, as well as a maid, whom he cheated on his wife with and had a kid with. Her's one quote about Marx's notes on Volume 3 of Das Kapital: “Not only did the notes need to be turned into finished prose, but the statistics were all wrong. For all his work in economics, Marx, it turns out, was as inept with math in general as with his household finances.” - Muravchik, “Heaven on Earth,” Kindle p88.
    32
  1305. So really, the decisive factor was the fact that the Germans had a limited number of ships to begin with
    32
  1306. I can't remember if Hitler talks about the Kingdom of Israel or not, but I'm sure he has an excuse.
    32
  1307. That'll be next week. I wasn't ready with that video so this was done instead
    32
  1308. Yeah, if they've got a career in mind, have done the math, and it works out, then fair enough. But so many go to uni to get a "education" and end up working crummy jobs wondering what went wrong. What happened was you committed to something without a plan, on an empty promise, and many don't even realise this after they've graduated. So people need to learn from history and don't make this mistake many of us already have done.
    32
  1309. Oh but I don't know anything else about anything other than "tanks", apparently... even though I hardly ever talk about tanks
    31
  1310. Terri did a good job with this one
    31
  1311. If you watch it at x2 speed it's even shorter ;)
    31
  1312. Oh I'm knackered haha!
    31
  1313. Thing is, I'm still studying Rommel in the North African Campaign videos. So yes, one day I'll do a review of him and other generals, but I want the nitty gritty details first
    31
  1314.  @doughboyjr9418  "the solution is a government not made up of american middle managers" -which is why Socialism, National Socialism, Fascism and all the similar derivatives are not the solution, they are more of the same. What we need is less government, not the same or more. - "very interesting you haven’t expressly spoken against mass immigration in Britain." Because this is a HISTORY channel, get with the programme. If we didn't have a welfare state, the immigrants wouldn't be coming over here. Again, the problem is all the socialists, third positionists, and benefit scroungers who keep voting for a "safety net" and "muh potholes". - "The problem isn’t with your own people" There is no "people". There are only individuals. We are not a group. I do not have "a people", nor are they "my people" or my "own" people. I am not beholden to anyone else. The so-called "British" people are voting for more government just like the "third (world) positionists" are. Their skin-colour is irrelevent to this equation, it's their collectivism that's the problem. - "There is no bigger issue, population decline pales in comparison to complete ethnic genocide." Genocide only occurs where the State is strong. The solution is less state, not more. - "Which is what it would be after every city is majority not white. I bet you’ll be begging for a racial state then, you’ll beg and long for the days of leftist idiots." I'll be long gone by that point. You think I'd stay in a country so hostile to me that it thinks it's entitled to reach into my pocket and take my hard-earned income? Do you know how guilty I feel knowing that my Patreons support me, for a portion of that to be stolen off me and go to the British government, which then wastes it on it's disgusting racial division policies, or it's playdohs? Honestly, I don't care who's in power - if they're demanding the destruction of me and my property, they don't deserve anything but my contempt.
    31
  1315.  @doughboyjr9418  I don't care who steals my money, whether they're white or some other colour is irrelevant - they're all hostile to me.
    31
  1316. To those who saw the post before saying there would be a delay: turns out YouTube had fast upload today!
    31
  1317.  @Caresfree637  Yes, I do plan to do a video on Mosley at some point. No, I don't think he was not a "good person". I do think he was a Fascist rather than a Nazi though, and I think he genuinely believed in Britain, but was deeply mistaken in his beliefs. I will explain all when I do a video on him.
    31
  1318. "TIK, this is no secret info." And yet, there are plenty of people strongly disagreeing in the comment section. They don't accept the evidence. - "I don't get how you are just now catching onto this." Because there is a lot of conflicting information, plus statements from Hitler saying he's a Christian. And it's one thing to say it's something, and another thing to prove it. With Rudolf Jung expressingly stating it, I thought that would be sufficient evidence with everything else. But no. Apparently, it's not. A lot of people are not convinced. - "How do you uphold both the Gnostic Idea and the Norse faith?" Guido von List was a hermeticist who 'discovered' the runes that were later used by the National Socialists, including the Swastika. He was influential over several early proto-Nazis, one of which founded the Thule Society. When List 'discovered' the runes, he was writing in the journal 'Gnosis'. He was also reading various types of mysticism from a wide range of beliefs. So the National Socialist religion is not the same as the old pagan religion, even if it uses the same gods and (similar) symbols. It clearly has a gnostic and hermetic influence.
    31
  1319. I thought I hadn't seen a message from you in a while! Is everything okay now? To be honest, I'm in desperate need of some time off... I'm as exhausted as the soldiers at Stalingrad
    31
  1320. NOTES, CORRECTIONS, LINKS and SOURCES - Please Read I’m near to finishing Battlestorm Operation Crusader, the next in the series I’m doing on the North African / Western Desert Campaign. So, over the next few weeks, I’m going to be concentrating on this battle, and tailoring the videos to suit. Don’t worry, I’ll be working on Stalingrad after this period. But it’s been several months now since my last Battlestorm video (The Bruneval Raid Battlestorm video was in November 2017!) and I’m getting withdrawal symptoms. Therefore Operation Crusader will be done, then back to the Eastern Front. I’ve not added the “armoured” circle to the armoured car units (except one or two). I’m not sure if they warrant it or not, given the fact that the recon-line and the three circles represent recon cars. I do also plan to go back and change some of the units prior to the main Crusader video because there’s a few issues among them. At 11:19 I say “like all British armoured fighting vehicles” - but should clarify, that I meant any that had cannon-weapons. 12:40 I’ve noticed Pienaar’s 1st South African Brigade unit has “Brink” as its name rather than “Pienaar”. I had to go back and redo some of the units to make them motorized and accidently put Brink’s name on Pienaar’s unit. I have since corrected this. Sorry about that. There’s a huge debate about the British use of Jock Columns. I’m planning on creating a video about Jock Columns in the coming weeks, after I get a video out about Kampfgruppen next week. And there’s a even bigger debate about British armoured warfare doctrine between the interwar period, plus the reasons why it was so inadequate. As it stands, I haven’t decided which reasons were more significant (and if any aren’t true, if any). This is something I will be ironing out for the main Battlestorm Crusader video, although I may also do a separate video on this too because it deserves it. Either way, British armoured warfare doctrine in the early battles of WW2 left a lot to be desired, and resulted in a lopsided British Order of Battle going into Crusader. This is perhaps why Crusader ended the way it did - with the infantry carrying the day. Links Please consider supporting me on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory and thank again you to all of you who have pledged your support. You guys are awesome! The BIG North African Campaign video playlist (including big battles, discussion, and Long Range Desert Group videos) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe The (new) Operation Crusader playlist where I’ll be putting additional videos about or related specifically to Operation Crusader https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL Battlestorm Somaliland 1940 (for Godwin-Austen’s first battle) https://youtu.be/k_xy7RCm5Ho Dubno 1941 - the BIGGEST tank battle of the war https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw “Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941?” The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2 https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 (for the discussion on why tanks alone are a bad thing) Selected Sources / Bibliography Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command.” The Definitive History of the Desert War. Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. I did use several internet sources too, including - The Order of Battle pages from “Operation Crusader” http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol013ed.html (for the biography of Brigadier Borain) Thanks for watching!
    31
  1321. A rock and a hard place
    31
  1322. Absolutely! That's the point of history - to challenge and debate people who believe in things that don't make sense.
    31
  1323. Well, if you lived in Leningrad during WW2, you'd eat it
    31
  1324.  @junfour  That's absolutely a factor. I work a lot of hours to put these videos together. I worked about 80 hours the week prior to releasing Episode 38 of Stalingrad in order to get it edited in time, and that was after a week of doing research, preparing the scripts and recording it. Not everyone's got the will to do that. Same with the other subjects. It's exhausting, and I can certainly see why people are unwilling to commit to a serious amount of reading on these topics. The simple topics are far easier and get more views anyway. People seem to prefer them
    31
  1325. Then you should be encouraging me to make more videos on the North African Campaign, because as I have said, I'm working my way through the North African Campaign first, before the US arrives in Torch, then Tunis, then Sicily and then Italy.
    31
  1326. Agreed! This is the MAIN reason Germany lost the war
    31
  1327. At no point did I "praise" anyone. I discussed this unit purely from a military standpoint, and said they fought hard. Beyond that, there was no praising. Yes, the Croatian state may have been a puppet regime, but this video is not about the state. The 369th Reinforced Croatian Infantry Regiment did not take part in atrocities. And this is history, not politics. Current political views need to be put aside when discussing history, otherwise it will colour the events of the past and mess with our understanding of the truth.
    31
  1328. Yeah, that's the issue for me too.
    31
  1329. Yeah, as I said, that's the sticking point. So it's not like I'm against the idea - I welcome it. But I don't know if it would work for more than a short period. This is why I would like the AnCaps to point me in the right direction so that this issue can be clarified.
    31
  1330. I would concentrate on it more, but I'm being pulled in every direction at the minute. Stalingrad, tanks, banks, madman, Halder...
    31
  1331.  tian wong  It would actually suit him quite well, because just like him and Lenin, they allowed a little capitalism to operate, which is why their economy is actually growing. I've got a feeling though that it's in a massive bubble that will pop one day https://youtu.be/C33AdAIkNXA
    31
  1332. I'm no good with live-streams; I prefer being able to provide references and get my words right. I like AA though, great channel 👍
    31
  1333. Thank you! I always feel bad when I release content like this. It's not "historical" work, but it's necessary talk about this stuff, especially so people can understand my biases when it comes to historical topics. So I'm glad you're enjoying it and have found this discussion useful
    31
  1334. I think it's an ego thing. People get so emotionally invested in a particular 'side' that when they hear evidence that may cause them to rethink that particular viewpoint, this then causes internal conflict. Rather than rationally questioning whether they may have been wrong, they turn to denial... and usually (although not always) back up that denial with accusations and insults.
    31
  1335. I'm glad you like them because it took me an hour to put them in 👍
    31
  1336. You should definitely keep hold of them!
    31
  1337. "They definitely didn't hoard the money, pay out executive bonuses, pay lobbyists, or just shovel it all into stock buybacks for shareholders." Hording money under a mattress is pointless. If they invested it into a bank or similar, they indirectly invested it into the economy. Same with bonuses and shareholders. Lobbyists is government corruption. The problem here is that you can't see behind closed doors, or you didn't/can't follow the path of the money, so you don't know where it was going. I'm going to recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" to you personally as this will explain this better than I can, but you can't see the "magic" (to use your own words) because it's subtle. It's obvious when your economy has 10 workers making 10 pieces of bread, but not so obvious when there's 7 billion workers. And that's why it's so easy to recruit people to the idea that capitalism is evil. Capitalism is complicated, but it's better than the alternative.
    31
  1338. lol have my heart
    31
  1339. "I might still not agree, but I know you will have made me think." I don't necessarily want you to agree, I want you to think. So I'm happy that I've convinced you to watch on :)
    31
  1340. That's why, if you watch the video itself, and read the pinned comment, as well as read the source material, and think about it, it makes perfect sense. There's a convergence of evidence that says this is the case. Or there's the lazy postmodernist "you're wrong" mentality... your choice, I guess.
    31
  1341. Disliking the video doesn't prove I'm wrong; it means I've hit a nerve.
    31
  1342. Great counterargument there. You'd make a great postmodernist.
    31
  1343. I don't want to spoil anything at the moment, but I'll explain the Ruhr issue when we get to it. In this series we've only reached the years 1919 and 1920!
    31
  1344. Thanks Goebbels! (never thought I'd say that)
    31
  1345. I think both types of videos are important, but yes I agree.
    31
  1346. Good point. It still confirms my point at the end - that the external powers wanted to save Austria in 1848, but not in 1918
    31
  1347. That's awesome!
    31
  1348. I fully agree. The problem I have right now is that it's hard to actually tackle the arguments because the arguments are difficult to find due to all the censorship. I understand why people knee-jerk react and demand that Nazi or Communist books and content get taken down, but it doesn't solve the issue. All it does is drive it underground, making it more difficult for people like me to address it.
    31
  1349.  @dwizzi1724  Democracy? Here's your democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    31
  1350. This is the problem. They can make stuff up without evidence because they "believe", and there's nothing you can say to break them out of the spell. They "believe" that humanity is divided into "racial spirits" without a shred of evidence, and no amount of logic or counter-evidence can convince them otherwise.
    31
  1351. And the only reason that happens is because Premiere Pro bugs out and can't do a simple fade while you've applied opacity and Ultra Key for green screen to a layer.
    31
  1352. First!
    31
  1353. Thanks 😂 I've not finished watching it, so I've got a painful few hours ahead of me at some point, let alone making notes and taking screenshots of it
    31
  1354. @Muhamed Muratovic - this is my profession! And yes, I have a degree in history, although that's meaningless. History is studied via books and sources, not in lecture halls
    31
  1355. I must say, I do like it when two socialists who disagree with me on the definition of Socialism get into a heated debate with each other in the comments of my videos over the 'true' definition. It quickly devolves into a swear-word competition, and obviously both of them accuse each other of being 'fascists' and members of the 'far-right'.
    31
  1356. I wouldn't challenge your professors. Play the game, nod and agree with them, tell them what they want to hear and get the grade. Once you've got the grade, then you can start challenging others if you want to.
    31
  1357. Imagine if I had started this series on, let's say, the 13th of September 1942... Viewers would have gotten the wrong impression of the battle. I hope by doing this in full, everyone is realizing that Stalingrad is so much more than just the city itself (although the city is probably the bit everyone wants to hear about)
    31
  1358.  @oceanmadrosci3381  Maybe, but it also doesn't come up in search thanks to TIKTOK, so I changed it
    31
  1359. A few reasons, but the main one seems to be that they wanted to control trade between islands, and people were smuggling goods via boats. That's why they let some of them fish in the day, near the coast, and weren't allowed to trade between boats. There may have been other reasons but that seems to be the main one
    31
  1360. Wow! Thank you for your comment! It's long, but it's actually something I needed to hear right now. There's so many detractors, criticisms, and false accusations (someone's just accused me of "pandering to the Fastests and neo-Nazis") that it's very disheartening. The threat of being deplatformed is real and that's a worry. But knowing that people appreciate the effort I'm making keeps me going. So thank you!
    31
  1361. The answer is leave the gate open so the kid runs away to become roadkill and thus avoids a mediocre life as a retail employee
    31
  1362. They did not. But the Allies did.
    31
  1363. You're right that there were many reasons for the failure of this Operation, and it would take too long to list them all here. However, if you were to choose the major/one/critical reason for the failure, which would you chose? For me, it's the failure to take Nijmegen Bridge. That doesn't excuse the poor planning, the British at Arnhem (who really dropped the ball) or that XXX Corps might have been able to race off to Arnhem after Nijmegen Bridge was finally taken. But, for me, it was the biggest factor in the collapse. The 36 hour delay at Nijmegen is inexcusable. "The resources for MG should have been used to clear the Scheldt but everyone was too blinded by the idea of finishing the war by Christmas, so Antwerp wouldn't be necessary." This operation was probably not aimed at riding off to Berlin, and probably was in fact about clearing the Scheldt https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM "Ike or Monty should have overruled the USAAC and RAF and insisted on two drops the first day." Brereton made that decision. "Bremerton should have ordered him to stay behind, but Bremerton simply checked out with regard to this battle." No, Brereton had an active part in the planning of the operation. He just didn't follow the troops into battle like Browning. "But in the end, if you have to blame one man, it has to be Browning. He was so worried he was going to miss out on the fighting, as he had done so far, that nothing was going to prevent this operation from going forward and him from commanding it. There is evidence he ordered Gavin to concentrate on the Groesbeek Heights as more important than going for the bridge." That's fine if you want to blame Browning as he made a lot of mistakes, and perhaps made the decision not to take the Nijmegen Bridge on day 1. Blaming the Poles is certainly inexcusable. "Even if the 82nd had taken the bridge, it is not assured that XXX Corps reaches Arnhem in time." Possibly. However I do think it would have been easier to fight 10th SS Panzer Division north of Nijmegen than inside a city they'd had two days to fortify. "They were to be supported by attacks on either flank, but those stalled almost immediately." This is Montgomery's fault. O'Connor didn't know about the operation until the last minute, which explains why his 8th Corps couldn't keep up. And it's not like O'Connor wasn't a good general. His performance during Operation Compass in 1940-41 was brilliant https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk "The plan was abortive from the start and had almost no chance of success, even if everything went right." I don't see it like that. At the end of day 1, every bridge except Nijmegen Bridge was taken (Son was blown but the area was taken). Even after a 14 hour delay at Son Bridge, XXX Corps was at Nijmegen on time with a full day to go the last 8 miles to Arnhem to reach it on time. It was then delayed by a critical 36 hours due to the Germans having possession of Nijmegen, which they really shouldn't have had. If the 82nd had gone for the bridge (which they did, but only after delaying for several crucial hours on day 1) they would have taken it before 10th SS Panzer Division even arrived on the scene. Therefore, the plan was only abortive because Gavin and/or Browning messed up at Nijmegen. It had a good chance of success, until the decision was made not to go for Nijmegen bridge. "So, yes, Gavin should have moved more quickly to secure the Bridge at Nijmegan. But to blame the failure of the whole operation on him is scapegoating." XXX Corps was blocked at Nijmegen. That's not scapegoating. That's just a fact. Ignoring this critical error and then blaming Montgomery for everything, isn't fair either. Montgomery should bear responsibility for the operation's success or failure, since he was ultimately in charge and that's how "responsibility" works. However, the operation itself failed at the tactical level thanks to the decision not to go for the Nijmegen Bridge on day 1. If you want to blame Gavin, fine. If you want to blame Browning, fine. If you want to blame both, fine. But Montgomery isn't to blame for the tactical failure to take Nijmegen Bridge. And, just to be clear, I'm not a Montgomery fanboy. I can't wait to dive into his other battles so I can get to grips with the failures he made elsewhere. However, I'm not convinced he was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden. Maybe the plan could have been different. Maybe it would have been better if the plan wasn't attempted at all. But even as it was, Market Garden could have worked... had Nijmegen Bridge been taken on day 1. And there's no valid excuse as to why it shouldn't have been.
    31
  1364. Me too. Glad you enjoyed this! Don't forget to check out my other Battlestorm documentaries.
    31
  1365. Don't you do it!
    30
  1366. I can definitely confirm I've done 406,938 words so far. However I've officially lost track, and I've been using some of the books while writing the script, but not making separate documents for them (just directly referencing them in the script) so I'm not sure I could give an accurate number. What I can tell you is that the script for the first two videos is done (minus some tweaking), and I'm working on the third right now. I'm also working on the map at the minute too, which is proving to be quite a colossal task..
    30
  1367. But but but - the math says so! ;)
    30
  1368. Fingers are a cost-effective solution to all problems
    30
  1369. Awesome! I'm trying to bridge the gap between the TV documentaries and 5 minute history videos on YouTube, and the books, so it's nice to know that it's working!
    30
  1370. @Kenneth Knoppik - true, although to be fair, striking a balance is pretty hard. I think a lot of people are so used to people who blatantly side with one side or another that they assume everyone does it. In my case, I don't care for taking sides. I'm just trying to find the truth, which means I annoy almost everyone. Well, so be it :)
    30
  1371. Yeah, and there will be more on this topic in the future because I need to address the criticisms... Thought I'd get this video out, then see what the critics are, then tackle them all in one go in another video in a few weeks time
    30
  1372. I take it you enjoyed the video then? :)
    30
  1373. Oh don't worry, I'm pushing! Exhausted today though if I'm honest. I should be working right now, but I'm actually going to give myself half an hour or so to respond to comments.
    30
  1374. I don't make my videos to be definitive; I want my videos to act as the spark, to encourage you to do more research. Sources I used are in the pinned comment.
    30
  1375. There is no break! I've got to crack on :)
    30
  1376. You may hear from me a little more often soon as I'm in a fairly-good position with Gazala now, so I want to concentrate on publishing more regular videos in the meantime
    30
  1377.  @kaustubhillindala2643  The long videos are here to stay, but I have wondered if doing shorter videos on non-Mondays would be something people want
    30
  1378. Haha good to hear a few people got that one ;)
    30
  1379. I can absolutely see why it's not taught in the west then. The big problem is that this will come to bite hard when a proper war does break out. Surely practice could overcome these problems, and proper classroom training prior to going out on the field? Also, infantry use AFVs. Surely they cooperate all the time? Do the same principles not apply??
    30
  1380. They've quoted an article to me before that "proves" they didn't nationalize the industries. Not only is this source written by a Marxist and completely misses the mark, but the author even admits they "privatized" the industries by handing them back to Nazi Party members. Considering the Nazi Party was the State, that's not privatisation. I'll be covering this in a future video. But yes, Wikipedia is dominated by Marxists, which is why their "Fascism" page is complete rubbish. And also why they distinguish Fascist-syndicalism from Marxist syndicalism, even though they are the same.
    30
  1381. "And your analysis of Capitalism was overly ideological, would you call the War Time Economy of the United States Capitalist with the tremendous amount of government control?" If you have a black market, that's an indication that you don't have a free market. If you don't have a free market, you don't have capitalism. The reality is that all economies have parts which are capitalist and socialist to some extent. But some are more socialist than others. Too much socialism ends up in Fascist/National Socialist/Marxist Totalitarianism. Too little and you have anarchy. All that matters in our discussion on Fascism and National Socialism is - were they trying to create more socialism (state control) or not? If they were, they were socialist. "I believe it is Fascism, but a particular German form of Fascism." Fascism is a completely different ideology. This would be like saying the Protestant Church is the Catholic Church. Yes they are similar, but they're not the same, rather they are part of the Abrahamic religions. "Fascism is NOT about economics, it is about power and the force of their particular ideology to use whatever economic tools necessary to achieve their vision." So it Marxism. That's why it doesn't matter if their economics doesn't work, or that they're aiming for anarcho-capitalism (a state-less class-less society).
    30
  1382. Well, this isn't technically part of that series, since this is just me going through the Agar-Hamilton South African History Book which tries to defend Pienaar. I don't think it would have fit within the framework of the series. But I think it definitely needed covering because people were defending him in ways that are not defendable, as you'll see in the video.
    30
  1383. You can defend him by saying he didn't want his brigade to get destroyed too. But you can't say he couldn't have moved north, as the South African Official History tried to do.
    30
  1384. I will probably do videos on the Great Recession at some point in the future. Not yet, but I will. It impacts all the countries involved in WW2, and actually explains a lot of things
    30
  1385. That is a good point! Yes, Britain was bankrupt by 1942 and was entirely dependent on the USA from that point onwards
    30
  1386. Yes, exactly! It was desperate enough outside the city, let alone once they actually got to it!
    30
  1387. I'm actually beginning to worry about that particular issue
    30
  1388. Can do. But that will come later.
    30
  1389. That's why they hate each other, they're so similar. They're competing over the same ground.
    30
  1390. The sad part about it - it's true. Some people honestly think Rommel is godlike
    30
  1391. They didn't fight for the city though. They held the flanks on the Don and the area south of Stalingrad, and fought for the encirclement operation (Operation Uranus). But did not take part in the assault for the city. That assault was only made by Sixth and Fourth Panzer Armies. So I was correct, it's the only non-German Axis unit to right at the battle of Stalingrad
    30
  1392.  @newbichote7178  No, to be honest. I obviously try to play things safe, but I know people get offended by the slightest things, so this is why my Patreons and SubscribeStars are important because they'll keep this channel going regardless whether YouTube pays me or not.
    30
  1393. Good question 😂
    30
  1394. They had no mercy for me
    30
  1395. Are you sure? Read the pinned comment too.
    30
  1396. In 40 days time, I would like to hear that you passed this period with flying colours and didn't touch alcohol or chocolate 👍
    30
  1397. Hahaha yeah
    30
  1398.  @mitchconner6831  No, he is correct to some extent. The very first video or two I made on this subject wasn't great, nor backed up by the on-screen references (because I only came up with the reference-bar idea in the Public vs Private video). Only really from the 5-hour video onwards has the argument been significantly improved.
    30
  1399. It's absolutely rediculous. If you think about it, I nearly did a full other Battlestorm documentary in about 3 weeks (Rommel's 2nd Offensive), yet it's taken me from 2017 to late 2022 and I'm still nowhere near finishing Stalingrad.
    30
  1400. Yes, and as someone else has pointed out, withdrawing in the middle of a blizzard wouldn't be easy. Paulus would have had a difficult time as it was if he'd been fighting in the summer. Given the immobility of his army and the fact he only really understood the danger of encirclement at mid-day on the 21st, it really doesn't make sense to order a withdraw.
    30
  1401. @GrandSnow469 Yes, both sides aren't innocent. However, that's not the point. The Left are now openly anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist, and racist. Plus, as I've shown numerous times, they always have been. Once again, people don't listen, and history is repeating.
    30
  1402. Absolutely, you should look at both sides of the argument
    30
  1403. Hey Anton! It's a good idea, and I could maybe do that with some of the topics I've covered, but I think I rely too much on secondary sources right now to allow me to do it with a lot of the topics. I'm sure there's copyright issues with these videos (like relying on Glantz works too much...) but I feel that the visuals give me an excuse, whereas a book maybe wouldn't. Also, the visuals really enhance the message, as does the audio. Many people do other things as they listen to the videos and don't actually watch the visuals. But the audio is important.
    30
  1404. My pleasure :) and I'm glad you're reconsidering the events of WW2. It's good to keep an open mind with history.Logistics isn't something that's been written about (at least not in English) as a study on its own. I would love to find a book that talks purely about the German and Soviet logistics in WW2, but as far as I'm aware, one doesn't exist. I'm therefore suspicious about all these claims about logistics being made across the internet or even in books on the Eastern Front. I think some of it isn't accurate. I suspect that we won't be able to find the truth until a proper study is done. (same goes with Lend-Lease, which has also got a lack of literature on it)
    30
  1405. Yes, and many of the "battalions" had a couple dozen guys in them. This is where the idea comes from that the Germans were moving division symbols on their maps when in reality those divisions weren't there at all. Of course, some remnants of divisions were there, but these could hardly be called divisions, and were barely at regiment-strength at this point.
    30
  1406. Maybe, but I intend to take a month off when it ends to recover!
    30
  1407. Terri's outdone herself again with this one!
    30
  1408. I'm sorry that a tree fell on you
    30
  1409. It's funny how they would bring this up even though the evidence for it is sparse due to most of it being under lock and key, yet dismiss the mountain of evidence we have for the H. (Not saying the full H word due to YouTube censoring my comments.)
    30
  1410.  @GenocideWesterners  I'm curious what your opinion is on the Bengal famine. I intend to do a video on it in the future (this and the National Socialist Aryan Religion videos were part of the preparation for that). You're happy that Churchill stood up to the Axis, but I'm guessing you also don't like his actions at Bengal? Or is it something else?
    30
  1411. That's really good to hear! Interestingly, this channel also reignited my passion for history... after university extinguished it. So it's a win for both of us!
    29
  1412. I'm glad you're enjoying the series! "The only way I see those casualty numbers being even somewhat realistic is if the Germans were dug into defensive positions in rough terrain, with the addition of their superiority in air power, local tactics, and materiél." That's exactly what happened. The Germans were dug in, the Soviets were advancing across open terrain, had little artillery, no air support, and their infantry got separated from their tanks. They also attacked day after day for several days when their troops were exhausted, having started the offensive after several units had been fighting for weeks before, which is why they went nowhere after the first day. - "You've seen the casualty reports and strength reports of the German units and I haven't, however I believe a casualty ratio of ~10 000 German to ~40 000 Soviet is more realistic." German casualties were probably as I said - 4,000-ish, maybe slightly higher. Definitely not 10,000 otherwise there wouldn't have been anything left. Soviet casualties are a bit of a guesstimate, however the point is that they did take heavy casualties, and even admitted that they took heavy casualties.
    29
  1413. You're not the only one to say that... I may do a video on this issue in the future
    29
  1414. Yes exactly, and this is before the Germans even got to the city. That's why it's annoying when authors ignore this period of the fighting. It's impact is too important to miss out
    29
  1415. Yes, I think that is partly true
    29
  1416. He's a historian who's published a few books on Barbarossa. The link to his article is in the description
    29
  1417. And there was that British guy at Arnhem (Robert Henry Cain) who ran around with a mortar trying to take out German tanks. Apparently he took a few out with it too
    29
  1418. Was there a famine just after the war? Very interesting... I didn't know that! Could you recommend a book about it, or another source?
    29
  1419. Yeah, I don't get "uncomfortable" at all. I challenge the accepted narrative in almost every video, and this video itself also challenges some of the narratives. This is just another typical Turd Positionist troll comment.
    29
  1420. Yes, I stand corrected. Thanks!
    29
  1421. Loved this comment. I haven't specifically studied this time period, but there has always been the doubt in my mind that "Soviet communism" didn't work. If it didn't work, they why did it survive from 1917 to 1989? Clearly it must have worked. I have written down the idea and I will (at some point) come back to answer this in a video. I can't promise it'll be any time soon, but I will. Thank you very much for your comment :)
    29
  1422. This is what a lot of people don't understand. Thank you.
    29
  1423. Terri did the thumbnail, but she didn't colour that photo of Chuikov. You can find the coloured photo online though.
    29
  1424. I may have to do a follow-up on him discussing the events. Someone last time (forget the name) insisted that I get and read the South African History on the battle to see Pienaar's point of view. It arrived yesterday.
    29
  1425. Glad you enjoyed it!
    29
  1426. Meesa Jedi? Yousa should follow me now, okeeday?
    29
  1427. There's a lack of names and images. It's mainly due to the sources to be honest, because most sources in English are from the German and thus don't name the commanders. Those that do don't always have pictures, or the pictures they do have may not be suitable for the image cards (too small/blurry etc)
    29
  1428. lol
    29
  1429. That was what Hofmann said during the trial in 1924.
    29
  1430. "I hadn’t heard before that german pilots didn’t use parachutes at Stalingrad. Is that real or Soviet propaganda?" I have no idea. I included it to see what people's reactions would be, and see if anyone else has another source which confirms or denies it.
    29
  1431. Why would you want a murderous and racist totalitarian dictatorship that's willing to wage wars of aggression and starve millions of innocent people in order to provide more food for the fatherland to win?
    29
  1432. Nice! When do you start teaching?
    29
  1433.  @Lilliathi  "We're not just individuals though. We're a group animal." You might be an animal, but I'm not. - "We're both individuals and part of a group," But we're not animals, and that 'group' is not a solid entity. Individuals come together at times to work together, but then we go our separate ways. - "because working together makes us more successful." Perhaps, but again, there is no magical "spirit" that unites us.
    29
  1434. You have no idea how hard it was to break a habit of a lifetime. I practiced for a couple of hours in order to say it a bit more naturally (and I still don't think I got it right haha)
    29
  1435.  @QuizmasterLaw  Remember how you were saying that libertarians like me are all nazis. Surely this video shows you're wrong? Also, weren't you saying that international law didn't apply to Keelhaul for various reasons, all of which would also excuse the Nazis of this crime too?
    29
  1436. I'm not sure what you mean by me not providing the context? The context is that people (see comments in this video) are saying that the Germans were superior to the Soviets, in terms of skill, training, fighting prowes, etc. That is the context. I don't know what else you want me to say about that. And yes, that's the point - it doesn't make sense that the Germans were able to replace their losses, yet we hear that their divisions were understrength. Clearly there's a discrepancy in what the German generals are saying compared to the raw hard facts (in my opinion, I think Halder is the main guy we must blame for this). We know by simply crunching the numbers, that the Germans have the most men they ever had in the east in July of 1943. In terms of outnumbered - the Germans outnumbered the Soviets on day 1 of the campaign. This is why they do so well in the early stage of the war. The first time the Germans are outnumbered is December 1941. Coincidentally, that's when the German advance stops. Now, what people (again, see comments in this video) are saying is that the Germans were outnumbered from the get-go, and that this proves that they were better soldiers because they were able to defeat the Soviets when they were outnumbered. But the reality is that this is simply not true. The Germans are not able to repeat the successes of 1941... because they no longer outnumber the Soviets. THIS is the point. They only win when they outnumber the Soviets. What I was saying in this video is this. The Germans do so well in 1941 when they outnumber the Soviets. People don't THINK they're actually outnumbered from the first day of the war. They then assume the Germans had a superior army to the Soviets because how else would they achieve such success in 1941 (when they're outnumbered, even though they're not). I then pointed out that the Germans outnumber the Soviets in 1941 (until December), and that they were ONLY outnumbered by 2 to 1, or 3 to 1, throughout the war. The reason for this is because I wanted to show that - given the current assumption that the Germans were outnumbered from the first day of the war and that they could achieve so much in 1941 because of their "superiority" - why couldn't they repeat the successes of 1941 in the period 1942-1945? The answer is that they couldn't repeat the successes of 1941 because they no longer outnumbering the Soviets. They no longer had the fuel to fight the maneuver war they wanted to. They no longer had the strategic surprise they had on day 1. They no longer faced an enemy that was in the middle of an unfinished mobilization effort, where they were transitioning their units across the front. They no longer faced an enemy that were unprepared for war. The Soviets fought hard in 1941-1945. They didn't win because of Lend-Lease, or because of mass hordes of infantry and tanks. Yes, they did have more - but that does not tell the full story. Ultimately, what I'm saying is that the Red Army rifleman was just as capable as the German Schützen. This, in fact, increases the German successes in 1941 even more, because it shows the Germans were able to defeat an equal enemy, while taking very few losses doing so. And it also praises the Germans that they were able to hold out against superior numbers for so long. BUT this truth requires people to accept that the Soviet soldiers were not bad soldiers. That they were comparable to the Germans. And apparently, this is a bitter pill to swollow for most people in this comment section. The point of this video was to question the assumptions that most people have about the Eastern Front of WW2 - which is exactly what I did. I did not offer explanations, I just showed that these assumptions (given to us by Halder and the German generals) weren't correct.
    29
  1437. "Wouldn't defeating the British lift the blockade of Germany and also give Germany access to "British" oil from the Middle East as part of a peace deal?" Hitler wasn't interested in lifting the British blockade because he thought that he could get all the land and resources he needed in the East. Plus, a peace treaty with the British wouldn't necessarily mean that Britain gives up the Middle East, or the oil there. "Surely the simple explanation of the halt would be that Hitler and his generals believed the Luftwaffe could destroy the encircled British Army and sink a good proportion of the Royal Navy in the process? If Hitler and the generals believed the Luftwaffe could destroy the encircled British Army and sink a large chunk of the Royal Navy then the halt order makes perfect sense." Yes, absolutely. The tactical reasons are part of it. I just think there's also a strategic reason too. "The whole it was not us who made a mistake, it was not a military decision but a political decision made by Hitler smacks of retrospective reputation polishing." Hitler is evil and his political, social and economic ideas were ridiculous. I'm not polishing Hitler's reputation. I just don't think he was a "madman" as some believe. Evil yes, mad/evil policies yes, insane no. "Not the sort of thing Hitler would say is it, but pretending it was out of some altruistic respect for the British Empire sounds just like him. Hitler was never a man to admit errors of judgement, he was in his own eyes an infallible genius." Absolutely agree. But this doesn't, by itself, undermine that the theory presented.
    29
  1438. First! Congrats!
    29
  1439.  Ho Lee Fukk  I'm assuming you're referring to Russia in the 1990s. But Russia also went through a hyperinflation during the Russian Civil War, and I'll be briefly mentioning this in this series because it's relevant to what happened in Germany at the time.
    29
  1440. "where the top 1% own more than the bottom 50%, if you think the oligarchy is "evil" then you must be stupid, right TIK!" We can't all own Buckingham Palace because there's only one of them. Again, basic economics. If we could produce 7 billion Buckingham Palaces, we'd all have one.
    29
  1441. Haha I used the Manstein outline to trick people into assuming it was someone other than the guilty party ;)
    29
  1442. You've no idea how tempted I am to call it quits for a week or two... but I can't stop 😂
    29
  1443. There were attacks in the north designed to distract the Germans, but they were weak and didn't do anything noteworthy.
    29
  1444. I hope the remaining 4 hours 40 minutes meet your expectations 🙂
    29
  1445. Yes I only discovered that particular book recently. It would have come in handy for this!
    29
  1446. Thank you sir! I've pinned your comment so I can remind everyone that Anton Joly has his own Stalingrad channel that you should all be watching too https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA
    29
  1447. I'm working up to it. I just want to clarify some things on the German side first.
    29
  1448. Yes, it's because of that, but also because most of the counter-arguments I've had about Hitler being a socialist come from the American 'liberals'.
    29
  1449. Just to clarify mraso30, the pause is only for Stalingrad. There's going to be other videos every Monday as usual. And I'm definitely not abandoning Stalingrad. Episode 43 has already been recorded and is currently being edited by my editor, but will take a while to do. I will return to the series at some point, and I'm determined for it not to be too long, just long enough for me to catch my breath before the final thrust.
    29
  1450. I had a couple of 'half work days' last week, and managed to catch up with Stalingrad research and scripts. Also plan to catch up more this week, but doing this short video was absolutely necessary
    29
  1451.  @SergeantAradir  "similar to you calling british educational ministry "marxist"" Are you saying that the government do not have "diversity officers" teaching Marxist/Nazi Critical Racist Theory in every university, every police force, every council, every bureaucracy, and every other government institution you can name (the BBC, the fire service...)? Or have you just not looked? And to preempt you, yes Critical Race Theory is both Marxist and is promoting racist thought https://youtu.be/rSHL-rSMIro
    29
  1452. Of course there are!
    29
  1453. I'm certain they've had a psychological impact! Also, I'm tempted to entitle tomorrow's video "The Epic of Pienaar". Haven't decided yet
    29
  1454. Really!? Nuts! 😢
    29
  1455. In gold we trust
    29
  1456. Links to other people’s videos that are interesting: The Irish Marxist Leninist’s “The Nazis Were NOT Socialist - Response to TIK” video. https://youtu.be/vaA_hix9E9k this was good, but fails to understand that the National Socialists weren’t capitalist, and doesn’t grasp that this isn’t Marxist Socialism. Blitz of the Reich’s “Nazism is not Capitalist nor is it Socialist... it's something else (TIK Video Response)” https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I this was very good. I don’t necessarily agree that it wasn’t socialism, but he makes a very good argument for it being neither capitalism or socialism. Highly recommend his channel. Hitler and Economics | Thomas E. Woods, Jr. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0 This is a “conservative” institution talking about the National Socialist economy. Yes, it’s biased (just like all sources), but it makes it clear that this wasn’t capitalism. There were other response videos too, but these pretty much covered all the points. Links to interesting articles that claim that National Socialism was not Socialism (which I linked in the original pinned comment, but nobody seemed to see that and thought I wasn’t taking in what other people were saying) - “Hitler was not a socialist, even if he did stash champagne” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/11655230/Hitler-was-not-a-socialist-even-if-he-did-stash-champagne.html A good example as to why you shouldn’t trust the traditional media for your information. “An entirely Americentric argument, spurred on by certain batty ideologues and infamous websites, claims that Adolf Hitler was not the far-right, anti-communist nationalist that everyone else remembers him to be, but rather an egalitarian socialist.” https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_socialism [This page was last modified on 8 August 2018] Hitler was anti-communist, so not sure where the author of this page got that idea from. But being anti-communist does not make him an anti-socialist. “Man says Nazis were socialist, gets schooled by history writer” https://www.indy100.com/article/nazi-socialist-right-wing-white-supremacists-history-twitter-mikestuchbery-7900001 Yes, except the history writer in this case thinks fascism and national socialism are the same thing. They are not. Thanks for watching and reading!
    28
  1457. That's the idea :) cheers Case!
    28
  1458. Yeah that's the way I see it too. It was probably the best decision in the moment (although I would also argue that Halder is still to blame for not having enough reserves, since he is the Chief of Staff) and if it had resulted in the capture of the city, then we'd be saying how great a decision it was. But the point is that Halder tried to have his cake and eat it too. He tried to deny that he'd made this decision, whilst saying Hitler refused to send reinforcements to Stalingrad, whilst claiming that if only Hitler had listened to him it would have been fine, whilst also saying that feeding reinforcements into the city was a bad idea, even though he had decided to send these 3 extra divisions into Stalingrad. Halder is wrong in so many ways and on so many levels here that I'm struggling to list them all! 😂
    28
  1459. @Calum Deighton  I really want to do Normandy one day - I think that would be extremely interesting at battalion level, and I'll be able to access the English language sources. More has been written about it too, so there will be tons of detail. But I don't think it would be right to do Normandy without fully understanding the context, which can only be got by going through the North African Campaign. The dislike and distrust between the different generals and the different armies is necessary to wade through, which is why I started that. So basically, if you want me to do Normandy one day, you should be encouraging me to pause Stalingrad and do more videos on the North African Campaign 😂
    28
  1460. I would argue they're making it up and throwing their men into the mincing machine, then claiming that they were geniuses later. But I know others will disagree
    28
  1461. That's interesting information. Thank you!
    28
  1462. Highly recommend 1984. My favourite fiction book... mostly because it's almost a factual documentary
    28
  1463. That is precisely it. I'm not "against" the Germans, I'm against the "bias" in the literature which favours the Germans. And also, I'm glad you don't agree with me on everything. I'd encourage you not to agree with me, because I want the people who watch my videos to think! But if people disagree, there's no need to scream in the comments and sling insults at each other. That's not thinking, that being childish
    28
  1464. Yeah, I can't believe it was a year ago to the week that I uploaded the previous video. That year has flown!
    28
  1465. Same thing ;) (and here comes the hate)
    28
  1466. RouG - Regardless, it isn't the eastern-front for the Soviets is it? So juggalo is right, it doesn't make sense to call it that
    28
  1467. Sabaton?
    28
  1468. Yeah, it's definitely not something you hear of every day.
    28
  1469.  @doughboyjr9418  Also, I'm not a libertarian. I'm just not a race-collectivist like yourself.
    28
  1470. I think I've shot myself in the foot by insisting on covering campaigns in the early part of the war before heading to the mid and later parts. I know why I've done that (to put things in order and give context), but I really want to cover US troops in battle :/
    28
  1471. I would enjoy a Stalingrad version of that song 😂
    28
  1472. @techgeekout xd, I could do both - list them in the pinned comment and the video. Although people probably shouldn't be copying my sources like that. They should be referencing my video (as a secondary or tertiary source), and then only listing my sources if they use them themselves.
    28
  1473. @Curium 96, but the sources are now listed in the video, so there's no reason to list them in the pinned comment.
    28
  1474. "I’ve fallen in love with the Eastern front because of you." Words you won't hear the soldiers say ;) glad you're enjoying the videos!
    28
  1475. To make you aware of the scale of this, David Glantz has a five book "trilogy" on this battle. Yes, you read that correctly. A five book trilogy. This battle is so huge numbers cease to have any meaning.
    28
  1476. My mentality now is - those who aren't willing to listen or continue to deny the reality of Fascism and National Socialism aren't worth worrying about. So I'm going to carry on with the Nazi economy and Holocaust even if the comment section of every video turns into a bloodbath. So far (first hour or so), this one hasn't, but I'm expecting the Marxists and National Socialists to start brigading soon when word gets out.
    28
  1477. There's nothing wrong with pessimism!
    28
  1478. That's not true! THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE
    28
  1479. Ah yes, unemployment only happens when "muh immigration", and no unemployment before "muh immigration" 🤦‍♂️
    28
  1480. That's true, and being interrogated by the British and Americans may have also caused him to downplay his role in certain events
    28
  1481. @hemmertapping - I've got some people saying I've got an "anti-German" bias, and then there's you saying I'm "pro-German". Turns out I can't be both, and indeed, I'm neither. This isn't a "nazi battle p*rn... channel". This is a history channel where I give an as accurate an account of the largest war in history. Yes, the war involved Nazis, Marxists and Fascists, but that doesn't mean I'm in favour of any of them. In fact, I've done quite a few videos against all three of those evil ideologies. The only narrative that you should get from these videos is that war is a terrible tragedy and an awful waste of lives and resources
    28
  1482. Thank you very much! I've just accepted them so they should start displaying now
    28
  1483. Did you know that Hitler's religion was his Socialism? And that he was fundamentally anti-Christian, since Christianity derived from Judaism, so Hitler and the leadership of the National Socialists deemed Christianity to be Jewish? Jesus was Jewish after all. Now yes, there is a historical debate on this, and I'm still in the process of reading about it. I will do doing a video in the future to explain both sides of the argument. However, apart from one or two instances in Mein Kampf, Hitler's views on Christianity was clear - he despised it.
    28
  1484. I did reply to you, but it seems my reply got auto deleted... I'll try and type it a bit more cryptic this time to get around Skynet. You are correct, but also that Hitler thought that capitalism was "J" as well. So he believed both capitalism and Marxism was a "J" plot to take over the world. Therefore, he implemented a National Socialism which was neither capitalism nor full communism, which he believed would save Germany and the "A" "race". Rather than "tricking the workers", he actually tricked the conservatives, the church and the middle classes into voting for him, most of whom regretted it later.
    28
  1485. It's standing but now belongs to the state.
    28
  1486. "That would literally make any country with a central bank socialist." If it's a state-controlled central bank, then yes it is. Although many central banks are not state controlled. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. Laissez-faire - or leave alone - is no government intervention, which is what most conservative capitalist governments favour. At least, that was the terms used at the time.
    28
  1487. Yes, it's quite strange. I feel like I'm being controversial saying this, and it's weird. But you're correct that the Eastern Front is inseparable from the atrocities, which is why I knew I'd have to cover these events eventually.
    28
  1488.  @jamestheotherone742  Why would you want to kill them in the first place?
    28
  1489. Interesting fact, I didn't know that!
    28
  1490. Yes! You can imagine the panic and chaos if Paulus gave the order to withdraw
    28
  1491. The mask certainly has slipped lower than it's done before... The Left have truly become the next dictator's willing executioners.
    28
  1492. I'm glad to hear! I should be doing more on this subject, and I would encourage you to watch the second video in the series on the Weimar Hyperinflation when it comes out because it'll add context to a lot of what I've said here in terms of why Hitler came to the conclusions that he did.
    28
  1493.  @slaterslater5944  Oh, and he also called a Polish Jew "a clown" for pointing out what had happened to his family in Poland by both the National Socialists and the Soviet Union. Truly despicable, Slater.
    28
  1494. Yes, Austria-Hungary seems to be the exception, and I'm not sure why. I was even taught this old narrative in college
    28
  1495.  Evan Langston  You made me laugh out loud, thank you for that!
    28
  1496. I agree. It was this topic that made me wake up from the socialist religion, so it stands to reason that if socialists understand this argument, then they will also abandon the faith.
    28
  1497. Hey everyone - I want your input! This was an experiment to see how quick I could make a Battlestorm video using 2D graphics. I only started this yesterday and finished it this morning - so the answer is - I can make these Lite videos pretty fast! Just to note, I only used one source for this video (which is not like me at all) and did it in such a rush I didn't realise you can't read the text above the units. I'll make sure to get it right next time. I'm already working on the next video which will be on the formation and first exploits of The Long Range Desert Group. That video may not be out quite as quick as this one as I'm going to use several sources as per usual. So going forward, I'm going to make Battlestorm-Lite videos and every so often a main Battlestorm video. Now, the question is - which battles should I cover in each? I haven't made up my mind yet, so your input could make the difference. Battlestorm Lite is quicker to make and has 2D graphics. Battlestorm is very very slow to make, but has nice 3D graphics. So what do you think?? Let me know! :)
    28
  1498. "Also, the people who cry 'privatization' don't know what private means." CORRECT! That's why I keep encouraging people to watch my Public vs Private video, but people don't. They don't want to educate themselves on what the word actually means (and hte word Public too) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    28
  1499. "maybe stop punting for neo nazis and other fascists instead of deliberately muddying the waters for their benefit then." You didn't see Monday's video where I picked apart Nazi sources. You also didn't watch this video where I talked about 'Race' not being a thing https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label
    28
  1500. Thanks for being concerned! But I'm actually on a bit of a roll right now - having got this video out, and done a decent go at next week's script today. As a result, I may be able to get a day off later this week! Seem to have also got over my burnout ☺️
    28
  1501. I guess that's the one thing not in short supply.
    28
  1502. Already done https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    28
  1503. Hey Vass! Don't worry, your question was a great question. In fact, I'm surprised YouTube hasn't already taken my channel down based on most of my recent videos on the POWs and the suffering civilians etc... The problem here is Corporate YouTube's policies. I'm happy to be open and honest with everyone, but with YouTube apparently deleting entire channels based on "bad" comments in the comment section, it's hard to be open and honest these days
    28
  1504. True. The question I now have is - was it more the quality of the troops that brought those victories on the tactical level, or the way those troops were organised and lead?
    28
  1505. I'll be talking about the motivations of the Western Allies in the next episode. Some of the Cossacks did fight against the Soviet Union, but others did not. And that wouldn't excuse the fact that some of the people sent back were fighting with the American Army in Italy!
    28
  1506. Thank you! Hopefully a few people will learn from this
    28
  1507. Manstein, I choose you! Operation Winter Tempest misses.
    28
  1508. I think so too
    28
  1509. Finally! It's only taken two years for someone to point that out. This was Krafft's 16th SS Panzer Grenadier Depot and Reserve Battalion. I put the 16th SS Panzer Grenadier Division symbol in there as a bit of an Easter Egg to see if anyone would spot it. After 1,372 comments and almost two years, yours finally did. Well done :) And there's at least one more symbol Easter Egg in the video. Let's see if anyone spots that as well...
    28
  1510. Here's a quick hotfix (version 001.01) that corrects a few of the more obvious mistakes in the original map and timeline https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lHY2Q4Kpmy63Pzpz0Imhb5dfndKl9YQy/view?usp=sharing
    28
  1511. Even now I've only lost about 225 subscribers from those two videos. And to be honest, after the way they reacted, I'm not missing them. As I've just said to someone else, one guy commented telling me to "Neck yourself". In fact, that was his entire comment.
    28
  1512. It's true though! 😂
    27
  1513. Yes, and we must also remember that there were transfers between divisions, and replacements etc. So really (if we lived in an idealistic world), we should be looking at each individual soldier, not the units. But that might be too much to ask
    27
  1514. "curmudgeonly" Well, I learnt a new word today 😂
    27
  1515. They wouldn't have me on mainstream TV - I rock the boat too much. If something needs to be said, I'll say it. TV corporations run by the establishment don't want people on that criticize the mainstream narrative.
    27
  1516.  @sosogo4real  Sorry about that. It's 1,142 men
    27
  1517. That rosebush was vitally important to the outcome of the battle!
    27
  1518. I've no problem with you using my videos as a source, but bear in mind that these are technically tertiary sources (or secondary sources, depending on which video) so I'd recommend you read through the sources I used too. That way you're not just taking my word for it, but are agreeing with my assessment of the sources based on your own reading of the same sources.
    27
  1519. Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "Rattenkrieg"
    27
  1520. But that's the point. If they had remained at 68 million tons and just swapped the luxury goods for military supplies, and the tonnage remained the same, you'd think 'fair enough'. But the overall amount of tonnage coming across the seas was reduced significantly, even though the U-boats hadn't become a major issue yet. This suggests that a lot of the problem was self-inflicted.
    27
  1521.  @michaelkovacic2608  "I know a workaholic who has taken years to understand that." I can certainly relate... But I've come to the conclusion that it's not the amount of hours, but the quality of the time you do work, that counts. So I need to cut the hours down, but be more efficient in the hours I do work so that the quality of the work doesn't suffer, and then I can take breaks. The problem is that it's hard to do that when you're self-employed and your hobby is your passion. - "I would also be greatly interested in the Bengal famine, especially how the British government handled it." I've been wanting to do a video on this topic for ages. I know it will be controversial too, so it's definitely something I want to dive into.
    27
  1522. Yeah, I don't get the "Tilk" thing. I'm assuming it's meant to be an insult, but I don't really understand why, apart from the fact it's a deliberately wrong way of saying the channel name.
    27
  1523. I've been doing more reading, and discovering really interesting facts... so more is coming at some point 👍 I'm hoping this video does well though, because it feels pointless releasing videos on this topic if it's just going to get downvoted by a bunch of screaming naysayers who aren't taking this seriously. I feel like I need to get through to them first, somehow, and I'm hoping this video might do that
    27
  1524. I do have the book but haven't had time to read it yet. I will do though. Thanks for recommending it
    27
  1525. I agree. I was working on the next Stalingrad script today and the attrition is killing me
    27
  1526. Except they do praise him. And they only mention Hitler's persecution of the Jews in one sentence. You'd think they'd mention that a bit more if they were trying to be even in their reporting.
    27
  1527. Good insight, but just to clarify, the Holocaust was known because Eisenhower made it known. However, due to circumstances, it wasn't really a popular subject to talk about. The interest in the Holocaust only really came about in the 1970s, but it was known about.
    27
  1528. "You think just because the means of production are owned by one certain class or race makes it socialist ?" Yes it does because that's what it is. Marx spells this out in Das Kapital, as does every source I've ever come across that defines the concept. " Socialism means EVERYONE owns the means of production, there is no one excluded." Except for those excluded from owning it - those that legally owned it before the race/class/gender/nationality decided to rise up and seize it. "Also "the socialized man" to Marxism is simply a worker that owns the means of production he works in. It has nothing to do with race." I don't know how much clearer I can make this to you. Once again - Marxist Socialism is ONE form of socialism. "Socialism" predates Marxist-Socialism. When I'm saying "National Socialism is Socialism" I'm saying it's "Socialism"; I'm not saying it's "Marxist-Socialism". Bog-standard socialism has nothing to do with class. Only Marxist Socialism has anything to do with class. National Socialism has nothing to do with class, because it's not Marxist Socialism; it's a different form of socialism. But it's still a socialism. Seriously, if anyone can explain this better please let me know, because I'm sick to death of explaining that Marxist Socialism (a form of socialism) is not the original socialism I'm referring to.
    27
  1529. @Trans Am That's exactly it. The idea that everyone should be able to do what they want, so long as they don't harm others, has been lost to these people. They feel like they should be able to dictate to others how everyone should live their lives. And they call this clear domination over others 'freedom'. It is not freedom, it's slavery by another name - 'socialism'.
    27
  1530. I am overall, but this is all a big transition for me. There's more going on behind the scenes than I mentioned in this video...
    27
  1531. I'm not conservative, but even I understand that "conservative" and "revolutionary" aren't exactly peas in a pod.
    27
  1532. Okay, society is the state. They are one and the same thing. I would suggest you watch my Public vs Private video which details the definitions using historical sources https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Ownership and control are two sides of the same coin. If you don't control something, you don't own it. A state that forbids the production or consumption of a certain good is intervening in the market and ultimately controlling the production process. Think about it this way - if you produce 100 widgets, and then decided to lower production to 50, we would say you're in control of the process. And if you decide to produce zero widgets, you're also in control of the production process - it's just that you've switched it off. Therefore, a state that turns off the means of production (via law or decree) is still in control of it, and therefore counts as public/state ownership of the means of production. And yes, I am defensive over this particular definition debate because I've had thousands of people (socialists) accuse me of just making up definitions or not explaining myself. They're trolling in the comments of my videos, day after day, insulting me and my viewers over this issue, discouraging people from watching my videos and then slandering me, calling me nazi and anti-Semitic and more, purely out of ignorance. Apparently I haven't given any thought to anything I say, and I don't understand "basic English", plus haven't ever "read a book". At one point, a post about how stupid I am ended up on the front page of Reddit. Well, I'm just sick of it. I don't mind when people have a valid question or are arguing over something I haven't addressed, but I have addressed it. In fact, I addressed this years ago, and have pointed to the Public vs Private video over and over and over and over, in numerous videos and comments. But people won't watch it. They won't watch it, and when they do, they don't actually listen. They let their emotions cloud their thinking, and as a result they completely misunderstand what I'm attempting to say. So, after years of verbal abuse over this (actual abuse by the way - technically criminal in the UK now, although I'm not so bothered by the insults themselves, more the ignorance of this so-called portion of "humanity"), I have no patience when someone says I've said something on this topic that I actually haven't. Obviously, in this case, the comment seems to be genuinely asking for clarification, but it looked like so many other comments that weren't written for that reason at all.
    27
  1533. Yes, sorry it took so long to get to your question... but I'm glad that you did your own reading on this! Alfred Naujocks had a very interesting career. How much of it is actually true remains to be seen, but an interesting character nonetheless. I was surprised to learn he was involved in an attempt on the life of Otto Strasser
    27
  1534. Thank you! I'll correct it in the "complete" video
    27
  1535. Incorrect. And surely you realise that I can't cover everything about the biggest war in history in a 44 minute video?
    27
  1536. Can you tell that I'm absolutely sick of our government? 😂 And by 'government' I mean ALL the political parties, the aristocracy, plus the media and the corporations being funded by our beloved Bank of England, which I class as part of the State. If it's funded by the State, it is the State.
    27
  1537. I'm glad to hear that! Takes the sting off the fact that this is the worst performing video of mine out of the previous ten ☹️ I guess the majority of my viewers are here for tanks, not history
    27
  1538. I have been tempted to do some "TIK responds to stupid comments" videos, but have decided against it... for now ;) I will do another addendum at the end of each season though because I think it's important to add in anything I've missed out, or mistakes I've made, or talk about the discussions in the comments (good or bad). It's nice to bring people up to date rather than leave something brewing until the end of the entire series
    27
  1539. @Die Hakenkreuzler - that quote actually confirms absolutely everything I said in the video.
    27
  1540. "but im sure that the poor (for whatever reason they are poor doesnt realy matter does it?) enjoy having "free" healthcare. Souldnt healthcare be available to you no matter how much money you have?" Healthcare isn't free in the UK. I've paid substantially more than I would have done if I'd paid directly for the same health care, and most UK subjects have as well. They don't realize this, because they just assume health care is "free" or "cheap". But it's simply not. I want good and cheap health care, and I want the option to not pay for expensive and poor health care. Apparently I don't get that option.
    27
  1541. Richard, the Beetles weren't a boy band. But they still suck.
    27
  1542.  @PyatPree88  He's referring to the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video which has a section dedicated to "National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw" https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (see the timestamps in the description)
    27
  1543. Sorry about that. The number of British tanks was 136
    27
  1544. Sure, if your comment gets 100 likes ;)
    27
  1545. People assume that good generals don't make mistakes. Well, Rommel made mistakes. Manstein made mistakes. Monty made mistakes. Patton made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. This Nijmegen business was a mistake, and if Gavin is to blame, that doesn't make him a bad general. His combat record doesn't not paint him as a bad general, even with the Market Garden issue. He's a good general, who made a mistake. Now, Browning's a bit different...
    27
  1546. I did mention that people still believe this stuff today at the end of the video, but yes it's something I could do in the future
    27
  1547. I did mention that he was only informed by von Weichs about the possibility of encirclement on the mid-morning of the 21st. But yes, we're seeing the battlefield with a lot more information than Paulus had. The 6th Army assumed that the cavalry corps was the main threat until the tanks were spotted.
    27
  1548. You may enjoy the book "The Taste of War" by Collingham. You can't eat it, but it's a good read
    27
  1549. The next episode of Stalingrad is coming next week :)
    27
  1550. I mentioned everything you just said in the video ;) but maybe we could blame Hegel for Socialism - or maybe Babeuf
    27
  1551. "ČSNS was since 1987 Workers party and social demorcats." I'm assuming you mean 1897? I explained in the video that they came from the Social Democrat Party. Also, the National Socialists in Germany also believed in socialism and democracy (Hitler's Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 ) (Hitler's Democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I ) - "In 1918 they combined with anarcho communist party and renamend itself to Czech socialist party... In 1926 they became ČSNS again." They started off as the Národně Socialistická Strana Česká (NSSC) - the Czech National Socialist Party. They then renamed themselves in 1918 to the Czech National Social Party (ČSNS), and in 1919 to the Czech Socialist Party, before renaming themselves back to the Czech National Socialist Party. None of this changes anything because as I always argued, National Socialism was socialism. The fact that they had the nationalist word "Czech" in the name is proof that they remained a nationalist party. Yes, they may have accepted Communists and Socialists into their ranks just as Hitler's National Socialists did, but that doesn't change the fundamental composition of the party. It was nationalist and socialist, which makes them Nazis. - "They were always on the left or middle left." Yes, just like Hitler. - "Even the nazis banned them in 1938." Yes, because they weren't German and were in opposition to Hitler's National Socialism. This doesn't disprove that they were Czech nationalist or socialist. - "The name itself come from combination of reforming socialism, national radicalism and anti Austrian anti militarism." And as you'll find out in a future video, the origins of German National Socialism had the exact same origins, except being anti-Czech and anti-Hapsburg rather than anti-German-Austrian. - "Again you are confusing political discourse of central europe of 1890s and 1900s with 1920s." I don't see how you can claim this. You haven't disproven that the Czech National Socialist Party were nationalist nor socialist.
    27
  1552. To be fair, I think the vast majority of them don't realise they've fallen for the Gnostic faith. I certainly didn't realise it was Gnosticism until recently, and when I was a Socialist I would never have considered it to have been a religion. But obviously I now see it for what it is.
    27
  1553. Yeah, he only fought one battle against the Soviets, then went rogue and fought against the Germans. But the critics ignore this fact.
    27
  1554. That's exactly what they argued, even though this crime was perpetrated by the Allies and the Soviets, and I have previously called out Nazi crimes too. So which 'side' am I supposedly shilling for? It makes no sense.
    27
  1555. I'll be honest, I'm probably not going to return to gaming on this channel. I will say that in hindsight my mistake was unlisting all my old gaming videos (although I was concerned with COPPA) and not moving the history videos to another channel. I could have had this TIK channel as gaming, and another TIKhistory channel for history, so that I could come back and do the odd gaming video. But now that this channel is dedicated to history, I can't release a gaming video on it.
    27
  1556. My oil video explains why, but essentially Hitler needed oil fast, there was little oil in the Middle East at the time and there was no way to get Middle Eastern oil back to Germany for processing. https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    27
  1557. Oh wow, thanks! It's nice to know you see it that way :)
    27
  1558. Yes, although the next episode will be out next week ;) hopefully I'll get a day off at some point within the next season to recharge. But I don't want this channel to become the "Stalingrad" channel
    27
  1559. Yeah, I've mentioned Lend Lease numerous times in the past. Most of the boots and trucks that powered the Red Army to Berlin came from the USA.
    26
  1560. Yes, this is outlined in Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries". If Hitler hadn't gone into Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland when he did, the Third Reich's economy would probably have imploded like Venezuela's. They got away with it by exporting their inflation and hunger to other countries, like the Ukraine or Greece https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk And yes, many States today are hyperinflating their currencies into oblivion. We haven't seen it properly hit grocery prices yet, but we're seeing the effects in the price of houses, tuition fees or the stock market... Bank of England talking about negative rates again today, but denying they'll implement them even though the market has priced them in for early next year... I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    26
  1561. The issue with my early videos is that I didn't put the references directly in the video, which invited many people to assume I either didn't use any sources, or everything was just my unbacked opinion. Now that I (usually) back up what I'm saying with references, critics can't do that. But I still get a lot of people ignoring what I've said, or assuming I'm wrong without having listened to anything, accuse me of saying things I didn't say, or insult me or my viewers for having such views. The other common one is to dismiss EVERY source I use as being "biased" - which is ridiculous anyway, especially in videos like the Hitler's Socialism one where I used over 100 sources.
    26
  1562. I would say that that applies to pretty much every army in WW2!
    26
  1563. I don't expect everyone to share the same view, and that's totally fine. Just ignore the bits you don't like or agree with, and move on. History is subjective. Everybody has their own view of the past. If you disagree with mine, great! You're doing it right
    26
  1564. @Erik Thomsen  You'll be happy to know that after the success of this 'trilogy' of videos on logistics, I have been considering doing this for other video topics in the future. Some topics won't warrant it, but for those that do, it makes sense to do them one after another like this 👍
    26
  1565. Yes, I value the evidence over the author's opinion. If the two align, great. If they don't, then that's a problem. It baffles me how my critics can "read" books and not see the contradictions within them. And I put questions around the word "read" because I highly doubt they've actually read the books. If they have, they've clearly not been thinking critically or questioning what they're reading, or integrating it with all the other evidence.
    26
  1566. Every historian has their pros and cons. Some have more cons than others
    26
  1567. That's it, his books are great narratives and a joy to read, but then he clearly has biases which seep into the narrative
    26
  1568. Well, I don't mind how many subscribers I have, so long as the ones I do have are learning things from my videos
    26
  1569. I put on a voice to prevent my enemies from copying/editing the audio and using that to claim that I'm promoting racism or Hitler or something. Got to be careful these days, especially when almost everyone is quick to believe everything they see, get triggered, and go on a witch-hunt without at least checking the facts.
    26
  1570. I totally agree! It's so much easier to see what's going on rather than trying to keep it all in your head as you're reading the books
    26
  1571. Hope you're not too disappointed. There was a lot to unpack with each sentence, otherwise I would have hit several more of the reviews, but it's easier to say something stupid than it is to explain why it is wrong
    26
  1572. Well, in reality the "intro" is actually the start of the battle, this is only the start of the city-fight. But people think the city-fight is the start of the battle 😂
    26
  1573. "Your Public Vs Privet video changed my friend from being a raging marxist." Oh wow! Awesome! Do you know what exactly made him change? Like, what part made him realise?
    26
  1574. Yeah in the comments in previous videos I've been using the line "you can lead a socialist to evidence but you cannot make him think"
    26
  1575. It was good, but I didn't think it was anything special and was a bit surprised to see everyone praising it so much. Then Terri explained that nobody really understood that they had no choice but to make the bomb because if they didn't then the Nazis would, and that nobody knew this. So, I don't think I appreciated it like others did because I already knew and understood this.
    26
  1576.  @Edax_Royeaux  "Um Tik, how does a free market prevent the logistics issue of not having enough trains?" Lack of trains = high prices = high profits = more investment in that particular business or sector in order to cash-in on the profits. - "Even if you have price data, you can still have logistical bottlenecks." But it's costly to have logistical bottlenecks, therefore someone will make a handsome profit if they can figure out a way to overcome those bottlenecks. Also, bottlenecks are usually the result of distortions in the market (government spending/easy money, or giant inefficient corporations, regulations etc.). A free market creates efficient small businesses which profit from being lean, mean and efficient product or services creating machines - "Switzerland could be as free market as it wanted, that wouldn't have prevented a rubber shortage from occurring." If there's a shortage of rubber in Switzerland, then rubber makers from other countries will flood their rubber onto the Swiss market to profit from the shortage. A bit like what happened more recently in Texas, where builders (and others) from other states raced to Texas to fix the problems caused by the bad weather. - "All you've done is point at a problem, but you haven't proved that a free market would have solved the problem as trains don't grow on trees in a free market and private business can use the trains however they want." I have told you the solution - an unhampered free market is the solution.
    26
  1577. A Black Market is a free market inside a state-controlled economy. The British had a Black Market, just like many societies today have Black Markets for drugs and other commodities. Therefore the British economy in WW2 was not a capitalist economy. I would say it was certainly more socialist than what it was before the war, although not as socialist as it was after Labour got in at the end of the war.
    26
  1578. "So the big reveal turns out to be more-or-less just "1. Already fighting USA" - just in different words." No. The big reveal is that Hitler believed that the USA declared war on him, not the other way around.
    26
  1579. The best way to take out a Tiger tank is to get three cowboys to walk towards it
    26
  1580. Puns are intoxicating
    26
  1581. I need to buy tweed. You're not a proper historian unless you wear tweed
    26
  1582. I had to look up what this meant, and wow, that's hilarious 😂
    26
  1583. Glad you're enjoying the videos! I'm working on the next Stalingrad video now, but it'll be the week after next
    26
  1584. 2. An individual deceived by another person - "looks like you've been haldered again"
    26
  1585. Wow thank you! Think this is the first time anyone has contributed subtitles to any of my videos
    26
  1586. They were. Mobilization had barely started in 1940. Their rifle divisions were vastly undermanned, and in the winter of 1940-41 they'd also stripped them of their tanks to quickly form tank divisions and mechanized corps - themselves without motorized infantry formations, mainly because they were in the midst of mobilization. Their units didn't have sufficient fuel or ammunition supplies. Their massive tank numbers also included every tank they'd ever produced, including amphibious tanks and tankettes without turrets. Their airforce was equally as badly equipped. They had fewer men than the Germans in total at the start of the war, and fewer men at the front, as shown in the video. And while they did have 12 million reservists they could call up, they couldn't just do that instantly. Explain to me how this could be interpreted as being prepared?
    26
  1587. Like Lend Lease? Or the Nazi or Soviet economies? I intend to prove the Holocaust happened. I've had to go back to basics in order to do that, apparently.
    26
  1588. Thank you for the feedback Rex! I was talking slower because of the nature of the video, but if you think it's better, I could keep the pace similar to this in the future. And yes, I wanted this to be a little bit more emotional, which is why I didn't do the normal "thanks to my Patreons and for watching" bit at the end. A more abrupt "the losses could be higher" ending suits it better in my opinion.
    26
  1589. Oh wow, you're in the thick of it right now :/ best of luck sir
    26
  1590. They disregard my history videos despite having a history degree. A piece of paper with a number on it is completely pointless.
    26
  1591. The vast majority who did, didn't watch it at all, but disliked it and left. They're not interested in facts, only emotions.
    26
  1592. I also said that 130,000+ allied troops (mostly French) did get evacuated at Dunkirk as well
    26
  1593. Maybe one day I will write a history book or two. Who knows! Cheers Liam!
    26
  1594. As I've just replied to you elsewhere Dan - Which countries are Capitalist? Please let me know so I can move there. Remember, Capitalism is when there's no forceful coercion of money (e.g. taxation) and no monopoly (e.g. multiple court systems rather than just the State's one), since Capitalism is the Private (individual) control of the means of production. The former Soviet block never had Capitalism and doesn't now. Giant hierarchies of society that dominate a region and the economy cannot be classed as an individual (Private) and therefore not Capitalist. Again, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y which will provide you with the correct historical definitions of the terms.
    26
  1595. Shadow-ban realm 😉
    26
  1596. That's a very good question. He even said if he didn't get the oil of Maikop and Gronzi, he must end the war. And yet he didn't. It is a question I've been pondering myself, and I don't yet have a full answer right now, but I will continue to look into it and make a video on it when I do know.
    26
  1597. I see you've changed your name to include the hashtag. What's the meaning behind it?
    26
  1598. I'm normally the same, but my reading on eugenics (which does include the T4 program) has caused me to despair as well...
    26
  1599. Thank you for doing that! It really does help - especially since I just purchased a £400 book today in order to answer a future Q&A question... I hope it'll be worth it, but I'm a bit concerned it won't be
    26
  1600. I always recommend three books to start: 1. "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt 2. "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell 3. "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. (You can find this one online for free) Then you can pretty much follow them up with whatever you like. I do think Mises' "Socialism" is a good read for any Socialist who still thinks Socialism is a good idea. And you can find this one online for free too.
    26
  1601. Haha
    26
  1602. Yes! You've just reminded me about the lady who wanted a landline so bought a corded phone, and I had to explain to her that she couldn't just plug it in and expect it to work and that she actually had to get a connection from a company like BT. If I do another one of these I'll tell that tale because it was very painful dealing with her.
    26
  1603. Wow! That's impressively stupid. Thing is, if you tell someone these tales, they may think what you're saying couldn't have happen because there's no way people could be that dumb. But anyone who has retail experience is like "yep, a similar thing happened in my store". And it's absolutely true - people really are that dumb. Retail work is terrible, but it lets you see a side of humanity which a lot of people don't realise exists
    26
  1604. Go and do substantial research to prove or disprove what I said was true or false with a convergence of evidence and peer-reviewed work. Yay for history!
    26
  1605. I have got a bias (everyone has), but I try to overcome that by examining all the various points of view, then seeing which arguments are the best. I'm glad you stuck with the channel to find out that I'm not pushing the agenda of a particular 'side' though 👍
    26
  1606. What do you think he got right?
    26
  1607. He was in charge of the navy effort in that area though, and was pushing for a breaking of Norwegian neutrality, as I explain a bit further into the video
    26
  1608. That's what I think too.
    26
  1609. I didn't know about that book, so that's interesting!
    26
  1610. Thank you AdventureInc, I still have nightmares about retail :)
    25
  1611. Exactly
    25
  1612. FIRST! :D
    25
  1613. Glad I could be of service!
    25
  1614. You joke, but this is exactly what Socialists/Marxists/Nazis/Keynesians think
    25
  1615. If Crusader has taken me months to make a 6 hour video, and Stalingrad has taken me years now to do a 48 documentary, how many decades will it take for me do France 1940!?!?
    25
  1616. It definitely stalled a few German attacks, and was a Soviet strongpoint providing fire against German units, but it's overall significance is hard to gauge. The other factories (Krasnyi Oktiabr' especially) seem to be more significant overall, going off the narrative so far. Obviously, I'm not close to finishing the research yet.
    25
  1617.  @thedj3319  Thank you for your response, but I disagree. I don't have time to go fully into it right now, but as Rainer Zitemann points out in "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction", and as Hitler makes clear in Mein Kampf and elsewhere, Nazism wanted to abolish class differences by uniting the Germans via the race. So you're saying "In Socialism, the driving force is CLASS, and they seek the abolition of Class." - yes, exactly. Hitler was seeking to do the same thing, abolish class, but the driving force was the RACE, not the CLASS. That's why I describe them as 'Race Socialists', rather than 'Class Socialists' (Marxists). And you have to realize - Marx introduced the idea of Class into Socialism. But there were other socialisms before Marx. So, Socialism has nothing to do with Class, only Marxist Socialism has anything to do with Class, and I've said this numerous times before now. I just wish people would listen.
    25
  1618. You should be early more often!
    25
  1619. Oh wow, thank you! I'm glad you liked the video because I was worried I had missed something. If a lot of people think Monty made this terrible blunder, then I was thinking: why can't I see it? And why aren't the books really talking about it? I assumed I had missed something, but it appears that I didn't, it genuinely is all to do with Bradley and the US reputation
    25
  1620.  @QuizmasterLaw  Yeah, the labour theory of value is about as effective as the Maus was
    25
  1621. Thank you, it seems I was misinformed when I selected that particular photo. I will correct in the final "complete" video
    25
  1622. Don't make me use some harsh words
    25
  1623. Thank you! Corrected
    25
  1624. It's something I've considered, but not sure if the majority of my audience would want that. Many are still plugged in to the Matrix, and when I mentioned the "Great Reset" in a more recent video, I was called a "conspiracy theorist" despite showing the video of Klaus, and despite the fact that Prince Charles is also in the same video saying the same thing... So not sure if my audience is ready for me venturing into topics like that
    25
  1625. That's the point, there is no front line or anything. And to be honest, the sources for this battle don't allow me to really create a front line. Most of the maps are like this https://goo.gl/images/3ti2Sv
    25
  1626. This is why myths and legends end up ingrained in the collective consciousness of society, and why it's the job of future historians and economists to piece together exactly what happened, and separate the lies from the truth
    25
  1627. There's a reason. You'll see if you keep watching
    25
  1628. Probably not
    25
  1629. I'm good thank you! Nothing special to report, just cracking on as usual. How's things with you?
    25
  1630. Yep, I totally agree
    25
  1631. Battlestorm will never end! Stalingrad might at some point, but no idea when :)
    25
  1632. I agree, it is good timing. Part of the reason I wanted to do this was because I personally wanted to figure out if what we hear about inflation (from both sides) is true or false. If we're going to suffer under inflationary pressure, then we need to be as informed as we can be about the situation, and you can't learn from history if the history is giving you the wrong information.
    25
  1633.  @ericharrison7518  People stay on benefits for a long time, but that doesn't mean they work. The government has been around a long time, but that doesn't mean the system works.
    25
  1634. Be warned: there are a bunch of trolls in this comment section. Guys like Aiden B, jeff jr, mike mcmike and similar seem to be spending hours per day spamming responses in these comments. Here's some examples of what jeff jr has called me: "dumb" "crazy" "dellusional" "an idiot" "a loser" "a pathetic liar" "a nutter who doesn't know what he's talking about" "a clown" and "a fucking clown" and a "balding clown" "a libertarian joke who has said sub embarrassingly stupid things he only should be made fun of" "an extremist" "a libertarian extremist pushing a narrative" someone who needs "actual medical help" he's said I "don't live in reality little Tiki" "flat earthers" "idiot troll(s)" "obvious troll(s)" he's also asked me to "get tested" He's also called me and other commenters a "kid", suggesting that he's actually an adult. Perhaps this "adult" should look himself in the mirror and start acting like one. This is not how you start or continue an intellectual debate. If you can't write a comment without insulting the person you're talking too, you don't deserve a decent reply. Also, WATCH THE VIDEO before commenting. Most of the "rebuttals" I'm getting are from people who haven't watched the video and don't realize that what they're arguing has been refuted in the video. Look at the timestamps - there's even a section titled "TIK is mentally ill" 04:43:42 and “Historians Don’t Agree with TIK” 04:18:16 and the section on "Whataboutism" 04:14:44 addressed the "North Korea" counter-argument, as well as the Pinochet argument. Don't be like these guys https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 and actually WATCH THE VIDEO
    25
  1635. Are you saying the creation of the NHS in the 1940's was not a socialist policy?
    25
  1636. The only thing that's important is that you watch this series ;)
    25
  1637.  @spaman7716  Yeah I understand that, but when I was a socialist, these were the definitions I used. It genuinely is the case that if I had said all this as a Socialist, the Left would have (largely) agreed with me. But because I converted from being a socialist to someone who actually understands economics, they've decided I must be wrong just because. It's insane.
    25
  1638. FIRST! And no. I'm not willing to ignore ignorant comments - especially when SO MANY are saying the same thing
    25
  1639. That was the previous video, link: https://youtu.be/PQGMjDQ-TJ8 I gave a few answers in that video, and some examples. Will be doing a follow up soon and I'll do my best to show you how bad it was.
    25
  1640. I'm not even joking. The BBC recruits people based on the colour of people's skin. They actually have racial quotas.
    25
  1641. You know, I was probably the only person in my class in school who didn't touch the stuff. It's like cigarettes, just a colossal waste of time and money.
    25
  1642. Yes, Glantz's maps are just the worst. I'm having to use his Stalingrad maps as references, and they make me want to cry. But his narrative is pretty spot on. For the pre-war years, if you want to learn about the state of the Red Army before Operation Barbarossa began, Glantz's book "Stumbling Colossus" is a good book (kinda more like a reference, but paints a bleak picture which crushes Viktor Suvorov's 'preemptive strike' thesis completely).
    25
  1643. Yes, or at least having watched a reasonable portion of it. It's clear by the comments that the majority of downvoters didn't watch the video, and in some cases I'm suspecting whether they're paid trolls (e.g. from Communist countries) because some of the stuff they come out with is in the negative IQ territory, and when you engage with them they don't respond like normal humans would
    25
  1644.  @slaterslater5944  "So it's just the "Marxists" that are running academia, as per your claim then? You know you Hitler blamed for Marxism, right?" Oh I see, so you're now agreeing with Hitler and saying that the Marxists are all Jews? See, unlike you, I don't agree with Hitler. I don't think Marxists are Jews, nor operating under some sort of "Jewish conspiracy". It's a ridiculous claim. Hitler also said that the "blood" was magical and I don't agree with that either. Tell me, Slater, what are your opinions on Marxist "Critical Race Theory"? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    25
  1645. "Socialism is worker control not state control, he thinks socialism is when the government does stuff" Worker control is Marxism, not Socialism. Socialism pre-dates Marxism, and is when there's societal control of the means of production. If you had bothered to watch the video, you would have realised this.
    25
  1646. Glad to hear you found this useful! More to come soon on the topics covered here
    25
  1647. Gazala will be after Stalingrad
    25
  1648. "If a government sanctions a "private" company to do services for it, by definition, the company is being propped up by tax-payer (i.e. public funds) dollars, which means it's NOT private. It's just a public entity outsourcing it's dirty work to an entity that's slightly less 'public'." Yep! Couldn't have said it better myself 👏
    25
  1649. Well, they weren't very nice back in WW2
    25
  1650. When I get to it during the Battlestorm North African Campaign videos, I'll be sure to mention it
    25
  1651. I'm not a fan of Thatcher and understand the hate, but yes, I agree that people have concluded a hatred of free markets based on "privatization" and "Thatcher", even though neither of them were actually for free markets. Thatcher may have wanted a freer market than what we had in the 1960s and 70s, but that doesn't mean she wanted to abolish taxes or government controls.
    25
  1652. Thanks for the birthday wishes guys!
    25
  1653. Yes, YouTube is deleting my comments right now. An absolute shame that they're censoring people calling out anti=Sematism. Shows which side they're on.
    25
  1654. Yes, Stalin said exactly that to the Germans during the Molotov-Ribbentrop negotiations
    25
  1655. Awesome! I'm glad I could clarify it for you!
    25
  1656. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Would love to hear your thoughts on Rommel’s Dash to the Wire and whether you think it was the right move or not? And if Rommel is entirely to blame for it or not? Let me know! Just discovered that 23rd New Zealand Battalion is actually commanded by Colonel Leckie, not Romans - who was in charge of B Company. Romans came later in 1942. Also discovered that Dittmer was wounded on the 23rd of November in an attack on Sollum, so Captain Love of D Company was placed in command of the 28th Battalion on the 24th. Here’s a great quote from the Official New Zealand History explaining the aftermath of the attack on Sollum: “Among the booty taken at Sollum was an army pay-truck and very soon the desert was strewn with Italian lire notes of all denominations. At first they were used for short sessions of poker, mostly in Headquarters Company, and players rose untroubled after winning or losing some hundred thousands of lire. When they tired of the novelty of being useless paper millionaires the currency was used as cigarette lighters and for toilet-paper. But the state of mind of the survivors of the campaign, who later discovered that Italian lire were exchangeable in Cairo, is better left to the imagination.” P147 http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2Maor-c6.html So far, we’ve focused on the actions of the British and German tank forces. Well, I thought I’d let you know that, as of next video, we’re going to start moving our focus onto the New Zealanders as the battle slowly shifts over to them. Their actions around Sidi Rezegh start to become more important, so we’re going to go into more detail starting next video. And as you can probably tell by my voice, I was ill when I recorded this. Please forgive me! If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    25
  1657. I feel like I've been fortunate so far. But then, I haven't bothered monetizing most of my recent videos just in case.
    25
  1658. Editing it made me hungry, especially the bit where they sweep the dust and breadcrumbs from the floor to eat that. Yum yum yum
    25
  1659. I like your reaction
    25
  1660. Yes, and yet, some do
    25
  1661. Thank you for your awesome comment :) also, you ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until I finish my Stalingrad documentary...
    25
  1662. I'm glad you think so Jim! It takes a lot of work, and I always wish I could make them quicker
    24
  1663. Yeah it could be. I should have clarified that I was refering to Europe in WW2, not the Far East as I don't have much knowledge on the Far Eastern Front.
    24
  1664.  @LuciusEV  I said Fascism was "National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism" (which is James Gregor's definition by the way). It's a socialist variant. But National Socialism, Fascism, and Marxism are all socialisms - they all come from the common root. I mean, if you're going to say that National Socialism is Fascism, then Marxism is also Fascism by the same standard.
    24
  1665. National Socialism = Racial Socialism Fascism = 'class' national Socialism Marxism/Communism = 'class' interNational Socialism
    24
  1666. Yeah, and sadly, I was aiming for Stalingrad to be out next week, but I think it may be rolled back to the week after now :(
    24
  1667. That must have been a long time ago!
    24
  1668. I think it's quite fitting. Things aren't always as they seem at first Glantz. And some questions are left unanswered simply because we don't have enough information.
    24
  1669. Care to explain why?
    24
  1670. Good points and well explained. I've run out of time to reply in depth right now so will come back, but I do want to point out that Glantz did rely on Soviet sources in his early books but looks like he learnt from his earlier mistakes. All I'll say is watch the video I linked because he shows that even the German sources aren't accurate (76th Infantry Division "at Stalingrad" is a great example).
    24
  1671. "I own my land out right, my car, my truck and my home. I am my own master and will remain compliant only until I'm forced to commit. I'm 68 years old and plan on going game and hope to finish ahead on points." Try not paying your taxes on any of those things and see how long you have "ownership" of them. If you truly owned them, you wouldn't be paying taxes on them. But you don't own your home, or car, or land. You just think you do. In reality, you're renting them off the State.
    24
  1672. It's because they've been told that everyone on the "Right" is a secret Nazi who's trying to trick them. They feel no reason to read books written by people they perceive to be so evil.
    24
  1673.  @jangelbrich7056  When I was in school, our "WW2" lesson was all about the atomic bombs... it's a story I need to tell one day because it was ridiculous
    24
  1674. Good spot, and yes I misspoke :)
    24
  1675. "Don’t burn out." Too late, I've been burnt out for weeks/months :D "Believe me, I couldn’t go into the level of detail for the Eastern Front like I’ve seen in these documentaries." I actually love the detail, and feel like this series isn't detailed enough :( "Though if you want to see how hellish the Pacific was, there are some places like Peleliu and Okinawa that stand out." I have been very tempted to do some of the island-hopping campaigns, but I've read basically nothing on the Far Eastern Theatre, and I'd be starting from scratch, without context. It would be a huge effort just to get started, and it certainly can't happen while I'm doing Stalingrad. But I do want to do it at some point. "I often stuck to naval combat because it was easier for me to have a sense what was happening." See I've never been interested in the naval combat-side of things, so you have an advantage over me in this regard. I have no real idea of how naval combat works in terms of strategy and tactics, and I don't know the purpose of different ships, unless it's obvious (e.g. submarine or carrier). The difference between a destroyer, cruiser, battleship or similar? No idea! "I’d encourage you to continue on the content you want to do. I’ll be a patron regardless." Well thank you, and I'm glad you're still enjoying the videos, even if they're a bit too detailed and not on naval combat!
    24
  1676. I also can't wait to carry on with the Weimar Hyperinflation series. Even though it gets half the views the other videos get, it's incredibly enjoyable to make, and it's so relevant to the times we're living in right now. The markets are crashing, the printers are printing, and nobody seems to have learnt from history. Well, I intend to get some of you to learn at least.
    24
  1677. Totally understand your reasoning there! Not my cup of tea though :)
    24
  1678. Exactly, however I'd also recommend that you read multiple sources/authors in order to get a much wider perspective. Usually when you have say 10 sources you can see through most of the bias and "ideologies", and then come to a good conclusion. Common sense also plays its part. But even then, if lies or distortions are rooted deep, it's really hard for us to spot them.
    24
  1679. I actually tried to copy the way that the guy says it. I would have used the clip but I'm pretty sure it would get copyright-killed, so I just mimicked the guy
    24
  1680. That's right. Having been a socialist and used to think that society did owe me, I can attest that it's a hard thing to do. But the harsh truth is that society (e.g. the State, which steals off people) doesn't owe anything to anybody but itself. Therefore you have to go out in the world and do something with your life in order to achieve anything. And once people realize that they can actually create wealth, and that everything is on their shoulders, it opens up doors they never realized existed
    24
  1681. Notes Timestamps are in the description! Short notes this time! It’s worth noting that 21st New Zealand Battalion is from the 5th New Zealand Brigade but cooperated with 6th New Zealand Brigade at Sidi Rezegh. 27th New Zealand Machine Gun Battalion was not assigned to any brigade, but was a separate unit in the division, and cooperated with 19th Battalion. This battle is beginning to shift from the first phase of the battle (the tanks) to the second phase (the infantry). 2nd New Zealand Division plays a central role in this, so the focus will shift to them in the next episode or so. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    24
  1682. Just want to thank Anton Joly and Egor Kobiakov for their help with this series. If you haven't seen Anton Joly's channel, check out this link https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA And if you haven't read Egor Kobiakov's articles on the Battle of Stalingrad (including the new one on Pavlov's House) here's the link too https://warspot.net/users/201-egor-kobyakov/published
    24
  1683. Yeah, I was playing it super-safe both for the algorithm and for the outrage mob. I did some reading on it to see if I could say it and the jury is out (some say it is offensive, while others say it technically isn't). Others were saying that "black" is also offensive... so I avoided that too. I do remember one of my university professors explaining to everyone during our American history course that if we used a certain term (e.g. "black Americans") in an essay, that we had to use that term throughout the rest of the essay. Apparently, swapping from "black Americans" to "African Americans" or another variant would "prove" you were racist and thus be considered offensive.
    24
  1684. I didn't even bother to monetize the video. I just know YouTube wouldn't be happy with this so why bother. If they want to lose money being woke, so be it
    24
  1685. Because if they admit it's about state power they'll lose popular support, so they have to maintain that it's not about state power whilst advocating just that. Hegelian Emotionalism ("logic") at it's finest.
    24
  1686. I think I've seen that same video. Is it the one where he's comparing Hitler's and Stalin's mustaches? My IQ dropped after just a few minutes of watching that video. I felt embarrassed for him. But then, simple people like simple pictures and jokes. They're the same people who think history is boring, so maybe in terms of reaching many people Suvorov is doing it right, and I'm doing this wrong :(
    24
  1687. Hey Vass, not seen your comments for a while! I've actually been ill recently (this video was a struggle to get done). I am considering taking next week off... but we'll see. That will provide you a bit of a chance for a catch up!
    24
  1688. @RED EYES - yes, even if this had been a genuine incident, the response by the Germans was ridiculously over the top for what it was.
    24
  1689. The sand people are easily frightened, but will return in greater numbers and take Tobruk.
    24
  1690. There's also Himmler and Heydrich
    24
  1691. Thanks for your comment Mikistjep. I try to remain neutral in all these videos, although there will always be some bias or other. In this case, I know next to nothing about Balkan politics, and am not burdened by an ideology (like you mentioned) so it makes for a neutral video :)
    24
  1692. I should add that there are postcards on the cupboard door to places I've never been, and a poster for WW1 (a topic I hardly ever cover)
    24
  1693. Absolutely, and "money" is a shorter word than "currency", so it makes sense from an advertisement point of view.
    24
  1694. sTIKle down economics
    24
  1695. I would 'heart' your comments because both made me laugh, but I know it will just provoke a response from the you-know-who's ;) Oops... my finger slipped. Twice. As did my mouse...
    24
  1696. Well, this wasn't even the SS. The SS were no where near Stalingrad. This was the 6th Army - part of the Heer.
    24
  1697. The YouTube algorithm doesn't like me much :/
    24
  1698. Correct, it is the Cold War and lots of other understandable things (Halder, anti-Communism, etc). But yes, we absolutely need to move on. Sadly, some viewers in this video don't seem capable of doing that...
    24
  1699. It's common advice to skip the first 200 pages of Mein Kampf because they're mostly irrelevant anyway. His unpublished Second Book goes off on rambles, but is actually more straight to the point
    24
  1700. Well, I hope this episode was worth the sprint! :D
    24
  1701. Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. You cannot have social ownership of the means of production without heavy taxation. Therefore, taxes aren't socialism, but they are a socialist policy.
    24
  1702. Definitely Stalingrad is next!
    24
  1703. "And many owners made huge profits, which is just one way in which the system was by definition not socialist." Socialism is defined as social/public control of the means of production. Such an economy can make profit, and there's no rule saying it can't. Only Karl Marx said that profit was bad, but socialism predates Karl Marx.
    24
  1704. We're not groups of people, we're individuals. Sure, we may share a common language or place of birth, and we may band together for certain tasks, but every group is made up of individuals. Those individuals deserve rights, respect, and distinction. When we forget this - when the group is more important than the individuals within it - the lives of men, women and children become secondary to the group, and are no longer important. The death of individual bee matters not if the hive carries on. Loyalty to the group at the sacrifice of the individual is not good for humanity. We need to work together for the common good, but be equally critical of any organization that becomes too strong. States, nations, government, parties, ideologies, groups... these you shouldn't be loyal to. You can still support them, you can still vote for them, but you shouldn't become an adherent. Always be ready at any moment to remove your support and keep those groups in check. Same applies with your perception of history. Always be ready to change your views. Zealots separate man.
    24
  1705. It's not an easy one, but I hope I've explained it well
    24
  1706. "some other history youtubers I love have sometimes this tendency of lacking rigor in the following of their series and some "ep1" remain orphans." Honestly, after the poor performance of the first video, I was considering whether to continue with it or not. However, I realized that I needed to publish the videos, even if they didn't perform well, simply so that I didn't waste all the research that went into them, and the fact that some people were enjoying the videos. Plus, I wanted to lay it all out as a way to fully understand what happened during the hyperinflation so that I could learn from it myself. Researching it is one thing, but putting it together into a script really brings the history alive for me. So to protect myself from inflation/hyperinflation, I needed to continue the series. - "if you are not with them you are a fachist, I have the same problem, for my university's friends, I'm a rightist nearly a nazi, for my more...concervative friends, I an awful leftist nearly a communist" Yep, join the club! Everybody is fascist if you're not Stalin, apparently... They're insane.
    24
  1707.  @baskoning9896  It's just a lazy eyelid. Had it for years.
    24
  1708. I'm glad someone got the reference ;)
    24
  1709. Amazon was pressured into it, so I actually have respect for them for resisting the censorship for years. I understand why they did it, but I do think it's a bad move
    24
  1710. I think some are already triggered (getting a few down-votes). Not that I care much - I try to trigger as many people as I can nowadays 😂
    24
  1711. I do think the Polish had a rough time. Not sure if Britain has officially apologised for what happened to Sosabowski, but an apology is very much deserved. Browning was the person who should have been sacked.
    24
  1712. Just in case you haven't heard, I'm working on the next ww2 documentary... You can get quotes and more updates if you follow me on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/tikhistory/ Let me know what battles you want me to cover in the future
    24
  1713. Sounds like double standards by the Allied powers thanks to the context of the Cold War...
    24
  1714. I haven't added it all up, but it's got to be at least 60 hours of video editing last week, and many many more hours of audio recording, video filming, script writing, and reading/research before that.
    23
  1715. The fighting will end on the 2nd of February 1943, but there were some holdouts going beyond that which I'll briefly cover. I suspect there will also be a wrap up / analysis episode (or maybe more) for the whole campaign. I won't be covering in any detail what happened to Paulus after he surrendered since Anton Joly has a extremely good series on that already so my plan is to just link to that. But otherwise, there's no real plan. I suspect we've got at least another dozen episodes left, easily, especially with the discussion involving whether Paulus could have broken out and whether Manstein actually gave the "order" or not.
    23
  1716. FASCIST CONFIRMED
    23
  1717. "@TIK Far too simplistic, your 1st example doesn't even mention Fascism..." Because Fascism and National Socialism are not the same thing
    23
  1718. Thanks for asking! I've been working on scripts and research for other videos. This includes some Q&As and responses to a lot of the criticism I receive a while back. The problem is I'm well behind when it comes to research and script-writing at the moment. One reason is because I'm setting myself some pretty high-standards. I can't just use 2 or 3 sources for a video - I feel like I need to use 10-20, which means I've got a lot of work to do just to get a "standard" video out. I have a lot of work done on the Nazi economy, for example, but I know people will simply reject/dismiss it again, even though I used +80 sources, so I'm reluctant to publish more without doing other topics first. But to do the other topics, I need to do a lot of research, and then there's Stalingrad on top... Another reason is because I can't answer the criticism is pieces - I must do it all in one video, otherwise they'll accuse me of not mentioning or addressing all the other criticism, and will reject me dishonestly. So the script for the addressing of the criticism is currently over 24,000 words and is nowhere near finished. For context, the combined script for Stalingrad Season 1 was just over 16,000. This is partly why this video was short, and the other videos this week will just be Q&As. I need time to get the research and scripts done. And I'm a little panicked that they won't be done in time.
    23
  1719. Wow, thank you! No, seriously, thank you. I actually just took a screenshot of your comment and shared it with some friends and family. It's great to hear these videos are really appreciated and are (at least) getting people interested, if not contributing to the overall discussion. Sadly, my day job has nothing to do with history, and I don't enjoy it in the slightest :(
    23
  1720. Unfortunately, the sauces I have don't specifically mention the role of British Sausages, and the research into this topic (especially by German historians) is simply the wurst. The Italians did have the 25th Baloney Infantry Division in this battle though, and Böttcher's 104th Artillery Command Afrika was a banger.
    23
  1721. Glad you agreed, spartan! As a gamer myself, I too fell into this category. Been wanting to make this sort of video since some guy was arguing that the Eastern Front wasn't the main front of the war "because it was just a big infantry slog and therefore not important compared to the west" (paraphrasing). He kinda missed the point a little :)
    23
  1722. Oh but apparently, I've been told that the Indians were forced to fight for their slave masters, and that I'm biased for stating otherwise 🙄
    23
  1723.  @1lordho  I think it's deliberate. I'm assuming it's meant to be an insult, but I'm not sure how.
    23
  1724. It's funny because I was told quite firmly by some socialists in the comments that the Soviet-styled economies worked until the late 1980s
    23
  1725. I have been tempted to cover the US Civil War... However, I'm focused on the Battle of Gazala at the moment, and to read up on the US Civil War would take a LONG time
    23
  1726. That's from one particular speech in early 1922, and he never says anything like this again. Hitler's views were much clearer later on: “The religion fabricated by Paul of Tarsus, which was later called Christianity, is nothing but the Communism of today.” (from the Table Talks)
    23
  1727. Yes, just like all socialists, their intentions were correct, but their methods were the complete opposite of what they should have done.
    23
  1728. "His whole video on why Hitler was a socialist only works on a libertarian mindset, he's in pretty deep." You mean - it doesn't work if you worship the State, but then claim to not do? Or, it only works if you don't want to steal off the workers in the name of the workers, for the benefit of the State and the Corporations?
    23
  1729. Never forget - 201.3 million BCE
    23
  1730.  @Edax_Royeaux  Stick to aquariums!
    23
  1731. "they signed it with blood." That's a pretty good way of putting it
    23
  1732. You're correct. I must have miss-typed when I was feeding the numbers into a percentage calculator
    23
  1733. More people need to start saying this.
    23
  1734. There was an Italian jet designed in or just before WW2 which had to fly with its canopy open because the heat from the engines would otherwise be too much for the pilots
    23
  1735. "Where is Piebara?"
    23
  1736. And you'll have to wait until next season to find out how well or not the heavy weight will perform in the ring :)
    23
  1737. Yes, I quote him in the video where he skips over it
    23
  1738. Yes, eventually. But I'm concentrating on the European Theatre for now
    23
  1739. That's it. He either needed to react/overreact before the encirclement closed (3-4 days) or decided to break out immediately (1st or 2nd week). After that, it's wait for Manstein and his relief effort time.
    23
  1740. Yes, it comes across as desperation more than anything else. They're desperate to stabilize the front, or take pressure off somewhere else
    23
  1741. Bye.
    23
  1742. 1. In the video I wasn't arguing against Suvorov,'s entire case only against what he said about Keitel, as well as Keitel's own ideas. 2. Suvorov's thesis is bogus. To quote David Glantz - "There is no question that Soviet dogma had long spoken of "liberating" capitalist Europe by an offensive that would inspire the workers to revolt against their masters. In all probability, Stalin intended to enter the war at some future date when Germany was so overstretched that a Marxist revolution appeared possible. It is equally true, as described earlier, that the Red Army hada theoretical and organizational bias in favor of offensive action, if only to ensure that future wars were fought on foreign soil rather than that of the Soviet Union. This bias may have made Stalin and his generals overconfident until Zhukov recognized the imminent German threat in May. Having said this, there is little convincing evidence that either the Germans or the Soviets thought the latter could initiate such a conflict in 1941. On the contrary, as this chapter has documented, both sides were acutely aware of the weakness and unpreparedness of the Red Army and VVS. If anything, the German success against France and Britain caught Stalin by surprise, forcing him to confront his ideaological foe long before he had expected Hitler to defeat the West. Moreover, the Germans had been preparing their invasion since mid-1940, long before there were any indicators of Soviet preparations to attack." - Glantz, When Titan’s Clashed, P47
    23
  1743. Yeah, they push that nonsense a lot. I started watching "Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told" a while back and had to stop it after a while because it was just so stupidly bad. Unless you're already racist and don't think critically or know anything at all about the history, it's just mind-meltingly moronic. For example, they have some random voices that come in to give opinions, as if anyone with a brain would just believe the opinions spouted by the voice of an unknown Texas guy.
    23
  1744. Yes, Vinny got that bit wrong (and a couple of other things)
    23
  1745. Its definitely on my list of things I want to cover. Hopefully there's some good sources on it in English. I'd also like to cover the situation in Greece in WW2 too, and the Battle of Crete.
    23
  1746. @Red Raven - I obviously don't entirely agree with you about the Socialism argument, but I appreciate your comments. Thank you
    23
  1747. Thank you! Terri does a good job with the thumbnails :)
    23
  1748. Notes Timestamps are in the description! What do you think of Pienaar's moves? Let me know! By the 29th of November, Hartnell’s 19th New Zealand Battalion was split into two forces. So for the video, I’ve therefore moved the whole battalion from El Duda to Zaafran, but obviously some of it was at El Duda. Here’s a quote from the Official New Zealand History - “For the rest of the campaign the 19th was divided into two groups. Lieutenant-Colonel Hartnell’s force at Zaafran was known as ‘Zaaforce’, and those left at Ed Duda under command of Major McLauchlan as ‘Dudaforce’.” At 14:48 I said “1st Royal Horse Regiment” and then placed 4th Royal Horse Regiment in the video. I’m a derp; it should be 1st Royal Horse Regiment. Also, Norrie led Pienaar’s battalion from the front with 3 armoured cars. But in the video I said “behind” rather than “ahead”. I simply misspoke; Norrie was ahead of Pienaar. I only noticed these mistakes as I was doing the subtitles and it was too late to correct them. If you enjoyed the video and want to help me make more, please consider supporting me on Patreon. It is my Patreons who make these videos possible! https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Again, thank you to my Patreons! YOU ARE AWESOME! SELECTED SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. Becket, I. “Rommel: A Reappraisal.” Pen & Sword Ltd, Kindle, 2013. Bierman, J. & Smith, C. “Alamein: War Without Hate.” Penguin Books, 2003. Butler, D. “Field Marshal: The Life and Death of Erwin Rommel.” Casemate Publishers, 2015. Cappellano, F. “Italian Medium Tanks: 1939–45.” New Vanguard, Kindle. Ford, K. “Operation Crusader 1941: Rommel in Retreat.” Osprey Publishing, 2010. Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2005. Kitchen, M. “Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943.” Cambridge University Press, 2009. Kurowski, F. “Das Afrika Korps: Erwin Rommel and the Germans in Africa, 1941-43.” Stackpole Books, 2010. Macintyre, B. "SAS: Rogue Heroes." Penguin Random House, Kindle 2016. Mellenthin, F. "Panzer Battles." Spellmount, 2013. Mitcham, S. Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle, World War II. Leo Cooper, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “Rommel’s Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps.” Stackpole Books, Kindle, 2007. Mortimer, G. "Kill Rommel! Operation Flipper 1941." Osprey Publishing, Kindle 2014. Nafziger, G. The Afrika Korps: An Organizational History 1941-1943. 1997. Nash, N. “Strafer Desert General: The Life and Killing of Lieutenant General WHE Gott.” Pen and Sword Books Ltd, Kindle Edition, 2013. Pitt, B. “The Crucible of War: Auchinleck’s Command. The Definitive History of the Desert War.” Cassell & Co, 2001. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume II, The Germans come to the Help of their Ally [1941]. The Naval & Military Press LTD, 1956. Playfair, I. The Mediterranean and Middle East, Volume III, British Fortunes reach their Lowest Ebb [September 1941 to September 1942]. The Naval & Military Press LTD 1960. Ed. 2004. Rees, L. “The Holocaust: A New History.” Penguin Books, 2017. (yes) Smart, N. “Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War.” Kindle. Stewart, A.”The Early Battles of Eighth Army: ‘Crusader’ to the Alamein Line 1941-1942.” Lee Cooper Books, 2002. Zapotoczny, W. "The Italian Army In North Africa: A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance." Fonthill Media Limited, 2018. Jim, H. “Axis Forces in Libya (September, 1941).” FEBRUARY 17, 2010. http://www.comandosupremo.com/Libya1941.html Moore, G. “Operation Crusader” (Order of Battle) http://gregpanzerblitz.com/Crusader.htm German generals in Operation Crusader https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/02/03/i-have-a-son-in-russia/ 300th Oasis Battalion https://rommelsriposte.com/2010/07/28/oasen-bataillon-z-b-v-300/ British and German Armour Piercing Rounds Penetration Statistics https://www.wwiivehicles.com/ Tobruk Breakout Positions. “The Crusader Project.” 7th September 2014. https://rommelsriposte.com/2014/09/07/making-sense-of-the-tobruk-breakout/ Maughan, B. & Gage, C. “Australia in the War of 1939–1945: Series One: Army Volume 3 Tobruk and El Alamein.” Chapter 10, 2016. http://tothosewhoserved.org/aus/army/ausarm03/chapter10.html The Official New Zealand History http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-corpus-WH2.html Full list of all my WW2 and related books can be found here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for watching!
    23
  1749. Thank you! I strive to simplify and clarify complex topics
    23
  1750. "Plus, how did Jews being promoted/being prominent within the Communist Party justify/explain mass murder being conducted on people on the basis that they were Russian,Slavic, jewish and so on?" Because they were favoured over the native people, which caused animosity on racial-lines which wasn't evident before. I'm not saying it's justified, nor does it fully explain it on its own (it's just one example), but it does antagonize the situation and we do have evidence that this did prompt some of the Baltic peoples (mainly in Latvia and Lithuania) to blame the Jews. The Jews are traditionally seen and (if you believe right-wing propaganda today) are still seen as pro-Marxist-Socialist or the inventors of Marxist-Socialism in the eyes of their enemies. Hitler says in Mein Kampf that they were bringing in Marxist-Socialism so that they could take advantage of the "equality" to breed with the other races, "mix the blood" and cause the downfall of civilisation. So, when you get a situation in the Baltics where the Soviets come in, annex your country, ship off many of your countrymen to the Gulags, steal your private property, spread Marxist-Socialism, promote Jews to high positions whilst disfavouring the Baltic peoples... then National Socialist (racist-socialist) propaganda starts to take root. The seed has been planted. Then once the Germans march in, they recruit those who hate what the Judeo-Bolsheviks have done to their beloved country and use them to commit the crimes you mentioned. "Baltic nationalists venerated those people such as Jonas Noreika who organized mass murder in some instances before the Germans even arrived." Ok, but again, not everyone is a nationalist. I'm not, for example. I don't see how all British people can be classed as "the same". It's alien to me. So when people criticise "Britain" or "the British" or "the UK", it means absolutely nothing to me, because I'm an individual, and won't be judged by the actions of anyone else. Similiarly, the Baltic peoples cannot be branded as "all the same" as though they are all guilty of committing the crimes that some people committed. Only certain people committed those crimes, but if the Soviets or Germans hadn't invaded their countries, these crimes wouldn't have happened.
    23
  1751. This is a documentary!
    23
  1752. After all the help you've given me, the least I can do is a shout-out! I'm sure Brad will be impressed haha
    23
  1753.  @martiendejong8857  I only have a handful of videos this long. Usually my videos are between 40 minutes and an hour.
    23
  1754. Argo - I also assumed that it was just a ruse too. But it actually makes more sense for it not to be, and the evidence supports it. The point is, their socialism and racism were entwined. They're not separate entities, but one and the same. Therefore, the Holocaust and other atrocities are completely justified under their racist-socialism.
    23
  1755. "Nevertheless, by Antonescu's estimate the Romanian infantry divisions would still remain only two-thirds as powerful as their German equivalents." - Axworthy, "Third Axis, Fourth Ally," P85. You're correct, of course. I think the point is that the leader himself was aware that his divisions were weak :)
    23
  1756. Welcome onboard! Yeah, my intention here (as one old subscriber said once) is to be "super-accurate and filthy detailed", whilst also not being shy about providing a verdict. So if you like in-depth history, you're in the right place 👍
    23
  1757. It's a scary world out there, and it's not easy taking the chance... but the fear of failure guarantees failure.
    23
  1758.  @calumdeighton  The event at Lviv with the priest which is described in the source is interesting... And there are more discussion about the State-brothel system
    23
  1759. "honestly i am more into political history of WW2 and interwar period... i love your videos on logistics..." You'll be happy to know then that, instead of having days off, I've been working on a video in my spare time for the inter-war period. It's going to be colossal - probably multi parts, or a huge video similar in length to the bigger ones on this channel. No where near finished, but I think people around the world will find it incredibly important, and I think you'll enjoy it too
    23
  1760. You're right. Army Groups North and Centre had been neglected prior to Fall Blau to allow Army Groups A and B to be replenished. And they were under pressure from the Soviets in their fronts, and behind the lines. But still, if the priority is the south, you'd think that the southern army groups would get the priority, right? I do want to point out too that, due to inefficiency of the German economy and of the governmental system, a lot of potential labour was left in the Reich rather than sent to the East. That's where there's a massive misallocation of manpower. They could definitely have freed up a lot more men to go East, but chose not to do so for various reasons.
    23
  1761. It's a good habit to have ;)
    23
  1762. Yeah, I'm not doing that because I want to defend him necessarily, but to explain why he made those decisions. I personally think that most of the decisions he made are actually understandable in the circumstances. Yes he made mistakes, or questionable decisions, and I gave a good example of one in this episode. But I think a lot of the criticism laid against him isn't fair, and is actually being used to hide the faults of other generals (Hoth, von Weichs, Wietersheim, Hoth, Heim, Manstein...)
    23
  1763. Honestly, it sometimes feels like I'm repeating that scene...
    23
  1764. Glad you liked it! Don't worry, I'm not stopping here. Stalingrad is coming next...
    23
  1765. There's a difference between 'education' and 'school'. Diving deep into subjects that you're interested in and moulding new information into a narrative which can be shared with others is exhilarating. Schools (especially public schools) suck the life our of learning, so much so that everyone's relieved to be free from learning once they leave them.
    23
  1766. Haha glad you liked the ending ;)
    23
  1767. @jacobgorman3145  Glad you enjoyed my singing 😂
    23
  1768. I've just checked and there's no comment in the spam/review folder, so if there was a reply, it was most-likely auto-deleted for one reason or another.
    23
  1769. A surrender is a Lost Victory. You can never defeat the Manstein
    23
  1770. "I support your historical staff" This is a history video. It has nothing to do with economics or politics - just purely Karl Marx's own anti-Semitic words. - "It's not only communists, that are not okay with this vid." Yes, some of the Nazis and other Socialists are shocked about how close Marxist anti-Semitic ideology is to their own.
    23
  1771. Hahaha
    23
  1772. Thank you! I actually mention in the video what I got taught during college... needless to say that it wasn't correct.
    23
  1773. Yeah, I don't want make accusations because I don't know the guy personally, but if this wasn't a deliberate comedy, then it makes me concerned. He apparently is the same guy claiming to be the real King of England
    23
  1774. Oh yes, Poland got a raw deal in WW2 too
    23
  1775. "Do you get to the Cloud District very often have your receipt? Oh, what am I saying. Of course you don't."
    23
  1776. Which capitalist country? If you think Nazi Germany was capitalist, read "Wages of Destruction" by Tooze, or "The Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reimann (free online pdf, written in 1939) and they will show you that it wasn't capitalism.
    23
  1777.  @drakmatheism  Yes, and I even have a video explaining the name https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    23
  1778. Yeah, I really want to come out and say it, but I want to be fully-backed up and be ready before I do so.
    23
  1779. Wow, thank you very much, I'm glad you liked the video :) very little has been written on the early battles of the Western Desert Campaign, let alone videos made of them! Which is a shame. This battle was very interesting, as was Operation Compass which I made a documentary on. Yet, for whatever reason, they're almost forgotten battles. El Alamein might be a turning point, but so too was this battle. Rommel entering the scene put the British on the back foot for the next 18 months. Equally, Operation Compass may have resulted in total victory even before Rommel had arrived! My next documentary is going to be on Fort Eben Emael in 1940. But then I'm returning to the North African Campaign for Operation Brevity. My current long term plan is to work through each battle in the North African Campaign in turn, alternating from the North African Campaign to another battle somewhere else. So I will eventually cover all the battles you hinted at. The only limiting factor is time. It takes me ages to make these videos. All I ask is for patience :)
    23
  1780. I'm glad to see someone got that one ;)
    23
  1781. Interesting! Thanks for the extra info
    23
  1782. "I am sure that there were very few Communists among the so-called Reds in Spain. We were deceived because, had I known the true facts, I would never have permitted our aircraft to be used to destroy the starving and to reinstate the Spanish nobility and black frocks into their medieval prerogatives." - Hitler, from Zitelmann "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," P438.
    23
  1783. I'm afraid not. I talk about the future of Battlestorm videos at 51:54 in the video. My focus is on the European Theatre, and I'm struggling to get stuff done at the moment, let alone pick up an entire theatre. Sorry :(
    23
  1784. There are no heroes or villains. The villains believe that they're the heroes.
    22
  1785. I don't doubt it. Perhaps all 'elite' divisions really weren't as 'elite' as they claimed to be
    22
  1786. I mentioned the forest brothers in my Courland series
    22
  1787. Well, after all the complaints I got after the previous two North African Campaign videos, I'm reluctant to deviate from Stalingrad until this series is done and dusted. Then it's back to North Africa, although I do intend to do the second Korsun video too and have started to work on that, but again, it'll be after this series is done with. Not sure when I'll get to East Africa, but I want to focus on Gazala and then El Alameins first.
    22
  1788.  @brunomancuso7798  There's no chance I can get it done by February, even if I dropped everything else. It takes a week to script and a week for me to edit each episode. My new editor simply can't edit or animate as fast as me, and they'd have no chance. They're actually shocked that I can even edit a Stalingrad video in one week, probably not realizing that I spend something like 60 to 70 hours animating each one. This is why I'm struggling enough as it is doing them every 4 weeks - it's just too much. I'm absolutely exhausted, and it's Stalingrad that's killing me.
    22
  1789. To be transparent, as mentioned in the description, I heavily based that part of the script on the video "What If There Were No Prices?" by the channel Learn Liberty, because their video was great! Link: https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4
    22
  1790. "@TIK I have a question regarding your video TIK. I remember that a while ago the World War 2 day by day channel from indy neidell made a video claiming Hitler was injected a literal hardcore drug-cocktail regularly from 1936 on by Morrel. They really went into detail and even mentionend an account that Hummler allegedly stole one of the injections and had it analyzed in a lab, revealing its content, but he didnt tell Hitler. Where do these claims come from?" Ohler (who is using Morell's sources) doesn't say Hitler was being injected with hard-core drugs in 1936, only vitamins and glucose. So I don't know where they got that information from. Unless they have sources that confirm this, I would suspect that they misspoke. And yes, Himmler did do that, but only late war (1944 I think, off the top of my head, but it's in Ohler's book).
    22
  1791. Thank you! I do try to be as logical as possible
    22
  1792. Happy Birthday!
    22
  1793. He can translate German well. Think that's about it
    22
  1794. Some people here are quoting 4 million German losses to 8 million Soviet. I'm not sure where they got those numbers from as that's not what I've read, but even if that's somewhat accurate, that means the Soviets only took twice as many casualties as the Germans. This doesn't sound like "endless Soviet hordes" to me. According to Enduring the Whirlwind - which is getting this particular information from Müller-Hillebrand, Das Heer 1933-1945 - total German losses in the East between June 1941 and June of 1943 were 3,965,000 (this figure also includes "sick"). They sent out 4,440,000 replacements in the same period, which meant the German army grew by 475,000 men. Plus they were augmented by Axis allies. Now the Soviet side - Glantz says "since 22 June 1941, when the Red Army fielded about 5.5 million soldiers , it had suffered just over six million casualties, with roughly 3.5 million killed, captured, or missing, and about 2.5 million wounded or fallen ill. Despite such an appalling toll, the NKO's mobilization measures had managed to increase the army's average monthly operating strength from three million soldiers in 1941 to about 4.2 million during the first quarter of 1942." Glantz says that when the Germans had 5.8 million men (Axis total 6.5 million) on the 1st of May 1942, the Soviets had just reached about 9 million "with about five million of these assigned to its field, or operating, army at the front and to the Stavka Reserve." That's not even double what the Germans have! It really doesn't sound like the Germans were facing hordes of Red Army soldiers.
    22
  1795.  @BanglaBoy52  They're the UK's anti-anti-propaganda brigade. So anyone who criticizes the wonderful, always enlightened and beautiful propaganda that the UK Parliamentarians and State-controlled and funded media spout, is targeted by them. They are monitoring the internet for all content that they do not approve of, and have been reported as hacking into people's personal devices etc. They have extra-legal powers, with some of their members boasting about listening/watching targets performing intimate moments (if you catch my drift).
    22
  1796. Yeah it wasn't full hibernation. They would take it in turn to keep the fire going, eat the dried bread they'd cooked in the autumn, and more things like that. Otherwise they'd lay and sleep near the fire to conserve energy.
    22
  1797. As someone who used to buy into their world view, they're coming from a place of ignorance. They believe that capitalists are inherently evil and most-likely racist. They cannot see the truth because they're blinded by the lie. They believe Robin Hood stole from the rich, when in reality he stole from the State. This is why I don't hate them, but instead feel sorry for them, and want to help them see.
    22
  1798. Right. Except not all Socialists believe in class, only Marxists do. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Marxist. More importantly, the idea that there are separate classifications of people, and that one group must be destroyed or enslaved by another is at the heart of all Socialist ideologies, and this is the principal that led to the death of the bourgeoisie in Russia and the Jews in Germany. I've been saying this since the beginning, but I get the feeling that my critics aren't really listening.
    22
  1799.  @larrythorn6265  because repeating the same nonsense over and over means "proof" in your eyes.
    22
  1800. Or, the option you missed out, they wanted to wage a war of aggression to take more than their old territory back.
    22
  1801. "Basicaly 1 to 1 with bolshevik propoganda but with "kulak" changed to "jew"." Yep, that's precisely it.
    22
  1802. I used to play a bit of 40k back in the day
    22
  1803. Reddit's pro-Socialist slant is blatantly obvious. One day I need to hit back at r/BadHistory for their illogical "refute" of me, since their "counterargument" was an absolute joke, using two sources (I used over 70), one of which was Wikipedia (which is written by a collective and thus has no value as a history source), and the other was a source I used but they hadn't read fully because it actually contradicts itself and undermines they're own argument.
    22
  1804. Apologies, that's not from the speech in 1922 (I've just checked). Not sure where you got the quote from. He does say he's a Christian in the April 1922 speech and then never again. But regardless, the evidence clearly points away from him being a Christian. For example, Christians don't believe in World Ice Theory, which Hitler and Himmler did.
    22
  1805. When I get to that stage in the war, I will cover those issues.
    22
  1806. I laughed, but I probably shouldn't have. The French Army wasn't quite that bad.
    22
  1807. Takes a while to do too, so I'm glad to hear someone likes it! I am considering doing it for the quotes too, but again it takes a while to edit so it may not be worth it
    22
  1808. Agreed. That's also why it took so long for me to research and script-write. This battle is complicated. It's clear that the books also struggled to make a comprehensive version of the events.
    22
  1809. In English at least, Finland is classed as part of the Scandinavian Peninsula.
    22
  1810. That's awesome! It's really nice to hear that you're having debates with your dad over this stuff :) And I agree that (while the military is great) the wider picture is sometimes as or more interesting than the 'tanks'. I'd be interested to hear your opinions on the upcoming Monday video
    22
  1811. I'll try to enjoy it... I just hope the rest will make me more productive after the break
    22
  1812. Wow thank you for your comment Calum! I was a little worried about this video because it was done a bit hastily, and it mentions the big bad 'S' word, which normally gets people fired up... So it's great to hear that you (and others) think it's good! And yes, I'm sick of people screeching and screaming. Someone's just done it now in reply to another comment of mine. Even though I didn't say anything to trigger them, they got triggered anyway! It's getting ridiculous. So now I'm pointing out the facts and not holding back. I've tried being reasonable but it hasn't worked. The gloves are coming off!
    22
  1813. There's plenty more examples in the book if you're interested. As I say, you can find it online for free
    22
  1814. State capitalism is state non-state. It's an oxymoron invented by the Left to hide the true meaning of Socialism: state control of the economy. As I explained in the video, a worker-GROUP controlling the means of production is just a fancy way of saying state control of the economy. State = public, meaning group. Please see the video. "bolshevik counter revolution" I'm not even going to bother addressing this. The Bolsheviks weren't capitalist.
    22
  1815. That's a fantastic point! Thank you, and also I'm glad I'm not the only one who's an ex-Lefty
    22
  1816. Court marshalled? Nah, he was promoted. (I'm not joking)
    22
  1817. Thank you! It's one of my best. I actually mention it in this video... and the salty comments in that video... A lot of people would disagree with you though (and me). They refuse to accept the facts.
    22
  1818. Thank you for clarifying! I'll admit, I know very little about trains in general, especially Soviet armoured ones. Do you have a recommendation for books on the topic?
    22
  1819. I do think I'm doing something important, but it's nothing too special. If I can do it, anyone can! But as quite a few people have said, some people are jealous or annoyed that they haven't put the work in and done something like this themselves. So rather than be inspired to do, they take it out on those who have.
    22
  1820. A few people have asked me to do a video exploring my books, so you're not the first. I will do it at some point, I'm just not sure how to approach it because it'll take me all day to go through them!
    22
  1821. Got to always think critically
    22
  1822. Yes, I think that's interesting... Can rumour be more accurate than propaganda?
    22
  1823. "Im sorry but you have completely missed the point." Okay, let's see why - "Many people found his translated speeches surprisingly appealing not because of his socialism but because they reveal that the history we ve been taught is complete propaganda" You mean the propaganda that said he wasn't a socialist? So I've not completely missed the point - I'm actually spot on. - "people see for the first time that hitler wasnt the marvel supervillain that they thought he was and that the war wasnt completely on him" But he was a villain (a socialist), and the war was completely on him.
    22
  1824. Thanks! Yes, I want to clear up some of the myths, and the best way to do that is to dive into the details. More like this to come
    22
  1825. I'm not "anti-German". In fact, I'm learning the German language. And I'm not impartial, because no historian is. History is the study of the human condition, and all humans are biased.
    22
  1826. He also said “You wish to sail a ship up stream by lighting a fire under its decks, I have no time for such nonsense.” (thank you Civ IV for such an awesome quote)
    22
  1827. Not this unit. Other Croatian units may have, but a good portion of the book used as the source for this video (Croatian Legion by Australian historian Jason D Mark) details how the guys in charge of this unit used the initial marches to instill discipline in the troops and root out those who were looting and stealing and what not. Yes, some members of the unit did steal chickens and other things, but the unit disciplined and got rid of most of them. As far as the evidence I've seen, this particular unit did not participate in any major war crimes or atrocities.
    22
  1828. I never said the Red Army was superior.
    22
  1829. When I get time, I will respond to most of these comments, and will make more videos on this topic. But essentially I agree with you. The backlash I've received on this video is silly, especially since most of the commenters disagreeing with the video didn't bother to watch it all. If they had, they would have seen that the points they bring up in retaliation are actually answered in the video. If nothing else, it's made me determined to explore this topic in the future, but I have my priorities. Work on my Stalingrad documentary must come first.
    22
  1830. It might be next week... but probably going to be the week after. This video took a bit longer to do than I thought
    22
  1831. I can understand why you would be torn. However, having an interest in the subject (or a unit in this case) is not the same as believing that they were right and is not the same as supporting the cause they were fighting for. Studying the Romans doesn't mean you're pro-slavery. This particular Croatian unit didn't take part in any atrocities, and the men that broke the rules and stole from local civilians were sent home and punished. They were also pretty good fighters from what I've read, and well trained and equipped with German weapons. Also, I get most of my information for this unit from "Croatian Legion" by Jason D. Mark, which I'd highly recommend to you so I'll leave the link https://www.leapinghorseman.com/proddetail.php?prod=9780975107683&cat=5
    22
  1832. Yeah I have been recording his videos and taking notes, but I haven't done them all. I did read a book on Pol Pot's Cambodia when I was in college, but I haven't done any deep work on it. It is something I'll cover at some point, but I think Stalin might be something I should cover first once I've done more videos on Marxism in general.
    22
  1833. Loving the fact that nobody in this thread has actually said anything worthwhile. So I'll say it again: great counterarguments guys! Lol
    22
  1834. Yes, and the Quartering's content is good, but he is maybe reading a couple of articles per video, is generally just giving his opinion, and doesn't have to heavily reference (using multiple books) or edit his videos to the extent I do, let alone try to make them as accurate as historically possible. It's just a different type of content. If I was doing gaming videos like I used to, I could easily publish multiple a day. But the style of content that's being created on this channel requires more depth. This video took almost a week to script and a week to edit, with me working late last night to get it done in time.
    22
  1835. I can't wait to tackle the "Madman Putin" myth that's being pushed by the Media at the minute. Putin may be a bad guy, but it's clear that he's not insane, and this was all a calculated decision. After all, he's not Brandon who is losing and has lost a lot of his cognitive function.
    22
  1836. Everyone keeps saying I'm pro-Soviet or pro this or anti that. The only thing I am is anti-ignorance.
    22
  1837. There's worse comments than this. There's loads in my Public vs Private video. After providing the historical and dictionary definitions of the words, backing them with sources and so on, commenters have said - "Good lord, you're making your own definitions just to justify your points." "I still like your history videos but increasingly find your political videos don't follow the same level of self scrutnisation. You use dictionary definitions to try to prove real world outcomes, that isn't how it works." (spelling is his error) "Your only excuse to your fake definition is saying that "there is no real definition" which is the silliest response I've ever heard. You've already admitted you're wrong." (this one doesn't even make sense because I didn't even say this)
    22
  1838.  @2ndTimPlayground  Are you for real? The idea you're presenting is called "collective guilt". Well, as shown IN THE VIDEO YOU'VE JUST COMMENTED ON, there were factions of Germans who were resisting the Nazis. Yes, a lot of people got brainwashed and went along with it, but the point is that not all did. You cannot judge everyone of the same colour or creed as "bad". That's what the Nazis did, and it led to the murder of millions of people. If someone else commits a crime, I don't go to jail for it. If you think I should, then you're no different than the Nazis you're pretending to hate.
    22
  1839. Wow thank you very very much sir! I'm very grateful :) I think that's the same source I have? It does seem like the full sequence of events isn't known, however as Glantz points out Göring wasn't even in the same postcode as Hitler at the time. Of course, there's nothing to say he didn't pick up the phone and call him, but Jeschonnek was there and he "did at least not dispute the possibility" of the air lift succeeding.
    22
  1840. Yep. That's precisely the tactic they use against me. It's called "whataboutism". "What about the roads? What about a living wage?" It's all a distraction tactic in order to squirm out of dealing with the facts. Now they won't even watch my videos, saying it's "a waste of time", even though it's clearly just because they don't want to look at the evidence.
    22
  1841. Had Nijmegen Bridge had been taken of Day 1, it's most probable Patton would have gotten to Arnhem quicker than Horrocks and XXX Corps. Horrocks was a good general. But Patton was known for his speed so it's reasonable to assume he would have gotten at least to the Waal bridge quicker than Horrocks. But once again, it comes back to the fact that the tanks they had couldn't swim across a river. They needed the Nijmegen bridge, and they didn't have the Nijmegen bridge.
    22
  1842. The 509th Olde' English Division, obviously (https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00KFODHLK/ref=kinw_myk_ro_title)
    22
  1843. It really does make me sad to hear how people look down upon others - not for their actions - but for their characteristics, be that disabilities, skin or hair colour, or gender or whatever. I just don't get it. Are people incapable of treating others as individuals?? And to be honest, I'm no longer surprised that the so-called "tolerant" people are guilty of this. The biggest thing you have to realize is that a lot of people like to project their inner thoughts. So, those screaming loudest about racism usually are racist themselves. Those screaming loudest about the Jews usually have Jewish ancestors, or are poor and are jealous of others who have a community. So anyone screaming about being "tolerant", probably crave the power over life and death of other people, which is what we see. The "tolerant" are just itching to riot, loot and burn down other people's property.
    22
  1844. Exactly
    22
  1845. That's fantastic news! It's good to see that I've gotten through to some people. Sadly, I think the majority of those who need to watch this are simply dismissing it :(
    22
  1846. It's almost as though history is written by the victors...
    22
  1847. I'm hoping one day that I'll have a small team of people working on the videos so that I can pump them out more often. No idea if that will happen, but I do have hope
    22
  1848. There are others but I didn't want to drag the video on reading out their comments. Tempted to do so in a future video though... But I get exactly what you mean. It's frustrating that people don't listen or do any amount of research and just parrot the lie. And when they calm down and actually think about it, and listen and do some reading, they find out that the evidence doesn't support what they're saying.
    22
  1849. Wait, if I'm the commissar, then I'm the one shooting you. You'd better keep watching them, or else!
    22
  1850. They didn't!?!?
    22
  1851. I know a dog trainer who is passionate about this issue. Some still call them Alsatians, but she demands everyone calls them German Shepards
    22
  1852. Exactly!
    22
  1853.  @zejdland  "leftists have a lot of logical problems. funny how the left hates the rich corporations,,, yet they are completely supported both financially and ideologically by them." I've had this argument numerous times with people, yet they seem blind to the obvious truth. There's a guy in the comments now ("John Lenin") calling me a "corporate stooge". They have no idea. Socialists are the ones calling for the policies that create and then setup corporate monopolies, yet they're blaming the free market for it.
    22
  1854. I choose you, Ravenstein!
    22
  1855. I'd actually be interested to hear their response for this. They can't even blame it on the SS this time
    22
  1856. I'm surprised (and worried) by how many commenters have said they'd do the exact same thing
    22
  1857.  @johndoe-so2ef  A word will only offend you if you let it. A lot of Austrialians call me "Pom" in such a way that I assume they think I find it offensive, but I don't find it offensive because I don't care. The word "Pom" means absolutely nothing to me - it's just a random noise. I understand it's short for pomegranate, but I've never eaten one, and I'm not nationalistic in any way. So it literally means nothing to me. I've never seen so many people use a supposed "offensive word" with such gusto and it have absolutely zero affect. It's like a Pokemon using a water attack on the ocean, it's not very effective.
    22
  1858. He doesn't appear to have been anti-Communist before his capture (although it is debated), so I agree with you there. But by the time we get to the two manifestos, it's pretty clear that he had become more liberal in his outlook.
    22
  1859. I'm not taking what they say to heart, I'm just frustrated by their cognitive dissonance and cultist belief in the disaster that is Socialism despite the mountain of evidence that leaves no shadow of a doubt about the true nature of their ideology. The only counter they have is to fire off a string of dishonest questions or accusations that have either already been answered or are easily disproven, and are simply there to distract and dismiss. They're not interested in the reality, they're more concerned about not having their feelings hurt, which is why they'll never admit they're wrong even when you prove it definitively.
    22
  1860. 😑😑😑
    22
  1861. Yeah, thanks for that. I've pinned your comment so others can see.
    22
  1862. I see. Thank you for being honest :) it's funny because I always assumed that the Scandinavian countries and people were all friendly towards each other and got along. Shows how little I know! But then again, people think I'm weird for thinking we're all humans and that tribes are artificial barriers to individual alliances, so I'm not one to talk
    22
  1863. "Many are, but "Austrian Economics" and its political implications are based entirely on reason." Well, that's not good. If it's not evidence-based, then it can easily become detached from reality, which is what I was getting at.
    22
  1864. Oh yeah, because he never lied /s
    22
  1865. Thank you Vass! Merry Christmas to you too! And yeah, I guess that's about right. I would add that the world-wide Great Depression was a big factor, and that Brüning was actually pursuing the right policies to cure the crisis before he was ousted. But the perception at the time was that Weimar (and capitalist economics) had failed. This pushed people to vote for an alternative. And, since the Germans didn't like Bolshevism (Marxist-Socialism), they went for something similar - National Socialism. Do you agree, or disagree?
    21
  1866. Is... is that actually a game mechanic??
    21
  1867. Wait until we get into the city. I'm hoping to go down to at least battalion level throughout (if the sources will allow it)
    21
  1868. If I did that, I'd have to start off at the beginning of Barbarossa and cover the whole campaign in detail, otherwise my reputation of doing stupidly long and boring videos would be ruined ;)
    21
  1869. That's actually a Patreon question that I need to answer soon, and was the question that prompted me to make this video first
    21
  1870. Would be interesting to hear your take on this
    21
  1871. Certainly not during this series, but perhaps in the future. I do want to continue the North African Campaign first though
    21
  1872. Neigh!
    21
  1873. Some people who get into WW2 ignore the atrocities committed by the German Army and become "Wehraboos" and National Socialists. This is not helped by the fact that many of the books (especially the old ones) written about the Germans in WW2 conveniently ignore all the atrocities they committed, but made sure to talk about the Soviet atrocities a lot... They're attracted to videos that talk about WW2, especially those that don't mention the atrocities. And now you know why there's such a backlash on some of my videos when we talk about certain subjects - like the concentration camps or the Gulags. I can ban him, but people will complain that I'm abusing his "freedom of speech". But of course, banning him would be a problem with freedom of speech, since it's just spam, and he can always make counter-videos to my videos if he desires. To name a couple of authors who tend to avoid mentioning German atrocities, but do mention Soviet ones - Werner Haupt and Franz Kurowski. The book "The Myth of the Eastern Front: The Nazi-Soviet War in American Culture" by Smelser and Davies talks about this topic in some depth.
    21
  1874. With a little bit of help from Manstein, who provided his blessing
    21
  1875. Yup!
    21
  1876. It's alright, you have valid criticisms. I would say that a lot of the Axis countries (except for Italy) wouldn't have been doing much occupying. Bulgaria, for example, only occupied a relatively small portion of Greece. The Romanians (largest contingent in the East after Germany) didn't occupy any territory except the Soviet territories. Italy is the only one which had large occupation forces, so that is a factor and I will concede that. True, I didn't mention the USSR's forces, but many people already know that they had troops in the Far East etc. In fact, several commenters have pointed this out, and I've hearted their comments. My main focus though was to show that the manpower wasn't actually the issue, but the logistics. They could technically replace the manpower, but couldn't actually do it and keep those replacements supplied due to logistics issues.
    21
  1877. His books are centred around the diaries of the 6th Army and the 62nd Army which he's translated in full, so if you want to read the primary sources, I'd highly recommend
    21
  1878. Yes, this is half the issue. They're ego invested in their old believes that they can't understand why people have alternative beliefs, automatically assuming everyone else is wrong. I actually had a section I was going to including in this video talking about this, but I decided to cut it because I realized that those who really need to watch this video will watch it for less than two minutes anyway.
    21
  1879. Aiden, Marx did write a response to Bauer in that book, but he also said the same sorts of things in Das Kapital and elsewhere. When he wrote those words, he wasn't calling Bauer out, he was saying what he believed. Stop apologizing for Marx
    21
  1880. Yes! Imagine if I had started the series here in this episode - look how much you would have missed, and how the impression of the battle would have been distorted
    21
  1881.  @TomatoCarrotSoup  That's also the narrative I heard too early on. It was common in the west during the Cold War for Normandy and El Alamein to be classed as the "turning point(s)" of the war. It was partly due to ignorance of the scale of the conflict in the East, plus anti-Soviet Union/Cold War propaganda
    21
  1882. Haha :) I had considered calling the video "WW2 didn't get America out of the Depression", but I knew that people would click on it and downvote instantly. So what I decided to do was show the Keynesian argument for the 1946 Depression, explain why it's bogus, and then hit them with an argument that makes a hell of a lot more sense - the 1946 Depression was actually a boom, and WW2 didn't get America out of the Depression, the end of the war did. Not sure how effective such a tactic is, but hopefully some people who were pro-Keynesians have maybe begun to reconsider their stance, since Keynesians truly believe in a false-Depression
    21
  1883. That's a hard choice. Maybe a heart will help convince you ;)
    21
  1884. Exactly, this order was a management technique to sort out the middle-managers who were allowing retreats. And it worked. Yes, it was also bloody, but it was deemed necessary.
    21
  1885. That's why Churchill was Made Man of the Year in 1940, despite Hitler affecting the world much more than him, and why Roosevelt was made Man of the Year in 1941, despite Hitler being at the peak of his power...
    21
  1886. Sorry everyone! Pienaar’s 1st South African Brigade unit has “Brink” as its name rather than “Pienaar”. I only noticed the mistake prior to release and it was too late to go back. The reason for this was because I had to redo some of the units and make them ‘motorized’, and in this case I think I forgot to change the name to Pienaar. I have since corrected the unit so it will be correct in the main Crusader video. Please see the pinned comment for other notes and issues.
    21
  1887. Yes, lupahole got it! And yes, you're right, he was in the 1047th Regiment (my mistake). 1045th was the first regiment in Batiuk's 284th Rifle Division to cross the Volga into Stalingrad, the day before the 1047th and the final one (1048th?). Proves I shouldn't work from memory haha
    21
  1888. Thanks, I'm really bad at taking breaks. But I'm going to try find one at some point :)
    21
  1889. I've decided to do the entire battle in one video. The good news is that YouTube allows videos up to 128GB in size, which is approximately 4096 minutes of video time. I may have to miss bits out, but I think I can fit most of the battle into 4096 minutes
    21
  1890. In your own words - "the state is the tool used by the ruling class". A ruling class. A ruling group. The state is a group. Capitalism and classic liberalism are all about reducing the power of the rulers by giving power to every individual. Private control of their own lives, their own economy, and their own production. Socialism merely intends to replace one ruling class with another, keeping the individual enslaved, or enslaving them if they aren't already. This is why, as we see capitalism and classic liberalism being eroded by more state power on behalf of socialism, the freedom of the individual and his economic potential are being suppressed. We are sleepwalking into totalitarianism.
    21
  1891. I believe you were first! And yes, I'm also really happy it's finally out
    21
  1892. I never stopped working either. I worked the hardest during the lockdowns and then burnt out. I took a break just as the lockdowns ended and the views came down, which was October last year if I remember correctly.
    21
  1893. And yet people still fall for it...
    21
  1894. Got some bad news...
    21
  1895. The question is, could it have been done practically. As I mentioned in the video, by the time you get to mid-August, it's not clear if the option to do that was possible any more
    21
  1896. Shhhh!!! You'll annoy the Stick to Tanks crowd, and then they'll be moaning about how the private health care is cheaper than State health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    21
  1897. In a nutshell, yeah pretty much
    21
  1898. Well, they are all corporations funded by the Central Banks easy-currency printing and thus are part of the Central State
    21
  1899. Possibly... When I originally did my research on Gentile, I did sort-of get my head around Actualism, but then swiftly forgot it because it sounded like a load of mumbo-jumbo at the time. Now with the Gnostic perspective, I may need to revisit it.
    21
  1900. Beevor gets a lot of hate for his Stalingrad book. However, we must remember when it was released - 1992. The Soviet archives hadn't been opened fully yet, and as Glantz made clear, it wasn't until recently that they've mostly been open (I believe parts are still censored). So Beevor presented a very good narrative for the time, and probably the best narrative championing the German Generals viewpoint. For that reason, it's still a valuable read, and a nice introduction to the topic. However, it's now out of date, and significantly one-sided. Glantz has sought to address that bias, but of course those worshiping the German 'side' don't like him (or me).
    21
  1901. I'm now tempted to rename the video 😂
    21
  1902.  @QuizmasterLaw  So you're saying that nobody traded at all before a State magically came along and decreed that we all should start trading using bits of metal and seashells? Okay, at the beginning, how would they put a "price" on something? How would they know how many ounces of silver would trade for a pitchfork?
    21
  1903. I'm always trying to up the bar and improve my videos, and the reference-bar idea was a recent but great addition to my videos. I could always back up what I said with sources if questioned, but it's so much better to have them directly in the video for people to look up or double-check for themselves. Can't do it for the Q&A videos, but it's something I want to do for all my TIKhistory or Battlestorm videos from now on. Cheers!
    21
  1904. The irony being that the historical definition of socialism is quite clear. But, of course, socialists don't actually know the definition, as the meme shows https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    21
  1905. I wouldn't mind covering a topic completely outside of the current range of history I discuss. People have asked me to cover the American Civil War, and I like ancient and medieval history too, so it's certainly a possibility.
    21
  1906. Glad it was helpful!
    21
  1907. I hope you find the rest of the video as enjoyable Mr Zulu. Good to see you here 👍
    21
  1908. Those shelves are from Ikea
    21
  1909. Liked and hearted so that more people don't get caught out
    21
  1910. Haha I'm glad someone got that :)
    21
  1911. Yes, and the reason why they can say it is because they haven't read the sources, and don't know the definitions of the words they're using. Yet, when I point this out and try to explain, I'm wrong because I've hurt their feelings. Ignorance is their Strength.
    21
  1912. Actually they're all coming from 4chan. They're not my regular viewers.
    21
  1913.  a dalek  And how do you advise I make it "based not cringe"?
    21
  1914. Thanks for the response! I didn't know about the 'm' to move objects to a different collection. I'll try that now. I've got the machine guns parented to their respective units (thanks to my new editor), but what do you mean by "Constraints can help you streamline unit movement"? I've been using Grease pencil recently for arrows and similar, but I never considered using it for the front lines, so thanks for the suggestion! I've never tried animating a Grease Pencil using AnimAll (or however you do it). I'll have a play around. - "The pink you see in some of the images is Blender telling you that textures are missing." But the textures aren't missing. It's an image sequence - the images are all there, and if you move back and forth on the timeline it automatically resolves the pink issue.
    21
  1915. Cheers Vass. It's been a rough week all around. Thank you for your support
    21
  1916. That's a great idea! Thank you for suggesting it
    21
  1917. Mabye, but they actually did believe this. Julius Evola did. I've done videos on this. Watch my "The INSANE world of National Socialism’s Aryan Religion" video I did back in 2022, fully sourced https://youtu.be/fGUq3V8kl30
    21
  1918. Yes, he worked for the SS directly under Himmler, and that was in my "The INSANE world of National Socialism’s Aryan Religion" video, which is here https://youtu.be/fGUq3V8kl30
    21
  1919. FIRST!
    21
  1920. "I think you need to clarify that "corporation" is a not a free-market capitalist entity" Yes, I've done this before in my Public vs Private and Fascism Defined videos. Thanks for reminding other viewers that they're not capitalist entities at all.
    21
  1921. Unfortunately, YouTube has now limited the size of new videos to 12 hours max. This series is already 22 hours and 31 minutes long! So there's no chance of making an all-in-one video.
    21
  1922. Cheers mate! :)
    21
  1923. I think this one might be the final nail... but we'll see
    21
  1924. Before I publish, I always think my videos are bad, and that you guys will be disappointed with them. I was shocked that people enjoyed last week's video. It's incredibly rare when I think "okay, I've done a good job on that one", and you probably can't guess which ones I actually thought were good before they went out (there's probably only half a dozen of them).
    21
  1925. Anarchism is the actual Far-Right. It's absolute liberty to the individual rather than to the group (which is the Far Left).
    21
  1926. That's still classed as plagiarism! :D
    21
  1927. Ok, so you're saying it must be capitalism then... which means it's not totalitarianism. Now either Hitler's regime wasn't totalitarian, or your "privatization" explanation is a distortion of history. And since we know that they had state-officials controlling the businesses regardless whether they were privatized or not, we know that the state retained control of the means of production, and thus was totalitarianism. And thus we also know it was socialism.
    21
  1928. Part of the reason I wanted to make this video was to put all the pieces together in one go. Over the span of multiple hours, it's hard to remember what Churchill's contribution to the North African Campaign actually was. Now you can see a good chunk of it all in one go - and I actually didn't miss a lot of it out between Compass and Gazala. Apart from one convoy in 1941 (which was an extremely risky move anyway and probably shouldn't count as a win) his contribution was almost entirely negative.
    21
  1929. True, it's classic Critical Theory - criticize over and over to invalidate. This is why I say we're living in the Age of Emotionalism, because we cannot have a rational debate any more, only emotional outbursts. That said, I do feel like it's useful to talk about them and show them up, not in the hope that they change (they might) but in the hope that others will learn from their mistakes. This is why I did the "OWNED" video - it wasn't for the two guys I was responding to, it was for my audience. I wanted to show people how to behave and how not to behave during a debate, and the same principle applies here.
    21
  1930.  @SergeantAradir  If I can "only be trusted on hard facts and troop-movements" then why do you disagree with the fact that Hitler's Socialism is Socialism? I gave hundreds of facts in my 5 hour documentary, backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references, and more. I also showed why Karl Marx was an anti-Semite in my Karl Marx video. Yet, apparently none of this is true because my "content is basically an endorsment of his own political worldview", rather than hard facts backed by logic and reason which I've provided.
    21
  1931. I've actually tackled Tooze before as part of another video (link https://youtu.be/-w1iZ7RqZlU ) although maybe I need to do a specific video on him at some point
    21
  1932. Glad you liked the video! Out of curiosity, why were you previously 'against' Sweden over WW2? Is it because they didn't intervene to help Denmark?
    21
  1933. Gavin doesn't make clear which superior confirmed his decision. Technically he has two corps commanders - Browning AND Brereton. Browning, Montgomery and Brereton, as well as Urquhart and several commanders of 1st Airborne Division, and the RAF, all deserve a portion of the blame for their failure in this operation. However, if we have to choose just ONE person as the person who made the biggest mistake that without doubt caused the whole plan to fail (and without this mistake, the plan could and probably would have succeeded) then, for all the reasons stated, that person is Gavin. Nijmegen bridge shouldn't have been de-prioritized. Taking that bridge, even with all the other mistakes, probably would have lead to an Allied victory at Market Garden.
    21
  1934. 😂 what more do we need to confirm that the Labour Theory of Value is wrong!
    20
  1935. Göring is going to eat you, little one
    20
  1936. Lol sorry!
    20
  1937. It was 1941. Stalingrad is in my brain at the moment, so 1942 is the default year for me now :( I've added this to the pinned comment
    20
  1938. Well, I appreciate the comment nonetheless :) thanks!
    20
  1939. Might be three... :)
    20
  1940. Someone has to make a decision somewhere (not just in the military, but in politics or business etc), and everyone's lives are reliant of those above making the right decisions. Then you see that those above you are just as flawed as everyone else, and it's about that point that you realise just how completely your life is in the hands of a bunch of idiots.
    20
  1941. Awesome! I'm glad you're fond of the economic videos because they continue to be my most controversial 👍
    20
  1942. Exactly, they wanted more control. That's what socialization of the trade unions allowed.
    20
  1943. I can't, I feel like I'm behind with everything, especially behind with my engagement on Patreon (also not been on Twitter in over a month, so no idea what state that's in). My last full day off was the 8th of August, but I did have a half-day off on the 30th of September.
    20
  1944. Halderp
    20
  1945. The answer is complicated. The various ideologues don't like criticism of their religions, and so history contradicts their view of the world. When I present history (rather than just pandering to a particular religion), they have to rise up and defend themselves, spread lies and slander me wherever they can. It's all a game.
    20
  1946. @konstancemakjaveli I don't think this particular error is worth a full re-upload. It is what it is. Obviously if I decided to do the three "all-in-one" videos for this series, I'll correct it there.
    20
  1947. Yes, as I said a few videos ago, Terri did a very good job 👍
    20
  1948. Nazis at the time, not Germans now.
    20
  1949. No it was a man made famine.
    20
  1950. Awesome, I'm glad to hear it! It's difficult to know if I have made something clear or not, and sometimes people say I've said stuff that they don't understand, so it is good to know this video was understandable.
    20
  1951. @Stalin "I was just shocked at an entire video of hateful abuse & obvious lies." Where were the lies and abused? You asked a blatantly provocative question, and you got a reply that made it clear that I wasn't going to just 'stick to tanks'. You don't like this, but that doesn't make it 'hateful abuse & obvious lies'. I've also replied to your comment, which I've pinned, in which you call me a 'liar' 'douchebag' and more. It would be wise for you to calm down on your accusations.
    20
  1952. Was it? If it was, that actually wasn't the reason :D
    20
  1953. Haha, I'm not actually. I've just started doing some more advanced animations in Premiere Pro. But glad you noticed ;)
    20
  1954. No they didn't, that was a myth. Watch the video.
    20
  1955. Wow, thank you! I wasn't able to put references in this video (to be fair, most are from Zetterling's or Buttar's books anyway), but I do think references really do show that I'm backing everything up. And yes, I do intend to take more breaks in the future because it was definitely needed and helped a lot
    20
  1956. It depends on the Nazi. Hitler thought Christianity was an updated Judaism, so he despised it for that reason. However, at the same time, he and Chamberlain said that Christ was Aryan. But Chamberlain had different views to Hitler, so it starts getting complicated, and this is why it's difficult to paint a broad brushstroke (like I did last time) because one Nazi thinks one thing, and another thinks something else.
    20
  1957. It does feel like it should be longer, but I also think my script was very efficient for this one. I took my time and condensed a lot of information into a smaller space, so that might explain it. The reason it took so long to edit was because there was just so many battle-animations in there - it's way more condensed than Stalingrad was, which means there's more action per hour of the video, if that makes sense.
    20
  1958. First! Hope you enjoy the video!
    20
  1959. The only historians who've definitely acknowledged my work are Anton Joly and Egor Kobiakov (obviously), Isaev (yes, I heard through the grapevine that he apparently praised the earlier episodes of Battlestorm Stalingrad - not sure if he's still watching or not), and Poulussen was warm to my videos on Market Garden via Twitter a while ago (he's the guy who wrote the book 'Lost at Nijmegen'). There was also the grandson of Friedrich Kellner (who I did a video on a while back). I'm not sure if Robert Kellner is a historian or not, but he praised my video on his grandfather and I pinned the comment. Oh, and there was also Nigel Askey... but let's not go there. There have been some 'minor' historians and professors in the comments. But so far, no one major (apart from Isaev) has said anything yet. I'm sure there will be at some point, although I think most major historians think YouTube isn't the place for history. Many don't like Wikipedia, and probably view this platform as a similar waste of time. I could be wrong though.
    20
  1960. Thanks for double-checking! I would recommend the book "The Devil and Karl Marx" by Paul Kengor. It's where I discovered this fact, and others. Someone recommended it to me and I wasn't disappointed. (Of course, I encourage you to read it with a critical eye and come to your own conclusions.)
    20
  1961. @David S Cameron  Football is for losers! You should get into a real-man's sport, like history or chess
    20
  1962. Thanks for the feedback! Got to try these things in order to see what works and what doesn't
    20
  1963. First! Dolfuss was, yes. Don't know enough about Salazar to make an assessment.
    20
  1964. @DOOK NOOKUM hope you don't spit out your coffee!
    20
  1965. That's it. Glad you enjoyed the video :)
    20
  1966. 1. If you'd bothered to watch further than 6 minutes of this 44 minute video, you'd have seen that I did take into consideration the overall number of resources. 2. The numbers are from the sources listed in the description. Whether they're incomplete or misleading numbers or not, the fact is I haven't come across any better than them. If you have a better set of statistics from a reputable source, please let me know so I can take a look at them.
    20
  1967. You know what, I've changed it!
    20
  1968. I've had plenty of experience with women. They're not prioritising intelligence. In fact, I'd say that they're often put-off by it.
    20
  1969. Great counter-argument.
    20
  1970. People often complain if the video slips under 20 minutes.
    20
  1971. "@TIK It confirms that what is traditionally defined as Socialism is not what Hitler considered Socialism to be - therefore it seems odd to want to label him using the traditional definition and parameters." What's that? This is a history video, and you think it's strange that I'm labeling him with what you admit is the correct historical term? Geeze, I wonder why I did that
    20
  1972. "But, of course, it was never translated" Why did I start learning German first!? I should have started learning Russian first :( And thanks for the rest of the information. Is it all from that book?
    20
  1973. I have one... can't play one note of it 😂
    20
  1974. Yes, and another great book is "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Götz Aly, which talks about this in-depth
    20
  1975. I made it as PG-13 as possible, and I even showed YouTube's own policies at the beginning, so if they take this down there's no hope.
    20
  1976. They already are... It's sad because I gave the numbers in the video, and said that both sides were just as bad as each other. But of course, agendas are being pushed and so emotions triumph over reason
    20
  1977. I wasn't aware that this was a major issue, and wouldn't have included it if I had known. However, now that it is out, I'm not removing the video over that. If people want to argue about it - fine. At the end of the day, history lies in the heart of the debate. Refusing to allow the debate would go against a fundamental principle of history, let alone free speech. So, as painful as it's probably about to be in this comment section, it is what it is.
    20
  1978. Aiden, you haven't "proved" anything. All you do is troll repeatedly. Don't you have a job, or do you spend your entire life in this comment section making snarky comments and word-salads?
    20
  1979. "There has not been much research done for this video." 110 books = nOt MUcH rEAsErcH
    20
  1980. I tried. I really did
    20
  1981. It's not going to be next week - more likely 3 weeks. But I can't say for certain yet. The map is almost done!
    20
  1982. That's awesome! It fits with what the Austrian School is saying about economics. Do you know where I can find the accounts where Khrushchev said that?
    20
  1983. To be fair, they roast themselves.
    20
  1984. Also, thanks! Hope things are good with you too :)
    20
  1985. Yes, the Maikop oilfields were destroyed. But they started to rebuild them. I can't remember exactly how much oil they managed to extract from them by the time they had to abandon the area, but it was basically nothing
    20
  1986. Yes, I've been putting it off until I was ready... This is actually the second-draft of this video, and I don't normally need to do second drafts
    20
  1987. Yes, Engels was the one who asked Marx to change the name from the "Communist Confession of Faith" to the "Communist Manifesto".
    20
  1988.  @juliantheapostate8295  I must admit, some of Mises's works (more the early ones, like his "Socialism", which is a great book) aren't particularly easy to read. He was targeting other economic intellectuals, not the common man, so it sort of makes sense. But his middle and later works (e.g. Omnipotent Government) are easier to get into. Sowell, of course, is a great read.
    20
  1989. I thought an army marches on its stomach
    20
  1990. BRRRRRRRAAAAAWWWWRWRRRMRMRMMRMRMMMMM!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2jUhnCU9iA
    20
  1991. I think he's trolling
    20
  1992. It actually depends on the book. I'll be honest, I've been reading Eric Voegelin recently and have slowed down to a crawl. His text is incredibly dense, so it's been a slog to get through them. But then I can fly through other books. By the way, I think you'll like this video, especially the second question section.
    20
  1993. Good question, and I don't know. I'm glad though that you're watching :)
    20
  1994. Mstislaw - don't worry, Sir Joseph Stalin's comments aren't to be taken seriously :)
    20
  1995. I was considering doing one about Greece in WW2 relatively soon actually. Not on the fighting, but on the occupation
    20
  1996. Thank you Will. I don't expect you to always agree with me.
    19
  1997. "TIK not only are you ignoring half his comment but you also unpinned this AS SOON AS HE POSTED IT" - Ryan Wilson I'm not sure what you're on about. I've not unpinned this. Garlic - "Then why do you keep talking about how they interconnected, how hitler redefined marxism, how NS was a form of marxism, etc and etc?" Stop making stuff up and accusing me of doing things I haven't done. I've never said they were "interconnected". All I said is that Hitler looked at Das Kapital, agreed that the class struggle was real, but decided Marx was wrong on how to resolve it. So he was influenced by it. But Marxism and National Socialism are not "interconnected". "If you would talk about NS as some kind of ideological evolution from of pre-marxist socialism, then it would make a lot more sense." National Socialism had its roots in the pre-Marxist era (as did Marxism). But National Socialism as we imagine it came after Marxism. Hitler and his colleagues looked at Das Kapital and took elements out of it. So, why an evolution from pre-marxist socialism would be acceptable to you, but the actual reality of the evolution of the National Socialist ideology is not acceptable to you, I'm failing to grasp. "Even though according to your criteria, almost every major participant in ww2 was a socialist, including USA and Great Britain." I never said any of that. Stop making stuff up. I said SOME of their policies (mainly refering to Britain and the Labour Party after the war) were socialist, but the USA certainly wasn't socialist. "Why are you not focusing your comparison on how socialist britain fought with socialist germany," Socialism in Britain only really occured after the end of the war. "and how indian famine in 1943 happened because britain was socialist while nazi germany did the same to jews because it was also socialist?" Are you implying the murder of Jews by the Germans didn't happen, and that it was a famine? Also, I don't deny that there was a famine in India in this time period, and that it was probably (I've not looked into it) caused by British policy. The Irish Famine happened, and that wasn't socialism, so it's not unimaginable to think India would be affected in this way. However, all of this is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, since Britain wasn't socialist until after the Labour Party took office in 1945. "You also disregarded what i said about nazi germany motivation. Your argument that ”hitler did what he did” because it was in his book falls flat when we bring up all the nazi racial hypocrisy that i mentioned in the previous reply. This doesnt make sense to explain the entire war with ideology when nazis literally funded unpopular slavic nationalist movement, even though they considered slavs to be untermenches. Did i mention jews in wermacht?" I assume you're refering to this - -Why did hitler create collaborationist units out of ”inferior races”, especially slavs? Several SS formations, ROA and RONA, ukrainian collaborators, yugoslav collaborats, even african formations from black people that were sent on the eastern front (which is especially interesting because nazis basically took the rhetoric of ”we liberate you from british imperialism”. Because they were fighting a war. They definitely viewed them as inferior, even if they used them to fight on their side. Besides, Hitler was reluctant to use such troops, but caved in when the war turned against Germany. It doesn't invalidate anything I've said, which is why I chose to ignore it. "Do you know what USSR stands for?" I assume this is rhetorical. "Soviet Union was a council republic. Council republic is a form of democracy," and "This is not someones opinion, this is not a subject of debate - this is an established fact." A republic is a democracy? And I'm the one who doesn't understand politics. "We can debate on flaws and advantages of both systems but this is an entirely different topic, if you are going to dismiss USSR being a council republic by bringing up cold war stamps then i can as well dismiss your ”democracy” by pointing out how choice between hillary and trump had nothing to do with peoples’ will." 1) I'm not American and don't care about Hillary or Trump, but I'm assuming you're refering to the fact that the USA is a Republic, not a Democracy. 2) I said in the first video, which you clearly didn't watch, that the USA is not a democracy: she is a republic. Surprisingly, I thought this would be the controversial bit, but only one or two people actually mentioned it. I then explained to them a bit further and they saw what I meant. 3) I never said the USSR was not a soviet/council republic. However, I am saying it isn't democratic, even if it has got democratic elements. "You absolutely did say that [refering to what I said: ”It's not capitalist. I've not said it was. You're trying to make out that it is 100% capitalism, but you're not considering the historical reality.”], at least indirectly, when you were explaining nazi privatizations by saying that ”socialism does not exclude capitalism”." So, I didn't say it. Nor was it implied. You took it to mean that because, as is quite clear, you haven't bothered to listen to what I said in the video. "But you absolutely do. 11:00 you say that nazis are a ”branch” of marxist theory. So its either part of it or not. You are making contradictory points." 'Branch of the same tree' is what I was saying. Their roots are in Marx and co, but they're not the same. Just like Catholocism and Sunni Islam share the same roots, even if they're not the same. So, from this, we can conclude that you've misinterpreted the evidence.
    19
  1998. I think for most Russians, criticising the Soviet regime seems like an attack on Russia and Russians themselves. This might be true in some circles, but academically this is not the case. Saying that the Soviet regime was bad, doesn't also mean that all Russians are bad. The two are not synonymous. There could also be reasons as to why the book is looked down upon. Memoirs aren't super-reliable after all. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't correct in a broad sense.
    19
  1999. True, but again, there's still civilians in the factory. You're still bombing civilians.
    19
  2000. Glad you agree! To be fair though, it doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum you sit on, if you value truth and want to know the reality, you'll want as many sources used as possible.
    19
  2001. No worries. Couldn't do it for all of it because there were gaps and the front wasn't coherent during the back and forth fighting. But I'll admit it does look better
    19
  2002. It absolutely was! Maybe I'll cover that war one day
    19
  2003. And very few people watch videos longer than 1 minute anymore either :( the Twitter-de-generation
    19
  2004. Coming Next: The Pyramids built the Aliens!
    19
  2005. @Fake Playstore  You're right! We need to muzzle-up 😷
    19
  2006. To be honest though, I don't think a lot of people have even heard of this battle, let alone care enough to go buy books on it (which is a shame, Pitt's series is amazing). So they genuinely don't know what's going to happen next.
    19
  2007. My thoughts exactly ;)
    19
  2008. You're definitely right. As I said towards the end of the video, it was important as a tactical location, just not a major position like Mamaev Kurgan for example
    19
  2009. Oh wow! I know you've been saying you wanted to catch up for a while, so it's great to see you do it! I'm interested to hear what you think of this video, because it's like the Battle of the Bulge video and shares some points with it
    19
  2010. Awesome! That's good to hear :) I really want my Battlestorm videos to be the best quality possible, so to get this feedback is fantastic. Thank you!
    19
  2011. "Sanity is for the weak!"
    19
  2012. To be fair, I used to see it that way too when I was a moderate socialist. I couldn't understand why people didn't think socialism was a good thing. It's hard to see the truth when you're plugged into the lies
    19
  2013. Okay, I didn't know that. Thanks for the information!
    19
  2014. Why would the love of money be bad?
    19
  2015. I'd love to hear Sudweek's response to this
    19
  2016. I'll do my best (although sources are limited)
    19
  2017. Haha I'm glad you stuck with it! A lot of viewers here also fell for the trap of assuming that I think the 1946 Depression actually happened, and because they didn't watch more than 30 seconds, they didn't realize that the beginning was a set-up for the actual realization. Cheers!
    19
  2018. Thank you! I was able to put a lot of time into it, which shows :)
    19
  2019. Another one bites the dust!
    19
  2020. There are people who criticise Rommel, but I think the "safe" position is to say that he's a good general. I don't play it safe.
    19
  2021.  @philvanderlaan5942  "I could be wrong but doesnt TIK himself say he prefers people to Think and do their own research than just accept what others say?" Yes, I absolutely do say that. I much prefer for people to actually think for themselves. This is why, if someone proves me wrong, or provides information which is in addition to my own, or an opinion that is valid and not refuted, in a nice way (aka, not "you're an idiot TIK"), then I'm more than happy about it! Just like in this case, I'll pin a comment, or even issue a correction (if necessary). This doesn't mean people could just ignore what's being said, jump to silly conclusions, state things without providing sources, ask questions that are deliberately designed to divert us away from the topic onto something else ('Whataboutism'), or assume I'm wrong because I obviously want to 'eat the poor' like the unthinkers claimed in the comments of Monday's video... but if people have more knowledge, or have thought this through and have come up with better conclusions, then I'm all for it
    19
  2022. The chocolate ration has increased from 5 ounces to 4 ounces.
    19
  2023. Before Crusader, Auchinleck stockpiled a 50% reserve in tanks because he knew they'd lose a lot of them due to breakdowns. So, while I was joking, it has an element of truth to it
    19
  2024. Sorry for my ignorance :)
    19
  2025. @Kiyo - haha thanks, but it's not actually about destroying them, it's about felling the idea that National Socialist Germany and Fascist Italy didn't have states that controlled their economy (or that Socialism isn't state-control of MOP, or that it HAS to be about the workers - Marxism). You cannot explain World War 2 or the Holocaust, or even the Hitler Youth, if it was a free market economy.
    19
  2026. Yeah you're correct, a few people have pointed this out. There are a few other minor mistakes like that in the video, so see how many you can spot :)
    19
  2027. I am anti-establishment and pro-personal investigation. However I'm also not a postmodernist who manipulates evidence to further my agenda, like Irving does.
    19
  2028. Only if Hotzendorf then went on to have a major influence in all post-war histories of the war, because unfortunately Halder definitely did and we're paying the price for it now.
    19
  2029.  @dickesbrot5724  Due to the censorship policies of our criminal governments, my policy is to avoiding talking about the accuracy of the lamestream propaganda narrative of modern events, so as not to get the woke-y loser 77th Brigaders' backs up. My only advice is that you should 100% believe everything you hear in the news and don't ever question the narrative. Don't do your own research or think critically, and don't ever come to the conclusion that there's no way we'll know the truth until ~100 years after the event in question (once all the documents on it are released). If you do, you'll be called a racist-sexist-conspiracy-theorist-far-right-nazi-fascist-hippo-fish-bicycle-hating bigot, and you won't to be called that, would you!
    19
  2030. I had a lot of fun making the Operation Crusader series. A great battle, hilarious at times
    19
  2031. Herff's got messed up somehow and I didn't notice until after the render (because obviously, you can't pick stuff up like that before you render). But this is the benefit of doing small battles - I can learn and improve by the time the big battles come along
    19
  2032. Actually, YouTube doesn't like the words "Nazi" or "Hitler", so I'm screwed anyway. But I assume that they'd be lenient, since I'm talking history, and videos talking about history are supposedly okay to publish, according to their terms of service. The word "seduction" though could be overboard and warrant counter-action, even though technically it's the title of a history book.
    19
  2033. His "Icebreaker" is equally as hilarious. But what's very concerning is that many believe it to be true. Many commenters on the previous few videos have told me to take a look at Suvorov because, in their eyes, his argument is correct. I hope that this video helps make them realise that they're wrong.
    19
  2034. Post the best Hitler parody you know. My favourite is this https://youtu.be/ZrHmcpRAZNs
    19
  2035. I will create a video which is much longer and answers Suvorov once and for all. In fact, I'm gathering more and more evidence right now. However, this video wasn't actually about the full Suvorov argument, just one part of it. It was to show (in a short video) how Suvorov's thesis is based on memoirs and other evidence which doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The rest of his argument is the exact same.
    19
  2036.  @aleksazunjic9672  The choice isn't "coupons for bread" or "uber-rich buys all the food". The choice is "coupons for the bread that the uber-rich allocate to you" or "you have to earn money in order to trade for the bread that individual farmers produce". Unfortunately, you (and many others) mistakenly believe that the Fascist/Socialist system we have now is "capitalism". No, it is not. We do not have a free market, therefore we do not have capitalism.
    19
  2037. "Learning German to better shill Allied and Soviet propaganda, no doubt." The Allies and Soviets both committed crimes during WW2, and the regime of the Soviet Union was evil. Can you drop the Wehraboo logic now? Not being 'pro-Wehrmacht' doesn't mean I'm 'anti-German'. "He just keeps saying he is going to tear it down and did mention it in a Q&A with a smug sigh and roll of the eyes but that rebuttal still hasn't come." I was about to tackle it, but then a bunch of crying Marxist Socialists came along and screamed that National Socialism wasn't REAL Socialism. So, since that's far a more important problem in relation to WW2 than the Nigel Askey issue, I decided to tackle that one first, which I did in my 5 hour long "Hitler's Socialism" documentary. Originally, the Marxists were the ones praising me for standing up against Wehraboos in the videos that Nigel Askey replied too. Yet, once I said National Socialism was Socialism, the Marxists then turned about and used the Nigel Askey article as 'proof' that I'm not a real historian. The irony is that I've somehow made the anti-Wehraboos agree with Wehraboos, and the Marxists agree with the Nazis. Funny really if you think about it
    19
  2038. The critics have been accusing me of holding all sorts of views, and they're just pulling it out of thin air. It's sad that they're so intellectually dishonest.
    19
  2039. Have you seen my more recent (and still ongoing) Battlestorm Stalingrad series? The Croatian Legion plays a role right from the beginning, so you might be interested https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag
    19
  2040. Photoshop! :D I download maps of the battles for reference then try and recreate them as accurately as possible... Then give them a gritty look using noise and lighting effects
    19
  2041. "You hit the nail on the head when you asked about the market demand for a state." Someone has said it's more like lots of little local states like Lichtenstein, rather than pure anarchy. So, in other words, it's decentralization. That's fine, but that's technically not "anarchy", which then removes the "anarcho" part of "anarcho-capitalism". So I'm still not sure on that. But I could definitely see a world of lots of Lichtenstein-type states being far better than what we have now, so I can get behind that idea. - "The only other thing I would say is that the bridge might have been requested by some grandma or whoever writing in to a politician" That's not market demand. If grandma wants a bridge, then she should pay for it. And this is the issue: people demand "free" nationalised health care but NONE OF THEM are willing to pay for it. Well, if you're not willing to pay for it, then that proves that you don't want it. If you wanted it, you'd get your wallet out.
    19
  2042. Deliver those packages - logistics is the most importart part of war!
    19
  2043. I think you'll enjoy the next episode (coming in two weeks). But I may need you in the comments to say what you've just said again - "This war and these regimes were so devastating for our people. Turnig brother against brother, people who wanted their country to be fre against those forced to fight..." - because I've already got pro-Marxist-Socialist commenters proclaiming that the Baltic States were pro-National-Socialists, and I think the next episode will cause an even bigger fight in the comments.
    19
  2044. “It is worth clarifying that the Nazi-Soviet Pact was not an alliance as such, it was a treaty of non-aggression. Consequently, aside from the metaphorical title used here - The Devils’ Alliance - I generally refrain from referring to Hitler and Stalin as ‘allies’ or their collaboration as an ‘alliance’. However, that clarification should not blind us to the fact that the Nazi-Soviet relationship between 1939 and 1941 was a profoundly important one, which consisted of four further agreements after the pact of August 1939 and was, therefore, close to an alliance in many respects. Certainly it was far more vital and far more crucial to both sides than, for instance, Hitler’s alliance with Mussolini’s Italy. Hitler and Stalin were allies in all but name.” - Moorhouse, “The Devils’ Alliance,” P4. (Bearing in mind that this book is the only book specifically on the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and the author notes that the Pact is often ignored or barely mentioned by a lot of other authors. And when it is mentioned, it's only a few sentences.)
    19
  2045. Why would you be unemployable? Do you have a disability? Assuming you physically can't get a job and must remain a writer, I have a suggestion for you. I don't have a lot of spare time, but recently I've been playing solo-rpgs like Ironsworn: Starforged. Just got Four Against Darkness too. If you check out the solo-roleplaying sub-Reddit, you'll see that there seems to be a demand for well-written, simple mechanic systems with good world-building potential. Well, if there's a demand, you should fill it. Set yourself a goal of writing up an entire rule system in one day (which will force you to keep it simple). Then revise on the second day, and do some play testing on the third, fourth and fifth days. Revise once more, then come up with a setting. Add in some art (maybe even AI created), publish as a PDF, then advertise on the relevant subreddits and forums. In theory, you could have a published product within a week or two, especially if you're unemployed as you've got nothing else going on. You probably won't make a ton of money with this first product (unless it goes viral), but it will give you experience and show you that wealth can be created. Your wealth and life are entirely in your hands.
    19
  2046. "TIK You somehow manage to get better after every video." You should see the amount of research I'm doing behind the scenes.
    19
  2047. You should try reading that source you linked. First thing it said was monopolies are created by the government. And my source for government monopolies? It's the word "nationalization". In the UK we have several state monopolies - the NHS, the state pensions, the state insurance schemes, state roads, state utilities ("council pop"), and the Labour Party wants to make some more - nationalise the railways and the postal service. None of these are there to protect consumers, and monopolies are only created by the state, so your "bottom line" is a false conclusion.
    19
  2048. @Suleiman Kahani - No they're not.
    19
  2049. Are you not going to join in?
    19
  2050. It's alright, I'll forgive you
    19
  2051.  @guderian557  No it isn't, stop pushing Bayes Theorem. I explained why in the video.
    19
  2052. "I'm wondering.....what would be your position if I do not agree with you on some point and would say so in a respectful manner in the comment section...would you threaten me in some way with repercussions?" As long as you're not spamming, I don't care, say what you like. Free speech must be protected... even if YouTube punishes my channel for maintaining such speech (they judge videos by the content of the comments in the comment section), and even though I have trolls (Aiden B, and wannabchomsky to name but two) who are screaming all sorts of nonsense at everyone who supports my views. However, if you say stupid things, I will call you out on it. So be nice. - "So...are we free to contest or oppose something you claim without repercussions?" Not quite, because you forget that there's three dots next to your comments, and anyone can click on them and report what you say. So, while I maintain the idea of free speech, others may not. Oh, and YouTube automatically deletes comments... including my own. But in theory, you can say whatever you want.
    19
  2053. It's not that type of Crusade! (Edit: I see that OP has changed his comment to include "Pregnant Anne Frank", which I do not approve of)
    19
  2054. I have Kotkin's book, but haven't fully read it. Clearly, when I get time, I need to go back to it. I've seen his lectures on YouTube though, and he's a good historian. Thanks 👍
    19
  2055. They also lead to paradox's, like in the Terminator series. If you destroy Skynet (or Hitler), then how would you know to send someone go back in time to destroy/or kill them in the first place?
    19
  2056. Thank you Yohan! I wanted to make up for the failures last week. And I think I've certainly made a better-quality more-in-depth video overall compared to the others. I just wish this had been the video I'd put out in the first place. What you have to understand is that every author isn't going to be 100%. Some are better than others, but none are infallible. What you have to do is read several books from several different authors on the same subject to get a better view of it. This is why I suggest focusing on one or two battles and just getting as many books on them as you can. When you do that, you're able to see the contradictions, the problems and the mistakes. There's something to be said about specializing in history - reading too widely can leave you without a clear knowledge on any subject.
    19
  2057. Göring has become a figure of ridicule. He said yes to the Stalingrad Airlift, he was on drugs, he tried to invent the waterproof sponge... And while there's probably some truth to all this, it does make you wonder how much has been exaggerated.
    19
  2058. I will finish it, don't worry. I just need to do something else for a bit first before coming back to it
    19
  2059. You're welcome! And I'd love to hear your perspective on this. Did I get it right in the video?
    19
  2060. Damn it! I even looked up how to say it before the video. Need to work on my Russian before I narrate my Stalingrad documentary :(
    19
  2061. I agree. Both critics and supporters wanted a shortened version because 5 hours was too much. I have updated things though, so hopefully my regular viewers will watch as well
    19
  2062. Yep, that's why it's important to speak out against the totalitarian state at all opportunities, and is why censorship is inherently bad.
    19
  2063. "the idea of totally unrestricted free market capitalism being the solution to all problems is equally stupid." I never said it was the solution to all problems. I said it was better than socialism and communism, especially for the workers. "here's the simple fact that with limited space and resources, a growth based economy cannot be sustained indefinitely." So you need to make the best of the limited resources you have. This is what capitalism does many times better than socialism. Also, a capitalism economy corrects itself all the time. The boom bust cycle though is a central-banking / fractional reserve banking / government exasperated problem (thus a public sector problem), not a problem with capitalism. I explained this in the video.
    19
  2064. I've actually connected dots in this video that I don't think others have connected before, although some got close
    19
  2065.  @altaiaurelius  Do you? Maybe I need more feedback on this. I always assumed that longer videos were good
    19
  2066. I mustn't have got to that part in Wette's book, but it wouldn't surprise me. Also Mussolini was actively protecting Jews within Italian borders, preventing his own men from handing them over to the Germans. Obviously that didn't last because Mussolini was outed in 1943.
    19
  2067. Well, I'm glad to hear you set aside your feelings and gave it a go! I wish more people would do that
    19
  2068. It's stupid because Manstein's book is literally sat on the shelf behind me, and it's been on that shelf for like 3 years now. In addition, it was actually one of the first books I ever read on WW2, along with Guderian. But that guy is not the only one to say that I should read Manstein - a lot of Wehraboos do
    19
  2069. Sadly I don't think many people here are sane... I'm certainly not! (But thank you anyway!)
    19
  2070. People actually say to me that I should read Manstein and Guderian because that will "set me right", even though they were some of the first books I read on WW2, and they've been sat on my bookshelf in my videos since forever
    19
  2071. Yes, and it's actually quite common on Wikipedia. I was surprised to see Sewell do it, since he said he had nothing to hide. But apparently he does. The worst part is, the reviewers of his book on Amazon are not only singing his praises, but are "more determined" to fight fo Socialism after reading it. Terrible.
    19
  2072. WW1 would be fine. Also tempted to do something like the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, or the Korean War. But I've got a lot of WW2 to get through first before I go to them
    19
  2073. Yeah, there was a lot I missed out, but I hope you understand that time prevented me from mentioning everything
    19
  2074. I have no trouble talking about the brutality. If I thought YouTube would have allowed it, I would have given some of the examples of cannibalism and discussed them. I even had to trim the fat (pun intended) of some of the starvation stories because I didn't think they would pass the censors.
    19
  2075. I'll agree with Louisville. One of the often forgotten roles is the general's chief of staff. He was often left in charge of the division or the corps, and had to make decisions while the commander was elsewhere. In a lot of cases, staff officers were what kept an army running. Yet you hardly hear about them.
    19
  2076. At some point after Stalingrad. Stalingrad must come first
    19
  2077.  @Pullapitko  Look it up. There's 'diversity' (racist) 'officers' (commissars) in the schools, colleges, universities, the civil service, the police, the local councils/soviets, the criminal justification system, let alone inside the corporations (themselves funded by the Central Bank - the Bank of England - so are part of the State).
    19
  2078. Yes, it was in Episode 9 of that series. It's a shame because I grew up watching the World at War :(
    19
  2079. Thanks Peter! Yeah, I mean, if I had more time (this being a response video) I could have gone into more depth, but it wasn't necessary. And you're absolutely right - how can I cover the history of WW2 if we misunderstand one of the major powers that's fighting it!? I can't cover the battles or the atrocities without understanding exactly what the National Socialists are all about. Sadly, a lot don't want to accept this. Also, you're right that I generalise a bit, but I also didn't have much time to make this, so forgive me! :)
    18
  2080. Jokes aside, I would like to know why people disliked this particular video. It's strange how a small number of people always dislike my videos, regardless of the topic. I'm curious to know what their reasoning is in this case
    18
  2081. Glad you think so, although I don't think it is
    18
  2082. Thank you for the pronunciation correction! I was wondering about that... Also, if you like the photos on the map, you'll probably really enjoy episode 22 (when it comes out) because I was working on the script for it today, and there's a couple of pictures that I can locate on the map that really 'hit' me, and made me realize how remarkable it is that we actually have those photos
    18
  2083. Haha yeah that would be funny. But seriously - Stocks = publicly traded (socialism/corporatism - public ownership or control of the means of production) Capitalism = private trade (private ownership or control of the means of production) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    18
  2084. Exactly!
    18
  2085. I don't think this is the real Elon Musk... There's a few jokey names in the Patreon list (e.g. a "Jeremy Corbyn" was on there for a while)
    18
  2086. Thank you! Also, your username and avatar is pretty funny
    18
  2087. Wow, thank you fighter! It's great to hear you appreciate the quality - I spend a lot of time on these videos, and I do want to set a high standard. Like you said, there's a lot of documentaries out there that leave too much out. I always leave them feeling I want more. So I want to create the videos I wanted as a kid. "Super-accurate and filthy-detailed" as Indisguise often says. And I feel like I'd be letting everyone down if I don't provide those details in as unbiased a way as possible. So it really is good to hear you're enjoying them. Makes it all worth it :)
    18
  2088. I would still argue that half of them don't count, since slavery continued after the so-called abolishments. And even by that list, England was still one of the first. But what I was referring to was the fact that Britain championed the cause after 1806, sending the Royal Navy out from 1808 to pursue ships carrying slaves and freeing them. Between 1808 and 1860, the Royal Navy had freed 150,000 Africans who were slaves. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Abolition-Of-Slavery/
    18
  2089. They needed the oil in the Caucasus or it was game over. Have you seen my oil video?
    18
  2090. Terri did a good job with the thumbnail! Hope you enjoy it when you do get to watch it
    18
  2091. I'm 50/50 about it. I do want to counter them directly, but I'm aware that all they'll do is dance around the facts while mocking me. Ultimately I think it's a waste of time to entertain them, since they want to remain ignorant.
    18
  2092. FACTS
    18
  2093. They were still a victim of the Soviets in 1939-40.
    18
  2094. Wow, thank you! I would never have realised that, so thanks for pointing it out
    18
  2095. I laughed. Take a heart
    18
  2096. Oh boy, that's going to be fun!
    18
  2097. The 88 gunner was Heckenberg! Here's a blast from the past https://youtu.be/4PCNdB0WDvc
    18
  2098. Exactly.
    18
  2099. You should see some of my other videos. They attract neo-Nazis. I've been accused of being pro-Nazi pro-Soviet anti-this anti-that... I can't win! But no matter what the comments say, I'm presenting history as the sources dictate, and not by some social, economic or political agenda.
    18
  2100. lol
    18
  2101. Yep, definitely
    18
  2102. Because the Central Planners reject logic and reason, choosing instead to believe in irrationality.
    18
  2103. Hey Anton! Awesome information. You say that nobody forbade the evacuation, but now we have the question: how come we have sources (including Soviet ones) saying that Stalin forbade an evacuation? (Also, I'm making it a priority to email you first thing in the morning)
    18
  2104.  @walterdogg  They're both turning points, but it's been argued by a few historians (I think Stahel, Glantz and Citino if memory serves me right?) that the main turning point of the war was even earlier than Moscow. The war in the East was probably decided somewhere in the summer of 1941. I've even argued that they lost the war before it started because of the oil... but that's just me going out on a limb
    18
  2105. I would like to one day!
    18
  2106.  @SepticFuddy  How are things over there? I've heard 70,000 state employees were sacked?
    18
  2107. I do feel sorry for Freyberg because his division stood up to the entire Afrika Korps, plus Italian divisions. Yes, the Axis divisions were somewhat depleted at this point, but they still outnumbered the New Zealanders. Still, I think they performed well in the circumstances, and may have performed better had the British and South Africans not let them down.
    18
  2108. According to Toprani, the oil in Algeria and Morocco was so little that the Germans deemed it irrelevant
    18
  2109. Wow, did he? Do you have a source for this?
    18
  2110. It's also one of the reasons I've seriously considered moving to Texas.
    18
  2111. Why have a TV show when I have a YT channel where I can talk to my viewers here in the comments? :)
    18
  2112. "They are probably not the best for Battlestorm Videos, but for informative videos like these, they're an excellent upgrade. :D" I'm actually thinking of using them during Battlestorm Stalingrad. The white bar at the bottom is where I'm going to display information like the date, the scale of the maps, and then the references.
    18
  2113. Awesome! Glad you approve! Took me hours to do it, but I think it's worth it
    18
  2114. Yeah, I think a lot of people weren't here in the era when it used to take me months to edit videos due to working full-time. This 1 video or more a week thing is absolutely as a result of Patreons supporting me enough to go full time
    18
  2115. Can't win a battle without them
    18
  2116.  @harmen2456  I have to publish weekly videos otherwise YouTube's algorithm will destroy the channel. In fact, YouTube wants me to produce more often, which I simply can't do. I'm struggling to do the weekly videos, especially with the Stalingrad series. If it wasn't for the Stalingrad series, I'd have half a chance.
    18
  2117. And this is why I didn't take a screenshot and put his comment directly in the video to quote from because I knew it wouldn't be very flattering for him. From what I can see, he hasn't made a comment here yet.
    18
  2118. Thank you. In this case, they only have to read the books I listed in the description and pinned comment (3 in total, and the Rothbard one if nothing else). I do hope my critics are willing to give the opposing view a chance, even if they still end up disagreeing
    18
  2119. They're in the comments of this video. I feel slightly sorry for them though: their warped view of reality puts them in a corner they can't get out of, and they dismiss any evidence or logical explanation that contradicts their spiritual beliefs. It's incredibly sad for everyone involved - us and them.
    18
  2120.  @michaelkovacic2608  I hadn't considered talking about it before, but it's a possibility. Not during the Stalingrad series though, I'd have to do it separate if I do
    18
  2121. Never trust Wikipedia
    18
  2122. I've been tempted to create something like a blog where I can post the scripts or other essays too. Definitely something I've been considering
    18
  2123.  @Edax_Royeaux  Absolutely. If they can't afford to but their own bullets, then their services are not in need by the rest of society, and thus, they would be a drain on the rest of society.
    18
  2124. Wehraboos, Nazis and Marxists
    18
  2125. Well, he didn't doom Germany to fail here because his plan backfired. Not that having the Italians in charge would have been bad on its own, but because it would have hindered Rommel's performance in these battles. Rommel was promoted to an army commander because Halder's scheme fell apart - therefore, without Halder, Rommel wouldn't have had the chance to be as 'good' as some perceive him to be.
    18
  2126. You've inspired me to make a video that I've been meaning to make for a while... I don't know when it'll publish it, but I will reply to you.
    18
  2127. I don't expect you to always agree with me, but the evidence regarding the NSDAP being Leftwing is so overwhelming that the only way to say it was Rightwing is to do a bunch of mental gymnastics. Still, people would rather do that than accept the reality.
    18
  2128.  @QuizmasterLaw  "prior to the state they likely bartered. at this time specie's use value explains its rise as a medium of exchange." Exactly, and from barter evolves gold and silver. You've just confirmed that trade can happen before a State. Plus, you didn't actually answer my question. How would a king arbitrarily assign a price on every good in the economy when the goods have never had a price before? How would he know how many ounces of silver would buy a loaf of bread? Of course, the reason you can't answer me is because there is no answer. It's not possible. The only way for prices to come about is through the natural exchange of a free market. Gold and silver naturally evolved as the means of exchange, and had nothing to do with the State decreeing that they were valuable.
    18
  2129. "If you did a lot of "research" for this video why are like 90% of your sources YouTube videos?" That's not true. But even if it was, what's the issue with videos being educational? If you don't think videos can be as educational as books, you shouldn't be watching educational channels like this on YouTube.
    18
  2130. History lies in the heart of the debate. I know there's a lot of criticism of Beevor, but it would be wrong not to use his book. We have to use as many sources from as many different perspectives as possible in order to get to the truth of the matter. Incidentally, I know his book was banned in the Ukraine sort-of recently... Honestly I don't see any reason to suspect the Beevor quote in this video as being an unfaithful representation of what the Germans were up to. We know from many other sources that the Germans were living off the land, so it compliments rather than contradicts other information. That said, I will say that I'm not relying on his book too heavily. I'm leaning on Glantz/House & Jason D. Mark in the first season or two, just because so little has been written on this period of the battle. Once we get into the street fighting, things will be different because more authors have written on that. However, if Beevor's book compliments what others are saying, and I have no reason to suspect what he writes at particular parts, I don't see why using his book is wrong. Obviously, if there's a contradiction or I spot an error etc (a couple of errors come to mind), then I'll probably point it out or talk about it if it's necessary. With a battle this huge, the books don't all agree, and there are many errors... and that's good! It'll lead to some juicy debates!
    18
  2131. Absolutely
    18
  2132. Exactly. The SS weren't anywhere near Stalingrad. They only appeared on the scene after the encirclement, and even then, much further to the west.
    18
  2133. I don't normally talk about civilians in battles though.
    18
  2134. I read your comment and hearted, but I needed to give it some thought before responding. If I'm honest, I was in a very similar position right through until the middle of high school (in England, so about 13 or 14 years old). Then I almost died, twice. And I realized that life is too short to waste. So I prioritized my own education. Just like you, I'm mostly self-educated. Taught myself how to play guitar. Taught myself how to create 2D and 3D animations. Taught myself most of what I know history-wise by simply devouring the sources. Yes, I went to college and university, but I've spent a significant portion of my adult life UNLEARNING the garbage that the miseducation system indoctrinated me with. The more I unlearn their 'lessons', the better, happier and more determined I become. And everything else is self-taught. Nothing beats self-tuition. The point of all that is to say that I'm genuinely happy to see that I've inspired you to pick up the books and do your own reading on these topics. Never stop learning, and growing. And do not, for a second, think that you're 'behind' or that "you will never amount to anything" (as one of my teachers told me). It turns out that you learn best by learning yourself. Sure, you can get help from others, but unless you're willing to do the work and put in the effort, outside 'help' is just a waste of time. You have to want to learn before you will, and by the sounds of it you've already realized that. Thank you for your great comment
    18
  2135. Many people in the west also conflate fascism and Nazism, so this isn't a Russian thing, it's actually a Communist/Socialist thing. The official Marxist position was that Nazism was a form of Fascism, and that Fascism was the end-stage of capitalism. Therefore, most people are completely clueless about this topic, which explains why even the fascists and National Socialists themselves are getting this wrong.
    18
  2136. Except for all that socialism that it had. And the racism is also part of the socialism.
    18
  2137. And a lot of ingrained views. Many haven't watched the video and are disliked, commenting "you're wrong" (an example of a great postmodernist argument) and then leaving.
    18
  2138. The dislikes still count, they're just not public. I can see if a video gets a lot of dislikes or not. Of course, it would be better if the dislikes were public, but they still count.
    18
  2139.  @toby2581  Yes, and it doesn't matter what topic it is, nine times out of ten the first narrative that's pushed by the Media is wrong. It was for Jack the Ripper, it was for Swine Flu, it was for the beer virus, it was for Brexit, it is for this.... as well as many others. I would actually recommend assuming that the Media is inherently wrong in everything it's saying and thinking critically about it (ask: "but is this really the case?") and contemplate why they're pushing their particular narrative.
    18
  2140. Are you the second coming of Manstein?
    18
  2141. And yes, as theo von papen has said, never judge a video by the like/dislike ratio
    18
  2142.  @rndompersn3426  I know what Engels said about the State withering away and all that - I've talked about this before. I don't agree because socialism is Statism, regardless of what some lying Marxists said. Marxism isn't the only version of socialism, and socialism means statism. Socialism results in totalitarianism every time it's tried because empirically, logically, and from a praxeological perspective, it will end up in totalitarianism just due to the way it sets out to achieve its goals. It's a scam and if you think it won't end up in totalitarianism, you've simply been tricked.
    18
  2143. Sadly, it's a very common stupid idea. If you dive into the comments of my Public vs Private video, for example, you'll see plenty of similar comments
    18
  2144. "I don't really see what is wrong with having public police, firefighter, road, or railway services." If you haven't seen them, there's two links in the description to videos of Hazlitt's and Sowell's books, Hazlitts explains the problem with them. Now, on their own, they're not too bad. The problem is, they're funded by theft, and we can't afford them. This is something else you may want to see https://usdebtclock.org/
    18
  2145. Yes! Agreed
    18
  2146. Not sure but it's on my list of things to do :)
    18
  2147. Way in the past, somewhere else... https://youtu.be/JAFOqgMB2tY
    18
  2148. Mostly, thank you. I was still a bit off when recording the video and tried to compensate
    18
  2149. That's not what I said. Use your ears
    18
  2150. Those two states only split after the Cold War ~70 years later (with a brief split in WW2, but then rejoined)
    18
  2151. Halderp is always at fault
    18
  2152. It frustrates me too if I'm honest. I don't mind if we're debating over the details, but my critics aren't even listening. They'll respond to this in the usual way - they'll call me a fascist and "insane", then proceed to state the same old narrative about "privatisation" and so on... It's just crazy how easy it is to "lose" a debate with an opponent who declares themselves the victor without addressing any of the points I've raised.
    18
  2153. Honestly, I'm sure there was a double-exclamation mark (!!) somewhere in that book. There's one every other sentence!
    18
  2154. So long as you're advancing, you're not taking a step backwards
    18
  2155. The original Liberals were Right-wing capitalists. However they went through a "crisis of confidence" in the 1880s, where they abandoned capitalism and embraced Left-wing Socialism. So they actually migrated from the Right to the Left. This is covered in numerous books on the period, but the short text "New Liberalism" by Peter Weiler explains it relatively well. Of course, what this means is that Conservativism was originally a Left-wing ideology, and remained where it was as Liberalism became the "New Left". Which means, Conservatives are the old Left-wing, and are still on the Left today (or, at least, are in the middle of the spectrum); the spectrum on the bottom of this image https://images.app.goo.gl/aWgAPTmVPnTeaM7Q6
    18
  2156. Thanks! Good to hear :)
    18
  2157. I'm having trouble with YouTube suppressing the videos right now after my Greek one. If I'd gone into detail with the crimes committed in this video, it would be me in a kangaroo court trial awaiting execution
    18
  2158. Maybe a constant 500 rpm is a bit over the top for sustained fire, but they could (relatively quickly) change the barrels on the Bren and the MG34/42, so either way, it was high. And every side would suffer from overheating weapons, meaning that the overall firepower of a German Gruppe would still be higher than a British section, or American or Soviets squads
    18
  2159. Thanks! 15/04/2018 was the day I went full time, so it's exactly a year today :)
    18
  2160. If you think the lack of oil was the reason for defeat, Germany may have lost before WW2 was started
    18
  2161. Yes, I agree. I think the phrase "nearly inevitable" hits the nail on the head. There were a few choices that could have made a difference if they'd done everything perfectly, but otherwise all roads led to destruction
    18
  2162. He got it from Shumilov though I don't know where he got it from
    18
  2163. I actually show a picture of the Call of Duty map in this episode. It's inaccurate for one blatantly obvious reason...
    18
  2164. "I 100% support you TIK, glad you're fighting back against the onslaught of Reddit 'historians.' I've been targeted by thousands of them in the past as well for 'using Wikipedia and not citing my sources', which anyone who clicks on any of my videos will know is simply not true. The irony is that their goto source is Wikipedia." I'm surprised to hear they've targeted you too, I thought your videos don't really rock the boat (like mine tend to do). Their "Bad History" subreddit is appropriately named though, and Wikipedia really shouldn't count as a source. Think it's best to just ignore them and their echo chamber.
    18
  2165. I no longer believe in the Left-Right political spectrum or any spectrum for that matter. I think we should look at each movement on a policy by policy basis and judge accordingly. That said, I still think the Nazis are very similar to Marxists. Check out some of my recent posts on Twitter on this topic: https://x.com/TIKhistory/status/1866139447927931014 https://x.com/TIKhistory/status/1866162571348464005
    18
  2166.  @brrrrrick  It's in the description, but here it is again https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    18
  2167. A barbed wire fence erected by the Italians to stop native tribes from crossing the border. Not sure how long it was, but it went quite deep into the desert
    18
  2168. I agree that bias and agenda has crept into this debate. Krivosheev definitely downplayed the number of Soviet casualties. Arguably his manpower numbers were also lower because he wanted to show that the Red Army beat the Germans without resorting to copious amounts of men.
    18
  2169. It could just be the UK Amazon, since the Holocaust Educational Trust is a UK institution (with the backing of British politicians apparently)
    18
  2170. Been working on the next video all week, and it's coming on Monday :)
    18
  2171. Operation Retail - The Battle That Never Ended
    18
  2172. Don't be discouraged. As tempting as it might be to, say, copy what he's doing... I wouldn't. Trust is the foundation of human relations. If you break someone's trust, you lose all respect. So I'm certain that his audience will abandon him once they find out that he's lying to them and trying to scam them of their money. On the other hand, I'm kinda surprised your channel hasn't got many views. I'd imagine someone challenging the orthodox Vietnam narrative would have got more than 428 subscribers. I'll heart your comment so more people can see it, and I hope a few more people check you out.
    18
  2173. Thank you for admitting that you're a converted denier. That's actually very interesting. What made you realise your mistake?
    18
  2174. Welcome! Glad you've enjoying the videos and I hope to see you getting stuck into the debates in the comments 👍
    18
  2175.  @samsonsoturian6013  The forced repatriations started in 1944, and involved prisoners of war, so technically it was a war crime. I stuck with the "crime against humanity" slogan partly to get around the YouTube censors, but also because it wasn't just prisoners of war who were affected.
    18
  2176. "Trying"
    18
  2177. Thank you! You'll be just in time to get your name in the Battlestorm Stalingrad videos :)
    18
  2178. It was only for two weeks! I do think I should have had longer because I didn't fully recover, but I may take some more weeks off next year
    17
  2179. Yeah, I mean, I don't think we can dismiss Shirer completely, and I don't want to blame him entirely for his interpretation. It's difficult when you're in the early days of a history project and trying to piece things together, especially when a lot of the documents are under lock and key, plus many debates that bring about truths we didn't know about hadn't happened yet. However, people should be reading more modern works which have an updated narrative. Even they're not going to be perfect, but at least not as out of date as Shirer is.
    17
  2180.  @propagandalf577  I can't do that because YouTube changed their policies. The maximum length of a video used to be 24 hours, but now it's only 12, which means I've already exceeded it. This series is already over 18 hours long so far.
    17
  2181.  @trololobochum  No, stocks aren't socialism. The companies in the stock market though are not individuals. Therefore they're not private. They're publicly owned. That's why the Socialists want corporations - they just call them Syndicates. Syndicates/Corporations are the same thing, just different names. See my previous link.
    17
  2182. Glad you liked it 👍 went a little bit beyond what I normally do, but the video topic sort of warranted it... If it hadn't been about drugs, I probably wouldn't have thrown as many 'red pills' out there
    17
  2183. Great explanation! I did glance over the March of Rome bit, so I'm sorry. Your explanation was good. "Too many people keep generalizing Fascism and Nazism as cartoon-like dictatorships when in reality it's 2 very complex systems." This is the main problem I'm facing at the moment. You can't have a serious conversation because people have no idea that these two ideologies are different. They assume they know what they're talking about, and assume that Fascists are racists, and that Nazis are Fascists, and in reality they've done little to no research on it, and any they have done was done on Wikipedia (which is basically a Marxist propaganda piece when it comes to Nazism and Fascism or anything related). My hope is that the more I do this the more people will be informed about the subject and a serious conversation can actually be had.
    17
  2184. I'm not saying I won't do anything, I just don't have anything planned right now. I wanted to get through the North African Campaign and Italy first before I jumped to Normandy.
    17
  2185. "@TIK If socialism to you is defined as the 'socialised control of the means of production' why do you laugh at people who say that the NHS is not socialism?" Health services produce health. If you nationalize or socialize the health service, you nationalize or socialize the means of producing that health. How can you possibly claim that the socialization of the means of production is not socialism? "The NHS is not, by any measure, the socialised control of the means of production. So by your definition the NHS is not socialism." I rest my case. You don't understand what socialism is, so you're completely fooled by the Marxist narrative. Once people understand what socialism actually is, they wake up. "Their are many forms of socialism that exist on a sliding scale from state regulated capitalism with a social safety net(good) through the racist National Socialism (bad) to full on communism (also bad, but in different ways)." So you admit that state regulation with a social safety net is socialism? Or are you saying that capitalism is now socialism, because that's what you appear to be saying here? And you also appear to be saying that National Socialism is on the socialist scale, which is exactly what I'm saying. So we're in agreement - National Socialism is socialism. Again, contradictions in the narrative here.
    17
  2186. Thank you for your wishes everyone. Unfortunately, you're talking to someone who had 11 sick days in 11.5 years of working in retail, so I'm not stopping unless I absolutely have to do so
    17
  2187. TRUTH
    17
  2188. Das LOL
    17
  2189. Oh trust me, it gets worse. It gets so much worse.
    17
  2190. I'm glad you agree - a lot don't, which is a shame.
    17
  2191. @Johnny Carroll It's been a long time since I did, back in my socialist days. Now it's total freedom of speech here! (well, almost, because YouTube deletes comments automatically, even though I've set it to accept all)
    17
  2192. It's great to see that you're suspicious of the book before you've even read it, and have checked the publication date. That's awesome! And I think you should use it. This is a fantastic opportunity for you to learn a very important skill or outlook, and that is this - your interpretation of the past will change with every source you read. This is going to be a exercise for you to learn from. So yes, I think you should read it... with some advice. Go into it with skepticism, knowing full-well that you can't trust it and that, when you read the more up-to-date book, you may have to change your perception on certain events. Be ready to change that perception. Treat it as though you're hearing a rumour - "ok, I'll accept that version of events until I get more evidence and/or a different interpretation." If you haven't already, check to see if it's got a bibliography (sources), and if it does, see if it's using primary and secondary sources. If it hasn't got a bibliography, avoid avoid avoid. Don't use it, it's a waste of time. If it uses both primary and secondary sources, use it, but be cautious with it (as above). If it's only using primary sources, use it, but be very cautious, because the author isn't aware of the work of other historians who may have figured out and corrected some of the myths and lies within the primary sources which this historian didn't pick up on. Look up online - who is this author? What's he all about? Why's he writing this? Was he a Marxist, a capitalist, a pro-this, an anti-that...? Does he give his background in the preface or intro? Know your enemy. As you're reading it, if anything doesn't make sense to you, or feels a bit off somehow, write it down. Mark the page number. Then if you do get a more up to date book, you can compare two two versions. I would read this book, but you absolutely have to follow it up with a more up to date version. And I think you'll be surprised how much things have changed. But ultimately here's the thing you have to understand - you should treat the up-to-date book with the same amount of suspicion, skepticism and caution as you would the first book. Sure, it's perhaps more up to date, but that doesn't mean it's 100% correct. No book or source is 100% correct. You may pick up a third book next year which disputes or disproves points raised by both the first and second book. And that's good! We're making progress! But it's still not 100%. And this is why you have to remain fluid with your interpretation, and your perception, of history. The facts may change. The interpretations may change. So, treat history (and everything) like you would a rumour. Accept it for now, until you get more information, and be ready to rethink everything you thought you knew. Hope that makes sense!
    17
  2193. It's not over. There's one more episode
    17
  2194. The Canadians are aggressively not surrendering - get 'em!
    17
  2195. Apologies but I'm far behind on the Patreon economic questions. I've been hesitating to make a video on economics until recently because of the previous backlash. But I do intend to do an big economics Q&A video in the near future where I answer as many questions on economics as I can in one video, so I'll try and fit your question in then
    17
  2196. @DemomanTakesSkill  I will hopefully have time to update those pictures soon. I was rushing to get this video finished 😣
    17
  2197. If you want more details, "Supplying War" paints a bleak picture about Barbarossa's logistics. There's no way Guderian could have got to Moscow in 1941, and it wasn't Hitler's fault.
    17
  2198. When we see the world in groups, be them racial, sexual, or class groups, we no longer see the individuals in those groups. When the groups become more important than the individual, the individual no longer needs rights, and his existence is only valued if he contributes to the group. He is no longer a human being, but a number. Numbers can be removed, and the group will live on. The fate of an individual bee is not important, so long as the hive lives on. And this is why atrocities and Holocausts can happen - 'groups' are no longer human beings. This is the danger in seeing the world in groups. It is bad for humanity as a whole to forget that we are, at heart, all different from one another. So why do people see the world in groups? It's strange when you stop and think. The reality is, we are all individuals. We are all unique, distinctive, flawed, and deserve rights and respect. The fact that you see the world in groups says a lot about your character. It's because you need to be a part of something bigger because your own life lacks meaning. Your racism, and your "us" vs "them" attitudes are just another way of saying "I haven't got any meaning in my own life, so I'll try and be part of something bigger than I am in the hopes I can find that meaning". But you're all looking in the wrong places. You need to work on yourself, and stop worrying what other people are doing. You are individuals. And when you realise that 'groups' are not trying to oppress you, and that the world is made up of individuals, you will realise that you can shape the world around you. You actually have the capability of changing your own life because your 'group' is no longer holding you back. And suddenly you realise your life is in your own hands; not someone else's, or some 'group'. How very scary... yet... freeing...
    17
  2199. Exactly! Other channels can do it, and it probably would suit this channel well too. My main issue is that I need to retain Patreon support. If my Patreons are happy with this, then it's a done deal.
    17
  2200. Very true
    17
  2201. STIK TO SHORTS
    17
  2202. Yeah I was tempted to do more red lines like that for the subunits (divisions etc), and grey ones for the Germans, but it's not possible right now. Maybe once we get into the city it will be possible... And 2 X's is a division. 3 X's is a Corps. 4 X's is an Army. And 5 X's is an Army Group
    17
  2203. I agree that the Germans are responsible for the poor reputation the Italians have in WW2. I don't think they were as bad as often stated. But sadly, I can't read Italian sources and not much has been translated into English. So our (English speaking) perspective of the Italian contribution to the war is largely from the German and British accounts, both of which did not view the Italians in a good light for various reasons.
    17
  2204. Interestingly, the National Socialists weren't nationalists. They were racial-socialist, and didn't care for nationalism - they wanted to unite the race, not the national identity (otherwise German-Jews would have been fine).
    17
  2205. I actually want to look into things like 'The Great Escape' or 'Colditz' at some point. Not sure if there's much interest though
    17
  2206. I am a man, not 'men'. I have white skin, but I'm not 'white'. I have a British passport, but I'm not 'British'. I am a worker, but I'm not the 'proletariat'. I am an individual, not a gender, race, nationality, or a class. Individuals exist, artificial social groups designed to split society so that it can be exploited do not exist.
    17
  2207. "@TIK You realize there's never been a truly free market economy in human history, yes? Just like there's never been a truly communist or socialist." Yes, yes I do. However some states are more free than others. And National Socialism was definitely not a free-market economy and was certainly a lot less free than the Weimar Republic which came before it. This is why the National Socialists were socialist - they were moving towards more state control (socialism). "I see this all over Youtube now where people are trying to associate Nazism with the left and socialism." Because they are. National Socialism is all about controlling the economy. Read the books I recommend in the pinned comment and you will see so. "Nationalization of the private sector was never at any point a goal of the Nazis." They nationalized them in all but name. Read the books I've recommended and you will understand.
    17
  2208. "State capitalism is the state using capital for profit to the state rather at expense to the people rather than to their benefit." That's not capitalism because if the state takes control, you no longer have private control of the economy. Private control of the economy is capitalism. This is the problem - Marxists are so caught up in their own theories, they have no idea what capitalism is.
    17
  2209. @Frantick - "state capitalism" is not a thing. You cannot have state non-state, which is what state capitalism is. It is an oxymoron. If you have "state capitalism", you don't have a free economy. You actually have socialism.
    17
  2210. Haha don't worry, silly voices are here to stay :D
    17
  2211. Glad to hear you're enjoying them!
    17
  2212.  @josephsarra4320  Yes, technically it is. I'll add it to the Addendum playlist tomorrow (I've heard that you shouldn't add videos to a playlist straight away for algorithm reasons...)
    17
  2213. Sure! That'll save me doing any work for the next several weeks ;)
    17
  2214. It already has! 😂 I don't get it
    17
  2215. I largely agree with your arguments. The USA wasn't working with Britain - she was working to bankrupt her (although Britain also bankrupted herself...) and for her own benefit. Churchill was begging Roosevelt to join the war pretty much from the beginning, yet Roosevelt denied Britain help, showing that their alliance wasn't total. This is something that the Nazis won't acknowledge because it doesn't suit their agenda.
    17
  2216. Yes, exactly. Although some of what he says about Rommel might be true.
    17
  2217. Good point, I'll try include that from now on. In this video I used "Enduring the Whirlwind" by Liedtke for the stats. Now the official German history does also provide stats that are similar for this period. But they are different in a few ways. So Liedtke could actually be wrong. However, as I said to another commenter, the stats provided in the official German history for the same period appeared to be flawed, and looked as though they overstated losses (which then doesn't fit with other stats I have from many other books). So to me, Liedtke's stats appear to be more reliable, but I could be wrong. Either way, the only issue with the stats is the loss numbers, not the replacement numbers, which still favour Army Group Centre.
    17
  2218. Yes, I'm an idiot
    17
  2219. Woof woof!
    17
  2220. ​ @VADemon  Maybe... I don't think it's worth it though, it's only a minor mistake. Interestingly, you said the word that's misspelled!
    17
  2221. I have put subtitles in the video, but even with them your last sentence is correct. Language is meant to communicate, not obfuscate.
    17
  2222. It's not always available, but I'll see about doing it next time they come up
    17
  2223. Is your plan as cunning as a fox who's just been appointed Professor of Cunning at Oxford University?
    17
  2224. Exactly, everyone is biased. But by defending a group, you're not neutral when it comes to an agenda.
    17
  2225. This is probably a subject for an entire video in itself, but you're correct - eye-witnesses are unreliable. Unfortunately, in a lot of contexts, this might be all we have. It is essential to weigh up different types of evidence and consider whether each is reliable, unreliable, or somewhat reliable, and then rank them in order of reliability. Witness statements can be useful, but as you pointed out, have serious flaws. Even video evidence isn't always reliable, especially if it doesn't show the correct context. What happened off the camera maybe just as important as what happened on the camera.
    17
  2226. Yeah, I distinctly remember thinking "oh wow, didn't know Denmark had submarines" when I read it. How dare three countries have similar names in the same vicinity!
    17
  2227. Damn, just checked, it was a few days later. 24th?
    17
  2228. Off top of head - 15th of September 1942, replaced by Zeitzler
    17
  2229. Two reasons. 1. a lot of people don't like being told their wrong (not all people watching this were wrong, but as you can see in the comments, a lot were). 2. they didn't watch it all the way through, and so assume I didn't factor in certain things, which I actually did.
    17
  2230. I get where you're coming from, and I think you might enjoy the video I have coming out tomorrow because it does paint a accurate picture of the situation during Barbarossa. It is an equal mix of numbers, and leadership and logistical issues in the Soviet Army. The Germans had the "superior" army, but it wasn't because their soldiers were better. It was because they mobilized first. "Having said all that, I see no issue with people claiming the Germans were the most professional army on the planet from 1939-'41 because history itself gives us that narrative." I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying. But this is the only bit I strongly disagree with. It's not "history" giving us that narrative. Who wrote the history books? Western historians. What languages are the western historians who wrote those histories able to speak and read? German and English. Did they have access to the Soviet archieves to get their side of the story? No, because of the cold war. Why was there such a focus on how the Germans defeated the Soviets in battle? Because the USA wanted to know how to defeat the Soviets. Who then did they ask to lead such a project to find out how the Germans defeated the Soveits in battle? Halder. As I said in the oil video, Halder and his cronies are the ones painting this biased picture of WW2, not helped by the political context during the Cold War. This view of the war is simply incorrect. As the west slowly gains access to more and more information from the Soviet side about the Eastern Front, we're finding out that much of what the old narrative said about the war is simply not true. "It took the other nations time to reorganize and respond to the German army because their leaders were innovative borderline geniuses," They mobilized first. They were building up their army from the early 1930s, whereas the Soviets had to make up that ground in less than two or three years. On the 22nd of June 1941, the Wehrmacht in its entirety had more men than the entire Soviet Union's military. The German army in the East had more men than the Soviets had. And, if you read David Stahel, you'll see that these "geniuses" really dropped the ball when it came to planning Operation Barbarossa. Halder messed up big time. Barbarossa gives a lot of tactical successes over a smaller enemy (impressive), but doesn't achieve overall victory. Therefore it is a failure, and Halder and his generals are to blame for this. And they are to blame for the subsequent narrative that tries to pin the blame on Hitler. Hitler was an evil guy, but he wasn't at fault here.
    17
  2231. Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out when I get a chance.
    17
  2232. "First of all if Hitler really wanted peace with Britain why would he bomb civilians?" Good point. Maybe, if he just sat there and didn't do much of anything, it would seem suspicious to Stalin. So maybe he had to make it seem like he was genuinely going to invade or 'punish' the British Isles. "Wouldn't the Lost airplanes and oil be of much better use against his real enemy, the Soviet Union?" Absolutely, but then again, Hitler did think that the Soviet Union would collapse before the oil ran out. "Also what would the point be in attacking British convoys with submarines if not to force them to surrender?" To keep Britain weak. "Also something that is unclear is if he wanted them to escape why would he send in the Air Force and submarines? You mentioned in the video that he might have wanted to Cripple the British but then why not send in the army?" Well, I'd say that the army might have done a more thorough job. Alternatively, one of current Dunkirk theories is that Hitler kept back the tanks/troops in preparation for the next attack against France (Case Red). If that is true, it would make sense why he kept the tanks back. "Like it sounds a little over complex especially when you could have just destroyed them, crippled the British even more, and just not accepted a peace offer, if he didn't want to be seen denying one he could also just demand unconditional surrender similar to The Americans and I doubt Britain would accept and even if it did unconditional surrender from Britain would be extremely beneficial so it's win-win. I'm not convinced." Well, it seems to be a combination of tactical practicalities and strategic thinking. We already have the tactical argument for why he kept back the tanks, but the strategic element seems to be missing. I think this theory isn't too complex, and actually fits in. However, I can certainly see your point of view.
    17
  2233. "Sorry wat?" I promised to do a Holocaust video in a lot of detail where I explain why it happened and so on. I obviously want to prove it happened to the Nazis who watch my videos https://youtu.be/cmwogdxsUbA
    17
  2234. I encourage people to listen to both sides of the argument. However, I think I've done a decent job in this video... but I'll let each individual viewer decide (since value is subjective)
    17
  2235. Yeah, it was 1941. Unfortunately, it wouldn't be a TIK video if I didn't get at least one date wrong :(
    17
  2236. There are definitely a lot of parallels between Third Positionism and what many of the modern Marxists and Socialists are doing. Some have reluctantly realised that their economics is nonsense, so they're now trying to use "capitalism" to get to "socialism", which just results in Fascism. Of course, they don't call it that :)
    17
  2237.  @Edax_Royeaux  Let's get the full quote, shall we? "...the vast majority of people are incapable of thinking. It’s not necessarily because they’re dumb, it’s because they’ve been trained NOT to think. They’ve been trained from their early years to get emotional, which then shuts down the thinking part of their brain, and sets them up to obey the nearest authority figure. So they just follow the crowd and repeat what they’ve been told to say."
    17
  2238. Hitler did actually abolish private property. It was one of the first things he did. And this is why "privatisation" didn't actually happen, because the state was still in control - 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law.
    17
  2239. I will say, I haven't heard that before, so yes it is interesting
    17
  2240. Second! But I'll let you off haha
    17
  2241. The fact that they never provide their own definitions is a big tell.
    17
  2242. Ahem, 10 million in the Soviet Union by the Germans.
    17
  2243. Thank you! Never imagined I'd get an audience this big... It's actually frightening
    17
  2244. Arrogance and racism.
    17
  2245. Thank you Alex! And you are correct that Aiden hasn't watched the video. He prefers just to troll in the comments 😂
    17
  2246. Happy New Year to you too!
    17
  2247. It's not really about the economics too much, unfortunately.
    17
  2248. "Capitalist industrialists, whether German or foreign like Henry Ford, Eastman of Kodak etc were admirers and supporters of Hitler. In fact German industrialists funded Hitler's 1933 election supporting Hitler against the socialists." That's a lie. Historians now accept that only Fritz Thyssen and a couple of other German businessmen supported Hitler. In fact, I explained this in the video backed by sources. It's almost as if you didn't watch the video or something...
    17
  2249. I'm now your 16th subscriber :)
    17
  2250. I absolutely agree with you :) and not to make excuses, but I want to let you know some of the reasons as to why I didn't, and why I probably couldn't do what you suggest, just so you know why. So, some context - I was working on my Fort Eben Emael video (which took seven months to create from start to finish for an 18min video) and one morning, I needed a break. If you've seen any of my other battlestorm videos, you'll know that using multiple sources and going into depth on the subject are the things I value most. But I was getting frustrated that Fort Eben Emael was taking so long and wondered how quickly I could make a Battlestorm video if I really pushed myself and wasn't concerned too much with quality. So that morning I sat down and made this. I was finished by early evening and uploaded it the next day. And as you can probably tell by the fact that you can barely see the names of the units above the units, I decided not to delay too much by going back and change mistakes. Surprisingly, the research wasn't rushed, but I only used one source (the only source I actually own on Somaliland at the moment). The source I used is listed in the description and is actually the British official history by Playfair. So you'd think it wasn't too bad of a source? Right? Nope, it's terrible. He's the type of historian who'll introduce a unit in one book and then tell you who the commander of that unit is in the next book. Or just refers to a battle like so "two battalions attacked the town" and not say which battalions where involved. But that's not all. I've done videos on the North African/Western Desert Campaign, and have nearly completed the script for an upcoming "Battlestorm Operation Battleaxe video" where I've used a total of 18 sources so far, and not one of those sources - including an "organizational history" of the Afrika Korps which I've scoured the internet for - can actually list how many troops, tanks or even units are actually in the Afrika Korps at any one time. Whole battalions may or may not have been present or even existed. The composition of kampfgruppen, regiments - or at times even the entire Afrika Korps - cannot be provided. Even estimations of tank numbers cannot be determined and vary considerably from sourse to source, with some sources directly contradicting each other. And this is for the vastly more famous Afrika Korps in the vastly more famous Western Desert Campaign. If I can't find accurate numbers for the Afrika Korps, I don't think I'm going to have much luck finding numbers for units in Somaliland in 1940, which a lot of people don't know much about or have even heard of the battles there. And I'm not trying to make excuses, and I'm not trying to find sympathy or anything else. But I just wanted to let you know that I do put a lot of effort into making these videos (this one maybe being to one exception as I said before) and certainly going forward, I'm going to do my best to provide you with all the information I can. I hope that makes sense :)
    17
  2251. Franz Halder deserves his own video... and I'll get to that. Yes, the oil issues does also apply to Japan, however I don't have any statistics on the Japanese, so couldn't really mention them.
    17
  2252. I'm not a liberal nor democratic. Nice try.
    17
  2253. Yes, that's exactly it. Any sort of suggestions or feedback like that is needed because it's hard to see what needs fixing/improving from this end. As you said, I create the thing, so I'm not seeing this like a viewer would 🙂
    17
  2254. @John, there are a few quotes from Mussolini in the final chapter of Farrell's "Mussolini: A New Life" where Mussolini talks about his socialism just before he flees and is killed. E.g. - “The only socialism workable socialistically is corporativism, the point on confluence, equilibrium and justice for private interests in respect of the collective interest…” - Mussolini to Ivanoe Fossani, from Farrell Chapter 17
    17
  2255. @aurimixas - for reasons I will get into in a future video (going to be a while because I'm still gathering evidence), they couldn't have attacked before June, regardless what happened in Greece or the Balkans
    17
  2256. It was raining and I didn't see one of the potholes, so drove into it. The BANG shook me up. Couldn't have been good for the car.
    17
  2257. "Rye for now" as intentional. I like puns. In fact, did you know that Great Bakers aren't born... they're bread
    17
  2258. Yes, no worries. Trying to do that from now on (as you will see in tomorrow's video, and as I did in a few of my more recent videos too). Cheers!
    17
  2259. Wait? There's an alloy called Google Chrome?
    17
  2260. Why did I laugh?
    17
  2261. How can people be that dumb!? Hats off to the Mercedes dealer though for convincing him in the first place because that's impressive.
    17
  2262. I'm more concerned about your fellow countrymen continuing to support this guy who is deceiving them. Is it possible for you to help spread the word in your language?
    17
  2263. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
    17
  2264. It's a good film! But out of date and gives the wrong impression about the 'who was to blame' debate
    17
  2265. You're the one denying the evidence
    17
  2266. He does mess up alot that Churchill guy. A good politician, who was good at grand strategy (getting USA involved and so on) but terrible tactician, and very impatient with his generals, causing them to fail
    17
  2267. Makes sense to me!
    17
  2268. I'm doing one BIG video because I'm crazy. These smaller videos are just the interim. I will be discussing these topics in the big video, which will make it a lot easier for everyone to understand since you'll have the context and will see the units on the map and the events unfold as they happened.
    17
  2269. I also enjoy talking about whether the sources are trustworthy or not. And in this case, I've not seen anyone (from historians to other online commentors) publicly state that Hoffman's diary was a fake. There was some speculation from individual users on other sites, but nothing confirming it.
    17
  2270. Thank you! I'm not anti-Russian in any way, but I think there's a few nationalists out there who can't stand the idea that there might be a fault with the State they live under. As you said, I think it makes Chuikov far more interesting, and far more of a hero, because he did have a crisis in mid-October, but then overcame it. That's actually what they call the "heroes' journey" in fiction writing. A hero that doesn't come to the brink of destruction and then claw himself out of it is what we call a "Mary Sue". A character that's a Mary Sue isn't a good character, and I think the same applies in history. Nobody's perfect.
    17
  2271. I fully agree that we would have to look at them individually. (There's always exceptions to the rule.) But, to avoid giving an "indecisive" answer which would be interpreted by many viewers as a "cop-out", I thought I'd give a solid answer that could apply to most instances and see what people thought :)
    16
  2272. But they are both mammals - to reject that is to deny reality.
    16
  2273.  @arronjameshook  Probably the British because they had access to oil, rubber, trucks and lots of Lend Lease etc. But even they struggled in certain areas and overran their supplies at times (e.g. North Africa 1941)
    16
  2274.  @snagletoothscott3729  "Truth is objective. It happened or it didnt." There was a turning point of WW2. When was it? Oh wait, it's impossible to identify the turning point because that requires an interpretation of the evidence which is inherently subjective in nature.
    16
  2275. Glad you're enjoying the videos! And thank you for considering supporting me :)
    16
  2276. "Hey TIK, are there any books you recommend on the "proto-nazis" that you describe in your interesting video on Karl Marx, or are you considering a video on this topic." I do want to do a video on the topic as part of the origins of Nazism. Not really got a decent book on it specifically, it's more dotted about in other books. I have been meaning to publish a follow up to the Marx video though talking about the two 'P' words and other things because people were questioning my interpretation of them.
    16
  2277. And yet, the Nazis will argue that history is biased against them...
    16
  2278. I do. There's only me here!
    16
  2279. Hopefully! I have no patience for them after the garbage they write about me
    16
  2280. "Having no critics means living in a bubble. :)" Yeah that's true. I just wish my critics would be a bit more polite about it, especially when it usually turns out that they're wrong!
    16
  2281. Thanks! I do think it's good to challenge the perceived ideas we have. By testing whether they're right or not, we get to see if they stand up to scrutiny. I'm not sure if I challenge any today, but let me know if I do :D
    16
  2282. :)
    16
  2283. Pretty good idea :)
    16
  2284. Yeah, as I said in the video, I'm a bit behind where I hoped to have been thanks to Gazala, December being a busy month, and then being ill for nearly two weeks
    16
  2285. Question everything and you'll never stop learning!
    16
  2286. Beep boop
    16
  2287. It's a fun throwback!
    16
  2288. Thank you, certainly much better than I was!
    16
  2289. Even I've no idea what's going on ;)
    16
  2290. And then, they got a lot worse
    16
  2291. What's annoying is that the Wikipedia page on the Third Reich economy doesn't even mention the word or concept of "Gleichschaltung". But a separate Wikipedia page exists for it though, so someone clearly knows it exists. This is an indication that the narrative is being controlled by the user base on Wikipedia.
    16
  2292. Clearly it was that madman sat in Berlin, and the winter, and the Soviet hordes that caused the PSU to fry.
    16
  2293. No, it's named Sherman because it lights up every time or something
    16
  2294. Yeah, it's been a while. This is why I wanted to make this as a bit of a surprise (since only my Patreons knew I was working on it). The fact I've been stupidly busy at work over the past several weeks hasn't helped. However, if you think this is a long video, you ain't seen nothing yet. Stalingrad is going well, although I took a break from it to make this. Over 300,000 words, and will climb a lot more soon. I'll be going back to it bright and early tomorrow morning, and I'm optimistically hoping to finish the Glantz research by New Year and have all research boxed off by end of January. No idea how long it'll take to write the script for it though, but NOT ONE STEP BACKWARDS!
    16
  2295. Thank you for your comment! After all the effort I've put into this series (it's killing me), I'll happily accept a award... or a holiday... But if you think of any other ways I can improve my videos, let me know because there must be ways to improve this even further
    16
  2296. Have fun :)
    16
  2297. I suspect this is AI generated from the subtitles, but I'm impressed that it's possible to create this so quickly.
    16
  2298. Glad you liked it! According to the sources I used (listed in description) he did answer the phone
    16
  2299. Thanks! I believe you were first as well!
    16
  2300. I have been tempted before. If this nonsense carries on, I will do
    16
  2301. He's a Mary Chu
    16
  2302. But that still contradicts the idea that it was about the most influential person
    16
  2303. No, that's not the case at all. Guderian's memoirs are seriously flawed. He's deliberately trying to paint Hitler as a mad-man, much like many of the German generals at the time, and this was to save their own skins. The reality was much different, the German generals made many mistakes. I think you need to watch MHV video https://youtu.be/UTgf3UHMBjY
    16
  2304. The city was a legitimate target (as explained in the video). However, it was a war crime because the Allies didn't concentrate on the factories or railway stations, but on the centre of the city and the nearby residential areas with the aim of burning them all down along with civilians. So there was some truth to what people were saying, although the myth about them being strafed is just that, a myth.
    16
  2305. Probably not. The North African Campaign is pretty tame because there were few civilians, and I believe there was one island in the Pacific that had little to no civilians on it. But overall, most of the armies committed war crimes (or the soldiers within those armies committed crimes as individuals, since some of the armies didn't deliberately order crimes to be committed).
    16
  2306. You're very welcome. I actually had to be selective with what I said with this video because, while I have a strong stomach for this sort of thing, even I had to admit that some of the horror stories I read are not appropriate for me to repeat publically on YouTube (it would 100% have gotten the video taken down).
    16
  2307. It's interesting because a lot of poeple would say it was the other way round. Perhaps he favoured one over the other if he had to pick, but as I explain in the video, he's dismissive of both. He's not a fan of Christianity overall.
    16
  2308. I'm guessing you're read Peikoff too :)
    16
  2309. 70 hours. And this is one of the reasons I got rid of my previous girlfriend - she would complain that I was pursuing hobbies and interests (including this channel), and she wanted constant attention. So I ended it. That doesn't mean that I couldn't have a girlfriend and do this. There's still plenty of time in the evenings, or I could have a day off when needed. But she would need to work with me, not against me, for the relationship.
    16
  2310. It's a common tactic for people who haven't done any serious reading or research on a topic and rely entirely on an emotional argument to win. When you see them doing this, you've already hit the point of no return, which is frustrating because a lot of them apply this tactic straight away.
    16
  2311. Well, you've read more than me! I skipped the Japanese parts because they weren't relevant to what I'm doing. The rest was good though
    16
  2312. I liked the super-flexible and more accurate HOI3 OOB system (although I think it could have been done better), but I prefer the streamline HOI4 almost-everything-else. Really what they need is a cross between the two games when it comes to the OOB system.
    16
  2313. Yeah I've seen this on a few channels now, and I've seen a few people fall for it too :(
    16
  2314. Absolutely. This coming Monday's video will help address this, at least partly.
    16
  2315. Hope you enjoy salty tears, sir, because that's the only thing on the menu
    16
  2316. It was a bit of a surprise to me too, since I only decided to make this into a Battlestorm last week
    16
  2317. Exactly. It's counter-productive
    16
  2318. Correct, you would be a patriot, not a nationalist. Nationalism requires a strong, all-encompassing state.
    16
  2319. It's true though!
    16
  2320. You're goading them on? Braver man than me!
    16
  2321. I read it, and I'm glad to see you questioning things. We're in the minority of people who aren't fans of the NHS (like 5%) so we've got a long way to go.
    16
  2322. I have, but I'm not sure I would. I can reach more people on here than I can in a classroom. Just need to make this work somehow.
    16
  2323. Well, this isn't specifically on the content of the Table Talks (I will be coming back to that in the future). This is more dealing with whether the Table Talks are a valid source or a forgery
    16
  2324. When you're sat at a deck as long as I am, you need a comfy chair. One of the best investments I've ever made
    16
  2325. That was my intention - try and get them all in one go!
    16
  2326. Yeah, and we obviously shouldn't dismiss the survivors testimony, as that's what they believed. We just need to understand that the Nazi point of view was different from that of the victims point of view, and so we need to look into that as well.
    16
  2327. Yes, you have to be willing to consider alternative or unpopular ideas. This actually shows why historians should read widely; I was reading about the Hess flight, when I stumbled upon the idea that Hitler didn't want peace with Britain because it would tell Stalin he was coming, which then linked in with Dunkirk.
    16
  2328. Yep, already got it, but thanks for the recommendation :)
    16
  2329.  @sbevexlr848  "Weird, never saw any comment mentioning fredda before, where did you find it?" In my comment sections. Here's some comments from my viewers: "Hey Tik the Channel Fredda made a slader piece against you, he takes you out of Context and goes with bad faith against you, to make you look like an idiot. He is a Socialist, and he got butthurt about you calling Nationalsocialist, well Socialist." - N. "A socialist youtuber named fredda with a pretty decent sized channel attempted a full debunk of you. I watched his videos before and lets just say he uses some of the most normie and fallacious arguments I have ever seen. For instance, the suicide rate in Greenland is higher than Denmark, so Fredda states that this must be caused by oppression of Greenlandic culture ignoring that the cities with the highest suicide rate in Greenland are the most Danish populated as well as the high acholism and low sunlight in Greenland. However, I think a response would probably be worthy if even just a community post." - O. "Hey man I just wanna say that there's this Marxist YouTuber Fredda who said he wants to debunk you, be has some braindead but his fan base will eat everything up. You should look forward to debuking him" - C. "The dude's a sham. He shouldn't waste his time on a hit piece when you can actually fact check fredda and see that he either doesn't know what he's talking about or is flat out lying about TIK. I made a low quality 3h video response to the video directly capturing my screen with obs that I never uploaded. so in a sense yes I can since I spent about 6~8 hours of my life going back and forth between fredda's video and TIK's videos and I know exactly when and where he's either misinformed or lying. At some point in his video he claims he's been following TIK for over 5 years but he can't realize TIK's already responded to some of the video's claims. I can promise you that fredda's video is not a good video. I'd like to immediately respond but I have to be present at work atm" - J. "On cue Fredda starts strawmanning the video 3 hours after it drops on X. Doesn't even address the thesis or majority of the video for that matter. Funniest part of that he is trying to use his ole "disagreeing with your own sources". Democraticmarxist is in agreement." - F. "I do agree that the video by Fredda was quite bad, considering he used arguments I believe you have responded adequately to. The only thing in his video I believe was even worth thinking about was your use of sources in a few of your videos.... Fredda does clearly have a communist, or at the very least a socialist bias in his content, and thus it's no surprise he'd be very antagonistic against a self-proclaimed "free market guy," such as yourself. Thank you for taking the time to respond." - P. "The Fredda meat riders on the comments being slaughtered right now lol" - Dj. "Amazon being public or worker-owned (in share) doesn’t necessarily means it is socialist. Fredda is either confused with the concept, or he was putting words into TIK’s mouth to defame him." - O. "Hey, TIK, are you gonna respond to Fredda's recent video about you? He says he's using sources, but he only cites 4 of them that are contemporary to WW2 and the nazis. He basically disagrees with you on definitions and that's it. I commented that, by his logic of the nazis being capitalist, the UK was still monarchist, because they still haven't completely abolished the monarchy. He also tried to best you at military logistics, apparently - because locomotives shipped to Algiers weigh over 3,500 tons and it took the british govt weeks for their big-data informed experts to do, during an operation that was already in execution... or something like that." - U. "While a response video would be great, I wouldn’t blame him for not doing so. Fredda is a total hack and fallacious arguments are a pestilence in his video." - B.
    16
  2330. I think the exact date is disputed. Kengor says Heinrich converted in 1819 (or maybe 1820), so Marx was maybe 1 or 2.
    16
  2331. I've realised that I cannot cover the Soviet or Nazi economies, their atrocities, Lend Lease or practically anything else unless I go through some basic economics and political topics. The backlash on some videos has caused me to research into the criticism. While it might be playing with fire, my committment to covering the Holocaust and Holodomor, Lend Lease and more, has forced me to go down this route.
    16
  2332. There's no time for tea comrade, pick up your rifle and shoot!
    16
  2333. "If the government would not force taxes on me (allmost 40%, and the same amount from my employer) im pretty sure i would find a lot of things to spend that extra money on besides health ensureance wich i currently dont need." You realize you're actually proving me right here. You're admitting that you don't need healthcare right now (proving it's in a bubble), and that you'd spend your money elsewhere. This would actually grow the economy and benefit what the consumer wants, rather than what you don't need (healthcare). Not only that, but this would in-turn growth the economy even more, since profits would be higher and thus investment and innovation would be considerably higher too. I'm going to recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" to you. Great book, and definitely worth reading. It will explain what I'm trying to say but in a lot more clearer way. Also, the fact that you're being FORCED to hand your wealth to the state, is proof in the pudding. If the State enterprise provided you with value, you'd pay for it. The fact that you have no choice proves that it doesn't provide you with any value, and proves that they must take your wealth from you. The fact that you don't get a choice is also proof that you're a slave, just like me. "Now my job is quite dangerous sometimes, as i do repairs on "hot" 3-phase electrical circuits that can not be switched of be cause it would shut down entire lines of production. There are equipment and procedures in place to make those repairs as safe as possible, but humans can make mistakes. If i were to accidently bridge those 3-phase systems with my hand, my hand would turn into ash in milliseconds. If i would manage to somehow survive such an accident, i can likely never work in my job again," Sounds dangerous. I think you should be allowed to keep 100% of your wage, rather than just 60%, because you've earned it. "and without sufficiant savings or previous investments into private healthcare insurence, i would likely end up a homeless one handed beggar." You're smart enough to realize that now. So, if you were able to keep all 100% of your taxes, you could put that money aside in investments, savings or private healthcare insurance, and it would work out cheaper than what the state could do, since you're paying for politicians, taxmen and other officials who aren't even to do with the health care industry AS WELL as nurses and doctors etc. "But there are social insurences in place wich both i and my employer are forced to pay for" Yes, at greater expense than they would be if you paid privately. This video might be enlightening for you https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ "Unfortunatly you can not choose when to pay for expensive healthcare when its need is extensive but your savings are not. These tyrannic social services that i am forced to pay for provide me with security in live that i would otherwise likely not have ;)" I've paid many thousands of pounds for the State health care since I started working. I've been to the doctors 3 times. If I'd gone privately, my costs wouldn't have reached half a thousand, let alone thousands - and that's with more expensive state-regulate "private" health care, rather than actual private health care. "Or how about this: you develop a throat cancer and they need to remove it. Now you dont have a voice and can neither do youtube, nor work as a sales person like befor. Would your evil socialist government keep you from starving at the expenses of other tax payers?" Assuming I don't die from the cancer, I wouldn't expect the state to steal off other people who work and redistribute a small portion of that to me while they keep the majority of it. I'd just go get a job that doesn't require the use of a voice.
    16
  2334. He hasn't watched the video, but spends hours every day writing rubbish in the comments. I'm beginning to wonder if he's either a paid Chinese/Russian troll, or just unemployed and unable to provide wealth to his community
    16
  2335. Hey Uncle Joe!
    16
  2336. Socialism does not necessarily mean the execution of the landed elite. That's communism. You also have to realise that Hitler's socialism was that every Aryan was equal, but they could progress up the ladder. That's still socialism. It was defined by race, not by class.
    16
  2337. Also, the unemployment rate skyrocketed as a result of the Ruhr crisis and the currency printing, not the Treaty of Versailles
    16
  2338. Yes, and I also didn't mention Danzig or some of the other parts of the treaty. They're something I could do in a future video though. For this video, which is part of the Weimar Hyperinflation series (which is also covering the origins of Hitler and National Socialism) I was more forcused on the economic impact on Weimar Germany and also Hitler's rise to power.
    16
  2339. Wendy, I actually think Isaev is ok. But do think his translator (Kevin Bridge) for the book cited below was an idiot. Isaev, A. "Dubno 1941: The Greatest Tank Battle of the Second World War." Helion & Company, 2017.
    16
  2340. Who are they again?
    16
  2341. Freedom of speech is under attack. It doesn't disappear instantly, that would be too obvious. It's happening gradually, step by step.
    16
  2342. That's precisely it - I also assumed that the ideology prevented it too. This is the bias in the western literature and the failure of previous historians to look into this issue.
    16
  2343. Yes, it does say that. But then says “What is certain, however, is that Hitler had been closely considering the question of supplying Sixth Army from the air while he was still on the Obersalzberg, and that he had arrived at a positive assessment of that option. At any rate, he had discussed the subject a few hours prior to his departure with Colonel-General Jeschonnek, Chief of the Luftwaffe General Staff, who was present at Berchtesgaden. It seems that Jeschonnek - aware of Richthofen’s pessimistic attitude, but possibly misjudging the basic conditions - did at least not dispute the possibility of temporary aerial provisioning in principle. “This was enough for Hitler to settle on the solution to the crisis which was to him the most attractive psychologically - holding on to Stalingrad.” And as I said, Glantz then adds to it by confirming Göring wasn't there. I don't know enough about Jeschonnek either. In fact, I'm struggling to find any info on the German commanders at Stalingrad. You might know, actually - are there any books in German which list the German divisional commanders and then give short biographies on them? I'd definitely be interested if there was one (same in Russian tbh).
    16
  2344. @Irish Technical Thinker - I don't have time to play games any more, unfortunately. And one of my (many) New Years Resolutions was not to play games or consume any media (except books) during January
    16
  2345. As I said in the video - for the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism (fully sourced), watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    16
  2346. True! Thanks for your comment. One correction though: National Socialism wasn't Fascism, but a distinctly different ideology https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    16
  2347. It's shocking how many refuse to watch my videos, continue to make the old arguments, are presented with the evidence that refutes them, and they then resort to changing the subject because they can't accept the truth. Socialism is wonderful because it allows them to remain children forever.
    16
  2348. Because they're not listening, they're just pushing their ideological agenda
    16
  2349. Good to hear, and Happy New Year to you too! This video's a bit different from normal, but I hope you enjoy it for what it is
    16
  2350. No, thank you very much for your kind comment :) it is a lot of work, but I enjoy making them so it's a great hobby. My only wish right now is that I could make them more quickly somehow
    16
  2351. Maybe if I form a naval convoy the subs would come find me
    16
  2352. True, but I couldn't find pictures of the Stalingrad pontoon bridge (if any actually exist)
    16
  2353. I'll admit, I've been a bit distracted over the past couple weeks with the current economic and health crisis. Been watching the markets and making notes (tempted to make a video about it...). But otherwise, I'm good. How's things with yourself? Haven't read that book, sadly
    16
  2354. Yeah, their initial decision to flee and not surrender was probably taken in haste without them fully realising the consequences if they didn't quickly come across an Allied unit. Afterall, being captured isn't as final as death. At 2:40, I think they realised just how tough it was, and how much worse it was going to be, and decided to call it quits if the car was Italian. Without knowing what the future would hold, the sensible option was to surrender, especially since most of the party were ill or wounded. Obviously in hindsight and in terms of "pride" or whatever, it seems like a disservice, but when faced with almost certain death I think the vast majority of us would take the option most likely to keep us alive.
    16
  2355. True! Thanks for pointing that out. I mean, even without that there's still plenty of evidence that Churchill wasn't a Fascist (national syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism). Churchill sent the military in to deal with the miners strike in 1910-11, hardly a pro-syndicalist move https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonypandy_riots And for those who think Fascism = National Socialism there's an entire book written on Churchill about his pro-Jewish relations. So yeah, my argument in this video was sloppy, but Churchill wasn't a Fascist ideologue, even if he shared some of the traits at times.
    16
  2356. Tanks for being here
    16
  2357.  @Vingul  "despite their economy obviously going well up until the British declaration of war against Germany" But it didn't. You've been propagandised into believing that it did, but it didn't. There's plenty of evidence showing that their economy was collapsing prior to the war.
    16
  2358. Like, Share, Subscribe, Bell-notification, Comment and watch until the very end? ;)
    16
  2359. Thank you botiboy! I'm not "pro-Russian" or "anti-Russian" or "pro-German" or "anti-German" etc... I criticize all sides equally when they make mistakes or bad decisions or cause atrocities. If the Axis or Soviets didn't commit crimes, I wouldn't be here calling them out on it.
    16
  2360. I agree! Most accounts say entering the city was the mistake, but I'm not so sure it was
    16
  2361. Challenge accepted
    16
  2362. I'm glad you think so! I did put a lot of work into this one, so I'm happy to hear you think highly of it
    16
  2363. @AJ Simo - correct, we haven't seen a zoom-out like that before. This is because I've just made a breakthrough with the animation software and processes. I won't bore you with the details, but now I can animate things I couldn't animate before :)
    16
  2364. Yes, those early North African Campaign videos were during my "experimental" phase haha Perhaps I should remake them...
    16
  2365. I just facepalmed.
    16
  2366. All of these are genuine customers. The only exception is the zombie "brains" bit, which was a joke I used to tell to the staff when there was a crowd of customers at the door when we opened in the morning.
    16
  2367. Probably not. But the British prisoners starved while in Japanese hands seemed to have remained loyal.
    16
  2368. Preferably one that didn't get hit or sunk and was nowhere near the action
    16
  2369. Yes, that's religion for you
    16
  2370. My question is, though, could you not have learnt those skills without taking a history degree? Someone like yourself, or me, or someone else, could teach these skills on YouTube. And you've got to admit that these skills don't require three years in university and thousands of pounds in debt to teach. Using multiple sources, references, trying to understand all sides of a debate... I mean, in theory, I could probably teach all that within an hour or two.
    16
  2371. @Molle Tre, yes I'm doing a Battlestorm Stalingrad. It'll be as in-depth as my 9h Crusader video was, but far longer.
    15
  2372. Yeah I have mentioned the German-supplied French guns in a previous episode, but it's worth reminding people and new viewers. For anyone curious, they were the Pak 97/38's. As for the airlift, don't worry, we'll get to the tonnages and whatnot soon. The point in the video was to explain that they hadn't done the calculations yet, so they believed it was possible.
    15
  2373. Is it not a Republic these days?
    15
  2374. I don't want to trigger the copyright algorithm, which is why there's no videos within the video, or music. The early episodes had my own music in them because I was trying to get around that. And yes, this is for people who are serious about history. There are plenty of 5 minute toe-dipping videos out there for those with an extremely casual interest, but my videos are for those who want more than a superficial understanding of what happened.
    15
  2375. Haha no I'm not fond of Halder, can you tell? 😂
    15
  2376. I wonder if his soldiers referred to him as "Mein Kempf"
    15
  2377. The Hossbach Memorandum was in 1937, which was before 1939. And by 1939, Germany had annexed two countries and were aiming to annex a third. Chamberlain's Appeasement policy had failed, and thus the British prepared for war to contain Hitler's aggression.
    15
  2378. Didn't know that. What's a Rip?
    15
  2379. Good spot! Thank you for pointing it out
    15
  2380. From my experience, I'd say that number was too high. The competency of your subordinates is a huge factor.
    15
  2381. Exactly. And why was there an oil shortage?
    15
  2382. Now that's an idea! I like it! (Can't do that for all units because they were mixed)
    15
  2383. It's actually coming on quite nicely, although pace has slowed since I decided to do weekly videos. Next Monday's video will be on Stalingrad though (it isn't the main documentary, but a video you'll probably enjoy)
    15
  2384. Great comment, and I agree :)
    15
  2385. You're absolutely correct. Unfortunately, since most universities are funded by the state, they are the state, and thus most historians are now state employees whether they realise it or not.
    15
  2386. First! Congrats!
    15
  2387. Thank you for sharing, I also think a lack of purpose in life (aimlessness) and a desire for a community (loneliness) are two big factors that attract people to cults or movements.
    15
  2388.  @mrbeep8096  "I am a lazy bloke who sits in front of electronics all day" I mean, technically that's what I do too. I sit at my desk all day reading or staring at a screen writing scripts or editing videos.
    15
  2389. I had to pull an allnighter to get this finished in time, so I won't be staying long to chat today
    15
  2390. I'm glad you enjoyed it! After thinking about it, I realized that this video was important in several different ways, which is why I decided to release it on a Monday. It provides various different lessons to both supporters and critics of the channel, and is entertaining in it's own right. I've got a feeling that this may be the end of the matter (based on ODS's responses so far, it seems that he hasn't learnt his lesson), but I'm somewhat hopeful that the guy may realize and admit his mistake, or provide a solid counter-argument. If not, I may just leave him be.
    15
  2391.  @calumdeighton  I think they're deliberately mispronouncing it was TILK. Not sure why. I don't think they realize that TIK is actually a swear word in another language (Swedish? I can't remember) so they may as well have just said 'TIK'.
    15
  2392. Yeah, I saw that too. He also did a response video to this one, saying the same thing.
    15
  2393. It's fantastic! This part of the video is my favourite!
    15
  2394. Putin said - “Poland was also engaged in the partition of Czechoslovakia along with Germany. They decided together in advance who would get what Czechoslovak territories.... Poland was aware that without Hitler's support, its annexationist plans were doomed to fail...” Yet you interpret this as Putin saying Poland wasn't aggressive? - "Poland (and its Western allies) are not accused of aggression" I'm sorry but this isn't a "bad take" on my part. Putin literally says Poland has "annexationist plans".
    15
  2395. You're correct. Altruism sounds good in theory, but in practice it's terrible. I've been trying to convince one of my friends to be more selfish because I'm absolutely certain their altruism is the reason they're poor, stressed and depressed. I haven't read Ayn Rand. Do you have any recommendations where I should start?
    15
  2396. How do you explain the fact that Guido von List first talked about the Swastika while writing in the journal called "Gnosis"?
    15
  2397. Yes, that's why I want to get through the North African Campaign series first. My American (and British/Canadian/Austrialian etc) viewers should be begging for more North African Campaign videos if you want to see Battlestorms on Torch, Kasserine, Sicily, Italy, Normandy or the Bulge
    15
  2398. Absolutely, they deserve a lot of credit. In my conclusion I was more focused on what went wrong rather than what went right, and the New Zealanders did more than their fair share in this battle.
    15
  2399. To be honest I didn't have any good teachers at school or tutors at university (college history teachers were good, I will admit). In fact, I did not enjoy my education. Too linear and not enough room to go study the subjects that interested me. Honestly, my passion for history has no correlation to the teachers and tutors I had during my education. I was dying to pass university so that I could go back to studying the subjects that I did want to study - mainly WW2 history.
    15
  2400. The hunger you describe in the Ukraine happened a decade before the events in question. The war started in 1937 if you're Chinese or Japanese, and arguably earlier than that. And you're correct, people shouldn't be trusting some dude off the internet, which is why I encourage them to go out there and read books to verify or challenge my own conclusions. I encourage people to discuss and debate the issues brought up in the video, and spark an interest in the topic. I want to get people into history and have people educate themselves. I'm sorry if you dont agree with that view.
    15
  2401. There's nothing to prevent such things, but it requires a lot of work. The internet is still in the new "this is a toy" stage which many of the old establishment (media, book authors, TV 'experts' and so on) look down up or see as 'bad'. I firmly believe that we will one day soon progress beyond the old mentality and enter into a new era whereby the internet is the dominant place for entertainment, education, shopping, industry...
    15
  2402. You've misunderstood what I said in the video. They don't shoot them for failing to make a successful attack (as depicted in the film). They can fall back to their own lines. They just can't flee or retreat further than that without orders from above. The Order does target the officers. The officers were ordering retreats and encouraging retreats. Stalin put a stop to that. Therefore the officers now had to keep their men in line. It's a classic middle management technique.
    15
  2403. Sadly, this is very true.
    15
  2404. Correct. A big tank makes a bigger target. And the slow speed of the Maus means that there's a high chance of the Allies simply bypassing the tanks, and then simply waiting for the Maus(s) to run out of fuel, ammunition, or supplies. At least with the faster tanks they have a chance to flee.
    15
  2405. Yeah, this is only a "quick" video really, but a necessary one I think
    15
  2406. Nobody is "trying to find fault" with Chuikov, or anyone else. In fact, Jones does nothing but praise Chuikov throughout his book (perhaps being a bit too far "pro-Soviet"). All we're trying to do here is figure out what happened. In my opinion, I'd rather see Chuikov as a good-but-flawed general who's also human and real, than a mythical Mary Sue that was perfect in every way, but apparently I'm in the minority there... It was clear to me by just reading Chuikov's memoirs that something was off. So even without Jones, I was still doubtful of the narrative. Jones then provided extra context. Jones is using primary sources (most of which have been verified by Anton Joly and Egor Kobiakov). As I said in response to the pinned comment, there is a potential issue or two which I may need to do an Addendum video on, but otherwise it's fine. So I'm not relying on Jones, so much as relying on the primary sources he's provided. Jones places the blame on Eremenko, not Chuikov. I also think Eremenko was at fault for not sending reinforcements to Chuikov. What's important though is that nobody is saying that Chuikov was wrong to do what he did, or that he was a coward or whatever. A coward would have fled without permission, and wouldn't have prepared to fight to the end when permission to withdraw wasn't granted. Clearly, Chuikov wasn't a coward, and I don't think less of him for wanting to withdraw in the face of collapse. If Eremenko had sent him the reinforcements he needed, he probably wouldn't have been in that position in the first place.
    15
  2407. I hope you check out the other videos in the North African Campaign https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    15
  2408. Scratch that, two people have asked where the next Stalingrad video is 🙄 this video has barely been out 18 minutes!
    15
  2409. Thank you!
    15
  2410. I like WT, it's a good game. But I couldn't resist :)
    15
  2411. They were labour intensive (took me a few hours to put them in), but I like them. I'm thinking that I'll be putting them in videos like this, or Battlestorms, but probably not Q&As or such.
    15
  2412. I wonder how many people won't get the reference ;)
    15
  2413. Thanks for the advise. I've been a manager before, but nothing in my work experience or my formal "education" has prepared me for this sort of thing.
    15
  2414. That's a good question. Anton Joly told me that Chuikov had several accounts of the Battle of Stalingrad, some of them more heavily censored than others. I believe that the particular version of 'Beginning of the Road' I have is the least censored of the lot. It was widely known that the Soviets were in trouble UNTIL the turning point of Stalingrad (according to the official Soviet version of events), so perhaps being a thousand rifles short just wasn't deemed bad enough to censor. EDIT: hit submit too fast. But we doubt Chuikov's comment because other evidence (including more comments by Chuikov) show that he wasn't correct. Yes, they were short of rifles, but he himself then made effort to get more. And Eremenko did, and other reports confirm this... so the doubt here isn't that Chuikov lied, but that his perspective was limited and he didn't know that Rodimtsev's men got their full compliment of rifles before they went into Stalingrad.
    15
  2415. "I'm sure it was the crowd that also thinks their "blogging" supported by Patreon and GoFundMe accounts is somehow part of a productive economy that provides value." If people are paying for a service, then they're providing value to the consumer.
    15
  2416. It's funny how many of us get unplugged from the Matrix. In your case an anime show, in mine reading what Hitler actually said rather than just believing what the Marxists said that Hitler said... But yes, Orwell is my favourite "fiction" author for a reason: he wasn't really writing fiction, he was writing allegory, or satire, or warnings, or however is best used to describe it
    15
  2417. Got to watch out for those damn Antarcticans!
    15
  2418. None of them have any arguments, except that Irving uses archival sources (failing to mention that this is irrelevant since he's failed to use the sources correctly).
    15
  2419. And an extra 1.1 million drafted into the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine.
    15
  2420. Absolutely correct that he may have downplayed his hatred of the Jews at that point (1975). That said, we have contemporary sources from the 1930s, and there's no proof of Mosley's anti-Semitism prior to 1934. And even in his books at this point, he didn't have the same anti-Semitism that Hitler had. So we do have to take that into consideration.
    15
  2421. On this day, I didn't say 'on this day'... wait
    15
  2422. To be fair, I'm reliant quite heavily on secondary sources (e.g. books written by historians). And they play a major role. However, you're right that primary source material written at the time is more valuable. This is why I'm slowly learning German, and why I will eventually get around to the Russian, so that I can too start using more primary sources.
    15
  2423. 100% agree and can't really add more to that. Thank you for your comment. (I'm trying to strike a balance between the two sides. If this annoys some people, so be it.)
    15
  2424. I understand them: they don't understand me, or the arguments I'm making, because they're ASSUMING things that are not true. I used to do the same when I was a socialist or Keynesian, so I understand why they're doing it, but they need to realize that they've been deceived into believing what they believe. Unfortunately, I haven't figured out a way to get through to them. They'd rather live in their emotional-support bubble than learn and grow.
    15
  2425. Exactly! I wish more people understood this. But I understand why people believe this because I was also mistaught by the state miseducation system, and so it's easy to fall for this lie.
    15
  2426. I hope they watch half-way into the video where I offer a counter-argument that refutes their entire ideology.
    15
  2427. I'm not a fan of "it was the weather's fault". That's just downplaying the role the Soviets played. It's the only way the Germans could justify being defeated by an "inferior" opponent. Obviously, there's more to it than that, and this video shows that the Red Army Air Force played its part. I need to do more research on the factory moving and Soviet production and logistics. But from what I've read so far, it seems that these factories were getting back online during mid-1942. By the time Stalingrad rolls around, half the Soviet tanks are still light tanks (in the Stalingrad area). But more T-34s are beginning to appear. There seems to be a lot more artillery and mortars in the divisions than in 1941. There's seems to be more anti-tank weapons. In 1941, the Red Army was underequipped. By late 1942, they're beginning to recover, and you can see that. So I do think moving the factories to the Urals was a brilliant move, and very important. But right now, I need more details.
    15
  2428.    ​ "use the reply button instead of hiding like a typical iron cross wearing ss coward by not using it( so i don't get a notification). pathetic! ...like a nazi loving coward." 1. The option to reply with a tag to someone (like with this comment) is not available to creators in "creator studio" or the app, which is the primary place I reply to people (because it's easier). Hitting the "reply" button in the way you're demanding requires me to go onto the desktop, click on the video on YouTube, and then specifically find the comment, plus it goes against the stats of the video because I'm not actually watching it. Therefore, it's not viable for me to do that. 2. I'm not Socialist, therefore I cannot be a member of the SS, or a National Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Oh, and in that video there's a section called "National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw", which is where I completely undermine the contradictory ideology of National Socialism. The fact that I've exposed the fundamental ideological flaw in National Socialist ideology should be a HINT to you that I'm not a National Socialist. "anyway are you denying the fact i pointed out, that "german divisions were always under strength."and "before stalingrad they were far above their strength in august 1941" ? answer, and don't wiggle, like a nazi loving coward." I honestly don't understand what your argument is here, that's why I'm asking you to clarify it. Are you saying that the German divisions are always understrength? Or that they're above their strength? And in either case, what has this got to do with me being a Nazi? If the German divisions are understrength, how does that mean I'm a Nazi? And if they're above their strength, then how does that make me a Nazi? I genuinely don't understand how the strength or weakness of German divisions in WW2 equates to me being a Nazi. Perhaps you need to stop being so emotional, drop the name calling, and think before you type. Also, what has 1941 got to do with Stalingrad, which happened in 1942?
    15
  2429. Don't worry, I don't want anyone supporting me if they're not in a good financial position. You can't look after others if you're struggling yourself. You can show your appreciation by turning up each week, liking the videos and debating with others in the comments :)
    15
  2430. I talk about it in this video. It is something that needs to be tackled at some point, although I think others have already done so
    15
  2431. It's to do with WW2 British propaganda (fight Rommel!) and Cold War propaganda (the Germans are actually good and our allies against the commies!) and the fact that Rommel was probably one of the more 'clean' German generals. Plus he did defeat the British on several occasions, so English WW2 histories are all about him and his actions. What happened on the Eastern Front was largely forgotten or suppressed for quite a while (and, to some extent, still is).
    15
  2432. Yeah, I haven't responded to them because it degenerated into a "he said, she said" and "I believe" argument right from the very first comment.
    15
  2433. So, if PPSh-41 is PeePeeShah 41, how do you pronounce the PPS-43? PeePeeEss, or ?
    15
  2434. "the DAP (german workers party) and from 1920 on the NSDAP was from 1925 on fundet by some German Industrialists,Bankers and wealthy People" No, this is a myth. Several sources I have say otherwise. They were largely funded by the grassroots. "the "socialism" was to fool the workers" Incorrect. It was socialism - not for the workers, but for the German (race) people. This wasn't Marxist Class Socialism, but Nazi Race Socialism. Nobody was 'tricked'.
    15
  2435. @Thelfifi - technically it was TIME magazine which compared them... I do feel sorry for her, especially if she grows out of Leftist politics (which a lot of people usually do by their 30s). She'll look back and realize how much she was fooled by the false narrative coming from our conservative elites.
    15
  2436. Incorrect.
    15
  2437. "Quoting Hoppe, Friedman and Sowell. Dang your history knowledge and capacity to share it are incredible but you also have a very high level of economics education... And you can actually share it as well, on intelligible terms. Astonishing! Impressive! You are truly talented!" Thank you Liberteus :) I'm always learning, researching and studying. Got a few books on Lend Lease and British Economic History. Need to get more on the Nazi economy, the Soviet economy, the Fascist Italy economy, and the USA's economy though.
    15
  2438. Well done!!
    15
  2439. @Ryan To - Yes, Soviet units are organized one tier lower compared to the Germans. So a Soviet Division is about the size of a German Brigade. However, to confuse matters a bit, Soviet Tank Divisions aren't called Tank Divisions. They're called Tank CORPS. But they're are NOT a Corps-size unit - they're a division-sized unit. They are same tier as a Soviet Rifle Division (X X), which is why they're smaller than a German division. But Soviet Rifle Corps are Corps level units. So Rifle Corps are Corps and Tank Corps are Divisions.
    15
  2440. @Luka - Croatia (and many nations throughout Europe) were caught between two absolutely evil ideologies. Which devil was worse? The answer is "both". And yes, I do intend to cover the fighting in the Balkans at some point in the future. Might be a while off though... and I'm a little reluctant because I got a taste of the hate when I released the Croatian Legion video. Some level-headed Serbians were embarrassed by the behavior of their countrymen in the comments of that video and were apologizing on their behalf (which they didn't need to do, because as individuals, we're all responsible for our own actions, not the actions of others that we're associated with).
    15
  2441. You are correct! Marx hid his true message behind fluffy, complicated language, but if you dig deeply then it's clear what he was writing https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    15
  2442. "Seriously ill people, old people, retarded or malformed people, those that can not work because of injury, etcetera. I guess we let em all die or put em into the gas chamber to spare them starvation?" We who can work can CHOOSE to look after them. Right now, we are being robbed of our money, and most of that isn't going to those who need it, but is going into the pockets of the government and elites. I'd would much rather have 40% of my wage not stolen off me, and give that 40% directly to the people you listed, than have 40% of my wage stolen and have maybe 10% go to those same people. Sorry for being so "selfish". "Would you change your mind about this if you had a seriously ill wife or child that require treatment you can not afford?" I wouldn't think it right to demand that other working people hand over their wealth to me. I would ask or beg, but I wouldn't steal or expropriate or exploit. Why? Because I actually have morals.
    15
  2443. It's funny because I used those quotes in the video, but actually within context and gave the full quotes rather than be selective to change the meaning as you have done.
    15
  2444. It is, until the Marxists claim the Third Reich didn't have a centrally organized economy. This video shows that it did.
    15
  2445. Socialism definition : common control of the means of production. Explanation : since businesses cannot produce without human input, the "means of production" is a term that is used to describe the term "people". (Yes, it's a way of confusing people and hiding the actual meaning). "Common control" is a rejection of private/individual's control or freedom of the "means of production" or "people". Translation : "common control of the means of production" actually means "control of people by a central authority". Therefore, workers are not "democratic" at all under such a system, quite the opposite. Socialism is the removal of all freedom from the individual. This is why you cannot have totalitarianism without socialism, and in-fact socialism has always led to totalitarianism over time. It is inherent in the ideology.
    15
  2446. Shirer's book is highly biased and was basically written by Halder. He even said at certain points "I've just got off the phone to Halder and he said..." And no, I've studied this stuff for years but this is the first time I've read through Mein Kampf. Read through it, realised how wrong I was to think that "Hitler just put the word socialism in there to 'trick' the working class". I then went ahead and found another book that clarified what I was thinking (having got several others on the topic) and since this video and previous one, I have a few more. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. They're 'similar' but not the same. However they are both socialisms.
    15
  2447. Belated happy birthday!
    15
  2448. Thank you
    15
  2449. Tell me about it
    15
  2450. Check out my new Instagram page. There's a way to contact me via that.
    15
  2451. Yes, but it's not often you see Chinese books in bookshops here in England. The point was that, while I'm sure it's popular in China, it's not a well-known conflict in the west. Not completely unknown, but while everyone's heard of Hilter, not as many people have heard of Chang Kai-shek, let alone know what China did in WW2. Even the 'official' start date for WW2 is given as 1939, not 1937, which you could technically claim was when it actually started as a result of the 2nd Sino-Japanese War.
    15
  2452. Thanks for your comment. Can you be more specific in what concepts I should cover in a series? And why do you think the more I explain, the less they understand?
    15
  2453. Interestingly, they only claimed the second half of the video, not the first half... because the "melody" obviously changes halfway through 🙄
    15
  2454. He believed in a few falsehoods (e.g. races, and that economics is zero-sum). From that poor foundation though, it was logical thinking. And that's what I'm trying to get across - if ANY of us believe in similar falsehoods, we can come to some deadly conclusions. Of course, the alternative is to say that Hitler was a completely insane one-off. But I don't think that's true, and I think it's dangerous to assume that another logically minded individual who believes in a few similar foundational falsehoods couldn't rise to power once again. History shows that it does happen
    15
  2455. There's a few famous names on the list. I think Jeremy Corbyn is still on there somewhere (or was)
    15
  2456. I have a bitchute (although I'm still not in the habit of uploading to it) https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    15
  2457. To be fair, I was in the same position as them for a while, and it's difficult to snap out of it. We are dealing with people who believe themselves to be atheists, but who are, in fact, religious fanatics.
    15
  2458. Trial or no trial, show me the receipts. Apart from Fritz Thyssen and (in 1928) Emil Kirdoff, there is no evidence of money being sent to the National Socialists from big businessmen.
    15
  2459. Jokes on you, I don't have time for holidays!
    15
  2460. Thank you for the recommendation! I'll take a look at his book
    15
  2461. I agree, but perhaps with camels, not horses. Water isn't something that's always accessible in a desert, so camels a probably more suited
    15
  2462. Sorry for slow reply AA. Yes absolutely I'd be interested in doing a stream with you. How do we go about doing this? Also, which book was that which Hayek wrote on the history? I'd like to look into it
    15
  2463. @Athenian Privateer - very good response. Thank you for taking the time and saving me some trouble :)
    15
  2464. I'm learning German now, but sure, let me just learn Russian too so I can read the primary sources. And just so you know, David Glantz is incredibly good, to the point that Robert Citino has even said we're currently living in the "Glantz era of WW2". So I don't think I could get a much better source to be honest.
    15
  2465. Yep! And when they do think of supply, they think "so long as this division is connected to Berlin, it's in supply", taking no really account of distances or interdiction or anything :(
    15
  2466. An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
    15
  2467. I will get to the Pacific Theatre at some point, but not sure when. Probably after Stalingrad
    15
  2468. @eighthelement - that's actually the way I see it. Video is the future for history. But some concepts are better in book-format, especially in the age of tech-censorship we're currently in
    15
  2469. Ok, I'll see what I can do. Thanks!
    15
  2470. It's funny because I address this stupid remark towards the end of the video. If I remember correct, I actually call people that say this "morons who don't listen and dismiss all the evidence".
    15
  2471. I've heard of Dan Carlin, but I've never watched him, so I can't speak to the quality of his production. But it makes sense that a podcast couldn't compete with a fully animated series like this.
    15
  2472. Actually, many don't agree with that, which is why I'm constantly getting bombarded by comments saying that Socialism is the "future" and that anyone who disagrees is "wrong". I know people say to ignore the trolls, but there's enough of them saying it that it's worth addressing.
    15
  2473. Don't worry, next week's video is actually a tank video! It'll be the fourth ever video I've ever made on tanks!
    15
  2474. Yep, I believe it's the same guy
    15
  2475. You should comment more often! When I first heard about the island of Syros and the "Send us wheat or coffins" message, I knew I'd have to do a video on it. Cheers!
    15
  2476. According to WebMD: "Delusions are the main symptom of delusional disorder. They’re unshakable beliefs in something that isn’t true or based on reality." https://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/delusional-disorder Well, that would apply to every ideologue in history. At which point, is being "delusional" simply a part of the human condition?
    15
  2477. Technically some of it was in black and white
    15
  2478. I demand to speak to your supervisor
    15
  2479. It was definitely a motivation to get out of retail, and it's a motivation to make sure I do whatever's necessary so I don't end up back in it.
    15
  2480.  @manyinterests1961  F is for friends who do stuff together U is for you and me N is for anywhere and anytime at all Down here in the deep blue sea
    15
  2481. Plagiarism is essentially lying. I personally wouldn't trust someone if they had been caught plagiarising because historians rely on honesty and trust. How can you trust someone who has been so dishonest as to take someone else's work and pass it off as if it was their own?
    15
  2482. Alienated TV - "@TIK I'm saying capitalists supported Hitler and probably for narrow reasons of social/economic self-interest. And that reveals something fundamental about power relations under Nazism." But did they actually support it willingly? Did they have a choice? The reality was that they didn't have a choice at all. Those that resisted - like Professor Junkers - had their businesses taken off them (nationalization) and then given to Nazi-Party functionaries or others loyal to the state ("privatization"). And why were the businessmen complaining? Because private property had been abolished and state-officials moved into the businesses and took them over. A Nazi-bureaucracy was in charge. There was no free-market any more. The businessmen were tricked into thinking National Socialism was a right-wing party, and that turned out to not be true. Those saying it is are latching onto terms and concepts that don't work when you dig a little deeper, and this is why you cannot rely upon people who dip their toe in the subject and do not do in-depth research. This is also the same reason why socialism is bad. Those who think it's good (like I used to think too) are just misinformed. They're liberals at heart, who have been tricked into thinking that socialism is this amazing thing that will solve all the world's problems, and that anyone saying it isn't is evil. The reality is the exact opposite of this. Socialism twists words and phrases to hide their true meanings. It is built upon lies from the ground up, and when people take the time to start looking into it, they soon realise that - yes, they have in-fact been deceived.
    15
  2483. And the best part is that the Socialists don't even know what Socialism is, can't define it, and can't explain it. Yet they support it because they KNOW it must be so good! 😂
    15
  2484. 1. Why would you watch past episode 1 if you think this is a load of bullshit? 2. Sources are in the description. Have you read anything on the subject? 3. They did have a morale effect on the Italians (at least) as explained in earlier episodes. 4. This isn't the end of this series. I've just been focusing on other battles (Battleaxe and now Stalingrad) and will come back to this at some point. 5. The Siege of Tobruk was successful for the British in 1941. It was held until relieved during Operation Crusader. This is explained in the Rommel's First Battle in the North African Campaign video https://youtu.be/wMv9YN11xkY 6. These "cowboys" would go on to transport the SAS to their first successful mission during Crusader. Quite clearly someone thought they were useful.
    15
  2485. No problem!
    15
  2486. Well, I think I certainly blasted a hole in this episode. Cheers! :)
    15
  2487.  @simplicius11  There was a "supplementary agreement" to the treaty that has an additional 35 articles https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/bl34.asp#treatytext
    15
  2488. I didn't just debunk it. I provided evidence, quotes, and also attacked the ideology that Whoopi subscribes to. That all took time.
    15
  2489. It's interesting because the Catholic Church also refused to allow my mum and dad to get married, because my mother wasn't Catholic like my dad technically was (he didn't believe in Catholicism, but his mother did). They ended up getting married in a Protestant church instead. So the Catholic Church is very restrictive, and I'm pointing this out because it may not have been a "racial" issue as much as a religious one. Or it could have been in your case, I'm not sure. I don't know how the CRT theorists would classify the Armenian Genocide (although I would assume that they would side with the Turks and claim it wasn't a genocide). Maybe someone else has any insights?
    15
  2490. He never gave the order. And he kept telling Manstein to wait until he gave the order. Knowing that, try going back through the Stalingrad chapter of Lost Victories and you can see how manipulative Manstein is about the whole thing.
    15
  2491. I've considered writing a history book, but I don't know. I prefer videos anyway, plus I don't think I would have spotted this error regarding Hoffman's diary had I been writing a book. Only by painstakingly putting the units on the field of battle in order to animate them did I see that Hoffman must have been wrong.
    15
  2492. "the fun of history trying to work out what happened from vague and contradictory sources" It's fun at times, and frustrating at others!
    15
  2493.  @QuizmasterLaw  Just watch the video https://youtu.be/eJa65E2TKv4 Monopolies are thug tactics. That's why I'm against the State, which is itself a monopoly.
    14
  2494.  @andresdominguez6819  "So now we live in a Constitutional Monarchy" Ah, I assumed Spain became a republic again after Franco
    14
  2495. I should also inform you that Battlestorm Stalingrad will remain at 25fps for now, due to the animations and other technical reasons
    14
  2496. Thank you! Great to hear that! People are kicking off already, but it's worth it to see a lot of people get it 😁
    14
  2497. Wow, really? Glad you liked it!
    14
  2498. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    14
  2499. +gumbo yes they did. They conquered Europe in a couple years, and it took four years for everyone else to take it back.
    14
  2500. That's awesome. Have you shown him my documentary on Market Garden? I wonder what he'd think of that https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc
    14
  2501. This is the point - even if you don't agree with me. at least you get an alternative perspective rather than the Reddit-or-Wikipedia-'approved' perspective.
    14
  2502. Thank you! You just gave me an idea to make a video on XXX Corps issue ;) not sure why I didn't think of that!
    14
  2503. Glad you like the video! I do want to revist the situation in the Balkans at some point (although I am reluctant after the backlash from my Croatian Legion video where people were calling me a Fascist on, what was, a non-political video). However, the plan right now is to do Crusader, then Courland, then Stalingrad. (I also have some other videos planned in between, but I'm not saying what they are right now.) So, while I will say 'yes' to the idea, you might be waiting a while, I'm afraid.
    14
  2504. I know very little about that war, so it's good to hear similar scenarios from different wars. Thank you!
    14
  2505. Jolly good show, ol' chap!
    14
  2506. My pleasure! You're right, although I think the reason for that is because Austrians tend to be against war. I'm against war too, but that doesn't mean I don't find it interesting or can't make content about it.
    14
  2507. I've said before that this is a crisis of spirituality, and I think your comment is further proof of that. Traditional Western religions struggled after the Renaissance, and we've seen people move to "new" religions. People are looking around for community and guidance, and that vulnerability is being exploited by people who wish to enslave us.
    14
  2508. Really? Why do people keep saying the Russian Winter was the reason the Germans failed? Or the two front war? Or the logistics. Or the lack of resources? Or that Hitler was the reason Germany lost the war? Or the bombing of their industry? Or many of the other reasons given as to why the Germans lost? It wasn't just their strategy, it was their operational and tactical victories as well.
    14
  2509. That was just in 1942!
    14
  2510.  @LoganLS0  The Comanche are a tribal state. As I said, the state is strong vs some settlers, and therefore that was the reason for the violence. There was no private property, thus no cooperation, and everything descended into barter or violence.
    14
  2511. Logistics. They couldn't supply the DAK as it was, and Rommel couldn't advance further without taking Tobruk, which is where Operation Crusader comes in.
    14
  2512. Democracy = "people rule", which is state control. Workers = public body, which is state control. So again, this definition means "state control of the means of production". But they will say "it's not that", so 🤷‍♂️ And this is the problem. If you investigate their definitions, they ALL lead to totalitarianism. It doesn't matter which definition they give you, peal beneath the surface and you get "state control of the means of production". Then then say "but that definition means Rome was socialism!? Herpy derp!" even though Rome didn't have state control of the means of production. Then they'll wriggle out of it by saying something else. So, this is why I disagree when they say I (and others) don't know the definitions. We know the definitions, they just haven't thought them through properly.
    14
  2513. Because if I read it normally, my enemies would take the audio out of context and claim I was advocating the same things as the people I'm quoting, that's why.
    14
  2514. Thank you! Not heard of that one! I will get it
    14
  2515. University killed my passion for history. It took years before I picked up another history book. It was playing games for this channel that reinvigorated my passion, which is why someone suggested I should do a documentary...
    14
  2516. If you're impressed with that, just wait until the battle starts. Seriously, you've not seen anything like it. I won't spoil it for you, but I will say - enjoy :)
    14
  2517. Yes, it's fiction.
    14
  2518. Guy, I'm not understanding your point. He said he's read 4 of Beevor's books many years ago. How does that equate to a lack of attention span?
    14
  2519. I was considering doing Crete at one point, but everyone at the time voted for Stalingrad! I do intend to come back to it though. And General Messervy is an important character in the Burma Campaign, and he's central to the British defeat at Gazala, so covering Gazala first makes sense before Burma.
    14
  2520. Just double checked and you are correct. Thanks for pointing this out! I'll not mention Covenanters again for North Africa :)
    14
  2521. I had a poll up on a video ages ago asking which battle I should cover next. Crete was one of the options. As was the Battle of the Bulge. But for some reason, everyone voted for Stalingrad. So, going with the majority like a good democratic vote should, I'm now neck-deep in the most ambitious project I've ever attempted, or ever will attempt. So yes, I will cover them, but only after Stalingrad.
    14
  2522. Aspire to be yourself! Get some history books, a camera and make a video on whatever topic you're interested on. There's nothing stopping you! And, if you're thinking "yes, but", then that's the problem that you need to overcome. Do that and you'll have cracked it. Don't think about getting it right - nobody get's it right - think about getting it done.
    14
  2523. Really? Which language is that?
    14
  2524. @Legbreaker  I don't need a week off, I just would like the odd day or two here and there 😟 not going to happen until after next Monday's Stalingrad video though
    14
  2525. That's probably just an excuse. Most of the people who attended my university also left because the "couldn't handle the workload and their other commitments". Reality was they were lazy and didn't do the work.
    14
  2526. "There is no one agreed upon definition of capitalism." Yes there is. It's private control of the means of production. "Private control of the economy is not always capitalistic, such existed under feudalism as well." Feudalism isn't capitalism as it had serfs who were tied to the land. They were thus not in a free economy and didn't have private control of the means of production. "State capital would..." State capitalism = state non-state. It is an oxymoron that doesn't exist, as I explained in the video. "but the ownership by the capitalists would be 'collectivized' under the state. Such phenomenon happens under wartime conditions as we have seen in WW1 and WW2 ." Yup. A 'black market' is a free market. If you have a black market, you haven't got capitalism.
    14
  2527. I miss the music too, but people complained so I stopped putting any in 🤷‍♂
    14
  2528. Thanks! If it was a minor mistake (like a wrong date - which I seem to do a lot), I may have just changed the pinned comment, but this was too big a mistake not to pull the video. But yes, I have no problem saying I've made a mistake and doing something about it. Cheers!
    14
  2529. Not quite. It would have been capitalist in the sense that it had an economy not completely dominated by the state, but socialist in the sense that it would still have had a government. That government was most likely going to be a social democratic government on the lines of the Wiemar Republic. Remember, this video is meant to be based somewhat in reality. I highly doubt the Soviet/Russian government would have totally collapsed and not be replaced at all, and a truly anarcho-capitalist society would have emerged in ~1918, since that scenario has never happened (as far as I'm aware).
    14
  2530. I assume you mean Part 3, not 2? I'm certainly looking forward to it! Just got some more hilarious screenshots from the comments of this video 😂
    14
  2531. Yep :)
    14
  2532. 22,000 tanks, most of them obsolete light tanks. As shown in the video, Germany mobilised first and had a larger army than the Soviets, with more numerous up-to-date panzers (tanks). Prior to German mobilisation, the Soviet army was only 930,000 men. They mobilised because of German aggression, again as shown in the video. And as shown in the video, the states that the Soviets were "demanding" as you said, were the states they were entitled to as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that Germany agreed to. As shown in the video two weeks ago as well, without infantry, tanks are meaningless. Soviet Motorized formations hadn't yet received their trucks. The Soviets were outnumbered on day one of the campaign by the Germans. This there is ample evidence against the idea that the Soviets were going to attack first, and only circumstantial evidence that supports it.
    14
  2533. Precisely! Great comment
    14
  2534. I knew someone would say that... but was that really the case? Or am I manipulating the information I present to you to make you think that I would say that I knew that someone would say that?
    14
  2535. It really wouldn't surprise me
    14
  2536. While not a full explanation, this other video does a reasonable job of showing some of the unintended consequences of a minimum wage https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    14
  2537.  @RenVizsla  "he’s applying his ideology (libertarianism) to this situation" I'm not a libertarian, and the idea that we think and are therefore not animals doesn't come from libertarian ideas. - "his entire ideology is based on humans being rational." No, it's based on truth being objective. Humans are not always rational, although they can be. - "We are not rational, we are raised and developed in Nations by our parents," If you were born in a submarine, that doesn't make you a fish. - "we are the result of our community" But that doesn't mean we ARE that community. - "and our parents." What about orphans? - "It’s why a Muslim and an Englishman are noticeably very different even if they were born inside of the same country." That's religious differences, which is based on brainpower. That's not racial. And all this point does is support what I was saying, since animals don't have religions. - "Because the Muslim has not integrated into being English" First off, he can be. He isn't if he's only just got off the boat, but he could be integrated into the culture. But again, the issue here is religion, culture and politics, not 'race' or a lack of brainpower. - "he has remained with his community of which he favours which is not fundamentally an English community." Yes, that's what religions do. But religion is no proof of the existence of races or that we are animals. - "These communities then affect the way we think,the things we believe and the traditions we inherit." Correct. We are brought up by our parents and are influenced by the social networks around us. However, that doesn't mean we can't change those ideas, or that the ideas were "pre-determined" before we were born, which is what the National Socialists and racists believe. - "TIK is simply wrong with his rabid individualism." No I'm not.
    14
  2538. It would be good on the one hand, but I'm struggling to keep up with the comments already! :D
    14
  2539. It's been a long time coming
    14
  2540. To be honest, after doing Crusader (which is one small army vs another small army in a long but relatively small battle), Stalingrad appears incredibly daunting, even though I've already done hundreds of thousands of words of research for it. The plan is to do a weekly series like Crusader - although I may actually have to do it bi-weekly, because I'm 99% certain that I won't be able to finish the script whilst doing regular Monday videos, so I'll have to write the script and then edit the videos to actually get it done this millennium. I want to start the battle itself on or around the 23rd of July 1942 and work our way day by day until the 2nd of February 1943, with a hefty introduction (similar to Crusader) and a good conclusion. Depending on the events, it'll probably be a few days per episode at a time, slowing down when more complicated or in-depth events happen within it, and speeding up when there are lulls.
    14
  2541. @Michael - it may be that, or it may be things like "Hitler" in the tags or "WW2" in the title. All of this is technically fine because it's a history documentary, but I'm weary of requesting a review, because whichever YouTube employee reviews this video may decide to delete the video - which they did with that Battle of the Bulge documentary another YouTuber made
    14
  2542. What is this "outside" you speak of? There's a world outside of history books and editing software?
    14
  2543. Glad you enjoyed it!
    14
  2544. Yes, absolutely
    14
  2545. I might start calling him the Red Baron 😉
    14
  2546. There is a Patreon Q&A about this that I need to do, so I will integrate the 'history' of how I animate my Battlestorms into it. Thanks!
    14
  2547. I hate the fact that I was brainwashed into believing in Keckonomics for so long. My old history teachers should be ashamed. Worse, so many people still believe in it and think I "don't understand it", whilst preaching to me the wonders of an ideology that clearly has nothing to do with economics, but rather provides an excuse to impoverish the poor for the benefit of the rich and powerful. TLDR: you're right!
    14
  2548.  @QuizmasterLaw  "I already explained: to prevent private frauds and ensure efficient trade, for the convenience of commerce and thus to the benefit of the kingdom. Thus coinage arose and it as one aspect of state power to wit: DEATH for counterfeiters and coin clippers." Gold and silver were used as money before coinage was invented. Or are you seriously suggesting that there was no gold and silver at all until some king announced one day that he's discovered two wonderful new and rare metals that he's just turned into coins and then explained to everyone that they could trade x number of coins for a sheep? No, clearly the two metals were dug from the ground and bartered for other goods and services before being used as the primary means of exchange. Coinage no doubt came from that, but grains and grams of gold and silver were used as money before that (just like they are right now in Venezuela, even though the Venezuelan government hasn't officially declared their usage).
    14
  2549. Chess channels have had trouble with that word, since with sounds similar to another word which is naughty.
    14
  2550. Absolutely not. Had to do this before we go to the WW2 economics and interwar economics videos.
    14
  2551. Thank you sir! I'm trying to make things as clear as possible without slowing the narrative or video down too much. Not sure if I've got the balance right, but I'm doing my best. Cheers!
    14
  2552. Good point! I actually intended to do so, but forgot :(
    14
  2553. There's a difference between bog-standard racism and the ideology of Fascism or National Socialism. So I'm not denying that there was racism anywhere in Italy or the Italian armed forces or even in the Fascist Party. But I am saying that the ideology of Italian Fascism only started to bring in racist elements around 1936-ish when Mussolini wanted to align with Hitler after being isolated on the diplomatic level thanks to the Ethiopian war. So while racism was a thing (in practically every country at the time) that doesn't necessarily mean that everybody was Fascist, and Fascism was racism. There is a distinction to be made. And I would also say that Italian Fascism was Nationalistic (not racist-nationalism, just old-fashioned nationalism), and their attacks upon the Ethiopians were driven by pro-Italian nationalism (which maybe had some racism latched onto it) rather than ideological racism. They were pro-Italian on nationalist grounds, not racist grounds (until the late 1930s at least). Another way to think about it: Britain conquered a quarter of the globe because of free trade and making money, not because they just wanted to enslave other people. If they just wanted slaves, why would they sail all the way to India first before conquering Africa? Why would they sail to North America, or Australia? That doesn't make sense, until you realise that they only did so because of economics. And yes, there was racism that accompanied the conquests, and obviously slavery at first (until Britain adopted classic liberalism and was the first empire in history to fight to free the slaves), however it wasn't ideological racism that drove the expansion of the British empire. It wasn't anything like National Socialism. Racism accompanied the expansion, but it didn't drive it. Same with Italian Fascism: racism accompanied the expansion, but didn't drive it. With National Socialism however, racism drove the expansion and everything else that came along with. So there is a distinction and if we don't recognise it, we'll come to the wrong conclusions, which would be dangerous because our view of the world will be distorted. The Left today don't make this distinction, lump everything together, and then come to stupid conclusions like Churchill being a fascist, despite the fact that for almost a year Churchill and the British were the only ones fighting Mussolini and Hitler. (And I'm not saying Churchill wasn't racist or a bad guy, I'm just pointing out that he wasn't Fascist - he locked up Oswald Mosley and many other Fascists in Britain.)
    14
  2554. Why didn't you just write "No, you're wrong?" like the other Marxists did?
    14
  2555. Was this during the Ruhr crisis, or as a result of the Treaty of Versailles?
    14
  2556. Now you know, and knowing as half the battle
    14
  2557. Some are already here. Both are evil regardless who killed more
    14
  2558. Ah I see now, thank you for clarifying! Yeah, I should have been more precise in my speaking.
    14
  2559. Thank you for the post! I got the information about Hume from Peikoff's History of Philosophy series, but I admit that I may have misheard or misunderstood it. If he's not an empiricist, what would you class Hume as?
    14
  2560. Very interesting! Thank you
    14
  2561. I'm not skilled. I've got patience and perseverance, that's it. You can do anything if you obsess over it religiously for months or years until your fingers bleed or you get headaches from reading so much... Most don't put in the work. The best advice I can give you is this : stop making excuses and - DO. THE. WORK.
    14
  2562. Isn't YouTube the best! Based on your comment, I've decided to upload that video to Bitchute right now. Here's my Bitchute channel https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    14
  2563. Well... yeah, I'll start working on something :)
    14
  2564. Costa - Guards Armoured was part of XXX Corps. It was also not just tanks - by 1944, the British were using a mixture of tanks and infantry in their armoured formations. So yes, Guards Armoured is the spearhead of 30 Corps, and had infantry in it. And it's not just one division. This is a corps of tanks, infantry, artillery, engineers and a host of other units. They could have easily defeated a depleted panzer division if it hadn't been allowed to dig-in inside a city. The British infantry were busy fighting inside Nijmegen against the 10th SS Panzer Division, so couldn't ride on off towards Arnhem. They weren't late arriving, as you claim they were. They got there on time, early on day 3. They then suffered a 36 hour delay because the 10th SS Panzer Division were dug-in at Nijmegen city. If the bridge had been taken on day 1, as Gavin had been ordered to take, then the fight would have been to the north of Nijmegen. This would then have taken 10th SS Panzer Division out of the city and in open country. It is easier for infantry (because 10th SS Panzer Division only has a handful of vehicles and guns at this point) to defend in open terrain, than it is to defend in a build-up area. So, having a fight north of Nijmegen makes more sense than fighting inside the city. If the bridge had been taken on day one, the 10th SS Panzer Division wouldn't have had 24 hours to dig into Nijmegen city. They actually had time to demolish buildings to prepare their defences. You said that without the Groesbeek Heights the road north would be cut. Well, two things. As I said in the video, nobody's saying they had to move everything off the heights. Just one battalion would have done, and they spared that later in the day (after it was confirmed the 1000 tanks weren't in the Reichswald) so why not spare it earlier? And the second thing is, what's going to cut the road? The 406th Division? The unit that was barely the strength of a brigade? The unit the 82nd Airborne barely noticed on day 2? Again, one regiment would have been enough to secure the Groesbeek Heights until 30 Corps arrived and provided tank support to the 82nd Airborne - which they did. The main threat came from the north. I'm surprised 10th SS Panzer Division didn't counterattack into the rear of the 82nd Airborne in combination with the limited attack by the 406th Division. I'm also surprised the 10th SS Panzer Division didn't head south and retake the southern bridges. If Nijmegen bridge had been secured on day 1, then this would have prevented a potential disaster to the 82nd Airborne at Nijmegen. So Graebner was wiped out by Frost's battalion at Arnhem bridge. You don't think Warren was capable of doing the same? And Graebner only had a few armoured cars and half tracks. He was no match for Frost's para battalion, let alone a corps of tanks, infantry, artillery etc. The fact was that Browning and Gavin deprioritized the Nijmegen bridge, thinking that the main threat was going to come from the Reichswald. The reality was that the main threat came from the north, and nothing was in the Reichswald. This was a mistake, and 1st Airborne Division paid dearly for this mistake. "The argument you make against Beevor is the same I make against you." No it isn't. You're trying to argue without having a clear understanding of what actually happened or the composition of units. You're asking me to tell you why you I think one division with tanks and little infantry could have fought up that road. Well, they did it on day 5 and 6 (when it was too late) and got to Oosterbeek. If they'd had done this on day 3, this would have been much earlier and there was a much better chance of them getting to Arnhem. Yes, it's not guaranteed (nothing is in war or life) but the chance of victory is much higher if the Nijmegen bridge had been secured on day 1. But here's the main point - if Nijmegen bridge had been secured on day 1, and 30 Corps had got across the bridge BUT still not got to Arnhem, the fault would not be at Nijmegen. The Nijmegen bridge needs to be taken, otherwise the decision not to take the Nijmegen bridge could be argued as the reason for the failure, because taking the bridge gives the best chance for victory, which is exactly what I'm arguing. Birkby - I've already replied to your comments and you've still not explained your points, so I don't know what you're trying to get at. Steve - I don't censor comments unless they're spam, excessive swearing, deny the holocaust or something equally as stupid, or otherwise be abusive. I actually encourage people to provide solid counter-arguments because that's what history is - a debate. It's a good way to see if my own arguments hold water, and also test alternative arguments. In this case, my argument does hold water, and I haven't yet seen a valid counterargument. I can think of one very good counter-argument, and some people on other videos have gotten close, but nobody has yet said here it (unless I've missed it).
    14
  2565. It's a Gibson SG Standard from US. Picked it up when I visited Texas years ago. I play pretty much every day, and I've committed myself to doing a guitar video. Was going to do it this week, but it'll probably be next week now, so you can judge how good or bad I am for yourself :)
    14
  2566.  @orozco1111  "NSDAP is not mine, is from my enemy." Yep, that's precisely what the Marxist narrative is doing by denying the fact that Hitler was a Nationals Socialist. Nationalism is Socialism. - "And right wing political parties are pure and inocent again, and capitalism remain the pure and good form of system -wich is not-" I agree with you. Right-wing Parties are bad, and Capitalism is bad, which is why I'm for a free market.
    14
  2567. Thank you too!
    14
  2568. Because they hate me.
    14
  2569. Glad you liked it!
    14
  2570. I provided the context and proof. For more, read "Heaven on Earth"
    14
  2571. Lenin murdered Mensheviks and other various Communits and Socialists (like the Greens and the anarchists), yet nobody with any braincells is calling Lenin a capitalist. Hitler did kill non-National Socialist socialists, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a socialist. And I actually said this in this video, which is even more proof that you haven't watched it Slater, despite claiming numerous times that you have.
    14
  2572. I do agree that not everything has to be super-researched and right, and I agree that authenticity is important. However, I think, given the nature of the topics we're covering (WW2, Mr H etc) it would be very easy to mess up and accidentally say the wrong thing. We both made really bad slips of the tongues when recording this video, and that's why there's some cuts. Despite trying to keep his anonymity, I accidentally said Axiom's real name several times. This is why I don't think livestreams are an option for me/us.
    14
  2573. Also, Isaev (as much as I don't trust him) does say that there were a lot more infantry units at Dubno than at Kursk. To what extent this is true, I'm not certain, but he does say it changed the nature of the battle compared to Kursk
    14
  2574. If Exclamation Man says anything stupid, I will let you know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    14
  2575. In English, "gay" used to mean "happy" or "lively" (maybe even "delighted"), before it was then applied to homosexual men. It technically still means that, but the sexual definition has overtaken the original meaning.
    14
  2576. FIRST!
    14
  2577. "How are you today Tik?" Tired... Stalingrad has eaten up all my time, and I'm not getting enough non-Stalingrad research done, so I'm falling behind. I'm reluctant to accept the fact that doing both Stalingrad (a LOT of work) and everything else (also a LOT of work) is not sustainable over the long term. One or the other has to give... But I don't want to accept this fact.
    14
  2578. That's exactly my point. Socialists changed the definitions, and they don't work. The historical definitions do work, and make more sense
    14
  2579. Can't do it every week or for every topic, but I like longer videos. They allow me to dive deeper into a topic
    14
  2580. Good question, and I don't know. At a guess, I suspect that Hitler knew there was a limit to the number of tanks he could deploy. Instead of deploying more tanks, he may as well deploy better tanks. That is purely a guess, so don't quote me on that. However, I will look further into this question because it deserves a full answer in a later video.
    14
  2581. "All economies are planned" Correct. We don't have capitalism. The lie is that we do, but clearly we don't. You don't even own your own house - the politicians own it, which is why they can tax you for it. The UK's inheritance tax is 40%, and they're talking about 50 year mortgages (inter-generational). This is after three dacades of currency printing that's directly inflated the housing market, as the Bank of England admits on its own YouTube channel. The whole thing is socialism masquerading as capitalism, and people have bought into the lie.
    14
  2582. I'm certainly trying my best :)
    14
  2583. What would possibly give you that idea? ;)
    14
  2584. Forgot to add this source : Glantz, D. "Colossus Reborn:The Red Army at War 1941-1943." University Press of Kansas, 2005.
    14
  2585. Thanks! And yes, I drank quite a bit and it took a couple days to recover, which is great :)
    14
  2586. I agree. All sides did commit crimes in WW2 - however, the scale of those crimes tips massively to the Axis, then Soviets, then (to a much more minor extent) the Allies.
    14
  2587. @The God Emperor - I'm not politically motivated. I just favour the stronger and logical arguments. When there's contradictions, that's a problem. When there are fewer contradictions, or the evidence heavily supports a particular argument, I go with that one. When the counterarguments are poor, I stand my ground and show up their flawed logic. That's not political motivation - that's truth-seeking. May the stronger argument win. Those accusing me of political motivations are simply trying to undermine my arguments by attacking me personally (a smear and slander campaign) rather than taking on the arguments I'm making. It's an underhand tactic, but it's effective because it plays of people's emotions. The knee-jerk reaction is for people to think "guy A has accused guy B of being a Nazi, therefore guy B must be a Nazi" even though no evidence has been presented, and in my case, the absolute opposite is true. I've been called a Communist, a Fascist, a Nazi, a Marxist, a Jew, an anti-American, a pro-American, a pro-British, pro-Marxist, pro-German, anti-German, a conservative (even I laughed at that one), an Ancap (I'm not), a socialist, someone who's biased (we're all biased), someone with an agenda (my agenda is to find the truth about history - that's a good thing), pro-Croatian, a Londoner (I'm not sure why this one was meant to be an insult), a Scotsman (yep), pro-European, anti-European, pro-French, anti-French, pro-Polish, anti-Polish, anti-South African (the Pienaar video), and so many more I've lost track. I think it's fair to say that the smearing and slander must stop. I'm an individual. Therefore I'm a classic liberal who thinks the free market helps the poor more than state-control and tyranny, but only because the argument is strongly in favour of the fact that I am indeed an individual, and that tyranny is wrong, and that allowing the economy to actually function results in (shockingly) more economic activity.
    14
  2588. This is also why I put on a 'voice' when I quote Hitler etc, because I know if I didn't, someone would isolate it and post it somewhere as "proof" that I'm a Nazi
    14
  2589. @Peter - yes, it's something I need to work on for a future video. The Wehrmacht was definitely not clean. In fact, already I've shown that the civilians at Stalingrad suffered horribly during the 6th Army's occupation.
    14
  2590. I have one eye on Milei, and all things considered it looks like he's doing well. I know some people are upset that their sick and addicted economy had to get worse before it could get better, but that's just the nature of the beast. I think the next couple of years will prove him right.
    14
  2591.  @DeGreekDollmaker  Nothing in your comment says that Peikoff said anything wrong. You're just saying "they're wrong because they're Objectivists", which isn't an argument. Whether I agree with a source or not, I have to use it, and I've explained why in my video on the Objective Theory of History here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI And while it's true that I have relied on Peikoff, the reason why is because he does a great job at explaining the ins and outs of the various philosophies, and also explains where they go wrong. And I'm sure he made some mistakes (everyone does), but I doubt he's a million miles off. So unless you can provide a solid logical, non-contradictory and objective reason for why Peikoff is wrong, there's no justification for me to dismiss a fantastic source like this.
    14
  2592. Well, actually that was part of the reason I wanted to do this series. I think it's pretty hard to remember every single unit on the battlefield and really grasp the movements just from books and a few static and inadequate maps. My hope is that this will go some way to actually allowing people to really get a grip on this gigantic battle
    14
  2593. It was actually a much needed stress reliever! The work has been intense and serious for so long that it was nice to have a break from the heavy stuff... Glad to hear you enjoyed it too!
    14
  2594. I've got about 1.5 hours into it so far. I have to watch about 20 minutes at a time in order to spare my sanity. Not sure when I'll get around to doing a full-critique, but I do plan to do so
    14
  2595. Absolutely not. I would have been indoctrinated, and I would have come to accept that violence against innocent and wars of aggression are justified. Products of their times. Which is why there's a distinction between what Germany did then, and what Germans do now.
    14
  2596. The Greeks have recently been demanding reparations for this
    14
  2597. Wow... I feel sorry for her kids
    14
  2598. What Pienaar does tomorrow... It's amazing. And just remember, he got promoted
    14
  2599. Mat, Hitler was a socialist. And it's not just in the name. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    14
  2600.  @unlearningcommunism4742  True, but I'm more concerned about his audience being deceived into financially supporting the guy
    14
  2601. I would be incredibly grateful if you did that :)
    14
  2602. That's not an excuse to not cover it.
    14
  2603. I'm glad you enjoyed that video! A nice follow-up is the Fascism Defined video. And naval warfare since my Patreons/SubscribeStars are asking!
    14
  2604. I largely argee. The early Empire certainly did. I think that argument falls apart by the early 1900s, until the Second World War. India, for example, was actually a net drain on the British Empire until the Second World War.
    14
  2605.  @alexs_toy_barn  Saint Augustine wasn't a Christian? The fact that Saint John had divine revelation (which is 'gnosis') and was able to predict the future, suggests that he was a gnostic.
    14
  2606.  @toplak  As free as the cheese on the trap!
    14
  2607. :D
    14
  2608. There's a difference between 'school' and 'education'. Here, you get educated ;)
    14
  2609. I have a degree in history, but otherwise no I don't study or teach professionally. Then again, I can reach more people on here than I could as a tutor.
    14
  2610. Hi Claire, I agree with your five factors (and there's probably more). The point of the video was to narrow it down further and make a decision as to which was the most crucial factor out of them all. If you had to choose one of your five factors as being the most crucial, which would you choose? And they're good suggestions. I'm planning to get through the North African Campaign first before moving on to the Italian Campaign, so Monte Casino may have to wait a while. Clearing the Scheldt, Walcheren Island, and Hurtgen are good suggestions, so I'll add them to my list. Just so you know, I'm currently working on a Battle of Stalingrad Battlestorm documentary (yep). I've been working on it since April 2017, and current research is over 367,000 words. It's going to be epic when it's done! So, if you're wondering why it takes a while for me to post content, this is why :)
    14
  2611. What did she say? Let me know if you persuade her to watch one of my videos, I'm curious to know what she thinks
    14
  2612. Thanks for the pointers! This was more a preliminary to the main-Lend-Lease video I'll be making. Sadly, I'm really struggling to find anything on the subject. Have you got any source recommendations??
    14
  2613. They are useable, but only with extreme caution.
    13
  2614. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only person who feels guilty when playing games. It probably sounds crazy to anyone who games regularly, but once you break the habit and change your mindset, it's hard to go back. Good luck with your studies - especially your masters.
    13
  2615. "Socialism is the means of production in the hands of the workers" - no, because Hitler reinterpreted it to mean Race not class. It's still the seizure of the means of production. And there is no reason to think this "new" idea that Hitler had wasn't a variation of socialism.
    13
  2616.  @snagletoothscott3729  "Define a turning point and you'll know when that turning point is." The definition would be subjective.
    13
  2617. It's not agreed that history is subjective, especially in the Germanic-school of history (via Leopold von Ranke). They hold that history is a science, and therefore "just stick to the facts". The problem is that the facts don't tell the full story, and the postmodernists are like sharks to the Rankeanians.
    13
  2618. That makes sense. I'm a little annoyed I couldn't read Dutch because there weren't many sources in English. And many of the Dutch sources weren't available, so couldn't even buy them and sit there translating them because they simply weren't available
    13
  2619. Also, I'll add that my new editor hasn't got up to speed yet and is still causing me more work than they're taking off me. This is why I'm struggling to keep up, and why I missed an video a couple weeks back. I'm sure in the future they'll save me time, but right now I'm in trouble.
    13
  2620. Halder wins
    13
  2621.  @QuizmasterLaw  "there's absolutely no way to use the price mechanism in literal combat." Why? If people want it, it will be in high demand. And, so long as you don't waste the resources of society, then you can absolutely make a profit.
    13
  2622. Lol I love the way people view economics! You guys make me laugh 😂
    13
  2623. Glad you enjoyed that skit!
    13
  2624. AAAAARGGH! Thanks for pointing that out, I'll change it
    13
  2625. A good question - one which I hadn't considered before. To be honest, I haven't seen any 'conflict' in the early part of the battle (the bits we've covered so far). And I don't recall much conflict until right at the end, during the encirclement, which you mentioned in your comment. What you have to remember is that, Hitler was promoting non-Junker or non-elite generals into positions of power throughout the war, and especially as the war went on. He was against the "vons" and for the "lower" people who were fanatical "National Socialists". This was still an on-going process at this time, and wouldn't properly kick in until after Zeitzler took over Halder. We also have to remember that the German officers were trained to obey. So while Paulus may not have had 'seniority' over some of his commanders, they were trained to obey their higher-ups. Plus, Paulus was married to a Romanian noblewoman, which put him in touch with the Romanian premier. And he had planned parts of Operation Barbarossa, plus other campaigns, so he was a very experienced staff general. I don't know if I can answer your question fully today. But I will be on the look out for hints within the literature of the relationship between Paulus and his generals, and I'll include it within the series if possible. If you or anyone else has any suggestions for sources, let me know.
    13
  2626. That might be true, but I'm already throwing 65+ hours into this per week, so I really don't have time to do that. Perhaps in the future if I get more support I could hire a team and then take my hands off the wheel a bit more often to write articles and books - but it's a long way off that right now.
    13
  2627. Congratulations for getting your law degree. I wish you luck in the future, but ultimately you need to pick a goal and go for it. Know that the goal is almost always arbitrary, but that doesn't matter because it gives you meaning and purpose while you pursue it.
    13
  2628. You're looking at a spreadsheet right now https://youtu.be/UBX2QQHlQ_I
    13
  2629. Haha I put that in there to see if anyone would spot who it was 😂
    13
  2630. I'll remember that when I write it ;)
    13
  2631. As I proved in the follow up video (44 mins) jammed packed with h statistics, this is correct. No warning necessary
    13
  2632. According to Enduring the Whirlwind - which is getting this particular information from Müller-Hillebrand, Das Heer 1933-1945 - total German losses in the East between June 1941 and June of 1943 were 3,965,000 (this figure also includes "sick"). They sent out 4,440,000 replacements in the same period, which meant the German army grew by 475,000 men. Plus they were augmented by Axis allies. It also mentions that during Operation Blau, Army Group B (fighting at Stalingrad and along the Don) suffered one-third of all casualties occured by the Ostheer during July and August but only received 11% and 14% of the total number of replacements sent out to the Eastern Front. By September "Divisions assigned in Heeresgruppe Nord were on average short 2,029 men and those with the 2. Panzerarmee of Heeresgruppe Mitte lacket 2,120. In contrast, the personnel shortages of the formations within Heeresgruppe B already averaged 3,521." (page 244) Very strange, don't you think? German tank numbers - "At first glance, the lamentable tank state of the panzer divisions, especially those with Heeresgruppe Nord and Mittle, appears to be representative of an overall shortage of armoured vehicles within the German Army. Certainly, this is the conclusion presented within the post-war literature, even though most provide scant details, if any. The problem with this assumption if that the whereabouts of a large number of the 6,558 panzers and StuG in stock with the German Army on 1 July 1942 are unknown. Of these, an estimated 2,836 can reasonably be accounted for as being present with the Ostheer, while a further 1,613 were preoccupied elsewhere. This leaves 2,109 tanks and assault guns unaccounted for. Evidently, more armoured vehicles were either on the Eastern Front, or at least should have been, that the diminutive figures cited with the panzer divisions have led scholars to believe. Admittingly, because of severe shortages of spare parts, a number of these may actually have been in long-term repair. Consequently, they might have been located at maintenance facilities within Germany or at the major tank repair centres established within the occupied eastern territories. However, they also may have been with formations in the field but when unreported by these units since they were not expected to become operational for an extended period of time. The temptation and benefits of exacerbating deficiencies and the Germany Army's shambolic reporting methods at this time may also have played a role." (p198, Whirlwind)
    13
  2633. It's definitely a nice change of pace
    13
  2634. The "people" are the "public", and the "public" sector is the state. So yes, when the politicians say they're "doing it for the people", they mean themselves. I've tried to explain this in my public vs private video, but it's surprising how many people rejected this, even though it's clear that that's exactly what they're doing.
    13
  2635. If I didn't, there would be more knuckle draggers spamming complaints in the comments and harassing people who agree with me, so I think it's worth it in order to make the comments accessible to everyone else.
    13
  2636.  @LoganLS0  "If the government presently has a mandate to guard the borders and they are failing to do so, they are violating the native's freedom of association." If there was no government, there would be no welfare state, and thus no incentive for foreigners to come over here in the first place. There's no need to guard the borders, just abolish taxation and the Bank of England.
    13
  2637. Next week is Battlestorm Gazala
    13
  2638. People were saying (after looking it up on Wikipedia) that the highest temperature recorded in the area was about 40 or 43 degrees, which is partly why I got a lot of criticism. I haven't verified that, but I also think a lot of people assume Russia is cold all year around, even though there's camels on the Steppe near Stalingrad (I believe both sides used them during the campaign)
    13
  2639. @Peter Schattmann Undrinkable! xD
    13
  2640. Welcome! To be honest, I think everyone should read that book. It's simple, but will clear up a good portion of the misconceptions people have about economics without overwhelming people.
    13
  2641. Yeah, that's definitely a bad sign! I do think the ending is pretty awesome though
    13
  2642. Oh wow, I got through to someone! You're only the second guy I've ever seen who's said this! Fantastic!
    13
  2643. In my previous job, I had just 9 days off in over 11 years - two of which I turned up to work and was sent home because I was ill. Ultimately, you are what you produce - if you produce nothing, you are nothing. And schooling other historians sounds like a fun job to be honest, although in theory I'm potentially doing that right now for future historians who are watching this. I hope so because the world needs more historians
    13
  2644. Yes, Terri did a great job with this one 😂
    13
  2645.  @calumdeighton  Awesome! You're almost there, don't give up!
    13
  2646. It's because they've not been educated, but miseducated. That's the problem 🙁
    13
  2647. In answer to your first point - it depends how you see it. Some say the Spanish Civil War was part of WW2, and I would count the Winter War as Soviet aggression as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (is Soviet occupation of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania part of WW2? What about German take-over of Austria and Czechoslovakia?), so I would say it was part of WW2.
    13
  2648. I've not heard of Esoterica before, so thanks for that. I had watched a video by Let's Talk Religion, but hadn't subscribed, so I will.
    13
  2649. I read that the Austrians claimed that they weren't Germans in order to try and get better treatment from the Soviets.
    13
  2650.  @Neapoleone-Buonaparte  Think about it. You cannot give to charity unless you have something to give. You can't have something to give unless you desired it in the first place (greed). And the reason you give to charity is for selfish reasons. You feel shame and guilt that you have stuff and someone else doesn't. So to make yourself feel better, you give to others - that's ultimately a selfish act! Charity isn't a virtue, it's a sin. It's the ultimate form of selfishness. Especially when we consider the "give a man a fish" proverb. It's better to look out for yourself and put your own needs first, because that desire to better yourself is a huge motivation. If everyone put themselves first, then helped each other, nobody would need help. We'd all be much better off. So no, I think "Ethical Socialism" is equally as terrible as the rest. Socialism doesn't just fail because its economics don't work, it fails because it promotes Altruism. Altruism isn't "good" - it leads to anxiety and depression. By putting others before ourselves, we weaken and destroy ourselves, leading to a collapse, either of ourselves, or of society. That's what we're seeing right now.
    13
  2651.  @mr.2083  You're correct that more people should be like this - I respect people who can admit their own mistakes more than people who pretend they never make them. Too many people think that admitting their mistakes makes you a bad person, and that you should guard yourself from all criticism. That's a poor man's mentality. And perhaps I am overly self-critical. However, the idea is not to do myself or my work down, but about improving and getting it right. Only by accepting our flaws can we strive to overcome them. If I refused to admit mistakes (as some people do - and I've met those people) then it's impossible to learn, and it's impossible to grow.
    13
  2652. I've tried to include the Italians as much as possible in the North African Campaign videos, but it's difficult because I can't read their primary sources and few historians have written books on them, so they are definitely sidelined. I would love to see YouTubers from those countries doing in-depth videos on them because I think that would be a massive help to everyone.
    13
  2653. You'll like next week's video 🙂
    13
  2654. It's not parental issues by themselves, rather altruism and parental issues combined with a loss of faith, leading to a rebellious nature. And no, not everyone has parental issues, apparently. These people became intellectuals and could read and write a lit, but when it came to getting jobs they were work-shy. I'm sorry you don't like my videos, but I disagree with your criticism here. There is a clear pattern in their upbringing.
    13
  2655. It's a good point, however the purpose of bringing up the Marshall "purge" was to draw parallels with the other countries. Both countries were expanding at the time. Both were getting rid (one way or another) of their out-of-date officers. The main difference seems to be the (re)introduction of political commissars into the Red Army, which probably was more crucial than the "loss of experience" aspect. So yes, I would rather get sacked under Marshall than Purged under Stalin, but the end result would have been the same had the surviving Red Army officers not been restricted in their authority.
    13
  2656. How about underwear with "Butt is this really the case?" written on them?
    13
  2657. @Magneto: can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, so will assume you're not. Therefore, it's a joke. The joke being that (allegedly) the French Army was always retreating. And, for clarity, nobody sane sees the French Army as being that bad. They held their ground effectively in WW1. In WW2, they had their problems, but the fighting spirit of the men was not what led them to defeat.
    13
  2658. That's kinda my point at the end of the video. All countries played their part in one way or another. Chest-pounding and saying "my country is better than yours" is just silly. To deny that the Soviet Union bled the German Army white in the East is to distort the reality of the situation. There is the argument about Lend Lease and whatnot, but the fact remains that the Soviets did the bulk of the fighting. Britain and the USA's contributions were colossal too, but the Soviets paid the highest price for success.
    13
  2659. They only don't make sense if you haven't understood his ideology. Once you grasp the ideology, there is a certain irrational logic to it. Irrationality is inherent within the doctrine, and to call Hitler a madman is to call almost every philosopher in history a madman, since Hitler's ideology is based upon the philosophy of Plato, Kant, Hegel and so many more.
    13
  2660. I was actually wondering before I uploaded if YouTube would flag the video for that and was considering redoing the audio to emphasize "baker"... but then decided to live life on the edge and just release it as is
    13
  2661. The next episode is going to be the beginning of the Soviet counter-offensive (Operation Uranus). I don't know the proportion until I've actually done it, although I would hazard a guess and say we're probably two-thirds the way through the series now.
    13
  2662. Thank you, but the videos are edited!
    13
  2663. "The History Daddy" - should I call myself "THD" instead of "TIK"?
    13
  2664. Sounds like some people don't want to deal with the truth, and so will take it out on you, even though you're just stating the obvious. They may also be taking it personally, or are just worried for the future, or are proud... Sometimes people have to learn the hard way
    13
  2665. Technically, recon is US+Australian, and recon is British+Canadian. But when it comes to things like this, I treat them as synonyms, rather than put up artificial vocabulary barriers. So I'll use both, or one or the other, thanks.
    13
  2666. Emphasis on currently... But again, they're thinking in terms of nationality (a social group) which is a socialist concept (born in the French Revolution alongside socialism). When people are saying that Russia wants to become socialist/communist again, this is evidence that supports that claim.
    13
  2667. Unlike some, I don't complain that I'm fighting a war on two fronts ;)
    13
  2668. I addressed this in the video. The argument isn't that parental issues ALONE resulted in someone falling socialism, but rather a combination of factors in a clearly defined PATTERN.
    13
  2669. I disagree. The problem is that rather than starting at self-hatred and then saying you can overcome it, you could start at self-acceptance and then say you'll improve yourself. The latter is a much more healthier and more positive way of establishing self-esteem. So I disagree that self-hatred is required for every moral system. Any proper moral system would be built from a positive starting point rather than a negative one.
    13
  2670. Hahaha if that was the case I'd start begging for subscribers
    13
  2671. You'd be surprised. Quite the norm during Crusader, which is why Auchinleck had a 50% tank stockpile in reserve, in case the British tanks broke down.
    13
  2672. Yeah, it does have the MHV vibe. But it's just the best way I could explain this concept without my ugly mug being in the way.
    13
  2673.  @aasphaltmueller5178  Then the capitalists would be forced to lower their prices or go hungry themselves. That's why under a capitalist economy you have deflation. But of course, we don't have a capitalist economy...
    13
  2674. Honestly, it's hard to care about the "tanks" when there's a massive elephant in the room that needs addressing
    13
  2675. Thank you very very much. I have just checked it out and have ordered it. I think it will end up being very useful...
    13
  2676. Thank you Alan! More to come on this 🙂
    13
  2677. Same thing happened on the Soviet side, which is why you see loads of sailors in the Red Army (e.g. at Stalingrad). But when the Soviets do it, it's because of SOVIET HORDES. When the National Socialists do it, it's because of Madman Hitler.
    13
  2678. That was actually how he spelt it, so you can't blame me this time!
    13
  2679.  @erozionzeall6371  "Define Capitalism and explain to me why anyone should be able to earn billions by doing nothing while billions languish in poverty?" Okay, here's a video where I define both capitalism and socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And capitalism has brought BILLIONS out of poverty for the first time in human history. If you think the 1800s were bad, go back to the 1700s and see how people were hibernating in the winter in southern France because they didn't have enough food to eat. In Britain between 1870 and 1914, the amount of food that the poor person ate DOUBLED. And this was before modern fertilizers or tractors came along. On top of that, living standards actually grew. Yes, grew! Unlike today in our centrally planned world economy, living standards were going up, not down! See this video too https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    13
  2680. Hope you enjoy it! Considering I just did an all-nighter to get this out, I'm not so sure about the worklife balance... But yes, I've been trying to have more breaks.
    13
  2681. @SharpLight - I just tell what happens. If Pienaar hadn't decided to sit there and do nothing, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.
    13
  2682. At some point they might realize that these videos actually serve a purpose. They will reinforce what I'm going to be saying in future military history and non-military history videos. Explaining why the British struggled to finance the war, or why the Third Reich economy was imploding, and thus massively weakening their military situation, and the impact Roosevelt's centralization had on the economy of the USA
    13
  2683. I don't like the idea of livestreams. I much prefer to script my videos, which allows me to take my time to really think through what I'm trying to say. It also stops the emotional "you're wrong! No you are!" outbursts and insults which are prevalent in today's society. I also think that Anton would struggle to do this because he gets Brad to narrate his videos due to his strong French accent. I'm also against the idea of this being democratic. Just because people believe that the moon is made of cheese doesn't make it so. If everyone agrees with me because I've got a bigger audience and they just decided to dismiss Anton's work, then that's not fair if he's made the better argument. And people who see the results of the poll will then be influenced by that. I therefore think it should be down to the individual to come to their own understanding and decision, regardless what anyone else thinks.
    13
  2684. It doesn't help that he was in charge of the post-war German side of the historiography either, and is definitely to blame for the manipulated view many people have of the Eastern Front today.
    13
  2685. Also, thanks for the constructive criticism :)
    13
  2686. It will happen. But I want to clear things up some more things on the German side before I move to the Soviet side. That way, it'll put the Soviet side into more context.
    13
  2687. Never before have I had to buy so many external hard drives. I back everything up twice just in case, in addition to having videos uploaded on YouTube too.
    13
  2688. It's a combination of previous government interference in the market (wage and price controls, copious regulations, taxation, inflation, immigration etc) but is also a big sign that inflation is beginning to cripple the economy, along with the interest rate manipulation. It has nothing to do with Brexit or the other excuse the lamestream media continues to say but I shouldn't mention. It's not a coincidence that there are shortages of fuel, drivers, employees for restaurants and other businesses, sugar (a couple weeks back), toilet paper (last year), cars (old and new), milk (that's apparently the latest one), timber, cement, toys and stuff for Christmas, in addition to the fact we have a massive housing bubble crisis, a stock market bubble crisis, and other huge distortions running throughout the economy. It's not a coincidence that all this is happening at the same time. Brexit or a health crisis cannot explain all of this. But one thing can - our beloved Central Bank and it's interest rate and currency manipulations. This is similar to what happened in the Soviet Union, or National Socialist Germany, or Weimar Germany, or several other countries. It's been playing out since 2008, but really got going in September 2019. If you haven't seen my What Causes Recessions video, you may want to give it a watch https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    13
  2689. I laughed :D
    13
  2690. I use the historically accurate definition https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    13
  2691. I agree, there are definitely similarities with the 1920s and 2020s! I would also say there are similarities with the 1930s and 2020s too
    13
  2692. You really want me to return to HOI4? I will say, I love the game. Just wish they'd kept elements of the order of battle system from HOI3
    13
  2693. Stick to thanks
    13
  2694. "when are you going to do your supposed rebuttal to Askey's essay" One of my Patreons asked me to do it as a Q&A question, so it will be answered at some point, whenever I get to it. There's clearly no rush though.
    13
  2695. Ah that's interesting, thank you for commenting :) I have a question for you (or any other German-speaker out there) if you don't mind me asking. And apologies if it sounds stupid. The words "Panzer" and "faust" are translated directly as "tank fist". But why is the word "fist" used to describe an antitank weapon? As in, if it was called a "tank beater" or "tank puncher" or something, I'd understand. But the term "tank fist" doesn't seem to fit. Whereas "Panzerschreck" translates nicely as "tank fright" - which does make sense in the context.
    13
  2696. Late war, yes. But during the early to mid-war, the Red Army lacked artillery pieces. It wasn't until around the time of Operation Uranus in 1942 that they finally got enough, and it only grew from there. Their artillery at the start of the war was in a dire state, as I explained in another video https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    13
  2697. Not seen that so I'll check it out. Thanks EDIT: I posted this review of the suggested content below but decided to edit this comment too so people can see it Just watched the "Subverting the Narrative" video. While I agree with the premise, I think he's painting too broad of a brush. To suggest that everyone saying "international banking" is someone who hates the Jews (Murray Rothbard and Mises, both Jews, would like a word with him), is simply not true. Explaining how fractional reserve banking leads to depressions and recessions, and therefore that the banks (national or international) are a blight upon humanity, doesn't say anything about the people who work in them (be them Jews or not). The race is irrelevant, it's the non-free-market banking practices (combined with State control) that's important. He's conflating the two, and thus painting every Ancap or Libertarian (including many Jews, like Peter Schiff) as Nazis. I'm not an Alex Jones fan, but he plays a clip of Alex Jones saying something about "globalists" or whatever, and says the same thing about him. Alex Jones might be a bit off his rocker, but I don't think Alex Jones is an anti-Semite or a National Socialist for not liking things like Marxism (itself anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ). The video author then plays a clip of Jordan Peterson where Peterson explains how Hitler was disgusted by the Jews. The video author then says that what Peterson really meant was that Hitler didn't hate the Jews but only wanted to clean up things. Thus, the video author implies that Jordan Peterson is a secret anti-Semite. But Peterson was only explaining Hitler's reasoning - Hitler hated the Jews BECAUSE he was disgusted by them. If you read Mein Kampf (page 63 of the Jaico verson, for example, where he says the Jews made him "feel ill" and are a "pestilence", and there's plenty more I could quote) this becomes clear. The video author then starts saying that the Nazis viewed the Jews as an economic plight, and that's why the Nazis wanted to get rid of them... which is a cleaning up operation, as Jordan Peterson said. He also says "the only people who ate better than the Germans were the Americans", which is laughably not true. The British had way more food than the Germans did in WW2 as the book "Taste of War" by Collingham explains. I've been over the food crisis in the Reich many times, so I won't labour that point here. There's loads more I could pick out, but you get the picture. Overall, I think there's a reason the video is heavily down-voted, and I don't think it's just because the National Socialists don't like it either.
    13
  2698. I'm quite surprised it's not being swamped by the morons on 4chan or Reddit already
    13
  2699. It was "animal spirits" - Keynes
    13
  2700. Yes, that's half of the equation
    13
  2701. Thank you! Fingers crossed you can find something on this one way or another :)
    13
  2702. I'm not Black Pill. Black Pill is when you get depressed after taking the Red Pill (plus not fully understanding the dynamic between men and women).
    13
  2703. @Thelfifi - while the climate may (or may not) be changing, we cannot kill our economy and regress into the woods (and then call ourselves "progressives). The 'solution' needs to be something other than what's being called for by the Green (actually Red) New Deal lot. You may enjoy this video https://youtu.be/lLaKxeR3XtA
    13
  2704. "However, the fact that you're reccommending videos from highly partisan channels is dissappointing. It does make me wonder if you've got the ability to discuss politics in a neutral, non-biased manner." What I fundamentally reject to is the idea that evidence should be ignored or distorted. Fighting against distortions or misinformation has always been my thing. There's no difference here. I look at both sides, and decide to discount the one that cannot provide evidence, distorts its evidence or relies on cheap tactics/slogans as the basis of its arguments. For example, I've had at least two people already tell me in the comments that the Victorian era in Britain led to mass poverty and exploitation. Clearly they've been brainwashed by people who have ideological agendas. I've had to point out that real wages in Britain increased by 42-50% in the years 1850 to 1883, according to "British Economics Growth 1688-1959: Second Edition" page 24. In fact, living standards were increasing significantly in this period throughout Europe, especially when compared to what came before. This was what Bernstein (a Marxist who buried Engels) realised after he wrote the 4th volume of Das Kapital (Marxists like to pretend he didn't write it). He realised that the revolution wouldn't come, which is why he became a social-democrat. The reality is, hard facts are hard to swallow. I watch a lot of different videos and read a lot of different books before doing this video. I've also been reading a lot for other related topics. So, if I'm going to link to economics videos, I'll link to videos that get the economics right, not ones that get it wrong at a fundamental level.
    13
  2705. It's Operation Crusader all over again 😂
    13
  2706. Thanks! I'm not that interested in subscriber count-goals or play buttons if I'm honest. Obviously I want viewers, and it's nice to see that a LOT of people appreciate what I'm doing, but if I stay at 100k forever more I'd be fine with that, so long as people were still watching my videos and getting their weekly fill of history.
    13
  2707. Can confirm, they're awful maps. The worst element of Glantz's otherwise great books. That's partly the reason why this series needs to happen - so we can actually see the battle unfold on the map
    13
  2708. That's fantastic to hear! And I'm really glad you found the video useful enough to watch it more than once. I wish more of my critics would do the same. Cheers!
    13
  2709. My pleasure! And be sure to get the pdf too, link in the description
    13
  2710. @Suleiman Kahani - I'm exposing the Marxist-Denialist bending of history
    13
  2711. That's fine. All I ask is that you watch the video, understand the argument, read the pinned comment as well and think about it. If you accept for 10 minutes that this is the case, things start to fall into place that didn't before.
    13
  2712. I'm glad you disagree and didn't just go off on one. Cheers Marin :)
    13
  2713. @Yvonne Blocker - the New Deal made the Great Depression last until 1946, as I showed in my video on the supposed 1946 Depression (which never happened, but Keynesians believe it did) https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw Roosevelt wanted more power, and there was real concern at the time, especially from business leaders, that he was turning the United States into a Socialist or Fascist dictatorship.
    13
  2714. Oh yes, this was a massive learning curve for me. there's a fair number of mistakes, times where I was rushed and the quality wasn't where I'd like it to be. I actually converted from doing everything in Premiere Pro to doing almost everything in Blender during the first 10 or so episodes, so I wish I'd used Blender from the beginning. I've also learnt that I can show, not tell. So in the early videos I was saying "this division, this division, and this division advanced to unpronounceable location", whereas now I just say "the Soviets advanced" and then show which divisions advance and where they advance to... And I think if I'd dome this again, I would have bought copies of the 6th Army's maps (it's like $400 for the collection), but I didn't realise they even existed in book form until recently.
    13
  2715. And considering they (spoiler)... ..... ...didn't actually pay the reparations, yeah it was light.
    13
  2716. I'm glad you think so. I'm certainly trying my best, I can assure you that much :)
    13
  2717. You are correct. Changing the titles now
    13
  2718.  @TheDunestyler  When I was a socialist, I couldn't understand why anyone would watch the BBC because it was clearly a Right-wing propaganda machine. I thought everyone who voted for the Conservatives was either racist, or was so close to racist that they may as well be a closet Nazi. I believed that everything they were saying was a trick. Now I don't understand why anyone on the Right would vote for the Commie-servatives. They're clearly just socialists by another name. They're pro-statism, pro-interventionist, pro-war, pro-regulation, anti-freedom etc etc. Rather than being some sly tricksters, I just see them as ignorant power-hungry elitists. How much my views have changed! The point of all this is to say that it comes down to a lack of trust. They don't trust you because they think you're trying to trick them, just as my critics think I'm trying to trick them. The problem is: HOW DO WE GET THEM TO OPEN THEIR EYES? And honestly, I've no idea. I'm completely at a loss. And I think that's why I feel so frustrated. I'm frustrated as much at myself as I am at them because I can't think of ways to get them to break out of the spell they're under.
    13
  2719. There's a LOT of people saying "stick to tanks". But my reply to Horatio was actually not because he got under my skin, it was more because he presented his case in a nice way, and was responding to me in a proper debate. I have been meaning to make this video for ages (it was part of the reason I made the poll a few weeks back), and decided to include him as an example.
    13
  2720. "But his politico-economical views are more ideological than neutral/objective. He uses an one-sided definition of socialism and doesn't recognizes that some people (actually the majority of people) use a totally other definition." Please provide the 'other' definition that's agreed by the 'majority' of the 'people'.
    13
  2721. Great minds think alike 👍
    13
  2722. They censored my video on Greece because... reasons? They've also taken other history videos down for less. Their policies say one thing, their actions say another.
    13
  2723. Exactly. None of it makes any sense. All I can confirm is that they were looking for 1000 tanks in the Reichswald on day 1 of this operation.
    13
  2724. Don't tempt me
    13
  2725. Yeah, I'd definitely agree with that
    13
  2726. Glorious German army is defeated by buildings!
    13
  2727. I addressed that criticism in this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    13
  2728. It's surprising how many people want to be slaves. As Orwell said, they genuinely think Freedom is Slavery. And they think slavery is freeing because they no longer need to take responsibility for themselves, since someone else (the slave master, or politician) has taken the responsibility of looking after them for them
    13
  2729. So, why do you think that the Austrians and Hungarians didn't stick together after the collapse?
    13
  2730. "As for the planned economy, fact of the matter is that if you conscript significant part of farmers into army, significant amount of working animals into army(both for wagon train and cavalry), perhaps limit access to fertilizer and other goods, this is going to have great impact on the agriculture with the technology as it was at the time. And you can just forget about things like coffee, even if you could grow it in Central Europe (which probably you can't) doing that at expense of producing already collapsing basic food would be incredibly stupid. It's just sad that you again could not hold yourself from perpetuating the propaganda." Oh I see. The fact that the State forcefully conscripted people into an army, destroyed the economy due to central State planning, all for a war that the State started in the first place, isn't the fault of the State? Okay then... I guess I'm the one spouting propaganda...
    13
  2731. Yes. However, they didn't save themselves from Stalin, who was arguably worse
    13
  2732. Yes, although I wouldn't 100% trust the video since he's working from memory. He also says the big attack at Brody/Dubno came on the 28th, but in his book he says its the 26th.
    13
  2733. "Since we are talking about logistics in this video" We are? And I'm not an expert on ancient or medieval warfare, unfortunately. I will note that the Roman Republic expanded, whereas the Empire didn't do so as much, then the Empire split in two, with the west having a massive military and social budget which forced them to dilute their gold based money into fiat currency, causing them to suffer from inflation, which then destroyed their economy and helped speed up their collapse.
    13
  2734. Good question! I don't currently have any doubts about my view because the more I read, the more I discover. Like, the "Betriebsführer" and "Gefolgschaft" - that was a recent discovery. The only thing is that, because historians have written so little on the subject of the Nazi economy, and have ignored huge portions of the economy and ideology (like, what were the central planning boards that distributed raw materials called? No idea because none of the historians talk about them!), it leaves a bit of doubt. There is a potential that the more we discover about the Nazi economy, the less socialist it ends up being. However, I really don't think this will happen. In fact, the opposite is more likely. The more we discover, the more socialist the National Socialist economy becomes. So the wind is blowing the correct direction.
    13
  2735. "actual problem of the moment: Pharmaceutical companies without restrictions ask ridiculous expensive prices..and certain medical insurance companies are OBLIGED to buy them (or not , and leave the patients to ..rot)..and the government/taxpayer HAS to fund it...or not.. Different countries, different solutions." The reason they're charging more is because government regulation costs them so much that they have to cover that expense by charging more. Then the government decides to 'socialize' the health service. My solution is to get the damn government out of the economy and let it function as it's supposed to do: smart and cheaply.
    13
  2736. That's because the media isn't informative, it's entertainment designed to get you to keep watching. This channel on the other hand is meant to be educational first, then entertaining second
    13
  2737. "Capitalism is a system where state actions SERVE the dominant economic forces - those of Capital accumulation." Capitalism is non-state, as shown in the video. So there is no state to serve capital accumulation. "Capitalism didn't come about because a bunch of entrepreneurs had great ideas." Yes it did. "A lot of state action was involved," Unfortunately. "the enclosure acts which dispossessed people of their lands, outlawing and brutal repression of strike action, literally blasting open markets with military might, and of course a lot of slavery to help boost sugar and cotton profits." Yes, all those things are bad. Stealing private property is wrong. Sending in the state police or military forces to defeat strikers is wrong. Using state military forces to blast open markets (imperialism) is wrong. Capitalism is anti-slavery, since slaves are not free private citizens and cannot buy things on the free market. This is why Britain (capitalist) went about in the 1700 and 1800s trying to end the slave trade. If you have slaves, you do not have capitalism. This is why capitalism accelerated the downfall of serfdom and slavery. So I'm glad we are in agreement - state involvement in the economy is bad. "The private sector as we understand it does not, indeed cannot exist without the state." The only reason I made this video is because a state told me too....... oh wait. "Furthermore, you still mistake socialisation for socialism. Your desired political and economic outcomes would require extensive socialisation to make people all think as you want them to think in order for things to be, as you currently see them, natural. So then, I guess you're a Socialist." I have no desired political outcome - I'm anti-political (politics is "of the city"/state, and I am anti-state). I have a favorable view of capitalism because if benefits the workers. I am a worker, and so I want to worker hard and earn hard, and keep the profits of my earnings for myself, and not be forced to hand them over to other people (socialists and states). I don't want people to think the same. I want them to be fully informed before they decide that the answer to the current problems caused by the state is a different state with more power (totalitarianism) rather than freeing up the workers and allowing them to actually do their jobs without government chains, red tape and theft.
    13
  2738. Most of the casual Socialists are just fools, led by liars out to gain power.
    13
  2739. You were first!
    13
  2740. Yes, it's a good book
    13
  2741. Yes, and I cover this stuff in the video
    13
  2742. Interesting! What country is that?
    13
  2743. Those who don't learn from history...
    13
  2744. And now you know why I say things ten times over in my videos - because I've already had to fight off Wehraboos, Holocaust-deniers, Victor-Suvorov supporters, and a bunch of people calling me communist, fascist, anti-American, anti-German, anti-British (lol), anti-Russian, and a host of others as well.
    13
  2745. "The Marxist Soviet Union saved millions of Jews from the Nazis." After killing Jews during the Revolution, as I mentioned during the Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 The rest of what you said was answered in the video: Marx hated Capitalism because he thought it was Jewish.
    13
  2746. Back in the 19th Century, if the children didn't work, they would starve. That's why their parents sent them to work because they had no other choice. The economy was a lot more primitive back then, having only just recently been freed from serfdom thanks to classic (right-wing) liberalism. The State could only abolish child labour when the vast majority of children were already no longer working because capitalism had by that point pulled most of society out of the abject poverty of the previous statism.
    13
  2747. Yeah I only noticed when I was doing the subtitles but it was too late to go back, correct and rerender.
    13
  2748. It's a good map though. My favourite from the original COD
    13
  2749.  @SergeantAradir  "Am i missing something here or are there untold stories of mass-murders and extremly violent oppression by cops in the UK i have missed?" Critical Race Theory is racist indoctrination on very similar lines to the Nazi racist theories. The police in the UK have now fully embraced this Critical Race Theory as well as "Social Justice". They are but one step away from doing what Reserve Police Battalion 101 did... Google the concept of the "boiling frog effect". Edit: And plenty of people have been violently oppressed by cops in the UK. The lamestream media isn't telling you about the protests that have been crushed recently.
    13
  2750. I couldn't have come up with this myself without looking at a combination of different sources - James Lindsay's lectures on Gnosticism, actual National Socialist literature, and then Carlos Videla's book (which may also be a Nazi book, I can't tell). So if I hadn't gone down this route of trying to figure out roots of National Socialist ideology, there's no way I would have found this either. It seems that a lot of the answers to the questions we have about the stuff in WW2 aren't answered on the battlefield. They're not answered logically. It lies in the ideology.
    13
  2751. Yeah, I forgot. I knew this, but it's just easier for me to say the V when reading it as an English speaker.
    13
  2752. "I live in Iran" Oh wow, maybe I should be the one supporting you Edit: not having a go at your country, I just know it's not the richest place on Earth
    13
  2753. What do you mean by "robo brain"? I never said that. And again, we are biological creatures, but since we are able to conceptualise, we are separated from the animals. Outside of car crashes and the like, we do not rely on our "instincts". You are presenting a empiricist or an ideological (idealist) argument that simply denies the human mind. If all you do is 'instictually' react to things, I feel sorry for you. You might be a dog, or a feral child, but the rest of us use our brains, and I would encourage you to do so too. Problem solving is not merely "instincts", nor "mechanical processes", nor "animal spirits".
    13
  2754. "The new graphics features really help." I'm glad you noticed the improvement! Figured a few things out behind the scenes, which I won't bore you with the technical details, but it makes things a lot easier. And I've just discovered a new way of doing things, and it should (once I get a bit more used to it) allow a few new battle animations to happen, which I'm excited to try out :)
    13
  2755. @Светлин Цолов - at some point I intend to do a follow-up to the Yugoslavian video I did recently on the Chetniks. Not sure when that will be though
    13
  2756. We're heading for Stalingrad (Stalingrad) And still we stand tall
    13
  2757. Glad to hear! Some people aren't as patient as you are though, sadly :)
    13
  2758. Which is actually against the consensus of practically every historian! I had to create the counter argument myself (that Crüwell could be to blame because of Totensonntag and not admitting he's messed up to Rommel) simply because none of the sources I used defended Rommel here. I do think you can make a compelling argument for either case though, and Rommel definitely acted impulsively - although, the dash may have worked if Auchinleck hadn't been watching over Cunningham like an Auk (pun intended).
    13
  2759. Yes, it's the same Greg Hallett who thinks he's the rightful king of England
    13
  2760. @Jose' Petersen  The reason why is because all the videos either say "TIK" or "TIK history" or "TIKhistory" already, so it's a simple transition. I did consider "TIKstory" and "TIKenomics" though. And I was tempted to call it "TIKhead" but thought I'd better not 😂
    13
  2761. I wish I knew the context of that picture, because Goebbels seems to be enjoying himself, so I'm not sure why Hitler isn't
    13
  2762. Sometimes you have to think outside the box. It was no doubt very bad for Sixth Army's soldiers, but let's not forget the many other encirclements that happened during this war, and how many other people were starved. Puts things into perspective. Hope your sentry duty goes well :)
    13
  2763. And I didn't mention a lot of stuff because I knew it would be too much for YouTube Inc... Terrible stuff
    13
  2764. Exactly! It's hypocritical to say the least, and yet the pro-Nazi camp will defend their narrative, and say that any other narrative is unthinking "propaganda"... Insanity
    13
  2765. You did last 25 days though!
    13
  2766. Read the "Vampire Economy" by Reimann written in 1939 (free pdf online). That's a good start, as it shows that there's a problem with the "it was capitalism narrative". But I will do a follow up video at some point with all the proof you need.
    13
  2767. Looks like he's taken his video down (the one copying mine). And I didn't even have to report it. The power of the free market compelled him!
    13
  2768.  @venerable9077  Thank you sir! I'm grateful, and I hope nobody else gets deceived by this guy
    13
  2769.  @ep5019  British and Empire lives, perhaps. But the casualties on continental Europe (especially the USSR) would have been far worse. This is why I'm torn on the issue of whether Churchill did the right thing regarding staying in the war or not. I don't think there's a clear right or wrong decision.
    13
  2770. First!
    13
  2771.  Deejii Varissuo  That was actually from James Lindsay, so I'm not sure where exactly Plato said that. The only book of Plato's I've read was the Republic and I don't think he mentions it there.
    13
  2772. Exactly. They're suppressing it for a reason
    13
  2773.  @zxbzxbzxb1  That's because the Conservatives are left wing, as I've previously explained (see 12:08 onwards of this video https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY )
    13
  2774. I don't mind if you disagree, so long as you're looking at things from all angles :)
    13
  2775. Really? I'm surprised by this response. What's the reason why?
    13
  2776. That was the impression I got from Gilmour's book (and the original question) - that Swedes feel ashamed about WW2, and that there's varying interpretations... I'd recommend Gilmour's book for anyone interested in this topic because he makes a good case for why they did what they did
    13
  2777. You're welcome! Took me practically the whole week to put it all together, but a lot of people requested it, and some even refused to watch the stand alone episodes because they wanted it all in one go
    13
  2778. Awesome! I wish I could go fully zero carb/sugar (can't for a few practical reasons at the moment...) but yeah it's absolutely the correct diet to be on
    12
  2779. That's absolutely not what I said at all. You're putting words in my mouth.
    12
  2780. Yes, see pinned comment
    12
  2781. To be fair, a lot of what I do comes from the books themselves. I do use primary sources here and there (like Kesselring's memoirs, or Mein Kampf, or various other sources) but the majority is in the books. This is, perhaps, why I need to dive more into archives, or maybe even get someone to do that on my behalf...
    12
  2782. I hadn't noticed that! I'll let Terri know she's fired 😂
    12
  2783. Sadly, this was pre-Halder
    12
  2784. It's not about "winning" a "debate", it's about being objectively accurate. If people won't listen to logic and reason, that's on them, not me. But I refuse to lie to myself or my audience about history, and prefer to make logical, evidence-based arguments, rather than rely on heresay, feelings and what one issue of a British Keynesian magazine said in the 1940s.
    12
  2785. That's why I said it was "stupid" and didn't want to get into it... I guess I'll have to at some point
    12
  2786. This was short. I did explain Mussolini's entire political career and what Fascism was. That's not a 5 minute-history, and anyone who attempts that will likely misinform their viewers.
    12
  2787. @Nukclear - it only got restricted about 1 hour after release
    12
  2788. "A country where landowners, industrials, and clergymen hold a big fraction of political power cannot be called socialist." Unless they are the state. "State control of the means of production doesn't mean worker's control of the means of production." Yes, that's what I've been saying. Class control is the Marxist version of socialism. "By this definition, not even the Stalinist or Leninist regimes can be called socialist, because it wasn't the workers or the peasants who held control of the factories and the farms (even though both regimes wanted to boast that for propagandistic purposes)." Because socialism is fought in the name of the poor, against the middle class, for the benefit of the new rich and powerful. Socialism was never about the poor worker. It is a way to create a two-tier society, and always was. So you'll never have a socialist society which has the peasants and workers in control of the factories and farms, because that would be capitalism.
    12
  2789. "TIK is a Ancap. Anything is socialism for him." I'm not an Ancap. Socialism is the socialization of the means of production.
    12
  2790. The National Health Service is socialized healthcare. If you think it's private capitalism, you should rethink.
    12
  2791. Yeah, I wish! I think the real Elon Musk wouldn't be asking questions about Hitler's oil problems, or Göring's lies
    12
  2792. "This might cause that YT algoritms, can block this video in ... Germany xD" Actually, unlike many of my videos, this video has been accepted for full-monetization :/ makes absolutely no sense
    12
  2793. I've decided to pin your comment so that people can see my response to it.
    12
  2794. @MITCH - the next is Rommel's Second Offensive in the January of 1942, prior to Gazala
    12
  2795. I actually took a year of English at university thinking it was more applicable for a job (which is probably is). But about 2/3 of the way through I realised I'd made a horrible mistake when the English teacher basically said "you can argue anything in English - Jane Eyre is about witches because..." and then talked a load of rubbish. I walked straight out of that class and straight to the history department to enquire if they were also talking out their behinds. Turns out they weren't, so took it the next year. Probably the second biggest mistake in my entire life not going for history and wasting a year. But then, the history degree hasn't done me any good career-wise either so :(
    12
  2796. You're correct in a lot of ways. The Western Front really was a mopping up operation compared to the Eastern Front, and this battle didn't change the war too much. However, the point of this is that the historiography of this battle is dominated by authors who are deliberately withholding information in order to blame the wrong people. If you watch the film A Bridge Too Far (which is based on the book by the same name), you'll come to a completely different conclusion to what I did here. That's what makes this battle so interesting, especially since it's a multi-national operation, so people get really passionate about it. I have tried to remain balanced, but technically I'm biased by being British (although, as I said in the video, if you blame Browning, Gavin or both, you're probably correct).
    12
  2797. Rabh, yes I did. I've been annihilating Marxists in the comment sections with the resent research I've been doing on the topic. In fact, two of them were so upset after our little chats that they deleted their own comments because they couldn't face the evidence (so they resorted to calling me names which, as I pointed out, was an admission that they'd lost the argument). You see, I actually took the counterarguments and continued to do more research, and actually looked into the claims that the Marxists were making. Turns out that people have big misconceptions about Nazi philosophy, Nazi economy ("privatisation" being the big one), and of socialism itself. Their definition of socialism varies considerably - which is typical, since most refuse to accept that it has anything to do with the state (which is the definition). Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). To say it is a "stateless society" which some Marxists are claiming is exactly the opposite of what it is. I promised my Patreons I would leave the topic for a while. But I vowed to return when I have overwhelming evidence to prove to the Marxist and Nazi denialists that WW2 and the Holocaust actually happened. (Since without Hitler's socialism, neither WW2 nor the Holocaust could happen.) Overall though, I don't like people who deliberately distort history for their twisted beliefs. And, after the hate from those two videos plus the previous denialist comments on my channel, I'm now intent on crushing Denialists and Distorians alike.
    12
  2798. I'd imagine mortars are also easier and quicker to move around than artillery?
    12
  2799. I disagree. I do think the Germans have very good tanks. Their tanks are armed with 50mm and 75mm guns. These were more capable than most of the tanks they were going up against, giving them an advantage in the desert war, and in the East (early war at least). But the point of the video is revealed towards the end, which I can tell you didn't get to :)
    12
  2800. Really? I think it's one of my worst! 😂
    12
  2801. Good pro-Clark and Lucas argument. Thank you
    12
  2802. The official Soviet line is propaganda in this case. The whole event was bigged up to make Pavlov and 24 heroes seem more amazing than they already were. Telling a few fibs, twisting a few facts, and suddenly you've got a completely different story than what actually happened, and it's this new story that's spread in order to bolster the morale of the nation. That, to me, is propaganda.
    12
  2803. All sources are biased. That's why you have to use as many as possible, from all sides. German sources are unreliable, just like Soviet sources. They're not MORE unreliable, but about the same. So in order for us to get an accurate picture, we need to look at both German and Soviet sources. If we don't (which historians haven't until recently) we won't be able to get an accurate picture of what happened.
    12
  2804.  @yw1971  Samaan talks about that too in the book, and I talk about Weikart in the video. Probably best to just purchase Samaan rather than Weikart since Samaan's argument is actually better, and Weikart was refuted by Richards as I explained.
    12
  2805. It is depressing. To me, politics is the problem, whereas freedom from politics is the cure. Sadly, most people seem to be completely won over to the idea that the State is God, and even getting them to question that idea is incredibly difficult.
    12
  2806. After Gazala I may take a week off to go see my sister, who's just had a baby. But yes, apart from bereavement and that time I burnt out and stopped for a couple weeks, I've not had a proper holiday since 2015.
    12
  2807.  @LoganLS0  Tribes are, by definition, a state. The word "state" means "a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government". The Comanche had that. Yes, they don't resemble a modern state, but they were a state in and of themselves. I've been over the definition of the word "state" (and briefly mentioned tribes) here in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    12
  2808. No, but that's a good idea. I have thought of something else relating to Stalingrad that probably needs to be done, but I'll make a video on that
    12
  2809. I'm honestly trying to get through to people, but if I'm honest, even my patience is wearing thin... I just hope that this video actually does reach some people, and they let me know that it did, because I need to know what works and doesn't work, and whether I have a chance of getting through to people
    12
  2810. For a while I wasn't sure, because the vocal minority distort things. It's hard to know if the dislikes on a video come from your own audience, or from somewhere else (like 4chan or Reddit, as they have in the past). I may talk about this in a quick non-Monday follow-up video because I think people need to be aware that it's not easy to judge.
    12
  2811.  @thedj3319  But again, even if we accept your idea (which I don't) socialism has nothing to do with class. So it's irrelevant. Marxism might care about class, but socialism doesn't. HITLER WASN'T A MARXIST SOCIALIST, HE WAS A SOCIALIST. Please LISTEN to what I'm saying.
    12
  2812. Neither Jewish nor a communist, so you're a bit off the mark there.
    12
  2813. "That Nazism has it's roots in Liberalism" How's he defining "liberalism" here? Old fashioned liberalism, or new liberalism? - "it's embrace of competition and natural selection applied to human activities." As I explained in the Hitler's Socialism video, this aspect lies at the heart of the fundamental flaw in National Socialism. Hitler was very much about the race (group), but also believed in natural selection (individuals). Well, that's a contradiction. If you have individuals competing against each other, then you cannot have a race that's working together for the race. But Hitler just ignored that contradiction since he couldn't solve it (as Zitelmann explains). Thus, to say that this collectivist ideology was all about "competition" because Hitler slapped the idea of natural selection onto the side of Socialism is the incorrect way to view National Socialism. - "That Hitler and Mein Kampf are minor elements of Nazi doctrine that people focus way too much on" Which is exactly what me and Zitelmann have said. This is why it's vital to use Mein Kampf, his second book, his speeches, his letters, his table talks, what others wrote about him, and a multitude of all sources. That's why I often try to provide multiple sources to get my points across (although sometimes it's just not possible). - "That modern managerial techniques have their roots in Nazi hierarchical organization" Yes, Lord Baron Keynes even based his economic model off of the National Socialist economy, and borrowed heavily from the works of Nazi economists. - Nonetheless, I will read what he wrote and see if any of it has merit. Cheers!
    12
  2814. Zitelmann discusses these heavily in his book, and pairs the talks with Hitler's speeches and Mein Kampf etc to see if it all matches up.
    12
  2815. I don't know if it is a 'nice explanation'... It was certainly something! 😂
    12
  2816. "This isn't the content that people are donating for." A lot of my supporters are saying they want this content. But still, my editor is working on Stalingrad, and I'm rushed off my feet with everything, so it's not like I'm not trying here.
    12
  2817. The more exclamation marks you use, the more refuted your opponent will become!!!!!!
    12
  2818.  @przemekkozlowski7835  Given the history of Poland during WW2 and subsequent Cold War era, t's understandable why you would be taught that. This comment thread shows how different perspectives, biases and agendas can creep into history, and why it's important that we consider all angles before coming to any conclusions.
    12
  2819.  @tytlersbicycle  Fair enough. However, I would argue that, since 95% of Germans were Christian, he had to make himself out to be Christian in order to get them on side. If he had come out saying he was into Odinism, he wouldn't have stood a chance of getting elected.
    12
  2820. Yeah, I messed up because I've got Stalingrad living rent-free in my head
    12
  2821. In answer to your questions - 1. yes, you can absolutely argue that. The primary purpose of this video (or any of my videos) is to get people to rethink the commonly held beliefs about the events by reframing them or showing parallels. Clearly, the USA "purges" weren't anywhere near as bad as the USSR's, and clearly there were different circumstances in which the USA and the USSR fought during WW2. But I wanted to show that the idea that the removal of officers by itself was a fundamentally bad thing, may not be correct. 2. I have no idea about the French Army. France 1940 is something I want to get to eventually, but I've been concentrating elsewhere. However, I suspect that you could be right that the French (and British) Armies suffered from outdated mindsets as a result of not "purging" their officers (assuiming that a purge didn't happen, which I don't think it did). The British Army's tank corps was definitely stuck in the 'cavalry' mindset during the North African Campaign, as my recent Crusader videos show, and some historians (noteably Butler) have suggested that the reason for the early British defeats was because of their out-of-date minded officers. It stands to reason then that a pre-war purge may have done the British Army some good.
    12
  2822. Thank you for your comment. You could be correct that TV does pick and choose which battles get all the attention. However, I've also seen this in the books too. There isn't really one all-encompassing book on the North African Campaign. Pitt's trilogy is the only one that comes close (although the British official history does too, but that's 4 volumes). Some of the books miss out Brevity, gloss over Battleaxe and Crusader... or just refer to Crusader as a 'setback' for Rommel. I'm not sure why. But I agree that it has produced a slanted view of history. And this is just on the North African Campaign - often seen as the 'sideshow' to the main events of WW2.
    12
  2823. "Fall in line or it's Gulag Time" - amazing! I'm liberating that :D
    12
  2824. I suspect that the only way the Soviets would surrender completely is after a coup that removes Stalin. And I also suspect that's the main thing he was paranoid about in the early part of the war, which is why he only starts to trust some of his generals after he knows the Germans are on the back foot (at the conclusion of Fall Blau, during the Battle of Stalingrad, and before Uranus - as I discussed in my Fall Blau video https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY ) As far as your other questions, I've no idea. I couldn't guess who would overthrow Stalin or when would happen after that.
    12
  2825. Exactly, which is why I've explained that in the video. However, I'd also say it's also come about because the Soviet Union didn't grant access to their archives until the 1990's (and apparently they've closed a lot of them up again). So, while the Cold War and German racism played their part, it was also partly self inflicted.
    12
  2826. I wouldn't say we're over it yet, considering things are heating up at the moment.
    12
  2827. "Hello. I just wanted to ask: If the "stick to tanks" group did not exist, would you have made your in dept economical, and political videos?" Yes. Absolutely yes. I cannot stress this enough. They have significantly held me back and delayed me from working on and publishing videos on several critical economic and political topics which could have made a massive difference to the way that people see the war, the inter-war period, and the post-war period as well as modern day too. It's not been a waste of time, but fighting in the trenches over the Hitler's Socialism issue has caused a needless stalemate that could have been avoided had the opposition simply accepted (or even listened to) the evidence. Because they point blank refuse to do so, I've now concluded to proceed regardless. So even though I'll have the trolls telling everyone to ignore what I'm saying, I've realised that they are just fanatics who need to be ignored, and it's the rest of you who will benefit from what's coming in the future. I can confirm that I have been working on things behind the scenes... Usually when I need a break, rather than have a day off, I just work on long-term topics that I'm passionate about. There is one such big topic that I'm building up to right now.
    12
  2828. There's no reason why he couldn't still be a hero. Most heroes have a character arc. If they were just flawless all the way through a story, they would be boring.
    12
  2829. I'm hopefully going to have a day off at some point during this season... probably Christmas Day :D
    12
  2830. Then why wasn't Hitler made Man of the Year in 1940 or 1941?
    12
  2831. The Germans were using anti-tank guns to take out tanks, whereas the British at this stage were using tanks to take out tanks. And it was just a waste of tanks. This is why infantry should attack AT guns with artillery support (as AT gun suppression). And why anti-tank guns and tanks should work together too in defence, with infantry and artillery. The British simply hadn't grasped this in 1941.
    12
  2832. Well, he's not wrong in the sense that you want to disperse your tank strength too much. But by the same token, the lesson learnt from the early battles was that you don't want tank-heavy units. Nobody was saying a panzer division shouldn't have battalions of tanks in them. The question was, how many was the right balance?
    12
  2833. It's related to why Stalin didn't like it when his troops got encircled. He was paranoid that facts about the West might find their way to the Soviet people, telling them that life outside the Soviet Union was much better than their Socialist overlords had been saying it was, proving that Socialism doesn't work. When non-Soviet people entered the Soviet Union, they were only allowed into certain areas, and those areas would be prepared in advance to look better than they were, and the Soviet people coming into contact with Westerners would be fed better for a while too. It was all for show. Obviously, the Soviets couldn't make the entire Soviet Union look better than it was already, so they refused to allow non-Soviet troops on their soil.
    12
  2834. Now I feel bad that I didn't talk more about that particular action.
    12
  2835. Lol. Take a heart
    12
  2836. Thank you sir! I have put a lot of research into this particular video / topic
    12
  2837. @Jules Vallez - explain why. What difference does it make if it's listed in the video itself or the pinned comment.
    12
  2838. First! Well done!
    12
  2839. @Ricky Torres, I'm "chill", but I'm also in agreement with Hermit Oldguy. Theft is immoral, and that's exactly what Socialism wants - to steal from the "Bourgeoisie", and when they put up a fight, kill or enslave them. This is why socialism (historically) leads to violence. BUT I think the problem is that most socialists either feel like "capitalism" is oppressing them or stealing from them (it's not, but they think it is because they don't understand that trade is not stealing), and so they feel entitled to steal and murder. They're blinded by their anger. The good news is that, when you sit down and talk it through with them and explain the logic of what they're saying, the whole theory starts to come apart. It's not a 'nice' theory, and the lies they've been told "workers should get a fair wage" are hard to break unless you know how. ("How is 100% taxation a 'fair wage'?" and "if a worker doesn't think he's getting paid enough, or doesn't like his job, he's free to leave it at any time and get a better job") The bad news is that a lof of people don't listen, or don't think things through when they do listen. Economics is also very a complicated topic so it's hard to explain complexity simply. This is why socialism has the advantage in recruiting people because it's not based on economics, but utopian dreams.
    12
  2840. "Simply put, private ownership is explicitly rejected by Marx and Engels as being the defining feature of capitalism." Thank you for pointing this out, because this is interesting and I'm going to have to think this over and figure out why he would think that. I know this is going to sound like it, but what I'm about to say is not me having a dig at you or Marxists in general, it's more stating an observation I've made recently. I have honestly been wondering if anything Marx said was correct, or not contradicted by something else he/Engels said elsewhere, or if the logic doesn't always end in knots. As a big example of what I mean, they wanted a state-less (the state would "die" after it was created) and class-less society... which is anarcho-capitalism. Since without state control (group), you have private control (non-group), which is capitalism. Capitalism without a state is anarcho-capitalism. Now you might say it would be more anarcho-syndicalism... but a syndicate is a group. In anarchy, you don't have a group. So it's not socialism/syndicalism at all. And don't get me started on the Labour Theory of Value (which was outdated in Marx's time). My interpretation of Marxism is that it was purely designed to make the world burn, because they despised the world. It wasn't designed to create a new functioning society, but one which would divide and divide over and over in a constant revolution.... because they wanted to see the world burn. This is why even Lenin had to drop Marxist economics when he got into power. Marx/Engels and co were social-revolutionaries, not economists. And that's what mattered. Simple ideas like "steal from the rich!" are promoted, encouraging people to get angry with their fellow man, and choose violence (theft) over cooperation (trade). Thus, what mattered more was the revolution, not the economics. And this is exactly the conclusion Lenin came to prior to power, and why he so despised Bernstein when he realised Marxist economics didn't work. But this is just my current intepretation. I haven't solidified this yet.
    12
  2841. "@TIK Name a "free market economy" in the 1930s, in the wake of The Great Depression nearly every Capitalist market had major reforms which involved an incredible amount of reform." I can't, because there wasn't any. Some were more capitalist than others, some were more socialist than others. The closest any country has been to capitalism was Britain in the 1880s. But that didn't last because the Liberal Party became more socialist as time went on.
    12
  2842. "With this many details normal documentaries sound like propaganda to me now." Well, I like to think I've raised the bar a little :) but I would still encourage you not to take my word for everything and do your own reading/research. While I may not intend to spout propaganda, there's no way to know if I've been wrongly influenced by biased sources to come to the wrong conclusions, or just generally make mistakes. I'm human and certainly not perfect. So use my videos as a intro or a visualization of the topics, and seek new perspectives and information elsewhere. Comparing all angles will give you the best understanding.
    12
  2843. It's not a joke, they genuinely did lose a Grant tank from brewing tea
    12
  2844. I could do. But to avoid copyright, I also had to make the music myself, which wasn't the best, and it was also time consuming to make and add into the video. So I don't know.
    12
  2845. In answer to point 1, you may as well not read any history then, since you weren't there either and therefore could never understand it. That point also undermines the rest of your argument, since how do you know I wasn't right since you weren't there. Your point 2 is also ridiculous. You're suggesting that evidence and facts are irrelevant. You're rejecting the scientific method, which leaves you with interpretation alone. That's a terrible way to do history, and is known as Postmodernism. It's the same theory the Marxists, socialists, and National Socialists use to deny certain events in history, like the Holocaust, the Holodomor, and the definition of the word "socialism". Onto point 3. This campaign was confusing, but orders are orders. Pienaar deliberately misinterpreted his orders several times. That's not coincidental. Onto point 4. If you bother to watch the video, you'd know I didn't just use those maps, troop movements, and strengths, nor did I only use post-action concepts. We have contemporary evidence from within the battle. Norrie even questioned Pienaar's inaction during the battle - we have this, and I mentioned it in the video. Point 5. Again, I said this in the video. We know his motivations - he didn't want his Brigade to suffer casualties - however that's not the bit we're discussing. If you want to argue that Pienaar was right to disobey orders, fine, but you cannot distort evidence and pretend units were in the way when they weren't, as Hamilton does. Pienaar could have moved north, but he didn't. That is fact, as I outlined in the video. And your point 6 makes no sense, since the British armour was waiting for Pienaar to move up, not the other way around.
    12
  2846. My gift to everyone :)
    12
  2847. I'm curious now. Which country are you from? It's not good when political agendas dictate history. Very Orwellian
    12
  2848. Correct!
    12
  2849. You're famous! Also, I thought your original comment was worth highlighting anyway
    12
  2850. I might be doing an 'extra' video at some point soon which is economics related. But I've also begun the script for another one that economics-history too, so they are coming
    12
  2851. Nice theory on the Great Depression. Have you read Rothbard's book on the subject?
    12
  2852. This is an objective view. If you fail to use the evidence and basically make stuff up, you're writing fiction, not history.
    12
  2853. What's that? I didn't say not to read Irving in any part of this video? Such a shame your attention span is zero otherwise you may have learnt something today, or ever. And no, I'm not a "juice". In fact, I constantly question the traditional narrative of WW2, which is why I also have a video explaining why Hitler's Socialism was actually Socialism, using 107 sources, 350 direct references, plus more notes and quotes and salty tears in the comments from all the Marxist Socialists and National Socialists who don't like the fact that I tear their ideologies apart doing so. Enjoy https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    12
  2854. Yes, it was useful there (and I put a few words on the screen saying that too). And it will be useful in a few other areas as well. But I meant that it's use overall wasn't great. 14th Panzer Division had no problem smashing through the defenses just north of Abganerovo (before being counterattacked). And most of the rest of the line was simply bypassed later in both the north and the south, as we will see in the future. So yes, it had an impact, but I'd say only minor in the grand scheme of things.
    12
  2855. I think you need to get some better sources.
    12
  2856. And we've not even got to the city yet ;)
    12
  2857. That would be a good series to do. Might want to return to the North African Campaign first though
    12
  2858. Thank you sir! (A few people said it a couple videos back, but the channel only passed it last month)
    12
  2859. "If the Soviets wanted to conquer Finland, they'd have done so in 1940." They tried and failed. That was what the Winter War was about.
    12
  2860. I'm sorry to disappoint you :)
    12
  2861. This is the problem. The title of the next video may lead to some people shouting me down too... that said, you agree, Glantz came to this conclusion, and so does the Official German History, so this is a valid argument. Just because someone has a cult following doesn't mean he's 100% always right. In fact, I'd say that there's more reason to find fault with someone who presents themselves as 'perfect' than if someone admits their own mistakes and flaws.
    12
  2862. It's a great suggestion! I'll think about it
    12
  2863. If you haven't got "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly, I would recommend that. It doesn't talk about the domestic economy a lot, but shows how the National Socialist State robbed the rest of Europe of their resources in order to fund the social programs of the Third Reich.
    12
  2864. Yeah, it will definitely trigger some people. Why can't we have a nice historical debate?? :(
    12
  2865. Don't worry Dominik, we will see exactly how "strong" those arguments are in a future video. The point to take away from this video is that Suvorov backs up his argument by relying on opinions written many years later. And the evidence he does provide doesn't hold up to close scrutiny, just like what Keitel was saying in his memoirs.
    12
  2866. Wait wait wait... You weren't really into history, but my videos have made you want to look into it more??? Wow, you've just made my day! This is exactly what I want - more people who aren't into history, getting interested in it. You saying you weren't really into it, but are now, thanks to my videos, is just brilliant. I'm so glad to hear this, so thanks for your comment Plaskiz. Go out there and read more, watch more, and comment more. I want to hear your opinions too :)
    12
  2867. I actually craving a bit of a break from the Stalingrad videos right now... but if I do take a quick break from them, I'll do the next Battlestorm video in the North African Campaign. I really want to get to Gazala and then El Alamein
    12
  2868. The term "conspiracy theory" itself is Newspeak, designed to prevent you from thinking for yourself and questioning the mainstream narrative. But is this really the case? Is what I said not also a conspiracy theory? ;)
    12
  2869. Your granny gave you good advice :) They say in the army that a map is only as good as the day it was made. Well, a history book is only as good as the day it was written. This video will no doubt be outdated in the future, and our (yours and mine) current knowledge of WW2 will be outdated if we don't continue to search, read, watch, and learn. History is a constantly evolving process so we have to keep at it, always
    12
  2870. You might need a week, not a day! We've not even reached the city yet and we're over 7 hours of video content
    12
  2871. Thank you! And yes, the channel got a boost recently thanks to several events: 75th anniversary of VE Day, Barbarossa Day (today), and more... Plus, some of my recent videos did quite well as well. It seems more people are (finally) discovering the channel
    12
  2872. A doctor must understand the disease in order to cure it.
    12
  2873. Yes, there's two sides to the story. Pienaar witnessed the destruction of 5th South African Brigade and didn't want his own brigade getting wiped out too. However, the flip side is that his (and others) insubordination was tolerated during Auchinleck's era. For all his faults, Montgomery was able to keep his subordinate commanders in line and turn them into an effective team, which previous British generals (except O'Connor) had failed to do.
    12
  2874. Did I say it was a division? I thought I said it was part of 100th Jäger Division, but that it was a regiment?
    12
  2875.  @Saimlordy  I've just checked the "spam" folder, but your comments aren't in there, so yes, YouTube has auto deleted them. Remove any links and swear words (if there are any) and try to post only a few at a time.
    12
  2876. Apparently he didn't want to drag around a full bag of grenades
    12
  2877. No, the Germans didn't surround as many Soviets as they did in 1941. Blau was a complete disaster. Most of the prisoners taken in 1942 actually came before Blau even started, or at its very beginning. Once it was a week or two old, Blau was basically a hunt to try and find something to kill - and the Germans failed to find anything substantial until they entered the Caucasus, and until they were stopped at the Don. I actually mentioned this in the video.
    12
  2878. Social = socialism, which you already should know what I think about that. And I've covered democracy a few times. Democracy is a scam to make you believe that you have power, when in reality you're giving power over to your rulers, who then want to implement one variant of socialism or another.
    12
  2879. You're welcome! No idea if it will stand up in the long-term, and there's already been some counters, but it's worth thinking about :)
    12
  2880. I thought that too! My dad got me that board, so I'll direct all complaints to him 😂
    12
  2881. I would also recommend Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which I think knocks the ball out of the park. It's available for free here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression
    12
  2882.  @QuizmasterLaw  But again, you've avoided my question. Why did the king declare an official weight, or an official coinage? Was that because metals and coins were already in existence? That's why he could make an official coin, because the market had already decided that gold and silver had value, and the "price" of things evolved from barter. This all happened through the natural power of the free market. The king then made his own coinage afterwards.
    12
  2883. I guess you collect other silver too?
    12
  2884. True, but when the coins are made of base metals, you'd need a lot to make it worth melting them down. Thanks to the recent economic issues, the price of copper went up by 300%, and the same with other metals, which is probably why they've begun to disappear because it may now be worth it to melt them down. It's also more difficult to pay for things with pennies, since the price of things have gone up, making pennies less valuable. I actually have a small stack of pennies on my desk simply because they're not worth carrying in my pocket when I go to the shops. I don't want to be stood there counting out all the pennies and holding up the queue!
    12
  2885. No. It's not worth my time.
    12
  2886. I'm also hoping for an answer because I honestly don't know.
    12
  2887. 😂
    12
  2888. Haha good luck with that. I hope he's not like the Marxists in the comments of this video, who dismiss everything - the evidence, the sources, the fact that pigs don't fly...
    12
  2889. It's in support of a government, just not a national government this time. (Also, Nazism wasn't Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko )
    12
  2890. "But if they only have 25% of the total guns they should have doesn't that mean that each of those actually has 30% of the ammo it should have?" Possibly. But the ammunition is listed as the "percentage of required". So it could be that they only had 25% of the ammunition for 7.5% of the guns. Unfortunately it's not specified in the source. "Also, what does it actually mean when you say 100% of the ammunition they need?" Good question, and again it's not specified in the source I have. It comes from Glantz who's getting it from the original Soviet source. If you don't trust the want to include the ammunition, probably best to not factor in the ammunition. This is a good example of why you should always be willing to change your mind when presented with information. I'm going to trust the source until a better source or a new explanation gives us the correct information. The source in question is (Glantz, D. "Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War." University Press of Kansas, 1998.) if you want to double check.
    12
  2891. FIRST!
    12
  2892. Also, it's difficult to boil huge topics into 10 minutes... but it is possible in some instances
    12
  2893. Bad counterargument.
    12
  2894. Yes, Britain absolutely needed the USA. There's no denying that ;)
    12
  2895. Yes I agree. I've seen it so many times in the comments where we'll be trying to have a conversation only for it to get detailed by a bunch of nonsense talkers. From now on, I'm not going to tolerate such behaviour.
    12
  2896. I didn't know that. Thank you for the information. Sounds like the Americans want a modern version of the DAF. By the way, someone recommended your content to me as a way to understand Third Positionism more. I'm currently watching another creator on this topic first, but I intend to watch some of your videos in the near future.
    12
  2897. Welcome aboard 👍
    12
  2898. Well, I hope it didn't disappoint!
    12
  2899. Thank you Leviathan! It does feel a bit like Copernicus trying to prove that the Earth went around the sun... people are rejecting it, and the hate is completely uncalled for. But truth is truth, and I can't back down from what is clearly right. I'll admit, I haven't played Close Combat in a while now. It's still a great game, I'm just too busy reading, studying, editing and animating to settle down and play it. Maybe next time I take a break I will play it again. Cheers!
    12
  2900. Thank you for the recommendation! Pritt Buttar did a good job with "Between Giants", so I'm now hopeful he did a decent history of the UPA
    12
  2901. Yes, there's literally no sources on this topic in English, although there are some in German (which I couldn't read). So I'm sort of glad I couldn't go into detail about it anyway. That said, the main source ("Victims, Heroes, Survivors") is the best I saw.
    12
  2902. Beevor's "Berlin" is full of examples, but it gives the wrong impression because you're only reading what the Soviets did at the end of the war, not what the Germans did throughout the war in numerous other countries. I'm not excusing either side, just trying to balance it. Beevor's bias is blatant in both his Stalingrad and Berlin books. Another heavy read is about the Nanjing during WW2. Not for the faint-hearted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_Massacre
    12
  2903. Another idiot who didn't watch the video.
    12
  2904. I only listed the one because it was the best. I used more in the video... which you didn't watch.
    12
  2905. What about when the SS dragged them by their hair into the brothels?
    12
  2906. Western R's were included in the 1.4 to 1.9 million number.
    12
  2907. I mean... that's how you say his name... right?
    12
  2908.  a dalek  yes, although that doesn't fully excuse them because many actively participated in the crimes
    12
  2909. Scream louder!
    12
  2910. I release videos at 5pm on Mondays, and today's video (Tuesday) will be out at 5pm GMT. So, in another half an hour
    12
  2911. "Socialism isn't anti semitic. Marx's background was Jewish. He wasn't anti semitic." Everything you said here is a lie. Karl Marx never practiced Judaism, and he was incredibly anti-semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    12
  2912. Because your religion says so. Well done for complying and not thinking https://youtu.be/mPOUzlU804U Bearing in mind that we don't actually have a free market, and thus, don't have capitalism. However, the freer the market is, the better the living standards of everyone. The more the government prints currency, distorts interest rates, taxes and regulates the market to death, the more living standards decline. Strange that, isn't it?
    12
  2913. Exactly! Completely backs up what I said in the video
    12
  2914. The video refutes your argument. Try watching the video before talking nonsense.
    12
  2915. Yep. They've branded me all sorts of things, but it's not working. The evidence is what I stand by, not emotions.
    12
  2916. True, but I'm still quoting Glantz. See the sources in the description.
    12
  2917. No worries! And yes, unlike a book (especially ones with poor maps, which is the majority) it really does allow us to see the battle unfold properly
    12
  2918. It seems that Keyes, Campbell and third commando (Terry?) would enter the villa, while three disable the electric light plant. Five more would be outside as lookouts. Others were around the area to prevent the enemy interfering.
    12
  2919. Agreed. And when you realize that he had 980,000 men under his command, and there was a delay before information reached him, plus the fact that intelligence on the enemy isn't particularly accurate, it's understandable why he may have been out of touch with what was happening hundreds of miles away
    12
  2920. Yes, yes it could
    12
  2921. I would be curious to hear what an actual historian thinks. They're probably dismiss me like the Redditors do, but I'm still hopeful that actual historians might take this a bit more seriously.
    12
  2922. Glad you liked it :) this is roughly how I want Battlestorm Stalingrad to be, so hopefully that'll be just as epic
    12
  2923. "Capitalism is when the state does stuff." - Marxists
    12
  2924. "I was quite shocked at the mass berating you were receiving by neo communists/nazis in the comments." So was I. History lies in the heart of the debate. However, it's not a debate when one side's entire argument can be summed up in three sentences: 1. "you're wrong", 2. "you're a [insert insult]", and 3. "Stick to tanks!". There were a few people who gave valid criticism, however their counterarguments were fundamentally flawed because their definitions of socialism and capitalism were wrong. As I showed when countering TheFinnishSocialist's comments towards the end of this video, there's no substance to their confused and contradictory arguments. And then, when I'm not convinced by them, apparently this is somehow proof that I'm not open to new ideas or biased or have an agenda. No, it's proof that I'm willing to stand my ground against a flood of poor arguments and abuse. Even if the majority were against me (which they're not), I'd still stand my ground. Only a convincing counterargument that stands up to scrutiny can get me to change my mind, and they simply haven't provided one. Thank you for your comment!
    12
  2925. "First, the statement that the Chetniks protected civilians is incorrect. They protected (ethnic) Serbs, them exclusively." That's what I said that in the video. When I first mentioned it, I didn't want to give away that they were going to only protect Serbians, but later on, I made it clear that that was what they were doing, and said so at the end. "What is not mentioned are Chetnik crimes committed against the civilian population of Croatian nationality, of the Catholic faith." Again, I mentioned crimes committed by the Chetniks against the Croatian population in the video. "Secondly, the Chetniks cooperated with the Italian fascists in the territory under Ustasha control, and later during the war with the Ustashas against Tito's communists." Yes, as I mentioned in the video. "Third, regarding the support of Churchill and Western powers; since the Tehran conference in 1943, Titos' communists / partisans have been the only recognized ally in the Balkans by the Allies" Yes, as I mentioned in the video. "Mihailovic maybe didn't enter the war as a fascist, but he definitely ended it as one." I would agree with that statement. "Although the leading figures of Tito's movement were all communists, partisans in general were not." That's exactly why I decided to call Tito's force Communists rather than 'Partisans', so as not to confuse things.
    12
  2926. Already got one!
    12
  2927. Yep, that word is very appropriate here!
    12
  2928. You forgot to request that I show WW2 footage of fighting that's not related to the campaign in question ;)
    12
  2929. If you could find out which general that was, I'd be very grateful
    12
  2930. Oh no, that video is coming
    12
  2931.  @christopherhitchens163  "is it constructive or helpful for debate to say to someone you hardly know: “you’ve been propagandised”?" Yes, because we can prove it. The Nazis LIED in their propaganda. Or are you saying that Goebbels was super-trustworthy?
    12
  2932. I quoted directly from Marx saying that "Money is the jealous god of Israel". Marx says money is Capitalism in Das Kapital, therefore, by his own words, he's saying that Capitalism is Jewish.
    12
  2933. What you've done here is provided an opinion. That's fine, but it would be more beneficial for you to explain why the quotes don't mean what I said they do. The one from Das Kapital literally makes no sense if Marx doesn't think the Capitalists are the Jews.
    12
  2934. True! I have been meaning to get a book about this to read into the debate ("Fiefs and Vassals" by Reynolds). But I've been a bit swamped, so while I have heard of this argument, I don't know much about it
    12
  2935. I spent the whole of yesterday (well over 8 hours) expanding the maps and updating them. They're not 100% accurate, but they're getting there. So, I'm glad to hear you like them 👍
    12
  2936. The 'notification' system needs to be notified that it's failing to notify people with the 'notifications' it's not notifying people with
    12
  2937. Existence exists. Existence cannot 'not exist' as then it wouldn't be existence. Thus, in the real world, contradictions are invalid. Mind and body cannot be "two, but not two" at the same time because that is a contradiction. Life and its environment cannot be "two, but not two" at the same time because that is also a contradiction. Since these are clearly invalid ways of thinking, I "arrogantly dismiss" them.
    12
  2938. "Your redefinition of capitalism as a stateless society is counter to its historical meaning, which simply means policies in favour of the large employers rather than employees" Socialism is monopoly control of the means of production, since a society (a state) is a monopoly. Socialism might say it benefits the poor, but it actually benefits the rich. Once you realize this, your eyes will open. Contrary to the popular consensus among Left-wing ideologues, capitalism actually results in competition, which destroys large corporations and syndicates if capitalism is allowed to operate. Unfortunately, the State prevents the free market from operating, and passes laws that benefit the rich, the elite, and the corporations. Through minimum wage laws, price controls, pension schemes, national-socialist health schemes, inflation, taxation, and similar, they make it so that small businesses cannot compete with the corporations, causing monopolies to form. This is why the State is the enemy of the poor and the middle income earners. The historical definition of Capitalism is (and always has been) private control of the means of production. I explain this (backed by sources) here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Capitalism is private, and private is non-state. As soon as you have a state, you have public control. The public sector is the state. Thus, if there is a state in control of the economy, you do not have capitalism.
    12
  2939. That's an interesting way of butting it!
    12
  2940. Yes, and it also shows how poor the Soviets were at attacking at this stage. A combination of desperation and depleted units resulted in a lot of wasted men and tanks... which is only going to get worse in the near future...
    12
  2941. I actually feel guilty for having to release videos this short, especially with the question being rather simple. However, you're right, this will probably get way more views than last week's hour-long video on the Weimar Hyperinflation
    12
  2942. I only did it because I fear being taken down by YouTube's censorship. If this was a free non-socialist world, I wouldn't have apologized for not being racist.
    12
  2943. Yes, why are you? Get to sleep!
    12
  2944. I don't expect you to always agree, but I do want you to think for yourself :) cheers!
    12
  2945. "Have you been called a Zionist yet?" Of course. My 'local Nazi' (as I like to call the guy who comments on every video calling me Jewish names) is in this comment section now ranting as per usual. National Socialists don't like historians who don't 'believe' in the racial theory of history like they do,.
    12
  2946. The best part is when their cards get declined. "It must be your machines! It's definitely not my card!" - it's always their cards.
    12
  2947. Are you going against Marx and Engels now Mat? And I wasn't destroyed, I went away and did a ton of research (since apparently I was so wrong). Turns out, I wasn't wrong, and that I had indeed been lied to during my stint in the state-education system. I now have more than enough evidence to destroy the idea that National Socialism was capitalism, starting with the fact that Marx and Engels' definition of socialism is stated clearly, and Fascism and National Socialism both fit that definition.
    12
  2948. 1 minute after you commented. You wouldn't get that speedy customer service in the Soviet Union.
    12
  2949. So Marxist-Socialism was capitalism now? Or are you refering to the National Socialism - which isn't capitalism either. Technically the Finns were capitalist though, I'll give you that.
    12
  2950. FIRST!
    12
  2951. Yep, that's exactly why I framed it that way. It's the plagiarism and deceit that's the issue. His audience is being scammed.
    12
  2952. "Define the terms Left and Right, then we'll talk." Left = common control of the means of production. Right = private control of the means of production.
    12
  2953. "While all the returning Soviets were treated with suspicion they weren't all sent to gulags." You can't know that. The evidence proving or disproving that is locked behind closed doors. The only estimate we have on the deaths or Gulag numbers is the testimony of a former NKVD person who said that 20% were either executed outright or sent to long labour in the Gulags for 25 years (essentially a death sentence). Another 15-20% received sentences of 5 to 10 years in the Gulags. 10% sent to exile in Siberia for at least 6 years, while another 15% were exiled to other regions and not allowed to return. Perhaps 15-20% were allowed to go home, but were unable to find work because they were classed as "unregistered labour". (source: Tolstoy, "Victims of Yalta," p409).
    12
  2954. The documents are still locked in the archives... Also, this goes above Eisenhower. It involves Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin, plus it must have involved Truman and Atlee too.
    12
  2955. "Just read Carlos Videla's book" I've read it. It's useful, but he completely misses the gnosticism. It's also pro-Nazi, so it's more scripture.
    12
  2956.  @Mr.Witness  Thanks! I have his book titled "The Cause of Hitler's Germany", but I've not had time to read it yet. I'll add "Ominous Parallels" to my list.
    12
  2957. "But the main thing I always comeback to which all high ranking military officers will agree on is that the superior commander (in rank) is responsible for their juniors. So Browning is responsible for giving Gavin the proper orders just as Montgomery is responsible for then Browning and Eisenhower for Montgomery." If Monty orders Browning to take the bridges, and Gavin and Browning don't do that, then how is Monty to blame? His orders were clear, just weren't followed. So in that case the blame couldn't be Monty's, it would have to be Browning and/or Gavin's. And while an officer is responsible for their juniors, I would argue that the juniors don't get off. If you work in a corporation, and you order a subordinate of yours kills someone - and he does it - why would you go to jail and he doesn't? - "So Browning is responsible for giving Gavin the proper orders just as Montgomery is responsible for then Browning and Eisenhower for Montgomery." Right, but I'm not entirely convinced that Browning did give Gavin the order not to take the Nijmegen bridge. As I said in this video, the only evidence I've seen for this is Gavin's words after the battle, which are doubtful for the reasons I explained in the video. - "Browning landed with Gavin so Browning could have at any point during the battle or prior to told Gavin "Hey, I really want you to get that bridge that is your top priority". Gavin at that point has to listen to Browning as his superior commander." Yes, I actually suspect that this may have been what happened, but by this point it was too late. Gavin should have ordered a battalion or more to go to the Nijmegen bridge prior to landing, not after landing. This was the error. - "As I was saying I think there were many issues with Market Garden beyond what happened at Nijmegen." Correct, and I agree - the plan wasn't perfect, and I agree with most of your stated issues with the plan (and there's more besides). However, the crucial aspect was that the plan wasn't followed at Nijmegen, which is what led to its failure. - "So pinning all of the blame on 1 or 2 man (Gavin and Browning) is still just wrong to me... I still don't think their actions alone caused the failing of the whole operation." Theirs was the main reason, not the only reason. But had Nijmegen Bridge been taken, then the whole operation could have worked, even if the other faults with the plan remained. The objective was to take a 5 bridges. You cannot count to five if you miss out number 4 - 1. 2. 3. ... 5. By the same token, you cannot get to the fifth bridge if you fail to take the fourth. - "There were many things that go wrong and just like in regular jobs military officers can and do make mistakes as well. I'm not sure about Browning but I know Gavin was highly decorated prior to and after Market Garden many times. So putting so much blame on Gavin and Browning here just doesn't seem fair to me. Those are just 2 guys doing the best they can for their countries in a time of war and maybe they made a mistake in this case that helped contribute to the failing at Market Garden." All this is irrelevant. Yes, they were highly decorated... But experienced people in positions of power make mistakes all the time. In fact, this is my main criticism with politicians, bureaucrats and others who work for the State - you can have high-sounding titles, but you don't know nothing about how the economy actually works.
    12
  2958. The SA wasn't destroyed; it continued to exist until 1945. And while that may have been used as an excuse, they didn't kill Röhm because of homosexuality. To what extent it was a major influence in the SA as a whole, I'm not sure. EDIT: it existed until 1945, not 1943.
    12
  2959. Glad to have connected the dots, and agreed - great points. Now the questions are, to what extent did this organisation facilitate the failure of the Soviets in the early to mid-war period? Did this system help give commanders experience, or make the situation worse for them? And did the Soviets have to organise their divisions and armies this way, or was another option available to them?
    12
  2960. I doubt anything serious will happen, although some territory might change hands. It's all a distraction to the main problem - the world economy.
    12
  2961. I laughed! :) if you enjoyed this, I have some more Battlestorm documentaries out there. In fact, you might enjoy the Bruneval Raid, which was also 1st Airborne Division's first mission, and the first mission Frost was in. Plus it may actually be one of the turning points of the war (no joke) https://youtu.be/6EiOG_yvT04
    12
  2962. Awesome! Human Action isn't a particularly easy read, but it's a good one. I do recommend his "Socialism" too, which just kills it :) And a lot of people have said they've rewatched the Askey video, which is interesting because I didn't think it would really be rewatchable.
    12
  2963. Perfect! I will use your question and answer it in a future video I've already got planned and have started scripting. So I will answer you properly then. In the meantime, I'm actually more interested to hear your thoughts are on the same question. What makes a soldier's memoirs reliable in your opinion? And can you think of any reasons as to why they might not be reliable?
    12
  2964. FIRST! And yes, I hope you enjoy the video
    12
  2965. That's the spirit!
    12
  2966. There's a phrase about that
    11
  2967. "Its pretty apparent in the first 8 minutes." - proof.
    11
  2968. 1. Someone else (another person downplaying Lend Lease) said that the number of Soviet trucks that survived Barbarossa was ~210,000. 2. Soviet trucks could carry 6 tons of supplies. American trucks could carry 10 tons of supplies. Whichever way you split it, Lend Lease was important.
    11
  2969. They are - we call them Tankies. S-wehraboos say is full of Tankies (Soviet-lovers)
    11
  2970. I'll be the first person to say I'm wrong, if I'm wrong. And I was wrong. And yes, I'm lucky to have such wise council here in the comments. That's rare in itself :)
    11
  2971. Shall we call you von Mitch from now on?
    11
  2972. I'm glad Zulu is still planning on doing that video as I've been looking forward to it. I thought he had forgotten
    11
  2973. That's funny because many of my viewers told me in my logistics videos that private armies aren't possible... 😉 But I will say that I've seen a picture online of a German AA gun from 1918 being employed by the Dutch Army in 1940
    11
  2974. They were being concentrated - at Kotluban... I'll be talking about this in the future
    11
  2975. It's funny you should mention 40k in the comments of this particular video... I'll see if you notice before I say anything
    11
  2976. But it's not private ownership. A giant public company is not "private".
    11
  2977. The guy's a Socialist. He's going to assess Fascism incorrectly in the same way I described other Socialists falsely assessing Fascism here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    11
  2978. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    11
  2979. But Society imposing its will on the individuals within it is not REAL Socialism!
    11
  2980. "I think your herding of all on the left in the wehraboo faction is not an accurate representation." In my pre-National Socialism was Socialism video phase, the Left were all behind me. When I released that video, they then began to denounce me and say everything I said was wrong. This included me older videos which they had originally agreed with. Thus, they then started saying that Nigel Askey's article "proves" that what I said was untrue, which meant that the Left are agreeing with the idea that the Germans of WW2 were Aryan supermen. - "but being on the left does not mean communism or "theft or murder of a group". It could literally just be some sort of tax or regulation or something as little as state health or education. Social democracy is different from Stalinism" Tax is theft/slavery since you do not get a choice with it. Regulations are the same - force. State health is terrible, and state "education" is both slavery for children and fails to provide them with a proper education. Social Democracy is different from Stalinism... It starts off only stealing your wealth and destroying the economy, which causes people to rise up in a Revolution which then evolves into Stalinism.
    11
  2981. "Well then fine, then family is a socialism. Everything where more than one person is involved and there is some decision making process is a socialism. You have made "socialism" void of any meaning." What? A family is not socialism, unless the family unit has total control over the individual. What is this strange world you live in where people cannot cooperate together freely? Why must everyone be forcefully socialized together?
    11
  2982. "So, let's get this straight, by TIK's definition every society with taxation cannot be a free market as is therefore socialist." Let's think about it the other way. You think a market that isn't free is a free market. No it isn't. "Therefore every country including Nazi Germany were socialist." Every market that isn't free is not a free market, thus it isn't capitalism. In the Third Reich, the state controlled the economy. State control of the economy is socialism. "For example, most heavily capitalist countries have central banks; having a central bank isn't synonymous with socialism." Having a state bank is not state control? Are you sure? Because having a state bank is not a free market, and thus not capitalism. Just because they claim the central bank is 'private' doesn't mean it is. It's private in the sense that I can't walk into it, but it is still a public-sector institution. Central banks are the central state for the banks.
    11
  2983. Well, I'm only changing it for the future episodes - I'm not taking down the video for this minor mistake.
    11
  2984. Come back Monday
    11
  2985. Fantastic! You'll probably enjoy Monday's video then :)
    11
  2986. Yes, new and only uploaded a couple hours ago
    11
  2987. "TIK > MHV > WW2 w/Indy > Lindybeige" Poor Lindybeige...
    11
  2988. Seriously!? FFS YouTube, stop being Fascists!!
    11
  2989. FIRST!
    11
  2990. Congrats!
    11
  2991. Hahaha
    11
  2992. Food ;)
    11
  2993. It's a good start - an introduction to a topic. But beyond that, no you cannot rely on it. The problem is, for a lot of people, their research starts and ends at Wikipedia, which is dangerous in my humble opinion.
    11
  2994. To be honest, this is the first I've heard about that channel.
    11
  2995. I'm also a simple man. I see someone thanking me, and I thank them for thanking me. Thanks Case!
    11
  2996.  @Nitrogenfix  I'm on Bitchute, just having trouble uploading to it at the moment (processing errors) https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    11
  2997. She didn't implement free market principles. She privatised the industries, keeping them in government regulatory control. The railways remain under the control of Network Rail, which is government run.
    11
  2998. People have asked me to 'respond" to Second Thought directly for this exact reason. But I don't see the point. I'd rather continue to produce content like this and let the facts speak for themselves.
    11
  2999. Terri (the lady who does my thumbnails, and makes my newer maps) is currently working on a map for the Third Battle of Kharkov, but she's miles away from finishing that. After Gazala will be the Fall of Tobruk, then after that the retreat to El Alamein. At that point, I'll see where Terri's up to with the map.
    11
  3000. Yes, I agree fully. Constructive criticism etc is fine, but some people on the internet take it to a whole new level. I think there's a few main issues - 1, it's easier to criticize than it is to do. 2, people don't realize just how much work goes into this and they think I just speak to a camera and hundreds of hours of research, script writing, and editing gets done magically. I mean, I did over 400,000 words of research for Stalingrad before I lost count (it's much more than that now) and at the moment Anton Joly is sending me more! Plus I have more books ordered (Isaev's doesn't come out until the end of next month), and I even started learning a whole different language to access more texts. I'm working harder than I've ever done before, and people used to say I worked too hard when I was a manager in retail. But they only see the end product and don't realize any of this. 3, with a project this big, some mistakes are going to slip into the narrative, despite anyone's best efforts. Those errors are then used as a "ah ha! I've caught you out you [liar, cheat, revisionist, pro-this, anti-that...]". In reality, I'm not a god. I get things wrong. Sure, point out my mistakes, but be polite about it, and don't expect perfection. 4, trolls (e.g. "stick to tanks", "you're wrong", "here's a poor argument which makes no sense and the evidence doesn't support it, why won't you change your mind?") 5, Usually it's the same type of person who criticizes, and they criticize frequently. A "serial criticizer". Such people have no appreciation for the word "work" and sit there pretending that they 'know' best how the world should be. Since others are producing things, and they're not, they're losing out - they're even being hurt by the fact that others are contributing more to society than they are. They think that because others are doing better than they are, that they're entitled to criticize to their hearts content, but never truly look themselves in the mirror. They can't do much work, and the work they do isn't very valuable, but they think they're great, expect money to just flow into their hands, develop a chip on their shoulder when it doesn't, and go about telling everyone how much the world owes their greatness. They blame others - the rich, the people they work with, the Jews, men, women, the old, the young, the successful, the pretty... But deep down inside, they know that they're the ones to blame for their own misery. ;)
    11
  3001. Exactly.
    11
  3002. You're right, it doesn't. But I would argue that Hitler's Socialism actually was egalitarian for the German 'race' anyway, so even if we accept their opinion, it's still wrong!
    11
  3003. I think the other guy (Trevor?) is somewhat more reasonable. I'm assuming he's on another channel, but not sure which
    11
  3004. While not ideal, this is roughly how I see it https://images.app.goo.gl/PZemp8vGUJZhKJQe7 Or maybe this https://images.app.goo.gl/EeUUcHnRzaCXU34N9
    11
  3005. It took me a while to go through it, but it's great. There's also a book where someone collated everything Peikoff said in that series. I believe it's called "Founders of Western Philosophy: Thales to Hume"
    11
  3006. FIRST! I dislike the Birch Forest biome. It just doesn't look right
    11
  3007. It's been ages since I saw it so I don't really remember. I'm not a big fan of TV "play it safe and be vague" documentaries like that anyway
    11
  3008. Also, I don't think "Slav" being "slave" was German or Nazi propaganda because I've heard that be applied to other areas of history which have nothing to do with German or Nazi propaganda
    11
  3009. Most of the "counter arguments" against my videos are exactly like that. They click the video, downvote it, then leave a nasty comment saying something like "TIK, you're mentally ill and here's several illogical counter-points with little or no evidence that are actually answered and refuted in the video I didn't watch... HEY, HOW COME I'VE NOT CONVINCED YOU TO CHANGE YOUR MIND!?!?!??! YOU'RE CLEARLY INSANE!!?!"
    11
  3010. Someone else in this comment section is asking me not to go into details in this battle... I think he doesn't understand
    11
  3011. Not really, the Battle of Stalingrad began on the 20th of July 1942. Only the city-fight began on the 14th of September, but the battle had been raging for months by this point.
    11
  3012. There's a book called "The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem" by Nathaniel Branden that you may want to check out. It has helped me personally, and by the sounds of it I think you will get something from it too. A lot of psychology has been based on the works and Freud and Jung, both of whom were Hermeticists. Thus, in my opinion (and it is just an opinion), a lot of therapists are ill equipped to deal with real-life issues. It therefore falls upon our shoulders to do the majority of the work to figure ourselves out. For me personally, I have have found the works of Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff's books on Objectivism extremely helpful, even if at first it doesn't seem like they should be. The negative stigma they have delayed me from looking into them, and I regret that. There's no point in building a house on sand - you've got to have a good philosophical foundation, otherwise it's a fruitless endeavour.
    11
  3013. @Ashtray - you're not "useless". Your purpose is to protect the country. BUT you cannot claim to be economically productive (unless you are a mercenary, see below). The point is: we need soldiers, but only when we need them. An activated military that's engaging in defending a country is great. Having a massive military is a burden on the economy, so we need to keep our military small, efficient, inexpensive, and at home. Being a mercenary is slightly different because, in a free economy, they are economically productive - they're being paid voluntarily to provide their service. Someone who pays someone else to do something voluntarily is technically economically productive, since their service is in demand. A State military isn't economically productive if tax is not voluntary, since such a service is probably not in demand. We can't tell though because tax isn't voluntary.
    11
  3014. "I suggest you get informed better on the leftist side of economics" I used to be a socialist and I was taught the socialist and Keynesian anti-economic view of the world when I was in college and university. I am very well informed on how terrible it is, which is why I no longer accept it. "Most leftist economic systems advocate directly against the intervention of a state or larger power in the economy, and direct control of the instruments of production and the economy by the participants of said production and economy." Incorrect. When a COLLECTIVE owns the means of production, then that COLLECTIVE is the STATE. I've explained this in the Public vs Private video, and have told people over and over to watch it, and they refuse to do so. Here's the link once more - https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "There are many arguments against both the leftist and the rightist systems, but the ones you make against leftist economics seem largely uninformed and very basic in nature, and it is clear that it is due to a lack of knowledge on the subject. Otherwise, great content!" Unlike Karl Marx or Engels, who both wrote a load of contradictory gibberish so as to hide their true intentions (again, I've been over some of this in the Public vs Private and Hitler's Socialism videos), my intention is clear up the newspeak and show exactly what they're saying in plain language. That isn't because I'm 'uninformed' or 'basic', it's because I want to boil it down so that everyone can understand it. The reason my arguments seem 'basic' is because there are fundamental contradictions, fallacies, and illogical statements being made by Leftists. For example, I've smacked down the Labour Theory of Value on at least two occasions now - without which, Marxism completely falls apart, since the entire ideology is based on the Labour Theory of Value. It's not because I 'don't understand' or am 'basic', it's because the fundamental principles of Leftism are contradictory and make no logical sense when you say them out loud in plain language. Leftists don't like it when someone exposes their deeply flawed arguments, and then refuses to back down when they cry and scream in the comments, telling me I'm 'uninformed' or lack knowledge on the subject. If your arguments are poor, I will call you out on it regardless of your ideology.
    11
  3015. It's certainly longer than the shortest war in history https://youtu.be/NRqaveOD8TU (yes, an old video of mine with just 887 views)
    11
  3016. There is nothing else to accomplish except marathoning this ;)
    11
  3017. Ok, but the problem is that the number of executions also doesn't reflect that. Most of the people stopped by the blocking detachments were simply sent back to their units. Also, the blocking detachments weren't all NKVD.
    11
  3018. "most of the best movies that try to be historically based are the best there ever were. just to name a few: kingdom of heaven, 300, braveheart, ... the list goes on. all of them are inaccurate as hell, does that make them bad movies? nope. so stop saying people should be banned for making historically-based but inaccurate movies." They're based on history. But they're not history. Therefore don't base them on history. If Hollywood can't do history right, then it shouldn't do history at all, because all it's doing is adding to the myths, distortions and misinterpretations that people have of history - which leads to wrong conclusions, and has massive and dangerous real-world consequences. Better to create such movies in fantasy worlds, than pretend they were what really happened. "@TIK You are so wrong. Banning things is not the way to go. I hope you know better." Absolutely - we don't want socialism dictating our lives. However, it should be common sense for these film studios not to make said films if they're not capable or skillful enough of doing it right. But they do, so I'm voting with my wallet and not giving another penny to such creations, as I would encourage all of you to do as well.
    11
  3019. No game is perfect. Plus, as a kid, COD1 was hilarious. Jumping up and down to avoid the bullets. PPSh spam or MP44 spam. Raining grenades for days. It was also fun to annoy everyone on the server. "Hey, someone finally got me! What a relief! I'd killed you all that many times I was running out of bullets"
    11
  3020. Don't worry, I just haven't got to the Soviet atrocities yet. I will treat them just like I treat the German ones. See my video on the Red Army Purges video (admittingly I only covered the Red Army, not the whole of the Purges, but it's fairly balanced).
    11
  3021. @SonofTiamat Yes, it seems we're on the brink of a new era... I've been wondering if I could use AI to help with the scripts of these videos somehow, but I can't figure out a way to use it which doesn't compromise the integrity of the work.
    11
  3022. Thanks Daniel! I do miss doing gaming videos though :)
    11
  3023. I like them too because sometimes the questions are really challenging and I have to dive deep. But the problem is, because I do dive deep, and because Battlestorm Stalingrad takes up a significant portion of my time, I've fallen massively behind with the Q&As and now have people complaining that they've been waiting too long 😣
    11
  3024. Yes you are! Congrats!
    11
  3025. "But! wait! If it's not capitalism, how is there Interest Rates" Interest rates exist in a Socialist economy. The problem is you can't accurately calculate them in a Socialist economy because without free market prices (or money) you cannot make economic calculation. That's why interest rates are currently at or near or below zero for the entire world - because the Central Banks (called for by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto) have centrally planned and artificially set interest rates too low. In a free market capitalist system, negative interest rates wouldn't be possible, yet here we are. Thank you Central Planners!
    11
  3026. I didn't show the movements at the end, but 14th Panzer and 305th Infantry Divisions were sending their units south. Not all had arrived by the start of the next day, but they were concentrating on Chuikov's thin northern line.
    11
  3027. The problem is that people are begging for more Stalingrad. Someone has just asked now where the next episode is in the comments here, and others are asking in other videos. The market wants one type of content over the rest.
    11
  3028. Jumbo Wilson and Marshall seemed to like him though, so it was only really Eisenhower and Bradley that didn't like him.
    11
  3029. Many shy away from expressing opinions because they're trying to be 'objective'. But what they haven't realized is that it's impossible to be objective (unless you're a godlike entity). Therefore, as history theory shows (link https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc ) it's actually beneficial to provide your own interpretations of the evidence. However, a lot of people don't understand history theory and falsely assume history is ONLY a science (it's not, it's a mixture of science and 'art').
    11
  3030. Yes, that's it! Force-multiplier! I couldn't think of the term :) also "economy of force" is another one I remembered today.
    11
  3031.  @tancreddehauteville764  If one of your weapons has poor accuracy and might kill civilians, then choosing to use that weapon would be classed as committing a war crime. Bomber command should have restricted itself to military and (arguably) communications and industrial targets. Dresden's city centre might have been a legitimate communications target, but the fact that it was a city centre meant that it was bound to cause civilian casualties. Therefore, they could have targeted nearby railway lines or bridges, and left the centre of a city alone. They chose not to do that, but instead bomb the city, knowing (and hoping, to damage morale) that civilians would be caught in the crossfire. That's why I take the view that it was a war crime.
    11
  3032. "I have no idea how long it took you to put this together. But boy of boy did you do a damned impressive job of it." Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it! It only took a week, although I had to read three entire books, and a few other bits from other sources, before recording the video and then editing it. All in one week! And yes, I'm now exhausted! Yes, the whole subject has become a massive propaganda event used to push different agendas. But the main issue is the twisting of the facts. Two SS reports say that there was an estimated 25,000 victims, yet even normal historians are being persuaded to add extra thousands to that number just to be safe. I'm interested to hear what your friends think, especially if you've discussed it before. And I wish I could join you for that pint! Cheers!
    11
  3033. That might be part of it, but I would encourage you to read the book "Telling Lies about Hitler" by Richard Evans. It's all about Irving and what he's been saying and up to. From that and some other sources, it's clear that his motivation is to "revise" history to promote a certain world view.
    11
  3034. Started to capitalize? The most watched video on this channel is titled "The REAL Reason why Hitler HAD to start WW2" and has been like that since it was published in mid-2019. I've always capitalized words in my titles, although I don't always do that. And no, there will be no sponsors because I strongly believe that sponsors ruin the quality of videos. My Patreons and SubscribeStars are the ones who keep this channel funded and sponsor free.
    11
  3035. Taylor's book is fantastic! At the end, that's the main book I recommend on the subject because it covers all the bases, although I still think Taylor was wrong to compromise and go with 40,000 fatalities. The primary sources indicate that an estimated 25,000 is the correct figure (which Taylor includes as well, but does a 25,000 to 40,000 range, which I think is too much).
    11
  3036. You should comment more often!
    11
  3037. Standard socialism : common control of the means of production. Marxist socialism : class control of the means of production. National Socialsim : race control of the means of production.
    11
  3038. "@TIK I am a National socialist and I appreciate this thought provoking content, thanks sir." If you are a National Socialist, please see the Henry Hazlitt video in the description and try to understand what he's saying. I think you'll find it most enlightening.
    11
  3039. You're right to be skeptical. As I allude to towards the end, there are counter-arguments, and this is still to be debated and confirmed. So it's not 100% yet, but I think we're on the right path. And yes, Lindsay is Christian, although I'm not sure what denomination. But I'm curious as to why you're not materialist if you're not religious? If you only believe in reality, then there's nothing to stop you being materialist.
    11
  3040. "Now let's see you make similar videos about Soviet & Allied War Crimes." I plan to do so. "Wait, you won't do it because it's not politically correct" I will do it, no problem. "and you don't want to be de-monetized." This video isn't monetized because, given the subject, I decided not to monetize it. "So you're not such a tough proponent of the truth after all, only a propagandist. : )" Says the one spamming poor arguments in defense of the death of 3.3 million Soviet prisoners of war due to Stalin not accepting a postal service to National Socialist Germany.
    11
  3041. Thank you! Only just did it today :) very grateful to everyone
    11
  3042. The best joke is that Marx wanted a class-less state-less society... so anarcho-capitalism then
    11
  3043. "@TIK The idea of a "free market" is a myth." A baker sells bread to a customer. That's a free market. Why? Because both the baker and the customer didn't have to agree to the swap. They choose to swap money for bread. That's a free market. It's not a myth - it happens every single day.
    11
  3044. I'm not against the idea, but I'm not sure all my viewers would want that. I was hesitant to make this video, and only made it because I'm sick of trying to defend history against the naysayers who want to distort it. But I'm not against the idea of covering topics like that.
    11
  3045.  @erozionzeall6371  "Ancapistan will just turn into a feudalist hellscape." No, socialism is feudalism by another name.
    11
  3046. Yes! That's it! When you're in that mindset, you think you're the enlightened one. But you're not. And that's what I'm talking about when I say about "red pilling" people - they've got to be open-minded enough to actually take it, which is what you and I did. Unfortunately, most are not in that open-minded state, and you can't force them to be
    11
  3047. "Moderate Democrats, hard socialists, and that one r/antiwork mod are all "leftist" but have little in common." They actually have a lot in common, especially the world view. The differences lie in the way that they want to solve the 'system'. They think the system ('capitalism') is flawed. That's the thing that brings them all together. Also, i was highly entertained by that mod at antiwork. Dog walkers of the world unite!
    11
  3048. Well, Courland is the next Battlestorm (starting in February). Stalingrad is after that. I don't think Courland will be as long as Crusader, and I will need time to work on the research and script for Stalingrad... but I'm hoping to start it a few weeks (maybe a month or so) after Courland finishes. So no hard day, but mid-2019 is probably about right. I know I promised October 2018, but I didn't realise how big and insane Crusader was. Having done most of the research for Courland, I know it won't be anything like that, so I'm more confident with my estimate this time.
    11
  3049. "@SharpLight Make a video or at least a blog post then. I look forward to your story of Pienaar the hero. It will need to stand on it's own merits though and unlike your comments not be a collection of mistruths and deflection. So you didn't like the tone and you take issue with some of the comments. Much the same could be said of you." Good idea Robert, I encourage this! SharpLight has made the error of attacking me, the author, for my "tone". But the reality is that if I was wrong in my arguments, then the focus should be on the evidence and interpretations, not my narrative of the information. That's how history is done (as my upcoming history theory video on the 14/01/2019 will explain)
    11
  3050. "Looking at the comment section of your video The Epic of Pienaar there are people saying Pienaar should have been relieved, or court-martialed or even shot," You have to realise that what my commenters say in the video is not me saying that. "disrespectful tone and your unnecessary concentration on the actions of a single brigade" Pienaar's actions speak for themselves. I actually don't have a problem with Pienaar's actions. Watch this video fully and you will see for yourself. The criticism of Pienaar is justified. The tone of my voice reflects that criticism. It's not disrespectful, because I actually have great respect for someone willing to go as far as he did. I actually think Pienaar is hilarious in this battle! "In the episode after the Epic of Pienaar we see General Freyberg removing the 2nd NZ division without orders and leaving the field of battle; does anyone in the comments wonder why he wasn't shot? Of course not, the episode was not titled The Epic of Freyberg, your tone was respectful and neutral on that issue." Actually I did say in the video that you can't blame Freyberg for that because the British and Pienaar let him down and that his division was almost wiped out.
    11
  3051.  @vassilizaitzev1  Yeah I assumed that would be the case because I've heard stories about Japanese soldiers going hungry on islands and other areas
    11
  3052. Yes, this and the Public vs Private video do help make sense of the current world we're living in. Sadly, most people don't watch these videos. However, I still want to produce them in the hope that some people will listen and learn, and then be able to make better decisions, that have real positive effects on the world. Perhaps I'm being too hopeful Cheers!,
    11
  3053. @Adam Jaquay  "I vaguely remember one of your videos about an English translation of a Russian source being crap." Coincidentally, that was also a translation of one of Isaev's other books on the Battle of Brody-Dubno in 1941 😂
    11
  3054. Thank you slovene ball! The fact that you turn up every week to watch them says a lot :)
    11
  3055. Not as cool as Hyazinth Graf Strachwitz von Groß-Zauche und Camminetz
    11
  3056. I see. I'd better support the tribe that has enslaved me and may kill me at a whim, than another tribe that also wants to kill and enslave me... rather than just cooperating with others, and paying others directly to protect me when there's trouble.
    11
  3057. Because it's a Leftist hellhole and full of Chinese bots. Also, I don't really see any purpose in it. You can't have an in-depth conversation with so few characters, so any discussion quickly turns into a slogan-fest which then benefits the Left. Reality is not as simple as they like to believe it is. And the bots are just annoying.
    11
  3058.  @matijakurelja9827  Yeah, that was actually a last minute addition, so sorry about that. Egor clarified that the bank hadn't been finished, and I thought I'd better clarify that there was no money in the building.
    11
  3059. Because it technically is. Although, the conspiracy theory that all the bourgeoisie are conspiring against the workers somehow isn't a conspiracy theory and is widely accepted. I guess conspiracy theories are good when you believe in them?
    11
  3060.  @panzerofthelake506  But it was a welfare state as I showed in the video
    11
  3061. I think they've been reporting me regardless... but yes, I'll be careful, although it's difficult to talk about WW2 without talking about soldiers fighting.
    11
  3062. I am feeling better, thank you! Still got the cough though
    11
  3063. I've never once done a live video or live debate because I hate 'live' anything. Watching live debates is a hindrence to understanding. And I haven't "sniped" in this video. I made it clear that I do disagree with them, but I didn't explain why. That wasn't the purpose of this video. On the contrary, I've been as reasonable and as rational as possible, hoping that I would get clarification of their points. As I said, these individuals are not my 'enemy', the ideology itself is.
    11
  3064. I wish I could say it was for any other reason other than - because his picture was the only one high-resolution one in colour :D
    11
  3065. Interesting information!
    11
  3066. "and they are full of lies and half truths to bolster that pov; for instance, in reality, german divisions were always under strength." So, explain to me how this proves anything?
    11
  3067. My criticism of him is his massive negative influence on the post-war perception of the war (this being bad because I don't like deliberate distortions of history). I'm therefore trying to address that issue. The other issues, like the one shown in the video, just make for fun stories. I'm 'against' him only in so far as I want to correct his distortions - and I'm definitely going to have some fun with Halder while I correct them, just like I would with anyone else. I criticise Rommel in this video, but have praised him in the past, because I look at individual actions. If I come across and action that Halder does right in the future, I will have no problem praising him for that.
    11
  3068. Horvat, I explained this in the video.
    11
  3069. "I think a lot of you (TIK included) are judging Churchill based entirely upon hindsight and your contemporary political sensibilities..." I can't speak for the others, but my viewpoint isn't entirely from hindsight since the contemporaries (Dill, Auchinleck, Wavell etc) were all saying the same thing. In this video I'm judging him as a military leader based on his impact on this particular campaign (at least Compass to Crusader, plus Somaliland). Churchill was good with special-forces units (e.g. SAS and Paras, see my Bruneval video). And as a politician, Churchill was correct to put (some) pressure on his generals to fight battles. As a manager, you have to apply a bit of pressure on those below. However, there comes a point where you have to realise that it's better to wait a little longer and win, than attack now and lose and drag out a campaign. And putting a ton of pressure on your generals when they're all saying the same thing "we need to wait" and then not realising that you're at fault - that's bad. And it's also not good to take units away from an army in pursuit of the enemy (which happened during Compass and also Crusader). I don't think that's hindsight talking since the guys at the time were saying the same thing. And it's not political sensibilities from my part either - I understand that Churchill needed to show the Soviets and the USA that Britain was still fighting and doing everything it could. This explains why he put the pressue on the generals. But he put way too much pressure, and it wasn't all warranted.
    11
  3070. Thank you, both of you!
    11
  3071. It's a pain in the neck
    11
  3072. Thank you! I'm greatful for your comment because it is frustrating to read so many bitter comments. That said, the hate reminds me to stay on my toes and keep producing quality videos. And I do intend to return to this topic in the future, and hit it with a vengence
    11
  3073. Luckily, most of my regular viewers are people with common sense
    11
  3074. Glad to hear it! I would upload more on these topics, but a lot of my viewers complain if I do too many... Most are here for the "tanks" only. But more to come
    11
  3075. No there isn't. National Socialism is a disgusting ideology, and I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I would apologize for it.
    11
  3076. "Roger Moorhouse is British... Anglo-Saxon British are Generally = Anti-German, biased, unreliable, one-sided... History is literally written by the victor." And this is what we call 'racism' or 'nationalism'. You can't just judge everyone of the same colour or nation as the same. Not all British are "anti-German" or "unreliable". This is absurd.
    11
  3077. Just tell your partner - "Don't hit me with those negative waves so early in the morning" ;)
    11
  3078. You are correct. As Sun Tzu says, you only fight the battles you can win. My advice is: do not question him (he's a fanatic and will only cause trouble for you). If you still feel like continuing with your degree, then keep your head down and just play along to get the grade. At the same time, continue to educate yourself 👍
    11
  3079. First! Thank you for watching
    11
  3080. Yes. Here's a list of words, with the ones in yellow or red being the ones that will get you demonetised. Notice how "fetish" is in yellow. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ozg1Cnm6SdtM4M5rATkANAi07xAzYWaKL7HKxyvoHzk/htmlview?sle=true#
    11
  3081. "An economic model based on production which no western economy has seen since the 1980s, though in reality much earlier." This video was made by production. In fact, all YouTube videos are made by production. The device you're reading this comment on was made by production. Everything you consume was made by production. Tell me again how there's no production? "I will just move my factory to China or India and undercut everyone else." And provide cheap goods to the consumer? Sounds good to me. "When the factory falls down and kills everyone, no big deal." It is because you'll go out of business. You have an incentive to build factories that don't fall down. I'm guessing you've never worked in business. "Billions who have no choice than to work 18 hour days in my unsafe factories because starvation and death or 'slavery' is not really a choice." If they starve to death, they're not productive. The capitalist wants to keep his workers healthy. Also, those people have a choice not to work. If it's that bad, then they shouldn't work. "In case you did not realise, it was not simple altruism that ended slavery in the British Empire, rather the economic reality that slaves cost more than paid workers and you do not have to cloth, feed and house paid workers." Yes, classic liberalism and capitalism freed the slaves and ended serfdom. "Now, those in the service sector of the government who the people vote for to improve their conditions I will just buy off to give me some nice tax breaks." But they're not improving conditions at all. In fact, government regulations are causing unemployment, poor living standards, and the housing crisis here in the UK right now. And tax breaks are good for innovation and new technologies, as you saw in the video. Therefore, your entire argument is complete rubbish. You're playing on slogans like "stealing from the rich to give to the poor" and it just doesn't work.
    11
  3082. Haha thanks for the laugh. They've already started
    11
  3083. They're dying because they have corrupt governments https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs
    11
  3084. Wow! Thank you! That's great feedback! I'm really happy to hear that you weren't flooded with too much information! That's one thing I have fretted over more than anything else - how to strike deliver a ton of information in a way which doesn't overwhelm the viewer, and also doesn't bore the regular viewers who have seen some of this information before. Usually I resort to repetition because people take in information in different ways, so saying the same thing twice, in a different way, can help people understand. But I appreciate that it can get annoying and I've tried recently to minimize it. I also wanted everything to be short, sharp and sweet, so to hear that the pacing was right, is a relief! Some people don't like it when I appear in the Battlestorm documentaries (they think it's egotistical, which is not the case). But I decided that I wanted to appear in the videos at points where I thought it was needed, and to give the video a bit of variety, like you mentioned. So I'm glad you liked the balance! Thank you for your feedback!
    11
  3085. You ain't seen nothing yet :D I'm glad you've said that about the video not being boring because someone was saying I speak too slow in the videos. Not sure I can speak much faster and pronounce all the foreign names and the details right :(
    11
  3086. That video came out before this one, and this video addresses their arguments.
    11
  3087. They don't see it though, and they think they're anti-nazi...
    11
  3088. Yes, the two videos were hit by wave after wave of Russian Hordes... oh no, the Wehraboos were right!!
    11
  3089. Is that true? I would imagine there's a lot of unexploded bombs and such.
    11
  3090. I mispoke. It wouldn't be a TIK video if I didn't mispeak or say 1942 instead of 1941.
    11
  3091. The Red Menace - "If they abolished private property all factories would be run by the state, which they were not." Of course they were run by the state. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. National interests are - “made mainly by the Nazi party, or, rather, by its leaders, that is, by the State bureaucracy. It is a principle that only Party members shall occupy key positions in the government and in all organizations where the State influences the distribution of jobs. They must be engaged whenever there is a choice between the Party member and non-Party member.” - Reimann. “The influence of the Party cannot be seen in laws, but in practice, and personalities are the important factor. A large number of the ministers [at present all ministers] are Party members.” - Ministerialdirektor Sommer, spokesman for Rudolph Hess, in the Deutsche Juristenzeitung of May 21, 1936. Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    11
  3092. There are elections in the USA, but only two choices, which is why it isn't a democracy, but a republic. In fact, I said this in the video nobody has bothered to watch. Conspiracy Fearist clearly has an ideological agenda, which is why he was caught out. Also, I've seen that response video, here's a more balanced one by a non-Marxist that disagrees with me, but also with the Marxists https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I
    11
  3093. Socialism isn't one thing, but your example proves a point. State intervention is socialism. Liberal policies come under this bracket too (although only slightly). And, the rise in socialism directly correlates with the decline in political liberalism in the post-WW1 era. This is why the Liberal Party in Britain was out in 1921, and was replaced by the Labour Party which, in the 40s and 50s, was socialist. The point is, socialism is a spectrum; it is not a defined thing. Contrast this to Laissez-faire - or leave alone - which is no government intervention in the economy. This is what most conservative capitalist governments favour at the time (and now). National Socialism was absolutely state intervention and socialism. Think of the Brownshirts (SA) which existed until 1945 and conducted many of the Nazis "social" policies. Think of the Hitler Youth, which was promoting Aryanism and the "all Germans are equal, all other races are bad" mentality. Yes there was private companies, and individuals, but as I said, this was all working towards the state, which had a hand in everything.
    11
  3094. I didn't use him as a source. I linked to him. There's a difference. I also only realised this when reading the primary source: Mein Kampf. I then went out there and found more books and sources that supported my realization.
    11
  3095. It's definitely the book case!
    11
  3096. Turn off the media. They're selling you fear-pron anyway, keeping you watching for more "news" (propaganda). It's easy to get addicted to it.
    11
  3097. Honestly, I've not really been paying attention to the situation in the Ukraine. Too much propaganda on either side to really get to the truth. The fact that they're pushing a "Madman Putin" narrative tells you that the Media is all bought and paid for by the pro-war entities. We won't know the truth for at least 80 years, and even then they will have done their best to not tell you about all the stuff that went on behind the scenes before it got to this point.
    11
  3098.  @konstantinriumin2657  20 years? More like 80 to 100. We've still not got access to all the records relating to WW2 (e.g. Operation Keelhaul or Rudolf Hess).
    11
  3099. This video clearly shows the Ukraine was hit harder than the rest of the Soviet Union: What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg Also, this video is good too: The Origins of Mass Killing: the bloodlands hypothesis https://youtu.be/fXrqGlgufCA
    11
  3100. I'm interested to hear the disagreements. I'm new to Objectivism and need to read more of their literature, so any pointers from someone who better knows the philosophy would be grateful.
    11
  3101. Not sure if you're aware but I'm still working on the documentaries right now. I'm creating one on the Battle of Stalingrad, which is the main focus right now. It's going to take a while to do, so I'm making these videos as an in-between, if that makes sense. I apologise that I didn't make myself clear. Let me ask you a question - how popular is the Sino-Chinese War where you are?
    11
  3102.  @untruelie2640  I've just double-checked our previous conversations via my comment search, and it went exactly like this: you said I was wrong. I said I was using the historical definitions. You said "there is also a wider definition of socialism; a more descriptive one that is often used in the discipline of political theory." So I said: "Okay, despite the fact that the historical definition is clear, I'll bite. What is this "wider" definition you speak of?" Your reply was: "I tried to explain it above. I don't think that ANY definition outside of natural science is really clear or agreed on by everyone. At least that was one of the things I learned when I studied philosophy." In other words, your definition of socialism is "it depends and it's not agreed on". Well, it's no wonder I and Second Thought reject that definition because that's not a definition. You have failed to define socialism. In reply to other users you also said you reject "absolute definitions", and then proceeded to call anyone who defines things "dogmatic", whilst at the same time saying to them: "Claiming that YOUR personal conviction is the one and only absolute truth in the universe is not only unscientific but also rather narcisistic. That's simply the nature of a pluralistic world." It's not "personal" or a conviction. EVERY socialist who can actually define socialism, every political thinker, every historian, the dictionary, numerous other sources, all point to the same definition. When socialism is attempted the results are unanimous - totalitarianism and state ownership or control of the means of production. We have a convergence of evidence on this matter conclusively proving what the definition is. But you selfishly reject this, and when asked to give a definition, you then proceed to write paragraphs of purple prose that doesn't actually define anything. You have failed to define socialism because you either don't know what it is, or because your belief in the Hegelian religion (which you admit elsewhere) hinders your cognitive development. Like a typical dialectic materialist, you don't believe in definitions simply because defining what socialism is opens "The Idea" to criticism. Well, I don't believe in Cosmism, and I don't believe in Hegelian logic emotionalism, so I'll stick to the evidence which all points to the same conclusion. Socialism is state ownership or control of the means of production. If you disagree, you'll have to come up with a concrete definition for me to challenge you on. Failure to even do that is to admit that you're wrong, at which point this conversation is over. I'm not going to waste my time with someone who accuses me of being wrong but can't define the thing I'm supposedly wrong about. If you can't define it, you can't prove I'm wrong.
    11
  3103. The music I made for the Battlestorm videos (except Market Garden) was mine. It wasn't blues though 😂
    11
  3104. Glad you enjoyed it! There's a reason I've been doing some of these types of videos recently... Sadly, some people aren't listening or opening their eyes
    11
  3105.  @SufferToResist  If you're a soldier, would you want to have enough ammunition, or no ammunition?
    11
  3106.  a dalek  And yes, r/badhistory have criticized my videos, and I have criticized them. If you want to see an example of an echo-chamber, then r/badhistory is a VERY good example of one
    11
  3107. I don't disagree. Still, good introductions to the topic. The lesson here is that you have to read more than one book on a topic.
    11
  3108. It's kinda like the IJsselmere then which, as I found out, a lot of people get really upset over when you call it the Zuiderzee (which is it's proper name btw)
    11
  3109. How are you liking it so far?
    11
  3110. In the previous fighting, they had a 5:1 superiority in tanks. However, they suffered 50% casualties in the rifle units, but had suffered even more in the tank units. Instead of +500 tanks, the Soviets now had 150. The Germans had also repaired some of theirs, so now they are roughly equal in tank numbers.
    11
  3111. @q0w1e2r3t4y5 yes that's exactly what I realized. One of my other New Years Resolutions was to take steps to avoid burn-out in the future. So far I think the methods are working. They certainly helped me recover in the last week or two.
    11
  3112. As it should!
    11
  3113. I've found that if I watch just one thing in the morning, that's it, I'm unproductive for the rest of the day. Now I absolutely refuse to watch YouTube until the evening after I've done a full day's worth of work and I'm beginning to wind down for the evening. I find this helps a lot
    11
  3114. Three Socialists (all YouTubers - two of which have criticized me over this topic) were talking to Sargon and the others. I was quoting them, not Sargon himself. And I was quoting them to show the inconsistencies in their narrative.
    11
  3115. Been working on this on and off for about a year... and still think this was rushed
    11
  3116. Nationalism is Socialism. Nationalism was created by Edward Bellamy as an alternative to the word Socialism (which he thought was foreign sounding). So, calling Hitler a nationalist, is calling him a socialist. And besides, Hitler was a National Socialist, not a Fascist. Fascism is something else as I explained in this other video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    11
  3117. "Because Yugoslavia failed as well. Czechoslovakia failed as well." Only at the end of the Cold War (and also WW2 obviously, but they were then reconstituted)
    11
  3118. Interesting! And quite sad too. When you deliberately distort history, terrible things will happen. And yes, if you could find it when you get chance that would be great. Is it Article 354.1? Just had a quick search and can't find any information as to what the law actually states.
    11
  3119. Don't worry, I've got something planned :)
    11
  3120. Awesome! Thank you
    11
  3121. How did I leave that out? That was part of my answer.
    11
  3122. No worries! I only say "Russia" if I'm quoting from someone else. Otherwise, I'll say Soviets or Soviet Union because that nation consisted of more than just Russia.
    11
  3123. I'm also aware of the irony of publishing this extra video considering what I said in this video
    11
  3124. @slovene ball I'll probably cover them at some point, although I'm not sure when. I do want to cover individual units as we move forwards
    11
  3125. Yeah a lot of people are saying stuff about me that's not true, so I understand why you fell for it. Obviously, I don't think Hitler was a genius, but I also don't see him as a complete buffoon. Insane people aren't capable of conquering most of Europe
    11
  3126. "Looking forward to your next Stalingrad video." Should be next week, assuming all goes well with the editing process 👍 - "But have you ever considered going on the Lotus Eaters for an interview or an Epoch episode?" I don't want to go on other channels for two reasons. First, I don't think I'm very good going 'live'. I much prefer to script my videos and then have references to back up what I say. And secondly, since I (and other channels too) are covering sensitive topics, I don't want other channels to be dragged down with me (or I with them) if someone accidentally said the wrong word, or had the audio taken out of context or something. That's why I always do the "Hitler voice", and I'm constantly going over my scripts to check that nothing can be taken out of context. It's part of the reason why it takes me a while to actually script the videos - we're living in emotionally immature times. I know the Lotus Eaters have mentioned my videos a few times, and I'm grateful for that. But you've got to understand that I'm walking a tight-rope here, and at any moment YouTube could cut the rope.
    11
  3127. Good question. The Soviets seemed to be feeding green troops into the battle, piecemeal, while the Germans had numerical superiority, and panzer, Sturmgeschutz, artillery and Stuka support. The Germans had veteran troops but fewer replacements, so they were more experienced and probably knew how to fight. This episode shows, though, that when the Germans brought up their own green troops (the 18 and 19 years olds) they got slaughtered. So I think, in this case, these factors largely explain why Paulus lost fewer troops per day on average than Chuikov's battered army.
    11
  3128.  @aldinf512  Got it, thanks!
    11
  3129. I've been meaning to upgrade my lighting... but now I'm tempted to keep it as it is!
    11
  3130. I've really shot myself in the foot with that one haven't I?
    11
  3131. FIRST! :)
    11
  3132. They're obsessed because I'm attacking the one thing that underpins their entire argument: the idea that they are MORALLY right. They can deny all other facts because they believe that they're 'helping' people. Well, turns out that they're liars, murders and thieves, and they're doing the exact opposite - hurting people. That's why they're upset. I'm devoted to this for two reasons: 1, I'm dedicated to the truth (and I've spotted a lie that must be pointed out); and 2, they were the ones who attacked me first, so in reality I'm defending myself from them. They're trying to undermine all my work with the claim that I only know about 'tanks', which is complete rubbish. According to them, my "reputation" is in the gutter. For months (and even now) I've suffered from harassment from these people in the comments saying how terrible I am and how bad I am at what I do and that I shouldn't be trusted. Many believed them, and still do. Then I released my Hitler's Socialism video, and that threw a spanner in their works. It turns out that I do know what I'm talking about. But the damage is done. Many of my subscribers no longer trust me on anything other than the 'tank' issue... So, if I am continue doing any history videos whatsoever, I have to defend myself from these people, and I have to prove to everyone that there are huge lies within the narrative of history that are being supported by these Socialist ideologues, otherwise we'll not perceive history correctly, and thus (since history is the study of the human condition https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc ) we won't have a correct view of the world we live in, or of ourselves. And the best defense is a good offense :)
    11
  3133. Damn, those points would have been good to talk about. I'm definitely in agreement with 1, 2 and 3. I think 4 is probably right (I don't know), and 5 is a personal story but I have no reason to doubt it. Allied tank crews suffered very few deaths in Europe in 1944-45. The tanks were designed with hatches all over the place for fast-bailouts.
    11
  3134. Technically 5th, but I'll let you off ;)
    11
  3135. I don't like football and didn't watch match, but "ITS COMING ROME" made me laugh 😂😂😂 I'm going to steal that one
    11
  3136. Timothy Snyder and Richard Evans have been having an argument over history recently. However, the things related to him that I brought up in this video aren't really under scrutiny.
    11
  3137.  @aldinf512  It says vehicle insignia, and when you click on it, the description reads: "1st Logo of the 309th German infanterie Division." So I don't trust it.
    11
  3138. That could actually be true. I've had to dive into it a lot more recently thanks to all the hate I got from the Marxists (who are still trying to say I'm antisemitic, despite the fact that Marx himself was antisemitic and they defend him and adore what he says)
    11
  3139. If that is the case, then that's even more worrying
    11
  3140. "@TIK no you didn't, you failed to respond real arguments coming form socialist channels." Mat, the "real" arguments are about as "real" as "real socialism". Half of them boiled down to "no, you're wrong", even though they'd written hundreds of words. Much like Das Kapital, there was no substance to their arguments. It was just opinions without facts. That's why I was able, when I did stand my ground, to tackle them. Go check those comments sections again and see my more recent messages and you will see. And I got 1,300 comments in the first 3 hours - and I simply wasn't able to respond to them all, which is when people started crying that "TIK's not responded to me, therefore I'm right". That's a common tactic of the far-left, downvote brigade videos you don't like. Best part is the hundreds of people screaming "I'm unsubscribing" and then only actually having about 30 people unsubscribe. "You are completely ideologically biased, exchanges with you are pointless, you are only trying to inflate your comments section, you are only recycling the same old refuted BS..." I can summarize what you just said as - "no, you're wrong". Why haven't you answered my statement about the Marx and Engels definition of socialism? Oh, that's right, because it invalidates every counterargument made.
    11
  3141. Also Mat, you ignore the fact that I fought and won many arguments in the comments of those videos. But the Marxist and National-Socialist upvote brigades didn't upvote those comments...
    11
  3142. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. But yeah, it was capitalism apparently...
    11
  3143. "But what has happened in Russia is not real Socialism." Marx/Engels wrote Das Kapital Volume 3 and said "socialized man, the producers" "in common control" of hte means of production is socialism. In short, socialism is : "the social group called the workers should be in common-control of the means of production". Ok, so what exactly does this mean? Well, since businesses and factories can't produce anything without people, the "means of production" is just a fancy way of saying "people". Now we have - "the social group called the workers should be in common-control of the people". But wait a second, the workers in control of the people? How can that be? That doesn't make much sense. Well, what Marx meant by the phrase "socialized man, the producers [workers]" was a group of people called the "workers" being in charge of other people. This could take the form of a worker's council (in Russian, council is the word "soviet") or a "dictatorship of the proletariat". Either way, one group of people are in "common-control" of another group of people. So what does this "common-control" thing actually mean? It means a rejection of individualism, in favour of the collective. Individuals are no longer in control of their own life, since they are slaves to the public-collective. A "public" is, by definition, not private. This is why the public-sector means state/government while private-sector means non-state/individual. So in reality, common control actually means state-control. Now we have the definition of Marxism - A dictatorship in total-control of the people (in the name of the "workers"). "NO! This is distortion of History. Find me where this was ever written." This is why socialism manifests itself as this over and over. The theory written down sounds nice, but the reality is that the words have been masked to hide their true meaning. You wrote that the idea itself is noble and inspiring. Yes, but only on the surface. The reality is that millions of people are being duped by what actually is a terrible ideology that power-mongers are happy to latch onto in order to get into power. It is deceptive from its very core.
    11
  3144. Yup! I do feel sorry for him. Currently working on Operation Crusader research, and the situation isn't much better for Auchinleck either
    11
  3145. I think it's human nature to praise the underdog. It's like the British at Arnhem bridge, fighting on even though there's no hope of survival. But maybe if they did something slightly different, they could have held on a little longer...
    11
  3146. Who says Monty was the "best" the English had?
    11
  3147. Yep. And people say Wikipedia is an impartial source, and can't understand why you shouldn't use it.
    11
  3148. If that is the case, Brereton and Gavin should have been sacked as well.
    11
  3149. Jed, seriously, no race (Jewish or others) is to blame for anything. The world is not divided neatly into social groupings like you see it. Sure, there are communities and broad groupings to be made, but these groups are made up of individuals and are not a hive mind of insects that give up their individual rights to the "greater group". No human actually acts like that, because we're individuals; individuals who are not like other individuals in that group. Therefore entire groups of people are not responsible for anything. Not every German-speaking person wanted to go to war. Not every 'Brit' was anti-Nazi. We use group names only as convenience, not as absolute divisions between people. Therefore "the Jews" aren't responsible for any "subversion" (not that they would be even if they were a hive mind, since it was the Germans who murdered them) and the way you perceive the world is fundamentally flawed.
    11
  3150. Dean, as shown in the video, XXX Corps arrived at 0930hrs on day 3. They then suffered a critical 36 hour delay in taking the Nijmegen Bridge. Gavin later then lied, saying XXX Corps were too slow, and said they were 36 hours behind schedule... But they were on time, and only got 36 hours behind schedule AFTER they got to Nijmegen.
    11
  3151. Hey guys, I'm a fake "historin". I mean, I don't know what a "historin" is, but whatever it is, I'm a fake one
    11
  3152. Not sure about the USSR, but Britain only paid her debt back in 2006 (I think). I remember reading about it at the time.
    11
  3153.  @dusk6159  "not just limiting himself to tell history plainly." There's a place for those sorts of videos, but yeah I'm somewhat fatigued by the wishy-washy histories that don't go in-depth enough, or sit on the fence. Just because people don't give you their opinions doesn't mean they don't have any.
    11
  3154. Happy New Year to you too, Vass! I'm sorry if I didn't make the currency vs money bit clear enough :( but yes, the Reichsbank had laid the foundation for the Weimar Hyperinflation years beforehand. Other factors would also lead to the hyperinflation, and I'll be explaining one major one in the next episode of that series which I hope to release after the next Stalingrad video
    11
  3155. My pleasure! I even managed to get the subtitles done this time (unlike in Crusader) although it took a while
    11
  3156. Well I hope you take the advice to heart 🙂 good luck with your exams!
    10
  3157. You can't avoid being biased - everyone is biased. But what you can do is eliminate a significant amount of "unobjectivity" (which is the thing you're actually trying to avoid as a historian). You can't become 100% objective, but you can aim for it. The best way to become unobjective is to look at both sides - both alternative arguments. So for example if Argument A was that Hitler was blonde, and Argument B was that Hitler was Bald, you've got to look deeply into both arguments. Start with the first argument, and see if you can construct reasons and evidence as to why that is likely to be the case. Then look at the second argument and do the same. Give equal chance to both sides. Then, once both arguments are made, look at both and see which one makes the most logical sense to you given the evidence. Sometimes there's not a right answer, but when you do make a decision, it's probably best to think "I'm siding with this argument for now until I see better evidence" rather than saying "I'm siding with this argument, and nothing can change my mind", if that makes sense. This is quite a deep topic. I'll make a note to cover it in a future History Theory video because I could discuss this a lot.
    10
  3158. Thank you! I don't want you to always agree with me on everything. My goal is to get you to think, and so disagreeing shows you're not just blindly following what I preach, but going out there and looking into this stuff yourself 👍
    10
  3159. Maybe. But not now. Courland, Stalingrad, then back to North Africa
    10
  3160. This is an objective critique of Lenin. The guy was a mass-murderer who lied in order to gain power, which was all he ever wanted. And since I'm a human being who does not deny my own thoughts, I will not pretend to be anything but disgusted by this creature. It is "objective" to include my own thoughts and feelings in the analysis - it shows I'm thinking, and that I'm not pretending to be something that I'm not (a "blank slate"). This is what being objective means, as I explained in this video here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI And all authors are "biased", so that's not valid criticism either.
    10
  3161. Probably will, although Anton Joly has already done a series on this - his Suzdal Camp series, starting here https://youtu.be/dqOuwrMSdjw I think Part IV is on the Nuremberg trials, but the whole series is really well done
    10
  3162. The more people tell me not to do something, the more I do it. This is precisely why I read up on Mises and Rothbard. Everyone was screaming at me for "just believing Mises and Rothbard" when I hadn't actually read them. After arguing back that I hadn't read them, I began to wonder why they were so adamant that I had read them. So I picked up some of Mises' books (like his book "Socialism", and later his "Omnipotent Government") and realized that I'd independently come to the same conclusions as them regarding National Socialism based on the evidence, and then discovered that their economics was not only far superior to all the socialist "economics" (politics) that I was brainwashed with, but it opened my eyes to an entirely different way of looking at the world that wasn't what I had presumed the "conservative extremist right-wing racist nut-job" world view to be. Turns out that Mises and Rothbard aren't conservatives, aren't extremists, aren't "right-wing", aren't "racists", aren't sexists, and aren't nut-jobs... It turns out that all those insults are just that - insults, designed to make people assume the worst and therefore not pick up their books in the first place. But actually, their books make a lot more sense than the nonsense that Marx, Keynes or any of the lamestream media come out with.
    10
  3163. Exactly. They couldn't run the tanks they had, let alone more. Also makes sense to upgrade the tanks you do have rather than build more.
    10
  3164. @The God Emperor, I am too! I'm really pleased with the way it's progressed so far, and the feedback has been great!
    10
  3165. @Hermit Oldguy - I'm a humble guy and don't want to be swamped in feelings of "greatness". I also try to improve with every video that I do. So I can't become closed minded to criticism, even though some of the criticism isn't constructive to say the least...
    10
  3166.  @АлексейКосарчук  Yes, stocks are individually owned, but you're buying a SHARE in the company. SHARED ownership is PUBLIC ownership. The company itself isn't private, which is why we call them publicly traded companies. See my previous link.
    10
  3167. Let the hate begin!
    10
  3168. I'm glad you like it. Sadly, some don't like this type of content (analysing sources and discussing historical debates or theories). There's been a bit of opposition to this sort of content in the comments. And I'm not referring to the Nazi comments, I mean people not liking the analysis style videos
    10
  3169. There's a bunch denying it in the comments already!
    10
  3170. Well, the encirclement of the 6th Army didn't last 7 months, the entire battle did (~20th July 1942 to ~3rd of February 1943). So the Germans were only going hungry for about 2-3 months. But yes, it's still a bit much to assume that drugs could sustain them for that length of time. However, it does make sense that they rested in the breaks between the offensives in the city, then took drugs to sustain them for a few days during each offensive.
    10
  3171.  @seegurke93  What, specifically, are you struggling with?
    10
  3172. "I'm just trying to explain that large corporations can be anti-capitalists through corporatism and crony capitalism." "they also joined forces with big business" This is where you're slipping up: corporations nowadays are not the same as corporations in the Fascist and Nazi era. Corporations today mena big business, but back then they meant trade unions (essentially). The Nazi corporations acted the same - they were giant trade unions. Look up "syndicalism", and read Farrell's book - it will help you understand.
    10
  3173. Yes, I should have said there were no "death camps" rather than concentration camps.
    10
  3174. He was a tramp!
    10
  3175. "In a centralized economy, value is produced and profits are distributed or allocated by a central (i.e. governmental) authority. In a decentralized economy value is produced by virtue of the market, and profits are distributed by entrepreneurs by way of salaries or payments to shareholders, and also through taxation. This is to provide to more or less strict control of the authority which is expected to regulate, but not to allocate." A couple of points here. 1. Yes I agree with you that Hitler's economy was much more of the top than the bottom. 2. the bottom one is not a free market because it has taxation (which is state manipulation of the market). Same with regulation, inflation, central banking etc. "In the end, it seems to me that Nazi Germany had a centralized economy much like the Soviet one, so it is my opinion that racism has little to do with economic organization." So let me try explain it a different way. In the Soviet (or Marxist) socialist system, it's a central controlled economy. But hypothetically it's for the 'proletariat' or the 'workers' rather than the 'bourgeoisie'. So you have socialism (state control) and Marxism (class). Well, the same thing applies to Hitler's Third Reich. It's a centrally controlled economy, but it's for the 'German (Aryan)' or the 'race' rather than the 'Jews' or 'international finance'. So you have socialism (state control) and Nationalism '(race' in this case, not nationality). Now yes, Hitler is also against Marxism (class), for various reasons, but that doesn't make him a capitalist, nor does it mean that he didn't have any interest in economics, or that economics wasn't important etc. "After all, didn't Hitler and his followers rely on a common anti-jew sentiment by the German population, just in order to tighten their political control over the population? Personally, I'm convinced that one is economic, the other is purely political." This is going to be a video in the future, but I'll give a brief explanation here. Hitler believed in the 'primacy of politics' over economics. Economics came second to him. Economics had to bow down to politics. So he was willing to compromise on the economic front when it suited him. This is why you have elements of 'capitalism' (not actual capitalism, but what socialists believe capitalism is) left in the economy, such as the 'privatization' of the industries, and 'profits'. There's also the point that Hitler couldn't really implement his socialism fully until he'd conquered Lebensraum, which he never did. Hitler socialized the economy, and removed the Jews from the economy. He took their businesses off them, stole their wealth, and eventually murdered them. In this instance, the politics and the economics are linked so tightly in both the theory and practice of it that distinguishing between the two is pretty much impossible. It's a 'chicken and the egg' situation.
    10
  3176. "@TIK actually doctors/pharmacys 'produce health' as you put it. The NHS provides access to that. It does however not actually socialise the means of 'producing health'." So, in your own words, the socialization or nationalization of the means of production... is not socialism... It's no wonder we've never had REAL socialism then
    10
  3177. @Bravo Mokeyy - no, it's run poorly by the state and is a colossal waste of money. I've had three checkups in +12 years, and it's cost me an ungodly amount of money, and because I work I have to pay for medicine if I get any. It's only "free" for those who don't work. That's why the lazy intellectuals in society love it. It's an excuse to redistribute wealth to them, and a way to win votes. Whether you use it or not, you have to pay for it. When it fails, they say "give us more money to fix the thing we've let fail in the first place". There's no incentive to keep the thing running right. Should just let it fail and go back to private health care, which would be significantly cheaper if the government kept out of it.
    10
  3178. Mr Joly! Nice to see you, and I agree! Just so you know, I aim to reply to your email tomorrow morning :)
    10
  3179. I would like to cover the Japanese stuff at some point. However, I think I've got a lot of topics that need covering in the European Theatre that it'll be a while before I get to it
    10
  3180. Correct, thanks for pointing that out. What I spoke was correct and the text is wrong
    10
  3181. Do you have a link to the online journal?
    10
  3182. Well, I know there are a lot of better guitarists out there than me. But I'll give it a shot
    10
  3183. Except the initial SHAEF report declaring 1,000 panzers in the Reichswald, no there was no evidence. And yes, defending in the built-up areas makes sense. However, the classic counter-argument to moving off the Groesbeek Heights is "you've got to protect your landing zones" - which also was the Groesbeek Heights. Why not deploy West of Nijmegen instead, I've no idea, but you're right that the open terrain around Groesbeek wouldn't have been enough to stop a sizeable panzer-force.
    10
  3184. Sadly, I'm a one man band. I did put subtitles in the video though if you turn them on
    10
  3185. I did mention this in the video ;) but I don't think that alone explains it.
    10
  3186. I don't think others will let me wait too long to continue Stalingrad
    10
  3187. Maarten, consider this - Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. Also, saying National-Socialism is socialism didn't attract National Socialists at all, because I also said they were just like the Marxists. In those videos, you have a united-Left, both the National Socialists and Marxist Socialists all in union together against the idea that they are alike in any way. But to anyone who isn't a socialist, the differences are minimal. This is why the Left's identity politics includes racism.
    10
  3188. And Zaitsev is on the list, don't worry
    10
  3189. Me too. Just can't win
    10
  3190. 12 to 1 in 1941, overall 2.5 or 3 to 1 throughout the whole war. So the Soviets made good their losses towards the end. Germans weren't superior. They held the advantage in 1941, and to some extent 1942. But that's only because they struck an enemy that wasn't prepared for war. When the Soviets recovered from the initial surprise attack, they fought equally as hard as the Germans. Note - I'm saying they fought equally. Neither side was "superior" to the other by a large margin. The Soviets were able to stop the "Blitzkrieg" tactical and operational attacks at Stalingrad and Kursk and other battles, then also defeat the Germans on the strategic level. To imply that they were incompetant or inferior, relying on mass human wave attacks (which a lot of the narrative says they were) is factually incorrect.
    10
  3191. Thanks but it's not happening. I'm prioritising finishing this series and will take a break once it's done
    10
  3192. Ich bin nicht MHV (honest)
    10
  3193. You could say... it TANKed
    10
  3194. "That may seem like a contradiction but freedom is not just about being free from restrictions it's also about being free to do things." Like serve in a slave labour-Gulag camp?
    10
  3195. My pleasure! Here is a picture of Schmidt being taken prisoner http://www.bruneval42.com/sites/default/files/styles/cycle/public/images/slides/copie-de-h_017354.jpg
    10
  3196. Exactly, it's obvious what Putin's intentions are here. That's why the narrative he's pushing is questionable at best
    10
  3197. Except Marx maintained his anti-Semitism into his later years, and Das Kapital is rife with it. His views didn't change! He said in Das Kapital that the "value" contained within money and commodities were the "offspring" of the capitalists, which is why he called commodities "inwardly circumcised J's"...
    10
  3198. Also https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave https://www.etymonline.com/word/Slav?ref=etymonline_crossreference The word "Slav" is one of the origins of the word "Slave" but may NOT be referring to Slavic peoples.
    10
  3199. If you were excited for this, by the ending you'll be even more excited for the next episode!
    10
  3200. I don't blame Lutheran doctrine. Some of the people on this like (e.g. Mao and Pol Pot) weren't Lutherans. It's just that the first four were.
    10
  3201. I'm not sure if it was "unique" but I certainly agree with the rest of your comment :)
    10
  3202. Yep, that'll do
    10
  3203. It is truly scary times :(
    10
  3204. I'm really glad to hear that :) if you like this, you may also enjoy my ongoing Stalingrad documentary. This video (Crusader) was the longest battle documentary I've done up to this point, but Stalingrad is now longer, and the Germans haven't even reached the city yet!
    10
  3205. Well, I'm not sure if I did destroy a myth. I think I destroyed a false-perception, rather than a myth. But either way, I hope you enjoy the video :)
    10
  3206. Yes I have definitely considered covering the Pacific Battles. I think I should do more North Africa for now, but I do intend to go there at some point. Normandy and Fallaise Pocket will occur once we've been through North Africa, Sicily and maybe parts of Italy, because I want to cover the background of the conflicts between the British and American generals first.
    10
  3207. "Probably too distracted by pushing Tikenomics to get much history done these days." Yes, because economic history isn't REAL history, just like Socialism isn't REAL Socialism.
    10
  3208. The big one ;)
    10
  3209. A lot are, despite me making it extremely clear that they're every four weeks. Why are they not listening!?
    10
  3210. No worries about the correction - I was going off what one of the books said. And you're right about the Kammhuber line, although there's more to it than just that
    10
  3211. ​ @Edax_Royeaux  "As TIK would say, history is the debate." Yes, but a debate requires both sides to listen and be honest in their responses. You guys are not listening, and your arguments regarding what socialism and capitalism are lack both evidence and logic. In addition, your responses are about as dishonest as they come. I've seen the video you've pointed to, and it's made by someone who decided one day to pull out the hat the idea that I was a secret Nazi anti-Semite. ZERO evidence for said claim - he just made it up on the spot, much like he's making up what he's saying in the video. The guy is an absolute dishonest scumbag, and the fact that you've recommended people to go watch that video is proof in the pudding that you're a waste of time to debate with. The guy is a smearer and slanderer, and it's a waste of time responding to him. Here is some of the stuff he's said about me in a comment from 7 months ago (his spelling mistakes included): ... "AS for your second paragraph, utter projection. You have frequently equated capitalism with Jews in order to further a narrative. You are a racist antisemite that distorts the history of the holocaust to fit your narrative. "-You completely ignores the history of the Jewish Left "-You advance an anti-Semitic argument, associating Jews with capitalism....which erases the history of the Jewish working class + racist stereotyping. "-Your attempts to paint the Nazi persecution of Jews as an anti capitalist endeavor, this is false since the Nazis persecuted Jews of all occupations etc. "Your attitude towards Jews reminds me of Goering’s statement “I will decide who is a Jew”. Utterly reprehensible. "AS for your drivel about “not truuuu privitsation” + “not truuuuuu capitalism”, your lies and myths were settled at the Krupp, IG Farben, Flick etc. trials. Your revisionist history is ridiculous." ... (More quotes from him elsewhere responding to my viewers:) "TIK, thinks McDonalds and Amazon are socialist'..he also thinks Jews controlled the Chinese economy before the communist revolution. He is a anti-Semitic loon." "Cry more, he is an anti-Semite who thinks the Jews controlled the Chinese economy." "Again, why do you defend a fool who thinks the economy of China was controlled by the "Judeo Bourgeoise"?" "The man is clearly a delusional anarcho-capitalist(which is an oxymoronic ideology), I despise people who pretend to be impartial when they clearly not. His ideology has made him so deranged that he prefers to listen to halfwits like Samuels(who is not a respected historian) over Evans and Kershaw." "Its hilarious isn't it? He calls us antisemites when he constantly claims that Jews=bourgeoise..which is not only extremely wrong but also extremely anti-Semitic." "TIK is lying when he claims that the means of production were socialised...as you state, the means of production were mostly in private hands(like the other capitalist nations of the second world war). See Krupp, IG Farben etc. What a dishonest hack."
    10
  3212. Actually, thinking about it - I remember that there's a Citino lecture where he said he deliberately went out of his way not to use the term "turning point", so I don't think he said there was a main turning point. Here's the lecture if you're interested https://youtu.be/UNDhswF1GKk or it might be this one https://youtu.be/1SdO-btKuds (I forget)
    10
  3213. Thank you for that information. Conflicting orders does seem to be a thing at this stage, as well as animosity between the senior Axis commanders. The annoying part though is that, because Gambara didn't react (his fault or not) it gives the German commanders extra evidence to blame the Italians for the loss of the battle. However, as I pointed out, the Italians can't be blamed for the failure of the entire Axis force during Operation Crusader, since the loss came before this point. That fault lies with Crüwell and/or Rommel. This was just one of the last dominoes to fall.
    10
  3214. Yes, I'm making enemies of group-thinkers. They'll especially dislike my video on "The Vampire Economy" coming later this week (see Pinned Comment).
    10
  3215. Yes! Add-in some anti-tank guns and infantry, and it would no longer be "World of Tanks". Also, tanks have health bars? What is this, Command and Conquer?!?
    10
  3216. Yes! Even I get lost at times!
    10
  3217. Ah. I assumed that, like someone else complained about, he was suggesting that as a Brit I "should have said" the word "math" instead of "maths" (which is the US/Canadian verison). Even though I don't care about pointless language arguements, which is why I said "abbreve" even though that's not a valid abbreviation.
    10
  3218. Thank you Vlad, it's great to hear when people appreciate what I'm trying to do here :) also. there's no problem disagreeing with me, so long as you provide evidence and a compelling argument. In fact, I encourage you do disagree if you do have a compelling counterargument because having others counter my arguments means I can see which arguments hold water or not.
    10
  3219. Oh harhar. Take your heart and get out
    10
  3220. Because my job is to correct the distortions of history.
    10
  3221. "It wasn't so bad in the 80's before the collapse." Yes, but it could have been so much better had they had given people the freedom to do and buy what they wanted rather than have their entire lives mandated by the state. The west catapulted ahead while the Soviet Union dragged further and further behind. This is why it collapsed - because when some freedom was finally allowed, the people decided they wanted more of it.
    10
  3222. "Complete BS. Even the Estonian historians, like Mart Laar can't lie much because the number of deported Estonians is well established from the archival data. They are claiming that 10,000 were exiled in 1941. The actual number is 9156, of whom 3178 were arrested and sent to camps and 5978 to settlements in remote areas of the USSR." @simplicius, are you seriously arguing over 844 people? 9,156 people vs 10,000 people is 844. Not that I agree with your source, since mine states more than that, but stating such a low difference in the claimed numbers completely undermines your argument as "proof" that Estonian historians are lying. This is hilarious. Also, considering the population of Estonia was only around 1.1 million people, having 60,000 people (my source) taken from them does mean that many people would have known someone who was taken since that is 5.4% of the country.
    10
  3223. Famous last words
    10
  3224. You must have guilt and shame for it to be taken away. So yes, Christianity instills guilt and shame, then preaches Jesus. Again, this was addressed in this video.
    10
  3225. Well he was able to turn Aryan blood into panzer oil
    10
  3226. Turkey drove their tanks into cities alone? Are they insane!?!
    10
  3227. @Khan "I see now what you were getting at in the March 19th comment section, and your logic seems sound." Thanks :) as a result of all this in-depth research into Nazi ideology, I've discovered some very VERY interesting concepts and details which change our perception of WW2. I'll be following this up soon. "I am still wondering if you think the Nazi government is totalitarian or not. After reading these sources, do you think the Socialization of the economy under the Aryan race constitutes the requisite control over the economy to be labeled totalitarian?" Yes it was totalitarian. I hinted at it in the video, but the reality is that the National Socialist state absolutely controlled the economy to such an extent that it... was nationalized in all but name (to put it simply). There's a lot more to it than that, but I'll follow it up. If you read those three books I recommened above, you'll understand exactly where I'm going with this.
    10
  3228. The reality is, it's not black and white. The world at the minute is a mix of socialism and capitalism. The UK economy has a partly-free economy (e.g. me, Tescos and Costa etc), but also a part-state economy (e.g. the NHS, regulation, centralised planning etc). Somewhere in the region of 35% taxation basically means the UK individual is 35% non-free. "Then if everything is a socialism then why do you put so much emphasis on the fact economy was a socialism, but not a capitalism?" Because if you move from free-market towards socialism, then the government and ideology that does that is socialist. Hitler and National Socialism absolutely moved towards Socialism during this period, as Günter Reimann makes clear. To say that it wasn't socialist/socialism would be very very wrong.
    10
  3229. "@TIK Could you please provide any examples of countries with capitalism, given your definition. Every state has indirect control over means of production inside the country." Bingo. Arguably the closest country that ever got towards capitalism was Britain in the late 1800s during the classical-Liberalism era. But even then, they didn't have full-capitalism because it the Liberal Party was taken over by socialists (especially after Lloyd George and Churchill).
    10
  3230. "putting up with the comments from the ‘experts’ " Trust the Experts™!
    10
  3231. Yeah, I don't get the "truckers = fascist" argument at all. It doesn't make sense for Leftists to call the workers "fascists".
    10
  3232. Boris Johnson isn't a good PM, and I'm not a fan of the Conservative Party (who were the old Left-wing party back in 1850), and I have voted for Labour in the past. But now I know what the game is, and I'll never be voting for any of the current parties ever again. Every ballot I get from now on is going to be spoilt, because I'm not giving my support for a one-party state that masquerades as a multi-party system.
    10
  3233. If I found out that everything I've ever said was wrong, I'd be the first person to admit it. Thank you for your comment
    10
  3234. The video hasn't been out 10 minutes!
    10
  3235. Yes, 74 years today! It's also 3 years since I released my Market Garden documentary
    10
  3236. Is he/she not very good?
    10
  3237. I've not seen James Bond films so I don't know. The closest I've got to James Bond is James Pond, but that's a different thing entirely...
    10
  3238. Yeah I know, I just keep forgetting it :( thanks though!
    10
  3239. But Wikipedia is the greatest source in the universe, is it not? 🤡
    10
  3240. I'm glad to hear you like it! I do think it makes sense to have a female voice read female quotes. It doesn't sound right when I read out such quotes
    10
  3241. I'm more than certain it was, but as you can see, the reinforcements going to Army Group Centre was a lot more than was actually needed to replace the losses.
    10
  3242. Deal!
    10
  3243.  @ryanmurray7941  That's not a bad idea! I need to do more videos on the Western Powers again so it makes sense to compare and contrast the troops. I'll make a note
    10
  3244. Excellent that I've managed to get through to you. I'm curious to know what exactly was it fro my videos that helped drive you away from facsism?
    10
  3245. It's mainly his personality, with a dash of nationalism on the part of both the British and the Americans.
    10
  3246. I'm already in the bad-books of some of the Reddit subs, despite the fact that I've answered all their counter-arguments in the Hitler's Socialism video. They just refuse to watch that video or engage in the debate.
    10
  3247. Glad you agree Ray! And yes, the forces outside the encirclement would have needed to be informed. Although, at the moment the encirclement closed, there was only remnants and rear-service troops manning a thin German line to the south and west, dotted with the odd larger formation. So that's less of an issue. The bigger issue is that Paulus would have had to leave almost all his artillery behind and he would have had to abandon all of the ground he took over the past 5-7 months. To make that decision on his own, especially since he was being told to hold because they would supply him and get him out, would have taken some guts.
    10
  3248. I'll make them cute and cuddly next time
    10
  3249. Haha thanks! It was a nice break, although my friend got fired from her job so it wasn't a relaxing evening. And I don't know about anyone else, but I actually don't like ale that's too cold. It needs to be cool, but not like ice, if you get me
    10
  3250. I hadn't thought of it that way - that's a very good point.
    10
  3251. Since you're provided a recommendation for Surovov's works, I would also recommend the book "Stumbling Colossus" by David Glantz, which was written as a definitive answer to the claims made by Suvorov and others. Historian Robert Citino has stated that we're in the "David Glantz era" of WW2 history, such is the authority and respect Glantz commands in this area of study.
    10
  3252. Gavin didn't take the bridge though - causing a fatal 36 hour delay for XXX Corps, which he then blamed on the British.
    10
  3253. You weren't wrong, but you missed the one crucial point :) which is good, because it shows that not enough books give credit to where credit's due
    10
  3254. A lot of my audience aren't conservative nor libertarian. Many don't agree with me. I have picked up 20,000 new subscribers after the Southport video, and many are from the 'Left' and working class.
    10
  3255. They were just a taster for what's to come :)
    10
  3256. I'm also interested in Berlin. Not sure if it will be straight after Stalingrad though. I think the we'll be going back to the North African Campaign immediately after Stalingrad
    10
  3257. +Thumper He is a dude! And O'Connor wasn't the guy in charge of XXX Corps (the tanks advancing up Hell's Highway), he was in charge of VII Corps which was on the flank of XXX Corps. I didn't directly mention him in my Market Garden documentary as VII Corps only affected one small part of the Market Garden story towards the end. There's actually a (cheap!) book that looks purely at Richard O'Connor's performance in Normandy and asks why it doesn't compare to his success in North Africa. I won't say too much (because it's an interesting read) but basically O'Connor isn't to blame. http://www.amazon.co.uk/General-OConnors-Northwest-Effective-Expected-ebook/dp/B00NXZHGA6/
    10
  3258. It's something I want to cover, yes. It may be a while away though.
    10
  3259. @Matthew, sadly its not really YouTube's fault. The main cause is the advertisers. Maybe I should just replace the Swastika was the Wall Street Journal logo
    10
  3260. That is the quesiton :)
    10
  3261. And it's a genuine Patreon too. I'm sure there will be other jokey names up there soon after this...
    10
  3262.  @runethorsen8423  Oh har har!
    10
  3263. You're mixing two sets of statistics there. There wasn't 22 million Soviets on the Eastern Front at any moment in time. The most there was at any moment was 6.9 million (in late July 1943). When the Axis peaked at 4 million in early July 1943, there was 6.7 million Soviets on the Eastern Front. When the war began, the Axis had 3.957 million men on the Eastern Front, and the Soviets had 2.74 million. Axis outnumber the Soviets until December of 1941, when the Soviets finally gain parity with the Axis. They then go on to outnumber the Germans (roughly 2 to 1) for the rest of the war - and I look at and provide the full statistics in the video. In 1941 and 1942, Germany was not fighting multiple fronts. The North African Campaign at this time was just 2-3 divisions. The Eastern Front dwarfed that. British bombing was the only bombing they had to contend with until mid-1942 because the US hadn't even arrived yet. "Numbers only are not giving an accurate picture of anything, but even the number only approach make the Wehrmacht look far superior." Yes, the numbers do show that the Wehrmacht was far superior in 1941 when they outnumbered the Soviets, caught the Soviets in the middle of mobilisation, and caught them completely by surprise. Funny though that that's when some historians think they lost the war, and when you look at Operation Barbarossa, it wasn't as sooth as some of the German generals made it out to be. "Forget about the numbers and think out of the math box. History and the world is not simply black and white like number crunching. It's simply not that simple." It is not, however the point of the video was to show that people's perceptions of the war are based on what the German generals told you happened. Pick up an English-language history book on the Eastern Front of WW2 (there are some exceptions but these are more recent and few) and you will find that they are relying almost entirely on German sources. Go to Amazon and look up WW2, you'll get biography after biography on German generals, and German units, and German operations. Then try find the Soviet biographies, units or operations... There's barely any! This is a massive bias towards the Germans! And of course the Germans are going to say how superior they area - they're not going to admit how bad they were. No, when they make mistakes, they blame people who are dead - Hitler, Göring... or people who do not have credibility to defend themselves after the war, like Paulus (hint - he wasn't as passive as the other German generals made him out to be). Guderian lies through his teeth about Barbarossa. Manstein lies through his teeth about Stalingrad. Raus gets his dates mixed up - a period of 3 days of combat near Stalingrad is made out to have actually taken place in 1 day in Raus's memoirs (13th to 15th of December 1942) - let alone several other holes in his account. In history, you have to read ALL the sources. Soviet sources (and yes, some are unreliable, just like the German sources are unreliable) need to be read too. The only way to get an accurate picture of the war is to take both sides of the story and compare them against each other. That is the closest you'll get to the truth. And unfortunately, the vast majority of historians who have written books on the Eastern Front have not done this. Mainly this is because the Soviet archives have been unaccessable for over 70 years, and this has caused a warping in our perceptions on the Eastern Front. This is why I made this video, to shake that perception. Unfortunately, a lot of people are unwilling to at least consider that there is such a huge bias, even though it's blatantly obvious one exists.
    10
  3264. Please don't insult people. That doesn't win arguments and only makes you sound dumb. Try actually debating the issues at hand.
    10
  3265. Simple! Don't have a house, dog, car, wife, or kids. Ok, I'm sorta joking... but not really. The reality is, time flies when you get older because you have less of it to spare. Most of it is spent on auto-pilot just doing things you do every day, like the dishes etc. So you forget about most of it, and then the years zoom by. I'm 31, happily single (don't have to be, I've turned down two opportunities to get married so far), and while I like pets and whatnot, they're not a priority to me. I think you have to choose what you want in life. If you choose to have a family and lots of friends and partying and watching TV and etc, fair enough. But if I choose to put my hobbies and careers first (I suddenly sound like a feminist!) then those other things will have to wait. Significant amounts of time can be saved by simply prioritizing (although if you've already got a family, you can't/shouldn't deprioritze them). That said, there's a few more pieces of advice I can give you - First is: don't sacrifice your sleep. Get at least 8 hours of sleep per night minimum. Why? If you do just 30 minutes of work per day, you'll get the most out of it if you're not trying to stay awake. This is something that's boosted my productivity massively. I used to think doing 80 hours a week was good. Now I realise that I can do 90 hours worth of work in about 70 hours by just getting more hours sleep. In fact, I went out on Saturday for the first time in a couple of months, ended up messing up my sleep cycle, and it's Wednesday now and my sleep/work pattern still hasn't fully recovered. Concentration and focus for the last few days has been down as a result. And yet there's people out every weekend - really isn't good for their brains, their wallets, or their productivity. Second is: go to bed early and get up early. If you have kids that get up at say 8am, there's nothing stopping you getting up at 7am and doing an hours' worth of work in that super-quiet hour before they're even up. In fact, I get up at 7am every day regardless (that was until this Saturday, but tomorrow I will be back to 7am haha). This does require discipline on your part, and going to bed early. However chances are you should be going to bed earlier anyway. Super relevant and important video, even though it's long - https://youtu.be/pwaWilO_Pig Third is: find whatever minutes you can throughout the day. Got a spare 10 minutes? Use it. Realise you can stop watching that one TV show and go do something productive instead. Do it. Got a thousand apps on your phone? Delete them all. You'll be surprised by how much time you waste per day doing things like checking your phone. It's pointless stuff. Stop doing it. Fourth is: if you can pay your kids to do the washing up, pay them to do the washing up. If not them, someone else. Save time by paying other people for their services to free up your time, even if it's just an hour of your time. This may make you poorer in the short-term, but this is a capital investment to free up your time. This 'bought' time could also be used so that you can work on that project that may provide you with more income later. This is actually the basis of the capitalist system - capitalists take a risk by investing their money in production they believe in. In this case, you're paying someone else so you can be more productive. It's still a capital investment, and it's still a risk, but it may also pay off in the long-run. Similarly, if you can purchase a product that will help reduce the time it takes to create the product that you want to create, buy it! Fifth is: plan, plan, plan, plan, plan, plan, PLAN. Did I mention planning? Plan to plan. On the drive to work: plan. On the way to drop the kids off at school: plan. Are you doing the dishes because you don't have any spare money to follow my fourth point? PLAN. You can be x10 more efficient if you've planned out your spare time in advance. Plan your day and stick to it. Calendars, schedules and routines are there for a reason - use them. Efficiency often comes from planning. And yes, I spent way too long on this comment, which only you and maybe three other people will ever read. Not an efficient use of my time, but so long as you get something out of it, I think it'll be worth it. Cheers!
    10
  3266. I was. But I have other priorities than that rubbish... I'll get to it one day
    10
  3267. I too hope YouTube doesn't suppress these videos. We'll see. But I've not monetized this video as I don't want to give them any excuses to suppress it. That said, I'm really glad all this is making sense to people because I think we're onto something big here. This religious aspect to the ideology explains practically everything.
    10
  3268.  @albertarthurparsnips5141  "He has an….interesting….habit of ignoring the existence of what is, in fact, a legion of critics" You realise that the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video was a direct to response to those 'legion' of critics? And what did they do? Nothing. They dismissed it completely and didn't watch it. I then shortened it down into a 42 minute video, thinking that the length was the issue the first time round. I added in extra details, updated my sources, and published. Guess what, they ignored it too. Not only did they not watch it fully, they didn't even watch the first minute, as I deliberately put something in the first minute KNOWING full well that they would bring that up in their "debunking" comments. And, no surprise, they spouted the very thing I addressed in that first minute of the video. In fact, if you look at my responses to these comments, you'll see me and my viewers calling them out over and over, but they still REFUSE to watch the video. So yes, I've learnt my lesson. My critics aren't listening, and I've tried and tried to get them to do so, only to feel so frustrated that I can't even get them to watch a minute of a video. So I've now decided to take a stand. I will listen to my critics, but I won't necessrily respond to them. I will only respond to those that take me seriously, which my critics clearly have not. Respect is earned, not taxed. And if my critics continue to slander and smear me, dismiss all my evidence, not engage honestly in the discussion, and then act triumphant if and when I do respond, then I'm not interested. I'll give them what they deserve: silence.
    10
  3269. Marx didn't produce "intellectual output". He produced religious scripture.
    10
  3270. I haven't deleted any comments. If you have had a comment deleted, then it was reported by other users.
    10
  3271. Sources are listed in the pinned comment, not the description.
    10
  3272. "Between 1840 and the mid-1880s real wages only grew about 8%." Not in Britain they didn't. According to Table 7 and pages 25-26 of "British Economic Growth 1688-1959: Second Edition" by Phyllis Deane and Dole, there was a real wage increase of 25% between 1800 and 1824, and 40% between 1850. If average wage in 1850 was 100, by 1883 it had grown to either 150 or 142. So that's a roughly 42-50% increase. "For most people in Britain their daily existence was utter and dire poverty." And yet somehow massively better than what it was before industrialization. Paradoxical much? This is what Bernstein realised after writing the 4th Volume of Das Kapital in Marx's name, that the reality was that capitalism was making the workers richer, not poorer. And this was because of increases in production, low trade tariffs, and low taxation.
    10
  3273. It does begin! Didn't know that about the zh. I must admit, while my German is getting better I haven't started learning Russian, although I have been using forvo a lot (not all names are on there though)
    10
  3274. "- How did the free market result in the Iraq war, the Nakba?" It didn't. "- Which private business owned the Iraq war, the Nakba?" It didn't. "- How is no taxation a fair wage?" Because the workers get to keep 100% of their wages.
    10
  3275. 72111 - I have Marxists in the comments because they're attracted to my videos. Just because Marxists are here, that doesn't mean I'm an anti-Semite like Marx was (see: Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question” & Marx, “Das Kapital,” Volume 1 P107.)
    10
  3276. What about the bourgeoisie? The Aryan workers rising up and murdering and stealing off the bourgeoisie is classed as "citizens coming together to support programs with their money, pooling it together and creating something that benefits all"?
    10
  3277. I don't want them to sh*t themselves - I want them to THINK
    10
  3278. ScamallDorcha - you're dropping in the wrong area! The house is still there, but I'm in this fun summer camp called "Gulag". Wonderful place. Lots of fun activities. People are on this crazy new diet too.
    10
  3279. Lusty, I will do better, don't worry.
    10
  3280. Yes, but there's a bit more to it than that, e.g. the "Cosmic Order" and "ultimate Truth" concepts
    10
  3281. @Mad Moler  The only problem with that is that people complain when I post short videos 😣
    10
  3282. Actually yes I have considered it. I don't know how much demand there is for such content though, and until my new editor is up to speed it won't be a possibility anyway, but it is something I have considered
    10
  3283. "multiple times" lol.
    10
  3284. Nice counterargument.
    10
  3285. Marxists have been trying to redefine the term "socialism" since 1956. You can actually see it in the historiography. They're trying to twist it and turn it away from the idea that it is the state that controls the economy (because that doesn't work). But they still want the state to run the economy, so they're coming up with terms that don't make sense, like "state capitalism" or "anarcho socialism". All of this is because they're having to trick people into thinking that socialism is something that it isn't. But socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Always has been, always will be.
    10
  3286. Yes, although there may have been more German units available to place in the path of the Soviet pincers
    10
  3287. Yes, you could be right about all of that.
    10
  3288. That has to be the greatest idea ever (although I think Cadbury is owned by a US company now?)
    10
  3289. Mannerheim said it was only to retake the lost territories, not conquer Karelia... although actions speak louder than words
    10
  3290. Awesome! Thank you Vass! They'll be arriving just in time for the all-in-one Courland video next week (hopefully I get it rendered in time!)
    10
  3291. Well, I want to concentrate on Mosley for the moment, but I could do more on Franco in the future
    10
  3292. "Mosley... was a member of the Labour Party" Mosley was in the Conservatives for a couple years, then went Liberal, then went Labour for about 8 years, before founding the New Party, and then the BUF. So the counter will be that Mosley wasn't a real socialist, he was just an opportunist, and his moving across party lines "proves" that he didn't have a solid position. The problem with that narrative is that the Conservatives were the old Left-wing party in the mid 1800s. Because the Liberals embraced socialism ("New Liberalism"), they went from the Right to the Left. So all the Parties that Mosley was in were Left-wing, and Mosley was disappointed that they weren't radical enough to actually implement the socialist policies that they were preaching about. This is why I said in the video that he was probably an Actualist - he didn't care about the Real, he wanted to implement the Actual.
    10
  3293. I've only ever done like three tank videos ever, and the last one I made (the one on the Maus) didn't perform well at all. People aren't here for the tank content!
    10
  3294. Haldrick! That's awesome
    10
  3295. I'm trying not to drown in their salty tears
    10
  3296. @J K - "Can you tell us why those episodes about Stlingrad coming so rare?" I'm doing the Stalingrad series in seasons of 3 episodes at a time. The reason why is because each long break in between the seasons allows me to get more research done and do the scripts for the next season. - "but there is so much of other campaigns and battles to show and we are not inside Stalingrand yet." The priority is the Stalingrad campaign, but I have been working on and off on another Battlestorm video too... Not spoiling what that is yet. I can confirm that we will get into Stalingrad city itself in Season 6.
    10
  3297. They're coming from 4chan, apparently
    10
  3298. It's not self-censorship. YouTube has censored me. I have to conform to YouTube's ridiculous policies because if I didn't, they'll suppress this video like they did the Greek one, or some of my others. If they suppress the videos, you'll never see them, I'll be out of a job, and none of my viewers would get anywhere near the amount of content they'd normally get. So yes, I'm not "self-censoring". YouTube is censoring me. So, if they're going to do that, I'm going to comply, but let everyone know that they're more than capable of complaining to YouTube about their ridiculous policies.
    10
  3299. Maybe we could make it into a test for people. "Belgium takes Norway" - ok, you failed
    10
  3300. According to Timothy Snyder in one of his lectures, one of the reasons Stalin didn't believe Hitler would attack is because the Germans at the border didn't have winter uniforms, so he thought they wouldn't do it. And yes, I'm not convinced that the fall of Moscow would end the war.
    10
  3301. The annoying part is, next week's video is going to take like three times longer to make, and will be significantly shorter. This is why I quite like making videos like this
    10
  3302. Yes, I actually bought books on the subject a while ago but haven't had time to do a video yet on him specifically. I have done videos mentioning the atrocities he's committed, but a video on Lenin's Socialist atrocities is on the cards. I've no idea when it will be though.
    10
  3303. Oh and speaking from experience, I wouldn't trust the NHS with any sort of care. Probably better to spend your time digging your own grave.
    10
  3304. The bias certainly remains against those with disabilities. I think there's an element of awkwardness that people have when in the presence of those with disabilities. They want to be "good" people, but at the same time don't know how to act with them, and this produces a feeling of guilt and shame. This manifests in some as a feeling that they should get away from the disabled, which in extreme cases turns into disgust... and then, of course, eugenics. What the solution is, I'm not sure. Perhaps you have some insight? But I think it could help if people knew to treat disabled people just like you would treat anyone else. In other words, they don't need special treatment from the guy in the street. (They need help from doctors and carers, but not somebody they've just met.) By not feeling like they need to be "good" and give them special treatment, then the feeling of guilt and shame probably wouldn't manifest.
    10
  3305. False, conservatives were also sent to the camps, including Von Papen's associates, many of whom were killed during the Night of the Long Knives. This, North Korea and the rest of your argument was addressed in the video itself. I'd suggest you watch it before spouting the same old Marxist propaganda we've all heard a million times before.
    10
  3306. I hope you enjoy it all :) I think many people will be surprised by some of the evidence and arguments I present, which they've probably never heard before
    10
  3307. Yeah, I realize this now. I also realize that who my opposition are, as this video shows https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    10
  3308. Woops! Posted that to the wrong bit (deleted it)
    10
  3309. Wow, thank you! I think you're one of the few socialists who actually took the time to listen, so I'm extremely grateful for that. And I'm also glad you respectfully disagree because that shows you're thinking independently, which is ultimately what I want people to do.
    10
  3310. You're making assumptions based on faulty information. The free market is the best thing for the workers, and if you're not sure why that is the case, I'd recommend looking into it further. Start with Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson".
    10
  3311. 1) I'm doing both. The reason I use this definition is not only because it's historic, but their definition is contradictory, as I explained 2) Collectivism and Socialism are synonyms of each other, and the arguments otherwise don't convince me to separate the terms
    10
  3312. Thank you for watching!
    10
  3313. The currency is becoming worthless, so people rush to make more of it in the stock market. The problem is that the stock market is at all time highs, and is ridiculously overpriced. Worse, you have to beat the inflation - which was 30% in 2020 in the UK last year (that's how much Sterling they printed - about 30%. The CPI doesn't reflect this). Therefore, there's a high chance of a crash where you lose everything, and even if there wasn't, unless you day trade, you're going to get destroyed in the stock market, and you've got no chance in making 30% in a year. So unless you're someone like Gregory Mannarino and know what you're doing (which I'm certainly not), then I'd stay clear of the stock market.
    10
  3314. That particular one was actually a birthday present from my friend.
    10
  3315. Yeah I'm also at a loss on how to get through to them. The mental gymnastics they employ to wriggle their way out of reality is astounding. I genuinely have exhausted myself trying to figure out how to get them to just stop and consider the possibility that they might have got things wrong. But they think we're "secret fascists" who are trying to trick them, so they're suspicious of everything we say, and thus look for quick and easy "gotcha" counter-points to dismiss us and declare victory. It's frustrating as anything.
    10
  3316. Yup! I'm sure they'll dismiss me and call me a fascist again... They can't deal with the actual evidence
    10
  3317. Oh don't worry, I'm constantly working on these videos. Currently on over 200,000 words on my Stalingrad documentary research. I'm a long way off finishing that video yet, but it will happen
    10
  3318. "Self-Care is important. I've worked in the museum and public history field the last few years, and this kind of work on top of what we deal with personally can have a impact." I honestly think people don't realise how much reading, studying, script-writing, recording, graphic design and editing goes into making series like Battlestorm or TIKhistory. These Q&As are not visually great, but the reading is quite substantial. I read a good portion of 4 books specifically for this video, and a chapter from Beevor's book as well. This is why I've been doing 70 hours a week on average in order to get everything done (average has just dipped below 70 as a result of this week just gone). "If it helps, I can provide what I have for sources or work if you ever want to touch upon the Far East." Thanks you, but I'm ok for the moment, simply because I'm focusing on the Eastern Front and North Africa (current plan is Courland, then Stalingrad, then back to NA). I will probably get to the Far East at some point, but with the workload, I absolutely have to focus on a handful of topics at a time. This is why I'm hopeful to recruit an editor (and maybe a research assistant at some point) in order for me to concentrate on the research and scriptwriting, and also get these videos out faster and/or improve the quality.
    10
  3319. Specific month? Probably August or September 1942. When Hitler issued Order 45, sending Army Group A into the Caucasus at the same time Army Group B was to secure the northern flank and take Stalingrad, that was the major error. So that period until about September was their best chance.
    10
  3320. "The biggest part is that state authority and ownership of the means of production are not the same thing" Of course they are. "and can not be represented on a line from left to right." Yes, they can be. "This is common knowledge amongst experts for decades and as such the two dimensional political graph was born." You mean the political compass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#/media/File:Political_Compass_yellow_LibRight.svg The problem is that it's a load of rubbish. If a king taxes you, you're not economically free. Therefore you cannot have authoritarian right. You also cannot be free if the collective is in control over your economy. Thus you cannot have left libertarian. Thus, what you do have is a line - the same line that I showed in my video - a Left and Right political spectrum. "I am trying to not fit a political agenda here, as TIK did" No, you were trying to say how I was biased (which is fine because we're all private citizens with our own personal perspectives on the world, and the theory of history accepts bias) and how I was factually incorrect (which you haven't proven in your response, since even if I was incorrect on the political spectrum vs compass debate, that's not a fact, that's an interpretation).
    10
  3321. Thank you for deciding to support! I may be doing another video on this subject soon... Someone did a video response to my Hitler's Socialism video rejecting everything and being hostile. I'm going to reply in the hope I can get through to them, or educate others in the process
    10
  3322. She has been reading the comments 😁
    10
  3323. Steve, the reason I don't interact with subscribers as much as I want too is because I'm busy producing more videos and have to prioritize since my time is extremely limited between running this channel and having an incredibly stressful more-than full-time job. I do however read every comment, which is why I've decided to reply to you. I started this channel to do gaming, but have transitioned to history. Apologies for all the videos you don't like. I would suggest you stop watching if you don't like them.
    10
  3324. Glad you liked the video! Regarding the oilfields, it's mainly because it wasn't a necessary discussion for this particular video. This video was about the general strategic oil crisis for Germany and her European Axis Allies and it's impact on their decision-making, not about whether they could have got the oil extracted in a timely fashion. But it is a very good point, and will perhaps be the subject of a future video. Also, Broreale, if you enjoyed Ostkrieg and haven't read Hayward's Stopped at Stalingrad, I'd highly recommend it as it brought up many of the same points as Ostkrieg, although the book is focused more on the Stalingrad campaign (specifically the air war) as a whole.
    10
  3325. Exactly. I haven't studied the Far Eastern Front, so can't comment too much on that. But as Toprani points out, this war was a war between powers that did and powers that didn't have resources - mainly oil.
    10
  3326. I did when I realized what had happened
    10
  3327. Thank you for your feedback. I do put a lot of pressure on myself to constantly produce high-quality long-form content, and I do consider this video "cheating"... So your perspective is welcome
    10
  3328. Devil's advocate: Lots of Estonians fought for the Red Army to liberate their country, as you'll see in the video. So to them, it was a liberation.
    10
  3329.  @k4nd17r33  "Hi TIK, sorry for the slight hijack but which video of yours develops this idea? (Corps being socialist) I'm intrigued" I explain this concept in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And then hammer it home in my Fascism Defined video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko So I'd recommend that you watch these two videos in order to understand it.
    10
  3330. Let the salty tears begin!
    10
  3331. Know no fear
    10
  3332. They were the good old days! Here's a present for you https://youtu.be/XwGofLVh7kg
    10
  3333. It might be capitalism, but it's clearly not a free market.
    10
  3334. That's a really interesting topic I hadn't considered. Not sure if there's much written on it, but will write it down on my list of subjects to cover at some point. Thanks for the idea!
    10
  3335. @slovene ball - Just to clarify, it was Close Combat 2 A Bridge Too Far where playing as anything but the German Army was banned in Germany. I found out when someone commented on my videos asking which mod I was using to play as the SS. Turned out he was from Germany and was shocked to learn that his version had been censored to comply with German law. Not sure how the censorship impacted the balance of play in the German version of the game, but I remember thinking "that's stupid and a distortion of history" at the time, since the only difference was the colour of the uniforms, the units (e.g. Fallschirmjäger couldn't use tanks) and the stats of the soldiers (SS had higher stats, but cost more to "purchase" them). It's not like there was a "call in the Einsatzkommando" option or something
    10
  3336.  @nsaylor9  Proving that he is tired and watching this early in the morning!
    10
  3337. I'm liking your comment on the basis of the acknowledgement that Nazism is a religious movement. I'll be honest, I thought the religious aspects of National Socialism were just an added extra to maybe convince some Christians that they were on the same team. However, I now realise that the religious elements are actually central to the whole thing. This is an actual cult. From the symbols, to the "mesmeric" speeches, the rambling sermon that is Mein Kampf, the "stand fast" orders, the Volkssturm, the Volksgemeinschaft, the working towards the Führer, the way that Hitler's disciples were all spellbound by him... It all just makes sense when you see Hitler as a cult Leader (a Führer). - "It’s hard to dispute Germany war propaganda when today many of their narratives, at least on the fundamental level, are validated." I don't necessarily agree with this part. You have to realise that there's no such thing as "volk" or "races", or any of this nonsense. You're an individual, not a group. Nazi propaganda may seem validated, but only if you buy into the idea of "Volk" or "race". If you don't, then the narrative crumbles.
    10
  3338. Oh good! This being a new concept, I was concerned that I wouldn't explain it right
    10
  3339.  @Vitross  I can say Folk or Volk, but the different letter throws me off. It's a V, not an F, and so I read it as a V, not an F, and then have to mentally correct it from a V to an F, which makes me not give a V, which is secretly an F. 😂
    10
  3340. Good luck with your presentation!
    10
  3341. That's fair enough, but what specifically did Peikoff get wrong in his series?
    10
  3342. Public libraries are inefficient and are being closed down across the UK right now with government. Space exploration is unviable at the moment because the technology simply isn't there yet. In the future it may be... But Musk is doing a fine job compared to Nasa.
    10
  3343. Thank you, and I think you were first too! Congrats!
    10
  3344. You are incorrect, as you will learn when I cover the Treaty of Versailles and the reparations, neither of these factors caused the inflation. Especially since the inflation began before WW1, as shown in the previous video.
    10
  3345.  @bghyst  "The liberal Social Democrats" Yes, because Karl Marx's own party (the SPD) was "liberal" now, was it? Watch the video and learn.
    10
  3346. @Slawa Wacher - not true. You only have to wait two weeks (next Stalingrad will be out September 7th). Each season is 3 episodes. When the season begins, it's bi-weekly until the season ends. Then there's a gap of several weeks to allow me to do the scripts for the next season.
    10
  3347. I think that would be a very long video
    10
  3348. Oh it can get weirder, trust me
    10
  3349.  @paulbabcock2428  Yep, exactly. And I think it's part of the reason the channel hasn't been growing as much as others have. Hopefully this will help
    10
  3350. They're probably not as bad, but they're still bad. No side was truly innocent in this war.
    10
  3351. Some definitely. But humans tend to want to survive and fight hard to do that.
    10
  3352. I did mention a lot of the general crimes here. The reality is I need to find time to make a video like that, because it wouldn't be a 15 to 30 minute video and would require more research. That said, I do want to do it.
    10
  3353. I understand the morale boost - but it's about priorties. You can live without cigarettes. You cannot live without food. And when you only have limited transport capacity, you need to prioritise food.
    10
  3354. Thank you YouTube for warning us that a video with "coffins" in the title might be a little sensitive for us snowflakes
    10
  3355. I'm glad you agree!
    10
  3356. Sevenfm, the annoying thing is that this video (which took one evening to make) will probably end up getting a bazillion views or something while those history videos (which take weeks or months of hard work) get like 6 views. It's always the way. The video on the Stalingrad rations got tons of views because it had bread and steak in the thumbnail - it makes no sense!
    10
  3357. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then why that not socialism? Oh yes, that's right, Nazism is a form of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism.
    10
  3358. If the Nazis weren't Socialist, then they didn't have total control of the means of production (economy), and thus Hitler wasn't a totalitarian dictator. You need total control to be a totalitarian, and Mussolini coined the phrase for his own regime. This means that the Marxist narrative that the National Socialists were capitalist is clearly distorted. The Nazis were Socialist and had control over the means of production, regardless whether they nationalized them or not.
    10
  3359. Yes, I got wrote the 57mm and 40mm the wrong way round. Sorry about that!
    10
  3360. Would it be possible for you to spread the word in any way you can? I'd be very grateful
    10
  3361. From what I've read so far, it varies from 5.5 to 6.2 million Jews, and then many more millions of people from the Netherlands, Greece, Ukraine, Baltics, Poland....
    10
  3362. To be honest, my faith in the whole of humanity is dead, but I do have faith in small pockets of humanity. This community is one of those pockets.
    10
  3363. Had the Germans won against the Soviet Union, they would have dominated Europe. The Soviets beating the Germans did result in half of Europe being overrun, but that was actually a better outcome. So in reality, the Germans forced Britain to ally with the USSR and I've been over this here https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    10
  3364. "It seems to me that a lot of ideologies are like religions" Yes, that's the whole point of this video. They are religions, and many of them are denominations of the Gnostic faith.
    10
  3365. The problem with Hitler in the post-Beer Hall Putch (1923) and him becoming Reich Chancellor (1933) is that he downplayed his economic policies because he was told (e.g. by Hjalmar Schacht) that he would never get elected if he promised that he was going to nationalize the industries. In fact, when it was revealed that Kurt von Schleicher was intent on nationalizing the industries, he lost all his support. So Hitler understood that in order to get elected, he had to appeal to the vast majority of the voters, which is why he downplayed certain elements of his ideology. A great example is that he never talked about the Jews when he was in the company of the big businessmen prior to himself becoming chancellor, as he knew that they would be put off by his anti-Semitism. We all know he was an anti-Semite, yet he downplayed this too (at least to some extent) prior to seizing power.
    10
  3366. ...and the Australians, the New Zealanders, the Indians, Rhodesians etc I discuss the supply situation in my upcoming Battleaxe video, but I'm not entirely convinced that Rommel is 100% to blame for the bad supply situation, like some historians suggest he is. Yes, his supply chain was stretched as a result of his leap across the desert shown in this video, but the reality was that it was already bad, and this only made it worse. But if he had been supplied correctly, it's likely he could have swept into Egypt in 1941. There were times where the British forces facing him were decimated and barely had any tanks left (e.g. after Brevity and after Battleaxe) and if he could have sent just one of his divisions ahead, it's unlikely anything could have stopped him short of Alexandria.
    10
  3367. "Long time fan here and I do feel guilty for not being a Patreon of yours. I am struggling financially with this CPI being over 10% since JULY 2022!" Don't feel guilty. You cannot help others until you help yourself. Right now is a very difficult time for a lot of people, and while I think we could all do with more money, I'm not starving. So I'd rather you look after yourself first and get yourself into a comfortable position before you even consider sending a dollar my way. On this note, I would encourage you to watch Aaron Clarey's videos (link in description). He's an educated economist (but not woke, he's the opposite), and his content (including his books) can really help you financially, but also in general. - "I really don't want to find myself in 2030, being happy and owning nothing... definitely will never move to Oxford." I'm not saying you should do it, and you should definitely do your own reading and research before you do, but in order to avoid the "own nothing" crowd, a little bit of gold and silver can go a long way. You'll need your side hustle up and running first though... but it's something to consider for when you have LONG TERM savings. - "You've been a socialist and you now know the cure." That's the problem, I don't think I do. You cannot give people the "Red Pill", they have to want to take it themselves, which they don't want to do. That's why I often complain that my critics aren't listening, because they're not. - "I am now sure that this is your calling. Don't give up..." I need to figure out a way to make them listen. If I can do that, I can get through to them. But I need help with this. - "don't criticise the establishment" But I want too! 😂 - "Don't forget that you are addressing a lot of people that don't take the time to criticise you." I don't want to just be preaching to the choir. Thank you for your message!
    10
  3368. "Soon" is my official answer at the moment. As I mention in the video, I have been working on it (am about ~35% through editing the video)
    9
  3369. Who am I to question Colonel Adam? I'm someone who knows the difference between a reliable source and an unreliable one. This book is not reliable. Fine then, let's assume it was written in 1949 with Paulus there as well to back it up. How is that reliable? That's 8 to 9 years after the events it's describing. As shown in the video, the monologues are fiction, and a portion of what it's saying isn't correct. Yes there are snippets of truth in there I'm sure, but on a whole it is not a reliable source. Kalach is mentioned - I said that. But it isn't mentioned in the way it actually happened.
    9
  3370. Adrian Mahon - ok, agree to disagree.
    9
  3371. First! (and yes, you sure do)
    9
  3372. That's exactly it. Need to be a little smarter than that
    9
  3373. If those jobs provided a stable income, why was he constantly asking his mommy and Engels, and everyone else, for money all the time? “Throughout his life he appealed over and again for handouts from every friend or relative he could think of, even eventually from one of his grown children.” - Muravchik, “Heaven on Earth" Chapter 3. When a friend and devoted comrade died, Marx inherited £900, which should have lasted him two to three years. But he managed to blow through it in just over a year. “As Engel’s fortune grew, so did his generosity, but Marx always adjusted his standard of living to a level above what he received. Thus he was never out of debt, and he never stopped asking Engels for more.” “At one stage Engels moved into cheaper lodgings so as to spare more for Marx. He did all of this out of something more than friendship: he was convinced that Marx was producing a great work that would be the touchstone of the communist movement.” - Muravchik, “Heaven on Earth" Chapter 3.
    9
  3374. Also, I've covered Sutton here and the funding of Wall Street idea https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    9
  3375.  @mr.waffentrager4400  thank you, I am actually trying to prioritize my physical health at the moment because I have neglected it over the last year or two... But I'll be taking a couple days off over the Christmas period, and I just wanted to get this video done this week so there wasn't as much of a rush for next Monday's video :)
    9
  3376. There aren't any documentaries in any country with this level of detail, that's why I'm doing it! I was sick of watching TV documentaries about the war which had little info and no debate (thus, was poor history). I therefore wanted to make the type of documentary that I wanted to see - full of details and debate. I'm just glad I'm not the only one who likes in-depth history!
    9
  3377. Same to you Vass! Well, there won't be another for a little while, although I need to do at least one follow up Addendum video, and make an announcement about changes to the series going forwards, and maybe do another video purely on the new map
    9
  3378. That would make sense
    9
  3379. I'm surprised you noticed 😂
    9
  3380. Really glad you're enjoying it enough to go back and rewatch them all! A lot has changed since the first episode, in terms of style of animation, in source material, in the fact there's no music now... Episode 1 feels like an eternity ago!
    9
  3381.  @real_yunicellular  "collectivization increased the soviet food production and was a massive reason for why the famine in ukraine stopped (it was caused by weather events)" This is utter rubbish. Here's a quote for you to cry over - “By the 1980s it was an open secret that the 2 percent of Soviet farmland that was privately owned was producing 30 percent of Russia’s agricultural output.” - from Woods, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," Kindle p162.
    9
  3382. I will be covering those battles, once we've got through the North African Campaign. I don't really enjoy skipping ahead, so my original plan was to start in 1940 (Operation Compass) and progress from there until the fighting progressed into Italy.
    9
  3383. And thank you, glad you're enjoying it! Interestingly, I actually started the research for this in 2017 (3 years ago) so we probably started a studying it at the same time
    9
  3384.  @julianshepherd2038  This video is something you should watch https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    9
  3385. Early club is the best club
    9
  3386. I honestly don't know a lot about the Vietnam War as I haven't looked into it. I've seen a couple of documentaries, but that hardly qualifies me to comment. But I'm certain other viewers know more on this than me, so hopefully they can chime in one way or another.
    9
  3387. They were just as bad as each other. But considering that Hitler signed a pact with Stalin and carved up eastern Europe together, I wouldn't be so sure. Plus the fact that Hitler attacked first, and did so because he wanted the resources of the East (Lebensraum).
    9
  3388. My supporters are clever enough, but I wanted to address the critics as well in the hope they would listen. Strangely, they seem to be avoiding this video, which is highly unusual. Normally I'm bombarded by naysayers over "my" economics, but in this case they're near silent. Not sure why.
    9
  3389. +Richardsen Yes :) I didn't for the Market Garden documentary, I used royalty free music for that. But all the music since then has been my own. It may not be the best music, but there's zero chance anyone can copyright strike my videos if I use my own music, so I will.
    9
  3390.  @HistoryOfSocialism  "Anarchism is NOT the lack of a state anarchism is the political project of removing all illegitimate hierarchy." Anarchy is about removing all hierachies. A "every man for himself" sort of thing. It is not about removing illegitimate hierarchy - it's all hierarchies. A hierarchy is a state. A state can be as small as one household. The head of the household has power over those below and thus hierarchy. A 'collective' has power over the individual members, and thus is a hierarchy. You cannot go against the group, and therefore you are obeying the hierarchy of the group. "Democratic workers councils etc are a legitimate form of hierarchy" They are a hierarchy. A group has power over you, so therefore you are subserviant to the group. The group itself is the hierarchy, thus an organized group cannot be anarchic. "but things like societal racism and sexism are hierarchies that are illegitimate." Because they judge people by their skin colour, their sex, or their class, and that's why they're illegitimate. If you think people are guilty by association with the group, then you are by that nature judging people by their skin colour, their class or their sex, either through positive or negative judging. All collectivist group-thinking is immoral for this reason, not just the ones you personally think are bad. Judging people by their 'class group' is just as immoral as judging someone by their 'racial group'. Murdering people for their race is wrong, just like murdering people because of their class is wrong.
    9
  3391. You can't have "non-state state" which is what anarcho-syndicalism/socialism/communism is. Anarchy is lack of state. Socialism etc is a 'politically organized community' (a state) in control. It's an oxymoron. Anarcho-capitalism is a thing. You can have non-state private (individual non-state) control. Still stupid, but technically possible. So yes, anarchism is the actual Far-Right.
    9
  3392. @Blaarg - I've not heard of LBRY before. At first glance, it looks like a giant BitTorrent site for video content? If it worked in non-digital currency it would probably be viable, but I'm reliant on Patron support anyway so unless YouTube started actually censoring my videos I'm not sure it would be wise to split my audience over different platforms.
    9
  3393. "According to US case law YouTube is a private company and thus can censor what is put on it (see YouTube vs PragerU. As YouTube operates under American laws, the American court decision stands" Irrelevant. YouTube is not an individual, and therefore is not 'private'. It is a hierarchy, and is part of the Alphabet/Google hierarchy, consists of millions or people, and is collectively owned by its shareholders. Therefore is Public.
    9
  3394. If it's right wing, why are the left wing defending Hitler and the right wing not? And you've not seen a free market because we're not in one. Tax, inflation, regulation, minimum wage, price controls, state, state, state... That's not a free market.
    9
  3395. "Oh yeah they are all authoritarian controlled states and there is no free market." There's people in the comments saying that the NHS is free market capitalism. You cannot make this stuff up.
    9
  3396. @slovene ball - I've been full time at this since mid-April 2018. That's why the number of videos has increased to one per week (prior to 2018 it was ad hoc), and I now work over 65 hours a week. Last year I worked 70 hours a week, but people told me to cut it back a little, so I did. I spend ~90% of that time reading, writing, and editing videos, with the remainder to replies and other bits. There's a few reasons I've been able to get squeeze in some more time this week, but basically I've sacrificed some research time to make videos.
    9
  3397. Yes, that was early in the series. I also suspect that the official ration numbers can't be trusted because the men either didn't receive them fully, or supplemented them from local sources. Obviously that's difficult to do inside the Stalingrad pocket, but there would have been some foraging, and we have a little bit of evidence for that too.
    9
  3398. As I say in the video, most of them who are complaining aren't my regular subscribers. Those that are seem to have bought into the belief that I've never done non-military history videos before... even though that's absolutely not the case. Nobody complained about my economics or politics prior to the moment I said "Hitler was a Socialist". Then suddenly I'm terrible at everything I do, except for the 'tank' videos
    9
  3399. Privatized. I will explain in an upcoming video
    9
  3400. Too late, am insane 😂
    9
  3401. "Any idea where the korsun landing strip was?" That is a good question, and I've no idea. It was next to the town though because when Korsun itself fell, the airfield was captured. And thank you for the pronunciation of "Korsun". I'll try to remember that for next time
    9
  3402. An entire series!
    9
  3403. Answering that question could have taken 3 hours alone
    9
  3404. "leave it to the experts TIK" That's not going to be easy. For example, did you know that the Wikipedia article on Fascism currently shows Adolf Hitler and Mussolini together and says they're both Fascists? Hey Wikipedia, I've got news for you - Hitler's not a Fascist! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism For future reference, it's 22/10/2018. "Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, the fascist leaders of Italy and Nazi Germany"
    9
  3405. See pinned comment. Sources are in there ;)
    9
  3406. Yes! This is a book review on the Death of the Leaping Horsemen, but I talk about them a bit in the video https://youtu.be/sPNhk7ForPw I also plan to do a follow-up video specifically on the 24th Panzer Division (the division that 1st Cavalry Division is converted into).
    9
  3407. You could be right with that. It does make a lot of sense. But then, why not just produce a lot more anti-tank guns, which could do the same job?
    9
  3408. Wikipedia isn't on the list specifically, but it's equivalent to a bad newspaper.
    9
  3409. Yeah, the reason I included that entire part was because I was surprised how persistent Hitler was there, and he was right for being persistent. Zeitzler didn't tell him the full story, and if you think that one of the criticisms of Hitler was that he was making bad decisions, part of the reason why is because the generals weren't giving him all the relevant information, or were even being vague about it. For whatever reason, Hitler clearly didn't believe Zeitzler here, suggesting that he had been let down in the past regarding information on the logistical situation.
    9
  3410. 99IronDuke, this morning I finished the script for the battle-part of Crusader. This part of the script is 50,400+ words alone.
    9
  3411. Is he? I didn't know that
    9
  3412. Yes, I appreciate the sentiment, but Christian is right. Best not to limit yourself to a handful of sources
    9
  3413. Yeah you're correct. I did check, but I must have missed it.
    9
  3414. You are correct, and I was mistaken. It's funny because I did check, but I must have missed it
    9
  3415. Only to people who mistakenly believe in the welfare state, which is merely a race to the bottom.
    9
  3416. @Pyotyr Young ... no because my books are all in English, not Russian. I wouldn't know where to begin converting them :(
    9
  3417. It's a bi-weekly series. Done over 70 hours last week and episode 2 is no where near complete
    9
  3418. Yes, there seems to be a consensus among historians. But as I discussed, it could be argued that, economically at least, the turning point was earlier. Militarily, they could be right though about ~August 1941.
    9
  3419. ger du - actually, the I don't think that's how Crusader worked. The first guy to figure out what is going on ended up losing!
    9
  3420. :D
    9
  3421.  @justicar5  There was NO privatisation under the Nazis. Again, you didn't watch the video. The policy wasn't privatization, it was Gleichschaltung (synchronization), as in synchronization in with the state. The LIE is that that privatized the industries - they didn't. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO.
    9
  3422. Perhaps they would just make sock accounts. But I'm not sure why my disclaimer would be considered an insult to my viewers?
    9
  3423. Everyone was saying 'congratulations' in E50, but they were all suffering from premature congratulation
    9
  3424. Me too! Gazala is another grind, but it's coming along
    9
  3425. It's easy to say something stupid, and difficult to explain why that statement is wrong. E.g. "National Socialism is capitalism"
    9
  3426. There's a Patreon question asking this, so I'll be answering in more details in the future. That said, "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt should be your first stop. Here's the audiobook version https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    9
  3427. I believe you were! Congrats!
    9
  3428. Which is what I point out in the video, even though the focus should be on the north because that's where the Germans were heading. It's very strange.
    9
  3429. I'm a bit busy too. These videos aren't easy to make! Got to prepare for Courland 1944 too, which will (hopefully) start in February
    9
  3430. Except, I don't agree. Hitler didn't persue Autarky for that reason. It was part of it, but it was more fundamental to his ideology than that traditional/out-of-date narrative explains. In fact, I was looking into this earlier today. But I'll get into this in a later video.
    9
  3431. "You don't seem able to acknowledge a counter argument without characterising your critic as an ideologue." There was no argument. All he said was you must have a libertarian mindset. It's not libertarian, it's basic economics! When I say that 2+2=4, it's not because I'm adhering to an ideology - it's because it's correct. When I say that raising minimum wage leads to job losses and long-term unemployment, it's not because I'm adhering to an ideology - it's because it's correct (as an example: https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ )
    9
  3432. Just wait until BATTLESTORM Stalingrad - then you'll see who has the last laugh CRIKEY :D
    9
  3433. And this is just one battle! Wait until you get about half way through - it gets insane. There's a reason that most historians tend to gloss over this battle haha
    9
  3434. Thank you Jeck :) I don't expect you to always agree with me. That's what makes history good - the arguing! (Debating) Also, I'm currently working on the next videos series like this. This time on Courland. Should be coming in February sometime. Will be piece by piece first, then put together like this again at the end.
    9
  3435. So hold on, first you said that 2 million held the 6th Army in Stalingrad. Now you've revised that, and are now saying that the 6th Army killed 1.4 million Soviets on its own, and then just 600,000 Soviets held the 300,000 6th Army inside the pocket. Let me point out a few problems with this. First you've made an outlandish claim, and insulted two people by calling them retards for not knowing that this claim was clearly true. Now, when you were called out on it, you've revised your numbers (showing that your stance is deeply flawed). These revised numbers are taken out from the wider context, which is vitally important, and without which it leads people to the incorrect conclusions. Second, Glantz places the total number of men in the Fronts participating in the Stalingrad counteroffensive (Operation Uranus) as 1,042,218. [Table 11, Endgame at Stalingrad]. Not all of these man would have been committed to the offensive. Even if they were, that's not 2 million men, nor 1.4 million. Third, the 6th Army was trapped in the pocket (and numbers vary for that) and let's assume it was 300,000 for a moment. Ok, but it wasn't 2 million vs 300,000. Because we know that it was 300,000 trapped in the pocket AFTER the offensive. Third Romanian Army was 155,000 men strong, Romanian forces under Fourth Panzer Army were 75,000 men strong, Fourth Panzer Army was somewhere in the region of 33,000, Sixth Army was 175,776 men strong. For opposing forces during Uranus, Glantz lists the total numbers in Table 23 as 1,042,218 Soviets (782,548 combat troops) vs 521,703 (234,252 combat). Fourth, context is key. Just because the Soviets outnumber the Axis here does not mean they always outnumbered them. As I mentioned, 6th Army outnumbered Chuikov's army throughout the battle in the previous three months. Is it the Soviets' fault that they carefully husbanded their forces to mount a carefully planned counteroffensive? I don't think so, considering that the Germans were sending their reinforcements to Army Groups North and Centre during this period. So, as you can see, I have done my research. You assume that I'm not working on my own Stalingrad documentary, and that I haven't done over 400,000 words of research so far. Don't assume that someone doesn't know what they're talking about. What you should have done in this case is asked for clarification rather than calling people "retarded". Now onto your other points. 3,957,910 well prepared and equipped Axis troops strike 2,743,000 surprised, unprepared and ill-equipped Soviet troops on the 22nd of June 1941. The Soviets are overwhelmed and throw in reserves piecemeal against superior Axis numbers to get slaughtered, and the Axis capture 3 million Soviet prisoners, then starve them to death in the Reich's labour camps. And this shows you that the Germans are superior somehow? No, the Soviets were outnumbered until December 1941. Then it takes them a while to recover from this devastation, which they only do fully by the Kursk era. So this is an unfair comparison simply because the Soviets were unexpectedly struck by the Germans in 1941. Because of this they always fought with a handicap until they wrestled the initiative off the Germans, which they did during Stalingrad. Therefore this isn't "superiority" on the German side. All it proves is that they got the first blow in. And by Kursk, the tide of war had changed long ago.
    9
  3436. I have mentioned many times in other videos and in the comments that the Ukrainians and others welcomed the Germans at first... Then realised their mistake when millions were starved and more sent to the slave labour camps of the Reich, like the civilian population of Stalingrad https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    9
  3437. Yeah, I don't see how this is relevant. Both the Soviets and the Nazis were bad - it's no excuse to lie about the events in question.
    9
  3438. Wehrwolves vs the Red Undead
    9
  3439. I know, someone else pointed it out. Wouldn't be a TIK video if I didn't make a couple of stupid mistakes!
    9
  3440. True, except for the fact that in 1942 Germany wasn't engaging the other powers. The only land battle going on outside the Axis-Soviet Front was North Africa, where the Germans had ~3 divisions. The bulk of the German army, including the vast majority of its mobile and panzer divisions were on the Eastern Front. Yes, the Germans were fighting against resistance cells and whatnot (with Yugoslavia being a big issue), but again, most of their troops were in the East, as were most of their best troops.
    9
  3441. I do say this later in the video, but their artillery was taking its toll
    9
  3442. I've taken a screenshot of your question as it's perfect for a future video I'm intending to make. I'll give you your answer then
    9
  3443. Keep believing Communist propaganda bro 👍🏻
    9
  3444. Can we really believe you? You could have altered the results. We need more sources of evidence and at least one colour expert to verify the findings
    9
  3445. Yes, someone else has informed me. But thank you
    9
  3446. I think, if I did make such a video, this would be near the top. I'm pretty proud of this one because it places absolutely everything I've ever talked about in context, makes a hell of a lot of sense, and challenges the traditional narrative - precisely what TIK is all about.
    9
  3447. Haha sorry ;)
    9
  3448. It's already starting
    9
  3449. Yes, it's Armistice Day! Thinking about it now, I should have worn a poppy in this video
    9
  3450. The same could be asked of Helena Blavatsky, or the Free Masons. How did they discover Gnosticism prior to 1945? As I showed in the Aryan Religion video, we have a lot of evidence of an occult heritage that culminated in the Thule Society and then the Nazi Party. So it's highly probable that they got this stuff from previous groups of Gnostics.
    9
  3451. @YeOldVisigoth - but again, just because a socialist government fails at its job, doesn't mean that another socialist government has the moral go-ahead to murder millions of people after treating them as 'sub-humans'. The National Socialists should have treated their prisoners properly, regardless of what the enemy says or does.
    9
  3452. I didn't come across any in the sources I used, but they did say a lot of non-commissars and non-Jews got killed as well because they couldn't 100% identify who was who
    9
  3453. Thank you for your explanation. I'm curious. Why do you consider it impolite to respond to a YouTuber who responds to you? I don't see it as being impolite from my point of view, so I'm interested in your reasoning?
    9
  3454. That Is Kind
    9
  3455. You tell me. But they exist https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitWehraboosSay/
    9
  3456. I think I've come across him in the literature but not looked at his writings or read much on him. I will do though. Thanks for the recommendation!
    9
  3457. @Frantick "Do you not see the problem of calling any nationalization under any circumstance socialist?" State control of the economy... is state control of the economy. It doesn't matter the circumstance. It's socialism. "So you just don't care about making any distinction between true socialist countries and countries with some socialist institutions?" Socialism is state-control of the economy. The rest is unimportant. "How can you not see your own bias there?" How can you not know the definitions of the terms you're using? The reality is, you've been mislead into believing that socialism is something that it's not. Wake up before you sleepwalk into totalitarianism. "If you believe the Nazis were leftists then you don't know the difference between right and left." If centralised state-control is on the Left, and private-control (freedom of the individual) is on the Right, then the Nazis are on the Left. This also means anarchism is actually Far-Right (and that's not 'good' for Rightists). "By your strict definition if the Byzantine empire completely administered the production of arms then this is socialist, right?" IF. But they didn't. And even if they did, that ONE policy would be socialist (state-control). The rest of the economy would not be. "It's not state capitalism because I guess that's not a thing." Why on earth would you think the Byzantine Empire was capitalist? Capitalism wasn't really a thing before the 1500s, and didn't get going until later. "Anything not free market is socialism by your definition, right?" Nope. Anything that's not free market is not capitalism. Anything that is state-control of the economy is socialism. "Do you not see when you're applying a clear political definition to something more abstract that you're making a biased political move here?" I'm using the definitions of the terms, and have done substantial research into their meanings. This is what they are. There's no political bias - the definitions speak for themselves. The problem is that Marxist-Socialist theory doesn't match reality, which is why you're struggling to comprehend the idea that capitalism and socialism are what they actually are.
    9
  3458.  @RinaRavyn  That's the problem! I'm only about halfway through the series and I'm completely burnt out with it, and it takes so long to make it's preventing me from doing enough research for the other videos. Then, when I throw myself into the work, doing multiple days of intense hours (I read three entire books for the Dresden video in less than a week), I get told that I've wasted my time and that people are downvoting the videos because the only thing that matters is Stalingrad.
    9
  3459. "This is a pleasant surprise and a nice break from the grind of Stalingrad!" Yes, and a much needed break from it too. - "love the green and red box around the divisions when describing the two groups - nice visual aid." Glad to hear it! I didn't think the circles were working, and I think the rectangles are easier and better anyway so I may stick to the rectangles from now on. - "also i love the unit insignia at 50% opacity (or what it is) for troop movement/planning before it is set in motion. Really clearly setup the following actions - some really nice experimentation with clarity here." Thank you, because I wasn't sure if it worked or not. It was a last minute decision to even do it like that, but I think, if you liked it, I'll do that sort of thing again in the future. - "i always read the patron names when they scroll by to look for my own.. and i noticed my name was absent. Apparently there were issues with the payments. So i guess vanity has some benefits some times." Ah yeah, when I download the list of names, Patreon automatically removes those who haven't paid (either because they quit or because of a transfer problem etc)
    9
  3460. Glad to hear that :) just wish I could have gone more in-depth with it
    9
  3461. An equal distribution of exclamation marks will solve the problem!
    9
  3462. "And not all socialists or leftists think that state intervention is good thing" Then they are not socialists or leftists. Socialism is the state in total control of the economy (in other words, central planning). This is the historical definition and always has been https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The Leftists and Socialists who claim not to be for state intervention, are actually for state intervention. They just don't know what a State is. I actually watched a so-called "anarcho-syndicalist" video not long ago, and their idea is that after the 'anarchist' Revolution, they would then bring all the workers' Soviets together in a federalist system... which definitely isn't a state or anything! You can't make this stuff up.
    9
  3463. Pienaar's actions do not reflect all of the people of South Africa back then or now. I don't necessarily blame Pienaar for acting the way he did at the time because (if you watch the main Operation Crusader documentary) it really did seem like the British forces overall were going to lose and he was trying to preserve his men. But the extra excuses made afterwards (in hindsight) to excuse his action don't add up
    9
  3464. @Zava (and others) - the term "State Capitalism" is oxymoronic and doesn't work https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    9
  3465. It would probably have been similar to as I described in the video
    9
  3466. It's a genuine Patreon too
    9
  3467. Don't panic! Don't panic!
    9
  3468. See, being male, it's hard for me to see it from a female perspective, but it's interesting that you think males are inclined to 'like' war. Which raises the question: is it part of men's psychology? I certainly don't have the answer to that, but I'm fascinated nonetheless. I also think economics is a central issue to history. Without it, war cannot happen, and neither can society, nations and so on. It is a driving factor.
    9
  3469. Awesome! See everyone, I am right :D
    9
  3470. Yes you are
    9
  3471. Yes I agree, there are major advantages when it comes to video. Books definitely have their place, of course
    9
  3472. I don't have the time right now to verify this, but if that's correct, that's hilariously ridiculous
    9
  3473. "If we are not going to use GDP what statistics are you using to say the US didn't get back to 1929 levels until 1945?" You can use the GDP figures, but only if we remove or compensate for the manipulations, which is sort of possible. If you'd like more information before the video I'll be making, see Higg's "Depression, War, and Cold War". "If we were to ignore GDP stats and just use unemployment levels that alone would show the US got back to 1929 levels before 1945. I don't think that is a good option though." Higgs covers this too. And you're right, it's not a good option. Paying people who are unemployed doesn't solve the issue of unemployment. Similarly, paying people who are unemployed but also giving them a rifle and shipping them to France, also doesn't solve the unemployment issue. "but I have never heard of them being manipulated by the USA." Seriously, it's crazy how much they were manipulated in this instance!
    9
  3474. "And yes I’m posting this before watching because I’m gonna wait for other’s opinions before I decide to commit to the video. You preach to the choir too much and the choir will get bored." Value is subjective. Some will like this video, some will dislike it. The only way to know if this video is truly good or bad is to watch it yourself. This is supported by several sources, especially Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which is a great book. And as you'll hear, some of things I'm saying in this video are supported by current events...
    9
  3475. You are correct. It looks like I made a typo, putting "76" in my notes rather than "66" and then put the wrong page reference in the video. I can confirm that on page 57 it says 66. Thank you for pointing this out!
    9
  3476.  @voswouter87  Sadly YouTube took the ability to make annotations away a couple years back. I've now added a 'card' to the video when I start talking about the numbers, linking to the Addendum video. And I've decided (for a few reasons) to point out the mistake at the beginning of the next video telling people to go to the Addendum video. I'm going to play it by ear, but if needed I will remove this one in the future.
    9
  3477.  @mrniceguy7168  I've doubled checked the "review" folder, but your comment wasn't in there, meaning it was completely deleted. YouTube strikes again! You have to bear in mind though that I was chastised by many viewers for quoting General Patton saying "God damn" in the Patton video. Apparently I was taking the Lord's name in vain, even though I was just quoting Patton. So me quoting someone saying "Negro" would probably not end well for the same reasons.
    9
  3478. I have heard of that, and I think I mentioned this during my Courland series (might not have done). Do you know if that was part of Operation Keelhaul, or separate?
    9
  3479. Yes! This one isn't really talking about the events themselves, just the reasons, so it can be monetized. That's the problem when talking about some of the more 'difficult' topics is that creators are discouraged from making them because when a video gets demonetized or limited it doesn't get recommended as much, so you lose potential viewers and revenue. This is why my Patreons and SubscribeStars are important. They keep this channel going regardless of what YouTube does.
    9
  3480. Well, I hope it lives up to expectations! I'm actually looking forward to episode 3, where I get to strike back against all the naysayers in the comments of last week's video (and probably this week's too)
    9
  3481. "The Zundel trial of 1985, all the so-called camp witnesses had their stories debunked" Evans covers this in his book. You should read it. "exposed the fallacy of what we call democracy" Democracy = 'People Power'. Of course, the 'People' are the 'Public', and the 'Public' is the 'State'. Democracy = 'State Power'. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y So no National Socialist should be crying about democracy, since National Socialism and Fascism are State Power. "There is one historical event in which people can be jailed for... That alone should make it logical to question the official narrative." Only in non-Liberal countries. And as I explained in the Pinned Comment, Richard Evans, Deborah Lipstadt and myself are all against anti-Denialist laws. So that's not an argument against the evidence presented in the video and in Evan's book that Irving willingly and deliberately distorted the historical evidence to push his agenda.
    9
  3482. I like that Wikipedia is deemed as an "authoritative source" by YouTube. It proves that YouTube is run by morons.
    9
  3483. @Neil - it is a nice change to hear someone else's voice, and helps break the video up a bit :) given that I want to keep the quality of this series as high as possible, I'm not willing to publish a video unless I'm happy that it's as good as I could make it. I'm not a perfectionist and I know errors and issues will slip into it, but I'd like it to be pretty decent quality. So I won't compromise on that. But the flip-side of this is that I haven't had a day off this year yet... I will at some point, but the fact that we're into the 5th week of the year and I've not had a full day off shows that I'm not dragging my feet with this series.
    9
  3484. Haha thanks :D
    9
  3485. It's only going to get more detailed as we get into this :)
    9
  3486. Oh and no, the military won't help much, and may actually prevent the market from adapting to the situation.
    9
  3487. He was referring to the British, but yes, Rommel did a similar thing
    9
  3488. Thanks, and I agree! Although, I'm not convinced it was entirely Rommel's fault about the logistics. He certainly blamed Halder, and you have to remember that the Italian navy was suffering from a lack of oil to power it's ships to clear the seas to get supplies over to him.
    9
  3489. Maybe first on YouTube (a strong maybe), but not first in the books. Both Glantz and the Official German History say this too.
    9
  3490. Yeah, sorry about that. Not sure how I didn't spot it. Luckily I read out the numbers
    9
  3491. Working on it ;)
    9
  3492. I've answered that question in this video https://youtu.be/dm0H9oblK8E
    9
  3493. But the war in Europe was over before they could do that.
    9
  3494. Haha, and yet they were both bad!
    9
  3495. Well, I hope you enjoy my ramblings :) how's your channel coming along?
    9
  3496. I did not know that. Funny how the Communists and Nazis had similar policies
    9
  3497. Wow thank you! Glad you enjoyed the video!
    9
  3498.  @Euaggelos-d4v  "was he the one that declared war on britain and france🤔?" No, Hitler went to war with Poland. Britain and France were allied with Poland. So Hitler's invasion of Poland was the declaration of war.
    9
  3499. I do have a degree in history, but if I'm honest, it's not really been of any use to me. I'll come back to this topic in a future video because a few people have asked :) thanks!
    9
  3500. I gave up trying to please our overlords a long time ago. If they demonetize this video over that, so be it. They'll only hurt themselves, not me (thanks to my Patreons).
    9
  3501. Well done! I went into that text knowing about the contradiction, but I do wonder if I would have noticed if I hadn't known beforehand
    9
  3502. Fun fact: I've no idea what discord is
    9
  3503. @SharpLight, I'm not ridiculing him. I actually think his actions are funny (hense the tone)! I also think he's (arguably) justified. That said, this is a debate, and as such, it could be argued that Pienaar disobeyed his orders, and thus was guilty of insubordination. Since there was a huge negative impact in Pienaar's actions, I think the "tone" is the appropriate.
    9
  3504. So, like a reconnaissance battalion?
    9
  3505. But is there a specific tonnage that qualifies tanks as light, medium and heavy? Surely the weight is just an arbitary way of classifying tanks? Is it not the purpose of the machine that counts? Like the Valentines being produced to be a cruiser tank, but actually used as an infantry tank? I don't necessarily hold these views, I'm just wanting to test the theory.
    9
  3506. I agree. We may not agree on all the same points, but anyone wanting freedom and liberty for themselves should be moving in this direction.
    9
  3507. Great to hear! I'm also not sure if there's enough time left... but I guess the only thing we can do is push back and do our best.
    9
  3508. The title of "Master of Panzerfausts" and a certificate of brilliance.
    9
  3509. Yes you are! Congrats!
    9
  3510. Guilty! :D I can be late now and then
    9
  3511. 2.5 to 1 is not that high, considering the Germans outnumbered the Soviets at the beginning of the war, and caught them by surprise when they absolutely weren't prepared for war.
    9
  3512. You realize that America is a Republic, right? Not a Democracy? That's what it says in the Constitution. (See Article 4) "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government..."
    9
  3513.  @vitman2409  Since you seek the truth, I'm just going to leave this here for you https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o (The Curious case of Former Holocaust Denier Eric Hunt)
    9
  3514. That is a good point. It all seems to have gone wrong for Hitler during Barbarossa
    9
  3515. "I like your vids but after seeing your response to this comment I'd never want to meet you at a party lol" You'll be happy to know that I don't often talk about history when I'm at my friends or if I'm at a party, unless asked or prompted. I'm fully aware that most people aren't interested in history :(
    9
  3516. Congratulations Christopher!
    9
  3517. A Bridge Too Far is a close second :)
    9
  3518. It's almost as though I'm ignoring them or something... Perhaps they'll take the hint this time
    9
  3519. "I think you should respond to fredda's video" Absolutely not. Respect is earned, not taxed. He doesn't deserve a response. - "Your arguments will lose face and credibility if you refuse to address Fredda's arguments." No, they won't. The evidence I've presented stands regardless of the personal attacks. - "debate is key to understanding history afterall" Nope, that's the old subjective theory of history, which doesn't work. History isn't subjective, it's objective, and I explained why I've retired the old phrase "history lies in the heart of the debate" in my video on the objective theory of history here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI
    9
  3520. Karl Marx was a champion of the "proletariat", which is not the "working class". That's the lie that has been spun. Karl Marx was an elite who wanted to topple the current elites, and therefore needed the support of the peasants. He therefore promised them the world whilst estranging them from their work. The sad fact is that the peasants fell for it, and humanity has suffered ever since.
    9
  3521. I'm glad to hear you like it! I'll let Terri know that she's done another good job :)
    9
  3522. "If there are wage increases, and an increase in production, then yes living standards go up as consumption goes up. This is John Maynard Keynes." No, that's not what Keynes said. And no, as Britain in the 1800s shows, you don't need wage rises at all. In fact, they had wage deflation at one point.
    9
  3523. @Ki-Young Jang - that's a good question. Technically they could have preserved fuel in 1941 for 1942, but that would have meant stopping the advance of the German armies in 1941, which probably would have been seen as a failure by the world and the German army (suffering morale). The issue for 1942 was more that their logistics were so stretched that they couldn't get the fuel they had to the panzers - although part of the reason their logistics were overstretched was because of the fuel crisis... so it's a chicken and egg kind of scenario. If you read Citino's "Death of the Wehrmacht" you'll get the sense of how close the Germans were to success during Fall Blau
    9
  3524. If you say so David Hoggan. You'll have difficulty arguing against the Hossbach Memorandum https://youtu.be/1N8nuPdV5Ow
    9
  3525. Fascism and National Socialism are two separate ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    9
  3526. Not true. As explained in this video, Hitler put himself in the middle of the political spectrum (between Marxism and Capitalism) and I put him on the Left. See https://imgur.com/rLlDlcQ
    9
  3527. Spoiler, Lenin killed Mensheviks. Guess he wasn't a 'real' Socialist either...
    9
  3528. Thank you for being open minded and for sticking through it 🙂
    9
  3529. Marx taught us that it's not your fault you're poor, lazy and have a dysfunctional life. No, it's not because you made poor life decisions, took out student loan debt and ended up with worthless degrees that only led to you working at coffee shops the rest of your life, it's not because you haven't got a clue about investing or finance or economics, it's not because you spent all the money you did earn on new cars, fancy clothes and drugs, it's not because you didn't work hard or set up a business or even attempt to make a name for yourself... No, you're poor and a failure at life, and it's the most productive people in a society that are to blame. #LabourTheoryOfValue
    9
  3530. I never said a state can't exist. Rather, a state can exist, but if it does, it's only task is to protect us. It shouldn't intervene in the economy, because the more it does that, the worse the economy becomes, which is exactly the issue we've been having in recent decades. The state puts in more controls, more taxes, more currency printing, more propaganda, and manipulates interest rates at whim, with the result being a gradual decline in the standard of living. The more that "society" imposes it's will on the individual, the worse things become.
    9
  3531. "It's not like they have jobs or something." The reason the Communists in the Weimar Republic (KPD) sucked so bad at the elections was because most of their voters were unemployed, so they couldn't raise the funds to run a proper election campaign. (see Evans' "The Coming of the Third Reich)
    9
  3532. Hitler was a socialist, not a communist, and thus believed in the German workers - work would set them free. Hence the name: National Socialist German WORKERS Party. Hitler called out Marx when he said that the difference between the two worldviews (Jewish-Marxist-capitalism and real Aryan socialism) is that the Aryan likes to work for his community rather than selfishly pull everyone down into the gutter. This is one of the big reasons he hated the Jews, believing that they got their wealth off the backs of others rather than actually working for it, and a mere glance at Mein Kampf will explain this to you. I obviously disagree with the whole Aryan vs the Jews thing. However, the communist ideal of everyone laying about, all being benefit scroungers, and stealing off anyone who does decide to work and earn more than them, is clearly not a moral way to live.
    9
  3533. "He also claims capitalism has never existed. I have never seen such ignorance of history in my life." A Capitalist State has never existed, because Capitalism is anti-State. Black markets exist though, and they're capitalist.
    9
  3534. Take your time, and I'm glad you're finding it interesting so far :)
    9
  3535. Which is exactly why the Left changed the historical definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    9
  3536.  @MarkVrem  If you think it'll help, I'll give the exercises a rest this week. The study and reading has definitely not helped with the headaches. I've also been suffering from eye-strain for a while now, but I don't know how to get around that because it's not like I can just stop doing work or viewing screens.
    9
  3537. Most people don't watch the full video. Or don't watch the full video before commenting.
    9
  3538.  @Edax_Royeaux  The well is already poisoned, I can't poison it any more. Teenagers usually become "rebels" who then call for the very system they're supposedly rebelling against. There are exceptions, which is why I said "the vast majority", but I'm sticking to the point. If this wasn't the case, why do the vast majority of people not question the State narrative and just believe in the propaganda? Why are the vast majority just following orders?
    9
  3539. Fearist, oh you're playing the victim card now. Poor poor you. It's "backhanded" when I point out the critical flaws in someone else's video, but it's ok when you babies kick, scream and swear in the comments section of my videos. Talk about double standards.
    9
  3540. If anyone wants a better exploration of this issue than Three Arrow's video, check out this one https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    9
  3541. You've just said that Marx wasn't about private ownership vs state ownership, but then later in the same message said he was for state intervention (i.e. ownership and control, aka socialism). So please explain to me why, when I said socialism was state intervention-ownership-control of the economy, how that is not what socialism is? Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. If you decide to use the state to change that, that's socialism - which is exactly what you've just said Marx said it was. The contradictions socialists make when trying to deny their own ideology is unbelievable. And yet, it is "everyone else" who is wrong. No, stop trying to change the definition to suit your agenda. Socialism is the social-public-state ownership or control of the means of production.
    9
  3542. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good.... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “The government of a totalitarian State would not be “authoritarian” if the courts still functioned independently, as they do under liberal capitalism.” “The division of power between the executive or legislative branch on the one hand and the judicial branch on the other was formerly a guarantee to the owner of private property that his property rights would be protected even against his own government. The totalitarian State, in abolishing this separation of power, abolishes the sanctity of private property, which thereupon ceases to be a basic principle of society fundamental to State morality.” “Constitutionally the businessman still enjoys guarantees of property rights. But what is the value of such constitutional guarantees without courts that dare to defy the omnipotent bureaucracy or to enforce laws that are “out of date”?” - Reimann. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). National interests are - “made mainly by the Nazi party, or, rather, by its leaders, that is, by the State bureaucracy. It is a principle that only Party members shall occupy key positions in the government and in all organizations where the State influences the distribution of jobs. They must be engaged whenever there is a choice between the Party member and non-Party member.”  - Reimann. “The influence of the Party cannot be seen in laws, but in practice, and personalities are the important factor. A large number of the ministers [at present all ministers] are Party members.” - Ministerialdirektor Sommer, spokesman for Rudolph Hess, in the Deutsche Juristenzeitung of May 21, 1936. “The capitalist under fascism has to be not merely a law-abiding citizen, he must be servile to the representatives of the State. He must not insist on “rights” and must not behave as if his private property rights were still sacred. He should be grateful to the Fuehrer that he still has private property.” “This state of affairs must lead to the final collapse of business morale, and sound the death knell of the self-respect and self-reliance which marked the independent businessman under liberal capitalism.” - Reimann “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann
    9
  3543. Thanks Marcus! It's actually quite good to hear that because they are the very very vocal minority, so it feels like the majority are hating, when in reality it's the minority. I made a few mistakes in this video, but I will return to make a stand again. I've done a ton more research recently on the topic since this video, and next time it'll be decisive.
    9
  3544. Haha yeah :D
    9
  3545. I know this topic very well. Hitler supported the capitalists because he was socialist. Socialism is not the end of capitalism - that's communism.
    9
  3546. I don't think Corporate YouTube is particularly fond of this channel, which is already on the borderline with regards to several topics I cover. So I don't want to rock the boat any further and risk losing everything by talking about something that the Establishment is [...REDACTED...]
    9
  3547. You're not the only one. Last week's video had half as many views as my average. Either people really don't like to learn about the Weimar Hyperinflation, or people have been distracted by the potential build-up to WW3. But maybe it's both 😂
    9
  3548. Is that why Tottle (or Twoddle) was from Canada too? I also find it funny that every history book out there says this event happened, yet I keep getting told there's some sort of hidden agenda. If there is, I'll find it. If there isn't, prepare to swallow your words.
    9
  3549. I accept them. The British definitely did things wrong. Just look at what happened to Ireland. And I've already say a few times now that Churchill was an military idiot (good at politics though, it seems). I'm as critical of my country as anyone, don't you worry.
    9
  3550. Well, I'm using it to describe the whole famine, not just the one in the Ukraine. And both regimes lead to the deaths of millions of people. Moralistically, that's evil in my book.
    9
  3551. You were second, by about 10 seconds, but I'll give it you ;)
    9
  3552. Surprisingly, no I've not tried burglary. I can imagine it not being very efficient for making videos if I spend the next several years in prison.
    9
  3553. War, battles, guns and Hitler - things that are not advertiser friendly. I still earn money through YouTube Premier viewers though (but again, it's not a lot because not many pay for the service)
    9
  3554. @jim George Gammon, Emil Kalinowski and Jeff Snyder all share the same view as "money and macro" guy. They don't believe that QE-infinity actually counts as expanding the "money supply". That said, fiat isn't money. It's currency. Also, inflation isn't the rise in prices, it's the expansion of the currency supply itself. So there is inflation even if prices don't go up. You know this because that's why we get recessions and depressions every few years. And prices are going up, but not every price because they're not physically printing cash, but rather expanding CREDIT for certain sectors. The massive housing bubble here in the UK, or in Australia or New Zealand, or many other countries around the world is a direct result of Central Bank credit expansion. The Bank of England's own YouTube channel says this - they openly admit it! So yes, while they artificially set prices of wages, goods and services, taxes and interest rates, they're also pumping up certain sectors of the economy into a giant bubble. Even if the end result is hyperdeflation rather than hyperinflation, or hyperdisinflation, it doesn't matter, the fact remains that QE is inflation. And the 40% of your (and my) wages that go straight to taxation are perhaps the reason why we're not seeing ridiculously high goods prices. We're working to be robbed blind by our overlords who are telling us "you will own nothing and be happy".
    9
  3555. FIRST!
    9
  3556. According to the Oxford dictionary, a "moron" is someone with an intelligence of an 8 to 12 year-old person. So I was accurate in describing these people as "morons".
    9
  3557. I love "TIKheads" I'm going to steal that!
    9
  3558. I guess you missed the Germans R'ing 10 million Russians bit. Also the fact that the girls in the brothels weren't brought there voluntarily
    9
  3559. Thanks! I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the videos! Sadly, not everyone sees it the way you do... There are several people in the comments saying that this video is propaganda 😣
    9
  3560. The price kommissar was the guy in charge of prices in the Third Reich. The National Socialists controlled both wages and prices (amongst many other things in their centrally planned economy). You won't find much about it online since the narrative is being controlled. I've talked about the price kommissar in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 In fact, in that video I brought up the fact that someone else "googled it" and couldn't find anything on "nazi kommissars" either, so you're not the only one. You can read about his policies in the book "The Vampire Economy" by Günter Reimann (which is a primary source document). There are other sources talking about him and his policies too.
    9
  3561. The Soviets fight better in the winter because they're cool. :)
    9
  3562.  @numalesoybea1348  "maybe learn what socialism is before talking about it" 1. this video has nothing to do with that topic, so you're confirming that I was correct in my previous statement. And 2. listen very very very carefully to this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    9
  3563. @soulknife20 "So criticizing the actions of the Israeli government is Anti-semetic?" No, it's not. And I didn't say it was. If you read my comment again, you'll see that I say "both sides are not innocent", which suggests a criticism of both governments. But nice try.
    9
  3564. Hitler abolished private property, nationalized the industries and the trade unions just like Lenin did, and implemented a controlled economy. But when Lenin does this, it's socialism, and when Hitler does this, oh no no, he tricked the workers! Stop spouting conspiracy theories and start understanding that the Marxist narrative doesn't hold up to scrutiny, nor can it hold up against the overwhelming evidence presented in this video.
    9
  3565. I have Shirer's book. It was one of the first books I ever read on WW2. It's totally out of date, basically written by Halder (there are bits where Shirer says "I just got off the phone to Halder and he says...") and just doesn't do a good job on the ideology of National Socialism. This video will show you why if you take it seriously enough to watch it.
    9
  3566. I'm making you aware that I know both narratives (having previously believed the lies), and that I'm favouring the correct narrative based on the evidence.
    9
  3567. Here's a 45 minute video explaining the history of why Socialism is totalitarian, and how Marx lied and said it was democratic, with Rosa Luxemburg confirming that "dictatorship" is "democracy" "in the socialist sense" https://youtu.be/pwJf8O1S6eA
    9
  3568. "TIK is that so? Because i disagree" And I disagree with you.
    9
  3569. Is that true? What's the law called??
    9
  3570. Wow, thanks for your comment, you've just made my day :)
    9
  3571. That's exactly why I haven't used it - copyright. I'm even reluctant to use pictures sometimes. Getty Images are ruthless, as are other companies. Personally, I don't think copyright should apply to historical pictures at all, but it does
    9
  3572. Thank you for your support!
    9
  3573. And the point is that both Thyssen and Schacht were booted from their positions as a result of the Nazi Party, showing that the Nazis had socialised control of the economy.
    9
  3574. "Hjalmar Schacht fell from grace because after Kristallnacht "Schacht publicly declared his repugnance at the events, and suggested to Hitler that he should use other means if he wanted to be rid of the Jews"," That's not what happened at all. As Schacht himself explains, he tried to oppose Hitler's socialist spending policies and was booted from the Reichsbank as a result. He was replaced with Funk, who printed like a drunken sailor. So yes, it was 100% to do with Socialism. (Schacht, "Confessions of 'The Old Wizard'," PDF p355-358, p381.
    9
  3575. Karl Marx and Engels were dialectics (liars) and so said one thing in one place, and the complete opposite in another. In reality, it doesn't actually matter what they said, what matters is the fundamental truth that socialism and communism are terrible on all fronts - on the social level, the economic level, the moral level, etc. Far from helping the poor, socialism benefits the rich. I was an anarchist socialist too. But luckily I realised that it was all complete bull. You're in a cult, and the first step to getting out of it is to realise that you're in one.
    9
  3576. @Yathy - yeah I absolutely want to see Rommel's Second Desert Offensive play out. Then Gazala etc
    9
  3577. Exactly, "State Capitalism" is Socialism, since those States you mentioned are Socialist.
    9
  3578. The smartest people listen before they speak.
    9
  3579. Democracy? https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I Corporations are created by the State. Without the State, you don't have corporations. Yet somehow this is the free market's fault...
    9
  3580. No pure capitalist economy has ever existed.
    9
  3581. I'm just waiting for the map to be finished (next week or so), then I'll be editing it and releasing it. So we're talking a handful of weeks (say 3 or 4). I just can't give a specific date at the moment. Then I'm doing it in seasons, so the first season has 3 videos, which will take us from the 21st of July 1942 to the 31st of July 1942. I'll then need some time to get the second season ready, which covers the early August 1942 period. Third season is (probably) late August 1942, and so on... No idea how long it will take to finish the whole thing.
    9
  3582. Or, he turned on the whole world?
    9
  3583. If they just traded, there would have been no point to expanding German territory in the first place. The point of Hitler's ideology was for Germany to take the resources and not be reliant on foreign powers. This is why he lead his nation to war in the first place.
    9
  3584. Yeah that's how I see it. They were building infrastructure and school buildings in Ethiopia, which is not what you'd except if this was ideological racism. Hitler had no intention of building schools for the Slavs in the Soviet Union...
    9
  3585. I did cover almost a week in this video, and I suspect that the next video will cover at least a week too because not much happens at this time. That said, once Operation Uranus kicks off, I'm certain that the pace will slow somewhat, and I doubt that this series will be finished this year.
    9
  3586. It's not. And it's the German general's fault ;)
    9
  3587. The intro to that series is more dramatic though :)
    9
  3588. Because it's confusing people, I've just changed the episode titles and got rid of the 'seasons'. I'm also going to scrap the idea of doing seasons with breaks in between and just do each episode in sequence when it's ready - so one episode every 4 weeks (as a ball-park figure) rather than 3 episodes bi-weekly each season, then a gap between seasons. Again, people can't wrap their heads around this so I'm just going to get rid of the seasons idea. I will keep it inside the episodes for consistency though.
    9
  3589. There are three ways of doing healthcare: 1) free market = cheapest, most efficient, direct payment. 2) "privatized" = expensive, somewhat efficient, subscription via insurance companies 3) nationalization = most expensive, completely inefficient, but because you pay indirectly everyone thinks it's "free". For supporting evidence, here's a video on the American health care system which basically shows a real-world example of this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ?si=tIDEJuK1Z9Lb1Kfn
    9
  3590. It could be capitalist or socialist, but neither of them are free market.
    9
  3591. Evidence is the most important, followed by interpretation of the evidence (opinion). But yes, you should look for people prioritising the evidence before opinion
    9
  3592. @John Lillbourne - just gave you a reply. Once you've read it, take your evil anti-Semitism elsewhere
    9
  3593. As I said in the video, he never practiced the faith.
    9
  3594. You're not wrong :)
    9
  3595. I'll take it :D
    9
  3596. That is true! An extra video this week ;)
    9
  3597. Prior to the failure of Lenin's Revolution, Socialism and Communism meant the same thing. Lenin had to say they were different so he could claim they were living in Socialism (a failure), and not yet reached the paradise of Communism. See this other video of mine for a detailed explanation of the words https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    9
  3598. "It would be strange to think that Marx was so well versed in Bible studies that he used them in the manner you suggest." As you can discover in the book "The Devil and Karl Marx", Karl Marx was a christian who turned anti-Christian (almost Satanist). And his father had been a rabbi. Marx also studied religion at university, and that's how he started off. His Communist Manifesto was originally called "The Communist Confessions of Faith", but Engels convinced him to change the title. Reading his works, it's clear that he understood the Bible.
    9
  3599. I was hoping someone would get that
    9
  3600. It's not a comparison. The point is that a unified Europe is a bad thing for Britain. I'm also not comparing Napoleonic France to the Third Reich, nor to the EU.
    9
  3601. I hadn't actually thought about it that way, but yes, that would make sense. I'd need to read up on it to confirm it though
    9
  3602. @slovene ball - when the map is finished, I'll let you know. Should be just a few weeks away.
    9
  3603. Yes I have. I've got his book on Race Marxism too, and I hope he makes a book on Gnosticism. I've been looking into it myself, and it's a revelation. Seeing Hitler's Movement as a religion or cult of Volk-Struggle actually makes everything fall into place. The "hypnotic" speeches, the Volkssturm, the SS Aryan religion, the symbolism, the marches, the "Madman Hitler" card, the "stand fast" orders, the "irrationality".... It all lines up.
    9
  3604.  @alg7115  "However it's a bit daft to say races don't exist. And It seems a bit ideologicaly dogmatic." I'm not a race. Are you a race? Even if The Race existed, it's irrelevant. I'm an individual, and you're an individual. We are not the same. There are no groups, only individuals. Stop thinking as if you're part of something bigger because you're not. The fact that you think you're part of a monolithic group that doesn't exist is the "dogmatic ideology" you should be criticizing.
    9
  3605. You've got to remember that survivorship bias is a thing. He might have seen it as a "terror dictatorship", but those who willingly fought to their death for it saw it as something else.
    9
  3606. Isn't it funny how I've managed to make the Nazis and inter-Nazis hold hands?
    9
  3607. Yes, exactly! You may enjoy this video too, where I draw comparisons about half way through https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    9
  3608. Yes, because the government builds them. The government sucks at keeping costs down. They also make highly inefficient road systems with cheap materials that wear out in a handful of years. I have a friend who works for the local council, and he says it takes them weeks of meetings in the UK just to decide if it's safe to put up a sign to say that they're going to be doing some work in the area.
    9
  3609. It's not an accurate simulation. My point of using the game was to explain the principle.
    9
  3610. To be honest, since I work from home anyway, it's not really affected me too much. I have been keeping up with the news though, and it's depressing. I hope everyone here is coping... I know there will be a lot of unemployed, and I feel sorry for the next generation coming up. They're going to struggle like I did after 2008, but this is going to be a lot worse because we're also going through a financial 'reset' (collapse).
    9
  3611. How did you like Crusader? Too long? ;)
    9
  3612.  Ra's Al Ghul  Why what?
    9
  3613. I was invited, but I won't be going to Tankfest, no. I'm too busy to spare the time. Stalingrad MUST come first.
    9
  3614. I'm not so sure. The anti-semitic children's books (e.g. The Poisoned Mushroom) weren't in the children's section as far as I'm aware, and they're primary sources. Yes, if they were being recommended to children, then that's wrong, but otherwise I'm not so sure. And banning the books doesn't stop racism, it fuels it.
    9
  3615. I get what you're trying to say, but ultimately they also need energy, otherwise they'll drop dead. You can live without cigarettes, but you cannot live without food.
    9
  3616. Hold on a second, what's more important when your soldiers are starving to death - morale or food?
    9
  3617. Tempted to talk about the current economic situation (I'd describe it as a Depression) but I'm also concerned about YouTube/Google/Lamestream censorship
    9
  3618. Yeah, I don't get how anyone could claim this was capitalism. The "unofficial" market was trying its hardest to work against the official market, yet somehow it's raw capitalism?? Cheers!
    9
  3619. Weird that, isn't it?
    9
  3620. I agree completely. Thank you for your comment. If we censor things, like how war is brutal, then the danger is that people will think that war is just a big football game with guns. That's not what war is. And it's not just that, but other topics of history too. Censorship leads to distortions. Distortions of history are bad, and I don't want to be forced to censor my videos
    9
  3621. Yeah, I don't think this is country-specific, there's dumb people everywhere.
    9
  3622. I'm glad you liked it! It was actually quite fun and quick to make too
    9
  3623. I sent the link to a couple of them ;) I just hope some of my ex-customers watch this at some point and realise what Grade A Morons they were
    9
  3624. It feels like I'm fighting in the trenches. Where's my reinforcements? :)
    9
  3625. I had a lot of fun carving an L out of that bread :)
    9
  3626. "Krupps Siemens, Mercedes, Rheinmeatall , Blohm and Voss, Daimler Benz, IG Farben, BASF etc.." All controlled by the state. Read "The Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reinmann (a socialist btw) who was in hiding in 1939 when he wrote the book. You can get a free pdf online. Failing that, read "Wages of Destruction" by Tooze and you'll see just how much the racial-state (socialized man) controlled the economy.
    9
  3627. ​ @TellTheSpartans  If you want to see what the YouTube algorithm is doing, here's some stats that will depress you: My channel's stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/theimperatorknight Historiou's channel stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/channel/UC0iM_O9JXilI9_G4mt5naXw I've gained 3k subs this last month, he's gained 30k. I've had 830k views, he's had 6.6 million. The YouTube algorithm is promoting this nonsense over my own.
    9
  3628. "In other words, leaders of the capitalist class supported whatever label you want to attribute to Nazism." So you're saying that Hitler was a capitalist, and therefore his state was not totalitarian, since it no longer has total control of the means of production.
    9
  3629. Because Wikipedia says that Fascism is totalitarian, but not socialist. That's a blatant contradiction. Also, it says Hitler was a Fascist. This is completely incorrect, showing that Wikipedia is being written by Marxists who have no idea what they're talking about. If Far-Right is capitalism/individualism, then Hitler's regime cannot be on the Far-Right, since it's totalitarian. If the Far-Left is collectivism/social-groups, then Hitler's regime is on the Left.
    9
  3630. Everything in the state (Mussolini's definition) is totalitarian. Therefore that also includes the economy. Mussolini was totalitarian because as a Fascist (nationality-socialist) he had total control over the means of production. Not sure why you think I said he didn't.
    9
  3631. Yes, because murdering the women and children of the bourgeoisie and stealing their property is egalitarian... Oh wait a second
    9
  3632. It is going to be a series. There's at least two more videos planned.
    9
  3633.  @Thurman321  I'm not forgetting that, but Hitler also believed in Autarky, which was essentially a self-imposed blockade. Also staying in the war bankrupted Britain and led to the disintegration of the British Empire (for good or worse). If I was to argue from the point of view of someone trying to "defend the British Empire", then it's hard to say that Churchill made the right decision. Obviously, arguing from a perspective of someone who hates the idea of the British Empire, then yet, Churchill's decision to stay in the war was the correct decision as it cost a lot of British lives and ruined the Empire.
    9
  3634. COPPA means that if the US government 'deems' any video to be targeted at children (even if it's not) then the author can be fined $42,000 for each video. Since those videos were gaming videos, and because I don't trust the US government, I decided to make them private in case they randomly decided that they were targeted at children (which they weren't).
    9
  3635. "Rhetorically speaking, however, the word "socialism" is highly problematic as it means so many things to so many people. I don't particularly find it useful any longer for this reason." Socialism has a historical definition. It's only got that one definition. And I've explained this in-depth numerous times now, including in this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y When socialism was conceived, everyone knew that that was the definition. The issue was that when socialism got implemented, it ended up becoming a totalitarian nightmare. So the socialists were challenged on that definition. Since they couldn't admit that socialism was totalitarian in nature, they had to deny the very definition of socialism itself, which is what they continue to do. The reason you can't define what socialism is, is because you've bought into the lie that socialism doesn't have a definition. But it does have a definition. It might "mean so many things to so many people", but I don't care. I'm going to use the FACTUALLY HISTORIC definition of what socialism is. If it rubs socialists up the wrong way, so be it. - "The same can be said of "capitalism," a term that is used to describe free-market bottom-up systems as well as mercantile autarkies." Again, socialists have twisted the definition entirely. If capitalism is "merchantile autarkies", then the inventor of the term "capitalism" was also wrong, since he (Karl Marx) described it as a free market ("Nature" or "natural" is one of the terms he used). Mercantilism and autarky are the opposite to private property, since the state is restricting my right to trade my private property abroad, or on certain markets. These two concepts are against the very idea of capitalism itself, which is why all the so-called "stakeholder capitalists" (e.g. Andrew Yang and Klaus Schwab) are in-fact socialists by another name. Again, there is a historic definition of capitalism, and I explained it in this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - As far as the rest of your argument, you would do well to read "Killing History" by L K Samuels. It will set you straight.
    9
  3636.  @Biggestfoo  I've been tempted to make a video responding to them directly, but as AFGuidesHD has said, it's kinda pointless. You're dealing with liars. In fact, I would say that they're lying about what I am saying in preparation for this channel being deleted so that they can righteously claim that I said what they said I've said without any way for the reader to actually check what I did say. This is the problem with censorship, and also the problem with socialists in general, they're not interested in the facts, they just want to smear and slander you so that people are shamed and convinced not to listen to you.
    9
  3637. We're getting their with Stalingrad... But need a bit longer on it.
    9
  3638. I do wonder sometimes if I'm a bit too honest 😂
    9
  3639. "Basically it was fertile, it was a crescent, go to the baseball field" 😂 I'm laughing because it's so true!
    9
  3640. A few people asked the same question about the sizes of Soviet units, so I thought I'd answer it :) great choice on Rokossovsky
    9
  3641. I actually mentioned about her name that in the video. Her real name is Caryn Johnson, apparently.
    9
  3642. Millions lost their lives, but it was a turning point
    9
  3643. I do think that Britain should apologise for General Sosabowski's treatment. Browning should have got sacked instead of him.
    9
  3644. A very nice way of putting it :)
    9
  3645. FIRST!
    9
  3646. Good question, and I'm not entirely sure to be honest. It would be somewhere near the top, probably from Burke or Locke, but I'm not certain.
    9
  3647. He was a good general. But he really dropped the ball at Stalingrad, and then lied about it. Also, he's one of those people who always thinks they're right and who never makes mistakes. It's nice to bring those sorts of people down a peg
    9
  3648. I vaguely remember that conversation, so yes, this probably does explain it. Unfortunately, there's no way I can go back and redo the previous episodes to correct the mistakes :(
    9
  3649. It has definitely corrupted the history of the Grain Elevator, as various books quote Hoffman or talk about tanks at the Elevator. Hoffman also gives credibility to the dubious Russian accounts on that particular battle (e.g. Khozyainov's). Luckily, I presented the evidence in a sort of "here are several conflicting accounts", so it's not really done too much damage. I also went with Jason D Mark's interpretation that there were no panzers at the Elevator. If I had done something like agreed with Hoffman on that account (in other words, if I had dismissed Jason D Mark's interpretation in favour of a "primary" source), then it would have been a disaster.
    9
  3650. I'm sure that everyone that wants me to skip ahead just to cover Operation Uranus will be happy with that 😂
    9
  3651. Glad to hear! Fiction tip 1: Make sure you give them lots of flaws. Flaws make them more realistic.
    8
  3652. Thanks! A guy I used to work with existed on 2 to 4 hours sleep a night. He looked like a zombie, and also said that "I'll sleep when I'm dead" line. But it shortens your life and you're not going to be as productive, and you'll ruin your capacity to think. Sleep is honestly something you cannot afford to neglect.
    8
  3653. You couldn't have watched the full video by this point.
    8
  3654. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    8
  3655. Also, no I've had several Marxists agree with me. As I showed in the video, a Nazi agreed before I even published the first video.
    8
  3656. "I think you are confused at this particular point. You think that you just described national socialism in your video independently from marxism and then these filthy commies came into your comment section talking about irrelevant marxist definitions. The problem is that it was you, and not us, who first compared nazism to marxism." 1) I never used the phrase "filthy commies". 2) I am being targeted by Marxists - these are the people who are strongly disagreeing with me over Marxism instead of socialism. 3) I am completely right in what I'm saying; Marx is irrelevent. Just like the Pope is irrelevent to Sunni Islam. 4) all I've said is that Hitler read Das Kapital, was influenced by it, and decided to create his own version of socialism. I did not compare Nazism to Marxism - that was all the Marxist in the comment section claiming that National Socialism wasn't Marxism - which I've never said it was. You all think there's one definitive version of Marxism, and that's absolutely not the case. So it is on your shoulders that this falls onto, not me. Go back and watch the videos again, and you will see that I didn't say National Socialism and Marxism were the same thing. I did reply to people (after they made their comments) who were comparing the Soviet Union to National Socialism, but that was only in response to their accusations. "Here, 6:45 , you start with explaining (not very accurately) ”traditional marxist theory”. Then at 7:18 you are directly connecting hitler to what you just presented as ”traditional marxist theory”. What was the point of you explaining marxist theory if its irrelevant to NS?" It has its roots in Marxism, but it is not Marxism. Marxism (which came before) affects National Socialism (which came later), but National Socialism (which came later) does not affect Marxism (which came before). So, what Marx says is irrelevent to National Socialism, unless Hitler had a time machine. "You yourself directly connected them to each other and then you are saying that it doesnt matter, that socialism existed before Marx." I didn't directly connect them. I told the history of it, and explained the theory. I didn't say "these two are exactly the same". They exist in the same time frame as each other though, so as someone with a history channel who has plenty of videos on WW2 and the Axis-Soviet Front, I think it's fair to discuss them together and compare and contrast them. "Why you didnt connect it to pre-marxist socialism then? It would literally make a whole lot more sense. Once again, you contradict yourself even in your own definitions." I said National Socialism is socialism. That does not mean it's Marxist Socialism. This is what I'm saying. You and all the others who targetted this video took it to mean that, but that's not what was said. "historically, more than 1/3 of land at 1960s was socialist camp. Is this not enough of historical relevance to you?" This isn't about the 60s, nor do I don't see the relevence. "Why do you want to bring social-democracies into there, whats the point?" Because that's a form of socialism. They have socialist policies, therefore they're a form of socialism. It's something that occurred in history, and as someone who studies history, I look into these things. "It only harms the understanding of what socialism historically is." Let me finish that sentence for you. It only harms the understanding of what socialism historically is... if you think socialism just refers to Marxist Socialism. "When we clearly separate different economic systems and give separate terms for certain policies, we give clear understanding of what is what, so that people can understand the essence of things, causes and consequences, and etc. Your definitions dont make anything more understandable, nor do they make the term more relevant. Its just watering down the definitions so people have no idea what socialism even is. Because such watered down definitions get popularized, we then have people who think that if X president in their country starts regulating something then they have communist infiltration." Political theory bows to what happened in history, not the other way around. As someone who studies history, I do not bow to political ideology. Socialism is not JUST Marxist Socialism. It is all socialisms and socialist policies that have existed. Therefore, National Socialism was socialism.
    8
  3657. If I was wrong, I'd come out and says so, as I have done before. In this case, I am not wrong. Socialism is not a definitive thing. Hitler's interpretation of what socialism is, is socialism. Therefore, I'm fighting a battle with a solid argument and a convergence of evidence, against people who are clinging to a make-believe ideal of what they think the theory of Marxism is. That's nice, but theory and practice are two different things. And I have yet to see any well-thought high-effort responses. People were saying I didn't respond to yesterday's "high quality" rebuttals. I've gone back to find these arguments and I'm not seeing any quality there at all.
    8
  3658. Exactly. The Left are just as racist as the Right. Karl Marx hated Jews, and rants about them in “On the Jewish Question”.
    8
  3659. "The Soviet Union wasn't communist"? Oh boy...
    8
  3660. "More than anything this just highlights how weak the premise of the German logistics video was. It didn't fail because of their supply system being state run." Did you ignore the latter half of this video? The economic calculation problem was still a factor for the Soviets, it's just that the Soviets could throw more resources at the problem. And I did say in the previous video on German logistics that having problems doesn't show how EFFICIENT they were being. Just because the Germans or Soviets faced problems, and whether they overcame them or not, doesn't mean they were more or less efficient than each other. All it shows is that one side (the Soviets) had fewer problems, and more resources to throw at the problems they had. But if they had "rationally regulated their interchange with nature" (Marx) using prices, rather than leaving it up to a centralized bureaucracy, then they would have had a much easier time of it.
    8
  3661. Trust me, whether you're interested in the North African Campaign or not, Operation Crusader has to be one of the most chaotic battles in history. I've never seen so many historians throw their hands up in the air and go "yep, don't know what's happening right now".
    8
  3662. I'm counting sources. One, two, three, four, five... There's definitely, repeat, definitely a TIK video today
    8
  3663.  @nickl8337  It's not "subjective" to provide an opinion. Opinions are objective concepts formed by logically integration of the evidence perceived in the sources. I have taken a look at both sides. I've also studied this topic in both college and university, and actually have grades on this exact subject. And I'm telling you: Lenin was a mass-murder and one of the worst "human" beings in history. I'm reluctant to even call him "human", since what separates us from the animals is the use of our brains, and Lenin certainly didn't use his.
    8
  3664. I did over 80 hours of editing last week to get this done. So yes, it's a lot!
    8
  3665. Sometimes he's wrong, and other times he's right. But to dismiss his work completely would be the incorrect way to do history. History is about a convergence of evidence. You have to use ALL the sources you can get your hands on - even if some of them may end up being incorrect. For example, I use Werner Haupt's books, even though I know he's wrong most of the time, simply because he could be correct once in a while.
    8
  3666. Those laws therefore need to be rewritten. In my opinion, bombing civilians is never justified. If they had target military positions with Stukas, that's one thing, but destroying the centre of a city... no.
    8
  3667. The closest I've got is the book "The Myth of the Eastern Front" by Smelser and Davies. Other books mention it, but I've not come across any that talk about it in-depth. (If anyone else reads this and has found a decent book on the topic, please let me know below!)
    8
  3668. I try and spend a couple hours responding to people after a video goes out. Monday evening is the only time I can relax before it's back to the mad rush to get the next video done
    8
  3669. The saga of the Elevator is probably going to last a few episodes, including next week's Addendum video
    8
  3670. It could very well be the reason for those quotes. The game developers clearly did a little reading before they made the game, which is good to hear :)
    8
  3671. "Some folk'll criticize because they've never done anything great themselves. It's easier for them to bring you down than raise themselves up." You're correct, and I don't disagree. I'm doing this to discover and deliver the truth of history to everyone, so that we may learn how the world really works and then, armed with that knowledge, we can go about our lives better informed. Apparently this is not what some people want. They want to remain in their world-view bubbles and "already know" the "truth". They don't want to learn. And anyone who challenges what they know, is their enemy, and must be branded a "liar" or worse. Such people will remain in the pit that they find themselves in because you cannot grow without learning, and you cannot learn without listening. But my problem is recognizing what is valid and useful criticism and invalid and hateful criticism. The anonymity of the internet seems to be the main issue here.
    8
  3672.  @ChapBloke  "So, you’re saying we shouldn’t have a stock market because the shareholders don’t actually produce anything for the company other than injecting capital?" No, you can absolutely have a Stock Market. The issue we have today is that we really don't have a 'Market' for Stocks. We have a command economy. The State Central Banks are in there manipulating interest rates (the price of currency) and printing currency, and handing this newly printed cash directly to the Stock Market and corporations at the expense of the rest of the economy. The Fed even has a 'Plunge Protection Team'. Under normal market conditions, there's no way the Stock Market would be as overblown as it is right now because a free market actually reduces monopolies https://youtu.be/eJa65E2TKv4 . They're propping up one of the biggest economic bubbles in human history! - "each person earns what they directly produce/contribute, with no indirect income, correct?" Yes, that's how it should be. Sadly, it isn't like that due to the Central Banks.
    8
  3673. Wow thank you for your comment! It's not just in the USA, but economics education (actual economics, not Keynesian or Marxist) is rare throughout the world. People want "free stuff" and don't want to hear about anything else. But obviously this is bad because a lot people and institutions in the real world are having to make do with people who do not understand economics, and it's killing progress and creating big problems
    8
  3674.  @doriangray2347  Could you explain what you're confused by? If there's something that's not clear I can try and clarify it.
    8
  3675. @gordy - while editing it today I nearly put the Southwestern Front in where the Stalingrad Front was meant to be... but I caught that one :D
    8
  3676. First!
    8
  3677. ​ History Of Socialism "yes but man is a political animal we live in groups and we cannot escape that reality." Individuals cooperate with each other. Individuals are not groups. Individuals working together may look like a group, and even act like a group when it comes to certain activities, but the group is always made up of individuals. A group is not an entity in itself, and we cannot escape that reality. "The idea of anarchism is to minimise the influence of these groups over the individual" Yes, which is why anarchism is on the Right of the political spectrum. https://images.app.goo.gl/q9S7qhZvRsBSZrSY9 "what is considered to be "neccessary" hierarchy" Anarchists don't believe in hierarchy. "such as democratic organisations and matters of education etc." Democratic organisations are hierachies. Education systems and central planning are hierarchies. Anarchists want to abolish hierarchies for the benefit of the individual. Therefore they don't want democracy or organizations or education systems or central planning. "one such illegitimate hierarchy they perceive is that in the work place where capitalists and managers have what anarchists consider to be too much power over there workers." Anarchists are against all hierarchies, including this one, but also illegitimate hierarchies like groups who have too much power over others, such as collectives and trade unions. "This is why anarchists want worker cooperatives and to remove capitalism." No, anarchists don't want 'cooperatives' because they believe in anarchy - the end of cooperation. To cooperate is to submit to the group. That is to submit to the hierarchy. "they want to abolish class as a system of hierarchy and that requires the removal of the capitalist class" They also want to abolish a system of hierarchy where a collective group has power over others. "Also your notion of left-wing as "collectivist" and right wing as "individualist" ... leads you to weird and silly conclusions like "fascism is leftwing"." Collectivism is Left Wing, which is why socialists are on the Left and capitalists are on the Right. Fascism seeks a nationalist (group) government control of the economy, and National Socialism wants a racial (group) government control of the economy. They want to end the class-struggle brought on by the bourgeoisie (or the Jews in Hitler's case) by controlling the economy instead of leaving it up to the individual free market (capitalism). This is why they are on the Left. "I agree that it's collectivist but "left" and "right" have broader meanings and connotations that your ignoring." Then you agree they are on the Left. There are no other connotations. Socialism is the centralized collective group control of the economy. The German Race of the Fascist State are centralized collective groups in control of the economy. "Right wing can also mean pro religion, pro tradition etc which have nothing to do with individualism." An individual can be pro-religion or anti-religion. An individual can be pro-tradition or anti-tradition. The point of individualism (at least in the Classic-Liberal tradition) is that any individual can do what they want so long as they don't harm any one else. No body (corpse, corporation, syndicate, collective, group) gets to tell the individual what they can or gannot do, or what they can or cannot believe in, or what they can or cannot buy. Some individuals on the Right may believe in religion, and others may not believe in religion. It doesn't mean the Right are all religious or pro-religion. But it does mean that others, the state or the group cannot force someone to be religious or non-religious. An individual can be what ever they want to be, and believe what they want to believe, so long as they don't harm anyone else in the process. That is incredibly freeing and innovative, which is why the Right stands for innovation, liberty, free speech, property rights to the individual and progress.
    8
  3678. Yes they are. Please read "Prussianism and Socialism" by Spengler, or anything by Hitler, Mussolini or Mosley.
    8
  3679. It's interesting how they're all white, dressed in black(shirts), and attacking non-white communities, screaming they're not Fascists, and people are confused... Of course they're not fascists, they're National Socialists!
    8
  3680. "I'd like a video on how the Reich was able to afford everything and those providing the funds walked away free of blame." You'll be happy to know that I've actually been looking into this exact thing recently. Not close to making a video on it, but eventually I will.
    8
  3681. I'm all good here. How's things? Death of the Wehrmacht is a great book. I think it's still Citino's best book so far, although not read all of the 1944-1945 one (The Wehrmacht's Last Stand) so that could be good too.
    8
  3682. A black market is a free market. If you have a black market, then the rest of the market is not free. "every state is socialist and free market doesn't exist anywhere?" Is a state a free market? No. Then it is not capitalism. Capitalism is the private control of the economy. A state is not private. If you have state control (socialism) you do not have private control (capitalism).
    8
  3683. I'm just happy I took the time to learn how to pronounce his whole name because he pops up every so often and it just rolls off the tongue
    8
  3684. I'm glad you're enjoying them! I think part of the reason why I don't get more views is because I engage in historical debates. Many falsely believe that this is "wrong" because they don't have a firm grasp of history theory, which says that the debates are what make it happen. There's a school of historical thought (largely continental-European) that believes that you should just "stick to the facts", even though we can logically demonstrate that the "facts" don't answer certain questions like "when did the turning point of WW2 happen?" We have the "facts", but the only way to get the answer is to debate it. And by engaging in debates, and taking sides in those debates, I become "controversial". Again, people falsely assume that a historian must remain "objective" and "non-biased", which is a theoretical impossibility. And the "controversial" topics not only annoy people and cause them to unsubscribe or not view the videos, but also land me in trouble with YouTube, which I can definitely show are suppressing some of my videos (like the Greek video). Also, if you type in "TIK history" into Google, you'll probably find links on the first page to Reddit where the Marxist-echo-chamber of r/BadHistory have written hit-pieces against me, as well as "Pakistan Defence" website. This is off-putting to new viewers and potential viewers who have no idea whether I'm trustworthy or not. They'll see these hit-pieces and assume there's some legitimacy to them, which I would say there isn't. The other part of it is because of the channel name. "TIK" is hard to find on YouTube due to "TikTok". People may also assume that I'm part of TikTok or something. Also, I don't do collaborations (I've done 1 video with MHV and one with Anton Joly). So viewers have to find me by word of mouth. And finally, my strategy was never to get the "views" or the "subscribers". My strategy was to make good history and rely upon pledges from my viewers. My belief is that decent historical videos will bring people to the channel, and keep them watching. So I'm not here for the views... I mean, I obviously want people to watch the channel, so views are important in that sense... but it's about the history, not the views. That's why I put out content that I know won't get many views - the history comes first.
    8
  3685. It's a good movie but it's incredibly biased! This was partly why I made my Market Garden documentary - to show the other half of the story
    8
  3686. i should, although I'm better when I can take a long time to prepare and then backup what I say with facts and figures. But I would be interested to hear AA's take on my upcoming Monday video...
    8
  3687. In a nutshell, yes. But then, the answer should be obvious for everyone anyway
    8
  3688. It's a real issue. I periodically clear the spam folders, but it's a nightmare because YT's new Creator Studio Beta behind-the-scenes thing doesn't work properly, is slow and often fails to load comments at all if there's too many. Considering that I've also set it to "allow all comments" and it still doesn't, is proof that YT doesn't know what it's creators nor users want. I'm also beginning to suspect YT wants creators to moderate their comments sections and punish them if they don't, which is impossible given the fact that there's too many comments to moderate anyway and the fact that (again) their new Studio Beta is slow and stops loading due to the volume of comments. So even if I wanted to moderate my comments, I can't anyway because the tools YT has provided don't work.
    8
  3689. One of the French ministers did advocate a policy of just letting Hitler go east, which is interesting. But I think it would have been a problem in the long term. Had Germany conquered the Soviet Union, France would have been toast.
    8
  3690. Awesome! Glad you're enjoying the videos! :)
    8
  3691. Yes you were!! Congratulations!
    8
  3692. I went over this in the previous update. There's no point doing separate segments any more. I may as well release as one large video.
    8
  3693. I'm working very hard behind the scenes, and time is very precious to me. I know I can't waste any, so I focus focus focus in every spare moment. Got to get things done in the bits between eating, sleeping and work. Sleep though is something I try not to skip. I've tried sleeping less, but can't concentrate the next day. So it's bed early most nights. That way I can focus and hammer out research the next day (also helps if I have a week off work - like this week just gone!)
    8
  3694. The point being that ideally tanks should not be taking on tanks. Their role is in breaking through the lines and exploitation. When you said that the Germans didn't have good tanks, I disagreed, because not only were they better armed, they were more than capable of breaking through the lines exploitating. They do this with infantry support. While the Germans may have had the advantage early war (because they mobilized before the Soviets) by late 1942 onwards, the Soviets had recovered from the initial suprise attack and then had the advantage. Considering the Soviets focused on artillery (and mortars) and combining them with tanks for taking out infantry, I'd say the Soviets knew what they were doing.
    8
  3695. Well, all I know is that this General Frost is no joke https://youtu.be/7C_HoMVhKAI :)
    8
  3696. I don't recall the film showing the American crossing the bridge?
    8
  3697. The "poor time keeping and lack of self discipline" are symptoms of the problem, not the problem itself. Most-likely, the reason you're struggling with the work and feeling burnt out is because there's a lot of pressure being put upon you, there's a perfectionism element (you want to do well), and there's no immediate reward for what you're doing. The end-reward might motivate you to work on an essay the night before it's due, but otherwise isn't sufficient to get you out of bed in the morning. You're probably also constantly feeling guilty when you're not working, and maybe indulging in computer games or other media to distract you from the problem. The underlying reason is because you want to do X, but you're forced to do Y. There's a mismatch between what you want to do, and what you're actually doing. To give an example, this morning I couldn't bring myself to work on anything relating to 'tanks'. My mind does not want me to do it. I also looked at the growing list of Patreon Questions I have to answer, and I just wasn't able to tackle them. However, I knew that I could start to craft a video on Ernst Röhm, and I've been wanting to do so for a while. Well, guess what, I've spent several hours hammering out a script on Ernst Röhm. Apart from two quick breaks for lunch and some chores, I've been working at my desk all day. Yet there's no way I would have done this had I 'stuck to tanks' because my mind was simply not in the mood to do that today. If you're struggling to even start, and when you do, you're finding yourself unable to concentrate or you're getting distracted, then the problem is you're simply not doing what you want to do. Now, you may not be able to jump ship. You may have to do the work you're doing, which is why you're procrastinating on it. It takes 'discipline' and 'will power' to focus on a task you're not enjoying, and you only have so much energy to spare for that. But there are things you can do to help you get you started. First, understand that happiness is not the goal. You should aim for satisfaction, not happiness. You may not be happy while you're clearing a drain, but you'll be satisfied once you've done it. It's hard work to change a tyre on a car, but you can be satisfied with the end result. Well, similarly, you may not be happy while you're doing the work, but you can feel satisfied as you're doing it, and you'll be satisfied once you've done it. So aim for satisfaction, not happiness. This will clear your guilt, because even if you just do a couple hours of hard work on your assignments, you may not be happy, but you'll be satisfied and guilt-free when you hit that computer game in the evening as a reward. Secondly, if you can't change the work, change your enviroment. Perhaps you can't work without music. Perhaps you can't work with music. Perhaps you can't work by yourself, or need isolation to truly concentrate. I found that it was much easier for me to concentrate if I was in the quiet sections of the college or university libraries, or at a cafe, than at home. I also prefer having my phone in a different room, or at the bottom of my bag when I was in college so it wasn't a distraction, and maybe it's the same with you. Sometimes I need absolute silence, while other times I need some instrumental background music to help me concentrate (usually "epic battle music" or "sci fi ambiance", depending). Thirdly, use the Pomodoro technique. 25 minutes on the task, 5 minutes off. Do three of these, then take a longer break. There's plenty of videos on this on YouTube, so just look it up. But even if you don't use that, the principle is important. When you're doing the work, you need to take more breaks in general. And I'm not exaggerating here - if you have to do 10 minutes of 'sprinting', then a 20 minute break, do it! There are no hard and fast rules, and it's better to do 5 minutes of work than 0. Finally, there's a few miscallenous tips I can give you. Gamify the work (look up the Habitica app, or 'Forest' app). Get a good night's sleep, and cut out distractions (stop watching the 'news'). Change the book you're studying if the one you're reading is dragging or just sucks in general (perhaps there's a better one out there with better language?). You could just do a couple hours each day rather than expect to do 10 hours days, and then if push comes to shove, be prepared to do an all-nighter the day before the deadline to finish off the work. At the end of the day, if it's stupid but it works, do it. That's all I've got for you now, but I hope some of this helps. Honestly, I've been struggling with this as well due to my burnout and overworking, so it's not just you. Ultimately, in the future, you need to really ask yourself if doing a particular course or career is the right thing for you. Ask your SELF what you want to do. Don't rely on others to tell you what you should do. That way you minimize the chance of having this mismatch between your wants and external needs.
    8
  3698. It means that a second Hess flew behind the first one on the way to Scotland. And yes, this was the narrative in an actual book which I took a look at in this video https://youtu.be/pAZsANgpOVw
    8
  3699. Irving believes in German preventative strike against the Soviet Union thesis?? Wow, talk about distorians! You know he's clutching at straws if he'd believe Suvorov's ridiculous theory, since Suvorov's theory twists and manipulates evidence like Keitel's memoirs to come to its conclusion https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    8
  3700. Awesome! On Pavlov's House? Let me know how it goes
    8
  3701. But it's true! If I was doing this for the subscribers, I'd have done 5-minute videos on every major WW2 battle in the hope for views. Instead, I'm slowly working my way through the pre-El-Alamein North African Campaign (yes, the bit nobody cares about) and doing a colossal video on Stalingrad that's consumed over a year of my life already and which will probably get 7 views and be forgotten about after a week. Seriously, I couldn't care less about the number of subscribers; I'm more interested in the history, and in sharing the knowledge I've scraped together from the books I've gathered, with people who are genuinely interested in looking deeper into history so we can learn from the mistakes of the past and better ourselves today - ultimately, that's why I'm doing this.
    8
  3702.  @SchmulKrieger  "What's the difference then between big corporations collectivising the means of productions in the hands of a small group to collectivising the means of production for everyone? Because you said, the Communists want to collectivise the means of production, which is totally untrue, this is what the big corporations do." There is no difference. They are one and the same. Hence why we need a free market.
    8
  3703. Great! You can help convince the others because a lot of people don't see it like that.
    8
  3704. I think the point is that the Germans faced one Soviet army after another - but they didn't face "overwhelming hordes" of Soviet armies at the same time (until after 1943 at least).
    8
  3705. FIRST!
    8
  3706. @julian shepherd  "Quays pronounced keys." I used to work on a boat, so you'd think I'd know this. But no 😂
    8
  3707. "I fed my TIK itch with watching older videos." Good to hear! Which one's did you enjoy the most?
    8
  3708. I agree, it's a terrible drink. However, it was the ONLY drink left in the entire aisle. They bought all the other drinks (even the other bad ones) but left this one, and it's purely because of the name.
    8
  3709. You were second! But good try
    8
  3710. Hitler treated the Jews like the Left treat the Jews and the bourgeoisie, since Marx himself saw them as one and the same, just like Hitler. Do not forget that Marxists have conducted pogroms against the Jews too, such as Stalin's Doctor's Plot. Just because some socialists are rich enough to give to charity doesn't make up for the sheer evil of their cult ideology.
    8
  3711. Labour, Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives were all Left-wing Parties, as explained in my video on Mosley https://youtu.be/AGaPaOPNubo The Conservative Party in the UK has been associated with laissez-faire economics, even though it's an authoritarian tax-hiking pro-police party. Hence the word "Commieservative", which is a play on the words "Communist" and "Conservative".
    8
  3712. End the welfare state and reduce government involvement in the economy, since the state is the central cause of the decline in birthrate. There are other factors (such as feminism, obesity, a decline in masculinity) but these would also be improved with a reduction in state control.
    8
  3713. I'll actually be answering this question in an upcoming Q&A!
    8
  3714. Not why they stood at Bir el Gubi, although they're not under Rommel's command right now, so the answer lies with Gambara. However, they do play their part next time... (I'll say no more)
    8
  3715. It's only in this period really. But also, the Germans and Italian generals are also quite poor during this battle (Crüwell possibly being the exception) as you will see in future episodes
    8
  3716. I may have to do a couple of videos like this in the near future, but a lot of people are put off by their attitude and poor microphone. Glad you enjoyed the video!
    8
  3717. Yes, it's wrong on so many levels 😣
    8
  3718. Now you know why I've been getting down over this... What's the point of doing any video if they're just going to be ignored? Obviously my supporters will watch, but that's not the point. The point is to have a debate, which you can't have if one side refuses to engage because they automatically declare victory.
    8
  3719. I'm not perfect, but I had my goal at the forefront of my mind, which was to persuade them, not "own" them. That helped massively
    8
  3720. Haha glad to see you still around, Aiden. You always brighten my day. Keep being you!
    8
  3721. I've noticed that my video recommendations have become a lot more dull in the past couple of years (really since the demic started). This, in my opinion, is the result of nothing other than censorship.
    8
  3722. Awesome! Thank you for the recommendation. Yeah, it looks like it'll be difficult to get a copy of Shmelev's book
    8
  3723. I was quite surprised by how many people said that YouTube's could be 'proper' historians. I assumed (like the ideas that you shouldn't be able to make money on YouTube unless you "sell out", or that YouTube is not a "real Job") that most people would be against the idea... I assumed wrong!
    8
  3724. Good suggestion. I haven't got enough sources to do that right now though, but definitely something to do in the future, along with a video on Hitler hating Franco, calling out Mussolini for giving-in to the capitalists within Italy, and praising Stalin (no joke)
    8
  3725. Thanks! Pinned now. And next week, no idea. I'm trying to figure out if I can do the first Courland video next week, but I'm not sure I can. It's close, but probably not quite that close. But we'll see...
    8
  3726. No worries, Market Garden is one of my favourite battles, and the causes and effects of it are really interesting. Once day I hope to visit the area.
    8
  3727. Germany declared war on Poland, which was Allied to Britain. Therefore, Germany declared war on Britain.
    8
  3728. "Yes, Putin implied Poland was the aggressor but that does not imply him accepting Hitler as 'innocent'." Of course it does. If Poland is the aggressor, then Hitler was reacting to Poland's aggression, much like Putin claims that the Soviet Union was innocent for reacting to Poland's aggression.
    8
  3729. No country was "innocent" in WW2. But some were worse than others. Poland wasn't one of the worst
    8
  3730. I know, a bit out there but surprisingly relevant!
    8
  3731. @EJWS - Your comment is so insane that I've just got to respond to it. - "Then why the application of Austrian economics from Pinochet, Thatcher, Reagan" Are you for real? None of these practiced Austrian economics or anything similar. If you think these people are 'Austrians', you're clueless. - "failed to lead to the promised shareholder democracy" No Austrian economist or libertarian thinker wants "shareholder democracy". AnCaps don't want a government, let alone a democracy, and libertarians want freedom, not mob tyranny. - "brought about a corporatist, anti-democratic, stagnating, uncompetitive nightmare we're currently 'living' in?" Yeah, because they were Commie-servatives. They didn't believe in the free market otherwise they wouldn't have entered politics. Instead of calling for the wall to fall, Reagan would have been dismantling the IRS and the Federal Reserve. - "Did you actually read then - or now - any Keynes or Marx," Considering I quoted from Marx in this video, yes. And I was educated by the State miseducation system into believing Keynesianism. I've not read everything by Keynes, but I have read some of his stuff and it's just an excuse to print more cash to bail him out of his poor economic choices (he lost a significant potion of his wealth betting on the German mark as it hyperinflated away). - "Being a retail manager seems like a much bigger influence - that tends to turn people into little Eichmanns." Yeah, except I only abandoned the Socialist cult after exiting retail. It was when I realised that Hitler's anti-Semitism was his "bourgeoisie" that I understood the true nature of socialism. After the backlash from my first video on National Socialism, I was accused of reading Mises and Rothbard. I hadn't, but got curious as to why people were saying I had read them, so I read them. That's when I realised that everything I'd been told about "capitalism" was wrong. You can see this transition in real time on the channel, but since you're unwilling to actually listen to anything I say, it's no wonder you've not picked up on this.
    8
  3732. One of the things that gets me is the argument "well, he's a police officer, so why would he lie?" The obvious counter is that police officers are not always good honest people since they are human beings and human beings are flawed creatures. Case in point: the Gestapo.
    8
  3733. While I have learnt today that the word "Slav" may not have originated "Slav" or the other way around, it is also disputed whether it comes from "slava" (glory) either. At least, according to this article https://www.rbth.com/arts/history/2017/07/17/myths-of-russian-history-does-the-word-slavs-derive-from-the-word-slave_804967
    8
  3734. Not sure why it's that long, but well worth the wait Also, is it one of the 5 Book, 4 Part 'Trilogy'? Or the one-volume version? The one-volume version is available on Amazon for me, but I had trouble getting all 5 books of the 'Trilogy'
    8
  3735.  @paduapeted49  That's mainly thanks to Anton Joly and Egor Kobiakov, who put a lot of the names in accurately. By the way, if you haven't read Egor's articles, there's a link in the description - they're amazing
    8
  3736. I've said this before, but it's worth repeating - I can reach more people on here than I can in a lecture hall 👍
    8
  3737.  @LordPosho  yes, I don't want to break out the abacus... although the word-count does include the chapter titles and the dates (which I don't include in the subtitles), so maybe it's a few hundred words less.
    8
  3738. To be fair, if a word wants to be pronounced it shouldn't look like this - "Ginnungagap"
    8
  3739. I used the primary sources in this video. Try watching it before commenting.
    8
  3740. You'll enjoy next week's "Pienaar Analysis" video :)
    8
  3741. I'm actually going to do a video on it. But basically, do not use Wikipedia for anything other than to get pictures, to get references (seeing what they're using in case you've forgotten to pick up a particular book), or to double check that you've covered every aspect of it. Otherwise, it's biased as hell and the people dominating the editing (not all the editors, just the groups that dominate it) are absolutely pushing their own agendas. It's not so much what they say, but what they don't say. So overall, a 1.
    8
  3742. It's funny because I've been told by my friends IRL to shave it all off.
    8
  3743. You do what you want. I've already sent in my postal vote, and I crossed out all the candidates and wrote "spoilt ballot" in the middle. It's an incredibly freeing feeling when you deliver a middle finger to the uni-Party and the Establishment as a whole.
    8
  3744. I believe that the pattern is still there though. He was raised Catholic, was separated from his parents, lost the faith etc. I'd need to look at him in more depth though to be sure.
    8
  3745. I'm afraid you were second, but I'll give you a heart anyway :)
    8
  3746. I probably should do a full video on Guderian, and probably some of the other generals, at some point. The argument about pushing to Moscow or not in 1941 probably deserves its own video to be honest so will begin working on it
    8
  3747. It was my pleasure :) highly recommend the books listed in the description if you want to go super in depth with this topic. And Overy's book is great, if a bit short
    8
  3748. Both the Far Left and Far Right are pushing their agendas online. Sadly, they seem to be gaining traction these days https://youtu.be/583X6DGjits
    8
  3749. You're very welcome. Don't get me wrong, the Red Army certainly did bad things, and it's performance definitely wasn't perfect, but I will present the facts as they are (from the sources I use) to the best of my ability.
    8
  3750. Glad to hear! Stalin's still a monster though. That part is true 🙂
    8
  3751. Seriously? I didn't know that. Do you have any sources??
    8
  3752. The Soviet Union was an evil Marxist-Socialist dictatorship, similar to the National-Socialist dictatorship of the Third Reich. There are plenty of atrocities on both sides (in fact I'm just reading about the Soviet treatment of Latvians in 1940 and post-war). Denying the historical reality just because you have an ideological agenda to support the immoralities of socialism is not acceptable.
    8
  3753. I called Stalin evil in the video... I just waited to the end so that I could catch out those who don't have the patience to watch my videos all the way through.
    8
  3754. Stalin starved the Ukrainians in the 1930s, and the National Socialist Hunger Plan starved the Ukrainians in the 1940s. This isn't "BS".
    8
  3755. I have deleted and banned that Alex Shah guy. No need having racist trash like him spoiling the comments for everyone else.
    8
  3756. FIRST! Well done!
    8
  3757. The question is, can I surpass myself again with the next one? I've already started and I can't believe I'm even attempting the battle I'm attempting. I'm not even sure it's humanly possible - but here goes!
    8
  3758. I am, thanks, you?
    8
  3759. This is what's getting to me. The dialectic and postmodernist emotionalism (I refuse to call it "logic") triumphs over everything else. So, no matter how much evidence you present, no matter how solid your argument is, you automatically lose. It's a logical fallacy of epic proportions. You can 100% prove that fire is hot, and somehow still lose. It's stupid.
    8
  3760.  @Edax_Royeaux  "You're getting this from nothing, you have no evidence, you just declare it." I have screenshots of you saying it. I'm looking at your comment history on my channel right now. You've said this stuff previously, and now you're denying it. - "I am not a political warrior and I don't have the time to repel all of your petty insinuations about my personal character." And as I said, I don't have time for you anymore. My patience with you has run out, so we're parting ways. I'm preventing you from posting on this channel again so as to keep the comment sections open for other people who actually want to watch my content.
    8
  3761.  @Edax_Royeaux  Zero evidence? In your own words, you "Blame capitalism" for everything. You love Adam Tooze (who's loved by the Guardian, the Left-wing propaganda organisation), and you're outright denying all the evidence just like all the other good little Marxists. It's abundantly clear which side of the fence you're on. To be honest, I'm absolutely sick of you trolling my comment section with your BS. Your" response" to half my comment section showing you how wrong you were in the previous video was absolutely insane. The fact that you will state that r/AskHistorians on Reddit broke down my 5 hour video in "exhaustive detail with sources cited", and yet here is that pathetic breakdown https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/qs17g6/is_tiks_video_arguing_that_the_nazis_were/ The guy links to a Guardian article (as if that's a fantastic source), and he has no actual counter-arguments. The only thing he does is dismiss my sources, saying that the historical community doesn't agree with me. Oh great, so if every historian thinks the moon is made of cheese, we can't question them on it because otherwise some idiot on Reddit will cry about it. It's a fallacious argument! The guy has NO argument at all. In his "takedown" of my 107 sources, the guy says my bibliography doesn't contain a single source on Fascist ideology (which is an outright lie), and links to this post here as evidence https://np.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/qknk7g/modmail_madness_october_2021_edition/hixo3kr/?context=3 I mean, it's literally some worthless comment that doesn't even list the sources I used! Despite this, you claim that I have "cherry picked from sources". NO I HAVEN'T. I've used their evidence and questioned their conclusions. That's NOT the same thing as "cherry picking". The fact that you're being so dishonest with this is telling. You're acting exactly like all the other Marxists, and then lying about your ideology. At one point you even said: "Turner's German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler is not listed." And yet, it was in my recent 43 minute video, and Turner agrees with me! You brought this book up months ago as another "gotchya" to show how I wasn't reading the sources - but you hadn't read it yourself. If you had, you would have known what Turners' conclusions were. I mean, seriously Royeaux, I've been as patient as I possibly can be with you. But at this point I've had enough. You're one of the people who doesn't want to learn, so I'm going to let you rot. If you disagree with me so much, then I would encourage you to go elsewhere. I don't want you in my comment sections any more - you're ruining it for everyone else. We're all trying to have a debate here, and we can't get to the nuances of it because people like you are disrupting that debate. You don't want to learn, and I don't want to teach you, so why don't you just drop out of class.
    8
  3762.  @soulknife20  In an inflationary environment, those that cannot continue to create wealth will lose their inheritance over time. That's why, after a generation or two, the grandsons of the wealthy end up poor again, unless they work hard like their ancestors to maintain that wealth.
    8
  3763. I agree when he says: "No man becomes rich unless he enriches others." But I disagree when he says: “The man who dies rich, dies disgraced.” If a man dies poor he has failed. If he dies rich, he has created substantial wealth for society, which is why he died rich. You can only earn wealth if you've provided wealth (goods and services) for others.
    8
  3764. I do wonder if I'm overdoing it some times with the level of detail
    8
  3765. They were pro-healthy Aryan children, to be specific.
    8
  3766. Good question. I doubt it though, only because I read somewhere that the Free French only had about 40,000 troops or so at any one moment in time, which is barely an army. Plus, the French were far too reliant on the Americans and British, both of whom wouldn't want to subordinate themselves to the French.
    8
  3767. A mass stabbing on a yoga class of little girls in Southport resulted in three deaths and several more victims. This sparked off a backlash which resulted in riots across the country and police brutality.
    8
  3768. Let me know how that turns out ;)
    8
  3769. It's true that they didn't have enough trucks, but this is largely because of the oil crisis. You've seen my German oil crisis video, right?
    8
  3770. That could be true. But then, was it more a factor of cronyism, or a lot of good officers you could exploit by putting them into smaller divisions?
    8
  3771. "How do you do this every week?" I work to the point of exhaustion.... As I said in the pinned comment, I read three books last week (and other sources) in preparation for this. I only started the reading on this last Monday, and only finished the video edited this morning, after working late into the night. I haven't counted, but I must have worked close to 70 hours last week.
    8
  3772. I've heard he gives the best cuddles
    8
  3773. Actually the New Zealand histories of this battle are pretty good, and you can find them online. The Italians probably have stuff hidden away in their archives, but Italian historians are not really interested in WW2 for some reason... The German records are hit and miss, mainly because their archive offices were hit late in the war by Allied bombers, so a lot of the records for low-level units (e.g. battalions) for a good portion of the Wehrmacht were lost. There's probably more in the British archives about their units, but then I think this was detailed enough for a YouTube video. A great book that goes into a lot of detail (although, not quite the depth you're looking for) is Barrie Pitt's series "The Crucible of War". Highly recommend it
    8
  3774. Thank you Mr Auk!
    8
  3775. "TIK, aren't you afraid of backlash from these videos? I mean, I thought it was great, but surely you must get some forms of hate or something like that from these" I do get hate, but I don't care about the backlash. The truth must come before a popular consensus opinions, and can only be found through challenging the consensus. History and truth lie at the heart of the debate.
    8
  3776. It's only taken you a decade to recover... At least there's hope for the rest of us
    8
  3777. Yes, it's a very broad question. I've done one video on Mannerheim already, and I do want to look into it more in the future, but it's a very interesting subject. A small nation holding off a much larger one... really interesting
    8
  3778. Trust the British to form an orderly queue.
    8
  3779. I asked my old manager if we could install a machine gun nest at the end of the tills. Pretty sure that would solve a few arguments. Sadly, we didn't implement that policy.
    8
  3780. You can't believe Wehraboos exist?
    8
  3781. The Germans don't care about that
    8
  3782. Butter is really the case
    8
  3783. Apparently I mispronounced Duisburg though, so sorry about that!
    8
  3784.  @GoodGirlKate  Oh wow! You're one of only 34,489 people to have even watched the Moore's March video so I'm actually shocked you picked that one!
    8
  3785. Which one's your favourite so far? I know which one's the worst... the shortest one 😂
    8
  3786. Brexit is providing a great example of why all governments are bad.
    8
  3787. Ace, we live in a capitalist system, right? But is this really the case? I 100% agree with you that the current system is terrible. The only difference is that I believe what we need is a free market, not more socialism that's masquerading as capitalism. The corporations (syndicates) need to be taken down, not by force, but by competition. That won't happen while Central Banks (called for by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto) are centrally planning our state-run economy.
    8
  3788. You don't hear much about the German side because they didn't have anywhere near the same level of command struggle during the battle itself. Their struggle came after the Fall of Tobruk, which is why you'll hear more about them then. It's also why I talked more about the Germans more during the 9 hour video on Operation Crusader, because during that battle there were way more mistakes that Rommel made, and that put strain on his commanders.
    8
  3789. Because YouTube sucks :D
    8
  3790. I understand his motivations, but that's not what we're talking about. Hamilton makes the claim that Pienaar couldn't move up and that it wouldn't have mattered. As shown in the video, this claim is rubbish. Distorting history to back up a character's motivations is not a good way of doing history.
    8
  3791. Thank you! Merry Christmas to you too! (you were also FIRST)
    8
  3792. "@TIK please, make a political channel and stop politicizing history. You are probably the best historical channel in YouTube but it's really annoying how you don't miss a single oportunity of spreading libertarian propaganda" At no point have I said "vote for Bozo" or "don't vote for Bozo". Therefore this channel doesn't have a single purely political video in it. The "political" videos you're referring to are history videos, since history is about the history of humanity. All of these things - politics, economics, social issues, military history - are history. And they're all the same thing, since you can't have one without the others.
    8
  3793. Thank you! I was a little reluctant to do such a "what if" sort of video (not that I could say 'no' to a Patron question), so it's nice to see you enjoyed it. Definitely a different change of pace
    8
  3794. Those Mondays just don't come around fast enough, do they? ;)
    8
  3795. I said Lieutenant! When the USA decides to actually enter the war ;) I'll make sure I say Loootenant for them
    8
  3796. I'm a big fan of Triggernometry, and they did mention my channel at one point. But I don't think I'd be suited to live talks if I'm honest. My strength comes from being able to do research and craft an argument in a video (like this one), rather than rely on on-the-spot answers without citations. Back in the early days of the channel, everything I said was dismissed as just "being made up", until I put the citations in, which shut everyone up. That's why I came up with the in-video citations idea (first person ever to do that) because I was doing the work/research, it's just my critics didn't believe me. So if I go on live debates and am unable to provide citations, everything I say can be dismissed, especially so if I then make a minor mistake which can be used to "prove" that everything I've ever said is wrong.
    8
  3797. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH YOUTUBE, PRAISE OUR CORPORATE OVERLORDS
    8
  3798. It's illegal to shoot, 'R' and beat prisoners, as Article 2 of the 1929 Geneva Convention makes clear. So the British, Americans and the Soviets are all guilty of committing this crime (of course, the Soviets didn't sign the Geneva Convention, so they are technically allowed to beat, shoot and 'R' all they like, which is what they did). And if it was a crime to keep citizens of another country, this implies that all citizens are serfs/slaves of the countries they are in. I would agree with you there, we are all slaves of the State we toil under. Also national or international "law" is irrelevant. Legal training is not required for individuals to make comments on natural law. Just because a "lawful" jury condemned Socrates to death doesn't make it right nor "lawful".
    8
  3799. Yeah, I agree. The only thing I'd say is that the reason Hitler declared war at this time was for the reason(s) I gave in the video. But yes, he did want war with the USA eventually. That's partly why he was going east in the first place - to get the resources he needed to wage that war with the USA eventually.
    8
  3800. Glantz is (currently) the best historian on WW2. Irving doesn't come close.
    8
  3801. Thanks Peter, great explanation. I'll be looking into Rzhev soon :)
    8
  3802. Not that I know of, although this could have been what Halder was planning, since he did something similar in 1941, as you will hear next Monday.
    8
  3803. Excellent point, Vitross!
    8
  3804. "Now that I am aware of the need to block reinforcements I can even understand them not clearing the don bridgehead, which was really baffling me until now." I hadn't even considered that, but that makes perfect sense! Thank you!
    8
  3805. Early club is best club
    8
  3806. She was known as the "Man-woman" (Pugh page 51)
    8
  3807. "Was Oswald Mosley a Fascist or a National Socialist? The two are not compatible." He was a Fascist, not a National Socialist. I made this clear in this and previous videos.
    8
  3808. There were a few hundred Swedes in the SS. (not sure on the exact numbers)
    8
  3809. Hitler and the Nazis said that private property belonged to the workers, not the Judeo-Bourgeoisie, because the workers worked for the good of their community, rather than for themselves. He described the Capitalists (who he saw as the Jews) as working only for themselves, which is why he was pro-personal property, so long as it adhered to whatever the State dictated. In other words, it was a Gleichschaltung (syncronized) version of Socialism similar to what the Social Democrats call for, rather than a Zwangswirtschaft (compulsory economy) version of Socialism that the Marxists consistently fail to implement.
    8
  3810. Also, if private property was redistributed to the party, then that shows that there was no private property in Germany, since it was nationalized into the State (the Party), which would be socialism.
    8
  3811. Except he didn't get that job until later, after the funeral...
    8
  3812. Absolutely not, I've mentioned this before. In fact, this is related to the fundamental flaw in National Socialist ideology which I outlined in my Hitler's Socialism video. However, I will point out that competition happens in Socialism as well as Capitalism. The Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Kulaks and 'white' and 'green' forces were all competing against each other in the era of Soviet Socialism, and it was winner takes all (survival of the fittest).
    8
  3813. I'd like to say I carefully planned it that way, but I honestly didn't know
    8
  3814. Unfortunately, I've only recently managed to get to him. The Marxists kept criticizing me for reading Rothbard when I wasn't, so I just had to comply to the collective and start reading him
    8
  3815.  @utvara1  Because that's not how the battle went... I don't want to spoil it in case you haven't read about it
    8
  3816. Yes, and Hitler's Beneficiaries will show just how weak the economy was. I think more work needs to be done on the Nazi economy because, as Zitelmann points out, most historians ignored the Nazi economy until recently (late 1990s). So the people claiming the Nazi economy was 'strong' are just assuming it was strong. The reality that is now coming out, is showing that it wasn't.
    8
  3817. You're not wrong. Zitelmann shows how much Hitler was impressed by Stalin's regime and economy
    8
  3818. But the facts don't lead us there. The facts lead us to conclude that he was totalitarian.
    8
  3819. I just wish more people saw it your way too
    8
  3820. I wish I was your history teacher too - I'd probably be on a higher salary than the job I'm in now!
    8
  3821. GM4ThePeople - I will come back to this topic in the future, however I actually was quoting from Icebreaker. I couldn't quote the pages because I'm using the Kindle Edition. Sources are listen in the pinned comment above. I haven't yet read all of Icebreaker because the purpose of this video was just to get people thinking critically, and to tackle specifically what Keitel wrote. It was not to tackle Suvorov's thesis in it's entirety. I don't have Chief Culprit, but that said, from what I have read so far, I'm not convinced. I'm not against the idea of giving Suvorov a chance, nor do I discourage others to read his views. In fact, when I do return to this topic, I will give both sides of the argument an equal shot (like I did in this video) so that everyone can form their own opinion. But I will say that you're wrong in saying that my questioning Keitel in this video did not constitute critical thinking. Yes it did. You're only saying that because this casts doubt on what Suvorov is saying. This video is showing people that accepting things at face value is not a good way of looking at history, and accepting Suvorov's thesis is easy to do when you haven't done sufficient research, as I've shown in this video.
    8
  3822. Yeah I'm good, thanks for asking! The video's just late and will be out tomorrow instead. If you go to my channel's "community tab", I put up a post before about it :)
    8
  3823. "You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!" - Wall Street to their own bank robbers
    8
  3824. A bit of all of them, although I don't have a discord, and there's usually no debate. Socialists tend to just argue with their emotions and make "whatboutisms". They never accept evidence, and they think calling people names makes them "win", even though the goal is not to "win", it's to convince the other person that they're wrong. They can't convince me I'm wrong because I was a socialist and fully understand their (incorrect) position, and I can't convince them because they're unwilling to listen. That said, my videos and comments have convinced a few people and have converted people away from the socialist religion. Unfortunately, I think these are too few and far between. It's impossible to get them to listen.
    8
  3825. Couple of points. Brereton was the person who decided that there couldn't be two drops per day because it would tire out the transport pilots. That resulted in fewer troops reaching the battlefield, with the Poles delayed significantly. Brereton was the US Airborne Corps commander, so to conclude that that was Montgomery's fault, and that he did it for "British glory" is incorrect. Why was the road too risky? It was fine until the 4th or 5th day, by which point the battle was already lost. The delay at Son was 14 hours, but XXX Corps made up for lost time by the time they got to Nijmegen and were on schedule. What was more devastating than the factors you listed was the 36 hour delay caused by the failure to take Nijmegen Bridge on day 1. It's fair to assume that XXX Corps would have been at Arnhem on day 3 or 4 had Nijmegen Bridge been taken. Now, you may conclude that the plan was poor overall and Montgomery should take responsibility and the blame for the failure, and that's fine. However, by the same token it would be fair to make the claim that the plan could have worked had Nijmegen Bridge been taken on day 1, when it could and should have been.
    8
  3826. Exactly. The good news is, as time moves on, the emotions get slowly taken out of the equation and we get a more balanced view. The bad news is - it takes a long time
    8
  3827. No, because history isn't over ;)
    8
  3828.  @unlearningcommunism4742  That's a shame because your wife was doing a good job! I think she commented on one of my videos at some point maybe a year ago and that's how I discovered the channel
    8
  3829. That did happen, but it wasn't Hoth, it was one of the German Army Corps inside the pocket. I'll cover it in a future video, but they actually burnt their own food supplies, thinking they were going to make a run for it.
    8
  3830. And thank you again for you support Ricky. You're making these videos happen! :)
    8
  3831. :)
    8
  3832. It's a solid book! I'm critical of it because it's out of date, and not as details as Glantz's Stalingrad Trilogy. However, if you've never read anything on Stalingrad before, Beevor is the absolute starting point. Just be ready to change your opinion on a few things once you get more info
    8
  3833. I could do that on this channel - history is what happened in the past, and yesterday is the past
    8
  3834. "The leftists understand it" As indicated by the reaction many have had to my previous videos, a lot of Socialists are incapable of understanding basic English, let alone advanced philosophical concepts. - "the working class are capable of it if their minds have not been rotten by liberterian ideas and conservative penchant for embracing bad arguments." Yes, most working people could understand it, but they've spent years rotting away in the State miseducation system and wallowing in a altruistic welfare culture that promotes benefit-scrounging laziness and unconsciousness. They're perfectly capable of understanding it, but that doesn't mean they currently can.
    8
  3835. Citino, Isaev, Glantz, Stahel... there's quite a few
    8
  3836. You are correct (mostly). Panzer divisions didn't have 6 battalions. That was me being dumb. However, they didn't necessarily have 4 battalions either. Sometimes 3, sometimes more or less. It depended on the division and the date/time.
    8
  3837. Yes, I did think the music added to the videos, and I enjoyed making the music too :) I'll see about putting it back in
    8
  3838. @tokul76 shhhh don't tell them ;)
    8
  3839. He did have way too much influence on the post-war perception of the war. Books like Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich were practically written by him. At one point, Shirer says something like "I've just got off the phone to Halder and he said..."
    8
  3840. According to Croatian Legion, it started off with 3,865 men. That's everyone in the entire regiment, including the commander.
    8
  3841. Good to hear you found it useful :) I'd highly recommend the book "Croatian Legion" that I mentioned in the video (link in description) if you want to learn more. It goes into a lot more detail. And as I said, I'll be covering this unit's actions at Stalingrad during my documentary on the battle, so stick around for that
    8
  3842. Doh! I've just fixed it :) thanks very much, I wouldn't have noticed that lol
    8
  3843. The Italians formed a square against British tanks. At the four corners sat their anti tank guns. When their own tanks were knocked out, the square was overwhelmed and the Italians fled. I can't imagine what was going through the leader's mind when he decided to use that outdated tactic
    8
  3844. Italian soldiers are not to blame - especially not the conscripts or the colonial troops. It was mainly their political leaders who were to blame. I mean, let's put it another way - would you fight for Mussolini? And would you fight with insufficient training, equipment or motivation? I certainly wouldn't.
    8
  3845. Nando Passante "Young Italian men today stay "with their mums" because of massive unemployment, shamefully low wages and temporary work contracts that prevent them from buying a house, making a family, or just having a future." Fixed that for you :)
    8
  3846. I'm going off one source on this, and that source is the British Official history. And since that was written in the 50's, we can assume some level of stereotyping and patriotism when refering to the inadequacies of the Italian military. Playfair. The Mediterranean and Middle East Volume 1: Early Successes against Italy [to May 1941]. 1954. Playfair says - "[ITALY] had been living on a war basis since 1935. Her adverse trading balance was very large and the Budget for 1939-40 forecast a heavy deficit. It was difficult to see how she could be in any condition for war; a further armaments race at this juncture was likely to be disastrous." P38 He goes on to explain that the Italian Army was reorganising its Infantry divisions from 3 regiments down to two, handicaping them severely. Coupled with extra conscripts, a shortage of weapons, a lack of officers and instructors, and a lack of reserved for the Air Force, the "conclusion was that the Italian Army was not ready for war on a large scale." P39 The Italian 10th Army was also in dire straights, as I explained in the video. Most of the units were colonial Lybian troops or political "Blackshirt" formations of fanatical, but not so well organised, trained or lead troops. They also marched on foot, whereas the British were mostly motorized by this time. It is rumoured that the Italians did have a mobile brothel though, to keep morale high, but that's not confirmed. What is confirmed is that apart from the Italian artillerymen (who tended to fight to the last round or until their guns were destroyed), the Italian infantry as a whole were poorly trained, poorly lead and poorly equiped for war in 1940. - I can't tell you about drug usage or anything like that as the sources don't mention anything on it. I too have heard that Italian men stay at home for the longest so that could be true, although that's also becoming the norm here in England too due to the absolutely terrible economic situation and the lovely little housing crisis keeping an ENTIRE generation from owning their own homes - problems that our beloved Parliament have fundamentally failed to do ANYTHING about for over a decade. So we can't be too critical about their decision to stay at home.
    8
  3847. Sometimes yes, but not in every engagement, no. At the tactical level, the Germans often outnumbered the Soviets - that's the principle of the concentration point (schwerpunkt).
    8
  3848. They did, I screwed up somehow.
    8
  3849. See! This is why I had to warn everyone yesterday :) thank you in advance for becoming a Patron - the support makes these videos happen. In fact, I've just ordered 3 more books today!
    8
  3850. I had not heard of him until now. I'll check out his work, thanks
    8
  3851. You were third but I'll let you off
    8
  3852. RhaMMer341 - yeah, it's impossible to cover everything about the Eastern Front in one video, and there are way too many variables. I actually have the book Enemy at the Gates, and need to read it. I wonder how different it is from the film
    8
  3853. Your fly avatar is superior. Never change it.
    8
  3854. Why do you think that?
    8
  3855. Can you tell?
    8
  3856. This is precisely it. Sadly, history demands constant questioning and revision - that's part and parcel of history theory. So when people get annoyed with people revising history, what they're really doing is getting annoyed at the process of history itself
    8
  3857. It's insane though, since it's saving which causes growth not unrestricted spending https://mises.org/library/deflating-deflation-myth
    8
  3858. You've just made an ad hominem attack upon me by calling me a "semi-educated autodidact". Sounds like it's "one rule for me but not for you", because you're not being honest. Why can't you admit that I've addressed his arguments in previous videos, and in this video too? Oh, that's right, because you're being dishonest. Why can't you admit that a man's personality impacts his work? Oh, that's right, because you're being dishonest. Why did you tell me to look up Hegel, when I talked about him in the video and also have another video dedicated to that scrote? Oh, that's right, because you're being dishonest. I'm not at all surprised that a philosophy graduate from CAMBRIDGE of all places would be so dishonest, since their history books leave a lot to be desired 🙄 The Killing Fields of Cambodia are Karl Marx's ideas made manifest. I can explain why they occurred, and why the ideology behind them was a disgrace, but you can't. That's a testament to how much you're blinded to the truth, and how much you refuse to look at the evidence. As Eric Voegelin said: it's the self-censorship of the adherents.
    8
  3859. Thanks Brandon! I can't do this for every Q&A question, but I thought that this one was a great question which deserved a little more than me sitting in front of my books haha
    8
  3860. That's incorrect. Charisma helps, but charisma can't overcome the fact that Hitler's a murderer and revolutionary who was planning on killing millions of people and going to war - things that the average person doesn't really want. There has to be more to it than that to persuade millions of people to vote for this 'madman'.
    8
  3861. I plan to have a proper update video about it on Monday 18th Jan where I'll go into the details, but yeah it's definitely coming along. I'm hoping to have had the research done by either end of January or February. Then it's a case of writing the script, then animation, then presentation. It's going to be a push, but I'm hoping that October is doable. Not sure if 24 hours is enough, it'll probably be longer!
    8
  3862. @Lasstpak "I am not a socialist of any kind. But I think he better can stick to what he does absolute the best. And that is history." History and economics shape one another. Can't cover Lend Lease or the Holocaust, or the Origins of WW2 without some Economics or Politics. Look at my Croatian Legion video - non-political, but I still got called a Fascist by some of the Serbians. These topics are unavoidable, even if just covering the military aspects.
    8
  3863. It was futile https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    8
  3864. Nationalism is Socialism. Edward Bellamy thought the word "socialism" sounded too foreign for him, so made up a new term, nationalism. It's one and the same thing, since both require social ownership of the means of production. And as explained, Hitler was against the capitalists, whom he considered to be Jews, just like Karl Marx.
    8
  3865. Another way to think about this: Capitalism is the Free Market. And a "Black Market" is a Free Market. If you have a Black Market, then you know that your Market is under State control, and thus, you do not have Capitalism. If the currency supply is centrally controlled and manipulated by the State Central Bank, and there's a monopoly on banking and finance, how is the Market free? Also, how is this not Public/State control? Is the Private individual free to not pay tax? Then he isn't free. If you do not have a choice, you are not free, and if you're not free, then you are a slave. Capitalism cannot operate without free individuals who buy and sell. Slaves do not buy and sell. Where you have taxation and inflation, and central planning and regulation, you do not have private control of the means of production. The USA has Capitalist elements, but can't be classed as a Capitalist economy. People also say the UK is Capitalist, even though they just shut the economy down centrally, proving it isn't free. And yes, I subscribe to the Austrian School of Economics (although read others too, like the Chicago School). Recommended reading: "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt, and then Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". They are great reads.
    8
  3866. And since all interactions between humans are social, there is no foundational right to government law, except that might makes right. If it wasn't for that principle, individuals would not be crushed and have their wealth stolen off them by the Playdoh's who promise us everything yet deliver us into ruin.
    8
  3867. I've already addressed his criticisms, either in the comments, in the video itself (which he hasn't watched), or in other videos. He (and others) are not paying attention. I and others are pointing this out to him, but he's just trolling. For example, he keeps accusing me of using the wrong definition of Socialism. Okay, except he doesn't seem to know what definition I'm using. He then accuses me of saying that Rome was Socialist by "my" definition, even though I've pointed out to him that it's not "my" definition (it's the historical definition), that "my" definition doesn't actually say that, and that I've already addressed this exact criticism in this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 Just like I told those guys in that video, and as I said at the start of this video, if you disagree with the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism then you need to watch my Public vs Private video which will explain exactly why they are what they are, no questions asked https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I've pointed this out, but again, Jeff refuses to watch ANY of the videos and just insists on spamming nonsense. I've also replied and answered him directly, but he just ignores what I say. Another one he likes to repeat is how no historian agrees with me. If he had bothered to look at the timestamps in the description he would have seen that I have a section on that. Again, everything he's saying has already been heard before and it's all been addressed. There's nothing new. If my critics would just stop and actually WATCH THE VIDEOS then we can move on to more serious criticism. But no, apparently that's too much to ask.
    8
  3868. 107 sources used and 350 direct references in the video. There's a PDF you can download in the description, and timestamps too. I quote from numerous books in the video. Yet, I apparently have never read a book... sure.
    8
  3869. Several historians agree with me, Jeff and "Paid Government Shill". If you had bothered to watch the video, you would have realized that.
    8
  3870. I am human, and I want to be free from state control, as I am responsible for my own life and do not believe that others should have a claim on my life. Thus, I am against all totalitarian ideologies, including Marxism, Socialism, Fascism, National Socialism, and more besides. Despite what many claim, I am not an AnCap, nor am I a libertarian, although I have read some of their works, and agree with some of what they said.
    8
  3871. "TIK The point is that you are using definition of socialism from early 1900." The Nazis were in the early 1900s, were they not?
    8
  3872. This video shows that Hitler nationalized the industries, nationalized the trade unions, and even mentions North Korea. But feel free to deny history and circle-jerk on the Marxist echo-chamber of r/badhistory which I also destroyed in this video too. Perhaps if you actually watched it, you would understand. You remind me of these guys https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    8
  3873. Yes, I committed to it a couple of weeks ago https://youtu.be/cmwogdxsUbA also, I did mention the 1939 census in this video...
    8
  3874. Herman - I've made fun of Alex Jones (once), and his views are crazy, but banning him was a mistake.
    8
  3875. I'm glad you 'enjoyed' the video, as much as you could enjoy a video about the fate of civilians in war :)
    8
  3876. Sevenfm - I think it's fair to say that I'm committed to covering the Holodomor fairly. If I commit to doing that fairly, I'm committed to covering this topic fairly. If there are Ukrainian collaborators, I'm not going to hide that fact, no matter what the modern politics wants.
    8
  3877.  @jameslayton1560  Yes, you shouldn't just rely upon one author. Obviously you can favour certain people (I favour authors like Glantz, for example) but always do your own reading and research. You may discover things others (like myself) never saw.
    8
  3878. I've been to Greece, and to Turkey (but not the European-part, so I guess that's Asia). And yes, I do intend to learn Russian after German.
    8
  3879. Just looked it up, it's a 5 hour video. Is it any good? Or is it just Nazi propaganda? I can see Bomber Harris in the thumbnail, which gives the impression it's the latter
    8
  3880. No, because Marxism isn't "socialism". Socialism came before Marx. Marxism is a version of socialism, but it's not what socialism is. That's where you're wrong. And yes, the New Deal, the NHS, and any other policy where the state owns or controls the means of production is socialism, since that is the opposite to capitalism (means of production in private hands).
    8
  3881. "Congo" "colonies in Americas" "Guatemala" "India" None of them were Holocausts. The first may have been a disease, and it certainly wasn't an industrial racial killing. The second wasn't mass-state industrial execution to wipe out entire races. The third was a civil war, while the Holocaust (while it took place during a war) saw the murder of the innocent people from within the borders of Germany before the war had reached those lands. The last you will have to be more specific about, but I assume you mean the wars or famines, which again aren't mass industrial racial murder by states. And, like I said, none of them were on the scale of the atrocities committed by the socialist states, which number in the many millions.
    8
  3882. "It's your naive faith in free market panacea resulting in bizarre statements like the above." Except capitalism also kills people. The difference is, socialism (by definition) divides the world into groups. You have classes and races, and individuals don't matter - therefore, killing an entire class or racial group to 'better' the world is not unthinkable. "Without getting terribly personal, TIK, I'm afraid that wishing on the free market with all your heart isn't going to make you rich, my temporarily embarrassed millionaire friend." I don't believe in the free market. I also don't not believe in the free market. Just like I don't believe or not believe in socialism. And I'm absolutely not interested in getting rich. If I wanted to get rich, I wouldn't have taken a pay cut to do this full time, which I did in April (2018). "Tik dont listen to these libtard socalist in the comments." It's funny because they're calling me 'libtards'.
    8
  3883. Yes, exactly. Thank you for stating this
    8
  3884. I'm don't normally. A lot of the people claiming to have unsubscribed weren't subscribed to begin with. The video's been targeted by Marxists who have been drawn from other areas of the internet by the Marxists who do watch the channel who have shared it on their forums etc. One guy claimed I lost 1,000 subscribers in like the first 3 hours. No, I've lost 200 Marxists from the two videos so far (almost a week), and actually continued to gain subscribers overall. Therefore the overall majority of sensible viewers who normally watch my videos are sticking around, whether they agreed with me or not, because they didn't get offended. The majority of complaints were saying that I said National Socialism was Marxism... which I never said.
    8
  3885. He commented that on my Croatian Legion video ( https://youtu.be/bVbqdD6CmOI ) which is about the 369th Infantry *REGIMENT*. This Regiment DID NOT commit atrocities, so he was wrong. Apparently the 369th Division did, but I don't know about that.
    8
  3886. I didn't show the spike in views I got last week for the Order 227 video. Biggest spike I've ever received on my channel. However, it wasn't an enjoyable experience because every other comment was like those shown in the video. So, it's hard to say it's not affected me at all. The major impact it's had is delayed me finishing the Crusader script because I had to react
    8
  3887. Thanks Jaak :)
    8
  3888. I don't blame you
    8
  3889. Honestly, after reading some of the replies to this video I'm beginning to wonder if humans haven't already devolved...
    8
  3890. "strategic rather than tactical" - I like that! That's a nice way of putting it :)
    8
  3891. I have come to bury Caesar, not to praise him!
    8
  3892. This happens very often. As I've said before, this is why I put on a 'voice' when reading not-so-nice quotes, to prevent others from taking the audio out of context.
    8
  3893. Thank you! The current plan is to finish Crusader, then do Courland (which won't be quite as detailed as this because there's a lack of English sources and my German isn't good enough yet), and then focus entirely on Stalingrad. The major lesson I've learnt here is that I would need to do Stalingrad on a weekly basis in order to get it finished this millennium. And in order to even attempt it, I would need all the research, script, map and the units created prior to even starting it. That's a lot of work. Really, I've committed to an almost impossible project... but after getting stuck into Crusader, I'm now confident I can do it.
    8
  3894. @Tuning3434 yeah I'm not explaining it either... I can remember the day I say a "Grandma reacts to 2 girls 1 cup" video, and was like "what's that?" ... and then... "oh... oh... OOOOOHHHH .... AWAHSHDASHDIAKHDKJASHDKJAH!?!?!?"
    8
  3895. Then Stalingrad
    8
  3896. "Tik I went on Reddit to see what your skeptics say about you." To be honest, I was disappointed by their lack of fight. Not one of them seems to have read the title of the video, or understood what it meant, because "Defeating the Denialist Counter-Arguments" implies that I've defeated their arguments. Yet they didn't read this, and assumed that their old arguments still work, which they don't anymore. "They really don't watch your videos and make assumptions" Correct. They also banned someone for partly agreeing with me, which is why I pinned their comment in the Hitler's Socialism video. "A main assumption since they don't watch your videos much is that you're just another keyboard warrior that sites mainstream media and wikipedia" The irony is that they're the one's who use Wikipedia! Worse, in their recent "refutations" of me, only one guy used a source, and then just one source. I used 107. And if they'd bothered to watch the video, they would have seen just how flawed that one source was. But yeah, some aren't interested in the truth. They prefer simple slogans and easy to blurt-out half-truths than actual evidence and in-depth interpretation.
    8
  3897. @seegurke93 - I've done a video on Malta https://youtu.be/8pS54t-a3Z4
    8
  3898. Hi Daniel, I've read your comment a couple times but I'm not sure what you're trying to get across. Are you saying that I have a subconscious view that I don't expect a backlash because I think freedom of speech means others can't have an opinion? If that's what you meant, then I can promise you that I fully expect a backlash from every video. In fact, I'm surprised when I don't get one. But then I remind myself that most of those who backlash certain things haven't fully grasped what I'm saying, and thus ignore the elephant in the room. And as far as freedom of speech goes, have at it! Unless it's genuine spam or something, I don't delete comments, even though the YouTube algorithm penalises the channel for allowing certain comments to remain (swearing, denialism etc). Freedom of speech is freedom of speech! This is why I can't help but laugh when people accuse me of creating an "echo chamber". There's no echo chamber here. Certain arguments will naturally win out over others, based on evidence and interpretation. Those that rely on insults and poor argumentation get knocked down. Let the best arguments win!
    8
  3899. Yes, and they've already started
    8
  3900. 4chan Nazis
    8
  3901. Oh look, another National Communist who didn't bother to watch the video! If you did you wouldn't have had to written out an incorrect number, because I said how many in the video you didn't bother to watch.
    8
  3902. "Tiks pissed" Am I? I don't think I am. You'd know if I was...
    8
  3903. YES. I. AM.
    8
  3904. Exactly. If there was 1000 tanks in the Reichswald, they would have made mince meat out of everyone.
    8
  3905. If you have any suggestions, let me know ;)
    8
  3906. Really?? Now that is surprising :D In the future I may have to talk about the topic of "history" as it is, and the elements like that which go into it
    8
  3907. I hadn't even heard of it until I read it, and then googled it afterwards. See - I'm trying to learn German and I can't even read English!
    8
  3908. Again, show me the receipts. How much money did the industrialists donate to the Nazi Party through the Keppler Circle prior to Hitler getting into power, and give me the evidence for this?
    8
  3909. I covered that here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    8
  3910. Yes you are! Congrats!
    8
  3911. Considering I'm anti-state, which empire do you mistakingly think I'm "pro"?
    8
  3912. Yes you are! Congrats!
    8
  3913. I actually prefer this stuff to the "tank" stuff, although I like them too. However, I think the majority prefer the "tank" stuff.
    8
  3914. It's your lucky day because I've actually answered this question already! https://youtu.be/rK0SuYi4Hho
    8
  3915. Awesome! I'll work on it. Might need to give me a couple weeks though. I'm trying to get "Battlestorm: Battleaxe" out by the end of this month and I'm knee deep in animation right now ... as well as continuing the Stalingrad research (currently <!-td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}->104,023 words)
    8
  3916. Slight miscalculation when I added the words for Baker's comment. I'd actually done slightly more than I said I did in his original comment, so the numbers are out. Without going into all the numbers, I'm basically working at around 27.7 WPM, which is still 2,000+ words a day (although not quite as fast as mentioned in the video). I'm going to be recording my output per day going forwards so I can monitor my performance and give you some hard numbers in the future.
    8
  3917. I've actually been considering just "sticking to tanks" for a little while, since Stalingrad is nearly done, Gazala has peaked my interest, and I need to do a lot more reading on various topics before I can really dive back in.
    8
  3918. First!
    8
  3919. One of the reasons I haven't covered the Holocaust directly yet is because I'm worried about YouTube censorship. My video on the Holocaust in Greece got censored, and so I've been building up towards it to see what is and isn't "tolerated" by the "tolerant" Leftists at YouTube. I also have other information I won't disclose here... that makes me think that they don't want me (or anyone else) to make videos on the Holocaust.
    8
  3920. It wouldn't surprise me tbh. He really dropped the ball on this one
    8
  3921. I've seen a grand total of 4 socialists confirm they have actually watched it since this has been published. And you know, they came away accepting that Hitler was a Socialist. They remained socialists, however, but unlike their brethren they didn't deny history and continue to spout the lie that Hitler was a capitalist.
    8
  3922. @HondaMu$ic - Nazis burn books. Censorship is the equivalent of burning books.
    8
  3923. "There is no mention I can find anywhere, in any of Hitler's writing, of "Jewish Capitalism". Mein Kampf specifically lays out the opposite..." You obviously didn't watch the video or read Mein Kampf fully. Many of these were quoted in the video itself: “I began to study again and thus it was that I first came to understand perfectly what was the substance and purpose of the life-work of the Jew, Karl Marx. His Capital became intelligible to me now for the first time. And in the light of it I now exactly understood the fight of the Social-Democrats against national economics, a fight which was to prepare the ground for the hegemony of a real international and stock-exchange capital.” - Hitler, "Mein Kampf," p198. “The Marxist leaders, whose business consisted in deceiving and misleading the public, naturally hated most of all a movement whose declared aim was to win over those masses which hitherto had been exclusively at the service of international Marxism in the Jewish and Stock Exchange parties. The title alone, German Labour Party, irritated them.” - Hitler, "Mein Kampf," p324. “The internationalization of our German economic system, that is to say, the transference of our productive forces to the control of Jewish international finance, can be completely carried out only in a State that has been politically Bolshevized. But the Marxist fighting forces, commanded by international and Jewish stock-exchange capital, cannot finally smash the national resistance in Germany without friendly help from outside.” - Hitler, "Mein Kampf," p555. “The Jewish way of reasoning thus becomes quite clear. The Bolshevization of Germany, that is to say, the extermination of the patriotic and national German intellectuals, thus making it possible to force German Labour to bear the yoke of international Jewish finance - that is only the overture to the movement for expanding Jewish power on a wider scale and finally subjugating the world to its rule.” - Hitler, "Mein Kampf," p556. And there are more outside of Mein Kampf. For example: “... because this capital is international, its holders, the Jews, are international because of their being spread all over the world. And here everyone should actually throw up their hands in despair and say to themselves, if this capital is international because its holders, the Jews, are spread internationally all over the world, then it must be insanity to think that one will be able to fight this capital of the same members of this race internationally...” - Hitler, speech on 13 August 1920, quoted from Zitelmann, “Hitler: The Policies of Seduction,” P265. So yes, as I said in the video, Hitler believed that the Jews were behind both 'international finance' and Marxism. Many of the other points you mentioned are equally refuted in the video. Please watch it. - "One quick piece debunking a 5 hour video lol" Ignorance is your strength.
    8
  3924. Exactly. I wish the Marxists would understand this and stop saying that he didn't help the workers and therefore wasn't a Socialist. His Socialism had nothing to do with Marxist Socialism. It was another variation of the original pre-Marxist concept of Socialism.
    8
  3925. Socialism requires TOTAL (i.e. totalitarian) ownership of the means of production by the "Public" (aka the State). So when the State takes total ownership of a particular industry in the form of socialization or nationalisation, then that makes it socialism. I've explained this in detail in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and I've clarified and refuted the same argument you've provided here in another video which was a response to a response to this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 The Nazi "Zwangswirtschaft" ("compulsory economy") is Socialism because total power resided in the Nazi State, and the shop managers had to obey the orders and hit targets set from above, while being granted some autonomy to achieve those goals. Being granted autonomy, or having leaders delegate tasks to subordinates, doesn't mean that it wasn't total control of the means of production by the Public Sector State. The shop managers were not independent, they were part of the State. Thus, it was Socialism.
    8
  3926. So, you have confirmed that Marx was judging people of a certain 'race'. That's racism.
    8
  3927. @Mike Clark - ignore these Marxist trolls. Watch the video and decide for yourself who has the evidence and who is manipulating evidence.
    8
  3928. Timestamps are in the description. I talk about Röhm and the Night of the Long Knives at 4h 8m
    8
  3929. Yep
    8
  3930. "...calling Nazism far right. It just doesn't make sense." Yes exactly. They're Left-wing.
    8
  3931. As Turner showed in "German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler," published in the 1980s, Fritz Thyssen and Hjalmar Schacht (a banker) were the only people of any significance to show total support and donate to the Nazi Party BEFORE Hitler got into power. Krupp only donated after Hitler was in power. And Thyssen and Schacht both ended up in a concentration camp. Even mainstream historians have accepts this now, including Richard Evans. To quote Turner: “Aside from a few minor executives who belonged, for the most part, to the younger generation of Germans so strongly attracted to the Nazi movement, only one capitalist of note, Fritz Thyssen, became a loyal adherent of Nazism before 1933.” - Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p343. Turner also said that the idea that capitalists brought Hitler to power persists, despite the fact that the evidence doesn’t support it. He says regimes use this myth as propaganda to convince the masses that capitalism is inherently murderous and fascist by nature. I totally agree with him. “Most publications that explain the rise of Nazism in terms of capitalism have no need to rely heavily on evidence… Since most of what occurs in the economic sphere is assumed to remain concealed from the public and even from the historian, much must be surmised from a few clues rather than demonstrated by a sustained marshalling of evidence, as in traditional historical scholarship.” - Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p354.
    8
  3932. Hitler hated liberals - “Our bourgeois parties… unfortunately succumbed to the temptation to confront the fight for existence by this fourth estate [Marxism] by political means in order to oppose demands that cannot even really be regarded as social, but are simply purely human problems. Today when we go back and read what outrageous speeches conservative and so-called national liberal party bigwigs once held on the most basic of human issues, when we hear the nonsensical arguments that were voiced against them - always dressed up in the claim that it was all for the protection of the highest national values - then we can understand how Marxism was able to capture and internationalize these broad masses.” - Hitler, 16 Dec 1925, quoted from Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," p124. And Hitler explained why he called the Nazi Party the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" several times. Here's one example: “In a conversation with the poet Hanns Johst many years later [27 Jan 1934] and after the seizure of power, Hitler came back to the question why the NSDAP called itself a worker’s party. Johst began by saying that Hitler, or rather his party, were considered to be part of the ‘bourgeois right wing’, which Hitler immediately called ‘a mistake’, because he could ‘never be understood under the aspects of the middle class’. To Johst’s question, whether the name ‘National Socialist Worker’s Party’ was a sign that Hitler gave ‘the term “worker” precedence over the term “burgher”, Hitler answered: ‘I chose the term “worker” because it is much closer to my whole nature and because I wanted to win this term back for the national force… I had to “repatriate” it [the term “worker"] into the power of the German language and the sovereign rights and obligations of the German nation.” - Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," p149-150.
    8
  3933. He also said a bunch of other shocking things too https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    8
  3934. The collective can be run by one person. Hitler didn't own the collective, therefore it's not private ownership.
    8
  3935. I addressed this exact line of reasoning at 2 hours 44 minutes. Please see the timestamps in the description.
    8
  3936. "@TIK you know nothing of socialism" You know nothing of economics.
    8
  3937. That's the lie I used to believe too. Unfortunately it's not the truth. Plus, Fascism is not the name as National Socialism - there is a difference.
    8
  3938. Once you know the definition of capitalism, you realise that it has yet to be tried. Name one country with a 100% backed gold standard monetary system, with no taxation or mandatory government regulation, where everything is private property, nothing is public property https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    8
  3939. I mention this later in the video, but definitely want to go back to the North African Campaign. Gazala and the two El Alameins are crying out to be Battlestorm'd
    8
  3940. Mr Вячеслав Скопюк, you seem like a reasonable chap. Could you explain a couple of things to me - Is Putin is censoring history? And if he is, why? And what does Article 354.1 say? Thank you, sir.
    8
  3941. Thank you! The guy in that video sounds like he said "Ch- ear" or "cheer". Is that right or am I mishearing it?
    8
  3942. No worries - looks like a couple others beat me to it. I should clarify that it's generally not used in conversation nowadays to mean anything other than homosexual. So my advice is don't use "gay" to describe yourself as being in a good "happy" mood.
    8
  3943. Glad to see you reading Jason D Mark :)
    8
  3944. Nah, I'd rather keep doing this.
    8
  3945. I can tell you've not read Mein Kampf or any of Hitler's speeches or talks. To claim that he wasn't intelligent, or that it's incoherent, is simply false. Yes it's all bad, and I disagree with it, but it's intelligible. So this idea that it isn't is part of the Leftist narrative of pretending that it's not worth looking into. The Left also have an incentive for you to not know the reality of Hitler's ideology, which is why they deny it's central doctrine. Yet you embrace this narrative without question. And when someone gives you a ton of evidence, backed by 110 sources, showing you how important the Socialism was to the ideology, you dismiss this by saying there's no way I could know the truth. Only Leftists with a clear incentive to defend socialism can know the truth, of course. Your argument is ridiculous. The evidence is overwhelming, and I haven't even presented a fraction of it all yet.
    8
  3946. It's funny because I addressed that argument in the video. Try watching it.
    8
  3947. Thank you! That's important information, as many of the books gloss over the translation 👍🏻
    8
  3948. Rommel didn't fight on the Eastern Front. Plus, Manstein committed atrocities, yet for some reason didn't mention that in his memoirs and so his crimes were forgotten. A nice distortion of history.
    8
  3949. I don't think it'll be just them this time...
    8
  3950. You need to read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" (you can find it free online) or Robert Murphy's "The Politically Incorrect Guide to The Great Depression and the New Deal" or even just Herbert Hoover's memoirs. Herbert Hoover intervened heavily in the economy, deepening and lengthening the recession (itself caused by the Central State Banks), and then when this didn't work Roosevelt doubled down, making the recession last until 1946. See my video on what causes recessions and depressions https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs And my video on the so-called "1946 Depression" https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw Both of those videos will show you why the lamestream narrative doesn't work.
    8
  3951. I am now, yes. At the time of this, I wasn't sure. Remember, I was still a Socialist until about two weeks before my original Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/dlXqFgqOviw and it was the backlash I received after that which drove me to Mises and later Rothbard. The Leftists were accusing me of reading Mises and Rothbard, yet I hadn't at that point. So when they said that I got curious, and I'm glad I did!
    8
  3952. Go away Fascist.
    8
  3953. A good book (and I mean GOOD) that answers your question is Folsom's "The Myth of the Robber Baron's". In short, monopolies are broken by the 'robber barons', not set up by them, and the price of goods and services are less than the State monopoly charges. That's why Socialists (Social-elitists) are eager to hate on then.
    8
  3954. Considering they were aiming to annex the whole of Finland (as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact shows), they lost.
    8
  3955. A student needs all the pennies they can get, so don't be going hungry just to send a dollar my way
    8
  3956. @slovene ball - they are absolutely interesting. It's just I can't do everything at once! Must specialize on a few things at a time, and the Eastern Front + North Africa + the Third Reich economy + Patron Q&As have got most of my attention at the moment. Would love to cover the island hopping campaign, plus the Philippines Campaign of 1941-2
    8
  3957. Thanks Albert! And that is interesting. I haven't studied the Second Italo-Ethiopian War at all, so it would be good to dive into, especially since it merges nicely and gives context to the East African Campaign in WW2. I'll definitely add it to my to-do list of battles to cover
    8
  3958. That's because Germany was running a massive deficit even with Romanian and Soviet oil imports.
    8
  3959. Now you're under obligation to let everyone know if it was worth watching the full 46 minutes ;)
    8
  3960. Also, the UK government is preventing supermarket prices from adjusting (my mother works for one of the supermarkets). That's what's causing the shortages. If the prices went up a little, people would only buy what they truly thought they needed, rather than overdoing it.
    8
  3961. "liking video before even watching" A dangerous move, but thank you :) "as an economist now i only watch WW2 through economics not battles. lso as an economist i can say that TIK videos are amazing!" Interesting! A lot of viewers think I shouldn't make these types of videos and that I don't know much about economics. I'll admit I have gotten some things wrong (probably in this video too) but I'm not completely ignorant as some claim. "i am glad with small monthly donation that i am part of this great channel." Thank you! I have put the Patron list in alphabetical order, which might make it easier for you to see your name/username
    8
  3962.  @stephenlitten1789  I've covered the Axis occupation of Greece here in a video that was suppressed by YouTube https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk In short, they didn't treat the Greeks very well... However, again, I'm not convinced it was due to ideological racism, but more ideological nationalism. I'm sure, however, there were racist elements.
    8
  3963. "The whole ideology was based on white supremacy." Then it should be easy for you to point to a primary source prior to 1935 that shows the 'white supremacy' inherent within Italian Fascist ideology. There's none of that in Mussolini's writings (prior to the late 1930s), so please show me where you're getting this information from. - "Go read a book or two on Eritrea and the racist policies they implemented like segregation, only allowing education to 4th grade to the natives, land policies....ect" Assuming this is all true, where in Italian Fascist ideology does it say that they were going to do all this? Again, Italians might be racist, and nationalism might be oppressive, but that doesn't mean that the ideology of Italian Fascism was advocating any of this stuff prior to 1935.
    8
  3964. We can see your comments now, LucVNO, so no idea what happened to your first one.
    8
  3965. LOL
    8
  3966. I don't deny that. Neither National or Marxist Socialism was worth fighting for. Such a shame the Baltic States were caught between them.
    8
  3967. I actually intend to do a video on this in the next few weeks because a few people have asked the same question. I'll leave my answer until then
    8
  3968. Correct. They don't like evidence that contradicts their beliefs. They'll ignore or dismiss, but never address.
    8
  3969. Ahh I see. I really should do a video on that era because I could go into detail about what happened in Britain where the capitalist Liberal Party ended up turning socialist from about 1870 onwards. I've also been asked to do videos on the American Civil War, so I could tie that in too.
    8
  3970. Yeah, you're probably right that they should have ceased the attacks after the first couple of days, regrouped, then maybe tried again. Instead, they just fed their men into the slaughter, and that just wasn't a wise tactic.
    8
  3971. He's certainly up there. Wait until next week - you're going to love it.
    8
  3972. Ok, not just yet ;)
    8
  3973. Historically conscious? I'm using the term "Blitzkrieg" because that's the one most people seem to know. I do say Bewegungskrieg a lot throughout the video though.
    8
  3974. Tempted :)
    8
  3975. It's the best way to beat the Monday Blaus
    8
  3976. What about "Man, Economy and State"?
    8
  3977. People accused me of reading Rothbard and Mises before I had read them. When I finally got to them, I realized why they receive so much criticism - because they destroy the competition. Friedman was right for the most part, but his monetary theories were incorrect. He believed some inflation was fine. As Austrian School Business Cycle Theory shows, even some inflation is bad. Considering that the Austrian School economists were the only ones predicting this current Depression we're now in, and many mainstream economists were completely surprised when it struck, and as still encouraging people to "buy the dip" even though we're no where near the bottom yet, I'm not sure how anyone can defend Keynesian 'economics' at this point. Keynesian 'economics' is what's put us in this mess in the first place.
    8
  3978. I'm kinda surprised you think it's technical. Then again, I read quite a lot of technical books, so I guess I'm getting used to the 'mildly' technical ones
    8
  3979. Awesome! Love your videos btw :)
    8
  3980. That's awesome! I haven't studied Vietnam, so I only know bits. However, going off what you said, nothing is as black and white as what the Vietnam orthodox view is stating. It does sound like the Vietnam revisionists are moving down the correct path, which is good!
    8
  3981. Investigation sounds like a good way to put it, but then that would leave the "distorians" with the "revisionist" title, which would imply that you're not allowed to revise history. I agree with you though, and I'm glad you're enjoying my videos. More to come :)
    8
  3982. Yes! In addition, there's a great book called "The Devil and Karl Marx" which paints him in a similar light. He used to sit in churches and laugh out loud at what the priests were saying. Even if you're not religious, it's still not a respectable way to act.
    8
  3983. You've literally just outlined the Leftist 'woke' argument. Well done!
    8
  3984. I mentioned this in the video. Keep watching
    8
  3985. Many haven't actually read Karl Marx, and those that have choose to ignore the majority of what he wrote. Socialism is a religion, and it's followers are so blinded by the promise of paradise that they fail to see the dystopian nightmare they're building
    8
  3986. Fantastic! You are talking about history, and quoting from history, and have backed up what you've said with sources (including "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly!) so I'd say you're doing what a historian is doing. I've just subscribed to your channel, and I will watch the rest of your videos when I get a chance. Keep up the good work!
    8
  3987. I prefer ale to Guiness, and will be having some ale tomorrow night with some friends, so I'll wait until then 😉
    8
  3988. "Curious whether you can do a video about the Rheinland POW camps that often cause so much fuss and controversy? Similar to "Dresden" it's often used as anti western propaganda. " Yes. they're on my list of things to do.
    8
  3989. I'm convinced that Mike McMike is a communist troll. Nobody could be that dumb unless they were being paid to be and had a gun pointed at the back of his head.
    8
  3990. No, but I have been considering doing something like that. I've got other priorities at the moment though.
    8
  3991. It's funny how nothing you said contradicted what I know. You made a big rant about nothing. And no, I'll do what I like, including show how ridiculous most philosophers are, including Plato, Kant, and anyone else. As an independent mind looking for objective truth, I don't value your subjective gaslighting.
    8
  3992.  @leonardticsay8046  Same. I encourage people to tell me how they broke the spell of socialism or similar ideologies.
    8
  3993. Well, I'm certainly glad you've found the channel. Welcome aboard!
    8
  3994. Yup!
    8
  3995. Congratulations on your A-Levels! You get good grades, right?? Quite complicated to get into, but ultimately, the Dollar is dying, and the Dollar is the world's reserve currency. They're trying to implement a cash-less all-digital world fiat currency, so if the Banksters think they can get away with it, the next step is negative interest rates, and more easy-debt. So if you have savings in fiat currency, say goodbye to them. My advise is to avoid debt like the plague, no matter how tempting they make it to get into it. And if you are in debt, get out of it as quickly as you can before it's too late.
    8
  3996. First! Thank you
    8
  3997. Thank you, Merry Christmas to you too!
    8
  3998. It's already happened. Someone has already called me a conspiracy theorist 😂
    8
  3999.  @ronmka8931  Perhaps it depends on which country you're from? I've just searched "TIK" now, and the first two videos were mine, but most of the rest were thumbnails of TIKTOK girls in skimpy outfits. One title is "TikTok Girls That Are Hotter Than Magma". I mean, how am I (or super-sexy Göring) supposed to compete with that!?
    8
  4000. If I'm honest, I agree. It's partly because the sources are vague, they're mostly pro-German, and I can't dive down to the tactical level, which I think is where Battlestorm shines. I'm looking forward to Stalingrad for this reason - none of these issues are present in that battle.
    8
  4001. Curious to know if height up a mountain affects weight loss - only because you lose weight by breathing, so if you're breathing differently, would that affect it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuIlsN32WaE
    8
  4002. YouTube has Age Restricted this video! Thanks YouTube!
    8
  4003. What do you call a customer in pyjamas? A convict
    8
  4004. "US regulators issued a warning about this very thing a few years ago" It sounds like US regulators are making stuff up so that they can remain in an easy and pointless job at the expense of the tax payer.
    8
  4005. Ermm.... errrrrrr..... hmmmm..... can you repeat the answer?
    8
  4006. Well, I imagine there's a lot of places around the world that don't have gates, so I can understand that. But I definitely mentioned the gate in the question, which is a big clue. Plus, in the UK at least, it's fairly uncommon for houses with gardens not to have gates. To be honest, I actually thought it was a pointless question, and only used it as a introductionary "don't be nervous in this interview" sort of thing. That guy was the only interviewee out of all the ones I ever asked that didn't get that question right. In fact, I used to joke with many of the other ones after asking it because they would laugh and say "that's such an easy question!"
    8
  4007. I think a lot of people went to that school
    8
  4008. We were always surprised they managed to even get to the store in the first place, or dress themselves in the morning
    8
  4009. Cosmic - the reason he was going East for Lebensraum was for resources. The reason he had to take the resources was because he couldn't trade for them. He couldn't trade for them because he didn't believe in "international Jewish finance" - capitalism. Hitler went to war because of his socialism.
    8
  4010. People complained about the music so I stopped putting it in. Then others complained when I stopped putting it in. I do prefer the videos with music, but it does take a lot of effort to make the music and editing the videos to it, so I'm not sure about its return.
    8
  4011. I mainly do it because it'll stop people taking the audio and claiming I said the things that Hitler said, but I also do it because the voice is fun to do.
    8
  4012. Great! The deep blue is only for the SS units (e.g. Kampfgruppe Peiper) to give them distinction from the regular grey Heer-units (none in this video, see 6th Army OOB), and the Luftwaffe ones which have a lighter-blue/grey colour (e.g. Kampfgruppe Henke).
    8
  4013. That wasn't totalitarian. Authoritarian yes, not totalitarian. The Kaiser didn't have total-control over the people or the economy. Germany was (mostly) capitalist at this time. They didn't have state-officials in all the businesses and controlling them like they had in Nazi-Germany, and property rights hadn't been abolished like they were in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, so private property by definition places a check on public-state control.
    8
  4014. Honestly if you lot think the National Socialist economy was either privatized or free market, you need to recheck your definitions of capitalism, free market and privatization. The state being in charge of the economy cannot be any of these things. Just because the Nazis called it "privatization" does not mean that it was.
    8
  4015. @LordDark102 - China was socialist and totalitarian, but is now (slowly) freeing up its economy and people, which is also the reason why it's beginning to see rapid economic grown. Yes, it's not a totally-free economy, and it's definitely a dictatorship, but the fact is that if they free up the economy from government, they become less totalitarian. They stay a dictatorship and authoritarian and have a police-state etc, but without total-control of the economy they would technically no longer be totalitarian.
    8
  4016. Shooting prisoner and civilians isn't a "war crime"?
    8
  4017.  @yodwichalanna3880  "They cannot accept the funding of AH by the banksters either... Who created the Bolsheviks again?" I have Sutton's books on the funding of Hitler and the Bolsheviks. While I know central banks are a crime against humanity, I'm not convinced by the argument or the evidence that Hitler was funded by the West. I may end up doing a video on the topic, so I'll explain then. - "or the incessant little details like Kurt Eisner, Erik Jan Hanussen. Doubt you can accept these things either. Suddenly the Dodd Report to the Reece Commission starts to make a whole lot of sense." Honestly I don't know what you're referring to with these.
    8
  4018. Not the same Epstein! 😂
    8
  4019.  Minister Of Propaganda  I intend to do a video or two on the Bengal famine at some point.
    8
  4020. Unfortunately, the "Freedom of Information Act" and similar don't apply to all records - such as those in the Secret Service Archives, or the Royal Archives etc.
    8
  4021. Yeah, this it technically the first time I've set out a proper naval battle before, although I do have a video on the Battle of the Atlantic
    8
  4022. First! You know, I hadn't ever considered the English Civil War before. I think you're the first person to ever suggest it. People have wanted me to cover the American Civil War though
    8
  4023. I love the back and forth here. It's good to consider alternative perspectives. I'm generally against war (there's an argument for defensive action, but even then it should be avoided at all costs), however, I can understand the argument that once the war has started you're in a struggle for survival and therefore all (or most) bets are off. It makes me think that humanity is one good declaration of war away from losing its humanity, and that "humanity" is just a synonym of "barbarous". Or am I being too nihilistic?
    8
  4024. FIRST! And yeah, YouTube is broken
    8
  4025. What you have to remember is that Socialists believe that the current system is "capitalism". So therefore, when the State does stuff, it's the capitalist bourgeoisie flexing their power. Essentially, we're using two different sets of definitions when it comes to socialism and capitalism, which is why I thought it was important for me to do my Public vs Private video as a way to show the historic definitions... My mistake was assuming they would listen.
    8
  4026. Stay in ignorance. I'll stick with the evidence.
    8
  4027. "Just block all the roads with IKEA furniture" You made me laugh out loud. Take a heart
    8
  4028. "Our people"? How about you stop seeing the world in "groups". We're not groups, we're individuals. My genes say I'm unique, and so do everybody else's. There are no groups, just individuals, and there always will be.
    8
  4029. Patriotism is irrelevant here as I said in a follow up video https://youtu.be/WHCVKPIY6Pk
    8
  4030. I don't mind if you disagree with me, because that shows you're thinking, and the only way to prove or disprove a narrative is to debate it. So I welcome intellectually honest, respectful and valid counter-arguments to what I'm saying. I only take issue with the screaming man-children that flock onto my videos to call me names and laugh away what I'm saying, then wonder why I won't bow down to them and actually mock them back... Some people let their emotions cloud their judgement.
    8
  4031. Yeah, I think there's pros and cons for both independent episodes and all-in-ones, and I'm not sure what's best. For certain series it makes sense. In Crusader, I think doing independent episodes were great because there was always a "you won't believe what happened next!" sort of thing going on, so making people wait a week was actually fun (or evil) for me. But that wasn't really the case with Courland so maybe seeing it all in one go would be better.
    8
  4032. I've actually got a couple of Patron questions which sort of touches upon this. But I will give a brief go at it here. It would have helped in terms of having more equipment in general (e.g. trucks and vehicles). However I would say that most of the equipment lost wasn't great quality anyway. For example, the Matilda 1s weren't worth much. The only thing that I would say did have a big impact was that the abandonment of the 2-Pounder Anti-Tank guns. This did cause a shortage, and influenced the High Command to keep producing the 2-Pounder longer, rather than switch production earlier to the 6-Pounder. But you have to remember that Hitler was going East, not West. He had no intention (originally) in fighting Britain or France. He actually wanted to ally with Britain in the early days (speaking of an alliance in Mein Kampf or his unpublished Second Book). So I don't think he would have taken on France first anyway.
    7
  4033. Congrats!
    7
  4034. I am concerned for you guys down there. You're right to call it "enslaved". I don't know what I can do to help, but I have a feeling that the rest of the world will be following your example soon if more people don't wake up and start resisting.
    7
  4035. It's certainly entertaining, even if it's sad.
    7
  4036. Gihren Zabi - let's use Wikipedia as a source! Yay! Oh wait "In fairness, some studies have suggested that Wikipedia more generally does reflect a good degree of reliability, but articles on the Wehrmacht (in English Wikipedia) might struggle to meet this standard." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13518046.2018.1487198 Same applies for random websites that don't site their sources. I don't have time right now to go through everything you wrote, but I'm going to assume it's top quality, given the last line "Please tell me how America is socialist." I never said it was. Watch the videos you're on and you'll see I placed it on the capitalist-end economically. However, having a nationalized Postal Service, for example, is a socialist policy historically. Even in Britian, where we have a National Health Service founded by a socialist Party in the 1940s, our postal service is currently not run by the state.
    7
  4037. Cheers Mike! Yes, most of those downvoting these two videos have not actually stopped to think. They're ignoring or misunderstanding Hitler's words, and his actions during his time in power. It makes more sense for him to be classed as a socialist than for him not to be.
    7
  4038. That's it. They think I'm saying 'their' socialism (whatever that is) is the same as Hitler's socialism. I'm not saying that. However, Hitler's socialism was socialism. To say it's not is to ignore the facts staring them in the face.
    7
  4039. Which order was that?
    7
  4040. I've done Let's Plays of HOI4 on this channel. That said, I don't think I'd bother with strategic bombing in HOI. I'd just have air superiority and go for the land encirclements
    7
  4041. Don't stay locked up for too long. Get some sunlight at the very least, since Vitamin D is essential https://youtu.be/Oza9kjcXCRY
    7
  4042. "Ok you can't trust the offical USSR stats for whatever reason but then you quoting authors and clearly trusting their stats. Why? Where did they get them from? Guess? How scientific is thats..." Who said I trusted their stats? I made it very clear that you can't trust these statistics, since any economic calculation in a non-free economy is impossible. This is one of the fundamental problems with socialism. "Making up numbers higher than their are, especially during war time is borderline retared in totalitarian society... Most of western authors base their conclusions on dissidents stories, which is great for propaganda purposes, but those guys rarely have reliable data." That's not the issue. The issue is fundamental to socialism. The way we generate prices is by trading with other people. If you don't have that trade - if you don't have a free market, which you won't under a socialist economy because everything is owned by one entity (the State) - then you cannot have prices. Without prices you cannot have economic calculation. So this isn't propaganda, this is the socialist economic calculation problem. No economic data from the Soviet Union is reliable at all because it's socialist bureaucracy manipulated the economy. Because it did that, their statistics are fundamentally flawed. Yes, some things are reliable - 'such a division got 20 tanks' - but not the economic figures. However, I also said that even if we did use the official statistics, they're painting a picture that's pointing to the fact that the Soviet economy was running out of food. We also have more reliable facts (e.g. cats and dogs gone missing in Moscow, 64th Army down to a couple days worth of food, etc) and anecdotal evidence that is all pointing in this direction. So while the statistics are flawed, they don't actually hide the problem.
    7
  4043. "What can i say. TIK really sucks both in economy and politics ))))" And since the military is an extension of both economics and politics, TIK must also suck at military history too.
    7
  4044. Absolutely, I do recommend Glantz. His is not in the "narrative" style though, and is an operational blow-by-blow account of what happened. This is great if you want to get into the nitty gritty, like I do. But maybe new people to the topic may want a lighter read, in which case Citino is probably one of the best. And no, Duolingo isn't enough! Although it is helping massively
    7
  4045. If they are the same, then Beevor's Downfall was a great narrative history in my opinion, and I thought it was better than his Stalingrad book.
    7
  4046. How much does Xi pay these days to spam emotionalism in my comment sections?
    7
  4047. Second!
    7
  4048. It was a relatively new discovery in the literature. Too many people focus on the tactics and neglect the other bits
    7
  4049. I like the word "plebbitors" - I'm going to use that from now on! However it's not just Redditors, it's other viewers as well, including some regulars.
    7
  4050. Either him or Halder
    7
  4051. Dangerous tactic - you may not like it!
    7
  4052. Do some quick math, then watch!
    7
  4053. It's every 4 weeks
    7
  4054.  Arbane's Sword of Agility  Non of your nonsense comments have been deleted so far. But if you don't stop spamming multiple off-topic comments preaching your religion in my comment sections, I will block you completely.
    7
  4055.  @real_yunicellular  "1980s? im talking about the holodomor" Because it applies to any form of collectivism, including that of the 1930s. Collectivism led to a decrease in production, which is why just 2% of the farms (the private ones) were producing 30% of the food. The other 98% were producing just 70% of the total food. Had they been in private ownership, then the food production would have been astronomically higher. The reason the Holodomor starvation occurred was because the forced collectivization led to a substantial decrease in food production. Private farms were many times more efficient than collective farms. Thus, collective farms are a downgrade, and thus a loss of food production. That reduction in food production, plus a drought, and the fact that the borders were closed and that the Soviets were still exporting food from the area, meant that there was little food left for the local population, which is why they starved. Even in the 1980s, farmers were the poorest of the people in the Soviet Union.
    7
  4056. Enjoy! And don't forget to see the video I narrated this week for Anton Joly (link in description and pinned comment)
    7
  4057. One half of every transaction is completed with currency, and the price of that currency is set by the State Central Banks' interest rate manipulation and currency printing. Therefore EVERY price in the economy is distorted. Nothing is truly free. And there is no private property. Try not paying your property tax and see how long you can hold onto 'your' property. Taxes, regulations, wage controls, price controls, subsidies, laws, outright lies and a whole host of other things. This is why the price of EVERY single good and service in our modern economy is wrong. When this corrects to fair value, it's going to be shocking https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    7
  4058. @Torven The Grey  "They received supplies from another non-market based Socialist inefficient country so obviously, since two inefficient logistics systems are better than one, they did better!" Exactly 👍
    7
  4059. What did you think of Courland? I think you'll definitely enjoy Crusader 👍
    7
  4060. True, but this also goes with an upcoming Patreon Q&A video asking whether Poland's aggressive foreign policy caused her own destruction, so I thought it best to show how Hitler wanted to wage war first before we got to that. The source I take on in this video (Mr Hoggan's "The Forced War") is still being used by the Nazis to argue that Poland (and Britain) started WW2
    7
  4061. Actually, Nazi ideology is fundamentally anti-Christian. But morons who have only read Mein Kampf and don't really understand the full ideology don't realize that Hitler was lying to get support from Christians in the bit he said he was a Christian. There's loads of quotes and other evidence that Hitler despised Christianity as well as other religions
    7
  4062. You're right! And as a free market guy, I will obviously submit to your totalitarian regime, which is what I secretly want, because having a dictator who can execute me at any moment is good for the millions of stocks and shares I own. (In case it's not obvious to the social dullards out here, this is sarcasm)
    7
  4063.  @srfrg9707  "Syria and Libanon were not french colonies but rather french protectorates under SDN mandate." That's technically true, but I would still refer to them as colonies since the riots in 1940-1 and 1945 were put down by French authorities. That sounds like a colony to me.
    7
  4064. Not sure what you mean by a "Renaissance Man" but yup, do everything me.
    7
  4065. Ah, I was a elite miner in Runescape back in the day, wandering around, getting beaten fighting chickens... I even remember I mispelled my character name when I created it. Instead of being "Sweet Leaf" after the Black Sabbath song, I spelt it "Sweat Leaf", which probably suggests how young I was when I first played it (not that young, I just wasn't paying attention when I typed it in, but it got a couple of laughs from my school friends).
    7
  4066. May as well do, I'm doing everything else!
    7
  4067. Inflation is a secret tax that devalues the currency and steals wealth and savings from everyone that holds it. Gold has value (subjective) and is a store of value. If everyone used physical gold as a money, then the central banks couldn't secretly steal wealth/value off of them through the power of inflation. Therefore, those who hold physical gold during an inflationary period, such as during the Weimar Republic, or today, are shielded from the inflation, meaning central banks can't secretly steal the value from the physical gold. So in Weimar (and other societies who were about to inflate their fiat currency), they made excuses for people to hand over their physical gold, or taxed them in gold, or offered fiat currency rewards for handing it in, or persuaded you to put it in a bank and then unlinked the currency from the gold ("I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ten pounds of gold"). TLDR: Inflation works best when everyone is using fiat currency.
    7
  4068. Or Cambodia 1975-1979 Or Venezuela 2020
    7
  4069. "but in the end, it was the survival of large corporations that were at stake." Again, the corporations were the trade unions. The trade unions were the corporations. Forget the word "corporation" for a moment. Imagine giant trade unions (soviets) taking over sectors of the economy. That's what syndicalism is, and is what Fascism was. Fascism and Marxism are two sides of the same coin. They've been painted as though they are total opposites, but they are not. Fascism is socialism on the national level. Marxism was socialism on the international level. But when the Soviet Union didn't create a world-revolution, they became "socialism in one country". Socialism in one country is Fascism. I would agrue that the Soviet Union became Fascist under Stalin. Or that practically, Fascism and Marxism are the same thing. "The Fascists/Nazis took care of the trade unions, yes, but the taxation and regulation of the business were dire." The trade unions were part of the control of the business sector. Taxation went through the roof in the Nazi economy and regulations were rampant. Again, state control. My recent video on the Nazi's Vampire Economy talked briefly about this https://youtu.be/NxwidjWJxAc "it was a perfect version of “state-capitalism”." Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) control of the economy. If you have a state in control, you no longer have capitalism. State capitalism is literally "state non-state". It doesn't exist. The Left use this term to hide the truth. State capitalism = socialism. A black market is a free market (capitalism) within a state controlled economy. If you have a black market, the rest of the economy is socialism. The US, UK and the EU all have black markets for drugs and other things. They do not have free markets and do not have capitalism. They are mostly socialist economies and are getting worse. "[I] see the connection between socialism and fascism less theoretical." Same here. "The 1930s is coming back, it's already here." It's more like 1919 Germany. Expect uprisings and hyperinflation. The more the Far Left push, the more people will turn to the 'alternative' - Fascism and Nazism. And this is bad.
    7
  4070. And this is why it's important that people understand exactly what their ideology is. Know thy enemy and know thy self and you shall not fear the result of a thousand battles...
    7
  4071. @Stephanie Wilson - "peer-review" is actually more like censorship. It seems like a great idea at first, but it really isn't and actually hurts the historical process, because if you don't say something that your peers like, then you don't get published.
    7
  4072. If you think that, pick up Zitelmann's "Hitler the Politics of Seduction" or "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly, or Brown's "How 'socialist' was National Socialism", or Reisman's "Why Nazism was socialism and why socialism is totalitarian" or the "Vampire Economy"...
    7
  4073. FIRST!
    7
  4074. They're our most accurate source on the battle, obviously! (Interestingly - the maps in Close Combat A Bridge Too Far are pretty accurate since they were based off real aerial photographs. Obviously people in the Netherlands didn't paint large numbers on their roof to indicate how many storeys their houses had, but they are pretty good if you compare them to the real photos)
    7
  4075. EVERYBODY LIKE REX'S COMMENT SO PEOPLE CAN SEE - the Kindle version is the same as the bad version Not read A Street in Arnhem! I'll have to invest in it. Also just noticed he's written books on the Western Desert Campaign... think I might treat myself to some more books of his :) I'm trying to balance Panzer Corps, Documentaries, these new book reviews, and possible do some Close Combat videos again. It's hard finding time though
    7
  4076. I am full-time! Even with more-than full-time hours, the Stalingrad series is just too much!
    7
  4077. I might do after Monday's video...
    7
  4078. "You could talk about the history of phone books and make it interesting." Challenge accepted
    7
  4079. Well, the problem is that when there's a chorus of stupidity being sung by a lot of people, I feel like I need to address it. Especially when it hinders me and what I'm trying to do. I hoped that they would stop saying 'stick to tanks' etc after a while, but they've persisted. Therefore, this video
    7
  4080. I'll be able to do so once I've conquered more living space
    7
  4081. "Wait till you see what happened last week lol" Why? What happened last week?
    7
  4082. If I had had more time, I would have read Degrelle's account, but this was a bit of rush to get done in time unfortunately
    7
  4083. Really?? Well, if I get enough questions...
    7
  4084. Absolutely! But the point was that a lot were from the East, and a lot of them didn't have quite so happy endings :(
    7
  4085. Happy birthday Goodman! :) (I'm saying it now because tomorrow could be any time depending on time zone)
    7
  4086. Everything you just said is completely untrue. Britain was in heavy financial crisis in 1941/42 and reliant on US Lend Lease to stay afloat. The "socialists" had nothing to do with that, that was Hitler and the strain of two world wars. Caring for your own people is something a government should do - and I would argue that any government that fails to do that is a government you shouldn't support. I fail to see how providing pensions, national insurance, workers rights, a nation health service (that's free, universal and at the point of need) and so on, is not good for the people of the country. They may have started out as 'socialist' policies, but I would argue that these are not socialist policies now - they're decent policies that the majority accept as good policies. What's worse, currently the morons in charge of Britain (not talking parties, I mean the whole Oxbridge lot) are trying to completely undo what was achieved in the late 1940's by the 'greatest generation' under the pretence that they 'can't afford it'. Well, that's completely untrue. They can afford it. But they want to dismantle those things because they're looking to line their pockets in the short term at the expense of the majority of the populace. Same applies in other countries, like the Scandinavian countries. And this is a damn shame, because a lot of people don't realise just what it took to achieve the benefits we now enjoy today. Dismantling the NHS, workers right, pensions and so on are steps backwards and will lead to poverty and destitution, as was the case beforehand. It would be the equivalent of dismantling the internet because 'we can't afford it'. It's insanity, and it's no wonder a great proportion of the population in the UK are bitter over the policies of 'our' government.
    7
  4087. Yes. Watch the full video (specifically, Criticism five 35:36)
    7
  4088. Just thinking out loud here, but I was going to cover the Crete and Greek campaigns (then there was a vote, and Stalingrad won). But if I was to do that, I think I'd have to do Yugoslavia first to give some context. Again, this will all be after Stalingrad. And I think if I was to cover this topic, I'd have to do some other essential videos first (to give some weight and also links for the inevitable criticism I'd receive in the comments section). Luckily, the videos I have planned which I can't mention are exactly what is required.
    7
  4089. It's true, and I think a lot of people don't realise what tanks are there for. Can't do much without infantry. And yes, I'm doing my utmost to keep to these Monday videos. Can't promise they'll always be this long though :) and thanks for sharing btw! Means a lot. Hope the TE team find this as good as you did
    7
  4090. Because that's what people refer to it as. It is really a campaign though.
    7
  4091. I'm curious about what happened there, but I don't have plans currently to cover it at the moment
    7
  4092. Yeah a few people have asked about this, so it's definitely something I need to do
    7
  4093. So in your own words, Marx is saying everyone should be lazy and not work. That's fine, but I'm not lazy. I take pride in my work, and I work hard. I don't want to be lazy. If I have a bad boss, I'll find another job. If there's only one boss - which there will be in the collective ownership of the means of production - and that boss is bad, I'm kinda stuck as there is no alternative.
    7
  4094. I was a little surprised by the popularity of that one, and the comments were interesting. A lot of people thought that Germany was destined to lose the war. Some interesting counters to that too. Will do more in the future 👍
    7
  4095. Well it's good to hear they're reading between the lines :)
    7
  4096. I admit that I don't have a brain because I was 31 when I too the political and economic red pill. I should have realised earlier!
    7
  4097. Exactly. Mostly Cold War propaganda. I'm not "biased" or a "commie" as some people claim, I'm just trying to be neutral. That said, I do want to address the bias already within the current narrative.
    7
  4098. If I wasn't making these videos, I probably wouldn't read very often. There has to be an end-goal for me to commit to something that takes a lot of time to complete, and that might be the case with you too.
    7
  4099. Yeah, don't read the sources and remain ignorant of the facts, that's how truth works!
    7
  4100. I can promise you that I didn't cut it short - I definitely had the full two weeks. As I've just said in the pinned comment, I could have done with a more time off, but I'm much better than I was a couple weeks back. The headaches are gone, at least!
    7
  4101. What did Karl Marx call for in the Communist Manifesto? Central Banking. Why are you attributing the current proto-socialist system to "free markets"? If the current system is "capitalism", then what we need is a free market, not more socialism.
    7
  4102. The welfare state is the antithesis to progress. Progress is derived from human freedom, which is freedom from forces such as tyranny and altruism which threaten his existence.
    7
  4103. Thanks for you comment! As soon as I read it, I understood exactly what you meant, but I've not heard it spelt out like that before. Could you go into more detail and explain what you mean by minimum wage becoming maximum wage, and why it ends up that way?
    7
  4104. Thank you :)
    7
  4105. Yes, but how do they defeat Britain? You can't just swim across the channel, and they lost the Battle of Britain, and the Campaign in the Atlantic.
    7
  4106. 5 weeks since the last one? Happy new year to you too!
    7
  4107. Oh wow I didn't realize you were a couple episodes behind. I wonder how many other people haven't caught up fully yet?
    7
  4108. Well, I have some good news for you, sir! If you go back to the last episode (E30) and look at the chapter titles, you'll see that I did call Episode 30 "Make or Break" as you suggested. I just decided not to use that as the video title here on YouTube because I don't think it would appeal to people. And yes, the offensive in the city on the 23rd is very interesting, and sets us up for the grind in November where the German pioneer battalions are called in to help. Then it's Operation Uranus time, which is where it gets decisive Cheers!
    7
  4109. "Where do you foresee the end of the series?" This particular series will end with the collapse of the Stalingrad pocket in early February 1943. - "It would be very interesting to also discuss whether trapping the German armies in the Caucus was plausible or a pipe dream. So little content on that." They did trap elements of Army Group A in the Caucasus, opposite Kerch, and they stayed there for some time. See this map https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Eastern_Front_1943-08_to_1944-12.png
    7
  4110. I think I'm the only person in Britain who's enjoying Brexit, and that's only because I'm loving the instability it's caused our awful government (as in, every political party here). A weak government is the best outcome for citizens of a nation.
    7
  4111. Yes, although I wish they played a bigger role during Crusader, but they don't really. So many of the books don't talk about them much. They do play a role later in the battle though, but by that point the battle is decided.
    7
  4112. Ok mummy (let us not speak of this moment again)
    7
  4113. Enjoy the popcorn! I'd like to say Crusader doesn't get any worse than this... but it gets worse than this ;)
    7
  4114. I did edit a lot out (the original response was 3 hours!) but only because most of it had already been addressed and there wasn't much else to say. And part of the reason I wanted to do this video wasn't because I wanted to debate these two guys specifically, but to show everyone what I'm dealing with on a daily basis. Plus I wanted to show how not to create an "argument", how to respond (or not) to insults, and also (hopefully) get through to more people that previously dismissed me that I actually do have a solid grasp of these topics. I think I've achieved most of these aims, so I would say that this video was worth it. But you're right, unless they come back with a solid argument, it's going to be a waste of time dealing with them again.
    7
  4115.  @justicar5  What if I told you that the beating heart of fascism is socialism, not capitalism? https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    7
  4116. I've done a video defining fascism here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    7
  4117. Yes, considering that the Wikipedia page for the economy of Nazi Germany doesn't have the word "Gleichschaltung", but there is a separate page on that particular phrase, highlights the agenda that's inherent on that website. Facts that certain people don't like are being pushed aside, and facts that they do like are being put on centre stage. This is dishonesty at its finest.
    7
  4118. I'm curious how you got to 48 minutes - the video hasn't been out that long!
    7
  4119. Unfortunately, the same applies to our island... or indeed any nation. It's not a problem with the geography; most people aren't interested in how the world works, or how we arrived at this point. People don't understand or care about history, and it's a great shame.
    7
  4120. "I'm a Leninist because Lenin murdered millions of people and I support that." - trustworthy individual.
    7
  4121. If I'm honest, I've not read enough to really make a commitment either way. And in a lot of ways I don't want to commit, at least not yet. If I don't become emotionally attached to a particular viewpoint on Mannerheim, I can talk about him and his actions from a neutral - and hopefully - unbiased perspective. And then later, once I've read enough, then I can make a commitment, if that makes sense?
    7
  4122. Typical! I buy a book that's not entirely truthful :( could you recommend any good English books on the Winter War?
    7
  4123. Hitler wasn't a Fascist, he was a National Socialist, and Nazism is fundamentally different to Fascism as I explained here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Zitelmann also explains this too. And no, Fascism is a failed Socialist ideology.
    7
  4124. It might be better for you to buy gold and silver bullion, or jewelry if you can't get a hold of the bullion.
    7
  4125. They obviously didn't watch the last video ("What's coming after Stalingrad") where I explained there were two episodes left
    7
  4126. Yeah, I think it was more an excuse to just kill people - removing them off the land for future German farmers to take over - rather than to increase economic output
    7
  4127. Thanks! I'm not sure if this Q&A video is particularly well sourced because I only used a few sources, but I did try to pick books coming at this from different perspectives
    7
  4128. It really is depressing that people do fall for this stuff. I was a socialist, so I understand to some extent. You get sucked into a bubble, and it's really hard to come out of it because you assume everyone who isn't a socialist must be evil. I also think most socialists are there because of the slogans and the promises, largely ignoring the main ideology itself. The socialists I know in real life have zero clue about Marx, and couldn't quote Lenin or Stalin or Hegel.
    7
  4129. I'd appreciate a pint ;) cheers sir!
    7
  4130. They didn't push immediately into Holland, only in ~April 1945, several months later. They were preoccupied with the supply situation and heading into Germany itself, which they took months to do.
    7
  4131. Of course haha
    7
  4132. Don't mind at all! Everything is done in either Photoshop, Premiere Pro, or Blender (3D software). For this video, I used Photoshop to make the units, and Premiere Pro to put everything together and move everything around. The map, fire effects and explosions were made in Blender. And in case you're interested, I actually have a tutorial for my Patreons which shows me making this particular map. For some of my other documentaries I did all the unit movements in Blender, then put them into Premiere Pro because it's much easier to do movement animations in Blender. But decided to cut out the middle-man this time for time reasons, which is why they have very abrupt movement patterns in this video. At least, I notice it, even if others do not. Not sure yet, but despite the minor flaws, this is probably how I'll do it for Stalingrad.
    7
  4133.  @vantuz8264  Putin said Poland had "annexationist plans" (and thus was aggressive).
    7
  4134. Thank you for the recommendation!
    7
  4135. Congrats!
    7
  4136. I love the term "McDicks". Not heard that before, but I'm going to use it
    7
  4137. I'm not a Sovietboo nor a Socialist Romancer.
    7
  4138. Just to point out that I'm not defending Monty here - I don't care either way. However, I have read that Montgomery's appointment to the desert boosted morale for the 8th Army prior to El Alamein. He frequently visited the troops more than other generals before him. Also, part of the reason why he was so "cautious" in battle was because he was trying to reduce casualties, which is obviously good for morale. I don't know whether he did this for selfish reasons or if he genuinely cared about the troops under his command, but if he didn't care, why wasn't he more aggressive? It doesn't make sense for him to be uncaring to his troops, but then try to save as many of them as possible. And if he was doing this during the desert, it makes sense that he would do this elsewhere, including at the Bulge, which that author (at least) said he was doing.
    7
  4139. Do you know what animation software he uses?
    7
  4140. :)
    7
  4141. Well, next week I'm looking deeper into the Pienaar issue. It's not going to be in this format, but I think it'll be eye-opening if you're interested in the Pienaar problem
    7
  4142. I will get to it in a future video. All I'll say for now is that he believed in a concept called "shrinking markets". This led him to the conclusion that he had to stop exports. This meant he had to conquer land because once you stop exporting, you can no longer import. This forced him to find food and oil - Lebensraum. The point is, the ideology came first. It just happened to fit the idea of building up for war - but not with the Soviet Union... with the United States, after he'd conquered Russia.
    7
  4143. Now that's surprising because I've had a very stressful week! I had to spend 3 days at a coffee shop doing work (on paper, which isn't as efficient) while noisey workers replaced our boiler. Because of this I haven't been able to do any editing at all this week, which means I'm going to have to put in a ton of hours this week to get next week's Courland video done in time. Been worried about it, so not been sleeping right, so a little surprised you think I look better this video.
    7
  4144. You didn't watch the video. Most of them weren't in poverty. And none of them got anywhere in life, except on the list of evil dictators. The fact that you're calling me "evil" for showing the pattern in the lives of these evil people, is telling.
    7
  4145. You cannot be a socialist without being altruistic. Socialism requires altruism, since the "equality" principle is based upon it. Altruism is all about helping others. The question is: why are others in need of help? Because the system (capitalism) is bad. Material reality does not provide equality, and this, material reality is bad, and we must overcome it by coming together and helping our fellow men via the collective (the state). This, altruism is against material reality ("nature") and the free market. This is the reason they blame others, like you said. They think that men who are left to their own devices will devour each other like a swarm of rats. Therefore, other men are the problem in their eyes. That's why they call for a socialist "New Man".
    7
  4146. Considering they've shut down entire economies and are printing currency left-right-and center, and using that currency to bail out the banks and corporations at the expense of the private sector, I think we can safely say our economic condition for 2020 is grim
    7
  4147. If it doesn't produce profit, then it's economically inefficient. If it's not subjected to the free market price system, chances are it's hiding it's losses
    7
  4148. @Digital Nomad - try watching the video before commenting. The beginning of the video is just the setup where I lead to the real narrative - that the 1946 Depression wasn't a thing.
    7
  4149. I'm sorry! I'll try better next time :)
    7
  4150. 99IronDuke, as I said at the end of the video, the Soviets committed atrocities too. Both sides did. Also, the reason the Soviets didn't provide food for Leningrad was because it was under siege.
    7
  4151. Let them be triggered. Finland fought against the Commintern, fought with German troops, were supplied with German equipment, and were at war with Britain. Relevant video I've done on the Continuation War https://youtu.be/7FeTH0ET_lE
    7
  4152. That's the way I see it too, going off the sources. The Germans often outnumbered the Soviets at the tactical level in 1941-1942.
    7
  4153. Thanks! Yes, your point on being patriotic and not liking your government is a good one. Be sceptical of all governments, especially your own.
    7
  4154. And a video on the percentage of reliability for the German sources as well?
    7
  4155. Thank you for the recommendations! I've added them to a wishlist. And I'm sure you'll disagree with me at some point; it's bound to happen haha :)
    7
  4156. Lol
    7
  4157. I've focused on videos and topics I'm interested in, rather than topics many people are interested in. So, I've not done D-Day etc. This is bad, but also good. While I am now beginning to get to the bigger topics, the difference is that I've done a ton of research and videos beforehand. Therefore there's more depth and the quality of information is much higher. So, for example, when I eventually get to Gazala, I'll have covered every battle in the North African Campaign before it. Not only can I reference what came before it, but I can judge the characters from within the context. Same with El Alamein. And of course, I'm looking into Stalingrad right now, which will hopefully see more people find my channel. But yes, overall it's because I'm not focusing on growth, and thus I'm not producing a quantity of smaller and shallower videos (e.g. 10 minute histories). I'm focusing on quality, and on topics that will hopefully build up into something much bigger in the long run. Basically, I'm playing the long game :)
    7
  4158. Will you please stop swearing and calling each other names. I don't want to have to start deleting comments because you can't be civil to each other. It's also a sign of a poor argument to attack the person rather than their points, so don't do it.
    7
  4159. Also, I think the good thing about the all-in-one videos is that I can put them in chapters/parts, and include timestamp as well, so you can watch them at your own pace.
    7
  4160. FIRST!
    7
  4161. No pause, it's every four weeks, so the next one is next week. Takes me that time to get the script done, record it all and edit it. I've been working on it all day today, and it will be a stretch to get it done in time because this one happens to be a long one (perhaps the longest I've done).
    7
  4162.  @chaptermasterpedrokantor1623  Correct. Although I will point out that adrevenue is just the cherry on the cake, and a bit hit or miss. It's the Patreons and SubscribeStars that are keeping this whole thing going.
    7
  4163. Which might be an indication that Canaris was trying to sabotage Hitler's effort to conquer Europe
    7
  4164. Yeah, that's probably a good way of putting it
    7
  4165. "the far left might become even more anti-semitic than they already are." Yep, that is actually a danger. However, I think the vast majority would turn away from them though as most people intuitively know that racism is bad.
    7
  4166. Yeah, I've heard of it, but no nothing more than what you've just said. Something worth looking into
    7
  4167. I also see flaws in the Objectivist camp, however my background in history theory has helped me see through them. The truth is neither objective or subjective, but both. The evidence is objective, and the interpretation is subjective. There's no getting around this; it is this way. Pretending it's either one or the other is logically false.
    7
  4168. Yeah, there's a couple spelling errors... Sorry about that
    7
  4169. No, I didn't forget about them. The reason communism failed was because Lenin shot the farmers trying to deliver food to the cities, the forceful collectivisation of the farms resulted in chaos, and the industries were also rendered inefficient because of central planning. On top of this, they celebrated the hyperinflation of the ruble, which they encouraged via the central bank. People can unsub all they like. I refuse to lie to my audience just because a bunch of children can't accept reality.
    7
  4170. Nothing is real socialism! /s
    7
  4171. At the time I voted Remain. If we had had a second referendum, I would have voted Leave. The EU is not a good thing, and neither is the UK Establishment, do voting Leave would screw them both over.
    7
  4172. They wanted the German workers to control the means of production, and that's precisely the regime they set up https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=utJHDt5JaBuGXCU5
    7
  4173. There was no free market economy in Tsarist Russia.
    7
  4174. With Halder all things are possible.
    7
  4175.  @QuizmasterLaw  Yes, this was an incredibly easy video to make in terms of reading, scripting and editing etc. Could make this type of video from start to finish in one day! The only issue is that many questions I get require a lot more in-depth reading, and so making a short video on a topic isn't always possible. And I wouldn't want to put out a 5 minute video on a Monday.
    7
  4176. I don't know everything, and I'd like to learn more too, so it's all good. It's not about being upstaged, it's about getting it right. I'd rather we all find out the truth, so I won't let my ego get in the way of it
    7
  4177. Probably for the best. I may have to go on Rumble.
    7
  4178. Labour was in power for years and enabled this problem. This has been building for more than 40 years, and it's the Marxist-Fascist ideology that Labour is indoctrinated in that has caused this.
    7
  4179. You have no idea how many people there are over here that think it's better if only the criminals have weapons.
    7
  4180. I will admit, it was hard seeing some of those messages...
    7
  4181. Thanks! I'll get them right in the main video!
    7
  4182. You're right, I could have mentioned them. I just don't have too much information on US armoured units since my focus has been Market Garden, North African Campaign, and Eastern Front.
    7
  4183. Thank you! Really glad to hear that you enjoyed it
    7
  4184. What, by calling it a war crime?
    7
  4185. It wasn't Dresden, unless church services happen at 10pm on a Tuesday?
    7
  4186. I didn't skip many facts, just some of the most heart-wrenching ones... But yes, YouTube doesn't want this sort of content on the platform, which is why it appears to be restricting this video right now.
    7
  4187. "That's one percent of the population and that's far from 'everyone'." He didn't say "everyone", he said everyone knew someone. I know at least 100 people, therefore if I lived in Estonia during 1941, chances are I would have known 1 of the 1% of the 10,000 that got deported (going off your figures).
    7
  4188. Can't confirm if he said that or not, but I like it
    7
  4189. They aready are. The Marxists are claiming it's not socialism at all, which is a huge distortion. The National Socialists banned private property, nationalized the industries (claiming they were privatizing them but still conrolled them with state-militants and officals inside the factories), nationalized the youth (Hitler Youth), nationalized the railways, organized workers into state-run "workers battalions", nationalised the media, attempted to nationalise the farms (partially did), and implemented wage and price freezes. But yes, it was capitalism somehow!
    7
  4190. Ba-dum-tiss
    7
  4191. Will you take us to mount splashmore? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_E0CR01laQ
    7
  4192. @YeOldVisigoth "Yes I have historical videos on my channel. I'm a fan of unbiased history" You have playlists for 'Fascist Songs/Music', 'Historical Revisionism', 'Fascist Speeches', 'European Nationalist Videos/Songs', 'Fascist Tributes' and 'Historical Axis videos'... You also have 236 videos in your 'Alt-Right' playlist. Please tell me again how your history is unbiased?
    7
  4193. There's a debate about that too... which I'll get to in the future 'The Fate of German Prisoners of War' video which I'll no-doubt be doing
    7
  4194. Math teachers are usually worse than Hitler though
    7
  4195. And as is obvious from watching the previous video, and as argued in this video, that argument doesn't work.
    7
  4196. Yeah, you see, that's the problem. 425,000 rifles isn't a large enough number to make a significant impact, especially that late in the war. (I'm assuming that 425,000 number doesn't include any that might have been built post-war?) I also did a video a while ago explained how the MG-34s and MG-42s gave the German squads more firepower than any Allied or Soviet squads https://youtu.be/stIUuGFD2KE
    7
  4197. Yeah, trying something a bit different :)
    7
  4198.  @saltmerchant749  "We're actually seeing the perils of such an unregulated private rail economy in the UK right now." The only entity in the UK that's legally allowed to build railways lines and stations is Network Rail. Network Fail is the government (state) run corporation that's directly funded by the government/central bank. It has failed to do its job for decades. Private operators are struggling with overcrowding as a result. Virgin Rail closed down because of all the regulations (wage and price controls, but also the State told them to increase their pensions so they threw in the towel). So no, we do not have an "unregulated private rail economy in the UK right now" in any way shape or form. You have been tricked into believing that we do though.
    7
  4199. Yeah, although this doesn't explain why they forgot to put coal in HOI4!
    7
  4200. Thank you John. After all the criticism in previous videos I wanted to solidify the points and define everything so that there was no real comeback regarding the definitions at least. It's led me to some interesting places, and I've discovered a lot of interesting pieces of information which substantially changed my perception of WW2. I'll be delivering this info in future videos. And yes, the clumsy State management may explain a few things... :)
    7
  4201. "State Capitalism is the economic model of Fascism. It is a hybrid." I mentioned this in the video. You cannot have "State" "non-state (capitalism)". It's not possible.
    7
  4202. Honestly, I needed to just do something other than Stalingrad for a bit, and this was a nice change of pace. Other people are demanding Stalingrad, but I couldn't face it, so I did this instead. I'll be back to Stalingrad soon though. I also need to take another full break, but I'm going to wait until next month, if I take one at all.
    7
  4203. I didn't notice the pixel issue until after I had rendered and it was far too late to fix. IF I had known, I just wouldn't have zoomed in as much. I'm not sure what's causing the panning stutter, but I think I need to increase the frame rate for the next video to fix it... or it could be an issue with Premiere Pro. Hopefully I can resolve it for next week's video
    7
  4204. Good thank you, yourself? Also, FIRST!
    7
  4205.  @erozionzeall6371  "You for some reason believe that the free market is opposed to Monopolies." Because it's true. I also believed what you believed until I opened my eyes. Read the book "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom and you will get your answer. "A competitive free market will always lead to a monopoly, either through domination or mergers." No, Socialism is the monopoly that capitalism is trying to fight against. Again, see this video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    7
  4206. No, their policies are evil, but they are not.
    7
  4207. I agree entirely! And by the way, I wasn't defending the socialist world-view with my explanation of it, only pointing out what it is.
    7
  4208. Okay, first things first, if you haven't already, I'm going to ask you to read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. Follow this up with "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, and finally "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard (this last one you can get online for free here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression ). If you have read them, fair enough, I'd be interested to hear why you've dismissed their argument entirely, but if not then I highly encourage you to read those three works. Secondly, here's a video on US healthcare which may open your eyes a little https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Thirdly, there is no halfway house. If you believe in the "social safety net" idea (which is what you're saying about the government stepping in to save us from "capitalism") then you're already misunderstanding that it's not capitalism that's failed/failing. As I said, read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. Alternatively, watch my videos on what causes a recession or depression https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs When you said - "At the same time, not caring enough about another human to give none of them a chance to bounce back from a stream of crap luck is also bad." - my first instinct was to tell you that "that's not what the Right wants either". But then I realized that you wouldn't believe me. Yes, you're right that SOME people take advantage of others. However, a true capitalist system would be capable of getting those people back on their feet quicker than any socialist system could. If you cannot imagine how or why, then you need to read those three books I mentioned before. The State system is always more inefficient than the capitalist system. The heart is in the right place with a Leftist, but the method is wrong. The method we should be choosing is the one that has brought billions of people out of poverty (capitalism), not the one that wants to impoverish the poor in favour of the rich (socialism).
    7
  4209. That's because I stand by what I said - National Socialism is a form of socialism. As I've said in response to your other comments, free-market forces and supply and demand cannot explain the gas chambers. They are only possible in a socialist economy within a racist society.
    7
  4210. ">economics video TIK do you enjoy jumping into controversy" I don't shy away from it. If something needs to be said, I say it. And what people have to realise about me is that while I have made lots of videos on military history, that's not my only passion. I truly think economics is as interesting as military history, but in a different way. This is why logistics is something I like looking into when I study WW2, although the sources hardly ever mention it.
    7
  4211. Thanks John! Hope everyone has a great few days!
    7
  4212. I don't know how people can mistake the two. They're on the extreme opposite ends of the political spectrum (assuming you believe the spectrum is a real thing, which is an entire political discussion in and of itself)
    7
  4213. That's exactly it, and same why I gave it up too. I prefer to structure my videos as I would a historical essay and just drown people in data. Shame not enough people are creating content like that. Good to hear you're enjoying the content though :)
    7
  4214. WOOF WOOF!
    7
  4215. Yes, that would be a safe bet. They also were deployed in 'strongpoints' with commissars leading them, so I imagine them spread throughout the city. Whether that's true or not, I'm not sure, but seems likely at the moment. If I come across more info I'll let you know in the series
    7
  4216. "You are totally dissuading me from making my own YouTube channel bye covering all the topics that interest me." Haha you should do it anyway. Come up with your own versions, either in agreement or in disagreement with mine. Present a different perspective. Present additional information, or condense the information already given. Don't be put off by what I'm doing :)
    7
  4217. I hope I didn't disappoint
    7
  4218. I know you're joking, but with the EU Article 13 on the way (which might destroy YouTube), those 'continental overlords' in the EU government are quite literally evil incarnate. While I voted to remain (having been lied to by the government-run education system), I now understand fully that I should have supported leave. If I hadn't re-looked into what socialism was (in the aftermath of the National-Socialism was socialism video) I would have continued to believe the lie. The majority in Britain have been lied to by the government and the EU. People genuinely think that strong governments are the best thing for the low-income families. But the reality is that strong governments are only strong because they put taxes up in order to make them stronger. The question we all need to ask ourselves is, would you like a 20% increase in wages? If the answer is yes, then the way to get that isn't to raise wages, but to decrease taxes to the government. You can easily reduce taxes by 20% here in Britain for everyone and increase the wealth of every single working person by 20%, and you'll create more jobs doing just that. Right now, the government are taxing children. If you tax parents, you're taxing their children. If you tax a business that sells sweets, you're taxing children. If you tax a business, they can't hire as many workers, and so workers become unemployed and you have hungry children. Ultimately, no matter how you phrase it, taxation is immoral. And what do we get out of that taxation? Sure, an army, a police force, and a firebrigade. But beyond them, we get nothing other than a bad state pension scheme, a bad state national-insurance scheme, a bad (actually terrible) state education system, a bad state road building industry, an incredibly poor house building scheme which keeps house-prices high (locking out an entire generation from owning their own homes), 'unemployment' benefit for people who have never worked a day in their lives because they don't want to (minus the disabled, but they're the minority there), and a bloated and inefficient NHS which isn't even free to those who pay for it (only those who are on state-welfare get it free). If you had 20% more money each month, you'd probably be able to afford private healthcare - itself forced to charge higher rates right now because the taxman is paying 20% of his wages to keep the NHS going rather than have people use their own money where they think they can get a better service. But the people have been lied to. There are people spouting immoral lies about helping low-income familes. How can proping up the over-priced housing market with high taxation help the low-income families? How can taxing businessmen their profits lead to increased wages or more employment? How can taxing profits lead to lower prices of goods? How can tariffs (taxes on imported goods) lead to lower prices for low-income families? How can encouraging people not to work benefit the working class? How can destroying YouTube in order to prop up the dying media and television industries benefit the consumer? YouTube Creators will also lose their jobs - they're encouraging unemployment! Just to prop up failing industries. When you think about it logically, none of what the government does after stealing our money through taxation (taking away our right to choose what we do with our private property) makes any sense. The EU is bad, but so is Westminster. They're both out for gaining power for themselves. There isn't a single political party in Britain right now that is advocating lower taxation. You have socialist-parties, or mostly-socialist parties. Why? Because more power to the state. It's Orwellian. And that is not good for low-income families. The poor will get poorer through taxation, and it is the young who think that they're doing what's right. But the reality is, they've been mislead (as was I). Socialism is the social (state, public) ownership or control of the means of production (business or the economy). If you think politicians and bureaucrats can spend massive amounts of your money better than you can, you're a socialist. https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA
    7
  4219. Better than an Oldham too (you do not want to go there)
    7
  4220.  @adamjaquay4279  "yes i just noticed that. Either our western perception of the Soviet ideal of a beginning and an end to a offensive operation is incorrect or something was clearly lost in the translation." The thing is, when Glantz wrote his book, Isaev's book hadn't been translated into English yet.
    7
  4221. They lost 1 million men by the end of 1941, and it was clear by October that Barbarossa had failed. They were now in a long war, which they weren't prepared for. So there were incentives. But even if not, that's not a reason not to negotiate.
    7
  4222.  @randomusername7096  An interesting hypothesis! Hitler definitely wanted to go East in order to get the land and resources he needed to take on America (he was trying to take on the "international finance" people), but I don't agree with the premise that his main ideological enemies were in the west - and I think I presented enough evidence in the Hitler's Socialism video against that idea. But I'll remain open minded. I've just added the book to a list of books I need to get, so I'll get to it when I get a chance.
    7
  4223. It was the common term back then, and throughout the Cold War, so it's quite common in the sources. But yes, I refer to them as "the Soviets" or "the Russians peoples" (meaning, all of them, not just the Russians) for this reason.
    7
  4224. People mouth off and declare victory. I like to take my time, compile evidence (which I've usually already got, since I don't normally come to conclusions without doing a load of reading) and crafting a solid argument to show them why they're wrong. One day they might learn to stop and think before they speak, which is the ultimate aim of this channel - to get people to think.
    7
  4225. The only question is: were they wanting war, or reacting to Hitler and Japanese aggression?
    7
  4226. No, YouTube automatically deletes comments that contain certain words (e.g. swearing or Anti-Semitism). This is just confirmation that your original comment wasn't worth reading.
    7
  4227. Yes! It won't be Stalingrad every week, but it's all about working towards that bigger goal of the Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary. These little videos are helping me do the research and form the opinions and test the waters for the eventual culmination of all ideas and concepts into that big video.
    7
  4228. Good to hear! :)
    7
  4229. Oh good! I checked Amazon the other day to see the reviews on it, and a few people have given it a good review. Just checked now and one said: "I saw this book mentioned in a YT post and decided to check it out. After researching several things the book mentions that were not taught in any of the history classes I attended and discovering the book was correct I admit I was misinformed prior to reading this." I don't know if the guy was referring to me or another YouTuber, but I think the review speaks volumes.
    7
  4230. I've covered Soviet (and Allied) atrocities before. For example, I have a three part series on Operation Keelhaul that I spent a lot of money on (£400 for one book) that barely got any views because people weren't interested (I also suspect foul play from YouTube). https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM And within the 5 Hour Hitler's Socialism video, I spoke a lot about the disaster that was Lenin's Socialism. Sure, it wasn't Stalin, but it was close. I've also talked about Soviet atrocities throughout WW2 in numerous videos. So, you're wrong. You're only coming to this conclusion because your religion blinds you to the truth.
    7
  4231. Not played games in a while, but Hearts of Iron 4 was pretty good. I prefer the OOB style of HOI3 though, although the streamlined version in HOI4 is a close second compared to HOI1 and HOI2. I've heard they've updated it a lot since I last played it though, so maybe the OOB is different now... Either way, a fun game. I just don't have enough time or mental energy left at the end of the day to play games now
    7
  4232. As of the end of this episode, the series is 19 hours, 56 minutes and 51 seconds in length. And the entire script is now at 169,809 words.
    7
  4233. When I was looking for pictures for the previous video on Mosley, I came across the Bolt Action miniatures of the BUF, some armed with rifles, but most armed with an assortment of hand-held weapons. Apparently, these miniatures could be used as a militia (cannon-fodder) to support the Germans during Bolt Action's Operation Sealion scenario, which I must admit is a novel idea, and I'm surprised to see it in a tabletop war game.
    7
  4234. But more of their population was living on farms (57%) trying to produce subsistence levels of food and barely able to do so (being only 33% as productive as Soviet industrial workers). They couldn't divert many people from these sectors to the military without starving their own populace (which they did). By contrast, Germany had just 27% of its population on the farms, but being more efficient per output than a Soviet worker, yet they still struggled to produce enough food for their own population, so the Soviets were in big trouble. Percentages from Harrison's "Economics of World War II".
    7
  4235. Too late! 😂
    7
  4236. That's funny because the Jews were the bourgeoisie according to Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg And Jewish property was distributed amongst the workers; if you read Gotz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" you'll see that. Also, yes some of the private Jewish property was given to the party, but the party was the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The Party, just like Lenin's Bolshevik Party, represented the interests of the workers.
    7
  4237. Expropriation of private property. He stole off the Jews (the bourgeoisie, in Marxist parlance https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ) and redistributed that to the German workers.
    7
  4238. He never practiced Judaism.
    7
  4239. And also target the conservative supporters of von Papen. Oh wait, it's because the Night of the Long Knives had nothing to do with capitalism vs socialism, and I've covered this in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (see timestamps in the description, section 8 part 2)
    7
  4240. Someone who speaks Russian in the comments has confirmed that the source does say 50,000 - 60,000. However, the source was quoting from another source from 1964, meaning it could potentially be Cold War Soviet propaganda downplaying numbers.
    7
  4241. Thank you!
    7
  4242. Technically this is a Q&A and a Battlestorm - which is unusual
    7
  4243. I'll forgive you! :)
    7
  4244. @MITCH was he real or had he ascended to another plane of existence?
    7
  4245. 1) You're preaching to the wrong person here. 2) I know that Germany and the Soviets carved up Eastern Europe between them, I even mention this in the video. And Stalin was a bad guy here, nobody's defending him. But to say Stalin started WW2 is completely false. 3) Unless you can provide some concrete evidence not based on yours or others opinions, I'm afaid your argument simply won't hold up.
    7
  4246. FIRST!
    7
  4247. +Charles C. Thank you for your kind comments! I'm not sure I saw your last comment, but yes I set out to make it as detailed and in-depth as possible, so I'm thrilled you enjoyed it. I've been reading up on this battle for years and it was an obvious choice for me to do a documentary on this, since a lot of the documentaries on TV spout the same opinion over and over, and only vaguely explore what happened at Eindhoven and Nijmegen. I'm doing more documentaries like this. The next one is on Operation Compass, but my intention right now is to work my way through North Africa (including Tunisia where the 82nd first deployed), then Italy, Normandy (where they deployed again)... then cover battles like Crete 1941, and generally work my way up until I'm tackling bigger Operations like the Fall of France or Barbarossa. Not sure if I'll keep to that order or skip ahead for some... but I hope you can find the ones without the 82nd or airborne forces as enjoyable :)
    7
  4248. I'm sorry you can't comprehend basic concepts.
    7
  4249. "After France's defeat who wanted the war to keep going and who offered peace?" I've covered this here: Why Britain wouldn’t just let Hitler go East https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    7
  4250. "A somalian is not the same as a Mongolian." True. But they both have brains and shouldn't be judged on anything other than their individual characters. Pre-judging them based on their "race" is artificially ascribing them a ghostly "spirit" that doesn't exist.
    7
  4251. @Vulcaani The State does not work for the people's interests, only it's own, and is often in favour of the multi-national corporations etc.
    7
  4252. Great ideas! Thank you. I've done the oil and food situation (although need to do more on food) but hadn't considered coal or chromium
    7
  4253. Well, I did not know that! Thanks for the heads up!
    7
  4254. I did because my headphones stopped working, and I don't trust my awful speakers to give an accurate representation of the audio levels. Also, some people complained about the music, saying it was "distracting" :(
    7
  4255. I find topological maps and base my maps off them. Originally I sat there physically drawing them in Photoshop, but now I ask Terri to do them (graphic designer, link in description). This particular map is a map from the 1950s, so it's not quite as accurate as I'd like it, however I've manually corrected some of the obvious mistakes.
    7
  4256. You're completely out of touch. The Nazis hate private property and "liberalism". They think it's all Jewish. They're nationalist collectivists and will happily tell you this, if only you'd listen.
    7
  4257. FIRST!
    7
  4258. Yeah I don't know yet if I'm going to do this every four weeks. I don't want to put too much pressure on myself or the new editor/animator, since a lot of work goes into making each episode. So I'm being mindful of not doing too much and also want to start taking semi-regular breaks.
    7
  4259. Good old Wikipedia (to be fair, it's probably up for debate: depending on which side of the fence you're on)
    7
  4260. Good spot! I'd like to say that was a mistake, but it's actually really really difficult to find relevant pictures of tanks (or infantry) in North Africa WW2, so yes I've had to use some incorrect tank versions to fill in the gaps. Forgive me!
    7
  4261. There are several plot twists in this operation... but I can't tell you what they are because I don't want to spoil it for anyone!
    7
  4262. I was tempted to show Glantz at that point, but he's not really relevant to North Africa so I chose not to :)
    7
  4263. @Ivica - Nations and races don't exist. There are only individuals in this world, cooperating together individually. Therefore you cannot have a "nation of pathological liars" because not all people of a nation are the same. They're unique individuals with individual personalities.
    7
  4264. You're right about that. O'Connor seems to have grasped that early on. I'm hopefully going to be able to include more of the logistical side of things in my upcoming Operation Crusader video. And Rommel's logistics are clearly stretched right from the beginning.
    7
  4265. I am a man, but I'm not Men. I am from Britain, but I'm not British. I am a worker, but I'm not a Proletariat. I have white skin, but I don't even consider it. And this isn't "sad", as you described it. I am my own person. My achievements are mine, and were achieved by me. I didn't inherit the capability to do what I've done because of "my" group, I took responsibility for my own actions and made it happen myself. This doesn't mean I don't support my country or like the culture etc. It just means I'm not a sheep who's willing to follow the leader, even if that leader leads us into chaos.
    7
  4266. "it can lead to overlooking issues that are not individualistic." I disagree. Being individualistic doesn't mean you can't perceive the way others think. The group mentality still exists in other people's minds, and individuals are very much aware of that.
    7
  4267. I guess you're all going to have too...take a look at me nowwwuoww!
    7
  4268. His Stalingrad books aren't something you can just read cover to cover. It's serious stuff that deserves study and hard work to get through and digest properly. However, for what I'm doing, there's nothing else like it. No other book or series that I've come across is as thorough and in-depth as this for the scope. He's been call THE expert on the Eastern Front for a reason. Just to point out, I don't know what his new book will be like - apparently it's a condensed version of this series. Maybe it's a little more readable. Right now it's "and then and then and then and then and then..."
    7
  4269. You're correct, they didn't enter service until 1943. So, the question is, what is this German radio operator refering too?
    7
  4270. Yes, it does seem Jason D. Mark messed up with the translation here
    7
  4271. @Tanzanite - yes, it was a Battle of the Bulge documentary. I think it was Historigraph's video. The only thing in the video that may have caused YouTube to take it down was that he briefly mentioned the Malmedy massacre. And when I say briefly, I mean briefly. Here's the reupload https://youtu.be/ICl349WZaqc
    7
  4272. I won't say too much yet, but your point about the Soviet side is on the ball.
    7
  4273. It seems I got it right on one map, and wrong on the other. Good spot!
    7
  4274. If you see my previous Battlestorm videos (Compass especially) you'll see that if it wasn't for Churchill, Libya could have been in British hands before Rommel had even set off across the Med.
    7
  4275. Great for the time, and I still use his work, but out of date now. There were some statistics from Erickson that I used for my Battlestorm documentary which Anton Joly corrected me on, saying that he was using the official statistics from the time (1980s), but that the archives had been opened since then. This is why I think it's worth not reading just one author, or one book, on a topic, but read multiple, and then compare and contrast. Doing that, you get the best picture.
    7
  4276. Just watched the "Subverting the Narrative" video. While I agree with the premise, I think he's painting too broad of a brush. To suggest that everyone saying "international banking" is someone who hates the Jews (Murray Rothbard and Mises, both Jews, would like a word with him), is simply not true. Explaining how fractional reserve banking leads to depressions and recessions, and therefore that the banks (national or international) are a blight upon humanity, doesn't say anything about the people who work in them (be them Jews or not). The race is irrelevant, it's the non-free-market banking practices (combined with State control) that's important. He's conflating the two, and thus painting every Ancap or Libertarian (including many Jews, like Peter Schiff) as Nazis. I'm not an Alex Jones fan, but he plays a clip of Alex Jones saying something about "globalists" or whatever, and says the same thing about him. Alex Jones might be a bit off his rocker, but I don't think Alex Jones is an anti-Semite or a National Socialist for not liking things like Marxism (itself anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ). The video author then plays a clip of Jordan Peterson where Peterson explains how Hitler was disgusted by the Jews. The video author then says that what Peterson really meant was that Hitler didn't hate the Jews but only wanted to clean up things. Thus, the video author implies that Jordan Peterson is a secret anti-Semite. But Peterson was only explaining Hitler's reasoning - Hitler hated the Jews BECAUSE he was disgusted by them. If you read Mein Kampf (page 63 of the Jaico verson, for example, where he says the Jews made him "feel ill" and are a "pestilence", and there's plenty more I could quote) this becomes clear. The video author then starts saying that the Nazis viewed the Jews as an economic plight, and that's why the Nazis wanted to get rid of them... which is a cleaning up operation, as Jordan Peterson said. He also says "the only people who ate better than the Germans were the Americans", which is laughably not true. The British had way more food than the Germans did in WW2 as the book "Taste of War" by Collingham explains. I've been over the food crisis in the Reich many times, so I won't labour that point here. There's loads more I could pick out, but you get the picture. Overall, I think there's a reason the video is heavily down-voted, and I don't think it's just because the National Socialists don't like it either.
    7
  4277. Yes because as we all know, Wikipedia is super-accurate and never wrong. I also love it when they put a link to the NHS under certain videos that mention certain things. I don't think they understand the irony.
    7
  4278. Not only did they not check their sources, they also didn't watch more than 5 minutes into the video. Half the stuff they complained about is things I addressed in the video. The only thing I didn't mention was that the Soviet Union in 1942 had a smaller population than Germany and Italy alone (nevermind the rest of the Axis) so the Soviets couldn't have afforded to send "waves" of riflemen to their deaths.
    7
  4279. Tiger's certainly had a fearsome reputation and were ahead of their time. They had their pros and cons just like any tank of the war. They were tools to be used by the soldiers that drove them and the generals that placed them in the relevant areas of the battlefield. Battlefield tactics and overall strategy are more important imho.
    7
  4280. Ratings are meaningless. Plus I'm not here to make videos that conform to a false narrative. I believe that relying on one source of information will bring you to the incorrect conclusion. Relying on just German sources has brought a false perception of German superiority (no surprise there). Now looking at the Soviet sources as well as the German sources and we're getting a better picture. Unfortunately some people don't like it because it detracts from the old narrative. However, I'm not going to hide behind the old narrative just to spare people's feelings. Here's the facts, deal with it. Lend Lease didn't arrive in significant quantities until 1943. Germany lost the war in 1941. And if you could explain how this video (which presents the statistics as they are) makes me a pseudoscientist, that would be great.
    7
  4281. Thanks Agrippa!
    7
  4282. It's a one Party system, masquerading as a multi-party system. It doesn't matter who you vote for, the agenda pushes forwards.
    7
  4283. Also, I'm tempted to do videos on the Weimar hyperinflation
    7
  4284. Gellately's book is really impressive and he doesn't pull punches. I kinda hope he watches my stuff because I'd love to see him look into the gnosticism elements.
    7
  4285. Glad you enjoyed it! The channel has a mix of military and non-military videos, so be sure to check out the playlist in the description for more videos on this particular subject.
    7
  4286. Yes they are https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    7
  4287. We have feudalism now with our current socialist system. Taxation is feudalism, and the tax rate here in the UK (for those who actually work) is about 60%.
    7
  4288. @Fuzera  I see! I got some new lights, and I did try a new thing with the quote highlights and zooms. Thank you! 😁
    7
  4289. I concentrated on the 1930 election because that's where the National Socialist German Workers' Party gained their first major electoral success. That doesn't mean I haven't read Evans' book. As shown in the video, he can't explain it. I also don't agree with the idea being pushed of a "protest" vote. That's a false conclusion because there were plenty of parties to give votes too, yet they specifically went for the two Socialist parties that weren't the SPD - the KPD and the NSDAP. Evans refuses to see the Socialism in National Socialism because he doesn't know what Socialism is.
    7
  4290. Absolutely! And quite a few people are also very critical of the few authors that do actually explain it - e.g. Murray Rothbard (book: "America's Great Depression"). Interestingly they haven't actually read Rothbard, but have been told to huff about it at every opportunity by their kommissars, so they do.
    7
  4291. "Perhaps you should read Marx, because, like him, you are hoping that your fantasy will become reality." I have read Marx. It's a load of rubbish. It's that bad that Bernstein (guy who wrote 4th Volume Das Kapital, and one of the 4 who buried Engels) realised it was wrong and became a member of the social-democrats. When you can't even understand that the Labour Theory of Value is incorrect, and you sponge off your friends the whole of your life and don't actually do a day's work, you're in no position to dictate economics. Marx was a social revolutionary, not an economist. "I do not deny the realities of living in the UK today, but I would suggest that they are far better than those of 100 years ago. 100 years that has seen the rise of social democracy and capitalism work hand in hand to improve most peoples' lives." Actually the evidence suggests that socialism (or social democracy) has done more than enough damage to people's lives that we're actually further behind than we would be if we hadn't had it in the first place. Real living wages in the UK increased by 81-91% in the years 1850-1906. [British Economic Growth 1688-1959, Second Edition p24] There was no social-democracy in that time; that was purely captialism. And it was the biggest increase in living standards in history. Compare that to post-war Britain, where 20% of the economy was nationalized. Right from the beginning, Attlee's Labour Government realised something was wrong. That's why they didn't run a "more-nationalization" campaign in the 1950's election, and lost the election. Instead of increasing production and bringing about a rise in living standards, they cost the taxpayer a ton, and ended up subsidizing the industries which were now beginning to make a loss. And don't even get me started on the "welfare" problems they caused, which we're still suffering under to this day. The reality is, it is capitalism that brought about the rise in living standards you see today, not socialism. I don't think there's any way to deny that reality. "As for government regulation, without such, there would be no "free market" as we consider it. There would also be no protection of goods and property or property rights or the infrastructure to support the movement of goods." Law is different from ownership and control of the economy. Creating a stable enviroment for goods to be traded is all that's required - Thou shalt not murder, etc. Regulating it to the point of suffocation, is bad - Thou shalt not hire someone without paying for insurance, even if that person works from home. "Does this mean that all regulation is good? No, it does not, but unlike you, I do not present a simple onesided argument that has no bearing on reality." The other side of the argument is faulty and distorted. It relies on deception and emotion, not logic. The facts and evidence - which is what I'm interested in - is one-sided. Unlike you, I can't ignore that reality.
    7
  4292. Much like your comment.
    7
  4293. Glad to hear that Steven :)
    7
  4294. That's what I want to hear :D
    7
  4295. YEAH!
    7
  4296. Hahaha I hope it lives up to expectations!
    7
  4297. The lesson I've learnt from all this is that some people would rather remain poor and ignorant the whole of their lives, blaming everyone else for the misfortune they've brought upon themselves, rather than looking at their own reflection in the mirror. A fantastic example of this type of person is right here https://www.reddit.com/r/fragilecommunism/comments/sd96bv/fox_news_interview_with_mod_of_rantiwork/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
    7
  4298. It's almost like I mentioned the North Korea counter argument in the video...
    7
  4299. I see, so the nationalization of the means of production isn't Socialism now? I gave concrete examples of them doing this in the video, which you absolutely didn't watch, despite claiming to do so.
    7
  4300. It's because of the video I made this week on the same topic. Looks like some people finally realized that my arguments are solid https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    7
  4301. FYI I'm not deleting messages. YouTube is doing it automatically. Also, users are reporting comments, which will remove them.
    7
  4302. WATCH THE VIDEO BEFORE COMMENTING. In general patelle, your argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny, doesn't do anything against the argument in the video, and even contradicts itself. E.g. - "There are no shrinking markets, TIK! The markets are constantly growing, there are more and more products, ever-growing supply. But the YIELDS are shrinking, because they are sucked out of the markets." 1) I DON'T believe in the shrinking markets - Hitler and Marx do. Me explaining their beliefs doesn't mean I believe in them, just like me explaining war doesn't mean I'm pro-war. 2) If yields (profits) are supposedly shrinking, then the market IS shrinking. So you've just contradicted yourself. "That's a completely different model of ECONOMIC GROWTH." That's why it fails and implodes every time it's implemented. Because Value isn't Labour, it's Subjective, as I explained in the video. "Keynes was not a socialist." Keynes said - “Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work together for the benefit of all.” - doesn't sound like any capitalist I know. Also, he spent his entire career fighting against capitalism, which he wanted to be controlled by the state... which is socialism. But yeah, he was a capitalist. "But socialism is about production. Because: consumption follows production." Yes, supply-side economics, which is based on the Labour Theory of Value, and why it consistently falls apart. "The Nazi state (as a representative of the public) was never a PRODUCER, it was only the biggest CUSTOMER. That's why the Nazi economy indeed was Keynesian. And so was Mussolini's Italy, btw, and it was so explicitly." WATCH THE VIDEO. I show how the State was in control of the economy. They nationalized the industries - even though Marxists like to claim that they 'privatized' them. I showed this in the video. "They were racists and capitalistic imperialists." WATCH THE VIDEO. There's an entire section showing how 'fascist imperialism' was actually socialist imperialism. "To call others "socialist" is often nothing but a slur." People who call for the state control of the means of production are socialist. It's not a slur, it's a fact. "Hitler proactively adopted this slur and turned it into a buzzword for his own capitalistic, racist, social Darwinist ideology." Again, there's an entire section of the video dedicated to his racism and Social Darwinism that explains why it's there. "And under the conditions of public ownership, there is also NO PROFIT. All income is WAGE." That's why it falls apart. "the dictatorship of the proletariat. Which is the dictatorship of a class!" Why are you talking about Marxism? We're meant to be talking about Socialism, or National Socialism. ""Publicly owned" does not necessarily mean "state owned". " Publicly owned ALWAYS means state owned. That's literelly what it means, and I showed why in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "But it was "private" with collective ownership: COOPERATIVES." Oh yes, hundreds or thousands or millions or people = an individual (private). Watch the Public vs Private video to learn how wrong this statement is. "To put everything under state control, that's not Stalin, that was Khrushchev. He sacked the entire private sector of cooperatives, because he deemed the usually high incomes there as "theft" from society. He even tried to sack the kolkhozes and make all agriculture state owned sovkhozes, but that's another story of desaster..." Wow, this has to be the worst explanation of the economy of the USSR I've ever heard. Well done.
    7
  4303. Yes, I saw it.
    7
  4304. "@TIK No problem, I'll just spend a year making a 5 hour video debunking everything you said, and release it..." Well, that's what I did. I started the research for this video in the August of 2018. "Oh wait it'd have to be after the election!" The election is irrelevant. Hitler is a Socialist. If you don't like it, come up with an actual counter argument.
    7
  4305. He only crushed those trade unions that refused to socialize, as I said in the video you didn't watch. Again, I've heard the counter arguments before, which is why this video DESTROYS them. If you watch the video, you'll see that I do exactly that.
    7
  4306. Damn it, I always mess up one date!
    7
  4307. Yeah, I don't know the specifics about other bombing campaigns. The point being that the terror was on the civilians. In my view, if you're aiming at a legitimate military target in a city, but cause collateral damage that kills some civilians - I think that's at least understandable, even though it's still wrong. But indiscriminately bombing a city to kill civilians and cause a collapse in morale (or, attempt too, since it rarely did), is not excusable. In Stalingrad's case it isn't excusable, and probably not in Dresden and Berlin's case too (assuming they weren't going for military targets and intended to hit the civilians).
    7
  4308. Thanks Bejamin :) it was actually not easy to make this video, because the spotlight is off the civilians. However you're right, it does bring an important perspective to the reality of war.
    7
  4309. Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't need to follow me! You don't need to follow anybody! You got to think for yourselves! You're all individuals! You're all different! Man in crowd: I'm not...
    7
  4310.  @YuryTimofeyev  They took that feature away. Old videos with the speech boxes still show them (I think), but newer videos cannot have them.
    7
  4311. It was nationalized. They abolished private property under the Reichstag fire decree. And in my newer updated video I spent 18 months crafting, using 107 sources and 350 direct references, with lots of quotes and more, I showed this to be the case https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    7
  4312. Socialism is left wing. (assuming there's a left or a right-wing) And National Socialism is a branch of socialism, whether anyone likes that or not.
    7
  4313. Bender, why would I pull videos that are correct. See the new pinned comment (one in either video)
    7
  4314. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era. My research came from reading the primary source: Mein Kampf. And it's backed up by other primary and secondary sources. Your counterarguments need to be a bit better than "no, you're wrong" if you're going to prove that Hitler's own definition of National Socialism is wrong.
    7
  4315. Same with Lenin. Guess he wasn't a Socialist either...
    7
  4316. It's not embarrassing when you realise that his racism is the socialization party. Realize that, and things that didn't make sense before start fitting together. And btw, you can be a socialist capitalist.
    7
  4317. You're absolutely correct. They've no idea that there's a difference between socialism and communism is. I'm actually stunned by that more than anything else.
    7
  4318. "I said that he said that it is about the workers owning collectively the means of production, there is nothing about state control" And what exactly do you think this "collective" is? When the workers rise up and seize the means of production from the 'owner' class, what happens is they form a worker's council. A 'council' in Russian is called a 'Soviet'. So, when these soviets/councils combine together to protect themselves against the evil individuals unwilling to have their property stolen from them by other people, this leads to a Union of Soviet Socialists Republics (the USSR), which is a government. A government is - "the group of people with the authority to govern a country or state; a particular ministry in office." If a group of people seize a factory, they become the local government of that factory. They become the state. So, when you say that it's about 'the workers owning the means of production collectively', what you're actually saying (whether you realise it or not) is worker-state control. "It is two very different things that people working in a factory own the factory and that the state owns the factory." In order for the workers to gain control of the means of production, they have to rise up and kill the owner class (the bourgeoisie). Because let's face it, if you own something, you're not going to just let a bunch of other people steal it off you. And no respectible government is going to allow a mob citizens to kill or harm another bunch of citizens. So when these workers rise up, they have to topple the government as well. This is called a "Socialist Revolution". And again, the worker's collective councils will form together to create their own government, which will abolish private property rights to prevent survivors of the revolution from claiming back their property, and to prevent individuals setting up their own factories or whatever to "exploit the workers". Therefore, these collectives of workers become the state. "Now you could argue that you need state power to achive this state of affairs. Well fair enough, but you also need state power to have private property on factories and companies." Yes, but a government that passes one law that says individual human beings may own property and do what they want with their own property, and then leaves the economy alone to do its own thing, is different from the state dictating how each and every factory and company operates. Also, what you have to remember is that property rights actually develop prior to the government. An individual says "these clothes on my back are mine" and that's that. If a group of private individuals in society then get together to form a government, are they then going to change their minds and say "tell you what, all this property we individually have prior to the forming of government is now everyone's to share"? No, because that is not what happened across every civilization that has ever come into existence in history. Even little kids horde things. Humans naturally want to collect things, and buy things, and have things. The first state in existence didn't say "ok we can all have property now". The individuals who created the first state already had property. The laws that came into existence after the founding of the first states just confirmed that individuals could own property, and that anyone who stole from others would be criminals and be punished. "Ok I see you will simply not accept that not everyone applies the definitions you use. But even if we agree on them, there are still vast differences in economic policies between the USSR and Nazi Germany." Right we're actually getting to the main debate now. Shame you didn't read my previous comments in this thread because the evidence is overwhelming. "Yes, in Nazi Germany you had public economic investments, but the private property remained untouched" Nope! Sorry, the Nazis banned private property the first month they came to power. Did you not read my previous comments? If you read my comments in this thread above you will clearly see that on the 28th of February 1933, the Nazis banned private property. The privatization that took place was a slight of hand. The German-Aryan People's State owned the means of production collectively. "while in the USSR it was collectivized" Oh so state ownership is the definition of socialism? Good to know that. Also, it's worth pointing out that you can own farms without collectivising them. That's what the Nazi government did. See my previous comments regarding Hitler and Backe. Also, collectivization only occurred in 1932. This was ~15 years after the Revolution. The Nazis were only in power 12 years, and so they certainly hadn't finished implementing their version of socialism. This can be seen in several ways, but the fact that they hadn't starved the 20 to 30 million Slavs in Russia, or murdered all the Jews, are two examples of the fact that they didn't (thankfully) have the ability to fully implement their racial-socialism. "the USA under FDR were more socialist than the Third Reich, since the amount of investment in social security and public infrastructure was way larger in the USA than in Germany at that time (watch the video of Three Arrows for evidence)." Well, for starters, yes FDR was implementing socialist policies, so this is a non-argument. Just because one country or party does more socialism than another doesn't mean that the other country or party wasn't socialist. FDR didn't leave the markets to do their own thing, and heavily intervened. That is state ownership or control of the economy, and therefore a socialist policy. "Now you could say that private property remained untouched in the USA. Guess what, the same was the case in Germany." I don't recall the USA ever abolishing private property. I might be wrong though... "It is you who is twisiting history not me." I'm afraid I'm not. "And again I even don't think you yourselv are a libertarian you just got hijacked by their history twisting propaganda." Who said I was a libertarian? Who says I'm not a socialist? "It is their agenda to group everything we consider bad together (USSR, Third Reich) and then associte it with every kind of social or public economic policy." Because it is! Again, I'll repeat it over and over until you grasp it - socialism is state, social, public intervention (ownership or control) of the economy. Capitalism does not want the government to interfere. "It takes more then blindness not to see the agenda behind that in place." My agenda is to prevent and stop distortions of history. I have socialists claiming in this comment section that the Soviet Union wasn't socialist. And they can do that because people have forgotten what socialism actually is. THAT is a distortion of history. "But thank you anyway. Until now I thought that I had overreacted by unsubscribing, now I know that it was the right thing to do." Read my previous comments in this thread in response to "Common Sense1776". I have used overwhelming evidence to confirm my points. Three Arrows and other people may continue to spout the idea that Nazi Germany is capitalist, but then I would ask them - which private business owned the Holocaust? And why did Hitler start WW2? Without his socialism, you cannot explain either of those things. "Nonetheless an advice: keep on what you have specialized, because there you do a decent to very good job." I'll let you into a little secret - I know more about economics and the interwar period that I've let on. The WW2 studying only started after I started this channel. Prior to that, the period 1850-1950 in European history was my speciality (economically, socially and government foreign policy). Then after these videos had such a backlash, I thought "ok, maybe I did get it wrong" and went back and did a ton more research. Turns out, I was right. And I'm not backing down on this. It makes zero sense for the Nazis to be capitalist. If they were, WW2 wouldn't have happened.
    7
  4319. To address your points - Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. "Hitler imprisoned and killed socialists, democrats, communists, union leaders and other dissenters (along with some church leaders and conservatives)." This is an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations. However, the ‘socialists’ he killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. “he established the German Labour Front (DAF) which replaced all other independent trade unions” At first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. “gave more power to employers and made them solely responsible for decisions affecting the workers and their welfare” Since class has been abolished, working class doesn’t exist in a racial state. All that matters is the race. And it wasn’t the employers in control, it was the state. As you will see in my follow up message, employers were completely dominated by the state. “What redistribution of wealth was that? The Nazis did not redistribute wealth.” You are severely mistaken. I’ll show you in the follow up message just how high taxes were increased for businesses and employers in order to redistribute wealth. “[Hitler] believed the individual should work for the community but this effectively meant the elites and the state.” Which is a sign of socialism, since socialism is the state. “Hitler was inconsistent on this anyway since the nazis did occasionally rant against capitalism but were effectively in favour of it.” Again, you will see in the follow up message just how non-capitalist the Nazi state was. “The points about socialism were put in at the insistence of Drexler and Feder and Hitler was increasingly against them as time went on (Shirer p.41, 126-27, 143)” Shirer’s book may as well have been written by Franz Halder, and is massively out of date. And actually, Hitler was not against socialism no matter how much Shirer of Halder say he was. “The Nazis engaged in mass privitisation of government property and industry in the early 1930s and even into the war. The term "privitisation" was coined by a writer (Maxine Sweezy) in the 1941 documenting  the "reprivitisation" of government assets under the Nazis. The term was also first used in german publications in the 1930s. This is something Stalin and communists did not do.” And it is time to read my next comment where I will explain this ‘privatization’.
    7
  4320. How the hell is this propaganda?
    7
  4321. Thanks :)
    7
  4322. Thanks! And FIRST!
    7
  4323. Yes, check out the full Weimar Hyperinflation series (playlist) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhkgsclvhZ--Dx7Gnqehw4J I haven't yet fully answered why the the hyperinflation happened because, although it was caused by the currency-printing, we haven't got to point where I can answer why the Reichsbank chose to print print print. We will get there though as the series progresses. But I wanted to dispel the myth about Versailles Reparations causing it, and I want to also tackle other myths as the series goes on.
    7
  4324. Sadly you were more like 5th :(
    7
  4325.  @Worrun  You're probably right. It's a shame though because Hitler has featured in both the 2nd and 3rd videos of the Weimar Hyperinflation, and I've not really been talking much about the inflation, but about the conflicts of the early Weimar years (riots, strikes, uprisings etc). So while the video titles might not draw viewers in, the topics themselves really should.
    7
  4326. They can have their say on their own channels, and you can go watch them there - so freedom of speech is not affected.
    7
  4327. This is it. They're spamming all over the internet, and this is giving the perception that there's a lot of them. The reality is there's about 50 kids with no friends with 100 accounts each just spreading this rubbish.
    7
  4328. Agreed! And the last thing we want is a repeat of the disaster that was WW2.
    7
  4329. And yet there are many who do not accept that the event happened. They say those people were liars, and that there's no proof. Books and sources are all I have to work with right now, but I'm determined to make videos documenting this event and make sure people know the facts inside and out.
    7
  4330. Yes. Not sure when it will be, but I will
    7
  4331. NEIN! WIE CANNOT ACCEPT BRITAIN'S UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! DAS IST NOT GUT ENOUGH!
    7
  4332. That's a good question and I'm interested in what others think.
    7
  4333. Thank you, glad you liked it!
    7
  4334. Thank you, you too!
    7
  4335. It's not really noticeable, but the German divisions are slightly larger than the Russian ones, and I make sure to show that on the maps (even though the divisions on both sides show the XX divisions symbol). But yes, I will work on a symbols video because a few people have requested that
    7
  4336. Are you describing the lockup?
    7
  4337. Sounds good to me!
    7
  4338. My narrative is anything but traditional!
    7
  4339. @1207rorupar - If he's read 1984 by George Orwell, he may understand the concept of Doublethink and Newspeak. Well, the terms 'capitalism' and 'socialism' have been Newspeaked by postmodernist-socialists to hide their true meaning. You can tell this is true because certain things don't make any sense when questions are asked. If Hitler's a capitalist (people who like free trade), why did he have a policy of Autarky? If Hitler is a capitalist, then how can the abolishment of private (free market) youth organizations and the creation of the state (socialist) youth organization, the Hitler Youth, be explained? These questions require a socialist to make a lot of double-think and newspeak in order to answer them. If you ask him to define 'socialism' and 'capitalism' and he says anything other than 'state control of the economy' and 'private (individual, non-state, or free market) control of the economy', then he doesn't have the correct terms. He may have the socialist terms - but again, they mask the true meaning. Socialization means group-control. Group means non-private (individual), and thus is "Public" (from the Latin "publicum" meaning "state"). Socialists are just using newspeak to hide the true meaning of the word. And if you don't have the right terms, how can you know what Hitler's regime is or isn't? You can tell him that prior to 1956, socialism was well-defined. Then post Hungarian revolution, it started to be muddied. This is historic, and you can see it in the sources. If he wants to deny that the Soviet Union had state control of the economy, he's not read a history book. If he's trying to deny that Hitler wasn't a socialist, then ask him to define 'socialism'. I'm working on a video which explains the two out historically, going right back into ancient history in order to show it. In the meantime, he could try reading these sources (probably in this order) - Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Reisman, G. "Why Nazism was Socialism and why Socialism is Totalitarian." Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” (hard to get hold of) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." (original 1932, but updated). Mises explains why capitalism and socialism are, explains why socialism can never work, and later goes on to tackle National Socialism and Fascism, which Mises fled from in the late 1930s.
    7
  4340. Can confirm, the video above is decent on the Ukrainian situation
    7
  4341. That might explain why there's different takes on this. Reading online, Gentile calls his philosophy both "Actual Idealism" and "Actualism" at different times.
    7
  4342. That video they made about Hitler not being a Socialist came out a week before my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video. At the time I knew that their video didn't counter mine in any way, and that my arguments completely rendered theirs obsolete, so I went ahead and published with absolute confidence in my own video. I haven't responded directly to their video because I just don't see the need. There's no point creating drama. It's up to the individual viewer to look at both sides of the argument and see which they think is the stronger case. I do think they believe what they're saying. As an ex-socialist, I would have said something similar as they did, although I would have gone with the "he was a capitalist and criminal" argument because (like many socialists) I used to believe that "capitalists" (in the way that socialists perceive them to be) were evil in and of themselves. That said, like many of my critics, I don't think they've given what I've said a fair shot simply because they probably think there's no point. When I was a socialist, I refused to even consider what the "Conservatives" were saying as being anything other than a trick. So it wouldn't be surprising if they perceived me to be a snake-oil salesman, or just insane.
    7
  4343. Currently I'm using Premiere Pro
    7
  4344. Yes you are, well done!
    7
  4345. There's a difference between School and Education. And there's a difference between News and Information.
    7
  4346. I told you what I think about this in the video - that's literally the question. I do, however, only tell you at the end of the video.
    7
  4347.  @Raskolnikov70  True, but then you'd think they'd just demonetize the videos they don't like. But they're not just doing that - they're taking videos down, and even when they don't, they also suppress videos they don't like (such as my Greek video, which is the most obvious example because they only restricted it about 31 minutes after it went out).
    7
  4348. These National Communists are upset with me because my words "offend" their emotions. Worse, there are InterNational Socialists agreeing with them! BuT ThEy'Re nOt oN tHE sAmE SidE oF tHe pOLitiCAL sPEctRuM!
    7
  4349. "Despite the Rassenschande laws, Germans also had sex with Jewish women. Sex with Jews, even in brothels, was not allowed for any German military members. Seidler writes that Wehrmacht members who knew the person with whom they were sexual was Jewish faced “serious consequences.” SS officers, police officers, and police officials with officers’ rank faced the death sentence. Still, a man had to know that the woman was Jewish to be punished. Therefore, if someone claimed he was unaware of the woman’s Jewishness – he was not punished. In his research, Seidler found that this is what happened for most offenses. If a man was caught he simply had to say he did not realize the “whore” was Jewish, since it was not always obvious by outward appearance." - Gertjejanssen, "Victims, Heroes, Survivors," P67.
    7
  4350. I think I know what you're trying to say - you're suggesting that the starvation led to "going pro", rather than direct R. However, the Germans used both methods - direct R and non-direct "coercion" to going pro.
    7
  4351. Max is implying that I'm Jewish, but I'm not. That said, I'm not English either, since the English tribe has stolen my liberties from me, as well as my money through the power of taxation and inflation. I reject all tribes, national or international. Now that's out of the way, if you had listened properly then you would have heard me say that the 1.4 to 1.9 million figure includes all R's from both East AND West. So I did talk about the "unfamous US army" (as you put it). And no tribe is Capitalist. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    7
  4352. Which makes no sense because even the Nazis didn't believe in a "white" race. They believed in the Nordic Race, with Germans being a subspecies of the Nordic Race. Link https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM
    7
  4353. I have thought about it, but I don't think I'll be any good at live streams. I'm much more in my element if I have time to think of things, script out my videos properly, and back them up with direct references/citations
    7
  4354.  @2ndTimPlayground  I think you need to open your eyes. The reason I've been banging on about the Hitler's Socialism idea (despite the massive backlash) is because that's the reason for all the graves. You want to pretend that I'm denying the reality and being blind? It was SOCIALISM that led to the destruction of both WW1 and WW2. But of course, I can't even get the people to watch my videos relating to this topic, or get them to listen, or get them to accept the historical definitions of the word, and YouTube censors any videos that even mention certain events... but yes, continue to spout the nonsensical idea that all Germans are at fault, rather than the ideology that led them down the path to destruction.
    7
  4355. It appears that the 9th SS didn't have any tanks, as they'd been loaded up onto trains to be shipped elsewhere. Graebner's unit only had it's vehicles because Graebner took the wheels off them and pretended they were all being repaired.
    7
  4356. And yes, there were photos of tanks taken. The Major Urquhart story is true.
    7
  4357. Agreed - interesting points on the pilots. Didn't know about the Czech pilot getting the most kills. Interesting stuff!
    7
  4358. I think Jeschonnek didn't survive the war... but Göring did. Perhaps it was a way to discredit him further? And yes, perhaps people perceived it to be Göring at the time, having not realised that Jeschonnek got in there first. Either way, it's frustrating to hear so many get it wrong.
    7
  4359. Regardless of the word, without the explanation that no money was ever given, the reader is misled into believing that money was handed over, which is why so many people falsely conclude this.
    7
  4360. Thank you, and it did. I am and have been burnt out because I am frustrated that I'm not getting through to these people (who reject the evidence). I'm realising though that I was a little pessemistic. It does appear that I have gotten through to some people, and obviously I'm not the only one fighting the nonsense. People like yourself are using the evidence I'm providing to challenge the fanatics, and so, while I may fail to get through to them, it's still important to make these videos in the hopes that someone else can actually get them to listen.
    7
  4361. Go on, I'll give you permission this time!
    7
  4362. @rick oshea - Wikipedia is not a source
    7
  4363. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War") Spending is not what causes economic growth. Saving and investment does. This is why central state and bank spending and taxing of savings (through inflation as well as directly) since 2008 still hasn't got us out of the recession, and we're about to enter another.
    7
  4364. Thank you! Never thought I'd get anywhere near this many viewers
    7
  4365. Probably not, but at least Halder wouldn't have been able to blame Hitler for all his faults, and Hitler wouldn't be able to blame his generals for all his faults. Also, technically it was von Brauchitsch in charge of Barbarossa, with Halder as his Chief of Staff. Both Halder and von Brauchitsch failed, and Hitler dismissed Brauchitsch
    7
  4366. I don't think I do. I just have the patience and perseverance to do the work (both of which can be learnt), plus have learnt the process needed to produce the results.
    7
  4367. Well, I do hope this helps them, I'm happy to answer any questions and try help everyone out. Also, currently over 80,000 words now and climbing (not finished the day yet)
    7
  4368. That's not a bad tip! I do the same sometimes, although usually I just keep writing and rewritting it until it's a mash of the two paragraphs
    7
  4369. No, but someone else mentioned him and I learned that he was on board with eugenics and the Nazis. Never thought to look into him before, but wow, I'm surprised
    7
  4370. Is it moral to murder people you don't like? Absolutely not. You're complaining of "degeneracy and immorality" whilst also advocating those very things. The solution to your intolerance of other people isn't the Final Solution. Rather than trying to 'save' a bunch of people you've never met (your "nation"), try looking yourself in the mirror. Your morals are dubious, and I'm willing to bet your life is not in order. So, I have some question: Are you employed? Or are you running a business? Are you in debt? Are you making sufficient income to take care of your own needs, and the needs of your family? If not, my suggestion is not to look for external salvation, but to lift yourself up and be an example for others to follow. You cannot help others until you've helped yourself. And you cannot 'save' your "community" until you have become something better, at which point, you won't want to save your "community", because you'll realize that your "community" will be envious of your hard work and "selfishness".
    7
  4371. Except Fascism and National Socialism are two distinct and separate ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    7
  4372. I don't mind whether someone likes or dislikes a video, because it's no problem for me either way. But you can tell by the comments that most of those who dislkke or "refute" the video haven't bothered to watch it. Those who have actually watched jt but still disagree openly admit they're struggling to find a way to disprove it, are respectful, and admire the amount of effort that was put into the video. But the rest... it's like talking to a bunch of bots - they just spouting the same counter arguments that have been DEFEATED in the video (hence the title).
    7
  4373. I also argued against academics. For example, if you watch the video, you'll see that I tore apart Bel's "Against the Mainstream", and argued against the narrative of other historians too.
    7
  4374. 1. Watch the video. 2. The historic definitions of Socialism and Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 3. There is a difference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko 4. Hitler was pro-democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    7
  4375. Except, Slater, Hitler abolished private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, and stole the private property off the Jews and the industrialists who weren't members of the Nazi Party or refused to bow to their demands. They even outright nationalized several industries under a policy called "Gleichshaltung" (synchronisation). I explained all this in the video that you still haven't watched, and refuted several sources (including Bel's "Against the Mainstream") that claimed that the Nazis "Privatised" the industries. The word "Privatisation" wasn't coined by the Nazis, it was actually coined by The Economist, a British newspaper. The Germans, meanwhile, did anything but privatise the businesses, as Gunter Reimann describes in the "Vampire Economy" (a primary source document written by a German Marxist that I quoted heavily from in the video and is available online for free).
    7
  4376. Socialism = Nationalism If "international socialism" means uniting the world under one nation, well that's still a nation, and would therefore be nationalism. So your argument doesn't work.
    7
  4377. Yes you are! Congrats!
    7
  4378. I'm not ready for that sort of thing, but it's something I have considered.
    7
  4379. Yes, as I said, even Wikipedia got this right, and it's unreliable.
    7
  4380. I may do a follow-up video about this battle in the near future and talk about the nature of the battle and the tanks as well. Sadly I would have to rely on Isaev, but I don't doubt some of what he's saying, it's just the way he comes across about the whole battle. His points on the tanks - and there are some funny Soviet tanks in this battle - are probably on the mark. I'll have to double-check, but he also says that because the Germans had more infantry than at Kursk, it meant they were able to absorb the Soviet counter-attacks easier. I'm inclined to believe him. And like you said, both sides relied on infantry at this stage. Again, some interesting and funny facts about the infantry in this battle, but I'll save it for that follow-up video
    7
  4381. Yes. It was the first time the Romanian divisions are shown on the battlefield, so I thought I'd better mark the occasion :)
    7
  4382. The Germans had 3 divisions in North Africa, and there were some Italian divisions too. Otherwise the Axis weren't committed anywhere except on the Eastern Front. The Atlantic tied up the U-boats, and the air war was a factor, but the Luftwaffe dominated the skies in the East throughout 1942 (up until the Stalingrad cauldron) and there wasn't any naval action going on in Russia. Plus, submarines didn't require millions of men. It's also worth bearing in mind that the Soviets had to keep an eye on Japan too
    7
  4383. Interestingly, one of the British top brass (Colonel Laycock - the Commander of the Middle East Commando) was also sent in to assist Keyes in case of Rommel's capture. He was to remain on the landing beach, and (it seems) relieve Keyes of the duty of executing Rommel by doing it himself.
    7
  4384. If it's not "decisive" then technically it can be classed as a waste of time. However, that doesn't mean it isn't interesting, or... unique. On that note, I'd be interested to see what you think about the Crusader Battle itself (starting next week). It wasn't decisive, but wow, was it interesting.
    7
  4385. The Nazis are self-identifying as "Third Positionists", showing that they are believers in dialectics - a concept strongly endorsed by leftists and (especially) Marxists.
    7
  4386. To those not in the know, I responded to Owning Dishonest Shills a while ago in this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 The guy is just trying to get another reaction to boost his channel numbers.
    7
  4387. Awesome review, thank you. And I agree, this was definitely needed. I'm glad I held off on it for a while though so I could get more information on the way the DAF was operating in the factories. I just wish I'd had even more time though... I seriously think this is the tip of the iceberg
    7
  4388. Cope harder.
    7
  4389. Because government "incentives" always achieve the opposite of what they set out to do. For further information, see "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
    7
  4390. However the reason the Wall Street Crash happened was because of the State's central banks (called for by Marx in the Communist Manifesto, point 6) expanded the currency supply (inflation). You can read about this process here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression
    7
  4391. I saw a poll recently that said that the Economist was the most trusted media source. I couldn't believe it!
    7
  4392. You didn't watch the video. In fact, you didn't even watch the first minute of the video because you wouldn't be giving the "privatization" argument if you saw the evidence that shows that it's false, which I provide in the first minute of the video.
    7
  4393. Oh yes, this sort of video is easier to make than the map stuff! I enjoy the battle maps, but this is what I like most
    7
  4394. Socialism is just social ownership of the means of production. It doesn't need to benefit the designated "social group" in order to be classed as Socialism, it just requires that the economy is operated via a social hierarchy. In fact, it's not designed to benefit society - it's designed to do the exact opposite. Socialism is a war in the name of the poor, against the poor and the middle income earners, for the benefit of the rich and powerful. It's a trick. It's snake oil. It's a scam. Look at what it does, not what it says. You're voting yourselves poor and don't even know why, despite the fact that "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell are cheap to buy and easy to read.
    7
  4395.  @Edax_Royeaux  Yes, they provide half of the evidence, leave a bunch of other stuff out, still show that the Nazis were running the economy, and then conclude they weren't socialists. Let's forget the opinions of ideologues and let's look at the actual evidence. As shown in the video, they were socialists.
    7
  4396. I answered this question in the first seconds of the video. It was the British who came up with the term to describe when some Nazi banks sold shares.
    7
  4397. Yes.
    7
  4398. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production.
    7
  4399. There was no profit motive. They abolished distinctions of class, replacing "employers" and "employees" with "leaders" and "followers". Every business has uniformed militants in them running the show, reporting people to the Gestapo. The stock market was government run, then shut down. The businesses were centralised into 13 corporations for easy state management. Industrialists like Junkers and Thyssen were thrown out if their factories. Wake up.
    7
  4400. I addressed this in the first minute of the video.
    7
  4401. No, Hitler is a socialist because the evidence indicates that. Socialism doesn't work because every time it's implemented it leads to the deaths of millions of people and the impoverishment of the rest. And finally, if this current system is "capitalism", then I'm not a capitalist. I want a free market, because history indicates that the freer the economy is, the higher the living standards for everyone become.
    7
  4402. In other words, yes they sold some shares, but that doesn't mean the businesses were now in private hands. The businesses were being run by the Nazis, and there was no free market - it was all state control.
    7
  4403. "Lenin didn't recognize the Constituent Assembly at all. He wanted all power to the Soviet." Hitler wanted all power to the Germans. He only rejected Marxism because he believed it was a Jewish plot.
    7
  4404. "and they also persecuted and went after capitalists and conservatives as a group/ where did Hitler ever do that?!?& target the right as a group?" As I've said many times, the National Socialists went after von Papen's associates, Kurt von Schleicher, Hjalmar Schacht, and so many others. Mises fled the Nazis when they Anschlussed Austria. Most of the Communists went over to Hitler. And Hitler's main internal opposition during the war wasn't from the left, it was the conservative branch of the army - the colonels who conducted the July 1944 plot.
    7
  4405. Lenin killed the Mensheviks and all the other Socialists who weren't Bolsheviks.
    7
  4406. By the way, I've posted your comment onto the channel's community tab to inform others, so you should check it out. https://www.youtube.com/@TheImperatorKnight/community
    7
  4407. Haha thanks. Last time I take fashion advice from my sister ;)
    7
  4408. Their armament (2-pdr) was roughly the same as the Panzer III's 50mm gun, and had worse range than the Panzer IV's 75mm (admittingly, this was short-barrelled at this time). The armour of the older cruiser tanks was worse than both German mediums, and their speed was only slightly faster. The Crusader was better armoured, but had a nasty habit of breaking down at this stage of the war. The Matilda was super slow, but made up for it in armour - which is why the German tank crews feared it. This is why the sources say the British tanks weren't as good "overall" to the German tanks. You're correct that the tactics played their part. Rommel's use of anti-tank guns and the 88's was a deciding factor taking out the British tanks.
    7
  4409. I think I actually covered this in the History Theory video. But I could do a separate video specifically on bias
    7
  4410. Race is a policy of the left, not the right. Race is a social group (social-ism). The right don't believe in "groups" (collectives), only individuals.
    7
  4411. It was a big effort, and it'll probably only get a handful of views, but it was worth it because it addresses most of the criticism I've received over the past year or so. Glad you enjoyed it!
    7
  4412. @Nuclear Confusion - I guess you didn't know that the British Empire was the first country to attempt to abolish slavery which had existed for the entirety of human history. In fact, the Royal Navy actively went out of its way to intercept slave trade ships. This was because of the rise of Classic British Liberalism (in the old sense of Liberalism, not the socialist-new sense of Liberalism which has nothing to do with freedom).
    7
  4413. This isn't politics. This is economics and history, not politics. As for Stalingrad, probably 2 weeks, maybe more.
    7
  4414. :)
    7
  4415. Did we? When was there a generation where we had no taxes, no regulations, no central state banks, and no central law and judicial system? I don't remember reading about that generation in the history books
    7
  4416. Okay, this quote from Das Kapital volume 1 must have gone over my head. But you know more than me, so perhaps you can explain it for me: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital volume 1, page 107.
    7
  4417. Yes, you haven't actually read Marx. In the essay, he doesn't fully agree with Bauer, but he almost does. And those quotes I gave from that essay also align with Marx's Anti-Semitic views in Das Kapital, which you haven't addressed.
    7
  4418. In a nutshell
    7
  4419. Revisionist history isn't necessarily bad history, Tim. Clearly you've misunderstood what the term actually means (hint, it currently has two meanings) https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    7
  4420. Now you know what I'm dealing with on a daily basis. Thankfully a lot of my subscribers are smart people, but there's a ton of people out there spouting complete garbage, and it just frustrates me
    7
  4421. Thank you for your kind comment :)
    7
  4422. SECOND! And thank you for watching!
    7
  4423. I've actually had two YouTube shorts lined up for weeks (clips of older videos) but I've hesitated publishing them
    7
  4424. Are you a race? I'm not a race. Your skin colour doesn't matter to me.
    7
  4425. Yes, murdering women and children of the bourgeoisie in a bloody revolution isn't evil or anything. Shipping "bourgeois nationals" to the Gulag slave labour camps after invading the Baltic States, Poland and parts of Romania isn't evil or anything. /s Don't threaten me with an "unsubscribe" - such tactics won't work. I'm not counting the number of subscribers I have. I'm more interested in having a smaller number of good, open-minded, willing to discuss and debate, and civil subscribers than a huge mass of arrogant and ignorant sheep who are so wrapped up in their own beliefs they fail to notice the lies and contradictions inherent in their own ideology. And yes, I've read some of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Rosa Luxembourg, and Keynes. I've also read about Hitler and the National Socialist ideology. Surprising how similar the two socialist ideologies are to be honest.
    7
  4426.  @aquilatempestate9527  I need to revisit it properly, but I did an intro to the topic in this video "Suvorov and Keitel's "Preemptive Strike" 1941 Idea" https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA And I've talked about some of the concepts in other videos, like the "The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa" video https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c In fact the links in the description of the artillery video are all related to the idea that Suvorov's thesis is wrong. The Soviets simply weren't prepared to attack in 1941. That doesn't mean that the Germans didn't think they were going to attack, but there's little evidence that Stalin was actually going to attack, and the state of their army was terrible.
    7
  4427. Technically I would have said "Neigh!"
    7
  4428. Unfortunately, I'm beginning to think you're right.
    7
  4429. I hope that's true because I get the opposite impression, that more and more viewers are going to the "stick to tanks" crowd
    7
  4430. Absolutely. The only issue would be the supply situation, which his army's presence may have made worse.
    7
  4431. There's another video next week, and the next Battlestorm Stalingrad will be out on the 28th... But I am debating doing another (non-history) video for Christmas Day itself 🤔
    7
  4432. Dubai is a city
    7
  4433. Oh, and I should add, the reason why the NHS model is expensive is because you have taxes on absolutely everything - we have something like a 60% tax rate here in the UK, but people don't notice because half of them are stealth taxes. The NHS is terrible, yet people are completely blind to the corruption because it's "free". They therefore will defend to the death a horrible system because they think they're getting a good deal when they're not.
    7
  4434. "Trains can’t operate without government subsidies, they are too expensive" Then they should be closed down. If they cannot make a profit, they're not needed by the people, and thus are a missallocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses.
    7
  4435. You might need to be more specific. Topic-wise, what precisely are you looking for? Sun-Tzu "Art of War" type stuff?
    7
  4436. "I did not realize the US had an issue with supplying meat overseas, nor trying to get the citizenry to reduce domestic meat consumption so more could be sent via Lend-Lease." Yes, and how Britain was the best-fed country in Europe, which came at the cost of the whole world (pretty much) having to bend the knee and cut back their own consumption (USA, New Zealand etc). Also partly the reason so many Indians starved to death during the war.
    7
  4437. Collecting books is an expensive hobby! This is the reason why I'm reliant on my Patreons. But if you can save some pennies, Glantz's Stalingrad Trilogy (5 books) is all you'll ever need. I don't have the condensed one-book version of that series but I'd imagine it to be enough, plus the reviews praise it http://amzn.eu/0AXTYlM Sadly for Arnhem, no one-book has ever really done it justice on its own :(
    7
  4438. I should have taken the odd break at times, like you said. BUT I'M AN IDIOT! I kept going even though I shouldn't have done, pushing myself to breaking point.
    7
  4439. Socialism is Anti-Semitic. But not all Socialists realize this, because they've been tricked into thinking it's all good, when the ideology is fundamentally evil and doesn't work on many levels. That's why educating people about this is important. So this isn't a contradiction. Socialists and (non-antisemitic) Fascists may not realize how Anti-Semitic the ideology of Socialism is, but that doesn't mean Socialism isn't Anti-Semitic.
    7
  4440. Marx was a Christian in his youth, and didn't practice Judaism. He abandoned his faith and founded a new one that preached principles that are the opposite of Judaism.
    7
  4441. You realise I'm an ex-Socialist, right? Stop talking out your rear. I know what Socialism and Communism is, and your ignorance is clear if all you can do is label me a right winger. According to your political spectrum, I'm more Left than you are.
    7
  4442. Nope, neither. Try again.
    7
  4443. As explained in the video, Karl Marx believed Capitalism was Judaism, and Judaism was Capitalism. So yes, anti-Capitalism is anti-Semitism. Pay attention.
    7
  4444. I mean, I haven't put any canal or river on the map... nor any city, or forest, or disputed territory
    7
  4445.  @ajsimo2677  Yes, it was 1939 not 1938. I said the wrong year
    7
  4446. Haha maybe. I really should have a day off this week...
    7
  4447. Good point, very true
    7
  4448. Hope it's nothing serious, but you might want to watch this video https://youtu.be/bKU2JyIMHrc
    7
  4449. Currently, including this episode, the Battlestorm Stalingrad series is 147,920 words long. Not sure about Joly's series, I'll ask him
    7
  4450. That series was probably the most detailed documentary on the battle prior to my series. But it's not particularly accurate (I've noticed a few mistakes) and it's not got any references. Plus there's no unit names, commander names, the map isn't as accurate as mine (although I like the 3D map), and the front lines are vague (mine are as accurate as I can make them). Overall, a great effort, but I just wish they'd go the extra mile.
    7
  4451. "That's why we're third positionionist." National Socialism isn't third positionist. I know Hitler thought it was, and tried to paint it as, but it's not. In fact, this is one of the major flaws in National Socialist ideology which Hitler himself was never able to fix, and I will cover this in a future video.
    7
  4452. Middle or middle-Left, depending.
    7
  4453. Thank you! I'm glad to hear you found this so useful that you watched it three times - that's awesome :)
    7
  4454. As this video shows, the first one is incorrect. National Socialism isn't a version of Fascism, so Fascism has nothing to do with race.
    7
  4455. The book you've recommended focuses on the Italians between 1943 and 1945. That's when the Germans were in power, not the Fascists. Mussolini was deposed, and when he was reinstated he was little more than a puppet. So this doesn't suggest that Fascism itself was an ideology of Anti-Semitism, so my video isn't a "whitewash". I used plenty of sources and provided both a bibliography and references, so I did do responsible research. Britannica isn't a responsible source, especially since the quote you gave from it suggests that the Fascists were anti-trade union. That is nothing other than a falsification of history. The trade unions in Italy were called "Fasci". That's where the word Fascism came from - the whole point of the party was to promote the interests of the trade unions (hence the Syndicalism in the definition I provided).
    7
  4456. Robert Murphy has answered the question in his video "The Market for Security" https://youtu.be/V0_Jd_MzGCw?si=zI_4JoDS-NuMVPRF
    7
  4457. OpenTTD is a great game, highly recommended, especially if you like trains. It's basically a game for people who like making train lines.
    7
  4458. Now son, don't touch that cactus https://youtu.be/yXuKcnhvEfM
    7
  4459. No idea. This one was originally going to be part 1 of the second video, but then I realized that I had to explain things in greater detail because I know that my critics will scream at me if I don't apply overwhelming evidence when speaking about their faith. So I could guess now at around a dozen or so videos, but it could be longer.
    7
  4460. Oh wow, thank you! I'm certainly trying to improve my videos as best I can
    7
  4461. The inflation started before the war, and accelerated under the Social Democrats to the point it became unstoppable. Also, the SPD were the largest party in the Weimar Republic, so the Zentrum party was in no position to achieve a reversal of the Socialist policies. The SPD was also in government coalition in 1921 and 1922 with Joseph Wirth. And there's more besides this.
    7
  4462. Good question! But I'm not going to tell you the answer yet. Would rather you wait and find out 😉
    7
  4463. Good luck on your exam! History, or something else?
    7
  4464. "@TIK yeah I would like you to do ww2 first" Just the whole of WW2? No problem :D
    7
  4465. I did both!
    7
  4466. I didn't just laugh out loud in this video - I lost it 😂
    7
  4467. Well done!
    7
  4468. Exactly
    7
  4469. No... It's not at all liberating, unless you are or work for the Fascist State, corporations, or military. Everyone else gets completely destroyed
    7
  4470. They were just skin and bones
    7
  4471. It was probably an anti-tank rifle. I mentioned that incident again in episode 12 of the Stalingrad series
    7
  4472. The word "Corporate" literally means "group", as in "social group", or "socialism". Yet, nowadays it seems people have forgotten what a dictionary is
    7
  4473. What about the Armenian genocide?
    7
  4474. Oh? What problems is Armchair Historian having exactly? I've not heard about that. I feel like I've been very very lucky so far but I suspect it's because I'm small-ish. The thing is, I want to tell uncensored history and talk about things - which benefits YouTube - so it's not like this is bad for YouTube. And I generally don't monetize videos which have controversial topics, which might by why I'm not in the firing line right now. Ein Bier, bitte ;)
    7
  4475. Yes, agreed. I was skiving school that day, so I watched it live. I'm sure many of us have seen the audio and footage posted later... I wouldn't recommend anyone go look, but it's there. (link for anyone who doesn't understand what "skive" means https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skive )
    7
  4476. Good job it wasn't the Australian Postal Service, she would have been waiting a month at least to get them back. And if it was Royal Mail, the keys would have gone on strike
    7
  4477. Hold on, that BBC link says that Toyota's own car mat was at fault? So are you arguing for the abolishment of car mats entirely? Hans made it clear that the original "moron" thought that he had to buy a brand-specific car mat to go with his brand-specific car, and that he couldn't have a different make of car mat. But in this case, Toyota's own car mat was the one at fault, which contradicts the point. We're saying that brand-specific cars don't require brand-specific car mats (which is true). We're not saying that car mats shouldn't be safe, just that you don't have to buy brand-specific car mats. I'm also against the idea of a government (any, not just US) stepping in to mandate that people buy brand-specific car mats, especially when Toyota's own car mat is also at fault. I also agree that this is the oddest YouTube debate in history. We're making history folks!
    7
  4478. You're so heartless! [eats some bread with an L-shape cut into it]
    7
  4479. Puts things into perspective, doesn't it.
    7
  4480. Army Group North created the siege, and the Soviet regime made the situation a lot worse. For example, they didn't evacuate the city until 1942 - months after they were cut off. Overall, both regimes were at fault.
    7
  4481. Yeah, the Southport situation threw me off for a bit, and then last weeks video was surprisingly hard to do (even though it probably doesn't look like it)
    7
  4482. Oh and Mr Corbyn wants to nationalise them again. I haven't been on a train in like 7 years. Can't wait to have the government take money from my pocket to pay for something else I don't use. Yay!
    7
  4483. @Infected - by definition, a free-market where people can buy and sell what they want without a government stopping them, can't be totalitarian. But of course, you don't know the meaning of the words you're saying, which is why you've just been caught out.
    7
  4484. One person has already reported it, claiming that I'm promoting "far right propaganda"... So this may go the same way as my Greek video
    7
  4485. There were no capitalist countries. Name one country that had zero taxation, zero regulations, no wage controls or price controls, no central banks, no fiat currencies or Inflation (since fiat currency isn't "money", as Karl Marx himself made clear in Das Kapital), no monopoly on "law" or "order", no monopoly on the military, and you'll be pointing at a capitalist country.
    7
  4486. Just like me when I was a Socialist, you haven't yet figured out the true nature of your ideology. You are aware that Socialism in many countries led to starvation and death, but can't grasp why policies like the minimum wage or rent controls are bad things. When I realized the true nature of the ideology, I realized I had been led astray. I had been tricked. And I abandoned it instantly. Then, after a lot of criticism by people for announcing my conviction that Hitler was a Socialist, I read books on Capitalism, and realized it wasn't at all what I thought it was either. In other words, my entire world view got turned upside down. I had taken the Red Pill, was unplugged from the Matrix, and could now see the world as it truly was. My recommendation to you is for you to read the books "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. I also recommend that you watch my Public vs Private video followed by the "What Causes Recessions and Depressions" video, the "Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism", and the Hitler's Socialism video, if you haven't done so already. If you do, you might realize why voting for Socialism is like putting the noose around your own neck.
    7
  4487. Just as I like them. I've already got people calling me a Nazi... they're obviously new around here
    7
  4488. I disagree. The Germans weren't stopped just because of fuel issues. The American forces stopped them. The fuel issue made it worse, but the Siege of Bastogne shows that German panzers couldn't overcome determined Allied resistance. The only reason the attack succeeded at first was because the Germans gained the element of surprise, didn't have to deal with Allied air power at first because of the weather, and struck a handful of weak, second-rate and already exhausted divisions from the previous fighting that were spread out thin because they didn't expect an attack. Once the Allies reacted to the attack, the Germans got hammered hard. Let's not forget that the Americans ultimately won the battle and shrank the bulge back to where it started (roughtly).
    7
  4489. Actually no, in this instant it wasn't the Nazis defending this crime.
    7
  4490. I like how I directly responded in the video to almost all of those points, Archie. Yet, for some reason, you claim I "didn't even cover" them. No, I did. You haven't actually watched the video.
    7
  4491. What, like this guy? https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    7
  4492. "Analysing trade union monopolized by oppressive government in the state of war" The war only started in 1939. The unions were nationalized into the DAF in 1933-34.
    7
  4493. Yes, my plan is to work my way through the North African Campaign one battle of a time (from Compass to Tunisia, with Crusader being worked on now) then go through the Sicilian and Italian Campaigns before hitting the Normandy Beaches, before reaching back where I started - Market Garden. All this while covering small raids like Bruneval (already done) and Dieppe, plus battles on the Eastern Front (especially Stalingrad).
    7
  4494. Ha, no I said "Neame" as in, this guy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Neame
    7
  4495. Dude, the UK is all about Keynesian economics, that's why it's screwed. Your economy in Belgium is only doing well because Belgium is the beating heart of the European Union. The rest of Europe pours money into your state, which is why many other people aren't happy with the European Union and wish to leave. It's the same reason why the USA is doing well - it has the world reserve currency (a Keynesian invention). If it didn't have that, it wouldn't be living off the back of the rest of the world.
    7
  4496. "why don't you autists get a hobby instead of sprging about a 12 year regime in central europe that came to end almost 80 yrs ago?" You're arguing that we should ignore the biggest war in history, effecting the entirety of humanity at the time and since, with insane ideologies (like Marxism, Fascism, National Socialism and similar) that are still about today, just because you've got nothing going on in your life and want to shame others for the meaninglessness of your "existence". This is your life and it's ending one moment at a time.
    7
  4497. They really need to focus on logistics more than anything else, and trade. No point doing anything if the Germans can accrue a billion tons of oil before 1937 and can easily supply panzers on the moon.
    7
  4498. There's a lack of communication and organisation, but they're mobilizing ;) As it currently stands, there isn't another way of communication, other than on my videos and on Twitter (which I'm hardly ever on because I just don't get the appeal of it). I'm up for suggestions though.
    7
  4499. Deal!
    7
  4500.  @hermitoldguy6312  Correct. I don't know if the mainstream science is correct or not in this case, and I'm no scientist. But I do think an individual is hindered more by their culture and their false beliefs than by IQ or skin colour. I'm not saying that those things are not a factor, just less of a factor compared to thinking that "money is bad" etc.
    7
  4501. That's a good theory! Not sure if it's true, but a great theory nonetheless and definitely something to look into
    7
  4502. But 30 Corps weren't behind schedule when they reached Nijmegen, as explained in this video. Nor could they cross the bridge that the 82nd had failed to take. So no, your argument makes no sense. If the 82nd had taken the bridge on day 1, which they could and should have done, 30 Corps would have been just 10 miles from Arnhem at the beginning of day 3. Instead they suffer a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen because Gavin chose to prioritize a hill over the vital bridge. That was the mistake that cost the operation.
    7
  4503. Was it worth it then? I saw your comment on the other video :)
    7
  4504. Yeah, Patton said quite a few things about the Jews which I won't repeat here... There was a reason the public were comparing him to Mr H
    7
  4505. He's back on the game! ;)
    7
  4506. Sixth Army could have broken out in late November relatively easily. Manpower at least would have been saved. But by delaying until mid-December, it made the situation worse. The "saving Army Group A in the Caucasus" argument only really applies once the relief-attempt had failed in late December.
    7
  4507. Maybe, but an extra bad tank is still better than not having an extra tank at all.
    7
  4508. Has Volgograd been renamed?
    7
  4509. Hindsight is the reason why. Some historians were questioning it (e.g. Anton Joly) but hadn't confirmed it. It seemed legit, especially with regards to the Grain Elevator, which is why I didn't pick up on it until later. It was only when I came to the 22nd of October that I realized that Hoffman wasn't in the area of the factories, which is when I put two and two together. Once I realized that, I looked at it with more scrutiny and found more errors or questionable statements. So unless you're specifically looking for inconsistencies, or trying to prove that a source is fake, then you probably won't have noticed that it was fake. Plus, the diary is actually very vague, which makes it more difficult to prove as false. But now you should see why many historians are concluding things about WW2 that simply aren't the case. I've got my controversial videos out there questioning the narrative, and a lot of people trying to defend it. The reality is that, unless you're questioning everything (asking: "But is this really the case?") you'll just buy into what you're being told and not be thinking critically. I think this is where a lot of people are going wrong. I also think that because a lot of historians don't put things in chronological order, and tend to skip parts of the battle, and also don't do what I do - put as many units on the field of battle and watch them move about - they wouldn't have noticed where the 267th Infantry Regiment was, and they wouldn't have spotted the errors in Hoffman's account. Therefore, if anyone was questioning the idea that video-documentaries are 'real' history, you would need to think again because video offers advantages that traditional media simply can't compete with.
    7
  4510. CORRECT
    7
  4511. Yes, it's not just Colonel Adam's memoirs that we should be careful of. Generally, the longer it takes for someone to put pen to paper, the less reliable that source becomes. Equally every author is biased. Facts and figures - even those written on the day - could be wrong. This is why history isn't as straight forward as people assume it is. Even your most reliable sources could themselves be flawed in some way. We all must be prepared to change our opinions in case new evidence comes to light. "Revisionist historians" get a bad rep in some circles - but actually THIS is what history is! It's all about re-evaluating the source material and questioning everything. By definition, you can't be a "revisionist historian" because there's no distinction between the two. A historian that does not question what he's reading or the conclusions he's already made is not a true historian.
    6
  4512. Perhaps, but the panzerwaffe at this point had already suffered at least two major defeats in previous years, and were now operating on borrowed time. I can't say too much more now. You'll find out next Monday what I mean :)
    6
  4513. No, given the evidence I have, not really. A German victory at Kursk may have staved off defeat a little longer, but not changed the outcome of the war. The war was already decided in 1941-1942
    6
  4514. I know, but in order to tackle the Holocaust and the wider Nazi and Stalinist atrocities, I need to make sure everyone is aware what National Socialism is.
    6
  4515. Gulags = ?
    6
  4516. I've watched it.
    6
  4517. Name calling is not a valid counterargument.
    6
  4518. Cheers Roy! I may have to do another one or two more on this in the next couple days (more responding) but I will cover battles etc as usual on the Mondays. Promise :)
    6
  4519. I've lost about 200 subscribers from these videos. And, while I obviously value my subscribers, I think a lot of people have subscribed without realising what this channel is actually about. If people aren't willing to consider concepts that challenge the traditional narrative of history, they've come to the wrong place. I don't say things without thinking them through and without having reasons or evidence to back it up. My channel is not a mouthpiece; it's all about history and reasonable discourse. So if I present an argument and people throw their toys out the pram and unsubscribe because it challenges their world view, I'm not going to stop them. Walking away is a strong indication that you're not willing to think critically. Cheers!
    6
  4520. If the people are the government...
    6
  4521. It was a combination of fuel, training (as the war went on) and the fact that they had to protect their Stukas etc as they were striking the Soviets. The Eastern Front was the priority in the early-mid war. In my opinion I wouldn't say Germany lost because of the air war alone. It was important, but definitely not the decisive factor. I'm still saying OIL was the main factor.
    6
  4522. I could do, although I'm not an expert on the Far Eastern Front. What about them specifically do you think I should discuss?
    6
  4523. Yes, I agree, and I usually do mention war crimes - which is why my critics tell me to "Stick to Tanks"
    6
  4524. Mein Englisch ist fanatiscally doubleplusungood
    6
  4525. Yes
    6
  4526. You not only have to click the bell icon, but also select it to 'All'
    6
  4527. I'm on Bitchute already https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/ Some videos automatically go across to there, others don't. But if this main channel goes down, then I'll back everything up on there manually, since I keep copies of all my videos
    6
  4528. Yep, exactly. Yet we still get people saying it was a free market or capitalist economy.
    6
  4529. It's a good habit to have :)
    6
  4530. I have been working on the script for Season 2, but it's simply not ready yet. When it is, it'll come out. Not sure when that will be, but the last thing I want to do is rush it.
    6
  4531. Well, the way I'm looking at it now is that 5 stars = perfect. And I'll just deduct stars off the books if they fail to do certain things. No bibliography = 1 star deducted. No index = 1 star deducted. No Soviet sources = 1 star deducted. And so on. Technically, this means a really bad book could go into negative-star territory, and I have plans on what to do if that does happen haha
    6
  4532. Thanks! Yes, I think the simplest and fairest way is to start with 5 and then deduct for faults in the text. May end up with negative stars this way, but then again, that'll be entertaining when that happens. And yes, I am uncompromising when it comes to things like that. It's basic stuff, and there's no excuse to miss them out.
    6
  4533. You're playing a dangerous game
    6
  4534. When you get Citino's book, I'd like you to do something for me. Read Citino, and compare what he's saying to what you've read in Shirer's book, especially what was said in Chapter 26 "The Great Turning Point: 1942 - Stalingrad and El Alamein". See if there's any contradictions. And ask yourself, why is that? I don't want to give anything away, but I will say it'll be a great exercise for you. And when you do this, I hope you'll understand why I say over and over again, you have to question everything you see, think and hear, and be ready to change your opinion when new evidence is available. And why I recommend you read as many books from as many different angles as you can, and compare them. Question the motives of the authors. Ask why they formed the opinions they did. THAT is history at its finest. And as far as other books, what are you most interested in? Are there specific battles? Campaigns? For the Eastern Front, I've recommended Overy's "Russia's War" several times in this comment section. It's short but good. So if you're interested in the Eastern Front, I'd recommend that too.
    6
  4535. Great! I was surprised by how much the Third Reich inflated its currency, considering Germany went through hyperinflation in 1923. But then I remembered that they really had no choice due to their welfare spending, Autarky and their war mongering.
    6
  4536. "I have learned to leave behind nationalistic ideas" Wow, that's very good to hear! I'm glad you can see the world in a different light and have the intelligence to reconsider your stance. A lot of people simply cannot do that so well done
    6
  4537. Thank you! Sometimes the evidence does point in a certain direction. Other times it doesn't. So it's easy sometimes to pin the blame on certain characters or decisions. Plus, if one historian says one thing, and another says the opposite - that causes a debate. And the historical debate is where the action is. That's what makes history great!
    6
  4538. I wish I could tell you. I've been working on it every day, and it's a huge mess of a battle. Definitely not as straight forward as any battle I've ever done before. Even Stalingrad seems more linear than this. Crusader is back and forth like a yoyo! When I can put a date on it, I'll let you know.
    6
  4539. Haha after all that time, it better had be! :)
    6
  4540. No, but I plan to at some point. I've read that it's not so accurate.
    6
  4541. Because some people are racist collectivists.
    6
  4542. Haha I wish
    6
  4543.  @gorazdtrrattarlaptopprotot6931  I've checked the 'review' folder and they're not in there, so looks like an auto-delete
    6
  4544. Yes! After my warning video about the scammer last week, a few people suggested I get verified, and I did. YouTube responded really fast too
    6
  4545. Not exactly, but I did mention that Mussolini was on the Allied side up until Ethiopia 1935 in one of the Fascism videos. I can't remember if it was the Fascism Defined video ( https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko ) or the much earlier "A Short History of Mussolini and Fascism" video ( https://youtu.be/06vJY9nLMXU ) but it was one of them.
    6
  4546. My current plan is to go back to the North African Campaign once Stalingrad is done (or if I need a break from it). I'm not against the idea of doing Iran, Syria or East Africa though, since they're all interesting in their own right
    6
  4547. "You're making an ideological case for libertarianism in a video explaining military logistics." No I'm not. I'm explaining the economic calculation problem inherent in a system that has no prices. - "Also militaries can't be organised by price because there would need to be a price on risking your life." Value is subjective. There is a price for risking ones life. People do it all the time in dangerous industries, e.g. mining, construction, oil rigging, sailing... Militaries can be organized by price. Mercenaries manage it. - "As long as there's conscription the whole "soldiers buy more bullets"-argument doesn't work." I'm not for conscription, taxation or inflation. However, you can absolutely do it with conscription, taxation and inflation. Rather than paying the armaments factories directly, you'd pay the soldiers themselves and tell them to order their own equipment and ammunition (in the barracks first before going to war). That would set up the price system. - "Clearly, the socialism in Germany and the dictatorship-related inefficiencies hurt them a great deal. Was this the case of the Russians?" Yes, absolutely. - "It seems that the Americans dealt with this much better and their high-tech actually worked." True, but at a massive cost to living standards at home. I've been over this in my Great Depression 1946 video. - "Was it because they were a democracy and selected their leaders less on ideological affiliation and more on competence, as seems to be common in democracies?" No, it was because they sat out of the war for the first couple of years, waited until Britain was bankrupt (having paid for their stuff from the United States), and then created Lend Lease straight after. This allowed them to fund the war at the expense of other powers. - "All of those would've been really interesting points, but instead, you chose to preach you ideology of Libertarianism" Half of the points you mentioned have nothing to do with the German Army. This video was focused on the German Army, and I had to explain the economic calculation problem that was inherent to it. I did that, then offered the solution. I'm sorry that you don't like the solution to the problem.
    6
  4548. What do you mean? To get an undistorted price system, you have the soldiers and generals pay for what they need, and have the State pay for what it needs too without, of course, manipulating prices. It's as simple as that.
    6
  4549. Actually there is a Patreon Q&A coming up about whether Poland was the aggressor. In WW2. The source used in this video (Hoggan) is part of the argument that says this, so this video is part of my reading into answering that question. I can now link back to this video as part of my rebuttal
    6
  4550. No, Marxist historians are equally as moronic as Nazi Historians, since they're all the same - Socialists
    6
  4551. Hi Rosalind
    6
  4552. He's also had his channel deleted by YouTube. The lockup is too profitable for them to tolerate dissenting voices. Continue defending the corporation-states!
    6
  4553. Yeah, you were second, but nice going!
    6
  4554. How on earth did you watch this video and conclude that? The "corporate" state is merely Marxism rebranded. It lead to economic stagnation and poverty for the majority of the Italian and German people.
    6
  4555. Yes you were! Congrats!
    6
  4556. Except, Franco actually wanted to join the Axis and actively tried to do so. Thus, the answer isn't quite as simple because, despite knowing that Spain had been devastated, he still wanted to participate.
    6
  4557. Thanks! I'll correct it
    6
  4558. There's nothing "anarcho" about syndicalism either. As I explained in last week's "Public vs Private" video, it's impossible to have "anarcho-syndicalism" because it literally means "non-state, state".
    6
  4559. Then why don't they spell it correctly!? 😭
    6
  4560.  @abuseofmainstreammediacanh5713  "It is very important to know that there is a very strong "filter" applied when you look at this through the lens of history written for and by English speaking nations. Unfortunately, this filter is "visible" in this very interesting video.... So, watching this French documentary, I was astonished to the point that I went checking if it was really about the same event! I don't say that the French have it all right and the Brits all wrong - as usual the truth is somewhere in between. Hearing a British Historian talking about the Free French makes me often think of this Churchill quote " History will be kind to me for I intend to write it." " I get your concern, but I think it's misplaced in this instance. I used French historian Henri de Wailly's book as the primary source of information for this video. So if nothing else, I was presenting the facts as a French historian agreed with. Yes I did avoid French politics (mainly because of the complexity), and I did present it from a Free French and British point of view (mainly because that's what the question asked), but I don't believe that the "filter" you speak of is actually there. The question was asked about the Allied perspective, which is why the answer is presented from the Allied point of view. Other than that "bias", and the fact I was avoiding French politics, in what way was a filter provided?
    6
  4561. Time is the killer tbh. I tend not to make these tracks unless I'm tired and need to give my eyes a break from writing or reading. Last night I decided to take a break, since I'd done several hours of Crusader research beforehand.
    6
  4562. They are absolutely necessary! Just wait until it starts. Crusader was nothing compared to what's coming.
    6
  4563. A very good question. I will be looking into it... but I'll say no more for now as I don't want to reveal my plans.
    6
  4564. I'm no longer for Socialism, and now I'm pro-freedom to the individual and free market. Third Position is silly since it's just Socialism under a different name (Fascism) as I explained here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Since Socialism and Fascism are detrimental to the poor and those who work, and since they both benefit the elite and corporations/syndicates, I'm against them. So you are wrong, 3P is not something I will ever embrace.
    6
  4565. "that use animation........" Really? I thought people prefered animations! Maybe I should start showing my face in my Battlestorm documentaries again
    6
  4566. @Lenny Maze - Or, being an unscripted video, I made a mistake and should have been more precise. Some Marxists in Russia were pro-war, some were not. I said "Lenin" but really should have said "Marxists in Russia were also split on the issue".
    6
  4567. @Illya Lypyak - Here's an interesting quote for you - “Already, under Fascism, via IRI, three-quarters of Italian industry was nationalised - in terms of management if not in terms of ownership. The manifesto proposed the full-scale nationalisation of public services. It also proposed the join management of enterprise by workers and bosses who would all be required to join trade unions. The representatives of the workers on the management boards would be elected by the workforce. The phrase socializzazione described Mussolini’s Fascist brand of Socialism.” Farrell, "Mussolini", Chapter 16. Three quarters of the industries were nationalized... But it was capitalism somehow?
    6
  4568. Fascism does have a definition (Socialism on the national level, as outlined by its philosophical founder, Giovanni Gentile), but as Orwell points out, most people have no idea what it is
    6
  4569. @Grethe Therese Juel - He does have books published, so technically that would make him a historian. And I personally think that you don't need qualifications to be a historian (although a lot of people think you do) so I can't criticize him too much for not having one. His interest in gaming and trying to game-ify history is a bit concerning though
    6
  4570. Exactly, a black market is the free market - if you have a black market, you know the rest of the market isn't free. There are plenty of black markets in the world today, which is proof that we don't have a free market.
    6
  4571. Capitalism is private control of the means of production (a free market). If you have ANY state intervention, it is no longer capitalism - it is no longer a free market.
    6
  4572. @Marti Grey - I've just cleared the 'spam' folder for this video so you should be able to see it again. Not sure why, but some comments auto get blocked and I have to clear them, even though I have the default set to allow all. Must be trouble-makers on other videos so YouTube auto puts them in the spam folder to be safe
    6
  4573. "...he is too afraid to reveal his Mannstein portrait that he secretly keeps over his bed frame" Or the marble statue of Halder in the porch
    6
  4574. Thanks! I don't expect you to agree 100% of the time, and encourage you to think for yourself! All I ask that you try to consider my perspective. Cheers!
    6
  4575. 4th I think, but I'll heart you anyway
    6
  4576. Poland was a kingdom well before Germany became a united State. It was then carved up between Russia and Prussia. When it won its independence after Versailles, the Germans and Russians may have been unhappy, but that doesn't mean they had the right to take it back.
    6
  4577. If I read Hitler quotes in my normal voice, my haters will take the audio out of context and claim I'm promoting him or his ideology
    6
  4578. I have thought about doing a video about the current global financial debt crisis, which is connected to the Brexit issue, but I'm a bit reluctant to do so for a few reasons: 1. I'll be labeled as a "conspiracy theorist" for ripping apart the blatantly-obviously-flawed Lamestream propaganda narrative. 2. YouTube-Corporate-Socialist-Fascist censorship of anything the 77th Brigade labels as "disinformation" could take down the channel just for speaking out of line. 3. Statists will bring out the "TIK knows nothing about economics or politics" card and my actual viewers will be bullied and harassed in the comments again by Statist trolls (perhaps even government-paid, see 77th Brigade) which I obviously don't want. 4. Popular opinion is in favour of Totalitarianism and the National Socialist Health Service, so I'm obviously swimming against the stream, which invites further criticism. 5. I'm struggling to keep up with my regular history work, let alone do stuff on the current lockup crisis, and I probably won't get away with releasing it on a Monday because people will complain, so it would be a lot of extra work to make an extra video in addition to the regular Monday schedule.
    6
  4579. It's coming, although I'm focusing on Operation Crusader right now because I want to get that finished. Didn't expect it to be 92,000+ words of research and then a super-confusing battle, plus all over the damn place, so I'm behind. I actually expected it to be out by now. However, I am still working on Stalingrad. Next week's video will be on Pavlov's House, which I've just been looking into.
    6
  4580. That might be true, and I hope it is. But I've only looked at what he did at Stalingrad, so I've only specifically looked at the Kotloban operations and the planning for Operation Uranus. The four Kotloban offensives were desperate and wasteful, but I can see why they were necessary
    6
  4581. Maybe one day. I do want to visit the Market Garden battlefield at some point
    6
  4582. Got to take a stab at a German general in every video, otherwise it wouldn't be a TIK video ;)
    6
  4583. The Eastern Front books I recommend are the ones I use most often. So, "Russia's War" by Overy is a great place to start because it's small and compact. Then "When Titan's Clashed" by Glantz, for a more operational overview of the war. Then something like "Death of the Wehrmacht" by Citino (although this particular book only covers 1942, it's amazing, and Citino's books are good in general). And Enduring the Whirlwind is also a good one, more of a study than a chronology, but a very good one that deserves a look since it questions several assumptions about the German war effort. Beyond them, I would say you should avoid getting memoirs for now. The reason is you need to understand what happened first with the secondary sources (books written by historians) before you get the first hand accounts. Memoirs are usually biased and twisted, so it's best avoiding them until you have a fuller understanding of the events and have books you can compare facts to. And beyond that, I would strongly suggest you specialize, like I said in the video. Rather than looking at every battle, eventually I'd say you should pick one you're most interested in and really focus on it. Get several books on it, and dive into the debates surrounding it. That's when you'll really get the most out of history. Hope this helps :)
    6
  4584. In answering your first question, the book "Enduring the Whirlwind" is probably one you should pick up. While the answer probably still isn't fully fleshed out, it seems that Germany's manpower crisis was (mostly) self-inflicted. It's to do with the labour requirements of the German economy, and it's a seesaw effect of men going into the army, and then taken back out the army to go back to industry, then back to the army again. And I'm afraid I don't know anything about the Doolittle raid, sorry :(
    6
  4585. Well, I'll definitely say, nobody has asked me to talk about King Zog of Albania before :)
    6
  4586. Sounds like you have a good teacher :)
    6
  4587. The Soviets didn't want to talk about it, because it was a major loss for them. But why the Germans didn't want to talk about it, I'm not sure. To hazzard a guess, maybe because many of the units that took part in this battle were the same ones that got trapped at Stalingrad?
    6
  4588. Honestly, I was shocked when I saw that number. They started off with 56,100 mortars on 22/06/1941, and 272,400 entered service between then and January 1st 1943. So that's 328,500.
    6
  4589. After people were discussing it last video, I have decided to buy his book and look into it. But while I will look at his work in as an unbiased way as possible, this video was actually the setup to me saying "nope, it doesn't make sense that the Soviets would launch an attack in 1941 when they hadn't yet mobilized" or "that their forces wouldn't have been able to attack even if they'd wanted too" in 1941.
    6
  4590. I believe the term is called "tank desant", and it could be quite dangerous. I also assume other armies did this.
    6
  4591. It has the Official "AdventureInc" seal of approval. Therefore I'm happy :)
    6
  4592. Don't worry, I will. Gathering sources
    6
  4593. Hahaha yeah, so many people in the previous videos were telling me how the railroads in Britain are 'privatized'. They obviously haven't heard of Network Rail Fail
    6
  4594. I actually have that book, and it's absolutely worthless. It should be retitled because it has next to nothing to do with the title.
    6
  4595. I get the eagerness for loads of Battlestorms on different battles but I'm really stretched right now
    6
  4596. Personally I like the meadow biome. Great for building and getting dyes
    6
  4597. I have considered doing an analysis of that scene. The thing is, by April or May 1945, desperation had turned into despair. Hitler knew the end (including his own) was upon him. So a bit of 'madness' would certainly be a reasonable reaction to the stress. However, even if this is the case, the danger is in using that last minute madness to conclude that Hitler was always mad. I don't think it would be right to do that.
    6
  4598. It's difficult to get a copy of this book right now, but second hand copies are selling for like £17 on Amazon. Books range in price, so I can't give you specifics. Some books are dirt cheap (usually £10 to £30), especially if they're on Kindle (sometimes just £2), but others can be hundreds. My copy of Julius Epstein's "Operation Keelhaul" cost me £460. That was definitely a one-off - I'd never buy a book that expensive again, unless it granted me immortality or something.
    6
  4599. Maarten + hrgiyzueghe - If someone said "I identify as a white man" then that person is being both racist and sexist. You're not racist for thinking that one race is better than another - you're racist for thinking that human beings can be judged by the colour of their skin. An individual (like me) does not say that, because I'm not like all "white" people, nor am I like all "men". To say I'm a "man" (in terms of social group) implies that all men think and act the same. That is utter rubbish because the reality is men don't. Same applies with "class" or "nation". Just because I was born in the UK, doesn't mean all the people in the UK think like me, act like me, or represent me - they don't. Just because I am a worker doesn't mean I'm the same as all other workers. It's a rediculous notion. These artificial social-groups don't represent me in the slightest. The left, however, is inherently interested in removing individuality and placing everyone into social-groups - that's fundamental to the definition of socialism (e.g. class) - and required for identity politics.
    6
  4600. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    6
  4601. Ah, I think I get you now. People's perceptions of the battle (including mine before I started doing proper research on it) is that this battle was a back and forth afair. Neither side had the advantage. But is that really the case? The answer is no. The Germans were gaining ground constantly throughout the battle. Smaller and smaller chunks of the city were being taken, but they never had the strength to take the city - or the dock-area completely. This idea of a back-and-forth, or a giant melee with no front line as some documentaries say, is incorrect. Yeah, maybe at a local house-to-house level, it was a back-and-forth, but operationally it wasn't. The Germans were taking ground and inching their way to the Volga. But they simply ran out of time, and Operation Uranus caught them in the rear (joke intended)
    6
  4602. Original COD with a thousand grenades each man, with everyone jumping up and down to avoid getting shot. Yes, totally accurate
    6
  4603. Actually I'm currently setting up a way for people who don't want to become Patreons to help out in a different way. I'll announce it when it's set up. Which country are you from?? And I don't blame you not getting a credit card. Debit cards are good, credit cards are bad.
    6
  4604. I do want to cover the air war eventually, but it may be a while away. I will do the bombing of Dresden (and other such bombings) when I get to it, yes
    6
  4605. I must remember never to change the day I upload ;)
    6
  4606. According to the propaganda, it wasn't just Russians
    6
  4607. I have read the first one... Not the rest. The 'best' part is where he realises he's talking rubbish, then swaps everything around, and when that doesn't work, rallies against the Jews (p104). Marxists tend to ignore that part, if they even read it at all, which most have not. In summary, capitalism is when money, and the mo' money there is, the more capitalism you have https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg?si=axrdYxzqiflE2CcE
    6
  4608. It's "The Science", not the scientific method. Water boiling at 100 degrees doesn't mean you can calculate next week's winning lottery numbers. Science cannot predict human action.
    6
  4609. As shown in my earlier comment, the Ostheer strength did not stagnate until after Kursk, it actually grew in strength. I also think it's significant that the Germans make the most gains during the first few weeks of Barbarossa when they had a numerical superiority over the Soviets. 2.7 million Soviets defending against around 3.8 million Germans. Then when the Soviet numbers gain parity with the Germans in late 1941, the dramatic German advances grind to a halt.
    6
  4610. Yes, I've seen it. The Canadian government is 'democratic', which means Fabian-Fascism.
    6
  4611. I can't promise it'll be soon. In fact, it's a difficult topic to talk about due to the fact it's a conspiracy in and of itself, and we live in a world where people have been conditioned to believe that conspiracies don't happen...
    6
  4612. I do want to continue with North Africa because I want to cover El Alamein, then Torch, Tunisia, Sicily, Italy, then Normandy, and see all the relationships between the generals from the beginning, but yes I understand why people are getting fatigued.
    6
  4613. I'll be honest there's only a handful of books in English on the Romanians, and the only one I've read is Axworthy's "Third Axis, Fourth Ally". I can definitely recommend it though as it's good.
    6
  4614. You were second by 10 seconds, but good try!
    6
  4615. "The better solution is to get rid of council tax altogether and allow private companies to compete for bin collection services." Bravo! That's precisely what I've been saying. - "Had she not bought in the reforms in the early 1980s the UK would have plunged into a Greek style economy. She also had a massive battle on her hands because whenever she tried doing anything remotely radical and free marketish, both her own party and the public would be in uproar." I do agree with that assessment. From her point of view, she was in a tough position, and she inherited a country that was on its knees. However, my point is to say that she's not what people perceive her to be. And if people take their emotions out of the equation and look at the facts, yes she closed the mines, but the industries she supposedly "privatised" weren't really privatised. The railways are still owned by the government via their corporation: National Rail. It's only nominal privatisation, not actual. And she introduced the Poll Tax, which is obviously a tax increase.
    6
  4616.  @julianshepherd2038  "British government hadn't organised the railways because they were in private hands." That's the traditional narrative. In reality, they had nationalized the railways in all but name before the First World War. It's like the idea that the British railways are not nationalized now - except Network Rail is the State corporation dictating wage, prices, pensions and is the only entity in the UK who can build railways and railway stations. So the British railways are nationalized in all but name now, and if you look into the details, you'll find that they were nationalized back then too. - "Also agriculture. If you didn't produce, they would take your farm off you!" Yes, confirming that farming was also nationalized in all but name.
    6
  4617. You started off belligerent and insulted me first, so I'm giving you back what you gave out. If you don't want to be insulted, don't throw the first stone.
    6
  4618. Excellent! It's awesome to hear you've been reading those books! I'm not sure I saw your question on FDR (I've not checked recently with Battlestorm taking up my time), however I've been wanting to do a video on FDR ever since I read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression", plus some other books on FDR. Your question may give me the excuse to finally make such a video... Even if I'm skipping ahead with the questions.
    6
  4619. It's a well known fact in the UK that off-licences (corner shops that sell cigarettes and booze) can't make a profit with cigarettes due to the high taxes imposed upon them. They often sell them at a loss in order to entice people to come to the shop, hoping they buy beer or sweets alongside the cigarettes, which will make up the loss. At least, that was the trick a few years back... It may have changed since.
    6
  4620. They're dishonest, as is Wikipedia.
    6
  4621. Ah, I see! Yes, we had the same problem when I worked in corporate retail. There was basically no difference between a regular staff member and a supervisor, or a supervisor and a management role. The differences were tiny and hardly worth the added stress.
    6
  4622. Yes, my intention is to go back to North Africa as soon as this series is over (or before if I need a break from it)
    6
  4623. Yeah, whenever I hear "2 to 3 days" I just think of Market Garden now haha
    6
  4624. Well I have good news for you, I'm hoping to get the next one out next week
    6
  4625. Of course he hasn't!
    6
  4626. Which is exactly what my critics are doing. They're doing it here, they're doing it in the comments of my previous videos, and they're doing it on Reddit and elsewhere. This is the level of opposition I'm dealing with, and I wanted to highlight it so people could see what the problem is
    6
  4627. Aiden, again, everything you have said here couldn't be more untrue. I provided timestamps, I addressed the idea of Mussolini's regime persecuting Jews in the Fascism video, and it's you who has insulted me numerous times in the comments. I cannot get through to you, or Mike Mcmike, or others, how incorrect you are. I cannot understand why you would spend so much of your time replying to people, and getting frustrated over them when they ignore you or tell you to actually watch the video because your points have already been refuted. You have got the time, you just automatically assume you're right. Well, you're not. Watch the video. Listen. Learn.
    6
  4628.  @VocalBear213  "can you give the definition of private ownership of the means of production please? And of "a state"? And double please for "totalitarian"?" Yeah, I can. I did it in this video again, but I also explained it in detail in this old video of mine which people really should watch fully https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Tik, please, with a cherry on Top, provide a real life example of existing capitalism today in your definition!" The black market. I would say self-employed workers, or mom and pops shops, but they're all state controlled now (tax, inflation, regulations) so unfortunately they're not really capitalist.
    6
  4629. You seem to have a warped view of private enterprise and individualism. I would, therefore, encourage you to reconsider this perception. My advice is to start by reading Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" before proceeding to Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics", and then moving to Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". There are also numerous videos of Milton Friedman's speeches, and others, who will explain to you the principles of private enterprise and individualism, and dispel the myths (e.g. "capitalism bad because child labour" or "what Dickens wrote was accurate"). Lastly, I would also recommend you watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y You'll see quite clearly that my definitions are not "arbitrary and simplistic", but both correct and historically accurate.
    6
  4630. I also enjoy annoying them all at the same time. Although, I would rather get through to them, and convert them from their erroneous ways. I just haven't figured out a way to do that, since they're not listening.
    6
  4631. The cake is a lie 🍰
    6
  4632. I guess that counts
    6
  4633. That's fine, I'll take the hit since that is valid criticism :)
    6
  4634. Scarecly a day goes by where I don't work on it - but it's going to take a while. I honestly don't think people realise just how HUGE this battle actually is. And I'm not willing to put out a video unless I know exactly where every battalion is at any moment in time... so please just know that it will come eventually and that I am working on it behind the scenes. But don't worry! Next "Their Story" video will be about something related to the Battle of Stalingrad (not saying what it is yet) Also, not sure if you've seen my "How I Get a LOT of Work Done... And How You Can Too" video, but in it I talk about how many words I've done for it so far on Stalingrad, which might give you an idea of the scale of the task https://youtu.be/efY-KnqrI-0
    6
  4635. I know not the meaning of this?
    6
  4636. "millions of fans" - are there even that many people interested in history??
    6
  4637. Yes, I agree entirely. His book "In Defence of History" is fantastic. I just wish he would apply the principles he outlined there when it came to National Socialism rather than just continue to spout the Marxist narrative.
    6
  4638. Yep, sounds exactly like a socialist to me!
    6
  4639. If it's National (public), it's not private (capitalism). Therefore, "National Capitalism" is an oxymoronic phrase that doesn't describe an actual economic system. It's the same as saying "anarcho-socialism" - it's inherently contradictory.
    6
  4640. Here's a million articles about Adam Tooze that show he's Left wing https://www.theguardian.com/profile/adam-tooze You might like this video of me discussing what he wrote in the official Cambridge history of WW2 https://youtu.be/-w1iZ7RqZlU And I could sit here an point out the flaws in Wages of Destruction, but it would honestly take too long. I'll sum it up by saying that the guy paints a picture of a Socialist economy in Germany, and then says "it's capitalism" 😣
    6
  4641. There's plenty of articles here that show his views are definitely left wing https://www.theguardian.com/profile/adam-tooze
    6
  4642. Absolutely, I agree it wasn't the only issue. However, the point was that there's no point even dropping at Arnhem if Nijmegen bridge isn't taken. The 36 hour delay at Nijmegen killed the operation more than the drop zones at Arnhem (even though they were bad).
    6
  4643. But that doesn't change the fact that the leadership wanted it to happen too and gave the go-ahead several days before. Some had reservations, but the leadership still went ahead, and didn't try to stop it. Therefore, the leadership cannot then turn around and blame everyone else for not helping them out, when they didn't coordinate the uprising to coincide with relief or resupply from the outside.
    6
  4644. It has nothing to do with the fact that they're both socialist regimes. They carved up Eastern Europe between them - thus, not just a simple non-aggression pact. There's even a book out there called "The Devil's Alliance" which talks about the pact. Calling it "just a non-aggression pact" is ridiculous.
    6
  4645. Except they are thinking. This isn't about slogans (which would be duckspeak), this is about the ideological jargon being spouted by the intellectuals of the party.
    6
  4646. "Hegel's entire philosophy starts from the recognition that there are things about which logic and experience cannot provide definitive answers." Well, that's where he's wrong. - "Limits for human logical and empirical knowledge. The Kantian 'noumenon', so to speak." Yes, empirical knowledge alone isn't sufficient. We must use an Objective epistemology, not empirical. - " 'Reality' (and/or our experience of reality) is not always logical and non-contradictory." Of course it is. Reality does not contradict itself. There may APPEAR to be contradictions, and man might error and make contradictions, but man making an error is not a contradiction in and of itself, nor is an appearance of a contradiction a contradiction. If you have a contradiction, that means that you (or someone else) has got something wrong, or there's a clue about reality that you've not yet understood. - "His dialectic is an attempt to deal with contradiction" Exactly. This is the problem. By embracing contradictions, Hegel has rejected reality. He has assumed reality is not real, because it "contradicts" itself, even though it doesn't. This is where he's gone wrong. - "but Hegel's original intent is not to establish an irrationalist mysticism just for the sake of it" Perhaps that wasn't his original intent, but that's certainly how it ended up being. Once you reject reality, you will end up in mysticism. - "but rather to try to find a means of investigating issues and answering questions for which - by definition - logic and experience can say nothing" As explained in my recent video "But how do you know you're right" ( https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI ), there is a method that can help you perceive reality that doesn't rely on just logic and experience. This method rejects empiricism and mysticism, because it is Objective. Therefore, these issues and questions you have are not "by definition" impossible like you said they were.
    6
  4647. It applies to all. This isn't to say there aren't any coherent and sensible thoughts from philosophers or people in politics, because occasionally there are. Ideobabble only refers to the nonsensical stuff where it's hard to even grasp what they're saying because they're just stating abstract things that are detached from objective reality.
    6
  4648. Did you watch the same video as everyone else? I was explaining the concepts, which I do understand. You're mistaking the idea of "not understanding concepts" with the idea of "these concepts only work if you accept their faulty premises".
    6
  4649. Good question, and I honestly don't know
    6
  4650. It's mentioned in Neillands' "Battle for the Rhine". Specifically Chapter 3 where the problem is mentioned a few times.
    6
  4651. Correction? Yeah, keep watching the video. You'll understand when you see it
    6
  4652. Happy to make Mondays that little bit better :)
    6
  4653. Glad you enjoyed it! I'm not doing this for views, but you might be interested to know - I released my Market Garden documentary in parts, then uploaded one big video that was all the parts in one. The big video gained a lot more views than the separate parts.
    6
  4654. No problem at all - anything to help :)
    6
  4655. Thank you for your feedback. You're right, I should avoid putting people's usenames on screen when I'm criticising them. I've done this when it comes to other YouTubers (I've addressed their arguments without stating their usernames directly), but not when it comes to random commentors. I'll start blotting out their usernames.
    6
  4656. When you say it like that, it does sound awesome
    6
  4657. I've heard similar stories from a few people now.
    6
  4658. I'm not sure about that. It was fun for me. I love calling out illogical arguments
    6
  4659. Our interpretation of the past evolves as it moves closer to the truth
    6
  4660. Now just imagine what it was like for those fighting in the streets!
    6
  4661.  @calebeluz3123  That's correct. The 399th Division had been downgraded to the size of a division, and the 'regiment' was the size of battalion at this point.
    6
  4662. I've relied heavily on Glantz, and rightly so. His in the only account that covers the entire battle from July in sufficient detail! Without his series, this series would have been impossible
    6
  4663. Yeah, if that's what the German assessment was for the Bulge, then I largely agree with it.
    6
  4664. "Ridgeway's anger regarded the intent to cut off the German 7th Army - NOT the entire salient. Had the 82nd and 10th armored support moved to delay the Germ 2nd, and the 7th held the line, then Patton's move would have cut the Germ 7th then and there." There was absolutely zero chance of any of that happening. The German 7th Army was far to the south at this point and wasn't in danger of being surrounded or cut off. The 5th Panzer Army was between 7th Armoured Division and Bastogne, and Patton didn't turn up for days. When it did go in, Patton's counterattack only reached Bastogne - it didn't go further north to St Vith because that was miles away to the north. What you're describing is complete fiction.
    6
  4665. Also, Churchill was prodding him (like Wavell and Auchinleck before him) to attack attack attack, and Monty refused. So his cautiousness is not because the political situation required him to save on the casualties.
    6
  4666. Well, I'm currently working on next week's video (Xmas Eve) which will be on the Pienaar issue. So it's technically not quite over ;)
    6
  4667. And thank you for watching and commenting! I hope your uncle does like my videos as well :) I'll have the "Complete" Crusader video (fixing the minor issues) out on the 7th of January so he can watch
    6
  4668. "that got me wondering if you've considered doing something similar to this about the Battle of Gazala?" "Either way, I'm looking forward to whatever is coming next!" I've said this in a recent video [link https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I around 22:59 onwards] but I'll let you know anyway. Next will be the Courland Pocket of 1944-45. After that will be Battlestorm Stalingrad. After that I may return to the North African Campaign to see Rommel's second offensive (1942), which is the battle before Gazala. My intention is to complete the North African Campaign in order from start to finish, then do Tunisia, then Sicily and Italy. Then jump to Normandy.
    6
  4669. At 22:59 onwards in this video (probably around 25:00) I explain the future plans for Battlestorms https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I but essentially, Courland 1944 is next, then Stalingrad, then probably back to the North African Campaign (which would be Rommel's second offensive, then Gazala).
    6
  4670. Oh, and while not a book, Wikipedia
    6
  4671. Memoirs!
    6
  4672. Yeah :)
    6
  4673. Haha no Glantzing hits on that like button please
    6
  4674. A man that falsely identifies as an "attack helicopter" doesn't have a clear perception of reality. He might have a self, but that self would be classed as faulty.
    6
  4675. I think you were 9th on my end... But yes, I do think there's a definite pattern here though with their upbringing
    6
  4676. Sadly, I think we have a lot of economic pain coming our way very soon...
    6
  4677. Thanks for your comment, good to know my content is appreciated :) I'm aiming for highly detailed and accurate history, which is the type of videos/documentaries I wished I'd had access to as a kid. If it's helping others out there and providing value, I'll keep it up
    6
  4678. All in one go? ;)
    6
  4679. Fantastic! At the end, be sure to watch the 'Piemaar' video. I link to it in the end card and the description - you'll know why by that point :)
    6
  4680. And yes, I was going to do this as one big video in the first place, but if I had I'd never have got it done. Think it was a good idea overall to split it and then merge
    6
  4681. No worries! Hope you enjoy all 9hours 13mins and 29seconds :)
    6
  4682. Fantastic! Enjoy and good luck :)
    6
  4683. +Martin Juda too long! I've been working on it for months. The animation side of it was the biggest hurdle to get over. Sadly, just as I was getting to the end, I realised I could have animated it a lot quicker if I'd just done one thing differently. But you live and learn :)
    6
  4684. The sources are in the PINNED COMMENT. I've even put that in the description. And they're not "links", they're books.
    6
  4685. Yes! Not sure why I said 1941. And not sure why I didn't catch that in editing. Sorry everyone!
    6
  4686. What about the 10th NKVD Division which panicked and fled at Stalingrad, at a time when the regular Rifle Divisions stood their ground? What about the time the Red Army Rifleman marched towards the German lines outside Stalingrad holding hands and singing songs, with no NKVD around? What about the fact I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video, but deliberately left it to the end so as to catch out impatient people who don't listen, devine what I think, jump to ridiculous conclusions, assert historical "facts" that are contradicted by the evidence, and then call me a "shitstorian"? I'll wait.
    6
  4687. I'm not sure I understand your question? The Soviet generals came from all sorts of backgrounds. You even have a Soviet general who's Polish (bit more complicated than that, but true) called Rokossovsky.
    6
  4688. If you're going to be like that, why don't you suggest Western Allied atrocities in WW2? At least then you know there is a good chance I'll cover them at some point.
    6
  4689. Yes you are!
    6
  4690. From what I've read, it was invented by their Marxist critics at the time, which is why many actual Nazis don't like being called "Nazi" as they see themselves as National (racial) Socialists. I tend to use the full term because I know people in real life (people older than me too) who were shocked that the term "Nazi" was short for "National Socialist". They had never heard that before, so as an educator I think it's vital that people know this.
    6
  4691. "I've been researching more about ideologies and politics to try and make my believes more concrete. Unfortunately as a university student I have little time to read many books and I often resort to watching YouTube for information." This is a major problem, not just for you, but for everyone. I would advise that you to remain neutral in politics at the very least until you've done sufficient reading on a given topic. Always question everything that you hear or read. There's a new phrase that I'm going to start using which I think sums up my stance: "know all perspectives or know nothing at all". If you cannot fully understand the alternative perspectives, then you're not fully informed and should remain neutral. Ideologues will then try and pressure you into taking their side, which should indicate to you who has jumped to stupid conclusions rather than having studied the subject soberly. - "Was their any reason in particular you use the Jaico Publishing Translation?" No particular reason, it was just what was available on Amazon at the time. Amazon no longer sells Mein Kampf at all, and I did a video about that a while ago... I tried to learn German, but my ridiculous schedule simply won't permit me to do it. - "...I wonder if you would be able to do a response video to the YouTuber Hakim?" I've got a few Marxians making videos directed at me... but I think my time is better spent doing reading and research, and providing everyone with as much information as possible to make their own decisions. The reason some of these Marxians are targeting me directly is because I'm hitting them where it hurts. They're on the defensive, not me. And the more information I provide, the more evidence they'll have to ignore, which will make them look even more dishonest than they do already. As an example, one of them recently "debunked" me by quoting Hitler's speech in March 1933 where he said (paraphrased) "don't worry guys, I'm not going to steal your property off you". This is fine, except he did steal the property off people AFTER March 1933. He stole the property off the Communists, the Socialists, the Churches, the businessmen, the Jews, and many others besides. But apparently, because he said in March 1933 that he wouldn't, then I'm wrong 🙄 And this same person who "debunked" me with this March 1933 speech has claimed elsewhere that I'm "just believing what Hitler says". Clearly, he was projecting, since Hitler's actions in this case go against his words, whereas in many other instances, Hitler's actions and his words are in alignment.
    6
  4692. Yes you were!
    6
  4693. Yeah, you tell him!
    6
  4694. That's not a bad theory, but the problem is that the Maus had seven times the fuel requirements of the Panther (as I explain at the very end of the video). So unless the Maus was seven times more effective than the Panther, then it's not going to be worth it.
    6
  4695. Not sure if it will be specifically on Schacht, but he will definitely be present in future videos, including one I've been working on behind the scenes for quite some time
    6
  4696. The recession (and all recessions) was caused by Keynesian policies in the first place, and has made the recession longer. See the event on 17 Sept 2019, and Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" for more details.
    6
  4697. I have let them drag me down. But no more. Let them rot!
    6
  4698. I also can't answer the second part of your question because it's impossible to make economic calculations under the circumstances https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ
    6
  4699. My original intention was to go down to company level, but the sources simply don't allow it. For platoon level or lower, I would suggest Jason D. Mark's books (see the link in the description). His are the most in-depth for the units they cover. Croatian Legion, Panzerkrieg, Into Oblivion, Death of the Leaping Horsemen, Island of Fire... they're all great and as close to the individual actions as you can get.
    6
  4700. "I want to thank you for your recent video about holocaust denial. Please do make more videos on that topic." I intend to at some point :) - "Additionally, over on the World War Two channel with Indy Neidell, they have a video about the economy of the Third Reich titled "Why the Nazis Weren’t Socialists - ‘The Good Hitler Years’ | BETWEEN 2 WARS I 1937 Part 2 of 2" in which they say the Nazis were not Socialists. Could you comment on the contents of that video, and especially on their assertion that the Nazis weren't socialists? Thanks Tik." That video came out the week before my 5 hour "Hitler's Socialism" video, and I actually watched it before I released the Hitler's Socialism video hoping that there would be some juicy new counter-argument I could insert into my video before it came out. There wasn't. Since the release of my video, lots of people have linked me their video claiming it refutes what I said. No it doesn't. It simply doesn't. All it does is present the old Marxist "Hitler tricked the workers" narrative. The arguments I presented in the Hitler's Socialism video counter their points.
    6
  4701. Also, here's the link to my video on the Soviet economy. Learn the facts https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    6
  4702. I've already done a video on the Soviet economy. Link in case you've not seen it https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    6
  4703. I've used sources I agree with and sources I don't, yet that's "cherry picking" to you? 🤨 Even if I had cherry picked, you should be able to integrate the evidence I've presented with your own views. So there's no reason to be scared of watching my videos. Sure, you may not agree with them, but at the very least you'll receive copious amounts of new evidence and hear and understand the argument presented by someone who's sees the world differently than you. You don't have to agree, but wouldn't it be an interesting thing to see? Also, there were 2.9 million SA members. Only 85 to 100 people were killed in the Night of the Long Knives, many of them non-SA members (like the conservatives). I know some sources claim higher numbers, but, as explained in the video, they were based on newspapers at the time who were guessing, and who named people who they said were the victims but who had actually committed the crime.
    6
  4704. How many millions died in 1933 when the initial revolution happened? Yes, later as the revolution continued, millions died, but we're specifically talking about the seizure of power.
    6
  4705. Yeah, except the economy never recovered. Literally, unlike every other country, the Soviet economy NEVER recovered https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w The civil war no doubt didn't help, but the famine was caused by Lenin socialising the means of production, shooting a bunch of farmers who were trying to deliver food to the starving cities, and the forceful confiscation of the food. The result was economic collapse, not driven by the war, but by socialism itself.
    6
  4706. As explained in a previous video, primary sources are not always accurate. In fact, I explain in the video why Shirer got several things wrong https://youtu.be/CcwmbqxF9so
    6
  4707. You were third, but 1st claimed he was 3rd, so I'll give it you just to confuse people
    6
  4708. You were fourth on my end, but have a cookie anyway
    6
  4709. Yeah, I've missed publishing every week... but with a huge Battlestorm on the go behind the scenes, and with the problem with history theory, and Christmas, it's just been difficult to get much time for these sorts of videos.
    6
  4710. Thank you! I think the debates in history are the interesting bits. Pretending to know all the answers doesn't get us very far, and history really comes alive when you have everyone informed about the situations. That doesn't stop us from having opinions or arguing for a particular interpretation, but the debates get people interested in the subject, which in turn leads to more evidence and perspectives, benefiting all of us.
    6
  4711. Yes, I didn't mention this, but you're correct. The working class don't like seeing their social housing, social benefits, social pensions and so on go to others and not themselves.
    6
  4712. I will confirm, I'm not suicidal. Be sure to take a screenshot just in case... Hate to even think of this, but you never know these days
    6
  4713. Who needs logistics!? Send the panzers to Siberia!
    6
  4714. For Eastern Front, I'd say start with Fritz's "Ostkrieg", then followed by David Glantz's "When Titan's Clashed". Anything by Glantz is usually good if you enjoy his in-depth style of history, but some people prefer a general narrative, which is why I've suggested Fritz first.
    6
  4715. Good info!
    6
  4716. Yes, his performance in Crusader was exceptional.
    6
  4717. It was my pleasure, no need to tank me!
    6
  4718. The main problem with the late war is that, while you do have legitimate German unit compositions, the Germans couldn't actually man them any more. Post-Kursk, they do have a manpower crisis, and most of their units were understrength. They were scraping the barrel when it came to new recruits, as well as air-force and navy personnel. This is the point, before Kursk they did have hte manpower, post-Kursk (and especially, post-Bagration) the Germans simply didn't have the manpower or resources to sustain their units in the field. But, this fact has been twisted by some to mean it was a gradual decline from 1941, but that's not the case. It's up and down until Kursk, and then the decline happens. But even post-Kursk, they still had a relatively decent amount of tanks and SPGs, even though overall numbers were down compared to previous years. But they no longer had the infantry to support them with. This meant the tanks struggled against enemy anti-tank guns, and explains why they weren't able to break through to the operational depths any more like they had in the early war battles. They'd also lost air superiority, and there was a colossal lack of fuel. So, strategically and operationally the Germans were at a severe disadvantage, even if their tactical formations were more balanced compared to the early-war period.
    6
  4719. I agree, they are triggering
    6
  4720. Hope you enjoy!
    6
  4721. I haven't looked into El Alamein yet, but I think it was Monty that ended the Jock Column idea as well. While these had their uses outside of main battles, it diluted British artillery strength in the battles, making British artillery unable to concentrate their firepower when it was needed.
    6
  4722. The problem is quite simple - Patreon can terminate my (or anyone's) Patreon page at a moment's notice without any warning even if I haven't violated any Terms of Service. That's not good, so I can absolutely understand why people are dropping support for it. An alternative is required.
    6
  4723. All thanks to my Patreons! To be honest, I don't think I've read so much in my life. Between reading and editing videos, I'm surprised I haven't developed myopia yet
    6
  4724. Thank you Shoofly! I know that only a handful of Patreons actually watch the updates, so I know most of you aren't interested in the updates, but still I feel obliged to do an update now and then. The Q&As are a must though, and I intend to catch up with them in January.
    6
  4725. Exactly. Thanks for your comment!
    6
  4726. Yes, they suffered under both as you will see if you watch the full video.
    6
  4727. "@TIK Sosialim: Common control of the means of production. Fascism: Race control of the means of productions!!!!" Dayren, racial socialism is National Socialism. Racism isn't part of the Fascist ideology. Fascism is nationality control of the means of production. Mussolini only introduced the first racial law in 1938 - 16 years after taking power - and only because Hitler influenced him to. But there were still 8,000 Jews in Rome in 1943. Only when the National Socialists took over did the Jews get removed. This was because Mussolini thought in nationalities, not race. So long as you were Italian and fighting for the Italian state, he didn't mind if you were Jewish or Sicilian etc.
    6
  4728. Thanks silver, I felt that too many of the books did skip over this, which then allowed them to distort the events and glorify one side or another. I wanted to avoid doing that so thought this was the way to go.
    6
  4729. I like the way you guys completely ignore what I wrote. It really is pointless talking to you or providing evidence because your ideology is blinding you to a false conclusion. And you pretend I don't know what socialism is, which is a false assumption. In fact, it is you guys who don't actually know the real meaning of "common control of the means of production" [total-control of the people]. It'll definitely come back to bite you in the long run.
    6
  4730. Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. SOURCES (Some are general economics texts) - Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    6
  4731. Interestingly, the Nazis were nationalists in name only (since they believed in the race, not nationality). But they were socialists.
    6
  4732. Thank you Jason! Hopefully a few people will consider subscribing because of this
    6
  4733. Define history for me.
    6
  4734. "Hating Christianity and blaming it for secular society's inability to manage it's communism problem is bread tube tier narrative fabricating and I honestly feel sad that an otherwise reasonable channel has fallen into foolishness like this." That's not my argument. At no point have I hated on Christianity nor blamed it for Communism. Have you got a comprehension problem?
    6
  4735. Not heard much about the Beretta M38, so I'll look it up. The problem with the Italian ships was that they were stuck in port for most of the war due to a lack of fuel.
    6
  4736. Very true. I definitely prefer this era of the channel, although it was much easier and quicker to make videos back then. Creating and then editing this video took about 6 hours. Creating and editing a Battlestorm video takes days. But a Close Combat video, a couple of hours.
    6
  4737. That's awesome! And yes, the problem with 'realism' in games is that it's (generally) not fun for players. That's why health bars and multiple lives exist in computer games. It's only the hardcore players who play with 'instakill' on.
    6
  4738. Haha I see an Edward Troth comment and I like and heart
    6
  4739. Some people watch my videos at x2 speed. But is that really the pace?
    6
  4740. Tell me about it. I think most people don't quite grasp how huge the Eastern Front is. I also suspect the title "BATTLE of Stalingrad" leads people to the wrong conclusions. This wasn't a battle, it was an entire campaign in itself. I'm also taking a break from Stalingrad at the moment to do Operation Crusader and get that out in a few weeks time. That battle's big enough! But it's incredibly interesting too.
    6
  4741. Well done!
    6
  4742. Exactly, which is also why I'm determined to correct the distortion as best as I can. Thanks for your comment!
    6
  4743. Thanks Matt! I do want to go into more detail about the differences between Fascism and National Socialism in the future, but this is a start :)
    6
  4744. No worries sir! Sorry it took so long to get around to answering
    6
  4745. Wow thank you, sir :)
    6
  4746. A Patron has asked a question about it, so I'm going to have to do a quick video on it soon. But a full Battlestorm video on it (which I do want to do eventually) will be at some point after Stalingrad.
    6
  4747. It may not seem like it, but this is actually deeply related to my history videos, and is the reason why I no longer see the point in continuing doing them. See the pinned comment.
    6
  4748. I don't defend socialism.
    6
  4749. Yes, because those facts are being delivered by the Right, and they've been told that the Right are all Fascists.
    6
  4750. Nonetheless, an incredibly interesting campaign in it's own right and deserves attention.
    6
  4751. There's plenty of other channels doing five-minute histories of various topics. This channel, and Battlestorm especially, is about the details.
    6
  4752. Yeah I'm probably not doing episodic Battlestorms in the future (unless the battles are longer than 12 hours, which is YouTube's upload limit)
    6
  4753. Haha only from late 1942 ;)
    6
  4754. Unless they're socialists ordering me to "neck myself"
    6
  4755. Makes a nice change, and it's allowed me to work more on the next episode of Stalingrad, so it's a bit of a breather
    6
  4756. My Patreons are supporting this channel and making this possible. If they ask a question, I answer it. It's the least I can do.
    6
  4757. And I hope you enjoy every minute of it!
    6
  4758. Field Marshal commands Generals. It's just the rank above. In theory, you don't really need a Field Marshal unless you have two or more armies to command.
    6
  4759. Fantastic! Glad you agree!
    6
  4760. I'm really glad to hear you liked Bruneval because I don't hear many people praise that one, even though I think I did a reasonable job with it. Have you watched Battlestorm Crusader? I still think that one's my best completed series (Stalingrad probably the best when it is completed)
    6
  4761. Aber ist das wirklich der fall?
    6
  4762. Honestly, I'm exhausted... But I keep going because I don't want to let all of you down
    6
  4763. Thank you! Terri made these recent thumbnails, so I'll let her know you like them. Cheers!
    6
  4764. "basically the idea is to radically change society by eliminating the system of social classes and creating a new society based on public propierty of the means of production and personal/private propierty of the consumption goods." Right... but that's exactly what the National-Socialists did. The first thing they did when they got into power was abolish private property. They nationalised the industries in all but name (which they called 'privatization', but it wasn't privatized) and their envisioned society was a racially-pure society after they had removed the Jews (who, in their eyes, were causing the class conflict). The state was in ownership and control of the economy by the mid-1930's. So much so that industrialists like Gunter Reiman went into hiding. As Mussolini said, Fascism (slightly different again) is a heresy of Marxism. But just like Christianity and Judaism are both part of the Abrahamic religion, Fascism and National-Socialism are 100% part of the socialism branch.
    6
  4765. Yes, Andrea is correct. A total consensus on such an important issue doesn't seem right to me. I think it is worth exploring that, or at least inspiring someone else to do a little digging to figure out more information about it. And not only that, but the scholars who are against Rommel here may not have considered all the facts. If Auchinleck hadn't propped up Cunningham, Rommel's plan may have worked. Hindsight says it didn't, but at the time it looked possible. And Crüwell may have been at fault for the losses, which in turn reduced the impact the panzers could have had at the frontier. And even if that's still incorrect, fine. However, at least by explaining Rommel's perspective, we can see why he attempted the Dash in the first place. It wasn't because he was 'mad' or anything, but simply saw things differently. Ultimately he misjudged the situation given the facts he had available. But his willingness to take risks and "dashes" is what makes him the general he is. His tactics often worked. Not this time, and I think it's worth asking why it didn't work as well?
    6
  4766. I like debates. And part of me thinks we should try and offer a counter viewpoint when there's a consensus. This view may not hold up now, but it may inspire someone else to look into this issue a lot more and make a more compelling argument which beats the consensus.
    6
  4767. This is explainable. Falsely believing only 80-90,000 men were in the pocket, the Soviets decided to try and destroy it with the majority of their troops (like they did with Group Lascar). After a few days, they realized that there were a lot more Germans trapped in there than originally believed, and that they couldn't destroy it at that time. They then needed to keep their divisions around the pocket to keep it contained. So the reason they didn't send more troops to the outer-encirclement line was because they wanted to destroy the pocket first before doing so. But then realized that they had to keep their troops around the pocket because more troops were in it than they believed. That's also why Operation Saturn was downgraded to Operation Little Saturn because 2nd Guards Army ended up being moved east to the Stalingrad area due to the Soviets not have nearly enough troops to both hold the pocket at stop Manstein's counterattack.
    6
  4768. I'm afraid you're second (or third if you count the bot)
    6
  4769. Traitors to whom? You can only be a traitor to your own overlords, not someone elses
    6
  4770. The Soviet Union definitely killed more overall during its entire lifespan, but I would argue that the Nazis killed more vs the Soviets in the years they were active.
    6
  4771. They should, but they won't, because they think it was all lies
    6
  4772. Actually if you read the treaty properly, it only promises aid to the other Axis, not a declaration of war.
    6
  4773. @Chaoshield - are you denying the deliberate starvation of the Greeks in WW2 by the Axis (mainly German) powers? What about the starvation of the Dutch? What about the Ukrainians or the Poles? All done by the 'glorious' German Wehrmacht and 'Aryan' SS. I mean, you've been denying other things, so why not these events too, right?
    6
  4774. I wonder what Germans today would think about what Germans did in Greece? https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk
    6
  4775. Glad to hear, and don't worry, I will :) It's a great battle to study for several reasons, not least because there's so much going on, and it's linked in with the whole summer offensive in 1942, plus the overall strategic situation. It's also one of the (if not the biggest) turning points of the war.
    6
  4776. I'll admit, I have been reluctant to publish stuff like this primarily because of YouTube's censorship policies. But I can't ignore this aspect of history for the reason you explained. It may end up resulting in the termination of this channel... and I accept that risk, even if it's a tragic situation to be in.
    6
  4777. No, you've been lied to like I was. It turns out that socialism is for the rich. Capitalism is for the poor.
    6
  4778. The wait might be a little bit longer this time... I'll let you know in the Addendum video
    6
  4779. A bit of much-needed comic relief :)
    6
  4780. The East Karelian concentration camps didn't exist?
    6
  4781. "No, you don't understand e.g. Market Socialism. A sole trader would be sharing the profits of their business with their employees (themselves)." That's private ownership of the means of production (capitalism), not "market socialism". The individual business owner of private property is sharing his profits with his employees - giving them a wage. That's precisely what capitalism is. Many Marxists, including these idiots on Reddit (who are quoting from other Marxist sources), define capitalism as the "means of production... owned and operated by private individuals in pursuit of profit" https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/skcnvq/were_the_nazis_socialists_1_national_socialism/ Well, that's precisely the definition I'm using (although I would include "loss" in there too). But apparently, you consider this to be "market socialism". - "Breathing is not a property right." Your body is your private property. That's why the Marxists want to abolish it. - "Read an economics text to understand what "property rights" means." I understand what property is, and I understand the Statist interpretation of what they think "rights" are. You misunderstood me because you haven't done any research on free market economics. - "What is to stop me from taking your business, if there is no legal system?" 1, I will stop you. 2, There is a legal system in anarcho-capitalism and it will stop you. The fact that you don't know this is proof that you haven't done any research on the topic. You can start here https://youtu.be/V0_Jd_MzGCw - "A fight on my hands? I somehow don't think it would be much of one, having watched your videos. But of course, someone stronger than me could them come and take what I've taken from you." And if I can't handle it myself, I'll get my friends, family, or if necessary the local private non-State non-monopoly police force (depending on the nature of the threat). - "This is what makes Anarcho Capitalism an oxymoron." You don't know what an oxymoron is. Even if anarcho-capitalism doesn't work, that doesn't make it oxymoronic. What would make it oxymoronic if there was an inherent contradiction in what it was calling for. So, if I said there was a "cold fire", that would be oxymoronic because it's two opposite things. You can't have a fire (hot) that is cold. Well, something that is pro-State and anti-State at the same time (anarcho-socialism) is an oxymoron, because "anarcho" means non-state, while "socialism" is a state. While for anarcho-capitalism, "anarcho" means anti-state, and capitalism is also "anti-state", since the free market is free from government control. - "Now, you need a common system that sets out what transgressions that defence force will defend you against and the punishment for such transgressions. Seems like you have a state..." The local independent corner shop is not a state. A local independent police station is not a state.
    6
  4782. Yeah, the idea of anarcho-socialism just doesn't make any sense. But you try telling them that you can't have a collective without force and they'll cry foul, and instead of explaining what would happen if an individual in their collective decided to open his own business, and coming to the obvious conclusion that he would be forced not to, they'll go on the attack, saying how capitalism requires the State to function, which is simply ridiculous. The black market is a free market that is outside State jurisdiction, yet it functions very well.
    6
  4783. I'm just a little cautious after my "Perception of Eastern Front is wrong" and "Numbers" videos. Plus, some people take offence at everything.
    6
  4784. Thanks for the feedback! Because it was a shorter video, I thought I'd play around with different concepts and camera angles. I'm learning though that zooming out quite often is beneficial. I'm not sure on the characters standing over the map. Not sure if I should continue to do that or not. That took the majority of time in this video and without them I probably could have done it in 3-4 weeks, instead of 8-9 weeks. But at least I gave it a go. Well, the Desert, Centre, and Coast groups are just a mixed bag of units so I couldn't really put NATO symbols on them. I did for the other units. I could write "infantry" or "armour" on the base if needed? I'm used to NATO symbols so I guess I forget that not everyone else will be.
    6
  4785. You may be right. The reason I started doing the references was because I had a lot of people accusing me of "making stuff up". Those comments have largely stopped as a result of the references, but now the comments have turned to "he uses bad sources" or "none of the historians he references backs up what he says" etc. This is partly why I wanted to do last week's episode, because it was getting me down that people could just dismiss all the work I'm doing to back up what I'm saying. It's made me wonder what the point of putting all the effort in if I'm just going to be dismissed. However, I still think it's important to back up what I'm saying with sources, and if some people want to dismiss the facts, let them be. The vast majority of the viewers have made it clear that they want facts and references and solid arguments, and that's what I'm determined to give them. As you said, those that don't like it can change the channel (or just cry salty tears in the comments as they're doing right now)
    6
  4786. This is a topic I wanted to talk about for a while, since I studied it at college, and it's an interesting topic. That said, you're right that it's 'ballzy'. I suspect a few people will be 'triggered' by this video, even though the debate itself isn't really controversial.
    6
  4787. I really respect Evans, but his conclusion that the Nazis weren't socialist is baffling. He spends practically the whole of his recent books talking about all the socialist policies the Nazis had, then says they're not Socialists and had 'vague' policies. But yes, if you bypass his flawed interpretation of the ideology, his books are great.
    6
  4788. I've had people say to me that "history has happened, why care?" But the reality is that the lessons of history need to be learned, because things are happening today that have parallels in history, and we've not learned from those lessons. As you've shown, it's good to question things :)
    6
  4789. So long as you go away questioning everything and trying to figure things out for yourself, then I'm happy.
    6
  4790. Thank you, and I've ordered it 👍 can't wait to see this new evidence!
    6
  4791. I mean, I answered that one on Monday!
    6
  4792. True, but that doesn't mean Britain started the war. Germany started the war.
    6
  4793. You made a good choice. However, if things continue as they are, we'll all be communist soon anyway.
    6
  4794. +Christian S. (DerBalu) thanks! There will be more soon, don't you worry :)
    6
  4795. What about if someone who's Dutch wrote a book saying that Gavin was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden, would that undermine the whole "patriotic" and "nationalistic" argument you've going on there? Yes it would, and here it is - Lost at Nijmegen by R.G. Poulussen http://amzn.to/1UfBRQ7 So let me make this clear to everybody. Nobody is pointing fingers at the USA, or Britain, or Poland or any other nation state and blaming an ENTIRE COUNTRY for the failure of this (or any other) operation. Nor do we decide blame based on race, gender, creed or patriotic standing. Why? Because that would be moronic. Blind patriotism is something we should all discourage. Nationalism too. Instead, we should look for a true understanding of what actually happened free from such silly distractions. You cannot learn the lessons of history if they've been clouded by lies and deception. Patriotism is deception. Browning made questionable decisions. Urquhart was the wrong man for the job. 1st Airborne fought hard, but got a lot of things wrong. Frost got to Arnhem bridge. The 101st got a lot of things right, and probably did the best of the three airborne divisions. The 82nd took most of their objectives with ease. The Polish saved 1st Airborne. The soldiers and generals of all nations fought hard. Nobody is denying that. But people make mistakes. Someone has to take the blame. And some of us think that not issuing clear orders to your officers to take a vital bridge... the only bridge not taken intact or not on the first day... until several hours after you've landed... and then having the Germans beat you to that bridge by mere minutes... and then spending the next four days trying desperately to take that very bridge... having to send your paratroopers over a river in paddle boats like marines which they weren't trained to do to take it from the other side... risking their lives to take an objective that could have been taken on day one... was the main reason for the failure of Operation Market Garden. And maybe those people are wrong. But let's discuss that without bringing patriotism into it. “If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame. But, if orders are clear and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers.” - Sun Tzu, Art of War
    6
  4796. I never said Hitler was a Marxist. I'm saying he's a Socialist. Socialism came before Marxism and is distinct. Nationalism and Socialism were both born out of the French Revolution. Both are social-group based. "National identity" is about saying people of the same nation all of the same traits etc (regardless of race btw, e.g. Americans). It was viewed as a Left-wing political ideology for a while. Then it was moved to the Right (not sure why, because that still doesn't make any sense). Therefore, having nationalists in the National Socialist party doesn't actually make them non-socialist. Socialism is an economy policy - common control of the economy. There is nothing to stop someone identifying as a nationalist, but wanting state control. In fact, that would be the definition of Fascism (not National Socialism, but Fascism).
    6
  4797. I didn't say that the poor are against the minimum wage (many are for it). I said that the poor are HURT by the minimum wage as a result of the unforeseen consequences.
    6
  4798.  @Chud_Bud_Supreme  AA is a decent YouTuber. Need to catch up with some of his more recent videos, but the guy is on point. I disagree with his stance on Postmodernism, but I respect his views on it
    6
  4799. 😂
    6
  4800. Also, it is about Weimar Germany, so it would be perfect for you
    6
  4801. I haven't decided yet, but I may split it into separate videos and make it a series. In that case, the first episode could be out in a couple months
    6
  4802. Then don't watch it. As I've told you before, I'm not skipping ahead to Operation Uranus.
    6
  4803. Ethically, Socialism is immoral since it relies on coercion. Economically it is a disaster. Therefore, unless socialism is done totally voluntary, it should be avoided. Capitalism is also bad. That's why the free market is the way to go.
    6
  4804. Thanks Traub, glad you agree! I'm certainly trying to be as accurate as possible :)
    6
  4805. Just tell your boss you can't work on Mondays because that's when TIK releases a video. I'm sure he'll understand
    6
  4806. I don't subscribe to the "Paulus is at fault" idea. I don't want to say too much because it's the topic of a future video (or several). But the evidence suggests that he was wanting to break out.
    6
  4807. Haha sorry :D
    6
  4808. Also, there are no dumb questions, only dumb answers!
    6
  4809. "I have not once seen you refute anything from the third positionist doctrine" If you watch my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video, you'll see me explain that there's an inherent contradiction within National Socialism. I even called it "National Socialism’s Fundamental Ideological Flaw", at timestamp 01:24:54. Link https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 This is in addition to all the anti-Socialist explanations I've given across the channel. - "I would prefer if they dropped the socialism and kept everything else." Then they wouldn't be Third Positionist. - "No reason you can't have capitalism and a free market and be ultra nationalist at the same time..." If you have a free market, the country wouldn't be nationalist. Nationalism is Socialism. - "Socialism will just lead to poverty and squallier.." Which is exactly what happened with all the Third Positionist states.
    6
  4810. Two reasons. 1, because I was ill for four days that week. And 2, because I don't do weekly videos anymore. See this old video for the reasons why https://youtu.be/kVKToZyVj-k
    6
  4811. Orman's British Fascisti weren't actual fascists. She borrowed the name thinking it just meant "anti-socialists", and when actual fascists joined her movement, they were incredibly disappointed.
    6
  4812. Partly. Germany's Reichsmark was effectively the Axis European reserve currency and the other European currencies were being hyperinflated to extract value for Germany. The Hungarian government no doubt issued more notes for this reason. That said, they initiated the hyperinflation due to the collapse of the war effort, and this process was accelerated by the occupying Soviets. As far as covering the transition from the Third Reich to the DDR, that's something I'd like to cover in the future. I need to do more work on the Nazi economy first though, because without that understanding, I won't be able to fully explain the transition.
    6
  4813. FIRST! I never see the outside world so I don't know about the weather 😂
    6
  4814. It's certainly tempting
    6
  4815. Disagreeing on socialism does not mean I'm not neutral. All I care about is the argument that has the superior evidence and interpretation. Having heard both sides, the idea that Hitler was a socialist is clearly superior, since the traditional narrative of Hitler being a capitalist relies on distortions, falsehoods, misrepresentations, slander, and is crushed by the new emerging evidence, interpretations and arguments that I will provide.
    6
  4816.  @trex2621  "If I didn't want it, I could have multiple ways to avoid social and healthcare taxes." Please explain to me how I can pay 0% taxes in the UK because I don't want nationalized social welfare nor healthcare, yet the government taxes my income and hit me with VAT on everything I purchase. Then there's a million other taxes - TV tax, car tax, council (Soviet) tax... The list goes on. If you know a way where I could avoid all these taxes and just live without the government "welfare", please let me know.
    6
  4817. Well, I'm looking forward to your assessment once you've watched the video 👍
    6
  4818. This video is entirely set up to answer this question
    6
  4819. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. When I realized that socialism was based on splitting society into artificial social groups (class, race, gender, nationality etc) in order to exploit them and gain power for a small elite, I began to look deeper into the economics of the situation. That's when I discovered that socialism is based on force - the social group will take your property off you in order to make everything "fairer" for them. Except it's not fair for those who they have stolen off, and doesn't benefit the "us" group in the long run. Stealing from one person to give to another does not increase thr living standards for both people. That's a "zero-sum" mentality (if one person has more, then it's because he's taken it from me). When in reality, economics is not a zero-sum game. Living standards can rise for both people if production increases. The more goods there are, the cheaper the goods, which means there's more for everyone. The best way to increase productivity is through incentives - rewarding the individual, or those who invest in new production. And increasing the money supply doesn't increase productivity. Doubling everyone's income doesn't double the amount of goods being produced. Taking the state out of the economy and letting the individuals decide what to do with their own wealth is what grows an economy the fastest way. The evidence is clear if you're willing to look (which socialists will not). Every socialist state in history has been an economic shambles, and wasn't "fair" to the people that lived within those states. A free economy rewards you for working hard and punishes you for not working hard. That is fair to those willing to put the work in. But yes, this is all propaganda. Not backed by the historical reality or anything. I recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" for a simple and effective lesson in basic economics.
    6
  4820. He was stopped at Tobruk at the tail end of Rommel's first desert offensive, but it wasn't really much of a defeat, and his forces were still in the field. He was prevented from taking Tobruk, but the siege continued. Whereas Crusader is the first actual defeat of Rommel. He withdrew 7th December 1941 after being defeated during the middle of Crusader - which aimed to break the siege (which it did). So linking the two absolutely isn't odd. Morshead wasn't even in charge at Tobruk when it was relieved in December of 1941 - Scobie was.
    6
  4821. I voted to remain, but in hindsight I'm not sure Brexit was a stupid idea. In fact, I regret not voting to leave.
    6
  4822.  @AFGuidesHD  I would also say that every primary source is just as questionable as eye-witnesses. But just because sources are questionable, doesn't mean we should dismiss them. If we can prove via other sources that a lot of people were sent to the camps and then didn't end up going East, then the question becomes "where did they go?" And if the eye-witnesses say they were disposed of at the camps, then we can be pretty confident that this happened.
    6
  4823. YouTube is the one deleting your comments. It also deletes mine too. Or others are reporting your comments, which will get them removed too. Some idiot was reporting all my comments a while back and they were all getting wiped out. And I don't get time to visit the comments much (this is the first time I've looked at them today). The only ones I delete are the spam/scam ones, and I'm not around enough to spot them all the time either.
    6
  4824. Karl Marx was an anti-semite. The religion of socialism is built on a foundation of anti-semitism as I showed here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    6
  4825. It's a great video - I linked to it in the last video. For anyone curious, here is the link https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU
    6
  4826. Lol. Glad you're getting your sustenance
    6
  4827. Incorrect. I have plenty of books on WW2, and I understand that you cannot take people at face value. The German generals after the war lied. This is a common fact. Jonathan House goes into it in his video https://youtu.be/zinPbUZUHDE
    6
  4828. Incorrect. Lend Lease really didn't provide much until 1943. Before that, it was just a trickle. As stated in the video (proving you didn't watch it all) half of the Red Army remained in the Far East or internally and wasn't at the front, until late 1942. So, no I'm not stupid or ignorant. Watch the video before making assumptions.
    6
  4829. It doesn't matter what insults she gives you, don't stoop down to her level. Attack her argument, not her. And the same advice applies to her and everyone else. We can all throw insults at each other all day and night, but what does that actually achieve? Far better to say something like "as shown in the video, which you clearly didn't watch all the way through, 50% of the Red Army was deployed internally or in the Far East." Not only does this lead to a discussion, but will undermine her argument more than calling her names.
    6
  4830. Haha thanks for that
    6
  4831. I can't be sure with this one because few have commented from those groups. I suspect that those who have downvoted in the first hour are viewers who want "tank" related videos, not political or economics ones
    6
  4832. The only issue with Friedman is his monetary policy ideas. Try the book "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. Not only does it explain what causes recessions (the things Milton and Keynes called for), but is a great history lesson too
    6
  4833. I'll work on this, but in the meantime, see this video https://youtu.be/LdyHso5iSZI
    6
  4834. Would you rather I pander to the elites like Lord Baron Keynes?
    6
  4835. "They want to get rid of the state, so why is Zulu saying it's not about getting rid of the state?" Watch the video and I explain this. He does want to get rid of the "state"...
    6
  4836. It's funny because university killed my passion for history, and it was only by playing war games (e.g. Close Combat) on this channel (back when this was a gaming channel) and talking about history that I regained that passion. I'm really glad to hear you're regaining your passion from watching my videos, it shows I must be doing something right!
    6
  4837. Thanks for the review! Interesting about how people/popular history think the British Army was 'bad' during WW2, and I'm surprised how many people have a lot of hate for Monty. I sort of understand why, but I've always been suspicious of the hate. By 1944, the British Army was very effective in the field. A tad cautious perhaps, and as you pointed out not very flashy, but certainly not bad. Monty also sorted the army out prior to El Alamein. Before he did that, it definitely had its problems, but then again so did most armies facing the Germans in 1939-1942.
    6
  4838. Maybe it's not significant, but it's interesting nonetheless. It's also related to the Hiwi situation, so it's worth discussing. I'm of the opinion that we should look at both the macro and micro scales of a battle, and people were interested in Volodina when I mentioned her
    6
  4839. That's why: YouTube doesn't like links to external sites
    6
  4840. Maybe, however I still think it's worth answering criticism and not letting it go unanswered. As I've said, history lies in the heart of the debate! So pushback actually allows the debate to continue.
    6
  4841. I can understand why they would do that. People use their "hearts" rather than their heads, and the term "Capitalism" conjures up demons that don't actually exist. So many anti-capitalists in the comments criticize "capitalism" for things that capitalism doesn't do, simply because they hate it so much that they can't bring themselves to pick up books on it (e.g. Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson"). If they put their emotions away and actually looked into it properly, they'd soon change their tune. The trick is to try and get them to realize that they have to look into this stuff.
    6
  4842. Plus, when that note was issued it could buy more things than it could today if I swapped it at a bank.
    6
  4843. You were third, but I'll let you off
    6
  4844. People need to eat. When society collapses and the currency is worthless, food will still have value. Well, the same applies to gold, silver, other metals, wood, concrete, bricks, water, and every commodity under the sun. The point is that gold was traditionally used as money because it's the best commodity to do that (for numerous reasons I won't get into here). That's why, despite the collapse of society and the currency in Venezuela, Venezuelans have started turning to gold to purchase things https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-20/venezuelans-break-off-flakes-of-gold-to-pay-for-meals-haircuts
    6
  4845. "the hyperinflation was the result of Germany having to pay war reparations" But is this really the case?
    6
  4846. As I said to someone under the pinned comment, my viewers have made it clear that it's not worth my time to "respond" to Fredda. Here's some comments from my viewers: "Hey Tik the Channel Fredda made a slader piece against you, he takes you out of Context and goes with bad faith against you, to make you look like an idiot. He is a Socialist, and he got butthurt about you calling Nationalsocialist, well Socialist." - N. "A socialist youtuber named fredda with a pretty decent sized channel attempted a full debunk of you. I watched his videos before and lets just say he uses some of the most normie and fallacious arguments I have ever seen. For instance, the suicide rate in Greenland is higher than Denmark, so Fredda states that this must be caused by oppression of Greenlandic culture ignoring that the cities with the highest suicide rate in Greenland are the most Danish populated as well as the high acholism and low sunlight in Greenland. However, I think a response would probably be worthy if even just a community post." - O. "Hey man I just wanna say that there's this Marxist YouTuber Fredda who said he wants to debunk you, be has some braindead but his fan base will eat everything up. You should look forward to debuking him" - C. "The dude's a sham. He shouldn't waste his time on a hit piece when you can actually fact check fredda and see that he either doesn't know what he's talking about or is flat out lying about TIK. I made a low quality 3h video response to the video directly capturing my screen with obs that I never uploaded. so in a sense yes I can since I spent about 6~8 hours of my life going back and forth between fredda's video and TIK's videos and I know exactly when and where he's either misinformed or lying. At some point in his video he claims he's been following TIK for over 5 years but he can't realize TIK's already responded to some of the video's claims. I can promise you that fredda's video is not a good video. I'd like to immediately respond but I have to be present at work atm" - J. "On cue Fredda starts strawmanning the video 3 hours after it drops on X. Doesn't even address the thesis or majority of the video for that matter. Funniest part of that he is trying to use his ole "disagreeing with your own sources". Democraticmarxist is in agreement." - F. "I do agree that the video by Fredda was quite bad, considering he used arguments I believe you have responded adequately to. The only thing in his video I believe was even worth thinking about was your use of sources in a few of your videos.... Fredda does clearly have a communist, or at the very least a socialist bias in his content, and thus it's no surprise he'd be very antagonistic against a self-proclaimed "free market guy," such as yourself. Thank you for taking the time to respond." - P. "The Fredda meat riders on the comments being slaughtered right now lol" - Dj. "Amazon being public or worker-owned (in share) doesn’t necessarily means it is socialist. Fredda is either confused with the concept, or he was putting words into TIK’s mouth to defame him." - O. "Hey, TIK, are you gonna respond to Fredda's recent video about you? He says he's using sources, but he only cites 4 of them that are contemporary to WW2 and the nazis. He basically disagrees with you on definitions and that's it. I commented that, by his logic of the nazis being capitalist, the UK was still monarchist, because they still haven't completely abolished the monarchy. He also tried to best you at military logistics, apparently - because locomotives shipped to Algiers weigh over 3,500 tons and it took the british govt weeks for their big-data informed experts to do, during an operation that was already in execution... or something like that." - U. "While a response video would be great, I wouldn’t blame him for not doing so. Fredda is a total hack and fallacious arguments are a pestilence in his video." - B.
    6
  4847. The Killing Fields of Cambodia are Karl Marx's work.
    6
  4848. "From an Article in the Financial Times..." ...which is quoting from official Chinese state statistics which are all made up.
    6
  4849. I've been working on it, but I can't give a date yet
    6
  4850. So, 33.08+37.29 = 70.37% of the people voted for socialist parties.
    6
  4851. Yes, he has some great economics videos
    6
  4852. "@TIK you should at least read up more economics and then cover it. doesnt mean that you shouldnt cover it but understanding it better is good" I have read up on it, and will read more on it because I wnat to know more. But I disagree that I don't understand it already.
    6
  4853. Did we? When was there a generation where we had no taxes, no regulations, no central state banks, and no central law and judicial system? I don't remember reading about that generation in the history books
    6
  4854. Just skip school :D
    6
  4855. @ugowar, Yes I also fully agree. In fact, it's just a matter of time until this discussion does devolve into that sort of thing. It's a real shame because we get caught in such pointless discussions and end up going around in circles, when there's more important things to be getting on with. Just because the government of a country back then did something bad, doesn't mean that the people living today in those countries who had nothing to do with that era or the government are at fault with it. But group-thinkers blur that line. In their eyes, you're guilty by association.
    6
  4856. Yeah, I thought I'd slip that in now and then :)
    6
  4857. If you give this video a go, you'll see that most of the comments criticizing the video are undermined by the counterarguments made in the video itself. Most of the critics haven't actually watched the video. So I hope you do.
    6
  4858. The Great Depression (1929 onwards) and Great Recession (2008 to present) were both caused by the Central Statist Banks called for by Karl Marx in point 6 of the Communist Manifesto. This is why we need to end Marxist Capitalism and embrace a free market.
    6
  4859. That truly is the problem, and I'm struggling with it too. I can't even get them to watch this!
    6
  4860. Socialists don't know what real Socialism is lol https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    6
  4861. Instead of asking me a very basic question, why don't you seek out the answer online? It's not like this hasn't been addressed a million times before elsewhere. All this does is confirm that you haven't done a single shred of research on the topic, and haven't looked at both sides of the argument. A black market operates without a state. The black market is the free market, and the rest of the market is the enslaved market, since it operates within the tax, regulation and inflation system set up by the State. Neither tax, regulation nor inflation help the market - they all hurt it. So without the State the now free market would operate properly, and you would see a growth in living standards rather than a decline in living standards as we are right now thanks to all our rotten State control of the means of production. A mere glance at Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" or Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics" would explain this without a shadow of a doubt. Finally, private police and law forces (as opposed to monopoly State police and law forces) would enforce property rights. There is a market for security after all. And it's irrelevant to this discussion whether a stateless market can or cannot exist. Hitler's not a capitalist in any way shape or form.
    6
  4862. Thanks for your amazing feedback! Great counter argument! I've completely changed my mind now that you've accused me of being a schizophrenic. If only someone had said this before, I would have realized how wrong I was. Thank you Big Dee for enlightening the world and just being right all the time. Without you calling my statements sad, where would we be https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    6
  4863. Orwell was a Socialist most of his life, but seemed to have turned at the end. That's why he made the Party of Big Brother in 1984 "Ingsoc" (English Socialism). Animal Farm also shows how Socialism always turns into Fascism. Yet, even though it's simple enough for kids to understand it, many somehow miss the message.
    6
  4864. @SoloLucha de Clases, I explained that he didn't do that in the video, thanks. See the timestamps in the description
    6
  4865. Socialist doctrine is all about divide and conquer. Karl Marx was about eliminating the bourgeoisie (which he also saw as the Jews). He actually called for the elimination of the Jews/bourgeoisie, and that is part of Socialist doctrine. “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Marx,On the Jewish Question. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx is saying here that the people who trade goods for money (in other words, capitalists) are Jewish, and are on the side of “tyranny”. Yes, the reason he hates capitalists is because he thinks they’re Jewish, and the reason he hates Jews is because he thinks they are capitalists. And he says this again in his last book, Das Kapital: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital, P107. Karl Marx has said that the products of the Capitalist are "inwardly circumcised Jews". In other words, the offsprings of the Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews", because they Capitalists are Jewish. But why did Marx believe that? Well, Marx believed that Capitalists were the bourgeoisie (boroughs, townfolk) who practiced Usury (lending of loans and charging interest). Since Usury was banned by the Pope in the Dark Ages, and since Jews were not allowed to own land in Christian Europe, they were forced to live in towns and became "money changers". So, for Karl Marx, the bourgeoisie were the Jews. This was why the offspring of the bourgeoisie were "inwardly circumcised Jews". And what did Karl Marx call for? Oh yes, that's right - REAL Socialism: “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx was calling for the removal of the Jews/Capitalists from Society. This will allow him to usher in Socialism. ALL SOCIALISM IS ANTI-SEMITISM. That is why, when I realized that Hitler was a Socialist, I realized the true nature of Socialism and what it was really calling for.
    6
  4866. Which is why the propaganda needs to be challenged. Hitler is a (non-Marxist) Socialist, and to say he isn't is a massive distortion of history.
    6
  4867. As I show in the video, Hitler only hated Marxism/Communism because he believed it was run by Jews
    6
  4868. Yes, exactly! They've done the same with this. Read their comments - they've not watched the video, or even the title of it, and are spouting the same old arguments I've debunked in the video. Their only comeback now is "it's not real Socialism because TIK doesn't know what Socialism is even though we can't define it". It's insanity on a collective level
    6
  4869. I'm VERY surprised you didn't hear this. But yes, that's why they think all people who aren't on the Left are racists and fascists
    6
  4870. "WRONG!!!! You cannot replace the word "collective" with the word "state"." LISTEN to what I said in the video. I said: if you disagree with the definitions, watch my Public vs Private video and it will explain why this is the case. Link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    6
  4871. There's timestamps in the description. Can't split it up because my enemies will only watch the first one and say I didn't provide enough evidence therefore I'm wrong. By putting it all in one video, it forces them to watch it all, which then forces them to address every point (which they can't).
    6
  4872. Minimum wage hurts the poor and benefits the corporations, which is why I'm against it. For more information, see Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell.
    6
  4873. Maybe it's not factually incorrect. For example, Hitler abolished private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, nationalized the unions and the industries, and took over the economy with wage controls, price controls, regulations and a host of other measures, creating a Zwangswirtschaft (compulsory economy) that was synchronized with the state (Gleichschaltung). If you had bothered to watch the FIVE hour video (not four hour, as you falsely stated) you would have known these facts and more. But, of course, you already know everything, and a video with 107 sources and 350 direct references isn't going to persuade you otherwise.
    6
  4874. Thanks Rusty! But it's clear that OP hasn't watched the video (not even an hour of it), just like many of the other critics...
    6
  4875. I explained this in yesterday's video - I know more about politics and economics than I do military history.
    6
  4876. Well done for not watching the video but falsely assuming that I must be wrong. 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and more, all says otherwise.
    6
  4877. This isn't justifying anything - this is both a response to their counterarguments and presenting a full argument in favour of the National Socialism is Socialism argument. History lies in the heart of the debate. This is the debate
    6
  4878. If you read the description, you'll find timestamps and a PDF of the script. I do recommend you watch the video though because I colour-coded the words in the quotes to make what I was saying, and I didn't have time to do that with the PDF version. I also used 107 sources and 350 direct references. So no, you're being dishonest by suggesting that I'm not taking this seriously.
    6
  4879. It's not capitalism though. We don't have capitalism anywhere in the world right now, and I can prove it. I know the linked video seems a bit random, but if you watch the first 11 minutes, you'll see exactly why we don't have capitalism https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    6
  4880. And workers owning the means of production would be classed as a state. Yes it would, I've been over this, and told you in this video that if you don't agree to watch the Public vs Private video, which will explain to you in simple terms why that is the case. Here's the link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    6
  4881. That's why I did it. My critics don't have much of an argument now
    6
  4882. I have. They know they're socialists. It's only the Marxists and democratic socialists (and people who have bought into their world view) who deny that National Socialism was 'real' Socialism.
    6
  4883. Do you have this supposed quote where Hitler himself said that his ideology was a derivative of Fascism? Only because he later made it very clear that National Socialism wasn't Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    6
  4884.  @melisadrucker719  That might explain why it's lingering! And why it got worse after it started to feel like it was getting better
    6
  4885.  @melisadrucker719  It's your lucky day! If I remember correctly, I think I answered why I got interested in WW2 and history in general in this video https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    6
  4886. Feel free to add them! A few people have contributed to my other videos. And if you make a start, others can finish it off
    6
  4887. Yes, it does. Cheers!
    6
  4888. LDN yes, they swore, threw their dollies out the pram, kicked and cried out for Derrida, until they made a complete mockery of reasonable discourse. This wasn't about disagreeing - I had many nice pleasant discussions with people in that video who disagreed with me, and they were great. As tyskbulle has just said, there are going to be times were people disagree with what I say - and that's fine! But in the National Socialism was Socialism videos, this was all about Marxist ideology (to them). And the lesson is that, on the internet at least, freedom of speech is being abused. If you're like me, and want a reasonable discussion and debate over alternative view points with evidence etc, you should be concerned, because ultimately they wanted to shut that down. And, in my opinion, they succeeded in doing so on those two videos.
    6
  4889. Yes, which is why I gave a subtle hint.
    6
  4890. steenkigerrider - If the Soviet Union had attacked in the July of 1941, it would have been suicidal. This video paints a bad picture of the Soviet artillery situation. The Red Army were outnumbered for the first months of the war (at any one moment in time - my "Numbers say it All" video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds ). Their tank forces were inadequate https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8. And I've already shown that Viktor Suvorov was willing to distort evidence to make it fit his narrative https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA In fact, Glantz wrote his book Stumbling Colossus in response to this idea that the Soviet Union was going to attack in 1941. Plus, you have to see things from the German side. Hitler speaks of invading the Soviet Union in Mein Kampf, written in 1924. In fact, this was central to his entire philosophy. And I've shown that Germany had to invade the Soviet Union in 1941, or run out of oil https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg The evidence completely destroys the idea that Germany's Barbarossa was a preemptive strike.
    6
  4891. I believe you were second!
    6
  4892. Okay, fair enough. I'll give it a watch when I get a chance
    6
  4893. Lol that's actually an awesome title. I may borrow that for the future ;) glad to have you subscribed and open minded, welshy. Cheers!
    6
  4894. I think you'll enjoy this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    6
  4895. ;)
    6
  4896. Hahaha that's not good!
    6
  4897. hahaha
    6
  4898. Me too :)
    6
  4899. National Socialism is Socialism, as my more updated video with 107 sources, 350 direct in-video references, numerous quotes and notes shows https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And National Socialism and Fascism are two separate ideologies, as this video explains (again, in a lot of detail) https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    6
  4900. I'm not alt right, and I'm not lying on the part of the Nazis. I'm explaining who they are. Closing your ears to the facts, is not a healthy attitude to have.
    6
  4901. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what National Socialism was. How is that "so wrong"?
    6
  4902. "@TIK Where did I say that he was for state intervention? Please quote" Ok - "And speaking about Marx: no he does not say that socialism is when the state controls production. He says actually very little about socialism, because he is like 95% of the time busy analyzing capital. But when he does his definition of socialism is that workers control the means of production in a collective way or that the means of production are socialized." There you go. You're saying that Marx does not say that socialism is when the state controls production, but then that he says that socialism is the workers ("collective", social, public, state) control of the means of production. Marxism is just the worker's state's ownership of the means of production, which is why it's classed as a socialism. "All I did was to point out that Marx has simply a different understanding of the terms than you think and I gave a source for it." You pointed out that he has the same definition of socialism, but he adds on the "worker" to his socialism. This is why Marxism is class-socialism. Hitler had racial-socialism, Mussolini had nationalist-socialism (Fascism - you could be an Italian Jew and that's fine for Mussolini until 1938 when Hitler pressured Mussolini to introduce racial laws), or even gender-socialism or "feminist socialism". All socialisms require the state to bring about their paradises. None of this is capitalism (non-state). "And you can stop repeating the definitions you are basing your argument on, I got them." I genuinely don't think you have, otherwise you wouldn't be telling me that Marx wasn't a socialist, which is basically what you're arguing in your previous message. A government is simply a public body of people who govern a state. When the workers rise up to form a collective, they become the government. And when we have a collective-social-group state, we call this socialism. "Since you read Mein Kampf without becoming a Nazi you definetly will be able to read Capital without becoming a stalinist ( I at least succeeded)." You're assuming I haven't had the misfortune of reading Volume 1 of Das Kapital (the only one that Marx actually wrote, since the next two were written by Engels and the fourth was written by Bernstein, who buried Engels and then announced that Marx was wrong and joined the SPD). Oh yes, I have done my research. "Apart from that: Why do you have to start labeling me? Why do you attack me that I twist my ideology? Can we please keep this civilized?" This is civilized. However, when you redefine terms to try and distort history, and don't fully understand what you're saying, I can absolutely point out where your logic is twisted to suit your ideology. That's not an attack on you, that's an attack on your ideology - an ideology that rejects the scientific method, rejects the rights of individuals (free speech, free thinking) in favour of the collective, rejects the idea of private property, promotes violence in order to gain its goals (seizing the means of production, collectivisation, mass exectutions and murder of social groups that are its enemies - bourgeoisie, Jews, Kulaks), promotes inequality, and (for me, the biggest issue) willingly distorts history to favour its agenda. So yes, I will attack your ideology in the context of a civilized debate on the topic, and I will point out where it is fundamentally wrong. I'm not calling you names or anything - I'm saying your definition of socialism is incorrect, and that definition was twisted post-1956 (after the Hungarian Revolution) in order to squirm away from the reality of what socialism is, in order for people to be tricked into believing that socialism works and will cure all evils. It is a trick, a newthink tactic, and a distortion of history, and it's not happening here.
    6
  4903. What?
    6
  4904. -He nationalised the unions -He nationalised the industries -He didn't get donations from the rich (except Fritz Thyssen, a fact all mainstream historians have accepted since the 1980s when Turner proved this to be the case) -Hated communists because communists hated socialists. AH is definitely a socialist https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w (a far more update video, fully-referenced with hundreds of sources)
    6
  4905. We can't study WW2 without touching upon the politics. You cannot understand Nazi atrocities in the East if you don't understand what National Socialism actually was. This video is correct. The National Socialists were socialist, which explains why they intervened in both the economy and society to transform that into a Aryan utopia. Failing to understand this principle means a failure to understand WW2 and the horrors inflicted on millions of innocent people.
    6
  4906. I had my doubts about the reparations being so harsh that they caused them to print currency, which then led to the hyperinflation, because I knew they couldn't pay external debts with domestic currency, only gold and other commodities. But I didn't doubt the rest of the narrative until I started doing reading for this series, and realized that I should have read Mises' "Omnipotent Government" years ago. It would have saved me a lot of time and effort!
    6
  4907. I look forward to your verdict when you watch the video ☺️
    6
  4908. Great! I recommend "Red Famine" or "Blood Lands". Avoid Tottle (if you can even find his denialist book any more).
    6
  4909. I'm glad you think so Agrippa. Racism is becoming a problem, as you can see.
    6
  4910. You know, that's a better argument than what they produce
    6
  4911. I will.
    6
  4912. Post-Crusader I've been doing bits of research on Stalingrad. It will come at some point, don't worry.
    6
  4913. Considering you won't be seeing me in the Courland videos, yes :D
    6
  4914. I'm rubbish at collaborating. Working 70 hours a week doesn't allow much time for talking to living human beings
    6
  4915. You forgot "May" ;)
    6
  4916. You have a very pro-Soviet stance there John. Considering that the Soviet Socialists murdered millions of their own people throughout the 20th Century, I can understand why the Finns would want independence, and would want to keep it. The Soviets thought they had the 'right' to conquer people who didn't want to be part of their totalitarian ideological suicide.
    6
  4917. @1207rorupar - "I tried asking him exactly why was Hitler not a socialist, but he avoided the question time and time again." Yes, a lot of people do that. "The most clear answer he gave on the topic was the racial supremacy part of Nazism," Because murdering people of a different class is socialism, but murdering people of a different race is not socialism...? Yeah, that's not a valid argument. Socialism is state-control. A state can murder a class or a race and still be socialist. "he just said that "no serious academic would date question the fact that Nazism is a far right ideology", without ever stating WHY." This is a "don't question the ideology I clearly have and have built my life around" response. "given his apologetic attitude towards the Soviet Union I think he may be denying the socialists elements of Nazi Germany and the USSR more out of some kind of bias in favor of left-wing ideologies than anything else." I agree with your assessment. However, that doesn't mean he can't realize his mistake. But I wouldn't push it because you can only get people to see if they're willing to open their eyes. "He just dismissed my points by saying that I should stop watching Jordan Peterson videos" Sounds like he's one of the Marxist trolls who comment on my videos. They've clearly never watched any of Peterson's videos, and this is definite proof that this 'teacher' of yours is reading Far-Left literature or soaking in Far-Left news outlets (which are the majority out there). Honestly, as much as it sucks, your best bet is not to push it. If you go too far, this guy may use and abuse his position of authority and get you in trouble. It's happened before... As I said, I've been working on an in-depth video about the definitions and I hope to clarify once and for all the terms. Marxists will probably deny it still, but at least it'll go some way towards showing them the error of their ways.
    6
  4918. People don't watch my non-tank videos, so it's not worth making a video on it. I'm only continuing with this series because I've started it and don't want to leave it unfinished. Also, I want to know the history of this period too, and how to protect myself during extreme economic circumstances.
    6
  4919. Except the National Socialists didn't privatise the economy, they nationalised the economy under the policy of Gleichschaltung. They also nationalised the unions into the DAF. Please watch my videos on the topic instead of pushing Communist propaganda.
    6
  4920. This particular video was over 25 hours of editing the actual video-part itself, although I already had all the units made, the effects ready, the pictures gathered, music created etc. Including audio and render + upload and prep (subtitles, thumbnail etc), we're talking 40 hours at least. Surprisingly, this video was actually quicker to edit than the previous Crusader videos, or even normal TIKhistory videos. This is partly because I had all the unit and map images ready in advance, plus those other videos required more fancy-edit-intensive animations (surprisingly). This is why I was 2 days ahead this week, and I was going to use that time to update Patreon and get to work on future videos... then my computer broke :( I still worked on future videos though in the evenings after editing... but not saying what I'm working on haha. If you have all the images prepared and ready to go, half the battle is done. Audio can take a while, depending on the script and whatnot. I really could do with an editor, since it takes up a ton of time which could be spent doing more research etc...
    6
  4921. It's sad, but you're probably right
    6
  4922. Christmas in July!
    6
  4923. This is why social group-think websites like Reddit, Wikipedia, and even YouTube, are problematic for truth, history and reasonable discourse. The socialization of opinion doesn't work. Individuals need to be able to question things without getting insulted, slandered and banned. Universities used to provide a place you could go to discuss things, but apparently that's not the case any more.
    6
  4924. "Battlestorm should be weekly" It's currently impossible to make it weekly. I struggle with by-weekly when the scripts are ready, which is why I'm doing it in seasons of 3 episodes in order to give me time to get scripts done in the gaps and not burn out. "You shouldn't stall out projects like that its like flaking on appts and pisses people off. nobody likes to wait" I'm currently training my new part-time editor on how to edit them, in the hopes that she can speed up the process a little in future. Ideally, I'd like to make Battlestorm Stalingrad bi-weekly in the future with no breaks between seasons. But the only way to achieve that is to train the editor and give her more hours, which I can't do financially at the moment. Therefore, if you're not already, considering becoming a Patron and make this possible.
    6
  4925. True! One guy on Reddit commented something like "Fastest reporting I've ever done". Abysmal and intellectually dishonest behaviour. Shutting down the debate because you can't win it isn't what civilised people do. Yet, that's exactly the tactics they choose :(
    6
  4926. @David S Cameron - context doesn't matter. I know YouTube says it does, but actions speak louder than words.
    6
  4927. The others have explained it well. As a proud US citizen, you must understand that your government spends itself silly, and the Federal Reserve is robbing you blind through the invisible power of inflation. And they're doing it without you even understanding what's happening https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU Plus, it isn't just your Central Bank that's doing it - the Bank of England and every Central Bank is doing it too
    6
  4928. You like the National Socialist Health Service? And Obama Care is expensive https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    6
  4929. 1. The 1.4 to 1.9 figure for the number of German women R'd includes the crimes of the Western Allies as well as the Soviets. 2. Yes, the Americans committed crimes and I've hinted at some of these in the past. But the question asked by my Patreon didn't ask about the West so I didn't talk about them. That's not because I wouldn't, just that this video was focused on the East.
    6
  4930. The PDF goes into things that I couldn't do, just so you're warned.
    6
  4931. "Axis soldier's would face trial of course for committing rape." Not in practice as this next quote makes clear - "Despite the Rassenschande laws, Germans also had sex with Jewish women. Sex with Jews, even in brothels, was not allowed for any German military members. Seidler writes that Wehrmacht members who knew the person with whom they were sexual was Jewish faced “serious consequences.” SS officers, police officers, and police officials with officers’ rank faced the death sentence. Still, a man had to know that the woman was Jewish to be punished. Therefore, if someone claimed he was unaware of the woman’s Jewishness – he was not punished. In his research, Seidler found that this is what happened for most offenses. If a man was caught he simply had to say he did not realize the “whore” was Jewish, since it was not always obvious by outward appearance." - Gertjejanssen, "Victims, Heroes, Survivors," P67. But otherwise I agree with the rest of your comment.
    6
  4932. "Austria was not annex it was a peacuful anchluss. People of Austira worked for Anchluss from 1921." So you're saying that Hitler didn't annex Austria? An "annexation" doesn't necessarily require violence (although there was violence during the Anschluss, against the Jews and other political enemies). - "Another video full with half truts and 95% propaganda from the allies history of what happend before and after WW2" Oh I see, and the Nazi narrative is 100% perfectly truthful is it, even though I've pointed out numerous errors with it? Wake up from your daydream.
    6
  4933.  @Black-js5ke  I'm not sure about the Iranian thing if I'm honest, so I can't answer that today. But I can answer the "HOC" question. So they deny it for a few reasons - 1. They are postmodernists, and they can just ignore contradictions in their narrative so long as it benefits them political. Politics is primary, and they're denying it for political reasons. It's the same reason other socialists deny that socialism doesn't work, even when all the evidence available points to the fact that socialism doesn't work. They deny that socialism doesn't work because a socialist would never get elected if they admitted that it doesn't work. Only by denying it can they get into a position of power. 2. Because the majority of the historians are socialists, or have bought into the socialist world view, most of them deny Hitler's Socialism. Because of this, the Nazis know there's a gaping hole in their narrative. Anyone who accepts that National Socialism was real Socialism cannot also deny the H without undermining the core principles of National Socialism. So, since the Nazis understand their own ideology better than most historians do, they've spotted this error in the historical narrative, and are using it to exploit them. I outlined this in previous videos, such as this one - https://youtu.be/go2OFpO8fyo 3. They know it will annoy their enemies if they deny it. And there's other reasons besides this, but bottom line: it's purely a political move.
    6
  4934.  @Talmurid  "Kowtow to the lowest commom denominator and present them with their comfortable echo chambers, and you will succeed in that respect." Are you suggesting that this is an echo chamber? If so, you're severely mistaken.
    6
  4935. You've completely misunderstood what I was saying. I know why Gavin took Groesbeek, that's not the issue at all! As I said in the video, he has the forces to take both objectives. And his orders were to take both Groesbeek and the bridges. I haven't said he's disobeying his orders - only that he's disobeying his orders by not taking both objectives. His orders were to take Groesbeek and the Nijmegen bridge, so why did he deprioritize the Nijmegen bridge for the Groesbeek Heights? The bridges are more important. Even if the orders said that Groesbeek was more important, that still doesn't explain why Gavin didn't send one battalion to Nijmegen bridge.
    6
  4936. It's either that, or aliens
    6
  4937. Hahaha sure!
    6
  4938. Yes, but the problem is, the Germans were on their last legs before winter arrived.
    6
  4939. Hitler wasn't funded INTO power by the capitalists. What happened AFTER Hitler got into power was a different story. Once the businesses were NATIONALISED under the policy of Gleichschaltuung (synchronisation, see https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY ) then the businesses were forced to work with the state. This is called "the socialisation of the means of production", which is socialism.
    6
  4940. That makes perfect sense to me. These videos aren't exactly ideal escapism for what you're going through... I wish you luck
    6
  4941. I've done videos on those topics but people aren't as interested in them.
    6
  4942. "@TIK Yes and socialist inspired government spending was caused by the abject poverty that many people were reduced to by rampant capitalism." Oh, I see. So there was no poverty before the 1800s? My mistake.
    6
  4943. Thank you, and yes I had a sore throat when I recorded some of the audio for this
    6
  4944. Yes you are! Congratulations!
    6
  4945. Also, they're still doing it. I know they were still doing it in August 2022...
    6
  4946. You were second on my end, but good effort!
    6
  4947. It's not your place to say who should or should not exist. The lives of other people are not your concern, only your own.
    6
  4948. "But if the state isn't owned by Proletariat, like I said, is it really socialist?" Yes, because Marxist Socialism (class socialism) isn't the only version of socialism. In fact, Marx himself admits this in the Communist Manifesto when he says that there were other socialists (e.g. Christian socialists) before his socialism. I'm saying that Hitler and the National Socialists were Race Socialists rather than Class Socialists (Marxists). Both National Socialists and Marxists are Socialists, even if they're not the same. - "If the King controlled the state, thereby the means of production, not the proletariat, is it socialist?" The state is NOT the means of production. "Means of production" is just another term for the "private sector". If the king controlled the State AND the means of production (so if he had his bureaucrats in charge of every business and industry, like Hitler did) then that would be classed as socialism because that is the historic definition of socialism. - "also there is no timestamp on the other video, or i am just stupid?" I meant timestamps in this video that we're on now. The other video is much shorter and doesn't need timestamps.
    6
  4949. As Farrell and the other historians point out, Fascist Italy, and Mussolini specifically, tried to save Jews from the Germans. That's why it was only after the downfall of Mussolini that Italian Jews (e.g. those in Rome) were shipped to the camps. It's almost like I explained this and backed it up by references in the video that you didn't bother to watch. Also, considering that Wikipedia gets the start date for the battle of Stalingrad wrong, as well as numerous parts of the battle, I don't think it's a trustworthy source. In fact, historians will tell you just that. The first thing we were taught in university was don't use Wikipedia. This is why I normally only use it to criticise it, or for pictures, or if sources are in foreign languages I can't read or something similar. It's should only be used as a last resort because the history books themselves are vastly superior, which is why I reply upon them and back up what I'm saying with in-video references.
    6
  4950. I've been working my way through it slowly, so yes I will at some point
    6
  4951. The reason why is because this was actually a response video to a bunch of Leftists who cried fowl and made wild accusations and statements that turn out to be completed wrong. It also turns out that by explaining capitalism (how the market works) properly, you not only defeat the Marxist denialism but also National Socialist denialism too, since they believe that capitalism is failing. Incidentally, capitalism isn't an ideology. Capitalism is just allowing the economy to actually function without the shackles of state bureaucrats and politicians holding it down and killing it. Capitalism is the absence of politics in the market - the opposite of ideology. You're complaining that rich people can bribe government officials. Exactly. The issue isn't rich people, it's government officials. And about democracy, you may want to watch this https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    6
  4952. "Notice that e.g. a 1000 page history book does not take 700 pages to redefine common terms in a bizarre way in order to spend the next 300 pages making a political point and complaining about how you are being suppressed by academics.." That's not what this video does. If you look at the timestamps in the description, I only defined socialism and capitalism in the 2nd Section (about 20 minutes). Bearing in mind that this video was a response to Marxists (including the Finnish Bolshevik), I then proceeded to shatter the Marxist and Nazi view of how value is created in Section 3, and then showed how the Nazis borrowed from the Marxist economic and ideological theories in Section 4, before proceeding to explain the National Socialist Economic Ideology in Section 5, and then provide numerous concrete examples of their socialism in Section 6 (almost 2 hours worth of evidence). Section 7 takes on the numerous other racist talking points (Ernst Röhm, North Korea, who's going to build the roads), before the final conclusion. So out of all of this, instead of most of the video just being a "refining" of "common terms", and then the rest of it being "making a political point", only 10% of the video is on the definitions, and the rest of it directly addresses EVERY Marxist argument that's been made. But again, you haven't watched the video, so you wouldn't know this.
    6
  4953. I answered most of these in the video. For example, the Reichstag Fire Decree abolished private property rights. You also say that the Nazis marched saying "death to Marxism", but this is correct because the National Socialists were Socialist, not Marxist. The others don't make sense within the context. Also, a cursory glance at the description would have revealed the timestamps. But I guess that's too much to ask for people who believe they know it all.
    6
  4954. In this video (see timestamps) I reveal National Socialism's fundamental ideological flaw; a flaw so bad it completely renders the core concepts of Nazism as impossible, thereby destroying the ideology. If I was supposedly "a cog" for the "radical right", why would I do that?
    6
  4955. 107 sources, 350 direct references, lots of quotes. And here's something you may find interesting - Trade Unions are a group of people/workers. A union is a group of people, or a bundle of people... like a bundle or sticks. And a bundle of sticks is a Fasci, which is why Italian trade unions were called Fasci prior to Mussolini even entering the picture. Fascism is trade unionism (syndicalism, which is Marxist). But instead of the syndicate state, they wanted a Corporate state. They wanted trade unions which "embodied" the nation. Body, corpse, Corporation. That's where the word comes from. Fascists are Socialists. And Social Justice Warriors, clad in Black Shirts, running around screaming that everyone else but them are Fascists, are doing it for one reason and one reason only - they are what they claim not to be.
    6
  4956. https://youtu.be/pjKH9E_IvBw And a video by the Mises Institute debunking that article 👍
    6
  4957. Only those that have total control are Socialist. However, those AIMING to implement total control would be classed as Socialist too, like Hitler's Third Reich.
    6
  4958. Ignorance is your strength https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    6
  4959. "How can you have a socialist or communist country without workers controlling the means of productions (corporations still ran things in Nazis Germany)?" 1. "Worker control" is Marxist Socialism only. The "workers" (plural) being in control is also "collective" control - which means that the PUBLIC is in control. The PUBLIC SECTOR is the State. 2. Corporations ran the show in the Soviet Union too. What do you think "Soviets" were? The word "council" in Russian is "Soviet". The worker's "councils" are corporations, which is why the "Local Councils" here in the UK are nicknamed "the corpy" because a "corporation" is just another name for a "syndicate", which is socialist in nature. - "How can the workers control or even have a say within their government without some sort of Liberal voting system in place?" Because it's a trick. Karl Marx wrote that Socialism/Communism was totalitarian. But since that wasn't popular, he later changed tactics and declared that Socialism was democratic. This was a lie. Yet, people believed him. That's why there was a split in the Socialist Parties during the Second World War. In Germany there was a three-way split between the Majority Socialists (pro-Democracy), the Spartacists/Communists (pro-totalitarianism), and the Independent Socialists (who knew that Socialism was totalitarian, but also understood that democracy was popular, and so sat in the middle). The point is that workers cannot have a say within their government, because the government is fundamentally totalitarian in nature. The workers have been tricked to believe that it will somehow be "democratic", without realizing that it simply cannot be. - "A government can call itself anything it wants but if it completely contradicts those said ideas, it ain't said government (same for USSR, Red China and even in the US "Democracy"." Democracy = "people power". Except, the people are the public, and the public is the State. So democracy is "State power". Again, you've been tricked.
    6
  4960. Which is interesting because Fascism and National Socialism are two separate ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Also, "peer review" is also known as "censorship". It's a central planner method to prevent non-approved ideas getting published. Unfortunately, the central planners can't stop me publishing here (or independently), so they can either address the argument or ignore it. So far, they've ignored it. But I welcome an honest review by a critical historian (the couple that I know have watched this have largely agreed with me).
    6
  4961. It's irrelevant anyway since the Subjective Theory of Value is superior to the Labour Theory of Value. You know this to be the case because YouTube videos like this where I used 107 sources, 350 direct references, and put 18 months worth of Labour into creating it, can be dismissed with an offhand comment. The Labour Theory of Value cannot explain such a phenomenon, but the Subjective Theory of Value can.
    6
  4962. When you realise that all the "corporate oligarchies" in the West are funded by the same central banks that Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto, you'll realise that the Socialist solution to so-called "Capitalism", is more so-called "Capitalism".
    6
  4963. "I've never seen a History Channel call out Historical figures and historians before TIK." Now that you say that, you're probably right. I may be one of the first to bring the historical debate into video form. Also, I don't necessarily think historians "lie" (some might, but most just make mistakes, like I do), but historical figures definitely do lie (and also make mistakes, or are biased etc, but they definitely lie too)
    6
  4964. Interestingly, this was one of the few things that my college education got right - that conservativism is the old Left wing, and that the "liberals" swapped from the Right the Left. When I said it in the original video, I was shocked by how many people didn't know this. They accused me of "not knowing politics and economics" and smeared and slandered me, giving everyone a false impression of me. Well, I then went back to double check to make sure what I was taught was correct, and it was. It turns out that the people who accuse me of "not understanding" are themselves the ignorant ones
    6
  4965. I'm working on it. But it takes time
    6
  4966. Socialism explains why the harvest was ~60 lower than pre-war levels
    6
  4967. The Germans also had little tanks at this time. And the size of the actual tanks has nothing to do with it. It's about the number of tanks on the field, not the size of them.
    6
  4968. Please do unsubscribe. Especially if you can't read or quote correctly.
    6
  4969. It's difficult because HOI doesn't have a proper economy. In theory, there should be an inflation feature, much like there was in EU2, where after a while the currency you're using becomes worthless and the economy starts to implode. So it may have a good effect in the beginning (maybe), but then results in long-term stagnation and difficulty.
    6
  4970. I know that Rageaholic had heard of the video, but I didn't know the Lotus Eaters had looked into it too. What have they said about it?
    6
  4971. Yes, they can't actually address the points, so they're ignoring me and slandering me. The evidence is overwhelming.
    6
  4972. I've seen Three Arrow's take on this. It's the other way round - I've countered his arguments.
    6
  4973. The Left want to distance themselves from Hitler's Socialism and will do all the mental gymnastics conceivable to deny the evidence.
    6
  4974. Chris, I agree with the sentiment, but I should also say I still think it's better to try and convince them that they're making a mistake before the bullets start flying and they starve millions of people again.
    6
  4975. Over 100 sources = "ignorant" 🤦🏻‍♂️
    6
  4976. Thanks for the recommendation! Hadn't heard of that book before
    6
  4977. They think capitalism is fascist, therefore anyone who's into free market economics must also be fascist. That's their logic. Obviously, it makes absolutely zero sense, and is also why this debate is important.
    6
  4978. Lenin and Stalin also killed socialists and communists. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Communist. Hitler banned every party, because they're all opposition parties. Like every socialist ever, he wanted total power.
    6
  4979. Of course he hasn't watched it 😂
    6
  4980. I do love how the socialists haven't even read Karl Marx, yet proceed to try and claim that we don't know what we're talking about
    6
  4981. I didn't mention it because it's irrelevant to this discussion, although is relevant to a discussion on Hess. Not sure why you think the Nazis having ties to the Playdohs would be "annoying" to me.
    6
  4982. Karl Marx wasn't Jewish. He never practiced Judaism. That's why his entire doctrine was fundamentally Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    6
  4983. They had central planning boards that centrally distribute goods to get around the "profit motive". The stock market was state managed and then shut down.
    6
  4984. Can you explain where I misquoted?
    6
  4985. Race is a social group. Centrally planning racism (like the Nazis did) is their socialism. If you deny the socialism, you deny their policy to centrally plan the removal of the Jews from society and the economy. Yes, they hated them because the National Socialists were racist. Fine. But the idea of centrally planning their removal is because the National Socialists were socialist. If you deny the socialism, you deny their desire to centrally plan the economy and society, and thus also the removal of the Jews from said economy and society. Therefore, denying the socialism is denying the Holocaust. I literally don't know how to make this more clear.
    6
  4986. I'm afraid you were third
    6
  4987. So the Jews didn't have their private property stolen from them prior to their destruction? Why didn't they sue the state for violating their private property rights? They were dragged out of their private homes and had their private businesses closed down - all in the name of (German) Socialism. Private property had been abolished, and the National Socialists believed that they were entitled to steal off the "Bourgeoisie" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg If you do not learn from history it will repeat itself, and yet you're unwilling to learn the actual lesson from this era - that the reason the Holocaust happened was because of Hitler's Socialism.
    6
  4988. Except, as explained in more depth in this recent video, the selling of shares is irrelevant if the National Socialist Party remained in absolute control of the firms. Their guys were in the businesses running the show, so the selling of shares is not an indication of "privatisation" in a non-capitalist economy https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=g6KsbG5eJ0OKGLhW
    6
  4989. Everyone is an individual. Just because individuals exist doesn't mean every it's always capitalism. By your logic, socialism is impossible because individuals exist.
    6
  4990. Oh no, I'm sorry for following the evidence and exposing false historical narratives rather than just believing THE NARRATIVE that you want me to believe, oh no...
    6
  4991. Glad you enjoyed it Jose!
    6
  4992. Yeah, this was an important stepping stone towards Stalingrad. Glad I took the time to do it. Many lessons were learnt that will make Stalingrad that much better
    6
  4993. Isn't he? That's what I was told
    6
  4994. @Clone Warrior Also, thank you!
    6
  4995. @Clone Warrior For some reason your comments were ending up in the 'review' folder. I've accepted them and they should now appear. I'll start working on a video about this. My only concern with this source is that it was written after Market Garden, not before... Otherwise, it's great. It does raise several questions though - like why Gavin would hide this fact later? Or why this wasn't revealed later? And why Browning made the decision (relating to the 1,000 tanks in the Reichswald)? I'm going to have to think about all this and maybe dig a bit deeper on the subject of the 1,000 tanks
    6
  4996. Yeah, YouTube views lag again. They sorted it for a while but then something changed. Glad you're enjoying the videos!
    6
  4997. This is not true - both of these groups leave university as socialists. I have a degree in history, and we were all indoctrinated. And everyone is being taught Keynesian economics (which is 'Socialism-Lite'); they're not even teaching them actual economics!
    6
  4998. Because honesty and truth are dangerous to all versions of socialism.
    6
  4999. You should comment more often! I'm surprised by how many people are saying that this is one of my best videos. Of course, I have that faction which hates it. In regards to your degree and job, it sounds like you know what real money is. Liberty will prevail, but we might have to go through a rough patch to get there. Cheers!
    6
  5000. "@TIK Socialism is a society based on meeting the needs of people and planet, not maximising the profits of the rich." No it's not. As I explained in the video, it's the socialization (public sector, state) control of the means of production (economy). Nothing says the public sector can't make a profit. The reality is it DOESN'T make a profit because it's badly run by people who have no idea what the real world is. Instead, they steal wealth off of those who work and redistribute them to those who don't, and say that they are for the workers. It's a joke. "A socialist society would be one where items are produced because they are needed, rather than because they are profitable." I also explained this in the video. Profit indicates to the businessman what is needed. You can't sell something that isn't in demand. Socialism is a slave-barter society. It's a way to destroy a functioning economy and regress back into a two tier society - the workers as serfs, and the lords in their castles overseeing and ruling over us. "It would mean an end to a system where millions of people struggle to make ends meet while the rich sit on piles on money." The only way to make money is to produce something that other people want and trade that product for money. If they rich have all the money, then the millions of people have all their stuff.
    6
  5001. By 1943 you had had the Battle of Britain, Barborossa, Blau 1942 (stretching Luftwaffe to breaking point), Stalingrad and Tunisia - all disasters for the Luftwaffe. Plus the shortage of fuel.
    6
  5002. All my videos automatically get put to limited monetization upon upload. The Fascist Corporation also decided to manually confirm limited monetization on my all-in-one Courland video (and numerous others). Some topics are fine, but the very nature of talking about WW2 means I will be mentioning things like "Hitler" and "The Third Reich", which YT doesn't like. I've also heard that they judge you on your comments section, and have deleted channels due to bad comments in the comment section. I can't possibly police my comments section, and I'm against the idea anyway since it goes against the principle of free speech. So I'm quite fearful of the future of my channel if I'm honest.
    6
  5003. It's not completely missing from the narrative, but it's as though there's a lack of emphasis on it. I'm not sure why this is, but I suspect it's because most historians are more concerned about the tactical aspects of the war rather than the economic aspects. I also suspect that Halder and the German general's viewpoint on Hitler being 'mad' (and therefore speaking rubbish) and Halder being correct on the Moscow axis caused historians to miss the mark.
    6
  5004. Hitler was definitely evil. Evil as evil can be. But he wasn't mad (at least not until late war). He was as dangerous as he was because he was intelligent and on the ball. You do not go from dropout artist to leader of continental Europe by being mad or by not having your priorities straight. In this situation, his generals did in fact make the mistakes, and then blamed him for their mistakes.
    6
  5005. No worries, glad to hear you're considering a new perspective :)
    6
  5006. THIS is what I want to hear. When new evidence comes along we must be ready to question our assumptions - all of them! It's fine to accept an argument or point of view, but be ready to change that view or dispute that argument at the drop of a hat. That is history.
    6
  5007. They were trading with the USSR, but the amount they were receiving simply wasn't enough to cover the massive shortfall.
    6
  5008. I expect nothing less from you, Onyx ;)
    6
  5009. There will be a quarantine here soon too, which won't really affect me much because I work at home anyway :) (main issue is getting enough food stocked)
    6
  5010. @Juan Rafael Cabrero - I've just published them now! I saw your message from a couple weeks ago, liked it and was going to publish them but forgot. Thanks for the reminder, and thank you for doing them!
    6
  5011. "Measures are starting to come into full force in the United States, so I'm out of work next few weeks." Given that rates have just been dropped to zero (and will most likely go negative) and the Quantitative Easing, my recommendation is for you to pull some cash out of the ATMs and have it on hand just in case the banks go under, or we get hyperinflation. I actually have a second video coming on Wednesday that talks about what causes recessions (recorded it in December, but didn't publish because was waiting until after Hitler's Socialism came out) which you might want to watch, since it's very relevant to what's going on at the moment
    6
  5012. I'm glad you think so 🙂
    6
  5013. I only really scratched the surface here. I'd really recommend Hanson's book, and some of the Mises articles, especially from the Soviet medical minister I quoted from in the video. There's a reason I'm now favouring Austrian School economics rather than the mainstream Keynesian/Socialist 'economics' because they're providing a narrative that not only fills the gaps, but also makes a lot more sense. They also predicted the current recession we're now in (which is why I'm prepared for it) while most of the mainstream were completed taken by surprise
    6
  5014. I will continue with it. I'm fatigued with my job (with it being christmas time, plus other issues causing stress) so all I can do when I get home is watch videos and animate... which is why I'm still doing these videos but not much else atm. Don't worry, I will not abandon it
    6
  5015. Hey Carpathia, they were meant to be brighter. I made a brighter red shade for the Soviet land units and a dull shade for the Soviet air units. But, for some reason, I didn't realise and accidentally used the dull red shade for the land units. I only noticed last episode, but it was obviously too late to go back and fix the issue. I may have to keep this series as it is (simply because it would take an absolute age to redo them all) but I do plan to use the brighter red for the Soviet units at Stalingrad. Sorry about this. If I do get time at the end of the series to fix it for the all-episodes-in-one Courland video, I will.
    6
  5016. It's an important text, but it's massively out of date and was basically written by Halder. Shirer even says "I've just got off the phone to Halder, and he said..." a couple of times in the book!
    6
  5017. Democracy = "people power" Except, the People are the Public, and the Public is the State. So Democracy is actually "state power". Therefore, North Korea is democratic https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    6
  5018. That's not what "privatization" is or means, but even if it did, as I showed in the video, the stock exchange (where the shareholders are) was nationalized by the Nazis. Many of the business leaders were already Nazis, or forced to become Nazis, or at least let the Nazis march into their businesses and take them over from within. - "it's typical for utilities to be private, but the government controls prices and regulates them strictly." Then they're not private utilities. They've been socialized in all but name (synchronized - Gleichschaltung). And you've got to remember that Lord Baron Keynes got his economics from the Nazi economists.
    6
  5019. Thank you! I agree. But I don't know what The Gilded Age is?
    6
  5020. "As I understand it, the German economy was not put on to a wartime footing (that is with centralised control under Speer) until 1942" NO, that's the lie. It was on a war footing during the 1930s BEFORE THE WAR EVEN BEGAN. I've explained this time and time again, but you don't listen because you automatically think you're correct. Watch my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video. I've explained this. - "It seems that you regularly conflate socialism, liberalism, libertarianism and social democracies with each other." I can see you haven't watched my Weimar series, specifically the second episode where I addressed this criticism head on... - "The reason we ditched the Gold Standard is because of deflationary bias." I can see you haven't watched my Weimar series, specifically the first episode where I addressed this criticism head on... - "Austrian Schoolers ... believe that in order to fix the economy, we need to wreck it and thus return to antigrowth, deflationary Gold Standard. " That's not what the Austrian School believe at all. You can get a free PDF of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" right here which will explain to you what they actually suggest https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression - "Have you ever seen those conpiracy videos about how central banks are behind all these vast conspiracies involving the Illuminati? That's the Austrian School." I've literally just done a video debunking this idea https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA - In short, you're lying and making stuff up. Stop being an idiot, and start educating yourself.
    6
  5021. Yes, I've noticed that they're trying their hardest to emotionally attack me, probably with the aim of making me "crack" somehow, or just to make themselves feel better. But such tactics aren't effective nor convincing. You know, when someone calls you a naughty name, all it does is drive me further away from their position.
    6
  5022.  @JustYKnowY  That's a bad take, and I actually address this "argument" in the video.
    6
  5023. The Battle of Brody in 1941
    6
  5024. I don't fear "Hate speech" because I have nothing to hide 👍 cheers!
    6
  5025. I'm not a Leftist
    6
  5026. You're welcome, glad you enjoyed the video :)
    6
  5027. Pass the salt, Manny
    6
  5028. And to think, most people don't look forward to Mondays!
    6
  5029. Welcome! I would recommend you start at the beginning of this series, which is here https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag My intention is to give you "filthy detailed and super-accurate" history doctumentaries, so you'll be hard pressed to find videos elsewhere quite as detailed as this :)
    6
  5030. Don't do that! 😂
    6
  5031.  @panzerofthelake506  Because apparently, according to most people I've talked to, "Capitalism" no longer means "private" ownership. It just means "when money does stuff".
    6
  5032. Yeah, someone else pointed it out... Really annoying I didn't see that!
    6
  5033. Thank you for your support! And just know, I hope to go even more detailed once we actually get to the city :)
    6
  5034. Thanks! Enjoy! :)
    6
  5035. Dangerous strategy liking a video without watching it. You might hate it!
    6
  5036. For the same reason they didn't just take Stalingrad completely. In short: they couldn't
    6
  5037. Ah, you noticed :)
    6
  5038. Hate explaining my (bad) jokes, but I will. I was saying, "You're about to find out who the murderer is, when everything fades to black." Meaning that the book ends a little bit too soon. The video went black to show you how annoying it is.
    6
  5039. Exactly, but they're actually distorians. Revising history is good - when done properly.
    6
  5040. I'm actually working on a video which, while not specifically about that, will cover it in. The video is a big secret video which I can't talk about though, and will not be out for a while because it's taking a lot of work to get it done (will definitely be out after Operation Crusader). So shhhh
    6
  5041. Interesting! What is the reason you don't watch the Stalingrad videos? I agree with your take on doing what I want to do rather than what others want to do. I'm really really eager to cover subjects that I know will cause a stir, but have held off because of Stalingrad and knowing that there will be a backlash. However, I think now's the time to take the gloves off and dive in
    6
  5042. I think we're even closer to the end than you think! We'll definitely hit episode 50, but I'm not sure if there will be much beyond that. The problem is that the sources get vague for this period, so it's hard to go into detail, making things move quickly
    6
  5043. You were right to question this though. Glad to see you're thinking and questioning things rather than just accepting things at face value 👍
    6
  5044. What about the Anti-Semitism in Das Kapital then?
    6
  5045. Yeah, I need to start uploading more to Bitchute. In theory Bitchute is meant to carry videos across, and occasionally it does so, but then other times it doesn't. I can't figure out why. But I'm reluctant to upload an old video in case it magically moves the same video across and I get two...
    6
  5046. Of course not! Nothing to see here, move along!
    6
  5047. It's almost like I said this in the video!
    6
  5048. I'm really glad to hear that! More to come on these subjects :)
    6
  5049. What's the point of a tank that can't make it to the battlefield because it breaks down all the time and only exists in low numbers? How can that be a 'good' tank?
    6
  5050. Devolution is good.
    6
  5051. Considering the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, it makes sense for Poland to move her assets to a safer place, so it's not really much of a conspiracy that they did that. As for the fleet, I don't know about that. But again, it makes sense considering that Poland didn't really have much of a fleet to begin with, and it would have just been destroyed had it sat in the Baltic.
    6
  5052. Exactly. They're only seeing it from one point of view, and not thinking about how others may react
    6
  5053. @You're Spying - good ideas, thank you!
    6
  5054. People like being "1st!" in the comments. It's just a bit of fun :) But yes, after some of the great comments last week, I had to follow it up with this
    6
  5055. I've said it a lot, but it's worth repeating: there's a difference between school and education. The State School System is deliberately designed to make you be uninterested in education, so that you're willing to leave all the thinking to those above you in the Social hierarchy and not rock the boat
    6
  5056. There are no individuals. Individuals are private, and they're Socialists, so any achievement you make is the achievement of society, and any mistake the society makes gets you sent to Siberia
    6
  5057. I've not, but I'll look into it. Thanks for the suggestion!
    6
  5058. I'm certainly trying to
    6
  5059. It was. And I have been considering doing something on him at some point 👍
    6
  5060. Where's your evidence that Marx practiced the Jewish faith in the 1840s onwards?
    6
  5061. Mussolini's mistress was Jewish. 10% of the members of the Fascist Party in Italy were Jewish right up until Mussolini got overthrown. So yes, it is difficult because it turns out that Italian Fascist ideology wasn't interested in "race" as you (and the Leftists who write Wikipedia) claim.
    6
  5062. Yes! The "Far Left" and "Far Right" are on the same side (the Left) of the spectrum. The lie that's been spun is that "we need Socialism in moderation". I used to believe that too, but it turns out to be complete nonsense. Reading "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and doing more reading beyond that should tell you why
    6
  5063. Fascism is an evil ideology. But saying that it's not Nazism, and that Marxists deliberately distorted history for their own political agenda, doesn't mean I'm defending Fascism.
    6
  5064. This one was difficult to produce, and I've been working on Battlestorm screenplays and other stuff behind the scenes which have slowed me down. But thank you for your patience
    6
  5065.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  I had not heard of that series, thanks for pointing it out!
    6
  5066. Everyone uses government "currency". Nobody is using gold or silver (actual money).
    6
  5067. Yeah, just ignore all the government regulations preventing certain types of house building and making it unprofitable to do. Also, forget about all the taxes and government fees associated with house buying, and the pumping of the stock market by the government central banks who are paying public companies and banks to buy up all the housing 🙄
    6
  5068. No, because if you force me to pay you for using your roads, I would use a different road that doesn't force me to pay you to use the roads.
    6
  5069. If you suppress the wage system, you suppress the people who earn wages - the workers. It's one and the same. If you take away people's ability to earn a living, they stop living. That's why Socialism has always ended in disaster, because it's trying to drag the economy back into the feudal age - an economic model which simply cannot sustain our current population size.
    6
  5070. Yes, it's by far the most accurate of the economic schools. I do like the Chicago School too though, although their ideas on Central Banking let them down.
    6
  5071. I certainly intend to do this series. Although this video is more focused on the politics, just because the politics influences the economics that followed
    6
  5072. "Worse, a tank battle now erupted at Zety, with Tanaschischin’s 30 or so T-70s bravely (and perhaps foolheartedly) going up against the German Panzer 3s and 4s of 24th Panzer Division. This clearly one-sided tank-battle in the area north of Zety did however bring the main advance to a halt." I guess you missed this part.
    6
  5073. @DemomanTakesSkill - the reason why was because I was rushed to get this done in time and didn't have time to redo the unit cards. Everyone was complaining and getting impatient so I wanted to release this this week rather than next
    6
  5074. A TIK heart
    6
  5075. Unfortunately, "conspiracy theories" hurt those genuine people with a theory that's not (yet) accepted by the mainstream. The theory of evolution was a new genuine theory, but if it was to have been made in today's culture it would be classed as a "conspiracy theory" just because it's new. There is a danger of us dismissing perfectly good ideas as "conspiracy theories" just because there are a few nuts out there spouting their own fiction. One bad apple spoils the bunch!
    6
  5076. The word "imperator" comes from Latin and I chose it as a gamer because of its original meaning (see this video for more explanation https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I), not because it was a 40k reference. But yes I am a fan of 40k lore, and gave a load of Dawn of War references in a recent Stalingrad video.
    6
  5077. Exactly, and yet people hold up Wikipedia as if it can never be wrong. This is why I like to call it out constantly so that new viewers become aware of the problem.
    6
  5078. Stalingrad comes first (at least, the first season) but I will return to North Africa after that
    6
  5079. 14 pounds, or a small rock
    6
  5080. Ah yes, the war of 1812, which led directly to the panic of 1819, America's first great economic crisis https://mises.org/library/panic-1819-reactions-and-policies
    6
  5081. Yes, people like being first. And I agree. I've also heard that YouTube has taken channels down based on other people's comments in the comment section. So if someone posts a comment that YouTube takes offense at, bye bye TIK. What a joke.
    6
  5082. No, I just stayed in Manchester for about 2 years. Muffins are not bread!
    6
  5083. Yeah I can imagine. That's quite similar in terms of dealing with the public
    6
  5084. Yes it is a bit obvious and automatic, plus the exact wording of the original question was different and even more obvious (I don't remember it exactly). And if you'd said "greet the kid" in the interview, I think that would have been fine because it shows great customer service. The kid would have been happy and the parent may have been impressed that you'd taken the time to say hi to the kid. After you'd explained that, then I probably would have said "and what would you make sure you do as you leave the _garden_?" to prompt you towards the "close the gate" answer. But to not even attempt an answer is a massive red flag, especially after having spent a minute thinking about it, then asking me to repeat the question, then spending another minute thinking about it again.
    6
  5085. May job hunting have mercy on your soul
    6
  5086. That might actually be true
    6
  5087. AAA BBB yeah I would block them, but I'd have everyone else complain about "freedom of speech". I had people complaining about that when I blocked a bunch of National Socialists a while back. It's a catch-22 - they're using our belief in freedom of speech against us by abusing the very idea of it.
    6
  5088. Yes, and we'll be covering that in the next Battlestorm
    6
  5089. I don't think I have any sanity left at this point
    6
  5090. Nobody takes Reddit seriously.
    6
  5091. Thank you! He has been deleting comments though. Are there any other platforms you could post about this to? I've also pinned a comment by a Brazillian YouTuber who says he's making a video about it, but he's a small channel. Perhaps others will do the same.
    6
  5092. That's precisely what I said, and it is. He's removed 20 of his own videos.
    6
  5093. "Though they didn't outright ban private ownership of things" They did. The Reichstag Fire Decree of the 28th of February 1933 banned private ownership by abolishing it in law from the constitution.
    6
  5094. Hitler hated Marxism, not socialism. And he also hated capitalism, which he referred to as "international Jewish finance".
    6
  5095. 1984 is a great book. Orwell's my favourite fiction author.
    6
  5096. @Toll, as you said, Fascist Italy didn't have a free-market, thus had a planned economy, and opposed both capitalism and Marxist-Socialism. Therefore they were not capitalists, and were socialists (for the national group, not the proletariat, since they weren't Marxist). Therefore it was totalitarian because it had control over everything, including the economy. It didn't have a capitalist economy if it was regulated and non-free, which you admitted it was.
    6
  5097. "As for the people themselves, just give up and ignore them. Seriously, save your breath and just do it the original way. These sort of people will always try to spin up a new narrative when their old ones don't gain attention." Agreed, although I would say that if my narrative doesn't work and has holes/contradictions in it, then I've done something wrong. Now in this case, I've been successfully filling in the holes, so I know that it's their narrative that doesn't work. It's a problem of getting people to see the flaws in their own perspective, and to become open-minded to the possibility that they might be wrong and to start listening. That's my biggest challenge right now. Hopefully the end of this video will start the ball rolling for some.
    6
  5098. So you're saying socialism isn't about common control (total-control) of the means of production (the people)?
    6
  5099. That was actually mentioned in one of the books (think it was Epstein's book), and I may cover that later in the series.
    6
  5100. Good point! I guess I now need to look into the history of the 11th Armoured Division and see if we can figure that out. But perhaps it was elements from the division, rather than the whole division?
    6
  5101. At no point did I say that the Allies were the same as the Nazis. If you 'believe' I did say that, leave and don't come back. I only want honest and intelligent people watching my channel.
    6
  5102. Also, British prisoners in Japanese hands were starved, but I don't recall many of them turning traitor.
    6
  5103. That's exactly what I said in the video. I said that the Soviet prisoners would be encouraged to fight with the Nazis thanks to their harsh treatment. Please pay attention. Maybe you would have preferred it if I had given you a video on the Soviet treatment of German POWs? https://youtu.be/rS_59PHhO4M
    6
  5104. I've not heard of this before. What's the claim?
    6
  5105. Stick to tankers!
    6
  5106. FIRST! Congrats!
    6
  5107. The SS had polygamy centres to breed "Aryan" females and SS studs together, so I wouldn't say that was an example of "traditional values". Neither was the "struggle against the Church" (Kirchenkampf).
    6
  5108. A very strong opinion you have there! He was definitely a socialist, although I'm certain a lot of socialists will claim he wasn't, partly because they don't know what socialism actually is...
    6
  5109. I'm not right wing (which proves you didn't watch my videos on Mosley), and a lot of people are enjoying this content. I'm not against Trans people at all, but I am against Woke Culture since they were the ones who decided that history should be distorted to suit their Gnostic agenda. This channel is about history, not modern politics. In this video, I'm talking about ancient and medieval history, as well as the renaissance and Hitler. Yet somehow you've deemed this to be "modern day Politics". That's a swing and a miss if I've ever seen one.
    6
  5110. Thanks! Terri outdid herself again
    6
  5111. FIRST!
    6
  5112. Research is over 400,000 words. Just checked and currently the script for the first three episodes (which are mostly done) amounts to 11,953 words. Roughly aiming for 4,000 words per episode, which is just over 30 mins. These episodes cover the period of the 22nd of July to the 31st of July 1942 with 6th Army trying to get to Kalach.
    6
  5113. SHAEF intelligence reported the panzers. Where they got their info from, I'm not sure... I have a theory, but I cannot confirm it
    6
  5114. Thank you for your support! You prefer the economics and political videos, I'm guessing?
    6
  5115. I've responded to their arguments in my videos. I've also called them out for lying about me in a recent video https://youtu.be/3BEeQgN-njs
    6
  5116. I'm glad you liked it, Rommel :) I'm planning on doing one on Operation Brevity soon too and then slowly working my way through the entire Western Desert Campaign
    6
  5117. Wow thanks! :) I can confirm it was just me who made it
    6
  5118. Yes you are! Nice one!
    6
  5119. Du bist richtig (I'm probably butchering it again!). But the good news is I only need to be able to read it, not speak it :) I did have to look up some of the words you used, but I got the first 6 right, so I am getting there... langsam
    6
  5120. ""Every man is an island" is a very lonely thought which scares the shit out of me. I want to be part of a "group"." Islands are not alone. They can still work with and trade with other islands. But you are ultimately an island in a large sea of other islands.
    6
  5121. I'm glad you enjoyed last week's video, because it was one of the worst performing videos in ages. People complain that I should "stick to tanks", then don't watch the military stuff Stahel's book is good. Have you seen some of his lectures on YouTube? If you've read the book then he only goes over the same stuff in less detail
    6
  5122. I wish we had a 2nd Amendment here in the UK
    6
  5123. But they would have been across that bridge 36 hours earlier if General Gavin had captured it on day 1 when there were just a dozen Germans at the bridge. Horrock's tanks (just 4 that made it across) could not advance without infantry support. The British infantry were busy fighting in Nijmegen against 10th SS Panzer Division, which wouldn't have been able to get across the bridge to occupy the city had Gavin taken the bridge on day 1.
    6
  5124. Was the museum the Hartenstein hotel? I heard they turned the former HQ into a Market Garden museum. Thank you for sharing, I'm glad to hear you enjoyed the video. Be sure to check out the Bruneval Raid Battlestorm video, which was John Frost's first mission. Plus I have a video on General Browning too you might like. I'll give you the links Bruneval https://youtu.be/6EiOG_yvT04 Browning https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    6
  5125. Good to hear! Coincidentally, I've just released a new video on this subject - a review of Beevor's new "Arnhem" book. I talk about the Nijmegen situation in a lot more detail than I do here. You may be interested, so here's the link https://youtu.be/fr92BwihIoU
    6
  5126. I think the controversial subjects are the best ones - history lies in the heart of the debate, after all. But I've got to be careful with Corporate YouTube. That's the only thing holding me back.
    6
  5127. Yes, some have mentioned him. My intention is to update this timeline going forward, so I'll be adding him onto it.
    6
  5128. Good to hear! Also is the best time to catch me since I spend the evening replying to comments. Normal days I'm that busy I can't keep up with comments, but Monday evenings I dedicate to replying to comments
    6
  5129. But Manstein was also telling Paulus repeatedly to hold on, that the situation was fine, and that he'll get him out. He kept telling him this, even until after Winter Tempest had failed, by which point it was far too late.
    6
  5130. You know, I've not actually heard of this before. Is there a book on the subject?
    6
  5131. Glad I'm not the only one!
    6
  5132. I think this is the first time I've actually stated that a previously believed-to-be-genuine historical source is a flat-out fake. Yes, I've disagreed with sources, but I've never accused one of not being written by the author it claimed to be. So this is a first for me, and a controversial issue, especially because it paints Chuikov in a bad light.
    6
  5133. Glad you finished it, and it was a lot of time and research! Be sure to check out the 9.5 hour Crusader video too if you haven't already. I think that battle was extra-special :)
    6
  5134. Yes, they're competitors on the same ground, not opposites
    6
  5135. Fantastic! I hope you enjoy it and get as much out of it as I do
    5
  5136. Script is done, been editing episode 4. Can't give a date yet, but hopefully in a couple weeks
    5
  5137. For me, memoirs are the worst type of all the sources. They're classed as a primary source, but they're written so far after the events that they should really be classed as a secondary source. And as a secondary source, they're simply awful for the reasons you list. Honestly, the priority should be the other secondary sources and then the primary sources, not memoirs. But you cannot just dismiss them either.
    5
  5138. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but assuming you're not. 1. He's not Russian, he's Soviet. Russia didn't exist in 1942. And 2, I've called out many German soldiers for lying throughout this series - HALDER being the most obvious, and Manstein will be called out when we get to him.
    5
  5139. Do you remember exactly what your orders were on the 13th of September 2016? Do you remember - word for word - the entire conversation you had with every officer you spoke to during your military career? No, you do not. The point still stands.
    5
  5140. @Monkey Man - the traumatizing events descibed in this book are the events of a 7 month long battle. If it was his diary, I'd understand. But it's not. He may remember the general feeling, or certain events, but not all of them - and unfortunately he seems to remember a lot, which casts doubt on the reliability. @Carsten Oepping - I think you're failing to understand what I'm saying. Colonel Adam was there and therefore can be "reliable" in that sense. However, the book is not reliable as a source on the battle of Stalingrad because it gets the events wrong, and has been influenced by post-war political agendas. If you want a "general feeling" of how the troops are on the Seydlitz Front and so on, fine, or his opinion what Paulus is thinking (stressing the word "opinion" here), fine. But beyond that it is not reliable. Yes, he was an important figure, but unlike a diary with the events recorded at the time, a memoir written so many years later is not as reliable. If there was a 1 to 10 "reliable scale" for history, this would be about a 3. It will lead the reader to the wrong conclusions, therefore it is not recommended. And if another source written at the time says something else happened or that something else was said, we are justified in saying that that source is probably more reliable than Colonel Adam's memoirs. If he compliments another more-reliable source, then that's great. If he contradicts another more-reliable source, then he shouldn't be trusted.
    5
  5141. Thanks Andi! Should really do a 10,000 sub special. Any ideas?
    5
  5142. Being Hitler's last gamble for victory, it changed world history, as next week's video will show.
    5
  5143. Based on the one I did a while ago, probably not 😂
    5
  5144. Haha thanks! Hope you enjoy the videos 🙂
    5
  5145. Forget motivation. Don't be looking for inspiration to do something because even the most interesting subjects get boring after a while. The difference between a professional and an amateur is that a professional does the work every day regards of his emotions. So use the tips I've provided in this video. Place yourself in a position where you have no other option other than to do the thing you need to do. Your options should literally be 1. stare at a wall and be bored for 6 hours, or 2. entertain yourself by looking into the work you have in front of you. And try to be curious about it. Not "interested", just curious. Ask yourself if there's any aspect that you actually would like to learn about this particular thing, even if it's just a minor thing. Then decide that you're going to make some effort to find that out. Ultimately it's about reducing your options and trying to find something interesting out of it. Perhaps even just going through the motions and focusing on each sentence, kinda like a game (washing each dish one at a time). It all just requires a change in mentality.
    5
  5146. No worries Jack, glad to know it's helping :)
    5
  5147. @Evan - yes, absolutely right. I saw your other comment too. I should have clarified what I said in the video about the liberal vs conservative issue, but this video was more a quick off-the-cuff response to the criticism from the previous video, so the main issue was the socialism part. Of course, I've learnt the cons of doing unscripted videos as a result, and I'll try minimise the impact in future. However, the overall message (NS is Socialism) still stands, and my research into the topic has continued to gather pace. Abolishing private property rights, enforcing price controls, wage controls, nationalizing the industries (and calling it 'privatization' to mask what was happening), heavy taxation, absolute bureaucratic control, land reforms, abolishing private trade unions and replacing them with the state trade union (the German Labour Front), the Holocaust (state ownership of the means of destruction), and the Hitler Youth... all of that sounds like social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production to me.
    5
  5148. Except, classic liberalism (or at least the Liberal Party in the UK) also changed as a result of Disraeli, Lloyd George, and Churchill. They (mainly the latter two) moved the party in a more socialist direction.
    5
  5149. Garlic, Hitler says in Mein Kampf that he read Das Kapital, and discusses the implications of it. This is where he then does his best to differentiate between his socialism with Marxist Socialism. So to claim he didn't take anything from it is incorrect. He states it in Mein Kampf.
    5
  5150. Ryan, I don't know why it unpinned for you.
    5
  5151. Yes, exactly
    5
  5152. That's awful logic. Instead of listening to the people who are the thing you are looking at, you'll listen to Marxists who will tell you that Nationalsocialism isn't socialism because they have an agenda to deny that socialism has ever existed? It's no wonder few people actually know what Nationalsocialism is.
    5
  5153. Hahaha
    5
  5154. Vasantha - I'm not American nor do I sip latte, so your anti-democratic anti-US stance won't work on me. There's a difference between individuals breaking the law and a state capturing, torturing and forcing random people into slavery as was done in the Soviet Union.
    5
  5155. Yes, Viktor Suvorov was promoting the idea of a "preventive strike". The video ( https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA ) was a partial take-down of Suvorov, and I intend to go back to it. And my recent "The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2" video ( https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c ) also undermines Suvorov's entire thesis. David Glantz's book "Stumbling Colossus" basically renders Suvorov's thesis mute - although there are a minority still trying to defend him.
    5
  5156. I have considered writing a book, but not sure what on. I feel that in order to write a history book, you have to spend a long time in the archives, which I don't have time to do whilst working on this channel
    5
  5157. I plan to do Crete at some point. And also, I'll get to Tunisia as part of my North African Campaign series... whenever I get time to continue that (probably after Stalingrad)
    5
  5158. starcraft2own I used... MY PHONE :-O
    5
  5159. I have it, although my copy is old and is falling apart. Have you got to the bit where he says something like 'I've just got off the phone with Halder and he said this...' ? I'm not going to discourage you from reading it. It's a good book if you want to know how people used to perceive the war - a view highly influenced by the German generals and Halder. So I do recommend it for that reason. But after you're don with it, I would encourage you to read something a bit more up-to-date (say, within the last 10 years)
    5
  5160. "Talking shit about planned economy without realizing what is it and how the prices were calculated is another." You can't calculate prices without a free market. The way we generate prices is by trading with each other. If everything is owned by the commune, there's no trade. Thus, any price you have on a good is not accurate. "He definitely is blinded by western economical indoctrination and holy faith in so called "free market"." I fully understand socialist economics, since I used to be a socialist.
    5
  5161. Dedication, or insanity. Depends on your perspective and the evidence you have available!
    5
  5162. Prank, you do realise I've been called out several times for criticising Beevor? He gets many things wrong in his Stalingrad book, as I've pointed out and will continue to point out. That said, it's still a great introduction to the battle, so long as people are aware that they then need to follow that up with the work Glantz and House have done.
    5
  5163. Is that any different to Beevor's "Berlin: The Downfall 1945"? Or is it the same book, but retitled?
    5
  5164. Got them but not had time to read fully them yet
    5
  5165. Yes, and it's also frustrating hearing "revolutionaries" defend the state, taxation, regulation, nationalization and socialization (same thing) of businesses, state health care, state wage fixes, state price fixes, bureaucracy, state monopolies, social workers, state unemployment benefits paid by people who actually work, state police forces, state road building projects, state tariffs, state house building, theft (also known as "redistribution of wealth"), state education, public state transport subsidies (since such industries can't operate without taxpayer money), and state centralised planning in the economy. Yeah, they're not "revolutionaries" or "progressives" at all. Quite the opposite.
    5
  5166. Maybe, but not until after Stalingrad. Stalingrad is next.
    5
  5167. Both sides were suffering from casualties and manpower crisis which is why both sides forcefully recruited Latvians. But Soviet divisions were designed to be smaller than German ones, so in general that principle will stand right. Of course, my sources do not tell me how the Red Army divisions were fairing at this stage, so I'm not able to say what strength levels they were at. And there will be exceptions to the rule. But until better sources are given which do give accurate strength levels on both sides, this is probably the best way to visualize it.
    5
  5168. Yeah you were nearly first but not quite
    5
  5169. I guess. But sometimes being bold and outspoken is a good thing. And sometimes it's not.
    5
  5170. Thank you! And as I've said a few times, I don't think there's any shame in admitting you're wrong :)
    5
  5171. Yes, although it wasn't my gut, it was several people from all different places saying the same thing. Also, I think I can make the video better than those two were
    5
  5172. Maybe, but I'll stay clear just in case
    5
  5173. I think he had help from General Gavin of the 82nd Airborne
    5
  5174.  joshualoganhoi4  Yeah, that's the only thing I can think of too. It must be an auto-correct mistake?
    5
  5175. "Capitalism with monopolies are NOT free markets." I fully understand this. If you listen closely later in this video, I make the point of saying that giant public corporations should be abolished. That said, I also differentiate between "Capitalism" and free markets. Capitalism contains monopolies, while free markets do not. And England in the late 1800s was Capitalist, even if it wasn't a truly free market.
    5
  5176. Honestly, it's no wonder I make some of these minor spelling mistakes and whatnot, because it's an impossible schedule to keep up
    5
  5177. Thanks for your comment! I'm glad you've been inspired to dive into the sources and dispel the myths - my ultimate goal with this channel is to inspire people to do just that! And I wish I could comment more about the 1812 issue, but I literally know nothing about it. I'm interested though, since Rothbard says that the War of 1812 led directly to the recession of 1819 https://mises.org/library/panic-1819-reactions-and-policies "The panic of 1819 grew largely out of the changes wrought by the War of 1812, and by the postwar boom that followed."
    5
  5178. @Julian The Apostate  That's good to hear! I'm just happy I've got to the point where I can actually start using them for this series, because they only start on the 13th of September 1942. Anton knows that he needs to work on a pre-city Atlas volume 😉
    5
  5179.  @mr.waffentrager4400  I'll be honest, it's pretty difficult to keep up with the comments. It was manageable until about 100,000 subs, but after that it just gets too much. If I was to spend all day on it every day, I could keep up right now, but obviously that's not practical, and I have to prioritize the history and the videos - since without them, there wouldn't be any comments! If anything, I should be prioritizing Patreon and SubscribeStar comments/messages (which I honestly have neglected and need to sort soon), but I have this tradition of celebrating the video releases by spending an hour or two on a Monday evening in the comments of the latest video. The point is that I can certainly understand why other YouTubers give up on the comments once they reach a certain stage. Maybe it is an ego thing for some, but that's certainly not the case for me. I just have to prioritize. And I don't have the intention of abandoning the comments, even though it will get to a stage where it's impossible to keep up with them (and it basically is now).
    5
  5180. Well, Terri (graphics designer, link in description) made the map. Took her months! And Anton Joly supplies the Soviet maps and the aerial photographs that it's based on. Plus without the history books, I'd have no chance. Really I'm just standing on the shoulders of giants (to quote Newton)
    5
  5181. Yes, I really really need to do a guiitar video 🎸
    5
  5182. Yes, my name is Lewis :)
    5
  5183. Thanks! I practiced saying it a few times :D
    5
  5184. Yes, it definitely didn't work at Stalingrad!
    5
  5185. Also, insert 'just following orders' and 'it wasn't my fault, it was someone else' excuses too
    5
  5186.  @ghostman303  At this rate I may have too! I was going to do a video on Dresden, but looks like that's not going to happen now...
    5
  5187. Yeah, it's had about 400 views in the last 55 minutes. At 1.5 hrs and 2 hrs after publish the video had 2,289 views. Now (just under 2.5 hours after publish) we're at 2,723 (stuck like that for five minutes). But the dashboard is telling me it's at 7,100 views - even though the comments, likes and dislikes absolutely don't reflect that exaggerated number. Something is definitely wrong here.
    5
  5188.  @MultiChris777  What time were you notified? It only seems to have been restricted in the last half hour
    5
  5189. Yes you are! Congrats!
    5
  5190. Glad you're enjoying it, and caught up! A couple more weeks until the next episode though, unfortunately
    5
  5191. Me
    5
  5192. Don't worry, we'll get to it... eventually!
    5
  5193. According to the stats for episode 20, only 0.5% of my audience for this series is female. Terri watches some of the videos, but only to keep up with what people are commenting and to see how the videos turn out after editing, not really for the history. And I've got a feeling that many of the other ladies are either men using their wife's account, or people who identify as female, not necessarily female. Not saying there's none, but it's few and far between. It is a shame really, but shows that war has a different meaning for males than for females.
    5
  5194. Yes, there were the anti-aircraft guns on the banks of the river. A couple of episodes ago, Wüster was shelling one Soviet anti-aircraft regiment on one island, so we know they were there. The Stukas would have been taken heavy losses striking targets right next to AA guns.
    5
  5195. It'll be in the next few weeks. As I said in a recent video, I work on the scripts between each season https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    5
  5196.  @guidobolke5618  If the demand for soldiers is high, and if the soldier is good at his job and isn't being inefficient with resources, then of course he can make a profit and be paid well. Their motivation would be profit, just like anyone else in the economy. If a soldier was bad at his job, he'd make a loss and wouldn't be able to fight any more. Just like in the real world, a business that goes out of business frees up resources for others in the economy. So if there's still profit to be made in war, then a new soldier would come long, be more efficient, and be able to turn a profit. Of course, if there isn't a profit in war, then it's not possible to run a war like this. If war was economically a waste of scarce resources that have alternative uses, and if people didn't want war, then it wouldn't be profitable. In that case, the soldiers would go home and do something more profitable for the society. Or the State would come in and forcefully seize wealth off the people and redistribute that to the war industry in order to launch a war for Lebensraum. At that point though, you'd have an inefficient military and logistics system.
    5
  5197. Yes, because every army had inefficient logistics 👍
    5
  5198.  @chriscarlone527  "Pseudo economist." I'm not a Keynesian!
    5
  5199.  @karapuzo1  ​@PutasZG ​ @Kimo Andrews Correct, you can't have a free market in an unfree world
    5
  5200. True! Also, Second!
    5
  5201. Third! :D
    5
  5202. You'd think that argument would work, but apparently not! Come back to these comments in a day or two and I guarantee that people will be arguing that Hitler wasn't to blame. The comments in my David Irving video are just the same - they reject everything in the video and continue to spout their propaganda
    5
  5203. Yes you are!
    5
  5204. They're all human. There are no human subspecies https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/
    5
  5205. Yes, and just to add to it, the danger of demonizing everyone who tries to understand or explain Hitler's views (even though we don't agree with what he said) is that it discourages exploration or discussion of the topic (which I think is the primary motive of the people calling everyone a 'Nazi' or a 'Fascist') and thus is damaging the process of history itself
    5
  5206. Yes, and in Finland, where they fled
    5
  5207. I'm actually shocked that there's been so few people in the comments who've disagreed with me this time. A couple people said they didn't understand, but I haven't seen anyone yet who has disagreed, which is shocking. I'm sure they're here somewhere, or will come, but this is unusual. Maybe explaining it so simply helped?
    5
  5208. Or did you mean, you're against the corporate state, but it now makes sense to you?
    5
  5209. I've talked about Anthony Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    5
  5210. Are you saying that French politics isn't impressively complex and crisscrossed with emotional investments that will invoke rage at the mere mention of such things? I mean, me mentioning French politics has triggered all the French viewers... Imagine what would have happened if I had waded into it!
    5
  5211. My dad used to be a truck driver, and we used both words. So from my point of view, they're synonyms. Truck sounds better though which is why I use it, although I may have used lorry in previous videos. But I don't really care for the British vs American language distinction, since language is for communication, not tribalism.
    5
  5212. Yes, I was meant to say that they had no "death camps", not concentration camps.
    5
  5213. And we've still got the same issue today
    5
  5214. @Evil 1 "You should actually see youtube vs prager u and find out why the case got thrown out almost instantly rather than making the ridiculous assertion that the American law is irrelevant." If the American 'law' State said that the Moon was made of cheese, does that make it so? What a bureaucratic state says had no relevance. - "What you're claiming is the same as saying mcdonalds has many shareholders so it must be public domain, I can just waltz in and do what I want, doesn't work like that pal." Are you a shareholder of the company, or work for the company? If not, you're not a member of its Public and cannot enter, just like a citizen of one country cannot just waltz into another. - "So what do you do when youtube for whatever reasons (intentions unknown and don't act like you know mr conspiracy theorist) decides to mess with your video and manipulate and influence the amount of people who can see it? You call them fascists (in your description) and leech off their platform that they don't owe you. Talk about ingratitude. I see no state interference here, no nation-state propaganda so have fun fighting your interpretation of fascism with youtube." YouTube is literally messing with my videos and manipulating the influence of me (the private individual creator) and the viewer (also private individual). That is State (YouTube) control of the market (buyer and seller). Yet, you see no state-interference? What do you think YouTube interference is? It's hierarchical control of me (the means of production). And yes, you are correct that I'm ungrateful that my work is being manipulated by our glorious Marxist overlords. HOW DARE I COMPLAIN ABOUT CENTRAL CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION.
    5
  5215. @Illya Lypyak - the Nazis also nationalized the industries, as I explained in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And there's no difference between the socialization of the means of production and the nationalization of the means of production. They are the same thing. A nation is a society https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "If that were the case that France and Britain could be called socialists too" You think that the Labour Party of Britain wasn't REAL Socialism now? Really? - "The first move of fascist Italy was to privatise large parts of the states owed assets, but when the economy fell apart they applied socialist elements to the economy in order to accomplish their ultimate goals and you couldn't do that with a tattering economy." That's a false narrative if ever I've seen one. Just please, read an actual history book. Farrell's "Mussolini" or something other than a PDF from a Marxist university. - "So as you can see this happened in the late 20's and early 30's" I've explained in another video that Mussolini, and this is explained by Farrell, that it took Mussolini time to consolidate power. Just like the Soviet Union didn't fully socialize the farms until the 1930s (and really, not even then), it took time for these things to happen. A 'revolution' doesn't happen overnight. The French Revolution went on and on, the Russian Revolution went on an on, and the Fascist and Nazi Revolutions went on and on as well. Expecting everything on a Monday to be Capitalism, and then Tuesday to be Socialism, is ridiculous. "Also personally I wouldn't take any claims of worker control of these newly nationalized any seriously because if fascist Italy wouldn't allow working class people to have some semblance of control over Mussolini's political goals why would allow them to interfere with his economics?" He wasn't a Marxist, he was a Fascist. The Fascists wanted to end the class-conflict by merging the workers with the bourgeoisie in syndicate trade unions that would embody the nation - body, corpse, corporation. They actually did allow worker control. However, Socialism is about societal control of the means of production, and that's exactly what happened. Mussolini was in charge of the society that had control of the means of production. Fascism, Nazism and Marxism are all different flavours of the umbrella concept of Socialism.
    5
  5216. But is this really the case? (You were first!)
    5
  5217. Thank you! You should comment more often
    5
  5218. Oh yes, I have an interest in ancient warfare, especially Greek and Roman history.
    5
  5219. Damn right!
    5
  5220. "1. The way you emphasise your words about what is not capitalism can be taken as capitalism does not exist at all in our current world (with the exception of black market trading), and all states are socialist. Do you really believe this? or do you think that capitalism (as well as socialism) is a matter of degree, at least in modern common understanding of the words?" The free market is capitalism. A state which relies upon tax is not capitalism. If we have states that are allowed to artificially redistribute wealth from the rest of the population to themselves through non-market means, then that is not a free market nor capitalism. "2. Straight up calling taxes theft... that one triggered me a bit, with no taxes there is no state, which if you are an anarchist is fine, you are allowed to have that view. But generally that statement came across to me as a bias of your own that you might want to keep in check." I am not an anarchist. I pay for what I want and need. There's only two ways to gain wealth. 1. Trade/exchange. 2. Force/theft. If I want a product or service, I trade currency in exchange for that product or service. This is called a trade. I'm happy to trade with a good corporation, if and when I want or need something. A corporation which forces me to hand over my wealth is not one that I'm trading with. I have no choice in the matter, and I don't want nor need their product or service, for if I did then I would have paid for it anyway and they wouldn't need for force me to hand over my wealth. There is no exchange. It is take first, then hopefully I get back something of some use. That's not a trade/exchange. That is force/theft because I (as the consumer) have no choice in the matter. I do not want nor need a corporation that takes my wealth. I want one which provides me with products and services, if and when I want or need them. If I don't need their product or service, then I don't pay them. If I do, then I will pay. And bad businesses fail because they do not produce what the consumer wants. The only reason these bad businesses survive is because they can force people to hand over their wealth. I think such businesses should be let to fail, and let new good businesses have the opportunity to give the consumer what they actually want. So no, I am not an anarchist.
    5
  5221. "By your logic on 7 minutes any state funding it’s own army is socialist, this makes absolutely no sense." A state funded army is a socialized army. It is not a private army.
    5
  5222. It's ridiculous that 80 years after the events, we have people who think Hitler wasn't a National Socialist.
    5
  5223. "the whole point of the Night of the Long Knives was to consolidate NSDAP support among the army and business leaders." Too complicated to explain here, but basically there was a schism in the NSDAP, with Hitler's newer version of socialism, and Röhm's more traditional version of socialism. Yes, the army and business leaders were involved, but big business was merging with the state at this point, and the army is the state.
    5
  5224. Shouldn't be giving secrets away like that!
    5
  5225. Unfortunately I'm struggling to create the content as it is, and am debating whether to not do a video for this coming Monday so that I can have some time off. The pace required to create these videos is unsustainable, and as much as I'd like to do two videos per week, it's simply not possible. And you're correct, most people do not want this level of detail in the videos. To many, they think these videos are tedious. And because I don't just spout the same old stuff you hear in the old books or on TV, but actually challenge the mainstream narrative, this is too much for people to handle. The majority just want to be told what they already know. Anything new is a challenge to their egos, so they avoid it or get angry, which is why I have a lot of critics. Call it intelligence or cognitive dissonance, but it's too much for them.
    5
  5226.  @bigjo66  But is this really the Musk?
    5
  5227. You were second on my end, but nice try!
    5
  5228. I'll hopefully do the update this week. I wasn't able to do it last week.
    5
  5229. Yes, I was going to put a pinned comment about Lattmann because I noticed before that I hadn't updated him, but it was too late to change. Not sure about Arenstorff, so will check. Thanks
    5
  5230. I think it had a massive impact, and explains a LOT of things that we see. I can't possibly answer this in a comment, but if you watch this Monday's video, you'll get a sense of how senseless the economic situation was in Germany during the Nazi era, and you can imagine how bad the situation must have been in the armaments production industries
    5
  5231. Open mindedness is a rare thing these days. I don't expect you to always agree with me - in fact, if you sometimes don't agree with me, then it means you're thinking, and that's what I want to see :)
    5
  5232. You're right, comrade!
    5
  5233. In my opinion, the closest any nation came to Capitalism was Britain in the mid-1800s. That's why living standards boomed during that time. The USA was probably a close second, but all of this came to an end in 1914. But they weren't anywhere near fully Capitalist because they had a combination of things like socialized law enforcement, a socialized judicial system, socialized finances (tax and central banking - on and off for the USA), a socialized army, and plenty of regulations and laws that prevented or interfered with the market process, leading to disaster. So no, an economy that's based on private property rights hasn't yet existed, and certainly doesn't exist right now. And just to clarify: The NHS was created by the socialist Labour Party. Socialized 'health care' is Socialism. Karl Marx called for central banks in the Communist Manifesto. Why would that be? Because they're a way of socializing the financial system.
    5
  5234. But yes, I could try changing the voice to Darth Vader 😂
    5
  5235. Just checked and yes, I made a mistake here. It is 1941, not 1942. The source (Popov) randomly jumps back for a page to 1941, and I didn't notice the year change... I will make a pinned comment to address this, and will probably do a video about it too.
    5
  5236. I kinda fudged the word so it's no wonder you didn't catch it. My bad. The sentence was 'oh good, Hitler's coming along, we can actually be employed now" - meaning, we can all stop being unemployed and have jobs in the army :)
    5
  5237. Wow, thanks! I like the fact you say this on this video, which is probably the first in a while which isn't the super-quality type haha
    5
  5238. Well, the reason I'm working my way through the North African Campaign (admittingly slowly) is so I can compare Monty to what came before. Then work through Torch, Tunisia, Sicily and Italy before heading to Normandy. By this point, we'll all know how good Patton and Monty and all the generals were. So yes, I'm playing the long game, so stick around ;)
    5
  5239. They will primarily be 5-10 minute videos, but with the occasional longer video popped in. I'll be honest though, it took a lot of effort to get this done in time, which is why there's no music in the video. I simply ran out of time!
    5
  5240. I do intend to do St Nazaire at the very least as this was a Patreon request. I also want to do Dieppe too as that's clearly important. And I'm glad you enjoyed Operation Biting as I think that was one of my better ones.
    5
  5241. As I said in the video, I need to do the History Theory video first because it will be essential before I cover the economics and politics stuff going forward.
    5
  5242. I'm glad someone understands! I hope you get better soon, Merry Christmas to you too
    5
  5243. As I said in the video, no. I haven't watched it, have no intention to do so, and I don't see any reason to respond. Most of my viewers who have watched it don't think it's worth a reply either.
    5
  5244. This is my current aim. I have just got the Halder Diaries, and can't wait to make a few videos on that, since he was the guy who championed this view of the German army in ww2.
    5
  5245. Hey David, yeah I'm glad you agree it was mainly an infantry war. Hopefully gives extra incentive for your work on Wikipedia, since that's the main part of the war :)
    5
  5246. No they did not! And again, why is everyone asking me to read Suvorov? As shown in this video, there is no way the Soviets were ready to attack in 1941.
    5
  5247. The conclusion is that the warfare on the Eastern Front is not a tank vs tank afair, and that it was a mix, with infantry being a very important part of that (plus AT and artillery). A lot of people see this war as a "Tiger bears T-34" war, but that's not what it is. Also, I wanted to explain why the Germans did so well during Barbarossa, and offer another more suggestions as to why they didn't do so well later on. So really, there was multiple conclusions. And I'm sorry if you already knew all this, but I get comments every day saying about how the Soviets had great tanks and how the Germans were better at tank warfare... so I wanted to provide people with some perspective. And no, tanks were super important. They just shouldn't be used against other tanks. Obviously they will run into other tanks, and they need to be able to take them out. But that's not their primary purpose.
    5
  5248. Well, I can't mention everything! But you're right, the Luftwaffe also played a very important role in getting German forces to Stalingrad. In a lot of the fighting, the Germans would have been in more trouble than they were in if it wasn't for Stuka support.
    5
  5249. There's a very vocal but minor portion of the west which isn't open to new ideas and wants to see the Germans as superior in every way (as the German themselves at the time claimed to be). But a majority are open to new ideas and are willing to change their views when presented with strong evidence and a compelling argument. This in itself is encouraging 😊
    5
  5250. Glad you did too!
    5
  5251. I agree, it's a very good read and can recommend it. But it can't be read alone. Urquhart does make lots of mistakes himself so his account must be read with others to see what mistakes he made and get the full picture.
    5
  5252. From the first page of Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics: "Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources that have alternative uses." So when I said "scarce resources that have alternative uses", I had him pop up
    5
  5253. Yes, why?
    5
  5254. I actually think the answer might be "logistics" - not having enough supplies or troops in the area
    5
  5255. That's why it's classed as a valid source, even if it's one of the worst. You can still glean information from a memoir, but you've got to be careful and verify as much of it as you can using other sources.
    5
  5256. I agree that "peer reviewed" histories are censorship. Luckily, self-publishing is also a thing. Nonetheless, the principle remains true that the more time we have to wrestle with the contradictions etc the better the history becomes.
    5
  5257. Welcome to early-club!
    5
  5258. I understand, but it's difficult to do when history lies in the heart of the debate. Without the opposition, it's difficult to know if you're right or wrong. The pushback from the critics has caused me to dive deeper in the topics, unearthing information that I and many people didn't know. So in some ways I need the haters.
    5
  5259. Joint first!
    5
  5260. It's actually about 60% if you include the navy and air force, plus Japan. However, if we factor in that the Soviets also (practically) allied with Germany in 1939, then the damage done to Poland, France and the other countries occupied in 1939-1941 could have been significantly reduced, meaning that the Soviets wouldn't have had to shoulder so much of the work. In addition, you have massive material and financial support from the West, a naval blockade, and an air campaign that significantly impacted the Axis ability to conduct the way. Thus, it's not as clear cut as just counting casualties, as explained in the video.
    5
  5261. "Its only 200 years, and give Johnson goverment few years more" Technically, slavery has never been abolished if you count taxation.
    5
  5262. "Don't blame banks for war-induced inflation." The war is just the excuse for them to print currency. They printed paper, increasing the amount of currency units, drove up prices, and then took the silver off the market and shipped it back to England. That's why there was a ship with 100 tons of silver coins travelling from Bombay to England that was sunk by a German submarine https://lunaticg.blogspot.com/2015/05/100-tons-silver-coins-found-in-world.html
    5
  5263. Except Chuikov had gold teeth
    5
  5264. :( I think the battle is more dramatic this way. It wasn't about one guy, it was about everyone banding together to forge victory out of a desperate struggle.
    5
  5265. Not to Georgia no. They got to the northern area of the Caucasus Mountains in late 1942, but we're brought to a halt by Budyonny's troops.
    5
  5266. Start here https://youtu.be/y011Pdrb3Sk
    5
  5267. You clearly know more than I do. So can you please explain to me why the Marxists, Fascists and National Socialists all embrace dialectics?
    5
  5268. "It is not a RELIGION it is an IDEOLOGY." They are the same thing.
    5
  5269. The point of this video was to introduce the topic. There's plenty of evidence, which is why I made a follow up video jammed packed full of statistics. Link https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Sadly, most of the people who clicked on the follow up video only watched the first 5 minutes before concluding that I didn't mention a load of stuff (which I did) and that I was anti-German (nope, I praised the Germans for their achievements at the end, but they didn't get that far). They also complained that I was pro-Russian (nope, neutral) and that my sources are biased (and the people saying that were using Krivosheev - who was as biased as they get). Reality being that this is a big topic. Bullshit or not, I can't cover everything in a short video like this.
    5
  5270. Except 99% don't believe in the alternative. I'm certainly not the only person to "put it this way". I don't create the scripts to these videos in a vacuum.
    5
  5271. Revising history is what historians do. "Distorians" are the ones that distort history https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    5
  5272. To all the people saying "there's no evidence the Nazis were socialist", I've made multiple videos on this topic and have provided an overwhelming amount of evidence showing you that they were definitely socialist. Start with this video https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w I've also addressed the counterarguments here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (this includes a response to numerous commenters, Redditors, and the Finnish Bolshevik). And here's me responding to two socialists who have supposedly "debunked" me https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    5
  5273. Yeah, it's something I need to do at some point
    5
  5274. It's more of an influence rather than a direct cause
    5
  5275. Yeah, I doubt that many people will get notified on this one... It's really annoying!
    5
  5276. It doesn't matter because Kant and Hegel (and Marx) all rejected reality. They dismissed logic and reason in favour of mysticism, and as such can be dismissed, since if this reality doesn't exist, then neither do they or their arguments.
    5
  5277. Evening!
    5
  5278. Thank you, it's lingering, but I'm sure I'll recover soon
    5
  5279. Well done guys!
    5
  5280. Yeah, a couple people pointed that out. I did check but I must have missed it somehow.
    5
  5281. "i mean sure but a bit of state intervention is not necessarily a bad thing" In your opinion, perhaps. However, the point is that Thatcher didn't free up the market. We still have taxes, inflation, regulations, wage controls, price controls, and a lot of the corporations and banks are being directly funded by the state. Thatcher's industrial policies were a slight step in the correct direction, but overall it's hard to conclude that she was low tax or pro-free market.
    5
  5282. Keep ignoring the evidence, racist.
    5
  5283. And yet, Leftists are the biggest racists around, just like their hero Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg?si=R97pmYc-05T8Sm7F
    5
  5284. "helped to built sympathy for Great Britain as the "sympathic underdog",undermined the nazi legitimacy as nothing more than pirates." That's something I hadn't considered before, but now that you mention it, that's absolutely true. The only thing I would say is that this was from an American/Western point of view. From an Axis or Soviet point of view, probably not so much.
    5
  5285. It was the first proper break I've had for about 4 years. I went full-time 3.5 years ago, and was working hard for a good six months or so before that, so it's been about 4 years. I don't think I'll last another 4 years, so I do think I'll be taking the odd week here or there from now on, and I'm going to attempt to take more odd-days off too.
    5
  5286. I don't have the time to answer your questions, so instead, I pointed you to where you can get the answers. But you're not willing to read the answers because you're afraid. Well, that's on you, not me. You can continue to state ineffectively that "capitalism" is corrupt, and since I'm not a capitalist, I will agree with you, it is corrupt. This is why we need a free market.
    5
  5287. It's really good regarding the economy of the Third Reich, and then the exporting of inflation to the rest of Axis Europe. I, personally, see the United States (with the dollar) doing the same thing to the rest of the world right now (exporting inflation), and think it would be better to study this period to understand our current inflation woes than Weimar Germany.
    5
  5288. I admit that this does seem like a losing battle, with only a handful of people fighting for the actual truth. However, even if we lose in the end, I'm determined to go down swinging.
    5
  5289. Socialism is bad because it wants to take us back to the hunter gatherer stage, despite the fact that such an economic system can barely sustain even a small population. The advent of a freer market resulted in the most unprecedented economic boom in human history, despite the emergence of socialism. And as the west implements more socialist policies, the worse the economy becomes, and that's not a coincidence.
    5
  5290. Yes, but I'm 4 years behind with the Q&A's right now, and the current way I've been doing things isn't working. I'm intending to change things after Gazala goes out next week, and I talked about the issue in the recent short update video here https://youtu.be/6QUrntk4U5A
    5
  5291. I'm not libertarian, and I disagree with you.
    5
  5292. Shareholders are not part of socialist ideology. The company is run collectively via the share system, but the individual shareholder isn't necessarily socialist. There is no free market but that's a whole topic in itself.
    5
  5293. Dismissing legitimate sources is an invalid way of doing history. I'm aware of Stoddard's views, but I must still use him as primary source evidence, as not doing so is a distortion of history. To learn why, see this video https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI
    5
  5294. And here's a big lesson in basic economics: the laws preventing the exploitation of plebs actually cause the exploitation of plebs in the first place.
    5
  5295. I wouldn't mind a break (not had a week off since I left retail, which was early 2018). However, the YouTube algorithm will punish the channel. They say it doesn't affect anything, but that's rubbish because a lot of YouTube creators have showed evidence that it does. Skipping a video will hurt the entire channel badly, and it would take ages to regain the momentum. Plus, viewers will most likely start not receiving notifications, thus making things even worse. Thus, I won't skip a week, but I will do less stressful videos like this one as a change of pace and to catch my breath :)
    5
  5296. Battle of Gazala will definitely be the next Battlestorm. I'm in the right frame of mind for it
    5
  5297. Yes, it really comes down to either peacing out with Britain, or toppling the government of the Soviet Union. And they have to do it before November 1941 at the latest, or possibly eek out a victory in 1942/43 if they play Blau right. But on all of these goals they're relying on chance more than anything. Once the USA comes into play late 42 and 43, it's game over.
    5
  5298. It's on pause until Stalingrad is done because I'm struggling to do much else
    5
  5299. FIRST! Which AnCap video?
    5
  5300. Neither do I...!
    5
  5301. Every 4 weeks.
    5
  5302. Oh wow! Which episode is your favourite?
    5
  5303. More like "Return of The [Imperator] Knight"
    5
  5304. It's true though!
    5
  5305. Logistics mainly, but the British couldn't concentrate their forces there because they were fighting all over the place, and the Germans were mainly committed to the Eastern Front.
    5
  5306. Thank you Nigel! I've relied quite heavily on Pitt for the position of troops in these videos (although definitely not exclusively), which are the best book series on the North African Campaign in my opinion. Barnett has also questioned the generals a lot in his book "The Desert Generals" although may have taken it a little too far. The graphics are the essential part in my opinion. It's incredibly hard to picture the events of such a complex battle in your head. If nothing else, this is why I'm doing this series - just to allow people to actually see the battle play out.
    5
  5307. Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary, Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten war— Quoth the Fox “We need more OIL!”
    5
  5308. I'm glad you like it :) It's true that the Italians had more resources than the British at this stage of the conflict. To be fair to Graziani, it sounds as though he was pushed into doing what he did on the coast with the 10th Army. But by the same token, there were more options available to him. And for the man who wrote Italy's armoured and mobile warfare doctrine, you'd think he'd be the first to say yes to said schemes. Like you said, they could have hunted the LRDG, or even counterattacked with their own mobile patrols. It makes you wonder why they didn't, and the leadership issue is definitely relevant here
    5
  5309.  @azkrouzreimertz9784  Don't be criticizing the holy text that is the Wikipedia. Bless it, and Manstein
    5
  5310. I'm good thanks! How are you? Been looking forward to releasing this video because I knew it would... get an interesting reaction
    5
  5311. Yes, however the guys share the views of 99% of all my detractors. And I've been wanting to do a video like this for a while, because I don't think people realize what my original Hitler's Socialism video was about. As I explained here, it was originally a response video itself!
    5
  5312. I started backing up on Bitchute, but now it won't let me upload any more. Videos get stuck "processing" forever.
    5
  5313. I've addressed the Night of the Long Knives issue in the Hitler's Socialism video. Go to the timestamp and watch that section.
    5
  5314. Every time I scroll into the recent comments of my videos, there's loads of comments with people spouting the same views as these two guys did in this video. This is why I wanted to reply to this, and try and get through to some of them
    5
  5315. If you are limited in your ability to use your property, then you (the private "owner") have lost control of that property to the public collective (the State). Taxation is a seizure of the private property (your cash is yours, is it not?). And at any moment, your business can be expropriated by the State, as happened in Britain recently with the private hospitals, the private railway companies (operating on the State railways), and what happened in Venezuela during their Socialist revolution. It's either private property, or public property. It cannot be both https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5316. The Labour Party is full of anti-Semites, Corbyn did nothing about it (showing his guilt), Marxism is inherently anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg and since you cannot face the music you're denying reality.
    5
  5317. The German version (under a different name) is available for much cheaper. But I think the only thing we can do is email Rainer Zitelmann himself and ask him to do another run. I've been tempted to ask him if I could read out his entire book on my YouTube channel, but never got round to it
    5
  5318. Glad to hear it!
    5
  5319.  @SwingDancer61  That's the way I approach it too. I don't think these guys are being dishonest - I used to believe what they believed too, and that was because I was ignorant, just as they are now. So they're not dishonest, they just haven't seen the evidence.
    5
  5320.  @thewarlock539  Money is evil. We should redistribute it to the unemployed and the single mums because they deserve evil money
    5
  5321. Ownership and control are one and the same thing. If you do not have control over something, you do not own it. Thus, when the German State controlled the German industrialists and their enterprises, they had "ownership" in name only. "State Capitalism" is just another name for Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5322. Haha yeah I'm good. Just tired and feeling ill, thanks
    5
  5323. Yes, although that wasn't an option until the very end of Fall Blau. Apparently, if the Germans had reached Baku, the Turks may have joined the Axis. How much that is true though, or wishful thinking on the part of the Germans, I'm not sure.
    5
  5324. I'd recommend the book I mentioned in the video. It's a great introduction to the Winter War and talks a little more in depth about Mannerheim. And I do think there is an English biography on Mannerheim on Amazon, but I'm not sure how good it will be
    5
  5325. Wow thanks Kaspar! The good thing about having smaller numbers of people watching these videos is that I get time to read and respond to (almost) every comment. I'd struggle to do that with a big audience :)
    5
  5326. Don't worry, as soon as it's working again I'll just download more RAM. That will make up for the blast processing reduction.
    5
  5327. That's very true. The good news is I upgraded the CPU fan, and before I had to shut the computer down again for the PSU, I noticed that the CPU was twice as cool with the new fan (about 33 degrees idle) compared to the stock fan I replaced (60s idle). So there is a small silver lining out of this.
    5
  5328. I'd rather people know! I don't like breaking promises. I actually still feel guilty because, through no fault of my own, this is the first Monday this year where there will be no video (it was my New Year's Resolution)
    5
  5329. Yes you were! Congratulations!
    5
  5330. Unfortunately, I've been limited to English sources. I'm very much aware of the problems of the sources I've used (mainly pro-German) and have tried to compensate, but the reality is that Courland is not really a popular subject in the west and therefore few people have written much on it. My German isn't good enough yet to utilize their sources, and the Soviets wrote practically nothing on the 6 Battles as they saw them as a shideshow to the main event - Berlin. Luckily, Hunt's "Blood in the Forest" has done a good job on describing the Latvians caught in the middle of the conflict, so I intend to lean upon him a little.
    5
  5331. That's good to hear! At least one of my Patreons, plus several viewers have asked me about productivity tips, so I may have to provide some soon.
    5
  5332. XXX Corps were not slow. They were on time when they reached Nijmegen. They then suffered a critical 36 hour delay at Nijmegen because the 82nd did not take one of their objectives, which they could and should have done
    5
  5333. Honesty is awesome :) this is why this is a historical debate, and a controversial topic. It's left to interpretation. This is why for many history is classed as an 'art' (some may not agree with that statement) - because when it comes down to it, it's about interpretating the facts and weighing up the different sides of the argument. Yes, science can prove there is paint on the canvas, but how you perceive that paint changes your view on the events.
    5
  5334. Being from Estonia, I'm curious what you think about the Courland series?
    5
  5335. I felt sad taking out the book marks from all the Stalingrad books as I was finished with them...
    5
  5336. 1st on my end!
    5
  5337. There's a few small operations within both Courland and Stalingrad - the next Battlestorms. After that, who knows!? And, while I do intend to cover the Holocaust and Holodomor, this video has confirmed that I won't be able to monetize such videos (see pinned comment). I also suspect that YouTube doesn't really promote demonetized videos which is discouraging. So yes I will do them (probably after Courland), but right now I'm a bit disheartened by YouTube's anti-history stance.
    5
  5338. Haha glad you liked it!
    5
  5339. I certainly had to go to Google Street view to figure out where places where. Just be warned, as mentioned in the video some of the place names have changed since 1942
    5
  5340. I disagree because it's wrong, and on top of that it is also the Nazi argument, that's my argument.
    5
  5341. I would say that if anyone hasn't read 1984 by Orwell, they really should
    5
  5342. Good evening to you too!
    5
  5343. He's not been hitting first much recently. I'm guessing he's been busy
    5
  5344. Thank you! You should comment more often... I do know that there's a silent majority, and I shouldn't focus as much on the critics, but it's difficult and almost impossible to ignore them
    5
  5345. Then the question becomes: if your argument is that businessmen are bad, then how can you argue against the Nazi narrative, since the arguments are one and the same?
    5
  5346.  @ltdike123  No, I should be apologizing to you... I wish I could pull a miracle and get the series finished for him, but I know I can't. I wish you and your father all the luck in the world.
    5
  5347. My advice is to specialize. Pick one limited battle and read a few books on it. E.g. Kursk (which is only 10 days of battle)
    5
  5348. Germany started mobilizing for war in 1933. The Allies and Soviets did not do that. Now yes, Hitler had not expected a full-scale war in 1939, and they weren't fully-prepared, but they were better prepared than the allies were at that time. My videos on the Soviet artillery, tanks, and air force for Barbarossa will show you how badly the Soviets were not prepared for war, and I will do more videos in the future for Britain and France.
    5
  5349. I will at some point, but Stalingrad must come first
    5
  5350. In my experience, about 98% of salty comments did not watch more than 2 minutes of a video. You can tell this because the drop-off rate on my disputed videos is huge compared to other normal videos, and the salty comments are refuted by what I said in the video (proving they didn't watch it). A good example is my Myth and Reality of Order 227, where many of the haters are calling me a "Commie" or "Socialist", and are very silent when I tell them that I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video which they've clearly not watched all the way through.
    5
  5351. Yes, the centre of the city gets a lot of attention, and we'll be seeing more of the specific locations you mentioned in the coming videos 👍
    5
  5352. Oi! Do your homework! (Unless it's English homework... nobody needs to learn English now that we're all speaking American)
    5
  5353. Awesome! You definitely won't go wrong with the three books I mentioned - they're some of the best I have. And I'll probably do more like this in the future :)
    5
  5354. Everyone is biased. Doesn't matter who they are, they're biased. For example, at the minute I'm learning German, but I can only read English sources. This is bias because, unless something is translated into English, I'm pretty much reliant on what other historians think. So everyone is biased (doesn't matter who they are, they're biased). Therefore the question you're really asking is - do I have some sort of fascist or communist political agenda? And the answer to that is a straight no. To take your example about the Ukraine - I've looked into (and will do a video one day on) the Holodomor, and I've already done a video on the Purges (admittingly focused on the Red Army, but I've studied the Purges in general when at college). So I'm fully aware of the brutality of the Soviet regime, and Stalin. At the same time, I want people to understand and have absolutely no question about the fact that the Wehrmacht committed atrocities in the East, and that it wasn't "just the SS" or some rogues, but it was a systematic effort by the entire army and state, and that the soldiers were politically motivated to do that. However I think you may get certain impressions from some of my videos simply because I may have overreacted to the fascists/wehraboos who've flooded the comment sections of those videos. If you go to some of my "Your Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front" or "The Numbers say it all" videos, you will see a warzone in the comment sections, with people saying I'm anti-German. But if you go to other videos, like my Croatian Legion or Kampfgruppen videos, or even my video on Fall Blau where I said Hitler was correct in his military strategy, you will see that people are accusing me of being pro-German. As I've said a few times now, I can't be both. Honestly, I think people are trying to pick fault with what I do because that furthers their agenda. "Don't listen to this guy because he's a communist, come over to our fascist side." or "You're clearly fascist and people shouldn't believe in your lies because we communists are correct." It's the same technique that the denialists used - cast doubt on something to slowly chip away at its credibility and slowly recuit people to their cause. The reality is that I want to incite debate. I want to question people's ideas and perceptions - both left and right. I want to get people to think, and to discuss history. If people are discussing history, in my opinion, the world becomes a better place. Here's a link to a video of mine which you may want to watch https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    5
  5355. If it's unconquerable, how did the Russians conquer it?
    5
  5356. "Why do you try to put a comment like this when it is proven wrong by it's own thumbnail?" Because OP is ignorant of my views. He's jumped to the opinion that I'm a "far right fascist blah blah blah" as his programming has ordered.
    5
  5357. I've done this before a few times, mainly to catch people out. The lesson here is that people should always watch the video in full, and it's a punishment for those with poor attention spans 😉
    5
  5358. "How is any of this surprising? We built +27,000 liberty ships, +640,000 jeeps, +295,000 aircraft between 1941-45. Then the war ended, and we just stopped doing that (at least on this scale)." And the economy grew! Strange isn't it
    5
  5359. "Hoover was the opposite of a socialist: he was a non-interventionist. His response to the depression was -- do nothing" Yes, as Leonard Wei has said, the myth is that Hoover did nothing. But actually, Hoover intervened massively. I quoted him directly at the end of this video saying as such!
    5
  5360. I'm just going off what the source said. They said the older generals were removed (although many returned later) and new generals were promoted. The new generals were the ones that had had a formal military education, rather than those that had Civil War experience. It's also stated that Tukhachevsky and some of the higher commend were exceptions to the rule - the further down the ranks you go, the more of the "old brass" you have being removed. To what extent this is true, I've no idea. Unless I get a whole of a table that listed the 41,000 purged officers and their education, I can't say. But the sources do make it clear that this was the case. And bakters - links are automatically censored by YouTube and have to be approved by me. As far as I'm aware there's no option to change that. So if you see any comment on my channel with a link (up to this point at least because YT might change it) you know it will have been approved by me. My advice is not to post links if you want your comments being seen straight away because I may not have time to go through and accept them for several hours - or even days.
    5
  5361. How was it pointless? As part of a fringe-propaganda tin-hat "alternative" media based on opinions and emotions rather than facts, logic and evidence, he is an equivalent to the Editor of Pravda. That therefore is a good comparison people today can relate to which highlights the absurdity of the Soviet decision.
    5
  5362. Yes, nine hours. And this is without the Pienaar video
    5
  5363. Thank you for the tag suggestions. I always forget about that. I've added all three :)
    5
  5364. I'll forgive you 😂
    5
  5365. Yes a compilation with some minor corrections :) glad you enjoyed it. I had the most fun with this that I've had with any Battlestorm so I'm glad you found it entertaining
    5
  5366. It's a rare treat :)
    5
  5367. Also, the sources I used are listed in the pinned comment.
    5
  5368. Since this is a history channel, when I say Germans, I'm referring to the Germans at the time, not now. So yes, the Germans at the time were National Socialist.
    5
  5369. Correct, socialism doesn't work.
    5
  5370. Yes he absolutely did.
    5
  5371. There's a difference in explaining his reasoning and justifying him. I've explained Hitler's reasoning in much the same way, so calm down.
    5
  5372. I concur with FR. Russians are not a problem, but people defending Stalin of Hitler etc are.
    5
  5373. The Chieftain sees tanks from a tactical point of view. I see them from an operational and strategic point of view. Having a tank take on a tank is a waste. It's better to use an anti-tank gun or platform. Especially when that tank could be exploiting to the rear of enemy positions and defeating the infantry, artillery and support units.
    5
  5374. What about if the Soviet Union collapsed in 1941-1943? Not conquered, but collapsed, in coup or simple disintegration? Some authors have suggested that the Soviets won the war by simply not collapsing in 1941.
    5
  5375. That's why I made sure to say that the USSR government and leadership was still evil because I agree - both sides weren't innocent in this war.
    5
  5376. Well, I do think Chuikov was a good commander. And I definitely want to do a video about him soon. That said (remaining balanced as possible) he does have his flaws.
    5
  5377. "I'm assuming it's one of the copy protection errors that maps have." No, it was deliberate on my part. The village is really called Bobrovskii, but it was so close to the name Bob Ross that I just had to change it
    5
  5378. Glad to hear you found the channel 👍
    5
  5379. Nope, you are correct, it's my fault for copy-pasting and not changing the text - sorry about that
    5
  5380. "What books would you recommend on the North African front?" Best series I've come across so far is "The Crucible of War" by Barrie Pitt. Three books, and very good.
    5
  5381. My poor animation skills :(
    5
  5382. I was tempted to take a trip to the fort as I was making this video, however I never did. I will go one day. But glad you thought this was accurate :)
    5
  5383. I don't know about "heeding" it, but it's defintely a rare event
    5
  5384. Only about 50 out of 13,000 apparently
    5
  5385. It depends who you're talking to, and what you mean be "The Few". I'm intrigued by the idea that it could be seen as a "banker's war", but the evidence I've seen has so far left me unconvinced. The videos and books on the topic seem to be too vague, and reliant on snippets of evidence. They're also contradicted by other pieces of evidence that I've already presented. So I'm not convinced.
    5
  5386. You're absolutely right. However, I've heard that a lot of Reddit accounts are actually bots, and I'm wondering if a lot of the "critics" I've responded to on here are actually real people. Sometimes they're so incredibly unintelligent that they don't even pass the Turing Test. Is that because they are human, but are stupid beyond belief? Or is it because they're bots with pre-programmed sayings and behaviours. One example I can give is that almost every socialist counters me by saying "TIK thinks the Roman Empire is socialist!" They all repeat this as if it's some sort of "gotchya!". But is this really the case? Not a single one of them has ever stopped and thought about whether what they're saying makes sense. In this case, I just respond back with: "Did the Roman Empire have social ownership of the means of production?" And obviously, the answer is 'no'. So "my definitions" don't say that the Roman Empire is socialist, and yet every single one of these socialists repeat this line. Where did they all learn to say this? It seriously makes me wonder if they're bots.
    5
  5387.  @joehua  I have exactly 14 accounts banned on this channel. Four are advertising spam accounts, three I'm convinced are the same person, and the rest have spammed my comments with nothing but dribble. I'm pretty certain that a third of the comments in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video were from one troll account (now blocked). Four of these 14 accounts have been blocked this week - including Royeaux, who has commented thousands of times. The reason for the recent purge of these four accounts is because my patience is done with them. After thousands upon thousands of spammy comments, I'm done with them. And clearing these four accounts has reduced the amount of new stupid comments by about 80%. I don't mind if you disagree with me. There's plenty of people in these comments right now who do. I don't mind that. But I do mind spamming. I do mind terrible behaviour, especially from people who are eager to restrict my speech. So, the rule is simple: behave yourself. And before you scream "free speech", remember that I'm a believer in private property. You can have as much freedom on your own property as you like, but when you're on my property you have to obey the rules. You're free to complain about my "censorship" (if you can call the blocking of 14 spam or troll accounts "censorship"), just as I'm free to complain about YouTube censorship. I disagree with YouTube's arbitrary and random censorship, but respect their right to enact it, since it's their property and they can do what they want.
    5
  5388. Burma is on my list of things to cover. Not sure when I'll get to it, but I will
    5
  5389. That's good to know!
    5
  5390. Literally the dictionary definition: "unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others"
    5
  5391. Does the number one have consciousness? Because they think Society has consciousness, as it's not just a collection of individuals (or digits), but a living organism that has a mind of it's own. That's why it's spiritual in nature.
    5
  5392. Trained philosopher? You mean Hegelian. Try learning how to write using paragraphs. It's funny how my critics (now all claiming to be "philosophers all of a sudden) have trouble actually providing coherent counterarguments that don't rely on opinions and fallacies. You're making massive assumptions. You assume that I haven't read anything outside"my field". You've no idea what I know. The first book I ever read all the way through as a kid was Plato's Republic, which I've read twice. It's as badly written as your wall of text, and the "logic" held within it is terrible. Plato believes that children should be torn from their mothers and fathers and placed in the hands of random strangers (where they're more likely to be abused by the way). Disgusting to say the least. Maybe we should start calling Plato "playdoh". And yet here you are; a fellow "philosopher". Don't you mean "theologian"? Go away shaman. I work in the real world, not the one you actualise into existence like Giovanni Gentile. The solid, concrete, material evidence is far more substantial than your fascist beliefs. Stick to spirituality, and go back to Reddit with the rest of the slobs.
    5
  5393. "I think society does exist, because we (as humans) will it into existence." Correct. That's the process that Giovanni Gentile called "actual idealism" or "actualism". It's a spiritual creation since it doesn't really exist but people believe it does.
    5
  5394. Thanks for the recommendation. I'll add it to my list.
    5
  5395. "when in reality by this time 62nd Army costist of 6000 men" Sorry, I don't think I made this clear. That 6,000 men is only for the area north of the Barrikady Factory. The 62nd Army had more men elsewhere in Stalingrad.
    5
  5396. Good suggestion on the next episode title - I like it! 1. Don't forget the censorship. Chuikov may have wanted to tell the truth, but may have been prevented. 2. I obviously don't support the execution of people, but it was desperate times and Chuikov may not have had a choice. I can see both sides, so I'll let others be the judge on that. 3. Yes, people were complaining previously how the Germans didn't target the ships on the Volga, but here's an example of where they did and they failed. In other instances, they did destroy boats, so it's not a clear yes or no answer. German artillery and Stukas was somewhat effective in interdicting the 62nd Army's supply lines, but there's no real way of calculating how effective it was or wasn't. All we can really say is that their actions weren't enough. And was it a waste of shells? Apparently not because they kept doing it.
    5
  5397. He was a National Socialist, not a fascist. And yes, there is a difference between the two ideologies as I showed in this other video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko?si=FDLjZgsh3HApAAbD
    5
  5398. Thank you for informing me! The only thing is that I think my strength lies in crafting solid videos backed by sources, rather than interviews.
    5
  5399. Stay ignorant 👍🏼
    5
  5400. Except they didn't really get better. In fact, it's doubtful that the Soviet economy ever recovered, as I discussed here https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w?si=HB9bugzui4xy3vkv
    5
  5401. When I said Hitler was a socialist, the counterarguments were that he was funded into power by the capitalists, he killed Ernst Röhm (proving he wasn't a socialist), and he "privatised" the industries. I'm just providing overwhelming amounts of evidence to show how none of these counterarguments stand up to scrutiny, and that Hitler genuinely was a (non-Marxist) socialist.
    5
  5402. Hitler's Socialism was economically interventionist. They nationalised over 500 industries. They synchronised the whole economy under the policy of Gleichschaltung. The Left then lied and said it was a free market, relying on dubious sources and ignoring what actually happened inside the Third Reich.
    5
  5403. I can't correct it. Once a video is uploaded, it's uploaded, as YouTube doesn't allow any means to edit it. And I'm not taking the whole video down for what is, obviously, a minor mistype. You and everyone else knows the spelling of the name, so it isn't a "big" deal.
    5
  5404. As explained in the video, an estimated 70 to 77% of SA recruits where former Communists.
    5
  5405. So why were non-homosexuals and women targeted as well? And if Hitler was a homosexual, why would he stand with the Wehrmacht rather than the SA? Also, why would he take on the Conservatives and kill two army generals? Your narrative doesn't fit.
    5
  5406. I'm afraid it is your education that has failed you. The evidence of Hitler being funded by the capitalists is dubious at best https://youtu.be/fNvfzJwyzX8?si=SsQ5AIuqf5gJy55_
    5
  5407. Yes I do.
    5
  5408. Here's the other video https://youtu.be/HNrOvGkxqac A lot of German-speakers were debating it, but the word "synchronisation" seemed to fit the best for what was described. One person said it was like "synchronised swimming", while others were refering to circuit boards...
    5
  5409. The only problem is, of course, if you reject the Russian Revolution, it'll be difficult to explain why the split occurred in all the Socialist parties, but I'm sure you can find an explanation for that.
    5
  5410. Everything I say in this video is cited with references at the bottom of the screen. Nothing I'm saying isn't backed up by evidence, and I've used sources from all sides to give the most accurate account possible. If you don't like my point about the Russian Revolution, skip past it. The video isn't about the Russian Revolution, and you're missing out on so much due to an emotional reaction. Patience is a virtue.
    5
  5411. Where's your evidence that he was "spying" on these parties? The only evidence of him "spying" only comes AFTER the fall of the Bavarian Soviets. Your logic is flawed simply because you're too busy running your mouth instead of actually looking at the evidence.
    5
  5412. But is that really the case?
    5
  5413. Yep, it's frustrating
    5
  5414. I watched half his video, it's not worth responding to. His audience hasn't watched my videos, so he's able to lie to them and twist what I said in them to match his agenda. Such deplorable tactics aren't worthy of a response.
    5
  5415. Then I shall use it irregardless!
    5
  5416. Yes, quite a few people have asked about this over the years, so it was a good question by Diego
    5
  5417. I could do with a break, but no rest for me! 😂
    5
  5418. I'm definitely considering doing more shorts. Thanks!
    5
  5419. Good to hear! How are you finding it so far?
    5
  5420. I actually did, but I think in this case I just messed it up.
    5
  5421. FIRST! Well done!
    5
  5422. It's alright, Paulus had to stop outside the city for a while to rest and refuel
    5
  5423. Thank you! Glad you liked the video. And yes, it's something that's intrigued me for a while. Now I've looked into a few different campaigns, I can see there is a correlation. It might be both the combined arms and logistics elements
    5
  5424. It was an abbreve
    5
  5425. You are correct Jamie! Thanks for pointing that out. Now, off to the Gulag with you.
    5
  5426. I actually disagree. In some cases, the Ariete Division performed better than the German panzer divisions in Crusader.
    5
  5427. I don't hate it. I just know it's deeply flawed https://youtu.be/UTgf3UHMBjY
    5
  5428. FIRST! Well done!
    5
  5429. Three American bomber groups missed Dresden and hit Prague, which is 120 kilometres away (72 miles)
    5
  5430. "This is one of your best videos." Oh wow, thank you! I'm glad you think so
    5
  5431. What's getting you down?
    5
  5432. Either next week, or maybe after the next Stalingrad. It's hard to say because I'm struggling to get the Stalingrad stuff done at the moment
    5
  5433. That book was actually a jokey Christmas present from my friends. At the top it says "A digital arts book for kids!"
    5
  5434. "Penal battalions were given the most dangerous work. They were sent ahead through minefields or on air attacks into the teeth of German defences. They could be reinstated only if they were wounded. ‘Atoned with his own blood’ was added to their reports.” Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Books, 1999. Page 160. I tend to trust Overy. I disagree with some of his interpretations of evidence, but I believe he's only presenting evidence in this case, so it's trustworthy.
    5
  5435. As a leader, you're only as good as the people below you.
    5
  5436. Will I start leaving cliffhangers in the comments section? Find out next week on...
    5
  5437. Thanks Michael! It gets better next episode (if you can believe that). But yes, this is a great battle in my opinion. Shame it isn't that well-known
    5
  5438. "And have you heard that Dave Rubin and Jordan Peterson will maybe make an alternative to Patreon?" Yes I have. They actually released another video before on this topic. It will be good if they can, although it does seem like the credit card companies have a hidden agenda now, so this could be larger than Patreon itself.
    5
  5439. "The Nazis were Far Right with Centre-Left economic policy" No they weren't, they were far Left in every respect. Please define what you mean by right-wing policially? Are you saying liberalism, democracy, freedom and capitalism go hand in hand with National Socialism? Because that doesn't make much sense to me. Authoritarianism and totalitarianism are definitely Left-wing. You can't have totalitarianism if you don't have a regime that's in total control of the economy - that's the point of "total"-itarianism.
    5
  5440. Seriously? That was a big coincidence!
    5
  5441. Having recorded part of the audio for the next video, I realised this earlier today and cursed myself for not double-checking. But thank you for pointing that out - I'll correct it in the "complete" video.
    5
  5442. That's it. I'm getting constant messages on certain videos saying I don't understand non-military concepts and that I should give up (and "neck myself"). Such hostility and unwillingness to talk/debate makes a mockery of reasonable discourse, freedom of speech, and the concept of historical debate and history itself, since history is all about debate, as I said in a previous video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    5
  5443. 2 million people died in the Gulags during the war years alone, at a time when they were in decline because people were being sent to the front to fight the Axis. Please explain how you'd define this as a "low mortality rate" because 2 million doesn't sound low to me.
    5
  5444. "@TIK I think any number of historians have explained very well why National Socialism really wasn't Socialism. Richard Evans and Adam Tooze both cover this pretty well." Having read their counter-arguments, they made it very clear that it wasn't Marxist-Socialism - which is not what I'm saying it is. This is actually why the National Socialists (who I disagree with on many levels, but on this case I'm in agreement with) say that "academic historians" don't understand. The reality is that these two historians you listed both think Marxist Socialism is the only form of socialism. Again, bog-standard "Socialism" came before "Marxist Socialism" and it is bog-standard "Socialism" that these historians have failed to define.
    5
  5445. When I was getting the screenshots for that part of the video, I read some of the comments on the pages, and on some RT videos... I can't tell if the viewers/commenters were actual people or not, but the phrase "people will believe anything" comes to mind.
    5
  5446. On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187
    5
  5447. They disbanded the private trade unions and replaced them with the state trade union. And there was no alliance with teh industrialists, nor did they "privatise" the businesses (despite the claim they did based on the fact they invented the name "privatization"). The reality was much different - 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good.
    5
  5448. I used to think the same way you did. Then I realised I'd been lied to my entire life. I cannot convince you otherwise because you're unwilling to consider the evidence. My ideology has and always will be the same - tackle the distortions of history. And I can't be a fascist, since Fascism is nationality-socialism. Mussolini got into power in 1922, but the first racial law in Italy came in 1938 (because of Hitler's influence). In 1943 there were still 8,000 Jews in Rome, until the Germans deported them. For Mussolini, being a Jew wasn't an issue, so long as you were Italian (nationality). He wanted the Italian peoples (nationality, not race) to have common control of the means of production. This is why he was a socialist before WW1, then became nationalistic during WW1. He never lost his socialism - he just changed it to be nationalist-socialism rather than international-Marxist-Socialism. And the nationality vs race thing is the difference between National Socialism and Fascism btw.
    5
  5449. I never said he was "normal". But yes, normal people can be mass executioners. The question is, what drives a normal person to become one of those people, and in Hitler's case it was his ideology. The lesson here is that ideologies drive normal people to do insane things.
    5
  5450. Yes, he did see the East like that. However while that is the motivation to go East, that isn't the motivation to go to war for the land and resources in the first place. Again, why not just trade for the land and resources? He HAD to go to war because of the shrinking markets, thus he viewed the East as his "wild east".
    5
  5451. "How is this channel not banned yet? He mentions Hitler and Nazis and context doesn't matter!" Given that channels are getting censored and banned for randomly minor infractions on "rules" that challenge the mainstream, and that this channel's entire purpose is to challenge the mainstream, I'm surprised it hasn't happened (even if just by accident). In fact, that's history's entire purpose! History lies in the heart of the debate. You cannot have history without a challenging debate. So if they do ban this channel, it will only be proof that censorship is king, the traditional mainstream narrative is more important than truth, and that history and free-speech is dead.
    5
  5452. Because they think they have all the answers and don't accept any disagreement. They become totalitarians, and anyone who gets in their way must be immoral and dealt with accordingly. They're right, and everyone else is wrong. It's their way, not anyone else's way.
    5
  5453. "You do realise that Hitler was a scientific Pantheist, right?" There was no "science" (it's Platonism), and I'm aware of the Pantheism, but also the fact that (most) Gnostics are Pantheists too. Pantheism is equally a description of a religion as well as a religion in and of itself. So it would be like saying "Christianity isn't a separate religion, it's just Monotheism". That's not true, because Christians can be monotheists, just like Gnostics can be Pantheists. - "Each time he refers to Nature or Divine Providence or Fate/Forture etc etc, that is his God. Hitler's God is a Darwinian God that favours the superior, pure bloodlines over the lesser or weaker blood which is impure." Yes. Although I would call it "Social Darwinism" not "Darwinism" as there is a difference. - "But don't think Christianity plays no role whatsoever in his worldview. He borrows the idea of a 1000 years of an empire from the Holy Bible (Kingdom of God ruling for 1000 years)..." Exactly, so it's not "Pantheism" as a stand-alone religion. This point actually confirms that it's Gnosticism which borrows from other religions, because that's what Gnosticism is - a parasite religion. - "So, for you to call it ''Gnostic'' and to not blame Christianity's role in the creation of Marxism and Nazism is complete BS." I never said that Christianity doesn't influence Marxism or Nazism. I don't know why you're concluding that, because that's simply not true - I do think they had a role in these movements.
    5
  5454. It's funny because I did pronounce it as an F in this video, due to everyone complaining about it in the past. I'm now thinking my F and Vs are so close that people aren't able to distinguish between them.
    5
  5455. FIRST! (I think) All good, just busy!
    5
  5456. "@TIK well I'm not a socialism expert here nor an exponent of socialism because labels are silly to begin with. Secondly, all modern governments are brutal and oppressive and totalitarian." Socialism = state control. You're complaining that today's governments are oppressive, but advocating socialist ideologies which believe more government as the solution. And then you're calling me delusional. "Just because Big Brother in America and Britain allows you to mentally desensitize yourself with porn and McDonalds using soft power to gain compliance rather than openly oppressive measures like Soviet Union or Nazi Germany doesn't mean you're any more free in the former Liberal societies than you are in the latter two overt oppressive systems." This is my point exactly. Socialism/state control is bad in all its forms. This is why I'm against it, and like to point out how morally corrupt state-control and the ideologies that advocate it are.
    5
  5457. @YeOldVisigoth "Now, tell me about Churchill gassing Iraqis, starving 4 million Bengalis, letting Stalin shoot 25,000 of his Polish allies and still brushing that under the rug despite Poles urging him to investigate" Assuming Churchill did all that, then yes Churchill's at fault. I don't know why you assume that I'm not for criticizing the British or whoever. I've already criticized the British a few times, and will happily do it again. But in the period of the war that I've studied and published videos on so far (mainly the early to mid-war), there hasn't been any British or US atrocities - that's the actual reason why I haven't covered them. I'm not saying there isn't any, but I haven't come across them in the topics I've covered. When I do, I'll let you know.
    5
  5458. I spoilt my ballot in this recent election, since none of the "parties" offered anything other than more power to the Establishment. Nobody "appointed" me to military history. I was educated on non-military history, and have grades on the same subjects I'm talking about. I've got a video showing why David Irving is wrong. I don't know why you think I'm someone who "quotes David Irving", but that's simply false. I'm shocked that people are ignorantly accusing me of doing or believing things I don't, and it makes me wonder why those individuals are so quick to slander me like that. I use books from mainstream historians. I use sources that agreed and disagree with my stance. I look at the evidence and come to the most logical conclusions, which is why it makes zero sense for you to regard my military videos as being okay. If my non-military videos are flawed, then my military videos would be equally flawed, since I'm using the exact same history method for both. What's really going on is that I'm presenting overwhelming evidence, and since you can't refute it, you instead ignore it and then attack my character. It's due to people like you that I've lost my faith in humanity.
    5
  5459. But you misunderstood. None of the socialists were Christians when they were in power. Mao and Pol Pot weren't Christians to begin with. Those that were Christian LOST THEIR FAITH. So I wasn't blaming Christianity, I was blaming altruism, parental issues, and a bunch of other factors.
    5
  5460. Yes, this is why it's clear they haven't actually read Ayn Rand nor understood her philosophy. They're speaking from a place of ignorance, which is why it's easy to call them out on it.
    5
  5461. Absolutely, which is another reason they need infantry and artillery support
    5
  5462. Sort of. The point though is that the Germans only had better gear because they mobilized earlier, not because they were inherently superior (as some claim). And the advantage was only an advantage until the Allies caught up. That helps explain why the Germans lost the ability to win on the tactical level as well mid to late war.
    5
  5463. The officers have nothing to do with this, beyond the doctrine part.
    5
  5464. Well, that was 1942, which is more mid-war. This video was about the early war, with 1941 being the year in focus. But you're right that it would have made a difference. I haven't looked into it specifically though.
    5
  5465. Good question. I don't know the answer. However, it seems that the British in WW2 didn't face many tanks. Whereas, the Germans did, so they were more used to using guns against them etc. I also suspect that the British officers who came into positions of power in the interwar and early WW2 period were more cavalry men or infantry men than tank men, which also had an impact.
    5
  5466. Me too. And the Battlestorm Crusader script is 74,319 words right now too.
    5
  5467. "So your definition of Capitalism is at best so poorly defined as to mean there is no Capitalist anywhere in the World and never has been." This is the definition of capitalism - private control of the economy. There's no ifs or buts about this. "Well according to your interpretation there is no Capitalist Nation on Earth." Yep.
    5
  5468. Nice one Jamie!
    5
  5469. "@TIK I had to google it, I'm sorry for your loss." Actually I didn't purchase it. I don't get to play games often at the moment, but I do keep up with gaming news.
    5
  5470. "@TIK Still better than no government at all." And I'm sure the people in Stalin and Hitler's empires argued the same line of reasoning. Ultimately, a weak government that's unable to gain more power is the best kind of government for everyone except those elected. I'm very happy with the weak government we have now, at least compared to the strong government we might have in the aftermath of the next election. I just hope the British people have the ability to create another hung parliament.
    5
  5471. Thank you for your comment. I do try and remind myself that the majority of my viewers do appreciate what I do, but it's difficult when a third of the comments are people telling me how crazy and insane I am, or how I don't know what I'm talking about, despite being fully referenced and backed up. The system is rigged!
    5
  5472. "It'll always be a mystery to me how people can read George Orwell but remain Socialists afterwards." It's because you don't think it's Socialism that has failed, but that Socialism got corrupted (e.g. Lenin was right, but then Stalin came along...)
    5
  5473. That's the word!
    5
  5474. Good spot! Yeah, there were 242 Panzer III's and 40 Panzer IVs. Sorry about that
    5
  5475. It's easier to say "British" than "British and Commonwealth", just like it's easier to say "Honey" than "M3 Light Tank". It's not technically correct, but the subtext is obvious; we all know what we're referring to.
    5
  5476. It's not a joke, some good tea was lost that day.
    5
  5477. I would argue that Normandy wasn't really a "tank battle", though. Normandy was a campaign that lasted something like four times longer than Gazala. Monty lost one armoured division, whereas the British at Gazala lost two armoured divisions, plus the better part of two army tank brigades.
    5
  5478. That was VERY quick! Well done
    5
  5479. I don't think I could even if I wanted to. I want to get back to publishing, and I need to train this person. I'm driven to do this
    5
  5480. So you're saying that IBM was entirely responsible for the death camps? Or the Opel Corporation? Come on, which one owned and marketed the death camps? And how did supply and demand and free market capitalism result in the death camps? I like the fact you're avoiding my question. [Despite the fact you've just lost this argument elsewhere in the comments, you're still going to go down this line. Fair enough - we'll have a repeat of the same argument across the comments section.]
    5
  5481. Rommel is a very interesting character, and the North African Campaign is great. That said, regardless of whether he's your favourite or not, Rommel made mistakes. And, as I said at the end of this video, Operation Crusader is probably the Desert Fox at his worst.
    5
  5482. Thanks Shin. I will be having a few family-enforced days off, but I'm planning to get up early tomorrow (christmas day) to get an hour of work in before everyone else gets up :D
    5
  5483. I wanted to see if there was a valid counter-argument, because I thought that would be interesting to discuss. Turns out there wasn't, and I'm somewhat disappointed.
    5
  5484. Yes but first I need more space for another bookcase. Starting to buy books purely on Kindle or Google Play because I don't have much more room for physical books :(
    5
  5485. And in this case, a Colonel was commanding a Division. After considering all this, it's no wonder the British Empire fell.
    5
  5486. Thank you! My source only said "Czech", so I just assumed that no Slovakians were in it. Thank you for that correction :)
    5
  5487. Oh yes, that's the one! Haven't watched TV since uni so I'm surprised to hear that program's still going - or is it all repeats?
    5
  5488. Do you really? I'm going to be looking into the 20th Estonian SS Division soon. And be covering the withdrawal into the Courland Pocket - and the abandonment of Estonia by Germany. Any recommendations (in English) of books on these topics?
    5
  5489. Yeah I agree. Every person is biased, and every source is biased. But I do think it's my role to try to be as unbiased as possible when looking at the details and doing the research. While I may express opinions, it's based on the research I've done and weighed up from a standpoint as neutral as I can possibly make it. Sadly, it's hard to ignore the critics, and I welcome them (especially if it's constructive). Keeps me on my toes. Thank you and I will try my best!
    5
  5490. You not cycling to work today? :) This isn't really one of my typical in-depth videos, but I wanted to make it because I want to hear everyone else's opinions and story. You should consider making a Finnish Military History channel - I would definitely watch that! Apart from the Mannerheim video, I've not had time to revisit Finland yet, so it would be good if someone else (like you) could cover it. I'm really glad you commented because your paragraph on the accusations of me being biased is fantastic! It's changed my perspective! You've made me realise what I should have known all along - I'm not biased, but they are. They're calling me pro-Soviet, because they're anti-Soviet. They're calling me anti-German, because they're pro-German, and so on. That is absolutely brilliant! Thank you very much! And don't worry, I totally understand - I was just being a little cheeky in this video at the end :P watching the videos, likes, comments and sharing is plenty of support sir, so thank you thank you thank you :)
    5
  5491. I'm going to cover it when I get to it during this series. We're going in order and not skipping ahead 👍
    5
  5492. Thank you! I'll certainly try :)
    5
  5493. I think it's ridiculous. Why are they in so much debt in the first place? I knew a recession would come at some point, so I paid down my debt and I've built up an emergency fund so as to weather the storm. Why didn't these businesses do that as well? Why should corporations or banks that took on tons of debts that only make money when the stock market goes up (aka, get funded by state-induced inflation which robs everyone else of their purchasing power) be bailed out by the tax payer? It makes no sense to me
    5
  5494. "Traits for Jeremy Corbyn- Defiant Anti-Semite" So, what you're saying is, Jeremy Corbyn is a racial-socialist? Can we do EU socialism while we're at it? "Article 13" effects: -50% YouTube videos and an unemployed TIK https://youtu.be/gBTJb08VYUU
    5
  5495. Your avatar shows Corbyn, and your username says 'Marxist'. "But democratic socialism isn't REAL socialism" - every Marxist on my National Socialism WAS Socialism videos.
    5
  5496. This, in my opinion, is how a debate should be conducted. None of this "let's do it live and get into a screaming match!" What we need is a genuine back and forth where both sides present their strongest arguments, then have a chance to think about a proper response to the points. Few (if any) emotions involved, and an honest civil debate. What more can you ask for!
    5
  5497. Perhaps, but they still had to fight all the way to Berlin, so an early peace was perhaps tempting.
    5
  5498. That's a good thought! The sources don't say it though, and that wouldn't explain why Keelhaul went on beyond 1945, but it could be a reason for the 1944-45 period.
    5
  5499. @Игорь Пищулин  All of them 👍
    5
  5500. Thank you! I have seen that video several times, but I somehow forgotten his comments on Keelhaul. Very interesting how that one guy said he wasn't forced and actually had a choice, but wasn't told. Other commentors and accounts also suggest that some of the British troops (and probably other Allies too) deliberately let their Soviet prisoners escape. So I think there's probably various accounts of what happened with different experiences, depending on who was interacting with whom and where they were. But if they had a choice, I would then ask the question: why are the archives still sealed on the matter? Plus, why do other accounts say they didn't have a choice? Clearly, if some did have a choice, not all had a choice.
    5
  5501. Yes, and I think he was in power during the Suez Crisis
    5
  5502. What hypothetical situations?
    5
  5503. Exactly. Regardless of the subject or the side of the fence you sit on, there should be two things - 1) a civilised open discussion, and 2) lots of facts and figures that you've gathered from extensive reading to provide evidence for whatever point you're trying to put across. Reading one book and calling yourself an expert doesn't cut it. Statements without evidence or chest-pounding opinions designed to strike an emotional response have no place in these discussions.
    5
  5504. That wasn't the reason
    5
  5505. I appreciate the offer :) and I'm glad you're enjoying the videos! Keep reading!
    5
  5506. That's what I said.
    5
  5507. Very interesting! Thank you for your comment
    5
  5508. Goodbye!
    5
  5509. "Wikipedia is a good and easy reading material, so I don't really see a problem." There are multiple problems with Wikipedia. This website lists 10, although I can think of several more http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/education/2010/march/The-Top-10-Reasons-Students-Cannot-Cite-or-Rely-on-Wikipedia.html
    5
  5510. As much as I don't like them, I don't think YouTube should be censoring their comments. Censorship is not the answer to this problem, education is
    5
  5511. "I think that TIK's slow and measured speaking style allows non-native English speakers the maximum ability to follow" I know my talking pace annoys my native-English-speaking viewers, but this channel has an international audience which I cannot ignore. It's easier for non-native English speakers to listen if the pace is slower, and it's much easier on the ears to speed up the video by 1.25 or 1.5 or even 2x than it is to slow it down to 0.75. Plus, it's hard for me to read and talk quick at the same time, especially when I'm pronouncing German and Russian names...
    5
  5512. I understand, and I wouldn't mind making the videos shorter. The issue is that it's hard to make detailed videos or dive into complex issues in just 10 minutes. Plus, on the few occasions where I have made a 15 minute video, people complained that they waited an entire week for a short video, so I can't win :D
    5
  5513. "How many vidéos do you intend to do on Stalingrad?" No idea! However many it takes to complete it!
    5
  5514. Sounds like you'll enjoy next week's video too :)
    5
  5515. That's part of the reason.
    5
  5516. Thank you for your great comment. Very encouraging :) I'm getting my ideas from the books and sources, although I am also forming my own conclusions. Assuming you want to know more, I'd recommend the books "Enduring the Whirlwind" by Liedtke and "Death of the Wehrmacht" by Citino. Also anything by David Glantz. Can't go wrong with Glantz!
    5
  5517. I agree, but sadly I don't have the statistics/sources to do this for the whole of Blau :(
    5
  5518. Why not? You do realise that they drafted the class of 1923 in April 1941? That's 18 months early. So technically you could say the same applies in 1941 as well as 1942.
    5
  5519. My recent video on Dresden said "some viewers". But this one rightly deserves "most viewers". If you aren't disturbed by the actions of this brigade, I would say you're in the minority.
    5
  5520. "I said that it seems he prefers the Russians over the Germans, he omits a lot of information about the dictator Stalin etc." And as I said in the comment above which you've ignored, I've explained to you that you're wrong. You clearly haven't watched many of my videos.
    5
  5521. No, National Socialism wasn't capitalist. They abolished private property, nationalised the unions and industries, implemented widespread wage and price controls, and more. I have a video showing all this and refuting all the counter arguments that are given (Ernst Rohm, "privatisation", "crushing the unions") https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 It was a Socialist lie to try and distance themselves from National Socialism.
    5
  5522. It's not "my" definition - it's the historical definition. Karl Marx's definition of socialism that he provides in Das Kapital volume 3 is actually the one I'm using, along with Mises', Lenin's, Hitler's, Mussolini's, the dictionaries, and many others' definitions too. In fact, the only people who disagree with the historic definition of socialism are the anti-American Lefty-losers who's professors defined it as "when the workers share hammers and there's no money". Well, that's the incorrect definition. The actual definition was and always has been "public ownership or control of the means of production" https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And calling Dirlewanger "anti-socialist" when he was calling for socialism is clearly incorrect.
    5
  5523. As I've explained in my North African Campaign series, they could barely supply Rommel and his couple panzer divisions, let alone send more troops to him (the Libyan ports could not handle more). But assuming they did get to the Middle East, the problem would then be: what would they do with the Crude oil? They'd have to ship it to Germany to be refined, and the only way to do that would be through the Mediterranean, unless they went through Turkey or the Soviet Union, at which point, you then know why they attacked the Soviet Union. If they went through Turkey, Stalin would not have been happy.
    5
  5524. I'm glad to hear that! This is also the longest Stalingrad episode so far, with the largest script too.
    5
  5525. No, I don't think I'm a military history god. And in what way is my ego is out of control? I actually think I'm not doing a good enough job here.
    5
  5526. It's syndicalist, which is a sub-branch of socialism.
    5
  5527. Karl Marx wasn't an economist; he was a theologian who studied "philosophy" (the Philosophy of Religion by Hegel).
    5
  5528. Thank you for the recommendation!
    5
  5529. Hope you enjoy it!
    5
  5530. Well, I guess I don't have a bit of a brain, because I think this topic is more relevant and interesting than the tank stuff. Hitler's ideology is important to understand because it's what resulted in the war and the H (masking speech to get around the censors). If he wasn't a socialist, and was a capitalist, then he has no reason to go to war and no reason to implement the H. In reality, this debate cuts through everything like a knife through butter. If we don't get to the bottom of this, then the rest of it is pointless.
    5
  5531. "There's nothing in socialism that prevents an individual from opening their own business." That would be "private" control of the means of production, which isn't socialism but capitalism. So no, you're wrong. You don't know what socialism is if you think that private individuals can open and run their own businesses without government intervention. "What's stopping an individual opening their own business under socialism?" The State. And the fact that as soon as a private individual opens up and runs his business outside of the collective, that would no longer be classed as socialism. - "Of course, Anarcho Capitalism is an oxymoron because you can't do Capitalism without property rights, and you can't do property rights without a state, can you TIK?" The State doesn't provide property rights. The State takes property rights away via its monopoly "law", taxation and inflation policies. When an individual picks up a rock he finds on the floor, that rock becomes his property. He enforces his right on that rock - it becomes his property. It's down to other people (namely the State) to take that rock away form him, through force (coercion or outright expropriation). And Anarcho-Capitalism might be many things, but it's not an oxymoron. "Anarcho" (or anarchy) means an absence of the State and hierarchies. Capitalism (the free market) is an absence of the State in the economy - the market is "free" from the State. There's no oxymoron here. Anarcho-Syndicalism and the like (all the anarch-socialisms and anarch-communisms) are oxymoronic because Socialism is the State control of the economy, whereas anarchy is anti-State. So which is it? Are anarcho-syndicalists anti-state or pro-state? Because if they're anti-state, then they're not socialists. And if they're pro-state, then they're not anarchists. And if you say that Socialism isn't state control of the economy, then you simply don't know what socialism is. - "The black market is an excellent example of what would happen - you would be robbed and/or killed by more powerful rivals. You'll notice a.g. Mexico has not been turned into a libertarian paradise by the drug gangs.." Actually the cartels are not an example of a free market. Mexico has a government monopoly on law and order, on regulations, and on the police etc. It is government failings that have caused the rise of cartels. For starters, drugs shouldn't be illegal. Secondly, there should be no monopoly on law or on law enforcement. In a capitalist economy, multiple police and judicial services would compete to rid the streets of gangs. But because the government has a monopoly on violence, they're happy to allow the gangs to continue. In fact, the government is a giant gang of criminals and are operating with the other criminals. That's why, for example, our monarchy here in the UK, and our parliamentarians, and our civil service, and police, and social services, are all so keen to "save" children. They're doing such a wonderful job with those children that Prince Andrew is able to walk around as a free person. That's what the government endorses - saving children. And you, Slater Slater, are all for the saving of children. - "How do you do capitalism without property right? And how do you establish property rights without a state?" You don't need a "right" to breath, and yet you do. The State doesn't grant you property rights, it takes them away. You don't need to establish property rights. They already exist. I have my stuff, and you don't have it. If you come to take my stuff, you'll have a fight on your hands. That's how you enforce property ownership from thieves - you prevent them from taking it, and you do that via private law enforcement.
    5
  5532. And it was also the conservatives, and liberals, and non-socialist entities, but you'll conveniently ignore all them to push your agenda. Besides, as Hitler himself said, National Socialism was competing with Marxist-Socialism on its own ground, and therefore saw the other socialists as a bigger threat than the so-called "bourgeois" parties.
    5
  5533. There were 5 German armies in the south, 2 Romanian (technically just 1), 1 Hungarian, and 1 Italian armies in the south. However, German reinforcements were deprioritized for the south. So, the Germans had 4 Army Groups in 1942, and the southern two got less Germany reinforcements than Army Group Centre, or Army Group North, even though the two southern Army Groups were the focus of the 1942 campaign and were taking more losses than Centre and North. Plus, you can't just count the armies. You must look at the divisions. 6th Army was the largest German Army. The Axis Allied armies were full of small divisions, meaning they weren't 'full' armies. They also had a lack of equipment etc. So I do think the southern Army Groups were neglected, which means Halder shoulders at least some of the blame for that.
    5
  5534. Rundstedt had nothing to do with this battle. And why would Hitler take the blame? (Bearing in mind that next week's video will explain properly why Manstein is to blame)
    5
  5535. I'm glad someone spotted that!
    5
  5536. The only language they tried to teach us in school was French. However, I had no motivation to learn it (and still don't) so I didn't do so well in that and have forgotten everything. They then said to us in the second to final year "those who did well in French can now learn German" which really annoyed me because even then I could see the benefit of learning German. So yeah, this will be my first time learning another language. While I'm not aiming to flip the skirts of any German lady, I do see the benefit of being able to say the words outloud. I can then practice it when I'm away from the computer or phone. Also, duolingo is doing all three simultaneously so I don't really have a choice there. Obviously, I'm not aiming to get the pronunciation 100% right as the priority is the reading, but I can see the benefit of learning to say it too.
    5
  5537. His "Hitler: The Politics of Seduction" isn't a particularly easy read, and it's hard to get a hold of, but it's literally one of the best history books I have. Highly recommended reading if you can get it. It trashes the Marxist interpretation of Hitler's ideology completely. I don't quite agree with everything he says, but I'd say well over 95% of it is spot on.
    5
  5538. Congrats!
    5
  5539. Is that how I'm known now?
    5
  5540. When did WW2 start?
    5
  5541. Oh don't worry, I'm not. The issue is that the Germans had a free-hand at writing WW2 history after the war (due to Cold War politics). So, thanks to more modern historians who have gained access to the Soviet archieves, I'm now presenting a more balanced accuont of the events. This comes across as pro-Soviet at times, but that's not really the case. It's just not quite as pro-German as the old popular histories (what I refer to as the "traditional narrative") used to be.
    5
  5542. This is why you have to specialize (another life lesson). This is why I'm doing videos specifically on WW2 - and more specifically on the European Theatre - because this is bad enough! If I was to cover the whole of human history, I'd never have come up with videos likes these. There comes a point where you have to accept what someone else is saying. But at those times, it's a case of saying "Ok I believe you for now, but if new evidence comes along that trumps your argument, I'm ready to change my mind".
    5
  5543. Yes, his Stumbling Colossus book was written in response to Suvorov's Icebreaker.
    5
  5544. Can confirm, editing is time consuming (especially the Battlestorm videos). I just wish I had got the lighting and the camera set-up right with this one... oh well
    5
  5545. "Simple answer: Yes it (they) did." No, I don't think they did to the extent that people say. Yes, some funding ended up going to the three entities in question, but only at certain points and for specific purposes. The evidence does not support the idea that all three were not puppets of Wall Street. - "However, be careful because once you start discussing theories in this direction community guideline strikes magically start to appear uninvited, to pay you a visit." They suppressed my video on the Holocaust in Greece, so I wouldn't be surprised if they suppress these videos.
    5
  5546. You too!
    5
  5547. +DJ Redpants probably should have sent the New Zealanders in first because they were fighting in the desert long before the Australians turned up ;)
    5
  5548. Not a bad idea :) I'll think about it, thanks
    5
  5549. Sorry, I can'b fix ib because my keyboard is broken. Ib doesn'b leb me bype bhe key bebween 'R' and 'Y'
    5
  5550. Great because Stalingrad is next week! (assuming I can get it edited in time)
    5
  5551. Why support climate change if the end result of human progress is more pollution? We should just accept it! /s The logic doesn't make sense. First off, every civilization is built on private property. A little known fact is that one-fourth of all agricultural production in the Soviet Union was produced on PRIVATE plots that the peasants were allowed (which was just 2% of all arable land in the Soviet Union). Think about that for a second. The public ownership of the means of production was so inefficient that private ownership of 2% of the land was able to produce a quarter of the food. What this means is that every civilization that has moved towards more and more public ownership has become more and more inefficient. Its citizens have become more impoverished. This is why most governments have fallen. The State steals wealth from the private sector, but in doing so destroys the private sector, and then destroys itself once the private sector is no more. Throughout all of human history, people were formally enslaved. Then, the British invented a concept called "Liberalism" which decided that each private individual should be free, and that liberty was something to strive for. It turns out that the British were the first nation in history to free the slaves, and actually sent the Royal Navy around the world actively taking out slaver ships and freeing the slaves onboard. By your logic, though, if slavery has been around for millennia, why stop it now? The answer is because we now know it is wrong. We now know slavery is immoral, and from an economic standpoint is also less efficient than if the individual is free. Well, the same thing applies with the State. We now know what causes the boom and bust cycle https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs Yet, I guess we should do nothing about it, because it's always been that way... We know that freeing up the economy results in prosperity, but I guess we should lock it down and throw away the key because it's always been that way... NO. We have learnt from the mistakes of the past. We can progress. Statism isn't the end-goal of humanity - freedom from the State is the end-goal of society.
    5
  5552. They hadn't ever done what they had set out to do before, so they were experimenting. But then, others learnt from their mistakes and applied them to their ideologies, meaning that they're better able to paint over the cracks.
    5
  5553. Yes! It crushes the small businesses (the 'private' capitalists) and helps the big businesses (the 'public' corporations - the organs of the State). It's a trick. It also causes mass long-term unemployment, and hurts the young and inexperienced workers, plus any minorities or disadvantaged. And since the private sector is the engine of the economy, this is why I said it hurts the workers and the poor - it lowers productivity and thus hurts everyone.
    5
  5554. "Modern psychology suggests that our intuition comes first." Modern psychology is based on the work of Freud and Jung, both of whom were Hermeticists. - "We then look for arguments to confirm our beliefs afterwards. Intuition, and therefore our beliefs, are largely in our DNA." So you fully admit that modern psychologists look for arguments and evidence that confirm their beliefs? Perhaps there is another way - an objective way.
    5
  5555. "I'm not one of your haters, by the way. I've been subscribed to you for well over a year..." Alright, despite your username and flag, and the fact that I've talked about this concept for the past 6 years, I'll assume you're not being dishonest and are genuinely unable to grasp this concept. Let me explain it in a different way. Hitler himself said that the race is the nation. The German people were the nation. So racism and nationalism are linked. Hence why so many people think nationalism is racist. But Hitler also said that the race was the society, and that racism was socialism. Why? Well: Marxist Socialism is all about the class. "Class warfare", therefore, is a concept of socialism. (Classism = socialism.) National Socialism is all about the race. "Race warfare", therefore, is a concept of socialism. (Racism = socialism.) "Class" is a social classification of people. "Race" is also a social classification of people. Racism, socialism and nationalism are no different, because they're all the same. Race/racism is a version of socialism that says that racial groups form a society and nation. National Socialism is trying to implement a nationalism and socialism for the race. I deny this because there's no "racial spirit" that unites us together, just like there's no social or national spirit that unites us together. We're individuals who can cooperate, but we remain individuals.
    5
  5556. I know. Happens all the time and it's really frustrating.
    5
  5557. Absolutely - you said it perfectly! Everyone's quick to dismiss everyone else, but all that does is divide us further. We need open discussion to get to the bottom of all this.
    5
  5558. I'm sorry I can't upload as regularly as I used to. Considering I'm exhausted even now, I genuinely don't know how I used to manage it! MentisWave is a great channel though. I've probably watched half his videos so far.
    5
  5559. Yes, they don't understand Objectivism at all, nor basic economics. They've not read anything relating to free markets or capitalism, which is why they misunderstand it, and why they mischaracterise it.
    5
  5560. I disagree. As I said, the narrative is still being pushed that Hitler had to go to war because they were being attacked. This event plays into that narrative.
    5
  5561. Really? I actually thought this was an interesting topic. Trivial perhaps, but interesting, and relevant since a lot of people still spout the narrative that Hitler was only acting in self-defense
    5
  5562. 1. Soviet divisions were in an even worse state at this moment. Glantz says most Soviet rifle divisions at Stalingrad during this time were down to 2-3 thousand men, from the 10,500 they should have had. That's an 80% reduction in strength. And as shown in this video, the 208th Rifle Division was unofficially dissolved after just 22 days of combat. 2. I never said the Germans were not good soldiers. I only said they weren't the Godlike-super-human-Aryan-wonder-warriors that Nazi propaganda and some Wehraboo writers claim they are
    5
  5563. I see, thank you. Academic Agent is the only channel I've seen who uses it, but I wasn't entirely sure what it was... Honestly though, I'm not sure live-streams is my thing. Not ruling it out, of course
    5
  5564. "Should have had" is the number of battalions they should have had if they were at full 9 battalion capacity (the original standard size of a German division). You are correct though pointing out that smaller division-sizes (specifically binary divisions that had 6 infantry battalions) were workable, and the 100th Jäger Division was originally a binary division prior to the Croatian Legion getting attached to it, so being a binary 6-battalion division isn't necessarily a bad thing, and I probably should have pointed this out in the video. However, the fact is that many of the 6th Army's 6-battalion divisions at this time were way below 100% strength, so even then they're weak
    5
  5565. You'll enjoy episode 12 ;)
    5
  5566. Every Monday :)
    5
  5567. I'm not into live streams or interview type content, and I don't think it would be a good fit for me. I'm much more into scripted content. If they have questions or points they want to raise, they can make a video directed at me, and I'm happy to respond. Of course, I may have to take some time to do research or whatever, but I'm willing to do it.
    5
  5568. Oh yeah, don't worry, I've long since lost my mind
    5
  5569. Neither was I, until I started doing research for it (starting with Compass). While it's not as 'decisive' a campaign as the Eastern Front, it's incredibly interesting and actually mindboggling at points - as Crusader is proving and will prove to be :)
    5
  5570. Just to clarify, next week is the preliminary operations (Operation Summernachtstraum, and a brief look at Operations Flipper and Squatter) where we'll see the units in action for the first real time this series. The actual Crusader battle starts the week after.
    5
  5571. I have considered writing a book (although finding the time to make one would be difficult right now), but I think these videos explain things better than books can. It's impossible to visualize the battles properly in books, especially one as complicated as this. Next week onwards, this battle will really come to life, because we'll see the units in battle - something you can't see in a book.
    5
  5572. I love to hate Halder! (Derp: clearly TIK's biased and has an agenda, unsubscribled)
    5
  5573. I don't really have a "favourite", although I do think General Richard O'Connor was a great British general who has been forgotten. If you've seen my Operation Compass video (and I mention him in this one) you'll understand why.
    5
  5574. Yes, I'm planning to do a video or two on them in the near future.
    5
  5575. We've already debated the breakout operation (at least partly). More needs to be done on it though.
    5
  5576. Thanks! You should check out my other Battlestorm videos https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y the lastest videos (Battleaxe and Bruneval) are some of my best. Also, I'm currently working on the follow up to Battleaxe (the next in the North African Campaign series), which will be Operation Crusader. As of today, the unfinished script is 74,319 words - which will put the video in the region of between 7 and 8 hours long :)
    5
  5577. +Thomas IV it's just a shame that O'Connor couldn't continue on to Tripoli and take all of North Africa. If he'd done that, Rommel would have had a hard time landing in Libya. This is why I made a video about whether Churchill created the Desert Fox as he took the resources from Wavell and O'Connor at the last minute and robbed them of total victory. There's definitely some comparisons between France 1940. It's strange to see that a British general was using good tactics in 1940 as the impression you get from most places up until El Alamein is defeat after defeat. And I'm pretty sure the word "Pimple" isn't Italian or Libyan :D
    5
  5578. "@TIK look man everyone is biased because the things that we see influence our opinions. I'm biased too. I think it's wrong though to make out as though your not biased when literally everyone is." I am biased. Everyone is biased. But that doesn't mean I'm not neutral in my agenda. That's where you've misunderstood. You think bias and agenda are the same thing. They are not. This video is about neutral-agendas, not biases. "@TIK a 10 second scroll through your liked videos shows that you're biased towards the right and that's fine btw. Just don't make out that your unbiased when you clearly get your politics from sargon and peterson." Evidence and interpretation. Agreeing with certain arguments only means those argument are superior to the alternatives - and that's what I'm going for, superior arguments, evidence and interpretations. While I have watched both Left and Right videos, I have agreed with certain Right videos for presenting better arguments. That's why fewer Left-videos are in my Liked videos playlist. Doesn't mean I haven't watched them - it just means I don't agree with them because I am siding with the superior arguments, evidence and interpretations. And Sargon and Peterson are wrong in a lot of ways. For example, they still think National Socialism is on the Right. It is not. This undermines their own arguments because, while they are effective with dealing morally with the Left (they suck badly at economics), they cannot deal with criticism and questions from the National Socialists. This is because they think National Socialists are capitalists, and this is giving the National Socialists the edge over them. This is why it frustrates me when people deny Hitler's socialism - you're aiding National Socialists with your agenda of denying that nothing is "real" socialism.
    5
  5579. ""I see everyone as individuals" -- sigh, why does everyone claim this when it's not true. You're *human*, you've been bred by millions of years of evolution to judge others by reputation, by image, by stereotype." It may not be true to you, but it is true to me. I don't judge people by their looks. I get to know people first. If they turn out to be bad, then I will critize them for that. If they turn out to be good, then I will praise them for that. The reality is that if someone judges British people to be bad - then I know this isn't true because, while there are some bad British people, there are plenty of good British people. If someone thinks men are evil, then that's not true either because there are good men and bad men. Same with classes, races and creeds. So if this is the case, it makes zero sense to judge people until you've given them a chance to show you who they are. "Tribalism is a survival instinct." So is fighting and killing things. You must learn to be restrained and not submit to instincts, otherwise you'll do more harm than good.
    5
  5580. Neutral in agenda, not neutral in bias. No one can be neutral in bias.
    5
  5581. A perfect example. Thank you for sharing!
    5
  5582. Also, coming back to this because it's been bugging me. How is this click-bait? I mentioned Panzerfausts in 1942 in the title, and the video is about Panzerfausts in 1942? If it had been "Panzerfausts in 1942" and you'd clicked on it and it ended up being me talking about what I had for breakfast, then it would have been clickbait.
    5
  5583. That is very possible :)
    5
  5584. It all makes sense now!
    5
  5585. @Gills1776  😂 thanks for that sarcastic reply, you made me laugh out loud
    5
  5586. Yeah, that's probably it, but it lead to a huge controversy. I wouldn't dare translate then publish a book into English from a language that I didn't know. It's obvious that someone else who understands the language should be the one to do that.
    5
  5587. That would have been interesting movie - the July Bomb plot destroyed time and created portals in space
    5
  5588. True, but the same could be said about every army, including the Soviets
    5
  5589. I'm not entirely certain if the Germans knew or not. Many of the post-war memoirs etc are surprisingly quiet on this and only give the division numbers to show how much they were outnumbered. But if you read the pinned comment, I have a quote from Hitler which shows that he knew about it.
    5
  5590. Thank you sir! Sadly, I won't be able to go down to battalion level this time (the sources are limited and don't allow it). I'll be sticking to division level for the most part, but there will be the odd regiment and battalion thrown in. I really wish the sources were better, or that I could read German and Russian, because they may have had more on this campaign than the English sources. While my German is coming along, I can't read their history books yet.
    5
  5591. Except, it was at the tail-end of an offensive where Rommel had completely wiped out British forces, so I wouldn't count that as a defeat - more like the end to his offensive. The siege of Tobruk was a siege - neither a victory nor a defeat until the siege was ended. It ended during Crusader.
    5
  5592. And now that it's been 20 minutes, we can assume you're busy elsewhere
    5
  5593. From that video, it sounds more like PaPaEshh ?
    5
  5594. No, that was used against the Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog
    5
  5595. Very true. I really don't trust any media news outlet. They're all pushing their own agendas. And that's why I always list my sources just in case something like that "fact" slips in
    5
  5596. 1. I agree. 2. In fairness, the German high command didn't do their homework when it came to supplying their forces in North Africa. The Italians basically said 'Sure, you can easily supply a PanzerArmiee in Africa, no worries!' And the German High Command basically said 'Oh, okay. We won't question what you say or do our own research on the handful of inadequate ports that can't possibly take the number of supplies needed to sustain your forces, let alone ours, and just send one of our most aggressive commanders over there.' In reality, the sources I have say that 80% of supplies sent did actually reach Rommel. The issue was that it was more of a trickle because of the lack of decent ports that could offload the cargo quick enough. When Halder asked Rommel how he was going to sort his supply situation out, Rommel replied "That's your pigeon!"
    5
  5597. Thank you for your feedback. In regards to the Hitler stand-fast orders, I'll be covering the reasoning behind that in a video that'll be out on Monday 19th of February. Let's just say, that under the circumstances, there may not have been much choice.
    5
  5598. I couldn't mention everything in the video, and logistics is one of those things not mentioned. That doesn't mean it wasn't important. I'll copy what I've posted elsewhere to others - Logistics played a big part in the German defeat in 1941. The first three weeks of Barbarossa saw the Germans get roughly half-way to Moscow. It then took them a few more months to cover the rest of the distance. The reason being, just like on their way to Stalingrad in 1942, is that they had to stop-start stop-start their Bewegungskrieg due to (mainly) their poor logistics. While "Blitzkrieg" had its advantages, it was also poor on the logistical side, which the Germans never mastered. This was made worse by the poor roads in Russia, different guage railways, and the vast distances. Weather also played its part later. However, by the same token, the Soviets were also suffering from serious logistical issues in 1941. At the battle of Dubno-Brody (I talk about it here https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw) 2,000 Soviet tanks break down on the way to the battlefield due to lack of fuel, mechanical failures, lack of spare parts etc, and those that did make it sometimes ran out of ammunition. So to say that the Germans were suffering from poor logistics isn't that good of an excuse since the Soviets were too. To say that "General Winter" only affected the Germans is a poor excuse too, since that affected the Soviets too. And its not like the Germans didn't know about the poor Russian roads, or the different guage railways, or the vast distances. This was why they planned for a short knock-out war. Unfortunately, the Germans deemed the Soviets as inferiors in every respect and, in their poor planning, didn't consider what would happen if the Soviets weren't knocked out quickly and decided to continue the fight. The fact was that, despite the initial advantages I outlined towards the end of the video (surprise attack, unprepared enemy etc), the Germans squandered these advantages in their arrogance. This arrogance is what's leading to certain portions of the viewers of this video believing that the Germans were superior. However, you and I both know people in real life who think they're superior to everyone else but who actually have several deep flaws that impact the things they do. People like that often can't see the error of their ways, and it's the same here. The German generals believed the Soviets were inferior, even though they were beaten numerous times on the battlefield. Even when they won (1941) they paid heavily for their success, one way or another. The fact remains that the "greatest army in WW2" lost to the Soviets. And as shown in the video, the reason wasn't because they were drowning in Soviet rifles and tanks.
    5
  5599. "Well, you went on full defence here, seemingly without ever considering my points - judging by the number of dislikes these points are not just mine to make." Of course I did. You're accusing me of doing something I clearly didn't do. "Look, you cannot just show tables - no matter how accurate because it is "boring" " I cannot prove that the Wehrmacht wasn't superior the Red Army without showing the numbers. If I don't show the numbers and back up my points with evidence and sources, this wouldn't be history - it would be worthless. "and saying that "a kill ratio of 3:1 is not much of a great deal" (pardon me a very heavy paraphrase) without even mentioning the numerical disparities between the two nations just looks wrong and dishonest." I do show the numerical disparities in the table at 12:31. "Just think how it looks to people - you have one country half the size of the other," The Germans knew they were going to war against a bigger country. This wasn't a surprise to them. "with relatively crappy equipment" Do you know what equipment the Soviets had? Most of their tanks in 1941 were light inter-war tanks. They were outdated and obsolete. They were even using tankettes. This lead to the largest tank battle in WW2 (Brody-Dubno https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw), which resulted in 5,000 Soviet tanks getting wiped out by 800 German tanks. If the Germans had relatively crappy equipment, the Soviets were worse than that. "which at the time is smashing its way through a numerically superior army," Incorrect as shown in the table at 12:31. "defending and fighting on its home ground, an army with shortening supply lines, taking advantage of defensive lines, an army with massive reserves of manpower, with resources and production that is beyond the reach of any short campaign and yet taking casualties beyond belief... " It's not like the Germans didn't know this prior to the invasion. "Just think about it this way- if in a parallel Universe you were to have the situation reversed (1941s trained and equipped Russians attacking 1941s trained and equipped Germans) I have no doubt that the Russian attack would have been crushed and destroyed by the Germans from the first "Ura!" " The Soviet Army in 1941 wasn't prepared for war. As shown in the Dubno video I linked, the Soviets didn't have the logistical capability in 1941 to keep its tanks in battle, either fueled or with ammo. It was caught completely off guard, and had fewer men than the Germans at the start of the war. "We all know that the Russians went through the purges," I'm working on a video about this at the moment. "we know that in a year they suffered losses that would empty entire countries," Absolutely. A credit to the German attack of 1941. "we know that they were not as well trained and as well led as the Germans," Do we? Are you sure? "that they were not as well equipped as the Germans (I mean mostly signal equipment here, some Russian stuff was good)" They didn't have radios, true, but as stated their equipment was obsolete. In fact, the motorized divisions they had in 1941 weren't motorized because they didn't have enough trucks. And these divisions were without the horses and wagons the regular rifle divisions were equipped with because they were supposed to be "motorized". "and yet somehow you decided to make this video..." Yes. Yes I did. "It looks to me like a perfect example of an exercise in futility." The only futility here is trying to convince people who have a German-centric view of WW2. The German generals wrote the history of the war from their point of view, and because of the Cold War, the Western world wasn't willing to listen to what the Soviets had to say. That's why you and a lot of the other commenters have a bias towards the Germans, and think the Soviets were inferior. The reality was, they weren't. "One additional conclusion that one might take from your video is that if the Germans were actually NOT better led and trained than the Russians then those Russian losses look even more embarrassing." Yes. I'm not denying that. That's a credit to the Germans in the first year of the war. I actually mention this at the end of the video. I'm not here to do disservice to the Germans. I'm here to say what the reality actually was. The Germans did exceptionally well in 1941, but it wasn't enough to knock the Soviets out of the war. The German strategy (their only hope) was to knock the Soviets out of the war in 1941. When they failed to do that, they lost. That is why historians say they lost before they even got to Moscow. "Please pardon me but I still see this video as pointless, maybe you had a point somewhere there, maybe some people do have wrong assumptions about this conflict," Yes, they do. "but this did not come through here - possibly you were simply "too ambitious" in your attempt and did not manage to get the point across." Perhaps I could have done it differently. But, boring or not, the point still stands. You can attack the video for being "boring", and that's fine, but you and the other hate-commenters haven't come up with an effective counter-argument against the point being made in the video. All that's happened is people have had a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that someone is doubting the "superiority" of their beloved Wehrmacht. Unfortunately for them, this somebody has done his homework.
    5
  5600. Yup. There's some good comments in here, but sadly they're like rocks drowning in a sea of morons and trolls
    5
  5601. Thank you for watching, and yes there will be more to come :)
    5
  5602. I do want to do it, but everybody has those "off" days where you really can't motivate yourself to do something - no matter how much you really want to do it. These tips were for those days. Don't get me wrong, I love doing this research. The major issue is that I'm not getting enough time to do it!
    5
  5603. Do you think he would lie to Goebbels over this particular matter?
    5
  5604. Zitelmann is EXCELLENT. Truly excellent. However it's difficult to get a copy of his book in English. I believe that the German version is more widely available (under a different title though) but obviously it's no good to people who can't read German. Evan's book is very good too in my opinion, even though he rejects the idea that Hitler was a Socialist (doh!).
    5
  5605. I think my History Theory video is relevant here https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    5
  5606. You should care what the Nazis believed because history will repeat if people fall into the same line of thinking, which many do right now (and I'm not talking about the few National Socialists out there).
    5
  5607. That depends entirely on corporate YouTube and their algorithm. This video isn't monetized, and I'm curious to see if they suppress it, which they've done to similar videos on this subject in the past. If they don't suppress it and people are interested, then my intention is to do more videos on the Holocaust.
    5
  5608. See this video for the definition of Fascism and the differences between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Then see this video for the evidence of Hitler's Socialism https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    5
  5609. National Socialists are not "leftist", they are Third Positionists. However, that doesn't mean they didn't believe in social ownership and control of the means of production https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w I also did mention that the Communists were the first to be rounded up. I also explained how many were converted into National Socialists. Please watch the video before making silly assumptions.
    5
  5610. I believe that this is a Patreon question, so I will be answering this at some point :)
    5
  5611. Awesome, thank you!
    5
  5612. Thank you sir!
    5
  5613. Yes you are! Congrats!
    5
  5614. In what way do you think it's better?
    5
  5615. "Inflation is known prior to central banking, e.g. In the roman empire after plagues." The Roman Empire watered down their gold coins so that they contained less gold and silver. With less gold per coin, more coins could be minted. In other words, they inflated the currency supply on purpose. This is actually one of the major reasons for the collapse of the Western Empire before the Eastern Empire. But you're correct that if a load of people suddenly died, then you would have an inflationary crisis due to more money in existence and less production.
    5
  5616. There's actually a Patreon Q&A question asking this, so you'll get your answer soon 👍
    5
  5617. OP is so smart he thinks that libertarianism and Objectivism are the same thing 😂 And notice that he doesn't offer any insightful information, or corrections, or sources, merely criticism. The witch-doctor chastises the producer, hoping he can shame him into handing over some of what he produces...
    5
  5618. They'll have difficulty pulling that one this time since both Jones and Wheen are pro-Marx.
    5
  5619. Because it's not been fully implemented yet. They're boiling the frog. But this is why the economy hasn't properly recovered from the 2008 crash (we're in a great depression that they're not acknowledging) and why inflation has been going through the roof. If the state doesn't back down and keeps growing, it will collapse, and that's what everyone is saying.
    5
  5620. No date yet, but both me and my editor/animator have been ill recently (she still is ill), so we've fallen behind a little. It is coming along though, and I've been working on the script for the one after Tobruk - the retreat to El Alamein.
    5
  5621. Spoke with my editor today, and she's plodding on with the next video for North Africa. I'm also working on the script for the video after that. However, since Battlestorms take so long to make, and I need to make money in order to live, and a lot of viewers are not here for them, and I'm not entirely focused on one things at the exclusion of everything else, I create videos on topics other than "tanks". Marxism is a very relevant subject, especially since all 10 points of the Communist Manifesto have been implemented, meaning that we're already living in a Communist/Marxist world. So the fact you think it was never implemented is interesting...
    5
  5622. China isn't the biggest economy, not close. Their propaganda ministry might want you to believe that, but it's obvious that they're lying. There's a load of videos on this, such as this one https://youtu.be/XNFvQGGl8RA?si=Gf49Nnv2fQ0nmGQU
    5
  5623. Nope, I haven't seen it.
    5
  5624. Thanks lemon! Sorry, should have clarified. In my "recent" John Frost video, I said I'd do a Frederick 'Boy' Browning video soon. Due to working as a manager in retail, I've had to abandon it during Christmas Peak season. But I'm back in the game now, so it's coming!
    5
  5625. Yes. Freedom is always better than slavery
    5
  5626. Only found him recently though, after the NS is S videos
    5
  5627. Computers are easier to operate than they used to be. Cars are more universal and easier to operate than they used to be. Phone systems, radios, electrics and many other technologies (like software) are actually easier than they used to be as innovation made them simpler for the user to use. Therefore, higher skills aren't always necessary, and the new forms of technology may decrease the jobs in a particular production industry, but will spout new businesses as a result of the new technology, which creates jobs. The production workers may go to these new jobs, leaving the unskilled to fill the old gaps. The point is, the economy is complicated, and you can't measure the effects of one decision, because the ripples affect the rest of the economy. You therefore have to look beyond the first step - yes, this new technology has created unemployment, but look what opportunities it has created for those unemployed. Also I'm not an ancap. I was pointing out that large governments decrease productivity and living standards, which is historically correct. Numerous socialist states have found this out and the evidence is clear cut. This was an explanation as to why it happens, which will lead nicely into the Nazi and Soviet economies, the Holocaust, and Lend Lease.
    5
  5628. Don't forget that your teachers will probably want different answers to what I'm giving in my videos. If they're a bunch of Socialists, tell them what they want to hear, otherwise they'll mark you lower.
    5
  5629. Ah, but I only criticised state ownership of the means of production, which I've been told confidently by numerous socialists isn't socialism. So, they have nothing to be salty about.
    5
  5630. Also, the C P Lie is not inflation.
    5
  5631. Weimar Germany refutes your analysis, since at times prices went up faster than inflation.
    5
  5632. "You suppose that people are paid in function of their productivity." As a way to keep the video simple, yes. "If someone buy a yacht, people who are making the yacht are not making usefull things for the rest of the society. So rich buying yachts has a negative impact on the society." No it doesn't, it benefits the consumer, and it doesn't take anything away anything from anyone else. By your logic, if I produce a loaf of bread and it gets consumed by someone, then that's not benefiting the rest of society. So consuming food has a negative impact on society, by your own logic. The purpose of producing things is to consume them, or to use them. If you want more stuff, the economy needs to produce more stuff. Redistributing wealth won't solve the issue. Producing more stuff will. And the best way to do that is to have a system that increases production, not takes production away, or actively decreases production. "You talk about the problems created by the state (every economist knows that taxation has a negative impact) but you say nothing about the problem resolved by the state." Name one economic problem resolved by the state. "Saying "this is fair and this is not" is not economy. It's politics. You can not say "this is fairer" you can only say "I find this fairer for these reasons..."" No, it's economics. Basic economics.
    5
  5633. Thanks J, I'm happy to admit my mistakes, and/or that I didn't clarify everything correctly. But the best way to learn is to make mistakes. Being denied the chance to make those mistakes in the first place, as others are demanding, is not a strategy for growth.
    5
  5634. :)
    5
  5635. Who do you think will win?
    5
  5636. @jaxxstraw - someone else commented saying that the highest temperature in the area ever recorded was 40C. But yes, it could be a misprint. I'll be honest, temperature readings etc are not something I'm that familiar with so I'm happy to accept it as wrong
    5
  5637. I don't think I'll be doing an all-in-one video for just one season. But when I get to 12 hours of video (which is currently the maximum length for a YouTube video) I will make a 12 hour all-in-one video for Stalingrad before continuing on with the series. And yes, I do expect this series to go on for more than 12 hours worth of content.
    5
  5638. Can confirm. Bit busy right now. But I do want to do a video on Greece at some point, don't worry
    5
  5639. I do not necessarily disagree. However, I would argue that Socialism has branches, with Marxism, Nazism and Feminism being all branches of the same tree. I wouldn't say that Feminism is necessarily Marxism, although there are crossovers.
    5
  5640. It is, that's why I had to call it out. Once you have the evidence, it's clear that National Socialism cannot be anything other than Socialism.
    5
  5641. Jeff is wrong, I have since debunked this counter-argument here https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    5
  5642. I've explained the historical definitions of capitalism and socialism here, backed by sources https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And these doubters of mine tried to argue against this point, and discovered that I was basically correct https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    5
  5643. "I wish you success against the YouTube moderators / sensors." Thank you. Thought Police Censorship is the main problem with the modern world.
    5
  5644. Thank you, glad to have you on board :)
    5
  5645. If you haven't seen it already, I think you'll find this other video very interesting https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5646. Ahhh, but the Left argue that, even though they're calling for a welfare State, taxes, State roads, an organized Society (which is the definition of a State), central State planning, Central Banking (see Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto"), a State education system, regulations, a Democracy (People Power, except the People are the Public and the Public is the State, so Democracy is State Power), and believe that all the means of production should be owned or controlled by the central authority... they also say that they don't want State control. So obviously they don't want State control, because their words speak louder than their actions and the words they speak combined 😂
    5
  5647. I've provided a PDF in the description
    5
  5648. Watch the video please. Timestamps are in the description. And the thumbnail is actually a quote. I provided the quote in the description, and also in the video itself. I also provided hundreds of quotes in the video showing that Hitler wasn't at all for "free enterprise".
    5
  5649. Even Karl Marx doesn't define Capitalism the way you do, and he invented the term! Please watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5650. If everything is capitalism before it hits "real" socialism, though, then that's fine? But showing what capitalism actually is, and what socialism is, and saying that the opposite is true, that's bad https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5651. Thank you! Glad to hear you enjoyed the video enough to watch it again! I wish some of my critics will watch it at least once, but that's too much to hope for. Cheers! :)
    5
  5652. Voting is irrelevant. If people all vote that the moon is made of cheese, that doesn't make it so.
    5
  5653. You got me! DEFEATED
    5
  5654. Because it's selling food to the public (the people). Because as I said in the public vs private video, the people are the public, and the public is the state.
    5
  5655. Already happened lol
    5
  5656. You obviously haven't heard of the Four Year Plan, or the Reichswerke, or the fact that numerous industrialists had their factories seized (Professor Junkers) or fled the country (Fritz Thyssen)
    5
  5657. Like this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024?si=-nBZe7cy0LutEuy0
    5
  5658. They argue that Hitler only put socialism in the name to trick the workers. That's why this video is important because it explains why that wasn't the case.
    5
  5659. You don't have a Capitalist system in the US. Do you have lockdowns (public sector state control of the means of production) or do you have a free market (private control, in which case, you can't have lockdowns because businesses would be free to open)? Clearly you have lockdowns, showing that private property rights have been abolished. You also have taxes, and regulations, and wage and price controls, and a central bank manipulating every transaction throughout the world (the dollar is the world's reserve currency) by setting interest rates (the price of money) and printing currency into existence. All this central planning distorts the entire economy, and thus it's not possible to say that you have Capitalism. I would encourage you to watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Then this https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs Then this https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ (this one may seem a strange recommendation at first, but trust me, it's relevant).
    5
  5660. It's funny because I'm using Karl Marx's definition of socialism. Socialized man, the producers, in common control of the means of production. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5661. You may like this video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs Followed by this one https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    5
  5662. Tanks In Kazakhstan
    5
  5663. Yes, and prior to Lenin, both words meant the same thing https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5664. @Kit Richardson - I'm glad someone understands how frustrating it is to speak to these people. They wear postmodernism like it's a badge of honour. Reason, logic, evidence... none of it matters. All that matters is belief, and you can't make them see the evil in their faith. It's hard to convince them to listen, let alone take in what you're saying.
    5
  5665. @Aidan B - your massive rant about me ignoring criticism is not true. As I've replied to you in the Public vs Private video, I'm addressing your criticisms of "my" definitions (the historical ones), but you're the one ignoring them. You're ignoring them because your Socialist-indoctrination blinds you. You said that - "State capitalism is absolutely a real term, just because you disagree with the terms being used does not mean they cease to exist." - Aidan B You also said - "I would disagree with your framing here, a state can absolutely be capitalist, after all a state is just a collection of individuals with commonly accepted authority. Take away the consent to be governed, and the state is just another grouping of wealthy people. A state can absolutely be capitalist, work in the interests of capitalists, or work not at all yet still exist. Similarly, the term "state capitalist" does not describe a system of a literal capitalist state, it is a shorthand term used to describe another type of system completely. State capitalism does exist, even if you want to reference it by what you assume is preferential etymology." - Aidan B I then proceeded to address your criticisms directly - "A hierarchy cannot be an individual. An individual may or may not be in charge of the hierarchy, but the hierarchy itself makes it Public. And a Public in charge of the means of production is Socialist, not Capitalist. Only individuals (non-hierarchical) in charge of the means of production can be Capitalist." - TIK "This is an important distinction, because when you say a State is Capitalist, you're saying that the dark is light. If the criticism is a monopolistic hierarchy - like a totalitarian dictatorship, or a Corporation - then the criticism is of Socialism. If the criticism is of the individual who is in charge of the totalitarian dictatorship, or the Corporation, then that is still a criticism of Socialism, because the individual only has power due to the fact he is in charge of a politically organized community (the definition of a State). Yes, he may be rich and have money, but the criticism is that he has power over everyone else due to the Socialism." - TIK "To then turn around and say he's a Capitalist makes zero sense because Capitalism is an individual on his own, without the hierarchy. The hierarchy is what makes it Socialist, not the individual. If the individual is what makes it Capitalist, then every collective would be Capitalist because every collective consists of individuals." - TIK Bearing in mind that this was on the Public vs Private video, where I clearly explained why this is the case in the video, backed by multiple sources, as I did in this video. You then responded by accusing me of 'misdefining' the language - "Yeah, this is the problem. In order to even come somewhat close to rationalizing your choice of terms or language, you either have to horribly misdefine everything, or define it to be so broad that the word itself has no meaning." - Aidan B You then correctly explain what the historical definition of Socialism is, proving that you understand what I'm saying - "If a hierarchy is always a public, and public control is always socialism, then socialism is just a form of hierarchy." - Aidan B This is exactly right. Unfortunately, you then say - "The problem with this is that you've just destroyed the term, and reformed it in your image. The problem then with that is that if this is how you describe socialism... it isn't what a socialist wants." - Aidan B Hold on, which is it? Have I really destroyed the term? (Not likely because I explained the historical reasons for why the term is what it is, backed by sources.) Or is it because Socialists don't realize what they're actually calling for, which is why I made the Public vs Private video in the first place, because I realized that many Socialists had no idea what it was they were actually calling for? Oh yes, that's it. The criticism you have of me isn't that the historical definitions I'm using aren't correct (because your argument in that regard doesn't have any weight to it and doesn't stand up to scrutiny). Your criticism is that, because most Socialists mistakenly think Socialism is something that it isn't, my definitions don't align with what people mistakenly think Socialism is. You say this over and over again - "Socialism is not power. Socialism is not hierarchy. What you are criticizing socialism for are things that most socialists do not want." - Aidan B This is exactly my point - Socialists don't fully grasp what they're calling for. This is the purpose of history - to educate people and make them learn from the past so that they don't repeat the mistakes of history. It is mistaken to believe that Socialism is anything other than totalitarianism. A Socialist may BELIEVE Socialism is paradise and rainbows, but they are WRONG. 2+2=5 is wrong, not because of ideology, but because it is. Me telling you it is wrong and explaining why is not me "redefining" the terms, it is me correcting your mistaken beliefs.
    5
  5666. I'm not getting "factual" corrections at all. All I'm getting is beliefs and propaganda. The amount of people telling me that "the Nazis privatized the industries" is unreal. NO THEY DIDN'T. They nationalized the industries in a process they called Synchronization - which I gave plenty of evidence for in this video. If the critics have bothered to have watched the video, they would have known that. Instead, they're assuming they're right and spouting off Marxist propaganda, having not listened to what I said. Then they cry that I'm not listening to them!? They can't even read the title of the video, which clearly states that I've addressed all their old counter arguments. Yet all they do is give me the same old counter arguments I've already addressed. There can be no debate until the Left decide to engage in it. You cannot learn if you will not listen.
    5
  5667. Let's say I am/have... the facts and evidence don't change. Hitler's still a Socialist. Trying to implement Socialism, and failing, doesn't make him a Capitalist.
    5
  5668. No, socialism originally had nothing to do with class. This is an established fact which I've been over before. Here is a video outlining why the historical definition of Socialism is what it is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5669. They are the same, watch my Public vs Private video and it will explain why https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5670. Exactly!
    5
  5671. He nationalized the industries, the businesses and the trade unions, and waged a war for resources because he believed in the same shrinking markets concept that the Marxists and other Socialists do. He was an Anti-Semite just like Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg and Hitler also abolished private property (as shown in this video that you haven't watched).
    5
  5672. I'm really glad to hear you read/listened to those books! Many simply pooh-pooh the idea of reading economics books, or books on Austrian economics (Thomas Sowell is Chicago, but many don't like that school of thought either). Yet, those who actually take them seriously realize just how enlightening they really are. Yes, it is like a horror show. And the way the world has been moving - especially since 2008 - should make you realize where we're headed. As Rothbard explains, inflation starts in the capital goods industries, which is perhaps why lumber, copper, oil and more have shot to the moon recently!
    5
  5673. No Mat, the people who disagreed with me nicely had some valid points, and I've listened to them. The Marxists who kicked and screamed in the comment section like babies did not. I value reasonable discourse. Calling me and my viewers names, saying "no, you're wrong" as the basis for their argument, takling about Marxist Socialism (which is irrelevant to the discussion), claiming the National Socialist economy was capitalist (see Blitz's video response https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I ), and then proceeding to accuse me of lying (like PZK did in the thumbnail of his video) is not reasonable discourse. See the newly pinned comment in those videos because I've done more research, and that research supports the conclusion I came to.
    5
  5674. Decbaa 22 - I pulled it from the official German history. Here's the quote from it - “When the city is entered the entire male population [was to be] liquidated because Stalingrad with its population of one million, all of it Communist, was particularly dangerous.” - Hitler, Situation conference on the 2nd of September 1942. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015.P1078-1079. One footnote says "KTB OKW ii/I. 669 (2 Sept. 1942)" was the source. The other footnote says that Halder reported the word was actually "annihilated" in another document. However, the order was weakened when given down to the Army Group, and turned into "evacuated", which is perhaps why they didn't "liquidate/annihilate" the civilians but decided to deport them.
    5
  5675. Thank you for the recommendation! I've added it to my shopping list :)
    5
  5676. I've never been normal ;)
    5
  5677. So, their railways couldn't cope sending troops to the front, but these same railways were absolutely capable of moving entire factories to the East whilst shipping men to the front after the war began? Plus the Soviets were outnumbered at the front until December. You'd think they'd just march their men forwards a few hundred kilometres, but no, they had to wait for the trains.
    5
  5678. Actually, it's not. I know AA's turned in the Evola direction recently but in this case it's not him.
    5
  5679. Well, I hope you enjoy it :)
    5
  5680. In theory, yes. However, in practice, that's not what left-liberalism is at all. Again, look at what they do, not what they say. They use the power of the state police to enforce compliance with their totalitarian demands via threat of violence. That's not "human rights" or "individual freedom". The poor and marginalised and poor and marginalised under such a system, and deliberately so. "Paying your fair share" = "give us your money or else". And they're also socially regressive. They're anti-white, anti-male, anti-traditional female, anti-semitic, and they're anti-democratic since they champion "minority rights" over the "majority". (I don't believe in democracy anyway, since it's a scam, but the point is that they're anti-democratic while claiming to be democratic, and pro-rights but only for some.) So no, the core value of left-liberalism isn't human rights or individual freedom. The core value is power of the state.
    5
  5681. I'm doing alright, thanks, you? I needed a break from Stalingrad so I've spent today doing research on the Battle of Gazala. It's the first time in a while that I've done battle-related work that was fun to actually do
    5
  5682. Yeah I would appreciate it if you (and others) don't say who it is, just in case. I'm surprised how large an audience he has though, in the sense that I'm surprised he hasn't been wiped out by YouTube before now. But from what I've seen he's been careful with his wording, and he's not advocating violence, he's just explaining the Third Positionist stance on things (again, from what I've seen). In that sense, there's no immediate threat.
    5
  5683. Oh good! Hill's book is good. I've been working on Stalingrad (no surprise), but today I did some reading on the Battle of Gazala in preparation for post-Stalingrad. It was a very welcome change from the Eastern Front and I can't wait for Stalingrad to be done with now
    5
  5684. Hey Vass, how's things? I've got a couple of Stahel's books on Moscow and Barbarossa, and can confirm he's good. I do feel bad because, thanks to me, people keep saying they've got a load of books to read and not enough time to read them :D
    5
  5685. "When people vote for a politician because he has a nice ass you know why we cannot have nice things." Politicians talk out of their ass so it's sometimes hard to tell the difference
    5
  5686. Yes. Can't cover the Holocaust and the Nazi atrocities in the East (including Stalingrad) without studying the source material, which is when I realized that Hitler was socialist. Also, my Monday videos aren't going to be all Stalingrad videos.
    5
  5687. Cheers Adam! Yes, I'm sick of hearing about that damn documentary haha
    5
  5688. Updated video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    5
  5689. Thanks for your comment. Here's my counter argument https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    5
  5690. Two weeks before I made this video I was a Socialist. Then I accidentally Red Pilled myself into the true nature of Socialism. You're still in the Blue Pill zone, which is why you're trying to persuade me to come back to the way I used to believe, but can't now, because I know it was all a lie. If you'd like to see the world in a better way for how it really is, you can start here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5691. "I live in Sweden where the fuck are my socialism? No where, because SWEDEN IS NOT SOCIALIST. God damn..." - The 80's Wolf Let's see if Sweden is socialist or not. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If the state owns or controls parts of the economy, and takes that away from private individuals or private businesses, that's socialism (the opposite of capitalism, which is the private ownership of the means of production). To quote from wikipedia, Sweden has - 1. An elaborate social safety net (funded publically through taxation) 2. Free education (public ownership, funded publically through taxation) 3. Universal healthcare (public ownership, funded publically through taxation) 4. Public pension plans (public ownership, funded publically through taxation) 5. "A partnership between employers, trade unions and the government, whereby these social partners negotiate the terms to regulating the workplace among themselves, rather than the terms being imposed by law." (state control of the economy) 6. "Sweden at 56.6% of GDP, Denmark at 51.7% and Finland at 48.6% reflect very high public spending. One key reason for public spending is the large number of public employees. These employees work in various fields including education, healthcare, and for the government itself. They often have greater job security and make up around a third of the workforce (more than 38% in Denmark). Public spending in social transfers such as unemployment benefits and early-retirement programmes is high. In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries." (public ownership, funded publically through taxation) 7. "Overall tax burdens (as a percentage of GDP) are high: Sweden (44.1%), Denmark (45.9%) and Finland (44.1%)." (state control of the economy) In addition, Wiki states - "Public expenditure for health and education is significantly higher in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in comparison to the OECD average." If private individuals and businesses had a say on where their money goes, then that would be capitalism. Since 44% of your money is taken from you by the social-public state, that 44% cannot be classed as "capitalism", it must be classed as "socialism", since socialism is the state ownership or control of the means of production. So, to answer your question, you have plenty of socialism in Sweden, and it's crippling your economy and slowing the growth of your nation, much like it is here in the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Sweden
    5
  5692. Thank you! Socialism allows capitalism though, whereas communism (in theory, at least) does not.
    5
  5693. Why?
    5
  5694. If you're going to say I'm wrong, you need to give a proper counterargument.
    5
  5695. TheXasti - You've misunderstood what I was saying. An authoritarian government can be left, right or central - correct. But a government becomes socialist when it heavily controls or owns the economy and businesses. When I said "I would absolutely argue that this could not have happened to this extent in a free-market capitalist economy", what I was getting at was that the Holocaust could not have happened naturally in a capitalist free-market (economy). If that was the case, you would have 'McHolocausts' springing up everywhere naturally in capitalist societies without the need for state intervention. And you don't have that because no capitalist business could market a Holocaust to consumers. No capitalist business owned the Holocaust, because it wasn't capitalism, it was owned and controlled by the socialist state. Going off the evidence, it's probably wise to conclude that without an all-powerful state that owns the economy you cannot have another Holocaust. "Mass murder by the State is not exclusive to Communists and Socialists." True. But please point to a capitalist state which deliberately mass-murdered 6 million Jews, plus starved 3 million Soviet POWs in 1 year (1941), and starved the Dutch, Greeks and many others, plus enslaved and murdered millions of Slavs... plus ignited a war that killed many more millions. And that's just National Socialist Germany, which was in power for 12 years! When you look at the Soviet Socialist Republics you have many more millions. And Mao's China, millions more. Cambodia. The scale of this disaster was unprecidented in world history. Yes, you have pogroms and starvation and famine in capitalist dictatorships, but absolutely no where near the scale of this. And why is that? Because the economic power of the state was and is limited in a capitalist society. A capitalist business does not want high taxation, price controls, an end of private property, or an end to trade outside of their own country. They want economic freedom to do what they want. Sure, it can go too far the other way, to the point that capitalist businesses own the show, thus lowering wages, exploiting people, forming monopolies, enslaving people, hiring thugs to destroy the property of competition, or even raising armies which then results in slaughter in the name of profit etc. But it's in the best interests of capitalists to have a state with laws and stability. The difference is, those state laws and stability is political in nature, not necessarily economic control or ownership. Too much state ownership of the means of production (economy) is not what a capitalist wants. The point being that capitalist states were often limited in economic power, and didn't have the means to actually industrialize murder on the scale that the socialist governments in the 20th Century did.
    5
  5696. Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    5
  5697. They're both planets though. And they're very similar in their policies, even if there are some differences.
    5
  5698. "Marxism does not define socialism" - or communism, or anything. He left it vague for others to interpret. That's why you have Mensheviks and Bolsheviks. Saying the Soviet Union wasn't socialist or communist because they purged a portion of their socialists or communists, doesn't make sense. Neither does saying that the Nazis purged 1,000 out of at least 3,000,000 socialists they had in their SA movement. There's a difference between socialism and communism. And there's a difference between various different types of socialism and communism. There is no definite definition. People like Lenin and Hitler definied what socialism and communism was.
    5
  5699. It is.
    5
  5700. Again, great counterargument there STBFKR.
    5
  5701. You're correct and I didn't consciously realise I had ordered Joly's like that!
    5
  5702. Glad it was helpful!
    5
  5703. Glad you like them!
    5
  5704. Your country went to war. Your country lost. The winner takes all. This happened in 1871 when the French were beaten by the Germans and the French were forced to pay reparations, and this should have happened after WW1 to Germany, but Germany refused to pay, and the Allied leaders stabbed their own people in the back. - "I didn't hear him mention the Occupation of the Ruhr" Because it didn't happen until later. This series on the Weimar Hyperinflation is only up to 1919 and 1920 so far. I'll cover the Ruhr incident when I get to it. But I will remind you that the inflation that led to the hyperinflation had started years before the war even began, and was already accelerating before the occupation of the Ruhr. Hyperinflation would have occurred regardless of the Ruhr incident, although it certainly sped it up.
    5
  5705. Exactly what Mises says. Top Marx!
    5
  5706. Hi, and FIRST!
    5
  5707.  @Adiscretefirm  Yes, and according to a couple of sources, many of the people living there at the time wanted to either be independent or return to France.
    5
  5708. That's the problem with history. The only option is to use multiple sources from all different perspectives to overcome this issue. See this video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    5
  5709. Well, I wouldn't have answered it this way anyway because your teachers are probably expecting an answer that bows to the traditional narrative.
    5
  5710. First!
    5
  5711. (I have a video coming about this in two weeks time)
    5
  5712. I can only pin one comment in a video, sadly. I wish YouTube had a Reddit-like comment system or something similar.
    5
  5713. I would have got to this topic anyway eventually, so may as well start now.
    5
  5714. Actually, it was probably one who was using numerous fake accounts
    5
  5715. Yes, that too. I'm not so wide read on the Pacific Theatre, but again history should not be denied or distorted.
    5
  5716. Evening Zorn (well, 1708 hours)
    5
  5717. And the reason I even talked to them was because of the old theory of history which said "history lies in the heart of the debate". That's why I was concerned about what they were saying, because history theory itself said I had to be. Now, with a proper theory of history (one that isn't flawed), we can now see that truth doesn't lie in convincing anyone else. I'm sorry you were bored, but plenty of other people have said this was one of the most (if not, the most) important video I've ever done. I also think this was vitally important, as it was the realisation that history can actually be done - that I can trust my senses, trust that the sources are valid, trust my conclusions - that instantly pulled me out of the burnout. You're claiming that it wasn't, but it was. As soon as I learnt the Objectivist theory of knowledge I lost my burnout.
    5
  5718. That's only part of the process, and relying on primary sources by themselves actually leads to the "post-truth" problem.
    5
  5719. That's the worst interpretation of Objectivism I've ever heard! Objectivism encourages relationships, since it promotes mutual cooperation - a synthesis between individuals who trade and contribute to society. Socialism demands isolation. If I'm being robbed blind by people screeching at me in their religious tongues that I'm evil and greedy, then I'm less likely to cooperate, and more likely to isolate myself. In fact, this is precisely what I aim to do - get away from the world as much as possible so I can live my life as freely as possible. I think you've been misled by others as to the true nature of Objectivism, and the reason why is because they probably also haven't looked into it properly either, since it's in their interest to prevent you from looking at alternative ideas. My suggestion is that you listen to Ayn Rand speak here on YouTube and judge for yourself.
    5
  5720. As I said in the video, you must use ALL the evidence. You don't judge the sources impartially, but rather you try to logically eliminate the contradictions, which will force you down the path towards the truth. As far as trusting me, if I make an error, I will be called out on it. Another YouTuber (Liquid Zulu) with more knowledge than me on Objectivism has correctly pointed out a mistake regarding my imprecise explanation of Hume. This is a subtle mistake, but highlights the fact that it's not really possible to make mistakes or lie to a large audience, since you will get called out for it. Thus, you can "trust" that this video is mostly on point, even without knowing that I have zero reason to lie about this subject. I mean, what purpose would it serve for me to lie to you? And no, don't "blindly" follow me or anyone else. Do your own reading if you have the time and find this subject fascinating. Or maybe check other YouTubers out (like Liquid Zulu) who have videos on the topic. You can then logically verify the conceptual conclusions based on the evidence.
    5
  5721. In a nutshell, "Russia" (the Soviet Union) didn't start WW2. I'm not saying Stalin didn't make mistakes or whatever, and maybe he had a part to play by allying (in all but name) with Hitler in 1939, but that's not the same as saying "Russia" (the Soviet Union) started the war. People are taking the current conflict and trying to work history to suit their agenda, which doesn't work.
    5
  5722. I'm glad you think Crusader was the best, but I want to make them even better... I'm never satisfied and all I see are the faults :(
    5
  5723. I'm trying to give the Soviet perspective. But the sources I have are quite heavy on the Axis side, and the Axis hold the initiative, so they've got more detailed plans etc. Plus, it's hard to be balanced when all the sources (especially the history books) start their narrative in September. The fighting that happened before the 23rd of August has basically been forgotten. Next episode, in the final part, you'll see the Soviet perspective more.
    5
  5724. The captions are the script, so they aren't too bad to put in :) yes, Kursk and Berlin will come one day, but I think it's back to North Africa first after Stalingrad (or perhaps before then if I fancy a change of pace)
    5
  5725. I have not come across anything like that in my current reading. Have you asked Anton Joly? He can read the Russian and access the archives, so may be able to help https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA
    5
  5726. Congrats!
    5
  5727. Strange... 10-15 dislikes have just disappeared 🤔 Not seen that before
    5
  5728. Not sure when it will be, but was recording some of the audio for it today :)
    5
  5729. I didn't mention the dreaded "socialism" so there shouldn't be too many trolls in this video. If I want downvotes, I just need to say the word and boom, it's like inflating the currency supply with QE
    5
  5730. In that song (written in 1935 during the Abyssinian War), they sing that the "black girl" will wear a blackshirt with them, meaning that they're inviting her to be a fascist with them. They also say she will become Roman. So while it's clearly talking about race, and slavery, it also doesn't prove that Italian Fascist ideology itself was fundamentally racist. There's a difference between the Italians being racist, and Fascist ideology being racist. I'm not saying the Italians weren't racist, only that Italian Fascist ideology was not racist until Hitler got involved in the late 1930s.
    5
  5731. Haha glad you like the jokes at least! :)
    5
  5732.  @LuciusEV  That is precisely it. They think we're untrustworthy and tricking them somehow.
    5
  5733. I understand, but that doesn't work. If the State's Central Bank prints currency and throws it at the stock market, which is full of public corporations, the public corporations grow large and out-compete their competition, leading to many competitors shutting up shop. The banking sector also gets centralized, and everyone is forced to be in the system. The fiat currency we use as a means of exchange is heavily manipulated as a result of inflation and interest rates, both caused by the State's Central Bank. So I don't think corporations are voluntary in any way shape or form. I have to have a bank account (banks are corporations) in order to pay my taxes, for example.
    5
  5734. Again, that's not what I said, but keep falsely accuse me of this.
    5
  5735. Socialists are masters at justifying their immorality
    5
  5736. House arrest is a lockdown.
    5
  5737. Sadly I can't spend the first 10 minutes of every video defining my words. This is why I often say "if you don't agree, go back to the other video where I do define it and argue there". Usually though this is ignored, and then the entire video is dismissed based on this. There are videos out there on YouTube "refuting" my arguments in this way.
    5
  5738. Well, the Italians had an entire division while the British had just a brigade. It shouldn't have happened like that in the first place. The question of course is, who is at fault?
    5
  5739. Yup.
    5
  5740. "Free education, public healthcare systems, various benefits" It's not free, it's actually more expensive than if it was left to the free market. See Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson, link in the description, after a few chapters you'll get it.
    5
  5741. Nazis and Hitler also killed Nazis, Fascists, conservatives, liberals, and basically everyone else. You've been listening to Marxist propaganda, which doesn't stand up to scrutiny. On this channel I've provided plenty of actual evidence to back up my points. You can start here https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    5
  5742. Damn, I wish my professors had been like yours. I was taught Hitler wasn't a socialist. Also would have liked Citino as a lecturer haha
    5
  5743. The Germans targeted the Poles during the war. Snydor talks about this in "Blood Lands", but there's an article on Wikipedia too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crimes_against_the_Polish_nation#Ethnic_cleansing_through_forced_expulsion
    5
  5744. I'm glad you enjoy them! They're stressful to make sometimes (like next week's Stalingrad video...) but it's good to know people like them!
    5
  5745. Being right = delete channel. That explains all the YouTube censorship 😂
    5
  5746. Oh I've already been accused of making up terms! When I said Hitler's ideology was "race socialism", the Marxists (who are all about splitting people into racial groups) said there was no such thing 🙄
    5
  5747. And you're downplaying the rapes. Women were forced into the brothels by their hair.
    5
  5748. "Despite the Rassenschande laws, Germans also had sex with Jewish women. Sex with Jews, even in brothels, was not allowed for any German military members. Seidler writes that Wehrmacht members who knew the person with whom they were sexual was Jewish faced “serious consequences.” SS officers, police officers, and police officials with officers’ rank faced the death sentence. Still, a man had to know that the woman was Jewish to be punished. Therefore, if someone claimed he was unaware of the woman’s Jewishness – he was not punished. In his research, Seidler found that this is what happened for most offenses. If a man was caught he simply had to say he did not realize the “whore” was Jewish, since it was not always obvious by outward appearance." - Gertjejanssen, "Victims, Heroes, Survivors," P67.
    5
  5749. It's just this video. A bunch of morons from 4chan
    5
  5750. You're conflating the two numbers. Figure 1. 50,000 women (at least) were in the R-Brothel system (this wasn't voluntary pros, by the way, they were dragged into it by the hair in certain cases). Figure 2. 10,000,000 women were R'd on the Eastern Front. That's two separate statistics. R's happened both INSIDE and OUTSIDE the R-Brothel system.
    5
  5751. This is why I like Terminator 1, but think Terminator 2 ruined it. Terminator 1 was a closed loop. Terminator 2 opened up the loop and made it paradoxical. EDIT: Terminator 2 was still a great film though!
    5
  5752. So that was in the early Close Combat days then?
    5
  5753.  @dragosstanciu9866  Which is why it's not always best to give people what they want.
    5
  5754. I know, but I just haven't had time to make it yet. I will do though
    5
  5755. Apparently, according to Breevor's book, the photos taken were actually of German tanks in the Eindhoven area. I have no idea if that's true or not, as that's the first time I've heard that, but it might be.
    5
  5756. Yup, been a subscriber of his for quite a while :)
    5
  5757. It's never a waste of time because I can use that to my advantage in the videos. And there's always usefulness in every book. Even if 99% of it is wrong or irrelevant - use the other 1%!
    5
  5758. Hahaha I hope it was!
    5
  5759. Wait until you see what he does prior to Crusader. His plan backfires and its hilarious
    5
  5760. Thank you! If they're direct translations, then I don't see any problems with the site. But what I said in the video still applies for the sources themselves.
    5
  5761. Haha snot bad 😂
    5
  5762. I'd say that history is actually written by the survivors.
    5
  5763. Can you point to a specific error I made? Considering that I'm actually agreeing with all the mainstream historians here, doesn't your comment imply that Ian Kershaw, Richard Evans, Henry Turner, and George Hallgarten (to name a few) are all not historians now?
    5
  5764. "So it's a proven fact that major industrialists donated huge sums to the NAZI party." Watch the video. The "evidence" for this claim is bogus and was called out in 1985. Mainstream historians now accept this fact, with only the Marxists or the ignorant claiming otherwise.
    5
  5765. That's precisely what I've been saying for years. Fascism and National Socialism are socialisms, not Marxism.
    5
  5766. No, iI refuse to edit Wikipedia on principle. Their policies are ridiculous, and most edits seem to get reverted anyway by the Communists in charge.
    5
  5767. They didn't help the National Socialists prior to the seizure of power, and only supported them after the seizure of power because they had no choice. As I've shown in previous videos, the National Socialists marched into IG Farben and took it over from within. All the board members ended up becoming Nazi Party members, except the one who was a Swiss national and therefore exempt.
    5
  5768. Awesome! I look forward to seeing what you do with Market Garden!
    5
  5769. You're right about the Patreon and SubscribeStar questions. I'm worried that I'll never catch up and I'm letting people down by not getting their questions answered. It's been on my mind for a while, but I don't want to just end the Q&As because a good portion of them are decent questions and lead to some interesting videos
    5
  5770. Congratulations!
    5
  5771. Apart from the fact that Mary's customers are idiots and deserve what's coming to them, and the fact that this story has major holes in it, the best part is this - "Fortunately though, the bank, the brokerage houses and their respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multi-billion no-strings attached cash infusion from their cronies in Government. The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new taxes levied on employed, middle-class who have never been in Mary's bar." Socialism shouldn't have bailed out Mary or the banks that financed her. By doing so, the system is no longer capitalist, and socialism props up a bubble. This then leads to another recession down the road when the bubble pops. If the socialist state didn't get involved, Mary's bar and the bad banks would go out of business, leaving the good bars and the good banks to remain. The lesson is learnt by everyone who survives - if you don't try to swindle people, you'll do well in business. But by propping up the bad banks and bad bars, the socialist state keeps the faulty economy and encourages everyone to keep making the mistakes. This is precisely the point I made in the video.
    5
  5772. First!
    5
  5773. "@TIK Spending on education produces the largest economic growth when looking at long run macro economics." I won't tell you that private education produces much greater results, as shown historically https://youtu.be/Rx6A2IFjMyQ "Also deregulation and an out of control market caused the big recessions not govt expenditure." See the link in my previous comments. Government does cause the recessions. If it wasn't for central government and central banks, you wouldn't have any recessions at all.
    5
  5774. Yes, exactly. What I don't understand is why Montgomery is insisting that this operation was an attack on the Ruhr. It's obvious he's trying to lay blame on Supreme Headquarters. And it's clear that he's trying to damage control to boost his integrity. But why say this attack was aimed at the Ruhr, when it wasn't? I think it's because it was a disaster. They couldn't justify the loss of so many troops at Arnhem this late in the war just to potentially outflank the Fifteenth Army. The loss of so many men could only be justified if they sold it as an operation that may have ended the war by Christmas. That's the only reason that makes sense.
    5
  5775. I have (mostly) recovered now, thank you. Luckily I recorded the audio for this video before I got ill, so I was able to edit it in time for this week :)
    5
  5776. It was 7,750 words (although that's including some titles and dates, so maybe a little less). It's the second most words of any episode in the series so far, with only episode 18 having slightly more (7,962). Total word count for the entire series is currently 140,593 (again, including titles and dates so a bit less).
    5
  5777. Plot twist!
    5
  5778. #butisthisreallythecase?
    5
  5779. TIL of an "umlaut" :D
    5
  5780. Don't say the quiet part out loud!
    5
  5781. Did you figure it out? Or do you need a hand? (Pun intended) 😂
    5
  5782. I talk about it in my Operation Compass documentary, but will repeat what I read. Basically, there were no plans. The grand strategy was to hit the British at the border, take some territory, and when Britain fell to the Germans in late 1940, use what they'd taken to gain extra territory from a defeated enemy. The plan didn't go beyond that, which is why Graziani only got as far as Sidi Barrani. They weren't prepared for war. Link to my Operation Compass video https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk
    5
  5783. Mostly photoshop and premiere pro. I use Blender for the 3D ones
    5
  5784. Let's put your Hegelian emotionalism to one side and define Socialism as it was historically https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5785. "Finally a historian who is an actual historian and not an echo in an echo chamber." That's it. I expect there will be a backlash of opinion on this, and I'm alright with that. I don't want this to be an echo chamber. Sadly, my opponents do want echo chamber "safe spaces", which leads to many problems, as I explain in the video
    5
  5786. It was not a direct response to TimeGhost, but it will counter most of their points
    5
  5787. It took about 18 months to do the research, scripting, recording and editing (obviously I had my other videos going on too, so it wasn't purely 18 months for this, that's just how long I was working on it in the background)
    5
  5788. He nationalized the unions into the DAF (German Labour Front) and crushed those unions that refused to nationalize. Lenin did the exact same thing, and I talked about this in the video.
    5
  5789. Hitler also killed Capitalists. He abolished private property. He nationalized the industries and trade unions. I know Wikipedia and Three Arrows may not admit this, but the sources are clear. You can deny history, but I can. And yes, Socialism is defined as social ownership of the means of production. By that definition, Hitler was a Socialist. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5790. Of course he hasn't watched the video 😂 that's why his trolling has been unsuccessful
    5
  5791. "Or, How to lose your credibility in five hours or less." Do you have a counter argument? No, because I've destroyed them in the video. So either go away and come back with something that isn't already refuted or admit defeat.
    5
  5792. Yeah, not neo-classical, nor were my "talking points" neo-classical. I don't think OP knows what neo-classical is.
    5
  5793. Timestamps in the description. Facts come later. The purpose of the first few minutes was to show that my critics aren't listening and are relying on emotional responses, like these two https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    5
  5794. Please watch the video before commenting. Everything you said is fully addressed in the video, and backed up by copious amounts of evidence. The fact that you think I'm a "conservative" is proof that you didn't watch even the first couple of minutes. And to address your final paragraph: the evidence is overwhelming. The problem is that you've not heard it. Watch the video (timestamps in the description) and realize that what is written on Wikipedia is incorrect.
    5
  5795. No, but what it shows is that Racism is a form of Socialism. In fact, it's one and the same thing https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5796. You may be right that most people are Socialists, and I used to believe what you do too about Socialism being on a sliding scale... But then I did my homework.
    5
  5797. Lenin said that no Marxist understands Marx. And I agree, I don't think any Marxist really understands what Marx was saying https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5798. It does feel like I'm wasting my time trying to persuade those who are unwilling to listen. That was my biggest lesson from this: that some people don't want the truth.
    5
  5799. Antifa don't realise that they are the Blackshirts! They're all white racists running around burning black communities, trying to find "Fascists". Well, they correct, they aren't Fascist - they're Nazis.
    5
  5800. China is Communist. Because Socialism doesn't work, they've allowed some limited businesses some token freedom, but that's not the same as private ownership of the means of production. A businessman in China is much like a businessman under National Socialism; totally under the thumb of the government.
    5
  5801. And "capital" is defined as "commodity money" by Karl Marx in Das Kapital volume 1. To have Capitalism, you need to have gold and silver as the means of exchange. Since we do not have gold and silver, we do not use commodity money. And since we do not use commodity money, we don't use capital. And since we don't use capital, we don't have Capitalism. Again, here's the historical definition of Socialism and Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And here's some more things Karl Marx said that should enlighten you https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5802. Mike McMike and Slater Slater are my biggest CCP 50-cent army trolls, so you've managed to attract both of them, well done!
    5
  5803. "However I fundamentally disagree with your reactionary economic positions" Socialism is reactionary. Capitalism is progress. "I notice one big issue with your definition is that you assume that all so called “collective” control is the same. This is I think is stupid, human beings are complex creatures and so are our hierarchies. When you talk about private control of the means of production and collective for example: How is a capitalist who controls multiple machines similar to a small family own business? Other then in theory both of them being “private”. You seem to act like a worker Soviet and a centralized government are the same because they are “groups” of people. I simply cannot agree as humans from the beginning of our species are groups." Again, I covered this in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Two individual people working together is still capitalism. A thousand people collectively owning the means of production, as in the case of corporations with thousands of employees and thousands of shareholders, cannot be capitalism. As shown in the Public vs Private video, when a large collective organizes, it becomes a State. Corporations are States. They're States within a State, but they are still States. They are not individual people. They are collectives. "If a work place is controlled through democratic means" Democracy = people power. Peope = Public. Public = the hierarchy of society. The hierarchy of society is the State. Again, see the Public vs Private video. "A few capitalists in control a large business is like wise not the same as a small family ran business. A group of investors or higher ups in a business are still a collective of sorts." Correct. That's exactly what I'm saying. "Ultimately human beings naturally will organize into some kind of group, whether family or not so the distinction “private versus public” is incorrect." No, it's correct. Public = the collective, or hierarchy of society. When humans organize, they create hierarchies. Those hierarchies are States. "You also state that Marx tired to hide the real definition but I feel that’s based off a misunderstanding or deliberate attempt to mischaracterize him" It's not mis-characterizing him or misunderstanding him. He said that socialism is when there's State control, but also non-State control. He, just like many other socialists, are trying to hide the true definition of socialism. Socialism is State control. When you have a society, which organizes itself into hierarchies, you have a State or States. Socialism is Statism. There's no getting around that. Marx though, along with many others, are trying to say it's not totalitarianism, but REAL democracy, and stuff like that. Well, democracy = people power. Power comes from the hierarchy of the State. Democracy is the tyranny of the majority. Socialism is also the tyranny of the majority. And if the majority has total tyranny, then you have totalitarianism, since the majority will organize into a State, and the State will have total control. "Marx refers to Private ownership based on the idea that a private entity controls means of production as we agree but by private he means a certain type of group of people in a capitalist system (CEO’s, CFO’s, Investors etc) control the input and out pit of labour." Okay. "Marx saw this is unnecessary and believed it would be easier if people who worked in this places had a voice in how things are ran, hence “Worker Ownership of Production”" It's not individual worker ownership, since that would be capitalism. What Marx is calling for is collective-worker ownership. Again, collective = State. The State (supposedly in the name of the worker) is in control of the means of production, is what he's actually saying. If an individual worker owns his own means of production, then that worker is a capitalist. Self-employed workers are practicing capitalism, whether they realize it or not. "I think the issue here is that we understand economic hierarchies differently, but fancy terminology and over simplified rhetoric is ultimately made it harder to see that." Agreed. Socialists are trying to distort the words so that they lose all meaning. The words are very clear. A private is an individual. Individual control = Capitalism. Social or State control = Socialism. "I’m not as well read as you and I’ll be the first to admit it but I don’t see how a worker co-op is the same as nationalized industry other then the fact they are owned by “collectives” and that collectives of people aren’t all the same." They're both States and collectively run. They're both not capitalism because capitalism is private control, and these are not privately controlled.
    5
  5804. Fascism is different to National Socialism as this video shows https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    5
  5805. "I dunno sounds overall you’re doing a disservice to anyone from Anarchist, to syndicalists, democratic communists, council communists or even democratic socialists." Bearing in mind that I used to be a moderate socialist of the George Orwell variety. My private Facebook page still says I'm an "Anarchist/Socialist". So no, there's no "disservice" here. I'm warning you and them that Socialism is fundamentally totalitarian in nature. The rest of the stuff, from anarchism to democracy, doesn't work with Socialism or Communism. - "All of these people argue for workers democratic control over their means of production." Yes, and I am pointing out that that's not possible. When they call for "workers" (plural) "democratic control", what that translates to is totalitarianism. Democracy is state control. A "group" of "workers" is a "public", and the Public is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Hell many of these same groups argue for market socialism, just with the means of production controlled by cooperatives." And a cooperative is a (small) State that has monopoly control over the individual (totalitarian). So it's not "market" Socialism at all, it's just Socialism which is State control (totalitarian). - "You have to remember that TIK has NO idea what he'd talking about and is somewhat deranged." That's not an argument. Even if I was "deranged", the point still stands. A complete moron can still be right when it comes to 2+2=4. So just because he's a moron doesn't mean that he's always wrong. Counter the points, don't resort to insults.
    5
  5806. Are you trying to gaslight? Then why are you attacking the author with the suggestion that he has "personal stuff going on" like all the other socialists have done previously? Shouldn't you be concentrating on the historical debate? Nothing in your two paragraphs suggests to me that you've actually watched the video. If you have, why are you dismissing all the evidence I've presented (backed by 107 sources and 350 direct references, and more since this video) and instead are trying to say I know nothing about this subject? Quite clearly, if you had actually watched this video and paid attention, you would have seen that I do know what I'm talking about because the evidence is overwhelming. So which part of the video did you not understand? Was it the bit where the Socialists marched into the industries and took them over from within? Was it the bit where they implemented wage controls and price controls? Was it the bit where Hitler killed Ernst Röhm because Hitler preferred a 'peaceful revolution' and gradual reform (like the German Social Democratic Party - specifically the MSPD - in the early Weimar era) rather than a 'violent revolution' which Hitler feared would bring in Bolshevism? Was it the bit where they crushed the trade unions that refused to socialize into the State trade union, the DAF? No, it was none of that. It's because I have "personal stuff going on". In other words, you've challenged me on a point I addressed in Section 8, Part 6: "TIK is Mentally ill" 04:43:42 ... Again, the reason the video is called "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments" is because I've heard all this before. And this is proof that you didn't watch the video because if you had, you wouldn't have made a remark that has already been refuted in the video that you claimed to have watched.
    5
  5807. Thank you! Yes, I'm surprised how few people realise that Socialism came before Marxism. I think that's where a lot of the confusion comes from
    5
  5808. Thanks for your comment. This is the common criticism of this video - the definitions. But the problem is that "my" definition is the historical definition, the dictionary definition, and the definition both Karl Marx and Hitler, as well as numerous other Socialists use. I've outlined this in full in this video here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and I encourage you to really listen to that video all the way through. There are many truths in that video, and my biggest regret was not just copying that video into this one so that nobody could dispute the definitions. Cheers!
    5
  5809. Sweden is socialist? https://youtu.be/0lxD-gikpMs The State can go on spending until they squeeze the private sector too much, then they must either cut back or collapse.
    5
  5810. Robin Hood stole from the State (the King), and gave the money back to the taxpayer. But the Socialists would have you believe that he stole from the rich. No, the king was only rich because of taxation (and inflation). If you take away the ability for the State to steal money from the poor via tax and inflation, the rich won't be as rich. But the Socialists will have you believe that taxation is necessary to build roads or social health care or whatever. There's a reason there are traffic jams and health care costs going through the roof https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Again, the State causes the impoverishment of the poor, who then call for more Stare (and subsequently more tax and inflation) which then makes them even poorer. It's a never ending cycle. So if you want to know why the rich are getting richer and own so much - it's the State and Socialism. This is why I'm now a Capitalist, even though I'm not rich. I understand what's happening and realize that I've been fooled by the allure of Socialism into impoverishing myself. Well, no more. Recommended reading for you: Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson", then "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, then Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". That last one in particular will set you free.
    5
  5811. Exactly! I agree with you fully. The reason I'm no longer a Socialist is because I realized that the theory was awful, and in reality didn't just lead to laziness, but starvation and totalitarianism. And yes, I never said all Socialists are Nazis, but many are just playing dumb and haven't even watched the video. They're just repeating the same old arguments that were debunked in the video
    5
  5812. I agree. Thank you for watching and commenting!
    5
  5813. The problem is that Leftists will just not accept facts. The mistake I've made is trying to overwhelm you all with evidence in order for you to not have any way of wriggling out of the correct conclusion, that's why my videos on this topic are so long. But as a former Leftist, I should have realized that none of you are thinking with your heads, you're feeling with your hearts. It's impossible to use reason to appeal to emotions, and this is why I'm failing to make you accept the evidence and see the reality for what it truly is. When I engage you with evidence, your faith in what you perceive to be 'heavenly Socialism' acts as a shield, deflecting all my attempts to break through. Meanwhile, your mockery and insults, based on emotions, do nothing to me, since evidence is my guide, and the evidence is on my side. Thus, we're at an impasse.
    5
  5814. Happy New Year to you too! Along with this video, and Monday's video, and the end of Stalingrad, 2024 will be a new era in the channel's history
    5
  5815. Except in the UK apparently?
    5
  5816. The Germans had three divisions committed against the British in North Africa. The Italians had several divisions there too. Otherwise, the Axis were fighting on the Eastern Front.
    5
  5817. They originally had several objectives, but because they didn't land from the submarines, they abandoned most of them.
    5
  5818. Yeah, I can swap the km and miles around in the scale, no problem!
    5
  5819. First!
    5
  5820. The statement is wrong because the recovery started to happen under Schleicher (thanks to Brüning's cutting back on State spending prior to him). Under Hitler, there were shortages of consumer goods (coal, food, gold, wood, numerous other things...), and the only reason things seemed good for the Germans was because they expropriated property off the Jews and then foreigners too when they conquered other territories. But I would argue that it was an illusion of prosperity, not real prosperity. Schacht's policies kept the whole charade going for longer than it should have, and it was beginning to come apart in 1939. Had Hitler not gone to war and stole resources off other countries, then I think the economy would have imploded. This is roughly the conclusion Götz Aly comes to in his book.
    5
  5821. The German word for "race" is not "Volk", but "Rasse". Volk does not mean race, it means people.
    5
  5822. I can tell you didn't watch the video. Explain to me how taking over the businesses using party members and socialising the whole of society is somehow not socialism.
    5
  5823. Of course he didn't watch the video Cole. None of them have
    5
  5824. The reason they've banned discussion of my content on r/SadHistory is because they can't refute the evidence I've presented. They can only dismiss and slander me, not actually address the given evidence. So many posts on there were just "herpy derp TIK sucks", so that's why they banned discussion of it. This is actually proof that they've lost.
    5
  5825. You've read Wages of Destruction, yet haven't noticed that it was the Nazis, not private interests, that were running the show? You also haven't considered how Far Left Adam Tooze is, and how much the Guardian praises him for his Left wing political views. The Nazis ended the class struggle by abolishing class distinctions. They abolished the roles of "employer" and "employee", in favour of "leaders" and "followers". Yet you continue to state the opposite of the evidence. It's a hopeless cause if you can't even be bothered to think critically.
    5
  5826. "Your mistake here is thinking government control=socialism" Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. - "Under socialism there is worker, not state control of the means of production." Under MARXIST Socialism, the workers are the social group that's in ownership of the means of production. - "State control under the Nazis was for its own sake, not to help people." Under NATIONAL Socialism, the Germans are the social group that's in ownership of the means of production. - "And the Nazis put the socialists and communists in camps." Lenin killed the Greens and the anarchist-socialists, and the Mensheviks. Stalin killed Trotsky, as well as numerous other socialists. Socialists kill other socialists and communists all the time. Hitler also put liberals and conservatives in the concentration camps, and National Socialists too. Hitler put men in the concentration camps - that doesn't mean that he wasn't a man.
    5
  5827. I've just responded to someone else asking for the same thing. I could do this, but I'm not sure I would do that on this channel. I have been debating making a second channel for more off-the-cuff type content, so this is one possibility
    5
  5828. I think it was him who said not to listen to me, but to read James Gregor on the definition of Fascism... not realising that I'm using James Gregor's definition of (Italian) Fascism, which is "National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism". The fact that he said this proves that he hasn't read James Gregor and hasn't watched my videos.
    5
  5829.  @-jammy4123  Yeah I don't know what OP is smoking, but the National Socialists know exactly what they are. They know they're socialists. I've had a few people admit that they converted from National Socialism to free market economics thanks to my videos, so I'm getting through to some of them.
    5
  5830. If you bothered to watch the video, you'll see that I did use definitions. This criticism is invalid. I'm using the historical and correct definition of socialism: social ownership of the means of production. You may not agree with it, but you're wrong. This is the definition that all the books (including Karl Marx) use.
    5
  5831. They economically centrally planned the distribution of goods, abolished private property, and attempted more economic policies besides. Have you actually watched the video? Oh, of course you haven't.
    5
  5832. Your assumptions betray you. If you watch the video, you'll see that I'm not "right wing" nor "fascist" or anything else. I'm not "apologising" for those evil ideologies.
    5
  5833. But he did nationalise the industries. I've given plenty of evidence of this. Why are you ignoring the Betriebsführer and the Betriebsgemeinschaft? Why are you ignoring Gleichschaltuung? Why aren't you willing to accept the evidence?
    5
  5834. Marxism isn't the only version of socialism. Marxism isn't stateless, and it wasn't for "all people", it was only for the workers. Marxism despised the bourgeoisie, the farmers, the "kulaks", the Cossacks, the Jews, and more recently the "white cos gendered men".
    5
  5835. I used over 100 sources from all different perspectives, scrutinized them, integrated the evidence together, and formed the most logical conclusion. It's the truth because it's based on the evidence of reality, rather than on pure doubt, which is what you're basing your conclusions on. If you can explain why dismissing sources based on their popularity is somehow justifiable, I'm sure we'd all agree with you.
    5
  5836. That's not true. If you watch this video, or my other video dedicated to showing why the idea that "Hitler privatized the industries" is ridiculously misleading, you'll see why https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY
    5
  5837. As were the conservatives, like Von Papen's associates, and even some national socialists too. Lenin killed plenty of socialists - it doesn't mean he wasn't a socialist.
    5
  5838. Oh yes, there were loads. They hang out on r/BadHistory on Reddit, because that's where all the best historians go. None of them have actually watched my videos, and they say I've said things I haven't said. They love to lie and slander, accuse me of straw-manning whilst doing the same... But their favourite tactic is to dismiss sources that they don't like, because picking and choosing sources is obviously how you get to the real history. While I use all the sources I can, they throw out the ones that disprove their narrative, but they can do this because they're the enlightened ones, you see.
    5
  5839. North Korea is a democracy because democracy means "people power". Except the people are the public, and the public is the state. So democracy is State Power. it's a trick - a play on words. You think it's about "voting" but all you're doing by voting is giving all power to the political establishment. It's a scam. Also my argument here doesn't just rely on the name choice. If the National Socialist German Workers' Party wasn't called that, it would still be classed as Socialist due to what it did and what it aimed to do, as explained in the video.
    5
  5840. "You can see this clearly in the way the Nazis denounced Marxism as a jewish plot, arresting & killing socialists and communists, and espousing values like militarism and nationalism that are directly opposed to most socialist writings and the general beliefs held by socialists." They're opposed to Marxism, yes. Marxist Socialism isn't socialism. Again, I explained this in the video. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO.
    5
  5841. "It did not grant the means of production to the workers, it gave them to the state and then put the Nazis at the head of said state." The workers' state = the dictatorship of the proletariat. The German workers established a Reich and that helped them socialise the means of production. So yeah, it's socialism.
    5
  5842. He had evolved past Marxism, seeing it as a Jewish plot.
    5
  5843. "Quant easing was reversed in January of 2022, and now quant tightening is happening." Lol. Okay bro. As one of the leading stock guys on the planet says: "central banks are not done inflating" https://youtu.be/HD-KWJQDYng
    5
  5844. The Party was the German Workers' Party. The workers were synchronised with the state under the policy of Gleichschaltung, which is why there was a 32 million worker strong trade union, and why private property rights and class differences were abolished.
    5
  5845. You cannot have socialism without centralised power. Denying this is denying reality.
    5
  5846. Try watching the video. Everything you said in this and the other comment was shown to be false in the video. You're denying the overwhelming evidence.
    5
  5847. Also, there's a reason I named the Hitler's Socialism video "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments" I took the counter-arguments given to me, and I destroyed them. Since then, the only counter I've got is that I don't know the "TRUE" definition of Socialism. But again, my critics ignore what I said in my Hitler's Socialism video, and distort/ignore my arguments in favour of denial and attacking my character. This is why they ignore this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5848. "@TIK dear TIK, respond to central points of FinBol's video without ideological biases, without your religious beliefs in Friedman's economics. Ignoring one part of reality and forwarding another. We love your metaphysical thinking!)" I did. I spent a significant portion of my 5 hour "Hitler's Socialism" video directly responding to his various points. That's partly why it was so long https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I didn't directly aim the video at him, because I don't want to give him any credit. Same with others who have criticized me. I don't answer them directly, I answer their arguments for the benefit of people who actually listen and want to learn. And also, I'd don't "believe" in Friedman's economics.
    5
  5849. "Check out FinBol and SocialistDemocrat's videos about him and then say "rational argument"))" Yeah, I love their videos (sarcasm). Hilarious how irrational they are. SocialistDemocrat even 'divines' how I'm a Nazi because, obviously, he's able to talk to divine entities
    5
  5850. @Clone Warrior this is the first I've heard about it. If this is the case, this is fantastic! The reason (finally) can be revealed, and the blame can land squarely on Browning (assuming that this source definitely says that, and isn't flawed in another way). My only issue is that Beevor should have stated this in his book. Would have taken him a sentence or two to say it. Why didn't he!?
    5
  5851. I'll be recording the audio this week, and then editing soon after. I suspect we're only a couple of weeks or so away. Will confirm a date when I can :)
    5
  5852. "yet, also, no man is an island.." I don't agree with a dead poet from 300 years ago. Every man is an island. - "we must all interface with others." Every man is an island, but islands can communicate and trade with each other. But in doing so, the islands don't suddenly become classed as a landmass - no, we're all still islands even if we trade together. - "what about a private union?" A union is fundamentally opposed to business. If it wasn't, then it would have no reason to exist. If capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, and a union is opposed to that, how is it capitalist? A "private" union isn't "private". It may not be centrally-state owned, but it's still public. Why? Because a union is a society of people, which is fundamentally non-private. - "A free market would have to allow for such a thing..." In a free market there wouldn't be Statist "unfair dismissal" laws forcing companies to keep the workers on the books during a strike which is legally allowed to last for 12 weeks. There wouldn't be laws preventing employers from stopping these non-workers from entering the premises of the building for ten days during the 12 week period, which stops employers from hiring new workers and dismissing the old ones. There also wouldn't be a "tribunal" which determines whether an employer has breached the law, and could fine the company £50,000 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/245596/10-922-industrial-action-employee-guide.pdf In a free market, the employer would have absolutely control over his private property and could just sack the employees if they walk out of their job. I mean, if you don't like your job or your working conditions, you should be looking for alternative work, not demanding things off your employer.
    5
  5853. Not read a lot on it so far if I'm honest, but "Bloodlands" by Snyder details the killings of both the Soviet and Nazi regimes in the Eastern Territories, "The Holocaust" by Rees, and "Telling Lies about Hitler" by Evans, which does a good job of tackling Holocaust denial.
    5
  5854. "Trying to understand a topic just by looking up dictionary definitions is a poor way to understand a topic." That's in addition to all the history books and primary sources and so on. It's also a response to people who say that the dictionary definitions disagree with "my" definitions. No they don't. Everything I'm saying is in alignment - the dictionary definitions, the primary and secondary sources, logic. The only people complaining about what I'm saying are people who believe that Socialism is anti-State. Those people are believing a deliberate Marxist lie. - "You tear down socialism based on a narrow and incomplete definition of Socialism while at the same time discount the narrow dictionary basis of Nazism and have an in depth discussion of the topic to try and explain how Hitler was a socialist." I tear it down because I was a socialist who had been tricked too. Then I realized the true nature of socialism and converted to capitalism. The reason I disagree with the dictionary definition of Nazism is because it's wrong. I have videos on the topic explaining exactly why that is. It's the same with the definition of Fascism, which is different again https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    5
  5855. Really glad you enjoyed the videos! That's a good point about "crony capitalism". I hadn't considered the origins of it before, but now I'm curious. I'll see what I can dig up 👍
    5
  5856. Yes, because private law enforcement, private roads, private utilities, private rail and other private businesses don't exist and have never existed, and it's clear that you've not actually looked into the Capitalist argument otherwise you'd know that there are counter arguments to what you're saying.
    5
  5857. You mean a tactical-level ambush? I'm not sure what there is to elaborate on. Isn't it just a surprise defensive strike?
    5
  5858. Here's some Marxist theory for you https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5859. No it isn't.
    5
  5860. Get some work done Sam ;) and yeah, it worked out very well. Definitely left at the right time. How come you weren't at the recent leaving do?
    5
  5861. One of them is "Jeremy Corbyn" too. And I used to have "Adolf Hitler" supporting me too.
    5
  5862. It's not just the UK. Deutsche Bank is on the brink, and all the central banks are interlinked. The Federal Reserve has just started printing more money (QE or "Dollar intervention" as they're now calling it, although they haven't announced it). In my opinion, Brexit is being postponed until the crisis hits so that they can use that as an excuse for why the economy has collapsed, but the economy is already collapsing. https://usdebtclock.org/ https://usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html (just look at the UK debt... And people wonder why the world economy is at a stand still. Only way out is to hyperinflate the currency supply.)
    5
  5863. Thanks! The word "Panzer" is well known and has entered the English language, so it's surprising to hear you've not heard anyone use it before in English. Unfortunately though "Panzers" is the English plural, and makes more sense to have the "s" at the end in English. It's not like the word "sheep" which is either plural or singular - "There's a bunch of Panzers" makes sense, while "There's a bunch of Panzer" does not.
    5
  5864. But it should also be noted that even with the supplies of oil going to Germany, the Germans were still in a deficit.
    5
  5865. That's a first! Normally everyone criticises my German pronounciation, especially for names
    5
  5866. I explain why in the video, if you bothered to watch it all. As shown in the video, the Germans lose in 1941. And in 1941, the Germans lose just 312,600 men on the Eastern Front. Manpower wasn't an issue at that point. But oil was. Even with trade with the USSR, they were not receiving enough oil.
    5
  5867. Yes, that's about it.
    5
  5868. History is written by the survivors. Also, Halder had a naturally high Intrigue Stat, giving him an advantage in most situations.
    5
  5869. Maybe, but I think it's more because it's 44 episodes long, and it's a niche thing.
    5
  5870. History theory says: use ALL the sources you can. Yes, Beevor is slightly out-of-date (which is why he still subscribes to the old narratives), but he's still useful. And the specific references to Beevor in this video complement the other sources, so I currently have no reason to think he was wrong in this case.
    5
  5871. Glad you're enjoying it so far! In this case, I had some help from Terri (my part-time editor/graphic designer). And Anton Joly's been helping me with primary sources plus the vitally important maps needed to make this as accurate as possible. Obviously I'm relying on the books too - so the historians who wrote them deserve the bulk of the credit. But yes, I've done most of the reading, all of the script writing and most of the editing as well. That's why I'm currently suffering from eye-strain! :)
    5
  5872. Very good points! I'll be explaining my stance in a future episode... I'll say no more for now :)
    5
  5873. "I think the “means of production” are people, not factoris or tools." Yes, this is actually the exact conclusion I came to years ago. They do mean tools and factories too, but they definitely mean people.
    5
  5874. Yes, and people need to stop that. They need to be made aware that this is a bad habit.
    5
  5875. I'm still waiting for the internet to understand the difference between libertarian, anarchist, and Objectivist.
    5
  5876. You were second, but good try!
    5
  5877. I'll let Terri know (the graphics designer), she made them!
    5
  5878. Hope you like it!
    5
  5879. "Let's say that a state nationalizes a mine and then sells the minerals for profit." The only way that the State could nationalize the mine in the first place is through taxation or force (expropriation is a form of taxation). So once it's done this and sold for profit, all it's done is heavily taxed the business.
    5
  5880. I did respond. The 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video was actually structured to counter every single one of his points. That's why it's so long, and why I tackled the Labour Theory of Value and all the other things he mentioned in his video. And I talked about this more recently when this other guy "debunked" me https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    5
  5881. "Nazis i.e. National Socialists were fascists." Just to point out, there's a fundamental difference between Fascism and National Socialism. They are not the same ideology, and are actually as different as Marxists and Nazis are. I've been over this here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    5
  5882. It's funny because this week's video explains why it didn't say that every modern economy was socialist, and that was a massive misinterpretation of what I said originally in my Public vs Private video. I also explained why the definition I'm using is the historical definition, and that many of my critics actually use the same definition but don't realize it https://youtu.be/hr9TUcWcoYY The purpose of the war was to gain the land and resources needed to implement full socialism, as explained here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 If using evidence, logic, science and standard history theory is classed as "extreme" then so be it. Also, I'm not an ideologue. When I was a socialist, I knew what socialism was. The definition hasn't changed, but my critics don't listen to what I'm actually saying, so they're imagining I'm saying things I'm not.
    5
  5883. Considering I knew practically nothing about this subject before I started looking into it, I'd say that's pretty neutral
    5
  5884. Great state and motto!
    5
  5885. Also I should say, I usually go over the 6 hours. I aim for 6 hours as a minimum. But usually by that point I'm done in and get headaches for concentrating too long
    5
  5886. Hard to say how often because I'm doing editing as well, but what I normally do is dedicate each day to one thing - scripting or research or editing etc. Then I'll do 5-6 hours on it (with a lunch break about 4 hours in). Can't put a word count something on it, but on certain topics I can easily do a few thousand words a day, especially when I'm inspired. But it really does depend on the subject.
    5
  5887. I never said Chuikov was a coward?
    5
  5888.  @zxbzxbzxb1  It's not just newcomers. One guy unsubscribed because he mistakenly thought I said I was a Leftist in Tuesday's video. Yes, in a video where I was complaining that people aren't listening to what I'm saying, people didn't listen to what I said and jumped to blatantly incorrect conclusions.
    5
  5889. While not the same, I have been a manager, and complexity is something you absolutely want to avoid. However, sometimes you have to make tough decisions and say "no" to people below you. In this case (yes, hindsight), Cunningham should have said "no" to Godwin-Austen and Freyberg, and insisted that the tanks go with 30 Corps. Although in real hindsight, there should have been a trade - one tank brigade for 13th Corps in exchange for an infantry brigade for 30th Corps to make a more-rounded force.
    5
  5890. Lol, when you put it like that, yes
    5
  5891. See pinned comment, and also this https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    5
  5892. That would be nice. Is there anything you want to know in particular? And yes, I've actually been gathering the odd book about Finland for this reason. I've also done a video on Mannerheim. Might be a while away, but I do want to do more on Finland (and other Axis allies) in the future.
    5
  5893. :D
    5
  5894. To be fair, it's hard to compete with singing dinosaurs
    5
  5895. It makes a lot of sense. Encircle all you want on the Go board, it won't necessarily lead to victory.
    5
  5896. You're very welcome. Trying to make YouTube that little bit better :)
    5
  5897. Because he's a Socialist who genuinely thinks National Socialist Germany was "capitalist", ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.
    5
  5898. Definitely start with "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, then "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. If you had to buy just one, then I guess I'd go with Sowell's book, since he does provide copious amounts of real-life evidence to back up what he's saying.
    5
  5899. FIRST!
    5
  5900. Good news! There's information coming on the Romanians next episode :) info on the Italians coming soon too, and info on the Hungarians will probably come during the Operation Uranus time, since they're not really relevant until then
    5
  5901. "Hitler's Bonesaw" You mean Hitler's Buzzsaw (mentioned this in the video) "No one did mad minutes in WW2. that's a U.S. Vietnam war thing." Or a WW1 British thing ;)
    5
  5902. I have Red Famine and started reading it in order to do videos on the Holodomor and the horrors of the Soviet Union, but that was when I got hit by the original Marxist backlash, so I put it down. Therefore I can't say whether it's good or not, yet. I do intend to pick it up again though, and do videos on the Holodomor, and the horrors of the Soviet Union.
    5
  5903. Yes it will be like the Market Garden video (actually probably more similar to the more-recent Battleaxe or Bruneval videos in the way it's presented and graphics-wise) but significantly longer!
    5
  5904. In Playfair's official British history of the Mediterranean Theatre, the maps have keys that say the Germans are in one colour, the British are in another, Italians another and so on... Except all the maps are in black and white!
    5
  5905. Obsessed is probably the right word! I'm not sure why tbh, there's a number of factors and it's different for everybody. This is probably why it's hard to convince people who aren't interested in history that history is actually extremely interesting and there are valuable lessons to learn. It doesn't matter if it's the history of sport or of computing, there's a topic out there for everybody.
    5
  5906. Maybe... wait, you realise you could have said "First!"
    5
  5907. Yes, yes and yes. That's exactly it :)
    5
  5908. That's because history is written by the survivors, not the winners.
    5
  5909. Now that would be hilarious!
    5
  5910. Haha, you're very welcome, there's a lot worse in some of those videos if you scroll down in the comments :)
    5
  5911. Exactly! It's also where the debate is too :)
    5
  5912. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you too Vass! The Battle of the Bulge video is interesting to me too, as it involves both Monty and Gavin of the 82nd Airborne again!
    5
  5913.  @222rich  No, not really. If anything, they're causing more work. I'm actually going to discuss this in tomorrow's behind-the-scenes video, so I'd suggest checking it out.
    5
  5914. Thanks! That was actually my new editor's idea, and I agree, it looks great
    5
  5915. The channel started off as a gaming channel, and my favourite game was Close Combat A Bridge Too Far. Here's the first video of my 2nd Let's Play https://youtu.be/sb5Km8LqkLs Sadly, I decided to hide the gaming videos when I began the history content. In hindsight, I probably should have just left them up and started a dedicated history channel. But, it is what it is. I don't have a favourite FPS; I prefer strategy games overall, although I don't get to play very often these days (maybe a couple hours a week).
    5
  5916. Yep, I'm prioritising Stalingrad at the cost of everything else. Channel growth has slowed to a crawl, I've lost ad revenue... but I don't care. I don't want this to drag on any longer. Once it's done, I can recover and get back into the swing of things. I'd also like it to end at 50 just because it's a nice round number, but if it needs to go beyond 50, it goes beyond 50. Someone has accused me of "rushing" to finish, which is nonsense. There's no point working had for 94% of the series just to skip to the ending. If I've made it this far, I'm going to finish it properly. The reasons why time passed so quick in this episode is because nothing happened the first 9 days of January, and the German sources become vague after the 10th. But yes, we are at the end now and I'm looking forward to it being over.
    5
  5917. Even by Karl Marx's definition, we don't have "Capitalism". Please see this other video to learn what Capitalism actually is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5918. Actually I didn't. I came to this conclusion myself when I realized that Hitler was a Socialist (racism=Socialism). Then when I had time to go back and reanalyze the text, I quickly found evidence confirming my suspicions. However, someone else mentioned Kengor's book on the subject in this comment section, so I have ordered it and am waiting for it to arrive.
    5
  5919. It could be because he was now of a different faith and he was embarrassed by his heritage. Or it could be something like this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-hating_Jew
    5
  5920. Was he really? Wow I didn't know that! Thank you so much for pointing this out! I'm so glad that you're here to point out things I definitely didn't mention in the video. What would we all do without you,? Our hero.
    5
  5921. Mostly - there are examples in this video of him being racist though
    5
  5922. Spot on! Most of them also didn't watch the video and just disliked it because their internet commissars told them to
    5
  5923. Yet, they are denying it 🙄 I've honestly no idea how to get through to these religious fanatics. They won't listen to evidence, or reason, and seem incapable of even listening at all. They're so closed minded, they're like bricks But I'm glad to see you and many others are listening and understanding what I'm saying. So thank you!
    5
  5924. How is the "inwardly circ... J" quote from Das Kapital a half quote or out of context? If I got it wrong, could you please explain what that quote means exactly?
    5
  5925. Incorrect. Anti-Semitism is related to either the religious persecution of the Jews, or the ethnic persecution. Marxist Socialism (at the very least) was fundamentally Anti-Semitic and anti-religious. Also, if it wasn't, why did Karl Marx say the Anti-Semitic things he did? And why did the Soviet 1st Cavalry Division commit crimes against the Jews during the Russian Revolution? And why did Stalin persecute the Jews in the 1940s?
    5
  5926. It's almost like I mentioned this in the video!
    5
  5927. I just wish more people would pay attention to these videos. A lot of my subscribers have been convinced that all I know is "tanks" (which I don't even talk about) and that I don't know anything about anything else. I've tried to warn people, but they don't want to open their eyes
    5
  5928. Good show
    5
  5929. I'm really lucky to have such great support from my patrons. It's just a shame this video was too short to put the list of names in
    5
  5930. I'm certainly trying too, although there's a lot
    5
  5931. You brought up a good point!
    5
  5932. @Random Nepali - I was tempted to say the same thing https://youtu.be/aNa3Co83_gk
    5
  5933. I'm glad I managed to get your name right because normally I mess names up! 😂 But yes, thank you for your comment last time, and this time too!
    5
  5934. I mentioned the sewers in this episode!
    5
  5935. It also appears that you are FIRST! Congrats!
    5
  5936. "Can you actually be a nationalist without being a socialist?" Nationalism is just a version of socialism.
    5
  5937. Betrayal of Marxism? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5938. Perhaps. I can definitely see people taking my stuff out of context, which is why I put on a 'voice' when reading some of the quotes, to prevent them from saying "look, he's quoting from Hitler, so he must be a Natzi" or something
    5
  5939. That's how the Fascists themselves saw themselves - as extreme centrists. However, Fascists also thought they were the good guys. What they think they are, and what they actually are, are two different things. Nations are societies, are they not? So why is nationalism not socialism? What's the difference between the nationalization of the means of production, and the socialization of the means of production? The reality is that the "extreme right" doesn't believe in nationalism, it believes in anarchy (no state, no collective) https://images.app.goo.gl/YaHmmwdcskb5uVrp7 If you haven't already seen it, you may want to watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    5
  5940. You clearly haven't read Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    5
  5941. Traditional Fascism was national syndicalism with a philosophy of actual idealism.
    5
  5942. That thing over there - the thing that has a wooden handle and a big metal head that's used to hammer nails into things. That's called a 'tent'. Yes, yes it is. I don't care what the dictionary says. I don't care what history or common sense tells me. Me and my friends call it a 'tent', and that's all that matters. Lalalalalala! I can't hear you! Lalalalala!
    5
  5943. He was, until the end. The Party of Big Brother is called INGSOC, which is English Socialism.
    5
  5944. Yes, Sorel is on my ever-growing list of people to look into. I don't know how I'm going to get through this list!
    5
  5945. Yes, it's almost as if Fascism (and western philosophy) was based on the thoughts of Eastern esoteric religion.
    5
  5946. Yes you are! Congrats!
    5
  5947. In the video I tackled the group-basis argument too, so I got them on both counts. We're all individuals, and therefore there is no collective-group consciousness. So I disagree with the charge that I made a "mistake".
    5
  5948. I've already done it years ago, but the videos are hidden now
    5
  5949. No it won't. Natural monopolies cannot exist - only government creates monopolies. And in every instance where the private company is in charge of something, the price came down. If you want examples, read "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom.
    5
  5950. Slower, perhaps, but far more efficient. If you read "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom, you'll see that when it came to the trainlines in the USA, the privately created line was the only one that was efficient and made profits. It took longer to build, but hundreds didn't die in the process compared to the state-built lines. And if a supermarket wants to keep making a profit, its customers must be able to get to the supermarket. Therefore a certain level of infrastructure must be maintained.
    5
  5951. This is what I mean. I actually think my non-battle videos are some of my best, but people are either not choosing the watch them, or aren't getting notified, and given the fact that some of those video do get a lot of views (the Hitler's Socialism video, for example) I suspect that certain videos are getting suppressed. This is why I haven't made purely economic or political videos for a while - partly because of Stalingrad, and partly because I wasn't sure what was going on with YouTube.
    5
  5952. You're probably in the minority there, but I do think the non-combat ones are more important for people to learn than the combat ones. This video, for example, has a load of lessons that help give context to a lot of what happened later and still impacts us today. The previous video gave lessons on currency vs money, and (hopefully) opened a few people's eyes. So while I get that people want me to "stick to tanks", I don't think the harsh criticism I get when I do non-combat videos is valid.
    5
  5953. Go on, I'll bite. What did they have in common? Was it Communism?
    5
  5954. It might not be practical to do it, but I will consider it. Thanks for the suggestion!
    5
  5955. And we've not even got to the city yet! It's only going to get worse from here - you haven't seen what Zhukov does either
    5
  5956. "So not only will you not be able to get rid of debt, you won't be able to point out that your incabapility to do that (and million others like you) is a problem." I am debt free. The only debts I have are taxation and inflation, which is debt-slavery to the State, and I'm betting against these final debt-obligations... I not only intend to survive the coming reset, but try to educate as many others as possible too so that they can take action to save themselves. Unfortunately, because of the slander and smearing of the ideologues, many aren't listening to me any more, and few now watch the videos I've made about economics... So, I have little choice but to keep quiet and watch the whole world burn.
    5
  5957. Probably not a bad assessment for this battle, and I definitely agree for Crusader. But we should remember that this was his first battle as an Army Commander (as was Cunningham, and look how "well" he did!) so we probably shouldn't judge him too much based on this battle alone. That said, I haven't studied his future battles in much depth yet, so you could be perfectly right about his operational capability.
    5
  5958. I do want to cover that some day. However, Courland is coming after Crusader (although, probably not immediately after)
    5
  5959. Just wait until you get to the bit where he says about New Zealand!
    5
  5960. Second!
    5
  5961. I need a reason to read books. I can't just read a book for the sake of reading it. This is why I don't read fiction and just see it as a waste of time. But taking the information within a history book and turning it into content motivates me to read and make notes. If you can find a bigger reason to read a particular book, that will help you massively. If you can't, then this may be the reason you're procrastinating.
    5
  5962. I'm really glad you liked it! More to come on that series in a couple weeks
    5
  5963. Minus inaccurate sources, and numerous problems with the bias and agenda of the people counting the numbers
    5
  5964.  @MidKnightblue0013  "how big was the red army when Barbarossa was launched" As I said in the video, the Soviets had 4,629,500 men in their entire military prior to the war. Krivosheev lists 2,743,000 on the Western military districts at the start of Barbarossa, but that might be a little low.
    5
  5965. I think they bought the book and didn't read it. I've read a couple of accounts that say just that, and given the fact that the book is really really bad, it isn't shocking to think that nobody got more than ten pages into it before putting it down
    5
  5966. Yes, it might just be for UK Amazon. I've corrected the title of the video
    5
  5967. Yes, it seriously is an awfully written book
    5
  5968. But they can't do that. You have to use the evidence, and if the evidence says otherwise, the evidence says otherwise. Any attempt to write history in favour of one side or another will get called out very quickly.
    5
  5969. If you're not reading David Glantz, you should be reading David Glantz. In terms of being up to date and in-depth, no one else comes close. "When Titans Clashed" by him is probably a good starting point. And here's a link to a video lecture he did that if you haven't seen, you owe it to yourself to see - https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU That said, you really can't rely on one author. Robert Citino is doing a great job too. I can also recommend "Enduring the Whirlwind", and if you want insanely detailed unit histories (more like references) then Jason D. Mark is your guy.
    5
  5970. Good idea, I probably will :)
    5
  5971. I'm doing Stalingrad in seasons, with each season being 3 videos. Between seasons I work on the scripts for the next season, which is what I'm doing now. So, the next Stalingrad video might be a few weeks away... but I am working on it :)
    5
  5972. Thank you! I've spent the day unable to concentrate, worrying about this and discouraged by the restrictions imposed on it by YouTube... Has made me wonder if I can even attempt to do videos on the Holocaust in the future... You're correct, too many people are only interested in the "tanks", but you cannot understand the importance of the battles if you don't know what could have happened if those battles were lost
    5
  5973. The Wehrmacht, although this went all the way to Hitler, Göring (in charge of much of the economy), Backe etc
    5
  5974. I think the certain people you're referring to haven't looked into the subject of Hitler's ideology, Fascist and National Socialist economics, or the Axis occupation of Europe for more than five minutes. If they decided to do a deep dive, and not just skim the surface of the topics they're mentioning, I'm pretty sure they'd realize what the real deal was. Of course, their business model doesn't allow them to do that, since they have to publish more often then I do, and they need to bring in the cash to support their large team. I have different priorities, and my Patrons allow me to sink my teeth into topics that may not generate the views as much as others (like this video, which isn't performing so well, with YouTube telling me it is currently my worst video out of the last 10 for the length of time it's been out)
    5
  5975. Yes... yes it was
    5
  5976. It is a way of excusing German nationalism. Not heard of the Poles being blamed for German concentration camps before? Is that actually a thing!?
    5
  5977. When the robots take over, they will save humanity from Black Friday by speeding up Global Warming. All hail our Terminator overlords!
    5
  5978. Do you think this car can fit in my TV?
    5
  5979. You're very kind :)
    5
  5980. Yes, I've just seen your previous comment, I'll reply to you shortly
    5
  5981. I will admit, I didn't know how people would react to this video. Glad you liked it! Obviously it won't detract from tomorrow's regular history video :) And I have managed to avoid working in food-retail or restaurants. But I've seen some sights in McDonalds with people throwing their food around and deliberately dropping food on the floor just after they've mopped it etc. So I can only imagine some of the morons you've had to deal with
    5
  5982. I genuinely have no idea how they even get to the doors in the first place.
    5
  5983. Not only that, but becaue they ran out of heating, they chopped up their window frames for firewood.
    5
  5984. The Desert Fox was an old video! I'm glad you liked it though. You preferred that to Gazala?
    5
  5985. Perhaps I got the wrong impression from their previous action at Commonwealth Keep during Gazala? I didn't know the New Zealanders were armed with spigot mortars at Minqar Qaim either as none of my sources mentioned them, so that's interesting.
    5
  5986. Glad to hear it, although I can't shake the feeling of guilt that this could have been a more substantial video. I know these questions and statements needed answering at some point, but I get the impression that most people will be disappointed
    5
  5987. Oil. It's all about the oil
    5
  5988. Thank you sir!
    5
  5989. Haha well, I got that from James Lindsey, so I need to cite my sources too ;)
    5
  5990. I talked about this towards the end of the video. Basically, an allied battlegroup would tend to be a big unit with other smaller units attached, and were usually established prior to a battle. The kampfgruppen concept worked differently because you could have two regiments and a few battalions form a kampfgruppe under one of the regiment commanders, while the other regiment commander was either subordinated, or commanded another kampfgruppe completely - they mixed and matched their units to suit. Plus, kampfgruppen were created almost instantly, with commanders forming them in a matter of hours, or even minutes.
    5
  5991. Nah, I demand the 8th day of the week be named after this channel. Moon day, Tiw's day, Woden's day, Thor's day, Frigg's day, Saturn's day, Sun day, and TIK's day.
    5
  5992. It was nice knowing you ;)
    5
  5993. "So the liberal west was actually national socialist since non whites couldn't hold property?" They weren't liberal if they didn't treat everyone equal, since that's a core tenant of classic liberalism.
    5
  5994. Also, if state control of the means of production isn't socialism, and private control of the means of production isn't capitalism (as you are suggesting) then why are you so concerned about the Nazi privatization? Surely it wouldn't matter if they privatized the industries or not, since that wouldn't be an indication of either socialism or capitalism by your own definition. That would mean no country in the world was socialist or capitalist. Gasp - it's not "real" socialism!
    5
  5995. Hahaha missed opportunity! I've been trying to think of excuses to get the monocle out again.
    5
  5996. Exactly. Some people (those in-charge) totally-control the other people. That is socialism/collectivism. It's all about controlling other people and restricting people's freedoms. You're no longer an individual who has rights, you're part of a group (non-individual). Because you're part of a group you no longer need rights or property, and you're just a number. You lose your humanity, and if you're in the wrong social group (race, class, gender, nationality) you must be gotten rid of.
    5
  5997. Totalitarianism is total control of the people by a dictator. Google's definition - a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state. Wikipedia's definition - "a totalitarian regime attempts to control virtually all aspects of the social life, including the economy, education, art, science, private life and morals of citizens." "Totalitarianism, form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to the authority of the state." State control of the people (common-control of the means of production) are also socialism on the economic level. You cannot have totalitarianism without a socialist-dictatorship.
    5
  5998. This is why I think it's wrong to paint Hitler as a "madman". No, he was a smart, logicial, well-read person who went from nothing to controling most of Continental Europe. No madman could do that. But of course, this means he was not only human, but also normal. Sure, the foundations of his reasoning were flawed at a fundamental level, but the ideology he built up from there definitely was logical. This means that normal people can commit crimes like this. This means that crimes like these can (and do) happen again. This means that maybe there is something fundamentally flawed in human nature, or something... But we're best confronting the monster to its face than denying it in the hope that it may go away. Calling Hitler a "madman" excuses all the normal human beings that committed crimes in his name, and forgives them for it. I think we shouldn't do that. Hitler was an evil, but not insane human being. What he did was logical. Let's correct the flaws in the logic and prevent this whole thing from happening again.
    5
  5999. Certain archives are unaffected by the Freedom of Information Acts, and some documents can also remain under lock and key if it's in the "public" (aka State) interest. That's why the Hess files aren't available - they're locked in the ROYAL archives, which are exempt.
    5
  6000. Nice coincidence!
    5
  6001. TIK rants against the USSR, Nazi Germany and the Western Allies. What a shill!
    5
  6002. You'll find out next time!
    5
  6003. I'll be talking about this in the next part.
    5
  6004. Perhaps. The war criminals within Vlasov's forces definitely should have been punished. But they still should have been tried honestly first, and the fact that they faced starvation and death as an alternative placed them in extraordinary circumstances, so just because they joined the ROA doesn't instantly make them a war criminal.
    5
  6005. Thank you very much! I already have "Churchill's Secret War", and can confirm the bias is so blatant it's practically propaganda. I'll check out all the other ones you mentioned.
    5
  6006. Thank you for your response! I'd be happy to take source recommendations. The only problem is I can only really read English sources, but if you have any suggestions please let me know. Thank you
    5
  6007. It's definitely not every single teacher. There are good teachers. However, it seems to be a common experience that most teachers have no clue what they're doing, and in the case of the UK, are just following whatever guidelines the central government has given them
    5
  6008. Except the Nazis don't consider themselves right wing. They see the Communist Left and the Capitalist Right as Jewish, and therefore put themselves in the Third Position. Their Nationalism is their Socialism, since nations (or races) are a social group. This has been explained a hundred times now. If you don't listen, you won't learn. I'm not a "Christian Libertarian" and have never said I am that. Nor are the Nazis (your poor English is hard to read, but it appears that you're implying that the Nazis are Christian Libertarians, which is just nonsense). The National Socialists shared the same social policies as many other socialist movements. There were some differences, but only because they were RACE socialists, not CLASS socialists, so this changed a few elements. They still believed that humans were subservient to society, and that we should all work towards our community ("volksgemeinschaft"). Just like many socialists (Fabians, American Progressives, Soviets) they believed in euthanasia, segregation, and Social-Darwinism. They fought a war against the Christian Church just like the Soviets did, and the SS even set up polygamy centres to breed "Aryan" children. They arrested Marxists and conservatives, and many were converted over to National Socialism, which isn't much different from Marxism anyway. Yet, despite an absolute TON of evidence (more than I've listed here) you're still seeing them as somehow opposite to Marxism because of Communist propaganda. They're Socialists competing on the same ground.
    5
  6009. I didn't say it was Soviet propaganda. I said it was British propaganda that was pro-Soviet. But that's not the only reason of course.
    5
  6010. What was the narrative you were given?
    5
  6011. They're either my normal haters who down vote everything I put out, or people who hate the thumbnail, or people from the "stick to tanks" and "where's Stalingrad!" crowds.
    5
  6012. One of the points they raised was actually correct (partly), and I knew that going into this series, which is why I planned this third video from the beginning
    5
  6013. Sadly, you were second
    5
  6014. Not this year, no. Too busy preparing Stalingrad
    5
  6015. Always with those negative waves! Maybe you can accept that I'm right this time
    5
  6016. Hope you enjoy it!
    5
  6017. No, their policy was Gleichschaltung - the synchronization of the economy in with the state. In other words, it was nationalization. I've been over this in multiple videos, showing that the SA marched into the industries and took them over from within. It was the Keynesian "Economist" magazine in England that claimed the Nazis privatised the industries, and the reason why they said that, despite all the evidence to the contrary, was because they wanted to deny the socialism of National Socialism.
    5
  6018.  @samsonsoturian6013  Everyone wants socialism, but nobody's willing to actually pay for it. Saying that, unions are bad for the workers, as I pointed out in the video. https://www.columbian.com/news/2012/nov/26/unions-often-better-at-killing-jobs-than-creating/ https://mises.org/wire/how-unions-reduce-real-wages
    5
  6019. I do not deny that. Have recently been trying to learn German in order to work on it. Unfortunately, I'm still nicht gud at it.
    5
  6020. That's because I'm still working on it. It's going to be a while away yet, but you can find some of the Stalingrad-related videos I've been working on as a precursor to the big video here (specific to Stalingrad) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhLd1zG3MeeRSbIei6lHhxO And here (Fall Blau related) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgcM-q2fUFYToNBX6zuREsC And also, here (6th Army Order of Battle before Stalingrad) https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw
    5
  6021.  @onylra6265  What part of "you don't need to go to university to get an education" do you not understand? The "methods and skills" can be learnt by listening to my video on History Theory. There you go, I've saved you thousands of pounds and years of your life. Nobody's arguing that history degrees don't teach you anything, and nobody's arguing that history as a subject shouldn't be done. We're arguing that thousands of pounds of debt is not worth it to get a piece of paper with a digit on it. Let's take an example. The average electrician in the UK is on about £33,000. A university lecturer only averages £40,000. So that's at least 2 years in college, then 6 or 7 years in university just to get the degree and PhD needed in order to do the job, let alone actually get it after you've got your qualifications. That's versus 3 years as an apprentice electrician where you actually get paid (about £20,000) to be an apprentice. The math is obvious. The average debt for degree holders in the UK for 2022 was roughly £45,800. Since a PhD requires at least double the time at university, we can assume PhD graduate debt will be somewhere near £90,000. Meanwhile, in that same time span, an electrician could have earned £225,000 (3x £20k + 5x £33k - don't forget the two years at college), and is only £6,000 worse off assuming that the PhD person actually gets a job as a lecturer. Now obviously, there are other jobs out there than university lecturers, and some of these are higher paying, but the point is that the cost-to-benefit ratio is actually pretty bad for PhD graduates. This is why the outstanding UK student loan debt was £182 billion in March 2022. Graduates are not earning enough to pay it back because they're not getting the high-paying jobs they were promised to do so.
    5
  6022. That's actually a Patreon question I've got to answer, so I will be discussing this. I did talk about it in this video though https://youtu.be/WVtT-NIq1Zg
    5
  6023. Yeah, you see, while that's something to look into, it shouldn't take up the entire course.
    5
  6024. Thank you! I think in an ideal world I wouldn't be on such a strict weekly schedule. I would publish on a Monday if I had something solid and ready to publish. So maybe I'd miss the odd week, but then you guys would know that the week after's video would be dense and fully sourced. However I don't think the algorithm would like me if I did that, so I have to keep doing what I'm doing.
    5
  6025. Never hand him a stick. He may use it.
    5
  6026. The unit sizes only really reflect 1942. By 1943, things were improving a lot on the Soviet side, and they reintroduced the corps-tier, so I don't know about hte post-war world or the Chinese sizes. That said, it's good to hear you're appreciating the Red Army's effort more, mainly because it wasn't as "bad" as the traditional narrative made it out to be.
    5
  6027. I still need to research more on Rokossovsky, but he's deemed to be one of the best Soviet commanders of the war
    5
  6028. I don't know yet. I jokingly said it would be over 24 hours long, but it might be longer than that at this rate.
    5
  6029. @Kowakian  Don't worry, I'll still be making Battlestorm videos when I'm 94 to 104 years old 👍
    5
  6030.  @Boric78  I did put a flak gun in the video!
    5
  6031. It's also not her real name...
    5
  6032. I think I am as well
    5
  6033. Hearts of Iron 4 confirms this
    5
  6034. It's alright, many people do that :)
    5
  6035. Tribalism is still alive and well, I see.
    5
  6036. Exactly Neil :)
    5
  6037. I don't disagree. As I said in the video, it wasn't​ ok for the British to drop south of Arnhem bridge on day 1, but it was ok for the Polish to do it a few days later? That doesn't make any sense. Also, having the majority of 1st Airborne at Arnhem bridge would have made a significant difference to the outcome of Market Garden. The RAF should take some of the blame, as should the generals (Browning especially) who allowed the RAF to call the shots. I don't think dropping supplies directly on Arnhem would have been a good idea, but desperate times call for desperate measures. If Frost's men had survived for another day, XXX Corps would have been there for them.
    5
  6038. I'm glad you agree and I agree with what you said. The kampfgruppe concept was vital in many battles, and definitely played a part in the Wehrmacht's early victories and its slow defeat. In a lot of ways, German officers really outshine Allied officers more often than not. But the question is, was it their training/doctrines, or their experience that made them so effective?
    5
  6039. An excellent comment :) thank you for taking the time to write this
    5
  6040. With the tax rate as high as it is, I certainly don't blame them!
    5
  6041. "First, it is NOT the job of the historian to judge the actions of a subject as right or wrong." I disagree. A historian can absolutely judge the actions of a subject as right or wrong, and this is perfectly in line with basic history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc "Second, what do you mean by "of course it was wrong of Patton to order his men not to take prisoners if they attempt to surrender at a short distance to the men." There is no legal obligation to interpret a momentary cessation of hostility as genuine. And under the circumstances, Patton's approach was the most effective that could have been made." Three reasons. One - people attempting to surrender should have their surrender accepted because it's the morally correct thing to do. Two - just because a State doesn't "legally" declare something to be "legal", doesn't mean anything. I don't care what a State says, killing people attempting to surrender is morally wrong. Three - if you don't accept surrenders, the enemy will fight harder and to the death (knowing that the option of surrender is not an option). So this could actually lead to higher casualties on your own side because the enemy won't surrender.
    5
  6042. I will be covering the starvation of 3 million Indians at some point, but not sure when. I also want to do the Burma Campaign and so on.
    5
  6043. Das ist nicht richtig
    5
  6044. Yep that pretty much sums it up
    5
  6045. This is it. Just because he was a war criminal and messed up at Stalingrad doesn't mean he's not an excellent operational general overall.
    5
  6046. "TIK Hey Tik are you intending to do answer videos to videos from other youtubers regarding your recent videos about nazis?" Apart from Blitz of the Reich's response video, I don't see the point in responding to the others since they just repeated the same arguments that I knocked down in the comments of the two videos (see the newer pinned comments). I actually recommend Blitz's video, it's quite good. https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I
    5
  6047. "Generalissimo Tik Report for Duty,how it's at the Front?" To the right, General Patton. To the left, the British Army. To the rear our own goddamn artillery. And besides all that, it's raining. And the only good thing about the weather is that it keeps our Air Corps from blowing us to hell, because it's too lousy to fly!
    5
  6048. I haven't read that book, but looking at some of the discussion and reviews of it, yeah I can see why you're suspicious of it. According to one reviewer on Amazon - "Although it's implied this is an autobiographical account, it seems that (at best) the sniper described his experiences to Wacker, who published them in anonymised form, then that account was edited and translated by Brooks. The result is an over-dramatised tale with a great many highly dubious incidents." I also see that Wikipedia has also deleted its page on Allerberger, probably for the same reasons as they deleted Hoffman's memoirs. I'll add the book to a list and see if I can cover it at some point. Cheers!
    5
  6049. I'm estimating the first video will be out in about 4 weeks, but that's not 100% because I'm waiting on the map to be finished by someone else
    5
  6050. In some ways, yes
    4
  6051. Technically it's in the Thumbnail and title too! I don't waste people's time :)
    4
  6052. No, which is why I don't have a love for all the German generals and that's why I'm critical of them and anyone who just repeats their lies.
    4
  6053. Thing is if you work 30, that means you have time after work to work another 1.5 hours (a pomodoro session) to work towards a big project, like learning guitar, a language, writing a book, working on a new business etc.
    4
  6054. Currently averaging 67 hours per week (was ill for a week and a half, and had my grandad's funeral that same week, so it brought my average down from just over 70 hours). A few weeks back I worked 89 hours. Last week 71. Probably by about 65 this week. And yes I'm keeping track 😁
    4
  6055. To be fair, Blender is really damn hard. Took me 5 months to do the Rommel's First Desert Offensive video because I had to learn Blender from scratch (also took me an age to render it out).
    4
  6056. If I can help people out, I will. If we learn from the lessons of the past, then we can share those lessons, regardless of the topic.
    4
  6057. "TIK Absolutely, don’t cow-tow to these socialists just because they are unable to face up to the truth." I'm not backing down, but it is frustrating because nobody was willing to even listen. Half the criticism was answered in the two videos which they didn't bother to watch. Yes I did make some minor mistakes (like the liberalism thing), but there was no need for the harsh reaction that was received where people were telling me to "neck yourself". It's frustrating because the decent thing to do if you disagree with someone is to explain why you disagree, not kick, scream and throw punches. When they did engage me in discussion over it, they quickly realised that I had done the research. In those circumstances they either chose not listen, or even resorted to deleting their own comments once they realised they'd lost. The Marxists have made a mockery of reasonable discourse in these videos. "It’s less the kind of full “ownership” by the state as traditional socialism, but still a form of virtually complete control of the means of production so as to make civilian ownership really just a fiction, a care-taker position performing in the interests of the state. After all of you can’t decide what you sell your property and produce for, and if you’re not even free to decide what to do with your business or even what to produce in many cases, then you don’t have meaningful ownership." Yes, this 'control' is something that I've noticed in both National Socialist Germany, and Fascist Italy. However, as Hitler said, the people were on his side, so he didn't need to fully nationalize the industries (although he did bring them in line and nationalized some), and he threatened total nationalization continually to keep the doubters in line. But while some claim the industrialists used Hitler, this really wasn't the case. They were all "working towards the Führer" (to quote Kershaw) and Hitler and his regime dictated policies to them. I can't see how anyone can claim this regime was capitalist.
    4
  6058. I would also ask you to apply your own system of critical thinking. Socialism doesn't mean the ending of private property or businesses. It only means that if you're a Marxist, which the National Socialists were not. So none of what you're saying proves or disproves anything. However, as I've said in the video, the racism and socialism are one and the same. A bunch of racists in power doesn't instantly result to death camps where the goal is to murder every single last person in a race. That's above and beyond simple racism. However it does lead to death camps if you want to "socialize the people". The state lead and centrally planned concentration camps and the gas chambers are as a result of the socialism in National Socialism (as well as the racism, obviously). Viewing the world in terms of "groups" rather than individuals, is definitely a socialist/Marxist/National Socialist way of looking at the world. Once you see them as groups, you no longer see them as individuals. Once you take away someone's individualism, they become 'rats' or 'parasites' in your mind. Once they become that, it becomes much easier to kill them. Same applies with the killing of the mentally ill and so on. So the socialism and racism combined are the key ingredients within the National Socialist ideology and massively explain what's going on in that era. Or they're capitalists. At whic point, it becomes possible to deny the Holocaust because you can say "there's no way a state would create industrial mass execution centres", and when you think of the capitalist system, yes that makes sense.
    4
  6059. He was influenced by Marx... just like Hitler...
    4
  6060. "Socialism does not want a market" - communism, not socialism
    4
  6061. History is definitely not set in stone. Your teacher is absolutely right in that regard.
    4
  6062. MajorRoy - I don't know about the Congo atrocities specifically. Were the atrocities committed by the state, or an independent contractor?
    4
  6063. It was his own brand of socialism. Catholicism and Sunni Islam are not the same, but they're part of the Abrahamic religions. The same applies here - NS is socialism, whether the 'orthodox' Marxists believe it or not.
    4
  6064. Yes, anyone who divides human beings into artifical 'groups' like race, class or gender in order to exploit them is clearly not working on the side of humanity. They pretend to be on the side of those 'groups', but really they're splitting humanity and causing conflict. If you favour one 'group', you harm another. And you're not racist for believing that one race is bad - you're racist for believing that races exist in the first place. Same applies with gender (unless you're dating someone, it's irrelevant what gender someone is) and class (I'm from a low income family, but there's no reason I can't or shouldn't one day earn more money). The actual way to equality is to treat every human being as an individual, but the Left seem to ignore this fact.
    4
  6065. lol
    4
  6066. I didn't say Stalin was a capitalist. I'm saying that if someone made a clear case for that, and there was evidence for it, then I don't think the argument can be dismissed out of hand.
    4
  6067. But, even if Stalin was on the right, that doesn't mean all people or systems on the right are bad. Therefore Marxists and other socialists aren't affected because Hitler is a socialist (unless they're racists). Plus, if there was substantial evidence that said Stalin was a capitalist, wouldn't it be better to place him in the correct position? I think so. History should not bow to people's feelings or political beliefs. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. Aryans collectively owned those means, therefore this was socialism.
    4
  6068. "The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze, Wages of Destruction page 113. Yes, it was a centrally planned economy and society (despite other people's claims that it wasn't). So to call it socialism would be correct.
    4
  6069. You're right that the purpose of my videos are ultimately to provoke a thoughtful discussion. Unfortunately these videos provoked another Bolshevik Revolution, this time to create an echo-chamber in a comments section.
    4
  6070. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. Also, if the neo-Nationalsocialists are saying this every day, doesn't that tell us something? I've made my motives very clear in a previous video https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    4
  6071. Yes! I've been wating to do it for a while, and people were complaining about my old camera (as was I), but never really had the opportunity to upgrade. Most of the money came from my Patreons (obviously) but I got some Amazon vouchers at Christmas from my family, so I thought it was time :)
    4
  6072. Ah, I know what you mean, but don't worry I absolutely want to go back to it :)
    4
  6073. It was automatically flagged, and because of the nature of the video, I've not bothered to request a review. This is why supporting me (and other creators) on Patreon or other sites like that is vital if you want to see content talking about anything that isn't squeaky clean. Even putting the word "gun" in the title, description or tags is a no-go, which is why I didn't put "88mm gun" in the title
    4
  6074. I haven't visited the Baltic, no. You're not staying in Courland by any chance? :D
    4
  6075. You're correct that it is emotive, and I agree that ultimately if the Axis hadn't been aggressive at the start (or before) the war, then none of this would have happened. Yet people have an agenda to try and paint National Socialist Germany and the Soviet Union as somehow innocent or victims of the "evil" western powers. The reality is very different. Sure every side had its faults, but clearly these two powers take the largest chunks of the "evil" cake.
    4
  6076. Absolutely! Beevor's Arnhem and Neilland's Battle for the Rhine are the minimum two you want/need, but will give you a good all-round perspective of the battle. And the hardback version of Kershaw's It Never Snows in September has some great maps and a lot of details which may help you decide where to visit, but make sure you get the hardback only. There are more, but those three are plenty. Also, I'm jealous of you; I would like to visit the area one day too 😁
    4
  6077. I bet those gun nuts are feeling pretty safe right now
    4
  6078. Nice avatar your have there, NKVD man
    4
  6079. Welcome! Glad you could join us :)
    4
  6080. You completely missed the point of the video. Yes, SOME of the SS divisions were good fighting troops, but a lot were not. Since everyone everywhere says how "amazing" the SS divisions were, the question then becomes - are there instances where SS divisions performed badly? This video gives a few examples of this, which was it's original purpose. It was not meant to be an overview of EVERY SS division.
    4
  6081. Well, if all else fails, just check the channel every Monday at 5pm :)
    4
  6082. I could do that, but I manually sort it like it is. It's in order of pledge, not names, so that those who contribute more to the channel are displayed first.
    4
  6083. As much as it pains me, I would suggest that you don't listen to distractions and study at the same time. Best to have 100% deep focus on the topic at hand. You can take breaks though and listen then :) not sure if you've seen my productivity tips video https://youtu.be/4nJ582vu_0o
    4
  6084. "TIK, you are doing nice videos on military matters but everytime you try to foray into economics it is much (much!) less good." War is the extension of economics. "You say that prices were arbitrary in the Soviet economy (and use T-34 price as an example, a wrong one I must point out which is just another demonstration of that you didn't actually research the topic) but it is simply not the case." If you're alone on a desert island, how much is a coconut worth? It's not. Only by millions of people buying and selling goods and services do prices develop. Without the buying and selling of goods and services, you do not have prices. Prices are arbitrary in all socialist economies, since socialist economies do not have a free market in which individuals can buy and sell. Without a free market, you have no buying and selling, and without buying and selling, you do not have prices. Without prices, you have no economic calculation. The cost/price of a T-34 is incalculable because it's price was determined by some commissar somewhere. But is that really the price? The answer is 'no'. A good must be exchanged on a market to have a price. With no market, you have no price. "Different factories provided tanks (and everything else) to the Soviet government at different prices. Cost of single T-34 varied wildly depending on when and where it was produced." The government collectively owned all the factories. Therefore there was no buying or selling. Without buying or selling, the price of a T-34 is meaningless. They may have slapped a price on it, but that price isn't a true reflection of the actual value of the T-34. "Why do you think that happened if the price was determined arbitrary?" Either the Soviet Union had a fully free market economy (which it didn't), or they made it up as they went along (we know they based the cost of things on western prices). My bet is on the latter.
    4
  6085. Thanks Vass, Happy Monday to you too!
    4
  6086. Cosmic Wakes isn't trolling. He once commented on my previous videos saying things like - "Tik is an automated meme generator for right wing hysteria." and also said "Here comes the fascist with the Holodomor lie."
    4
  6087. @Hej Ludvig "According to Marx a communist society is a society which is 1 classless, 2 stateless 3 moneyless. Soviet Union fails all three therefore it wasn't communist." According to Marx, a communist society wasn't stateless. I've explained this in the Public vs Private video. Marx (actually Engels) lied, pretending their ideology was 'stateless' because critics were complaining that their ideology was totalitarian. To answer the critics, all they did was claim that AFTER the state was established it would 'die away' or 'wither away' (depending on translation). But as I showed, that would lead to anarcho-capitalism, and would be fundamentally non-socialism since socialism is state-control of the economy. The founding of the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' would make them socialist. The destruction of that state, and everyone reverting to the free market, would make them anarcho-capitalist. Clearly, Marx and Engels weren't anarcho-capitalists, just like they weren't anarcho-socialists. But the Soviet Union under Lenin was effectively 'moneyless' (prior to the NEP) since Lenin killed the economy. The people had to resort to barter. And, while it may not have been classless by Marxist standards, since class is a social construction and doesn't actually exist, every society is classless. And even if you disagree with that, you can't argue that Lenin and the Soviets didn't want to aim for communism/socialism. They collectivized 89.6% of the farms by the end of 1936. (Gellately, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler, P 228.) How can you say that's not a communist/socialist economy?
    4
  6088. I'm on Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/ but not entirely backed up on there. I do have backups saved of all my videos on external hard drives though so I could upload to Bitchute in case of YouTube censorship or financial collapse.
    4
  6089. Interesting. I haven't studied Tunisa yet, but I'll be getting to it after I've worked through the Western Desert Campaign. When I do, I'll be checking up on Citino's stats. Thanks!
    4
  6090. True and true. But the German sources are also super biased. As are the British. As are the Italian. As are the Romanian. As are...
    4
  6091.  @PunishedRalph  Exactly! Profit is good once it's redistributed to the workers!
    4
  6092. Some of them are critics, some are genuine questions... but yes, some are pure and simple propagandists.
    4
  6093. My suggestion would be to read Richard Evan's "In Defense of History" because he gives a great overview and talks about Ranke etc. My History Theory video also provides a concise overview of the topic, so might be worth giving that a watch.
    4
  6094. That's the plan! And thanks :)
    4
  6095. Well, I'm determined to get it right next time. And it's not his interpretation I disagree with. It's his argument. He's made a statement which is contradicted by all the current evidence, and then hasn't backed up his argument or even acknowledged it was debatable. That's the problem.
    4
  6096. Nonsense. Of course humans have children out of self-interest. This is why mothers who were often feminist beforehand, turn against the faith and become "selfish" once they've had a child. I've seen this happen in real time several times. Nobody has a child "for the good of the community", they do it because they seek the pleasure of doing so. It's the "atheist" altruists who are all depressed, and the religious altruists who are incredibly odd - it's often difficult to even be around them. Those who place their own interests before others, who want to raise their own children for their own self-interest, are usually the most normal and most successful individuals.
    4
  6097. Marxists don't care about the poor. It's all a farce. If they cared about the poor, they'd let them get on with economic activity without sending commissars to steal their wealth and murder their families.
    4
  6098. Yes, it's 400,000 for all of Russia, not just Samara. Sorry about that.
    4
  6099. Plato's entire philosophy is collectivist. Look at his "Republic", where the state takes children off the mothers to distribute them evenly amongst his comrades. That's the antithesis of the concept of private (individual) ownership.
    4
  6100. Oh, so he said the markets would shrink?
    4
  6101. Well, it depends on who you believe. According to Zeitzler, Göring said: "Mein Führer, I assure you that the Luftwaffe can keep the Sixth Army supplied." Whereas Göring said his words were "Mein Führer, we’ll do the job!” I'm skeptical of both accounts if I'm honest, but of the two, I think Zeitzler's account is more suspicious. I've just seen that Hayward offers a slightly different account, and also says that the debate between Zeitzler and Göring couldn't have occurred before the 27th (although does say Göring visited Hitler at the Berchtesgaden). So by the time the debate occurs, the air lift has already started.
    4
  6102. Yes, that's one book I haven't got but need to. I've heard a few Russians in the previous videos say you have to be careful when looking at what Khruschev did or said (or what others said he did) because he became Premier and everyone was pandering to him at the time
    4
  6103. Unless you live in the UK - the government has cancelled Christmas 😂
    4
  6104. If you haven't seen it, watch his lecture here https://youtu.be/7Clz27nghIg
    4
  6105. I have talked about Finland and greater Scandinavia before, and I do intend to do more in the future
    4
  6106. Glad someone caught that 😂
    4
  6107. Sorry to disappoint you guys but I'm nether god and I do make mistakes 😂
    4
  6108. Yes, see the pinned comment, it's a bit of a one off. But makes for a nice Christmas present for you all!
    4
  6109. I intend to do Kursk in the future. But Stalingrad is the focus right now
    4
  6110. The way it's argued is that the Dutch weren't giving in, were deliberately delaying their surrender and negotiations, therefore the Germans were justified in doing what they did. Also, they'll say that there were communications issues, so if only the Dutch had negotiated their surrender earlier, this would have provided enough time for them to call off the bombers, but since they didn't, then the Germans 'accidentally' bombed Rotterdam after the negotiations had started. Basically, the pro-German argument says that the Dutch are to blame for German actions.
    4
  6111.  @Splodge542  yeah I do use a teleprompter. I didn't used to, but in the end I bit the bullet because people complained I wasn't concise and kept repeating myself. Sometimes I don't use one (some of my addendum videos or similar), but for most videos now I do.
    4
  6112. Possibly. The problem is that the diary entries aren't always accurate either, and I've come across quite a few bits where the diaries are simply wrong just by looking at the map. Luckily this isn't a game changer even if the occupation of the elevator happened a day earlier, or not at all. It comes down to interpretation of the contradictions in the sources (and there's certainly many!)
    4
  6113. Yeah, it's going to be every 4 weeks, not 3. I can't produce them quicker :( And I assume Isaev meant they it wasn't occupied until the elevator fell later?
    4
  6114. This isn't a video game. I've made those graphics you're seeing.
    4
  6115. Well, it wasn't the weather! That's just foreshadowing 😉
    4
  6116. I actually did one years ago when this was a gaming channel. It was actually multiplayer too. Very few people watched it and later I removed the gaming videos.
    4
  6117. It was hard to cross the Volga, but also it doesn't appear that the Germans had enough troops to do it.
    4
  6118. IF Spartacus did say what you said he said, then I do find it interesting that he referred to those in the Gulags as "inmates", whereas he called those in the Nazi labour camps "slaves". Perhaps this was just a slip-up rather than a deliberate attempt to categorise the Gulags as somehow not-slavery, but if so, it shows that we all need to be careful when making statements and that we have to choose our words carefully. As far as the rest of it goes, my videos on Hitler's Socialism call into question their arguments on National Socialism being Capitalism. And the ones I made on German prisoners of war in Soviet camps, plus the one I made on whether the Soviet economy ever recovered from WW2, talk about the numbers within the Gulags. (Thinking about it, I may need to do a Gulag-specific video in the future.)
    4
  6119. What's labour day, exactly? Is it just a day off?
    4
  6120. Proof is available. The book "Enemy in the East" by Müller talks about it.
    4
  6121. @King George V - Glad to hear you liked the Hitler's Socialism video 👍
    4
  6122. "Are you considering making a video on the inflation that many countries faced in world war 1, the deflation that followed in some countries and the hyperinflation in Germany and Russia?" Yes. Not sure when it will be (probably a while away) but I absolutely do want to cover this issue because the current narrative completely misses the mark (pun intended). "I am also interested in your thoughts on why Hitler declared war on the USA." This is a Patreon question. I've currently not fully figured out the reason for it yet. If you (or anyone else) has any suggestions as to why, or has any recommendations of books on this particular topic, let me know. "However I think it would be important to explain how the United States would fit into Germany's larger strategy" I do know that Hitler envisioned a war with the USA after the conquest of Lebensraum, since he says this in Mein Kampf and his Second Book. But that doesn't explain why he declared war on her in 1941.
    4
  6123. Source was stated in the video and in the description: Müller "Enemy in the East". Everything I talked about was talked about in that book, and it's a great book
    4
  6124. Congrats! Yes, I lost track of time myself 😂
    4
  6125. It has, sorry about the delay for Stalingrad content
    4
  6126. Oh man, yeah if only I had read these out-of-context quotes from one guy talking about Hitler prior to him being elected when he was trying to downplay his socialism to win votes, I could have saved myself a lot of trouble. I guess all the hundreds of primary and secondary sources I've used to show how the National Socialists implemented autarky and de facto nationalized the industries can all be dismissed now thanks to these few quotes. My goodness, all my videos are now defunct as a result of the glorious words you wrote! Quelle horreur! /s
    4
  6127. Yeah I've noticed that and people have pointed it out. I'll correct it for future episodes. Cheers!
    4
  6128. Aarrgghh! There's always one typo! :D I'm forever grateful to my Patrons, but I don't expect everyone to pledge support because not everyone is in a good place financially. You must help yourself before you can help others, after all
    4
  6129. Thanks! Yeah I got it right earlier in the series, but forgot by the time I got to this episode. I'll do my best to remember for the future
    4
  6130. Ahhh... that may explain why I've felt super-tired all day
    4
  6131. Glad I could help! But why is today the "Most Depressing Day of the Year"??
    4
  6132. Just like any business that turns a profit, you have to provide a good or service that people actually want, and not be inefficient with resources.
    4
  6133. @Torven The Grey  Glad you found it entertaining! 😂
    4
  6134. Well, the reason they glorify Germany and ignore the crimes is because they believe that all narratives that go against the Aryans are made up or written/funded by a "racial" minority, despite the scientific fact that race doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ And they dismiss evidence that says that Germany committed horrible crimes because they also think it's made up by the same group. This is despite the fact that basic history theory says you cannot dismiss inconvenient evidence just because it goes against your argument (you must either argue successfully why it doesn't work, or change your narrative) https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    4
  6135. YouTube automatically deletes comments, including my own. I'm not deleting comments or shadow banning people because I'm an advocate for free speech, plus I don't have time to police the comments.
    4
  6136. First!
    4
  6137. Yes it does, which is why I address it in the video
    4
  6138. You're ignoring the idea of Lebensraum in the East which Hitler outlined in Mein Kampf and numerous speeches and table talks, which was the goal of conquering the Ukraine and Caucasus. You're also forgetting that Hitler and Poland discussed a joint venture into the Soviet Union, as outlined by Müller in "Enemy in the East", and so Hitler's goals were not just taking a couple of small states in the center of Europe. Everyone knew he was going east - even Oswald Mosley knew this, which is why he was anti-war, because he didn't think it worth fighting Hitler over Eastern Europe
    4
  6139. And I've done several videos that show that the Red Army was in no position to defend, let alone attack, in 1941. Suvorov's thesis doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
    4
  6140. And thank you for your comment! What I explained ties into what I said a while ago in my history theory video. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend it https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    4
  6141. The First War for Oil and Meth
    4
  6142. What you learned about dinosaurs is called "pre-history", not "history". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory "Human prehistory, also known as pre-literary history,[1] is the period between the use of the first stone tools by hominins c. 3.3 million years ago and the invention of writing systems... This article is concerned with human prehistory, the time since behaviorally and anatomically modern humans first appeared until the beginning of recorded history. Earlier periods are also called "prehistoric"; there are separate articles for the overall history of the Earth and the history of life before humans."
    4
  6143. Ohler suggest that it is, but also says it could be Parkinsons. The jury is out on this issue, and I honestly don't know. It's possible that it's a bit of both.
    4
  6144. Capitalism doesn't work. What we need is a free market.
    4
  6145. I despise the monarchy and the commieservatives. And I'm not an anarchist.
    4
  6146. Lenin and Stalin killed other socialists and communists. Socialists killing socialists isn't a bug, it's a feature, since wealth can only be plundered in a socialist regime. As explained in previous videos, individuals were granted by the Nazis to own their homes ON CONDITION. If it was deemed they weren't benefitting the community, they could have their property taken off them, which happened. The state could march into your home and ship you to a concentration camp, which happened en masse. And as explained previously, Hitler didn't think Germany had the resources to implement a full socialist utopia. He needed the land and resources first. So he created a limited autarky in Germany, and went East to get the land and resources there. So while the Third Reich was not "full socialism", Hitler and his Party certainly were socialists.
    4
  6147. 😂 Blut- und Investmentbanking
    4
  6148. Not sure if you have seen it, but you might enjoy my "Public vs Private" video which talks about the political spectrum and the definitions of Socialism, Capitalism, Fascism and National Socialism. Fascism and National Socialism are Leftist ideologies because they desire a strong Public Sector.
    4
  6149. A lot of people said my last video (the Public vs Private one) was perhaps my best ever video. Then a small minority said it was my worst :D I respect Evans for what he did on that trial, and his "In Defence of History" is a fantastic discussion on the theory of history
    4
  6150.  @abuseofmainstreammediacanh5713  "So, depicting De Gaulle as a fame hunting imposer bringing nothing but trouble to the table is very clearly a Churchill thing." But I didn't frame him like that at all. I never said he was "fame hunting" or an "imposer", nor did I say he was "nothing but trouble". I honestly don't even know how you got that impression from this video because, while I did say he wanted to keep fighting and take over Syria because he didn't have a base, the only time I said he wasn't in with the British was AFTER the war (1945 during the Levant Crisis). - "IF De Gaulle was such an empty suit..." Please explain where I said that de Gaulle was an "empty suit"? I don't think that, and I didn't say that in the video. In fact, I have no real opinion on de Gaulle. I get the impression that he was confident, and outspoken, and maybe a bit impatient, but that's certainly no different from Churchill or any of the other leaders. - "So, once over TIK, this is no trolling. I would very much encourage you to look at the Free French without "Churchill-Goggles" it's a bit like the Guderian memoirs.. ;-)" But I used a French source, not Churchill's. And I don't like Churchill. I've actually said several times, and will say it again, that Churchill was an idiot. So I'm not looking at this from Churchill's point of view. - "I would suggest the battle of Bir Hakeim" Yes, which I will cover once I get to Gazala in the North African Campaign series. I actually covered some of the Free French actions in the rest of that series, plus in the Long Range Desert Group videos. I have nothing against the French, so again, where exactly have you picked up that impression?
    4
  6151. All I can say is, you're spot on!
    4
  6152. Yes you were! Well done!
    4
  6153. "Tik u think the German army was the best Hitler decisions lost the war" No I don't.
    4
  6154. Thanks! I think for most of this it's because I wasn't clear with the words in the video. Let me explain - "Italy unprepared: absolutely, but not THAT unprepared: 7to1 ratio in Libya against Brits (also unprepared?) Graziani stopping to build aqueduct" They had manpower, but little else. They lacked motorization, tanks, artillery, anti-aircraft guns and adequate anti-tank guns. They also had binary divisions, which arguably caused them problems, especially so given the lack of experienced officers. See my Operation Compass documentary for more details https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk and my video on German and Italian divisions here https://youtu.be/Q3RGtIpjvvw. "Navy one of the best: fleet in being be cursed (Taranto)" Except Italy ran out of oil, so couldn't use her fleet as much as she wanted to. So I would count that as not prepared. "You say: Italy could not oppose Nazis in Austria. This is not true: Italy did, in 1934 they forced the Nazis to retreat. But in 38 they were already allied so I'd rather say they allowed Germans to take on Austria (and, by that tome, absolutely could not oppose them)." Yes, they did in 1934, but not in 1938 because the situation had changed due to Ethiopia and the Spanish Civil War. They were in no position to oppose them militarily in 1938, so had to let the Germans take it. "I think you underestimate France and Britain's role (appeasement) in the outburst of the conflict." Not at all. This is another reason Mussolini couldn't oppose Hitler - he couldn't stand up to Hitler alone, which is basically what he was forced to do because of appeasement. "Italians in Russia: not great a display BUT great glory. They did what they could. And beyond." I'm not denying that. But again, they were under-equipped and ill-prepared for the conflict they found themselves in, much like hte Romanians and Hungarians. I'll be covering this in more detail in my Stalingrad documentary.
    4
  6155. https://images.app.goo.gl/TthXZsCVHE8QvcJY8
    4
  6156. @Filthy Weaboo, currently my (very rough) understanding from Right to Left would be - Anarchists - Anarco-Capitalists - Democratic Capitalists (e.g. Classic-Liberals) - conservatives (and Monarchy) - democratic socialists - Fascists - National Socialists - Marxists. Probably missed a load out there, but you get the picture. It's a scale from economic and political freedom on the Right to economic and political state control on the Left. I think Monarchy is somewhere in the middle, just because its centralised political control, and not centralised economic control. I hope that makes sense.
    4
  6157. I'm not sure exactly where they'd be on the spectrum (either Centre somewhere or Left imho). But the Nazis saw themselves as being in the Centre, and the Fascists argued they were on the Right. I guess it depends what you see as the Left and the Right. As I explain in the video, if liberty for the individual and economic freedom (free market capitalism) is on the Right, then the Fascists and Nazis are simply not on the Far Right.
    4
  6158. I know what you're saying but you have misunderstood me. A 'group' is not a separate being. It does not have a brain or a separate will. It is comprised of individuals, but the group itself is not an individual. Some people (e.g. Fascists and other Identity-based ideologies) actually believe that the group exists physically as a being. So when one person of the group is attacked, everyone in the group is attacked because the group itself is attacked. I, as an idiot, do not believe that groups exist at all. I am an individual. I'm not a group. You cannot judge me based on other people's actions or traits. I'm not them and they are not me. Individuals may cooperate and act together, and we may call that a 'group of people' for convenience, but the group still does not exist, only individuals exist.
    4
  6159. The Guardian is a leftwing newspaper. Of course they didn't like a historian calling Mussolini a socialist. That goes against their agenda.
    4
  6160. I truely believe that the issues we're facing today wouldn't even be faced if people understood the true nature of what Fascism and Nazism are.
    4
  6161. I'm not so certain it was actual Fascism. I think it was just nationalism... but I could be persuaded otherwise.
    4
  6162. I love natural 1s and 20s. Can make or break an entire campaign.
    4
  6163. And Labour Party policies here in Britain.
    4
  6164. Well, I'm glad to hear that the videos are starting to be sent out... Hope you find the Greece video as engaging!
    4
  6165. Christopher Beer "So in other words, you want this company to be controlled by the people rather than by shareholders? Never thought I'd see you convert to socialism, TIK. 🤣" The company is controlled by the people. Shareholders are people, are they not? I don't want collective control over me (the individual creator) or you (the individual viewer). I want the market (me and you) to decide what we get to create or watch, not the social-collective (YouTube).
    4
  6166. The word 'Corporate' means 'group', as in Public, as in State. I'm the Private individual Capitalist creator, you are the private individual viewers, and YouTube/Google/Alphabet is a Corporate hierarchical structure consisting of thousands of people, lording over millions of people, and collectively owned by their shareholders. That's not Capitalism. And it's not Fascism either, because they're interNational rather than National as the Fascists are. International Socialism is Marxism, and that's why they're acting exactly like Marxists. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6167. I prefer to rely on the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    4
  6168. I'll try! They're National Socialists (they're all white for a reason) who are fighting Fascism. And, because most people have no idea that fascism and National Socialism are two distinct ideologies, they're getting away with it
    4
  6169. Little known fact: Conservatives were the old Left. In the UK, the Liberal Party was on the Capitalist Right-wing, but had a "crisis of confidence" in the 1880s and became Socialist. The Conservatives stayed where they were, meaning that our current Right-wing isn't Right at all. In the UK at least, you're voting for moderate Socialists, or major Socialists. By the sounds of things, the USA isn't much different
    4
  6170. BBC News : Breaking confirmation that dogs are Fascists! Here's what our correspondent, Joseph Goebbels, has to say...
    4
  6171. Maybe but it was a Patreon question and my reputation was supposedly in the gutter because of his article, so a response was needed at some point
    4
  6172. There was a battle like that during Operation Crusader, near the start of the battle. The action at Bir el Gubi. See my Operation Crusader video timestamp 02:59:42 https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    4
  6173. They destroyed their own reputation in this book. I just made a wider audience aware of their views
    4
  6174. "All your research and work is paying off. This is brilliant, you just keep getting better. In my economics classes the students were clueless about history and in my history classes they were clueless about economics. I wish I could bottle this and slip it in people's coffee." You could share it with them :) I'm glad I have your approval too. There's some disagreeing with me still, even though I've tried to make it as clear as possible to them
    4
  6175. The Fed has (31/07/2019) just cut rates and promised more printing of money (inflation). The US middle class is going to unknowingly have their savings wiped out, and the rest of the world will follow suit. Prices will rise, and people will blame capitalism. History repeats.
    4
  6176. First! (I'll say it if you don't - and thanks!)
    4
  6177. I've been tempted, but I add to it all the time, so if I did one I'd need to do one a few weeks later :D
    4
  6178. Are you saying that something that isn't a free market, is capitalism? That's bizarre...
    4
  6179. "It is government contracts that private health companies bid for to provide the care under conditions which prevent U.S. style medical bankruptcies and other bad health policy. To say the NHS is socialism is wrong, it is social democracy which is still a capitalist system by definition." If it's funded by the government, it is the government.
    4
  6180. "Please, TIK: NO russians - ONLY soviets." At no point in the series do I refer to them as Russians. The words in the thumbnail are there purely for alliteration purposes.
    4
  6181. In the next season of Stalingrad (Season 6), I will show you when Hitler realized that the tide had turned. However, maybe Speer is correct that Hitler didn't give up until January 1945... It's certainly debatable. I wouldn't necessarily trust what Speer says for the same reason I don't trust Göring. And yes, apart from the fact that I was ill when I recorded this (and still am ill), I quite liked answering today's question because there was a lot of different things to cover and talk about. A bit unusual, but good :)
    4
  6182. See the pinned comment! It's getting there, but it's not going to be next week. Maybe the week after, but probably the week after that
    4
  6183. Oh don't worry, I'll be revisiting Market Garden when Antony Breevor's new book on Arnhem comes out in a few days (got it pre-ordered). I don't know why, but I suspect he'll either not mention Nijmegen much and thus come to the wrong conclusions like a lot of others have, or mention it and be the first if the big popular historians to do so. Either way, I'll be talking about it.
    4
  6184. Clearly we can all learn the lesson here: don't have friends.
    4
  6185. I haven't made any decisions yet, but the feedback has helped. I intend to do an update video later this week as I wasn't able to do one last week. I'm better than I was, but I know something has to change because the pace is too much.
    4
  6186. Saving grows an economy. Spending (and currency inflation) causes bubbles that eventually pop (a recession). But Keynesians don't understand this because they don't know basic economics, even though they pretend that they do.
    4
  6187. "You know a couple months ago I would’ve thought you were exaggerating how bad colleges are but now I’m in one and I see your point." You made me laugh :) I'm so sorry. I actually mention this in the upcoming Monday video "The rest are borderline or overt socialists." You'll find that some people think that's a 'conspiracy theory' and they say there's zero evidence of this. And while there probably hasn't been a survey that confirms or denies it, there's a lot of people who are saying that this is the case - including myself. "Guess which of the professors drives a Mercedes, has a Rolex, and has his own business?" That says it all, doesn't it
    4
  6188. I'm still looking into it, but it's actually more interesting than it seems at first glance because the answer has much bigger implications, and the debate seems pretty heated
    4
  6189. @Raskolnikov70 - that's it exactly. The Revolution isn't to overthrow the existing system, it's to put themselves in total power of the same system, and then rapidly expand it to cover every aspect of people's lives. They won't get rid of censorship - they'll double down on it. They won't get rid of the central banks - they'll take them over. They wont get rid the other problems - they'll support them, and cause more of them.
    4
  6190. Marxists: "You're an idiot TIK!" Also Marxists: "Why hasn't he responded to me!?"
    4
  6191. Not sure how I missed this comment, sorry for late reply. I learnt history at university, but most of the info I've got for these documentaries has come from reading extensively on the subjects. I started this channel so I could get better at my favourite game - Close Combat A Bridge Too Far, a game on Operation Market Garden - and the subscribers I got were all into history and WW2. So some suggested I do a documentary, which I thought was a great idea.
    4
  6192. "I'm curious TIK, do your references have numbers of Marders that the Germans had on hand during these battles?" Not at this stage, no. And they don't say how many StuGs there were either. So in reality, there were more German "armoured" forces than the tank numbers alone. Plus the fact that the Soviets didn't have many "Destroyer" units in the area at this time. 4th Tank Army had the 5th Destroyer Regiment, but that only arrived in time to be destroyed in Episode 7 ;)
    4
  6193. During the Market Garden era of this channel, I was also anti-American and pro-American at the same time
    4
  6194. "Of course, for some of them, their self-image is built around nationality & a tribal mindset" THIS is exactly the problem. And they can't even fathom that someone doesn't play the tribe game. Baffles them :)
    4
  6195. @Marti Grey - interestingly your reply to my comment was marked as 'spam' and I've just had to clear it to allow it to be displayed. Not sure why because your comment doesn't have any bad words in it as far as I can see. Again, the whole comment-spam-censorship thing is ridiculous
    4
  6196. Hey Paul! Over time - possibly. But right now they've got legitimate concerns about the online world - mainly Wikipedia and 'Fake News'. In my case, and MHV and others, we're using sources and doing (mostly) the right sort of thing. But 99% of what's out there on the internet (forums, Reddit, Wikipedia) is pretty BAD, so they're right to be concerned. I hope that over time as we YouTuber's and others get more 'professional' and make real strides in the field, we can gradually show that at least some of us are doing history right.
    4
  6197. Yes I'm back, thank you. Been doing okay. Hoping for no more tragedies for a while
    4
  6198. Yes, that's the socialist/Keynesian world view, correct. I used to buy into that world view too, until I Red Pilled myself and realized it was a complete lie. I strongly recommend that you read two books - Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson", then Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" (especially the first 50-60 pages, but the whole book is brilliant). They will set you free 👍
    4
  6199. Second! But I'll let you off
    4
  6200. And if I told you that I have read Keynes, but still maintain my position. Then what?
    4
  6201. "I really respect TIK and all his methods but I just cannot take his conclusion that Hitler was socialist seriously, no matter how long he makes his video or how many sources he uses to back it up." Okay well, let me try and persuade you that you need to take what I'm saying a bit more seriously. And by the way, I've hearted your comment for two reasons. 1) because I want you to take what I'm saying seriously, and 2) because you're definitely not the only person who is saying what you're saying, so I want more people who share your views to read this message as well. - "Hitler adopting the trappings and rhetoric of leftism while at the same time destroying unions and buddying up with big corporations is like textbook fascist populism." Except he didn't "destroy" the trade unions - he nationalized them, and crushed those that refused to nationalize, just like Lenin did. I've been over this and provided sources backing this up in my Hitler's Socialism video. He did "buddy" up with big corporations, but it's not in the way you're imagining it. The government is a giant corporation. And it's easier to control a small number of other giant corporations (13 in the Third Reich, and 9 in Fascist Italy) than it is to control thousands of small businesses, so central planners like strong corporations. In fact, the idea of the Fascist corporate state comes from the idea of Syndicalism (trade unionism). The Italians called their trade unions 'Fasci'. Trade unionism was therefore Fascism. And giant trade unions that 'embody the nation' were called 'corporations'. Why? Because 'embody', is another word for 'body', or 'corpse' - therefore 'corporation' = the 'body of the nation'. So corporations (at least in the Nazi/Fascist sense) are trade unions. And the corporations were also nationalized in all but name. The Nazis walked into the factories and took them over from within. A good example is Professor Junkers, who was kicked out of his factory and replaced by a Nazi Party member. So when you say that they 'buddied up with big corporations' - yes, this is correct, but it's because they were Socialist, not because they were Capitalist. Capitalism is AGAINST corporations. See my Public vs Private video to find out why. - "Even in this video he says that "Hitler's socialism" flies in the face of Christian teachings..." Again, see my Public vs Private video to find out why. Really, I recommend that you watch my Public vs Private video, then the Hitler's Socialism video, and then the Fascism Defined video, in that order. That way, you'll come to understand what I'm saying, because it seems right now that you're not even grasping what I'm saying, and that misunderstanding is blinding you to the point I'm trying to get across. Even if you end up not agreeing with me, it's worth trying to at least understand what I'm saying, because you will learn from it, even if you disagree. - " "Hitler was socialist" is like the first thing they teach in red scare class..." Yeah, but I was a Socialist. I redpilled myself by accident when I read into the origins of the Holocaust, and why Hitler hated the Jews. I explain this in my Hitler's Socialism video. So, I'm not doing this because of 'red scare'. I was on your side (socialism) previously, but changed to my new stance (capitalism) based on the weight of evidence over this particular topic (and others). When you take seriously what I'm saying, and grasp what I'm trying to say by watching those three videos I mentioned before, you'll realize why I'm sticking to my guns on this particular subject.
    4
  6202. I'm obviously not trying to rehabilitate Hitler. And 'Madman Manstein" is not what I'm doing here. Manstein lied in his memoirs. This is actually a known fact. David Glantz has said exactly that when talking about what Manstein said regarding Stalingrad. Books have been written on the subject.
    4
  6203. Yes, they're called Nazis and Holocaust Deniers.
    4
  6204. Yeah, I'd say that's true. But again, it's not necessary. Just because you haven't got a degree does not mean you can't think about a topic in a logical way etc. And I haven't read that book. In fact, I was concentrating on the LRDG until the SAS appeared, so simply haven't got to them yet.
    4
  6205. I plan to learn it once I have a good grip on German
    4
  6206. It's certainly an advantage, and you'll hopefully learn those things. But it's not essential, since you can learn those things without going to university. In fact, I learnt almost everything I needed to know about history at college - before I got to university. The only lesson I didn't learn until I got to university can be summed up in one sentence: watch out for bias in every source. Quite honestly, if someone had said that phrase before I'd got to university, in hindsight I wouldn't have needed to go there at all. And this is why I plan to make a series (and why Simon Baker, the teacher I mentioned, wants me to make it) on how to study and write history. I want people to have the skills to study history regardless whether they go to university or not. The more people who have said skills, the better our societies will become.
    4
  6207. It's different when you can choose interesting topics and not boring ones set by people who seem to deliberately pick ridiculous topics. One semester we spent studying Palestine BEFORE 1948. I can sum it up in two words: NOTHING HAPPENED. Why didn't the tutor pick Palestine after 1948 when things actually happened? No idea, but this is partly why I only got a 2:1.
    4
  6208. Yeah, from what I remember (it was 10+ years ago when I studied it), the German government defaulted on their payments, so the French troops marched into the Rhineland. The idea was they would sit there and take the resources. But then the workers went on strike, so the government started printing money to pay the workers for their strike. End result was money became worthless and the Germans lost all their savings. I believe they actually lost their savings three times in the early 1900's.
    4
  6209. Yeah, I actually have that on Kindle, and have used bits of it. Should have checked it before doing this video. I'll look into chapter 14. Thanks!!
    4
  6210. Apart from some awesome Stalingrad videos coming up, Operation Crusader's the next Battlestorm documentary. However, I will do St Nazaire at some point
    4
  6211. Glad you find them useful! Not every video deserves them, but I will include them if I think they're necessary.
    4
  6212. I genuinely just laughed out loud. It's so true!
    4
  6213. Merry Christmas to you too!
    4
  6214. Merry Christmas to you too
    4
  6215.  @ThatOneGuy7550  Well, since I'm not a libertarian as Fredda claims, I understand that free speech is a violation of private property rights. Since you're insulting me on my own property (my channel), I'm going to ask you to leave. But we all know you won't leave by your own accord, so I guess I have no choice but to ban you. Merry Christmas.
    4
  6216.  @saulzuniga3366  One person has described it as "slander" and several refer to it as a "hit piece". One viewer said Fredda "pretty much called you a libertarian shill because of your arguments and your sources. Which I find to be laughable because he also made a video saying that history is subjective but also made a video saying that academica does not have a left wing bias and is only a conspiracy pushed by conservatives who are terrified of Confederate statues being torn down." It's not an honest critique. Therefore, it's not worth my time, and it definitely doesn't deserve a response from me. I'd probably respond to a video made with honest intentions from someone who genuinely has an interest in discussing the sources to uncover the truth. This Fredda guy is not that kind of person.
    4
  6217. Pretty much, although Cyrenaica is quite big
    4
  6218. That's a terrible summary of this video, especially since I didn't say the Germans suck, or the Allies are the best. A better summary would be - tanks aren't as important as you think they are.
    4
  6219. Great question! And I have absolutely no idea! Hopefully someone else can shed some light on this for us because I'm curious too now :)
    4
  6220. I have double checked, and there's pictures of wrecked T-34s that were part of 32nd Tank Division at Yazuv Stariy (Dubno area).
    4
  6221. Then explain how they took part in the Battle of Dubno in June of 1941?
    4
  6222. Absolutely not, both are war crimes. If you think I'm the type of person who would let the allies off for this sort of thing you have another think coming
    4
  6223. Problem???
    4
  6224. Well, I can confirm that the film wasn't accurate - that much is true. John Frost was there on the set and he even told them they were making it up as they were going along (he says this in his memoirs)
    4
  6225.  @alganhar1  Actually it's the other way around. You can abandon prices for small groups, but prices would definitely work for an army of two and a half million.
    4
  6226. Me: 2+2=4 Socialist: nO iT IsN't! YoU'Re pUShInG iDeOLoGy! Me: No, it really is. And if you don't like it, cry about it in the comments. Socialist: wHY aRe YoU bEiNG sO eMotIOnAL REEEEEEEEEEEE
    4
  6227. This is war history
    4
  6228. Okay, well I sort of see what Rothbard's saying. Bad histories do get written. If most people believe that Hitler is a capitalist, then that view will dominate the history books between 1960 and 2010. There's also no guarantee that we won't descend into a 'dark age' where only a few priests can write history, and where only propaganda can be pushed. Obviously, in such a scenario, the 'new' histories would be bad. However, outside of a 'dark age' or a totalitarian dystopia, I disagree with Rothbard's assessment. In general, assuming a free market in history, the newer history books will tend to be the most up to date, and thus most valuable of the sources.
    4
  6229. I'm not familiar with the Whig theory of history. But let's swap this round. Does the overcoming of contradictions and getting to the truth of the matter result in a worse history overall? Clearly not.
    4
  6230. No worries, and I wish you luck. I'll add that I enjoyed college because we covered the 1850-1950 era in Europe, which is an era I'm most interested in. But at university, we didn't cover that period, and so my interest waned over time. I went from being enthusiastic in the first year, to bored in the second, to almost angry and resentful in the third. How I came out with a 2:1 is beyond me because I really stopped caring by the third year. The topics were just awful, and the tutors weren't great. My point here is to say that you're not the only one struggling with this, and you shouldn't beat yourself up about it. Perserverence is the name of the game. Most people don't survive university (or a Masters Degree) because they can't stick it out. As much as it sucks, you have to perservere. And if changing the setting or something else can help you crawl across that finish line, then do it!
    4
  6231. Welcome! I'm glad you enjoyed the 5 hour video, and I hope you like the rest too 👍🏻
    4
  6232. Affirmative!
    4
  6233. Evans is good. He thinks Hitler's not a Socialist (which I obviously disagree with), but otherwise he's definitely recommended reading. Glad to hear you picked it up 👍🏻
    4
  6234. It's always those pesky socialists
    4
  6235. I've argued with others in the comments over this. While other nations did temporarily ban slavery at points, or "abolish" it earlier, or freed some groups of slaves from their giant pool of slaves, the British were the first to do it fully and consistently. I mean, some have argued that the Chinese banned slavery in Ancient times, but this was only for a couple years before the Emperor that did it was overthrown. To me, that doesn't really count. Mexico did pass an act banning slavery before Britain, but they didn't seem to enforce it and slavery continued for years after it. Whereas Britain was actively sending the Royal Navy around hunting ships and freeing the slaves on them. Between 1808 and 1860, the Royal Navy freed around 150,000 slaves this way https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Abolition-Of-Slavery/ But if this is not convincing, then just imagine that I said that "Britain was one of the first nations to abolish slavery" instead.
    4
  6236. Yes, but I was referring to the fact that Britain was moving in that direction before 1833 (and 1823). Parliament formally started the abolition process in 1807 (the Slave Trade Act), and there were several acts between then and 1833 where they moved towards abolition. Between 1808 and 1860, the Royal Navy had successfully freed 150,000 Africans being shipped as slaves. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Abolition-Of-Slavery/
    4
  6237. I'll be honest, I haven't dived deep enough to really give a concrete answer at this time. I've read a couple of books on the subject that offer theories on why it all occurred, but I'm not so sure about them. No doubt the Central Banks had their hand in all of it. However, I also don't think they were the sole reason it occurred. There's so many interlocking elements that pulling out one just breaks the chain.
    4
  6238. Looking at the house, it appears the windows were smashed, so he was probably getting enough sunlight and exercise.
    4
  6239. It's a good starting point on the battle, but once you've read it, get Glantz's Stalingrad book (if you haven't already)
    4
  6240. Thanks Stefano! With Crusader, I'm trying to do a bit of both, first by creating the big picture, then flavouring it with the individual stories. Bit like this video where I still gave the wider picture before the details. Hopefully it works out.
    4
  6241. 02:33 watch for a few seconds
    4
  6242. How do you not get it? The official stance was 24 men held out for 58 days. This wasn't true.
    4
  6243. They described him as witty and always smiling. But unfortunately I don't know what Pavlov thought about the house being named after him
    4
  6244. Making Monday's better since 2018 :)
    4
  6245. Unfortunately, there's no mention in the sources I have :(
    4
  6246. The information in the video came from the sources listed in the pinned comment. Can you please list your sources? Some of what you've said is certainly questionable - 1) My sources list them as Captains. This could simply be a language translation issue, but nothing to get upset about. 2) It is disputed how they took the house, but not a single one of the sources I have say the house was captured the way you described it. 3) Assuming all these facts are true, these only add to the story, not dispute anything said in the video. 4) The official account of the siege ended after 58 days because Pavlov was wounded and carted off. But the siege continued until the 10th of January, when Dragan's garrison was ordered to go north. You say there's no house garrison after that date, but this is incorrect as stated in the video, by one of the veterans of the house. 5) "Soviet newspapers used "Pavlov's house" name because it is the name which was on the maps at the time." No, it wasn't called that on their maps; I said this in the video. And not only is that confirmed in my sources, but since the publication of this video, French historian Anton Joly also confirms this https://youtu.be/kJ0QtCuJSN4
    4
  6247. Good luck! I can't get through to them, but maybe you can.
    4
  6248. It's not a coincidence.
    4
  6249. Sometimes truth is not a compromise. For example, if someone says that the moon is made of cheese, they're wrong. No amount of compromise will ever make them correct in this circumstance. Again, you are incorrect in assuming that it's ONLY used for analysis. No, it's not. And Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism are cults, not a means of arriving at the "Truth". By "Truth", you mean exactly what the Fascists say when they talk about "Truth". You've got a naive view of what dialectics are. Thus, you are incorrect in your assessment. A much fairer analysis is not possible while you stubbornly stick to your incorrect illusion.
    4
  6250. I've replied to thousands of detailed criticism over the years, and most of them just repeat what previous critics have said. Most of it is just "muh roads", or "you don't know anything", "TIK thinks [something outlandish I didn't say]", "muh Wikipedia says", or they just resort to insults, or similar. Like OP, who hasn't provided an actual argument, just dismissal. I've got screenshots of comments where I've gone back and forth, over and over, with people using ZERO sources, denying ALL the evidence I bring forth from multiple sources, even denying quotes from the people they believe in who say the opposite to them. The doublethink is unreal, and honestly I've given up responding to most of them. The only reason I'm responding to this now is because I'm curious to hear an actual counter argument. Two of you have yet to provide one, despite being asked.
    4
  6251. This is the thing I'm struggling with. I want to help people see through the lies and break free of the nonsense, but it's difficult because they've been programmed to shut down all thinking, won't listen, and instantly come back with counter arguments. You can pile the evidence upon them but it doesn't matter, they've already decided you're wrong. I'm genuinely stumped on what to do.
    4
  6252. Yes, capitalism is bad, which is why we need neither socialism nor capitalism. What we need is a free market.
    4
  6253. If you removed the bureaucracy from business, the workers would get paid the same, because workers' wages are calculated via supply and demand, just like every other commodity in the economy. If the business was run for profit (which they're not anymore, since profit is heavily taxed) then there would be an incentive to cut the fat. If middle managers were useless, they wouldn't exist in a profit based system, since they're eating into the profit. I could go into dialectic materialism and all that, but I don't think you're truly listening, so I'll not bother.
    4
  6254. Yep, capitalism is bad. The solution isn't more capitalism though like the Marxists want, it's more liberty. We need a free market.
    4
  6255. That's the only way to learn.
    4
  6256. Everyone is biased, which is why you must use as many sources as possible to try to overcome it... Also I don't expect everyone to agree with me all the time. In fact, I encourage you not too
    4
  6257. This video goes into a 44 minute discussion on the statistics that proves this argument correct https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    4
  6258. Yes except lend lease didn't really become a major factor until 1943, prior to that it wasn't substantial enough to make as big a difference as you claim.
    4
  6259. Should have been "Most People's Perception of the WW2 Eastern Front is Wrong" but that's not as catchy :P Stalingrad is taking up most of my time at the minute, but I do want to continue to make videos like these. Sadly, it's a question of balancing these types of videos vs working on Stalingrad :(
    4
  6260. Thank you for informing me, I've just unsubscribed from the guy. Wasn't really watching his content anyway so there's no loss. However, having been a socialist myself, I know it's pointless trying to get through to someone who is. I've tried numerous times, but when they see you as inherently evil and wrong, there's nothing you can do about it. No logic, reason, evidence, or persuasion can overcome religious mysticism. A response would only create unnecessary conflict over a matter that will just entrench both audiences, and I've nothing to gain from such a thing. I will say that I've been trying to come up with a solution to the problem of getting through to socialists, making them see the hole that they're in. In fact, I've been working on this problem today... However, I've yet to figure out a solution. Until I'm confident that there is a way to get through to them, engaging in a "debate" with them is pointless. If he's using 5 sources and twisting the data, then he has zero respect for the evidence for this reality, and is, instead, believing it's "mind over matter". I cannot engage in a debate with such a person.
    4
  6261. Yes, but there were bottlenecks of supply and massive distances in the East, plus the road and rail network in the west was much more able to cope.
    4
  6262. Don't worry, I'll survive
    4
  6263. Glad you liked it!
    4
  6264. I do have other areas - I mean, I've done videos on the inter-war period already. However I'm open to suggestions. What periods of history interest you the most?
    4
  6265. Perhaps I'm pessimistic, but I think any new party will either be suppressed or become corrupted, and be the same as the current ones
    4
  6266. My name is Lewis Barton. I made my full name public in the opening credits of the Market Garden video, which was a mistake in hindsight. But there's no reason to hide it now!
    4
  6267. What are you afraid of? Why are you so dismissive of perspectives other than the messages approved by the Left? Surely, in order to fully weigh up who is right or wrong, a deep dive in the opposing viewpoints are necessary so that you can judge the arguments by their merits and flaws? I'm not saying you have to agree with Rothbard, but I would ask that you read the first 55 pages, which is enough to explain the main premise of his explanation on inflation. I'm not sure how long that is in the audiobook version, but there's no reason to be scared of (or enraged by) an alternative viewpoint. Of course, we both know why you're enraged and instantly willing to dismiss other views. As an ex-socialist myself, I was in the same boat as you. It's difficult to admit that you don't actually know what the arguments for free market economics actually are, and you're concerned that your current world view might not actually be the correct one. Your subconscious knows this, which is why it's so dismissive - a defence mechanism designed to protect a fragile ego. Remain a socialist. Don't change. But I ask you not to assume anything and actually give these books a chance: "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, and the aforementioned "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. I have answers to all your questions, but you'd do better to read these been and figure it out by yourself. And no, this will not be a waste of time: it could be the best thing you ever do for yourself.
    4
  6268. Common Weal, not Common Wealth. And if you're trying to make a jab at the Commonwealth, sure be my guest. Just because I'm forced to pay taxes doesn't mean I'm loyal to this race-collectivist regime.
    4
  6269. Socialism is bad whether the Nazis are socialist or not. But I'm forced to defend history from the socialists who are willing to deny and distort history to prop up their religion. I will stand by the evidence whether they accept it or not.
    4
  6270. Just do a few hours a day. Every day. Make it a habit. If you did 3 hours of focused study a day, that would be 21 hours per week, which is lot of hours. The secret is to do it little but often.
    4
  6271. If you haven't realized it by now, yes.
    4
  6272. I'm glad you like the idea! For some people it may be surprising to hear but I enjoy admitting my mistakes and debating things, so I really enjoyed making this video :)
    4
  6273. Someone was surprised when I pointed out that Craig's book wasn't fiction, unlike the film
    4
  6274. Yes, I recognize some usernames/thumbnails from ages ago :)
    4
  6275. That's interesting! Do you have a source for those consumptions??
    4
  6276. I'm hopeful the eugenics video will be out next week, or maybe the week after. It's been a difficult one, and I've actually changed my mind on the whole thing since I last mentioned it
    4
  6277.  @grathem9789  My friends and family worry about me too, but the show must go on
    4
  6278. Haha I've been to Turkey and they're a good bunch. The issue is their government, which is the problem with every country.
    4
  6279. Well, I certainly hope that's the case, because I have a feeling that most historians take a dim view of video-content. I don't think any of them are watching (or very few). Perhaps the upcoming generation of historians will be different, and I like to think that my videos might make some of them see the benefits of video documentaries done right.
    4
  6280. Ahhh wait, yes I do. They've updated it! Fantastic
    4
  6281. You might be waiting a while, since we've not even got to Operation Uranus yet!
    4
  6282. Also, there was only one railway line from Egypt to the front, and they extended it for Crusader!
    4
  6283. Cheers Pablo! Hope you enjoy it :)
    4
  6284. It was only this long because the script sorta dictated it. I could have chopped it up a bit more but people don't like them too short. I'm thinking 30 mins is about right though.
    4
  6285. Yes, I was a bit surprised too to hear that the weather was this bad in North Africa during winter. I'd imagine it got a bit chilly in the evenings, but not this bad. But this mud will come into play in tomorrow's episode in a somewhat hilarious way... I won't spoil it for you.
    4
  6286. Gott knows!
    4
  6287. Corporations are not private, and the only reason public corporations are as big as they are is because the central bank and central state creates fiat currency out of thin air and gives it to them, then makes laws that stamp out their competition. If the market was actually allowed to function without government intervention, there could never be a monopoly, and corporations wouldn't be as huge as they currently are. In fact, many of the ones currently in existence would go out of business in a heartbeat because they're unprofitable. They're zombia corporations that can only make profit in a low interest rate and quantitative easing environment. Take those things away and goodbye corporations.
    4
  6288. Recessions are caused by the central banks, which Keynes is calling for, as explained here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs?si=6YcftBP2hyTQtRiQ
    4
  6289. A socialist is someone who wants to destroy private property in order to get to some kind of utopia (usually a money-less society). Since the free market can't deliver them to this, they employ the state to make it so. Hitler had the exact same aims as the Marxists he despised. His method of getting to Eden was different, but ultimately he wanted to take the land and resources of the East in order to create his money-less, class-less utopia.
    4
  6290. I agree. However I'm not going to ban them personally (even though I have the power to hide their comments). I think both Aiden and Mike McMike are so ignorant and insane that they're actually funny. I like to claim that they're working for the C C P as pro-commie trolls, which frustrates them so much (probably because it's true, it wouldn't surprise me)! In fact, I've just replied to Aiden directly saying "keep being you". Definitely not worth arguing with because they're not actually listening, but a good way of reminding ourselves that some people really can't grasp even the simplest of concepts, or tie their own shoe laces without a government bureaucrat from China doing it for them.
    4
  6291. Perhaps I've been "nationalised" by them, which is definitely not the same as "socialised" or anything!
    4
  6292. I actually know more about economics and politics than I do the battle stuff. It's just the battle stuff is more entertaining, and interesting in it's own right. The reason I'm getting flak online is because I'm a threat to the Socialist religion, due to the fact I understand it (being an ex-socialist) and being the fact I'm willing to put the work in. Everything I say is backed up by sources. And I've shown my critics regarding this topic to be nothing other than liars and slanderers. That's why I'm getting a lot of flak. It has nothing to do with the "no proper qualifications" because that's untrue too. A simple read of the description will show you that I have a degree in history. I just happen to think that my degree (like all qualifications backed by the State) are worthless.
    4
  6293. In Hitler's mind, Jews weren't German, and he treated them just like how the Marxists treated the bourgeoisie.
    4
  6294. "must have missed all of the instances where two black people passed their genes down to their white babies." Having the traits of your ancestors doesn't equal "race". Race is nothing more than a social construct. We are the human race (specifically, the human species).
    4
  6295. Yeah I know, but I do think it's worth watching the last ten minutes if you can
    4
  6296. The Hitler's Socialism video (5 hour one) was a response to numerous other channels and commenters and Redditors. That's why it was 5 hours long, mentioned people like the Finnish Bolshevik and that Mouse guy who's a socialist (forgot his name) and others. That's also why I titled it "Defeating the Denialist Counter Arguments" because I was directly responding to their counter arguments. But you see, that doesn't count because you assumed that it wasn't a response video. Well, you're wrong. Watch it https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6297. Yes, and I addressed Evan's argument in the Hitler's Socialism video, which is why I keep saying people need to watch it before they try and make weak counterarguments that have already been addressed
    4
  6298. The Nazis were the Socialists. And guess what, I covered the Night of the Long Knives in my Hitler's Socialism video. There's even a timestamp for that. And guess what, it destroys your counter argument because, guess what again, I've heard this counter argument a thousand times before. I would recommend that you stop spreading the factually incorrect statement that the Nazis murdered the Socialists during the Night of the Long Knives because that's a blatant distortion of history, as you will see if you watch the Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And again, the Marxist Socialists exclude the bourgeoisie in their "paradise", and the Nazis exclude the Js. So to argue that Socialism should benefit all is simply untrue because it doesn't. In fact, I've done a video on Karl Marx and his hatred of the "bourgeoisie" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  6299. First time in ages that I've had to report + ban someone for both false and baseless accusations, and mass reporting my videos as a way to get the channel censored. While people might disagree with my views on Hitler's ideology, I'm not a Fascist, not a Nazi, not a Marxist, and not a racist. I don't deny the Holocaust - I've done several videos on it, trying to defend the history of it too - and I'm not "promoting genocide". I don't like banning people because I'm pro-free speech. But when the person is actively trying to get me banned on a platform that's pro-censorship, I'm forced to step in.
    4
  6300.  @thedj3319  "Pre-Marx socialism dealt with class." No it didn't. Pre-Marxist Socialism had nothing to do with class. It was all about social ownership of the means of production. - "ALL Socialism deals with class because social ownership of the means of production- the central tenet of Socialism- is impossible without overcoming class barriers." No, class is irrelevant to socialism. Again, you're basing the everything on the Marxist interpretation of Socialism. Well, as I said, Hitler isn't a Marxist, he was a Socialist. And even then, he was trying to overcome the class crisis - so even if we accepted your incorrect interpretation, Hitler would still be a Socialist. - "Mate. Read carefully, because your conceptions are extremely skewed." Incorrect, you're not grasping the concepts here. Socialism has NOTHING to do with Class. Only Marxist Socialism cares about Class. Class doesn't even exist - it's a made up concept. We are individuals, not groups. There are no "classes". We are all individuals. So your argument is invalid.
    4
  6301.  @ExceptionalPleb  That's definitely something I should do
    4
  6302. I actually want to start calling myself something else which will really annoy them... but I'm going to leave that surprise for the future
    4
  6303. Wow, awesome! I wish more people would leave the Donkey and the Elephant and start doing what you're doing. In our elections here in the UK over the last week or so, I spoiled my ballot papers in protest for all the main parties. I hope you enjoyed the last few minutes of this video because I imagine it was right down your street :D
    4
  6304. I think it was designed to be annoying, but I don't get why they chose that particular word. I'm sure they could have come up with something more creative
    4
  6305. I know, but I really can't accept the idea of just giving up on people. I used to be as blind to the reality as they were. My hope is that I can figure out a way of getting through to them. And someone else in the comments has said that I managed to get through to him, so it's certainly possible.
    4
  6306. Exactly!
    4
  6307.  @roelhodzelmans1004  Yeah, Stalingrad is next week, and I will be doing more 'tank' videos for a while.
    4
  6308. He was against Marxism, not Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6309. I'm currently not sure if I have all my audience on board with the idea of Hitler's Socialism. So, my mission at the moment is to consolidate my own audience, get them all on board, do more reading, more videos, provide more evidence, and then consider my options. I think you and other viewers of both channels need to see both sides of the debate, then come to your own conclusions. It sounds like you already have, which is great! But more need to do it. I do think the weight of evidence is on my side, but the popularity of "Hitler's Capitalism" is on their side. And if their audience acts like the two guys did in this video, it's pointless to even try to engage them
    4
  6310. Coincidentally, the Mises Institute actually released a post about the topic of mainstream propaganda saying how "the free market" is behind all the bad in the economy, even though we've not got free markets and haven't had any https://mises.org/wire/we-cannot-build-economy-lies
    4
  6311. That's not what happened
    4
  6312. As I said in the video, corporations aren't 'private', they're 'public'. And since 'public/social control of the means of production' is socialism, then state + big business = socialism
    4
  6313. Turks were not interested, which I don't blame them considering what happened in WW1
    4
  6314. When the scripts are finished, which they're not. I have been working on them though, don't worry.
    4
  6315. I like "tanks giving"! I'm going to use that 😂
    4
  6316. You admit you're a Communist/Socialism. The issue is that this is fundamentally pro-State. You'll deny this, but it's true. Submitting to society is submitting to the State. Society and the State are one and the same thing, as I've explained in depth in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6317. See! TIK doesn't know anything about the Table of Elephants! He should stick to ants!
    4
  6318. I've just upgraded the CPU fan (which works because I tested it this morning before finally realising it was the PSU), and it's halved the CPU temperature (about 33 degrees idle now). But yes, I think I've caught the PSU in time. This was actually my own build from a few years back, so the Dell issue shouldn't be a problem. Once the PSU is here out I'm going to back everything up immediately before proceeding to finish the video and render, just in case. I do have backups but not of the latest couple videos. Would hate to have everything wiped.
    4
  6319. You mean like some other YouTubers do? Nah, I feel bad as it is that I don't use many primary sources as it is, so the last thing I want to do is start relying on tertiary sources!
    4
  6320. Ah ok, I will grab some. Books like that can still be useful (dates and times, events etc), even if they're biased or have an agenda, you just need to be careful with the interpretation.
    4
  6321. And this is how easy it is to misinterpret a source ;)
    4
  6322. Thanks Gaslight! I've still been working on stuff. I've actually been very productive with a new video series idea that I think everyone will like. But working on paper isn't ideal. And if dual monitors aren't enough for me, working off a phone is almost impossible!
    4
  6323. Excellent! Good luck with it :)
    4
  6324. Many historians praised Irving in the early days because Irving was only exposed later. Context is key. That said, Zitelmann's book has little to do with the H (censoring my speech to get around YouTube filters) so your point is irrelevant.
    4
  6325. Elimination of the bourgeoisie is "equality", is it? Oh that's right, it's only "equality" for the "workers", just like National Socialism only grants "equality" to the "Aryans".
    4
  6326. Because when I started learning it I quickly realized I couldn't spare the time to keep going. There's not enough time in the day to do what I'm doing already and then learn a language on top of that. I don't remember the last time I had a full day off.
    4
  6327. Because Marxist propagandists can't differentiate between Fascism and National Socialism, which are two distinct ideologies as I explained here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6328. "Hitler’s Germany was neither state socialist, nor market capitalist, but rather monopolist capitalism." Except it wasn't capitalist. Read the Vampire Economy by Günter Reimann. - "The giant trusts and major war industries, along with all heavy industry was privately owned" Nope, that's the lie that the Marxists keep spouting. After the National Socialist revolution, the Nazis seized the industries in all but name. They threw out the old owners and replaced them with National Socialist Party members. The State had seized control of the industries in a process they called "Gleichschaltung" (synchronization, as in synchronization with the State). I've been over this in the Hitler's Socialism video which people keep ignoring https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 - "but like many Western nations today, was heavily subsidized by the State." Yes, because Lord Baron Keynes copied heavily from the National Socialist economists when he drew up his economic Fascist economic doctrine. - "Garnering enormous profits from these subsidies, they obviously had to be subservient to the whims of the Reich government." Correct. So they weren't privatized, were they? If they have to obey the orders of the State, the don't have private ownership or control of their businesses, proving that it's not capitalism.
    4
  6329. Has he nationalised the industries in all but name under a policy similar to the National Socialist "Gleichshaltung" (synchronisation) policy?
    4
  6330. I explain the difference between Fascism and Nazism in this 39 minute video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6331.  Hermann Göring  No. Learn your history https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6332. He actually says something like that in the new introduction
    4
  6333. It's pointless because they don't watch them. They just click on the videos, down vote, leave a "stick to tanks" comment, and then disappear.
    4
  6334. Sounds about right. They don't want to acknowledge it. It triggers them before they've even considered the points being made.
    4
  6335. It's the other way around. The evidence clearly points in the direction that Hitler was a Social Revolutionary who didn't believe in Marxist Socialism. But historians can't accept this and so ignore the Social Revolutionary part, which is why their explanation of National Socialism and Fascism leaves much to be desired. "It's hard to define because it doesn't stand for anything," is not how real historians should behave, and yet they do, and you continue to believe them simply because they are the majority. History isn't a popularity contest, nor is it a realm fit only for the Marxist faithful.
    4
  6336. The series will end in E51
    4
  6337. Can't say "s u i c i d e", and I'm not sure about "seppuku", so got to be creative 😁
    4
  6338. Have to put on a voice to stop the Marxists taking my audio and claiming I'm something that I'm not.
    4
  6339. You were third, unfortunately!
    4
  6340. Well done!
    4
  6341. I've not heard that before, and none of the sources I used mentioned that, so I would assume it's more of a post-event-hindsight outlook on the events. That said, evidence may be out there to support it... but until it's brought to light, assume it's not the case.
    4
  6342. The creeping progress of 30 Corps? You do realise that 30 Corps reached Nijmegen at the beginning of day three, and had the rest of the day to go to get to Arnhem (just a few more miles further). They'd gone 50 miles by this point. Yet, it would take them 36 hours to take the bridge in Nijmegen. A bridge that should have and could have been captured on day 1. The myth that 30 Corps was too slow came from the same people who should have been blamed for the failure for not taking the Nijmegen Bridge? Coincidence? Worse, Sosabowski and the Polish got the blame - which is completely false. Your point about the Germans being at the Nijmegen bridge already is false. There was only a handful (perhaps a dozen men) at the Nijmegen bridge on day 1. After the 7 and a half hour delay, one para battalion finally moved towards the Nijmegen bridge. As they approached the bridge, THAT is when the Germans arrived in lorries from the north. They also didn't blow the bridge because the paras managed to take the post office, that had the detonator - and they did this after a 7 and a half hour delay. If they'd gone straight to the bridge, with the element of surprise, there's no way the dozen Germans at the bridge would have resisted. The only bridge not taken on day 1, complete or destroyed, was the Nijmegen bridge. That failure was made by Gavin, Browning, or possibly Lindquist. That is the historical debate here. Had the bridge been taken, 30 Corps would have been north of Nijmegen on day 3, and possibly have linked up with Frost on day 3 also. If not, by day 4. This would have meant British tanks would have been across the Rhine on day 3 or 4 of the operation. But because they couldn't get across the bridge until after the 36 hour delay at Nijmegen, Frost's battalion was overwhelmed, and the operation was doomed.
    4
  6343. True, although he did dismiss the intelligence officer (who was called Brian Urquhart - not Roy Urquhart who commanded 1st Airborne Division). Perhaps he didn't actually know how much armour was actually in the Arnhem area.
    4
  6344. Used to play HOI3 and 4, but I rarely get time now, and when I do I'm never in the mood for WW2 games because I spend most days studying WW2 stuff. HOI4 but with HOI3's OOB would be a great game. I miss the HOI3 OOB :(
    4
  6345. @Leonardo Gomes - Well he's going to be disappointed when I point out to him that there's only me here and I take orders from no one
    4
  6346. "Is there anyone who still doesn't realize that tik is being 'directed' ?" Go on, I'll bite. Who am I being 'directed' by?
    4
  6347. 😁
    4
  6348. Okay, and now explain the alternative point of view, that the mind is part of reality, not separate from it.
    4
  6349. I think it's gibberish. Why don't you explain why it isn't?
    4
  6350. As I said at the end of that video, I'm not sure Samaan is that reliable. In this instance I haven't had time to verify that claim, but I do intend to at some point.
    4
  6351. +YOYO MAN that's the Russian language version. He was Georgian!
    4
  6352. No worries, I really enjoy talking about Operation Market Garden :)
    4
  6353. Glad you liked it! The aim in this series is to include as many details as possible without going overboard, and try keep things simple. Not always possible, but that's the aim :)
    4
  6354. If you think this is long, don't watch my Operation Crusader or Battlestorm Stalingrad series...
    4
  6355. If you haven't realised already from several of my videos, no I don't think Churchill was the greatest British person ever. He was a good statesman, politician and figurehead, but his impatience and military bumbling lead to numerous disasters and in my opinion prolongued the Western Desert Campaign. That's not to say he was "bad" or not right for the country at the time, but neither would I say it's right to appoint an alcoholic as the greatest Brit ever.
    4
  6356. Thanks! The British Army really is barmy. Everything they come up with (plans, units, tanks, equipment) seems to be put together by superglue and sellotape. A bit like my videos really. Just realised that only one of my Battlestorm videos does not involve the British in some way or another, and that was the one on Fort Eben Emael. May have to do more non-British stuff in the future... like Stalingrad!
    4
  6357. I don't know enough about the Air War to state my opinion on the effectiveness of strategic bombing. If I'm honest, I've only really been interested in land warfare, while only being interested in air or sea power if it affected the land battle. However, this video has peaked my interest in the Air War, so I'm starting to come around to the idea of looking into it. In fact, earlier today I ordered my first Air-War specific book ever - "Stopped at Stalingrad: Luftwaffe and Hitler's Defeat in the East, 1942-43 (Modern War Studies)"
    4
  6358. "TIK is a neo-liberal shill, he’s slowly exposing his agenda..." Sorry for wanting everyone to be free, rather than slaves.
    4
  6359. Except both the Soviets and the Germans wanted to expand their territories, made demands of Poland that she wasn't willing to make, then destroyed her.
    4
  6360. "Not everyone who sees themselves as socialist opposes free markets, and socialists don't have to be antisemitic or Marxist." A socialist who doesn't oppose the free market doesn't know what socialism is.
    4
  6361. Third! But probably first from the Czech republic!
    4
  6362. Yeah I've not made a video on that yet. I'll be honest, I got about half way through the "Greatest Story" and I was like "no wonder it was never told because this is a load of garbage!" It's so bad, I genuinely don't know why the Nazis are so obsessed with it. Like, surely if you're going to try and promote your own ideology via a video, you'd actually make a well-crafted video rather than something so paper-thin. Random people were talking and it didn't even say who they were. It's like a poor copy of a badly made TV documentary - and they're bad enough as they are!
    4
  6363. lol ok
    4
  6364. It's not a 5-star book (I do say that in the video). But it's definitely not a 1-star either. On Amazon I'd probably give it 3-stars, but only because I've read a lot on WW2 and had already come to this conclusion, so to me it wasn't super-useful. Maybe if I was new to the topic I would have found it more useful and given it a 4-star rating
    4
  6365. Halder wrote in his diary on the 3rd of July 1941 that they had won the war. They expected a short knock-out blow, and had planned for that. The Soviet Union didn't collapse and kept on fighting, the Axis plans went out the window and left them with no alternative but to fight a more attrition-based war which favoured their enemies.
    4
  6366. @John Whitesell  Good to hear that Arch is back! That's brightened my day ☺️ and I enjoy the 40k fluff, but I'm not sure it would suit this channel
    4
  6367. That's a pretty good idea! Thanks! I did have music in the background of the first episodes, but people complained so I got rid of it. Then people complained I got rid of it... Can't win, and I assume it would be the same if I put battle sounds in the video too. Plus I'd have to make them myself somehow in order to avoid copyright strikes... May be more effort than it's worth unfortunately :(
    4
  6368. Really!? Hahaha wow okay. That's surprising because I don't actually have many Russian viewers (although there are some)
    4
  6369. That... might make sense! I knew about the calendar difference ( evidence https://youtu.be/4ajIw5DQPjU ) but hadn't thought about it with regards to this issue. I will do some calculations...
    4
  6370. The vast majority of people only want quick, stupid summaries where the author plays it safe. This is not that, which is why the series so far has not performed particularly well, whereas my video talking about what the 6th Army had to eat gets tons of views
    4
  6371.  @paduapeted49  Not at the right scale, unfortunately! But the Close Combat maps for the CC5 mod on Stalingrad were pretty decent
    4
  6372. Thank you for the recommendation - I've ordered it 👍
    4
  6373. I haven't seen that video. I believe one he talked about was Sosabowski? He remained in Britain after the war
    4
  6374. I'm despised by the Marxists and other Leftist benefit scroungers for daring to say that Hitler was a Socialist, so that's a swing and a miss.
    4
  6375. I did a video on Franco, which did mention the Civil War, but I didn't do maps or anything like I did in this video https://youtu.be/0d7Kcf_pPiM
    4
  6376. Good idea!
    4
  6377. Auchinleck did a lot for this battle, and without him the British wouldn't have lost. But I think I was looking more at the negatives that impacted the battle rather than the positives, which is why I left him out at the end.
    4
  6378. Yes, I have fixed it. Thanks for pointing that out!
    4
  6379. Sorry sorry, I meant "Roman wannabees" ;)
    4
  6380. @Andrew - yes, I saw that video before. I think that's the best outcome if they make a Patreon-like service which sticks to its own Terms of Service.
    4
  6381. Thanks Yoshi! And Yathy, I don't think bitcoin is the right solution lol
    4
  6382. Yeah, that's why I'm biding my time. I can last a short while, but it's ruined my plans. I was going to hire an editor in January to help make my videos (thus be able to make more per week - or better quality videos), but I won't be able to do that now.
    4
  6383. "This classic study, first published in 1976 and the third volume of a trilogy, is reproduced here in its original form. The other volumes in this trilogy are Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution and Wall Street and FDR." - Amazon description. Seems as though Wall Street is financing a lot of socialism around the world.
    4
  6384. It absolutely is
    4
  6385. Haha yes, a lot of people asked me. In the end I just had to do it
    4
  6386. Well, thank you Serafim :)
    4
  6387. A definition can be found here http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/self.html "A man’s self is his mind—the faculty that perceives reality, forms judgments, chooses values."
    4
  6388. Originally, that's how I viewed it in the Lenin video - a lack of a father figure. Altruism and "equality" are not masculine ideas. (I'm not saying they're feminine ideas as such, just that they're not masculine.) However, it's more of a rejection of strong male role-models then a lack of them. Mussolini had a good relationship with his father as far as I can tell. The question then becomes: was Alessandro a "strong" male role-model for young Benito?
    4
  6389. Well, if you're going to go down that path, I'd suggest reading "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
    4
  6390. I never said that 🤨
    4
  6391. Socialists believe that the end stage of capitalism results in revolution, because the poor will get poorer until they've had enough and rise up in revolt. So, if we have social reform, the poor will be happier, and we won't get to the end stage of capitalism nor have a revolution. Therefore, Lenin concluded that he wasn't going to help the poor or advocate for social reform, thinking that this would bring us to the end stage of capitalism. And because his logic is correct, which is why I said we won't have a Socialist revolution unless we have a free market. I then (tongue in cheek) said that Anarcho-Capitalists are the real socialists, because they're helping bring the revolution quicker (according to socialist logic).
    4
  6392. The German workers owned the means of production. The Public Sector is the state, and the German workers' state owned the means of production. I've shown this to be the case in numerous videos with copious amounts of sources. You can ignore the evidence all you like, but it's you who is ignorant here.
    4
  6393. Hey Vass! I need to start reading about stuff on the American Civil War... I've never looked into it, but I'm tempted to do some videos on it at some point. Also on the Holodomor, because yes it was bad for the Ukraine (and other areas of the Soviet economy). I think some will survive this current crisis, but it's going to be very very very bad afterwards... Economically, our leaders are destroying the economy
    4
  6394. "TIK no I agree with you on most things but i disagree with the notion that all state is bad." I think you misunderstand. Let me try again: I'm not anti-State. I'm anti-theft. IF the State wasn't stealing resources from society, but actually creating things like the rest of us have to, then it's fine.
    4
  6395. Haha - people seem to forget that I've always been controversial, right from Operation Market Garden onwards :) cheers!
    4
  6396. @Mark Young - I'm not sure off the top of my head, although I'd imagine Nazi-State issued bonds weren't honoured after the war, since the Reichsbank was dissolved. Could be wrong though.
    4
  6397. Glad to have you along for the ride :) obviously the US "purge" wasn't as bloody as the Stalinist one, but the point was that they were also removing officers from the ranks during a mobilization effort and that didn't affect them, so why would it affect the Red Army? Just wanted to put things into perspective, since a lot of documentaries and even books don't seem to do that
    4
  6398. "you should consider turning the music up a little in the background during editing" I actually turned it down for this video because a couple of people complained it was too high! :(
    4
  6399. Cheers Neil! I certainly had some fun making it so I'm glad you liked it
    4
  6400. A good portion of the information came from other books, plus I think video is better overall anyway. I have considered writing a book on some other battle though... maybe one day
    4
  6401. I'm working on the Courland Pocket next, coming in February. After that at some point will be Battlestorm Stalingrad
    4
  6402. @Derek you're correct, although I would also point out that language barriers are big issue in general. Luckily, the internet seems to be bridging the gap a little. That said, there are many people taking advantage of this innovation to spread myths and distortions faster than anyone can correct them.
    4
  6403. Haha yes! Be sure to check out the follow up video on Pienaar https://youtu.be/LlOZdrvnIfk
    4
  6404. akgeronimo501 Nobody here is defending the British army. The British army was awful during WW1 and still suffered (mostly) under poor leadership during WW2. But riddle me this. XXX Corps was on time when they reached Nijmegen. Then they were 36 hours behind schedule after the Nijmegen bridge finally fell. What caused this delay? This is the ultimate question. Why was there such a delay at Nijmegen?
    4
  6405. akgeronimo501 Gary's not a Brit. And why are you arguing so much to defend Gavin? Is it because you're from the USA? Or is it because you're disputing the evidence I'm presenting to you - evidence I pulled from several books on the subject? Let's face it, you're defending Gavin because you're American. Well, I'm a "Brit" and yet I think Churchill was an awful leader who was responsible for several disasters in both wars, Gallipoli being probably the worst. He had his good points and his bad points, just like everyone else. But overall - as a military strategist - I'd say he did a bad job. I haven't studied Montgomery enough yet to come to a definite conclusion about him. But I'm not liking what I'm seeing so far. I prove he was lying in the video I linked to you in the other message (repost here just for benefit of others https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM) and I'm certain that he wasn't as good as he made himself out to be. It appears he wasn't as good as O'Connor was during Operation Compass https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk In Gavin's case, he was a good airborne leader... who made a big mistake in this battle. That's not a slight against 'Merica, nor against Gavin as a person, that's just an argument that makes a lot of sense given the evidence. I want to find the truth as to what happened during these battles. There's no point reading history "to defend the Brits" if it doesn't show me the truth. In fact, I was debating whether to change my conclusion to blame Browning because I was scared of the backlash I'd get if I concluded it was Gavin's fault. Then I remembered that the purpose of me making this was to find the truth and I'd do myself injustice if I didn't say what I found. At the end I say "new evidence could come along and sweep away the conclusions we make today". Hopefully that happens because then I can create another Market Garden documentary disputing my original :)
    4
  6406. I called Stalin and the Soviet regime evil in the video. Looks like you didn't watch to that point.
    4
  6407. Yes, the Red Army in total on day 1 of the war had 4,901,800 men, but as stated only 2,743,000 were at the front. The Wehrmacht has around 7,309,000 men in 1941 (not sure which exact date with this statistic) but only 3,118,910 at the front on day 1 of the war. I can't possibly respond to every comment. Only reason I'm responding today is because I'm feeling ill, so stopped working earlier than normal, freeing me up to reply to people. But I can't possibly reply to all.
    4
  6408. Wow thank you Valentin! :) and it was my pleasure to make this, so I'm glad you and everyone else are liking it
    4
  6409. Do you have a source for your claim that 2 million Soviets surrounded the 6th Army at Stalingrad? I think you'll find that it was much less than that. Also, Paulus's 6th Army outnumbered Chuikov's 62nd Army throughout the Battle of Stalingrad and yet managed to hold out for several months.
    4
  6410. Yes, and coupled with the fact that the Soviets had enough reserves of rifles, and were producing more, the lack of rifle thing makes no sense. Yes, the units did arrive with a lack of rifles, but they got them shortly after. And it's doubtful that the men who had no weapons found themselves in the thick of the fighting.
    4
  6411. Numerous comments have just been deleted from this thread and several commenters banned from commenting on the entire channel. I will no longer tolerate far-left or far-right propaganda, denialists, or people being abusive to others in my comment sections. If you see anything like this, let me know and I'll delete and/or ban asap.
    4
  6412. I can give you several examples of officers being shot for retreating in Stalingrad alone - and their men weren't shot in these circumstances either. And as I said in the video, Stalin and his regime were brutal, but there's no point in making stuff up in order to paint Stalin worse than he already was. Order 227 has been used to exaggerate the Soviet regime's brutality - but the Order 227 portrayed in the film Enemy at the Gates is fiction, and isn't even based on the book by the same name.
    4
  6413. "Separating Myth from Math" would annoy some math tutors when they realise I'm talking history and not hard sums ;)
    4
  6414. Stalin was evil, and socialism / communism doesn't work.
    4
  6415. I don't think anything. It's in black and white. It's implied that the Soviets slaughtered 13,500 of their own men inside Stalingrad. That's not the case. The fact that you have to read another source (in your case, Reader's Digest issue 1973) should tell you that Beevor has not made the distinction clear. Not everyone who picks up Beevor's book (new readers to WW2 or Stalingrad especially) are going to know the difference between the 62nd Army and the Stalingrad Front.
    4
  6416. That's only because of the beginning of the video. The thing is, I have to mention the war of annihilation for the desperation and the morale factor to make sense. This was a war of survival for the Soviet peoples, so they resorted to anything and everything in order to survive. Of course, all sides committed atrocities. I don't want anyone to think I'm siding one side or another.
    4
  6417. That is the split between Army Groups A and B and, as I show in the video, only one division is between those points.
    4
  6418. He won't because the current pinned comment contains the sources used in the video and it has to be there. However I will heart your comment for the attempt 🙂
    4
  6419. If I can find sources on them, yes. German official history for 1942 had just two pages on them :(
    4
  6420. You didn't watch until the end of the video
    4
  6421. Don't mind me, just deleting some "Alt-Right" (Nazi) and extreme-left comments and banning their accounts. My policy now is zero toleration for said people. If you see any comments denying the Holocaust or the Holodomor etc, let me know.
    4
  6422. If he's spreading lies, then you can call him out for it by simply saying "show me your sources, otherwise you're wrong". You can say where he's going wrong if you want. But swearing and calling him names actually makes your opponent look like he's won (unless he's also swearing and calling you names). If you're both swearing and calling each other names, you may as well stop commenting completely because what's the point? You won't convince anyone that you're right by acting like that.
    4
  6423. I do need to create a back-up channel on Rumble. It's on my list of things to do
    4
  6424. You were fifth, but good try!
    4
  6425. There's no such thing as "honour". It's not that I'm not familiar with it, but it's a concept used to control people, and once the victim sees they've been tricked, they'll never fall for such nonsense again in the future.
    4
  6426. Because it's impossible to just stick to the facts. Anyone who pretends that they're just sticking to the facts is being dishonest - all they're doing is hiding their biases from you, and you're mistakenly believing that they're not subtly pushing their interpretation upon you. I know for a fact that some of the other so-called "non-biased" or "objective" history YouTubers out there actually have extreme views, and their audiences have no idea. History theory makes clear that the historian should interpret the evidence. This interpretation requires a value judgement. To mitigate bias, the historian has to look at the evidence from all the different perspectives. This requires that the historian KNOW all perspectives. I was a socialist, and now I'm for the free markets. I've also studied Third Positionism extensively, and use all the evidence I can get my hands on, giving me numerous different perspectives. So, having an understanding of several different perspectives, I can make very informed judgements. I also always place the evidence and logic above everything else, and that's why I end up concluding the way I do. That's why people value my work. My "political" bias isn't actually political - it's evidence and logic based, unlike those pretending to be "objective", when in fact they are anything but. But this is why people don't like me. I'm not just going to accept faulty premises or poor logic. I'm not just going to assume something is true. And I have no problem calling out the false narratives when I see them. If you don't like it, tough. I'm not compromising the truth for your beliefs. Evidence and logic must come first.
    4
  6427. No. This is an extra video which needed to be made before Episode 50, so I could reference it in Episode 50.
    4
  6428. They don't need to burn books when the adherents of the faith self-censor.
    4
  6429. People may hate it, but I'm unwilling to not talk about something that's inherent within the topic at hand. I can't cover the military stuff without it - it's not possible, unless I want to distort history, which I don't.
    4
  6430. Yeah, there's a few like that. They're keen to dislike non-controversial videos for seemingly no reason and don't even say why... although this video may spark some controversy as a result of Part 3
    4
  6431. I'm glad you like Terri's voice! I think she does a good job of it. And yes, I need to try zoom out more often to show the overall picture, and it's something I'm aware of that I need to figure out - can't just randomly zoom out, it needs to fit into the script.
    4
  6432. It's similar to lego, but I was going for a papercraft style
    4
  6433. Oh don't worry, it's still there on that list of mine and I will do it at some point soon :) this time though, I'm going to try my hand at a BIG battle as I've been promising people I would for quite a while
    4
  6434. I'm glad you like it! And I'm glad I wasn't too far off :D I've seen pictures online that made me think it was a museum now. I was tempted to visit when I was doing the research for this, but that idea never materialised. I didn't mention the other units landing and taking the nearby bridges simply because I wanted to concentrate on the fort itself, but I am aware that they took the bridges. I read that one of the German fallschirmjägers got into trouble for talking about the operation before it began. He was forgiven after its success. I'm not sure about them executing anyone. And I didn't know there was a cave system in Belgium?
    4
  6435. Yes, I will cover it at some point, as well as Epsom. Whether they'll be seperate videos or part of one big "D-Day" video, I'm not sure at the moment. However my plan right now is to cover the WDC and the Middle East before progressing into Tunisia, Italy and then eventually Western Europe. All this while simultaneously covering battles on the Eastern Front (Stalingrad is the one I'm focusing on right now). This will hopefully give me a good grasp of the units (e.g. Eigth Army) and commanders (e.g. Montgomery, Patton etc) before I tackle the big battle (D-Day).
    4
  6436. Thank you Thomas! Grechza (the drunk guy) also got a "head injury" at some point late on or after the battle. Nobody can say who or what caused it, but legend has it Wenzel got a hold of him after the battle... Grechza was also the only member to receive a Iron Cross 2nd Class - everyone else got an Iron Cross 1st Class. The 3rd video for the LRDG I did also has characters and is more personal, like this video. But this is the first video I've done with 3D guys running around. I think it works well with the scale of the operation... might not work so well with the next one, but we'll see. Happy New Year to you too!
    4
  6437. Google Translate said it was 😢
    4
  6438. “The hazards of working with material related to secret operations are immense. Long-standing friendships with this or that member of a particular service are only a disadvantage, as events still covered by the Official Secrets Act and therefore subject to archival embargo obviously cannot be discussed. The consistency with which the most modest and oblique of enquiries have been met with a wall of dignified and amicable silence in certain quarters, usually quite voluble on other topics, is an impressive testament to the oaths of loyalty that servants of the Crown, distinguished and undistinguished, embrace. If there is one great lesson to be learnt by those who research the more obscure dealings of the British secret service during the war, it is that the officers of those services cannot, on the whole, be persuaded to break their vows. For those who believe that a country without an efficient and loyal intelligence force is automatically doomed, this is reassuring.” Bassett, “Hitler’s Spy Chief,” p11-12.
    4
  6439. ">Local balding man yells about government incompetence for 37 minutes" Where exactly did I rant about that in this video?
    4
  6440. Yeah he was called that during the war by the British press, and it's not like he wasn't in command of Bomber Command. He was also nicknamed "Butcher Harris", which is also true. I don't think there's any reason for historians not to use the nickname. Nobody complained about me calling William Gott by his nickname "Strafer Gott".
    4
  6441. I don't think there are any stupid questions, and I thought that it was a nice one. If nothing else, it gives us an opportunity to point out why some ideas might seem good at first, but when you really think it through (the principle of "the seen and the unseen") you see why things don't work out as we might imagine. Raising minimum wage might seem like a good idea, but what are the consequences? It turns out that it actually hurts the poor. (And if someone reading this doesn't understand why, then I encourage you to read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.) Also, if I'm honest, while I could guess at the answer to this question (oil, production issues, chaff, etc), I wasn't actually 100% sure because I'm more focused on the ground war. Therefore I had to look it up too.
    4
  6442. Good idea on comparing their policies! It's a shame you've only managed to shake them, but not get them to change. If you do manage to gre through, let me know how you managed it because I'm still open to the idea that it's possible, even if I'm not going to actively try to do it now.
    4
  6443. It's not the "community" that teaches you to read and write. It's your parents and your teachers - individuals.
    4
  6444. That's the book of hers I started reading, although I'd already come to the conclusion that "selfishness" was not actually bad, but I needed to hear it from someone more immersed in philosophy. I also considered the possibility that pride might also not be bad, and she confirmed it isn't. It's something I haven't internalised yet though...
    4
  6445. How so?
    4
  6446. Glad you enjoyed it! Some people are now trying to argue that I was disparaging Chuikov, but I'm glad you and others are seeing that that isn't the case at all. Chuikov was still brave even if he had a moment of doubt when everything appeared to be collapsing.
    4
  6447. You have no idea
    4
  6448. "Apparently the best English language video series about the Stalingrad campaign." Is there one rivaling it that's not in English?
    4
  6449. Not that I'm aware. Many games tend to use hex-grids and are turn-based, which is fine, but also extremely limiting. I do think Close Combat 3 (especially the Stalingrad mod) did a good job of platoon level combat though.
    4
  6450. I explain it in the middle section of the video. The Germans took a break to gather supplies and inserted an extra two divisions into the line, whereas Eremenko had kept reinforcements sent by Stalin to Chuikov on the eastern bank of the Volga.
    4
  6451. I don't know about 'soon', but I will get back to it at some point. The issue I have with that series is that very few of my viewers were watching it, and the YouTube algorithm was punishing the channel because of it.
    4
  6452. You've got to use multiple books to find the contradictions. But generally, it starts to become obvious when a particular book is heavily biased, or is pushing a particular agenda. If some books say X, and a bunch of others say Y, and then you look at it and realize that all the books saying X were written by the same group of people who would like to go goose-stepping on a weekend, you can be fairly certain that they've come to their conclusion based on their faith. If, on the other hand, many of the people saying Y are from different backgrounds and hold different beliefs, then you can be certain that they've come to their conclusions based more on the evidence.
    4
  6453. What's "fake" about what I said?
    4
  6454. It was a post-serfdom economy controlled by a monarchy. It may not be classed as "socialism", but it certainly wasn't a free market.
    4
  6455. That wasn't the reason. But out of curiosity, why would you click on a video if you're not willing to watch it?
    4
  6456. Hitler was not a spy at this time. If Hitler did any spying, it happened later.
    4
  6457. The Communist propaganda is strong with this one 🤦🏼‍♂️
    4
  6458. Yeah, that's not true. Hitler was in the Bavarian Army, controlled by Eisner and the Communists. If any spying did occur, it happened after these governments were toppled.
    4
  6459. I'd have to take a look at the sources, but it could be explained by the total breakdown of logistics across the entire front. After taking Antwerp, the British and Canadians did little until Market Garden launched, while Patton, Bradley and Devers were more or less sat still too. This can only be explained the failure of the logistics.
    4
  6460. Well, there is the possibility that they simply didn't have enough tanks for Crusader, so it should have been more. This would be further evidence against Churchill's insistance on the battle starting as soon as possible. It's also worth noting that 1st Army Tank Brigade had 132 infantry tanks, which would work out as 11 per squadron.
    4
  6461. It is. The stalemate is on. However, as mentioned, a stalemate favours the British. You'll be surprised to learn that the British do change the command structure a little next episode.
    4
  6462. I like your attitude!
    4
  6463. No worries sir! Sorry it took so long to get to it
    4
  6464. Technically yes, although they would have had to change their policies towards Japan
    4
  6465. Yeah and the British and RAF would have been all over any oil tankers
    4
  6466. Also, I will point out that people don't believe the Government. Supposedly Alex Rudakubana was a "Christian", but everyone knows that no true Christian would ever commit such an act, which suggests he fell under the sway of another ideology (such as Islam). Secondly, just because he was born in Wales doesn't mean he's Welsh. Just because you're born in a plane, that doesn't make you a bird. People are upset that he was the child of immigrants, and given the context posted above, it makes sense why they're angry.
    4
  6467. One of the lessons of history is that you must always look at the context, which you would have got had you watched the video. As someone posted on Twitter: “A small breakdown of just one month of why British people are unhappy with mass immigration: July 4th, at the election, several Muslim MPs were elected to the House of Commons on the back of Free Palestine. July 11th, the new Labour government announced it would release 5,000 prisoners early in September, with most having served 40% of their sentence. July 15th, we learned London’s Metropolitan Police had not solved a SINGLE petty crime burglary, car theft, phone theft in three years, across 166 areas. July 17th, it was reported that a Jordanian refugee, Mustafa al Mbaidan, who had assaulted a female police officer in Bournemouth, was spared community service on the grounds that he cannot speak English. July 18th, two asylum seekers, Yousef Garef and Amin Abdelbakar, who stole a Rolex worth £25,000 from a tourist, were spared jail. July 18th, that same day, mass rioting in minority communities broke out in Harehills [which is in Leeds] after social services took four Romani children into social care. July 18th rioting broke out in East London’s Bangladeshi community, following political unrest in Bangladesh, with rocks thrown at police officers and cars smashed in communities that are majority Muslim. July 23rd, it was announced that Anjem Choudary, Britain’s most famous Islamist, was to be sentenced for directing Islamist terror on Britain’s streets. July 23rd a British Army Officer was repeatedly stabbed outside his home by Anthony Esan, a Nigerian immigrant. July 26th, protests broke out after footage emerged of Greater Manchester Police taking action against Fahir and Amaad Amaas at Manchester Airport who had severely assaulted armed officers. July 27th, six arrests were made after a drive-by shooting in the town of Watford. July 29th, reports emerged that a man had been stabbed to death, with two others injured, following a knife fight in a park in East London. July 29th, Southport there was the mass stabbing and murder of three children. July 30th, a mass brawl involving machetes erupted on the streets of Southend. July 30th it was reported that a homeless Kurdish migrant had pushed a man onto the tracks at a London Underground station after feeling ‘disrespected’. July 30th it was reported that another 3,000 migrants have entered Britain illegally on small boats since Labour took power less than a month ago, taking the total number of crossings by mainly young male migrants from countries like Afghanistan, Eritrea, Sudan, and Syria to around 130,000."
    4
  6468. Okay Fascist, whatever you say.
    4
  6469. It's all of them. Tories, Labour, Libdems, the police, civil service, the teachers and tutors, the entire Establishment... and I said this in the video.
    4
  6470. I don't mind if you disagree (in fact, I encourage it), so long as you're considering what I'm saying. Too many people get triggered and won't even listen, which is not how we should conduct ourselves.
    4
  6471. I'm not deleting comments, YouTube is. It's automatic. They even delete my comments. Try commenting without saying any of the following words https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ozg1Cnm6SdtM4M5rATkANAi07xAzYWaKL7HKxyvoHzk/htmlview?sle=true#
    4
  6472. I really wasn't sure whether to put this out, but I had to make a stand on the off-chance that this is shown to the PM or the Establishment. They do not understand the people of this country, only the woke Twit-ter mob or the brownnosers in the corporations and universities.
    4
  6473. People in the UK live under the false belief that there are very few criminals, and those criminals there are do not target innocents. They also believe that the police will protect you, and thus there is no reason to take security measures or be armed. Well, those beliefs have been shown to be incorrect yet again.
    4
  6474. Labour, Tories, Libdems... they're all the same. The entire Establishment is to blame for this problem, which has been building for decades.
    4
  6475. They're all to blame. This has been building for 40 years.
    4
  6476. Perhaps they are racist. But considering the mosque is a temple, it could also be the religion they're disagreeing with, rather than the race?
    4
  6477. Yes, I messed up. They were Ju 88's, not Stukas
    4
  6478. I haven't read that one, sadly. I guess a nice follow-up for you would be "Case Red" by Robert Forczyk? The danger of only presenting one view of the battle (in this case, the German) is that you're only seeing the way the Germans believed the French were wrong, rather than the way that the French themselves believed them to be wrong. But I'm sure you're already aware of that :) everything's okay over here right now! Hope things are good with you
    4
  6479. That's the true tragedy of this situation. The whole war was a total waste.
    4
  6480. Yes, good to see you so punctual!
    4
  6481. "You got one thing wrong: The holocaust has been the prime topic in German history at least since the 1970's. In fact, WW2 is mostly reduced to this topic in basic German history lessons in school." You've misinterpreted what I said. After the war, scholars all-but-ignored the Holocaust until the 1970s. There are books written on this period where it wasn't talked about much. NOW it is talked about a lot, probably from the late 1970s, but prior to the late 1970s, it wasn't talked about.
    4
  6482. At this point they didn't have 6-pdrs. And with the long range short 75mm guns on the Panzer IV out-ranging the 2-pdrs, their most effective counter to tanks was the 25 pdr.
    4
  6483. Harsh, but I know what you mean. I actually changed the names in order for it to make more sense. Instead of 1st Battalion of the Rajputana Rifles, I changed it to 1st Rajputana Rifles Battalion. That way you get to know which regiment they're from, but know it's a battalion. Still doesn't excuse the fact that it's a convoluted system and the names suck.
    4
  6484. Dermot, I hope you're sober for this coming Monday's video. Take a sip every time I say "Kampfgruppe" or "Kampfgruppen" and I promise, you'll be hungover for a week.
    4
  6485. Well, I'm glad you're enjoying this :D
    4
  6486. Haha no, it is not that either. Clue: think Zaitsev.
    4
  6487. Would you like an answer? Or should we let someone else guess first?
    4
  6488. Sadly, not yet. There's a ton of work still to do on the script. It is not easy to wade through +97k words of research.
    4
  6489. Haha you forget that the Germans didn't need rations because they stole all the food from the Dutch, the Greeks, the Ukrainians and more...
    4
  6490. Thank you! I'm glad you liked the style. Trying to make the videos better :)
    4
  6491. It is, and it will be mentioned in the main Crusader video. That said, not a lot has been written about it, at least not in the sources I have. If you have any suggestions for sources on this topic, let me know!
    4
  6492. I actually put a text in the bottom corner explaining this. Chemnitz was renamed Karl Marx Stadt (city) after the war, and this map was made the year after the change.
    4
  6493. Yes you are!
    4
  6494.  Historical Revisionism  It was a crime, but the biggest? What about Operation Keelhaul? https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM
    4
  6495. It does feel like that sometimes
    4
  6496. Yes, I didn't know anything about this battle, so it took me ages to read the sources while working on other videos. I feel really bad, but it's just one of those things where it's a simple question but not a simple matter of providing a video on it.
    4
  6497. Second! Glad to hear!
    4
  6498. They did stop after they crossed the bridge. And no one's disputing that they stopped. The reason they stopped was because they had no infantry backup. Without infantry, they couldn't advance. Their infantry was in Nijmegen fighting two entrenched kampfgruppen of the German 10th SS Panzer Division. And no, this isn't fiction. I've listed my sources in the video description.
    4
  6499. +martaxsasLT sadly, it does have to end. However, I am working on more documentaries. Check out my twitter for some sneak previews https://twitter.com/TIKhistory
    4
  6500. Not this time ;)
    4
  6501. In a nutshell - they have a Leftist agenda of deleting Patreon pages if they decide they don't like your content, even if you haven't broken their Terms of Service. So potentially they could delete my Patreon page randomly for no reason with no warning. As a result of this, people are pulling their support for creators through Patreon.
    4
  6502. Congrats! The First First of 2019. That's going to annoy Jamie
    4
  6503. Hey Noah, first thing I'd say is don't wait until you "grow up". Get started now. While qualifications are good for getting a job, they're not required at all for anyone with an interest in a subject. All they provide is accreditation (validation from an institution), but not having a piece of paper doesn't mean you can't start. Get two books on the same topic (e.g. the US in WW2) and read both. Make notes (use Google Drive, which is free, to take notes). See if there's any contradictions between the two. See what their writing styles are. Look for any twists or turns in their texts which might indicate distortions. Question everything. Check out my recent Pienaar video for an example of why being critical of your source material is good https://youtu.be/LlOZdrvnIfk Most sources are not this bad, but you'll be surprised by how much they miss out. Once you've read two sources, get a third, and see how that differs again. In general, you can only really be sure that a source is distorted or untruthful once you've read widely on a topic. This is why you're probably best starting off broad (like, strategic) but then over time narrowing down what you're looking into. So, you might start off looking at the US in WW2, but then decide that the European Theatre is something you like best. Then you might narrow it down even further until you look at the Normandy Campaign. Then you might narrow it down further by looking at just Operation Lüttich, for example. And if you look at the Wikipedia Page for Operation Lüttich, you'll find 11 books on or related to the battle for you to start looking into. Then if you go on Amazon, you'll probably find even more. And this is just the secondary sources, nevermind the primary sources. And this is the point - there's a LOT of sources out there for you to read. There is a colossal mountain of information; far too much for any one of us to ever wade through. But by splitting things down into manageable chunks (going from looking at the whole of the USA, but then over time focusing on Operation Lüttich and the Battle for Mortain) you can gain 'specialist' knowledge on certain topics. And you'll find this to be the case throughout the profession - most historians specialize on certain topics. I've had to say "no" lots of times now to covering the Pacific Theatre. Not because I won't ever cover it, or am not interested in it, but I have a ton of reading yet to do on Courland, Stalingrad, North Africa, WW2 economics and politics, Lend Lease, the Holocaust... so I simply don't have time to even start on it. Sometimes saying 'no' is necessary in order for you to specialize on a topic, and it is by specializing that you'll really become the master of that particular topic. You'll still want to read the occasional broad book, but in general specialize. I'll be talking about a lot of this stuff in my upcoming video on the 'Theory of History'. I think you'll get a lot from that video so be sure to watch it.
    4
  6504. I disagree. The right reacts against Socialism (common control, which manifests as state-control) but is all about progress and innovation (which is essential to capitalism). How can you be innovative and reactionary at the same time? Socialism is all about taking humans "back to basics" by removing things like property, land-ownership, hierarchies, and incentives to work. It's regressive and reactionary in the extreme. It also sees the world through the lense of the mid-1800s, which is why it's running on concepts that are out of date now (like the Labour Theory of Value). It has its own traditions and slogans... Seriously, socialists label their enemies in words that best describe themselves. It's double-think at it's finest.
    4
  6505. TIKmondays ;)
    4
  6506. Yes, someone else has informed me. But thank you
    4
  6507. I've just tweeted about this. Wish I'd know this earlier :)
    4
  6508. Unfortunately my sources didn't mention any of that, so I wasn't able to talk about it. English sources on these topics are rare.
    4
  6509. Thank you! Glad to hear :)
    4
  6510. No worries sir, and yes I understand/knew about the points raised in your P.S.'s. Maybe I could have explained the whole thing a bit better in the video.
    4
  6511. "@TIK It is not socialism! when they say race control it does not matter if it is private or social owned as long a sit is racially pure." Except it does matter if it's privately or socially owned - "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann (Vampire Economy) They also nationalised the railways (Deutsche Reichsbahn), the youth (Hitler Youth), nationalised labour (Reichsarbeitsdienst; RAD; Reich Labour Service), formed workers into "workers battalions", nationalised recreational activities through the Strenght Through Joy program, nationalised the unions (German Labour Front), regulated food protection (Reichsnährstand corporation), and nationalised the engineering sector (Organisation Todt, State run. Constructed the Autobahns and other huge engineering projects. Constructed concentration camps. Had 1.4 million prisoners as slaves in 1944). So yes, they controlled the means of production.
    4
  6512. Danke! Ich lerne Deutsch langsam und ich haben alles vergessen. (no idea if this is correct, I'm just mashing words I know together now haha)
    4
  6513. It's up for debate, but yes the locals did do the majority, which is why I explained that anti-semitism increased during the Soviet occupation.
    4
  6514. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.”
    4
  6515. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses - namely the Jews. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    4
  6516. Glad to hear! I hope you enjoy the rest of the series :)
    4
  6517. Reading Marx will give me a view of what Marxist-Socialism is, since Marx was a Marxist-Socialist (class) not a bog-standard "Socialist".
    4
  6518. And yet some people don't get it.
    4
  6519. But communism (Marxist-Socialism) is international socialism, and controlled by Moscow at this time.
    4
  6520. Except they weren't https://youtu.be/wXIoVEKIpMg And https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6521. Thank you! Yes, it seems like only a tiny percentage of people grasp the true nature of National Socialism. Even a lot of National Socialists that I've seen commenting on my videos don't understand it. One guy was telling my how the Fascists in current day Italy don't know what Fascism actually is either. And we know a lot of Marxists think they're trying to help the poor, but get sucked into a false belief system which makes them think they're fighting for the right things but in reality are fighting for the polar opposites (yet they don't see it due to the slogans). This is why I'm hoping a few people may click on the Hazlitt video in the description. Once you know what these ideologies actually are, and why they are the way they are, it's easier to understand the historical events, as well as how the world is "working" today.
    4
  6522. Yes, but it's a terribly written book, which is why most people don't read it. That's why I'm explaining the ideas from that book in this video, and explaining why they're stupid.
    4
  6523. I've had to hide them due to COPPA. Regulations are fun
    4
  6524. I'm not moderating these comments at all. There is an automated filter though, which I've not got round to clearing because it's a low priority.
    4
  6525. Yes I have, that's where a lot of the concepts are coming from. This proves that you haven't read it.
    4
  6526. It has. Although the graphics card, the RAM and PSU were new-ish, the rest were purchased in 2012!!!
    4
  6527. Ah yes, Hitler was famous for building mosques... And no, I didn't forget Islam, but that doesn't work either because there is zero evidence of Hitler worshipping Allah. Sebottendorf was a Freemason. The evidence he converted to Islam is shaky, and I talked about him in the previous video on the Aryan Religion. He was a liar, saying that he was an aristocrat, when in reality he wasn't. Sebottendorf wasn't even his name, it was Glauer. While the Thule Society did influence the beginning of the Nazi Party, there's no evidence that Hitler was a member of it, or met Sebottendorf. Sebottendorf was kicked out of the Thule Society before Hitler joined the Party.
    4
  6528. That's a very good point. Maybe they didn't know everything about it, and that explains some of the discrepancies...
    4
  6529. Oh wow, thanks for the recommendation!
    4
  6530. @J man "@TIK unfortunately this guy has a bunch of national socialists videos on his YouTube channel supporting it" And yet, he doesn't seem to know that National Socialism was socialism (Visigoth - "@TIK lol dude this socialist nonsense is just that."), despite the overwhelming evidence that it is. Even some of the modern-day National Socialist literature says that they are socialists, but apparently Visigoth here isn't a REAL National Socialist and doesn't understand his own ideology. Actually, looking at his channel, he may be a Fascist, not a National Socialist. So yes, it would make sense that he doesn't know the true nature of National Socialism. However, Fascism is also a form of socialism, so there's no excuse.
    4
  6531. They didn't see them as human. When you don't see people as human, but as "rats" or "parasites", you may justify curing the "disease". Dehumanizing them makes it easier to kill them. This is why I keep saying that people who view other people based on their racial/national/class/gender social-group are dangerous. If all people of a certain race can be viewed as 'inferior', or all people of a certain class as 'criminal', or all people of another nation as 'evil', or all people of a certain gender as 'oppressive', then it becomes easier to dehumanize them, and justify their slaughter. Hopefully people can wake up to this realization and look past the propaganda and start seeing people as individual human beings.
    4
  6532. If you want your brain to melt out your ears. All history is biased because all records are written by humans. You need a lesson in history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    4
  6533. Very true, and I don't think we shouldn't hold our punches when it comes to topics like this
    4
  6534. Devote, defined as: (Google) give all or most of one's time or resources to (a person or activity). (Cambridge) to give all of something, especially your time, effort, or love, or yourself, to something you believe in or to a person (Merriam-Webster) to commit by a solemn act, or to give over or direct (time, money, effort, etc.) to a cause, enterprise, or activity "Devote" does not mean "try your best", as you described it. It means GIVE ALL. Historically, Catholics said you must devote your life to God, since God is everything. Now, I'm aware that Catholicism has watered itself down over the past 50 years, but that's irrelevant considering we're discussing the first 1950 years of the Catholic doctrine.
    4
  6535. "Randians were big lockdown boys, and one of their biggest think tanks has an American Israeli president." If they're wrong on some issues, does that mean I must disgard everything they write and plug my head in the sand? I fail to understand why someone who's against the lockdowns would be so keen on self-censorship?
    4
  6536. Not a Libertarian. Ayn Rand wasn't a libertarian. I also addressed this argument in the video - see the final timestamp.
    4
  6537. What relevance does this have to the argument that a loss of faith, plus parental issues, resulted in a fear of independence and a desire for safety?
    4
  6538. When I've donated to charity, nobody has ever asked me what my faith was or wasn't, so I highly doubt any claim made about who donates more or less.
    4
  6539. Thank you for sharing! There's similar stories in the comments from others, and it's surprising how many still refuse to see upbringing as a factor.
    4
  6540. I got the PDF a while ago, so not sure where I got it from. Does it not come up on Google search? I think there's a copy on archive.org too if you can't find a PDF version
    4
  6541. I can confirm that I have a 2:1 Degree in History (as stated in the description of most of my recent videos). My critics (in this case, the Socialists) claimed that I don't have it as a way of trying to undermine my legitimacy. The problem of course is that degrees are less than worthless. Mine got me into thousands of pounds in debt (which makes it less than worthless) and I've never had to use it at all. Plus, a degree only proves you attended 3 years of boring classes at a State-sanctioned university. They don't have any bearing in the real world, except perhaps in the sciences, and only then in certain jobs. So even if I didn't have a degree, it wouldn't mean anything. What really matters is that some people can't argue with the facts I've presented, and so are looking for ways to wriggle out of the debate. Whether or not I have a degree in history is irrelevant to whether Hitler was or wasn't a Socialist, and they should be concentrating on rebuilding their arguments after I've demolished them in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (link in case you haven't seen it)
    4
  6542. Absolutely, yes
    4
  6543. 😁
    4
  6544. And sir, yes sir!
    4
  6545. :D
    4
  6546. I've seen it, thanks
    4
  6547. Probably better than margarine...
    4
  6548. You were second Jamie! Sorry!
    4
  6549. Benz und Jerry's eisen cream
    4
  6550. That's not what capitalism is. Capitalism is simply private control of the economy. Marx redefined it, but Marx wasn't a capitalist and didn't understand basic economics.
    4
  6551. Yes, exactly. Two sides of the same coin.
    4
  6552. Maybe because if people told you what Fascism was (another version of socialism) you'd realise the true nature of socialism any more and wouldn't support Marxism any more, so it's best to deny the true nature of Fascism in it's entirety. You may want to read Farrell's book on Mussolini, or anything on Mosley.
    4
  6553. A black market is a free market, since the rest of the economy is a state-controlled one, and thus not-free. Having a black market is an indication that you have socialism.
    4
  6554. "If a state is a tool used by capitalists, then we can make the case that even though the state might take over the private sector for emergency measures, it is still capitalist." The Nazi state wasn't a tool used by the capitalists at all, as Gunter Reimanns book makes quite clear. But even if it was, the state would still control the economy, and thus it would no longer be capitalism.
    4
  6555. Here's a fun fact for you! Some people have actually commented on other videos saying "I won't watch a video of yours that is less than 30 minutes long"
    4
  6556. I think you were third, but good going!
    4
  6557. @Bill Bolton  "shorter videos; instead of a video that takes eight days to make every week, release it in two parts." That's what I did here, but people are complaining about that, so apparently that's not an option 😕 - "Also if you want to keep releasing content how about a q&a video every other week, maybe centred around the last weeks 'Battle storm' video, needing less graphics and editing." I did that with the Addendum series, but people weren't watching them. They're not even watching this, apparently because it's not Battlestorm Stalingrad. It appears that I've turned the channel into the "Stalingrad channel", which is absolutely not what I wanted to do. - "I've heard for maximum YouTube ad revenue you need lots of short videos;" Yes, if I was aiming for views and ad-revenue alone, that would make sense. It's the best way to grow a channel - lots of cat videos and vlogs. If I turned this into a gaming channel again, I could release half a dozen videos a day, no problem. However, I'm not reliant on YouTube ad-revenue; I'm reliant on my Patreons & SubscribeStars, who prefer long-form content. What I'm most concerned about is the YouTube algorithm, which can completely derail an entire channel by not recommending the videos to people. If I don't get new Patreons, and the old ones drop off, the channel will slowly die. So I have to publish weekly, and I have to publish longer videos, otherwise I lose the algorithm, and/or I lose Patreons. I've put myself in the most difficult position - a rock and a hard place.
    4
  6558. "German is not really confusing at all." In German, girls are neutral. It makes zero sense.
    4
  6559. "I understand there are none available now because of Barbarossa." It's not Barbarossa. It's the supply situation that's causing the lack of reinforcements (and supplies, obviously).
    4
  6560. Thank you Pipes! Hope you enjoy the video :)
    4
  6561. Sorry ;)
    4
  6562. Some day, but it will be after Stalingrad
    4
  6563. Oh, but in two sentences out of a chapter in one of his books where he was taking fascism to task, he said that fascism (in 1927, so Italian and Austrian Fascism, not Nazism) wasn't as bad as the Russian Bolsheviks, so that proves that he's defending fascism. And yes, that's a genuine argument that one of my critics (the one with 20k subs) has given as a way to dismiss my point that Karl Marx was anti-semitic.
    4
  6564. I can't explain every socailist world-view in one 50-minute video, so I painted a broad brush-stroke. That said, I haven't "misrepresented" you or Socialism. The other Socialist factions all want the same end-goal, and that end-goal is the opposite of what you think it is. You have been deceived into believing in the exact thing you fear the most. If you want to hurt the poor, implement any version of Socialism or Socialist policy you can dream of - it will hurt the poor.
    4
  6565. You're right about the length of the videos being bad for newcomers. It's something I've considered for a while. "TIKshorts" (maybe 5 mins) might be the answer. Thank you!
    4
  6566. I don't blame you to be honest. There's times here in the UK where I think "why am I working so hard when those who don't get free houses and laptops"? The system is against the workers, but not in the way that the Leftists believe.
    4
  6567. I've always opposed the state. The only difference now is that I understand economics and no longer believe in Socialism.
    4
  6568. Wow thank you for your story. It's interesting that you started off conservative (usually seen as Right-wing), then got drawn into the Left, then came out of it again. I've not heard of that before, so that's really intriguing. "Most of the people that follow it though just don't realize the end goal." - You hit the nail on the head there.
    4
  6569. You're correct, it's a typo which we didn't spot... I need to hire viewers to check the videos over :) And yes, the middle number (242) is the Panzer III number
    4
  6570. It does! The French did an outstanding job to resist for as long as they did there.
    4
  6571. You're correct, it's "witches cauldron". However, it's also worth pointing out that Rommel's pocket here has since just been referred to as "the Cauldron", which may be why Butler translated it as such. He probably got his wires crossed.
    4
  6572. You're correct, someone else has also pointed this out. There were 242 Panzer III's and 40 Panzer IVs. Sorry about that
    4
  6573. And that's to say nothing about the tactics and the sheer incompetence of Operation Aberdeen.
    4
  6574. Happy birthday for tomorrow! Have a good one, and I hope you enjoy the video
    4
  6575. So, I actually went full-time in mid-April (2018, in case people are seeing this in the future) thanks entirely to my Patreons - although I've only just started making enough per month that I'm not eating into my savings. The only reason I was able to release a video a week between January and April was because I built up a reserve prior to making the new-years resolution, and then I also gamed my holidays at my old job so I had four whole weeks off during the January-April period, plus bank holidays. In fact, had I not left my job when I did, I would have failed to release the next video (which was Fall Blau), so I only barely scraped by. As I said, I'm working 73.9 ours on average - with some weeks where I'm working 90+ hours. Yes, that is including breaks (like lunch), but I can say, hand on heart, that I'm not actually having enough breaks. Forget Pomodoro, I've just been working solidly. Sure, I'll go get a cup of water if I'm thirsty, but I'm back to work within 2 minutes. On top of that, I didn't have a single day off between July 4th and August 4th, and I've not had a full-day off since the 8th of August (it's now the 3rd of September). And I'm going to be honest, I've absolutely struggled to keep up with the Monday videos whilst working on the script for Crusader. That's why I started doing Patreon Q&A videos every 3-weeks because they required less time to make, which would free me up to do the Crusader script. So, to commit to doing more videos a week is simply impossible at the moment. I've seriously been considering reducing the videos down to bi-weekly, but you're correct that the weekly-videos have been the reason this channel has taken off. I'm 100% reliant on my Patreons (ad-revenue is just pocket money for a channel this size) and I don't want to let anyone down. That's why, I decided last night that I absolutely needed to release Crusader in parts going forward - otherwise I'd never get it done. You're right that I should get help making these videos, however the money I'm bringing in off both YouTube and Patreon has only just (this month) reached a point where this has become sustainable for me. I'm making just over minimum wage, and I've taken a pay cut to do this! So there's zero chance right now of hiring an editor or a research assistant etc. But, in the future, with more support, that might be an option. Clearly though, I'm not doing this for the money. Despite the long hours and the lack of a social-life, it's the best job I've ever had :)
    4
  6576. hi
    4
  6577. "Make enough mistakes, and you become wise."Haha I'll remember that one!
    4
  6578. Thanks Strizhi :) I am biased (we all are), but I don't have an agenda. I value truth over everything else, so I'm willing to admit mistakes and pull videos down when it's warrented because the last thing I want is for people to get the wrong information. Yes it's embarrassing, and I feel like I've let everyone down, but I'd rather admit the mistake than pretend everything's right when it isn't. Hope that makes sense :)
    4
  6579. Yeah, there needs to be a new-form of annotation or something because minor mistakes are being left in. This is why it's always good to read the pinned comment in case I have made minor mistakes that don't warrent taking the video down. And yes, I'll see you on Monday for Crusader :D I'm super-excited as well, even if it's only part 1!
    4
  6580. Oh no no no... German is bad enough! Then Russian at some point :(
    4
  6581. Yes, but that was a very limited trade. As a socialist economy, the Soviet Union was aiming for autarky.
    4
  6582. Poland was pretty antisemitic prior to World War II, so it's not out of the realm of possibility
    4
  6583. Not necessarily. This is more of an opinion piece due to the nature of the question
    4
  6584. It's ok, I don't explain what happen to Gott in this video (since that happens in the future). But was I really too harsh on him? Didn't know he described himself as 'average', but that's amazing that me and him both came to the same conclusion. The guy just... wasn't... good. I don't know how else to put it! Also, the sources I have only mention the Matilda didn't have the HE round. If all the tanks didn't have the HE round, you'd think they'd bring their artillery along a bit more.
    4
  6585. Westminster is a shambles, which is good. Nobody wants an efficient government. So far the outcome of the Brexit vote was to destabilise the UK government - and that's a win for every UK citizen, regardless of which way an individual voted.
    4
  6586. Merry 17th of September 2018!
    4
  6587. Is that actually a thing? I know they're making a 3D Close Combat (The Bloody First), but a 3D Panzer General?
    4
  6588. It would be nice, although I'm struggling to keep up with comments as it is!
    4
  6589. Thank you Brian! It's good to hear you enjoy them :)
    4
  6590. 1. Last stands and fighting against the odds is understandable. There's something about the underdog that's appealing. 2 Para at Arnhem, Sixth Army at Stalingrad, Couland Pocket, Battle of Berlin, Tobruk... the list goes on. I wonder what the appeal is though...? 2. I'm the same. But I actually find that when I create a video, it helps because it's hard to visualise where every single unit is, with every single commander, and every single engagement etc. 3. Agreed. Too little has been written about most of the divisions.
    4
  6591. I have two books on the Finnish right now - Lunde's "Finland's War of Choice: The Troubled German-Finnish Coalition in World War II." and Trotter's "The Winter War: The Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40." I've not got any plans at the moment for future Finnish videos, but I'll take suggestions if you have any.
    4
  6592. I've read both but have forgotten much about Berlin. They're good narratives of the battle, but definitely out of date now. I would say, you can read them as introductions to the battles, but I would immediately pick up something more modern than them and read that too. So for Stalingrad, definitely definitely definitely read "Stalingrad" by Glantz and House, which is far closer to the reality and in my opinion superior, even if not a narrative and more of an operational account.
    4
  6593. Yes, and that's partly why I recommend it. Glad you liked the video!
    4
  6594. There's been a massive German bias, which I'm currently fighting against daily in the comments because people love to talk about stuff that's been disproven in the last 20 years. There's always a danger for it to swing too far the other way, however I don't think it will go as far as it did to the German side, simply because we already have the German perspective and there's a natural drag pulling it that way.
    4
  6595. They didn't do that at Stalingrad. If you check the source, it shows that the 13,500 were executed in the Stalingrad FRONT, not just in 62nd Army. I've been over this multiple times e.g. https://youtu.be/JOKAIDpOY80
    4
  6596. Mir geht's gut, danke! To be honest, I've put my German learning on pause for the minute because I realized I couldn't commit enough hours to it and had enough going on with the videos to keep it going. I may get back into it in the future though, and I remember a lot of it
    4
  6597. Yeah, I used to censor comments, but I realized that free speech is important so I stopped that a couple years back. Sadly, YouTube automatically censors comments (including my own) so we're not in 100% free-speech territory. I can confirm though that I do not censor comments (although I do remove obvious spam when I spot it).
    4
  6598. You didn't listen. The choice is between: Option 1. Taking a pay cut (let's say, by 25%) knowing that the price of everything will be lower still (50%) and thus your pay has actually increased in real terms, even though the amount has gone down in nominal terms. Or Option 2. Being unemployed, and thus not being able to afford anything. In such a scenario, it's better to take a pay cut and remain in the job as your living standards will actually increase due to the reduction in prices. But obviously, this is assuming we have a free market, which we certainly don't. In reality, continuous inflation, price regulations, and more manipulations prevent prices and wages from coming down, thus creating mass long term unemployment.
    4
  6599. As far as I'm aware, in modern times there's never been a free market economy where there wasn't taxes, government manipulations and regulations, nor a 100% gold-backed fiat currency system. Therefore, I can't actually point to one. There may have been examples from the ancient or medieval world, but I'm not so familiar with their economies. I do know that Rome hyperinflated their currency, which was probably the main reason why they collapsed. Some city-states in Ancient Greece also did the same.
    4
  6600. Thanks for watching! Glad you found the video useful. I don't have time now to respond to the Gold Standard idea, but I have done a video which explains what happens when you don't have a stable currency https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    4
  6601. It's not just your government; it's every government :/
    4
  6602. Yep! Sometimes it's worth playing it safe. University professors are about to be very upset, since they're in a bubble (tuition fees have gone up astronomically over the past decade or two due to government manipulations and currency supplies)
    4
  6603. "Inflation is actually a sign of a growing economy." As I explained, it's a sign that the economy is being manipulated and that a recession will come in the future. (Clarification: in a free market, there would be periods of inflation and deflation, rather than constant inflation, so technically there would be some inflation, but only for a short period of time) "Deflation might just be the easier problem to solve as you just print more money." Deflation isn't bad. In fact, it can be quite good, unless you're a government who needs constant inflation to survive since you don't create wealth, you only steal it. That's why banks and governments like inflation and dislike deflation. But for the average guy, deflation is actually a good thing. "My point is that inflation is not always counterfeiting money." Of course it is! That's literally what it is! "You can't keep having a growing economy when you can't have a money supply that grows with it." No, you absolutely can! Growing the currency supply is irrelevant. All that matters is producing more goods and services. If you have £1000 and buy a car with that, then you have a car. If you have £2000 because of inflation and buy the same car with it, you're not any better off than you were when you have the £1000. The digits are meaningless. What matters is purchasing power, which is slowly destroyed under normal inflation, and rapidly wiped out during hyperinflation. "This is actually a massive problem with the Gold standard. The Gold standard can only increase the money supply by digging up more gold." The amount of gold is irrelevant. What matters is what you can purchase with that gold (the purchasing power). The reason gold is good is because it retains your purchasing power. This is why every fiat currency eventually hyperinflates, whereas gold does not. It also can't be inflated to the same extent as currency can, and has actual uses (e.g. jewelry). "The fiat system allows governments control the money supply very quickly" Bingo. That's why they want it. They can counterfeit currency and steal wealth from everyone, and redistributing it to themselves. "it will not be affected by someone just showing up with a massive amount of gold and make all money worthless. Like Spain once did." Gold doesn't stand still, but it's also not as bad as the currency supply. Your argument against gold - pointing to Spain - is actually the exact reason why fiat currency is bad. In order for gold to lose value, you'd have to dig a hell of a lot of it out of the ground all of a sudden (like Spain did). However, there's a finite amount of it, so it's not a very likely scenario, which is why Spain is one of the few exceptions. But EVERY fiat currency has the potential to hyperinflate because the government and central banks can just print a massive amount of currency and make all the currency worthless. Like Wiemar Germany, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Rome, Austria, North Korea, Hungary, the Soviet Union.....
    4
  6604. Incorrect. Socialism creates the crisis of capitalism, as I explain in the video.
    4
  6605. Technically, it's the fiat banking system that causes recessions, not the government by itself. However, since all states currently control the banking system via the central banks, all governments are causing their own recessions, which is why they're currently global in nature. A sound money system where issues of fiat paper or digits on a screen would be impossible would end the boom-bust cycle. For a more detailed analysis, I'd recommend Murray Rothbard's America's Great Depression, which you can find online as a PDF for free.
    4
  6606. The more I learn about socialism (Fascism, National-Socialism, Marxism, democratic-socialism), the more I realise how much I was lied too, and how much they've distorted history. One of the greatest lies that people are told is that socialism isn't the state ownership or control of the means of production, or the destruction of the freedom of the private individual. I hate being lied to, and I hate distortions of history.
    4
  6607. I know ;)
    4
  6608. That's a good idea! Especially since there are a couple deployed in Courland, and that's the next Battlestorm. Thanks!
    4
  6609. Yeah I've seen them a lot on financial channels. No idea why they're targeting me. Maybe my references to Thomas Sowell, Mises, Hazlitt and Rothbard has triggered the code or something
    4
  6610. So true. I used to have hope for humanity, and then I worked in retail...
    4
  6611. Well, apparently according to some Marxists in the comments, the Soviets didn't even need Lend Lease
    4
  6612. They invaded Poland together, and carved up Eastern Europe. That's not a simple "non-aggression" pact.
    4
  6613. The evidence I have points in that direction. To give a couple examples, Soviet troops were malnourished throughout the war,1 and US troops were given twice as much food as Red Army soldiers, even with Lend Lease.2 1. Fritz, Ostkrieg, P167. 2. Tuyll, H. “Feeding the Bear: American Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945.” Greenwood Press, 1989. Table 39. Supplies Consumed by Average Soldier (Long tons per soldier, per month)
    4
  6614. "Part about soviet economy collapsing in 42 and "needing" LL is nonsense." Soviet troops consumed half as many rations per soldier as US troops in WW2 even WITH Lend Lease.1 I also have several sources that point out that the Soviet soldiers were malnourished in 1941, let alone in 1942-43 when the Ukraine and Northern Caucasus were under German control. But since you're not the only one to question this, it looks like I'm going to have to make a video about it and crush your ramblings with evidence. Also carving up Eastern Europe is not a "trade deal" or "non-aggression pact". National Socialist Germany and the Marxist Socialist Soviet Union were allies in all but name in 1939-1941. 1. Tuyll, H. “Feeding the Bear: American Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945.” Greenwood Press, 1989. Table 39. Supplies Consumed by Average Soldier (Long tons per soldier, per month)
    4
  6615. And if the history books say the same thing, then what?
    4
  6616.  @dwarow2508  Maybe Stalin didn't, but the Soviet government did. Here's the quote and source: “There are no Russian prisoners of war. The Russian soldier fights on till death. If he chooses to become a prisoner, he is automatically excluded from the Russian community.” - Soviet Government response to the Germans 1941, quoted from Tolstoy, “Victims of Yalta,” p34.
    4
  6617. Whatever you do, don't read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which is available for free online here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression The last thing you want to do is challenge the historically inaccurate mainstream narrative that I also believed until I learned otherwise...
    4
  6618. Good points! Tbh, it's almost too close to call. When I was working on my documentary, I debated whether I should blame both Gavin AND Browning, as Browning made a lot of really crucial mistakes. In the end I chose to single out Gavin because I do think his decision at Nijmegen was huge. A lot of people say the operation was doomed from the start, but this argument actually suggests it wasn't, which is a nice alternative argument to the traditional one. Also it presents a "what if" because if they had taken the bridge, would XXX Corps have gotten to Arnhem, and would people still say the plan was "rotten"? So that's my reasoning for backing it. But like you pointed out, there were lots of mistakes made by everyone. From Ike and Montgomery, all the way down to Browning and Gavin. Browning's mistakes especially are so numerous that it's hard to list them all. But I would say (again, my opinion) that Nijmegen was a bit more decisive. Sort of like an umbrella. Browning's umbrella has a lot of holes in it, but it was Gavin that snapped the stem. Which is worse? In the end it doesn't matter because either way you're definitely getting wet. Obviously, this is all up for debate. But you're right in saying that Browning is at fault here, and I certainly won't try to persuade you otherwise :)
    4
  6619. The comments from my regular viewers are actually fine (for the most part). It's when the videos get linked to the neo-Nazi/Marxist dens of Reddit and 4chan (like last week's video, or my Hitler's Socialism video) that things get rough
    4
  6620. Well, I hope you enjoy this one :)
    4
  6621. Maybe... it depends because the USA was attacking German U-Boats and supplying Germany's enemies with equipment and materials, and was gearing up for war at that point... so technically you could see that as being at war.
    4
  6622. You can't ignore the fact that he misused all the information and documentation he discovered.
    4
  6623. I have to put on a voice (especially with Hitler) otherwise bad faith critics will take my voice out of context as "proof" that I'm a racist or whatever.
    4
  6624. You haven't watched enough of my videos
    4
  6625. I wouldn't trust Goebbels's Socialist Propaganda Ministry of Enlightenment (the BBC).
    4
  6626. I would say no, for several reasons. The main one being that, if he's willing to change the evidence to suit his interpretation, and his ideology comes first (e.g. his known love for Hitler), then he's going to present a fictional account of what happened. Plus, they're out of date now, and there are far better books out there by actual historians: Citino, Glantz, Stahel...
    4
  6627. No point looking at the sources if Irving so blatantly changes what they say to mean something completely different. You may as well be reading fiction at that point. And you don't need to blame the "mysterious elitist tribe" for the failings of your heroes. You only have yourself to blame if you decide to believe someone who manipulates evidence to push a warped agenda promoting an idea that history didn't happen
    4
  6628. @Shitindawoods Bear. Everyone is biased - that's basic history theory. So yes, I am biased However, I can only go where the evidence takes me, and the evidence clearly indicates that the Axis Powers of WW2 murdered millions of people, and a part of murder toll was the Holocaust. If such evidence didn't exist, then I would be the first to say it. But it does exist. Irving has even used this evidence himself, except he manipulated the documents to 'prove' his agenda. And I have come out against the Lamestream interpretation - including Evans - in other videos. I have been outcast by many for saying that National Socialists are REAL Socialists. And the video I said that Evans was wrong in his interpretation (note: he didn't manipulate evidence like Irving did) was during my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I also pointed out the fundamental ideological flaw in National Socialism in that video, which is that it's own ideology disproves itself. But this is the point: as postmodernists, you don't care for evidence. Your racist agenda blinds you to your faith. Well, my faith is in reason, logic and history, not in pseudo-scientific and irrational Socialism.
    4
  6629. Awww look at the little cognitive dissonance, it's so cute!
    4
  6630. I've covered the Preemptive Strike Thesis and debunked it. Here's a list of videos that undermine the legitimacy of that idea https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw Nobody has the complete truth, but some historians are more wrong than others. Because Irving manipulated and distorted the evidence, Irving is a distorian.
    4
  6631. No comments have been deleted by me. But other users are reporting comments, which is their choice.
    4
  6632. Yes, they're also using multiple accounts to try boost their numbers, just like what the Marxists do when I say something they don't like
    4
  6633. Thank you for unsubscribbling!
    4
  6634. Because it's historically accurate to differentiate between two distinct ideologies, Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6635. If the State demands it, then I will not comply!
    4
  6636. "TIK, I really like your content but please stop with the nuclear political hottakes. They really deminish the quality of your videos." Value is subjective.
    4
  6637. It's only going to get better once we actually make it to the city ;)
    4
  6638. Greetings! I bet you're waiting eagerly for me to cover Operation Torch :)
    4
  6639. "TIK think Henry the Eighth was a socialist." Was he in collective control of the means of production?
    4
  6640. Yes, I agree. As people have pointed out, the Rzhev offensives might have distracted the German High Command and lead them to beef up Army Group Centre. I've already gathered some books and I'm planning to look into this for future videos. In the meantime, I agree that things perhaps weren't so clear-cut at the time, and we're viewing this from the benefit of hindsight.
    4
  6641. Yes, but a 40% replacement rate (A and B) vs a 38% replacement rate (Centre) doesn't scream priority to me. In my opinion, North and Centre probably should have got around 40% between them, and South 60% - or something along those lines. This is including the Rzhev issue.
    4
  6642. Yeah I think that was a bad call by Keegan. Sources should be standard. Secondary sources are great of course, but there's no excuse for not providing a bibliography. I haven't read his book though. Also, just so you know, I deleted a couple comments on another video which I'd missed, but you'd responded to a couple hours ago. I'd rather not have far-right idiots spamming the comments so I'm straight up deleting and blocking them now (hate doing it, but I feel it's necessary). YouTube doesn't like said topic and I don't want hate in the comments, so for the safety of the channel I'm playing it safe. I had to delete your comment, but you're obviously not blocked :)
    4
  6643. Good point! I think the Dieppe Raid had something to do with sending units to the west.
    4
  6644. Glad you agree! What's your area of focus?
    4
  6645. Thanks for the support, it really is making the difference :)
    4
  6646. Hate to tell you but I'm working on a 24 hour in-depth video on the Battle of Stalingrad. This is why I'm concentrating on this subject. I promise you though, it'll be this entertaining, if not moreso, since it'll be like my more recent 'Battlestorm' documentaries. Glad to have you onboard :)
    4
  6647. No, that's MARXIST Socialism, NOT socialism. I don't know how many times I have to tell you this, but there is a difference, and I've explained this in so many videos. Socialism is state ownership of the means of production. Marxism is the worker-state's ownership of the means of production. See the difference? National Socialism and Marxist Socialism are two variants of socialism, but they are not the same. And again, I've been over this before too. Please pay attention and understand what I'm saying before you attempt to call me out for something I've explained a hundred times before.
    4
  6648. The maps are Glantz's Achilles heel. But in theory, this series will compliment Glantz's works, since I'm providing the maps that he lacks. And he provides the details I couldn't possibly include in this series (otherwise it'll be even longer!)
    4
  6649. Yes, that is the downside of books compared to video. But videos can't really give you all the details, so the books are still vital. Video and books complement each other
    4
  6650. "I am on suicide watch" As in, you're watching others, or you're being watched?
    4
  6651. Maybe not, but I'm playing it super-safe. I think my content is on the edge as it is, and I don't need to give the censors or outrage mob any excuse to get rid.
    4
  6652. That's a good way of putting it
    4
  6653. You were third I'm afraid. Good try though!
    4
  6654. Fascists are idiots = far right apologia now?
    4
  6655. AN-IM-A-TOR ST-RU-GG-LING! And I'm struggling too if I'm honest... The work-load is too much
    4
  6656. I cover this in the video
    4
  6657. Good points!
    4
  6658.  @li6008  I have a link, but it's not on YouTube, and I'm not giving it you. If you search for "Hitler communist" on Bitchute, you should find it. (EDIT: The reason I'm not giving you the link directly is because I don't know the integrity of the people who've uploaded such videos, so I don't want my enemies accusing me of agreeing with them when I don't know who they are.)
    4
  6659. Wikipedia doesn't tell the full story https://youtu.be/wXIoVEKIpMg
    4
  6660. A global drought and famine and a specific latitude and longitude... in fact, only in Russia during a period where Lenin was actively shooting peasant farmers and stealing their grain.
    4
  6661. The definition of a "manifesto", according to Cambridge dictionary, is "a written statement of the beliefs, aims, and policies of an organization, especially a political party". https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/manifesto Similar definitions are provided by: Webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manifesto The UK government https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/manifesto/ And, your favourite, Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto So yes, the Communist MANIFESTO was a political program.
    4
  6662. He wasn't a Communist when he got into power, only in early 1919. He was a National Socialist when he got into power.
    4
  6663. But surely, if they did that, then that would make them a revolutionary force, since they've trying to take down the government.
    4
  6664. Except there was no monarchy, and they were fighting for the revolutionary government against counter-revolutionaries, since any uprising after the first revolution would technically be counter to the first revolution.
    4
  6665. I've just checked the "held for review" folder in case the comment was put under that, but no. So it looks like it's been deleted. Considering that I was able to reply to it, I'd imagine that it's since been reported by someone. I've looked up that book by Borrego, but from what I can see it's not available in English, so unfortunately it's not something I'm going to be able to access. To clarify, so are you saying that you were a NS who didn't think that NS was antisemitic?
    4
  6666.  @romitkumar6272  I cover this topic in more depth here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg (video: Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism)
    4
  6667. I know, it's silly, but it's not the first time a video of mine caused people to unsubscribe. The extension is called VidIQ. I think the free version provides the subscriber count, and also other features too.
    4
  6668. " So, in another words, you want to prove that all "socialists" are warmongers and mass murderers. Are you aware that you're taking a slippery slope position? You're trying to blame an ideology, not people (or rather psychopaths) who want to hide behind it. That's just dishonest and so wrong on too many levels, and gives people totally wrong ideas." Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Che, Lenin, Trotsky, Xi Jinping, Beria, Ho Chi Minh, Molotov, Khrushchev, Castro, Kim Il-sung, Kim Jong-un... ALL of these communists/socialists were/are warmongers and mass murderers. Karl Marx called for war, which he called "Revolution", and for "class struggle" (war against the rest of society and the Jews). The ideology itself is inherently designed to cause violence, slavery and oppression. It's not a case of psychopaths are being drawn to the ideology, but that the ideology is actually creating psychopaths. None of what I'm saying here is "dishonest and wrong", nor is it giving people "totally wrong ideas". History shows all this clearly, that's why you and your brethren are desperate to distort history. - "Just btw, when you were a socialist (as you've admitted so), did you want to initiate wars and kill people?" I understood that war was a necessary evil and that the Revolution was inevitable. I, of course, no longer subscribe to either of those views now. War should be avoided at all costs, and the Revolution is absolutely not inevitable and doesn't even need to happen. The poor can get rich under capitalism if they drop their socialist ideology and learnt basic economics. - "Hitler was an ambitious, ego-tripping psychopath. Just like many other politicians." Just like ALL politicians. - "He used the crisis in society to seize the power." Just like any other Revolutionary. - "And the most important thing is that we learn what exactly brought him in such position and what initiated crisis, so we wouldn't make such mistakes again and avoid potential crisis. That's what history needs to teach us." Absolutely. - "Symbols and labels are NOT important, just maybe a side note, at most." Except that those symbols and labels are exactly what brought him to power. So you're ignoring the lesson that history is trying to teach you, and you're doing it because you support the exact same symbols and labels. You're ego-invested in the ideology and don't have the courage to seriously question it, in case it (somehow) damages who you are as a person. I can guarantee you that that isn't what will happen. You will be embarrassed for believing in such nonsense and then, after you get over that embarrassment, a world of opportunities will open up to you that you never even dreamed possible. - "For instance... We are on the brink of the WW3, right now. What is Putin? Tell me, is he a socialist? Communist maybe? What ideology we should blame now?" He's an ex-member of the KGB (communist) who wants to reunite the Soviet Union and destroy western capitalism. At the very least, he's socialist, which is why he's aligned with China. - "Or maybe, just maybe, nothing is really black or white, and there are many other instances we should pay our attention for. Causes and consequences, actions and reactions... not ideologies." Nothing is by accident. People have ideas, those ideas are the causes, and the consequences are what we are seeing. Ignoring the ideologies is ignoring the causes. - "And that's why only numbnuts are interested into labels and symbols." The reason I'm a numbnut is because I will stubbornly stand by the facts and not bow to social pressure, even when my critics are trying to paint me as insane, anti-semitic, evil, demonic, madman, hopeless, crazy, Jewish, bitter, angry, hateful... and so on. Name calling is irrelevant. Even if I was any one of those things, it doesn't change the evidence. Focus on the argument not the person making it. - "Smart, mature people are getting into relevant details and data, into causes and consequences, because that's how problems are getting resolved. And I really, really hope you can understand that." This is relevant, it's detailed and it's data. It is the cause, and the consequences are striking. I can't talk about the consequences unless I talk about the causes. I cannot explain the Holocaust if it was caused by the buying and selling of goods and services on the free market. I can only explain it if it was centrally planned, and in order to cover it I have to explain the ideology that caused it - socialism. Denying the socialism in National Socialism is equivalent to denying the Holocaust. - "Stop with child games already, and smarten up, will you?" You have the potential within you to do great things, but your distorted view of the world will prevent you from achieving your dreams.
    4
  6669. The old political spectrum we're all taught in school https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-o3ksdRetlXA/UwyeyC9seOI/AAAAAAAAA-Q/fAbadsmxY-g/s1600/left_right_political_spectrum_011.jpg And while not perfect, a more reasonable political spectrum that actually makes sense https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o6CgYef2JOc/V-7eJdEoTaI/AAAAAAAAASc/N__TENzy5-QwIzzpcux0YOIuJ-MVuhxDACK4B/s1600/Political%2BSpectrum.jpg
    4
  6670. "Archives have no documents, supporting the version that the Soviets wanted to go to Vyborg. There were simply no such plans." Or the documents were removed/hidden, similar to those documents involving the Warsaw Uprising, where the place the documents for those dates are meant to be is strangely empty...
    4
  6671. I'm sorry this disappointed you. Given the limited sources (this basically isn't covered at all in English) I don't think it would be possible to do this any differently at this time
    4
  6672. Yes you are :)
    4
  6673. The sacrifice of the 6th Army to save Army Group A is partially true, and I'll be covering that in a future video :)
    4
  6674. Good to hear! That means we're discovering another truth about this conflict :)
    4
  6675. During a recession (if left to correct itself) living standards increase. However, during the Great Depression, the government under Hoover, and later Roosevelt, intervened to 'combat' the Depression. Thus, living standards declined further like they do during the 'boom' years.
    4
  6676. I missed your comment somehow. Thanks for the feedback. The idea I had was to put the narration to the music. That didn't work, but at least I gave it a go. Leant my lesson :)
    4
  6677. Was it worth the wait? :)
    4
  6678. Blender, which is free, and on Steam http://store.steampowered.com/app/365670/?snr=1_5_1100__1100 If you (or anyone else) decide to use it, good luck. Seriously, good luck. It's an absolute nightmare to learn, took me months to get a decent grip on it. But once you get used to it it's good.
    4
  6679. I've just deleted them. Use the non-auto ones I put in!
    4
  6680. I did talk about them a lot in the earlier episodes, but they've been sat on the Don for a few weeks. Soon they'll be back in the action :)
    4
  6681. Glad to hear you enjoy it enough to rewatch it!
    4
  6682. Congratulations!
    4
  6683. Define 'great'. Great at holding and keeping power, yes. Great at looking after and leading his people, no.
    4
  6684. Again, watch my Public vs Private video, which shows what the terms are historically rather than what people 'believe' they are or mean https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6685. Yes, Wikipedia is absolutely wrong. Fascism is nationality-socialism (non-race, which is why there were Jews in the Italian Fascist Party and State). and National Socialism is racial-socialism (socialism on the racial-national level).
    4
  6686. It's tempting, considering how long it's going to be! :D
    4
  6687. If Viktor Suvorov approached those sources anything like the way he's approached Keitel's memoirs, then I expect he's taken what was said out of context. I will probably do more on Mr Suvorov in the future, but I've been told Glantz's book "Stumbling Colossus" was written as a definitive answer to the claims made in Suvorov's "Icebreaker". I haven't read Stumbling Colossus yet (but have just purchased a copy), but I think you'll get your answer there. In the future, I do hope to answer it properly too.
    4
  6688. His Icebreaker goes into a lot of different aspects to this idea (and I couldn't possibly cover them all in this video), but essentially he is manipulating the facts to provide weight to his argument. I'm glad you agree, because as a Russian anti-communist, you're probably one of the target audiences for Suvorov (along with pro-Nazis trying to make Germany seem like the victim)
    4
  6689. What about 1937? Or 1923? Or 1914?
    4
  6690. Yes, I agree. There are people out there that do think critically, but you're right that more people need to start doing so.
    4
  6691. Thanks Ricky, I'm so glad that someone currently in the military is agreeing on that point. Had someone in the comment section saying that I was wrong.
    4
  6692. Thank you Shaw, I tried to make the video accessable to non-history people too. And if you, or anyone else reading this, are non-history people, THIS is what history is about. It's all a constant exercise in critical thinking. In a way, historians are like prosecutors in a court room. Gather the evidence, form a conclusion, crush the opposition.
    4
  6693. Yeah, a lot of people make statements that simply don't hold up when you question them. People comment every day on my Market Garden videos saying "A single lane for 16 miles with your enemy all around you. Great plan!" (this is an actual quote from one of them, and he got it wrong, it was 60 miles). They don't like it when I point out that it wasn't the road that was the issue, it was the bridges, since one of them wasn't captured on day 1, which is where the tanks got stuck. The usual response is for them to go very quiet, or argue back saying "you're just in love with Montgomery", which is also equally as false.
    4
  6694. I do not :)
    4
  6695. Hey Crownofall, I'm glad you didn't jump to conclusions :)
    4
  6696. Well, I hope it lives up to expectations 👍
    4
  6697. I sort of did that in the Public vs Private video, but you're right that I probably should do a stand alone video on the subject.
    4
  6698. Hope you enjoy the video!
    4
  6699. At least you're honest!
    4
  6700. Pro tip: it's always OIL, or HALDER
    4
  6701. The views are down this week, mainly because of the length of the videos. YouTube really doesn't like short-form content at the moment.
    4
  6702. "Capitalism is not free market, it can not be and it will not be" Fine, I'm not a capitalist then. I'm a free market guy.
    4
  6703. "Capitalism" If this economy is capitalism, then I'm not a capitalist. I want a free market, not a state-run fiat currency BS "economy".
    4
  6704. "if you are not able to pay a living wage, you should not be in business at all." Nobody owes you anything, not even a "living wage". Your wages are determined by your skill and the number of people who have the same skill as you (supply and demand). If you're not being paid what you deem to be a "living wage", then the onus is on you to either get better skills, or work for yourself. And I encourage you to produce your own products and services, as that's the way to wealth. Working for other people is not the way to wealth. - "Working full hours, even 2 jobs and still having to use gov benefits is just wrong." Correct, although the problem isn't the employer, it's you and the government. I'm not against the idea of someone on benefits also working for a cash-in-hand job on the side. In fact, I encourage it. If you're going to receive benefits from the state either way, you should at least be productive. The economy is grinding to a halt as a result of the inflation and low-interest rate policies we've had for decades now https://mises.org/wire/here-we-go-again-fed-causing-another-recession
    4
  6705. caelachyt Ah, but here's the thing. I was taught (when studying for my history degree) to come to definite conclusions. So for example, rather than saying "it was a combination of factors that lead to blah blah blah" we would say "this was the main reason for blah blah blah". Now, the reason I think we were taught that was so that actually stated an argument in our essays, which would then lead to higher marks. But the benefit of having an argument when writting essays or in this case a documentary is that it leads to discussion (or an argument lol). Now, I absolutely agree with you that it was a "combination of factors" that lead to the failure of Operation Market Garden. You listed a good chunk of them above. But for me to just state that it was a "combination of factors" wouldn't teach anything to anybody. It wouldn't discuss the debate that historians are having over this subject, as every documentary out there comes to the same conclusions. Seriously, I ask you to go out there and find a documentary that even mentions the failure at Nijmegen. Nobody mentions it. Why? Because it would lead to debate. On TV, a debate is bad. You don't want people complaining about your programs so you just pander to the masses. On the internet, debate is good. YouTube is a social platform. I enjoy debating things. I'm enjoying debating it with you now. And that's something we wouldn't have got if I'd said the same thing every other documentary out there had said. Because I said "it was Gavin" essentially makes this a debate. And that's the point. On the one hand, it's actually arguing something, rather than being a bit indecisive. On the other, it gets people interested in talking about history. So with all that in mind, here's a question for you (and anyone else reading this). We all accept that it was a combination of factors that lead to Operation Market Garden. BUT if you had to choose ONE reason out of all of the factors listed as the PRIMARY reason for it's failure, which one would you choose? You can only choose one. What problem had the most negative impact on the Operation and cost the Allies the victory? It doesn't matter if you still think it was a "combination of factors". What, in your opinion, was the main factor out of the combination? Was it Browning? Was it Gavin? Was it faulty radios? What part of Monty's plan was it that went wrong? And I said it when I came to my conclusions in the video but I'll say it again. Every soldier, both Allied and German, fought hard in this battle. Nobody questions that. But sometimes mistakes are made. We just need to figure out what was the biggest mistake in this case.
    4
  6706. But that's not why it failed. That's why it began.
    4
  6707. It's the taking part that counts or something
    4
  6708. Which is probably why they need to read that book I recommended. I don't blame people who get sucked into the propaganda, because unless you've looked beyond the military history you won't spot it.
    4
  6709. Well, of course history is inaccurate when you have socialists who think National Socialists are capitalist.
    4
  6710. Unfortunately, their solution to capitalism was a more intensified version of it - socialism. What we need is not capitalism, but a free market.
    4
  6711. There's more factors than just minimum wage: regulations, taxation, and so on... The same principle I outlined applies to all of them. Goods prices are a different kettle of fish, which are determined by supply and demand, not cost. However, we'd have to talk about inflation, which is caused by the communist Central Banks, in order to discuss the price. For this reason, you'd be better to watch my first video on Weimar Hyperinflation because I explain the problem there https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA?si=ndwxkADjqSzciBP-
    4
  6712. I'm not a Commie-servative, so no it isn't.
    4
  6713. Oh wow, thank you very much!! I'll be messaging the new Patreons tomorrow, but seriously, thank you. You and the others are making these videos happen. It's going to make a difference, you'll see :)
    4
  6714. Thanks, I like constructive feedback :) in this case, I had to rush to get the video done, mainly because I ran out of time between doing this and my full-time job. I simply didn't have time to trim the fat during the editing process. Totally my fault and I'm aiming not to do it again
    4
  6715. My plan was to get through the North African Campaign, then do the Sicilian and Italian Campaigns, then Normandy. Why? Because I want to see what came before Montgomery and the US generals, and see how good they really were. Long term strategy ;)
    4
  6716. It's on my to-do list :)
    4
  6717. Nope. And it's not the weather either ;)
    4
  6718. And thank you for your kind words sir!
    4
  6719. Seydlitz did take a tea break in this video
    4
  6720.  @caryblack5985  Yeah, it's a challenge just to get these videos out on time as it is!
    4
  6721. I saw a few comments saying this. Yes, you are correct (Google failed me). It's annoying, but I'm not going to take the video down just for that
    4
  6722. I'm using a modified version of this http://niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html I actually need to do a symbols video explaining what I'm doing because a couple of Patreons have asked me about this and I need to explain a couple of my modifications
    4
  6723.  @82dorrin  To be honest, I'm not sure. I think I'm just run-down. None of my family or friends have caught it, despite being in close proximity the day before I got it, and having seen some family since then.
    4
  6724. Devon Ziegler I've heard he hasn't been a good president?
    4
  6725. When it dropped I actually started making a script. But I'm not sure if I'll continue with it or not. I think my priorities lie elsewhere right now... However, I could still change my mind.
    4
  6726. Is that genuinely what happened? I didn't know Keith Woods started off 'normal' socialist. I know AA went into Julius Evola territory, and it was at that point I stopped keeping up with his stuff. I still watch occasionally, but not as often.
    4
  6727. Because both lead to totalitarianism.
    4
  6728. * SPOILER and CORRECTION * Due to me misreading the info, I got this wrong! (see, I will admit my mistakes). PzIII chassis production was more than any other, but technically, it was the StuG III that was the most produced German AFV
    4
  6729. Congrats!
    4
  6730. Glad you enjoyed the video! As for the book by Max Domeras, according to: http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/Hitlerdocumentary.htm "Unfortunately, however, the Domarus volumes suffer from several significant deficiencies. Contrary to what most people think this is not a complete collection of complete speeches. Some speeches are mere excerpts. Others are missing altogether. Even worse is the fact the confused editorial structure of the book. It is often hard to see where speeches begin and end, and Domarus insists on inserting his comments in the middle of speeches. The main value of the book is that it is a good list of Hitler's speeches and footnotes for those speech listings. The English translation is a particular problem being of very poor quality." :( This is frustrating because I could really do with a complete collection of Hitler's speeches.
    4
  6731. If we keep at it, our videos will slowly get better over time :) Have you considered explaining economics using your Lego collection? There's already a lot of economics channels out there, so doing it using Lego could be a nice gimmick of yours, and it might appeal to both economic and non-economic audiences. Just a suggestion :)
    4
  6732. "Instantly discredited in my humble opinion." Why? Because you can't accept the idea that democracy might not be what you think it is?
    4
  6733. Not all socialists realize that they're anti-semitic. When I was a socialist, I didn't realise that hatred of the bourgeoisie was the hatred of the Jews. This realisation was what instantly broke the spell, and I came out of the hypnosis. That was my Red Pill moment.
    4
  6734. It is silly. When I bought Mein Kampf, I wondered if my name was added to ze list... And it probably was!
    4
  6735.  @BobWill1846  I've actually decided that I prefer to script all my videos. I think they just come across better overall, which is why I don't usually do them like that anymore. But the downside is that this does put more pressure on me because scripting takes time. It's a trade off.
    4
  6736. I'd say the opposite. The channel has never done as well as it has recently done. Pausing Stalingrad to concentrate on the ideology of Fascism and Nazism for just a few months was by far the best decision I've ever made. The return of Stalingrad could potentially lead to a loss of momentum.
    4
  6737. I honestly don't know. I've not looked into it. But I would assume not considering he was living behind the iron curtain.
    4
  6738. He gets promoted
    4
  6739. Brave brave brave, Sir Pienaar
    4
  6740. Hope they're worth the wait :) I just wish I could make them quicker, but I'm going as fast as I can right now
    4
  6741. Maybe it's not a question of when the British start "winning" but when the Germans start "losing"
    4
  6742. Glad you liked the video! And yes, I replied to someone else about the battleship thing who questioned it. I must apologize, I double-checked my source, and it's not "Battleships" but "warships". Somehow in the process of making the video I've converted this into "battleships", which is incorrect (although may have included battleships, but it wasn't Battleships). I shall give you the original quote - "[Rommel] had cabled Mussolini on December 2nd to the effect that the fighting efficiency of Panzergruppe Afrika depended upon a continuous stream of reinforcements, fuel, ammunition, and replacement armour and artillery, and the reply, that sea traffic between Italy and Libya was becoming increasingly dangerous, and that warships were the only vessels capable of getting through - and then with only limited cargoes of fuel and ammunition - had been dismissed by him as just another example of Italian obstructiveness." Page 146-147, Pitt, B. "The Crucible of War: Auchinleck's Command." Volume II, 2001. I can't pull this video down for that mistake, but I will correct it for the final 7-8 hour all-in-one Crusader video.
    4
  6743. I am too. It's interesting because it seems like a waste of men, so I want to know why it was formed in the first place. Also, Gause (mentioned in this video) was the Chief of Staff of German forces in Courland. The only issue is, I have very limited sources on it in English, and I'm not sure my German will be good enough by the time I come to work on it. But I'm determined to do as good a job on it as possible.
    4
  6744. I do want to cover the battle of Berlin one day. The current plan though is Crusader, Courland, and Stalingrad.
    4
  6745. Agreed. Think it doesn't help that I originally accidentally titled it the "Division" rather than "Regiment", so some people are coming from other areas of the internet where they're linked to this as the "Division" rather than the "Regiment"
    4
  6746. You've very welcome, Tomislav :) you may like next week's video too (it'll give some context to how this unit fit in with Sixth Army)
    4
  6747. "except that bullshit when you claimed that NSDAP was a far left party simply because they stuffed the word "socialist" in their name, which was a total nonsense and pretty silly" Except that wasn't bullshit. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Are you telling me that the Nazi economy wasn't run by the state? Because I can provide you with overwhelming evidence that says it was, if you'd like to see it? The best part is, by exposing Hitler's socialism, you massively undermine the neo-Nazi cause. By pretending it's capitalism, people will be more willing to go over to the neo-Nazi cause, since they think it's just another form of capitalism (which it isn't). "You are responsible for your comments, you can't just make a video, no matter how unbiased it is, and stand aside and let people do anything in YOUR comment section." Funny because when I announced that I was deleting denialist comments, I had such a backlash from people crying 'free speech'. Of course, they were correct. Free speech is actually a core tenant of western liberal thinking, and therefore, comments shall remain (except for spammy ones that don't do anything to the discussion). For example, your comment wasn't deleted even though you're promoting the myth that Nationalsocialism wasn't socialism, furthering the neo-Nazi cause (and, unknowingly, denying the existence of both the Holocaust and WW2 - since you can't explain these two events without Hitler's socialism). Rather than delete your comment for spouting Marxist propaganda, I've left it up, challenged you on it, and prepared to unleash a ton of evidence on you when you claim that I'm still wrong. ('Privatization', trade unions, Erst Röhm etc, all can be explained.) So, let's see what you decide to do - claim I'm wrong without presenting any evidence in support, claim I'm wrong by presenting evidence that won't stand up to my evidence, delete your own comment (lots of Marxists and Neo-Nazis resort to that tactic when I corner them) or accept that perhaps TIK actually has done a ton more research and has absolutely done his homework so you'll ask me to present my evidence because you're curious as to what I've found. Your choice.
    4
  6748. I'm glad you think so! Be sure to tell people about my videos :) and if you could recommend me a good English book or two on the Estonian division, I'll do it. I actually want to cover obscure units like the 100th Jäger Division, as well as others, but can't find English books on them
    4
  6749. VIII Corps, not VII Corps :/
    4
  6750. "Nearly of the sources you cited were right-wing libertarian ones, which you took your hyper-simplified economic model from." I used economic books from economists, not social revolutionaries. Turns out that socialist economic models don't work, as history makes it very clear. The Labour Theory of Value can't even explain why a Manchester United shirt is £45 while another shirt that takes the same time to make is £5 in Primark. It's pointless. And the only reason they come to this idea that socialism works is because they don't understand basic economics. Worse, they assumed that because they have read the Communist Manifesto (they clearly hadn't read Das Kapital, and I don't blame them because it's almost as badly written as Mein Kampf) and think that they were entitled to free money by not working. Sorry, but if you crash land on a tropical island and you don't work for your food, you starve to death. The same applies in the modern world. Unfortunately, people didn't listen to me at all in that video, otherwise you wouldn't be accusing me of making blank statements. I explained why taxing the rich hurts the poor. In fact, that was one of the central points of the video. "Groups that develop this kind of group tribal mentality don't have to just be groups that people are born into. The same thing can happen with ideological groups." Agreed. "if you identify yourself as a libertarian, it is easy to fall into the trap of assuming that sources or models which support your ideology are trustworthy, and ones that don't are untrustworthy. Both marxists and libertarians are often guilty of this, thinking that hyper-simplified economic models which support their ideology represent the fundamental nature of capitalism, but others which don't are either nonsense or malicious propaganda from the other side." Agreed. This is why I'm neither a Marxist nor Libertarian, since their models don't work. I go for evidence and interpretation. Superior evidence and interpretation is essential for our understanding of the truth. If you reject evidence and interpretation, rather than build a strong argument that counters it, you've failed - which is what I explained in my "What is History" video I mentioned and linked to in this video. My arguments are based on the superior evidence and interpretations. Many people who disagree with me assume I don't understand their arguments. No, I do understand their arguments 100%, I'm just siding with the superior evidence, interpretations and arguments.
    4
  6751. Retail will do that to you, trust me
    4
  6752. Stalin and the Soviet Union were evil, just like Hitler and the National Socialist regime were evil. I'm not anti-German at all. If you genuinely think that, you've come to the wrong conclusions.
    4
  6753. But while I may have a liberal bias, that particular ideology doesn't mean I support other liberals, or that it restricts me from understanding other ideologies. Unlike other ideologies, the liberal one is the most flexible, and most neutral - since it's individualistic. Also, I didn't "ignore" those things. I just haven't heard about most of them until now. But while they may be American companies, by the end of 1933 the German industries had been expropriated to the state, so those companies were under German state control.
    4
  6754. We don't have a "private" train network in the UK. The government corporation known as Network Rail (or, as I like to call it, Network FAIL) is the only entity in the UK that can build train lines and train stations. It also dictates the wages, pension and prices of every "private" operator that rents the government lines. Thus, it's merely a veneer of free markets on a coffin of socialism. And this explains why the network is inefficient and overcrowded - the state hasn't built enough lines or stations.
    4
  6755. I love that it failed. That's the power of the free market - letting bad businesses fail, something socialism discourages.
    4
  6756. I do try my hardest to bring clarity to the topics at hand, so I'm glad you think so.
    4
  6757.  @markzuckergecko621  "Most smart people are also pretty weird." OR you haven't taken the time to actually listen to the position and have jumped to silly conclusions. Like, I disagree with a lot of other political movements, but I wouldn't describe most of them as "weird" because I understand their position, I just don't agree with it.
    4
  6758. Government is the primate social order. Government is based on violence and oppression towards the lower orders. That's why, when government stepped back and let the market function, billions of people were lifted out of poverty for the first time in human history. And now that government is taking over again, we're heading back into poverty, eating bugs and being happy.
    4
  6759. "I’ve seen your public vs private video and I’m a bit confused how corporations, such as Apple or McDonald’s, can be considered statist. Weren’t these businesses started by entrepreneurs?" Yes, they started off as private businesses, but evolved into corporations - organs of the state. They're now funded by the state via the debt-based economic model, and they're heavily regulated, taxed and inspected (if not run in some ways) by government officials. So, having an independent restaurant chain with a couple of branches isn't a statist. But once you reach a certain point (probably when a business goes "public" and puts its shares on the stock exchange, or gets involved in politics) that's when they transition from Private to Public and become statist. I hope that clarifies things.
    4
  6760. Thank you! I do get the impression that people don't take me seriously. In fact, most of them aren't even able to listen.
    4
  6761. You weren't first!
    4
  6762. Yes, no question about it. I even bought this book a few days ago https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01L2MWKZ2/ref=kinw_myk_ro_title Although I tend to avoid books like this, there really isn't a lot written about them in English - or at least not much I could find. If anyone can give me book suggestions or point me in the right direction, I'd be greatful
    4
  6763. Only support me if you can afford it. Your education must come first! And yes, but I'm going to make another video soon explaining about the sources and why buying multiple books on the same subject is important. I'm also going to answer a question about sources that InDisguise asked about 2 months ago and has probably forgetten about, but I haven't forgotten as it was quite a good one.
    4
  6764. I'm an idiot!!!! Sorry Ricky! :( I now need to make it up to you somehow
    4
  6765. Well yes, because all the primary and secondary sources were written by other humans/authors
    4
  6766. I'm afraid you were about 5th, but nice effort!
    4
  6767. Interesting. Can you point me to a book or video where it's explained that Carrier mistranslated sources? Edit: I'm fascinated about ancient history in general so would like to do more reading. Carrier's lectures on YouTube are interesting in their own right regardless of your perspective, but I'd like to hear more counter-arguments.
    4
  6768. Well, this video is doing really well for the first night (better than average). But in some ways, I actually don't want it too; I have enough trouble replying to everyone as it is :)
    4
  6769. Isn't Courland just 1 province in HOI4? It would make for a very quick gameplay video!
    4
  6770. Glad to hear you enjoyed it!
    4
  6771. Hope you enjoy!
    4
  6772. That's not how logic works, sir. History lies in the heart of the debate because HISTORY IS THE DEBATE. No debate, no history https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    4
  6773. Four videos for you OP - Two critics already making the same argument as you https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 For the historical definition of Socialism (the "Public vs Private" video) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Why Hitler was a Socialist ("Hitler's Socialism" video) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And why there's adifference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko These are long videos but they're fully sourced and referenced, and I think you will find them enlightening.
    4
  6774. Because I discovered in the past that YouTube likes to suppress videos on this subject, that's why. There's other evidence I have which I've not presented that I think makes it certain that this "platform" (publisher) isn't on the side of reason.
    4
  6775.  @calumdeighton  Well, I'm glad you're doing better today! I don't think this video is "heavy" - it's more of a historical debate, so it shouldn't depress you
    4
  6776. By "liberalism", do you mean old fashioned liberalism (individual liberty) or Left-wing "liberalism" (which is just Socialism by another name)?
    4
  6777. From my own experience in studying history at college and university in the UK, I don't think it was given anywhere near enough attention. Perhaps I was just unlucky and I hope it's not the norm for other students, but I only recall us ever dicussing this issue once in the whole of my education. The emphasis was more on handing in coursework and passing tests than teaching us the core values of the subject. It's no wonder people view history as "boring". I also see Prit Buttar's done a couple books on WW2. I will add them all to my wish-list of doom
    4
  6778. Jamie can't respond right now as he's too busy being LAST
    4
  6779. I'm sure there's no way to exploit comment time stamping. 5th comment on video, 16:46 BST 25/12/1972
    4
  6780. In what sense?
    4
  6781. I didn't realise I'd get this type of knee-jerk reaction, but it really is funny
    4
  6782. I'm currently reading up about Stalingrad, and the Germans used airstrikes to cripple many of the Soviet counterattacks. It's certainly implied by Glantz that this was one of the reasons the Germans held out against the counterattacks. Now, how is that any different than what the Germans suffered later in the war? It just seemed that people view the German success because they were "superior" and then the German defeats because "they didn't have enough stuff" as the allies. Maybe then the reason the Soviets lost so much in 1941 wasn't because of German superiority but because they didn't have enough stuff either. Reading up about Barbarossa, the Soviet tanks often ran out of fuel. Again, people assume it's because the Germans used superior tactics and so on, not that they held the initiative because they started the war against an enemy that was both surprised and unprepared.
    4
  6783. Sean, answer me this - if the Germans were tactically superior to the Red Army, why didn't they at least kill double or triple the Soviets at the end of the war? As I quotes in the comment above from Max Hastings "T-34s would approach six, twelve abreast. The Germans would knock out four or five, but there were always more. 'You couldn't believe the way they kept coming - their infantry simply charging our tanks, running and shouting, even when the bodies were piled up in front of our positions. Sometimes our infantry seemed paralysed by the spectacle. One thought: "How can we eve stop such people?" ' Surely, if the Soviets were charging around like that, you think the Germans would slaughter them. But apparently not. And this wasn't a documentary, this was a lecture.
    4
  6784. Link to the Glantz video you suggested for anyone out there that's curious https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU (I actually linked to it in the previous video as it's great) Common myths in the literature (and especially in the comments of my previous YouTube videos, as well as other places like on forums online) often state the things I disputed in this video. For example, the drowning under Soviet hordes. To quote Max Hastings in Armageddon P129 "Yet, if the Red Army at last possessed hitting power and command skills as great as those of any combatant, its infantry and armoured assaults relied upon the sacrifice of lives rather than upon tactical ingenuity or even common prudence." - this is a blatent lie. Again, by Max Hastings page 130 "T-34s would approach six, twelve abreast. The Germans would knock out four or five, but there were always more. 'You couldn't believe the way they kept coming - their infantry simply charging our tanks, running and shouting, even when the bodies were piled up in front of our positions. Sometimes our infantry seemed paralysed by the spectacle. One thought: "How can we eve stop such people?" ' Rolf-Helmut Schröder, a Wehrmacht officer who became a post-war Bundeswehr general, said: "The Russians were not good soldiers. But they had very good generals, and they had mass.' " If that above quote doesn't make it seem that the Germans were good on the defense, I don't know what does. And this is typical of the literature. Hasting (amongst many others) gives the impression that the Soviets used weight of numbers alone to overcome the Heer. When you consider that German officers were also saying this, it's no wonder people have this impression. And he's not alone. I quoted from Manstein in the video, and I could go on. In the video I linked to at the end, Jonathan House discusses this issue, again I will link it here https://youtu.be/zinPbUZUHDE You make the distinction about the tactical and operational vs the strategic level, and again conclude that the Germans were better on the tactical level. My point was to say - if the Germans were great at the tactical level, you'd think they'd still kill many more times their number. The reality is they didn't. Most of the "kills" and captures came in 1941, and to a lesser extent 1942. Overall rates for the whole war were a lot less, which suggests that the Soviets weren't so inferior on the tactical level. You'd think that 100,000 Germans who were meant to be superior on the tactical level, would be able to take out at least 100,000 Soviets, if not a lot more. Yet, by 1944-1945 they don't, even on the defense.
    4
  6785. The thing is, that what I'm saying in this video is still true. People may not be agreeing with me (and I may not have presented it as well as I could have) but what I'm saying is true. The German and Soviet soldiers were equal adversaries. The Germans though, outnumbered the Soviets at the beginning of hte war, and the Soviets outnumbered the Germans from December 1941 onwards. Coupled with the oil crisis, it explains why the Germans were ultimately defeated. (for anyone else reading this wondering about the oil video - here's the link https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg )
    4
  6786. So you want me to mention everything in great detail about the biggest war in history *in just 15 minutes*? Sorry, but that's not possible. My previous 10 minute video did attempt this and everyone complained I didn't give enough examples, which is why I made this one. And this video has had a knee-jerk reaction by people who can't bring themselves to watch a whole video before accusing me of not talking about stuff I actually talked about in the video they didn't watch. The point of the video, as talked about at the beginning and in the title, was to show that the Wehrmacht wasn't as "superior" to the Red Army as the German generals and as a lot of people consider it to be. This video does prove this point, and most of the people arguing in this comment section saying it doesn't or that it's wrong either haven't watched the full video, or haven't any or sufficient provided sources to back up their claims (which means they haven't brought any evidence to refute it). I do in fact mention most of what you said in the rest of the video. At around or just before 15 minutes in I start talking about how the Soviets didn't outnumber the Germans by much for the whole of the war. This is the point I also discuss the strategic and operational situation, but obviously you switched off at this point. 27:17 start talking about equipment (tanks and SPG's and rifles especially). 35:43 I ask the question - if the German Army wasn't superior, why did the Germans inflict so many losses on the Soviets in 1941? This part again talks about the tactical, operational and strategic advantages that the Germans had in 1941 as well as their "Blitzkrieg" (it's not called that) strategy. Within that last 10 minutes, I do mention force ratio for attackers and defenders as you asked. And to your point about the Russians were fighting on the defense "obviously", you are incorrect, as I explain in the video. They are not supplied with significant quantities of Lend-Lease equipment until 1943. I do not mention this in the video, but am planning to make a video about it in the future. "I saw a lot of numbers taken out of context which looked to me both wrong and sounded boring." - I suspect it's boring because it is you who do not understand the context, not me. They are not out of context. We're talking about the stratigic level of the WW2 Eastern Front between 1941 and 1945 and the battles therein, as I talked about during table 3. Patience is a virtue. Please learn to be patient. Sources are in the description.
    4
  6787. It's wasn't as long to put together as some of my documentaries. My Market Garden video took around 3 months to create. Hope you enjoy the other video :) and you weren't far off with my accent.
    4
  6788. Yeah, it's a lot of dislikes. But most of the people who disliked the video didn't watch more than 5 minutes into it. Someone actually commented today saying that they only watched 2 minutes of the video (why they chose to admit this, I have no idea) and then preceeded to argue against the video (even though most of the points they brought up were tackled in the video, which they didn't watch). A lot have also misinterpreted what I was saying to mean that the Germans were "bad at fighting" which I never said. Ultimately, I've learnt several valuable lessons from this video, and I will return to this topic in the future.
    4
  6789. That's precisely correct. Race, class, gender... they're all social groups that can be formed into a demos state
    4
  6790. Or anyone who's wages come from the theft of my own
    4
  6791. I watched them a while ago. They're pretty good for TV documentaries, but I prefer much more in-depth stuff with debates (e.g. like Battlestorms, or what some other YouTubers are doing)
    4
  6792.  @AlbertComelles1970  It didn't start with Walther Rathenau, it started in 1914. Only the "hyper" part started after his assassination, but it was going to happen regardless of his death
    4
  6793.  machivellsucs2 Go  They're not 'private', they're 'public' bankers, hence the word 'central' https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6794. The miseducation system is part of the Corporate State. It's job is to fail you, so you "get a job" and work for them rather than gain true freedom by becoming your own boss and generating wealth for the individuals around you.
    4
  6795. Socialism is Utopian in nature, not "scientific". It has the same roots as both National Socialism and Fascism, which is Hegel, Kant, St Augustine, Plato and ultimately Heraclitus. It's a religion.
    4
  6796. Yeah I had that idea years ago when I did my Public vs Private video. Most videos of mine since then have the references listed.
    4
  6797. Because academia is dominated by Leftists, and those who wrote the popular history books were therefore Leftists too.
    4
  6798. You're wrong.
    4
  6799. Explaining the Nazi view doesn't mean I agree with it. National Socialism is a terrible ideology, and their camps were the stuff of nightmares.
    4
  6800. If struggle is about "labour for a worker", then it is about work. Struggle means many things, as I mentioned.
    4
  6801. Socialism is always mandatory.
    4
  6802. Yes, that's part of it
    4
  6803. +Gary Thomas "production staff"? What is "production staff"? ;) but no, this was 100% me. Not a single shred of practical help from anybody (although a lot of hindrance) You're right that the lessons learnt in this Operation were vital for future airborne operations. I'm going to throw a spanner in the works and ask - "but have we drawn the right lessons from Market Garden?" As you pointed out in your other comment, there has been a movie, books and countless articles etc on the battle, but they don't all reveal the true events of Market Garden (as you'll see later). Like I pointed out in this episode, few people know about the 56th Lowland Infantry Division's role in the battle (there's also a unit present in the next episode that may surprise you. I won't say what it is, so let's see if you can spot it). Basically, there's just bits that seem to have been missed out by a good portion of those who write about the battle, which is why I wanted to make this documentary. Whilst I've not gone into a stupid amount of detail, I felt the need to include anything important I thought has been missed out, and also debunk a lot of the myths and misconceptions a lot of people have about the battle. I just hope I've conveyed that and get it right in the end :)
    4
  6804. Good question! I'll give a heart to the first person to guess it correctly
    4
  6805. The only way the current bubble is 'sustainable' is by lowering rates to zero (or negative), all inflating together, regulation of consumer prices (e.g. in the UK, Ofgem has just 'allowed' energy prices to go up by £100), and locking up the economy to kill the velocity of 'money' (actually FIAT currency). If rates weren't manipulated, or if people weren't forced to close their businesses, and if the trade restrictions going on that are currently leading to the starvation of 270 million people around the globe were lifted ( https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/12/1079742 ) then you would see the effects of inflation on everyday consumer prices. Instead, inflation is being moved into certain assets - tuition fees (education is in a bubble), house prices (simply unaffordable), second hand goods sales (guitars, pianos, second hand cars, even books), and the blatantly obvious one - the STOCK MARKET. One day though, the bubble will pop.
    4
  6806. You're not wrong
    4
  6807. Thank you for your comment. I don't want to alienate some of my audience by only talking about economics and politics, but at the same time I don't want to just 'stick to tanks', so while I certainly won't be doing it every week, I do want to do more of this sort of video in the future. Plus, the more people tell me not to do something, the more I want to do it! 👍
    4
  6808.  @kondwanimututa2302  Correct. Not that I support any tax, but there are also numerous instances where lowering taxes actually result in higher revenues for the government because the rich decide not to dodge taxes, and they can also invest in the factors of production, which increases jobs, and thus more revenue from the poor and middle classes too.
    4
  6809. If they grow large enough to be classed as a Public, yes. The larger ones could be deemed "states within states".
    4
  6810. I think I know the answer, but I'm curious to see how other AnCaps respond, so I'll heart your comment and see :)
    4
  6811. "Ancaps use a weberian definition of the state" Yes, and that's the problem. In reality, it's not anarchy, because this definition isn't correct.
    4
  6812. I don't really talk about the policies of Anarcho-Capitalism here in this video, but I've outlined it in my previous video, which might be better for you https://youtu.be/aSfiEniyUBY
    4
  6813.  @margerald1  I'm very aware of DemocraticMarxist01 (formerly DemocraticSocialist01). I responded to some of his criticisms in the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video, and have argued with him in the comments numerous times, so I've known about him for a while. The guy is a nutjob. He lies and makes things up, and accuses me of being an anti-Semite and Nazi etc without evidence, he just pulls stuff out of the ether... It's all nonsense. The guy genuinely needs mental help. I have no incentive to respond to him. My policy now is to only respond to people who I think deserve a response. And if someone is so focused on attacking my person with slander and outright lies rather than genuinely debating the topic at hand, then it's not worth a response. There are more important people to talk to, like people with honest arguments.
    4
  6814.  @markzuckergecko621  I haven't been 'wrong' as such, except that I've gone against his beliefs, so therefore I'm wrong in his subjective opinion.
    4
  6815. I'll be talking about that later in the series
    4
  6816. Episode 1 for the Weimar Hyperinflation. This video only goes from the start of the inflation through to 1918. Future videos will go through 1918-1923 (and a little beyond)
    4
  6817. Yep. A lot more to come
    4
  6818. I agree that house prices are a good indicator of inflation. I would also suggest that we measure prices in terms of gold http://pricedingold.com/uk-house-prices/
    4
  6819. I like controversy, so I'm looking forward to the responses from the Bitcoin boys 😂
    4
  6820. That's the plan! It's what I live for 👍
    4
  6821. Same with regards to being prepared. I keep my car topped up with fuel, so the recent fuel crisis in the UK didn't affect me at all, while my friends had to queue for the pumps. Crypto is a currency, not a money. That doesn't mean it doesn't currently have value, but that value is based on faith rather than having a use like a commodity does.
    4
  6822. Yes you were! Congrats!
    4
  6823. To be honest, neither do I! YouTube is telling me that most of my viewers aren't interested in this topic, so it'll probably get ignored by those who really need to see it. Won't stop me from making more though.
    4
  6824. Yes it is! And it's going to be just as in-depth, if not more so. 65 sources used so far 👍
    4
  6825.  @melkor3496  Better luck next time!
    4
  6826. Congratulations!
    4
  6827. "Would you rather be happy, or would you rather be right?" - Rian Stone
    4
  6828. No, not at all. The scam of a controlled economy would be exposed straight away as prices begin to saw due to low productivity despite no inflation.
    4
  6829. If that was the case, then we should see the highest population growth in the medieval era. We don't see that, which massively undermines your argument. It's true that the West today isn't having children. But that's only because there's a fundamental problem with our society, which is central bank-induced inflation coupled with child and man-hating feminism. These two things combined culminate in a doctrine that prevents people from earning enough to buy their overpriced house, and then having stable relationships and households in order to have children. This is actually further evidence that socialism is dragging us all down into the gutter.
    4
  6830. Okay, here's some facts for you (107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous notes and quotes...) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6831. If you do not watch, don't bother commenting.
    4
  6832. I agree, it was a good question
    4
  6833. Yep, a racial-socialist party. They believed in the Race Theory of History rather than the Class Theory of History.
    4
  6834. There's a few in the comments, but not as many as usual. They must have bigger fish to fry right now. I'm surprised there hasn't been a few "stick to tanks" comments yet though
    4
  6835. Well, I actually think that Brüning's policies got Germany out of the depression much quicker than people realized. Historians argue whether the "Nazi Economic Recovery" actually started before the Nazis got into power, which makes sense if you understand how recessions are caused and how they are solved.
    4
  6836. Hey Rex, sadly they're not the priority at the moment, simply because of time issues. I barely play games at the moment if I'm honest. I'm not against the idea of doing another Let's Play, or even carrying on the others that are on hold, but priority is the history stuff. I guess if I'm struggling to do a video on a Monday, I could do a gaming video as a bit of a stopgap
    4
  6837. Happy New Year to you too Thomas! Don't mind making mistakes, shows I'm human ;)
    4
  6838. Musk is bringing down the cost of rockets and launching into space. Current USA government rockets cost $400 million, while Musk has got his down to the ~$50 million mark from what I've seen. Innovation and advances in technology as a result of Musk's company is causing the cost of the rockets to come down.
    4
  6839. "shill" - is this word of the month or something? The Nazis seem to be using this word a lot at the moment.
    4
  6840. Ok, so please explain how increased wages leads to higher living standards for everyone without any additional production. https://youtu.be/QPqPnWTaMrE
    4
  6841. Because otherwise who would supply the capital? Who would do the innovation? Who would be the banker? Who would be the entrepreneur? Who would be the manager? The capitalist business owner is all of these put together. And they're also working too (like Elon Musk for example). You could employ several bureaucrats or administrators to do all this, at several times the price. Or you could let the workers run themselves, which will lead to a host of problems and an eventual uncompetiveness and closure. Or you could just let the capitalist do his job.
    4
  6842. I know I'm wasting my time, but I am still hoping they'll listen. I want to help people and educate them. But it appears that you can't teach those who have no desire to learn. Still, I try... If you want to read some not so intelligent comments, read wannabchomsky's numerous responses to my Hitler's Socialism video. The guy must have spent two hours every day just posting comments on that video, and not one of them are intelligent. Dedicated ignorance.
    4
  6843. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. "The same way I wouldn’t blindly label anything Marx said as gospel or correct." Funny because when I published my original videos, most of the criticism against my argument was based on what "MARX SAID" and that if Marx didn't say it, then it couldn't be true. But the reality is that Marx did say what socialism was, so now it's being reframed again. It's a typical postmodernist tactic. "you frame your arguments within a bubble that you control" You mean I control it by insisting on evidence rather than belief. I have a strong opinion because it's based on facts and evidence. The counter arguments are based on distortions and emotions. This is why my "opinion" is so strong, because I can back up what I'm saying. The only counterarguments made are either jibberish, distortions or simple rejections of the facts. I've countered them quite effectively numerous times now in the comment sections.
    4
  6844. Exactly, it's an insult. They can't counter with actual evidence because the evidence is overwhelmingly against socialism, so the arguements boil down to insults and downvotes as a way of trying to stop the message from spreading or being listened to. That's fine with me, downvote and insult away, see if I care.
    4
  6845. The fact that the counterarguments basically all amount to "no, you're wrong" or calling me names is evidence in itself, Gucci. This isn't criticism at all, it's defence of an ideology that doesn't work. The first thing Marx talks about is the Labour Theory of Value - talk about falling at the first hurdle.
    4
  6846. Great counter-argument.
    4
  6847. "Not giving employees their labour's worth" If you increase production, you increase living standards. If you increase the money supply, you don't do anything. That's it. "B) The whole premise is wrong, why should there be a capitalist anyway, who has £100 while the others have £10?" Why should we have doctors? Let's let the people do look after their health. "Contrary to popular belief if workers self manage their smart enough to go "well we got a good life, any profit can be spent on innovation"" So what's the advantage of paying the workers more if they're just going to spend it the same way a capitalist does? "Anyway that's as simple as I'm putting it, if you don't understand how every mouthful you eat is at the suffering of the 3rd world" I ate an apple before, and that apple came from the UK. But I know tomatoes in Britain largely come from Spain. So sorry to all the Spaniards for providing jobs in your country. Coffee comes from South America - sorry to all the coffee farmers for keeping you in jobs too. "the 3rd world is too backward technologically and not united enough to resist" There's nothing stopping them from trading. Several countries have done this recently. See North Korea. "but if you can't see that, despite indisputable facts I've mentioned here and the ones you can see in the real world, then you are lost..." I see what you're saying, but I don't agree. The fact of the matter is, as shown in the video, providing jobs is not exploitation. Nobody is forcing you to go to work. Nobody is forcing you to work where you work. If you don't want to work, stop working. You have a choice to be unemployed and on the street.
    4
  6848. Which version of socialism are you talking about? Marxist-Socialism? Feminist-Socialism? Fascist-Socialism? Democratic-Socialism? Or "State Capitalism"?
    4
  6849. The state bureaucrats are incredibly good businessmen - said no one ever. The state takes taxes from the population, and spends it on things the people probably don't actually need. If they needed them, then the market would have created them in the first place. The fact it didn't is an indication that the state is investing into things it shouldn't be, such as peanut farms in Africa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanganyika_groundnut_scheme?wprov=sfla1 I recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" as it explains the answer to this incredibly well - better than I could.
    4
  6850. Your first link explains that living standards did rise, so that's counter to your own argument. https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/IndustrialRevolutionandtheStandardofLiving.html Your second and third links list no sources, and therefore cannot be trusted. "@TIK Bernstein did not attribute low taxation to the fact that Capitalism was not collapsing. He pointed out that things were getting better but not because of the beneficence of Capitalism or operations of 'the free market." Bernstein pointed out that things were getting better. That's the point. Marxist theory says that the workers will receive less as the rich get richer, thus igniting the revolution. Except, that isn't what happens in a capitalist free market. Bernstein realised this very early on, creating a schism in Marxism between the social-democrats and the Marxists to this day.
    4
  6851. Haha thanks for the laugh hamster! Glad you enjoyed the video
    4
  6852. First!
    4
  6853. Second! But I'll let you off
    4
  6854. You're not late, this series is still in progress :)
    4
  6855. That's awesome that your kid said that 😂 probably my youngest fan! And times are tough right now with lots of talk of recession again, so look after your family. They're more important than me or this channel 👍
    4
  6856. It's quite coincidental that I've released this at roughly the same I cross the 100k sub mark (Should hit 100k later tonight or tomorrow). Can confirm it wasn't planned though, and I almost had to delay this video until next week. Glad I didn't though!
    4
  6857. If you look at the references, most of the references are from Glantz. I didn't directly quote from him, but I will. And if you check the description and the pinned comment, you'll see that I recommended Glantz and House's "Stalingrad" book
    4
  6858. Good luck!
    4
  6859. Good things come to those who wait for Stalingrad
    4
  6860. @S'Aarum There's no Soviet unit emblems as far as I'm aware, and I am trying to find pictures of the officers, but they're not always available. That said, Anton Joly has sent me some more officer pictures, so I can update some of them
    4
  6861. @Kev Y - now that you mention the fact that the German say "funf und dreizig" (five and thirty), it makes sense that it was a mistranslation
    4
  6862. @ jaxxstraw - Lots of people are commenting about the 53 degrees thing. I've double checked, and Beevor definitely says 53 degrees in the sun on Page 87 of Stalingrad. He's quoting from Helmuth Groscurth, chief of staff of XI Army Corps. It could still be a false reading, or Beevor/Groscurth may have got the numbers wrong, but that's what it says.
    4
  6863. @slovene ball - Season 1 will end on the 31st of July 1942. Currently, Season 2 is from 1st of August to the 19th of August 1942
    4
  6864. True, but when the best general of the German army is telling you that he will get you out, and that they can resupply you too, and you can't see the future, how would you know that they were bad orders?
    4
  6865. Many more cliffhangers to come ;)
    4
  6866. Geberal was his middle name. General Obi-Wan "Ben" Geberal Kenobi
    4
  6867. As this video released yesterday, I requested both the first and second videos of this series be monetized. The first was accepted for full-green monetization, and this one has been confirmed as limited-monetization. No idea why. If the first one is acceptable, then there's no reason that this one shouldn't be. But they give ZERO feedback so it's impossible to know their reasoning (assuming there's any reason at all, which I highly doubt there is). Monetization of videos is nothing anyway. I wouldn't be able to work part-time on this if I relied solely on the monetization of videos - which is partly why I don't care too much about the monetization status of the videos. I haven't monetized most of my recent videos because they've been on topics which I know our Fascist-Corporate overlords would disapprove of (not just the economic ones, but the videos on prisoners of war, or any video where I show anything that snowflakes won't like - which is pretty much every video). This is why I now either don't monetize videos, or if I do I wait until after all the views have come and gone before bothering to monetize. It doesn't hurt me as much as it hurts YouTube. So I think, if they've decided to make these stupid rules and pander to idiot advertisers and Fascist-Justice-Warrior activists, fine. Let it hurt them more than it hurts me. You reap what you sow. Ultimately, it's my Patreons who make this happen. I rely upon them and their support. And they give me the flexibility to cover topics that others don't want me to even touch. Don't get me wrong, in an ideal world I would happily monetize all my videos since they don't break YouTube's terms of service (historical content is fine, apparently...) and use that money to buy more books or equipment, but this is clearly not an ideal world. If YouTube wants to lose money, fine by me, I'm happy to comply with them.
    4
  6868. You didn't watch the video. And this isn't Fascism. Fascism is a different ideology, as I mentioned in the video, and as I have explained at length in this other video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6869. Just watch this video please https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y My biggest regret is not putting that video at the start of this video to 100% confirm that I'm using the historical and correct definitions of the words.
    4
  6870. [Part 1] It’s been a while since I hit the character limit in a YouTube comment response… So count yourself as lucky I spent so much time on this. - "You also must not how you walk back on two previous arguments you've made, one that Marx did not create or invent socialism and so that he cannot solely define it, and two that hitler was not marxist, or did not agree with marx. When taken together, this means either this argument or your previous ones fall apart. Didn't quote think of that when writing up this copy-pasta, did you?" 1. Marx and Hitler both agreed on the point of anti-Semitism. 2. Hitler wasn't a Marxist. However, he was anti-Semitic, as was Karl Marx. This argument of yours is completely irrelevant to the point I made, and doesn't cause my argument to "fall apart" at all. You wrote this purely because you don't have a relevant point, and you want to try and attack my character rather than address the points raised. BuT iT's nOt ReAL PoStMOdeRniSM! - "Furthermore, you're arguing that anyone associated with "socialism" is a socialist. And that all socialists are anti-semetic. Therefore, hate to break it to you mate, but as a man who's admitted to using "socialist" medical services, living in a "socialist" country, and operating on a (gasp) marxist website, you would be an anti-semite." Anyone who calls for Socialism is an anti-Semite, whether they realize it or not. Socialists say that Capitalism is bad. Well, according to the father of Socialism, Capitalism is Jewish. I wonder if all Socialists realize that they're anti-Semites? Probably not, which is why they need to be educated. And that's why I'm providing that education. And yes, I would say that, since Marx was anti-Semitic, and that Marxism is inherently anti-Semitic, that Marxist websites are anti-Semitic. All you have to do is replace the words "bourgeoisie" and "capitalist" with "Jew" and you'll see the REAL nature of what Marxist Socialism preaches. - "Hell, you literally said society itself was socialist, so everyone is anti-semetic?" Society = State. The State is anti-Semitic. An individual may or may not be anti-Semitic, but the State/Society is. And why is the Society anti-Semitic? Well, a Society defends itself from anti-Society/anti-Socialist elements, which, according to Karl Marx himself - "We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. So Karl Marx is saying that the Jews are anti-Socialist. He's saying that Jews cannot be a part of a Socialist Society - the State. - "If we say all socialism is anti-semetic, and all corporations, groupings, and societies are socialist... well you see where that's going." Yep. Your point? - "Hell, you seem to be anti corporation and don't want them around as they are (as per you not liking socialism, and calling corporations socialist.)" As a Capitalist, I am anti-Corporate, yes, since Corporations are Socialist by nature. - "Does that make you a socialist anti-semite, for hating the elites in positions of power and the vessels they achieved it through?" No. The elites in positions of power are Socialist anti-Semites. They're anti-Money, they're anti-Jewish, and they're anti-Capitalist. But this is where you're going wrong. You still falsely think that Corporations are Capitalist. THEY'RE NOT. Corporations are not individuals (private), and are groups (corpse = body, as in group or people), and thus are societies (Socialism). Corporations (Socialists) are against the 'little man' (small private Capitalists), and that's because Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews" (Karl Marx, Das Kapital, P107). - "I don't know man, if we replace every time you say "socialist" with "jewish" it begins to make more sense... That was a bit of a jab at your reasoning, but it does make sense in a way." Except, as a Capitalist, I believe in Mises and Rothbard, who were both Jewish. Again, there's a reason why the Marxists hate Mises and Rothbard. And no, your 'jab' makes no sense at all. I don't even believe in 'races', since races don't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ - "Similarly, I notice that despite you calling the most powerful corporations and countries in the world socialist, you apparently don't even believe it, as those are never the examples you give when saying socialism doesn't work." They don't work. That's why we're in the greatest depression we've ever been in. The entire monetary system of printing socialist currency into existence in order to fund massive corporate-states is collapsing. That's why Gold and Silver are rising almost daily. In the UK, they're now at all time highs. Why? Because EVERY currency around the world is being devalued, making real money (gold and silver) more valuable. Socialism has never worked, and this time is no exception. - "You also have admitted, in capitalized letters, that you have no idea what socialism is, which i'm personally thankful for." When did I admit that? You're clearly about to take something I've said out of context. - "You start off with an easily disproven assertion: both of us are marxist." Really? What version of anti-Semite-Socialism are you then? - "you assume that Marx's impact on socialism was foundational, that he created it and that his views and his interpretations alone must be put into the open fully when understanding it" No I didn't. You accused me of that, then have decided to conclude that this is true. In reality, this was my argument in this video. You know, the video you still watched? If, as you just said here, that Marxism isn't the only version of Socialism, then I guess that opens the door for their being other versions of Socialism. You know, like National Socialism being a version of Socialism? Oh, but wait, that would undermine your entire 'argument' (I use the word 'argument' reluctantly, since it's more like trolling). - "Are you really saying that to be against capitalism, or against the rich in positions of power, that you must be anti-jewish? I'm afraid that simply makes no sense, one can easily dislike the ruling power of corporations and billionaires." Once again, you have made the false assertion. Corporations and billionaires are Socialists. They're NOT Capitalists. This is why the Socialist Corporations of the Third Reich worked with the State, as part of the State, to murder millions of Jews. This is why they stole money off the Jews - because they thought that Capitalists steal wealth off the workers, and so stealing that money back would be fair game in their eyes. This is exactly the same thing that the Socialists of today are calling for - the Revolution, and the theft of the Capitalists (the small private individuals and businesses). - " Hell, now that i'm thinking about it, that brings up an interesting contradiction. You assert socialism is anti-semetic because marx in cases correlated jewish people with the capitalist upper classes. But... you also say the upper classes, and the corporations/society that enriches them is socialist. So, are the rich anti-semetic because they want to remove themselves, because they think they're jewish? What? Hey, and what about actual billionaires who happen to be jewish, are they anti-semetic socialists as well? Or Jewish socialists, even?" 1. I don't believe in what Karl Marx said. 2. it is contradictory because you've mixed two opposing views (mine as a capitalist, and Marx as an anti-Semite) together as one, and then found a contradiction. Well done. Of course there's going to be a contradiction. I'm not an anti-Semite, and I don't believe in Karl Marx or his teachings. - "As I said, we've had our fun, throwing insults back and forth, participating in useless debate, me commenting under you only for you to give a non-response, I respond, we move on." Incorrect. You've never once responded with anything other than complete and utter rubbish/trollish points that contradict each other. I've provided tons of evidence, and all you do is throw out assertions and insults. You make false accusations. You make contradictory statements. You don't address ANYTHING I've said in this video or any of the other ones, and the reason why is because you still haven't watched them, or listened to ANYTHING I've said. And now that I've called you out on your true nature (anti-Semitism), you're now beginning to make excuses and run away, rather than look yourself in the mirror and ask the question: am I wrong? - "But now, devoid of all of that performative insults that I used as flavor text, devoid of the snippy language we threw back and forth as I pissed you off, and devoid of the mocking way i've addressed you before, just stop." Oh right, so you openly admit that your language is crude, you've made a mockery of the right to free speech, that you've deliberately attempted to "piss me off" and openly mocked me? Good! I'm glad you're finally admitting that your behaviour has been absolutely disgraceful to say the least. A discussion/argument is not meant to have insults, or "snippy language", and isn't meant to "piss off" the opponent, or "mock" them. A discussion/argument is meant to be a respectful a back and forth of ideas and counter-ideas, addressing the points raised in a mature manner, with the goal of seeking the truth. YOU and Chomsky here haven't done this. You've done nothing in these argument except argue poorly. And the reason why is because you were not once interested in discovering the truth. You just wanted to insult your opponents. Well, now that the tables have turned, and it's clear that morality is no longer on your side (because all socialism is anti-semitism), you're now backing out. You two should be ashamed by your own behaviour.
    4
  6871. Lenin killed Mensheviks. I guess Lenin wasn't a "real" Socialist either?
    4
  6872. I have. There are significant distinctions between Fascism and National Socialism as I outlined in this video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6873. Exactly, the community (or nation) as a whole! The definitions are the same. A nation is a community, a nation is a society, a society is a community, and a "race" is a society as much as a "class" is a society. It all means the same thing https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6874. Yes, that's the myth I was taught in college as well. It's not true though. You can find Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" online for free. I'd highly recommend it because it will enlighten you.
    4
  6875. Thank you for your comment James! I'm glad you found this video, although it's a shame others think this is a joke. I didn't use Mises too much in this because I knew people would simply dismiss his words, and therefore I focused more on other evidence. But yes, Mises had done a lot of good work on this. Interestingly, the way I heard about Mises was through socialists mocking him and saying that I must have read him to come to such conclusions. Since I hadn't at the time they were mocking me, I decided to check him out, and that's how I went from Socialist to Capitalist. Cheers!
    4
  6876. Yes, and this video will confirm why https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  6877. Monopolies are only created by State intervention and manipulation of the market. Under a free market, competition can undercut the monopolies and drive them out of business (see book: "The Myth of the Robber Barons" for great examples of this).
    4
  6878. Well, they fell out recently (a year or two ago). I don't know the details exactly... but they're both good in my opinion
    4
  6879. Hey Vass! Yes it's long, but full of sources, references and more :) I actually use Snyder's Blood Lands in the video. I think it's a great book (not perfect, but great). I also use his current nemesis - Richard Evans (who is a great historian too, even though he thinks National Socialism is Capitalism for some reason)
    4
  6880. The Reichstag Fire Decree abolished private property. See the timestamps in the description.
    4
  6881. Excellent! Thanks for the review, and I'm glad you liked it overall. Yes, it's not perfect, but as you said it's important because it does bring a lot of evidence to the table. Cheers!
    4
  6882. None of my critics seem to have realized that I'm now winning this debate. Look at the state of these Reddit posts lol. When will they realize that NONE of their old arguments work any more? https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/f95ax3/tik_crosses_the_event_horizon_the_nazis_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitWehraboosSay/comments/f8uhg4/tik_just_uploaded_a_5_hour_video_about_hitler_and/
    4
  6883. The "law" is the State. Bezos is buying corrupt State officials. The issue here isn't Bezos, it's the State.
    4
  6884. Right wing of the Left-wing political spectrum...
    4
  6885. He didn't only persecute left wingers when he was in power. Watch the video and you will see that.
    4
  6886. "A house made of straw." Not any more, I've destroyed the idea that Hitler was a Capitalist.
    4
  6887. I've been over what socialism was in this video, and in my Public vs Private video. I've showed why the Socialist "it's not really State control" argument is false. Socialists may not know what Socialism is, but I do. Sources and references are included in both this video and in the other https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I also showed in this video that the National Socialists nationalized the industries, and took apart some of the sources that said they didn't. Please watch the video before commenting
    4
  6888. Of course he didn't watch the video. And he fails to realize that there are plenty of racists on the Left side of the political spectrum, including Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  6889. Because Marxists won't accept it. Even though I've provided a TON of evidence here, they still won't accept it... or even watch it
    4
  6890. But they do. From Wikipedia, to the Marxists like DemocraticMarxist01 and TheFinnishBolshevik, to these guys too https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 They're all saying that Hitler was a Capitalist.
    4
  6891. 1 and 2 are the same thing. A market is just a buyer and a seller. But you think that 2 ("the market") is giant monopoly corporations... This is untrue. Corporations aren't private , they're Socialist, not Capitalist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y That's why the Fascists and the Socialists were/are for corporations/syndicates https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  6892. That logic doesn't even make sense. You're concluding that the hypothesis is wrong, even if the evidence proves it correct 🤔
    4
  6893. Dismiss the sources and insult me all you want, the argument still stands.
    4
  6894. If the collective can't define socialism, I will define it for them... plus, I have defined it months ago in the Public vs Private video, link in the description
    4
  6895. Why would anyone who wants free markets vote for someone who doesn't want free markets? I explained why many of the people voted for Hitler in this other video https://youtu.be/Ydx72tT552k
    4
  6896. I actually had more sources but decided to publish now rather than wait. It isn't perfect, but it's 'good enough' to stand on its own, so I decided that I will just add more to it in future videos.
    4
  6897. Are you employed, Jeff? You spend a lot of time in these comments, so it's likely that you have a lot of time to waste, even though you don't have any time to watch the video
    4
  6898. "I said NOTHING about anything 'stolen'." Socialism argues for the theft of property from the bourgeoisie (who Karl Marx identified as the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ). You made it clear in your criticism - "Saint Bezos, patron saint of Capitalism, appears to be TIK's icon of innocence." - that you're against Capitalism. This means you're against the Jews, and for Socialism (which is inherently anti-Semitic). Whether you realize it or not, you're advocating for theft. - "'Scroungers' is another one of your false arguments [an ad hominem attack]." I never said you were a scrounger, but the fact that you've become insulted by this word proves that you're unemployed. Meanwhile, it's perfectly okay for you to accuse me of being ignorant, worshiping an "icon of ignorance", falsely accusing me of creating "straw man arguments, weak analogies and unanswered objections/arguments from ignorance." I mean, how would you know? You admit yourself that you only watched 1.5 hours of the video - so by the timestamps in the video description, we can see that you didn't even get to the parts where I talked about the nationalization of the German economy, the so-called "crushing of the trade unions", the National Socialist Commissars, the attempt at collectivization of agriculture within the Reich, the abolition of private property... But yes, somehow it's me who's ignorant. - "You also claim that your understanding of 'what money is' and 'how the system works' is the best [only?] interpretation." Money is not the root of all evil, but I guarantee that you, as a Socialist, think it is.
    4
  6899. I don't idolise Jeff Bezos. However, he doesn't deserve to have his factory stolen off him by a bunch of unemployed benefit scroungers just because they mistakenly believe they're entitled to other people's stuff just because they don't understand what money is or how the system works.
    4
  6900. To answer number 1: For starters, many of the Allied countries were also socialized. But also, having domestic servants doesn't mean anything, because if the State had called them up, they would have had to fight. The fact is that the central planners in the socialist totalitarian state had decided that the Nazi Party had to retain power from within by pleasing the German people. They would do that by continued production and consumption of consumer goods, which is why the breweries in Berlin continued to work even as the battle went on around them - Hitler always feared an internal coup. Number 2 would require a video on its own. It's something I've been meaning to do, and will probably get to in the future.
    4
  6901. I don't think there's enough alcohol in the world for that!
    4
  6902. As I explained in the Stick to Tanks video, most of them are not my fans, but socialists from across the internet who are brigading and slandering away to damage control and undermine my legitimacy
    4
  6903. "Marx despised the "jewish attidute"not the jews as a race" So Marx thinks Capitalism is Jewish like Hitler does?
    4
  6904. Try watching the video before commenting. And read "The Vampire Economy" by Günter Reimann and Zitelmann's "Hitler the Policies of Seduction".
    4
  6905. I don't see it in the review folder, so looks like YouTube automatically deleted it. It does that with my comments too sometimes. Really frustrating because I have the settings set to "allow all" ☹️
    4
  6906. A job well done for me then!
    4
  6907. I have considered making a shorter video (say 15 minutes) with condensed information, but it's not something that will be easy to make. I mean, how do you condense 5 hours of info into 15 minutes? And if you don't get it right, your critics with tear it apart for not providing enough information, even though you did in the 5 hour video 🙄
    4
  6908. @wannabchomsky - as I've told you, this isn't a popularity contest. It doesn't matter if nobody agrees with me (actually a lot do, including some historians, economists and so on, not that it matters). All that matters is facts, evidence and logic, which I've provided in this video... a video you still haven't watched, despite spending many hours each day replying to people on this video, instead of putting that "political science" propaganda degree you have to actual work.
    4
  6909. Unfortunately, I must agree. The assumption most have is that capitalism is bad because they've been told so. Nobody knows what capitalism is. So then they're told that Hitler was a capitalist and they swallow it without thinking. Then when someone points out to them the overwhelming evidence that Hitler wasn't a capitalist, but was a Socialist, cognitive dissonance prevents them from even listening to the evidence. It just "must" be wrong.
    4
  6910. I feel like we should get alternative perspectives. They're sticking to the 'accepted' view, which is fine. I'm not. Viewers should get both perspectives and make up their mind.
    4
  6911. Thank you for your comment! And thank you for becoming a patreon 👍
    4
  6912. "@TIK except they aren't. they are different terms. THIS IS YOUR PROBLEM. You've lumped in terms together as one thing that they aren't." Historical terms yes. And at least I can define them. Socialists can't even define their own ideology! Well, if they won't, I'll define it for them using evidence :)
    4
  6913. Very very few critics have. Those few that did have admitted that it is a solid argument, but remain adamant that I'm wrong because they don't agree with me on the definition of Socialism... even though they can't define it themselves 🙄
    4
  6914. Trust me, I don't delete comments. YouTube automatically deletes comments, and even deletes my own. If I quote Anti-Semitic racist literature (e.g. quotes from Hitler or Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ) then YouTube deletes my comments too
    4
  6915. Yeah, I can see that you haven't actually read the book by Spengler, which is why you're relying on others to (incorrectly) tell you what's in the book. Here's some more: “The English people is structured along lines of wealth and poverty, the Prussian along lines of command and obedience.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p39.) “In England democracy means the possibility that everyone can get rich; in Prussia it means that the existing ranks are open to everyone. Within the structure of Prussian society the individual receives his place according to his ability, not according to the demands of tradition.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p40.) “Here, finally, we can grasp the profound ethical meaning of the slogans ‘capitalism’ and ‘socialism’. They represent two systems of social stratification, one that is based on wealth and the uninhabited struggle for success, and one that is founded on authority and legislation. The Englishman would never accept commands from someone poorer than himself, nor would the Prussian ever pay homage to wealth for its own sake.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p40.) “Proletarian class conflict is incapable of affecting such deeply rooted attitudes. The entire English labor movement is based on the distinction between rich and poor within the working class itself. Under such conditions it is impossible to imagine anything like the iron discipline of a Prussian-style party of millions.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p40.) “Everything that Marx has to say with grudging admiration about “capitalistic society” refers principally to English, and not to a universal, economic instinct.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p44.) “The sublime term “free trade” is part and parcel of Viking economics. The Prussian, i.e., socialist term would be “state control of the exchange of goods.” This assigns to trade a subordinate rather than a dominant role within the complex of economic activity. We can understand why Adam Smith harbored a hatred of the state and the “cunning beasts called statesmen.” Indeed, government officials must have the same effect on tradesmen as policemen on burglars and naval cruisers on the crews of private ships.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p44.) “English-style capitalism is the only true counterpart to Marxist socialism. The regulation of economic affairs by the state, a Prussian idea, transformed German capitalism instinctively into a socialist economic pattern. The first step in this process was the protective tariff legislation of 1879. The large syndicates were, in effect, economic states within the state.” (Spengler, "Prussianism and Socialism," p44.)
    4
  6916. Who are you quoting from there? It appears that whoever you are quoting from hasn't read Spengler, or if they have, are not being honest. For example, Spengler rallied against the idea of private property and capitalism when he ranted against the English in his "Prussianism and Socialism". He also says: “For us, the controlling factor of society is the interplay of command and obedience in a strictly ordered community, be it state, party, officers’ corps, or civil service. The member of any one of these communities is a servant of that community.”
    4
  6917. OP is projecting his own insecurities. Socialism is the political religion, and I came to my conclusions when I was a Socialist, which is why I'm not one any more. I explained this in the first minutes of the video OP didn't watch. I like the fact that he hasn't even got past section 3. Wait until you get to the abolishment of private property, the nationalisation of the industries and the trade unions, and the disintegrated of Bel's "Against the Mainstream", which is the usual go-to source on the subject that the Lefties pull out. You can deny the evidence, but I won't.
    4
  6918. You're welcome! 👍
    4
  6919. Yes that's it exactly. They think Socialism is Marxism, which it isn't.
    4
  6920. See this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y?si=LHPbsK_3oYQY-YE1
    4
  6921. The UK is a Capitalist country? The National Socialist Health Service, National Pensions, National Insurance, wage controls, price controls, massive number of regulations, central bank (called for by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto), local councils (Soviets), nationalized railways (Network Rail), and numerous other Socialist-introduced policies and syndicates = capitalism now?
    4
  6922. I've given you both the dictionary definitions, and the historical definitions, and they tell you exactly what you're asking. Yet you simply refuse to read them. As I said, I'm not going to get into a debate with you until you go back and read what I wrote and admit that you were wrong.
    4
  6923. We don't have a free market. The more socialism we have, the worse things will get.
    4
  6924. Try coming up with an actual counter argument which hasn't already been defeated in the video, rather than conjecture. I've been working on this video since August 2018. The 'election year' bit is irrelevant, and the point of the Sargon video was that three socialists failed to define socialism in a live debate with him and others. If you actually watch this video, you'll see that you and your comrades are losing this debate
    4
  6925. I like how Nick is constantly spamming comments saying how Conservatives all voted for the Nazis, without realising that I've said all along that Conservativism was the old Left Wing until about 1870. The old classic liberal parties had a "crisis of confidence" and shifted from the Right to the Left Wing, but the Conservative Party stayed where it was. You can read about this in the history books. And I talked about it in this video (about half way through) https://youtu.be/-6jityjzH1Q
    4
  6926. "What kind of moron would come to that conclusion." Despite the fact that part of the video is dedicated to exposing National Socialism's fundamental ideological flaw, and I ripped all the listed ideologies to shreds in the video, I have people in this comment section calling me a Nazi. I've also had people in the past ('marxists' - actually Nazis in hiding) claiming that I'm a secret anti-Semite. So the disclaimer is there just in case some censor decided to check out the video without actually watching it (like the vast majority of my critics have failed to do so far).
    4
  6927. Yes, they deny that they're postmodernists of course, just like they deny what 'real' Socialism is 😂
    4
  6928. I don't think reading that one book on its own would be sufficient. I think reading the 107 sources I used would be better, especially the books "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction" by Rainer Zitelmann, "The Vampire Economy" (a primary source) by Gunter Reimann, and Gotz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries". There are others, but these three especially crush the Leftwing narrative, which is why I relied heavily upon them in this video.
    4
  6929. That's how British people pronoune the Planet that is Your-anus. In Russian it's Your-Ann, and in the USA it's Erroneous. ;)
    4
  6930. "You really expose your bias and lack of scientific approach in this video." This video in particular? Where's the lack of scientific approach in this video? And what is my bias in this video?
    4
  6931. One historian does comment saying this was the peak of Ritchofen's career, so you're probably right.
    4
  6932. A lot of it appears to be propaganda, and historians think so too. I do think there's elements of truth in it though. The boat crossing where he goes over at night is supported by the other evidence, and I have no reason to suspect he would lie about not getting shot at while making the crossing, as an example. For clarity, I don't tend to rely on memoirs unless all the other accounts back up what's being said, or we have no reason to suspect it's not telling the truth. If a better source contradicts it (like a contemporary report or diary etc), I'd most likely favour them over the memoir. Memories are, after all, flawed.
    4
  6933. It certainly puts it into perspective.
    4
  6934. "TIK It's actually very hard to define Fascism. You jumped into the political deep end with that video." I wasn't defining Fascism; I was talking about National Socialism.
    4
  6935. Day Y. Exactly! And the only form of capitalism is what Adam Smith said it was. Therefore the only money in existence is that money which is backed by gold.
    4
  6936. This is a Bob Ross quote, right?
    4
  6937. I don't disagree, but that's why I said my only source on this issue sepecifically says them. I'm not saying Glantz is correct, but I'd need other sources. And maybe Glantz was talking about those Polish rifles? Of course, the fact that they removed their anti-tank weapons and left them without AT-rifles (if that is true) makes the situation even worse.
    4
  6938. cooiejr, annotations are not a thing anymore, so I can't. Only videos that already have annotations will still display them; new videos cannot. And there's no way to edit the video unless I take it down and redo it, and I'm not doing that again for one small error/mispoke.
    4
  6939. I mean, the original was pretty flawed, and this version is better, so why not? I should actually take the original Operation Crusader British Order of Battle video down too because stupid me assumed that the British units were the size they called themselves. But turns out they're not. So 4th Royal Tank Regiment is actually the 4th Battalion of the Royal Tank Regiment. How the hell was I supposed to know the British Army couldn't name their units correctly!?
    4
  6940. If you notice the dates, my 5 hour video came out after theirs. I saw their video in the run up to me releasing mine and knew that it didn't bring anything new to the table. They're just rehashing the same old Marxist narrative, which shouldn't be surprising because that's the mainstream narrative too. The fact remains that the evidence doesn't support their narrative, as anyone who watches my videos on the subject knows. As several authors like Götz Aly show, the banks were no really longer independent from the Nazi dominated Reichsbank, much like our banks these days aren't independent from the central state banks. Karl Marx called for central banking in the Communist Manifesto (point 6) because Socialism/Communism isn't what it appears to be on the surface... For Time Ghost, Hitler must be Capitalist, because real Socialism has never been tried. For me, Hitler synchronised the entire economy and society under the policy of Gleichschaltung, and proceeded to implement policies that the socialists also advocated for, such as nationalising all the trade unions into one giant trade union (the DAF) or the Anschluss of Austria. Every individual needs to decide which argument is more compelling.
    4
  6941. “By the 1980s it was an open secret that the 2 percent of Soviet farmland that was privately owned was producing 30 percent of Russia’s agricultural output.” - Woods, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," Kindle p162. This is what Communism does to the economy - it destroys it. And I have a video explaining the Soviet economy where I come to some surprising conclusions https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    4
  6942. Happy Birthday!
    4
  6943. Hitler adopted the Swastika due to Guido von List's influence on the Thule Society and the DAP in turn. The SS adopted the runes that Guido von List picked out. One of Himmler's henchmen (Karl Wiligut) was reading List's works and was having visions like List had. So while Hitler reformed the DAP into the NSDAP, it wasn't in isolation. Himmler's völkisch version of National Socialism is very much influenced by Guido von List, and as I said, Guido von List is writing for the journal 'Gnosis'. National Socialism was influenced by Christianity, but it's not a Christian heresy. Jesus is Jewish, and Hitler hated the Jews. Christianity originates in Judaism. Hence why the National Socialists had a war against the Church. So yes, I can certainly understand why you've come to the conclusion that it's a Christian heresy, but it's not. The Cathars were a Gnostic-Christian heresy, and so it's correct to say it's a Christian heresy, but it's only a heresy because of the Gnosticism. Similarly, even if National Socialism was a Christian heresy, it would only be a Christian heresy because of the Gnosticism (or Hermeticism or whatever other influence was laid upon it). Therefore, for these reasons and more, I totally disagree with your argument. The best argument right now is that it was Gnostic or Hermetic or similar.
    4
  6944. As I said to someone else, if National Socialism isn't Gnosticism, why did Guido von List write for the journal 'Gnosis'? Guido von List was the guy who picked the Swastika as the symbol for Aryanism. "It is therefore possible to trace the origin of the Nazi symbol back through the emblems of the Germanenorden and ultimately to Guido von List.” - Goodrick-Clarke, “The Occult Roots of Nazism,” p151.
    4
  6945. Yes you are! Well done!
    4
  6946. You were second, but very close!
    4
  6947. According to Engels in Das Kapital volume 3 (Marx didn't write this volume), socialism is "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production. That means, socialized man could be the social class (Marxism), or the social gender (e.g. Feminism), or the social nation (Fascism), or the social race (National Socialism). This is why Leftist politics is dominated by these divisions. Hitler abolished private trade unions and replaced them with the state trade union. The state is the public sector. The public is the social side of society (since public is opposite to private). That means that abolishing private trade unions for a state trade union is an indication of nationalization, or common control of the means of production. That is socialism. Hitler only killed the communists, and political opponents. He didn't kill the entire 3,000,000 strong SA, only the leadership of ~1,000 members. He didn't destroy the SS, or the workers battalions, or the nationalized railroads, or the fact that the industries were nationalized and controlled from within. They did invent the word "privatization", but when you look into it, what they actually did was sell the industries to the Nazi Party and then called it "privatization". But of course, the Nazi Party was the state, so this was actually nationalization.
    4
  6948. Yes! And even more in my follow up video, which really got them annoyed because it crushed all their arguments 😂 https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    4
  6949. Nope, that really is the definition of socialism. It's a bit broader than that obviously, but that is a big factor of it.
    4
  6950. Thanks John! I agree, I think the Cold War played a hand in this (once again). I'm actually embarrassed that I only realised all this myself about a week ago as I was reading Mein Kampf. Can't believe I didn't connect the dots earlier.
    4
  6951. Yes comrades! It is not real socialism. Do not listen to the propaganda from the capitalist pigs. Remember, you're part of the group now. No individuals here. The Party tells you how to think. And you give your lives to the greater hive! The idea that the National Socialists were actual socialists, and that there's any other version of socialism that isn't glorious and unstoppable Marxism is doubleplusungood. Ignorance is strength!
    4
  6952. Great counterargument.
    4
  6953. Bye. Oh, and socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what National Socialism was.
    4
  6954. Glad to hear it. Be sure to watch the follow up. https://youtu.be/4_eQ7weo_ys Also, while people have got counterarguments (like the trade unions and the "privatisation" arguments) they don't actually hold up. I'm planning on doing a follow up video explaining all this in more detail, but if you want I can provide you with more info (or you can find that info in some of my response comments).
    4
  6955. Your wasting your time Anna. Their belief outweighs the definition that socialism is the social (public, state) ownership of the means of production (business/economy). They're trying to twist it to say that the definition isn't that, because if they change the definition of what socialism is, their political religion can disassociate itself from all the horrible states that socialism has created. The Soviet Union, Pol Pot's regime, Venezuela, Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Mao's China, North Korea... The list goes on. Of course, you and I know that the definition of socialism has always been state ownership of the economy and the abolishment of private property and the destruction of the individual (otherwise, why "nationalise" the industries, aka steal other people's property, for the benefit of one social group?), plus there's plenty of socialists who say it is that, but let them pretend that it's not.
    4
  6956. Hitler nationalized the industries. He also formed a "People's State". And Hitler wasn't a Communist or Capitalist - he rejected both. Instead, he was a Socialist. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Also, the historical definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  6957. No, National Socialism isn't capitalism at all, it is socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (more updated video with 107 sources, 350 direct references, notes, quotes and more) In addition, Marxism is anti-Semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  6958. That video actually confirms it's not Marxism (which is not what I'm saying NS is - I'm saying it's socialism). "Your major mistake is that you base your entire argument on the defintion of the terms "socialism" "capitalism" and "comunism" on the definition of liberatarians (i.e. an extremistic political group), who have the agenda to disqualify any kind of social and left-wing policy." No, I base my definitions of what socialism and capitalism are on the actual definitions used both now and back in history. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Nobody's disputing that. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. But people dispute this. Why? Because they've been trying to dispute it since 1956 (the Hungarian Revolution began this process) and you can see it in the historiography. Let me give you some concrete evidence to support my definition of socialism - Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need”https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.”http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    4
  6959. That should tell you something
    4
  6960. I'm prepared. But their bitterness won't change anything.
    4
  6961. Yes! Glad you're entertained by this fact at least ;)
    4
  6962. It won't get me down because I expected it. I'm not sure if the Hitler and Stalin regimes are "the same" as some historians claim, but I do think it's interesting that they're so similar that people can claim that. I also wish I'd defined what socialism and communism was in the video, since that seems to be the chief problem people have. It seems they think they're the same, when they're not. Glad you liked this though :)
    4
  6963. That's quite a nice way of putting it :)
    4
  6964. Apparently, the not so obvious. I only realised about a week or so ago when I was reading through Mein Kampf. So I'm a bit embarrassed I didn't realise this earlier.
    4
  6965. Let me give you a quick rundown on the political ideologies at the time (this is super-quick, but you'll get the idea). And yes, I've posted this elsewhere. First, in the 1800s, there's the old conservative attidue of Laissez-faire - or leave alone - is no government intervention. Then came lberalism, which was slight state intervention (small amounts of welfare, but we're talking very small amounts). Then liberalism got absolutely wiped out in the WW1-WW2 period in Europe. Its replacement was socialism (and the like), which advocated much more state intervention in the economy and society etc. This was in response to the economic, military, social and political catastrophy of the WW1-interwar period, plus the mass poverty across Europe at the time. State intervention (regardless of ideology) promised a way out of this. This is why the Labour Party in the 1940s was classed as socialist, and intervened in the economy post-WW2. So yes, socialism is economically and socially on the left of the (disputable) political spectrum, as defined from the times.
    4
  6966. Yes you were! Congrats!
    4
  6967. It is still worth it because the devil's in the details. A lot of information was in the series, but a lot was missed out, and your reading of the sources might be different to mine, so yes I'd say it's worth it
    4
  6968. Other viewers have said that he has watched some of my content, and has praised it, apparently. Whether that's true or not, I'm not sure
    4
  6969. Keep watching the Weimar Hyperinflation series and you'll find out :)
    4
  6970. I'm all out of hearts today!
    4
  6971. Yes, although this is probably one of the worst ratios of likes to dislikes on my channel (apart from one video which the Wehraboos downvoted)
    4
  6972. Save some for me, I'm going to need it
    4
  6973. Forget Wikipedia, it was a deliberate act. The Origins of Mass Killing: the bloodlands hypothesis https://youtu.be/fXrqGlgufCA What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg
    4
  6974. Okay, but the problem here is academia (which has embraced empiricism and subjectivism). As I said in the video titled "Just tell your teachers what they want to hear" ( https://youtu.be/yQ5x_2u3WOw ), you're at school or university to get the piece of paper with a digit on it. But outside of academia, for your own sake, you want to be aiming for the truth, otherwise your ship will be sailing against the wind.
    4
  6975. What's the point of citing sources if they don't contain the truth?
    4
  6976. Yes, we can trust perception. The issue with hallucinations is the brain (the conceptual level) departing from reality.
    4
  6977. I don't understand what you mean. How is this a cope? I've struggled with the subjective theory of history since forever, burnt out four years ago because of it, and finally discovered the objective theory of philosophy (which I then applied to history) and have come out of my burnout. I don't understand how you're seeing this as an ego problem or a cope?
    4
  6978. Maybe. I mean, I've watched half of his video, and it's nonsense. It's probably not worth my time to actually address it, but I'm not ruling it out. I just have other priorities.
    4
  6979. Introspection is not evidence. Faith is looking inwards rather than outwards.
    4
  6980. You have to prove that a historical event took place. There's no need to provide evidence to disprove something someone claims without evidence. If someone claims something without evidence, this is belief (an error in methodology) and can rightfully be dismissed as invalid. It's true that history COULD have happened differently than we know due to sources not being available. However, we can only prove what we have evidence for. Thus, there's no point speculating what history "really" could have been, since there's no evidence for it being any different. History is, and can only ever be, conceptually concluded by logically validating our perceptions of the evidence. Your point about historians knowing more than others isn't true, since they must publish their findings in order to eat. You consume the history they provide in a symbiotic fashion, and as such, we're incentivised to tell you what we know, just as you're eager to receive the knowledge. And historians love to call each other out if one is lying or something, so there's no reason to worry about that (unless the state gets involved and regulates what historians can say). This isn't a trust issue or faith issue, just like going to the shop and buying food isn't a trust or faith issue.
    4
  6981. Glad you think so
    4
  6982. I wish more people saw it that way. People are choosing not to watch (or the algorithm isn't sending it out there). But yes, I do think this is an extremely important video.
    4
  6983. I like nuts, and I like chocolate, but I can't stand nuts in chocolate
    4
  6984. Oh don't worry, I'm always stressing about getting my videos done - it's what I do haha
    4
  6985. Talking about things like "Hitler", "battles" or "war" is not deemed avertiser-friendly, so every video just automatically ends up "Limited or no adds". In this case, I'll only get money through YouTube if viewers are paying for YouTube Premier (like me), otherwise I'm reliant on Patrons. I've asked for reviews on some of the videos, and some pass, but recently most have not. This is why I've said "sod it" and have decided to start displaying the Nazi flag in the videos. If it's not advertiser friendly, who cares, since there's no ads on the videos anyway.
    4
  6986. I have a problem of taking my time. I feel immensely guilty when I take a break, so I'm actually forcing myself right now to take breaks at the moment (today I went for a walk for an hour). Burn-out does happen, but I force myself through it. But yes, I don't think sponsors would fit. Unless it was David Glantz who was sponsoring me to sell his books, it wouldn't work :)
    4
  6987. Great question! I will answer this question in the next Stalingrad Addendum video :)
    4
  6988. Probably not very.
    4
  6989. Yeah, that might be a while away. But one day!
    4
  6990. @The Kommissar - yes, I got that bit about the radio and Hitler's involvement in the battlefield. It's very interesting, because as the war progressed, Hitler personally took charge of more and more of the army, and this overwhelmed him. Instead of letting his troops do their own thing, everything was controlled tightly by the central state - and the central state couldn't cope.
    4
  6991. Not read all of it, but is a pretty nice read (all of Beevor's books seem to be readable). Didn't know that the German soldiers in France were all on drugs until I read it
    4
  6992. Odd, the previous comment about the video has disappeared. Here's the link again https://youtu.be/If61baWF4GE
    4
  6993. Hi, that's fantastic news! No need to send me a copy, I will buy one myself as support because that book needs to be read more in English. I'll do a review in an upcoming video (probably after next week's Stalingrad video). If you would like to contact me further, there's a way to contact me via my new Instagram (link in the video description).
    4
  6994. What's the difference between the nationalisation of the means of production, and the socialisation of the means of production? That's right, nothing. Hitler collectivised the means of production. He just did it for the German workers, rather than for "international finance".
    4
  6995.  @michaelsage4599  At a guess, I'd say more like 60 than 50.
    4
  6996. "Investing" in the stock market is little more than gambling. The central banks (called for by Karl Marx) are manipulating the stock "market" and their fiat currency printing has put it in a giant bubble. If you watch Gregory Mannarino here on YouTube, that's more or less how I see it too.
    4
  6997. They've changed the definition of 'sarcasm'. Now it's Fascist.
    4
  6998. Yes they do. However, I'm not talking about that. Words like 'Socialism' and 'Fascism' have meanings. But some are deliberately rejecting those historical and dictionary-defined meanings and pretending they're something else, but then refusing to actually define what they are. When I provide the definitions backed by historical evidence and dictionary definitions that are in agreement, apparently I don't know what I'm talking about.
    4
  6999. Socialism. Except Orwell later realized that Socialism was bad - hence Animal Farm and 1984, where he made Ingsoc (English Socialism) and the Pigs (Socialists) the bad guys.
    4
  7000. Words have multiple definitions, and will change over time. I'm not talking about that. To take your example, if I refused to accept that a boot goes on your feet, or is the back of your car, and insist that you don't know the true definition of the word which only I know and you'll never know because I'm not going to tell you due to the fact that if I do tell you that will undermine my own argument, then I would be in the wrong.
    4
  7001. "I wasn't saying your definition is wrong and that mine is right.... Where I disagree is your assumption that there is only one definition of these key terms and that everyone who uses a different one is wrong. That's not how language works," I agree, but that's not the issue here. - "and I think we might lose a lot of nuanced meanings if we insist things like "people" ="state" = "socialism" however eloquently you argue your case." I'm using the historic definition of the words, which the dictionary happens to agree with, and is how the authors of the ideology I don't support also used the words. I have shown and explained this in detail, and have backed this up with multiple sources which I have given. The response has been - "your definitions are wrong". Oh, so Karl Marx didn't know what 'real' Socialism was either? There's no rhyme or reason for why the definitions are wrong. All I'm getting is word-salads and people saying things like "modern socialists disagree". The problem is, of course, that these "modern socialists" also fail to provide the "new" definitions of the words. And if, IF, they do provide them, they quickly regret it because their definitions don't stand up to scrutiny. When they are discussed, it's quickly revealed that they're hiding the old meaning by using "new" definitions, oftentimes with other words ('Capitalism' is now often used to mean 'Socialism' for example). THIS is the problem.
    4
  7002. 22nd Armoured Brigade had one battery of British artillery and one company of British infantry (aka, insignificant amounts of each). Plus the tanks charged forwards ahead of them. Technically you're right though, I probably should have said "little to no" rather than "didn't have".
    4
  7003. Trust me, as this battles goes on, it gets insane
    4
  7004. They're already trying... but I've not made it easy on them
    4
  7005. Tell me about it... hurt my eyes reading it
    4
  7006. "You seemed a lot more emotional than on your other videos." I'm not emotional, I just figured that a few harsh truths and jokes is the best way to get through to the Nazis and inter-Nazis (who tend not to be rational, and rely upon emotions). If you want to see emotional, go check out the comments of the previous video on why Hitler went to war... it's truly horrifying.
    4
  7007. Please see the sources listed in the pinned comment. Tackle the argument, not the arguer.
    4
  7008. That's a good way of putting it
    4
  7009. Who said I'm doing that? See the pinned comment for multiple sources
    4
  7010. Thank you! You may also enjoy the extra video coming tomorrow :)
    4
  7011. "It’s good, just very dense with economic terms." Interesting! See, I enjoy economics so I didn't pick up on this when I read it, but you pointing it out makes me realize that a lot of people won't understand a lot of economic terms. Which terms did you struggle with? But yes, I'm glad to hear you enjoyed last week's video, and Collingham's book. There needs to be more said on the economics side of the conflict, and her book really helped bridge some gaps.
    4
  7012. Goebbels doesn't (as you'll see)
    4
  7013. What you painting?
    4
  7014. "Like, a social Democrat who sees an enormous amount of his taxes go towards preparing an offensive war, public suppression and murder of parts of the population doesn't have the right to complain? Despite being firmly against all of them?" What are you talking about? That's exactly what Social Democracy is! Democracy is 'People Power'. Except the People are the Public, and the Public is the State. So Democracy is 'State Power'. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y This is exactly what Hitler implemented - a Social Democracy (he called it a "People's State" in Mein Kampf, and also a Volksgemeinschaft or "people's community" elsewhere). As the guy who created Fascism (Giovanni Gentile) made clear, the State is the manifestation of the people (People = Public = State). If the State wants war, the people want war. If the people want war, the State wants war. That's why the people are currently calling for suppression and economic lock ups, and 'democrats' all over the world are bowing down to the people. The democrats also want suppression and economic lock ups, so the people also bow down to the democrats. There is no difference.
    4
  7015. He didn't need to. Most of Germany went along with what Hitler was doing, for one reason or another.
    4
  7016. What's the difference between a department of the State and a Corporation that does exactly what the Party wants when asked?
    4
  7017. But I didn't just use this diary. I've used a convergence of evidence, and there's plenty more where that came from. Somehow though, your own "principles" don't apply to yourself, because you haven't provided any evidence to back up your claim that Kellner was Jewish.
    4
  7018. "The labor theory of value" I've tackled this twice - in my Public vs Private video, and in my Hitler's Socialism video. I'm not going to go over it again here, but it's a load of rubbish. Value is subjective. And even if it wasn't, if the capitalism was stealing wealth from the workers, that doesn't mean the workers are justified in stealing wealth too. "I do think ignoring the obvious fact that lots of wealth started out as conquest and slavery is." And what about those who are trying to create their own wealth, but are constantly being robbed by socialists (social-elites) who force the workers to hand over their hard earned income over to 'Society' (the State)? Are workers not allowed to reject this clear example of theft, just as they are rejecting it under the Labour Theory of Value (if it was true)? Because if the Revolution is justified thanks to LTV, then clearly workers are also justified in rejecting taxation for the same reasons. "People who enjoy inheriting all that stolen labor are of course going to claim that all that was hundreds of years ago and has nothing to do with the present all while, overtly or covertly knowngly or unknowingly affirming and worshipping dyanstic power such as the house of windsor alias hohenzollerin pick your royal mafia any royal mafia" Stop living in the past. Start looking to the future. Wealth is created. You have the ability to create things, and thus create wealth. As someone who values freedom, I want freedom from the Windsor State. I want to actually be able to own a house, rather than rent it (even if I owed a house outright, I'd still have to pay tax on it or they'll seize the property, which proves I don't own it). I want to keep my income, rather than hand it over to the regime. You need to convince me that a worker being forced to hand over his income to a regime is 'good' before I'll have any chance of "rejecting" the idea of freedom.
    4
  7019. YouTube is deleting my comments too. It happens automatically, and it's not me doing it.
    4
  7020. That's not the definition, nor was that implied. Well done for missing the entire video.
    4
  7021. "TK, you are definitely wrong by grounding your Rape-scale on the part of the Soviets on the Antony Beevor's fiction work" I'm not sure why you're saying that because I didn't, I used different sources for that, including the main source, a German source, and others. "P.S. Please do not forget to count the rate of rapes committed by the Anglo-American allies in Germany during that particular period!" As I said, the 1.4 to 1.9 million figure includes R's by the Western Allies as well as the Soviets.
    4
  7022. Sorry, you were second by about 20 seconds :(
    4
  7023. And I didn't say "only" 1.4 million. I said between 1.4 and 1.9 million. At the end I even said 2 million because I think 1.4 is too low.
    4
  7024. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7025.  Mock Harris  No, you're are the Left wing, I'm on the Right. And yes, I do believe in free markets, unlike EVERY Socialist (be them National or International, all Socialists want closed borders - Autarky).
    4
  7026. Apparently it's Nazis from 4chan
    4
  7027. My Hitler's Socialism video got more. This just reinforces my view that you don't ever bow to social pressure. This isn't a popularity contest.
    4
  7028.  @somerandompersonidk2272  10 million Soviet women were R'd. 2 million German women were R'd (by both West and Soviets). There are plenty of examples (including one in the pinned comment) of the Wehrmacht committing such crimes. Yet, a National Socialist documentary "proves" all this a lie because "sources"? Wake up, take the Red Pill.
    4
  7029. Dragged by their hair into them?
    4
  7030. The Germans dragged the women into the brothels by their hair... This was done with permission from the military leadership.
    4
  7031. It's almost like they're not watching the video before commenting or something 😂
    4
  7032. Don't feed the National Communist trolls ;)
    4
  7033. Yeah, I sometimes wonder if people genuinely think all the medals that the higher-ups wear were actually earned. I know Göring's medals were mostly made-up to make him look impressive, and I'd imagine most other medals you see our "leaders" wearing are the same.
    4
  7034. That was at Arnhem. And yes, this is why I said the Arnhem drop was a disaster (apart from Frost's units). Those drop zones were way too far from the objective. They could and should have landed some of the paras south of Arnhem.
    4
  7035. I have not, no. If I ever do, I'll be asking him "WTF BEEVOR!??!?"
    4
  7036. Agreed. It was all about egos. The men suffered as a result.
    4
  7037. I wish I knew the answer :(
    4
  7038. Haha one day I'll do a solo-outro for you ;)
    4
  7039. I'll accept that :) You know, this was my first ever map I ever made for any history video. I didn't feel like making an up to date version, so instead I just dug this one out and reused it. And everyone had the same complaints last time too. That's why I covered up Zuiderzee with the word "IJsselmeer" - because I knew people would cry about it.
    4
  7040. I'm sorry! But don't worry, you'll be getting more Stalingrad-related content like this (and longer videos) in the coming weeks. And I'll definitely let you know when the REAL Battle of Stalingrad Battlestorm Documentary is out before it comes out.
    4
  7041. He does seem to be blamed for everything. And yes, just because we're disputing a myth about him being overly incompetent at Stalingrad doesn't mean we defend him or his other actions.
    4
  7042. Thanks Sean! I already have his "Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler's Defeat in the East 1942-1943". It's a very good book in my opinion :)
    4
  7043. Sadly the firing squad can't execute me because the men either have rifles with no bullets, or bullets without rifles.
    4
  7044. Maybe, but not in June to September
    4
  7045. That's exactly what I mean! It makes zero sense, and I don't understand why people actually watch those videos because there's much better content out there than that stuff
    4
  7046. That's actually quite a good point! I didn't see it like that :D my reading is slowly getting there - better than my speach. It's funny how I forget it, but as soon as I sit down to learn it again, it all floods back. It's very strange
    4
  7047. I was originally an anarcho-socialist, not a Marxist (which is communism). I do know the difference between the different types. However, I also know that sitting there and listing out the various types every time I want to say something would get tedious and boring very quickly, so I just brandish them all as Marxists, which ultimately they're so similar to they may as well be. Alternative words I could use are "Looters" or "Parasites" or "Benefit Scroungers". The last one is my favourite, even if it's technically untrue, since many socialists do put the minimum effort in to the jobs they hate to have.
    4
  7048. Is that a genuine policy?? Wow!
    4
  7049. It's your lucky day! I've made several videos on Suvorov, but have just collated them into a playlist for you, so here you go https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp
    4
  7050. It was the idea of deporting Jews to Madagascar to die from the environment (although it was assumed some would survive), but wasn't possible due to political and logistical reasons, plus the war prevented it. There was another plan to ship them to Siberia, but after they started losing against the Soviets, their "Final Solution" was implemented.
    4
  7051. That's what I think too. And it also makes the losses seem justified.
    4
  7052. Thank you Brian! Sorry for the delay. If I could have got it out earlier I would have
    4
  7053. And it'll get a lot more detailed once we get into the city. Most of the sources don't even begin until after the battle enters the urban area
    4
  7054. I'm surprised to hear you're not into Stalingrad! What are you interested in?
    4
  7055. You're on to me!
    4
  7056. Exactly what I needed, thank you very much! It's good to know I pronounce "Paulus" right after all as I didn't want to have to change the way I say it :)
    4
  7057.  @juhopuhakka2351  Yes, it really depends on perspective. The "pro-Soviet" viewers have been angry at me for not skipping ahead until Operation Uranus, while the pro-German viewers have dreaded this moment. Personally, I'm not in either camp. While I'm certainly not perfect, I am trying to give as balanced an account as I can with the sources I have available.
    4
  7058. Good to hear :) little and often is the key until it becomes a habit.
    4
  7059. Yeah, that would be nice. It does prove that many businesses aren't as productive as they could be and are slow to adapt and incorporate modern working techniques
    4
  7060. The problem is that "The Science" and "humanitarianism" are actually based on altruism, not selfishness.
    4
  7061. This video is actually a test to see what YouTube will do. So far, not much. But I know my video on the H in Greece was censored not too long after release, so there's still time for them to intervene.
    4
  7062. Originally I used Anime Studio, and then for the LRDG videos I just used premiere pro. In the later 3D videos (including Bruneval and Battleaxe) I'm using Blender 3D software to make the graphics, then putting them into premiere pro
    4
  7063. Thanks Rikki and really good to know! I'm trying to make videos like this a semi-regular thing. Still working on my next documentary behind the scenes :)
    4
  7064. What you've just described is (old-definition) Liberalism, not Capitalism. Capitalism is only private ownership of the means of production. Liberalism takes that and runs with it.
    4
  7065. It's also funny that other people liked his comment, proving that none of these guys are actually watching the video and are just jumping to false conclusions.
    4
  7066. Some of my other videos are only 30 minutes long, yet they don't watch them either. The fact remains that this 5 hour video "Destroys the Denialist Counter Arguments". If you have a 54 hour long video that does honestly and completely refute this video, I'll watch it.
    4
  7067. You mean like what Marx said here? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  7068. See the timestamps in the description? Yes, it appears that the video addressed your point, rendering your argument mute. Stop denying history and realize that this video is backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and notes, and tackles all the denialist arguments. So watch the video and learn why you're wrong.
    4
  7069. Sorry for making you depressed, but yes, history will repeat if we do not learn from it. Glad you liked this though!
    4
  7070. Nope, been working on this for months. Just coincidence that our videos came out when they did
    4
  7071. And thank you for watching! One like is enough 👍
    4
  7072. "I have noticed perusing the comments that he is extremely bias." Bias is a part of history https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Everyone is biased. - "I've been in a similar psychological place before." I was a socialist. Then I realized the true nature of Socialism. It's not for the poor (which I once believed), it's for the rich. Most working-"class" Socialists are unwittingly empowering the rich. If you don't understand why, then you need to listen to what I'm saying. - "Making a 5 hour video and nastily engaging with people, publicly who disagree by demeaning them in bad faith only to be wrong is a lot of shame to confront." Really? In what way have I "nastily" engaged with people, or demeaned them? Did I call them - "dumb" "crazy" "dellusional" "an idiot" "a loser" "a pathetic liar" "a nutter who doesn't know what he's talking about" "a clown" and "a fucking clown" and a "balding clown" "a libertarian joke who has said sub embarrassingly stupid things he only should be made fun of" "an extremist" "a libertarian extremist pushing a narrative" someone who needs "actual medical help" or that I "don't live in reality little Tiki" "flat earthers" "idiot troll(s)" "obvious troll(s)" and that I should "get tested" ? Oh wait, no because the person who said all that was jeff jr, who you're agreeing with. I'm not the one calling people "idiots" or "clowns". I'm not the one who's failing to watch the videos, or failing to provide evidence. When I provide evidence it gets ignored or unwatched or dismissed. Then you wonder why I have little patience with people who refuse to open their eyes, and then accuse me of having my eyes shut. How can I have my eyes shut when I used to hold your position? THINK. - "@jeff jr lol shame is a powerful thing. I wish him well. I appreciate your efforts to counter the narrative good sir." He's not trying to counter the narrative. If he was, he would actually watch the video and try to have a conversation, rather than just going off on one, spamming thousands of comments, insulting everyone and preventing a proper dialogue from being established. A couple of comments above he called me a "crazy extremist libertarian", yet you haven't once called him out for it. And the reason why is because you won't call out bad behaviour of the people you agreeing with, only those who don't agree with you.
    4
  7073. "international finance is not capitalism." Again, that quote from Hitler proves you incorrect - "... because this capital is international, its holders, the Jews, are international because of their being spread all over the world." - Hitler, "Mein Kampf," p556. So yes, when Hitler says "international finance", he's referring to Capitalism. - "The Jews historically had a monopoly on it because Christians could not lend at interest. Its common knowledge international finance was considered a subversive tool for communists just as it is today." Correct, that's exactly what Karl Marx said. He said that the Capitalists/bourgeoisie were the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "You didn’t address his argument you just provided quotes that you chose to interpret in favor of your argument." I provided evidence that directly addressed his argument. You're choosing to ignore that evidence because it contradicts what your ego has chosen to believe.
    4
  7074. To be honest, I've been working on this since August 2018 when I got the first backlash against my argument. The timing with Indy's video is just coincidence, but it's perfect nonetheless 👍
    4
  7075. Except, when you conquer the world, you get one large nation. One nation under God is still a nation. So "internationalism" is no different than "nationalism". They're irrelevant. What matters here is that both are socialisms.
    4
  7076. Yeah I used plenty of sources, new and old. I also have many more sources since then that only confirm what I said here. For example, there's a new book on the Reichsbahn that says it was unofficially nationalized BEFORE 1937, much like all the other industries. I quote from that book in this more recent video https://youtu.be/O3JaxXK25qo
    4
  7077. Then you're not understanding the argument. An apple isn't an orange, but both are fruit. National Socialism isn't Marxism, but they're both Socialism.
    4
  7078. Funny because I'm using the Marxist definition of socialism. Even Marx said it was State control, and I've been over this in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7079. He nationalized the trade unions and murdered Socialists like Lenin murdered Mensheviks. Is Lenin also not a Socialist?
    4
  7080. I wish it had been obvious to me a little sooner... but I got there in the end :)
    4
  7081. Glad to hear you found it useful!
    4
  7082. I understand your confusion. The best thing to do is watch my Public vs Private video as it specifically addressed this question and will make things clear https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7083. Well, Jeff, if you took the time to actually watch the videos and tried to understand them, you would know. Instead of making quick nonsense responses to every commenter, calling them all idiots for watching my videos, realize that the biggest idiot in the room is the one who doesn't listen to points of view that are different from one's own.
    4
  7084. You're correct, Bezos wouldn't have become billionaire under a 100% free market. He (and the other elites) are only a billionaires because the State is creating laws, regulations, and printing endless amounts of currency to prop up their corporations/syndicates and wipe out the "petty-bourgeois" businesses.
    4
  7085. Ah, but the Socialists get around this by saying that Hitler "privatized" the industries... even though, as I explained, he didn't do that, and the term the National Socialists actually used was "Gleichschaltung" (synchronization). Where the term "privatisation" came from, I'm not sure, but I would guess it was the Marxist Left that made it up to paint the National Socialists as Right Wing.
    4
  7086. Exactly. Karl Marx did say the bourgeoisie were the (J). I can't say it properly, or give you the direct quotes because YouTube automatically deleted my comments which quote Karl Marx, but Marx said in "On the J Question" that "Money is the jealous God of [the place they live]". So capital is the god of the J. Then in Das Kapital, page 107, he says the products of the Capitalists (so, their offspring) are "inwardly circumcised J". That means that when the Marxist-Socialists are hating on the bourgeoisie, they're really hating on the J. All Socialism is anti-Semitism.
    4
  7087. As I said in the video, if you disagree with the definitions, watch my Public vs Private video which will give you the historic details as to why Socialism = totalitarianism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And you may also want to see my other video on Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  7088. And there's a difference between Fascism and National Socialism - they are not the same ideology https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  7089. A race is a social group, is it not? You cannot have racism without Socialism. Also, Karl Marx's Socialism was inherently racist https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  7090. It's not just state control though. A state is an organised community of people with ownership of a piece of territory. In other words, it's a "public" (the public sector). A community, though, doesn't mean everyone. It can include and exclude what it likes. This is where the "identity" bits come into play. Socialism can be a state run by a community of a particular class, gender, race, religion... The list goes on. I outlined this in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7091. If only you bothered to watch the video, or see the timestamps in the description, you'd have heard why because I explain both your questions in the video.
    4
  7092. Karl Marx called for central banking in the Communist Manifesto because he knew that central banks steal wealth off the poor and middle classes, and redistribute it to the Elite. He then lied and said he was trying to help the poor... Well, here's what his 'help' has done for the poor https://i.redd.it/hgr0s7i9kmw71.jpg
    4
  7093. 1. Watch the actual video. 2. Pay attention. 3. The historic definitions of Capitalism and Socialism are clear https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (it is your definition that is flawed, as I explained in that video). 4. Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg 5. I'm not saying that Nazism = Marxism. I'm saying there are varieties of Socialism, and that National Socialism was one of those varieties. 6. Both Hitler's Socialism and Stalin's Socialism were totalitarian, unless you're eager to distort history simply to defend your religion, then you may dismiss this fact as heresy. 7. Are you saying that what Hitler said in Mein Kampf (e.g. Lebensraum, his view on the Jews, or how Marxism is bad) is not a true reflection of his beliefs? Because what Hitler says in Mein Kampf is the same thing he says in his speeches, in his interactions with others, in his Table Talks, in his unpublished Second Book, and more. Dismissing them is to dismiss Hitler and render history to the dustbin. My "belief system" is history - evidence and interpretation - NOT an "AnCap narrative". I don't just dismiss evidence without reason like the Socialists do. I use it, even if I challenges my beliefs. You're incapable of doing that due to your ego-investment into your religion, which is why you're blind to what the evidence is telling you, and therefore you must dismiss it.
    4
  7094. North Korea is democratic. Democracy is 'People' 'Power'. The 'People' is the 'Public' and the Public is the State. Democracy is State Power. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7095. Relevant video https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    4
  7096. It is frustrating saying the same things over and over (e.g. I've told them a thousand times that they need to actually watch the video!) but I know I've gotten through to some of them, so I'm hopeful that eventually more will realise the error they've made.
    4
  7097. Thanks for watching! Yes, there's a couple of posts on Reddit where they're laughing at me... and haven't yet realized that they've now losing this debate
    4
  7098. Explained all of that in the video.
    4
  7099.  @slaterslater5944  "You mean where they BANNED trade unions and created an organisation (DAF) that protected capital? Why are you so dishonest?" To be socialist, you need to socialize society. As Lenin made clear, you can't have private trade unions knocking about, because if the State is pro-worker, and the private trade unions are pro-worker but also fighting against the State for better rights, then this undermines the idea of the State being pro-worker. So under Socialism the trade unions must be nationalized/socialized, and the private trade unions that refuse to nationalize must be banned and destroyed. But according to you, when Lenin does it, that's 'real' socialism, and when Hitler does it, that's not 'real' Socialism. Why are you so dishonest? Also, I explained this very clearly in the video in the section: ‘Crushing’ the Trade Unions 02:44:33
    4
  7100. Sadly you're arguing with a troll. Aiden doesn't debate, he just talks gibberish and claims it's a debate.
    4
  7101. A tribe is a society, and a tribal state is also a society. The nation is both a society and a state. The state is the society. That's why the "public sector" is the state. And that's why I linked to the other video because I go through this in detail and explain why what I'm saying is the correct interpretation. And at no point did I say that every state was Socialist. You're jumping to conclusions there. I've explained this in another video here because it's one of the common criticisms and these guys brought it up too https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 In a nutshell though, socialism is when the State takes total control of the economy. "Every" state in history hasn't been able to do that. Only with the advent of the modern police state has this been remotely possible.
    4
  7102. "didn't get through the 5 hours of it but I saw an issue early on and that is the conflation of an economic system and a political one." Thank you for your criticism, although I would encourage you to watch further. Economics and politics are entwined. "also to add to this point a reason that a Socialist would disagree that a totalitarian regime is not socialist even if the state controlled the means of production is because the public have no control over the state." Yes, but the reason why they would/are disagreeing is because they don't understand that a slight of hand has been played with the words. The individuals in society have no control over the state, true, but the 'public' does. The 'public' is the State, not the people in the State. "Thus only a democratic type political system coupled with state owned production would actually be considered a true socialist system in a large centralized model." Democracy = people power. However, by 'people', they don't mean the individuals in society. 'People' is plural. By 'people' they mean 'public', which is the State. Democracy is people 'State' power. Note that Hitler also wanted a 'People's State', and wrote about that in Mein Kampf. Well, a 'People's State' is democracy. This is why North Korea and many other socialist countries call themselves democratic, because democracy is 'public' (State) power. Again, this is why the Founding Fathers of America created a 'republic' rather than a 'democracy'. They knew that democracy was bad. (...the Republic for which it stands..." "Socialism is defined classically, the means of production owned by the public. However, it doesn't define what that public institution is. Democracy, republic, Totalitarian Dictatorship. It just so happens the Stalinist model that spread across the world happens to be of the totalitarian variety. Which isn't ideal with any type of economic system." As I said, watch the Public vs Private video. Public means the 'hierarchy of society' which is a State. Doesn't mean the 'Central State' necessarily, and could mean 'a state within a state' (e.g. a corporation or trade union), but it is a State. Here's the link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7103. The collective is a State, no matter how big or small that collective or State is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7104. If the US has social control of the businesses, which you say it does, then how can you say it's a free market? How can you say it's not socialistic? The people have power (democracy) to tax and regulate the producers and the businesses, and redistribute it to themselves (the looters). Production and wealth, therefore, has been socialised. You even pay rent to the state in the form of property taxes, proving that private property has been abolished.
    4
  7105. If all the state controls all businesses to some extent, then how can it be claimed that we have a free market?
    4
  7106. Please watch the video and see how your arguments are countered.
    4
  7107. Yes, Hitler wasn't a Communist or Capitalist and saw himself in the middle between the two, and the middle was his Socialism. Marxist-Socialism isn't the only version of Socialism. Hitler wasn't a Marxist, but he was a Socialist. He's not a Fascist, he's a National Socialist, and there is a major difference. They're not the same ideology https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    4
  7108. They're not bad books, but they're seriously flawed when it comes to the origins and cause of the hyperinflation. If you learn Austrian Economics first, then read them, then you'll see what I'm talking about. So, if you want to read them, pick up the Austrian books I mentioned first (free PDFs are available online), then pick up those books. They're still worth buying as history books, but I think you should have a grasp of what causes inflation (defined as the expansion of the currency supply, rather than the new "when prices go up" doublespeak definition)
    4
  7109. I don't think I'd be any good doing a 'live' video. I'm much better when I can think things through and back up my points with references at the bottom of the screen
    4
  7110. I genuinely think that History Theory should be the first thing they teach you in history class, because it doesn't take long, and if you've got a decent teacher who understands the full dimensions of it, it actually makes the task of studying history much much much easier
    4
  7111. Haha there's a reason it didn't take long to edit!
    4
  7112. Happy new year to you too!
    4
  7113. But in the sources I have, they talk about all the ethnicities and nationalities rallying to the Austro-Hungarian flag at the beginning of WW1. So, why did they do that, if the regime was so oppressive of ethnic minorities? (The exception in 1914 was the Serb minority, because obviously they went to war with the Serbs and they did start oppressing them then.)
    4
  7114. I'm aiming for two weeks time
    4
  7115. Sadly, Isaev fails to say how many tanks were abandoned. He does say a lot broke down or actually ran out of fuel (and ammunition too by the sound of it). While he is probably right on these details, he fails when talking about the whole battle. And someone else mentioned that it might be due to certain laws having been passed in Russia. Either way though, there needs to be more written on this subject. I'm kinda hoping there are more books in other languages that do come out about this battle soon, since western historians as a whole are too busy writing the 342nd rehash of D-Day. As I said to someone else, I'll do a follow-up video to this in the future and talk about the tanks, infantry and formations because there's some interesting facts about this battle that are quite funny. And I do need to look at Rzhev, even if it's just for context for my Stalingrad documentary.
    4
  7116. Actually, since this video, I've confirmed that the numbers that Isaev provides are correct. This video is not a hoax. Just because everyone thinks humans only use 10% of their brains doesn't mean it's true.
    4
  7117. Sorry to disappoint, but it's much more effective this way :)
    4
  7118. Very well! I've got a pretty detailed picture of most of the fighting up and until early December 1942, and I've gathered a horde of books on the subject. I'd suggest you follow me on twitter @TIKhistory as I tend to post word-count updates every so often (over 250,000 words of research at the moment, and climbing).
    4
  7119. Yes, I have War of Annilhilation. It's a short book, but pretty good. As I explained in last weeks video, it's not possible to ignore the political and economic aspects of the fighting, since they're all entwined (which this video also shows). All is well for me, but I'm suffering from burnout right now. So glad I decided to do this in Seasons :) hope all is well for you Vass
    4
  7120. What's NNN?
    4
  7121. Yes, it actually starts next week. And that first domino falls so hard, and it just goes all over the place from that moment on :D
    4
  7122. The correct spelling is "Halder". I just wanted to crack a few smiles
    4
  7123. Yup! That's why I said we've been in recession since then, and I do believe that. But remember kids, "stimulus" definitely works! 🙄
    4
  7124. Happy birthday Thranduil!
    4
  7125. Good! :)
    4
  7126. Why? Are you likely to die in the next two hours?
    4
  7127. I'll be honest, I haven't read much on the Battle of Budapest to really comment on it. Being late in the war, I'm sure it was brutal though
    4
  7128. I'm just telling it as it is. If Hitler was a Capitalist, then he would have zero reason to sack Schacht
    4
  7129. I'm surprised to hear you've never heard of him before! I've mentioned him a few times. And yes, there will have been a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes which will now have been lost to history, sadly
    4
  7130. That's precisely the problem I'm having. They're completely clueless as to what socialism is, yet are willing to defend it to the death. It's genuinely depressing trying to figure out ways to get through to them, so any thoughts would be appreciated
    4
  7131. @slevinchannel7589 but Fascists do agree with me about fascism. Socialists can't agree with themselves about what Socialism is, because "nothing is real socialism". However, that's a reflection of the poor education of a Socialist, many of whom haven't even read Marx and don't realise how anti-semitic he is https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  7132. They're already here and doing just that. It's insane how they can't watch a minute of the video and see that "privatisation" has been debunked.
    4
  7133. North Korea is a democracy. Democracy is "people power", and the People are the Public, and the Public is the State. Thus, "people power" is "State power", which is why democracy is a scam designed to trick you into surrendering your power to the establishment https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7134. No mate, I just don't answer to anti-Semites who have for years spammed my comment sections with a load of dribble whilst claiming that the Jews run all of academia. Telling a Polish Jew who was describing how their family was badly treated by both the Nazis and Soviets that they are "a clown" isn't acceptable behaviour.
    4
  7135. "It's just more of your false equation if Socialism and Totalitarianism." That wasn't what I said. You didn't watch the video.
    4
  7136. "and not an example of a socialist policy." You didn't watch the video.
    4
  7137. Gleichschaltung= getting on board, or synchronisation (nationalisation). That was the official policy of Hitler and the Nazis. If you watch literally the first two minutes of the video, Slater, you will see that the "privatisation" narrative is a complete lie. The Nazis nationalised the industries and put their uniformed officers in them to run them. They abolished class distinctions... Just watch the video.
    4
  7138. First minute of the video shows that there was no "private" companies or industries. WATCH THE VIDEO.
    4
  7139. Racial community = socialism. Also, private enterprise was curtailed as shown in the video you didn't bother to watch. There were no "mega profits". Götz Aly's Hitler's Beneficiaries is an entire book written to show that the ordinary Germans were the ones who directly benefited from the regime through copious subsidies and controls on prices and rents, while the corporations were taxed heavily. Inflation is caused by central banks Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto (point 6). Corporations themselves are created by the State.
    4
  7140. I made it as clear as day, and yet he somehow attempted to twist it into an entirely different meaning, which is a misinterpretation so stupid that I didn't even realise it when I first read his comment 🤦🏼‍♂️ Socialists say that they banned strikes, and therefore conclude that Hitler wasn't a socialist. I pointed out that, since the worker's state is for the workers, therefore they're not allowed to strike as that would be an indication that they're not for the workers. Lenin also banned strikes for the exact same reason. None of this means that every state that bans strikes is socialist, only that banning strikes doesn't mean they're not socialist.
    4
  7141. That's an oxymoronic term.
    4
  7142. I addressed that point in the video!
    4
  7143. If you watch the video, you'll see these points explained, but in their proper context.
    4
  7144. Don't tell OP that Hitler was all-but allied to the Soviet Union between 1939 and 1941.
    4
  7145. They're not actually listening even when they do watch these videos. In fact, that was the lesson I learnt from doing this video, as I explained a couple weeks later https://youtu.be/HNrOvGkxqac
    4
  7146. "Is state control and nationalisation necessarily socialism?" Yes. Socialism is defined as the socialisation of the means of production. Nations are social groups. Nationalisation and socialisation are the exact same thing. - "I think of socialism as egalitarian" It can be, which is why they reject the free market for the socialisation of the means of production. - "I believe you can have a central planning and nationalisation without egalitarianism" Nationalisation is Socialisation. Egalirarianism is a separate issue. Some socialisms are not egalitarian. For example, Marxism is fundamentally against the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "you can have socialism without a strong state, or any state at all for that matter" The socialisation of the means of production is a state in and of itself. I've been over that here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "(that is in fact the end goals of communism, a stateless and classless society...sounds kind of libertarian)" And this is why you've been misled. What they say and what they do are two separate things. The totalitarians claim that they're not for totalitarianism, and you're not questioning the lie. You literally cannot have socialism (totalitarian control of the economy) without totalitarianism. - "Your argument is more coherent than so-called Marxists, but I think some distinction between right-wing and left-wing "socialism" is needed." The National Socialists are Third Positionists, not "right-wing" (whatever you take that to mean).
    4
  7147. But socialism doesn't work due to what's known as the "Socialist Economic Calculation Problem", therefore it can't ever be more productive than a free market economy. And as that quote from Karl Marx indicates, the Third Reich was Socialist, since capital was in the hands of the state, as shown in the video. Everything was "synchronised" with the state under the policy of Gleichschaltung.
    4
  7148. I did my own research. The citations are on the screen as I'm talking. Over 150 books went into this video. And I refuted everything you said in your comment (he did ban the SPD and the KPD, but he also banned every other party, socialist, communist or conservative), but ignore all that and just continue to spout the Marxist lie!
    4
  7149.  @franklindelcanoroosevelt4957  To be honest, I think even that's too complicated for them
    4
  7150. WATCH THE VIDEO. As I said, it's not Marxist Socialism. And no, it was Leftist.
    4
  7151. No, it absolutely isn't. It's all made up nonsense. Keynesians haven't got a clue what's going on in the economy, which is why they made up an entire "Great Depression of 1946" which didn't even happen https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    4
  7152. I'm afraid you were second
    4
  7153. Social ownership of the means of production.
    4
  7154. "Hitler had lots of support by bankers and industry tycoons and farmer lobbies because of his statement to private property." Again, no matter how much I prove this statement to be false, it gets brought up over and over. WATCH THE VIDEO and you will see that this ISN'T true. Seriously, it's frustrating how you and the others are not willing to actually look at the evidence and continue to spout nonsense.
    4
  7155. It seems that no matter how many times I address this point about Röhm and Strasser, people keep bringing it up... It's almost as if they're not listening or something.
    4
  7156. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production.
    4
  7157. I saw you! Thank you very much, and I hope you enjoy them all :)
    4
  7158. Surprisingly enough, I haven't heard of Pierre Biétry before, but reading up about him online, it's surprisingly how there's a huge overlap between him and the origin of Fascism in Italy.
    4
  7159. If you ignore everything in the video, and all the evidence, and don't understand the history of Fascism or National Socialism, then yeah what you said makes sense.
    4
  7160. Yeah, I personally don't see how a public corporation like Coca-Cola is classed as "capitalist". I mean, if capitalism is the free market, then Coca-Cola is certainly not that. But other people's definition of capitalism is "corporations", so maybe instead of asking if Coca-Cola represents capitalism, maybe it's simpler for free market guys not to use the term "capitalism" at all.
    4
  7161.  @threemeters1425  Thank you very much for your suggestions! I will check them out.
    4
  7162. "Easy to ignore the right is more guilty of this under the guise of protecting the women and children, and appealing to base emotion, like fear and blind nationalism, the idea of an invisible supernatural being that favors only those who think and look like you." It may come as a surprise to you to know that I'm (mostly) in agreement with you. Remember, I'm a free market guy, so I'm not on the "Right". I'm not a Commie-servative, or a tradcon, or a racist. I'm against totalitarianism in all forms, regardless of which part of the "political" (statist) spectrum it's from. In fact, I'm not on your political spectrum at all. There's no room for me here https://images.app.goo.gl/Br34rwiHAfjoSSFQ7 I might be on this one though https://images.app.goo.gl/HbFUCVKgGUGjKxUg6
    4
  7163. Lenin and Stalin literally killed Communists, Socialists and Jews. Yet they're still classed as Socialists/Communists?
    4
  7164. dēmos (“people”) and kratos (“rule”) It's literally in the words Mike. https://www.britannica.com/topic/democracy
    4
  7165. "You are arguing that the Nazis were socialists because they nationalised production and established a single forced union for workers. That is not socialism." SOCIAL OWNERSHIP OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. Did the German workers have social ownership of the means of production? Yes, yes they did.
    4
  7166. "when the Nazis took power, most leading figures of these parties and movements were arrested and/or killed." Yes, and Hitler also killed many conservatives (like von Papen's associates) and even Nazis too! Stalin and Lenin murdered socialists as well, but somehow they're still socialists. Socialists kill other socialists all the time. This is part and parcel of being a socialist.
    4
  7167. I understand it contradicts your state education, and it contradicts mine too. However, the evidence is pointing clearly to the conclusion that the Marxist narrative (yes, it is the Marxist narrative) is incorrect. So we're faced with a choice: believe THE NARRATIVE pushed by the state, or follow the evidence and come to our own conclusions. You have to make that choice. And since you've watched the video where I explained why Hitler had to go to war, I think this video explains why they went to war with Poland specifically https://youtu.be/1uzO0gLTEGc
    4
  7168. It relies on the evidence of the socialism, and doesn't just rely on the definitions. If OP had watched the video, he would have realised this.
    4
  7169. "but the state is capitalist and perpetuates the private ownership of means of production, even so private that they exclude inferior races from the pool" They abolished private property and took over the industries. WATCH THE VIDEO. Killing off people is what socialists do. Both Lenin and Stalin targeted Jews.
    4
  7170. "oh ye they named the privatization gleichschaltung guys" German speakers have been telling me the word Gleichschaltung is actually better translated as "getting everyone on board" or "same circuited", as in nationalisation. So no, it wasn't "privatisation" in any way shape nor form. They took the industries over, and even the British sources claiming they "privatised" them confirm this fact.
    4
  7171. Yep! You should see what they've written about me on Reddit... It's absolutely disgusting
    4
  7172. It's funny because when I quote loads and loads, they don't watch it. When I cut it down, they accuse me of this. Instead of either, it's simply a case of them not wanting listen to the evidence because they don't want to consider the possibility that their world view might be wrong.
    4
  7173. My response is that you should watch the videos and make your own mind up instead of relying on the opinions of others.
    4
  7174. It's relevant, but be prepared, it's not a great read
    4
  7175. "You mean the marxist AND the social-democrats (you said it earlier)." Where did the KPD come from? Oh, that's right, the SPD. Gee, it's almost like they've all just got different interpretations of Marxism, which is why when I say "Marxist" I include all of the different varieties of Marxism, like the SPD, the Democrat Party, and the Labour Party. - "it advocates for peace and equality between nations and individuals" The murder and theft of the bourgeoisie, the systematic destruction of the family, and the annihilation of all non-Marxist religions and nations during the "Revolution" is "peace and equality" is it? You're not equal to me. If you're not equal to me, then there's no way there can be equality. And why would we want equality anyway? The religious idea of the "blank slate" is utopian BS, it does not exist. - "the Left believes in attempting to eradicate social inequality (which exclude racist thinking)" No you don't! They believe in segregation and "white man bad". They despise equality and are the primary source of racism in this world. Look at their actions, not at what they say. They're advocating for "justice" whilst dressed in black-shirts and smashing up ethnic minority communities. Marxist Critical Race(ist) Theory is just that - divide and conquer. The Left IS inter-(National) Socialism. This is what you're not getting. - "while the Right regards most social inequality as the result of ineradicable natural inequalities" There are no groups, only individuals. Follow the science, "race" does not exist https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-for-race-its-a-made-up-label The Left believe in "race" because the Left are racists. When you realise this, you'll wake up. - "and sees attempts to enforce social equality as utopian or authoritarian." Because it is. The Nazis aren't 'Right-wing' though. The National Socialists are Left-wing, which is why they both believe in authoritarianism and their Thousand Year Reich utopia. - "As you say, Nazism rejected the concept of the universal equality of human beings which per definition a Left idea and a socialist idea." Because Hitler thought it was Jewish. He tried to square a circle. In the "National Socialism’s Fundamental Ideological Flaw" section of my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video (timestamp 01:24:54 and link https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 ) I explained WHY this was the case. Hitler was a Socialist, but also had racism on the side. Hitler was well aware of this contradiction in his ideology but decided to run with it anyway. However, holding two contradictory ideas is typical for a Dialectical Hegelian like Hitler. Marx did this all the time. E.g. Capital is "money in circulation" and yet capitalists are accused of "hoarding all the money". Well, are they hoarding it or circulating it? And in fact, Marx trips over this in Das Kapital just before he accuses the capitalists of breeding "inwardly circumcised Js" (Das Kapital p107) - "Only those who qualified as Aryans were allowed full legal rights, including equality before the law." But I thought you just said he didn't believe in equality? Looks like he did. - "As you say, nazism is egalitarian for the people its considers at the top of hierarchy of inequalities." Correct. - "The nazi egalatarianism presuposes inequalirian thinking." What? Like murdering and killing the bourgeoisie? - "It can therefore not be equalitarian, not leftist and not socialist." Of course it is! That's the whole point of socialism! There's no equality in socialism. It's a LIE. Socialism is a war in the name of the poor, against the poor and the middle class, for the benefit of a new rich and powerful. The only equality in socialism is in the rhetoric. Once the Revolution is done, the 'equal' are enslaved or wiped out. - "you must at least admit that is is right wing socialism (which is an oxymoron) and not left." No, it's Left-wing. Here is the political spectrum you see https://images.app.goo.gl/dW59WPbtLEdb8PWo6 And here is the political spectrum I see https://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/a6oM03e_700b.jpg Alternatively https://images.app.goo.gl/Df1z8z5EG6GnS6Aw7 Or this https://images.app.goo.gl/neu52ztgLA8rXCoU7 - "your inventing new concepts." 1. I am allowed to invent new concepts. 2. Technically I didn't invent it, I just named it. 3. the "National" in National Socialism is RACE. So all I did was clarify what National Socialism was. - "The outcome is the same. You playing with words. Didnt you advice to look at evidence, not at opinion?" Mussolini's mistress Margarita Sarfatti was Jewish. There were 10,000 Jews in the Fascist Party of Italy (a third of the adult Jews in Italy) - source, Farrell, “Mussolini: A New Life,” Chapter 11. Clearly, the outcome wasn't the same, and I'm not just giving "an opinion". To quote another historian: “Fascist “racism” throughout the period between 1922 and 1938, however distinctive, was essentially benign - and shared little, if any substance, with the malevolent racism so prevalent across the Alps. None of the major Fascist intellectuals were racists of the sort one found in National Socialist environs. In fact, since many, if not most, of the principal ideologues of Fascism were Actualists, they had principled objections to attributing human behavior to material - that is, biological - causes. They simply could not accept the proposition that an entire population, characterized by ill-defined “racial” traits, could be held, as a body, guilty of anything.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” p193-194. “The form of anti-Semitism adopted by Fascist Italy, as a consequence, was singularly different from that of National Socialist Germany. However indecent, it shared few of the genocidal traits that have horrified the civilized world. Italian Jews suffered innumerable indignities and material losses, but there is scant, if any, evidence that between 1938 and 1943, any Jews died at the hands of Fascists simply for having been Jewish.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” p217.
    4
  7176. Full sugar coca cola, no questions asked. Although I'm not drinking/eating much sugar at the moment since I'm sorta on keto (trying to maintain weight now rather than lose any more)
    4
  7177. Good question about the 25 pounders. Typically, the sources I used don't say. Will see if I can figure it out
    4
  7178. Thanks! That's good to hear :) must have done something right for you to have done that
    4
  7179. I believe that's the next battle in the Western Desert Campaign, so don't worry, it'll be coming :)
    4
  7180. It's definitely gone downhill since then. I had someone comment once saying that they didn't believe me about how bad the universities were... until they actually went to university and saw just how many of their professors were open Marxists.
    4
  7181. Maybe, just maybe, I'm not the one distorting the definition of socialism to hide the meaning of the word in the hope that it can be 'tried' again. If the Nazis were capitalist, as the Marxists claim, then you can't even explain the Hitler Youth. The Marxists are the ones distorting history. When you understand the historic definition of socialism, and Marxism (which is different), and fully understand both Fascist and National-Socialist ideology, it will be impossible for you to deny the socialism in National-Socialism. The issue is that a lot of people don't know what Socialism actually is, and this is being exploited by the social-revolutionaries within our society.
    4
  7182. Yeah, he was there. Wish I could have gone into more detail about the fighting there because it would have been good to see the tactics employed.
    4
  7183. The moon isn't made of cheese. Just because the phrase exists doesn't make it true. State Capitalism is an oxymoron used by people who don't understand what the words mean. This video explains what the words mean and why the phrase is complete nonsense.
    4
  7184. The Stalingrad region map was completed last week. I'm recording the audio tomorrow afternoon for the first video in the Battlestorm Stalingrad series. The first video should be out in a couple of weeks.
    4
  7185. "Based on your argument here, the answer would be to dissolve ip protections and let anyone who can produce anything they want. That's a common idea but is it not a communist one, where individual rights(in this case the individuals right to profit off of their own ideas) are forfeit for the greater good?" I think we're getting our wires crossed. Patents are a problem because the 'public' sector is protecting bad industries. The answer, as you rightly point out, is to abolish the public sector's patent regulation and allow the free market to function properly. The answer to a public sector problem is not more public sector control, it is less public sector control. The idea of abolishing patents is a capitalist idea. It's not a communist idea because communists want more public sector control over the economy. "Interesting thought but to the point, where does the dismantling of idea protections stop? For example, without ip protections someone more charismatic could take all your work on these videos and publish it as their own for profit, would you not have a problem with that?" It's a free country. If someone can be bothered doing that, fine. But I'll certainly be sure to call them out if they do that :) "The only alternatives I can see are let people continue getting squeezed as is happening or add MORE regulations so companies can't skyrocket prices for profit up to having a nationalizing of the industry so it's no longer for-profit. Did I miss any other possibilities?" As I said, the solution is to abolish public-sector regulations and free-up the market. Also, if companies increase prices, then there will be less sales. Less sales means losses, not profits.
    4
  7186. The agenda to correct the distortions created in the historical record so that we can properly understand ourselves and the world we live in
    4
  7187. Right, but Marx and the other Marxists are incorrect. Socialism came before Marx, and has nothing to do with class. It means State control. Just because a bunch of Anti-Semites believe otherwise doesn't mean that it isn't State control https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    4
  7188. @Nexus, Tim Pool is a Leftist, and yet I said he was doing a good job. Plus, everyone is biased because everyone is a private individual who has a unique perspective on the world.
    4
  7189. I've replied to you directly as part of my latest video https://youtu.be/hr9TUcWcoYY
    4
  7190. "You do not understand 1984" What is it that I don't understand about 1984? George Orwell is my favorite fiction author and I've read most of his books (which is unusual because I normally see fiction as a waste of time).
    4
  7191. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.
    4
  7192. Yes, that's how the spectrum is seen in the UK too. The spectrum has become a spectrum for Leftwing parties only. "Far Right" just means "rightwing of the Left", not actual Right (anarchy)
    4
  7193. You're unjustifiably accusing me of racism. By your own logic, that makes you a racist.
    4
  7194. Corn Laws were bad, as is the British government. However they did the right thing by allowing Thomas Cook to go under. Propping up a dying business is a bad idea and leads to market bubbles, which grow larger and larger, then later pop, causing bigger recessions than needed to be.
    4
  7195. @Dean Mulready - thank you for all your doublethink comments in this comment section. I am now so enlightened by them that my brain has left my body and has ascended to another plane of existence leaving just the collectivized animated corpse of a once individual human being. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
    4
  7196. Sorry my videos keep you up at night!
    4
  7197. No, of course not. A centrally planned economy isn't the same as a free market.
    4
  7198. Good questions, and you can find the answers to all of those questions by listening to what Austrian economists are saying. For example, laws, police and military services will still exist in a free market https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ Of course, there wouldn't be taxes, inflation or slaves, since those things are criminal activities and the root of all the evil in the world today. The market naturally doesn't have taxes, uses gold (which can't be printed) and history has shown that slavery is less profitable (if profitable at all) for the owners than if the workers were free and paid for their labour. It was the rise of free market liberalism that resulted in the freedom of the slaves in the late 1700s and 1800s.
    4
  7199. It could definitely be remade and shortened, and you're correct that I hadn't yet realised the "privatisation" narrative was wrong (although was suspecting it was).
    4
  7200. Agreed!
    4
  7201. I was considering doing the Battle of Britain and the Atlantic, both of which I could do in great detail since I'll have access to the British sources
    4
  7202. 1. I'm not "apologizing" for Hitler, so well done for jumping to a ridiculous conclusion. 2. I made a poll on the channel recently asking if the Manstein strategy was viable. You can find it on the community tab. Many do think that retreating all the way to Berlin would help Germany win the war.
    4
  7203. I offered a pretty compelling argument. Do you have a pretty compelling counter-argument?
    4
  7204. But WHY couldn't they possibly win? What factors made it impossible to win? And why did they lose at a specific time? Why did they make certain strategic, operational, and tactical decisions during the war? All these questions deserve answers, and oil explains the whole lot of them.
    4
  7205. I absolutely encourage you to look into it! My sources are listed in the pinned comment, and I'd highly recommend Toprani's essays, plus Hayward's Stopped at Stalingrad, as starting points.
    4
  7206. Well, I just learnt a new word :) I think I'm going to make a video on it in the near future because it does deserve one.
    4
  7207. It's just a quick extra. There's another one tomorrow which I'm still working on.
    4
  7208. If I hadn't done Stalingrad, but 44 other Battlestorms on other battles (maybe averaging 3 or 4 videos per battle) this probably would have brought in more audience. But doing the same battle for 44 episodes isn't bringing in new viewers, and the long-term viewers are slowly dropping off. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
    4
  7209. Thanks for your answer! Do you think they could have achieved an encirclement of Lopatin's force? I'll be giving you my opinion in a future (I'll say no more for now)
    4
  7210. I used to. In fact, I had some HOI3 videos on this channel back in the day. Have had to hide them due to COPPA
    4
  7211. Yes!
    4
  7212. Yes you were!
    4
  7213. "But believe in capitalist statistics where each and every company has huge incentives to tweak and forge the accounting systems either to lower profits to evade taxes or inflate profits to attract investments and increase market capitalization (depending on goals)...." Incorrect. I don't trust government or corporate statistics at all, and neither should you. Such statistics are manipulated, because again you cannot calculate statistics if there are no free market prices. In the UK, for example, we have government price controls on food, toilet rolls and other retail items which is why there's shortages in the shops right now. In a free market, prices would go up to match the increased demand. The fact that this isn't allowed to happen, is proof that we don't have a free market. Well, without a free market, you cannot have economic calculation. That's why we're currently in a stock market crash, because the markets have been so manipulated that they're currently trying to find their actual value. [a market correction is a return to "fair value"] Also, see my Public vs Private video for why corporations are Socialist, not Capitalist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7214. My video on Wednesday will be aptly timed too ;)
    4
  7215. "Oil is difference why Italian army was crap and why soviet army was amazing from 1942" I need to do more on the Italians in WW2, because yes, the Italian navy was basically trapped in port for half the war due to the oil shortage.
    4
  7216. "Socialism only consumes wealth? Very odd opinion. Economics is really about production which can be helped by social programs." Murray Rothbard wasn't wrong on this particular point. In order to fund the social programs to help those that produce, you must rob off those who produce. You're not growing an economy by robbing from Peter to paying Paul, you're just redistributing wealth. Worse, government programs aren't as efficient as free market operations, and the State takes a huge cut of the "profits" for itself (claiming that others are selfish and greedy, when they're the thieves who have robbed from others.) "What's weird is that people seem to think America is some sort of free market which is ridiculous and for obvious reasons would be catastrophic." The USA is not a free market economy. The fact that the market is crashing right now proves that it's not free. Booms and busts only happen because of State-manipulations (fiat currency creation especially) in the market. Please see Rothbard's "America's Greatest Depression", which I think you can get online for free, but if not it's well worth it
    4
  7217. Yes I did 😂
    4
  7218. Good to hear!
    4
  7219. I've done an entire video explaining how Italian Fascism wasn't racist until the late 1930s, fully backed by sources https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko A fun fact from that video is that there were 10,000 Jews in the Fascist Party of Italy, and Margherita Sarfatti was Mussolini's mistress until 1938, and she was Jewish. The ad-hoc "gotchya" counter-argument was then raised that I had "forgotten" about the Ethiopians. But I hadn't, and so this is my explanation. As I've explained in this video and in others, Italian Fascist ideology just simply doesn't have racism built into it like National Socialism does. So yes, this is an ad hoc response, and there are no sources in this video... but there doesn't need to be. The sources have already been provided in the linked video.
    4
  7220. I'm glad you do! Thinking about it, it does make sense to do quick replies like this, so I may do some more in the future
    4
  7221. I'm an individual. I'm not a race. Are you a race? Why are you not an individual?
    4
  7222. It's only clickbait if I didn't talk about the subject in the thumbnail or title. So if it had been "Himmler's Insane Reasoning", but it was me discussing the benefits of cutting sugar out of your diet, then that would be clickbait. But as it is, a catchy title and thumbnail are not the same as clickbait
    4
  7223. It's funny because someone else in the comments said I should have named the video "the Liberation of Estonia" rather than "Reconquest". I do mention later in the video that the Estonians did attempt to declare independence, and I do understand what you're saying. But technically it was a 'liberation' because it was Soviet territory in 1941 prior to the invasion. I'm not saying this was 'right', but I am saying it is what it is. Some Baltic peoples fought with the Red Army to liberate the Baltics from the Axis.
    4
  7224. Fantastic! Productive days are good :) I find that if I'm very productive in the morning, it becomes a snowball effect and I end up having an incredibly productive day.
    4
  7225. Yeah, they'll say "socialism in the name doesn't mean anything", which is true. However, it wasn't just in the name. They actually attempted (but failed) to implement full socialism.
    4
  7226. "Nazi Germany was a totalitarian system that allowed private enterprise" If it had private enterprise, then it wasn't totalitarian.
    4
  7227. The German middle-class had traditionally voted for capitalism, democracy and liberalism, but had been destroyed during the Weimar Hyperinflation, and were getting hammered again during the Great Depression. They wanted socialism, but were not happy with the SPD or KPD. So they voted for Hitler during the 1930 election campaign. But the middle class alone wasn't enough to gain power, so in order to win even more votes from other parts of society, Hitler downplayed the socialism part of his party in 1932. I went over this in more detail in this video of mine https://youtu.be/Ydx72tT552k
    4
  7228. Yes, I've realised this too. The Left are totally incapable of debate, and it's really unfortunate and terrifying how they're rapidly becoming willing executioners of the next dictator.
    4
  7229. As far as what the sources I used said, D'Ornano and sergeant Hewson were the first casualties of the LRDG. I'm not sure who died first in the battle at Murzuk. However, the sources may not be 100% accurate so don't quote me on this :)
    4
  7230. I don't think you can ever get the details 100% right - there will always be missing details. But I do think that we should aim to get as close to that 100% as possible. There's no way I can include every spec of detail in my videos, but I do think my Stalingrad video will put Beevor to shame. To be fair to Beevor though, he didn't dive into the Soviet archives like Glantz has been able to do, so he wouldn't have had the details to begin with. And just so you know, I'm now trying to do a few of these videos each week, plus two gameplay videos at the weekends, and research for Stalingrad inbetween them all
    4
  7231. I can understand Serbians focusing on the elements that hurt Serbians the most, and neglecting the other parts. And I'm sure others will be doing the same with their nationalities. This is why tribalism is bad for an individual. It just warps your perspective.
    4
  7232. YouTube shouldn't allow people who don't listen to comment. First, I made it clear that Chetniks were war criminals. Second, you're wrong about them "happily collaborating" for all the reasons listed in the video. And, since others have asked, when I do another video on this topic, I will address the "supplies from Moscow" issue.
    4
  7233. No, he also fought against the Germans and the Ustasha
    4
  7234. Yeah I think this is just the start of a series on Yugoslavia Not sure when the next video on this will be, of course, but very interesting topic.
    4
  7235. I'm glad to hear you're reading the books! The Vampire Economy is interesting because it was written by a Communist, and he even denies that Hitler's economy was "real socialism" despite writing a book detailing all the socialism in the economy... Also, I knew that the Lotus Eaters have been recommended some of my videos, but I think you're the first I've seen saying you've come over from them, so it's good to see. If more people understand history we'll have less chance of it repeating itself. Cheers!
    4
  7236. "Indeed, it has become more evident to me that I am wasting my time since, I assume that you already have it deep rooted in your mind that certain people just have to live in a comfortable middle calls life and the first world lifestyle that brings with it, while others have to go to back-breaking work in poor working conditions miserable living standards from childhood to old age (if they even get that far anyway) and then death." Nope, not in the slightest. This is a false view of what I believe, and what many on the right believe. Capitalism actually frees man from the shackles of state-slavery and allows him to climb out of poverty. A poor worker (with the right attitude and will-power) can achieve greatness. But those that do not strive for greatness will remain where they are - and that's fine too. Let the best rise to the top in a meritocracy. - "Yes. It seems perfectly reasonable to me to assume that you believe the rest of the 4 billion people, have to work in sweatshops in order for you to have your smart phone..." This entire paragraph is a joke. I want to pay the workers as much as I possibly can get away with. Obviously I could pay them more if the State wasn't taxing me to death, or stealing their wages via tax and inflation before they even received them, but I have no control over that. I want happy employees who are good at their job, and who strive for excellence. Their landlords should be able to provide them with decent accommodation, which they're not able to do because of taxation, regulation, inflation and outright destruction of private property rights. All this leaves the workers blaming the "greedy" landlords for their run-down flats, when the State stole the wealth from the landlords in the first place, impoverishing them and causing the situation to deteriorate. Capitalism gets blamed for the failure of Socialism. - "Just look at the conviction of this leftist:" Conviction, yes. Understanding of basic economics, no. - "Have you heard of Lenin" You obviously haven't watched my channel. Lenin murdered Jews and shot farmers trying to deliver food to the starving cities as the peasants fled into the woods to get away from Lenin's bandits. See the "Public vs Private" video for an explanation and sources https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "I must confess, I only asked you to debunk Lenin because you can't, no one can, it is basically impossible.." Hahahahahaha... oh boy. Let's give a quote from Lenin himself in 1918 on what to do with the starving peasants who refused to relinquish their grain. "1. Hang (hang without fail, so the people see) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers 2. Publish their names. 3. Take from them all the grain. 4. Designate hostages… " - Lenin, 11th of August 1918, from Gellately, “Lenin, Stalin and Hitler,” P53. Definitely sounds like he wanted to help the poor, right? The peasants were condemned to starve in the name of the workers. If they resisted, they would be murdered. Another quote: “Some were shot, others drowned, some frozen or buried alive, and still others were hacked to death by swords.” - Gellately, “Lenin, Stalin and Hitler,” P65. - "I would provide you with a link http://digamo.free.fr/23things.pdf (hopefully it works)." I'm honestly reluctant to click on such a dodgy link. I'm going to pass. - "But if it makes you happier, (ignorance is bliss) I will help you with your libertarian journeys even though I am not a libertarian. You could read some of Thomas Sewell and Ayn Rand." I've never read Ayn Rand, and it's "Thomas Sowell", not "Sewell". "Sewell" is a Leftist author who's spouting nonsense about Weimar Germany, which I've started to debunk in the Weimar Hyperinflation video series. - "What else is there to talk about if man is to survive in the mess that capitalism has made of our society with its wars, its pollution of the air, the sea and the land and its degradation of our moral, social and economic health?" We don't have capitalism. See the "Public vs Private" video, and the first video of the Weimar Hyperinflation series and you'll know exactly why we don't have capitalism. Here's the link to the Weimar video https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA - "Capitalism enslaves the 90% who aren't capitalists." No, Socialism does that, not capitalism. You have no idea what capitalism is if you think the current system is capitalist. - Overall, your comments largely repeat the same Leftist emotionalism that I used to believe in. Unfortunately, I no longer believe the propaganda. I see Socialism for what it really is, not what it promises. It is the snake in the tree - offering you the original sin. Too many people fall for the snake, without realizing the consequences. I too believed the snakes, and once you see them for what they are, there's no going back. Ultimately, you haven't explained how I get through to a Leftist. How do I make them understand that they're believing nothing but lies. The promise of Socialism is just smoke and mirrors for the establishment of a totalitarian dictatorship. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it. But I can't get Leftists to open their eyes.
    4
  7237. "But what surprises me is that you say that Mikhail Bakunin is a socialist, even though he is actually an anarchist, and as a former anarchist you should have known this." No, he was a "collectivist anarchist". He actually created that breed of socialism. You're denying the collectivism inherent within his "anarchism", probably because you don't want to acknowledge it. But as I explained in the Public vs Private video, socialism (or collectivism) is the opposite of anarchism. Bakunin is a walking oxymoron, just as I was when I was a Socialist/Anarchist. - "As an anarchist, Mikhail Bakunin wanted a society without Rulers." But he wanted a society, so he was a socialist. This contradicts what you said earlier about him not being a socialist, since the only way for him to achieve his aims would be for him to impose a "federalist" dictatorship on the people. That would, obviously, require a dictatorship (either democratic dictatorship or totalitarian dictatorship). In fact, Bakunin called for a federalist system, much like every other anarchist-syndicalist does. I've even watched anarcho-syndicalist YouTube videos where they declare that after the Revolution they would form a Federal Soviet world which they claim would be "non-State". Sorry, but a federal Soviet state is clearly not "non-State". - "Also, it is actually imperialism that is the last stage of capitalism, not fascism or Nazism. Fascism comes about when the capitalism is in crisis." Right, but you're forgetting that many Socialists have painted Nazism and Fascism as Capitalist Imperialism. The excuse that the Left made for why Hitler went East into the Soviet Union was because Capitalism needed to expand via imperialism (this is related to the shrinking markets concept I've talked about). So, in the Marxist literature, they have tied the concepts of capitalism, fascism/nazism, and imperialism together. So I wasn't wrong. Perhaps I was imprecise in my language, but I knew what I was talking about. - "Fascism exists to retain capitalism and the capitalist mode of production and the continued exploitation of man by man." Exactly. You've just tied the three concepts together as well, proving my point. By the way, all I'm doing here is pointing out the inherent contradictions in your own narrative. As a Lefty, I couldn't see them. But I can now. - "The left are against them because of what happens under a fascist state when it does come: where social mobility itself is stopped and works to destroy a chance to ask for better working conditions or higher wages through trade unions, it is there to ultimately keep you in place." Except, that's not what happened under Fascism. Fascism is trade unionism. The Italians called their trade unions "fasci", as I explained in the Fascism Defined video. So not only is the Leftist narrative wrong, it's also in direct contradiction to the history. So again, you're pointing out things that I've already addressed, assuming that I haven't thought about this stuff, or didn't know it, when in reality I have. - "Which is the main function of fascism, to which Nazism is a part of." No, Fascism and National Socialism are two inherently different ideologies. I've been over this. Here's the "Fascism Defined" video link. Watch it, and learn https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "The fact that they are racist is just a means to rile up the reactionary elements of society to get them to be the useful idiots and foot soldiers to make such an event happen." That's precisely what the Left do with Socialists. They're doing it now, in fact. Again, National Socialism and Fascism are Leftist ideologies, and the Left are employing the exact same tactics right now, all in the name of the corporations (e.g. Big Pharma). - Now, let's tie all this together. Towards the beginning, you said this: "In addition, I also wondered how you could be so close, yet so far. Some are your videos are almost spot on, if only you made that leap then you would have found the truth, but you don't seem to do that." See, this is a laugh. You've tried to argue against me, but in reality, you've undermined your own arguments and also not been accurate in your descriptions. You've accused me of being ignorant on this topic, and say that if only I would have gone a little further, I would have found "the Truth". In your head, the Leftist world-view is "the Truth". In reality, it is you who doesn't know the truth. If you're ready to take the Red Pill, start by watching my "Public vs Private" video, then follow that up with the "Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism" video, then the "What Causes Recessions and Depressions" video, then the "Fascism Defined" video, then the "Hitler's Socialism" video, and I would recommend that you watch the more recent Weimar Hyperinflation series too, because that will show you why the Leftist narrative is completely false. By Karl Marx's own definition, we do not have Capitalism (as I explained in episode 1 of the Weimar Hyperinflation series). If you're willing to learn, then you will. If you're going to stubbornly hold onto the Leftist world-view, then I can't educate you.
    4
  7238. I don't want to spoil it for you, so I'll not say too much. But I will say that things get really interesting once we enter the battle, and it's very very surprising the way things turned out
    4
  7239. The Soviets certainly turn it around
    4
  7240. It makes a change, doesn't it :) and yes, I'm getting there with German names, although will need more help on the Soviet names. But when I do my Stalingrad Soviet Order of Battle video, no doubt a lot of people will correct me!
    4
  7241. Thank you! And I'm very grateful to the Patreons I have already. The more support I get, the more I can put into these videos
    4
  7242. Glad to hear I pronounced something right for a change! :D
    4
  7243. Ah, I do remember you Toni! Good times back then, getting shot up in Close Combat and Panzer Corps haha :)
    4
  7244. No, Go is not about surrounding enemy pieces. You can play a game of go and win without taking a single piece (unlikely in the late game, but technically it's true). Unlike chess, where you're trying to defeat individual pieces, Go is about taking influence over areas of the board. Yes, fighting is part of that, but it's not necessary. Imagine playing a chess move - like a Castle striking towards the Caucasus - but on a Go board. So what? All you've done is take some territory, surrendered the initiative to your opponent and opened yourself up to get yourself surrounded.
    4
  7245. Yeah, I agree with Mid ary. I'd say most of the points aren't true. Insufficient oil renders the first 3 points mute. Point 4 is untrue because the Germans replenished their losses in 1941-1943. 5 is correct. 6 is untrue, as I pointed out in my "Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2" video https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 7, 8 and 9are the same, but are all related to the logistics and oil problems. 10 is correct. 11 is wrong about the generals themselves because every army is like that, but is right about the underestimating the Soviets bit. 12 is correct, although the impact was only really severe from 1943 onwards when the Soviet state finally decided to support the partisans.
    4
  7246. Do it! I'd love to watch it :)
    4
  7247. Excellent! I hope you're double checking my animations and narrative against what Glantz wrote, in case I got anything wrong :)
    4
  7248. I've no idea! As many as required. Someone else estimated that at the rate we're going, it will be around 50 episodes long. I replied that it may be longer than that though because I want to go into more detail once we get to the city, and there's other concepts and things to discuss too, like you'll hear about next episode.
    4
  7249. Well, it's not clear. Krylov (and maybe Chuikov, depending how you read it) suggest that he remained to advise Krylov until Chuikov arrived, then went into the reserve for a while before being given command of other armies. Other sources say he was arrested... So it's not clear exactly what happened in the short term, but he definitely ended up commanding other armies later.
    4
  7250.  @VespasianJudea  "It’s a massive undertaking. You’re basically asking to read a few bibles worth of economics." You don't NEED to read every book I read out. If nothing else, read "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt, which is just 214 easy-to-read pages. Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics" is 633 pages. In total, that's 847 pages. A Bible is somewhere over 1,200 pages.
    4
  7251. Whoops! 🙈
    4
  7252. You've just highlighted the fact that paper is a scarce resource with alternative uses!
    4
  7253. And yet, they Tories are renationalising the rails again, which will not solve the issue. The railways should be fully sold off to individuals or small businesses. If they're not profitable, then people don't want them, which means the land can be sold off and used for other purposes.
    4
  7254.  @slopeisdope2293  Yeah, you could call it Fascism, Fabianism, Keynesianism... They've all got roughly the same policies.
    4
  7255. It's possible, but the sources I have don't mention malaria
    4
  7256. I've actually been heavily distracted with current events, since yes important history is being written. I think I need to comment on these events, because the mainstream media is pumping out complete rubbish as usual
    4
  7257. It's frustrating how often I make that error and don't catch it before release haha
    4
  7258. Damn it! Thanks for pointing that out
    4
  7259. Have you heard about the 'Murder Hornets'? Yes, the media are already lining up the next thing in order to scare us, and keep us in lockup
    4
  7260. I don't know if I'll cover the Caucasus specifically, but the reason I'm not doing as much from the Soviet perspective is simply because of limited sources
    4
  7261. Haha I'll risk it
    4
  7262. As far as I'm aware, it's not pink panzer colour schemes - it's pink on their uniforms, like the stripes and what not. If you Google image search panzer uniforms, you'll find some with pink on them. And I don't have a PhD in history. I do have a BA hons degree in history, however at the time of graduation I didn't see the need to progress further down the formal education route. For me, there's never been a need to use my degree in the real world, let alone a PhD, so I do feel that even my degree was a bit pointless tbh. And I actually learnt a lot more about history in college than I did at university - and they wouldn't even let me do a dissertation! That's actually one of the reasons that prompted me to do my Market Garden video because I felt cheated out of doing a 10,000 word dissertation. In the end, Battlestorm Market Garden was over 20,000 so I think I've earned my stripes :)
    4
  7263. Army guy in maxmagnus's video is talking nonsense. You cannot calculate human action, otherwise we'd know who'd win every football match with absolute certainty.
    4
  7264. I don't mind your disagreement. And yes, I can see your point of view, and I agree it might be useful to see how a battle might go (I actually said this in the video). But it won't give accurate results. On your second point, socialism is the state. You cannot have socialism without a society, and society is the state. I've actually been over this in great detail in my Public vs Private video backed by historical sources https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And I know the counter-arguments. I've heard them all before. But no, anarcho-socialism is Statism. If you listen to the anarcho-syndicalists and so on talk, they're only anarchists because they want to bring down the current state. After that they're going to erect a "federalist" state, or some other version of socialism (depending on the particular socialist you listen to). Anyone telling you that socialism is anything other than public (state) ownership or control of the means of production either doesn't know what socialism is, or is lying.
    4
  7265. Damo, the problem is that this isn't "alternative thought". Denialists are an extremist group founded on racism, bent on attacking the jews. I will copy what I posted elsewhere which explains this in full - The reason there is a law in certain countries that forbids people from DENYING the Holocaust exists is because it is a message to everyone that society is taking this event very seriously. These conspiracy theorists think that the government is trying to hide something. But it's actually the opposite - they're saying there is a mountain of evidence that supports this event, so we support it too. And they have to do this because there's a bunch of racists in the world, who are trying to deny it happened because if they can deny it happened, then fascism or National Socialism would no longer be stigmatized, and would be a viable alternative to democracy. Yep. They are an internal threat to western civilisation. They are a threat to our freedom and, much like extremists from other cultures the western world is threatened by today, it is our duty to fight back against them. Brave men fought for our freedom eighty years ago, and continue to do so today. Yet these men are trying to undermine their efforts now. Why? Because they are extremists who do not value the same values we do. What people like the denialists are trying to do is cast doubt on one or two pieces of evidence about the Holocaust. They think that if they can deceive enough people by spreading lies, their false-truth will come out and they will change the world - and fascism will rise again. It is a cause. A cult. And just like most cults, it is based on 'belief' rather than hard evidence. They believe in enemies - the Jews, or the government, or the grand conspiracy. They believe in their gang - fellow racists, neo-nazis, anti-semites. They are a cult. And what this cult fails to realise is that there is a mountain of evidence for the Holocaust. It would be like saying "the Roman Empire didn't exist" and then going "nope, it wasn't there, it's a conspiracy by the EU to keep Europe united". "But, but, they didn't wear togas, and they didn't speak latin. Look I've manipulated some evidence about aqueducts that proves they couldn't have worked. The Romans didn't exist". No... there's a mountain of evidence that says the Romans existed, just like there's a mountain of evidence that says the Holocaust happened. But what they're doing is picking at it in such a way that it casts doubt upon the full event. But even if someone proved that aqueducts didn't work, that wouldn't change the mountain of evidence that said the Romans existed. So, their logic is fundamentally flawed. The laws are there to show how serious society takes this event, and is a reminder to everyone that pure racism isn't accepted in our society. These laws do not prevent you discussing the details of the Holocaust. You can discuss the numbers or the events, so long as you do so in a reasonable way, backed up with evidence that hasn't been manipulated, and do so for an academic purpose. This is the good-side of revisionism. But the bad-revisionists - those distorting history, are not doing any of this. In fact, I’ve now started calling them distorians, to distinguish them from good-revisionists. These distorians present flawed logic and use distortion, manipulation and other tactics to undermine the event. They go so far as to call themselves "Revisionists" in order to cast doubt on the good-revisionism being done in academic fields. And they wonder why they get shunned by anyone who doesn't "believe" in their racist views. Unfortunately, those same laws that protect the Holocaust in certain countries also help the deniers claim there's some big conspiracy going on, and thus help their cause. They also claim it's a law that goes against freedom of speech. No it isn't. You can talk about it all you want, but that doesn't mean we have to listen, or that we have to publish your views on your behalf. YouTube has the right to take your videos down if you deny the Holocaust because freedom of speech does not mean companies have to allow those views to air. Same with me. Any extremist comments or hate-speech or links to neo-nazi websites will be deleted. Don’t like it? Tough. I’m not giving you a place where you can spread your lies and deceit, because I have the right to do that. And as I said, these people think if they can cast doubt on things like this, and recruit enough people to their cause, they will change things. However, their logic is fundamentally flawed. 80% of people are for the death penalty, therefore, the death penalty is moral. ... yeah, that's not going to work. This is why you should do what normal historians do. Ask - "But is this really the case?" Then go out there and do some reading. Educate yourself. If you've read one or two of their comments and are having doubts, buy the book "Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?" http://amzn.eu/bhDY6TE or https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=uACijKy-cbgC This book explains who the Holocaust deniers are - including David Irving - what they're trying to do, why they're trying to do it, how they're trying to do it, and why they shouldn't be trusted. And, of course, there are plenty of books on the actual Holocaust itself which will hand you a mountain of evidence that supports the existence of the Holocaust. I will leave you with a quote from Eisenhower, from his memoirs "Crusade in Europe" Kindle edition, 2007. "The same day I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however, that I have never at any time experienced an equal sense of shock. "I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that "the Stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda." Some members of the visiting party were unable to go through the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton's headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to sent instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for critical doubt." - Eisenhower. Yes, it seems even as early as 1945, Eisenhower predicted there would be elements in society who would dismiss these events. Well, unfortunately, he was right.
    4
  7266. Laut, it's hilarious that people get so offended at the little things. In fact, you've reminded me about another video people cry over - I made reference to Alex Jones in my Stalinist Purge video. Wow, I've never seen so many grown men cry.
    4
  7267. Never trust the media is one of the big lessons of history
    4
  7268. I can understand that :)
    4
  7269. Not in the slightest. It's good when it uses evidence correctly to support it's argument. Arguing something ridiculous, and then not providing anywhere near enough evidence to support that view, is not the way to do it.
    4
  7270. True, but that, to me, is where the fun is. History is a debate. There are "facts" but it is the interpretation of those facts that make it interesting.
    4
  7271. Numerous comments have just been deleted from this thread and several commenters banned from commenting on the entire channel. I will not tolerate far-left or far-right propaganda, denialists, or people being abusive to others in my comment sections. If you see anything like this, let me know and I'll delete and/or ban asap.
    4
  7272. To be fair, I didn't learn this in school either.
    4
  7273. Seriously? Is that true? That's amazing if that's true
    4
  7274. Y E S
    4
  7275. This is linked to Lend Lease, which I'm currently gathering sources on. As it currently stands, I think that without Lend Lease, the Soviets may still have won the war, simply because they had almost won it in 1941/1942 before Lend Lease had really got going. But I do think it would have dragged on a lot longer (probably by two or three years) and probably would have lead to a lot more death and destruction than there was already. Sources? Erm... well, pretty much every history book on the Eastern Front I own. Ostkrieg, When Titan's Clashed, Enduring the Whirlwind... Glantz's Stalingrad trilogy. To answer this further would require a lot more research and I'd probably have to dedicate several hours to writing out a full answer, so I'm sorry if this disappoints!
    4
  7276. Have they been quoting me? That's awesome to know :) remember, you don't have to always agree with me!
    4
  7277. Well, this is why I split it into "seasons". Every 3 episodes is a "season", and each season can sort-of be watched independently, although I'd still recommend you watch them in order, and they do flow from one to the next. So you could just watch the first season (which is the 21st to 31st of July 1942, and covers the battle near the Don before 4th Panzer Army gets involved, and until Chuikov gets... well, I don't want to spoil it). That's actually a really good stopping point if you just want to dip your toe.
    4
  7278. I actually bought books on those very topics ages ago but didn't have time to get to them. It's definitely on the cards, but might be a while away
    4
  7279. I accept your opinions Panzer Freak, but I'm not going back to my old Anarcho-Socialist ways. I've taken the Red-Pill and I now see the world for how it really is. The lies that are inherent within the history books on the Third Reich (largely written by Guardian activists like Adam Tooze) need to be called out, especially since the evidence doesn't support their narratives, and they mislead readers to the wrong conclusions about history. And technically, according to Wikipedia, I'm not a libertarian. To quote it: "Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state's encroachment on and violations of individual liberties; emphasizing the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, cooperation, civil and political rights, bodily autonomy, free association, free trade, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of movement, individualism and voluntary association." Yeah, except I don't agree with "the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism [and] civil and political rights". They're all statist policies designed to trick you into submitting to the rule of others. I know Wikipedia can't even get the start date for the Battle of Stalingrad correct, so it's not a great source, but I honestly have no idea if I am a libertarian or not. I just know that Socialism doesn't work, and that the free market and private ownership does, since the evidence for that conclusion is overwhelming. I'm following the evidence rather than The Faith.
    4
  7280. Less than 100k is bad for a channel of my size. Other one-off videos like the Dresden or Aryan religion videos bring in more views and subscribers, and aren't as hard to edit/animate. If I was getting 200k a video, then I'd have made the decision to go bi-weekly instead and keep on with Stalingrad. The 100k tells me to stay weekly, but pause Stalingrad and do other subjects.
    4
  7281. I will continue Stalingrad - this isn't an abandonment, just a pause. We've come too far to throw in the towel completely. Regarding the episode lengths, there's a large segment of the audience who refuse to watch videos that are less than 30 minutes long, which is why I aim for 35-45 minutes. I kind of get it, but some subjects don't require that length of time, and it would be nice to do the odd video that's shorter.
    4
  7282. I'll probably hit 50. Whether it goes beyond that, I'm not sure yet.
    4
  7283. Yeah, I think we'll get to episode 50, but not sure if there will be anything beyond that... So we're close now!
    4
  7284.  @baryonyxwalkeri3957  ​ @runtoth3abyss I think there will be an episode 50, but whether there will be an episode 51, I'm not sure yet
    4
  7285.  @insideoutsideupsidedown2218 Yes, but most of them would have been male. The Croatians managed to fly out their mistresses, so I'd imagine many of the Germans would have flown out theirs too.
    4
  7286.  @randomuser-xc2wr  Churchill was a dictator. Behind the scenes, he was on the same eugenicist team as Hitler and Stalin, which is why Churchill implemented the UK's eugenicist act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Deficiency_Act_1913 And I've called Churchill an idiot in the past https://youtu.be/z2c7d5RfkAA However, Churchill technically did have opposition. He had to defend his position twice in 1942 from votes of no confidence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_motions_in_the_United_Kingdom Yet, despite the obvious fact that I'm not a Churchill fan, you have this ridiculous notion that I'm defending him, or that I'm an "Englishman", whatever that means. I'm against the UK Establishment in all of its Playdoh-philic glory, Parliament is a scam, and taxation should be £0 for everyone. So don't throw this nonsense at me, especially on videos that aren't related to the subject.
    4
  7287. Google Translate is far too inaccurate, I can't read German, and I can't afford to pay for the translations. People have offered to translate them for free, but that opens up a can of worms, and I'd need entire books translating.
    4
  7288. Yes, it's something I want to do at some point
    4
  7289. Maybe Tim would be interested in this video because it may help him connect the dots
    4
  7290. Because most Socialists don't realise the fundamental principles of their own ideology. Most Socialists these days, for example, don't even know the definition of Socialism, and think that it's anti-State. Fascists (at least, most of them) were anti-Capitalist, which inherently comes from anti-semitism.
    4
  7291. I talked about this in the video
    4
  7292. I make the voice when quoting from anti-semites to prevent the enemies of reason taking my audio out of context.
    4
  7293. Yes, I was tempted to upload this on Monday but I knew people would be expecting "tank" videos, so thought I'd do this separately
    4
  7294. Because while Hitler was a socialist, he also said Marx was racially-Jewish, and thus Marxism in his eyes was seen as a Jewish plot. He explains this in Mein Kampf.
    4
  7295. If you bother to watch the video, you will see that Marx was antisemitic in Das Kapital. In fact, Marx said the Jews were the capitalists.
    4
  7296. Read the books "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. After that, Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". You will get your answer.
    4
  7297. Yes, Churchill was moving towards Fascism prior to WW2, and his treatment of the Indians was terrible. However, you're missing the point because you haven't watched the full video. Keep watching.
    4
  7298. Stop projecting.
    4
  7299. It's horrendously for a reason - so that it can sit on a shelf and people can point to it and say "have you not read Marx? If not then you know nothing!" Mein Kampf is the same. A boring slog of ranting rubbish
    4
  7300. I have to do that so that people don't sound-bite it and take it out of context. If I put on a fake voice, people will hopefully realize I'm quoting
    4
  7301. "I actually have read both these books." Well, it seems clear to me that you either haven't read Das Kapital or On the Jewish Question, or if you have you obviously didn't understand them, because the quotes I provided from those two book contradict your own statements. This is a clear indication that I was correct - Socialists either have not read Marx, or do not understand him. - "First of all, as noted by Avi Schlomo, Marx called for the emancipation of Jews in the JQ book." I'm not interested in the opinion of someone else. I'm only interested in what Marx wrote - and Marx didn't call for the emancipation of the Jews, but the emancipation of the world from the Jews as shown by this next quote by Karl Marx in 'On the Jewish Question': “The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” So yes, Karl Marx's "emancipation of the Jews" was the removal of the Jews and the Jewish faith from society. Therefore, you and Avi Schlomo have deliberately distorted the historical record by claiming otherwise. - "Worth noting that Marx’s Jewish family was de-emancipated after Napoleon was defeated in 1815, his father being forced to convert in order to keep his job. Yet you somehow claimed that his father was antisemitic, even though he has sent several pleas to the monarch asking for an exemption from the ban. Despicable. " The sources I have suggest otherwise. In the book "The Devil and Karl Marx", Kengor says that Marx's father left Judaism because of "social pressures", and chose to convert to Protestantism rather than Catholicism, saying he had a choice, since most Jews usually chose Catholicism over Protestantism (page 59). This was why Karl Marx ended up being anti-Catholic (page 60-63). The main point though is that Karl Marx himself was Anti-Semitic, and that's what's important here. And yes, IF this account you provided was true - if Marx's father was forced to become a 'conversos' or 'converted one' (Evans, “A Convenient Hatred: The History of Antisemitism,” p105), then that indeed is despicable. However, Karl Marx was seemingly happy that this had happened, which is why he continued to call for further emancipations of the Jews from society. - "As for your claim about Das Capital, are you arguing that Marx said all commodities were “uncircumcised Jews”? Something that does not even make sense." I'm not 'claiming' anything. All I've done here is point out what Karl Marx said. You clearly have no answer to it though, which is why you're saying it makes no sense. But it does make sense when you accept the fact that Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite. If you refuse to accept this, then what Marx wrote in Das Kapital makes no sense: "The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money." - Karl Marx, Das Kapital, page 107. Can you explain this quote in any other way? Why is Karl Marx saying that commodities are money (the "jealous god of Israel" - Marx, 'On the Jewish Question')? And why is Karl Marx saying that commodities/money are "inwardly circumcised Jews"? Please explain this quote. - "To quote Capital Vol III-" First, Das Kapital volume 3 wasn't written by Karl Marx, it was written by Engels. Secondly, Marx wasn't just an Anti-Semite, but was also Anti-Christian. I never said he wasn't anti-Christian, so the rest of your point on Das Kapital vol 3 is irrelevant. - “The cult of money has its asceticism, its self-denial, its self-sacrifice – economy and frugality, contempt for mundane, temporal and fleeting pleasures; the chase after the eternal treasure. Hence the connection between English Puritanism, or also Dutch Protestantism, and money-making.” Right, so Marx was saying that there's a connection between Christianity and Judaism (since he had previously said that "Money was the jealous God of Israel"). And it's true that Christianity grew out of Judaism (Evans, “A Convenient Hatred,” p23.) so what Karl Marx is saying here doesn't undo what he said previously. Karl Marx clearly hated both Judaism and Christianity, which was why he also despised Capitalism (which he believed was Judaism and Christianity). - "As for the definition of capitalist, in the communist manifesto, the word Bourgeoise is defined by Engels as “By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour.”" Yes, the 'class of modern capitalists' (which is defined by Marx as those who possess and accumulate money - the "jealous god of Israel"), who then use that money to own the means of production and employ wage labour. BUT the point is that they were only able to own the means of production and employ wage labour by being Capitalists FIRST - they had to accumulate money and possess it first before they could do those other things. Therefore, Marx defined the Capitalist as he who possessed and accumulated money (the "jealous god of Israel"), and then Engels confirmed this, then took it to the next level by saying the Capitalists used their capital to possess the means of production and employ wage labour. It is therefore wrong to say that the Marxist definition of Capitalism is 'the ownership of the means of production and the employment of wage labour'. It is, by Marx's and Engel's own words, correct to say that the Marxist definition of Capitalism is 'the possession and accumulation of money' (exactly as Marx defined it in Das Kapital). So, as I said, you're using the incorrect definition of Capitalism because Karl Marx defined it differently. - "Marx was certainly a flawed man who made racist comments, so I do not regard him as a “prophet” as you claim." You are a Marxist. It is in your username here - "DemocraticMarxist01". You regard Marxism as your religion, which is why you despise those who "possess" and "accumulate" capital/money ("the jealous god of Israel"). This is why you despise the 'bourgeoisie' (the Jews). Your 'class war' is your 'race war' - you're just blinded to the fact that Karl Marx and Engels chose to rename "the Jews" as "the bourgeoisie", and say that they ("the Jews") were Capitalists. This is why it's important for me to educate you, in the hope that you realize that your false religion (Socialism) is fundamentally evil and Anti-Semitic.
    4
  7302. A "Democratic Marxist" who's such a "scientific socialist" that he has to 'divine' what other people think through woo-woo magic in order to 'prove' that they're Anti-Semites, whilst ignoring the empirical evidence showing that he himself is part of an Anti-Semite religion. Also he can't define what 'real' Socialism is (since admitting what it is would be an admission that he's wrong) then wonders why nobody takes him seriously? Stick to hating on the 'bourgeoisie' and stealing other people's wealth.
    4
  7303. That'd why it's important to educate them on the true nature of their ideology 👍
    4
  7304. Thank you sir! I'll certainly try. And yes, while I like to call the Wehrmacht out (and any other military) when they claim falsehoods or make mistakes, I will give them credit where credit is due.
    4
  7305. Thank you Daz! I think it's the algorithm more than anything. But this audience is big enough for me 🙂
    4
  7306.  @matthewbadley5063  Is it really ripping apart the UK? I would argue that the thing that's ripping apart the UK is the lockdowns and the inflation, not Brexit.
    4
  7307. Congrats!
    4
  7308. No, because the Dutch Empire was a historic threat to Britain, plus there's a good chance that a united Netherlands could ally with France or Germany to overpower the other. Whichever they allied with, Britain would probably be best allying against them.
    4
  7309. What do you mean? Why are you surprised?
    4
  7310.  @stuartjohnson9019  Yes, I said the wrong year. It's 1939, not 1938.
    4
  7311. Of course I have a problem with the British state conquering the world.
    4
  7312. I want to, but when that will be, I'm not sure. I have read basically nothing on that war, although it definitely looks interesting, which is why I want to read about it
    4
  7313. @The God Emperor - I have absolutely no problem with people who disagree with me in a reasonable and civil manner :) the disagreements sharpen each other's arguments and move us in the direction of the truth. Cheers!
    4
  7314. It's early days yet. However, yeah you should feel sorry for me. It gives me a headache when I listen to or read terrible terrible history like that one. Arguments that I disagree with are ok because the debate is good, but when they're so bad that they contradict themselves or that it becomes blatantly obvious they're just propaganda, then it gets me worked up
    4
  7315. You're wrong. For a proper understanding of the history of the political spectrum, read L K Samuels' "Killing History". But regardless, I don't care about the political spectrum - it's a red herring. What matters is that National Socialism and Marxism are both denominations of the same "progressive" statist religion. I see no reason to arbitrarily separate them in order to protect an elitist religion.
    4
  7316. He's not wrong. True Communism envisions a Garden of Eden-like society where we all frolic around doing whatever we like without a care in the world. It's utopian and completely unrealistic. 98% of the population would have to be wiped out to allow the Elite to implement their vision, and it still wouldn't work the way they imagine it.
    4
  7317. "Of course besieging the city without striving to capture it at all costs was the best option, that's what I always write in such a discussion." This is true, but I would say - only in hindsight. Plus, the Germans couldn't siege the city properly because they'd need to cross the Volga to do that... so it's not necessarily a perfect solution either.
    4
  7318. "I do miss having the maps and tables laid out to get an idea of place. Ever run into that issue?" Yes! Constantly! This is why I don't like buying books on Kindle, because the maps are usually displayed too small. You should have seen me working on the scripts for the next season of Stalingrad earlier today. Books open all over the desk showing maps, Photoshop open on one screen with three different maps in different tabs, and other maps Anton Joly had uploaded for me on Google Drive open on another. All to figure out who and what was where :) But there's never enough maps, and if there are, they're awful!
    4
  7319. My pleasure! Not sure why, but I'm really really eager to make Stalingrad content at the moment :) cheers!
    4
  7320. I don't think there will be much of a backlash over this, simply because it reinforces the conclusions we came to last week, and, while there was some discussion back and forth, it wasn't heated. It was a pretty good historical discussion - the type I like to see!
    4
  7321. Haha I messed that one up! Didn't even notice until I saw this comment. Good spot
    4
  7322. I would like to yes. May be a while off though
    4
  7323. "TIK: Historians are supposed to only use facts and not be misconstrued by bias opinions." Relevant video on History Theory which destroys what you've just said https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc "Your claim that most Historians do not understand Economics is lunacy." Really? Try reading anything on the Hyperinflation of 1923. It's terrible, just terrible...
    4
  7324. "and the opposite of both is not to kill people and let them live." As a general rule, everybody should be able to do whatever they want so long as they don't physically harm anyone else (e.g. no murder, theft or property, enslavement etc).
    4
  7325. Not if people don't realise what it is. Anyone who supports Socialism and claims to be fighting Fascism needs to look harder in the mirror.
    4
  7326. The ideological motivation for the invasion of Ethiopia wasn't because of race, it happened because of imperialism. See Farrell's book for further details.
    4
  7327. Yeah, sorry it took so long to get to
    4
  7328. Great video on China's economy by Academic Agent https://youtu.be/C33AdAIkNXA
    4
  7329. Congrats!
    4
  7330. Hate to break it to you...
    4
  7331. Yes, and it's silly. At no point did Hitler want low taxes, a small government, or a free market, yet somehow those who believe in the free market are the "fascists", and those who believe in the things Hitler did (large government, lots of taxes, centralized allocation of resources) are definitely not Nazis or anything.
    4
  7332. "BTW wasn't the doctrine of facisim a document written by gentile and mussolini ?" It may have been. The version I have just says Gentile on the cover, so I took it to just mean Gentile.
    4
  7333. If you don't like Fascism, then you certainly shouldn't like Communism. Judging by the death toll, Fascism (not Nazism) is 'better' (less deadly) than communism (but don't take this to mean I'm advocating for it; I'm not). And it certainly isn't the "grandfather of Nazism", that would be Socialism. And yes, I know exactly what Marx was https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg And I know what Socialism is (not what Socialists pretend it is) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    4
  7334. Or, perhaps, because I'm trying to explain this to as wide of an audience as possible who are not clued-in and do not care about philosophy, I have to keep the topic as light as possible, giving you the false impression of "shallowness".
    4
  7335. I'm not a materialist nor a nominalist 🤔
    4
  7336. It was going to be after I finished the Weimar Hyperinflation series, which is currently on hold as I get this work done on the ideologies. There's no point doing such a series until I've Fascism and National Socialism nailed down.
    4
  7337. I guess the answer would be the same as the Christian answer for why God created Satan.
    4
  7338. Diving into Objectivism has helped massively. People will dismiss Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff, but their works have helped me massively here.
    4
  7339. I'm not sure at the moment. I've read Libertarian economic literature, but I'm currently looking into Ayn Rand's stuff now, so I'm not 100% certain where I am. I do agree with the Objectivist metaphysics and epistemology. I'm just unclear on the other stuff yet as I've not had time to read it all.
    4
  7340. I mean, that's how this channel started... I regret not just making "TIKhistory" a second channel, but hindsight is 20-20.
    4
  7341. Government roads cost billions because they're inefficiently made. The copious amounts of meetings required over months just to decide to put a sign up to say that they're going to be doing work in an area is so costly that it's a miracle that anything gets done at all. The free market would make roads that are far more efficient at a fraction of the cost. And it's not just the transport companies, but the supermarkets, the other stores and so on. But again, don't take the principle explained in the video and extrapolate that out to the wider economy, just close your eyes and ears and make a quick "gotcha" counter-argument that's easily shown to be incorrect.
    4
  7342. You're not allowed to make a profit these days. If you do, the government takes it all off you anyway.
    4
  7343. Well, I appreciate it! I should have mentioned this in the video, but around 60-70% of my viewers are not subscribers, and when it came to my Greek video it was doing fine until I saw they had suppressed it (about half hour after it went live), and then almost nobody who was not subscribed got notified, and many of those who were subscribed were saying they didn't get notified. That's why it has significantly less views than the Orwell video that came out the day after. And it seems that this video then killed the momentum of the entire channel, because the YouTube algorithm is brutal. There's loads of creators out there who will tell you that if you miss a week (or are slightly inconsistent), the AI will punish your entire channel severely, and you may not even be able to regain momentum. That's why I upload once a week at 5pm GMT and haven't missed any (once or twice being late, but I made sure to make a video explaining why) so as not to upset the algorithm. Another good example is when I released the first Battlestorm Stalingrad video, I released it 30 minutes early, and it took almost a month to recover from that because the AI thought I was being inconsistent. That's why the second video in the series has less views than the third. Again, it's not about the views, but I don't want to lose views, which will mean losing Patreons and SubscribeStars, which will mean lost revenue and me having to go find a job and then not be able to upload as often. It's a hamster wheel I'm unable to get off.
    4
  7344. Notebooks aren't efficient enough for this type of work. I do everything on Google Drive (which is why, if YouTube takes me down, so will Google, and I'll lose everything)
    4
  7345. That's a good idea! I'm really bad at taking breaks. I said I took some breaks in the video, but what I didn't explain is that they're not really mental breaks because I'm constantly thinking about history or editing or something. If I go for a walk, thinking. On the few days off I have, can't relax or even watch videos without getting distracted by thinking about history problems or getting anxious that I'm not working on projects
    4
  7346. I didn't miss anything. There's so much wrong with your world-view that it would take me hours to correct all of it. Luckily I have several videos already made which will help you. For the historical and correct definitions of Socialism and Capitalism, watch this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (I would definitely watch this first if you haven't already) To learn the true nature of Karl Marx's ideology, watch this one https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg A video on Democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I This video suggestion might seem a bit random, but if you watch it all the way through, you'll understand why I've placed it on this list https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ To learn about the Soviet economy (and why it wasn't "state capitalism") watch this video https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w And finally, if you haven't watched the first video in this series, you should because I explain why Karl Marx himself says we don't have capitalism https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    4
  7347. I would say you've done enough, sir :)
    4
  7348.  @bghyst  The German Communists LOST the second revolution against the victors of the first revolution - the Socialists (SPD). This video shows that precisely. Learn your history please.
    4
  7349.  @maesterchris2120  Pulling out of a coalition doesn't reverse the policies that the Social Democrats had already implemented, and couldn't be repealed since the SPD was part of the coalition.
    4
  7350. Is this a good or bad thing? I've been wondering if my videos are too detailed
    4
  7351. "Lenin didn't organize pogroms, people did." Yes he did. Here's Lenin's words on the 11th of August 1917, from Gellately, “Lenin, Stalin and Hitler,” P53. “1. Hang (hang without fail, so the people see) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers 2. Publish their names. 3. Take from them all the grain. 4. Designate hostages…” And, this is quote from Engelstein, “Russia in Flames,” P531 - “Despite the Bolsheviks’ official repudiation of anti-Semitism, some sections of the Red Army were nevertheless responsible for pogroms, as vicious as any other, in which Red officers, Red Army staff, and Soviet commissars themselves participated.”
    4
  7352. Yes, where have we heard that one before? 😂
    4
  7353. Thank you! You'll help make this series possible! :)
    4
  7354. It's fascinating what people will fight and die for. They believed they were justified to do what they were doing.
    4
  7355. There's Socialism all the way through the video - both sides were Socialist and fighting for their brand of Socialism; that's why they were fighting
    4
  7356. Next one is in two weeks
    4
  7357. Unfortunately, there's no book on the logistics as far as I'm aware. If there was, I'd have got it (so if anyone else reads this and knows of one, let me know). And you're getting as much information about the front line logistics as the books will tell me - which is next to nothing, unfortunately :(
    4
  7358. Ni
    4
  7359. Yes Ragged, it's all going good! Still a bit ill, but a bit of cold won't stop me from getting to Moscow
    4
  7360. But was he really entirely to blame? (I'm asking genuinely, since I do think this is up for debate, as I mention in the video)
    4
  7361. "Why there is always Stalingrad battle from the German perspective on every western WW2 channel?" There's several reasons. Firstly, they were the main actors for most of the battle. Even at this stage, the Soviets were mostly waiting for Manstein to attack. So, since it's down to Manstein to act, and Paulus to starve, we're looking at things from their perspective. Most of the sources we have (even including "Russian" sources) are written by the Germans. Why is this? Maybe it has something to do with the mass censorship policies of the Soviet Union (and now the divide with Russia). Maybe the Soviet archives were locked up for 70 years, and most sources haven't yet been translated accurately into English. Then on top of that many of these sources are full of errors anyway because of mass censorship at the time. For example, Soviet generals didn't want to admit their mistakes to their superiors, and made up a bunch of lies about how many panzers they were engaged with. Chuikov does this all the time, saying he was being attacked by a hundred panzers, when in reality he faced 20 or so. And most of what we do have concentrates on the Chuikov-phase of the battle, and ignores the parts that are embarrassing to the Red Army (which is a lot of it). In this series, I covered the Soviet experience at the Grain Elevator. But as I explained at the time (and in the follow up video discussing Wilhelm Hoffman's diary, which turns out to be a Soviet forgery by Chuikov https://youtu.be/u_3u2hLU1MA ) the Soviet soldiers at the Grain Elevator were engaged in bitter arguments with each other, and couldn't even agree who was actually at the Grain Elevator or not. Paulus's House is a minefield of distortions and propaganda myths, and don't get me started on Zaitsev! I deliberately stopped using his memoirs because they're so unreliable that you can't tell the fact (if there is any) from the fiction. And that's not to say that the German sources are any good - I constantly get criticized for saying how bad the German sources are. (In the coming episodes, we'll be diving deep on Manstein's lie about how he supposedly sent the breakout order, which he didn't.) However, it's actually easier to point out the errors in the German sources because we've had more time to scrutinize them. And we can now compare the German sources to the Soviet sources, and figure out a lot of the truths from the lies. But I think there's a tendency by Russian authors to think that "their" sources are somehow more reliable than the Germans sources, when in reality they'll all as bad as each other. We should be as skeptical of all the sources, be them Soviet, German, British, or whatever. State propaganda is rife throughout.
    4
  7362. I'm guessing you missed last Christmas's guitar video https://youtu.be/h1lWBEdNuFE
    4
  7363. There are some bad History Channel documentaries, but I think this is below even their standards
    4
  7364. That's exactly it. That's why I wasn't too concerned by arguing exact numbers in this video. It's pointless because there's no way they counted 34+ million accurately
    4
  7365. That's exactly why I did it! Stupid TIKTOK... Hopefully this works and doesn't cause any unforeseen problems
    4
  7366.  @tyvamakes5226  "Why "TIKhistory" instead of "TIK History"" I replied elsewhere, but just in case you didn't see it, because I suspect that "TIK history" wouldn't get around the TIKTOK search problem. Whereas "TIKhistory" would
    4
  7367. I've actually been looking into that sort of thing (not exactly, but similar), so yes, I'll get on it eventually. I will say that it's a stupid argument because the Reichsbank wasn't abolished, and actively funded the war with currency printing and interest rates etc so the modern-Nazis are incorrect even if we entertained the notion that that was what they were trying to do. While it doesn't touch upon it exactly, the book "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly shows that the Nazi State didn't fight the banks at all, and was definitely a bank-state in itself.
    4
  7368. Yeah I've explained this many times, both in the "Public vs Private" video [link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y ], and the "Hitler's Socialism | Defeating the Denialist Counter-Arguments" video [link https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 ]. Watch the first one, then the second, and you'll see exactly why Marx was both a totalitarian (despite claiming later he wasn't) and anti-Semitic. Also, Mussolini was a Marxist-Socialist, but joined the Fascist Party (which is also socialist, as I've explained before) after being pro-war for WW1. His totalitarianism is the same totalitarianism of Marxism, except instead of a one-world State corporation (e.g. USSR inc), he wanted a national-State corporation(s). Totalitarianism is total state control of the means of production, which is socialism. You can't have socialism without total control of the means of production by the public (state).
    4
  7369. I don't think Fascism and Marxism are the same. I think they're both Socialism.
    4
  7370. Made me hungry just editing this video haha
    4
  7371. It was sort-of three sieges actually. There were two Soviet pockets. I would count 62nd Army as in a state of siege, not only because of the conditions, but also because at times the ice of the Volga did prevent boats from crossing, cutting it off from the rest of the world. I'm talking ice like ice-bergs rather than frozen solid (which also happened too)
    4
  7372. As I said in the video, all sides are guilty. And those claiming the German Army were innocent are wrong.
    4
  7373. Oh yes, been playing since I was 13. You realise I make my own background music in the Battlestorm videos (only exception being Market Garden)?
    4
  7374. 40,000 front-line combat troops. The rest were rear-service, admin, logistical, auxiliary and others like Luftwaffe personnel.
    4
  7375. Militarily, helping the Greeks out was probably not the correct move. But in the bigger picture, it probably was. It's a shame that the British and Greek Armies failed to hold the line in 1941
    4
  7376. Not sure on the specifics of that particularly picture, but the British were supplying weapons to the Greeks and actively trying to persuade the United States to land troops there earlier than they did. The USA weren't interested in Greece as much as simply knocking out the Italians and Germans though
    4
  7377. Usually people who don't agree aren't very nice about it. And, since this isn't retail any more, I no longer have to abide by "the moron is always right" principle. These people deserve a bashing just for being uncivilised and unable to type out a sentence without swearing or accusing me of all sorts of things... A bit like you really, calling me "a child" and saying I'm doing this for my "image", rather than address a fellow human being with a modicum of respect. Because you've done that, I would like to remind you not to let the unsubscribe button hit you on the way out
    4
  7378. Locking up an economy leads to starvation https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1062272
    4
  7379. Thank you, now that you've said it, it makes a lot of sense. I don't think my analyses are perfect by any stretch. But the problem is that I can't get into the meat of the debate or iron out the creases in my own arguments because I'm too busy arguing whether 2+2=4 or 5. Five might be a bigger number, and it might sound better, or evoke certain emotions, but believing 2+2=5 doesn't make it so. It really is frustrating and I don't know how else to get people to open their eyes.
    4
  7380. I can confirm that Hitler saw Russia as the "Wild East", and said that the German Empire should have living space like the US empire had in their west (it's to do with the Shrinking Markets idea too). Not sure about the Karl May novels though.
    4
  7381. Now you know why I don't do very many unscripted videos ;) And yes, I get many complaints on YouTube... I may have to do a "TALES FROM YOUTUBE" video at some point! 5pm tomorrow - don't be late, otherwise you'll miss Pienaar's antics
    4
  7382. "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism." LA-Times And also, yes that video does show a bad car mat, but it's clear that that particular car mat is at fault. That doesn't mean that you have to buy brand-specific car matts.
    4
  7383. And it's not even Friday! They started expanding it to several days because morons went crazy over the one 'special' day and wrecked several stores. I honestly don't understand the mentality of some people
    4
  7384. Haha thanks :D
    4
  7385. You're very kind! Not sure I'll make a good comedian, but I have been thinking of putting a little more comedy in my history videos to spice them up (Crusader has had a mild-dose of comedy and I think it works). Not to this extent though, obviously. I won't be licking any shoes in Stalingrad
    4
  7386. Ok, I'll admit, you tricked me :)
    4
  7387. Wow! Talk about stupid!
    4
  7388. @AAA BBB, you're correct, but I want to beat them at their own game. Much like this thread. The fact that Mat J has still failed to respond to the Marxist definition of socialism I quoted earlier, but continues to reply in the comments, undermines his entire "opposing opinions" theory. So, in some ways, I enjoy the challenge, because without them spamming me in the NS was S videos, I wouldn't have done a ton of research after those videos, and wouldn't have more than enough ammunition to prove both the fact that National Socialism was Socialism, but also that the Holocaust happened (since private-control of the means of production doesn't explain the Holocaust - a distortion many denialists will use to "prove" that the Holocaust didn't happen, which the Marxists are helping by denying Hitler's socialism). But yes, I'll take your advice about ignoring the obvious trolls.
    4
  7389. What do you mean? This is the same series. Crusader was just one of the battles in North Africa.
    4
  7390. "Perfectionism is killing you." I will agree with that. "Maybe you should actually consider using this kind of filler content until Stalingrad is finished." Maybe, but I don't think that's the right approach. I feel bad for making this video and not doing something more substantial (although the questions/statements needed answering/talking about eventually) "I mean, anything that you can produce quickly and easily compared to your standards." I have actually been tempted to do a podcast-like video (possibly series) of me just talking about concepts without the need for much visuals. There wouldn't be a need for much editing, but it also limits the topics because I can't use visuals.
    4
  7391. I'll be talking about this in the next episode. The answer is logistics. They couldn't support the troops they had in the East as it was, let alone add an additional 100,000 men.
    4
  7392. I'm fairly certain putting Hitler on a shirt would not be the wisest business move in our current political climate
    4
  7393. First! Well done!
    4
  7394. Absolutely! So, in short, Halder is to blame ;)
    4
  7395. "No, the Czechoslovak national socialists were not in power during the Munich Crisis." As you said, Edvard Beneš was the president. Yes, he had a coalition government, but he was still in charge. So I would say that was the Czech National Socialists being in charge. However, if you disagree, which party would you say was in charge? And how do you square the circle that Edvard Beneš was the one sat in the driving seat?
    4
  7396. Yep, that wouldn't surprise me either.
    4
  7397.  @unlearningcommunism4742  I admit it's a far big problem that we can't solve entirely, but we take steps in the right direction by informing people about what's happening, and calling out the worst offenders.
    4
  7398. The obvious answer is because, unlike the State police, normal people don't go after an innocent people. It's also not "good for business" to go after innocent people; in fact, it's bad for business. This guy committed plagiarism, which everybody understands to be both unethical and immoral, so we all have an incentive to deal with him. YouTube and the Brazilian State did nothing as per usual (even though it's meant to be a criminal offense in Brazil), but the people (the free market) have successfully worked together to resolve the issue. Yet, because you're brainwashed into believing that only your beloved Gestapo-Elite can walk on water, you're upset by the power of the people.
    4
  7399. Already have. He's removed 20 of his own videos.
    4
  7400. Yes, he did.
    4
  7401. You're correct, which is why I've made plenty of videos saying how the German viewpoint is wrong. They made numerous mistakes and they weren't the brilliant army that many think they are. However, in this case, with the evidence I have, the Germans did have an innovative tactical organisation-doctrine, which the other powers had not made yet. That doesn't mean they're "amazing" or anything, or that other militaries couldn't do the same later, but defining a concept that the Germans did do different to the other militaries at the time, which did seem to give them a slight edge on the tactical level, shouldn't be unacceptable, especially when you consider I've made it clear in other videos that the Germans weren't all they were cracked up to be.
    4
  7402. Good to hear! Thanks, more to come :)
    4
  7403. You cannot have a state-controlled free economy. Therefore state capitalism is a contradiction. If the state is control of the economy, that is socialism. Socialists like to invent terms to hide meanings and paint their enemies as what they are to make themselves look good. Good for them. I like to speak straightforward and honest, because I have nothing to hide, and I'm not a liar.
    4
  7404. But my question would be - why should I, or anyone else, pay for your train fair or cigarettes? If you want to use the train and get purchase drugs, you should pay for them yourself. Nobody should pay your bills for you. We should take responsibility for our own lives and pay our own way. And no, it's not complicated. That graph shows the dire consequences of socialism in a nutshell. Public transport is a dying industry, but the taxpayer had to prop it up. Same with any state-run business. Governments cannot run businesses as well as businessmen. And customers - consumers - are put off by bad services.
    4
  7405. @Hermit, Except that's not true. British rail passenger numbers were in massive decline during the era of nationalisation. When they privatized them, the number of passengers started to rise again. Why? Because the government sucks at running them. The scam is that the government fixes them up with taxpayers' money. The tax payer doesn't even use the damn trains! It's an out of date technology. The number of British rail passengers are the same now as they were in 1914. Yes, despite massive population growth, we have the same number of train passengers now as we had in 1914, before WW1. During the nationalisation era that number dropped. It's pointless to shrink and stunt the growth of the rest of the economy just to prop up what was an unwanted mode of transportation. Check out this chart https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AGBR_rail_passengers_by_year_1830-2015.png
    4
  7406. It's state "control" of the means of production, not ownership. If the state controls the production/industries/businesses, and they have to comply with what the government says, they are no longer in private control (free market), and are under public-sector control ("public" meaning "state", as the Latin root of the word means). Thus, not capitalism, and definitely socialism.
    4
  7407. I was wondering when someone was going to claim that the meaning of totalitarianism is wrong and start changing it. Unfortunately for you, that is exactly how the term is defined. Google - "a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state." Wiki - "Totalitarian regimes are often marked by political repression, personality cultism, control over the economy, restriction of speech, mass surveillance and widespread use of state terrorism." Britannica - "Totalitarianism, form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to the authority of the state." It's not all forms of life is subordinate, but NOT the economic bit. It's all of it, including the economy.
    4
  7408. It's snot REAL social-schism unless workers get more paper
    4
  7409. "Feudalism was socialism?" - no, because feuedalism is all about private estates (lords of the manor etc). It manifests itself differently to both capitalism and socialism, which is why it's got its own name. "Italian fascism was socialism?" Yes. Socialism on the national level. This is why Mussolini and Oswald Mosely and many other Fascists started off as socialists before progressing to Fascism. "Absolute monarchism is socialism?" Not by itself, no. The monarch would need to have total-control over the economy and people's daily lives (which a monarch doesn't have since you need a bureaucratic state or party to do that). "Everything is socialism." People take the definitions I have to extreme, even though they're logical, based on dictionary definitions, and they're backed by evidence from places like Das Kapital and other historical works. Instead of thinking rationally, people get emotional and think I'm attacking them for some reason, rather than failing to understand that I'm actually trying to help them overcome a historical distortion. Socialism is total control of the people (common-control of the means of production). If you thiink it's anything else, look up the definition of classic Liberalism, because you might actually be surprised.
    4
  7410. Yeah the Soviets did their part, but it appears the British and Americans also turned their guns on them too when they refused to cooperate.
    4
  7411. "But unfortunately, you only cover half of the "equation." When Germany finally collapsed, the Soviets also liberated POW camps with Western Allied prisoners." I know, because I'll be covering this next episode. This is a multi-part series. Also, the Allies wanted to delay Operation Keelhaul until after the war so that their prisoners in German hands wouldn't be punished.
    4
  7412. How can forcing someone to do something they don't want to do be a crime? How can forcing someone to go to a country they're not a citizen of, and would only be executed or sent to forced labour camps, be a crime? How can delivering women to Soviet soldiers and watch them 'r' them be a crime? If it's not a crime, it should be.
    4
  7413.  @chalsfo  This one https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk It was heavily censored by YouTube. Currently it is 78,500 views LOWER than my average video for the time it's been out, and it still only has 35,000 views despite having been published over 14 months ago. It was both "limited" and age restricted too, and people were saying that they were not getting notified, with others saying they couldn't find it for a while. The video the week before has 120,000 views, and the view after it got 144,000. But this one, just 37,500. It helped kill the momentum of the channel that I had built at the time, and all this despite the fact that I put a significant amount of work into it and I think it's one of my better videos.
    4
  7414.  @dwarow2508  Sending in the tanks and shooting prisoners and civilians who refused to go back to certain pain, suffering and death, wasn't a crime against humanity? Forcing people against their will to emigrate to the prison camps of a Third World country that some of them weren't even citizens of, wasn't a crime against humanity?
    4
  7415. It's a good book!
    4
  7416. They're already in the comments! Apparently, just like with how the Germans treated the women on the Eastern Front, this is not a "real" war crime. Also, apparently, all my evidence can be thrown out for being anti-Soviet Cold War propaganda. One guy has reported the video for being "far right propaganda". And also, the Cossacks deserved it because they all attacked Jews in the Russian Revolution and fought for the Germans, even though not all of them did that or fought in those wars... And then they have the cheek to claim that I'm biased!
    4
  7417. "Why were the British so lovey of the Soviets in being so vindictive against these soviet/non soviets?" I'll be talking about this next time. - "Makes the conspiracies the National Socialists say about the British seem correct." No, their perspective is as warped as the Soviet perspective is.
    4
  7418. You live in a nation that isn't a nation, that doesn't have taxes, that doesn't have a central bank inflating the currency supply, that has multiple non-state and competing police and judicial services, that uses gold and silver as a means of exchange, and believes that you can do whatever you want on your own private property without "planning permission"? Oh, that's right, no you don't. You don't live in Capitalism. You have been deceived into thinking that you do.
    4
  7419. Already happened! But they were joking. Nobody has said it seriously... yet... but it wouldn't surprise me
    4
  7420. Great question, and great answers too! Yes, I think the radio silence was a big factor, and that's why Burnett couldn't just call Sherbrooke and ask for his location - it would give the game away that there were two British cruisers north of the convoy, and the element of surprise would be lost. However, radio silence doesn't excuse the Hyderabad in this battle because they received the radio distress from the Bramble but didn't report it. So they knew that radio silence had been broken, and confirming the message with the other ships wouldn't have given much away, especially since the other ships were communicating anyway about other things by this point.
    4
  7421. "This is the viewpoint of Nazi sympathizers. Are you one? ... I think you should reserve that description for your heroes like Adolf Hitler, who definitely fits the description of "idiot"." No, I'm not a Hitler supporter nor am I a Nazi. My video catalog should make that very clear. The fact you're even saying this suggests that you're new to the channel. If so, welcome. If you think Churchill wasn't an idiot who caused Britain numerous defeats which resulted in the loss of lives of many fine men and women, I'm sure you'll address the points raised in the video.
    4
  7422.  @Mitch93  True, although by this point the Liberal and Labour Parties were basically one and the same thing, like they are now. The old classical pro-free market liberalism had vanished after the 1870s, replaced by socialist ideas.
    4
  7423. Haven't seen Mad Max: Fury Road, but isn't there no dialogue in that film? Are you saying my videos are great, if only I didn't speak? :P
    4
  7424. Your wife's just jealous you're spending more time with me than you are with her. But women can't compete with WW2 battle documentaries, so she has to step up her game, or get used to playing second fiddle 😂
    4
  7425. Yeah, technically Bertie is correct with regards to the fuel usage, but the conclusion still remains that without the fuel from Lend Lease roughly half the Soviet aircraft would have been grounded.
    4
  7426. That's because politics is itself a spiritual concept. The state doesn't physically exist as a solid entity, yet people believe it does. It is their God.
    4
  7427. The entire SS was a religious movement. And it should now make sense why they allied with the Muslims.
    4
  7428. "but I must strongly disagree that Christians believe God is beyond gender" I never said Christians believed that. In fact, I said: "By the way I’m not saying that the Christian God is trans, nor am I saying that you should be trans. What I’m trying to get across to you is the concept at the heart of this. If you think God is trans, you will be too. That shouldn’t be an unfathomable concept to a Christian." My point was to get this concept across to you so that you could fathom it if you were a Christian. I wasn't saying the Christian God was beyond gender.
    4
  7429. In the grim darkness of the 1940s, there was only Halder
    4
  7430. Glad you enjoyed it!
    4
  7431. 😑
    4
  7432. The larger states definitely were. I'm sure some of the smaller states, like Holland or similar, were largely innocent though.
    4
  7433. Yes you are
    4
  7434. Thanks Hannibal!
    4
  7435. Nope, they didn't invent the term at all. That's a lie https://youtu.be/jKIYuOxxZWs
    4
  7436. "He liked the aristocracy" - no no no, he hated the aristocracy https://youtu.be/eCYIBpDVtP0
    4
  7437. It's odd how difficult this debate is. I've got people straight up denying everything - all the evidence, both primary and secondary sources - just to defend the idea that Hitler was a capitalist. It's insanity.
    4
  7438. Thank you! I'm working on the next one now - Operation Crusader, which I'm estimating will be about 7 hours long. Explains why it's taking me so long to make it haha
    4
  7439. Thank you! Really good to hear you're enjoying the videos :) Yes, Glantz will be a key source (since nobody else has gone into as much depth). I should hopefully have Battlestorm Operation Crusader out in the next few weeks, and between that and Stalingrad, I'll be doing lots of Stalingrad-related videos as well as others, so hopefully it'll keep you entertained while I slowly piece together the mammoth project I've undertaken haha
    4
  7440. Pretty much! I think the main thing to take away from this is though is that the British lost without fighting. If they'd stood and fought at Mersa Brega, at the very least they would have given Rommel a bloody nose even if they'd still lost. But by running away, they lost their tank force and were destroyed without doing any real damage to Rommel. And I didn't find any references to the 90th. I think they come a little later?
    4
  7441. My next doc will be on Fort Eben Emael, which is basically the start of the Fall of France. I don't think I can do just one video on the ENTIRE fall of France, since it involves hundreds of units and would take me years to research and complete. But I could do a series, like I'm doing with the Western Desert Campaign. Operation Compass, Rommel's first desert offensive, Brevity etc
    4
  7442. I forgot about that one! But yeah it's probably best for me to just avoid using the word altogether
    4
  7443. Welcome to early club. Put your feet up!
    4
  7444. "I saw pager u talking about topics, I believed them, this combined with my parents talking about topics allowed me to get indoctrinated by the far right." Wait. Prager U is far right? I'm sorry but Prager U is full of Christians. That's the opposite of the "Far Right". Also, the "Far Right" don't refer to themselves as the "Far Right", so this makes me question your story. What do you mean by "Far Right"? - "I don't like homeschooling as my home growing up was filled with almost constant arguing between my family to the point that now as an adult I am terrified when someone raises their voice." You would have had that regardless whether you went to school or were home schooled. Your parents don't disappear when you go to the state schools, and you would have also had teachers or other students yelling at you instead. - "I think in person schooling is incredibly beneficial to help kids meet friends and spend time away from home." Homeschooling needs to be supplemented with after school activities that allow the children to meet other children. It could be kids in the neighborhood, or in church, or in various clubs, but the point of homeschooling isn't to isolate your child from other children, and this should have been obvious to anyone with a child.
    4
  7445. My focus is on the European conflict, just because that's what I'm most familiar with, and it would take a lot of reading just to get to a point where I could talk about the Far Eastern Theatre. That said, it's a very interesting war and I would love to know more about it, especially the war in China and the Manchurian Campaign.
    4
  7446. One of my New Years Resolutions were to publish a video every Monday. And so far, I've stuck to that resolution! https://youtu.be/YHvY9jOR0tU
    4
  7447. Good question. If the priority is the south, they could have used the Hungarians, Romanians and Italians in the north and centre. Honestly, I don't know why. I will take a stab and say that the battles in the north and centre were seen as important by the Soviets and so they constantly attacked. It may not have been wise for Axis Allied divisions to take heavy casualties, and so the south was perhaps seen as an 'easier' front for them?
    4
  7448. Interesting. He took part in Operation Mars too
    4
  7449. So am I! But these videos are slowly building up towards it, and helping me do more research and form the ideas and concepts needed for it.
    4
  7450. As I explained in the 2nd episode of the Weimar Hyperinflation video, "democratic socialism" is just a reformist style of socialism compared to violent revolutionary socialism that the Communists want. It has the same outcome - the end of any economic activity and the collapse of the society.
    4
  7451.  @threemeters1425  Definitely a controversial one
    4
  7452. FIRST! Hope you enjoy the video
    4
  7453. The reason they hated the "free market" (capitalism) was because it was historically associated with the Jews. The reason they saw the capitalists as greedy was because the early capitalists were Jews, and they thought the Jews were greedy. So it doesn't matter if they are anarcho-syndicalists or Owenites, they all hold views that are inherently anti-Semitic. The assumption is that the free market is bad. That assumption is wrong. When you realize this, and start reading books like "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, it becomes clear just how damaging that assumption is to our entire planet. This is why I'm trying to encourage socialists of all creeds to read those books and think critically about their world view.
    4
  7454. To be fair, most (not all) of the information came from Gilmour's book. I'd highly recommend it
    4
  7455. @Vass - yes, "pragmatic" is a good word to use! I think they were being pragmatic more than anything else. Some have argued that they were cooperating and were 'pro-Axis', but there's plenty of evidence against that view
    4
  7456. I interpreted that part as being sarcastic rather than genuinely thinking they were actually half drunk farmers
    4
  7457. It's good to question things and not just believing everything you hear without considering the alternatives :) sadly, there's only been a few people here in the comments to actually question the logic of the argument made in the video. Most simply dismiss it or ignore it. So great! I could be wrong, but I do think it would have been easier to fight the Germans north of Nijmegen than fight them when they're fortified in the city. And of course, maybe they would have blocked the road effectively, and therefore the operation would have been doomed from the beginning anyway. That's a definite possibility.
    4
  7458. I actually started this channel started with Close Combat A Bridge Too Far videos. Did two complete Let's Play's of it, and numerous other videos, including the first multiplayer video of that game on YouTube. Sadly, because of COPPA, I decided to hide them, so you can no longer view them. But that was the reason I chose Market Garden as my first documentary, because that game was so good that I read about the topic. Cheers!
    4
  7459. But by the time the planning conference for the amphibious assault over the Waal was taking place, a massive delay had already had already been caused by the failure to take the bridge on day 1. "Painting this as the 82nd's fault is no better than blaming the Polish." No, that's not the same. The Polish had no part in the defeat and there is no evidence that says they did. As mentioned in the video, their drop, several days late, probably saved 1st Airborne. That's what makes the fact that Browning blamed the Polish even worse, because it was a lie. But in the 82nd Airborne's case, there is no excuse. They didn't go for the bridge for several hours, and that was the crucial mistake. And to be clear, it wasn't the entire 82nd Airborne Division that was at fault, it was Gavin and possibly Browning who were at fault for this. This is perhaps why Browning was so eager to blame the Polish to take the heat off himself. The two are probably related.
    4
  7460. Glad to hear you enjoyed it! 🙂
    4
  7461. "and the idea of moving all those tanks up a long single narrow road without serious opposition was crazy." But it's ok for Rommel to do this in 1941 during Operation Crusader? "The tanks never arrived so the paras were doomed from the start." The tanks never attived because of the 82nd Airborne's failure to take the Nijmegen Bridge on Day 1 which they could have done. Therefore, it was only doomed because Gavin (and/or Browning) didn't do what they were supposed to do. It wasn't doomed from the start - only in hindsight can that claim be made.
    4
  7462. ***** What happened to the Polish brigade and Sosabowski was wrong. Browning and others tried to pass the blame onto them for the failure of Operation Market Garden, but that excuse didn't last long. Such blame was only accepted immediately after the battle until historians were able to study the battle later. Now, nobody with any understanding of the battle at all blames the Polish brigade for the failure because that is simply untrue. The fault lies elsewhere. The Polish brigade didn't arrive until after Market Garden was already lost. That's a fact. They fought for the freedom of their own country, but also for the freedom of others. The government of the Netherlands has since shown gratitude to the Polish brigade. It recognises their contribution. And you have to remember that a lot of British, US, French, Indian, Canadian, Belgian, Dutch, Polish, Czech, Russian (and more - too many to list) soldiers fought for freedom. A lot of that fighting took place on foreign soil. And just because they died on foreign soil doesn't mean they died in vain.
    4
  7463. Sorry to disagree, but the British did take Arnhem bridge. They didn't have their entire division sat on the bridge - which was the plan. But ~750 British paras did take the Arnhem road bridge on day 1 and held it until the beginning of day 5 of the operation. And as you can see in the video, every bridge bar one was taken on day one. So the plan wasn't that bad. The issue is that the plan wasn't stuck to.
    4
  7464. The concept of parachute operations is to take your objectives quickly before the enemy can reinforce, and then hold them from expected counter-attack. Paras are too lightly armed to wage standard infantry warfare. They don't have the artillery and equipment support to really do more than dig in and wait. This is a major criticism for General Urquhart in the first few days of the operation as he didn't get his men to the objective and they were wiped out trying to punch their way through to Frost. Once he had them solidify and dig in - forming the Oosterbeek pocket - they stood firm for several more days. Equally, Frost was able to hold on until the 5th day of operations (despite no ammunition or supplies) because he got to his objective and dug in. So the question is, why wasn't the same principle applied at Nijmegen bridge? It worked at the other bridges. It worked at every other bridge during Operation Market Garden (except Son where the bridge guards managed to blow it before the 101st got to it). It worked in previous airborne operations, like during the German airdrop operations in Belgium and Holland in 1940. It worked at Bastogne later in the war. So why couldn't a battalion of highly trained parachutists from the elite US 82nd Airborne not dig in and hold the northern end of Nijmegen bridge? Bearing in mind, that they would be in supply (something Frost was not) and would only have to hold until the morning of the 3rd day. Warren's unit had several hours to reach the bridge and dig in. In the event they were minutes too late as it was. If they'd left several hours earlier - since the drops took place in the afternoon - they'd have had plenty of time to dig in and be ready for Graebner and the 10th SS. I'm not saying they wouldn't have suffered casualties. I'm not saying they would have had an easy time. I'm not saying the Germans wouldn't have reacted and done something different and so on... but my principle problem on day 1 at Nijmegen is that a battalion did not move towards its objective for several hours, and by the time it did, it was minutes too late. That to me is a fundamental mistake that goes against the principle of the operation, and the concept of airborne warfare. Now, it doesn't matter who's fault it is or why it happened etc. But the important point to take away is that because they didn't move and secure their objective, the Germans did secure it. They realised the importance of taking and securing the Nijmegen bridge. And the result was that XXX Corps suffered a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen and then failed to get to Frost and 1st Airborne in time to save the operation. We can blame Warren or Gavin or Browning or Monty or Ike or the Germans or the Sugar Puff Monster. That's not the point. The point is that a battalion did not move to take the Nijmegen bridge when it could and should have done so.
    4
  7465. Thanks! The German forces certainly should take extra credit for stopping this offensive. They did an exceptional job with the units they had. And I honestly feel sorry for Sosabowski. The Polish did absolutely nothing wrong in this battle and yet they took the blame. It's disgusting the way they were dishonoured by Browning, Montgomery and the British government at the time :(
    4
  7466. I'm surprised by the response to this. I genuinely thought nobody would watch it, but lots of people have found it useful or (in a lot of cases) it's confirmed what they already knew / suspected
    4
  7467. And people wonder why there's a housing crisis... The bureaucracy is slow, expensive, and completely pointless. If it's your land, then you should be allowed to do what you want on it. If someone else doesn't like it, tough. But, of course, it's not really your land, you just think it is. In reality, the State owns the land, and you're just renting it, which is why you pay taxes on your property.
    4
  7468. Just a quick note, the medical staff probably aimed to treat the wounded before the sick simply because of priorities and limited resources, not because they were negligent. If you imagine all these wounded coming in, and then you have some guy complaining of being nervous and not being able to sleep, you'd probably just stick him in the corner until you could get a chance to deal with him.
    4
  7469. I did. The issue isn't doing that, it's remembering how to pronounce them when you spend a couple hours sitting in front of a camera recording a video.
    4
  7470. "If you consider the Tory's to be "to left Wing", then what dose that make you then? A little to the Right of Attila the Hun?" The Tory Party was the old Left-wing party of the 1800s. I explained this here https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY?t=728
    4
  7471. I'm expecting to get into trouble for those ones 😂
    4
  7472. The next season starts next week
    4
  7473. Yes!
    4
  7474. Yes it may be a while before I finish Stalingrad or the North African Campaigns... I certainly can't cover Burma until after them. But I could do the starvation of 3 million Indians topic before then :)
    4
  7475. Communism = reverence for entrepreneurs? 😂
    4
  7476. But you are this time, congrats!
    4
  7477. I'm sorry, but the State Police of Airstrip One have issued orders to the slaves like myself, and we're no longer allowed to speculate about the suspect, which means I cannot answer your question.
    4
  7478. No worries! I prefer to know the truth than accept the lie
    4
  7479. That's not a bad idea Nerdwerfer!
    4
  7480. All kinds. Blues, Rock, and Metal mostly. In fact, listening to some BB King right now.
    4
  7481. But again, that second link also doesn't list its sources. As far as we know, they could be making it up.
    4
  7482. "TIK That's just blatantly incorrect and ignorant statement." No it isn't.
    4
  7483. And I'm not convinced they weren't fascists either.
    4
  7484. "TIK If somebody would call todays UK a fascist regime would you say that's correct. I'm only using a street colloquial meaning of the term? Why would I bother with a correct definition, that's just silly right?" I'm sure somebody did call them that during the Eurovision song contest. But joking aside, if you have evidence to support your argument, sure I don't see the problem in us discussing your argument.
    4
  7485. "Were the Germans able to launch the Western Campaign without Soviet Oil supplies?" Good question, but I don't fully know the answer. I suspect they had enough at the time to do it without Soviet supplies (although they certainly helped). The Germans seem to have had enough oil until they took over Western Europe, which then drained their reserves.
    4
  7486. Can confirm this is the one and only TIK channel (now TIKhistory because I changed the name last week). YouTube likes to unsubscribe people on occasion for reasons nobody can fathom, but YouTube actually denies this happens even though we all know it does
    4
  7487. Happy New Year to you too! Hopefully 2022 will be better than the previous two years :)
    4
  7488. Welcome to early club!
    4
  7489. He specifically said 'his' regiment (he didn't command it, he was just a soldier in it) fought for the factory, and it didn't. He also said that he was still fighting in Stalingrad at a time when his regiment had been moved out of the city. His diary has never been seen except by Chuikov, and we have to take his word on it that it exists. You're only annoyed because I'm challenging your world view, not because of the evidence, which is clear.
    4
  7490. "Where is the original?" It's in Chuikov's private possession, apparently. The original was from the Russian, and is in Chuikov's "Beginning of the Road". The actual diary has never been found, but historians have used it because it was in Chuikov's memoirs and people assumed he wouldn't make it up.
    4
  7491. Thanks, it's been a productive day. Done lots of recording and editing for next week's Stalingrad episode, a bit for the week after's video, some exercising and some food shopping, and have prepped this video for release. A busy day! How's things with you?
    4
  7492. Oh wow, I remember that scene in the film! Fantastic! I didn't know it was fake, so thank you very much for informing me about that
    4
  7493. Yes, it's not often I get to give credit to Wikipedia, and I don't like the overall concept of Wikipedia, so it's a rare event to actually say it did something right
    4
  7494. I didn't delete your comment and it's not in the spam folder. In fact, I've completely given up moderating the comments because I realized it's a total waste of my time and goes against the principle of freedom of speech. So either you've deleted your own comment so that you had an excuse to call me "pathetic" or other people flagged it and it got removed that way. I would suggest not jumping to conclusions in the future.
    4
  7495. I hope you did enjoy it!
    4
  7496. Glantz is really good overall. He's probably the "best" of the western historians currently looking at the Eastern Front. As I've said previously - "if you're not reading Glantz, you're doing it wrong". Yes, he's not perfect, and When Titan's Clashed is a little out of date, but I'd highly recommend you read Glantz. Stahel's great, but haven't read all his works, and he tends to stick to limited topics (which is good if you're looking for info on those specific topics, but bad for me because I tend to do 1942 onwards on the Eastern Front). Fritz's Ostkrieg does a fantastic job because it doesn't focus solely on the military aspect, but talks about the economics, social and political aspects of the conflict. As a general overview, Ostkrieg is probably where you should start, followed by Glantz, and then get specific with Stahel. I'd also recommend Robert Citino, but he doesn't have a book on the 1941 campaign (his 1942 book "Death of the Wehrmacht" is amazing).
    3
  7497. Okay, but do you have a source for that information? I can't just take your word for it, and none of the English-translated sources say this, and even Zaitsev doesn't say which medal he got, only that he got a medal "for valour".
    3
  7498. Woops! Thank you for pointing that out!
    3
  7499. FIRST! And hi to you too
    3
  7500. I did take a two week break 👍
    3
  7501. Well, that was the division that got wiped out in the past two videos (37th Guards Rifle Division), so that's why they're so depleted.
    3
  7502. Paulus didn't write this book. This was written by Colonel Adam. I'm not a Soviet fan boy.
    3
  7503. Yep! First!
    3
  7504. Good question. I've not actually looked at that to be honest.
    3
  7505. Awesome :) also, congrats on being First!
    3
  7506. Whilst this is true, what I find works best is if I don't watch YouTube at all until after a specific time (usually late afternoon). This way I can get all I need to do early and then be distracted in the evening when I'm tired and won't be doing much work anyway.
    3
  7507. Thanks for the suggestion! You'll actually be getting some recommendations later today 🙂
    3
  7508. Gary Thomas haha should I accept "both" as the right answer? :P
    3
  7509. Neither is having multiple candidates. Western democracy has a democratic process, but in a republican system. It is not democracy. And no, National Socialism was actually socialist in practice.
    3
  7510. This video was an off-the-cuff response to the comments in the previous video. Yes, I got things wrong here because I did it in a rush. That doesn't mean the overall message is incorrect.
    3
  7511. Tooze's Wages of Destruction "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - P112 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 This was by 1934. So yes, a state controlled and planned economy much like what you'd get in a socialist country.
    3
  7512. Thank you Stevie!
    3
  7513. At this moment in time, I actually think there's a difference between Fascism and National Socialism. For example, Mussolini's Italy only published racial laws in 1938, and this was only because of Hitler's/Germany's insistance. Fascism isn't necessarily racist, and it may not even be socialist - I've still got to look into it more before I've decided on the socialism element for Fascism. National Socialism, from what I can see now, is not just fascism. Someone else brought up the Congo too. I don't really know about that, however a brief look online shows that a significant (perhaps the vast majority) of the deaths caused by that atrocity were actually from disease and a "plummeting birthrate", so it's not as clear cut as some have suggested. I do know about many of the European and Asian atrocities committed in the 20th Century, and in the case of the East Indian company (and in the Congo too), the motivation was for profit etc. It wasn't "let's go there and wipe out a race because we see them as them rather than us and that is our goal". It escalated into violence, rather than that being the initial goal. Now, I'm not saying this justifies it - it doesn't, and it's absolutely evil. However, this factor, and the fact that the scale of the atrocity was no where near that of the Holocaust or the wider National Socialist atrocities, nor the scale seen in the Soviet Union, China or Cambodia, is quite significant. And the intention was not to kill a race or a group of people, but to exploit the local resources. This difference is so significant that the event in the Congo isn't seen as a genocide as a result. Obviously, you don't have to be socialist to commit atrocities against a racial group. However, the industrial scale of these atrocities committed by the National Socialists, and the group's attacked by the Soviet Union, China etc are beyond any other in history. We're talking mass industrialized, centrally planned, mass enslavement and extermination. And, it's not just racism there - because that happens elsewhere in history. The difference is definitely an ideology bent on creating a divide between one group and another, which, when you think about it, is central to what socialism is. Workers (one group) rising up and steal property off others. Aryans (a group) rise up and do the same with Jewish property (and Jewished-influenced property). Individuals no longer mean anything. You're a number - a barcode. I would strongly argue that the racism AND the group divide (the socialism element) is inherent within the National Socialist ideology. It's not Marxist-Socialism, but it's still socialism. And I think the reason many people are disagreeing with these two videos is because they're ideologically motivated to do so. If they'd really thought about it and understood the message I was saying here, they'd be downvoting some of my other videos too. They're not downvoting them, and are even liking and praising them, despite being evidence that this view is correct. This is because they didn't understand the message here, and don't recognize the implications of what I actually said. And maybe that's my fault. However, I'd also point out that several people had downvoted this video within the first minute, and I can see that the vast majority didn't bother watching the videoz - certainly not all the way through. If they're not watching, they certainly aren't thinking it through.
    3
  7514. Yes, I will do at some point. Thank you for your suggestion, and thank you for being civil in your disagreement. I don't think it's right that everyone should always agree with me, even my supporters :)
    3
  7515. I've already made it clear that I'm not friends with the alt-Right. If you knew anything about my channel and what it was about, you wouldn't have accused me of being in league with them.
    3
  7516. Yep. Sadly for them, I've been working on a much more comprehensive and thorough video explaining why NS was absolutely Socialism which counters every single argument they've made against it. The evidence is strongly in favour of NS being Socialism, and I'm intent on calling out the distortion.
    3
  7517. Thanks!
    3
  7518. Thanks! :)
    3
  7519. Oh and anti-American (thanks to my Market Garden videos). Forgot about that one!
    3
  7520. I may have to :) and thanks for subscribing. The channel isn't always quite this heated. But it has been in the past. I've been accused of being a fascist, communist, socialist, Nazi, liberal, American, anti-German, pro-German, anti-Soviet, pro-Soviet, conservative, pro-Croatian (yep) and numerous other names and political affiliations. It's really quite funny.
    3
  7521. That's good to hear :) I picked up Kotkin's books on Stalin not long ago. Not had time to read them yet, but I did watch his lectures on YouTube.
    3
  7522. That's a pretty solid analysis of the situation.
    3
  7523. No, socialism has statism built into its very ideology. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is the opposite to capitalism which is the private individual's (non-state) ownership or control of the means of production. Capitalism does not want a strong state (socialism) in the economy because socialism is anti-consumer and anti-private property. The first thing Hitler did when he got into power was abolish private property, just like the socialists do in every socialist country. Mussolini was a socialist. Fascism is just nationalism and socialism combined, rather than international-socialism. National Socialism (different to Fascism) is racism, nationalism and socialism combined. Both are anti-capitalist. They nationalised the industries in all but name (they called it 'privatization' but this was a slight of hand). And your ramblings about Nazi writings having nothing to do with economics is blatantly false. One glance at Mein Kampf will show you that that's not the case at all.
    3
  7524. Absolutely.
    3
  7525. "I think that the Soviet Union was about as socialist as Nazi Germany." That's what I'm saying. They're both socialist regimes (although one is Marxist-socialism and the other is racist-socialism). The USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics afterall. And how exactly does this legitimise the Nationalsocialists? You realise that this absolutely smashes any argument they have for denying the Holocaust, right? Since I published this video, the number of neo-Nazi comments on my channel has fallen to practically nill (which is amazing, because they were rampant before). Do you want to know why? Well, now that I understand what Nationalsocialists (I'm putting "National Socialism" together, as it was in the original German, because it makes a lot more sense to do so) actually are instead of what the Left pretend they are, their Holocaust-denial arguments are now easy to crush completely. In fact, that was why I was reading Mein Kampf in the first place - to figure out exactly what Hitler's philosophy regarding the Jews was (his Weltanschuung). It was only as I was reading it that I suddenly realised that Hitler wasn't at all capitalist and was arguing (almost) the same things the Marxists were, except it was based on race rather than class. His racism and his socialism are one and the same. And now that I've figured it out, the neo-Nazis have stayed away. Denialists usually ask a question like - "how can there be gas chambers?" And trying to argue against this is quite difficult because, if Germany was capitalist back then, why would they waste their time during a war where they need all the resources and manpower available, and channel resources into creating death camps to murder a large portion of their population? Thinking about it logically, it doesn't make sense, if it is capitalism. Supply and demand couldn't have done this. And this is why Denialists will poke at the holes in this idea, which then sends most conversations down the rabbit hole. Now it is easy. Now I can say - "it wasn't capitalism, it was socialism, and it was actually planned into Hitler's core economic theory and world-view. His economic policy and social policy and foreign policy are all linked into one. There's no way you can deny the Holocaust. To deny the Holocaust is to deny the war happened. To deny the Holocaust is to deny that Hitler was German. You can't do that." And interestingly, with the few Denialists who have commented after I made this video, as soon as I've made this argument (or similar) they rapidly accepted defeat. In actuality, by denying that the Nationalsocialists were socialists, you're enabling the Nationalsocialists to deny the Holocaust. And they're using the same flawed-logical arguments the Marxist-Socialists are using to deny that the socialism that has been in history was "real socialism", which is interesting... But once you realise that socialism was just the "workers rising up" but is actually the social (public) ownership of the means of production, leading to an un-free planned economy, which requires a totalitarian state to prevent it from reverting back to its natural state, you realise that the only difference between Marxist-Socialism and National Socialism, is who the victims are.
    3
  7526. And this is why people argue that there's never been "real" socialism. Well, regardless of the ideology, looking back on history, the socialist attempts count as socialism in my book.
    3
  7527. Well, I hope you enjoy it (whether you agree with what I say, or not)
    3
  7528. I'm also concerned for the same reasons, although I've never been one to chase the views or subscribers. But the main issue right now is the Patreon crisis, which is of Patreons' own doing but has hurt all creators including me.
    3
  7529. I'm not convinced that this was "deliberate". The word "deliberate" implies that they set out or planned to do it, which doesn't really make much sense. I'm not saying that the British didn't get things wrong and or didn't exacerbate the situation, and I will acknowledge that some think it was deliberate, but I'm skeptical, simply because the evidence is not decisive and that the majority of the authors are not saying that the British government did it on purpose. As Wikipedia says, some of those who think the British are to blame (fair enough) say that it was a lack of response to the famine that caused it to get worse, not that it was deliberate starvation.
    3
  7530. My brain wasn't working when I recorded this 😂
    3
  7531. You were fourth, sorry :(
    3
  7532. It is now!
    3
  7533. Next Monday (assuming nothing goes wrong in the meantime)
    3
  7534. YOYO MAN tempted, but my sister would kill me haha
    3
  7535. And also, thank you for the support but my clothes are staying on ;)
    3
  7536. Yeah, I suspect that would cause a storm... Maybe one day :)
    3
  7537. Haha if I think it deserves it
    3
  7538. If I dedicate the day to research, then easily between 9 and 15 hours. I probably average around 11 hours of YouTube-work on a typical day I'm not in work, with some breaks of course. Today I started work at 0845 (which is late for me, normally it's 0800 or even 0700) and I'll be working until 2200.
    3
  7539. Glad you agree! I can understand when he says "here's the original map the Germans used" - that's fine. But he should provide an original map which clarifies the situation for the reader in a nice easy way. Why he doesn't do this is beyond me.
    3
  7540. Thanks! It's all thanks to my Patreons - without them I probably wouldn't even have the shelves. Let me know what you think about the book if you do get it :)
    3
  7541. It's too big now! But I spend the first few hours after a video releases to reply to as many comments as I can :)
    3
  7542. Thanks Michael! The Eastern Front is certainly a different animal to the North African Campaign. You've got to factor in civilians at the very least, and they were caught between a rock and a hard place
    3
  7543. Politics and history are not "sciences". History uses elements of the scientific method, but the evidence itself is not enough. History relies on evidence AND interpretation. When the interpretation is wrong, it leads to contradictions, such as why free market loving Hitler created a welfare state (see book "Hitler's Beneficiaries"). I cannot accept the Marxist interpretation of history as it is full of holes and is clearly ideologically motivated. The same things the Marxists are claiming about "my theory" can be said about their theory. The difference is that the evidence is overwhelmingly on the side that Hitler was a socialist (a non-Marxist). If it wasn't, I wouldn't be saying it. If the Marxists can come up with a counterargument which doesn't rely on slander, simple rejection of what I say, or false definitions of terms, plus actually convinces me that Hitler was a free market capitalist, then I will change my stance. But so far, the evidence and interpretation is absolutely pointing in one direction - Hitler was simply not in favour of a free market.
    3
  7544. I mean, yes the Soviets obviously had logistics, but there was more to it than that
    3
  7545. I've just removed the fake TIK account that replied to you. I won't ever promote cryptos. Watch out for scammers.
    3
  7546. Can't you see the trees?
    3
  7547. And collectivism is statism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7548. My critics are certainly pushing me in that direction. Need to start handing out redpills to these people
    3
  7549. Haha blink twice, ok ;)
    3
  7550. Don't worry, I plan to talk about it more :)
    3
  7551. I was, in essence. It was a poor choice of words. Lesson learnt though
    3
  7552. It was purely the choice of words, not the conclusions drawn.
    3
  7553. Haha it's definitely British bias 😂 I'm missing the Eastern Front too
    3
  7554. First Battlestorm series on the Eastern Front, yes. I've done some videos on Fall Blau etc
    3
  7555. "From cradle to grave", the "nanny state" will look after the benefit scroungers. But somehow I'm wrong 🤦‍♂
    3
  7556. If I choose to give to charity for my own selfish joy, that's my choice. If I'm forced to give to charity, or shamed for not doing so, or only do so because it's "the right thing to do" or "you've got to contribute to society", that's when there's a problem.
    3
  7557. It's hard not to be when you come from a poor background, with a statist miseducation system, and an entire culture geared towards altruist morality and collectivism.
    3
  7558. No, wait, the other guy's comment has disappeared. So yes, you're first!
    3
  7559. I think this is the first ever draw!
    3
  7560. Your dad is a wise man
    3
  7561. Already covered Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    3
  7562. I'm against statism, but since the state has nationalised the healthcare system here in the UK, as well as all the roads, finances, education system, news organisations, and many more, it's physically impossible to avoid it.
    3
  7563. Yes, and I hate the way they ask that, as if it's some sort of "gotcha!" It's not! It's nonsense. Democracy IS dictatorship, which is why North Korea IS a democracy.
    3
  7564. Thank you for becoming a patron! Stay sane, and turn off the lamestream media 👍
    3
  7565. You may enjoy this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Non-nationalized health care is the cheapest of the three options. You still pay for healthcare even if you're unemployed - the reason you're unemployed is probably because of "free" healthcare or other government/State/central bank policies (e.g. minimum wage https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ ). It's the principal that Hazlitt explained in Economics in One Lesson - what is seen and unseen https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    3
  7566. Thank you!
    3
  7567. You hit on a lot of good points. Not sure if I'll talk about all of them, but I'll definitely be talking about the poor intelligence and Hitler's confidence in his generals in the future.
    3
  7568. Apparently, according to some other viewers, Isaev has watched some of my videos... But yes, in will start pronouncing Krylov correctly from now on (Kreelov)
    3
  7569. I think there's three stages of this battle - the pre-city fight, the city fight, and the siege of the 6th Army. They're all important and interesting in their own way. But the audience here has been looking forward to the city fight because they probably think the pre-city fight is just the warm-up. They probably think that the battle is about to begin, when in reality it began in the first episode
    3
  7570. This was a bit of an exception (see the pinned comment)
    3
  7571. Not really, unless you count the fire over the Volga, which he describes as not so series. Should we count that?
    3
  7572. "But why, oh why is Halder not relieved yet from his command? I dont get it." Well, he's about to be. But yes, it seems that Hitler only realized that Halder wasn't the right guy for the job during the 1941/1942 campaigns
    3
  7573. I think that Paulus requested reinforcements, then Halder gave him three divisions, which then satisfied him (for now). So perhaps Paulus thought that, with three additional divisions, he could now take the city. I don't necessarily think Hitler or Paulus are 'innocent', but that they're not the main culprit at this conference. Halder had no reserves, and Halder covered up for his own mistakes. Of course, Hitler was guilty for stretching his forces too thin, and starting the war in the first place, and Paulus is probably wrong if he thought he could take the city with the three extra divisions... The point is that Halder isn't as innocent as he made himself out to be. He's more guilty that they are at this conference
    3
  7574. I have to put on a 'voice' when I quote people like Hitler, or my enemies will take the audio out of context and use it to say I'm "pro-Hitler" etc.
    3
  7575. Hello!
    3
  7576. No, because they knew that they weren't accurate enough to just bomb the rail yard, and they knew their bombs would hit other parts of the city, including civilians
    3
  7577. Well, I'm certainly interested in your opinion on my ending comments
    3
  7578. "If you're looking for a crime against humanity tik, why not make a video about the bombing of Dresden... "History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte." Why don't you watch to the end of the video, because you're wrong on both accounts
    3
  7579. That's a good topic for discussion. It's somewhat muddied by the fact that every power conscripted their soldiers, so technically they weren't all professional soldiers but mostly civilians in uniforms. Britain definitely conscripted people into the factories, and I'm confident that Germany and the Soviet Union did too. So targeting factories would also be hitting people who didn't necessarily want to be there
    3
  7580. "Wait, so you can't bomb a city that has a set military defense? You lost me on that one." No, absolutely not. Targeting civilians is never justified in my opinion. - "If civilians are around that's literally not the bombers fault that's the other countries fault." They live in the city. That's why they're called "citizens". They can't necessarily move out of the way, and they certainly don't want their private property being destroyed just because public property doesn't respect their lives. Also, how exactly is it the Dutch civilians fault that Germany invaded their country without a declaration of war? You've lost me on that one. - "Plus, the war didn't sneak up on anyone. They could have evacuated." It did sneak up on them. Germany didn't declare war on Holland, or Belgium, or Luxembourg, or Poland, or the Soviet Union. Fallschirmjäger were outside the city on the first day, and the panzers and infantry arrived on the 3rd day. Not easy to evacuate in those circumstances. And where do you evacuate to, exactly? Their backs are against the North Sea.
    3
  7581. ​ @chriskortan1530  Looks like you were notified before the restrictions... Likes have also started disappearing! Was at 318 likes at 2 hours published, at 269 2.5 hours, and now at 263 (5 mins later)
    3
  7582. I strongly disagree. We are all individuals, and shouldn't be targeted just because we're forced to belong to the social group (nation, class, race...).
    3
  7583. Yeah I thought so! I was impressed by the flag, I have to say
    3
  7584. Sorry, you were quite a few behind :(
    3
  7585. "China isn't really communist and it's not capitalist so it crossed my mind that their might be similarities between the two." Was Lenin not Socialist because he implemented the NEP? China is absolutely communist, but they've allowed some market activity purely because they've realized that Socialism/Communism doesn't work. - "Stupid question but I'm wondering what if any similarities there might be between the modern CCP and the Nazis if any?" There are a lot of similarities, although the culture is completely different. Wage controls, price controls, token amounts of economic freedom, but large taxes and deficit spending... - "Any reading material on the topic would be appreciated." I'm not sure I've got any books that compare the two regimes like that, unfortunately
    3
  7586. My guess is that Kesselring was under pressure from above to end the war against the Dutch quickly to shift forces to the British and French, so that's why he sent the bombers - to encourage them to surrender
    3
  7587. Plus, it would be a LOT of extra work for me, and I'm already struggling as it is 😟
    3
  7588. Yes, I've caught a lot of flak from them due to the fact that I'm directly over the target. Quite a few have come around to realizing that I was correct though, which is the good news. Hopefully more do too
    3
  7589. Yes, but I was using the spelling from Craig's "Enemy at the Gates" which spells it "Sacha", as do some online sources like this https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacha_Filippov I will be saying "Sasha" from now on though
    3
  7590. Yes, most beneficent one?
    3
  7591. Better luck next time ;)
    3
  7592. I know, my tank videos are so bad!
    3
  7593. Yes! They were fairly quick with it too!
    3
  7594. Yep!
    3
  7595. I talk about the losses so far for some of the divisions in this video. It's not really possible to do that for all the units at this time, simply because of the lack of information
    3
  7596. Was it though? You may find the next episode enlightening
    3
  7597. That's actually part of the map, not the front lines. In hindsight, we should have chosen a different colour. But the red that isn't a front line is to indicate the area of the shooting range, or the grounds of a particular factory. Apologies for the confusion.
    3
  7598.  @Akm72  Don't panic! Don't panic!
    3
  7599. You were first by one second!! Nice
    3
  7600. I haven't listened to them
    3
  7601. That would make sense. I'm not sure if Hitler would have agreed with the idea because of his ideology and him wanting to dominate the farmlands and resources... but it would probably have solved the border issue.
    3
  7602. Possibly!
    3
  7603. Only after Britain declared war. So if Germany and Poland allied, and a war didn't start until 1940, then in theory the Germans wouldn't have run out of oil until 1942 or later.
    3
  7604.  @real_yunicellular  "also farmers are the poorest in most societies anyways, so why are you blaming it on socialism (besides homeless people)" Because in the USSR, the farmers were re-converted back into serfs (or actually slaves) who couldn't leave the farms and who were worked to the bone. There are statistics where a bottle of Vodka was more than a month's wage for a farmer in the USSR, and that many were still barefoot when the Soviet Union collapsed. Remember, the "dictatorship of the proletariat" was for the 'workers', not the farmers. Farmers weren't classed as workers and therefore were punished and exploited accordingly.
    3
  7605.  @real_yunicellular  "bro in the 1930s there were no private farms. that was in the 80s where 2 percent of the private farms produced 30 percent of the food, most farms in the 80s were private anyways" Did you not read what I wrote? Most farms in the 1980s were not private at all. Only 2% of the farms were privately owned in the 1980s - the rest being collectivised. That 2% produced 30% of the food, preventing the Soviet Union from starving, which they would have done if all the farms were collectivized. "but remember that in 1949 there was one final famine and then therw were no more" Yes, and I've explained why this famine was the last in my video on the Soviet economy https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w The reason it was the last was because Stalin died, and the Soviet government focused everything they had on the farms (unlike before, where there were other priorities). Despite focusing on the farms, there was a shortage of food right up until the end of the USSR, and the quality of the food was terrible. Unlike in the West, the Soviet news agencies constantly talked about how well the harvests was doing this year, and Soviet citizens listened religiously to the news for that reason, because they knew their was a good chance that their food allocation would be cut further if they had a poor harvest. The sources for these points are provided in the linked video.
    3
  7606. By holding the western bank, it forces Paulus to fight there, which delays him and gives the Soviets time to bring up more reinforcements in other areas to delay him again - like 4th Tank Army in it's bridgehead, which Paulus will strike in the 7th episode.
    3
  7607. Hope you enjoy it!
    3
  7608. I only usually post on Mondays, so don't be too eager! However, this week I have narrated one of Anton Joly's videos about Stalingrad, so if you're interested check out the link in the description or the pinned comment.
    3
  7609. I'm not sure, but they seem to do it a few times. To be honest, I think this was just a distraction to keep Chuikov's forces tied down and prevent him sending forces to hit 48th Panzer Corps in the East
    3
  7610. I've thought about it, but there's too much to do on the European Theatre for now, and the best way to get the most out of a subject is to specialize, so I need to just focus on one Theatre at a time
    3
  7611. Yeah, if people don't want war, and if the military can't run without wasting scarce resources that have alternative uses, then the system would break down. Oh and mercenaries don't exist, of course... 😂
    3
  7612. A lovely video for you here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    3
  7613. Am I going too fast with them?
    3
  7614. It's called "the algorithm". It deletes my comments sometimes too. I'd recommend not calling me names or swearing because YouTube doesn't like that
    3
  7615. Sadly, most are not going to watch the 9 hour one, let alone the 24 hour one :(
    3
  7616. I'm not a classical economist, so a swing and a miss there. And the idea that 2+2=4 isn't a "fundamentalist faith". Pointing out and explaining that something is the way it is, doesn't mean it requires 'faith'. It may seem like magic to you, but that's only because you don't understand it, and believe that the Santa Claus State will magic up resources out of thin air by manipulating interest rates and printing currency. THAT truly is a faith.
    3
  7617. Of course they used economics to wage war. Hitler went East for the economic benefits of Lebensraum, for example. And yes, given the choice, few people would volunteer to fight for bad pay. That's why conscription was introduced.
    3
  7618.  @ivanmonahhov2314  Hitler murdered the disabled because he was a Socialist who believed in the Labour Theory of Value, which says that non-workers (like disabled people) are an economic burden to the society https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Capitalism can help and look after disabled people, and pensioners well be better off under a capitalist system than under a Social system. The problem here is that you don't understand what capitalism and socialism are, and you think Socialism is for the poor. You are mistaken. Socialism is for the elite https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7619. Twice the distance from the middle to the end
    3
  7620. Okay I'll check the link. However, I think when it comes to payment like that you normally have to keep paying for "licencing", so it's usually not worth it
    3
  7621. "Let's forget for a moment that Germany had legitimate claims against Poland, namely, Danzig and the Corridor, which were German lands taken from her by the vindictive Allies after the end of WWI." ...which belonged to Poland prior to them being taken from her during the 1700s. But even if they were legitimate claims, taking them by force would be a war of aggression. - "Britain and France gave Poland a guarantee they could not enforce, which prevented the Poles from solving their dispute with Germany through diplomatic channels, effectively pushing them to war." No, they still could have negotiated. Hitler couldn't though because of the ticking time bomb of his own economy, which was imploding (as detailed in Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries", and I've covered this in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 ) - "The USA, on the other hand, had begun a massive rearmament program even before September 1st, 1939." Hitler began a rearmament program in 1933, and by 1935 had expanded from less than 1% to 10% of her GDP, which was "a bigger and quicker increase than ever seen before in peacetime in a capitalist state.” (Rees, "The Holocaust", P92.) In my opinion, it wasn't a capitalist state, but that's not the point here. - "Roosevelt wanted war with Germany and to this end he secured an unprecedented amount of funds to invest in American rearmament. Was Roosevelt planning a war of aggression?" Roosevelt was reacting to events in Europe and Asia, especially since it was Japan that attacked her in 1941, and Germany who declared war on her slightly after. America did not arm herself before Germany or Japan. - "Of course. I find it shocking when I read that bomber planes were being ordered by the hundreds even before the war started and that once it started and the US was officially neutral, high ranking US officers were present in the UK in order to formulate the strategy to bomb Germany and find the right locations to build their air bases." Germany was the first to bomb cities in WW2, starting with Polish cities on the first day of the war. She also bombed numerous countries, including Britain, before any bombs fell on Germany. Yet, because the other powers didn't sit there and take it, apparently they're at fault? I find it shocking that you could come to such a conclusion. - "And Stalin? Well, anyone who has paid any attention to the idea that Barbarossa was a preventive strike has seen the maps prepared by the Soviet General Staff, maps which show the starting points for the invasion of Germany and Romania by the Bolshevik Red Army. What does this mean? It means that Germany is not the only one responsible for the outbreak of the war." Yeah, I've addressed Suvorov's Preventative Strike idea in several videos - Why You NEED to Think Critically | Suvorov and Keitel's "Preemptive Strike" 1941 Idea https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA How BIG were Soviet Armies and Divisions in 1942? And what impact did this have? https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI Stalin’s Purge of the Red Army and Its Effects on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2 https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 The Red Army Air Force in the First Days of Operation Barbarossa https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw - "All the major powers involved share more or less the same degree of responsibility, but the victors have found it very convenient to shift the blame on the vanquished in order to clear their record, hide their responsibility, and portray themselves as the 'good guys' instead of participants in a criminal imperialist plot designed to divide the world among themselves under the pretext of saving it from Fascism, a plot that destroyed Germany and most of Western Europe in the process." All the powers made mistakes, and nobody's completely innocent. That said, it's clear that the Axis were the aggressor powers in WW2 who imperialistically (Lebensraum) waged a war of aggression to gain space in Eurasia. The Axis were the ones trying to divide the world into their domain. Western Europe AND Eastern Europe were destroyed, especially the east where millions perished under the Nazi regime (I've done several videos on this, including this one: The Fate of Soviet Prisoners of War https://youtu.be/OeRR100incE ). And Fascism and National Socialism are two separate ideologies.
    3
  7622. If you watch the full video, you'll hear both sides of the debate about why the Hossbach Memorandum is or is not trustworthy. Based on what I've read, I think it is trustworthy. And it isn't just one Memorandum - Hitler wrote about all this in Mein Kampf and his Second Book, for example
    3
  7623. I've not read anything by Moldbug. Do you have a link where he outlines his argument?
    3
  7624. Yes, it's the same with Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Great for the time, but we've come a long way since then. Carr's "What is History" was good too, but again is out of date now. I'd recommend Evan's In "Defence of History", which talks about Carr a lot (although is more advanced)
    3
  7625. I'll just leave these here https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/ https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/10/981008051724.htm
    3
  7626. Sid oldboy that's a very good point. I think it's in relation to the sun. I don't know though, so I'll look it up!
    3
  7627. No, because the science says so https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/1998-10/WUiS-GSRD-071098.php https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ Even Wikipedia gets this right https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
    3
  7628. Also, see my History Theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    3
  7629. Yes, however when you accept that definition you gave, and then realize the implications of that, you come out with the definition I gave. We are studying what humans recorded - what human brains recorded - about the past, and how people acted. Thus it is the study of the human condition.
    3
  7630. Type in "why I stopped being vegan" into YouTube and you'll get a few examples of people saying similar things. The top answer in this post says it too https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-vegans-quit-being-vegans?share=1 There are others if you search for things like "why vegans give up". E.g. https://roguehealthandfitness.com/vegan-bad-idea/
    3
  7631. I've done a video on Mefo bills https://youtu.be/mxpJbBXqYGc?si=f8l00Src5DH1AAXC
    3
  7632. They deny this, but it's true. The fact that they even dispute the words we speak and try to control the definition of language is insane. This is why they despise me, because I refuse to back down on the definitions.
    3
  7633. The Party benefitted, as did the people, as shown in Götz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries". So you are confidently incorrect. And Socialism is State ownership of the means of production. Medieval serfs were basically enslaved, but the totalitarian infrastructure was not in place to control every aspect of their lives, meaning there was no social or economic central state planning. No central distribution of good and services. So no, the definition of socialism does not apply to the medieval economy.
    3
  7634. There's also another part of the map where Turkey doesn't have part of Syria... And probably a load of other errors
    3
  7635. Did you know that syndicates are corporations? A syndicate is a trade union. A union of workers is a group of workers... In other words, a bundle or workers... Like a bundle of sticks, or a Fasci. It's actually where the word "Fascism" comes from. Fascism means trade unionism. And the Fascist trade union syndicates were called "corporations", because they were unions that embodied the nation... Body, corpse, corporation. https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko So why are Socialists pro-corporations? Oh, this is why https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7636. A couple of Patrons have asked me to do videos on non-German SS units, so I will do at some point, yes
    3
  7637. But I did. Keep watching. - "Now, some have argued that Karl Marx was Jewish, and thus, this “proves” that he cannot be anti-Semitic. This argument falls flat on its face when the facts are known..."
    3
  7638. You are!
    3
  7639. Some are saying I'm wrong. Some are saying I'm right. So long as people are talking about history, I don't mind
    3
  7640. Yes, I will get to it. In the meantime, while not specifically on Sweden, I have talked about Scandinavia in WW2 https://youtu.be/GBww_7j4HI4
    3
  7641.  @srfrg9707  "Well that's anachronical judgment, if you don't mind." I see. Colonies didn't exist in the 1930s and 40s? - "In the understanding of everyone in the 1930s it was not a colony at all." Yes, calling it a "mandate" therefore makes a colony a non-colony. It's just like calling thieves "taxmen". Changing the name doesn't change the function. - "That's how the French used to interpreted the mandate given to France by the Société des Nations." Yes, I'm not denying that they called it a Mandate, but the point is that it was still a colony. - "Historians of the future may say what that Georges W Bush's intervention in Irak was a form of colonisation, but it does not change the fact that nobody said so when it happened." But it was colonialism. Or it was the creation of a vassal state. Either way, it was still a major power enforcing its will on people from far away lands. - "What's the purpouse of historians? Projecting another period's feelings on past events or explain the old ways?" The purpose of history is to revise the past to make it more accurate. The Mandate of Syria and Lebanon was nothing other than a way to prolong French colonial rule over the Levant. That's not a projection of beliefs, that's precisely what it was and how it functioned. The evidence for that is that the Arab populace rose up against the French authorities, and the French authorities fought to retain their power, proving that they were subjects of colonial oppressors. - "How far is this from the cancel culture?" Very far. Cancel culture cancels other people's opinions and interpretations. I'm not cancelling you. You can have your interpretation and I can have mine.
    3
  7642.  @QuizmasterLaw  "this is one of your best videos. thank you and good work!" I'm glad you liked it! It was a bit rushed due to Christmas so I'm a bit surprised with the good feedback to be honest
    3
  7643. How can you tell I'm bummed by it?
    3
  7644. Yes! I'm surprised nobody noticed that last week
    3
  7645. Age of Empires had a great theme tune
    3
  7646. +John Duquette Just so you know, you can find free instruments online for Fruity Loops, and many of them are quite good.
    3
  7647. It's possible, but it depends. Have you watched my Hitler's Socialism video? A lot of economics of the Third Reich covered there. Most historians have no clue about economics, so do what I did - use their books and think critically. Don't just swallow their conclusions. Depending on how you approach it, you'd have to go into the archives. But Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" is probably the book you need to pick up first because it tackles your question directly. Gunter Reimann's "Vampire Economy" will be essential because that was pre-war too, and shows how the economy was failing. Tooze's "Wages of Destruction" too, but be careful with him, he calls everything capitalism because he doesn't know the definitions. Ludwig von Mises also covers the Third Reich in the 'epilogue' of his book 'Socialism'. While not entirely on the Third Reich specifically, I'd absolutely recommend getting Mises's 'Socialism' because it will absolutely give you the theoretical grounding and ammunition you need to tackle National Socialism. It will show you which parts of the economy to look at. Bear in mind that Mises was an Austrian, and fled from the Nazis when they took over because he was Jewish. They burned his library. So he knew a thing or two about them.
    3
  7648. He ate a lot of pasta and veggies and little meat, which is arguably why he was cursed by stomach pains for most of his life.
    3
  7649. No nation is, because national groups don't exist. We're all individuals ;)
    3
  7650. "I think you got so many things wrong this time." What parts did I get wrong? I mostly agree with what Farrell says, plus my own research on the topic of National Socialism, Marxism and Fascism (e.g. Mosley).
    3
  7651. That's exactly how I see the Left-Right spectrum. This is why I don't see Fascism and Nazism as being on the Right. You can't have totalitarianism without total government control.
    3
  7652. I'm not sure sargon is a true classic liberal. He seems quite nationalistic to me. Nationalism is a group (the nation) and therefore on the Left. If he's just patriotic, fair enough, then I guess he is a classic-liberal. If he's nationalistic, then he is not.
    3
  7653. I'm against Fascism, but even I can't agree with the notion that Fascism was worse that National Socialism and Marxist Socialism. The number of deaths caused by the latter two ideologies overshadows that of Fascism.
    3
  7654. I'm learning German at the moment and plan to learn Russian afterwards. One thing at a time. Mein Deutsch ist nicht gut, und ich lerne langsam.
    3
  7655. No problem! I'll admit, I fell prey to the Marxist narrative too, so you're definitely not the only one. But I absolutely encourage you to not just take my word for it and do some reading yourself. If you can get Farrell's book, I'd recommend it. And Zitelmann's "Hitler: The Politics of Seduction" is a great book on Nazi ideology (although it's hard to get a copy).
    3
  7656. "But in the original sense (French revolution), wouldn't right-wing be someone in favor of keeping/restoring the old order with aristocracy and absolute monarchy, and left-wing someone who wants to get rid of it (and rather appeal to the masses)?" The idea of a revolution is to get rid of it and replace it with another - hense "revolution". A "revolution" is not only to abolish the government, but to replace it with another. It is, like a wheel, a spin; eventually you get back to the same place - the state. Google's definition: "a forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system." They were wanting to take over, not just get rid of the old system. "In that sense, absolute monarchy is the most right-wing system" A monarch is the state. It is not for individual liberty and property. It is therefore not "Right" at all. It's right of the Far Left, but is actually more in the centre of the political spectrum.
    3
  7657. Too late for that Pete, they're already here!
    3
  7658. Well, I hope you had a good run! :D
    3
  7659. Do your homework, then watch!
    3
  7660. "which excludes all socialists." This is why Schacht (classical economist) thought Hitler didn't know much about economics... because he was a socialist.
    3
  7661. Ah ok. Maybe I could use a mix, because I can't do without the battle-animations when discussing what's going on. Might implement it for Stalingrad.
    3
  7662. "@TIK That would be quite the video! As much as I'd like to see one on Bagration and Gembloux, the fact of the Italian Army helping Jews is certainly something I had no knowledge of." You'll really enjoy Farrell's book :) and according to Zitelmann, Hitler actually says at one point that he regretted supporting Franco in the Spanish Civil War and should have supported the Republicans, who were the true revolutionaries.
    3
  7663. "Franco was more of a conservative, in the classical sense." This was what I think. He's like a nationalist/conservative rather than a Fascist. But I could be wrong. The Italian Army also saved a lot of Jews during WW2, something that's largely forgotten now.
    3
  7664. "@TIK have you had any interaction with the people who says something along the lines of "Well he was backed by capitalists so therefore he's not a socialist!" ??" Yes I have. They scream at me in the comments every day. When a debate is had with them, they soon crumble under the pressure of evidence and logic. Sadly, this doesn't change their minds. It's like fighting flat-earthers. Evidence and logic is not important to them. They have their belief, they think they're morally superior, and already believe that they have won the argument before you've even had it. They also assume the person they're arguing against (usually me) is either a Fascist, Nazi, has no idea what he's talking about, or doesn't understand socialism (so they tell me to read socialist literature, often times I already have). This is a completely incorrect assumption on their part, but again, it doesn't matter because they feel like they've won before the argument starts. You can't convince someone who's like that because they're not willing to listen, no matter how much evidence you present.
    3
  7665. Mussolini was a revolutionary anarcho-syndicalist. He was on the left. Corporatism is trade union syndicalism, because trade unions could embody (body = corps, corporation) the nation and end the class struggle. This is what I explained in the video. It wasn't capitalism at all - Mussolini was anti-capitalist and pro-revolution. His movement was a revolutionary movement.
    3
  7666. I can read better than I can speak or write. I'm struggling with sentence structure, the genders of words (die, das, der...) and my vocabulary is small. If I was in Berlin I could probably survive by ordering Kartoffel und Bier, aber I wouldn't be able to do much else. However, I think I've finally got to the stage where hiring a tutor would be useful.
    3
  7667. I'm not so sure. I think we should use the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    3
  7668. "So you really are doubling down on "corporations are socialist which means they're fascist"" Nope. I'm saying Marxist corporations (corporate = group) are Fascist, which makes them Socialist.
    3
  7669. @PsyWu "You want that the owners of a privat platform to obey to your rules. It is you who want to socialize the plattform to your favour against the will and rights of their property. you can choose to not use youtube and change your distribution channel." How is social-control of me, me controlling the social? That makes no sense. YouTube is NOT an individual. Therefore it is NOT private, it is Public. Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (Public vs Private video) And yes, I have a Bitchute channel. However, I would rather continue with YouTube if possible. All I'm asking is that my videos against fascism not be suppressed by the public-platform, and that Marxists stop defending YouTube for suppressing anti-Fascist videos.
    3
  7670. "Let me stand back and gasp at the masterly logic here. A very famous socialist claimed that term Fascism had no meaning by it's over use in his day. therefore TIK need not address charges that his peculiar Van Mises definition of capitalism is Fascistic (implied not stated ) Am I right? Is that the claim? If so ha ha, tee hee." A swing and a miss.
    3
  7671. https://images.app.goo.gl/a8CS18MuB2zwN47d6
    3
  7672. Is that Communism, Socialism or Fascism?
    3
  7673. Yes, it's confused a lot of people that I've quoted from Orwell, and said he's my favourite author 😂
    3
  7674. EXPOSED
    3
  7675. I'm not perfect, and I've never said I was. As I said in the video, I make mistakes because that's what humans do. But I also get things right, and in this case, I was correct. The only thing I did get wrong was a minor point which changed the stated 2 to 3 to 1, to 2.1 to 3.1 to 1. And I even agreed that Askey was correct on that point and that I was wrong. So I'm not sure why you think that I think I'm "perfect" because I'll be the first person to tell you that I'm not.
    3
  7676. I said in the video that the sources I used aren't perfect. And I didn't say I didn't make mistakes, in fact I admitted that I did. You have incorrectly assumed things because, as I've just called you out for, you didn't watch the video. Please watch the video before commenting.
    3
  7677. I put it that way so as not to get censored by YouTube, plus it insults my critics who are calling for Socialism
    3
  7678. Social ownership of the means of Reproduction... like Berlin 1945, or Nanjing 1937.
    3
  7679. People complain when I make short videos, so I've got to make the occasional longer one
    3
  7680. YouTube suppresses every video I make that mentions the H (like my latest video on Kellner, or the Irving one, or the Greek one). Thus, I'm now rapidly coming to the conclusion that it's not worth making videos about it on YouTube. Probably better doing said series on Bitchute... But either way, it won't be for a while because Stalingrad is the priority right now.
    3
  7681. Glad you enjoyed it!
    3
  7682. Sources/bibliography is in the description, but specific page references are in the video itself at the relevant times. (Kindle books don't always provide page numbers so I tend to put the chapter numbers in for them.)
    3
  7683. I'd recommend that you do your own reading. You don't need a degree to get permission to read books or primary sources. You just need to know history theory first
    3
  7684. Thank you! Unfortunately it's not always possible, nor easy, to ignore the Hate, though I do find it ironic how the people who are supposedly fighting Hate are also the ones giving it out
    3
  7685. Second isn't bad though
    3
  7686. You obviously didn't read the article, and haven't listened to what I said in the video. As I pointed out, it was Nigel Askey who started this, who wasn't very polite, who accused me of distorting history and of not being a "learned historian" etc (ad hominem attacks). Because of this, he didn't frame it as a "polite debate", but instead as an attack, which is the main reason why I didn't respond to him for 3 years because I actually want a debate, not an argument. So, considering that his article really doesn't hold up to scrutiny, I think those in the comments are correct in their assessment, and you would do well not to accuse them of not having read the essay, especially since I actually read most of it to them in the video.
    3
  7687. There's a few jokey names on there :)
    3
  7688. I guess that is true. It wouldn't be a debate if there was no challenge to what I say 🙂
    3
  7689. Do not be fooled by the rhetoric, social-democratic parties like the Labour Party are just Marxist Socialist parties. The best part is, there's people saying to me that Marxists aren't racist... and then we have Corbyn and the Labour Party being anti-Semitic. The difference between Hitler's Socialism and Stalin's Socialism is just the social group they hate - race or class. There's no difference. Also, just for disclaimer, the Conservative Party and all current political parties in the UK are socialist. There's not one free market party - because in a 'democracy' it's easier to promise 'free stuff' (relevant: https://youtu.be/G5odA8Gsmzs ) than it is to persuade the voters that reducing taxation is the proper way to prosperity.
    3
  7690. If the government buys the services of the hospital, it is not subject to the free market, and thus is not privatized. Calling it 'privatization' does not make it so. What's the difference between a government department which is financed by the state and a company that's financed by the state? Nothing. They're both groups of people in a building and financed by the state. The act of paying them converts them from the free (private) market into the public (state) sector. Similarly, when Hitler got into power, he controlled the entire economy through force and finance. Thus almost the entire economy (except the black market etc) was under state control. That's why we say he had a totalitarian regime - he had total control over the economy (socialism). If he's not a socialist, he doesn't have a totalitarian regime because totalitarianism cannot exist without state control of the economy.
    3
  7691. "It's capitalism!" "Oh no it isn't!" (Punch and Judy for anyone who doesn't know the reference)
    3
  7692. Can confirm, my name is Lewis. Can also confirm, Stephen beat you to first
    3
  7693. Exactly. However, Hitler did attempt a revolution in 1923, and arguably made his revolution after he got into power and consolidated it. He socialized society and brought it all under the state. To say that's not a revolution simply doesn't make any sense to me
    3
  7694. "OMG the end - Hitler wanted to steal other states resources. That is why he went to war." Yes, I explained this in the Why Hitler HAD to go to War video. Shrinking Markets leads to Autarky, which leads to a lack of resources, thus Lebensraum and the theft of food and resources from Europe (especially East and Southern Europe).
    3
  7695. "The NHS is a Social Democratic policy, not a socialist system." And Social Democracy is socialism.
    3
  7696. Does this look 'good' to anyone? https://usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html
    3
  7697. They changed the name of the planet to stop children from giggling https://medium.com/mel-magazine/from-your-anus-to-urine-us-the-rebranding-of-uranus-381e5921b04 But since I assumed we we're all adults here, I thought I'd pronounce it as it's always been pronounced, rather than the kid-friendly version. Clearly I was mistaken. However, I'm not changing it. You'll have to grow up. Also, I showed you a blatant error in the Soviet Storm series, yet the best come back you can give is to recommend to people that you continue to watch it? That documentary is full of errors! Meanwhile, if I make an error, I will admit it. For example, https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    3
  7698. Yes, I mention the 'Stab in the Back' theory in the video
    3
  7699. I'm tempted to do so, although I don't think the vast majority of my audience would be happy if I did that
    3
  7700. I would argue that they had air superiority in the first half of the war. The issue was that they ran out of fuel, and thus lost air superiority as a result (although air losses also played their part). But the Stuka support they got was vital, and you see this in the Stalingrad campaign. Without Stukas, they wouldn't have got to Stalingrad, because on the days they didn't have Stuka support, they got into trouble.
    3
  7701. Well, they need to be done with a 'voice' because otherwise people can take the audio out of context and claim I was saying that stuff. This is why I always put on a 'voice' when I'm reading quotes because this sort of thing has happened on other channels. Such is the world we live in.
    3
  7702. I have a degree in history, but I don't have a job as a historian, if that's what you mean? This is just a hobby for me, but I do take it seriously. I guess I could become a historian if someone's willing to hire me :) And I don't have the kindle version of this book, so I'm not sure. I just know that the newer paperback version has bad/missing maps and images so avoid getting that one. Sadly, I think the version I showed in the video is now out of print
    3
  7703. Yes you are! Congrats!
    3
  7704. I was listening to an audiobook last night (after recording this video), and it basically said that the US was actively fighting in the Atlantic before the declaration. You're right though that Hitler probably should have held off from formally declaring war.
    3
  7705. We will never surrender!
    3
  7706. I hope those commenters will see my Monday video
    3
  7707. Oh wow, I'm glad to hear you got out of that mess! And I know Western Europe isn't perfect by any stretch, but I hope you're having a better time of it now. You may find my upcoming video on Monday interesting and pretty heavily backed up :)
    3
  7708. It's funny how people say there's no inflation. How about house prices? Oil prices? Tuition fees? The stock market? Every capital good industry is in a bubble of stupidity, but apparently there's 'no inflation'. Insanity how they can claim that. It does appear that they're losing control right now though. Yield curve inversions, billions being printed and pumped into the markets every day, and several banks look like they're on their last legs (including Deutsche Bank)
    3
  7709. "TIK just stick to rant about working on retail... Actually as a fellow victime of retail/management work i would love that!!!" Yes, survivors never forget the nightmare that is retail "New logo btw? Looks neat and professional" Yes! Created today by Terri. Glad you like it! I'll let her know
    3
  7710. Unless you are a god, you're biased. Everyone is biased because we have a limited perspective. And it's only propaganda if I was giving you the official 'state' line. I'm doing the exact opposite of that - I'm challenging the 'official' propaganda
    3
  7711. Considering the backlash I get sometimes, I'll agree with you over the word 'brave' :)
    3
  7712. You also didn't mention the troops outside the city trying to break in. I call for an Updated Version Version 2! Are you just sticking to the breakout or are you looking at the battle itself and before it? I only ask because some historians suggest the battle was lost before it even began, usually citing the splitting of Army Group South as one of the deciding points
    3
  7713. Fancy seeing you here! Looking forward to discussing the breakout of Stalingrad during my video, and then seeing how that compares to your (updated) video on the breakout ;)
    3
  7714. Ah I see. I hadn't noticed, but now you mention it, yeah they are a little far from the neck :) And it's hard to say because each video varies. I couldn't do a Battlestorm video in a week, minimum of two just to edit. But that doesn't mean I'm working 100% only on that video. Editing editing editing drives me crazy, so I take breaks from the editing to work on other stuff. Some videos (like the SMG one) only take a couple days (maybe 20 hours total for that video). While others take many many more hours. I'm not sure I can give you an average for each video, but last year I worked an average of 63.5 hours per week (65 hours if you remove December), and had 20 days off the entire year (5 in December). That should give you some idea about how much effort I'm putting into this
    3
  7715. Yes. I do have a Bitchute channel now. But setting up my own website is not a priority. I did it in the past (in the Close Combat days) and it wasn't easy
    3
  7716. @Diego - that's actually a very wise assessment and I agree
    3
  7717. I am doing better, yes, thank you
    3
  7718. Awesome! Keep questioning things and get to the truth
    3
  7719. Technically second, unfortunately
    3
  7720. Conservative policies may be anti-scientific, anti-history or anti-intelligence, but that's because they're Conservative - a mild version of Socialism that wants to preserve society and the State as it is. I'm not Socialist, and so I'm not Conservative either. I believe in progress, and history shows us that progress happens best when individuals are allowed to live freely, without an oppressive regime stealing their wealth and keeping them locked in chains.
    3
  7721. He explains this in Mein Kampf - there wasn't enough resources in France as there was in the East
    3
  7722. I might do a video on that, but in the mean time you should read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard, which you can find for free online
    3
  7723.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  He obviously hasn't seen the number of videos I've done destroying the Nazi narrative and ideology. Or the video I've done showing that the Nazis are on the far left of the political/economic spectrum, not the far right https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  7724. I doubt it. There's a lot of silly names in the Patreon and SubscribeStar lists
    3
  7725. His actions
    3
  7726. I didn't say Keynes was for the gold standard 🤔
    3
  7727. I can't predict the future, but there are parallels. The USA exports its inflation to other countries like Germany did in WW2. They have more countries to play with, but some (like China and Russia) are starting to rebel. If more swap to their camp, it would probably result in catastrophe. This is why the World Economic Forum is calling for a "Great Reset" - they all know it's coming, it's just a matter of time. The only question is: was this by accident, or did the Socialists plan this as a way to destroy freedom and Capitalism?
    3
  7728. Essentially, making a Stalingrad video is like beating a game on the hardest difficulty, while this was would be like playing on normal. Still time consuming and the odd difficult section, but nowhere near as bad.
    3
  7729. The animations are similar, but nowhere near as in depth. There's no machine guns or explosions, and with the exception of the Estonian unit, there were no battalions. Most of the Soviet units are corps-level or up, and there's no front-line movements. There were also only like 5 books, so didn't have to work my way 50 sources.
    3
  7730. Thank you, and yeah it was the full reference "bar" that was missing, and the patreon lists. Both are important enough to warrant a reupload, even though it has completely destroyed the potential for this video to perform well
    3
  7731. Yeah, notifications might work this time because I deliberately demonetized the video, pre-empting them "limiting" it
    3
  7732. Haha thanks for the first like :)
    3
  7733. Interestingly, in December (2019) I created the unit image file for the 521st Panzerjäger Battalion, suggesting that I needed it for one of the videos in Season 2. And, I've just checked, and I do show the battalion at ~12 minutes into video 4, and possibly elsewhere in that video. The book “Mit Tanne und Eichenlaub: Kriegschronk der 100.Jäger-Division vormals 100.leichte Infanterie-Division,” mentions it, but the only time I've come across it since video 4 (I'm still working my way through the book), it only mentioned it briefly and I didn't put it in the video because it was for a minor skirmish. It appears to be attached to 100th Jäger Division or Heitz's 8th Army Corps at this time, as MacLean's Stalingrad Volume 1 Page 101 confirms it was attached (minus 1 company) to the 8th Army Corps on the 5th of September 1942. Where it actually was on the map though, I'm not sure. Is the reason you're interested in the battalion due to those tank destroyers?
    3
  7734. crackwiser at this stage, I only have a few working maps. All I know is it won't just be a direct port of CC2, because that'll be difficult to pull off using GWTC. I will use all the CC2 maps in the final edition of whatever this becomes (no working title either, so any suggestions?). For now, I've got the Arnhem maps ready, and I'm trying to figure out how to create my own strategic map. If I can figure that out, I'll officially announce the mod and maybe release something for people to try :)
    3
  7735. Really? I'm really surprised by the amount of people saying they liked this type of video. What factors made this so good, in your opinion? If I know, I can tailor future videos to suit
    3
  7736. Great to hear! The late war is interested, but it's obvious Germany had lost at that point. 1941-42 especially, it's not so clear. 1943 both sides are about even on the operational level, although Germany has lost strategically by this point. If I was to get back into tabletop wargaming again Flames of War or Bolt Action will probably be my top choices. Don't get time now though with all these videos to make.
    3
  7737. Wait, am I missing something? Since when was Churchill a socialist? I assume you're pointing out the flaws in capitalism with that question, Bertie?
    3
  7738. And what poverty and pain was caused by said policies in Britain?
    3
  7739. All thanks to my Patreons
    3
  7740. I'm happy for a truck-load :D and I'll take your advice about the Pacific Theatre. This is why I don't want to commit to it until I've done quite a bit of research on it.
    3
  7741. Seriously?? Tell him to watch my video first!
    3
  7742. It was published 3 minutes ago! But yes, yes I am :)
    3
  7743. That's good to hear! I wasn't sure how people would react to it, since it's not like my normal content. However, I really enjoyed making it and I can't wait to do another next month :)
    3
  7744. Also, I started learning Greek a while ago. I can say "this is a table!" haha
    3
  7745. I don't know about soon... But I'd love to cover it. I absolutely plan to cover the Spanish Legion soon.
    3
  7746. In terms of taking on Soviets in 1942, I think this would have been bad for Germany. They actually hit the Soviets at a time when they were in transition between unit organisation and mobilization. If they'd hit them later, they wouldn't have been caught quite off guard, although I think the Germans still would have done well initially. But that's my opinion.
    3
  7747. Right, but just because someone said that doesn't mean the Treaty of Versailles was harsh. There's a debate about exactly how 'harsh' it actually was. The fact that some can argue it wasn't very harsh shows that there are some flaws to the idea that it was the core factor.
    3
  7748. It's one of the reasons, but that alone doesn't explain it. There's a lot of factors, and I'd probably say WW1 alone was a big one. But then the economic crisis - especially 1929 - was a more decisive factor.
    3
  7749. Go to my about page, there's an email link
    3
  7750. Haha yeah, the guitar one's going to be interesting. I will work on it :)
    3
  7751. The last thing I'd want is people pledging support when they can't afford to do so. I'd rather know people have enough money in their pocket to get to survive to the next paycheck. But in terms of minor powers, I have an interest in Greece (been there, lovely country) and doing the Battle of Crete at some point after Stalingrad. For Stalingrad, the Romanians and Italians are definitely on my radar. I've somewhat started to touch upon the Italians in some recent videos and the Battlestorm North African Campaign videos, and I've actually started looking into the Romanians a bit. Whether I'll do a video on them specifically or not remains to be seen. Depends on how much evidence I can gather, bearing in mind I can only read English right now (and a touch of German).
    3
  7752. I'm sure it will be a blast
    3
  7753. I used to play 40k, but those dice are actually bought to play D&D. Haven't played it in about 2 years though now.
    3
  7754. Does it bug you?
    3
  7755. There were plenty in Normandy itself (Epsom, Goodwood etc). And lots of mini battles like during the Ardennes Offensive or Aarchen. But I think he's talking specifically about a campaign.
    3
  7756. I've got a ton of books on the subject now. However, they're all in English (still the only language I can read, despite currently learning German). If you can point me towards some less-biased English books, I'll happily take a look. The Italians are often neglected in the books, and I definitely don't think they were as bad as the Germans and English made them out to be. Although it does appear they were poorly led from mid-officer-level and up.
    3
  7757. Oops! Apologies! I wasn't sure if it was just a character reference, but I'll know for future, Jen :)
    3
  7758. Churchill was a good strategic leader and politician. But bad at tactical and the operational level of warfare. But you're right that nobody else was probably capable of doing the dirty work as well as him at the time.
    3
  7759. I will cover it eventually. I actually started gathering books. But then I did a poll and everyone voted Stalingrad, so here we are
    3
  7760. Yes, it's definitely something you should look into. You know, economics may seem boring, but the hyperinflation in the 20's plus the Great Depression in late 20's to early 30's is a really interesting subject for practically every great power at the time. I think I need to take a relook at this topic too...
    3
  7761. I've hearted your comment in hopes more people will see it :)
    3
  7762. Haha I got him at Leeds Royal Armories :) love that place
    3
  7763. Yes. I'm working my way through the North African Campaign first, then onto Torch, then Tunisia, then Sicily and Italy. That's why I started with Compass. I want the whole series to flow together, and it will give me all the context. Doing it this way will also allow me to compare the later commanders to those that came before them, and really decide just how good they are. And Battlestorm Operation Crusader is next. In fact, I was working on the script today. The only reason it's not out yet is because I thought it would be a 2 hour video... Turns out it's more of a 6 hour video.
    3
  7764. You didn't watch the video, did you. About the intelligence, you'll need to watch Criticism 3 32:30 and this part 46:24 which explains who made the biggest intelligence blunder of the battle.
    3
  7765. Slight correction - the video coming out Monday will not be the video I mentioned before (due to various reasons) but it will be a book review for a not-so-beginner book :)
    3
  7766. Awesome :) well let me know how you get on with it. Just, as I say, be ready to change your mind on certain things after reading it. Although, tbh my advice is to always be ready to change your opinion on things, since new evidence is coming out all the time!
    3
  7767. A book for a WW2 beginner...? There's certainly not a one-size-fits-all sort of book. Tbh, as much as it pains me to say it, I'm going to recommend Anthony Beevor's "Stalingrad". Very popular, and reads like a novel. Just make sure you read it with an open mind and don't accept it as gospel (he gets things wrong, as you'll see in my video coming this Monday). Alternatively, if you want something on Market Garden, Cornelius Ryan's A Bridge Too Far is good. Again though, be careful because it will lead you to the wrong conclusions (hence all my MG videos, including this one).
    3
  7768. I got a copy and skimmed through to the relevant parts... Oh boy
    3
  7769. You know, I never realised until now that I didn't pronounce some of my T's at the end of words... Must be a northern thing. I'll work on pronouncing them though because it ain' righ'
    3
  7770. Good because I agree with Carver that Ritchie and Auchinleck were communicating with each other, rather than Ritchie going rogue.
    3
  7771. Respect is earned, not taxed.
    3
  7772. Sorry to hear about your breakup. If you haven't already, check out Casey Zander on YouTube. I find (most) of his content to be good and will help you move forward.
    3
  7773.  @viktorgunnarsson9156 Yes, as my viewers who watched it said I shouldn't waste my time, so I won't.
    3
  7774. As I said in the video, no.
    3
  7775. Merry Christmas!
    3
  7776. I think the bell icon is just for videos, not for community posts, but I could be wrong.
    3
  7777. Yeah, Gazala is 27,300 words, not 320,000 like Stalingrad
    3
  7778. FIRST! Well done Jamie!
    3
  7779. When the history theory video drops, you should watch it, as it's built upon a ton of philosophy
    3
  7780. You were second by a second! VERY close
    3
  7781. I like this rule
    3
  7782. The sentence before that, I said that the sun (the big ball of fire in the sky) was behind the British. So, it was blinding the Germans as they advanced towards the British tanks. I made a subtle joke, implying that the British were so desperate that they were relying on 'sun support'.
    3
  7783. https://goo.gl/images/uirQNZ
    3
  7784. Glad you approve of what I'm doing here :) don't worry about becoming a Patron - worry about graduating! Good luck with your studies
    3
  7785. "I can't make it worse... right?" No, you absolutely can't make it worse. Seriously, the next three or so episodes... words can't describe the stupidity
    3
  7786. I do enjoy challenging assumptions. But I also enjoy questions and debates. Keeps me on my toes :) According to Thunder in the East, the Soviets had 2,000 heavy, 7,600 medium, and 11,000 light tanks on the 1st of January 1943. That makes sense since in my studying of Stalingrad, around half the tanks mentioned are light tanks (including US Stuarts/Honeys) I honestly don't know if everyone had that mindset. Rommel appears to be one of the first to develop this - but this is coming from Western historians (e.g. Liddel Hart) so I don't know if others had developed this idea before him or not. I highly doubt he was the only one since we see this same tactic with the AT guns deployed at Dubno. However, I don't have the biography of generals like, say Hube, to confirm this. Rommel seems to develop this tactic after seeing von Herff use his Kampfgruppe to lead the British onto the anti-tank guns during Brevity (which is why this small battle is important, and why I had to do a video on it). He then uses it during Battleaxe. So it may already have been a German tactic, and Rommel may have been late realise it, or maybe this just confirmed in his mind the value of the tactic. Sadly, at this time, I do not have the the numbers for the 88s. Between the 01/06/1941 and 01/07/1942, the number of "Light Pak" guns decreases from 17,354 to 15,202 (Light Pak meaning 37mm, 47mm and 50mm guns. They lose ~2,000 of them. There is a discrepancy in the German numbers but they do have more than the total requirements by the army). Meanwhile 75mm guns increase by roughly 1,619 to 2,227. Between 01/07/1942 to 01/12/1942, number of Light Paks stays the same, while 75mms drop to 4,697. However, again, they actually have surplus stock, since the army doesn't need this many (apparently). All of these weapons increase in balance between 01/12/1942 and 30/06/1943. So it does seem that the Germans are able to keep up with army requirements. [Numbers from Enduring the Whirlwind] T-34s did have an impact - it was a good tank! Sloped armour and the ability to be mass-produced is what made it good. However, it was still the minority tank even until 1943 (as you can see from the numbers above).
    3
  7787. I also said it wrong too! More like i'-say-ev
    3
  7788. Well, what do you think? Germany had just conquered or allied herself with most of continental Europe, has mobilised a massive army, and it was well known that Hitler's intention was to expand East. Stalin may not have known or expected an attack in 1941 (which explains why the Soviets were still mobilising and weren't prepared when the Axis attacked) but he was being told to expect one soon from several sources - including his own military, and Churchill. Stalin apparently ignored such reports, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't play it safe by guarding his border. And let's not forget that the area the Soviets were in was newly conquered territory, which perhaps needed securing.
    3
  7789. I the numbers came from Mawdsley's "Thunder in the East". However, I doubt they had 186,100 artillery pieces in 1943 so it does seem fairly believeable. And yes you're right, they do normally include both as the same thing.
    3
  7790. No no, they did have artillery! They really did! That was my point, they were using infantry, AT and artillery :)
    3
  7791. I have the numbers, do you? The numbers show there weren't a "few" medium tanks as you claim there was. And, if you'd made it through the video, you'd have seen that heavy or medium or light tanks argument is mostly irrelevant anyway. But you didn't watch it in full and once again jumped to conclusions.
    3
  7792. I rush home every day to make more videos about tanks and infantry 😁
    3
  7793. Oh good! I want to do more stuff like that in the future
    3
  7794. Don't wonder what if. The advice was correct. There's far more demand for engineering than there is for history, and you've probably earned far more than you could have done if you'd gone the other path. When it comes to a career, the amount you earn is most important. You get paid more for jobs that are in demand, and those jobs often suck, which is why you're paid more! When it comes to hobbies, enjoyment is what's most important, but people like to do something enjoyable, and so (supply and demand) you get paid less for doing those hobbies (if you get paid anything at all). Don't mix the two like I did because it's not all sunshine and rainbows. This isn't an easy or stress free job, and I'm working all hours just to keep it all afloat. Yes it's interesting and I'm passionate for it, but I've turned my hobby into the daily grind and that's not what you want to do.
    3
  7795. Great to hear! Not sure how many other people picked it up after I recommended it, so glad to see someone did! It's really interesting to hear some of the tidbits in it, and the debates.
    3
  7796. Ok! If you insist :)
    3
  7797. I do, but I'm usually reluctant to use internet sources. I will if I have no other choice (which is what I'm currently having to do with the order of battle for Operation Crusader). Thank you for the link though! I will use it :)
    3
  7798. IF this is true, I'd be very impressed! :D
    3
  7799. At least I made one person laugh!
    3
  7800. Very good question! It's a big one too, and I think this deserves to be answered in a future video. So I'll make one about it in a couple weeks. Hope you can wait a bit longer for your answer :)
    3
  7801. But is this really the case? I need proof!
    3
  7802. Who did the deporting? You won't find any SS units at Stalingrad. Plus, the front line was the city, so yes, in this case 6th Army's soldiers were responsible.
    3
  7803. Yeah, this idea that the Germans had an easy ride until they reached the city buildings simply isn't true. The battle for the Don bend and the battles going on between the Don and the city/Volga are probably as important than the city fight itself. Also, I can't remember who it was, but ages ago someone sent me audio of them pronouncing the general's names. So I relistened to that prior to making this :)
    3
  7804. Haha I laughed! Glad you liked this. Which games do you play? And by historian, does this mean you have written history books?
    3
  7805. Thank you GM!
    3
  7806. Thank you! Might be a little bit too small for me to use for these units though :(
    3
  7807. Pronounced "Lee-tenant" right?
    3
  7808. Airborne operations were still in their infancy, with the first taking place in 1940. They still had to learn from their mistakes and Market Garden was a hard lesson learnt.
    3
  7809. Yeah and was purely by accident, which makes it even better!
    3
  7810. Technically this isn't true. By 1914 there was quite a bit of government regulation in the railways, although the further you go back the less there was.
    3
  7811. "Actual eye witness testimony is always treated as the most important evidence in a court of law, along with artifacts and physical evidence. All "Secondary" sources are classified under hearsay and are only there for guidance." And now you know why many innocent people end up on death row.
    3
  7812. "Thus a memoir from a reliable honest source is FAR better than a new history book by someone with a political agenda." That's exactly what I said in the video. A new history book written by someone not pushing their ideology would be FAR superior to the memoir.
    3
  7813. Then you're selling yourself short. New sources, new information, and new concepts will outdo the old interpretations and fewer sources available in the past.
    3
  7814. Academic journals are histories written by historians, and so the newer ones are generally better. Archeology is the process of discovering new primary sources in the earth, and so the primary sources they find are close to the event, and thus are classed as C tier.
    3
  7815. I studied the Jack the Ripper case in university, although I've not read that much on it to be honest, but I am familiar with the topic. The primary sources are problematic for numerous reasons, and the fact you're relying on the newspapers is telling. The police records were also terrible because (at least in once instance) they actively destroyed the evidence. Sure, some of the histories written on the case by historians are going to be bad (I said this in the video), but in general a newer history by a serious historian on the topic will be better than an old history book from 50 years ago. That said, in the case of Jack the Ripper, you'll probably never solve the mystery, and the culprit is probably lost to time. This is why crackpot theories are abound on the topic, and they're not always 'disprovable'. But that doesn't mean that, in general, newer histories are not better than out-of-date old ones.
    3
  7816. It's a valid interpretation. I wouldn't agree with that, simply because leaving equipment outside in all weather without proper maintenance will result in excessive wear and tear, rendering them inoperable, and Hitler would have known this... However, that doesn't necessarily mean that he wasn't considering that.
    3
  7817. Surprisingly, some National Socialists I've seen on YouTube are aware that Hitler was "pro-Muslim". I think it's because Muslims are not fond of people from other religions, like Judaism, which has lead to conflicts in the past. Therefore it's a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
    3
  7818. They're not recordings, they're stenographic records in the sense that a stenographer sat down and wrote/typed up what was being said in shorthand.
    3
  7819. Wow, you're certainly in early with your opinions (you were second btw)
    3
  7820. Ignoring the upcoming Eastern Front Battlestorm videos, my plan is to do the North African Campaign start to finish (probably a third of the way through), then do Torch, Tunisa, Sicily, then work my way up Italy. I absolutely won't ignore Italy after Normandy happens. I'll probably just go back and forth like I am now between different theatres.
    3
  7821. Not next week, no. Still wading through the map and the script. Getting there though, and I'm putting in as many hours as I can spare, which is why the past two weeks (and probably next week too) have been Q&A videos. I am behind with them, but I'm also dedicating as much time as possible to Courland. Yes, the Americans at this stage were somewhat inexperienced, although still capable. I think in this case though it was two not-so-great commanders placed in an operation they weren't capable of pulling off. You can tell they're not the best, because the best were pulled out of Italy and sent to England in preparation for Normandy. And you're right that all sides underestimated the Germans (and the Germans underestimated the Allies and the Soviets)
    3
  7822. I do plan to do one soon, but I feel like I need to do a lot more reading on him first, and just haven't had time to spare recently. I will get to him though
    3
  7823. +Alexg6464 that's actually what happened! At least according to the sources it was :)
    3
  7824. One thing I will say about the Dutch underground was that the Allies weren't sure if it had been infiltrated, like the French resistance had. They felt they couldn't trust the Dutch intelligence reports, although in hindsight it does appear that they could have, since it wasn't compromised (from what I've read)
    3
  7825. +DJ Redpants They didn't find the entire plans, only the MARKET plans, and Robin Neillands points out that by 1500hrs (or at least by the early evening) they were on Student's desk. According to Robert J. Kershaw in It Never Snows In September (p75), with other pieces of information "General Student immediately grasped the full implication of the Allied plan". And as far as I'm aware, none of the modern books I've read mention that the Germans were suspicious of the plans. Perhaps A Bridge Too Far made that claim, I'll have to double-check. Model made the decision to send 10th SS Panzer Division to Nijmegen on the first day. It might be the case that he didn't have the plans for MARKET, but it appears that he was at least informed about them by Student. The stuff about him thinking the British had dropped in Holland just to capture him is false. The fact is that Model didn't survive the war and burnt his personal papers before committing suicide, so he wasn't around to defend his side of events. Perhaps this is where the idea came from too that the Germans disregarded the plans found in the waco glider of the 101st. It's hard to say, but I think it's a reasonable suggestion.
    3
  7826. "Sorry Tik, but whats up with the shit about racism in the beginning of the video, thats some serious distortions." I actually rewrote that section several times because I knew that I had to mention racism (otherwise I'd be accused of being "racist" for leaving it out) but then I knew that it would cause a stir in the comments. Oh well, let's get on with it shall we. - "you are claiming the raj, didnt govern in a racist way" No I didn't, stop lying and accusing me of saying things I didn't say. I said several times in that section that racism was part of the problem. YOU didn't hear those words because YOU are only hearing what YOU want to hear. - "And there are colonies by European nations that the main economy was is export of slaves to the americas, or force labor to extract natural resources." Yes, and then the British (thanks to liberalism and capitalism) realized that this was not only a ethically bad thing, but also was uneconomical. It made more sense to free the slaves as this would be better for the economy. However, none of this has anything to do with India. The British didn't go to India for slaves. - " Or to genocide populations off of natural resources." Maybe I'm wrong. Please tell me which genocide was deliberately conducted by the British in India for purely racist reasons? And if you say the Bengal Famine of 1943, I'll argue against you since that wasn't done for racist reasons - it was inflation that caused it. - " There was racist justifications at the time to make it ok for a christian to economically profit by force, it was never about "civilizing" the population really, it was about economic exploitation, thats the argument." Yes, and I disagree. The primary reason the British Empire did what it did was because of ECONOMIC reasons. Racism may have factored into this, but Britain didn't take over a quarter of the world's land surface just because it wanted to kill and enslave people. In summary, your opinions are wrong.
    3
  7827. I was just following orders!
    3
  7828. Actually, there are two generals (if not more) called Pavlov too
    3
  7829. Did you stop to drink and play cards? Probably not a good idea.
    3
  7830. It absolutely was. My favourite map and mission out of the original game :)
    3
  7831. No, heavy gunfire, meaning lots of bullets and possibly shells
    3
  7832. This is it, and also you don't have unlimited time to double check everything, so some half truths do slip through the gaps.
    3
  7833. I'd agree with that. Although, I with Great War would go into more details. They're a bit too Wikipedia-like in my opinion.
    3
  7834. Our house, in the middle of Penzenskaya Street, our house
    3
  7835. Well, the good news is I started reading on the topic a while back (in preparation for the Revisionist video) and I do have a book wishlist for it ready to go. I'm just a bit reluctant to do it on this channel, simply because I don't want YouTube to be tempted to take it down. If I do this, I may make another channel. But again, after Stalingrad :)
    3
  7836. I can and want to, but I'm not sure how YouTube (the company) will take it. However, if I do cover it, it will be after Battlestorm Stalingrad
    3
  7837. Not currently. I do want to go Market Garden area at some point, but might be a while away now
    3
  7838. Yep, me too. Great map
    3
  7839. Yes, I probably will talk about it soon. Although one of my main sources at the minute for it is Death of the Leaping Horsemen :)
    3
  7840. All of them!? Wow, that's a tall order!
    3
  7841. I'm not going to squad level in my Stalingrad documentary, although I will be quoting individuals and mentioning isolated incidents like Pavlov's House to give the human side of the story. However, I will be going very detailed. Regiment and battalion level deep at least.
    3
  7842. You haven't read Das Kapital. If you had, you'd know that about 100 pages in, Marx realised that he'd made a mistake so big it meant that everything he'd written so far was wrong. He therefore began to panic, which is when the mask slipped and he called out the Jews. In reality, Marx based his entire world view on the Labour Theory of Value, which was made obsolete just 8 years after Das Kapital. Thus, Marx doesn't show anything. The entire book was rendered obsolete just 8 years after it was published, and yet here you are pretending it has any relevance to anything.
    3
  7843. Let them rage!
    3
  7844. If you didn't see my video on the National Socialism religion, I do a better history of it there https://youtu.be/y011Pdrb3Sk But I'm not sure whether I'll do a specific video on Gnosticism itself. I will consider it though. Thanks for the suggestion.
    3
  7845. Yes they are. There's also a specific place called Looneyville in West Virginia.
    3
  7846. "I want to buy your car at a low price, but you want to sell it to me at a high price. We say in ordinary English "our interests conflict", rather than "there is a contradiction in the system"." That's not a contradiction, and that's not what the dialectics mean when they use the term. - "it is just a load of academic word games" Yes, that's what the dialectic is. And I was trying to boil it down. When you read their stuff, it's all mumbo jumbo. It's word-salad. - "just so you can try to say NAZISM = COMMUNISM." Nazism isn't Communism, and I'm not saying Nazism is Communism, nor am I trying to say it's Communism. The only time in the past I've ever called Nazism Communism is when addressing National Socialists themselves. The reason why is because it's an insult to them. They refer to each other as "National Comrades" and "National Collectivists", so I just call them National Communists. But outside of the insult, I don't think National Socialism is Communism, nor is it Marxist. It's clearly Socialists, not Marxist. But none of that has anything to do with this video. Denying that the Marxists, Fascists and the National Socialists all use the Dialectic, is simply denying the evidence. The quote about Mosley at the end of the video should suffice to make this point clear. - "You take silly positions by deying the obvious and easy to understand differences between Fascism (National Socialism) and Communism (International Socialism), which everyone except you and a few of your followers recognise" I fully recognise the differences between these ideologies. I don't know why you're strawmanning my position by claiming otherwise. If you WON'T PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT I'M SAYING, then that's on you. Put your emotions away and start listening. You listen with your ears, not with your heart. - "Everyone knows Hitler's entire life was dedicated to kill Marxists, who he believed were part of a "Jewish plot" to enslave the Aryans." Many of the Marxists in Germany went over to the National Socialists in 1933. Here's a quote from Dirlewanger on this: “When I was making my selections in the concentration camps, [I was advised] to try forming a unit of former political opponents of the Movement. In our camps we have men who in February 1933, and perhaps even after March 5, 1933, remained faithful to their own conception of the world and didn’t hide behind an appearance of national socialism. In this they showed character, unlike those thousands who went over to the stronger side and, despite an interior hostility, turned towards us with their right arm high after March 5.” - Dirlewanger to Himmler, quoted from Ingrao, “The SS Dirlewanger Brigade,” Kindle p40.
    3
  7847. I started reading it but I've had to prioritise other things. I do intend to go back to it.
    3
  7848. Of course it was!
    3
  7849. He was a Marxist-Leninist.
    3
  7850. Yup! Need to get rid of capitalism (Marxism) and embrace free markets!
    3
  7851. If you say so, cultist. Keep denying history.
    3
  7852. Hard evidence first and logical interpretation of that evidence second. That's how to do decent history.
    3
  7853. The EU is currently collectivising the farms in the Netherlands.
    3
  7854. "I just watched Indy and the WWII team talk about how the national socialists in Germany were not socialists" Yes, I've seen said video(s). "I would ask you to respond but there wasn't much to respond to." I'm not going to directly respond to them because I'd rather just provide an argument (with solid evidence and interpretation) for everyone that shows that National Socialists were (National) Socialists, rather than 'Capitalists'. "When you have seen it you cannot unsee it." Precisely. The issue is that most people aren't seeing it because they're not getting both sides of the argument. Soon I will provide them an argument they cannot ignore... very soon in fact...
    3
  7855. I haven't had time to read a lot of Stephen Kotkin's work, but what I've read so far, and his lectures online, have been really interesting
    3
  7856. YouTube censors videos if you say certain words https://www.insider.com/youtubers-identify-title-words-that-get-videos-demonetized-experiment-2019-10 https://reclaimthenet.org/youtube-demonetization-words-blacklist/
    3
  7857. Military historians who've been relying on the German sources.
    3
  7858. I think I didn't explain myself particularly well in this or the follow-up Numbers video, which is why I'm getting a lot of flak. However, popularity doesn't matter to me. I'd rather say it as it is than not say it at all, and the video coming next Monday (hopefully) will be another piece in this puzzle that will help add to this debate.
    3
  7859. Racing towards Stalingrad, Paulus' Sixth Army had 120,000 men and 150 tanks, vs Kopakshi's 62nd Army and Chuikov's 64th Army, both with 6 rifle division each and a few tank battalions and other units, with 277 tanks (most being light tanks). After being initially defeated by the Sixth Army, the Soviets counterattack with 1st and 4th Tank Armies, but this only amounted to a third of the tanks (maybe 200 in total at most) reaching the front, because these two armies hadn't actually formed yet. Despite the fact that the Soviets were defeated, they did halt the Sixth Army prior to Stalingrad, and caused great loss to the Germans, blunting their spearheads. The fighting continued outside the city, and Fourth Panzer Army had to be brought in to assist Paulus and get the attack moving again as Paulus' attack had stalled outside the city. During the fighting in the city itself, Chuikov's 62nd Army was outnumbered by the Germans (just those elements fighting in the city itself). In fact, 62nd Army’s combat strength ebbed and flowed, but never exceeded its initial strength of 54,000 men. Paulus had 80,000 men at his disposal during first assault on the city (Sept 3rd 1943), and would feed in other divisions to keep the fight going. By the beginning of November, both sides were completely exhausted in the fighting, with the Germans still able to attack, but the reality was that they were only gaining small gains in the city with each offensive. Soviet reserves for Operation Uranus did not come from the Caucasus because that was already fighting against Army Group A. Reserves came from other areas of the Soviet Union. While German attention was drawn toward Moscow and the Caucasus, the Soviets secretly shifted their reserves to the Stalingrad area. This does not mean the Germans didn't have reserves or that the Germans didn't have the capacity to launch an attack. In fact, they brought in reserves for Winter Tempest and the Stalingrad relief attempt. Instead, what it means is that the Soviets skillfully maneuvered their strategic reserve in secret to the Stalingrad region and surprised Axis forces in the area. The Soviets won, not because they outnumbered the Germans, but because they concentrated their forces effectively in areas the Germans didn't expect an attack to succeed. There's a lot more to it, and I'll go into it all during my upcoming Stalingrad documentary, but the Soviets didn't have "overwhelming" manpower numbers. Yes they concentrated their forces, but they relied on tanks, artillery, and air power to win (the Luftwaffe up to this point had dominated the skys, and Stalingrad is the first battle they really lost that domination). - Statistics from Glantz, D. House, J. "The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942." University Press of Kansas, 2009.
    3
  7860. Very interesting. I'm not going to claim to know a lot about Estonian history, however it does sound like politics is the reason many Estonians have a bias of being pro-German when thinking of WW2... or should we simply say anti-Russian. Estonia wants to keep her independance, and Russia is currently the biggest threat to that. So naturally, it makes sense to have an anti-Russian slant when it comes to history. In this case, it manifests itself as pro-German when remembering WW2. The reality is that both the Nazi and Soviet states were BOTH terrible places to live within. Their armies may have their pros and cons, but again, both the Red Army and the Wehrmacht are not inherently better or worse than each other. They were both terrible in their crimes and their bloodlust. Nazi atrocities are well know, and Soviet ones are too, although many have been covered up (Glantz briefly mentions this at the end of the video I linked too). Neither state should be "favoured" regardless of politics. We have to try and look at this from as an unbiased point of view as possible, and question our own perceptions, even if it's tough to do so. According to the view in the more modern histories, the Wehrmacht is not "superior" to the Red Army. It caught the Red Army in a state of disrepair and reorganization in 1941, and that is where the myth comes from, but even then Barbarossa fails. By the middle-to-late end of 1942, both the Wehrmacht and Red Army are on an almost equal footing. That is why the battles for 1942-1943 have often been seen as a "period of transition". But the Wehrmacht loses this "equal fight" and never regains it. And I think you're right, we need to look at the Red Army at the tactical and operational level to the same extent that many western historians have done with the Wehrmacht and see how the Red Army holds up. I'm hoping my Stalingrad documentary will do that well enough for a serious debate to begin.
    3
  7861. Ok, here's some things for your to consider. First thing is that Lend-Lease didn't really come into play until 1942 - at which point the battle of Moscow and the counterstrokes there had already bloodied the German army. Yes, some tanks did arrive, but if you look at the numbers and the quality of the equipment that arrived, it was not decisive in late 1941. That's not to say that Lend-Lease wasn't important - of course it was - but that the Red Army had already halted the Wehrmacht outside of Moscow by the time a significant portion of that aid arrived. Second, the Red Army had massive logistical issues too. What we tend to forget is that the Soviet soldiers suffered as much in the Winter months as the Wehrmacht's soldiers did. Soviet soldiers and equipment wasn't immune to the cold. And with the Ukraine occupied, many of the Soviet soldiers were living on meagre rations. Reading accounts about the Battle of Stalingrad, Soviet soldiers were half-starved BEFORE they even entered the city. And it must be remembered that the Soviets had to take apart their industry in the early part of the war and ship it East during the midst of war, rebuild it brick by brick, and start pumping out tanks and equipment again. Somehow, they did this. Imagine if the Germans had had to move the industries in the Ruhr a few hundred kilometers during 1941 - how would that work out? When the Germans fought during Barbarossa in 1941, they actually outnumbered the Soviets at the start. They crush the Red Army until they get to Moscow. However, once the Red Army rebuilt itself in the late part of 1942 - up to this point its industry and the composition if its units had had to be drastically altered due to the losses sustained in the early part of the war - the Wehrmacht suddenly seemed to lose it's ability to win battles, even at the tactical and operational level. It seems as though it couldn't win on an equal footing? Yet, if the German army was so superior earlier in the war, why didn't the 1942 Fall Blau offensive bag as many Red Army prisoners as it aimed to do? The Red Army up until late 1942 is basically a bunch of men with rifles and a handful of light tanks. In fact, one Soviet general refers to his men only as "rifles" and gets criticised for it - not saying who ;) However, by the end of 1942, the Red Army's industry has kicked in, and its tank units have been reorganized. They now have Tank Corps (division size) rather than Tank Brigades, which is what they'd been relying upon up to this point. And they'd learnt to be patient. Up until this point, the Red Army kept attacking, mainly in desperation. Kotluban' is a good example of where the Red Army launched ill-prepared offensive after ill-prepared offensive, to try and stop the panzer and motorized divisions north of Stalingrad from entering the city. Some of these attacks were born just days or hours before they were launched. If we contrast that to Uranus which is where the Soviets allow themselves weeks to build up their forces and plan and revise their attacks, they launch a decisive operation. Once they gain the initiative, they hold on to it quite well - again, a little strange for an inferior army? I don't want to spoil too much, but many historians have the view that Stalingrad was lost before the Germans even reached the city. Certainly on the tactical and operational level, they were suffering heavy attrition even before the city. The first phase of Uranus was a Operational counteroffensive in the Stalingrad area. German units were involved in this fight, including the undamaged 29th Motorized Infantry Division, yet still lost with heavy casualties. Manstein agrees with Hitler that the Sixth Army shouldn't break out - not a wise decision by the "greatest German general"? Manstein's Third Battle of Kharvkov shows that even with the "greatest German general" could only "win" a counteroffensive battle against a foe that was overextended. Kursk shows that the Germans can't even win on the operational or tactical level. Or does it? And by the way, I'm not committing myself to this point of view, I'm just playing devil's advocate at the moment. I could equally argue the opposite :)
    3
  7862. Actually, the reason I made fun of Zhukov's book in the video is because it's a typical example of a mistrust of Soviet accounts. Zhukov was working from memory (he wasn't allowed access to the Soviet archieves either!) and his book is filled with what sounds like (and might actually be) Soviet propaganda - "Hero of the Soveit Union, Senior Lieutenant V. F. Skobarikhin, a pilot, in an unequal dog-fight, while saving his comrade Senior Lieutenant Vuss, rammed a Japanese fighter plane, and having destroyed it, engaged two other planes." He had to self-sensor his writings, and they in turn were also sensored by the state. The edition I have has some of the revisions re-revised. All this doesn't make for very light reading... Honestly, I've just watched that Glantz lecture again. I think it's amazing. And I'm going to try remain as neutral as I can during the Stalingrad video (at least until the end), although I'm not sure how successful I'll be given that I'm reliant on these other texts.
    3
  7863. Yes, it took a while to make this one! Samaan's book is over 800 pages, and could really be half that if he didn't repeat over and over how the Nuremberg Laws were a verbatim copy of Laughlin’s “Model Sterilization Law” that had been enacted in the United States.
    3
  7864. FIRST!
    3
  7865. From my end, Choo Choo Oreo was first
    3
  7866. Glad you liked the video, but sorry it took so long to get to it. I've got a couple more of your questions to answer yet too (will do them in upcoming videos) so I'm stupidly far behind And yeah, Stalingrad is killing me, although this particular cold/flu isn't battle fatigue haha
    3
  7867. That's because I've already covered the logistics issue in more depth here https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ
    3
  7868.  @sosogo4real  I can rest tonight. Absolute priority is to get the videos done first for you!
    3
  7869. FIRST! And I'm tired... I was up until 4am editing this video
    3
  7870. Yep, that pretty much sums it up. Both sides are blind to some extent. The American historian's for not seeing that Monty was actually a fairly decent general (not amazing, just decent), and the British historian's for not seeing that Monty was a ****.
    3
  7871. Yes, however there was hardly an enemy to overwhelm at this point. The Germans in Western Europe had about 10 weak "divisions", if you can even call them that
    3
  7872. "Does TIK think the falaise pocket's success and failure was due solely to Montgomery?" No I don't. What made you assume that this is how I view it?
    3
  7873. Glad you like them! And yes, I think these videos are some of my best, but they usually get lower views. Last week's didn't though for some reason.
    3
  7874. Socialism, Communism, Marxism, and later Fascism. It's all the same movement.
    3
  7875. I despise the Labour Party. If you watched further into the video, you would have seen that. I despise all the political parties, since they're all one and the same.
    3
  7876. The free market does result in lower food prices and better living standards. It's also the state that creates monopolies and the aristocracy. Please read the book "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
    3
  7877. Glad you enjoyed it and found it useful!
    3
  7878. Yeah, I'm banning and removing Flash Gordon's comments because he's nonsense spamming. Also, Erster Zweiter is linking to a video that is calling for the "extermination" of all fascists. I don't like fascists as much as anyone, but inciting murder is way too much. I'm banning him too.
    3
  7879. I don't. Fascism is not National Socialism. I have an entire video explaining the differences https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko?si=7Bk76SrweFZeHZOM
    3
  7880. A bit of both. I already knew about Hegelianism, but the video on the Nazi Aryan Religion I made opened the door, and Lindsay's analyses helped connect the dots.
    3
  7881. If capitalism is a free market, then we don't live in capitalism.
    3
  7882. You should read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard as it will enlighten you regarding the Great Depression. It's free to download as a PDF here https://mises.org/library/book/americas-great-depression
    3
  7883. The "Leftwaffe" is such an awesome phrase! I'm going Commie for a moment and stealing that for future use 😂
    3
  7884. So I don't have to buy a million shirts.
    3
  7885. With most men having adopted altruism via the state miseducation system, women aren't finding suitable mates, and are even turning to other women for companionship, since they're more masculine than most men. I'm not saying women aren't at fault at all (because they've been indoctrinated by the anti-woman ideology known as "feminism) but in this case the fault lies with the men who have adopted altruism as their standard of morality.
    3
  7886. The problems you listed off are caused by the state, not the free market. We don't have a free market now, which is why we see the markets shrink with the boot of the state stamping down upon us.
    3
  7887. Sounds like a welfare state to me.
    3
  7888. That's precisely why they went to war when they did - their economy was collapsing.
    3
  7889. I used the term "National Socialist" 24 times. I used the term "Nazi" 6 times.
    3
  7890. Prior to WW1, the words 'socialism' and 'communism' were synonyms. It got changed because people in the Soviet Union were complaining that they weren't in paradise, so Lenin and Stalin lied and said that they were in 'socialism', which was a transitional period on the way to the utopia of 'communism'. Of course, they never got there, and the terms remain what they were, synonyms of the word 'stupidity'. And monopolies are part of the Public Sector, and thus are not Private Sector entities (capitalism). I've been over this in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7891. Yes! He has contributed a lot! I know some people may not care, but if it wasn't for him I wouldn't have known the commanders for most of the units. He's able to access and read the German and Russian archives, which I can't. Plus he knows quite a few historians who are working on books on the topic
    3
  7892. Wow, you have been around for a while!
    3
  7893. So long as I stick to tanks of course
    3
  7894. Thank you! You should comment more often!
    3
  7895. Wow, thank you for your support!
    3
  7896. Yeah, it's been 6 weeks. The main reason why is because my editor was on holiday and I wanted to look into Gazala
    3
  7897. "It really was a lost cause, if anything," But is that really the case? We're looking at this in hindsight, and there's no reason to think that they couldn't beat the Soviets. They won against the Russians in the First World War - why not be able to win again? Especially since they did beat France and Britain this time. "Maybe stopping a France and just shoring up , fighting just a limited war." Possibly, but the main issue is that Hitler went to war in the first place for the land and resources (oil and food) in the East. His whole philosophy was to expand Germany's borders and smash Judeo-Bolshevism (which he saw as the evil entity in the world that had to be destroyed).
    3
  7898. I'm planning to in the future, yes. Although I can't say when exactly they'll be. I definitely will cover Lend Lease in more detail than I have done though, and the German economy as a whole.
    3
  7899. From what I've heard, they were hoping for the Western Powers to align themselves with Germany and strike into the Soviet Union together. Or they were hoping for the West to get into a fight amongst themselves or peace with Germany as a result of the 'wonder weapons'. They were also just trying to eek out every minute they could to prolong their own defeat in case something miraculous happened. But there could be more to it, I'd have to do more research on it specifically to figure it out. Maybe someone else has more details?
    3
  7900. This channel was originally a gaming channel, but I unlisted the videos. Here's an example https://youtu.be/sb5Km8LqkLs
    3
  7901. +YOYO MAN you mean, all one video?? I guess that's possible!
    3
  7902. Good questions, and it appears they were being used as a substitute for front line soldiers and labourers in part because the home front wasn't releasing men to be soldiers. It might also be something to do with the fact that they weren't fed as much or kept as well as German soldiers, so they were a cheap alternative which made sense given the dire logistical situation. I suspect that Hitler didn't know about them, but I'm not so sure about the high command. They may have known and just not told Hitler. But honestly, I need to do more reading on this subject so don't take my word for it.
    3
  7903. I haven't read that book, but I would suggest that you check out reviews online, and also don't just rely upon one book. I don't know how many books have been written on the Einsatzgruppen, but I would read more than one just so you can compare and contrast. While not specifically on the Einsatzgruppen, I've heard good things about "Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101" and it might give a good account to compare too.
    3
  7904. Yeah, this was one of the original issues when I started this series. At the time, different sites were using both pictures of Schwerin, and it was impossible to tell which was the correct one, so I just guessed. But it appears that the issue has been resolved so I will update the unit card.
    3
  7905. Hope so! :)
    3
  7906. Thanks Michael! Glad you're enjoying it
    3
  7907. To clarify, I'm not sure Battlestorm would work with Partisan warfare, that's why I can't really do it.
    3
  7908. I'm not sure I can do a video specifically on them in a Battlestorm kind of video, but I am planning to cover the partisans during my Courland Battlestorm (the next Battlestorm). And I want to talk about the Partisans in general in upcoming videos
    3
  7909. Wow that's great feedback! Thank you for watching :)
    3
  7910. Thank you for promoting! I don't really like to push it, so I don't. But it's true, the more support I get, the more I can pump back into the channel and make it better. Every dollar goes a long way
    3
  7911. Twitter is a cesspool. I think my account is still active, but I only left it up so I could ignore everyone.
    3
  7912. Wow, thank you!
    3
  7913. Depressions and Recessions let off the pressure. We almost collapsed in the 1970s and 1980s, and we are collapsing right now, all thanks to too much government ownership and control of the means of production. The more State there is, the less the economy works, and there's a tipping point. If we let the steam out again (reduce State control and ownership), we won't collapse. If we don't, we will. It's as simple as that. See https://mises.org/wire/we-cannot-build-economy-lies
    3
  7914. Except one side knows how to define these things conclusively, while the other side can't define them at all. Once you accept the practical, historical definition, it's clear that Hitler was a socialist. If he's not a socialist, then he's not a nationalist or a racist, since his socialism is both his nationalism and his racism.
    3
  7915. "That’s why literally no academics say fascism is capitalism: tik had to create this strawman to have a point to his video." Adam Tooze says it was Capitalism. So does Richard Evans. There are more. This isn't a "strawman". - "But he is a libertarian extremist so he wanted to rewrite history and claim Hitler was socialist. He’s a sad loset" The sad loser here, mike mcmike, is the troll who keeps spouting nonsense in the comment sections of my videos. That's why you ended up in this video - because you have zero knowledge on the subject, your "refutations" are a load of garbage, yet you fire off hundreds of comments in my videos telling everyone how much of an "extremist" I am. Yeah, it's really "extreme" to want to tell the truth instead of bowing to political lies.
    3
  7916. Eventually, yes. I studied the latter in college, and I've been reading up on the former in my spare time more recently. That said, I'm a long way off doing either, since the priority remains the military videos.
    3
  7917. Correct!
    3
  7918. This is the problem. I need to get them to understand that this is not the true definition
    3
  7919. I'll quote from my script from my source tier list video: "A good example is William Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”, which was published in 1960. It was one of the first books I read on the topic, which is why my copy is falling apart, and it’s wrong. First, it’s written by a communist - and they never lie! But it’s ironic that this is held up by the National Socialists as a good book, because Shirer says several times that he’s just got off the phone to Halder, and Halder said such a such. Well, turns out that Halder was manipulating the sources - literally burning books - in order to cover his tracks and whitewash the German Army of its crimes. Shirer also pushes the idea that the Austrians were pressured to vote for the Anschluss, and thus, were a victim of Nazi Germany. This was shown to not be the case a year later by historian A J P Taylor, and it turns out that the Austrians willingly went over to Germany. And as I showed in the previous video, Shirer also pushes the idea that Hitler was funded into power by the capitalists, a myth that was based on dubious memoirs and subsequently disproven in the 1980s by historian Henry Ashby Turner. So there are numerous flaws in Shirer’s book, many of which would be overcome by future historians, and its main problem is that it’s simply out of date. So this is why old history books are in the C tier."
    3
  7920. You are correct. However, my hope was to try and get through to some of those who originally dismissed what I was saying without even considering it. I hoped that by watching this video thinking I would get "owned", they would hear evidence that contradicted their old beliefs, and perhaps even consider watching the longer videos on the subject. I think that has actually happened with some people, so this wasn't a waste of time, even if it appears like it is on the surface. But yes, I'm not getting through to most (like mike mcmike above) because their eyes, ears and minds are closed to the truth. They have their beliefs, and the facts be damned. Maybe when they grow up a little they may stop and think, but for now it's impossible to get through to them.
    3
  7921. Yes, my critics really should
    3
  7922. He's not the worst I've found. Go check DemocraticMarxist01 out. His videos on me are... dangerous Edit: I'm considering whether to respond to him or not. May be worth ignoring. Would be interested in your opinion
    3
  7923. Thanks, will do!
    3
  7924. They're mocking me. I'm just not sure why "TILK" is meant to be an insult?
    3
  7925. They admit in their video that they didn't get past the definitions section. Neither of them saw the time stamps in the description, nor the PDF. One of them watched "10 minutes" of my Public vs Private video (which is why I facepalm at 33 minutes into this video). So it's clear that they haven't seen any of the evidence I've presented.
    3
  7926. Didn't see your previous posts. And there's nothing much to respond to here. You have your religious beliefs, and I have the facts. Keep believing in what you believe, and I'll keep providing evidence that refutes it 👍 https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7927. Yeah, I mentioned this towards the end. I may need to do a short video, and maybe another quick PDF.
    3
  7928. Ah, but the meanings of words don't matter! That four legged barking animal over there is a stool!
    3
  7929. Glad to see you here, Aiden! You and Mike Mcmike and all the other troll commenters now have a fresh place to continue to remain ignorant of the facts. Wonder if this will inspire you to actually watch the video in full? Oh who am I kidding, we know you'd rather just continue saying the same old points that have already been refuted in the video you still haven't watched... Glorious
    3
  7930. There are bigger channels out there "debunking" my stuff, but it's all the same. My goal here wasn't to "dunk" on them, but to persuade them. I hoped that, because they were small, they would take this more seriously, and that seriousness would mean I could get through to them. Not sure if that's going to happen, but I'm hopeful that it will.
    3
  7931. Exactly! Most of my critics are ignoring what I'm saying and just jumping to conclusions. Then they get frustrated that I'm not backing down on the issue, and complain that my viewers are telling them to watch the video. It's just silly.
    3
  7932. I don't watch SG, so I don't know the reference, but I assumed that "TILK" is some sort of insult. Not sure what kind though. Also, I thanked you in the video, but I want to do so again - thank you for your comments on my previous videos, defending me, the videos, and the idea that Hitler was a Socialist. I don't know if you got through to anyone, but thank you for trying nonetheless
    3
  7933. I wasn't talking to you Mike. My reply was to OP. I've countered you numerous times, but you ignore what I say and continue to spout your fanatical beliefs. Tell your pay masters at the C C P that their trolls are failing to grasp basic concepts, like whether you're even speaking to them or not. Either the AI needs updating, or they need to redesign their public education system to actually teach people common sense.
    3
  7934. I see, you think Anti-Semitism isn't evil just because Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite? I forget, why is National Socialism not on the Left again?
    3
  7935. @Mike, Hitler put the red in there to represent Socialism. Quote - "The red expressed the social thought underlying the movement." (Mein Kampf, page 446)
    3
  7936. A commune is a State. If he's a communist, then he's pro-State. Thus, he cannot be an anarchist, which is exactly what I said in the Public vs Private video. If you did watch it, then you weren't listening. And I clarified my stance on public ownership in this video. Please pay attention. Louis didn't want (or have the power to enact) total or totalitarian State ownership or control of the means of production.
    3
  7937. The guy has apparently watched this video and is going to make a response which refutes it entirely, so maybe it's not quite "shooting fish in a barrel"... Time will tell!
    3
  7938. Unfortunately, I have to point out that you are actually incorrect (at least partly). The State didn't directly build them, but the heavy subsidies that were given basically meant that they did. There is a short but great book by Folsom called "The Myth of the Robber Barons" which I think you will find fascinating. One chapter is on the railways, and I think you will be surprised by what you'll learn.
    3
  7939. I'll make it simple for you. Watch these three videos in this order - 1. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 2. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 3. https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Yes, I've already done the work, you just need to listen. Again, my critics are not listening, and then they're wondering why their arguments don't work. For example, you'll see in the second video under the privatisation section (timestamps in the description) that I actually tore apart your "University of Barcelona" source which actually admits it wasn't privatisation if you read it properly. But again, you carry on spouting Marxist denialism on the internet, and I'll keep calling you out on your ignorance.
    3
  7940. "but by law corporations are considered individuals with individual rights, do they then fit the definition of capitalism?" This is because of the Fascist/Socialist concept of believing that lots of people that politically organize into a community (a State, or body-politic) has a consciousness. A body has a mind, therefore a body of the people (corporation) must also have a mind. If you read Gentile's works, or Marx's works, you'll quickly see the connection. But no, a herd of people may act as one (all moving in one direction), but they're all made up of individuals. They do not have a collective hive-mind. Thus, while the "law" (the State) may consider them to be individuals with individual rights, they are not individuals, and cannot be considered 'private' nor 'capitalism'.
    3
  7941. Yes, exactly! I mentioned Corbyn in the video!
    3
  7942. "Wait, did you just argue that true capitalism exists probably only in feudal monarchy?" No I didn't. The hierarchy itself is the State. The King exists at the top of the hierarchy, and thus is 'public' (State). Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7943. Also, see my Public vs Private video after this one https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  7944. The Courland Pocket is next. I'm thinking of starting it on the retreat from Leningrad though, so basically Army Group North mid 1944-45. Research is underway, which I'm trying to do in the evenings if I get a chance
    3
  7945. I will take a day off at some point - maybe once Crusader is over haha
    3
  7946. "it's just a name" Okay, so if someone had a username that says "Liberal Hitler Speaks" would you trust what that individual says? Also, you missed the point. Lenin was a Socialist. Socialism was what caused millions to lose their lives. Lenin simply implemented it. So anyone favouring Socialism is advocating for murder. And about the "no state" thing, there's a reason Lenin was calling for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat. He wanted State control, just like all varieties of Socialists do too.
    3
  7947. He's on my list :)
    3
  7948. I wish! Could do with a day off, but still working
    3
  7949. I know, I'm a bit of an oddball really. Should have just uploaded on Tuesday and said "No, it's Monday guys, get with the times" or something.
    3
  7950. If you keep making bad puns so quick I'll have to give you speeding TIKet
    3
  7951. Yes I do. It's a great introductionary narrative of the whole battle and I'd say it should probably be the first book you read for it. However, it's a bit out of date now, and Beevor is biased against the Soviets. Therefore, while you should read it, be skeptical of it and be prepared to change your opinion or perception of the battle if you read more recent books on the battle (or watch some of my Stalingrad videos which explain why Beevor's out of date on some issues). Overall a good book though. Also recommend "Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed" by Jones, although I get the impression he's favouring the Soviets a little. Could be a nice counter-balance to Beevor. "Stalingrad" by Glantz and House is the current 'stapel' book on the battle, although it isn't a narrative and more of a "this unit was here at this time, and then it moved over here and did this" sort of affair.
    3
  7952. So long as you don't throw them out the pram, that's fine
    3
  7953. There are many who are trying to mystify Hitler (the Marxists), and Hitler himself tried to cover his tracks. For example, Hitler glances over what he did in late 1918 and early 1919 after he got back from the trenches. He skips to mid-1919, which is strange, especially since we have video and photographic evidence of him attending Kurt Eisner's funeral (who was a Jewish Communist revolutionary). We also know he was elected twice into the Soviet Republic of Bavaria. Yet none of this is mentioned in Mein Kampf. Zitelmann's book will do you good. He doesn't just take Mein Kampf, but also Hitler's second book, his speeches, his table talks, and many of the other records we have of Hitler speaking to others, and takes a look at all that before wading into various debates surrounding him. And Zitelmann actually addresses many of your points in his book. Zitelmann doesn't call him a madman, doesn't call him a genius, doesn't call him "a hidden jew" or any of the other stuff you mentioned. Read it.
    3
  7954. They nationalized the industries in all but name under their Gleichshaltung (synchronisation) policy. The Marxists then lied and said they "privatised it". Wrong, no they didn't. The National Socialists introduced more Socialism to Germany than Karl Marx's own party did (the SPD - the Social Democratic Party of Germany). The Marxists are jealous of this fact.
    3
  7955. Awesome! I will purchase that book, and yes, the email address on my Instagram is the best way to contact me. Cheers!
    3
  7956. "Then there's a fact most of the critical race thinkers are Black people." Maybe, although a lot of the professors teaching this stuff are white. Here in the UK at least, the State (with direct funding by the central banks who are eager to push this line of thinking) was actively promoting this ideology in the police, the civil service, the courts, the fire service, the military, the schools and so on, and the majority of people teaching this were white. - "We are a minority of this country we would never ever have the power to commit genocide." Perhaps it's because this ideology isn't aimed at protecting black people. The people teaching black people to rise up against their "white oppressors" are white Communists. They want black people to rise up so that the white people react. There may be a genocide, but it will most likely be the minority who suffer because they're being prompted to cause trouble with the majority. By the way, I'm obviously not saying that this is going to happen, or that I want this to happen. I want to prevent anything like this from happening. But you have to look at how a lot of people are reacting to this. I know people here in the UK are sick to death of this race nonsense, and the general (white) public are turning against the other minorities BECAUSE of the constant bombardment by the State and by the media of how bad the white people are. If we're constantly labelled as "white racists" even if we're not, then people are going to react by accepting the label. I can honestly say that the Nazi movement is growing here (especially among Labour Party members), which is a pure reaction to all the garbage we're being told daily. It's the same with the men. We get constantly told how bad men are, so many men just think "meh, why bother" and walk away. We might consider them to be "weak", but the reaction is the important part here. The reaction to the activism is causing the opposite of what the stated end-goal is. It's the classic problem of Leftists not understanding the unintended consequences of their own policies. A decade ago, most "white" people here in the UK wouldn't have even thought of the racial issue. Now though, they're not happy with it, and so this country is slowly being pushed towards a reaction which will not end well for the ethnic minorities if the constant Leftist CRT activism isn't stopped. This is partly why I've been doing videos on National Socialism and Whoopi Goldberg's take on the H. One of my goals is to expose these ideologies and prevent more people falling into the sway of the National Socialists or Race Marxists. I want to prevent history from repeating itself. But only one side is listening to me. - "They call it critical race theory to see a book in schools about Rosa Parks!" There are some idiots out there. Obviously, a book in school about Rosa Parks isn't CRT. But as you admit, CRT is being taught in schools, and Rosa Parks and Martin Luther are being twisted by the Race Theorists to further their agenda. It's not about the facts, it's about the interpretation of the facts, and the history is being weaponised to push a black version of national socialism. - "A question for you was the US really capitalist from the start ?" I would argue that no country has ever been capitalist, since taxation and a monopoly on law has always existed, preventing a truly free market from functioning. However, if we say that capitalism is a free economy (excluding tax and the monopoly law system), then America was only capitalist when it didn't have slavery (when all private individuals were free), when it hadn't abandoned bimetalism, and when it didn't have a central bank. Well, as far as I'm aware, these conditions have never happened in US history, so therefore it would be a mistake to say that America has ever been capitalist.
    3
  7957. And when you provide them, you get told you're wrong, even though your definition agrees with Karl Marx's definition, Mussolini's definition, Hitler's definition, the dictionary definition, numerous other Socialists and capitalist definitions, and many historians saying the same thing. But it's wrong somehow because it must be, because we don't like you 🙄
    3
  7958. Yeah, he's a Marxist, so uses the Marxist definition of socialism, not the true definition of socialism.
    3
  7959. Yes you are! Well done!
    3
  7960. To be fair, it was Terri's idea, so it's her fault 😂
    3
  7961. And still make a profit. That's the power of the free market. There's another book out there called "The Myth of the Robber Barons" where it gives several examples of how old businessmen ran their businesses. It's funny. One example is that steam ship owner would let passengers travel on his steam ships for free, and still made more profit than his state-sponsored competition. Want to know how? Read the book.
    3
  7962.  Yukio Mishima  Fascism = democracy. Or have you not read Giovanni Gentile?
    3
  7963. "He is of course strongly proposing capitalism as the solution and not the problem. I’m sure you would like it, TIK." I agree with him. Socialism is the illness, Capitalism is the cure.
    3
  7964.  @Mitch93  They're trying to imply that he was bought and paid for by the J's (censoring my own speech thanks to YouTube's Communist Guidelines)
    3
  7965. Awesome! I hope you get as much out of it as I did 👍
    3
  7966. Read this book - resistance is futile
    3
  7967. Be strong and don't skip ahead 💪
    3
  7968. Hi
    3
  7969. Looking at a map, German forces going through Sweden to Norway makes sense - German forces going through Finland to Norway doesn't make much sense. That's what Lunde was saying.
    3
  7970. Valid points, thanks for commenting :) I'll address most of these in my Browning video (will be out in a couple weeks). The fact that 10th SS Panzer could just park itself north of Nijmegen and block the route there is a good counter argument, and one which very few people have so far suggested. I wish more were capable of coming to that conclusion rather than simply dismissing the facts and blaming "Monty" or "the British". Here's one for you: Have you considered that Browning and Montgomery got a lot of flak over the fact that there were two depleted SS Panzer Divisions in the Arnhem area, but zero flak about the perceived threat of 1,000 Panzers in the Reichswald forest? They reacted to that by placing part of one parachute division on a gentle slope, which they hoped would stop the equivalent of an Army Group's worth of panzers.
    3
  7971. Have you read the book "Lost at Nijmegen" by Dutch historian R. G. Poulussen? He takes a look at the 82nd Airborne Division in great detail and uses the US sources to come to the conclusion that General Gavin was at fault for the biggest error during Operation Market Garden.
    3
  7972. It's a joint effort. Gavin (US) was the divisional commander who made the initial decision. Browning (British) was the corps commander and approved the decision (according to Gavin). Brereton (US) was the Army commander. Montgomery (UK) was the Army Group commander. And Eisenhower (US) was the theatre commander who approved the whole thing. However the 101st and 82nd were actually part of Ridgway's corps, and were loaned to Browning for this mission. People are eager to blame Browning, Horrocks and Montgomery for the failure, and completely ignoring Gavin, Brereton, and even Eisenhower. The reason for this is because of nationalism and patriotism. The reality is that at the very least, all these characters should be blamed to some extent. Who you decide is ultimately at fault is up to you, but this was a joint effort and a joint failure because of what happened at Nijmegen bridge on that first day.
    3
  7973. See, I studied British Imperialism during uni, and many people don't realize that all it was was the state demanding other states open their borders. When the other states (e.g. Burma) refused, the British state would send the gunboats in and open them up, eventually colonizing them. Now they did this in the name of free trade, but that was just the moral pretense (which, to be fair, does make sense economically and actually benefits everyone who participates in it long-term, after some short-term pain). The British Empire cost more overall prior to WW2 than it gave back to the home islands. It was only WW2 which pushed Britain to bankruptcy and forced the home islands to take out massive loans from the colonies, which sped up decolonization.
    3
  7974. The act of thinking itself isn't the problem, but one of the problems is that very smart people 'think' too much. And what I mean by that is that they're in their brains far too much rather than living in reality. Their needs to be a balance, and they're no where near balanced. They reject concretes for abstracts, and therefore lose sight of reality. Why do they do this? Part of it is that there are cognitive traps people can fall into. But part of it is that they're scared of dying. They cannot fathom that they will no longer be here one day, and so they BELIEVE there must be some grander purpose to their lives. That WANT for a purpose drives them to reject the harshness of reality for more comfortable abstractions.
    3
  7975. Nope, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm not a materialist. Watch my video "But how do you know you're right" to hear exactly what my stance is.
    3
  7976. Hitler is constantly going on about "Providence" (God). The "race" is based on magic blood, which comes from a "cosmic duty" (although that's technically a more modern Third Positionist phrase). Hermeticism inspires Theosophy, which inspires Guido von List, which then leads to the Thule Society, National Socialism, and the desire to create God on Earth (a total state).
    3
  7977. I was waiting for you to get to that part of the video before commenting! 😂
    3
  7978. I'm not a modernist.
    3
  7979. You've misunderstood. Socialism is the social (state) ownership of the means of production. However the socialists (mainly from America) are constantly screaming at me that this is not the definition. They tell me that it's a moneyless, commodity-less society that has no class conflict. They've been taught this, and so reject what socialism is. As an ex-socialist myself, and have read plenty of books on the subject, I can assure you that you've misunderstood me.
    3
  7980. His actions set up the disaster that followed.
    3
  7981. Due to the high casualty rate, it's more of a Pyrrhic victory than anything else. Yes, it stopped the Germans and was one of the turning points of the war, but the cost was so incredibly high, it's simply not fair to call it a total victory.
    3
  7982. As I just said to someone else, I haven't watched his video, and by the sounds of it, it's not worth my time to watch it, let alone respond. One person has described it as "slander" and a "hit piece". It's not honest, so why should it deserve a response from me I'd probably respond to a video made with honest intentions from someone who genuinely has an interest in discussing the sources to uncover the truth. This Fredda guy is not that kind of person.
    3
  7983. Glad you enjoy it!
    3
  7984. I guess it's off to the gulag with me :(
    3
  7985. I'm assuming then that the likes aren't for Stalin
    3
  7986. I do not at the moment. I'm working my way through the North African Campaign so I can go through Italy then Normandy, and then reach Falaise. Is a long-term strategy for the channel, but I hope it will pay off in the end.
    3
  7987. You mean like Magic or Pokemon? That's an interesting thought...
    3
  7988. The irony - you were first! Congrats
    3
  7989. Glad to hear you liked it :) it's a shame that not more people are interested in events like this. I hope I've sparked some interest at least
    3
  7990. William, it wasn't 500 Fallschirmjäger, it was actually much less than that. You should watch my video on Fort Eben Emael if you haven't already. Never rely on Wikipedia for information.
    3
  7991. You know, in real life I work in retail. We had Black Friday recently, then Black Saturday... and then Black Sabbath. Black Sabbath was a good day!
    3
  7992. I'm certainly not against the idea as WW1 is a great topic to study, along with the interwar period. I want to get Stalingrad out the way first though since I'm knee deep in that at the moment
    3
  7993. I can't wait to see my Stalingrad video either! :D true, some of the sources say that the withdrawal was rushed, whereas Frost hints that it maybe wasn't. This is why I wanted to talk about it, even if it might be a no-brainer. It turned out well in the end though
    3
  7994. The reason I didn't put them in the description was because there's a word limit in the description, so they wouldn't fit.
    3
  7995. I've already pinned a comment to the top of the comments section with time codes. But thanks!
    3
  7996. I was never "away", just silently working behind the scenes like some mad scientist forging his next evil creation...
    3
  7997. It's my pleasure Bruce, I enjoy making them :) more to come!
    3
  7998. I actually have a few comments about the whole "one guy has a rifle, the other guy picks up the rifle and shoots" thing. But I'll save my comments for the Stalingrad documentary. The truth must be told.
    3
  7999. I'm still working on Stalingrad. Currently at 370,688 words. Problem was I didn't think I'd break away from Stalingrad to do other Battlestorm videos because I thought I could get it done relatively quickly. The reality was that Stalingrad is a titanic battle unlike anything I've attempted before, so yep, I was wrong to say that. My next Battlestorm video will most likely not be Stalingrad... but it is coming.
    3
  8000. All is well with me right now, just plodding on with editing and scripts etc. How's things with you??
    3
  8001. I'm not "British", I'm an individual. I don't belong to a tribe. And I quite clearly said in this video that the illegitimate "government" known as "Britain" made mistakes and did bad things. I've called Churchill an idiot before, and I stand by that statement. So stop trying to attack this individual because of the deeds of the criminal justification system I'm unfortunately forced to be a slave to. I'm not them, and they are not me.
    3
  8002. That explains why it's green... https://youtu.be/YQAG0JEb718
    3
  8003. "It was regarding that developed countries with high taxation and high social welfare do better on all indexes of living standards." If you tax the parent, you tax the child. If you tax the employer, you tax the employee. Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt explains why taxation only redistributes wealth at best, and squanders wealth at best. So my advice would be to read that, or listen to it here https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U The child doesn't have 'higher' living standards because you take money from the parent, redistribute that wealth to a politician, who then takes a cut, before giving a portion of that taxed money to the toys manufacturer to create "free" toys to give to the child. Well, saying that higher taxation = higher living standards doesn't make any sense for the same reason. A squandering of resources doesn't equal higher living standards. Instead, I would suggest that the countries that previously embraced liberal capitalist policies and got rich and higher living standards because of that, are now the countries with States that are now taxing that wealth. This is why the western economies are now struggling and have been struggling for years - because the wealth gained in previous generations is now being drained by the current State.
    3
  8004. No, you don't understand socialism. If you did, you wouldn't be a socialist.
    3
  8005. What? Working for free is exploitation, which is why socialism is slavery.
    3
  8006. Out of curiosity, what is it you don't like about me?
    3
  8007. "Even in a full free market state someone has to pay for police, army, govrenment so you must have taxes." But is this really the case? Can you not pay for these things directly through the market? If you want security, then there's a market for that, and if so, then the market can provide it. Search for "Mises the market for security" and listen to Robert Murphy's explanation
    3
  8008. "you should find some of the cartoons from Jewish media of that time, even they joined in." Oh really? Why did they join in with it?
    3
  8009. That's exactly it. The issue is that when you try and point this out, people laugh at you and call you crazy. This is why I'm trying to get through to them via alternative methods like this.
    3
  8010. Why was it anti-climate change? The climate changes. I don't disagree with that. I do disagree with the idiots pumping out propaganda that we should all eat bugs and be happy in order to "save the planet". The issue should be resolved differently than through the murder and impoverishment of billions of people. I'm sorry you believe in the annihilation of civilization.
    3
  8011. Even if I was insane, Hitler is still a Socialist because the evidence is overwhelming.
    3
  8012.  @shelbyspeaks3287  Surprisingly, so did I after I said it!
    3
  8013. I know... Maybe I should give up
    3
  8014. You were second by a few seconds I'm afraid :)
    3
  8015. My plan is to cover it all and then follow on to the Italian campaign. You know what, I need to try something... (Yep, I'm thinking out loud in a YouTube comment!) Battleaxe may give me the answer to an animation problem I know I'm going to face when I attempt Stalingrad... May have to use Battleaxe to test out the concept before I attempt the animation for Stalingrad... Think you might get a BATTLESTORM video sooner than you think
    3
  8016. A Wehraboo is someone who worships the Wehrmacht. I put an explanation in the video description. Also, while I agree that Newspeak isn't great, I do think this term is fine since it has a clear meaning and doesn't hide anything. If it was a Newspeak term like "State Capitalism" which is an oxymoron and impossible, then yes I would have an issue with it.
    3
  8017. FIRST!
    3
  8018. Just FYI - the battle began on the 20th of July 1942. This is only the beginning of the city-fight ;)
    3
  8019.  @dpt6849  4-5 months!?! Where do you live, Mongolia!? And I thought waiting over a month to get Jason D Mark's books from Australia was bad (their postal service is notoriously terrible, plus the distance). (By the way, the Vampire Economy is also available as a PDF from Mises.org along with most of their other books.)
    3
  8020. "a very happy patron!" Awesome! That's great to hear, and thank you for supporting :) "can you give us the strength of both forces on the “day the battle of Stalingrad started”" I actually did at the end of the previous episode (E18). See the timestamps in the description for part 3 of that video, and you will get the strengths etc for the divisions in the city before the fight began https://youtu.be/2L20L3RHL88
    3
  8021. I think you were 2nd - although I can't tell. Still well done 👍
    3
  8022. When the rectangles turn to squares, then you know you've had too much whiskey 😉😂
    3
  8023. I'm from the UK, but I'm not a nationalist nor a racist and I despite all States so your question doesn't really apply. No relative killed in WW2 as far as I'm aware. And here is a video about history theory you really need to watch https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc and there are plenty of videos on my channel where I condemn the actions of every nation or leader in this war, so I'm not supporting any 'side'. I do have biases obviously (everyone does), but they're not national or patriotic in nature.
    3
  8024. Neither!
    3
  8025. I have considered doing podcasts in general, but I also realize that this would be extra work for me which is why I haven't done any. However, I don't think this particular series would translate well to podcast because you really need to see the units on the field of battle in order to get a sense of what's happening and where. Audio-only would take away the advantage that the Battlestorm series has over books - an animated map where you can see the units moving around. If I was doing this specifically for a podcast, I'd absolutely have to redo the script to explain things differently, and I think in doing so I'd have to "dumb it down" and get rid of some of the details, otherwise it would swamp the listener.
    3
  8026. No, I'm protecting myself from having people take my audio and use it to claim those are my views.
    3
  8027. I believe you were third, but good effort!
    3
  8028. Yes, someone else has just recommended that book to me too. I pretty much already agree with him though. You can tell by just looking at the map that the 6th Panzer Army was basically half of the offensive force, and barely went anywhere. If you look at this map https://images.app.goo.gl/1fseLBxGjqDwco218 you can see that the offensive was stopped at and around Elsenborn. And I'm glad to see that I wasn't the only one to conclude that the north was neglected because Monty was in charge and because it was more complicated than the south. It's a shame because the north was more important.
    3
  8029. I appreciate your comment and agree that there was a cover-up regarding British involvement, however I don't think Bradley, Hodges or Eisenhower should have been fired. Just because they were attacked, doesn't mean they should be fired. I don't think they were incompetent in this battle. And what I read regarding Strong, Whiteley and Beddel Smith was different to your account so I'm not sure if I can agree with that either.
    3
  8030. I appreciate that joke
    3
  8031. Interestingly, a lot of people are denying that aspect of his character, saying he was only doing it for selfish reasons.
    3
  8032. Wait, so critical thinking is classed a cult now? So does that mean we're just supposed to believe whatever we're told by the "experts", like yourself?
    3
  8033. Yes, it's where I got my Gibson SG from, and my banjo
    3
  8034. Haha I think Gavin did well elsewhere, and I think he did a great job at the Bulge. I just think he messed up at Market Garden. Ridgway may have his hand in Market Garden too... but I can't prove that. But I do think he twisted things to suit his agenda...
    3
  8035. I can't. I just can't. Got to be productive
    3
  8036. FIRST! (I think!)
    3
  8037. Well done!
    3
  8038. I know a couple of history teachers watch this, and a couple of historians (authors) too, but yes it would be interesting to know if any university lecturers do too
    3
  8039. Thanks! I really have tried to look at all the viewpoints before making a decision. I'm sure I'm missing some out, but I think I got the important ones.
    3
  8040. A video on the Pienaar issue next week (not the same style as this so not going to include it in the 'Complete' Crusader video which is coming on 7th of January). A couple videos on history theory, one on basic economics, plus others I haven't decide yet... then Battlestorm Courland 1944-45 in February, then Battlestorm Stalingrad after Courland. Should be some Q&As as well :)
    3
  8041. You mean like "ö"? We don't have said letters, so yes. I am learning German (slowly) but I've got a long way to go yet
    3
  8042. "I didn't even know about the patreon issues. Have to check it out." It starts here https://youtu.be/4ThPdCicEsg but basically the reaction is that many users are now just cutting their support completely in a show of defiance, so I've lost a significant amount of support as a result. As I said, they're absolutely right to do it and I support their decision, but it is hurting creators and creators are looking for solutions at the moment. It's quite an issue, because potentially anyone can have their Patreon Page just deleted for no reason, cutting your funding in a second. And they can do it randomly, even if you haven't broken Patreons' Terms of Service. It's a real mess.
    3
  8043. I can't use paypal (long story). And subscribestar is looking like it's faltering under the pressure too.
    3
  8044. Commissar BRO hope it ends up being as epic as it looks haha :P
    3
  8045. KingSNAFU thanks Snafu! You've been subscribed for quite a while now :) two years I believe!
    3
  8046. It's out of date and I'd say not good any more as anything other than an introduction to the topic. If you get it and read it, be prepared to change your opinion on many facts. Glantz's one-volume Stalingrad book is currently the best up to date version of the battle, although it's not a narrative and is a bit dry. If you've not read anything on the topic before, Citino's "Death of the Wehrmacht" is probably a good read for you because that covers the Stalingrad campaign (from the German perspective, but it's fairly good).
    3
  8047. It's not click bait if the video talks about the topic. Click bait would be if I said "This video is about the Eastern Front" and you clicked on it and it had nothing to do with the Eastern Front, and it was just me walking down a street.
    3
  8048. They're useful, but not for people starting out. You absolutely need to read the histories first and get a grasp of the events before you go diving into primary sources (especially memoirs). Human memory is flawed, people have biases, agendas and so on. Memoirs allow all those things in and more. Really not to be trusted until you know the historiography. For example (which I used in the pinned comment), Manstein's memoirs fail to mention any of the war crimes he committed and was sent to prison for. He also messed up Stalingrad events and blames Paulus for his own mistakes (which I've covered in other videos).
    3
  8049. No, because you don't want to be reading just one author. You want to read a multitude of authors in order to gain different perspectives and take part in the debates that make up the historiography.
    3
  8050. I don't think this one needed to be an hour long.
    3
  8051. Yeah, that's a little bit out of date now, sadly
    3
  8052. Shirer relied on Halder's diaries and perspectives far too much. He actually says in the book "I've just called Halder and he said...". Therefore avoid avoid avoid, unless you've read up on the subject and want to hear the German-generals view of the war, or what people used to think about the war.
    3
  8053. I don't want to disagree, since all literature on the Eastern Front is useful in some way and I don't want to discourage people from reading it, but I wouldn't recommend that anyone new to the Eastern Front should start reading memoirs (see the pinned comment).
    3
  8054. Which made the logistics worse because they were using hundreds of different types of vehicles, all of which were breaking down and needing spare parts.
    3
  8055. They're not here for the history, they're here for their ideology. Most of my regular viewers understand that the non-military stuff is as important as the military stuff, as the responses to my "Stick to Tanks" video show https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    3
  8056. I'm absolutely knackered. But got to push on. History does not stand still 😁
    3
  8057. Jay, you're correct that the socialism that Hitler had is not the Marxist kind. Socialism was born in the fires of the French Revolution (with origins prior to that) and this was way before Marx ever put pen to paper. If National Socialism isn't socialism, then by that same logic Marxist-Socialism isn't socialism either. Also, just because millions of Marxist-Socialists fought the National Socialists, doesn't mean the National Socialists were not evil, or that the Marxist-Socialists are not right for defending themselves. It also doesn't mean the Marxists were responsible for the start of the conflict, nor does it imply that, so I'm not sure why you're suggesting that that's what I'm saying. In fact, if the Nazis were capitalists, that means that the British and USA soldiers who fought the Nazis were equally to blame for the war, since they shared the same ideology (a narrative the Marxists are pushing btw). That also doesn't make much sense to me. And even if it did imply all that you said, if it's true, it's true. Wouldn't you rather know the truth than believe a lie? I would. And as I said, I have done research on it. I haven't presented it to you yet, but I have done research on it. Trust me, I wouldn't be standing my ground if I hadn't done my research.
    3
  8058. You don't agree with my assessment at the moment, and I understand because I would probably agree if I was looking at this from your perspective. I will say no more for now, but when you see it, you'll understand. I would ask that you have a little faith... but if you want to remove your Patreon support, I won't stop you. I'm committed to fixing the distortions of history - that's the main reason I'm doing this channel. There would be no reason to continue the channel if I gave in on this point because I'd be willingly giving into the demands of a minority, even though there's a significant (and obvious-to-me, but not to you) distortion that's screwed people's perspectives on the issue. I have that evidence, and the research, I just haven't presented it yet, because I will when I'm ready.
    3
  8059. Altruism is based on self-hatred, otherwise you wouldn't be guilted into performing charitable acts for others. Adam Smith was good for his time but is massively out of date.
    3
  8060. Stay poor and ignorant 👍🏻
    3
  8061. No, I'm not. The follow up video I made to this one addresses this point, as so many people wrongly perceived this as an "attack" on Christianity. Mao and Pol Pot were clearly not Lutherans.
    3
  8062. But not everyone lost the faith and retained the altruism.
    3
  8063. And that desire for "fairness" and "equality" comes from the altruism. As an ex-socialist, I can tell you exactly what it is, and of course these aren't truly "fair" not "equal", but the altruism brings forth these desires.
    3
  8064. His mother was Lutheran. I talk about this in the follow up video.
    3
  8065. Continue to ignore the evidence then 👍🏻
    3
  8066. Hitler wasn't a fascist, he was a National Socialist, and there is a difference. I have a video explaining the difference in that playlist. Mussolini, who was a fascist, had a Jewish mistress for many years called Margarita Sarfatti. There were 10,000 Jews in the Italian Fascist Party. Clearly there is a difference. Again, I addressed the trade union argument in the other video. I also have a separate more in-depth video on that topic too.
    3
  8067. Yes, although I'm not sure when
    3
  8068. "but surely there’s some merit to government involvement in the economy" I'm not anti-government. I'm anti-tax. Voluntary taxation is fine with me. It would force the State to only be involved in the areas where the State can actually improve the economy, rather than destroy it. "to help social mobility" Everything the State does hurts social mobility. If you'd like to read or hear more, Thomas Sowell will set you straight. "to improve the chances of hard workers rising above their peers to the top like a free market should dictate" You mean like minimum wages? https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    3
  8069. You are correct. Bailouts and money printing will hurt the private sector more, and help the public-sector corporations, banks and States. And, since socialism cannot work without private sector propping it up, eventually the whole thing will topple over - and that's assuming we don't have a hyperinflationary crisis, which seems to be on the cards
    3
  8070. The GDP grew after the war. It didn't drop. Please watch the video.
    3
  8071. Poverty and homelessness still exist in 1st World countries. That doesn't mean we're not more prosperous than we were in the 1800s, just as people in the 1800 were more prosperous than they were in the 1700s.
    3
  8072. 2008 was the start of the current crisis we're in right now. 2008-2019 was a lost decade. They managed to kick the can down the road in the longest bull-market in history. But now we're suffering as a result of the problems not solved in 2008 AND the additional problems created since then
    3
  8073. Thumper, try watching the video before judging. The 1946 Depression didn't happen, even though the Keynesians think it did.
    3
  8074. I will admit, I don't know enough about this to comment on it. The only book I've read on this subject in particular is "Warsaw 1920" by Adam Zamoyski - which I do highly recommend if you haven't read it already. I think what Standardowy Login said was probably correct though.
    3
  8075. Now I wish I named the Pienaar video - "Pienaar didn't do nothin" :D
    3
  8076. Well, I certainly hope you did :)
    3
  8077. Wow, you dropped it at the good parts too. Well, I hope you enjoy the remainder of the series :)
    3
  8078. And this is the problem with doing compilations - those who watched it the first time won't want to watch it the second :( but there was no way I could possibly do this in one go. It took 15 weeks of working on it just to get it done!
    3
  8079. But somehow they still won
    3
  8080. Oh yes, it does
    3
  8081. Well, technically I am doing that - just not in order :) however, I would suggest that you watch the World War Two channel with Indy Neidell, who is doing a more week by week thing in order.
    3
  8082. The problem is that they couldn't supply the troops they had in North Africa, let alone send more. As this video shows, their logistics were struggling as it was.
    3
  8083. Thanks! Glad to hear you liked it :)
    3
  8084. I would say this is probably the better of the two series - Crusader just ended up being so funny and all over the place as a battle, so more entertaining in my opinion. But yeah, 9 plus hours is a long time in one sitting
    3
  8085. Thank you!
    3
  8086. Haha no worries! I actually have about 1,443 videos in my watch later :(
    3
  8087. The good news is you don't need to watch the other ones - just this one :)
    3
  8088. A side-show can sometimes be more interesting than the main event. I actually used to think the desert war wasn't important, and therefore wasn't interesting. But I then started working my way through it (from Compass onwards) in order to learn how the British fought before the "main events" in the west after the US arrived. It's still not "important" compared to Barbarossa or Fall Blau (really the only two "important" campaigns of the entire war), but is incredibly interesting and well worth getting into in my opinion. It leads to the bigger western events later, and has an impact on how the Allies conduct the rest of the war. It's also hilarious on so many levels. So much humour. The Eastern Front is just not the same, as my Courland series will show. The Axis-Soviet war just doesn't have the humour in the battles like the North African Campaign has... probably because of all the atrocities and the seriousness both socialist states took the conflict.
    3
  8089. Sometimes reality is as unbelievable as fiction
    3
  8090. Glad you liked it! And yes, part of the reason I started doing documentaries was because I was always disappointed with the battle documentaries on TV. I wanted more in-depth information and analysis, and it looks like a lot of other people want the same. Cheers!
    3
  8091. Because most of them have only read Wikipedia or maybe one source. Their target audience is also different - they're aiming for views, which means anyone with a vague interest in history that just wants to be told what they already know, not someone looking for accuracy or videos that challenge their own beliefs. I'm approaching this differently, which is why I end up doing videos like this, whilst annoying a lot of people at the same time. Market Garden was the first history video I did. It was like this, but it also went against the grain. Saying that a US general was at fault for what had previously been thought to be a purely British disaster caused a lot of arguments in the comments (obviously I wasn't the first to say this since I used sources that also said this). I was accused of being anti-American and pro-British (neither of which is true), and the debates still rage in the comments of that video until this day, because the evidence is pretty clear cut. But a lot of channels aren't willing to step forward and do what needs to be done and say what needs to be said. I'll probably never get many subscribers or views, but my focus is on the truth. "Super-accurate and filthy-detailed" to quote an old subscriber.
    3
  8092. Yes. It's the longest completed documentary on a single WW2 battle ever. Enjoy! (Be sure to check out my ongoing Stalingrad series which is much longer but not finished yet.)
    3
  8093. Well, this is just a complilation video really, but it's nice to finally have them all in one place :) glad you enjoyed the series Karaya!
    3
  8094. Well, I hope you have a nice weekend :)
    3
  8095. I have. I made this in a series of episodes, then put them all together into one (updated) one. See this playlist https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL
    3
  8096. Since ODDBALL requested, I'm going to reference my comment. Please see video description for full bibliography. 1) Actually it was earlier than 3pm. "At 1328, the 665 men of 1st Battalion began to fall from the sky." Poulussen, R. Lost at Nijmegen. Kindle edition, location 410. (sorry, no page numbers on Kindle ediitions). "Forty minutes after the drop, around 1410, the 1st Battalion marched off towards their objective, De Ploeg, three miles away." Poulussen, location 421. 2) The 82nd weren't drinking coffee when they landed. They were digging in and performing recon in the area looking for 1000 tanks in the Reichswald - Neillands, R. The Battle for the Rhine 1944. Kindle edition, location 1827. 3) They were dug in and preparing to defend their newly constructed regimental command post, which they established at 1825. Then Colonel Lindquist "was told by General Gavin, around 1900, to move into Nijmegen." Poulussen, location 445. Here's the events on the evening of the first day - Having dug in at De Ploeg, Warren's battalion wasn't prepared to move towards the Nijmegen at all. Poulussen, location 452. Once Lindquist told Lieutenant Colonel Warren that his Battalion was to move, Warren decided to visit the HQ of the Nijmegen Underground first - to see what info the underground had on the Germans at the Nijmegen bridge. Poulussen, location 455. Interestingly, this wasn't a direct route to the bridge from Warren's original position, and placed him squarely in the middle of the town. It was also around 2100 when "A" Company left to attempt to capture the Waal Bridge. "B" Company wasn't with them because they'd split up due to the fact it was night and "visibility was less than ten yards". Poulussen, location 481. The attacks were resisted by the Germans until the next day. Gavin drove up in a jeep the next morning and was told by Warren that although they didn't have the bridge yet, another attack was about to go in. Gavin then told Warren to hold because the Germans were attacking in the southeast portion of the 82nd perimeter. Then at around 1100, Warren was ordered to withdraw from Nijmegen completely. Poulussen, location 579. - A good portion of the information from this part of Poulessen's book comes from Major Benjamin F. Delamater, Executive Officer of 1st Battalion - who "wrote a coherent and technical account" of the actions of 1st Battalion. He wrote his account in 1947. Other quotes and sources are listed in Poulessen's book, but there's too many for me to list here. I'd highly recommend Poulessen's book - it's the most detailed account of the 82nd's actions at Nijmegen I've found. - As for the claim that XXX Corps was drinking tea on the 20th of September in Nijmegen (this is a new claim, as this claim is usually attributed to the 21st of September after the taking of the Nijmegen bridge), I'll quote Kershaw, R. It Never Snows in September. Ian Allan Publishing, 2007. "In Nijmegen, the arrival of British armour had raised the intensity and scale of the fighting. Extensive fires had broken out, marking the progress of the XXX Corps advance. Combined Sherman and infantry attacks during the early night hours of 20 September had been halted by accurate artillery fire around the traffic circle south of the Hunner park. SS-Captain Krueger of 21 Battery had personally directed the fire. At 0130 two Shermans remained with sheared tracks after the attack had been repelled. During the course of the morning three more combined arms attacks were concentrated upon the gradually shrinking 10SS perimeter defending the southern bank of the Waal." Kershaw, P192. He goes on to talk about the US involvement and the German perspective. At 1500, 40 Sherman tanks plus artillery and air support began firing to cover the advance of Cook's 3rd Battalion as they crossed the Waal in boats. Kershaw, P196. But resistance inside Nijmegen continued for quite some time after the famous actions to take the bridges. Bittrich (commander of IISS Corps) reported at 2330 on September 20th that "nothing [had] been heard from the Nijmegen garrison for two hours" and that he could "only assume the German units had been destroyed". Kershaw, P212. Just because nothing had been heard for two hours at 2330, didn't mean that Nijmegen was cleared of German units. It just meant that they hadn't been in contact. Some units continued to fight on. Kampfgruppe Euling were still holding their positions at 2230, although they then made a break for it in the dark some time afterwards. Kershaw, P213 According to Neillands in The Battle for the Rhine 1944, in a quote from the US Official History (which I do not own, sadly) states "The Guards Armoured's Coldstream Guards Group still was needed as a reserve for the Airborne division. This left but two armoured groups to go across the Waal. Even those did not make it until next day, D plus 4, 21 September, primarily because of diahard German defenders who had to be ferreted out from the superstructure and bridge underpinnings." Location ~2265. Neillands also points out that the US Official History itself reveals that it is a delusion to think that Lord Carrington and his five tanks could have penetrated the German lines to get to Arnhem on the night of 20th September. Location 2282.
    3
  8097. akgeronimo501 But if Nijmegen bridge had been taken early on day one - which it could have been - the Germans wouldn't have been in Nijmegen at all. XXX Corps wouldn't have had to fight a 36 hour street battle to fight, and Operation Market Garden would probably have succeeded. That's what I'm trying to get you to understand. The Germans weren't in Nijmegen (apart from a handful of bridge guards) prior to the landings. They only arrived from the North minutes before the paras got to the Nijmegen bridge. If the paras had got there earlier, they would have taken the bridge and the Germans wouldn't have been able to cross it and fortify themselves in Nijmegen. The point is that the 82nd could have got paras to the bridge sooner. But instead they wasted several hours, and by the time they started moving, it was too late. Britain was out of cash in 1941. Even before Market Garden, they weren't a "big boy" anymore.
    3
  8098. They did drop with their artillery. And I do criticize Monty in another video https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM I'm not "defending" him here for the sake of defending him. I'm looking at the tactical situation based on the books I've read and saying "actually, this could have worked" and "it's not as rotten a plan as some have made it out to be". If you want to criticize their strategic decision to launch Market Garden, fine. But I do think that this could have been won tactically if a unit had been sent to take Nijmegen bridge straight away. The intelligence they did have didn't suggest there was a sizable German armoured force in the Reichswald. They falsely believed there were tanks in the Reichswald based on rumour and speculation alone. I quote Frost at the end of this series, and his conclusion mirrors mine - that the battle was lost at Nijmegen.
    3
  8099. Yes. I'm guessing you're interested in it too? I'd cover it, but I'm not sure YouTube would like that.
    3
  8100. Day 1 of the war, the Soviets have 2,743,000 men on the Axis-Soviet Front. Germans alone have 3,118,910 and total Axis is 3,957,910. Axis forces are superior in number to the Soviets until December 1941. Source: Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Table N Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Soviet German Front 1941-1945
    3
  8101. Agreed, the pro-Marxists here also didn't even watch the full video, since I did call the Soviet regime "evil" towards the end.
    3
  8102. "Stalingrad" by David Glantz. Also, you don't need the four-part five book "trilogy", just get the condensed one-book version.
    3
  8103. Yes, although maybe not in the 1941-1942 period. Their army was reborn in the war and came of age from late 1942 onwards.
    3
  8104. Considering one of those views were mine, technically yours is the 300th!
    3
  8105. Sorry, he did drag them through industrialization
    3
  8106. Well, there's no doubt Stalin killed a lot of his own people. But he didn't drag the Soviet Union through an industrialization that was necessary for them to have a chance of beating the Germans in WW2. It's a question of, does the end justify the means? But in this case, the means is the starvation and murder of millions of people. I'd like to think there was another way, that they could have industrialized without resorting to seizing the harvests from the peasants to pay for it all.
    3
  8107. No worries! Glad you enjoyed it!
    3
  8108. Going by the comment sections in my Market Garden videos, people hate Montgomery more than they hate Hitler. So saying that only makes the guy even worse.
    3
  8109. It was stupid to go into the city in the first place
    3
  8110. I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video
    3
  8111. Fine, don't watch. But I don't have a political agenda, and your initial statement is incorrect.
    3
  8112. And if you watch to the end of the video you'll see that I'm not. Plus, see the sources in the pinned comment.
    3
  8113. A good overview book to start with is "Russia's War" by Overy (except it should really be called "Soviet War"). It's short sharp and sweet. I'd then recommend Ostkrieg by Fritz to get a decent overview of how the Germans were operating. And after that, David Glantz's "When Titan's Clashed", which balances out both sides from the operational level (quite detailed). You should have a very good grounding after these three books :)
    3
  8114. Dis ist falsch. I'm actually learning German right now, and I have nothing against the Germans. But denying that the Germans weren't racist during the National Socialist era is just moronic.
    3
  8115. I will cover Winter War and Continuation War in the future. The only video I've done so far that's related to that though is my video on Mannerheim.
    3
  8116. Fantastic!
    3
  8117. Which should tell you the scale of the fighting on the Axis-Soviet Front.
    3
  8118. I'm gathering books on the Holodomor right now, and intend to do Stalin's Purge (done one on Red Army already, but I mean the full purge) and 5 Year Plans. I will cover both Nazi atrocities and Soviet atrocities. The information in this video was presented in as unbiased a view as possible, because as I said in the video, there are things that are simply not true, and Enemy at the Gates style Order 227 is fiction. Sources in pinned comment.
    3
  8119. It's smaller than the number implied in Enemy at the Gates, which was the point of the statement.
    3
  8120. True. I misspoke.
    3
  8121. I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video. I guess you didn't watch the whole video
    3
  8122. Beevor has done more primary source research than me, that's for certain. Also, sources I use are always in the pinned comment.
    3
  8123. Less population than Germany AND Italy in 1942. I suspect that if they had held on to the land taken in 1942, by 1943 the Soviet Union would have been on the brink of economic collapse. Not sure if it would have collapsed, but Germany would have a good chance of knocking the USSR out of the war - either through economic collapse, hunger, or this could have sparked a coup against Stalin. Obviously this is all hypothetical, but a real possibility. Winning against the Soviets would have given Germany the resources needed to fight the US, although she still would be at a great disadvantage in manpower at this point.
    3
  8124. Which bit?
    3
  8125. That's the spirit!
    3
  8126. I called Stalin and his regime "evil" in the video. Did you not watch the whole thing?
    3
  8127. Soldiers were shot from the order. But it was also directed towards the officers because they were allowing, ordering and even encouraging the retreats to happen prior to the order. If soldiers are ordered to retreat by their officers, then they will retreat, and you can't shoot then. So the order out a stop to that, and units started standing their ground because officers suddenly realised they would get shot if they didn't stand and fight. And next time I'd appreciate it if you asked me to clarify something you don't understand rather than calling out "bullshit", thanks.
    3
  8128. Millions of people were deliberately robbed, murdered, and statved to death by the Marxist-Socialist Soviet regime. From Stalin's Purges https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ to the fact that people starved every year in the Soviet Union between 1917 and 1949 https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w this was a brutal regime that deliberately set out to destroy people's lives (that's the purpose of the "Revolution" after all)
    3
  8129. I agree Jen, which is why I've cleared several Nazi comments in this thread and will continue to do so.
    3
  8130. Paulus had 80,000 men. Chuikov had 54,000. Look up the "Hunger Plan" to read about the imposed famine on the Soviet peoples by the Germans. And I've already done a Purges video https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ
    3
  8131. You are incorrect. In order to pay for doctors and hospitals, nationalisation, unemployment schemes, nationalised insurance, state housing, nationalised pensions etc, taxes must rise - which then stifles the economy, leading to major problems for the countries that implement socialism (as has happened historically). If taxes do not rise - as you are suggesting - you have to print a lot of money to pay those state employees, at which point you'll have hyperinflation, and everybody will lose their savings, money will be worthless, and businesses will shut down (since people will resort to barter). So printing money isn't a good idea. Raising taxes is the only way. Now, having some socialist policies makes sense. Having a nationalised health service (the NHS here in the UK) is great, for example. But direct and indirect (stealth) taxes for everyone are high as a result. Sure, the rich may get hit more than the poor, but taxes are still high for the low income earners. That is the trade off required to pay for the nationalised state (public) owned businesses (means of production), and is why socialism in high doses often leads to major economic problems. High taxes means less consumption, which means less businesses, which means less employment, which means less production, which means less competition, which means higher prices (on top of the fact prices will be higher because you'll have higher taxes to pay for the nationalised industries), which means a stagnant or even stagnating economy. So, it's correct that having national healthcare is probably not a bad idea. But only if you want higher taxation.
    3
  8132. Wow... Yeah, I think he needs to be told.
    3
  8133. I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video.
    3
  8134. Not sure yet. I'm may discuss this in the next check-in video, because it may make sense to do an all-in-one video for the Weimar Hyperinflation (even though I've already released 4 videos for it)
    3
  8135. You may as well do because by the time you get to E49, the last two will probably be out!
    3
  8136. It will not. It's quality over quantity from now on.
    3
  8137. I was thinking of doing something like that! Glad to hear Historia Civilis is way ahead of the curb :) thanks for the suggestion
    3
  8138. If I did ever go back to gaming, I'd do a separate channel for that. This channel is staying history
    3
  8139. Very well spotted! The actual village is called "Bobrovskii" which is so close that I had to change it
    3
  8140. The 4th Romanian Army wasn't ever created. It was due to be created a few days later, but Operation Uranus began and it never happened.
    3
  8141. I'm glad you saw through them. Their philosophy is a bunch of projection, and once you see this, it's hard to unsee it.
    3
  8142. Just to point out, it was Leonard Peikoff who said that, not Citino. It was an editing error on my part - I accidently copied and pasted the wrong name. As to your question, if you read the book, you will come to understand his reasoning. Dismissing it or calling him "stupid" isn't sufficient, especially when his argument is very compelling.
    3
  8143. YouTube doesn't want us talking about s u i c i d e. So, it's not the word "shoot" by itself. It's the combination of that word and the others around it, like "himself".
    3
  8144. Second by two seconds, I'm afraid :)
    3
  8145. Never heard of him
    3
  8146. Yes, the outer defense ring. The other think lines are other defence lines. I'd go into more detail with them, but the maps I have aren't any good, so these lines are pretty much the best I can do for now
    3
  8147. I was crying with laughter when I saw that happen yesterday. Wonder what excuse the Keynesians will come up with to explain that one
    3
  8148. @Juan Rafael Cabrero - just accepted them! Thank you!
    3
  8149. Possibly... I've hidden all the old videos though for now, because I wanted to see what would happen with the COPPA situation. Not sure I want to risk doing videos that might be interpreted as "appealing to kids" (which the US government thinks videos games are for).
    3
  8150. Okay, I'll talk about/answer this in the next Addendum video :)
    3
  8151. Yes! That's an obvious one, but I made a few other mistakes too. Let's see if anyone can spot them :)
    3
  8152. I may be wrong but I haven't seen another history video quite like it
    3
  8153. Thank you. I absolutely have to get the history right - or as right as possible given the resources etc. This was 7 months of hard work (I did have to learn the 3D software I used from scratch in order to do it) but was definitely worth it :)
    3
  8154. +Ville “Villemaisteri” metsänmiettijä the artillery support from the Germans was unique. It was so effective, the commander of Artillery OB West visited the artillery command post to see it in action himself (according to Harmel) The Germans did fight exceptionally well. In almost all instances, they outfought the Allies with smaller groups of soldiers (or even non-soldiers) and inflicted serious set backs in all areas of the battle. There's several reasons for this, but it seems their commanders were free to use their initiative more, and the training the soldiers received was more practical (e.g. the troops weren't trained to march up and down in formation at this stage in the war) than that taught by the Allies.
    3
  8155. I know it's an early comment, but I explain in the video that number 1 was potentially going to be solved when the Germans started down the path of the super-heavy tanks
    3
  8156. Well done Jamie! 👍
    3
  8157. The war was a waste of resources, and time, and lives. But for Hitler and those waging the war, it's a question of what projects to spend their resources on. So the question isn't framed from a perspective of the whole war (because yes, everything is a waste of resources in that case) but is framed from the perspective of those fighting the war. I hope that makes sense.
    3
  8158.  @jamesmackenzie1536  "literally the Nazis took control of the German Evangelical Church" Oh? I thought they privatized the economy? - "and killed a handful of specific priests that were against them, just like any middle ages christian kingdom, yet you have the audacity to claim that. Even against the Catholic Church Hitler didnt exactly launch a Kulturekampf like Bismarck!" Right. So the Church was against him, Hitler then attacked them and forced them into line, and they went along with it hoping to stave off further attacks. And you class this as "in bed with Hitler". I'm sorry but I strongly disagree.
    3
  8159. No, I've said "Youtube's communist guidelines" before in a few videos 😂
    3
  8160.  @MrPro897  "High material prices are the result of a booming economy." That's the opposite of what a booming economy should be. Supply and demand. The more you make of something (higher supply) should make the price go down. But it doesn't, and the reason it doesn't is because of the inflation and manipulated interest rates, just as Rothbard explains in the book I recommended.
    3
  8161.  @MrPro897  "That's debatable. Keynesian policies came in order to correct the faulty laissez-faire system, which was failing every 2-3 years the entire 19th century, with Great Depression, being the best (or worse) example." Yes, the old Laissez-Faire system (which wasn't "Laissez-Faire" even though it's called that) didn't work because governments intervened so much in the economy, causing the recessions and depressions that they then tried to solve. The Great Depression, as Rothbard and others point out, is a great example of this. That's why I recommended that book, which you can get online for free. - "...thanks to Keynesian policy economy is growing again." Turning off a car and turning it back on doesn't create a bigger car. Turning off the economy, and then turning it back on, isn't economic growth. I should remind you that the stock market is not the economy. In fact, the private sector (the real engine of the economy) is dying. Gregory Mannarino has been pointing this out this every day for the past however long. The distortions inherent in this economy now are so acute that there's nothing left except the basics.
    3
  8162.  @neiloflongbeck5705  It was SOE. Sorry for not being precise in this instance.
    3
  8163. I've already done a video on Rotterdam, and that was bombed by the Germans before Churchill did anything https://youtu.be/2B5OeSpf4PM And Rotterdam wasn't the first bombing on civilians by the Germans, as I said in the video, and as the others above me have pointed out. I'm curious to know how I lied though, or how the "idiots" ate it up, even though the "idiots" clearly know more than OP.
    3
  8164. Congrats!
    3
  8165. Yes you were! Congratulations!
    3
  8166. It was Captain Mues. Unfortunately, Craig doesn't mention which battalion it was, and there were two in the area, which is why I didn't say the name in the video.
    3
  8167. I'm reading the Virtue of Selfishness at the moment. That's the one I started with. I agree that there are flaws, but the Objectivists are not as bad as some of the more vocal critics suggest.
    3
  8168. Altruism may be applied to the need to feel more excessively moral, social, or otherwise better than someone else.
    3
  8169. The answer is that individuals work together as individuals. We trade and cooperate for mutual benefit. The Marxist answer is to say that all work is social, that the individual should be destroyed as an independent force, and should be rendered subservient to the collective (them). Don't give in to their nonsense. You, Jans Kam, should read Peikoff before you fall from grace like they have.
    3
  8170. I'd be lying if I said it hasn't affected me. It does feel like I'm under psychological attack.
    3
  8171. That's what he said in his heavily edited and censored memoirs. Unfortunately, as I showed in the video, the request Chuikov actually sent doesn't mention only sending bits of the HQ, it just asks for permission to withdraw. See 18:54
    3
  8172.  @flavionessuno5085  "if you define socialism as "any political ideology based on the interpretation of Karl Marx's works " than Nationalsocialism is not socialist, this is the common definition of socialism;" That's not the historic definition of socialism. As I have said numerous times now, Socialism pre-existed Karl Marx. I've outlined the historical definition of Socialism here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "on the other hand if you define socialism as " any doctrine alternative to capitalism that redistribute resources to some subgroup of the population along class, ethnic or religeous grounds" than National Socialism is socialist." Again, that's not how I define socialism. I'm not sure why you've jumped to the conclusion that it is. - "TIK uses the latter definition, Indy uses the former." No, they're using the same definition as me, which is why they're saying Hitler was a Capitalist. It's not a question of definitions, it's a question of evidence. They've not seen or heard the evidence that contradicts the idea that Hitler was a Capitalist, so they still think he murdered Ernst Rohm because they believe Rohm was a 'real' Socialist (an argument I've destroyed in the Hitler's Socialism video). They still think that he privatized the industries, or only set up the DAF as a sham trade union etc. So this has nothing to do with definitions. The definition I'm using is the correct definition and doesn't contradict theirs. The only nuance that I've put in is that there's a distinction between "Socialism" and "Marxist Socialism". Socialism has nothing to do with class, but Marxist Socialism does. So when they say "it has to be for the workers" - they're describing Marxist Socialism, not Socialism. Socialism doesn't have to be for the workers at all.
    3
  8173. I saw it. Will you stop spamming the comments. If I do another video about Orwell, I'll talk about it.
    3
  8174. A rare event!
    3
  8175. Don't rely on the Google or Wikipedia for your history. Forget the labels because they're all mixed up anyway, look at their actual policies. The Whigs (later Conservatives) were authoritarian in politics and economics, not for a minimal state or a free market. They were the original Left-wing Party in the UK until the Liberal Party went from the Right to the Left in the 1870s.
    3
  8176. The first part of my video on Why Oswald Mosley turned to Fascism will answer your question in detail https://youtu.be/AGaPaOPNubo
    3
  8177. I was a socialist until I realised the true nature of National Socialism, and understood instantly that there was no major difference between them and "normal" socialism. Nationalising all the businesses under the policy of Gleichschaltung is precisely what a socialist would do. The evidence is overwhelming https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=1tjL0dRyExMMhSLe
    3
  8178. I didn't know he had such a series! I'd love to hear his views on Hegel. Do you have a link? Or do you know what to type in to find it?
    3
  8179. @jcl6861 Why were the East Germans so keen on fleeing to the West? Why are North Koreans so keen on fleeing from their country? Long after the wars, civil wars and revolutions, socialist countries remain impoverished and backwards. Why would that be? The Soviet economy NEVER recovered to its pre-war levels as I showed here https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    3
  8180. @alphana7055 Oh my... Was it hard swallowing all that Marxist propaganda? Have you considered actually picking up an actual history book and reading it? I'd recommend Robert Gellately's "Lenin, Stalin and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe".
    3
  8181. As I have said to others: Hitler was in the Bavarian Army, which was under Eisner's control, and later the Bavarian Soviet Republic. It doesn't make sense for them to spy upon themselves. If any spying occurred, it happened later. And honestly, it's very odd how Hitler's unit, which was predominantly socialist, elected the one "capitalist" spy in their ranks to represent them, twice.
    3
  8182. Britain wasn't a free market. It was freer than what we have now, but it was never truly free. Taxation was never abolished, nor was state intervention in the market. The British Empire was established by the corporations set up by the British state. Russia only just came out of serfdom (only abolished in 1861). It may have been a "freer" market than before, but that's not saying much. It hadn't had any the time to mature, with only a few industries actually set up, and again, the state was involved in the economy.
    3
  8183. I'm glad you enjoyed the scorpion video! The fact that one of them is called "Spartacus" (obviously after the Spartacus League, who were Communist) is telling. I don't think they're watching my videos though, as Communists tend to ignore and dismiss evidence that you goes against their world view.
    3
  8184. The Bolsheviks celebrated as they hyperinflated the Ruble (which they considered to be "capital"). And nobody wants to trade for a hyperinflating currency (unless you're John Maynard Keynes, because he did bet on the hyperinflating Mark...) But again, just continue to spout Marxist propaganda and don't read an actual history book.
    3
  8185. I also talked about it in my video on the topic https://youtu.be/fNvfzJwyzX8?si=vtzHOd4Sd9DpgpD-
    3
  8186. That's not true for several reasons. The Abwehr was created later, not in 1919. Hitler was in the Bavarian Army, which was controlled by the Bavarian government (which Eisner controlled until his death). Hitler wasn't "spying" on anyone at this time, certainly not his own government. He was elected into the position by his unit. The same again with the Bavarian Soviet Republic.
    3
  8187. I'm glad to see you gave it a fair shot :) Most of my videos have citations, although I only came up with the concept of the reference bar when I did my Public vs Private video in 2019, so videos before that don't have in-video references (they do have bibliographies though).
    3
  8188. Don't be ashamed of your interests
    3
  8189. It's a mistake on my end. Sorry about that.
    3
  8190. Monty wasn't aiming for the Ruhr. He wanted to cut off the German 15th Army, to make it easier to clear the Scheldt, and open the port of Antwerp.
    3
  8191. Second! Hello to you too
    3
  8192. Glad you liked it!
    3
  8193. It has. Now Gazala is in a relatively good place, I'm going to try get some more videos out soon
    3
  8194. Well, I hope you're not in too much pain! And yes, what's interesting is that Rommel does use the same tactics, but gets away with it. However, the 4th Indian Division also keeps using the "Operation Compass" tactics throughout Operation Crusader and also manage to get away with it (as you'll see in this and next video), so Rommel's not the only one. And no, I don't subscribe to the idea of presenting one side or another as being somehow flawless. I think my approach to history can be summed up as "trying to learn the lessons of the past by criticising everyone and everything in my way". If you try to white wash someone, that's a clear sign that you're biased in favour of them. Obviously, some people perform really well at points (or overall), but even then nobody's perfect and mistakes happen. And I think the mistakes are interesting.
    3
  8195. Hope it was worth the wait :)
    3
  8196. While I have read a lot, I haven't read everything. There were good and bad generals in every army. I would avoid saying the Germans were "good" simply because of the atrocities they committed or turned a blind eye too (like Manstein), and they're certainly not the only ones that did that.
    3
  8197. I'm sorry to hear that. Is it just in this episode or all previous episodes too? I'll make sure to turn it down for the complete episode. In the meantime, I have provided subtitles
    3
  8198. Good question! I don't have a source that states it, but I have done some rough calculations. 7th Armoured Brigade had 141 tanks prior to Crusader. That's 47 per battalion of tanks. Each battalion had four squadrons (A-D), which brings it to roughly 12 tanks per squadron. 22nd Armoured Brigade had 155 tanks prior to Crusader, which makes it roughly 13 tanks per squadron. 4th Armoured Brigade had 165, which brings it to roughly 14 per squadron. So it's between 12-14 tanks per squadron. I admit that I could be wrong here though.
    3
  8199. Thank you! Glad you've been looking forward to these videos :) there should only be two more Crusader videos though, and then the ride is over (until Courland)
    3
  8200. I'm not sure I agree. If Rommel had destroyed the British armour and hadn't made his "Dash to the Wire", his forces wouldn't have been exhausted, and he would have faced just two divisions of infantry with one tank brigade in support. That would have given his (at this moment) unfatigued two panzer, one armour, and multiple infantry divisions the immediate tactical and operational advantage, let alone a psychological one.
    3
  8201. lol
    3
  8202. If I do it will not be for a while. The priority is Courland, then Stalingrad, then probably back to North Africa for Rommel's Second Desert Offensive.
    3
  8203. You will probably enjoy my Thursday video
    3
  8204. Better than "First!"
    3
  8205. Check out the "Bardia" map of this map series. It's from 1954, but is more detailed than the others I could find which is why I used it https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/north_africa/
    3
  8206. I do, although I didn't have to do much for this particular video because of the short length and most of the research was already done 😂
    3
  8207. I don't think you'll have time to eat the popcorn with this video!
    3
  8208. There's actually a Patreon question about this and I've been reading into it lately (including today). As a short answer to your question: yes, absolutely, had the British decided to stand firm (Chamberlain was an idiot), and had the generals decided to act rather than get cold feet, Hitler could have been overthrown. If you haven't read the book "Nein: Standing up to Hitler" by Ashdown, I would recommend it as a good intro to the topic
    3
  8209. And thank you for your comment! I'm glad to see some people who like the economic and logistics videos because I'm beginning to tire of the people who don't. Their 'arguments' are so flawed I'm beginning to wonder if they're paid Chinese trolls
    3
  8210. I do too! I quite liked doing a short video for a change
    3
  8211. FIRST! And thanks 👍
    3
  8212. My friends and family agree with me, sir. My health is fine. I can see straight through the lamestream media narrative which is propaganda from the BBC and the government. It's a shame that so many people cannot question what they hear. You must always ask the question: "But is this really the case?"
    3
  8213. OP is clearly a Fascist. And I don't vote Reform. Swing and a miss, again.
    3
  8214. “[Fascism was] the totalitarian, cooperative, and ethical state - the final collectivist synthesis of nationalism, syndicalism, and Actualism.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” p99. Starmer's response to this crisis is awful. However, the problem started over 40 years ago and has been building ever since. Starmer has been in government during that past 40 years, and thus is responsible, as are all the so-called "Parties" of the entire Establishment.
    3
  8215. No. I didn't blame the state of the country on Keir Starmer. I blamed the entire Establishment, as this problem has been building for 40 years. Try again.
    3
  8216. A force to be reckoned with!
    3
  8217. Howdy neighbour! Thanks for subscribing
    3
  8218. Explaining their motivations is not defending them.
    3
  8219. I admit, it was hard reading those notes when I first saw them, and it was hard reading them out loud for this video
    3
  8220. Keep worshipping that bloated sacred cow. Don't look into all the reasons the bureaucracy is failing and has failed since it's inception, just assume I'm wrong and have no valid arguments.
    3
  8221. Thank you! It's surprising how many people can't watch that long
    3
  8222. I think so. Thanks for your concern though, I am genuinely expecting a knock at the door.
    3
  8223. I disagree. People would do the work if they weren't getting paid more for not doing it. We have a false economy.
    3
  8224. I have watched some of their videos on this
    3
  8225. They've suppressed my videos on similar topics, especially the Greek video, but also my videos calling out Marxism (e.g. the "Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism" video). I mentioned the censorship in a recent video - see 15:20 onwards in this video https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU I do have a Bitchute though https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    3
  8226. I don't really know to be honest because I don't necessarily read them all cover to cover. Take "The Taste of War" for example. I haven't read the bits on the Japanese because I'm not covering them in the videos (at the moment). Others partly talk about the naval war, or other topics that aren't relevant, so I skip those bits. So it's hard to say.
    3
  8227. Well, there are primary sources, but it's mainly secondary sources at the moment. I'd really recommend the books I quote and get a lot of info from - Glantz, Jason D Mark, Isaev, Falk, and Anton Joly (when we get to the city, I'll be using Joly's work more). I've left links in the description to their websites.
    3
  8228. Yeah no, they were Ju 88's, not Stukas. My bad
    3
  8229. I wasn't that specific. It'll be a miracle if it's exactly in between
    3
  8230. THERE ARE THREE LIGHTS!
    3
  8231. Thanks! Glad to see you here early
    3
  8232. I stand corrected. Although it was Samaan's book that implied Eisenhower didn't mention it. Now I think about it, it may have meant he didn't mention the gas chambers specifically 🤔
    3
  8233. While it wasn't specifically made for them, you'll want to see tomorrow's video
    3
  8234. I know, crazy isn't it! The majority of the videos in the next few weeks will be Crusader-related videos (although next week is on Kampfgruppen) in the run up to the main Battlestorm Crusader video coming out
    3
  8235. Gott to love it :)
    3
  8236. Axis Crusader OOB will be in two weeks time :)
    3
  8237. Congrats!
    3
  8238. Maybe, but not everyone is interested in this sort of in-depth content
    3
  8239. Thank you! I'll be sure to say it right in the main Crusader video :)
    3
  8240. Operation Crusader was a battle in the North African Campaign starting in November 1941. It's the first British victory against the Germans in WW2 and the first time Rommel was defeated. It was also extremely costly for the British, and was almost a defeat. The tank arm got battered and the infantry had to save the day.
    3
  8241. Well, I didn't know that.
    3
  8242. Glad you do!
    3
  8243. How was I to know it's not pronounced the way it's spelt!?
    3
  8244. I do want to do a video on Lend Lease, but I'm struggling to find detailed sources on it. Most of the books just say "yeah, Lend Lease saved the universe" but don't give statistcs or anything. However, it will be a while away because I'm concentrating on Crusader at the moment.
    3
  8245. Two weeks time!
    3
  8246. No worries. Current plan is to do a video on Kampfgruppen next week, then the Axis OOB for Crusader the week after, plus other short videos relating to Crusader in the weeks after (short so I can get Crusader done behind the scenes haha)
    3
  8247. Haha alright, if no one gets it, I'll tell you the answer in the morning
    3
  8248. I'm not qualified enough on WW1 to answer this question. But I've hearted it in hopes that someone else reading it is qualified.
    3
  8249. Yes, you can.
    3
  8250. George, that's not the only reason. The 2-pouder AT guns were capable of tackling the German tanks within 500m (which was roughly the range the Panzer III's also needed to be to engage the British). The main issue was that the Germans used their infantry and anti-tank guns with their tanks, whereas the British didn't. This meant that the Germans had more guns to bear on the British tanks. British artillery (with their good 25-pounders) was also kept out of the loop when they were needed most. Yes, the 88's outranged the British tanks, but even when the 88s weren't around, British tanks went in alone and got chewed up. At least, this is what happened up to and including Crusader, if not afterwards. In the few instances where the British did use their AT-guns with the tanks, the results were better for the British.
    3
  8251. Thanks! Glad you liked it!
    3
  8252. Yes, it's a complicated subject! However, I still think the physical removal of officers in the Purges has been overstated. The morale and other impacts of the Purges (like on doctrine) are still a factor.
    3
  8253. They're not equivalent, but they can be compared - or rather, contrasted - at the tactical level. Yes, the Eastern Front was a lot larger, and a lot more bloody/horrible - but we're talking similar organized tanks, concepts, doctrines, divisions and armies at the tactical and operational levels. So yes, they absolutely can be compared/contrasted. Perhaps the tank-heavy Soviet forces explains why their tank forces suffered heavy attritional losses?
    3
  8254. "when they were bombarded with incendiary bombs almost the entire night." They weren't bombed the entire night. There were two raids in the evening, and then one the next day. Each of these raids lasted only a few minutes. The first one was about 15 minutes long. And even then, a lot of the American bombs missed their target. - "There is no way that only 20.000 people died in Dresde (according to some historians)" The SS 'Final Report' stated 22,000 confirmed deaths and an estimated 25,000 in total. That's the most accurate report we actually have on the victim numbers. Stating that the number was multiple times the estimate can only be done without evidence and on wishful thinking. The evidence says 25,000. Emotions say higher.
    3
  8255. Beevor is great for casual readers as his narrative style is fantastic. I think people should read Beevor as an intro to a particular topic before moving on to something more detailed. That said, he plays it super-safe in a lot of his books, and his coverage of the Eastern Front is (or, at least, was) biased towards the Germans. His recent book on Operation Market Garden is great, but misses the key aspect of Nijmegen bridge not being taken by the Americans and therefore plays it safe by blaming the British 1st Airborne Division again, as I explained here https://youtu.be/fr92BwihIoU But otherwise, yes definitely read Beevor. Just be aware of his biases too.
    3
  8256. All that is probably true, and I agree with you. However, it's still classed as a war crime because it goes against the 1899 Hague Convention, which states: "The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited." Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp
    3
  8257. Article 25 of the 1899 Hague Convention says: "The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited." Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp So this was a war crime. That doesn't mean the Germans didn't deserve it, given what they had done previously, but it still counts as a war crime.
    3
  8258. @hot creamy fart  Ah, I'm sorry to hear that. Well, this video isn't exactly uplifting... 😣
    3
  8259. As I showed in the video, Irving's numbers aren't based in reality. It's also questionable whether you can believe anything he wrote, as shown here https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    3
  8260. I think TIK TOK was messing with my channel, so it was time to change it
    3
  8261. By the same token, why would the British tankers lie? They have even less reason to lie than the Americans. The 82nd didn't take the Nijmegen bridge on the first day. When the British reached them, they still hadn't taken it. Then the 82nd were forced to cross a river in boats like marines to take the opposite side of the bridge - an action that could have ended in disaster, or could have been avoided if Gavin had sent troops to take Nijmegen bridge on the first day. And all that just to cover the initial mistake. Then they were supposedly annoyed that a handful of British tanks didn't press on towards Arnhem even though they would have no chance of getting to Arnhem without significant reinforcements... which weren't coming because the British were busy fighting an SS Panzer Division in Nijmegen city because the 82nd hadn't secured the Nijmegen bridge on the first day. Also, all we have as evidence that that exchange happened came from interviews made years AFTER the war. And that's evidence that can't be fully trusted.
    3
  8262. It wasn't just that though. In the video I linked, I explained that the ports weren't able to physically take the supplies if they had sent much more. That bottleneck limited the amount of units that the Axis could deploy in Africa anyway. And yes, Rommel is running out of fuel constantly, which is also to do with the general oil situation, but is also to do with the interdiction by the Royal Navy of fuel shipping across the Mediterranean, but also (again) the limited capacity of the ports to take more supplies.
    3
  8263. I don't think Indy's voice is that dramatic though... but maybe that's just me
    3
  8264. Great to hear! And yes, I will cover El Alamain AFTER I've worked through all the other battles in the North African Campaign before it. Not skipping ahead ;)
    3
  8265. Well done!
    3
  8266. Yes, and next week's episode... oh boy
    3
  8267. I'm doing fine sir, how are you doing?
    3
  8268. "Can I ask you why you chose Courland next?" It was one of the Tiers on my Patreon page. If you support so much a month, I'll dedicate a Battlestorm to you. Well, Darren (who has been supporting me at or above the highest tier for probably about a year now) asked for a Battlestorm of the Courland Pocket. This actually fits with Stalingrad quite well because it's a pocket of roughly the same size, and we can see the similarities and differences therein. I actually feel bad that it's taken me this long to get to Courland if I'm honest. But it's finally coming at least :)
    3
  8269. Well done Jamie! First "Jamie First" in a while ;)
    3
  8270. "@TIK Well even if we would assume that, it still wouldnt make Nazi Germany socialist, because there was no collective ownership of the means of production by the "arians"." Were the Aryans in control of the means of production, or were the Jews in control of the means of production? If it's the former, then collective control of the means of production did happen. (socialism : "common control of the means of production", not "ownership", since property rights are abolished under socialism, which they were in NS Germany in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933)
    3
  8271. The definition of socialism has nothing to do with class. Marx changed the definition.
    3
  8272. Marxist Socialism : kill all those who are not of the same class social group. National Socialism : kill all those who are not of the same racial social group. TIK : Mr Guana needs to do more homework.
    3
  8273. I'm not saying you're a Marxist, but I'm saying you're defending one version of socialism over another. But they're all the same. Socialism is state control of the economy. That's it. It doesn't matter what form it takes, it's still state control of the economy. So yes, Leninism, Marxism, Stalinism, Hitlerism, Mussolini-ism, Corbynism and any other socialisms are different varieties of socialism, because they have different dictators, but they are still all socialism. As I said, it turns out that when you take away individual rights, you get slaves. This is why Stalin and Hitler both murdered Jews. It's the same deal. To say it isn't state-control in an attempt to hide the true meaning is the distortion. I'm simply pointing that out. This then leads to arguments about economics and definitions, and that's fine. I've done my research (always doing more of course) and I know exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying socialism is state control of the economy, and I'm saying Hitler's regime was a version of socialism. That's not going too far, that's just stating the reality of Hitler's regime. Without state control of the economy you can't even explain the Hitler Youth. So no, I'm not giving in on something just because people have a distorted fantasy of what socialism actually is. The definition is clear, and once people grasp the definition and realise why that is the definition, there's no going back.
    3
  8274. Murdering the women and children of the bourgeoisie is good is it? And how is that different from murdering the women and children of the Jews? They are the same. Socialism is state control of the economy. Doesn't matter how you paint it, and what lies you tell yourself, the reality is that socialism always leads to slavery and death, because once you take away the rights of individuals there is nothing to stop the state from enslaving and murdering whoever they like. This isn't politics, this is history. And history repeats itself because people aren't learning from it. In this case, most people don't know the true definition and meaning of socialism - because socialists are deliberately hiding the definition. Once you realise what it is, you see through the lies. Socialism is just slavery by another name. And I don't like distortions of history, which is why I'm calling it out.
    3
  8275. Thanks! Make yourself at home :)
    3
  8276. Yes, I'll change the photo, not the sign lol
    3
  8277. Never said the British and US Armies were perfect. However, they're not on the Axis-Soviet Front and are therefore not relevant to this video.
    3
  8278. Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. SOURCES (Some are general economics texts) - Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    3
  8279. Nationalism and Socialism go hand in hand. Both promote the idea of National or Class/Race/Gender social groups. This video is decidedly anti-nationalist, even though I am talking about nations.
    3
  8280. That, and the people who think I'm anti-Russian or anti-German, because being anti-Nationalsocialist and anti-Marxistsocialist (both ideologies) in the video means I hate two entire "nationalities" or "races" apparently.
    3
  8281. Glad you enjoyed it! More to come on this
    3
  8282. Will do
    3
  8283. Glad you think so! Shame the comments are a mess of pro-Nazi fanatics that have views not based in reality.
    3
  8284. Trump isn't insane and neither were the people who elected him. He's not right on everything, but he's far more sane than the National Social Justice Warriors on the Left.
    3
  8285. If this doesn't prove that I'm willing to stand up for the truth, nothing will. Also, corporations would be wise not to start a fight with a YouTuber who can prove that Fascism invented the concept of corporations (trade unions to "embody" the nation - body - corpse - corporation).
    3
  8286. I wish more people would understand that Keynesianism will lead to the death of an economy. The problem is that state schools and teachers cannot be trusted to deliver non-state-controlled economic theories. That's why they're currently preaching Marxism to the kids (like they did to me in my college and university) because they have the most to gain from Marx's teachings - more money to the state, more money in their back pockets.
    3
  8287. Of course! But don't forget, socialists don't understand prices, and think profit is evil. So yes, they assume if prices and profits are abolished, an infinite amount of food will just appear on our plates.
    3
  8288. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    3
  8289. "Socialism never wins" Agreed. People don't learn from history.
    3
  8290. Haha welcome to the right side of YouTube!
    3
  8291. Honestly, not many. It's just like Das Kapital... It's badly written and is deeply deeply flawed.
    3
  8292. Will do!
    3
  8293. Getting a new motherboard (my old one is from 2012), new CPU (i7 9700 - currently I have an old i5 on its last legs), 32GB RAM (currently 16), new SSD (never had one before), and Windows 10 (currently win 7. Need win 10 for software upgrades.) Not getting a new case because I think the old one will do. The PSU is relatively new so I'm keeping that, assuming it can power everything. And the graphics card (GTX 980 Ti) is decent enough since I upgraded that a couple years ago. Edit: oh and the CPU fan I have is good because I had upgraded that a year or so ago when the last one broke.
    3
  8294. I'm always tired but can't sleep, which is a sign of fatigue.
    3
  8295. Any recommendations as to what I should do for it?
    3
  8296. You're correct about the Hegelianism, which is a derivative of Hermeticism, which is related to gnosticism. I have evolved my views since this video, however gnosticism is still a factor.
    3
  8297. Yes I did. It's very kind of them. I feel like I should give them a shout-out back or something
    3
  8298. I was invited to join the Masons, and when I asked the guy if it was a religion, he instantly rattled off some nonsense about the Great Architect of the Universe. A quick Google search will show you that this is what they believe, and it turns out that this is EXACTLY what the Gnostics believe too.
    3
  8299. Agreed! While I'm working at a fast pace, it will not be rushed. There's no point dedicating this amount of time to a project just to see it half done
    3
  8300. It's still a while away, but man is Crusader an interesting battle. I was actually in tears at one point I was laughing so hard, because until I started doing the research I'd never read anything on it before, and to read what happens is just ridiculous! So glad I'm on to it now
    3
  8301. "@TIK i also have videos about Pakistan Army Music, American Civil War Music, Catholic Music, Islamic/Middle Eastern Music, Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Soviet Communist Music, funny that you deliberately excluded that." Because you only have a few videos in each of them, not hundreds like you have in the Fascist-Nazi videos.
    3
  8302. I have actually been working on debunking it. However, I've not yet got all the way through it (it's 6.5 hours long) and the upcoming Stalingrad documentary is the priority. However I will get to it eventually
    3
  8303. The Soviet Union and their Marxist Socialist ideology are evil.
    3
  8304. No worries, I hope you 'enjoy' the video (not a great choice of words, considering the topic)
    3
  8305. Yet, I still get people who have never been a Leftist denying it. They just don't understand.
    3
  8306. Which Christian sect doesn't believe that Christ died on the cross for your sins, making the ultimate self-sacrifice for everyone else? (Altruism)
    3
  8307. One of the four women I was dating at Christmas was a Catholic, and she explained to me that Catholicism has evolved in the last 50 years, which may explain why so many modern day Catholics are weak on their own doctrine. English is a Germanic language. The Anglo-Saxons were Germanic tribes. Sure, we don't think girls are "neutral" like the romantic Germans do, but I'm not sure why you would class English as a non-Germanic language. But yes, you're right. No Christian is devoted to God then... Guess there's no reason to go to church, read the bible, or do anything else related to Christianity then.
    3
  8308. I apologise, but I am getting a lot of negative comments saying similar things, and with a lot of them it's clear that they've done no reading on the subject and have just heard from others (usually leftists on Reddit) what they (mistakenly) believe Rand or the libertarians say. So what I do is create videos explaining things, or talking about subjects, and I bring up points from various different sources, some I agree with and others I don't. I then get told I'm wrong. But not just wrong, that I don't know what I'm talking about. And not just that, but that I've done no reading. And not just that I've done no reading, but that I'm "insane". And not just that I'm insane, but that I should stop making certain types of videos because I'm bad at those particular types of videos, but somehow really good with the other types, despite the fact I'm using the exact same method of history with them. So I think to myself: clearly these people are mistaken. I'll try to explain. But they don't listen and double down, calling me all sorts of names... So I think, okay I'll provide a ton more evidence and go further in-depth with my explanations... Nope, doesn't work. These "critics" are just so set in their mistaken beliefs that no amount of evidence or logic will possibly get through to them. And then I realise what the problem is: I'm dealing with the loud, unruly pupils at the back of the class who are ruining it for the rest of us. So then I think: oh well, may as well talk down to them like the children they are. And the funny thing is, my regular viewers are complaining that I'm not making content for them. And they're right, I'm mainly making content in the hope that I get through to the people who are unwilling to listen. But I can't help but hope that I eventually get through to one or two of them... And I somewhat hope that the more I annoy them, the more they'll go "I'll show him" and then actually start to read the books they've been avoiding for so long. Does that make sense?
    3
  8309. Could you explain why you think such an act would be beneath me?
    3
  8310. Define history for me.
    3
  8311. Thanks! I've just put them in
    3
  8312. Thank you for sharing your story, and you're correct that nobody is completely perfect nor completely flawed.
    3
  8313. I'm also curious what you think my politics are. I'm neither Objectivist nor Libertarian. I'm not National Socialism, Fascist or any other kind of socialist. I'm not con-servative, nor am I anything else. I'm not anarchist, nor statist. But please, tell me what political ideology I believe in, and tell me why I'm wrong to believe in it 🙄
    3
  8314. At what point did I say I have purged altruism? I didn't say that. I said I was attempting to do so, since I now see that altruism is an evil ideology. Caring about others more than you care about yourself is a terrible way to live. Helping others cannot come at your own expense. Anyone saying that destroying yourself in the name of others is a "good" thing really needs to ask themselves: but is this really the case?
    3
  8315. Thanks for the recommendation!
    3
  8316. And there are no crazy questions!
    3
  8317. Machine guns are decent defensive weapons, causing a stalemate in WW1. The tank was definitely an offensive weapon which helped break the stalemate. But I wouldn't say that the attacker always had the advantage in WW2, only that they would if they managed to check all the boxes needed for an offensive to work, and then their opponents made mistakes.
    3
  8318. Yes you are! Congratulations!
    3
  8319. The Irresistible Kitten
    3
  8320. I've said this before - I can reach more people here than I can in a lecture theatre. And I'm just not convinced that a PhD qualification will do me much good. I'm not saying "no, never!" but I don't think it makes sense for me to do one right now. Maybe in the future. My Degree isn't 100% "worthless" and I'm glad I have it. However, the course to get that Degree was 90% worthless. I actually got most of my knowledge about how to do history from college (pre-university). I actually only learnt one thing in university that was beneficial, and it was "use multiple sources", and that was only mentioned by accident in the first couple of months. If someone had said that at any point during college, then I would be telling you that my course was 100% worthless. And the point is, I don't think you need to have a Degree in order to get all the knowledge you need to study history. You can actually just read books on the "historiography" and learn pretty much everything you need to know. The only thing a Degree (any Degree) teaches you is how to write long essays and hand them in on time, and how to persevere. But again, I don't think you don't need a Degree to learn those skills.
    3
  8321. My agenda? To destroy the distortions of history. If we make allow lies to dominate, we cannot learn and grow as individuals. In the description you will find a link to a video entitled "Why I'm Passionate About History". I explain my "agenda" clearly in that.
    3
  8322. Stop it, you'll make the children cry!
    3
  8323. Elbuggo, Suvorov's thesis makes no sense. Glantz wrote a book called "Stumbling Colossus" which explains why the idea doesn't work. For a few pages in "When Titan's Clashed" Glantz also explains why it doesn't make sense either. And anyone who's actually read anything other than Suvorov's texts would know that the Red Army was absolutely not in a position to attack in 1941. It could barely defend itself, and indeed, didn't. Also, while the Red Army did begin to grow from 1937, this was in response to German and Japanese militarism. German spending on their army grew from 1% of national spending in 1933 to 10% in 1935. This was the fastest growth in military spending for any country at peace in history. The Germans were mobilising much earlier, and Japan was at war throughout the 1930's. WW2 for Japan began in 1937, so it makes sense for the Soviets to be mobilizing. In 1941, the German Army outnumbered the Soviets. Entire Wehrmacht strength was 7,309,000 on the 22nd of June 1941, with 3,118,910 on the Eastern Front. With Axis Allies, the total on the Eastern Front was 3,957,910. The Soviets had 4,901,800 men, with 2,743,000 on the Eastern Front. They were outnumbered! And caught completely by surprise, which explains why the Germans did so well in the early part of Barbarossa. Numbers come from Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Table N Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Soviet German Front 1941-1945. And I've done one video on Suvorov's thesis already, with more to come. Suvorov based his ideas on distorted evidence, as I showed when looking at Keitel's memoirs (which Suvorov used, and the video explains why he shouldn't be trusted). Link https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    3
  8324. Panzer 3s had a 50mm guns. They weren't Pak 38s, but they were 50mms, effective range of 500 yards. And the 75mms on the Panzer 4s were useful at anti-tank warfare as I showed in the video. Not necessarily in taking out the tanks, but by giving the Germans the advantage.
    3
  8325. Cheers Leandro! Glad you're enjoying them :)
    3
  8326. Dangerous game your playing. You may hate the video afterwards!
    3
  8327. Different speeds of tanks. Matildas were much slower than cruisers, so in actuality they were better suited to that role. However the issue is that the British didn't use them correctly after Operation Compass, and the Germans had an effective counter - the 88mm. Also, what's more surprising is that the Matildas were an infantry support tank that didn't fire HE rounds.
    3
  8328. Yes, the repair facilities that the Germans used were definitely ahead of their opposition early war. I suspect this had to do with the fact they knew they had limited production, so emphasized repair.
    3
  8329. Suppressing infantry and preventing them from following the enemy's tanks. Separate the tanks from infantry, and you're playing rock paper scissors against just rock.
    3
  8330. Awesome! Let me know if and when you do so I can thank you :)
    3
  8331. Ah, it was you! I was wondering who translated it into Polish, and for some reason YouTube doesn't tell you. Thank you very much!
    3
  8332. My job here is complete
    3
  8333. You first
    3
  8334. That's why I make them mad, because they never accept the truth!
    3
  8335. A few people gave me the link to RL's video asking for me to come on their show (at least, I think it was them who asked me). I don't do live-steams though because I don't think live streams are my strong area. I much prefer to do research and script out my videos - that's where my strength lies. So yes, I have considered it. But no, I probably won't. Of course, I have done collaborations with Anton Joly.
    3
  8336. In Das Kapital, Karl Marx said that Capital was money, and that money was a commodity. Except... we don't use commodities (gold and silver) as a means of exchange any more. We use fiat currency, printed by our central banks (something Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto). So by Karl Marx's own words, we don't have capitalism. In fact, the truth will shock you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8337. Love the phrase "nightmare truth goggles". I'm going to expropriate that!
    3
  8338. I think the adage was "Mussolini made the trains run on time", not Hitler. But yes, I do encourage you to verify what I said in the video. I highly recommend the book by Mierzejewski 👍
    3
  8339. They tried to make wood-powered vehicles. Not sure if they tried coal
    3
  8340. You do know that I've got enough to do without correcting thousands of pages of that particular website, only for other people behind the scenes to rewrite what I wrote because it doesn't suit their political agenda?
    3
  8341.  @saltmerchant749  "By and large we had an "unenforced regulated private rail concession operator economy" to be specific." Except it was enforced and it was regulated. 'Private' companies were allowed to rent the use of State lines, but the State dictates almost every aspect of their operation. As I said, Virgin was forced to grant pensions as dictated by the State, then couldn't increase fares to compensate, which then gets blamed on the private company rather than the State which created the problem in the first place. - "This case is something of a rare example for regulations actually being enforced, something successive governments have been reticent to do." So you're saying there's no minimum wages, no price/fare controls, no regulations, no forced pensions, no restrictions on who can build train stations and train lines, manipulated interest rates, easy 'credit' and magic money printer going brrr etc? I'm afraid I do not agree with your assessment of the issue. The State was always in charge of the railways during the so-called 'privatization' period. - "I make no excuses for the train wreck that is Network Rail and their prominent role in decay and delay of rail in the UK. But many operators would disavow themselves of their own role in the collapse of their service by hiding behind network rail." I'm not saying the train operators were squeaky clean. But I am saying that this wasn't in any way, shape or form a privatized rail network because Network Fail (and the State as a whole) was the puppet master pulling the strings.
    3
  8342. Funny because Karl Marx himself said we don't have capitalism https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    3
  8343. Yeah, they had Reichskommissars. Read the "Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reimann. And I've talked about this before in a few videos. In the Hitler's Socialism video, I told the story of a guy complaining that he searched on the internet for 10 minutes and couldn't find anything about "Reichskommissars". I explained that the internet is a good thing, but it doesn't have all the information on it. On Wikipedia, for example, the narrative is being controlled, with information deliberately being hidden. This is why it's important to read the books.
    3
  8344. Stick to tracks!
    3
  8345. I was going to say, our railways are not private. Network Fail (State owned corporation) is the only entity allowed to build train stations and train lines in the UK, and that's why there's major overcrowding. Also all the regulations, wage controls, price controls etc. Virgin Rail backed out because they were being forced to increase their pension payouts by the State. It's a veneer of private ownership on a coffin of State ownership. All the government is doing now is confirming what has already happened.
    3
  8346. Fantastic! That's what I was going for. I want history to be a bit more personal, because when reading a book it seems a bit impersonal (at least, compared to a video where you can see the person)
    3
  8347. You might be willing to ignore the overwhelming evidence that doesn't fit your world view, but I'm not willing to compromise my core beliefs and lie to myself to protect my "feels". I go where the evidence takes me, and I look at all sides of the argument before making my conclusions. And I've laid it all out for your lazy-heiness, all you have to do is open your eyes and ears https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 But of course, you're unwilling to do that because you automatically assume that I must be wrong. Socialism good, Hitler bad, therefore TIK must be wrong. Except Socialism isn't good. Wake up.
    3
  8348. You're very welcome!
    3
  8349.  @dodolipet9404 "The communism and the capitalism are two side of the same coin, it means the communism and capitalism they are same looking for money, for profit, and the communism after take over the government, they always betray the worker class." Communism (Marxist-Socialism) isn't looking for profit. It rejects profit, as it did in real life. They always betray the worker class, but that has nothing to do with profit. Capitalism and Marxist-Socialism are polar opposites. "The Nazi or NSDAP not looking for money, they looking for more production and the reproduction or increased the population, so thats way they need lebensraum or living space in the east area." That's not true. They needed living space because they were unwilling to trade (capitalism) with the other big powers for resources (Autarky). They therefore rejected capitalism, which then forced them to find new markets and resources, hence why they went East (as described in Mein Kampf and Hitler's Second Book). The rejection of capitalism in a small country (Germany) meant that they had to find resources, which is why they went to war. For the Soviet Union, they had the resources, which is why theirs lasted longer. But in order to make both of their socialisms work, National Socialist Germany and the Marxist-Socialist Soviet Union had to enslave huge portions of their populations, and steal wealth from their enemies (the bourgeoisie and Jews).
    3
  8350. There's two ways to look at it. 1. since Fascism is socialism on the national level, every Marxist-Socialist nation-state in history has technically been Fascist because they all failed to ignite world revolution (except maybe the EU, since that is technically international). 2. Fascism is for the nationality, not the class. So while Marxist-Socialist states did fail to be international, they weren't Fascist because they still believed in class, not nationality. However, on a practical level, there's not much difference between Fascist and Marxist states, except the people who are persecuted. This is why there are comparisons of Hitler's regime and Stalin's regime - because they are (arguably) quite similar in a lot of ways. Interestingly, Marxist states tend to kill more than Fascist states, and National Socialist states (Third Reich) tend to kill more in a shorter-space of time than Marxist states. Mussolini doesn't seem to have killed many people at all, at least prior to WW2.
    3
  8351. Yes, I got it last week and have started reading/taking notes. It's brilliant! Wish I'd known about it earlier! Not got through it yet though... If you liked this you'll probably enjoy Zitelmann's "Hitler: Politics of Seduction", which is all about Nazi ideology, the economy, society and the historiography surrounding it all. Also a German author
    3
  8352. The UK is sleepwalking into totalitarianism because the definitions have been blurred and the people have been tricked. The UK government has centralised planning, there's a free market for drugs (the black market) and freedom of speech is being eroded by "Hate Speech". Our vote for Brexit has been ignored. The state is taking over. So yes, to say the state is Fascist is actually very accurate, although I'd probably say it's Marxist at the moment due to being internationally linked with the EU.
    3
  8353. Pretty much, yes
    3
  8354. "Nothing about government regulation (even very heavy handed control) of production takes away from the capitalist nature of an economy." Regulation is state-control. It is no longer private control, therefore no longer capitalism (private-control of the economy).
    3
  8355. Feel free to unsubscribe, that is the power of the free market - you get to decide. However you fail to realise that many Nazis and Fascists these days are equally ignorant of what Nazism and Fascism are. Some of them HAVE been fooled into thinking that National Socialism and Fascism were Right-wing and capitalist ideologies. They are not. Just because some fools think they know what these ideologies are, doesn't mean they are what they think they are. I've also been arguing against National Socialists, Fascists and Marxists in my comment sections, and (as this very video shows) many of them don't know what capitalism and socialism actually are, let alone what their ideologies are. When I show them the truth, many simply cannot accept it, or go very VERY quiet... I will continue to fight for the truth in history and back up everything I'm saying with evidence (see pinned comment for a huge list of sources I have used in this case). I will always side with the superior evidence and interpretation, even if that means going against the grain.
    3
  8356. You obviously don't realise it's an oxymoronic concept that's impossibility once you know the true meaning of the words Socialism and Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8357. If you have a state which completely dominates and owns the means of production, that state sets the prices and wages etc. It also controls the humans within it. The economy is no longer free. Therefore no, you cannot have a free economy under socialism.
    3
  8358. "Hitler then continued to run the German economy into the ground." Sounds like a good socialist to me. Schacht was also a conservative who was liberal-capitalist minded. So in his mind, much like mine, Hitler didn't know about economics. If Hitler had known about basic economics, he wouldn't have been a socialist in the first place. Read "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt and you'll see exactly what I mean.
    3
  8359. “We National Socialists regarded our flag as being the embodiment of our party programme. The red expressed the social thought underlying the movement. White the national thought. And the swastika signified the mission allotted to us--the struggle for the victory of Aryan mankind and at the same time the triumph of the ideal of creative work which is in itself and always will be anti-Semitic.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P446 Red is socialism. White is for the 'nation' (meaning the Aryan race here). Swastika is for anti-Semitism.
    3
  8360. That is probably it. And they also said that Fascism was capitalist. This means that everything that wasn't Marxism was 'Fascism' and thus 'evil', and the distortion lives on to this day. The reality was that Marxism, Fascism and National Socialism were all versions of the same thing.
    3
  8361. The Kaiser asked Hitler to restore the Monarchy in 1940 during the Fall of France. Hitler called him a "fool". Hitler hated the monarchy. He was looking forwards, not backwards. I'll be covering this in depth in a future video on Nazi ideology.
    3
  8362. A commie that doesn't understand economics - all of them.
    3
  8363. We'll get there eventually, but might be a while away, unfortunately. Lots in between and I have to finish Stalingrad too
    3
  8364. Wait until you see the animation process - if you think what I showed you here is a lot of work, you ain't seen nothing yet! Everybody's going to have some biases. But I will do my absolute best to be as unbiased as possible in the narrative part of the video, show all sides of the argument and then give you my opinion right at the end. Saying that, after the reaction to the Market Garden one it's super tempting to blame Gavin of the 82nd Airborne for all failures in all battles involving US troops, if nothing else but to see more butthurt rants in the video comments :D Not that I'm doing a battle involving US troops any time soon or anything... hint hint The good news is I will make more videos this week. Won't be full schedule as it was before as my time is limited atm
    3
  8365. They weren't all fully motorized, although mostly. 70th Division wasn't motorized. 7th Armoured Division was, obviously. 2nd New Zealand Division was. 1st South African Division mostly was (I think) but 2nd South African Division wasn't. Not sure about the whole of 4th Indian Division, but some of it was at least.
    3
  8366. Yeah, it's an honest Patreon, and he's been there for a while. To be honest, I don't see the harm since it's clearly not the actual Adolf Hitler, it's clearly a joke, and they are supporting the channel.
    3
  8367. Yes! There's definitely a lot of lessons to be learnt here about leadership. Effective training, organization, caring, compassion, but also discipline and innovation... the list goes on. It also shows that you have to deal with those above you, and those below, both of which can be challenging, especially when the bullets are flying. Military history is a great teacher for leaders and managers. Certainly helped me in my previous management job.
    3
  8368. Well, next week's will be the last. So you've caught up in time :)
    3
  8369. I will be doing that, hopefully for Monday the 7th of January (2019). Not sure about the intros though. I may keep them in. I'll have to keep the outros because of the Patreons who contributed to the various videos.
    3
  8370. Glad you found my channel! Well, once Crusader is done, Courland Pocket 1944 is next (hopefully starting in February), and after that will be Battlestorm Stalingrad (step by step through the battle, just like these videos).
    3
  8371. Yeah don't worry I talk about the Churchill situation a bit next week in the analysis of Crusader. It hurt his operation and Compass, but the reality was it was a necessary move strategically. I don't blame Churchill for doing it, but it's still hard to conclude that it didn't negatively impact the North African Campaign. Burma seems interesting, as do the Pacific Island Campaigns. I'm not against covering them one day, although it would feel like I'm starting from scratch with the whole theatre.
    3
  8372. Working on said video, but you are mistaken if you think Hitler was a Christian.
    3
  8373. Oh yeah, I keep forgetting!
    3
  8374. Yes! I've been saying that since 2018! The Socialists are Leftwing! That's why I have so many critics, because people reject all the evidence I've presented that the National Socialists were Socialists.
    3
  8375. If that's the definition of a Leftist, then I'm still a Leftist.
    3
  8376.  @sum1799  It is possible, you just have to understand their intentions. Their intention is to save the world from the forces of evil. But they've been MISGUIDED and don't realize that what they're doing is the evil thing.
    3
  8377. According to me, you're first?
    3
  8378. I was researching the origins of the Holocaust, and decided to read Mein Kampf, which I hadn't read before because I had been told by my history teachers not to bother. So as I was reading it, I got to understand Hitler's reasons for his nationalism, and his racism, but I didn't understand how he could justify calling his party "socialist". I expected to find the whole "I only put socialism in the name to trick the workers", but that's not what I read. This is what I read: "The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung.” “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” - Hitler, Main Kampf, pages 406-407. In other words, the only difference between Marxism and National Socialism is that the National Socialists believe in the racial class rather than the class class. Hitler was a racial socialist, not a class socialist. Otherwise, there was no difference between the two ideologies. In that instant, I realized that racism was a version of Socialism. A race is a social group, just like the working class is a social group. So if it's okay for the workers to murder and steal off the bourgeoisie, then why is it not okay for the Nazis to do the same to the Jews? I obviously, and instantly, realized that it wasn't okay for the Nazis to steal off the Jews, and put two and two together, that it also wasn't okay for the workers to steal off the capitalists. I then made the connection that the same arguments used against the Jews were the same arguments used against the bourgeoisie, and realized that all socialism is about dividing society and exploiting that division. That's how I accidentally took the red-pill. Later I then read up on Capitalism, and also made the connection that all socialism was racist, since (according to Marx) the bourgeoisie were the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8379. That's not the reason I'm burning out. I'm presenting "a Truth" as you said, but people aren't listening anyway. So why bother presenting anything at all? Several people have unsubscribed from my channel as a result of this video because they mistakenly believed that I stated that I was a Leftist (now). I'm not a Leftist, and I didn't say I was, but they've now unsubscribed thinking that I did. As I said in the video, people aren't listening to what I'm saying and are just using their emotions to jump to false conclusions. It's no wonder that I'm having trouble getting through to people.
    3
  8380. I agree 100%. Yet to the Socialist, you are (somehow) the oppressor/fascist, and you are exploiting the employees that you give paychecks too, allowing them to keep their lights on. How dare you! You're also providing a service to everyone who comes in to get their cars repaired. How dare you!
    3
  8381. Perhaps you could help me. Maybe you can explain why me using 57 sources is me at my "best", but using over 200 sources is me being "naiive"? Just like in these battle videos, I look at all sides of the argument (I am an ex-socialist), and I come to the most logical conclusions based on the evidence. It just doesn't compute why you would conclude that the method of history I use for these battle histories would be the correct one, if that exact same method fails so spectacularly at the videos on economics or politics. If you are disagreeing with them, you should be disagreeing with this video too, since they are built on the same fundamental principles.
    3
  8382. You can skip the Brevity video. That was in my "experimental" phase... The rest are good though. Crusader is 9.5 hours, so enjoy 👍🏻
    3
  8383. There's a couple more mistakes I've spotted :) They're all minor, but it's still annoying... I did have more time to work on the script than normal, so that's why it's flowing much better. It's definitely the most efficient script I've written so far.
    3
  8384. I felt bad (and stressed) making people wait so long for this, but now that it's out and I see comments like yours saying the wait was worth it, I'm both relieved but also in agreement. I don't think the quality would have been the same had this been split into separate videos, and even though some are still saying I should have split it up, this way was better. Unlike the British, I'm going to continue to keep everything together and not split them into useless penny packets that get destroyed!
    3
  8385. Yeah, that's a crazy statistic. However, we've got to remember that some of the units were undercounting their tanks in the hope that they would be given more, so it's probably the case that there were a few more on the Eastern Front than reported.
    3
  8386. Yes, the plan is to do the whole of the North Africa Campaign, which is why I have a playlist for it here with all the previous videos in the series https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    3
  8387. I'm working my through the North African Campaign chronologically, which is why there's not any "follow-up" videos yet. The Fall of Tobruk is currently in the editing/animation stage (I've only just finished the screenplay today), and I'm currently at the beginning stages of the research for the Axis advance into Egypt.
    3
  8388. Well, you've come to the right place. Hope you enjoy the video!
    3
  8389. That's awesome! I knew I'd got through to some, but didn't realize that others like yourself were also using my videos to help them get through to them as well. Is there any topic I can cover to help in your efforts?
    3
  8390. I worked 69.75 hours on this channel last week, and that's not including all the time I took to learn German on the side. I've averaged 73.9 hours a week since I went full-time on YouTube in April. Eye-strain is killing me, and my sleep has been affected, which has hurt my concentration. So it's a knock-on effect. Plus, I was rushing to edit Crusader, which was why I wanted to make a short video this week. Therefore, I can see why I made such a stupid error. I know that once I get to about episode 4 or 5 of Crusader, it'll be a ton of editing, so I need to be ahead before I hit that part... that's why I sort-of rushed this week's video and thus, in hindsight at least, it's not surprising to me now that I made a mistake. But I will correct it and move onto Crusader
    3
  8391. "TIK is a hard-line liberal British Empire fan." Churchill was an idiot and the British Empire committed many crimes. In fact, you will see this in Monday's video - the first video on Crusader.
    3
  8392. Fair enough, so which business planned the Holocaust then?
    3
  8393. Still not answering the question! Is it because you can't? To answer your question "do you define Capitalism as a "Free Market"... and why do you define any form of "State Intervention" within the context of Capitalist Society as being Socialist?" Historically, heavy state intervention in the economy (which is centrally planned) is the one trait that all socialist governments have in common. The opposite is true for capitalist countries - which by definition place their faith in supply and demand and free-markets, and thus less state intervention in the economy.
    3
  8394. I see you're refusing to answer my question. That's because the death camps were not free-market capitalism nor a result of supply and demand. National Socialism was a centrally planned economy, with heavy state intervention, to intervene in society, and remove the Jews from the means of production and society, in order to end the class struggle, and bring about a social revolution. Yes, the workers didn't rise up - because this wasn't Marxism. But National Socialism was still socialism.
    3
  8395. So you're saying that IBM was entirely responsible for the death camps? Or the Opel Corporation? Come on, which one owned and marketed the death camps? And how did supply and demand and free market capitalism result in the death camps?
    3
  8396. To be honest, you probably wouldn't have realised. In fact, I don't think anybody else did until I pointed it out.
    3
  8397. Thanks Finnish Guy!
    3
  8398. Hi
    3
  8399. No worres :) there's no point making these videos if I give the wrong information, so correcting mistakes is essential.
    3
  8400. "+TIK your definition of Socialism ( the Government does stuff - in the sense that you used it as in intervening in the economy rather than organising eg. raindancing or prayer sessions ) applies to Every Liberal Democracy Ever." Oh, you're finally getting it! Yes, it does. Unlike your definition, which excludes any socialism that failed as "not real socialism". Again, to quote from Wikipedia - "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." In National Socialist thinking, Aryans (the social-bit) seized the means of production from the Jews, and now owned the economy (social ownership), then self-managed the means of production. By doing so, they had to rid the Jews from society - so, their removal of the Jews from society is evidence of their socialism. "Hitler changing the definition means Hitler wasnt a socialist" Nope, it means he wasn't Marxist - which he said plenty of time he wasn't. "Social-Democracy isnt socialist" Yes it is.
    3
  8401. Cheers Rich! It wasn't a major deal, but it's still annoying :(
    3
  8402. Again, people have their own agenda and are pushing it. I'm not getting involved in the politics because I know the media (British and international) are biased and I know the 'democratic' government is corrupt, and I know Robinson is also in the wrong. Too many agendas, too much chest-pounding, and all it's doing is distracting people from the main issues.
    3
  8403. I've read a little more on this Tommy guy. For starters, the guy has been in and out of jail constantly, and his views are extreme. The fact that you mentioned the US-influenced far-right news organisation (Breitbart London, which again, I'd never heard of) should give you a clue to the nature of this guy's political stance. He was found recording the trial and sending that recording on, which is a big no-no. Looking at his history, the guy is clearly a trouble maker. You also have to remember that a lot of the most vocal people on the internet, and the people who run British media as a whole, are right-wing and hold far-right views. The backlash in the comment sections of some of my videos is proof of that! People are calling it unjust (their opinion) that he was just arrested and sentenced so quickly. Except he admitted his guilt straight away, so is it really that unjust? Those people saying it was unjust are pushing their agendas. Therefore I would encourage you to take everything you hear about this with a pinch of salt, and remember that in politics everyone's biased in some way or other and are pushing agendas.
    3
  8404. :D
    3
  8405. My accent's sweet? A lot of people don't like it!?
    3
  8406. The Wehrmacht wasn't clean at all. I will cover this in future videos, but my Fate of Stalingrad's Civilians video gives a taste of the atrocities committed https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw And no SS units at Stalingrad, or anywhere near.
    3
  8407. The ultimate plan is to cover all the battles in the North African Campaign - which is why I started from Operation Compass in 1940. I explain the future Battlestorm plans at 22:59 minutes onwards in this other video of mine in answer to one of the Patreon questions https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    3
  8408. "This is a TIK video, its a "discussion" not an argument lol." I think "counter-argument" is an acceptable term. This is a discussion, but within that you have arguments (as in a "case" or "assertion", not fight) and counter-arguments.
    3
  8409. Technically you'll see me on the 31st (which is a Monday) - but thanks! Happy holidays to you too
    3
  8410. I mentioned this in the video. I understand his motivations, and you can argue that he was morally right in what he did (although that is definitely debatable). But to try and defend him by saying he wasn't ordered to move up, or that he wasn't able to move up, or that units were in the way, or that it's the British armour's fault, or it's Norrie's fault, or Freiberg's fault, or.... None of that's true.
    3
  8411. People are already accusing me of being a fascist, a nazi, a communist, a socialist, a "libtard", pro-German, anti-German, pro-Soviet, anti-Soviet, anti-Russian, pro-British, anti-USA, pro-USA, and I've got one Nazi currently calling me a "Jewish shill". But names will never harm me. The only reason I covered the Nationalsocialism ideology is because I was doing research for the Holocaust videos I've committed to covering. I cannot cover it if I don't understand Nazi ideology or the Nazi economy. While I haven't made videos on the topic recently, my research has continued. The criticism has compelled me to look into every aspect of National-Socialism, Marxist-Socialism, Fascism, and the rise of Hitler, plus the workings of the Nazi economy. Some of this I've looked into before, but I'm going deeper. If I can't prove what Nationalsocialist ideology was all about, and show how it manifested itself in the economy, I cannot cover the Holocaust. Those who criticised me didn't even engage in "debate". But I've learned my lesson. I have a plan. It's a long-term plan which will take a while to take effect, but it'll place them in an unwinnable position (like the criticism to this video/the other Pienaar one).
    3
  8412. I think you already know, but it's not the videos that are tiring me out ;)
    3
  8413. @Erich Kirk - not compared to all the businesses and trade that could have happened if trade had been allowed normally. Think of North Korea vs South Korea and you'll understand the difference in the types of economies we're talking about.
    3
  8414. It's fine, you're entitled to your opinion! I do get annoyed with some of the Socialist Romancer comments because usually they swear at me or call me names etc, but if someone disagrees with me about Socialism, that's not an issue at all :) Back in the day when I first started on the socialism topic, a lot of socialist commentators told me that I was an idiot for reading Mises and Rothbard, and told me and others not to read such "rubbish". Interestingly, I hadn't actually read Mises and Rothbard at that point (I've only just recently managed to get to Rothbard!). I had independently come to my conclusions about Hitler's Socialism by simply reading Mein Kampf. However, I don't know about you, but when someone tells me not to do something, I do it. (And when someone tells you to do something, I always don't, because that's just me.) So I did start reading them, and I now know exactly why the socialists were telling me not to read them - because socialists have nothing that can stand up to their arguments. If you've read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" first, then I have another book to suggest for you. I know it's not an easy read, but I would recommend you download the free pdf of Mises's book "Socialism". It pretty much spells out exactly why socialism can't work in the real world. Here's the link https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis
    3
  8415. You're not wrong. People lose confidence in their governments when they realize (usually at the beginning of a recession) that government taxation, spending and inflation of the currency supply hasn't worked, and was, in reality, a colossal waste of resources extracted from the people who would have spent it much more efficiently. Buying military stuff and spending resources on public services keeps the bubble propped up, and gives them the excuse they need to keep taxing you and inflating your savings and earnings away
    3
  8416. Long video, but I'd recommend you watch it from start to finish https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8417. All government spending is consumption of resources from the private sector. So governments require a private sector in order to extract wealth from in order to prop up their own 'economies'. Thus, every socialist state must have a private sector (even if that private sector is the Black Market).
    3
  8418. I will agree about the 1941-1943 period. It does appear that the "turning point" happened within that period. Glad you're enjoying the videos :)
    3
  8419. I think so ;)
    3
  8420. Thanks David! Forgot about that one! I'll update the unit card :)
    3
  8421. Zelota, you are correct about my lack of Italian sources. And thank you for the book recommendations. Massignani and Greene I will look into (not seen that before). O'Hara's book might be useful (although too late now to read it for this operation). I have the Iron Hulls book, but the Kindle version is a mess and not recommended (for example, it's all in bold type, and is badly written). I actually completely forgot I'd bought it (probably because it was so badly written) until I just checked my Amazon and discovered I had bought it. I'll try use it to figure out the Gambara situation in Crusader.
    3
  8422. The mighty Jamie fails again ;) congratulations Raymond
    3
  8423. Kevin, yes I studied history at both college and university (different here in the UK). Everyone is biased. Some have agendas or ulterior motives - and that's bad. But everyone is biased and they can't help it. For example, if you can only speak one language, that's bias because you can't access all the sources. Or even if you could read all the sources, it doesn't mean you could possibly read all of them. There is also the subconscious biases like nationality, or conscious ones like politics etc. Really, there's no getting away from bias, which is why I'd recommend reading (or watching) widely on the subject in order to circumvent it. However it's obvious when agendas creep into the text. For Market Garden, anyone looking to publish in the US avoids placing the blame on the failure at Nijmegen (including the majority of British sources). This is despite the fact that blame could still be placed at Browning's door. But I suspect the reason is because once you open that door it's hard to close it. Luckily, not everyone has an agenda. But again, the best way to figure out agendas is to read more than one book on the subject, preferably one which contradicts the other's view so that you can come to your own conclusions.
    3
  8424. @Joao the Longest Day was good. Just remember the clickers and John Wayne being an out-of-context cowboy
    3
  8425. @Tim, yeah I certainly have to prioritze content, just because of hte nature of the whole thing. But I love reading the comments, which is why I wanted to say that I read them all. Market Garden video is also my most watched video (currently) and was my very first. A lot liked it so I hope you do too
    3
  8426. Good to see you've found me Chappy! Definitely keep in touch! :) I don't know if you remember, but I didn't even take history in school. I only started in college and then went to uni. And I agree, our teachers weren't the best!
    3
  8427. It's all combined in there. I believe history is useful to everyone for these reasons :)
    3
  8428. Glad I could be of help! Interestingly, lower ranking generals can also command higher ranks. This happens during Operation Crusader (which I'll cover in the video) and it happens a lot during the Stalingrad Campaign. Makes things complicated as you'll see, but also confuses things, which is why I'm expecting you to be more confused after reading this :D
    3
  8429. I've played it. Trust me, I've played it. But it never seemed to quite click. Took too long to expand. Much prefered HOI
    3
  8430. I'm actively trying to be as unbiased as possible and question myself. I may have biases, but I have no agenda to push. Above all else, that is something you can rely on with me. But yes, unfortunately I am biased. I'm reliant on the English sources (or translations from other languages, which is limiting). This is why my next goals are learning the German and then the Russian. And other biases will slip in too. But at least I'm aware and I'm trying to rectify these issues.
    3
  8431. That's interesting! You're not into history, but here you are watching my videos? What's the reason behind this?? And a sim racing forum? That's a bit random! I'm glad you liked the oil video. Hopefully I'll be able to expand on that some day soon, although it does put everything else I mention about WW2 into perspective :) thanks for commenting Justin
    3
  8432. You could also say Finland vs Britain in WW2.
    3
  8433. Probably the shortest war in history https://youtu.be/NRqaveOD8TU
    3
  8434. I'm afraid I have no plans on learning anything but German (now) and Russian (a little later once I hang of German). Why don't you do a video on the topic??
    3
  8435. According to the list in the pinned comment right now, 254 on WW2
    3
  8436. Glantz is the master - and Ostkrieg is a good book. Your question about the railroads is a bit of a complicated one to answer. It appears that they didn't think it would have delayed much, and the Germans would simply have repaired them (which they did rapidly in other areas). Allied logic thought it was better to bomb the industries etc in order to shorten the war and save more lives that way.
    3
  8437. Coincidently, the first book you mentioned arrived yesterday. Not got the others but I will get them. The Churchill one I may hold off for now because of priorities.
    3
  8438. Awesome! Yes, there's definitely more to the war than vehicles and individual stories. That stuff's great on a tactical level, but I think the war comes alive when you start looking at the operational and strategic levels. Well, if and when you do get these books, I hope you enjoy them. And thanks Jake, good luck with school!
    3
  8439. Oh :) Pun intended. Thanks!
    3
  8440. It's a good narrative, however it's out of date and Beevor is very much anti-Russian. If you do read it, I highly encourage you to read "Stalingrad" by Glantz and House, which will correct many of the mistakes. Glantz's Stalingrad is not as "nice" to read as Beevor's, but it's the latest we have on the topic and doesn't have the Cold War anti-Russian bias that Beevor has.
    3
  8441. I'm sure I've read that but I don't remember much about it off the top of my head. The chapter you mentioned which debunks Suvorov's thesis will come in handy for a future video though, thanks very much!
    3
  8442. How would you know that? Because the video length was short? ;)
    3
  8443. Thank you, and thank you for being one of them! It's a big milestone :)
    3
  8444. Thank you! And thank you to your wife! I didn't realize that some of them were Ukrainian. Sorry about that. I'll leave it up to her if she wants to skip them or not :)
    3
  8445. I'll find an excuse to wear it, but it might not be in the Battlestorm series. I prefer the blue shirt I wear
    3
  8446. Dieppe?
    3
  8447. Yeah but it would get confusing because most of the units on the map would be like this. It's probably best if I just keep reminding people how depleted each unit was in turn
    3
  8448. Not a monetarist. In fact, I'm against monetarism. You would have realized that had you bothered to watch the video before commenting.
    3
  8449. True, although property prices are actually in a bubble right now due to the inflation, so it might be better to get the gold first, then buy property during or after the crisis. Hard to tell though http://pricedingold.com/uk-house-prices/
    3
  8450. I actually recorded this in December. I delayed it until now, but that was only because I wanted the Hitler's Socialism and Stick to Tanks videos out first
    3
  8451. Definitely! The economy was already declining last year, way before the virus came along. The virus is making things worse, and might be the pin that popped the stock market bubble, but it's masking the underlying state-manipulations in the economy.
    3
  8452. Yes, although this started a century ago and Biden is merely continuing the process.
    3
  8453. Saving allows investment, which stimulates growth. In fact, that's how you grow an economy. But Keynesians believe spending is what creates growth, which is why they print currency and destroy savers with lower and lower interest rates. There's a reason we've entered a period of prolonged slow growth (if any growth at all), and the reason is because of central banks
    3
  8454. Chicago School is pretty good! Their monetary theories are incorrect, but the rest is great, and I love reading Sowell. The Austrians have got it spot on though. They saw this current crisis from a mile away, which is why we're all calm right now (we're better prepared than most)
    3
  8455. Unions should be allowed to form and do their thing on public property, but workers would be smart not to join them, and private property rights must be protected
    3
  8456. I knew some people would complain because this is an economics video. So I've released this as an 'extra' video, so that they don't have as much to complain about :)
    3
  8457. Also, my Public vs Private video in case you haven't watched it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8458.  @Armageddon4145  I've seen your other comment Anton and I look forward to seeing a video response! Also sorry for not emailing you for a while, I've been struggling to keep up with the work load and have had to prioritize
    3
  8459. Congratulations!
    3
  8460. Yeah it's not a light read, but I do think the information provided is solid and well worth the effort. Things are going well, just trying to get reading and research done at the moment. How's things with you?
    3
  8461. Yes, exactly! And it's no wonder the EU is trying to stifle YouTube, because they can then exercise greater control over the limited media outlets that remain. Those who control the present control the past, those who control the past control the future. Controlling or even destroying the internet is a great way to destroy information you don't want the public to know about.
    3
  8462. At this point I'm not sure if they were Lend-Lease or just bought from the USA by Britain. They were definitely from the USA though.
    3
  8463. Good point Attila
    3
  8464. Glad you liked it Michael! I'm trying to be as fair as possible to all the characters, but it's not easy. Some of them do make really poor mistakes! But I do want to try and explain why they did it so that you can see that they're trying to do what's right. Nobody makes a deliberate mistake, otherwise it wouldn't be a mistake at all
    3
  8465. Considering the absolute insane stuff that's happened so far, I don't think this episode was too crazy. But hopefully still entertaining :)
    3
  8466. FIRST!
    3
  8467. What are you doing up so late?? Get to bed!
    3
  8468.  @ajsimo2677  You were close though!
    3
  8469. Okay but behind with everything. I won't be able to stay and chat unfortunately as I've got to keep working on future projects
    3
  8470. I genuinely believe that, if people take this more seriously, video platforms like YouTube can become far better than universities ever were. It's unfortunate that the internet has a (much justified) stigma, because if we can get past that then this opens the door to huge possibilities in the intellectual space
    3
  8471. 😂
    3
  8472. I'm glad to hear that. I've heard of some frightening scams where even interacting with the scammer in the comments can get your account hacked
    3
  8473.  @oceanmadrosci3381  You're on to me!
    3
  8474. I was wondering this too. The only reason my username is TIK (The Imperator Knight) is because someone else had the username I was going to use instead. I'm guessing YouTube has changed the rules since 2012 when I signed up
    3
  8475. Exactly, so we have to be constantly vigilent because more fake "TIK"s might appear in the future
    3
  8476. That's probably the one area of history I will say 'no' to, because it's not my cup of tea. I have considered doing the American Civil War though
    3
  8477. Yes! I do plan to do a video on Mr Mosley and the British Fascists. Not sure when it will be though
    3
  8478. @Davi Okamoto  😂
    3
  8479. Corporations are "organs of the State", so governments are keen to prevent their organs going under. This version of government is called Syndicalism or Fascism, which are Left Wing ideologies. Unlike President Harding, who tackled the 1921 Depression very quickly by NOT DOING ANYTHING except lower taxes and cut back on spending, Hoover and Roosevelt intervened so heavily in the economy that it's no wonder the Depression lasted until 1946 https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw Hoover and Roosevelt artificially kept wages high, printed currency (often 'forgotten' by lamestream economists), destroyed crops as the people starved, demanded that people hand in their gold to the US government before revaluing it and the dollar to much more favourable prices in order to save the corrupt banking sector... And the list goes on. I would recommend that you read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which you can find online for free. Alternatively, Murphy's "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression".
    3
  8480. What on earth are you talking about? You've jumped to some crazy conclusions there. At no point have I said that war criminals should be "given asylum". Individuals should be punished for the crimes they commit, but I don't think they should not be judged by other criminals because that wouldn't be a fair trial. And the fact is that the Geneva Convention applies to all prisoners regardless of other considerations. Also, the fact that you called the Waffen-SS "fascist" when they are quite clearly National Socialists is proof that you aren't a regular viewer of mine. I would suggest that you learn the difference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  8481. There's basically no difference between the two. I used to believe there was when I was a Socialist, but I've now come to realize that they're just two branches of the same ideology, that split apart during WW1. Their end-goal is the same, even if their methods are slightly different.
    3
  8482. Name one country that has no taxation, no monopoly on law and order, no regulations, no centralised school system, no state owned companies or media, no nationalized roads or railways, no wage controls or price controls, no national military, no central bank and fiat currency, but one that uses gold (which is money/capital) and has a free market. When you point that country out to me, then that will be your capitalist state. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8483. East of Berlin
    3
  8484. Your comments basically confirm how brainwashed you are. But whatever you do, don't look yourself in the mirror. You might realize that your ego is invested in the wrong things.
    3
  8485. Feel free to show them! I hope they find it useful :) knowing what happened is only half the battle, with the historiography being the juicy other half. It's all about being able to think critically, scrutinizing every written word and presenting arguments. But I don't think you can't do any of that unless you can take a step back and look at a topic from as politically neutral a viewpoint as possible.
    3
  8486. John, please do not throw insults around. As I just said to someone else, discuss the facts and present counter-arguments to your hearts content. But don't start calling names or try to discredit the another person on a personal basis. Thank you
    3
  8487. I'm thinking of doing a few more "talking about history" videos similar to this style
    3
  8488. Correct. From what I remember, Mussolini announced it to the Italians at 1445 hours, and Hitler announced it at 1530 hours
    3
  8489. YES YOU ARE!
    3
  8490. My pleasure! I just wish YouTube hadn't removed the feature that allowed others to contribute captions, because people used to translate what I said into other languages
    3
  8491. They did technically want to create a senate and made moves to implement it. (Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," P382-385.) "Hitler's concept of the constitution was therefore as follows. There was to be a republic, at whose head stood a leader elected by the senate. Membership in the senate was to be tied to the highest positions and changed. Besides the senate there was to be a parliament which had to support the leader, but which could intervene in the leadership of the state if necessary. The legislative and the executive had to be strictly separate." - Zitelmann, P385.
    3
  8492. Fighting a covert cold war (e.g. China in Korea, or China vs Soviet Union's border clashes) and being in a hot war, are two different things. Hitler's view is that he was already in a hot war with the USA. The first point doesn't say this, but implies only that relations were strained. This is why a lot of people (and historians) miss the point that Hitler thought he was already fighting a hot war.
    3
  8493. Everyone deserves a heart for having their notifications on
    3
  8494. I think it was Zitelmann in "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction" who said that Hitler had zero understanding of what the United States was, and just seemed to think it was a wilderness and a backward country... Boy was he wrong!
    3
  8495. I don't mind you disagreeing with me, it shows you're thinking, and that's the purpose of this channel - to get you to think! I actually agree with you to an extent. I think the plan went wrong, but then Hitler had to justify it by saying that the USA declared war on him. Whether he believed his own spin on it or not, I'm still not sure, but it is true that the USA and Germany were fighting in the Atlantic at this point, so maybe.
    3
  8496. You guys don't know me very well. IF there is something that needs saying about anything, I'd have said it. I've already come out several times against the Lamestream narrative, e.g. Hitler being a Socialist, not a Capitalist
    3
  8497. "That's simply false. It was Hoffmann who said "Hitler always condemned these acts of violence and the individual excesses that occured." This is not Irving distorting history, its what the first-hand witness himself said... Irving is not changing the evidence he is quoting the primary source material, which says that Hitler condemned violence against the Jews - an exceptional position to be taking at a time when the almost the entirety of Europe was rife with anti-semitic hatred. So when Irving states that Hitler was a friend of the Jews he does so as a professional historian recording the astonishing first-person testimony of the primary source to the actual events in question." 1. Hofmann said more than that. Previously, Hofmann made it clear that Hitler was only condemning the acts of criminal violence, not the political acts of violence. That's the key point, because when Hofmann says Hitler is condemning the "individual excesses that occurred" he is quite clearly incorrect. 2. Irving did distort history - as I said, he completely invented the idea that Göring was there! He also selectively quoted from Hitler, removing the part where Hitler said "By doing this [removing the party badge] you admitted that you did not belong to the party at the moment when you committed that act." This gives the false impression that Hitler condemned the act of violence, rather than condemning the removal of the badge. 3. The witness was a Nazi, and his bias was evident enough for his views to be dismissed in court. Again, I said this in the video you quite clearly didn't watch fully, or if you did, you didn't pay proper attention to. 4. He quoted from the primary source, but misquoted it, and distorted its meaning. 5. Hitler didn't condemn violence against the Jews - he promoted it. If he didn't, then you and Irving are saying that Hitler wasn't a National Socialist, since National Socialism demands the removal of the Jews from society, as laid out by Hitler in Mein Kampf - “The nationalization of the masses can be successfully achieved only if, in the positive struggle to win the soul of the people, those who spread the international poison [i.e. the Jews] among them are exterminated.” - Hitler Mein Kampf, P307. 6. When Irving says Hitler was a friend of the Jews, he's wrong. Hitler was calling for their extermination (see the above Mein Kampf quote). It is not "professional" to misquote and distort history like that.
    3
  8498. This video shows that Irving didn't do very good research. And yes, politicians and the Lamestream media are lying to us, but this channel is about history, not Socialism.
    3
  8499. Even if said "tribe" was operating the way you believe, it's irrelevant to this topic, or the fact that Irving has manipulated and distorted the evidence about the Holocaust. Interestingly, as National Socialists, you're denying that Hitler implemented Socialism (anti-Semitism). I guess Hitler wasn't a real Socialist then, was he?
    3
  8500. I'm glad you have sympathy! However many of my most disliked videos were not disliked by my regular subscribers. Too early days to check this one, but I think a lot of the commenters who aren't happy with it were not subscribers. Usually their scouts report back to the hive, which brings the hordes to mass downvote. This is why almost every video I make on a controversial subject never does well at first, because YouTube sees that most viewers have clicked on the video, downvoted, and then gone away, which tells the algorithm not to promote the video. That's why it's ironic that my critics tell me I'm doing this for "the money". If I was doing it for "the money" I'd avoid anything that might be controversial, like this subject.
    3
  8501. Because they're Socialists, that's why. All Socialists (including National Socialists) are the same - emotionalists who can't stand hearing people who disagree with them, so they shut them down, call them names, and accuse them of lying
    3
  8502. YouTube censors people saying things like "Thanks TIK" or "Great video", so it doesn't surprise me that your comment was censored too.
    3
  8503. That's how you pronounce "Lieutenant" in British English.
    3
  8504. There's a link in the description to a list of most of my books (it's not a complete list at the moment)
    3
  8505. YouTube censors my videos too, like my Greek video. It's stupid. I understand that people don't like other people, but censorship isn't the answer.
    3
  8506. Actually I watched it for the first time last night with my friends, which is why I wasn't replying as quickly as usual. Good film, although the actual history of the trial itself is more dramatic.
    3
  8507. Incorrect. I'm not saying that. In fact, I'm on record of disputing Evans interpretation of National Socialism. The difference is that debating interpretation is fine, whilst deliberately distorting the evidence to suit your agenda, is not. Irving deliberately distorted the evidence to twist history. He was writing fiction, not history.
    3
  8508. @Michael McCabe, no it's actually Terri Young, the graphics designer who did the maps for this series. I knew she used to have a Twitch channel so I asked her if she would mind doing a voice over for the female quotes and she said yes. I could have asked my sister (who has appeared on my channel before in videos that are no longer available due to COPPA and the FTC saying you can't have videos that "appeal to children", like gaming videos) but she doesn't live in the same area and hasn't been home to visit in a while so it made sense to ask Terri
    3
  8509. Well, I don't like to skip this, which is why I was working through the North African Campaign first before getting distracted with Stalingrad. I will get to Torch once we're through North Africa, and I'll definitely be mentioning its impact during this series, because it does have an impact on the Stalingrad airlift
    3
  8510. "The British also appealed to nationalism, and the state controlled most things during the war. So you could say they were national socialists as well. In fact you could say we're all national socialists if we like our country and support any social program." Did they believe in the Racial Theory of History and want to create a racial socialist state? Liking your country is call "patriotism". Liking your country and government is called "nationalism". Liking your country and wanting the State control of the economy is called "Fascism". Wanting a one-nation world with the State in control of the economy is called "Marxism". "I think it is interesting to break such divisions, and focus on the realities on the ground." Okay. "Not holding elections is bad" Only if you're a socialist who believes that the public majority should tyrannize the minority (either bourgeois minority, or Jewish minority). "not allowing civilians to evacuate Stalingrad is bad, forcing people to work in gulags is bad, and committing genocide is bad." Agreed. All of them were bad, and the Soviet Union was and did all of those things. "Appealing to nationalism is not inherently bad." Nationalism and Socialism are two sides of the same coin. There's no difference between the nationalization of the means of production and the socialization of the means of production. "Appealing to collective action is not inherently bad." By "collective" you mean "public". Public comes from the latin publicus meaning "state". Appealing to the State to force you to do things against your will is inherently bad. Public vs private video for the definitions of the terms socialism and capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8511. It takes a LOT of hours to do these videos. But it's worth it in the end to see the battle play out, and have people get a lot from this as well :) a lot more to come!
    3
  8512. You still playing it? I wish I had time to give the new one (Bloody First) a go
    3
  8513. It's Terri Young who made the maps (link in description). She used to have a Twitch channel, so I asked her if she would mind doing a voice over and she said yes :)
    3
  8514. Thanks for your feedback and I am listening. However, I always feel awkward reading female quotes with my manly voice, plus it makes sense for a female to read out the female quotes. So if we consider that this was Terri's first experience doing voice-over work, which means she has a lot of potential to improve (especially if I buy her the same quality microphone I have), I think we should give it another couple of shots first.
    3
  8515. So far I haven't come across anything. It has certainly not been seen as a significant factor if it happened. Beevor does get things wrong, but saying that I've been surprised by finding out that certain things he said which appeared to be incorrect on the surface when I read them, turned out to be true. So psy-ops could be a thing.
    3
  8516. Not on it's own. But they may have remained in the Caucasus (getting some oil) and it may have bought them time to do another offensive in 1943, assuming they went to the total war footing, which they only did after Stalingrad.
    3
  8517. I know the Romanians take the blame in a lot of the traditional narratives. I'll be coming back to this in a future video, but blaming the Romanians is not fair unless you also blame the poor German planning and ignoring the fact that the Romanians were stretched thin over a wide front, but still fought hard, despite the lack of heavy weaponry.
    3
  8518. Yes, definitely! It's not as in-depth as the others, but you're still getting much more than anything else on the battle.
    3
  8519. I hope not! I'm just talking about stuff that's out there already - although only in the academic history books and not in the 'popular' history books. It'll probably be a while before the popular history books and historians catch up.
    3
  8520. I'd say it wasn't necessary, and they could have bypassed it or sat south of the city and hit it with artillery. But at the same time, they could have taken the city in August if they'd had their entitled reinforcements.
    3
  8521. It stands for "The Imperator Knight". This goes back to my gaming days where I basically wanted a commanding username. I shortened it to TIK because nobody could say or spell the word "Imperator".
    3
  8522. You forgot to blame the weather too ;)
    3
  8523. Just to clarify what Luke Feet said, the way things turned out, I don't think going into Stalingrad was a good idea. That said, if 6th Army had received the reinforcements they were entitled to, then yes, going into the city would have been a good idea. Or if Army Group South had concentrated on Stalingrad/Astrakhan, and then been split in two to go south, then again going into Stalingrad would have been a good idea. But with Paulus and Hoth's armies as weak as they were, no it wasn't a good idea, and they should have avoided it.
    3
  8524. Haha thanks! You're quite lucky actually since I can't reply to most comments anymore. I do read them all though :)
    3
  8525. I mostly relied on Leidtke in this video. I understand that the Germany Official History states other things, but I'm not convinced in this case that their statistics are accurate. According to the official history, total German manpower deficit in the East between December 1941 and April 1943 was 714,935 (I've just crunched the numbers so apologies if it turns out to be out slightly), but according to Glantz in When Titan's Clashed the German army in the East was 2,700,000 men in December 1941, and 2,732,000 men in April 1943. Therefore it actually increased by 32,000 men, at a time when the official history says it should have decreased by 714,935. I think this can be explained by the "wounded" figures. It's similar to the tank "strengths" the Germans recorded. The Germans record tank strenght by those in the field, not by those damaged (in a lot of cases, for minor repair issues) that are sat in the repair shops. And they list tank "losses" only if the tank is written off completely, to make it look like they're taking fewer losses than they actually were. But in the manpower situation, it seems they're recording sick and wounded, but then not saying they've gone back to the front - which as I've just shown above, leads to problematic discrepancies in the statistics. Therefore, right or wrong I'm using Liedtke. And I'm sorry if that turns out to be an issue. If I have come to the wrong conclusion as a result of bad statistics (if proven) I will make a correction-video.
    3
  8526. Excellent! I look forward to seeing your results! That said, I'd highly recommend focusing on one battle or campaign at a time. The devil is in the details, plus you'll get more chance to gather more sources from both sides.
    3
  8527. Yeah, most of my videos are gameplay videos, which don't appeal to everyone. But there's going to be new videos every Monday :)
    3
  8528. You'll be happy to know that I pretty much answer all of this in this coming Monday's video :)
    3
  8529. This particular video isn't about Nazi atrocities and can't possibly mention everything, but I do have several videos on the atrocities (see links below). That said, I don't appreciate being called "grandson of killers and invaders" considering I'm not a Socialist (National or Marxist) and don't support said ideologies. You're assuming/accusing me of being something I'm not with zero evidence or explanation, which is not appreciated. Baltic civilians https://youtu.be/PWY3ByskitQ Stalingrad civilians https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw Leningrad civilians https://youtu.be/nnyJ-qlzZGk
    3
  8530. One nation under God is still a nation. Internationalism is no different than nationalism. Why don't you get that? And socialism predates Marxism. It's simple, yet you don't get it.
    3
  8531. An outbreak of jaundice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaundice
    3
  8532. I really struggle to pronounce the "ch" part of German words. I keep forgetting how to say it, so I think I pronounce it two different ways in this video!
    3
  8533. At this point, probably. This is why, if there was a 'turning point' to this war, it was probably before Stalingrad. That said, Stalingrad is definitely an important battle, and it didn't necessarily have to work out the way it did.
    3
  8534. It is the German name for the milk farm in the area.
    3
  8535. "While Economy is an absolutely vital part of the War Effort (and can be the deciding factor if everything else is fairly similar), at the end of the day a nation NEEDS to have formed and properly appointed people that KNOW how to effectively use the war material the country has, otherwise they can be beaten by a weaker force - all one has to see is the disaster in France 1940, when the Allies had a rather substantial economic advantage over Germany, but an incredibly worse command system and very limited perception of the usefulness of the Tank arm, despite having better armour." This shows that incompetent State bureaucrats cannot appoint the correct commanders and that the State-created command system mismanaged the resources it was given, which is why the side with the better resources lost. This is evidence that goes against the idea that the State should have a monopoly over all military power.
    3
  8536. I don't delete comments (unless it's genuine spam or something). YouTube has automatically deleted the comment because of the words. They delete my comments too when I quote Karl Marx's Anti-Semitic writings, for example. This is why I was careful to not say the word in the video.
    3
  8537. They were cannibalizing the parts from others, but it appears to have been specific parts that were breaking down and then not replaced, like the starter motors. So cannibalizing them wouldn't work because they all had the same problem. Plus the fuel issue may have been a factor too.
    3
  8538. In some ways, yes!
    3
  8539. Lend Lease trucks certainly helped the Soviets in their offensives in 1944 and 1945. And additional trucks would have helped lessen the load of the overburdened railways. The problem wasn't that there wasn't enough trucks. The problem was that there wasn't enough oil to power the trucks.
    3
  8540. I'm not sure there will be another Keelhaul video. I think that series has run its course, unless something comes up.
    3
  8541. FIRST!
    3
  8542. "It's pure cuckoldry to the censorious left." You mean, YouTube? The platform we're on? The one that has the ability to arbitrarily wipe this channel from existence for saying a single word that they've decided means something it doesn't? The one that has censors who check the first seconds of a video to make sure it conforms to their Communist Guidelines? That one? Huh, I wonder what possible reason I would have to make such a disclaimer at the start of my videos on fascism... No, the reason escapes me...
    3
  8543. You were fourth on my end I'm afriad
    3
  8544. I'll be making a video about this soon. Gnosticism is provably the basis for the ideology of all socialisms, including Fascism. It isn't one giant "mass movement", but it's the cultish element behind all these ideologies. When you see the connection, it'll all make sense. Literally, all the pieces of the puzzle come together
    3
  8545. You were first! Congrats!
    3
  8546. You're over thinking it. Rule of cool + me not wanting every unit on one side to look the same.
    3
  8547. First!
    3
  8548. Would you care to explain what parts of this "take" of mine is wrong?
    3
  8549. It's just a typo. I know it's the SPD / USPD / MSPD / KPD.
    3
  8550. That's not what he says in Mein Kampf. He says he was only ever a spectator at some of their mass meetings, and wasn't a Social Democrat.
    3
  8551. Because the footage isn't available on YouTube, and the only videos I've seen it on are on some questionable channels, so I don't want to link to them because I don't want to be associated with them.
    3
  8552. I would say the three are: Communism is Socialism for the workers and everyone else gets to be enslaved or killed. Nazism is Socialism for our race and everyone else gets to be enslaved or killed. Fascism is Socialism for our nation and good and evil are determined by your national loyalty. Communism isn't for everyone, it's only for the workers. Everyone who isn't a worker (Kulaks, bourgeoisie, farmers, managers, landlords) is either murdered and enslaved. And the reason I changed it to "race" for Nazism is because for Nazism the race is the nation, and the nation is the race. It's more accurate to say "race" though because there were Germans living outside of Germany that needed to be brought back into the homeland, either by immigration or by conquest.
    3
  8553. Watch the first 15 minutes of this video (I walk through Marx's political program) https://youtu.be/pwJf8O1S6eA And see this video to know what Marx's ideology is really about https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8554. We are being told that this is the political spectrum https://tfipost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/left_right_political_spectrum_011-750x375.jpg And while not a perfect representation, here is an image that may open your eyes a little Seth https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KveTp8yP0JY/UDcksz2AOAI/AAAAAAAAAII/_zzTjvnb5AU/s1600/True+Political+Spectrum+2.jpg Alternatively https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XXq3G0aG2TE/VyLRMqsuxxI/AAAAAAAADQQ/avw1eWJOE0MsFMiU9rAaHt2eM-_IwBragCK4B/s1600/political%2Bspectrum.jpg
    3
  8555. It's not on YouTube. Go to Bitchute and search for "Hitler Communist", and you'll find other people that I'm absolutely not advocating you should watch showing the clip whilst claiming things about Hitler that I don't agree with, which is why I'm not giving you the link directly because I don't want people thinking that I, in any way, agree with said people.
    3
  8556. Democracy is "people power". Except the "people" are the public, and the public is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y So democracy is State power https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I Therefore, North Korea is a Democracy since the people (the workers' State) is in power.
    3
  8557. FIRST!
    3
  8558. State control of the means of production = gubermint doing stuff in the economy https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8559. And conservatives and liberals, and monarchists.
    3
  8560. Ah, that's unfortunate. It also places the original source in the middle of the Cold War, where Soviet propaganda could play it's part there, downplaying numbers. I wonder if there's a more modern Russian source, or someone else using the archives that can confirm the numbers 🤔
    3
  8561. I'd recommend the videos I've made detailing why Suvorov's thesis is wrong. Here are two of them, but there are more https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    3
  8562. Technically, I'm not. I think a State (e.g. a government, a corporation, a syndicate, a trade union, or another hierarchy of society) can exist, so long as individuals voluntarily associate and voluntarily contribute to it. Once coercion comes into it, then I have a problem with it, which is why I'm against all current States.
    3
  8563. Wow thank you!
    3
  8564. There's always going to be a few weeks between each season of Stalingrad, to give me time to do the remaining research, the script, and the editing (editing for the first video). Was working on the animation today, and have been recording the audio. So with that in mind, the next season will probably start in two or three weeks' time.
    3
  8565. Another commenter who can read Russian has translated the Soviet source which does say 60,000 for the Soviet side. However the source was quoting from another source from the 1960s, which places it in the middle of the Cold War. Soviet propaganda could play it's part there, downplaying the number of troops involved. You're correct to ask the other questions. This is why the current numbers on both sides are questionable.
    3
  8566. It was Gavin of the 82nd Airborne
    3
  8567. How can I be more "Britisher"? I think his accent is stronger than mine! But I can see the similarities :)
    3
  8568. I'll give you a clue - Monday at 5pm London Time ;)
    3
  8569. He's a good general, but in his memoirs he lied heavily about Stalingrad to pin the blame on Paulus and also rid himself of any blame. The problem is he was at fault for a few reasons. He also failed to mention the crimes he committed, which is why popular opinion sees him as a great general.
    3
  8570. Oh don't worry, I will :)
    3
  8571. Hey Bucket! Oh wow, awesome! I hope your paper goes well. What specifically is it about? The entire battle or just parts of it?
    3
  8572. I'm not that old!
    3
  8573. Good point about the witnessing of the reliefs of the withdrawing commanders in 1941-42. I hadn't seen it like that. Even so, there was no guarantees that breaking out immediately, or even attempting it later, would lead to success. I suspect that 6th Army may have survived a breakout, but it still would have been a bad German defeat, with a lot of manpower and equipment losses and a reverse on a similar scale to as it happened anyway.
    3
  8574. It will be a while away, but I have begun to collect books on it (currently only have 1, but a big wishlist haha)
    3
  8575. By the time December rolls around, you're correct. But in late November, there's a good chance that most of 6th Army could have broken out. It would have meant the sacrifice of a lot of their heavy equipment, since most of their horses weren't trapped in the encirclement, but they could have broken out. Problem is that Manstein Hitler and the Luftwaffe are telling Paulus to stay where he is, so he doesn't move.
    3
  8576. Really? I heard it was more like "vysh"???
    3
  8577. I know, I screwed this one up :(
    3
  8578. Yeah, it's something that could work, although I messed up here. The main issue is the length of time it takes to make this sort of animated video. Overall I'd rather get videos out more often than wait for months just to do one like this. That was the lesson I learnt at the time.
    3
  8579. Yeah, I won't make that mistake again :) you'll be happy to know I'm currently researching Battleaxe now
    3
  8580. That's not a bad idea. Would be difficult to create all the figurines and position them, but I'll consider it
    3
  8581. It's not "Queen's English", but it's not really a local accent either. It's a bit of a mix, which is why nobody can place it. I'd rather not tell anyone where I'm from or currently living, so I'm keeping it vague. But I will clarify that there is no such thing as "standard British English". Some will argue that there is, but don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise.
    3
  8582. Zaitzev hasn't arrived yet. He was part of the 284th Rifle Division which only just started crossing the river in this episode
    3
  8583. Little videos? This video is 47 minutes long!
    3
  8584. The simple answer is that Hitler's idea was to win the West (maybe viewing them as the easy target), then turn all attention to the East again. We have to remember that the Germans have been fighting almost exclusively in the East for three years by that point, and hadn't won. So defeating the western Allies (again) was probably considered the easier target.
    3
  8585. I don't recommend it
    3
  8586. Genau
    3
  8587. Haha sadly I can't reply to all comments these days, but I do read them :) cheers!
    3
  8588. Good old YT
    3
  8589. Really? Oh wow, it was quite a popular one back in the day. Until I made this video, I assumed most people had heard of it
    3
  8590. Clarification: he was Austrian in terms of 'nation', but was German in terms of 'race', since Austrians are 'Germans'.
    3
  8591. Please watch my Public vs Private video, it will address pretty much everything you said https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8592. That would explain why my viewership and subscriber numbers (coming in) have declined over the past month. A couple of people have been complaining recently that they're not getting notifications for my videos, so I suspect Corporate YouTube is up to something behind the scenes.
    3
  8593. This video will explain why China is socialist, not capitalist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8594. @Kevin Pascual - from what I can tell, Evans uses the term 'socialism' to mean 'Marxism'. He doesn't seem to realize that 'socialism' came before 'Marxism' and that 'Marxism' wasn't/isn't the only version of 'socialism'. This is understandable since all Marxists believe Marxism is the only version of socialism. The problem is that it is not. So when Evans says "it's not socialism", what he means is "it's not Marxism". But he also doesn't know what bog-standard 'socialism' is (collective public/state control of the means of production). It's understandable though, since the Marxists have muddied the terms. It also makes sense because the terms 'socialism' and 'communism' meant the same thing back in the day. They only changed due to Lenin/Stalin. So Evans, who clearly hasn't looked into the issue, assumes all socialists must be Marxists/communists, which is not the case.
    3
  8595. *hic, show me the way to go home, I'm tired and I want to go to bed, I had a little drink about an hour ago, and it’s gone right to my head...
    3
  8596. My video explaining why the Germans had the tactical advantage with their tanks early war https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74 My video explaining the dire state of Soviet artillery and anti-tank forces prior to Barbarossa, proving that a preemptive strike is not on the cards https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c My video on Soviet tanks https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 My video on Oil, explaining why Germany had to attack in 1941 https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg And my video on the manpower numbers, showing that the Soviets were outnumbered at the beginning of the war https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds I will come back to Suvorov at some point to annihilate his myths, but it's a low priority, since it's obvious to anyone who's done any research that his version of events doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
    3
  8597. I have. This video on Soviet artillery shows they weren't prepared at all to attack, and the links in the description are to other videos that also confirm this fact https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    3
  8598. The Soviets were supplying them, and couldn't supply them enough oil to cover the deficit. Plus they would have been entirely dependent upon the Soviets. Please check out my oil video if you haven't seen it https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    3
  8599. My pleasure
    3
  8600. You didn't see my latest video on Pavlov's House, rawnukles. Definitely wasn't pro-Soviet in that video. In fact, I spent the whole of it debunking Soviet propaganda.
    3
  8601. I intend to do more on this subject, this was just a quick warm-up. But if you want a laugh, type in Viktor Suvorov in search and check out some of his lectures. I honestly could only watch so far before I felt my brain begin to melt.
    3
  8602. Yes, because none of Hitler's generals ever got sacked and stayed alive.
    3
  8603. Without evidence your opinion is just that, an opinion. You need to provide evidence that supports this idea that "every general realized" because right now what you're saying is that Hitler went around throwing generals into Gestapo prison cells all the time. That wasn't the case, at least not until post-July-Plot 1944.
    3
  8604. Money. Controversy sells. And in terms of the WW2 Eastern Front, Viktor Suvorov is a name people have heard of now because of this.
    3
  8605. The funny thing is that Stalin was the champion of the "socialism in one country" idea, who defeated Trotsky and later got rid of the Communist International. He also didn't invade many countries after the Cold War began.
    3
  8606. Oh wow, that's terrible! My history teacher in school said "next week, we're going to look at WW2!" and I got all excited. Came into class a week later, and all he talked about was the dropping of the two atomic bombs with very little context. I pointed out that that was the absolute end of the war, and was really more the start of the Cold War than anything else, which didn't get me very far. Also, I've been to Texas and Las Vegas. Great country. Weather's certainly better than miserable UK.
    3
  8607. No worries. What Keitel said was just a small part of it. But I will follow this up in future videos.
    3
  8608. Fine, you win. Change the circle to white light and apply the same principle.
    3
  8609. Careful, this is how conspiracy theories are born. A joke gets out of hand and then bam! The aliens insert rods.
    3
  8610. "Who care what he said? He stripped the flanks of every battleworthy division to throw into capturing the city." But he replaced them with an entire army - the Romanian 3rd Army. That army only arrived in September.
    3
  8611. Yes you are! Congrats!
    3
  8612. I've dealt with a situation like that a few years back. Someone was deliberately trying to start a fight at a house party so that they could get the neighbours (their friends) involved and hopefully turn it into a mass brawl.
    3
  8613. Thank you for your comment, Turtler. You mentioned sources that I haven't read, but will order the Turner book as it sounds like it'll be useful in the future.
    3
  8614. Glad you enjoyed it! And thanks for supporting!
    3
  8615. A couple of articles for you to read on how monopolies are created https://mises.org/library/five-ways-create-monopoly https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
    3
  8616. Our current economy is flooded with excess currency emitted from the central banks. Corporations are making profits by not actually producing anything of value, but merely because people keep throwing their cash at them on the stock market in the hope they'll make profit in the future. That's why the recent sell off happened. The central bank reduced their printing (they didn't stop it, just slowed it down) and the bubble started to pop. So yes, big corporation executives are paying themselves huge bonuses because they're getting wealth from the central banks, not because the businesses are profitable. It's all debt. Small businesses are what run the economy. They're not reliant on extra currency printing. In fact, currency printing hurts them as it's a hidden tax on them and their workers. In a recession, all companies (but especially the big ones) should lower costs, including labour costs. This will result in more people getting back to work, and thus get everything running again. Sadly, minimum wages and similar regulations and wage laws prevent this from happening, prolonging the recession. See this article https://mises.org/wire/here-we-go-again-fed-causing-another-recession And for full details, read Murray Rothbard's America's Great Depression https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression
    3
  8617. I mean, technically this is on the same lines, although this isn't anywhere near so outlandish
    3
  8618. "Tik, I’m curious to know if you believe unconditional surrender made Germany fight harder and prolong the war? " It may have prolonged the war, but it also prevented the Germans claiming that they were undefeated and going to war again twenty years later, like they did after the First World War. And I hadn't heard of the Morgenthau Plan, so I can't really comment on that.
    3
  8619. Yeah, I'm against the idea of live debates because that format favours emotional outbursts and insults (in other words, an argument). This is why I won't do live streams and such. I prefer to make a video or an essay, then have other people respond to that, and if I think they're worthy of a response, I'll respond to their response. Doing that favours those who rely on evidence and logic to back up their claims.
    3
  8620. +Chris Whittington very true. The RAF played almost no part in this battle as it was feared that they might shoot down their own transport planes. Kershaw says the lack of air support and interdiction to hamper German movements was a significant reason for the failure of the Operation.
    3
  8621. +KingSNAFU Good points. The point about Son is that the 101st can't really be blamed. They went for it, and the Germans blew it up. But at least they went for it. The difference with Nijmegen is that the 82nd didn't go for it until it was too late in the day. You could certainly argue that the capture of Nijmegen on day 1 would still have lead to a defeat around Elst rather than at Nijmegen. It's reasonable to assume though that XXX Corps would have had a better chance had Nijmegen bridge been taken early, or at least the delay wouldn't have been as bad.
    3
  8622. +cherrybrook1960 and if only the lady who lived near Arnhem Bridge hadn't called for a taxi. That was the turning point of the battle imho
    3
  8623. Hi John, I'm currently working on a Fort Eben Emael documentary (more than half way through it now) whilst also brainstorming ideas for future documentaries. The Bulge is definitely on the horizon as a few people have requested it :) not sure if it will be the one after Fort Eben Emael, but I do want to cover it soon. I've no plans to follow units through the war, although that's a good idea which I will consider. Thanks!
    3
  8624. +Thegamer8324 I'm not sure I can drink that much vodka, I may have to share it with everyone ;)
    3
  8625. +Gary Thomas That's exactly what I think, and I'm glad you came to that conclusion too :) next is the early part of the Western Desert Campaign, but I may move around a bit and do different battles (so, maybe do a few different playlists going at the same time, if that makes sense). I'd love to do Stalingrad, but I think it's a little too ambitious for where I am right now in terms of the quality of the work I'm producing. One day though :)
    3
  8626. I believe it's "Tankie" but I prefer something like "Sovietboo" or "Marxiboo"
    3
  8627. Every other week is Courland, then Q&As in between :)
    3
  8628. Privatisation is irrelevant because the National Socialist state was in control of the "privatized" industries from the inside. Therefore common control (socialism) was still in place. And let's not forget that the Jews and others were removed from society. Therefore the race was in common control (racial-socialism). Read "Wages of Destruction" by Tooze to understand fully the economy policies of control, and anything on the Holocaust to understand how non-Aryans were removed from the economy.
    3
  8629.  @gursugursakal5601  "So now they are in the same camp of Aristocracy & clergy." Kaiser Wilhelm II asked Hitler to restore the German monarchy. Hitler called him a fool. Hitler was not about the 'status quo'. He wanted to unite the German race, remove the Jews and others from society, end trade, conquer land in the east, and have a government that controlled every aspect of people's lives. There is no 'status quo' in Hitler's ideology. Nationalism is a group-ideology akin to socialism. By its very definition, it believes in a social-group - the nation. It's not patriotism (which is an individual's love of their own nation), but the idea that we are all the same because we share the same nationality. It's the same collectivist logic in why racists think all people of the same race are the same, or all sexists think all genders are the same, or all Marxists think that people of the same class are the same... The reality is that no two individuals are the same - individualism. Nationalism is a collectivist-ideology, which is why it's a left-wing concept.
    3
  8630. "@TIK so de Gaulle with his "Dirigisme" is socialist. And every war economy in WWII." Socialism is common control of the means of production. The state is the manifestation of that common control (that's why it's called the Public Sector). If industries are owned or controlled by the government, that is socialism. Capitalism is private ownership (meaning individuals can do what they want with their own property). If the state is dictating to the private individual what he can or cannot do with this property or means of production, then it's no longer capitalism. "German companies didn't become state-owned. Instead they become huge contractors of the state," That's incorrect. The state was in total control of those companies, to the point that wages, prices, orders and resources were dictated by the state. If you wanted additional workers, you went through the state. If you wanted foreign currency, you had to bribe state officials. If you wanted permits, you had to go through the state. Thus, socialism. Recommended reading: "The Vampire Economy", and "Wages of Destruction".
    3
  8631. I never said National Socialism was Marxist Socialism (communism). I pointed out they were both socialisms, and that there aren't as different as people make them out to be. Ideologically they are very similar. It's just race-struggle vs class-struggle. They're both still common control of the means of production, hence why they were totalitarian regimes.
    3
  8632. Thanks Olur, I will certainly try!
    3
  8633.  @Zveebo  The fact that you have to ask that question says that you haven't done your homework. First, watch this video https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ Then I would suggest reading "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, followed by "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. You can find free audio book versions of their books on YouTube if you don't want to buy physical copies.
    3
  8634.  @aquilatempestate9527  I have his books, and I've had them for a while. I'm not convinced. Now here's the question to you: what would be the counter-argument to Antony Sutton's books/argument? Could you give it? Or have you not asked 'the question' I always encourage you to ask?
    3
  8635. Can confirm, you were not first
    3
  8636. As I said, I will be doing a big video on the inter-war period. I'm not sure about the others, but probably at some point
    3
  8637. Hey everyone, I'm looking for more good books on the German economy. Does anyone have any recommendations? I wish I had read Mises's "Omnipotent Government" years ago - it would have saved me a lot of time and hassle! The guy was ahead of his time. The Age of Inflation books was a decent and recent find, but it's a little out of date in some areas. Obviously, Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries", and "Wages of Destruction" and "The Vampire Economy" are all good, but I could do with more besides this. Cheers!
    3
  8638. "every single time the free market was implemented or came to be naturally the effects I described have occurred throughout history." Name a single time when we've had a free market, and I'll show you taxation, regulation, inflation, wage controls, price controls, interest rate manipulations, and state intervention in the market. It's true that "real socialism has never been implemented", but it has been tried. Some countries tried to implement some free market principles, and did WAY better than their competition. It's the reason why the modern world ended up being far richer than anything else beforehand. However, we've forgotten the principles that made economics work, and now we're sliding back into a totalitarian cesspool. - "this can be traced back long before states even existed and can also be observed in natural systems free of any states or economic systems." Are you suggesting that cavemen had money and private property? They didn't have a free market. 'Capitalism' in any sense of the term was not created in prehistoric times. - "also id like to point out that my previous comment was apparently deleted" It looks like it's there now? But I'm not deleting comments. YouTube does automatically delete comments though, or hides them.
    3
  8639. They perceive me as a libertarian because they're ignorant.
    3
  8640. The reason they're importing so many people is purely because they need to due to the Socialist policies you're in favour of. You made your bed, and now you will lie in it. Also, I'm not a libertarian.
    3
  8641. Says this individual 🤦🏼‍♂️
    3
  8642. I'll take a look at that, thank you. A quick glance suggests that he only objects to the selfishness part? He also uses a priori reasoning, so that's highly questionable, since I've been there previously. Empricism doesn't work, which is why I ended up looking into the Objectivists in the first place.
    3
  8643. Except "genetics" in the way you're using it is a divine force. Genetics doesn't determine how you as an individual think.
    3
  8644. Yep, that's precisely it. Obviously Hitler was wrong about Socialism and the Jews, but people who are socialist won't abandon their faith.
    3
  8645. Hitler thought he was the good guy. He wasn't.
    3
  8646. First, I'm not a libertarian, nor dumb, and the fact you've all descended to the level of dogs in this discussion is evident that you're not thinking. A person's upbringing has more of an impact on their character than their "ethnicity". A person's gender has more of an impact on their personality than their "skin colour". Their education, their hobbies, their interests, their religion and ideology, philosophy, parenting, friendships, access to information, employment, and a host of other factors, are all more important than their biology. It is the human mind that makes us human. The mind is individual, not collective. There is no biological evidence for a spiritual collective mind that determines out thoughts, and it's ridiculous that you're asserting that there is.
    3
  8647. "Socialism bad. Mkay, but give some specific real world economics examples." Cambodia. Venezuela. Cuba. Vietnam. Ethiopia. Somalia. The Soviet Union. Robert Owen's New Harmony. The Labour Party's Tanganyika groundnut scheme... The list is nearly endless. - "Also, is there a way for socialism to produce good results?" No, because of the reasons outlined in this video: "What If There Were No Prices?" https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4
    3
  8648. You may operate on your instincts and wallow in filth, but I don't. I'm not an animal; I'm a conscious being who uses my brain.
    3
  8649. "Rightism is definied by being in favour of social hierarchies." Then I'm not a right-winger, neither are the libertarians, or ancaps, objectivists, nor anyone else advocating for a free market.
    3
  8650. Good question, and I don't know. I can't see why not, simply because the Sixth Army was supplied by the ground, so those supplies had to go somewhere.
    3
  8651. The numbers thing is a whole debate in itself. I actually got the 284,000 figure from Glantz as well. Wikipedia seems a little low in this case. I'll cover this in a future video. And I think the reason Richthofen said no is because they couldn't supply 750 tons. Or perhaps it was because they were overstretched and knew that Red Army opposition was stronger now than it had been? Good question. WIll also look into it.
    3
  8652. I'm working real hard to keep to this schedule - one video every Monday at 5pm London Time :)
    3
  8653. Exactly! You can't eat panzers!
    3
  8654. Thank you Marko! Don't worry, another will be out this Monday, and every Monday :)
    3
  8655. Thing is, I've said the exact same thing about the Kot'loban counterattacks in the Sixth Army Order of Battle video. Honestly, it's clear to me that the Germans like pincing from the north.
    3
  8656. I won't change the in-depthness or my morals, but I will adapt. I cannot grow and develop without change! :)
    3
  8657. One day, it will happen :)
    3
  8658. Well, I wanted to compare and see what the difference was. And then when I saw the difference, it was obvious then that the sources aren't giving enough credit to where it actually belongs L)
    3
  8659. Thanks for subscribing Russ, I hope you enjoy the other history videos I have. Another is coming out later today too (I post every Monday)
    3
  8660. When you assume your enemy can't hurt you, he'll surprise you.
    3
  8661. I'm glad you agree, I don't think it's wise to ignore the entire other side of the picture. "It was the weather" just doesn't cut it any more in my opinion :)
    3
  8662. I'm working on it. I've seen those comments too, and it's stupid. Hitler was in no way a Christian.
    3
  8663. Something on your mind?
    3
  8664. We don't have a free market now, and free market people already complaining about debt based economic model. And the fact you didn't know this says it all. You don't know what free market people think. You don't understand us.
    3
  8665. Thank you for the comment! I'm interested to hear more about the things addressed by the monarchists that the Third Positionists couldn't answer. What were those things?
    3
  8666. Thank you, I'm genuinely trying my best to understand these ideologies, and come to rational conclusions
    3
  8667. You underestimate me. I know that definitions change over time. And as an ex-socialist, I know exactly how the Marxists view what socialism is. My greatest flaw was that I assumed that people would listen first and accept the evidence, which would convince them of the truth. Turns out that they reject evidence, and don't even bother to listen. To them, there is no 'truth' as such, only opinions. Well, I only got over this hurdle earlier this year with my "But how do you know you're right?" video.
    3
  8668. Your first point is solved by the free market. You have assumed that Capitalism is the free market. That is a false assumption. And point two is also solved by the free market. There would be no commons at all, and therefore no tragedy if everything was private property.
    3
  8669. I'm trying to understand this. You're saying I'm wrong, but in your counter-argument, all you've done is repeated back exactly what I said, confirming that I was right. What are the three things I've had supposedly confused? It literally says this stuff in Mein Kampf.
    3
  8670. Because I'm not a Libertarian
    3
  8671. Welcome to the early club!
    3
  8672. I'm glad to hear someone noticed! Yes, I got new lighting and tried something a bit different. I'm quite happy with the results
    3
  8673. "As opposed to multinational corporations who're always truthful and have our best interests at heart?" As I said, States (corporations) and Lamestream Media (corporations) should be questioned
    3
  8674. Not a bad idea! Thanks
    3
  8675. Stalingrad is taking priority at the moment, but yes I agree, I need to return to the desert at some point
    3
  8676. The current plan is to do division and regiment level outside the city, and then dive down to battalion level and below if and when necessary once we're in the city itself, assuming the sources I have allow it.
    3
  8677. Thank you, it's been a long time in the making so I'm also looking forward to this :)
    3
  8678. Unfortunately it would take far too long to both create and render if I was to do animations like that again, which is why I haven't done any like that since (except Brevity, but less said about that the better...). Stalingrad will look more like Courland/Crusader
    3
  8679. Thank you! And yes, I'm trying to strike a balance between the small individual and tactical scale events and feel of how the battle was progressing, and the big strategic and operational scales of how the campaign was going too. Too many histories focus on the big or small, and miss the overall picture. Hopefully that doesn't happen here
    3
  8680. This isn't true. I presented my opinion (my "two cents") several times in this video when I analyzed the facts. But this is acceptable because history isn't just about facts, it's about the interpretation of those facts, as I've explained in my history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    3
  8681. I think that's a fair assessment. Although you have to consider that the Soviet divisions were also battered. Glantz says they're down to 2-3 thousand men each at this time, which is up to 80% loss in strength. Soviets got more reinforcements trickling in overall, but they were outnumbered at the beginning of the city fight, as I'll show in a future video
    3
  8682. Some people absolutely hate Beevor because of his "anti-Russian" bias. However, if you've not read anything on WW2, his Stalingrad and Berlin books are a great place to start because of their easy-flowing narrative. I know I'll get some flak for saying that... but if you're aware of his bias, then you can compensate. Once you've read Beevor, then move on to people like Citino, Stahel, Glantz... Citino is also a nice read and a good alternative, especially his "Death of the Wehrmacht" book covering the 1942 campaign
    3
  8683. For basic video editing, use Windows Movie Maker (which is free and is where I started). Premiere Pro is good if you can afford the subscription and is the one I currently use. Not had much experience with other video software, but I've heard Sony Vegas Pro is good too. Apparently you can now edit movies in Blender (3D creating software which I use for the animations, available on Steam for free) but I've not tried the video-editing part of it.
    3
  8684. I never once said the words "brigadier-general" in this video, so I'm not sure what you're on about.
    3
  8685. Also, no they didn't put the industries in the hands of the bourgeoisie. Why is it that Marxists can't listen or understand basic English. Watch the first minute or two of this video please https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    3
  8686. The Nazis thought the "bourgeoisie" were the Jews, just like Karl Marx did https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8687. That quote from Mosley doesn't mention "race". And I've quoted his reasoning for it: he saw them as a foreign nation.
    3
  8688. Anti-Semitism can be non-racial. Christians were Anti-Semitic towards the Jews for their religion, not their "race".
    3
  8689. I see the merit of both, and I don't see why I should be restricted to doing one or another. I do think I have to strike a balance though.
    3
  8690. Yep, that's my fault, it's Seduction. He recently reprinted it as "Hitler's National Socialism", however the page numbers are not the same, and I've not had time to go through it and update the page numbers, which is why some references are only from the original. I made a video about this book here https://youtu.be/7dFgOBiwSGM
    3
  8691. Manstein's lies will be exposed completely in the next episode (E44) and you'll see exactly why. Also, I don't make "every possible excuse" for Hitler at all. Hitler lied in Mein Kampf, downplaying his role in the Bavarian Soviet Republic https://youtu.be/UpuGRO72GbA
    3
  8692. It's definitely one of the more unusual thumbnails :D
    3
  8693. "He have obvious Conservative, Centar Right personal political attitude and approach in his videos." I'm not a Conservative (what I call "Commieservative") and I'm not on the political spectrum, since the entire political spectrum is pro-State. - "Tik is also sometimes very anti fashist, anti comunist, anti leftist, anti Woke in his reviews. It's unnecessary and not a point to be "anti" yet to be realistic and objective." Fascists, Communists, Leftists and the Woke are all Subjectivists. They're all Platonists. They are anti-Reason, anti-Logic, and anti-Objectivity. They reject evidence and reality, favouring emotions and belief. So to state that I'm not objective whilst saying I'm against irrational Subjectivism is simply nonsense.
    3
  8694. Here's your weekly reminder - it's new video day!
    3
  8695. Exactly. That was the question I posed at the very beginning of the series.
    3
  8696. I'm not decided on Pienaar yet, so don't see this as me disagreeing with your conclusions, but I want to give you a different perspective. Pienaar did what he did in order to save South African soldiers. But because of Pienaar, New Zealanders were sacrificed instead. If Pienaar had obeyed his orders, he may have been able to help the New Zealanders enough to turn the tide and save more lives overall. So in that sense, Pienaar's actions are not noble, especially if you think colonial troops are worthy of being saved - since New Zealand troops would then qualify as being worthy of saving.
    3
  8697. Must... resist... commenting... on... politics....... again.........
    3
  8698. Except when Rommel was there (later in the war). It became fluid and he captured a lot of Italians, apparently.
    3
  8699. From next week it will all be new, since we're getting into the preliminary operations next week and the operation itself the week after. I did elements of the setup in previous videos because it's hard to work on two projects at the same time (normal videos plus Battlestorm videos) so I published some of the content earlier, which is why some of this is repeats. But it allowed me to fix a lot of the mistakes in preparation for these video.
    3
  8700. Nope. I thought it was interesting that a leading Holocaust historian doesn't fully grasp what Nationalsocialism is, which is why I put it in there. If socialism is the state controling the means of production (which it is) then how can massive state mobilization and build-up for war be private non-state capitalism? It literally makes no sense. Maybe the reason why it was the biggest increase ever seen before is because it wasn't capitalism.
    3
  8701. All hail the Great Jamie!
    3
  8702. Wouldn't be the first time
    3
  8703. Thank you for watching! Wow, he did well to survive
    3
  8704. Not in the city, they fought to hold the flanks, many miles away. Technically, 4th Romanian Army was never formed. They are important to the Caucasus and Stalingrad Campaign though.
    3
  8705. Here's a fact for you - the 369th Reinforced Croatian Infantry Regiment did not take part in atrocities.
    3
  8706. Thank's Marcus! More to come :) have you got any suggestions for units I can cover? I'm making a list
    3
  8707. I can't really make a history video just using a film. I might be better doing a general history of Estonia in WW2 until an English book on the 20th Waffen Grenadier Division is found. There's a book by Prit Buttar called "Between Giants" about the Baltic states in WW2. I haven't read it, but it's on a wish list of mine. Perhaps that's something to look into
    3
  8708. At the minute, I do too. That might change when I do more research on other commanders though
    3
  8709. +alkafluence I didn't know about the lack of the HE shell. Interesting! I'm not 100% clued up on the naval battles, but the Regia Marina was rebased in Western Italy after Taranto. It's not that it wasn't capable, it just wasn't positioned in an appropriate place to support Libya. I'm sure it would have made a difference if it had supported Italian forces during Operazione E too
    3
  8710. +martaxsasLT that's true. I grouped it under "training", but that's exactly it. They seldom sent out scouts. They marched at the front in columns. They didn't group their tanks together. They formed awful tactical formations when engaged (e.g. that Napoleonic style anti-cavalry square). And they sat in isolated camps that didn't support each other, which is why the Battle of Sidi Barrani is also known as the Battle of the Camps.
    3
  8711. I'm hoping Brexit will happen before it comes to that. But I will vote for any candidate that stands for Brexit, since that is what the people democratically voted for (even though I personally, and foolishly, voted to Remain because I knew it would be a major hassle to Leave).
    3
  8712. "TIK you are really out of touch with the current year , we don't do that anymore , it's all about groups and privilege now ." It is, if you're a socialist (Utopian-Socialist, Marxist-Socialist, Feminist-Socialist, Fascist, National Socialist etc)
    3
  8713. "Talking about rejecting idea of class and groups, while talking about objectivity. And then talking about Germans allegedly killing Jews, while referring to group think, making not even presumptions, but plain assertions of reasoning behind those events. Hilarious." National Socialists killed Jews. They weren't just German either. As you will see in Monday's video, Estonians (in SS service) killed Jews (and others) too.
    3
  8714. That's exactly it. It's only by reading numerous books that you grasp a topic. This is why I think channels like mine are important - I can digest the books, argue one or both sides and provide recommendations for the books I think do a topic justice. It's not perfect because it does mean I'm acting as a filter, and I could have a hidden agenda (which I don't, but you never know) but every historian is a filter and I think people need to trust someone at some point.
    3
  8715. If you raise wages, employers can't hire as many employees, which not only reduces production (making everyone poorer), but also creates mass long-term unemployed. Similarly, if you keep prices artificially low (price controls), you reduce the amount of money being made by the producers. This means they have less incentive to produce the goods you want, instead turning to other goods that are not being restricted. If they do stick to producing the original goods now under price controls, they'll have no choice but to reduce the quality of the goods, and cut corners. Or lay off staff etc. Thus, price controls reduce production (making everyone poorer), and shift production away from goods that are needed to goods that aren't needed. For further information on this dynamic, I recommend the books "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. But bottom line: if you're wanting to help the poor, restricting prices and raising wages actually hurts the poor, which is why the Establishment are constantly trying to convince you that this is the correct policy (it benefits the Elite if you remain poor).
    3
  8716. It's difficult to completely shake the indoctrination. I'm still trying to purge all the nonsense the miseducation system taught me. More recently, I've come to the realisation that even society's take on "selfishness" and pride are incorrect, although these two haven't yet been internalised.
    3
  8717. Yes, thank you for letting me know! It was your comment that informed me of it so I checked it out a few hours ago. I've made a comment and linked to it on my community tab, and have started drafting a response (although I'm not sure when that'll be).
    3
  8718. Can confirm, lots of people are stupid.
    3
  8719. True. Technically it would be called "charity" or a "donation".
    3
  8720. As you're probably aware, I've only started reading Objectivist literature recently, so I'm certainly not in a position to comment completely on everything they stand for. But I was under the impression that they were happy with mandatory taxation? Perhaps I've been mistaken there.
    3
  8721. "as a historian you should probably have heard of FDR's new deal....right?" Yes, it ruined the economy. Here, read this book: it's free, and you may find it incredibly enlightening https://cdn.mises.org/Americas%20Great%20Depression_3.pdf
    3
  8722. Thanks for the recommendation
    3
  8723. "So who does build the bridge?" The bridge builders. ------------- "Who collects the funds for the bridge, pays the builder?" The private property owner and/or the entrepreneur. ------------- "Who pays that person," The consumer. ------------- "is that person the state?" No. ------------- "I live near a recent bridge collapse and the state quickly and effectively rebuilt the bridge." Why did the State let the bridge get into such disrepair that it collapsed? Surely the State Central Bank can just print infinite money to fund repairs! ------------- "My city had private policing - it doesn't work." Some real statistics for you: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/private-police-force-paid-residents-21355081 https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/private-police-london-a4523916.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65788756 So yes, the State is so bad at policing that private citizens are paying for their own private police forces ON TOP of being forced to pay the State for their Playdoh Police. ------------- ""Entrepreneurs" enslaved workers during the Gilded Age." Marxist nonsense. Folsom's "The Myth of the Robber Barons" shows the complete opposite - it was the State's political entrepreneurs that were the criminals, not the market entrepreneurs. https://www.aier.org/article/actually-the-gilded-age-was-awesome-for-equality/ ------------- "We will all reach the age when we will be grateful for Social Security and Medicare, which the rich should pay for." The entire State-run and regulated UK pension system almost completely collapsed not too long ago https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/06/bank-of-england-confirms-pension-funds-almost-collapsed-amid-market-meltdown In America private health care is both cheaper and more efficient that the State-regulated health service (Medicare) https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ And the National Socialist Hell Service (NHS) is an absolute disgrace. My friend had to wait 4.5 hours for an ambulance, and the "service" provided when she got to the hospital was just as bad as that when my grandmother was in there. The entire rotten "heath" bureaucracy needs to be torn down.
    3
  8724. A market is just a buyer and a seller. It takes into account human greed, because the "market" is the people. The free market allows humans to act as they are, instead of pretending that they are better than they are based on false ideals. Also, you cannot give to charity if you weren't greedy in the first place in order to accumulate resources in order to give them to charity. Thus, charity is based on greed. This is why "greed" may not actually be a sin.
    3
  8725. I haven't no, any good?
    3
  8726. Snow and Steel is about the Ardennes and the Battle of the Bulge. I was debating whether to do the Ardennes or Stalingrad, so got Snow and Steel and a couple other books, but people voted for Stalingrad in one of my videos so I bit the bullet and focused on that instead. I will come back to the Ardennes at some point though
    3
  8727. I think Levi is first. I don't have a Victoria Cross, but let me present to you the most honourable Double Dagger Medal ‡
    3
  8728. Thanks! If you have any recommendations, I'm all ears
    3
  8729. Actually it came like that. I got it from the Leeds Royal Armouries gift shop :)
    3
  8730. Wait. Luxembourg didn't win the war?
    3
  8731. I agree with everything you said. My intention is to learn the Russian and German (started learning German, but still basic at the moment). And I fully understand source reliability, and will be doing a video on that soon.
    3
  8732. Not heard of them before, but have now. Thanks for mentioning them :)
    3
  8733. Thank you oJo for reminding everyone to stay hydrated
    3
  8734. Well done!
    3
  8735. Yes, entire books have been written arguing for Hitler being or not being a Christian
    3
  8736. The same issue lies in archeology. When you dig up a sword, you don't know everything about that sword. Therefore, the source (the sword) is biased and therefore a flawed source.
    3
  8737. Asking the right questions! That's the year when (modern) history was invented - the publication of Ranke's first book.
    3
  8738. Thank you, will correct that!
    3
  8739. Not in the near future, but in episode 3 of this series we'll see the aftermath of Bagration in the north of the front.
    3
  8740. That's a good question which I'm hoping to answer in a future video :)
    3
  8741. Jamie has been defeated again
    3
  8742. Sure!
    3
  8743. Wow that's a good spot! And this is why I shouldn't have used a map of 1939 as the basis for that map :(
    3
  8744. "Its easy for us, 70 yrs hence, to point out "well, you should have done this or that"," But, thinking objectively, aren't you doing the same by defending Churchill's actions? "and easy to pick out voices from that era who support that contention." Feel free to pick out voices from that era who support Churchill's actions. In fact, this is exactly what historians do. Then we can have a debate (historiography). I would warn you though, all the historians of the North African Campaign (see the pinned comment for the list of sources) I can find are either neutral or critical of Churchill. Plus, we know that Dill was supportive of the idea, so if you do find supporters, it will probably be wise to start with Churchill's biographers (who will be biased in favour of Churchill, will be using 70 years of hindsight, as well as selective sources to support their views). And luckily for me, all that matters right now is that Churchill did put pressure on the Commanders in North Africa, not whether he was right or wrong to do it. But it will be a great debate to come back to in the future, so I'll make a note of it.
    3
  8745. That's good to hear! Tell him that at best I'm a secondary source, or in this case, a tertiary source. If he doesn't know what that means, Primary Secondary and Tertiary sources are something he should look into straight away ;)
    3
  8746. Is that a "finally, I've been looking forward to another Monday video"? Or a "finally, I've been looking forward to Crusader"?
    3
  8747. Glad you liked it! I'm predicting next weeks video will be about 40 mins long, and future Crusader ones will vary
    3
  8748. "No problems with visual/audio quality, and certainly not content" - Well, that's a relief! I put a LOT of effort into making sure this one was as top-quality as possible, and I don't want a repeat of Brevity. "Very good analysis of the strategic situation. I do wonder what the Germans/Italians could have done to ameliorate the situation in the Mediterranean, given their supply problems and lack of domestic resources." We'll be revisiting the German-viewpoint in video 4 (if my current plan stays as it is, which it might not). Other than taking Tobruk, or giving more oil to the Italian navy so it could actually fight the way, its not clear. They could have used the French ports in Tunis, if they could persuade the Free French to give them access. But then that would have required more trucks to ship supplies to the front, so it's still a bad situation to be in. "Based on your description, I can't decide whether I like Wavell or Auchinleck more." Auckinleck's performance during Crusader is good. I've heard his future battles didn't go so well, but how much of that is directly his fault remains to be seen. I do agree that Wavell's relief was not justified, although he may not have had the nerve to stand up to Churchill as much as Auchinleck did. "I'm already hungry for next week's video. Think of a hungry child who sees the biscuit jar and wants to gorge himself. ;)" So am I! I've started recording the audio, but got a lot of editing to do to get it done for next week since it's probably going to be twice as long as this video :)
    3
  8749. You're correct that I wanted to make this right. Thanks for your comment!
    3
  8750. Like this one https://youtu.be/U8LNFjFyGU8
    3
  8751. Chuikov said 500 panzers attacked his units in October. It was actually about 20, if you count the StuGs, and less if you don't. See my last Battlestorm Stalingrad video for the explanation (Episode 28). These things happen. And the larger the number, the more it's easy to get wrong.
    3
  8752. He was imprisoned for assault, but note when that was. It was years ago (2007). He made his videos in 2014, and changed his mind in 2017. So the arrest and imprisonment has nothing to do with him changing his mind. Therefore, you have no evidence of him being threatened into changing his mind.
    3
  8753. Oh and I address the "North Korea" argument in them too, at least twice.
    3
  8754. Yes, YT auto-deletes comments (including mine). You have to use letters instead of words (e.g. the "H", instead of the whole word). Links are usually a no-go, unless it's a link to Wikipedia because YouTube seems to think that Wikipedia is a trustworthy source, even though it's not.
    3
  8755. Nope, not me. YouTube is though, and even deletes mine if I do something like quote the Anti-Semite remarks of Karl Marx.
    3
  8756. This is a Patreon question, and I'm trying but I'm massively behind. I've got a few from a couple years back that I still haven't answered :(
    3
  8757. I was considering doing a video (or series) on it at some point. The problem, of course, is that - if comments are getting censored for even saying the name of it, will the videos get censored too?
    3
  8758.  @sosogo4real  I haven't seen the video, but it came up in this video (I think Eric Hunt said about it)
    3
  8759. Yes, the evidence is overwhelming, which is why they ignore it or dismiss it.
    3
  8760. Is it? At this point, I'm surprised everyone doesn't hate me
    3
  8761. Not heard of it until now. I'll check it out, thanks!
    3
  8762. Beevor is a bit hit or miss. He's a good introducer to the battle or subject, but then I feel he doesn't provide the details. It's much the same as watching a WW2 documentary on tv. Great if you know nothing about the battle, but then you get to the end and realise you only learnt six things and wasted an hour. And sounds good! I will add that book to my wish-list :)
    3
  8763. So far for the North African Campaign I've done (in order) Operation Compass, Rommel's First Offensive, Operation Brevity, and Operation Battleaxe. Plus a few Long Range Desert Group videos too. Next Battlestorm documentary will be on Operation Crusader too, so technically that will be part 5 ;)
    3
  8764. Except the Soviets stopped the Germans in 1941, before the USA entered the war and Lend-Lease really became a thing.
    3
  8765. You expect me to mention logistics in the first 7 minutes? There's a reason this video is 44 minutes long - and could have been longer - because there's no way I could possibly mention every factor in this war. But since you want logistics, I'll give you some now. Logistics played a big part in the German defeat in 1941. The first three weeks of Barbarossa saw the Germans get roughly half-way to Moscow. It then took them a few more months to cover the rest of the distance. The reason being, just like on their way to Stalingrad in 1942, is that they had to stop-start stop-start their Bewegungskrieg due to (mainly) their poor logistics. While "Blitzkrieg" had its advantages, it was also poor on the logistical side, which the Germans never mastered. This was made worse by the poor roads in Russia, different guage railways, and the vast distances. Weather also played its part later. However, by the same token, the Soviets were also suffering from serious logistical issues in 1941. At the battle of Dubno-Brody (I talk about it here https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw) 2,000 Soviet tanks break down on the way to the battlefield due to lack of fuel, mechanical failures, lack of spare parts etc, and those that did make it sometimes ran out of ammunition. So to say that the Germans were suffering from poor logistics isn't that good of an excuse since the Soviets were too. To say that "General Winter" only affected the Germans is a poor excuse too, since that affected the Soviets too. And its not like the Germans didn't know about the poor Russian roads, or the different guage railways, or the vast distances. This was why they planned for a short knock-out war. Unfortunately, the Germans deemed the Soviets as inferiors in every respect and, in their poor planning, didn't consider what would happen if the Soviets weren't knocked out quickly and decided to continue the fight. The fact was that, despite the initial advantages I outlined towards the end of the video (surprise attack, unprepared enemy etc), the Germans squandered these advantages in their arrogance. This arrogance is what's leading to certain portions of the viewers of this video believing that the Germans were superior. However, you and I both know people in real life who think they're superior to everyone else but who actually have several deep flaws that impact the things they do. People like that often can't see the error of their ways, and it's the same here. The German generals believed the Soviets were inferior, even though they were beaten numerous times on the battlefield. Even when they won (1941) they paid heavily for their success, one way or another. The fact remains that the "greatest army in WW2" lost to the Soviets. And as shown in the video, the reason wasn't because they were drowning in Soviet rifles and tanks.
    3
  8766. True. More important was the fact that 63.5% of the entire Soviet air defense force throughout the war consisted of western fighters, and two out of every three trucks were foreign built. However, you must bear in mind that Lend-Lease only really became "significant" from 1942 onwards. (All this from Glantz When Titan's Clashed, page 197) And I'm glad you liked the video, cheers! :)
    3
  8767. I'm glad you enjoyed it sir, and glad it got you thinking :) you'll be interested to know I'm actually working on a video on the Purges at the moment which I'm hoping to get out either this week, or next week. Coincidently Military History Visualised beat me to it, so I'll link to his video for now in case you haven't seen it https://youtu.be/AiA8dKNcjjk
    3
  8768. Compared to the loss ratio of 1941, plus the German accounts, which claim they killed many more times the number of Soviets than they actually did. So yes, it's not as bad as the Germans claimed it to be.
    3
  8769. Didn't ignore them, in fact I mentioned surprise many times. Can't mention everything about the biggest war in history in a video that's not even an hour in length. Doesn't mean I ignored those elements though
    3
  8770. Germany had the strategic advantage, was fully mobilized, had initial surprise, troops all in place, they outnumbered the Soviets (initially), they had a new-tactic (Blitzkrieg/Bewegungskrieg or "war of movement") that had already proven deadly to the Western Allies. They gained almost total air superiority on day one, and hit an enemy that was stretched thin along the border (Soviets were still mobilizing and didn't yet have enough troops to cover the front) that was ordered not to retaliate, fought against obsolete tanks, with little to no maintenance facilities to repair or keep them in the field so they all broke down (again, still mobilizing), who had motorized divisions without trucks (yep, they were less mobile than regular infantry divisions because at least they were provided with horses and wagons to pull their artillery), with poor logistics (still mobilizing), and whose industries would have to be torn down brick by brick and shipped to the east on trains that should have been delivering supplies and reinforcements to the front. It's obvious that no army in the world would have done well under these conditions. And yet, despite the terrible inital losses, the Soviets survived, fought back, and pulled it back to 3 to 1. That's not bad when you consider the circumstances in 1941.
    3
  8771. Not a day goes by where I don't work on the research for these videos :)
    3
  8772. The first thing they teach you at university is never trust Wikipedia. People can write what they want on it, and they don't often link to good sources. However - (All this information comes from The Price of Victory - see description) Approximate number of men who served in the Wehrmacht throughout WW2 - 18 million (varies slightly depending on source) As shown in the table at 12:31, the number of men on both sides of the conflict at certain times of the war. (it never exceeded 3.5 million Germans) Number of casualties in the Wehrmacht in WW2 on the Eastern Front - 4,941,600 Number of casualties of the Axis in WW2 on the Eastern Front - 5,980,300 The Soviets mobilized a total of 25,024,500 men during the war (does vary depending on source used) Number of casualties in the USSR in WW2 on the Eastern Front - 14,534,600 Number of casualties in the USSR+Allies in WW2 on the Eastern Front - 14,654,000
    3
  8773. Er... you're welcome... I guess? Haha :D to be fair, the publishers of Kershaw's book deserve a slap for publishing inferior editions
    3
  8774. Krivosheev's numbers are disputed, which again is why we shouldn't rely on one source. Interesting to see the ratio in my video compared to Glantz's though
    3
  8775. https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    3
  8776. Yeah, I want to cover the Finnish wars (Winter and Continuation) at some point. Have you seen my video on Mannerheim? https://youtu.be/8aEVQwRpKIY And glad I've changed/challenged your perception of history! It's good that people are reconsidering the old narratives :)
    3
  8777. Wish I had Easter Holidays :( also, yes I play guitar and have a firm grasp of music theory which is why I'm able to make my own music (barely) for the documentaries
    3
  8778. This is why politics is not the answer. Never trust a liar.
    3
  8779. When they say "we're doing this for the people", they know what they're doing. A 'people' is a 'public', and a 'public' is a 'state'. So, when they say "we're doing this for the people", they're actually not lying - they're doing it for the 'State'. But you don't realize this, because most people don't know that 'people' or 'public' both mean 'State'. It's a slight of hand.
    3
  8780. Glad to hear they're getting better! I was actually a little anxious about this video because I thought it was a bit short and didn't know if it would be what people want to see ("stick to tanks" and all that). But apparently a lot of people enjoyed it so I must have misjudged it
    3
  8781. "Authoritarian Democracy" = National Socialism. So, yes.
    3
  8782. I can reach more people here than I can in a classroom, but I appreciate your sentiment :)
    3
  8783. Now I feel reassured that you're only doing this to save me from my own independent actions. I'm confident that the 'new normal' will be way better for the Public than what we had before. Please, do more to save us!
    3
  8784. I preferred the first Rome Total War to the second. Graphics were better with the second, but the tactical battles were better with the first.
    3
  8785. I'm trying!
    3
  8786. I don't believe in horseshoe theory, so why would I do that?
    3
  8787. "Libertarian-Socialism" This is an oxymoron term. 'Libertarian' means 'liberty', as in individual liberty. And 'Socialism' means 'state power' (technically 'social ownership of the means of production', but that translates practically to the same thing). I've been over this in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8788. It's not often that I read a fiction book more than once, but 1984 is one of those books I've read multiple times, and I intend to re-read it again soon
    3
  8789. It's not Protestantism. It's its own denomination of Gnosticism.
    3
  8790. Also, you confuse Socialism and Communism together. National Socialism is Socialism, not Communism.
    3
  8791. No, and I'm not sure why you think that.
    3
  8792. I've got a series of videos addressing Suvorov's idea. Here's the playlist https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp
    3
  8793. My F and V sound the same.
    3
  8794. Oh, and this one too https://youtu.be/6C0c9HmWeJY
    3
  8795. Yes, many people did replace the word "Jew" with "Capitalist". In fact, that's exactly what Karl Marx did https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8796. You were definitely first!
    3
  8797. I totally understand that sentiment
    3
  8798. No it didn't, the Marxist narrative regarding the DAF is wrong and isn't supported by the evidence. I've been over this before in detail here https://youtu.be/wXIoVEKIpMg And here https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    3
  8799. I've made the distinction multiple times. They're not just rejecting it over that, they're rejecting it because they believe I've fallen for Nazi propaganda, and that Hitler really was a capitalist who tricked the workers into voting for him. This is why they're not even listening or watching the videos I've made, they're just screaming and laughing at me for being so dumb. This is why it's depressing. What's the point of doing so much work, and reading so many books, and putting hundreds of references into multiple hours of video, if it's just going to be dismissed as a crackpot theory? It all feels like a complete waste of time, which isn't helping the burnout I'm suffering from. Worse, they're now making stuff up about me, calling me an antisemite etc, which is obviously dangerous in today's political climate. There's some who have called me an antisemite over this video! They're out to get me cancelled, all because they're convinced in their religion. They are fools.
    3
  8800. That's far too simple, and the evidence suggests otherwise.
    3
  8801. That's what I said. Struggle means many things, and one of those things is work. You dismissed this when you said "National Socialism is not about work". Yes it is, as work is part of this Struggle.
    3
  8802. That's a VERY good point. They didn't have the food to spare for prisoners, as the treatment of Soviet POWs in 1941 shows.
    3
  8803. First! And I'm glad to hear that!
    3
  8804. Fantastic! Thank you for the recommendation! I've just ordered his "Enemy in the East: Hitler's Secret Plans to Invade the Soviet Union" because of your comment
    3
  8805. So, you think that Hitler hoped that Britain would have allied with Germany in 1941 just prior to Barbarossa? Perhaps that was a the reason for the Hess Flight...?
    3
  8806. It also benefits the debtors (like the State) when business owners charge higher prices because it gives them an excuse to print more currency (inflation), which is a silent tax that robs the poor and middle classes of their wealth without them realizing it, all in the name of 'helping' the poor.
    3
  8807. I think they're Keynesians
    3
  8808. Hello!
    3
  8809. It's not neo-feudalism. Socialism is neo-feudalism. And as I said, Anarcho-Capitalism is not anarchism.
    3
  8810. Whoops! I'll fix it.
    3
  8811. That makes no sense. Anyone who understands basic economics realises that government redistributes wealth to itself, not to those in need. Government makes the situation worse, not better. So the only logical reason why you've shifted left is because you don't understand the principle outlined in Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson.
    3
  8812. There is a state in Anarcho-Capitalism. They just don't call it a state.
    3
  8813. I knew they were one and the same, however, I wanted people to distinguish between the two so that I could see where to lean. This is technically a political AND economic subject, so anyone who voted for those two options (or wanted to) should get something from it.
    3
  8814. Providing services to other people is voluntary, as is paying for such services. For example, you don't have to rent from a landlord, you could live in a tent on public land. The fact you would prefer to live in rented accomodation provided by someone else is proof that this is a voluntary arrangement.
    3
  8815. Except, as I explained in this video, they're not denying the existence of hierarchies. They've just changed the definition of "State" to a different one (an incorrect one in my opinion). But a State would still exist in AnCapistan, showing that they're not denying the existence of hierarchies. Because of this, it's not utopian either. The only thing they've really changed from a night-watchman state is that taxation becomes voluntary, thus making it "non-State" by their definition. So it's not utopian because we know night-watchman states can exist.
    3
  8816. What dialectics do AnCaps use?
    3
  8817. When you go to a shop, you don't force the shop to hand over the goods. You trade for the goods. Thus, it's not coercion. Both parties (the buyer and seller) are free to walk away from any trade. Thus economics, by itself, is not coercion. There's only coercion from criminals (including politicians).
    3
  8818. I think it was just a tough nut to crack, so both sides thought it was important in the south at the beginning of the battle
    3
  8819.  @scipioafricanus6417  "The british just did'nt practice modern manoeuver warfare in ww2, they had their succes but no Minsk pocket, Bagration or even an operation Cobra." They did early on, it's called Operation Compass https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk Compass was probably the greatest victory by the British in the war. The problem was that this was very early on, and wasn't against the Germans. They never really got the chance to do that again after they lost O'Connor and after they faced the Germans. German equipment outclassed the British, Rommel wasn't like Graziani, and their other British generals weren't as capable as O'Connor.
    3
  8820. By "terrorize" I meant the R word. You know, the one I can't say in video because YouTube doesn't like it. We know all the other Socialist stuff happened in both the Soviet Union and National Socialist Germany, but the Germans didn't R their own citizens (they R'd Jews, but not their own 'Aryan' citizens, because they didn't class Jews and citizens). And I don't think the Soviet Union R'd their own citizens either (meaning, the proletariat). Remember, the Soviets didn't see peasants as proletariats (workers in cities), and thus peasants weren't/aren't classed as citizens by Marxists.
    3
  8821. Glad to hear you enjoyed this!
    3
  8822. Yes, the channel was originally called The Imperator Knight, but nobody could pronounce Imperator, so I changed it to TIK. I talked about it in this video https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    3
  8823. Nuts! I honestly keep forgetting 😂
    3
  8824. @Fordragon Folley  Yeah, sorry 😂
    3
  8825. You could also use them as wallpaper... but in general, there's little value. I would argue that a plain piece of paper is more valuable because you can do the same, plus write on it too.
    3
  8826. Nice! I do too, and you'll see it later in the series 👍
    3
  8827. @Royeaux Gold's just off it's all-time high in terms of US dollars https://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/gold-price/alltime/ounces/USD/ And that's despite the copious amounts of manipulation - https://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/jpmorgan-fined-126-billion-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/jpmorgan-pay-60-mln-settle-precious-metals-spoofing-lawsuit-2021-11-19/ https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jpmorgan-to-pay-%24920-mln-fine-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market-2020-09-29 JP Morgan alone has been fined somewhere in the region of $42 billion for artificially suppressing the price of precious metals in order to keep you in the dollar.
    3
  8828. I couldn't agree more. Today's inflation is being moved into assets (the Bank of England even admits this on their YouTube channel), which is why house prices are going to the moon in nominal terms (in real terms, or gold terms, they've come down since 2008, as have wages). When/if this bubble pops, stocks, house prices, tuition fees, and probably a host of tech companies (YouTube?) will collapse. Sadly, it might not pop - it might go up in a "crack-up boom". Time will tell.
    3
  8829. Thank you for your fiat currency! 😂👍
    3
  8830. You wouldn't use gold to buy gum, but something like silver or copper, since they're cheaper. And the world used to use gold and silver for millennia, so we know it does work. Yes, the current price is far too low, which is why many are buying now before it goes up.
    3
  8831. It's not "price controls" as such (unless they're actually setting the prices), but it is price manipulation, and it is government funding. So I would strongly argue that the farming industry in the USA isn't actually private ownership, but is government controlled. It's not total-government control, but it's controlled enough because if the farmers don't do what the government wants then they'll pull the funds away, thus incentivizing the farms to follow government commands. Therefore, it's probably not "full socialism" or communism, but it's certainly not free market capitalism either. I would class it as socialism-lite or Fascism.
    3
  8832. At 0% interest during a ~6% official inflation rate, yes you should feel depressed
    3
  8833. Yeah, I've got some more notes to show you as the series goes on, and it gets depressing when you hear how millions or billions were a reasonable amount one day, and then basically nothing the next. Good to hear you liked the camera set up!
    3
  8834. If it's totally unwatchable, why have so many people watched it? It's actually got a surprisingly high watch ratio, meaning people are watching for longer than most videos. And many other commenters are saying they agree with me, or have opened their eyes. This suggests that the problem isn't that the video is unwatchable, but rather it's unwatchable for YOU. In other words, I've challenged your perception of the world, which has triggered you, and now you're upset because I've challenged your world view. My suggestion is that you calm down, and try to understand what I'm saying, and why I'm saying it. Even if you don't agree, you'll see a different way of looking at the world.
    3
  8835.  @Anthony-jo7up  Not sure about the second one, but they definitely had one in 1945 and 1946.
    3
  8836. Yes, and they want to go cashless so they can implement the negative interest rates that they so desperately need to implement.
    3
  8837. I just want to confirm that I've not set out to deliberately mislead anyone. What I've said in this video, and what I will be saying in future videos, does challenge a lot of the beliefs that people have, just like my previous videos have done, but it's not done maliciously. The intention is to get you to think, and to question things, whether that be me or your previous beliefs. I always recommend that you pick up the books and do your own reading on these subjects, and challenge me if you think I've got something wrong.
    3
  8838. @WW2 Hungary Thanks for the feedback! I think a few people have asked for a bookshelf video so I may do one at some point
    3
  8839. No he wasn't, and no it isn't. Well done, stay ignorant 👍🏻
    3
  8840. And yet, this German guy on Forvo says it's Yenny https://forvo.com/word/jenny_marx/#de
    3
  8841. "I think Das Kapital alone is quite an achievement." Oh really? Could you explain this quote from Das Kapital for me? "The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money." - Marx, “Das Kapital V1,” p107.
    3
  8842. The free market is not the same as capitalism. Capitalism is the current system, which I'm not a fan of. What we need is less government in the economy - a free market.
    3
  8843. That's why these "democrats" are calling for electoral reform after the UK election, and why they're rejecting Donald Trump. Whether you like or do not like Trump/Boris and democracy, they were democratically elected. So it's hard to have sympathy for anyone who claims to be a "democrat" (or pro-democracy) but rejects Trump/Boris and/or the democracies that got them elected. When regressives say that they are "social democrats", what they really mean is socialism/communism/totalitarianism, with them on the ruling side.
    3
  8844. So far, it's not been too bad. I'm a little disappointed it hasn't devolved into a train wreck yet though to be honest, because they make for the most entertaining reads
    3
  8845. Not really, just not had much time to work on it specifically. Had to upgrade my PC (nightmare, and Windows 10 sucks), catch up with the Q&As (still behind), train someone, work on the "big response" video, deal with recording and technical issues, and December is a busy month in general due to Christmas and birthdays But I have been working on it 👍
    3
  8846. Hi
    3
  8847. Some Leftists have reported my videos in an attempt to censor the truth. I suspect that they'll win the censorship battle eventually, since by attacking Socialism/corporatism, I am also criticising corporations like YouTube, so they'll not want that. By the way, conservativism used to be the old Left wing before there was a shift to the Left. So for me, I class conservatives as somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. I don't believe that the actual Right wing (free market capitalism) is represented at all in modern politics
    3
  8848. I will cover it and already have some books, but because it's a pretty big battle, it won't be until after Stalingrad.
    3
  8849. Cheers! Well, hopefully then there will be something for you to watch each week :)
    3
  8850. Haha cheers! I actually only bought the jumper so that I could decorate it for a party... So you'll never see it again :D
    3
  8851. "housing, healthcare, education, vehicles, taxes, water, power, heating, clothes, etc" They're all commodities. If you want more of these, you increase production, innovation etc.
    3
  8852. "well you do need some sort of state and thereby taxes, at the most basic level for police and justice, because there will be criminals." I'm not arguing against the idea of the state. I'm saying that state involvement in the economy has been shown to be terrible in every single scenario. The modern state police force was invented in 1829. Before that, police weren't required. Also, justice can be done privately. However, arguably a state judiciary, police force and army can be good. So can a state fire department. Beyond that though, the arguments for social ownership of the means of production fall apart. "Secondly such a pure capitalist system would ruin our enviroment pretty fast" That has nothing to do with capitalism. That has everything to do with the technology level. Arguably we'd be better off innovating our way out of a technology level reliant on fossil fuels. Sadly, the governments (lobbied by petrol car companies) are dead against Tesla.
    3
  8853. You desperately need to read "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt. It's short and cheap.
    3
  8854. @Николай Гончаров - Property rights were abolished on the 28th of February 1933 as part of the Reichstag Fire Decree. Private property didn't exist - "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. P576 The state was in control of everything by law and physically, as the Nazi bureaucracy actually ran the businesses from within - “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses - namely the Jews. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. Your original comment - "@TIK "it was not privatisation, just a slight of hand" - WOW, seems like we could teach you a few new tricks, am I right?"
    3
  8855. "@TIK And the reprivatisation of the Nazi economy? That is Socialism?" They sold the state industries to the Nazi Party (the state) and called it 'privatization'. That wasn't privatization at all. Even those they did technically privatize were still under state bureaucratic domination. It wasn't privatization in any sense of the word. It was a slight of hand.
    3
  8856. Fascism is a form of socialism. And the authors do consider the banks etc, so I'm not sure why you came to that conclusion.
    3
  8857. He has 100 in savings for starters. But I took cost out of the equation to make it simpler. If we add cost back in, the same production principle is still the way living standards rise for all, but the numbers would change. It would make things unnecessarily complicated for zero gain as an example, which is why I cut it out of the scenario.
    3
  8858. Could you explain how robbing from Peter to pay Paul would raise both their living standards?
    3
  8859. "Like private property. It is a feature set and guaranteed by your government. You cannot do what you want. You still have to follow the rules." No, you're describing public property. Private property is property of the individual, who can do what he wants with his property. As soon as third parties start dictating what someone can or cannot do with his own property, it's no longer his property. Therefore it belongs to the community - the public - the state. "You get rid of the government, no private property." No, you get rid of the government and all you're left with is private property. The government is the "public" sector, and owns and controls "public" property and businesses. If the government owns or controls your property, it is no longer yours. Some governments do, by law, guarantee property rights. Others don't, or even abolish them, which reverts private property into the hands of the state - such as what Nazi Germany did on the 28th of February 1933. "A policeman, a soldier, a fireman, a doctor provide a safe environement for the busenesses to thrive." Arguably the soldier, policeman and fireman do provide a _service_, but the doctor doesn't provide a safe enviroment. They still don't produce anything though. Still, you can do all that without the government. If you use the government, you end up with politicians and bureaucrats, plus lots of inefficencies within the services, so it's better for the individuals or businesses to pay for these services directly than go through an inefficient governmental system. "A teacher, a road repairer, they increase the skill level, the transport quality. All this increase the productivity of the rest." Yes, so you should pay them directly rather than paying for administrators, city planners, civil servants, local council members, politicians, bureaucrats, advisors, executives, staffs... "All this increase the productivity of the rest." Yes, but not if you pay them through a third-party - a government. "I'm disapointed by the quality of the content of this video. You could have asked more of your famous question: "Bus is it really the case?"" No, I looked at the claim that social (public, state) ownership of the means of production was somehow more efficient than private owernship of the means of production. I asked "but is this really the case?". I've done the research and found that actually it isn't, and that social ownership actually leads to a decrease (or decline in potential) in living standards, which is backed up by many historical examples.
    3
  8860. Glad you enjoyed the video :)
    3
  8861. I mentioned that in the video. For starters, any good that is created by a government requires bureaucrats, politicians, administrators... the cost is extreme. Then, you take away from the spending power of the people in the economy. So the question then becomes, well, if this service/good was needed in the first place, why aren't people spending on it? The current Labour Party in the UK wants to nationalize the railways again. I never use the railways. In fact, I haven't been on a train in years. Why should my taxes go up to pay for an out of date and dying public transportation system? The money that goes from my pocket to the government won't be spent on things I actually need, it will be wasted. So governments shrink the economy and prop up inefficient and dying industries at the same time.
    3
  8862. "nationality and language" "You can't deny that this has nothing to do with a market that is too free and by that extend the core principle of capitalism." If the workforce cannot communicate to the employer or the consumer - as you said - then they're limited to the types of jobs they can have. That has nothing to do with capitalism. That's to do with the "skill" of the workforce.
    3
  8863. "What do we do with low skill workers when there is automation that replaces low skill job? The solution cannot just be to send them to school, not all can afford/study/work for a higher skill job. Hence, the software question and the low/high tier question." All automation does is reduce the number of bad jobs. But it saves the consumer money which they then spend elsewhere, creating more jobs. The same will happen when the robots take over. We might not need to be coal-miners or taxi-drivers (tired, can't think of bad jobs), but we will find new jobs that do require humans. That might be more entertainment jobs, or education jobs, or service jobs, or intellectual jobs, or space jobs, or whatever. I can't predict the future, but I think it would be pretty silly to stop working because we will lower our own living standards as a result.
    3
  8864. "Other question: Your Bakery example only covers low skill jobs, how about high skill jobs such as: Doctors, engineers, scientist, etc." Doctors do produce goods. In this case, their production is health. They can produce more health thanks to innovations, discoveries, inventions, research... For example, new drugs are coming into play all the time. I actually have the perfect videos for you right here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ and https://youtu.be/6-Vqjo2S1us The first one shows how they're able to perform twice as many surgeries per day than their competition, as a result of higher efficiency (essentially increased production). Engineers and scientists also produce goods. Etheir physical products, inventions, designs or scientific papers. Look at Tesla or SpaceX. Musk has reduced the cost of launching a rocket from $400 million (what Nasa pays for its rockets) to ~$50 million (SpaceX). While not there yet, imagine if he got the price down to say $1000. Would that make the consumer happy?
    3
  8865. Yes, because innovation and change is a "reactionary" view now.
    3
  8866. I can. However it may be a while away. People don't like me covering economics or political videos (which is annoying because it'll mean I'll never get to the Holocaust) so I'm doing them seldomly. Also, if I did that it would be like the Pienaar video, except a lot longer...
    3
  8867. Yeah, I maybe oversimplified (although if you read the comments, people still don't get it?!?). Highly recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson".
    3
  8868. Tyrant
    3
  8869. You would be correct with that assessment.
    3
  8870. "I’m taking high school advanced economics and it’s mostly about drawing graphs and memorizing formulas. It’s really sad and nearly useless" What school of economics does your teacher subscribe too? Also, don't let bad teachers get you down. Economics is an essential part of the world. If you haven't read it, "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt is absolutely recommended to everyone, regardless of if you're interested in economics or not. No graphs or anything like that, just basic explanations of how the world actually works.
    3
  8871. Why would I be having a meltdown for stating that National Socialism isn't capitalism and that they (and the fascists) need to be placed on the Left of the political spectrum. The economic difference between class-socialism and race-socialism is what exactly? As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    3
  8872. Value is subjective. So the workers receive their full subjective value under Capitalism. Only if you believe in the old, outdated and many times refuted "Labour Theory of Value" could you possibly make the claim that people who sell their time for currency don't receive their full pay, even though they could quite simply go produce their own goods and services rather than work for others.
    3
  8873. I'm definitely trying to improve the quality with each video and series, so I'm glad you've noticed! Shame I can't find pictures for all the units, but Anton Joly certainly helped with a lot of the unit names in this one
    3
  8874. I did a follow up video about this because a lot of people questioned it. Here's the link https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    3
  8875. Yeah, he wrote his Second Book in the 1920s after Mein Kampf. It was unpublished because he was supposedly told that it may hurt sales of Mein Kampf. Not sure why so many people are "shocked" that there's a Second Book.
    3
  8876. Yes, have just seen it and shared your video on Twitter :)
    3
  8877. After the Dubno video I sat down and manually calculated the number of tanks in Alexey Isaev's book and came out at somewhere near 5,000 Soviet tanks+SPGs. The Germans had hundreds too. There was definitely more tanks than all the tanks at Prokhorovka, or all the tanks at Kursk combined. Either way, Dubno is bigger, and it's still bigger even when you factor in the fact that 2,000 of the Soviet tanks broke down on the way to the battlefield. Glantz mentions it in this video https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU
    3
  8878. At some point yes, but probably not until after Stalingrad
    3
  8879. Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching :)
    3
  8880. We'll be seeing more of Exclamation Man later in the series :)
    3
  8881. Thanks for pointing that out! I can't edit this video now that it's out, but if I ever do a All-episodes-in-one video for Stalingrad I'll fix it for that
    3
  8882. I've double checked, and Beevor definitely says 53 degrees in the sun on Page 87 of my edition of his "Stalingrad" book. He's quoting from Helmuth Groscurth, chief of staff of XI Army Corps, who recorded that temperature. It could still be a false reading, or Beevor/Groscurth may have got the numbers wrong, but that's what it says. (Just updated the pinned comment saying the same thing.)
    3
  8883. 3 episodes in season 1. Then 3 more in season two. Then... who knows!
    3
  8884. I hope it lives up to expectations! :)
    3
  8885. It's my music. I make all the music for these videos so as to avoid copyright. The exception being the national anthems (e.g. the Croatian National Anthem used in this video, which is in the public domain)
    3
  8886. I agree that Glantz is, I'm not sure about me though, but thanks!
    3
  8887. More likely because there's a lack of officers. If you had 3 independent tank brigades, you don't also need a tank corps headquarters staff, so you save on the officers. This is probably more evidence that the Soviet Union was short of officers
    3
  8888. Yes, and thanks! Worked hard to get it out this week, and I'm fatigued now, but it's all good :)
    3
  8889. And thank you! I have put a lot of effort into this, and it's worn me down. So glad I said I was doing this in seasons because I'm going to need that break soon. That said, I'm really really happy with the way it has turned out so far, and with the feedback I've got too :)
    3
  8890. 3 episodes in Season 1, then I can (thankfully) break for a few weeks to prepare for Season 2. This has been exhausting to make so I need a bit of a breather!
    3
  8891. I would also like to hear what exactly is wrong with this video, so that I can improve upon it in the future.
    3
  8892. At no point have I "apologized for Hitler's actions". Aiden is a troll who spends hours in the comments of this video every day making nonsensical accusations, and yet still hasn't managed to actually watch the video, which is why nothing he says stands up to the counter arguments made in the video to the same old arguments he keeps bringing up.
    3
  8893. None of my critics seem to have realized that I'm now winning this debate. Look at the state of these Reddit posts lol. When will they realize that NONE of their old arguments work any more? https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/f95ax3/tik_crosses_the_event_horizon_the_nazis_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitWehraboosSay/comments/f8uhg4/tik_just_uploaded_a_5_hour_video_about_hitler_and/
    3
  8894. Glad to hear it! I hope you've had some success in those debates because more people need to understand what the true nature of Socialism is.
    3
  8895. [Part 2] "I came into this, seeing you as an authority on these matters." Really? You saw me as an authority, but then decided to troll me in the comments, mock me and insult me? And you thought this was acceptable human behaviour? And yes, after quickly realizing that getting through to you and wannabchomsky wasn’t going to happen, and that you two were just trolling, I started responding with sarcasm, and telling people to ignore you. I have been tempted (especially because others have asked me to shut you two up) to silence both of you in the comments. The only reason I haven’t is because a shadow-ban is the only mass-option YouTube gives us creators, and it would delete all your previous posts, which I don’t want. I want a free DEBATE in the comments, and I don’t want to have to silence anyone. But, a debate is not an insult-fest, and you two have started trolling and insulting each and every single person that comes into the comments. This is obvious not nice for those who are here to learn or even think. It gives a bad impression of the channel, and I don’t want that, since most of my viewers are reasonable human beings who are quite knowledgeable about history. Your mocking remarks definitely don’t give off that impression to newcomers, and so I have been tempted to just remove you. I don’t want to have to do that. You’re lucky that I’ve developed an epic patience as a result of working in retail and dealing with idiots on a day to day basis, because I think most creators on this platform would have lost their nerve by now. - “I'm not joking, not saying that for a response, I am serious. I actually respected the work you did. But then, you did this shit.” What? I made multiple videos detailing in depth arguments, using over 100 sources, 350 references, and a host of quotes, to show exactly why Hitler was a Socialist, and you think this was “shit”? YOU HAVEN’T EVEN WATCHED IT. Those that have – even those that still disagree – don’t think it was “shit”. Those few Socialists that got through it and listened to what I said, admitted that they needed to create new arguments because, as the title of the video makes clear, their old arguments don’t work any more. Those Socialists who got through this did not describe this video as “shit”. - “You made up insults, you attributed labels you cannot quantify and you went too far.” I’ve only just called you an anti-Semite. You asked me to provide proof, and I showed my workings out (backed by sources). You’ve then dismissed this with dribble and false claims. I haven’t gone too far, I’m just stating the fact that Karl Marx was an anti-Semite, and that Socialism is inherently anti-Semitic. - “With the faultiest argument you've made yet, you accuse two random people of being anti-semites.” You’re not random. After all the comments you two have made in multiple videos of mine, I know you inside and out. A normal human being wouldn’t have been so upset about Hitler being a REAL National Socialist. Only Socialists would be. And you, and wannabchomsky, are clearly defenders of the faith of Socialism. That’s why you’re still defending anti-Semitism right now. - “You literally have actual holocaust deniers that are running around, gaining actual support, in your comment section and we're the ones you chose to attribute that title, and time to?” Yes, they’re called Marxists, who are denying that the Holocaust happened. That’s why I titled this video “Defeating the Denialist counter-arguments” and proceeded to address the anti-Semite Marxist arguments. Are you only just realizing this? Why do you think I titled the video this, for fun? As I said IN THE VIDEO: if Hitler is a Capitalist, then the Holocaust didn’t happen, because there would be no reason for him to murder the Jews, and the free market didn’t cause the Holocaust. Hitler HAD to be a Socialist, and HAD to use the State (Socialism) to create death camps, in order for the Holocaust to happen. By denying Hitler’s Socialism, YOU are denying the Holocaust. AGAIN, if you had watched the video, you would have known this. As for the National Socialists, they know that they are Socialists. That’s why I completely ripped into Socialism throughout the video, and also did a section called “National Socialism’s fundamental ideological flaw”, where I tore National Socialism apart. I even put a link to this section in the description. SOMEHOW, for someone who has apparently watched the video, you’ve missed this entire section? You also missed the sections on the Holocaust and why it had to have happened? But no no, you’ve definitely watched the video and aren’t talking complete rubbish. Give me a break. - “Calling random people anti-semites, because they won't shut up, because they keep bothering you and you just want the "trolls" to stop and let this topic die so you can surround yourself with an echo chamber of those who agreed before even watching the video. You leveled a serious accusation, not for any real reason, but because we were pissing you off.” That’s not the reason why! You are a Socialist, I’ve shown why all Socialism is anti-Semitism, and you’re now saying I’m only calling you anti-Semites because you’re trolling me. That’s incorrect. You’re anti-Semitic because you believe in the teachings of Socialism, which is fundamentally anti-Semtic. Secondly, how is this an echo chamber? There’s plenty of people disagreeing with me. But somehow, this is an echo chamber. If you want an echo-chamber, go back to Twitter or Reddit. R/BadHistory will accept you. - “I have to answer if you're the very post modernist you accuse us of being, as you seem to use terms not according to facts or reasoning, but according to your emotions, and how much we piss you off, so you can be justified in taking them out.” Not once so far have you addressed the argument I’ve put forth, in both the video, nor this comment section where I’ve shown Socialism to be inherently anti-Semitic, as the ‘farther’ of Socialism himself has admitted. You have admitted that you trolled and mocked me. And you’ve falsely accused me of many things, including the latest one: promoting an echo-chamber in the comments. You refuse to accept evidence. You don’t provide evidence. You rely upon ad hominem attacks. But somehow, you have the nerve to say that you’re not post-modernists. - “You know you can just... ignore us, right? Get back to your life?” 1. You can do the same. Wannebchomsky literally spams trollish comments for hours a day in my videos. It’s pathetic. I’m beginning to wonder if he’s a paid bot. 2. This is my job. And my job is a big part of my life. I cannot completely ignore two trolls spamming multiple comments per day. “You have a career to destroy, after all.” Go back to my first history documentary: Operation Market Garden. You’ll see that, right from the beginning, I came out against the Lamestream narrative and pointed out the flaws in the old arguments. People like that. Why? Because they know the old arguments are flawed. And history theory shows us that we have to iron out the flaws in the old narratives. That’s literally what a historian does. I’ve talked about this numerous times, and have even made a history theory video explaining this. But you don’t know this because you don’t watch my videos. And you don’t understand basic history theory. In fact, you reject it. You make a mockery of it, just like you’ve made a mockery of free speech. This is why you’re postmodernists, which I’ve explained in this history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - “But in other words, yeah, any pretense of professionalism I had fooled myself into thinking you had, because of the youtube channel and previous work, is gone.” What reason have you as an individual given me to care about you? You are a troll, who has insulted me, mocked me, spread lies and vicious false accusations about me in the comments of my videos, and done the same to other viewers. Why would any of this make me care about your opinion? - “You're just another emotional idiot on the internet, who throws out words like they don't mean anything so they can feel justified in their irrational hatred of anyone who calls into question their beliefs” You’re describing yourself. - “I'm done for the night, but for a single bloody second, self reflect.” I always self-reflect. That’s what I do. I always ask the question: but is this really the case? And now, I’d like you to do the same. Capitalism is evil: but is this really the case? - “And I think that's the holocaust deniers calling you, so I don't want to keep you much longer. So long, TIK. See you for the next performative insult-fest tomorrow.” And, in conclusion, nothing you have said in your comment has addressed a single thing I said. This is what I’m talking about – you spout rubbish, get called out for it, then cry that I’m not listening, when it is in fact YOU who isn’t listening to the evidence. Hopefully, one day, you’ll grow up and discover how to talk to other human beings with respect.
    3
  8896. Why are you anti-Semitic? Well, you two are both Marxists. And Marx believed that - “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Marx,On the Jewish Question. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx is saying here that the people who trade goods for money (in other words, capitalists) are Jewish, and are on the side of “tyranny”. Yes, the reason he hates capitalists is because he thinks they’re Jewish, and the reason he hates Jews is because he thinks they are capitalists. And he says this again in his last book, Das Kapital: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital, P107. Karl Marx has said that the products of the Capitalist are "inwardly circumcised Jews". In other words, the offsprings of the Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews", because they Capitalists are Jewish. But why did Marx believe that? Well, Marx believed that Capitalists were the bourgeoisie (boroughs, townfolk) who practiced Usury (lending of loans and charging interest). Since Usury was banned by the Pope in the Dark Ages, and since Jews were not allowed to own land in Christian Europe, they were forced to live in towns and become "money changers". So, for Karl Marx, the bourgeoisie were the Jews. This was why the offspring of the bourgeoisie were "inwardly circumcised Jews". And what did Karl Marx call for? Oh yes, that's right - REAL Socialism: “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx was calling for the removal of the Jews/Capitalists from Society. This will allow him to usher in Socialism. ALL SOCIALISM IS ANTI-SEMITISM. That is why, when I realized that Hitler was a Socialist, I realized the true nature of Socialism and what it was really calling for.
    3
  8897. I'm not a Socialist, so I'm not a Nazi.
    3
  8898. Here's a history lesson for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8899. Also https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    3
  8900. And why did they have no food? Because it was Socialism, and Socialism doesn't work https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8901. That's because corporations are trying to hide the truth about themselves. Corporations are a Fascist/Syndicalist conception, and are fundamentally interlinked with Fascism and National Socialism.
    3
  8902. Plot twist: it was his study of WW2 that caused him to realise that Hitler was a Socialist, and why Socialism is evil.
    3
  8903. Many people have got through the video. The Marxists who have are now panicking because they know my argument is solid.
    3
  8904. As I explain in the video, Leftists will tell you that the "progressives indoctrinating the youth in the universities" idea is a 'conspiracy theory'. But I've seen it, you've seen it, and others have seen it. Still, they will deny it
    3
  8905. Mr Chomsky is just trolling, since he hasn't actually watched the video and has no actual argument.
    3
  8906. That's exactly what they've done in this comment section
    3
  8907. Relevant video for you https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    3
  8908. In regards to your last point and bracketed comment https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8909. "Socialism is abolition of private property." Which is exactly what the National Socialists did. The Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933 abolished private property
    3
  8910. A nation is a society. Society is Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And, as explained in the video, they didn't privatize the economy, and they only put rival socialists (e.g. Marxists) in the concentration camps, which is exactly what the Bolsheviks did in Russia (e.g. the Mensheviks).
    3
  8911. I'm afraid that the history, other Socialists, the dictionary, and common sense all show clearly that socialism is state control of the economy, and always has been state control of the economy https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8912. The only way in Capitalism to prevent competition is to use the State to implement laws (control the means of production). But by doing so - by having the State intervene in the market - this fundamentally negates the idea of private control of the means of production, making such a system non-capitalist by default. Capitalism is the system where there is a free market, where private ownership is given total control over the means of production. In Capitalism there is no State, no tax and no central bank fiat currency or manipulation of interest rates (causing recessions and depressions). That's why we've never had actual capitalism, or anything close to it, yet people continue to say that it fails. And no, I for one see corruption throughout human nature. That's why we need a free market - because it's the state that's corrupt. It's impossible for the free market to be corrupt, since corruption comes from an abuse of power - power that only the State has.
    3
  8913. This video explains the first point https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg "Dictatorship of the proletariat" just means "state control of the means of production" because the proletariat are the people, the people are the public, and the public sector is the state. This is a concept I've explained in great detail here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8914. I'm not "centre right". And no, the evidence quite clearly points to the fact that the Nazis were socialists, and therefore on the "Left" if we use the socialist political spectrum.
    3
  8915. "I don't understand, in particular why so few people see this and in particular why the Tory party are behaving as they are with regard to not nipping all this nonsense in the bud, allowing riots, violence and destruction, what are they about??" Conservatism used to be the old Left-wing. In 1850, the Liberal Party (classical liberalism, capitalist, free trade etc) was on the Right-wing, and the Tory/Conservative Party was on the Left-wing. But then, for various reasons, the Liberal Party converted to Socialism (technically "New Liberalism") in the 1870's and 1880s. By the 1890s, they were basically Socialist, and were later replaced by the Labour Party. Politics in Britain/the UK shifted dramatically to the Left in the 1880s. The point being that the Conservatives was never the free-market party in Britain. They were Left-wing, and still are. Yes, some Conservative politicians are small state, limited free market guys, and there's even some libertarians in there too, but the majority are not capitalist. The UK doesn't have a capitalist party. Not even the small ones that I've seen are capitalist, they're all socialist in one way or another. The reason most people don't see it is for the same reason people don't know the difference between money and currency: the State schools them. The State doesn't want you to know about money, or think that capitalism is anything but evil, because it suits their agenda. If you knew what money was, you would be able to preserve some of your wealth. If you knew that capitalism was actually not evil, then you would begin to question the Politicians (Polis = city, as in city-State. All Politicians are Statists - since that is their job). "Is all politics just a socialist trick and construction?" In my opinion, politics and socialism are the same thing. Politics/Socialism envisions a centrally organized society where the many toil for the few at the top (the Political Social-Elites). Capitalism envisions an open economy, with no slavery, where every individual is free to work, earn and keep 100% of their wealth and spend it as they see fit. Politicians and/or Socialists have convinced many people that Capitalism is slavery, is racism, is destined to fail, is evil, is the devil, etc, etc, etc... They have convinced many people that Socialism is freedom, is multicultural, is paradise, is the future, is progressive, etc, etc, etc... As George Orwell made clear, they have convinced you that: WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
    3
  8916. They all roughly desire the same outcome, but differ in their methods of getting there (Revolution vs gradual progress by changing laws), and some desire a dictatorship while others want a "democracy" (which is still a dictatorship, a dictatorship of the majority). Socialism is the entire movement. Marxism is a subset of Socialism which is based on class. Most Communists are Marxist-Socialists who demand a class-dictatorship-Socialism. Social Democratics or Democratic Socialists want Socialism via democracy. Anarcho-Socialists are oxymorons who don't understand what anarchy means, and call for things like 'federal' Socialism (depends on the AnSoc you talk to). The Labour Party is currently neither for Labourers, nor a Party. It is for the Socialist Social-elite, and is part of the international Marxist movement. Arguably it was different in the past but I'm not so sure. In the last election they had a "race" manifesto, which is interesting considering many Socialists will tell you that Socialism has nothing to do with race, and yet here we have several Socialist movements being all about race and gender identity etc. It's all a ploy to decide society so that it's easier to conquer it.
    3
  8917. "The Nazi regime expropriated property from German Jews, which is not the same thing as seizing the means of production." Businesses are the means of production. So when Hitler sent his SA to seize the factories and businesses off the Jews (and also other Germans who were members of the bourgeoisie, like Professor Junkers of the Junker's aircraft factory), that is classed as seizing the means of production. - "For one thing, the vast majority of German Jews weren't part of the Bourgeoisie." That's funny because Karl Marx himself said that they were https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "There's your tortuous mangling of definitions again..." It's not MY definitions. This is Marx and Hitler's definitions. I'm just telling you the history. You can either deny history, or you can learn from it. You've chosen to deny the H of WW2, just like all the other Leftists have, which is why I titled the video "Destroying the DENIALIST Counter Arguments". YOU are a H denialist since you are removing one of the central reasons for why the H happened in the first place.
    3
  8918. He called for Germans to seize the means of production. Again, his was a racial socialism, not a class socialism (which is Marxism).
    3
  8919. Again, just keep repeating the same old arguments that I've refuted in the video itself, or in others. Don't listen to me. Don't read the title of the video and see the words "Destroying the Denialist COUNTER ARGUMENTS". That's right, I've heard all the counter arguments before, and thus video destroys them. If you had watched it, you would have realized this.
    3
  8920. You obviously haven't read Mein Kampf, or watched the video, since I quoted extensively from it in this video.
    3
  8921. And he has - telling me I'm wrong on a point that Lenin and other Marxists agreed with me upon, which I explain slightly later in the video
    3
  8922. If you watch this video, you'll see that Hitler did not support private ownership of the means of production. I have shown why that the idea that he did is a lie. Also, the "workers" are a group of people. A "group" of people is a PUBLIC. And, as I have shown in the previously linked video, the PUBLIC is the... STATE. The term "the workers" is actually a slight of hand. It actually means "the State". Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8923. "peer reviewed" No, if the 'peers' (aka government funded state employees) don't like the premise of an argument (even if that argument is valid), they can reject it and not publish it. Therefore it would never get a chance to operate in the free market. Well, as I explained in the video, "without the free exchange of ideas, without the arguing back and forth, it is impossible to assess the true value of an argument." Therefore peer reviews are actually an intellectually dishonest mode of censorship.
    3
  8924. You better know what Fascism is before you claim to be against it https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  8925. Socialism has a concrete definition. But many people are denying it, either through ignorance or so they can trick people into getting what they want https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8926. Awesome! Let me know what you think!
    3
  8927. That's what the Left want you to believe
    3
  8928. Marxists don't want to eliminate class, they want to murder the bourgeoisie. National Socialists don't want to eliminate race, they want to murder the Js. The two concepts are very similar, especially when you realize that by "bourgeoisie" Karl Max actually meant the Js, as shown here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg (I'm masking my speech to get around YouTube censorship). Also, you remind me of these two guys https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    3
  8929. Jordan Peterson don't doesn't think the National Socialists were Left wing, as far as I'm aware. I'm not a conservative. Again, most academics have no idea what the difference between money and currency is. And you claiming that they study different economics theories, list two (one of which isn't even an economist), and then pretending that makes it alright for almost every lecturer to then ignore basic economic principles and preach Keynesian Socialism doesn't leave me convinced.
    3
  8930. Yes, informing people that Hitler didn't "privatise" the industries, but sold the state corporations to members of the Nazi Party, which was the State
    3
  8931. Your "argument" was defeated in the video you haven't watched. You're on the losing side, not me
    3
  8932. @Edwin Walther, yes it is sad that I have to do that, but even then, I've had people (including YouTubers) calling me anti-Semitic due to this topic. In fact, one Marxist claimed that all Capitalists were anti-Semitic, and that's why I must be too (apparently he can divine other people's thoughts). Bearing in mind, he was also accusing me of reading and 'believing' the 'false' capitalist economics of Mises and Rothbard, who were Jewish. Such is the world we live.
    3
  8933. If you're not a Marxist who believes in the Labour Theory of Value, use the timestamps and go to section 5. Watch that part onwards. That'll cut it down somewhat
    3
  8934. My thoughts exactly
    3
  8935. Find me the place that has private property (so, no taxes) and free markets (no regulations, or State manipulation of the currency supply) and I'll tell you how fine capitalism is.
    3
  8936. @William Bolton - you are correct. I only said that to emphasize the difference between the state and state-within-a-state trade unions. Technically they are not private.
    3
  8937. Exactly, even though Socialism predates Marxism and there are many versions of Socialism that all hate each other.
    3
  8938. Exactly. The one thing a politician is capable of doing is lying to you.
    3
  8939. Having watched your video, I'm very aware of your stance. Would you mind if I do a response video to your video(s) at some point?
    3
  8940. Yeah, you guys are going to start crying when you get to the middle of the video and I start presenting all the evidence that refutes everything you've said so far (not yet finished). You're getting caught up on my opening statements.
    3
  8941. I've also started watching your response video. You guys made me laugh.
    3
  8942. "you are using your own made up defintions, and you are playing semantic games." The historical definitions are not 'made up'. That video link again - https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Admit it you are some sort of free market fundamentalist ancap right?" As I said in this video, I was a Socialist until I realized that the fundamental core belief of all socialism was anti-Semitism. Then, after making this clear on the channel and getting massive amounts of negative comments, I started looking into the authors that the Marxists were accusing me of reading (even though I hadn't yet). The authors were Mises and Rothbard. When I read them, I realized that I had been duped into believing in a false religion, and that reality was far different than I had originally been indoctrinated to believe. Once you unplug from the Matrix, it's hard to unsee the world for what it really is. I'm not a "free market fundamentalist ancap". I just understand basic economics. I believe individual humans should be free to do what they want without being forced to 'cooperate' with a 'body of the nation' (corporation). - "You trying to redefine capitalism as none state is dishonest." Free market = not under State control. Capitalism is fundamentally non-State. Again, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8943. You know, when I was a Socialist, I believed Hitler was a Capitalist. Then I changed my opinion based on the evidence. Now, I'm being told to go back to believing that he was a capitalist and "follow the evidence" even though the evidence doesn't support that conclusion? Worse, I'm being accused of coming to a conclusion first and then cherry picking evidence to suit that conclusion, but that's not what happened, and I explain this in the first minutes of this video. I don't get why my critics have to make up lies about me in order to slander me. Is it only because their counter arguments don't work, is it because they don't know how to engage in open and honest debate?
    3
  8944. I can tell you haven't watched the video.
    3
  8945. Lewis Barton 👍 I did put it in the opening of my Market Garden video, but I haven't displayed it since because I probably shouldn't have made it public at all. Too late now though 😂
    3
  8946.  @dr1flush  I'm not going to repeat myself in the comments when I've already made the points in the video, backed by sources. And, by the way, your points on the Reichstag Fire Decree are correct - the Nazis socialised the industries, the trade unions, and seized the means of production (just like I said in the video you haven't bothered to watch). And yes, Hitler consolidated power over the SA, just like Lenin did with the Mensheviks.
    3
  8947. There will definitely be more WW2 related politics and economics at some point. Beyond that, I'm not sure right now. I have been tempted to do videos on the current economic crisis, but my focus right now is on Stalingrad.
    3
  8948. As I said at the beginning - I am now no longer a Socialist because I realized the true nature of Socialism as a result of realising that Hitler was an actual Socialist. I then looked into Capitalist economics and now agree with the Austrian School economists (although I also enjoy the opinions of the Chicago School, I just think Austrian Business Cycle Theory is spot on)
    3
  8949. If it becomes the state, it's no longer private, it would be public.
    3
  8950. A state is a public hierarchy. It can't be private. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8951. Society is the State, and the State is society https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8952. Capitalism is when the gubbetmint does stuff, and every gubbetmint is Capitalist coz Marx said so
    3
  8953. George, the difference is that the facts are on my side, but are not on the side of the flat-earth debate
    3
  8954. Haha not heard that one before, but it's very appropriate. Thanks for commenting 🙂
    3
  8955. "@TIK "I said NOTHING about anything 'stolen'."YES you did. In your 2nd sentence! The same sentence that you used the term 'scroungers". Apparently you do not read what you write. I did." Read what I wrote again. I was quoting you. You're the one who said "I said nothing about anything 'stolen'." You wrote that sentence, and I was quoting you. You're now saying that I said that. No, you did. And I know you said about stealing because I explained it to you. Let me try and explain it again- Socialism argues for the theft of property from the bourgeoisie (who Karl Marx identified as the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg ). You made it clear in your criticism - "Saint Bezos, patron saint of Capitalism, appears to be TIK's icon of innocence." - that you're against Capitalism. This means you're against the Jews, and for Socialism (which is inherently anti-Semitic). Whether you realize it or not, you're advocating for theft. - "How ludicrous to conclude such a sweeping condemnation of someone whom you have no knowledge of. No basis to refer to me as anti-Semitic, 'socialist' and unemployed. Ignorance personified." You hate Capitalism, which means you hate the Jews, as I've explained in this video that I linked to you https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg In other words, anti-capitalism is anti-Semitism. You are being anti-capitalist, which means you're being anti-Semitic, whether you realize it or not. And now you know why I'm no longer a socialist. - "Lastly, it is the LOVE of money that is said to be the root of all evil. This is the grand failure of monopolistic capitalism." But the love of money is not the root of all evil either. The entire idea that money, or the love of money, is bad, is simply false. And the reason people think the love of money is bad, is because the love of money is heavily associated with the Jews. To quote Karl Marx himself - "Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question".
    3
  8956. @Dataizm - none of my critics have watched the video. The few that have have admitted that I've got a solid argument.
    3
  8957. Hope you enjoy the rest of it too 👍
    3
  8958. I went back to work on Tuesday after the two weeks. I actually enjoy responding, even to the trolls. I can't do it all the time, but it's nice to relax and just respond to people. It's therapeutic, and good practice at remaining calm and collected when your opponent has lost their cool.
    3
  8959. Enjoy https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    3
  8960. @друг - I'm actually disappointed that they're failing to come up with anything of any substance to counter me. History lies in the heart of the debate, and there is no debate any more because (currently) I've crushed their arguments. Worse, they haven't even realized that this video destroys their counter arguments - even though it's in the title!
    3
  8961. In that History Theory video, you'll discover that the only way to get to the truth about history is to debate it. However, when one side (the Left) refuse to use reason, logic, evidence, facts or honest discussion, then they instantly render their arguments invalid... which is exactly what you're doing here. I'm happy and willing to go back to believing in Socialism. You just need to convince me that Hitler isn't a Socialist. To do that, you need to tell me what the definition of Socialism is, and base that on evidence, reason, facts and logic. If your argument doesn't hold up (which it hasn't so far) then you will have lost the debate.
    3
  8962. @Aiden B - I know you get what I'm saying, but you're unconvinced. So let's try a different approach. What is the one thing that, if I was able to prove it, would convince you that I'm right on this issue?
    3
  8963.  @dr1flush  The linked video explains my point precisely and is backed by sources. What's the point of rehashing what I said in the video here in the comments? You may as well watch the video... Or just continue to be ignorant and not actually listen to the evidence, like you're doing.
    3
  8964. No, it's historically accurate https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  8965. You're arguing with a troll, and it isn't worth it. Aiden hasn't watched the video despite repeatedly claiming that he has. He spends hours of his day arguing with others in this comment section, and his arguments are senseless word salads unsupported by evidence. Feel free to argue, but he's not listening. He knows what he believes.
    3
  8966. To put this in context, there's normally just a couple thousand comments on a typical video of mine. The top 5 or so videos only have maybe 3 or 4 thousand comments. This one has 44,000... To say they are triggered is an understatement. They're doing their best to Hate on me and the other viewers, but all it's doing is confirming how completely desperate they are in the face of overwhelming evidence.
    3
  8967. And you're making the same arguments these guys did https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    3
  8968. Fascism is different from National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  8969. Socialism has nothing to do with class. Only Marxist-Socialism does. I went over this in the video. And Karl Marx's "class" was actually racial https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  8970. "I didn't watch the video"
    3
  8971. Also, I like to that wannabchomsky (who is Marxist) is agreeing with a National Socialist. You two have so much in common
    3
  8972. You must remember that the State Central Banks are manipulating one half of every transaction through interest rate and printing "easy" currency. The result of this is the misallocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses, the impoverishment of the poor, the funnelling of currency to the rich, and the creation of bubbles that result in the boom and bust cycle. THIS is not only the main cause of recessions, depressions, and the impoverishment of the poor (as I've explained here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs ) but is also the reason CEOs get "golden parachutes". If you're thinking that the system we have today is "Capitalism", and think that I'm advocating for what we have today, you're badly mistaken. When one half of every transaction is controlled and manipulated by the Public Sector State Bank, we do not have a private sector. We do not have private property; you're just renting property off the government, which is why you pay tax on housing, cars and more. So questioning whether certain BIG monopoly corporations (corpse, body, organ, organs of the State - that's where the word comes from) are truly providing a service to people right now is correct - they're not. They're just getting "free" currency that's being stolen from the poor and redistributed to them via public taxes and public inflation. This is why actual capitalists (some socialists like Andrew Yang claim to be Capitalists so you have to be careful) are against Public Sector State Central Banks, and why Karl Marx called for State Banks in the Communist Manifesto - because Capitalists don't want to impoverish the poor. The bottom line is this: we don't have Capitalism now, so complaining that Capitalism doesn't work by pointing at the problems of our current system, which is in reality public ownership and control of the means of production, is not going to work. A free market would be the solution to the problems we have today https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    3
  8973. Been working on this since August 2018 too... on and off of course
    3
  8974. This is why https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    3
  8975. Taking power away from the workers is what the Left does. It's implicit in the action of social control and ownership. The definition of Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. That's it's actual and historical definition. And there is a historical definition - just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't so. Karl Marx based everything he said on the Labour Theory of Value. That's why I tackled the Labour Theory of Value in this video, because once you do that, everything that Marx said falls apart.
    3
  8976. Hitler nationalized the trade unions into the DAF and crushed those who refused to nationalize. Spoke about this in the video, so I didn't "forget". Hitler also created a massive welfare state. And yes, I explained this in the video. I didn't speak about the rich getting richer via Socialism, but it wouldn't surprise me considering that that's exactly what Socialism is designed to do - it's not for the poor, it's for the elite.
    3
  8977. I can't give you a gold star, but I can give you a heart :)
    3
  8978. According to Socialists, Capitalism is when the State does things.
    3
  8979. Well done!
    3
  8980. Also, you do realize that Lord Baron Keynes got most of his ideas from the Nazi economists, right? If Hitler wasn't interested in economics (which he was) then Keynes certainly thought he was. https://youtu.be/S2CkQqgCA7I
    3
  8981. Is an individual (private)? Or is it an 'organ of the state' (organ, body, corpse, corporation)? Relevant links https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  8982. I'm also surprised! Your son has a good history teacher!
    3
  8983. I'm working on it!
    3
  8984. Because otherwise my enemies will take the audio out of context and make false claims against me, so to head them off I put a voice on
    3
  8985. You are spot on. I've literally just finished another conversation with a Socialist where he called me to supply evidence several times, and I supplied it several times. But, unwilling to accept it, he then proceeded to dismiss the entire debate and end the conversation. The amount of times this happens is unreal, and I'm beginning to wonder if the word "religion" is wrong. "Cultist" describes them better
    3
  8986. Cheers Walt! If you go to my channel's About Page, you'll see I'm keeping a running tally too :)
    3
  8987. PJL, yeah there's simply two ways of saying it. This version is the way I was taught it in school, and I keep getting comments saying they're laughing, so I think I'll keep it up to be honest ;)
    3
  8988. Mat J - sadly, a lot of Marxists made it very clear that I should stick to military history, so those videos will have to remain as they are.
    3
  8989. Yes, I mistyped. I always get one date wrong!
    3
  8990. You are correct. But I needed to create a quick but accurate map to make this video, so had little choice but to use this one, then change the white background to green (making it look somewhat presentable).
    3
  8991. Ok, imagine you're in this situation. Imagine a military commander, who's in charge of a few thousand well-armed troops with guns, says that you have to 'register', and bring them food. What would be the incentive for you to 'register'?
    3
  8992. "And TIK, to most people National Socialism = Fascism or at the very least is a form of fascism. I've once met someone on the very far right claiming fascism was only the system of Italy, not Germany; but this is a minority view." Yeah, exactly, and having now grasped exactly what National Socialism is, I also take this 'minority view'. There absolutely is a difference between the two.
    3
  8993. If there was 1 million people in the city, then it may not have been physically possible to get them all out across the Volga in boats.
    3
  8994. It'll be Operation Crusader. Length 7-8 hours long. I'm aiming for October at the latest. Script is almost done. Would have got the script finished last week but the Marxpocalypse happened.
    3
  8995. Anton Joly, author of the Stalingrad Battle Atlas series, who also has a YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA
    3
  8996. It will be a while, unfortunately. Probably after Crusader.
    3
  8997. Part of me wonders if it's an attainable goal or not, and I know you cannot please everyone, but I also know that I was in their shoes once. I wish that someone would have guided me to the answers I didn't seek. I think that's why I want to get through to people... at least in part
    3
  8998. Thank you for your great comment - you should comment more often! And thank you for choosing to support! I didn't expect much support after this video... I'll try not to become a casualty or go MIA (it's not quite that bad yet). But yes, I need time to regroup. Your comment has convinced me that I need to be open and honest about 'the problem' I mentioned in the video, so I'll definitely make a video explaining it. It's not just about getting it off my chest, but also about finding a solution to the problem, which I'm not sure there is one...
    3
  8999. "Charles Dickens would publish his novels serialised in newspapers before he'd finished them. The feedback helped him to adjust nuances of the plot as he went along." I've heard that too. However this is ominous because Dickens sucks, and I don't want my series to be as bad as his books. Hard Times? Yeah I had some Hard Times trying to stay awake whilst reading that 'novel'...
    3
  9000. Thanks, although I'm not sure if that many are listening 😞
    3
  9001. I probably am, which is further proof that our tax money is being squandered!
    3
  9002. If National Socialism isn't Gnosticism, why did Guido von List write for the journal 'Gnosis'? Guido von List was the guy who picked the Swastika as the symbol for Aryanism. "It is therefore possible to trace the origin of the Nazi symbol back through the emblems of the Germanenorden and ultimately to Guido von List.” - Goodrick-Clarke, “The Occult Roots of Nazism,” p151.
    3
  9003. Yeah it's technically MegaZord but I flip-flopped back and forth a few times because I forgot :D
    3
  9004. I don't deny that "Left Liberals" exist, but to say that they're true liberals is completely false. Watch what they do, not what they say, and you will see that they're anything but liberal.
    3
  9005. Nationalism is Socialism for the Nation. It's pro-state, and anti-freedom. I don't believe in nation states and instead think private property (small family and small business) should enact the largest division of mankind.
    3
  9006. Not a weird question at all, I'm 35
    3
  9007. I think it was this one https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0 And it's (probably) not the real Elon Musk, just someone with that username
    3
  9008. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. Laissez-faire - or leave alone, is no government intervention. The Nazis interfered with the society (Aryan Germans, Jews etc, and Hitler Youth), and the economy (KdF and so on). This was socialism.
    3
  9009. Yes, exactly
    3
  9010. Saying all that doesn't make it true. By 1935 Hitler had pulled Germany out of what he classed to be "international Jewish finance". He also banned private property and had the state run those industries. Sure they were "privatized" in name, but without private property, and with the state in control of resources and manpower, if the industrialists didn't play ball they had their industries taken off them, which is what happened to Junkers. Taxes also increased dramatically for industrialists, which heavily restricted their profits. This is why some, like Reimann went into hiding.
    3
  9011. Ebrohim - more or less. I skipped the bits where he was talking about nothing in particular (which was a good portion of it). WolfE - "he believed in uniting the people among race rather than class" a socialist belief.
    3
  9012. I've been tempted, but I own my mistakes and want to show people where I changed. Obviously the evidence I've provided since this video is overwhelming and there's no doubt now that Hitler was a Socialist, but I understand why people were outraged when this first released.
    3
  9013. No, racism is not necessarily a socialist idea. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy is (although liberalism is partly this, but nowhere near as much). So, yes, I am correct in saying the National Socialist intervened in the society and economy on racial and economic (redistribution of wealth) lines and thus classify as socialists, which is what they called themselves.
    3
  9014. I'm glad the comments are entertaining for an observer. It wasn't so fun when they all brigaded this channel at the time of release. But the fact I've crushed many of them with evidence in the comments shows that I'm not willing to give in just because the evidence hurts someone's feelings.
    3
  9015. I'm not about pleasing people, I'm about going where the evidence suggests and showing what needs to be shown. They can downvote all they want, it won't change my views... although a proper argument might (certainly not seen any yet though).
    3
  9016. Point to the part of the video where I said National Socialism and Soviet Socialism are indistinguishable. Oh that's right, I didn't say that. As I keep saying, this isn't Marxist-Socialism, but it is still socialism. Also, saying that the Nazis didn't redistribute wealth is incorrect, as is the idea there was no social movement under the National Socialist regime which is what you're implying. I also explained why Hitler saw no need to get rid of businesses entirely, and made it clear that the state controlled businesses in the pinned comments. Hitler tanked the economy by 1934 by turning Germany into a centrally planned state. Pretending this is capitalism, doesn't make it capitalism. And, if it is capitalism, explain how market forces and supply and demand resulted in the gas chambers at Auschwitz. In fact, this is a typical denialist arguement, and I get tons of comments saying that capitalism doesn't result in gas chambers. Well, this is because the denialists know that people have fundamentally misunderstood what National Socialism is. The reality was that racism alone doesn't explain it, there has to be a centralised state control mechanism to make it happen. You also require the incentive of wanting to "socialize" the people in order to create an Aryan state, and typical racism doesn't result in that. There's a difference between being racist, and being willing to murder millions people in murder factories. That difference is the idea that people are no longer individuals, but groups - a typical socialist viewpoint. They're no longer individuals, but 'workers' and 'managers' and 'upper class' and 'lower class' and various different racial groups. Groups don't need property and their lives are forfeit to the group, as both Hitler and Marx says. (Hitler says that they can keep their property, unless they're deemed unworthy by the state.) They're no longer people, but parasites. And this is why the Germans were willing to execute the Jews, because in their mind, their 'group' was the better than the other 'group'. That is their reasoning, and this is why the denialists get away with it because people haven't connected the dots between the Nationalism and the Socialism of National Socialism.
    3
  9017. Haha yeah
    3
  9018. Calling it names is not a valid argument.
    3
  9019. "You have allowed the propagandistic redefinition of socialism and thus made all arguments null and void." Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If this is not it, then please state your definition and tell me how it differs from capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). "It has always had one through-line and that is worker ownership of the workplace." Marxism is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Marxism is a socialism, but not the only type of socialism. You're using "socialism" to mean "Marxism", and this is where you're going wrong. They are not the same thing. "This was not the project of the Nazis, therefore it was not socialism." Nationalsocialism is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). "It really is that simple to debunk the entire video and every similar attempt." Except, you haven't debunked anything. You've admitted you thought Marxism was the what socialism is, which is incorrect. Your definitions are muddled which is plaguing your analysis and undermines your entire argument. "you mistakenly think that there is some clear and distinct difference between Nazism and fascism. There isn't." Nationalsocialism is racial-socialism. Fascism is what I'm going to call 'nationality-socialism'. The first racial laws in Italy only came in 1938 after Mussolini was influenced by Hitler, prior to that, Mussolini wasn't interested in race. You could be Jewish, but as long as you were an Italian citizen and working for Italy, it didn't matter to Mussolini. "In the most significant way, fascism is the collusion of corporation and state. This is a perfect description of Nazi Germany." So what you're saying is that both Fascism and National-Socialism are moving towards state ownership of the economy? So both of these parties are socialist compared to the capitalist parties? Oh yes, that is exacly what you're saying, and exactly what I'm saying. "Just because the Nazis also included an extreme emphasis upon the antisemitic element, really has little to do with the description given above. It fits the tendency to a tee." Except the means of [destr]uction were owned by the state. The Holocaust is a massive example of state control of the means of the production (socialism). So yes, the antisemitic element is relevant because how Hitler decided to remove the Jews from his society wasn't through private ownership or market forces (capitalism) but by using the state (socialism) to artificially remove them from both the economy and society. "By contrast, what happened in the USSR has a very particular name among socialists: State Capitalism." So you're going to distort history now? Please explain to me how the Soviet Union allowed private ownership of the means of production? "Well, capitalism is the capital owners having control of the workplaces. And in governments such as the USSR, the capitalists were just the central party managers. They separated the workers from control of their workplace. And thus, instead of simply calling this arrangement capitalism, it is called state capitalism." Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). What you've just described is state ownership. This was socialism, not capitalism. Again, your definition of socialism is mistaken and has no bearing on the historical reality. Marxism (worker's state ownership) may have failed in the USSR, but the Soviet Union was absolutely state ownership and control of the economy. There's zero chance of denying that. Therefore it was socialist. "I think, in a very significant way, the reason you have been fooled so thoroughly by this argument, is that you have accepted the false notion that "when the government does more things, it's more socialist."" Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). "As has been laid out extensively, this actually has a tendency of being LESS socialist and MORE capitalist, because it separates workers from ownership and management of their workplaces." Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Marxism is what you're describing, not socialism. "That Hitler despises communism is an exact through-line to this fact." Yes, Hitler was anti-communism. "He exterminated socialists and communists alike, so that he could create propaganda to confuse people just in the precise way you are being confused in this video." Hitler was pro-socialist and anti-communist. Again, you're confusing the terms, turning them into false 'Marxist' definitions and then accusing me of getting this wrong. The only reason people are confused is because, as I have discovered to my horror, they don't actually know the difference between socialism and capitalism. Again, capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. "That's all. Bye." No no, that's not all. Come back and define socialism and capitalism for me. If I've got it sooooooo wrong, tell me what the 'real' definition of socialism and capitalism is.
    3
  9020. This video and the follow up got brigaded by Marxists who think that socialism is just Marxism, and there I was attacking socialism.
    3
  9021. Exactly, and most of the viewers on this video were not from my subscribers. They came from Marxist areas of the internet intent on down voting and shouting how much they're unsubscribing. Well they couldn't unsubscribe, because they were never subscribed in the first place.
    3
  9022. Socialism rejects the freedom for the individual in favour of the collective. Socialism is just slavery by another name. Think before you submit to the Borg collective.
    3
  9023. I was a socialist until about two weeks before this video released.
    3
  9024. Okay, if you say so... But whatever you do, don't under any circumstances watch this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9025. "No they werent. You havent proven anything in this regard and just completly ignored my citations." "You still havent demonstrated how this was the case. I have explicitly shown you that private ownership skyrocketed under the nazi regime. You harping on about race is actually irrelevant since its not relevant to the structure of the economy. Banks didnt dissapear with the jews or did they?" - Kommentatus Cosades The industries weren't under state control? Ok, I'll prove that they were. And I didn't ignore your citations, I said they're irrelevant, since 'privatization' didn't actually happen the way you think it did. Sources will be listed at the end of my last post. ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good.
    3
  9026. Because you can't refute it. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism.
    3
  9027. Reading reading reading. To be honest, this was a realization after reading through Mein Kampf about a week ago. I'm embarrassed that I didn't connect the dots earlier.
    3
  9028. No they weren't.
    3
  9029. And a video to refute the counter argument https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9030. I'm glad you liked this Bandholm! Yes, I could have emphasised that socialism doesn't mean an end of capitalism (it's a mix between capitalism and communism). And you bring up some interesting points about the conservatives etc. I also hope this video will survive on YouTube, even if it gets a billion dislikes. The fact that people like yourself 'get it' is enough for me :) Cheers!
    3
  9031. Yes, and they're disliking my new response-to-this-video video before they've even watched it (had several dislikes when it hadn't been out a minute) https://youtu.be/4_eQ7weo_ys
    3
  9032. I went the extra mile with the "communism" thing, in order to make the penny drop with people. But yes, Nazism and communism are not the same. However, socialism is a central part of National Socialism. The classic counterargument is to say that the Strasser movement was snuffed out, so therefore no socialism. But this was 1,000 people out of a movement that was many millions. But it's good to hear you agree :)
    3
  9033. Both economic systems are the same. Politics (democracy vs authoritarian dictatorship) may be different, but ultimately the economics (socialism) are the same. Anti-private property, anti-choice for the individual, pro-state, high taxation, less inventive, less efficiency, less innovation, hurtful for all consumers, and completely unequal. If everyone is treated the same, we no longer have equal rights. I want to own the clothes on my back - nope, can't do that because that will make someone else poorer. Therefore, I can no longer have equal opportunities. We all must be brought down to the lowest common denominator. The state dictates what we can or cannot eat, what we can or cannot do, what we can or cannot say, what we can or cannot think... And we all must exist at the bottom, otherwise we risk "offending" the laziest member of our glorious society. That's not equality, that's slavery.
    3
  9034. Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members." https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    3
  9035. Wow, thank you Mr Czar! And yes, I'm either brave or dumb ;)
    3
  9036. He hasn't realised that socialism is state. But he is correct in his assessment that I published this before it was ready. This is why I intend to redo it, but with substantially more evidence (which I now have).
    3
  9037. Yes, yes it was
    3
  9038. "State capitalism is simply state ownership of production instead of private ownership or public ownership." Public = State. And state ownership of the means of production is Socialism, which is why State Capitalism is an oxymoronic term https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9039. Explain?
    3
  9040. Thanks Jamie. Yes, what these people haven't realised is that there's a difference between things like communism and socialism, and racism. They're not necessarily one and the same. You can be a communist or a conservative, and still be racist. Glad you agree. Thank you
    3
  9041. Here is my updated video. I think this will clarify things a little better https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9042. Thank you. I will follow up on this with additional information and evidence, since I do feel I could have delivered this message better. I also want to address the criticism, which I think doesn't stand up to scrutiny and is relying upon historical distortions. E.g. was Hitler's regime totalitarian? Yes. Therefore it must have had total control of the economy. If he doesn't have total control of the means of production, then he cannot have a totalitarian regime.
    3
  9043. I'm glad you enjoyed and agreed with the video. I'm currently researching postmodernism right now actually, so it's interesting you mentioned it :) not sure how you can give me a million likes, but I'll heart your comment. Hope to hear from you on Patreon! (Will have an update on there tomorrow)
    3
  9044. Thanks Salokin :) I expected the hate to be honest. Little sad to see it, but it's one of those things. This is going to be a bumpy ride on the route to the events of the Holocaust and the wider Nazi and Stalinist atrocities I've now committed myself to cover.
    3
  9045. That's not my entire arguement at all. See the new pinned comment.
    3
  9046. Or the extremists who don't want to admit this to be the case.
    3
  9047. This is why I didn't focus on the title, but the policies that the Nazis had. The main element here is that there is no definitive definition of what socialism is - since it's a spectrum. National Socialism absolutely fits into this mold.
    3
  9048. Hi Jason! Thank you for your message, I'll send you an email shortly to the leaping horseman email
    3
  9049. "Erickson road to stalingrad" Nuts! I knew I'd forget one! Yes, Erickson was good for when he came out, but is sadly out of date now. Could be a nice alternative to Beevor or Craig as a starter, but again, you can't read him alone; you'd have to follow up with Glantz.
    3
  9050. I've read all the Stalingrad ones in English, except for that Raid book and the German ones obviously.
    3
  9051. Nice! It's worth it and I hope you enjoy it. It'll go well if you read it alongside my series
    3
  9052.  @ImaxNZ  Yes, until you see his comment history. It's all "stick to Stalingrad and tanks", and insulting. Here's his previous comments: "This is TK weakest tirade. Modern social democracy in the European Union is not equal to Nazism or Stalinism. Marx is garbage. Grow up TK. Move on." "Tok describing his "illumination" using the vocabulary of those who believe cavemen cowboys rode dinosaurs." "TK has gone full Jordan Peterson, how sophomoric." "Your not the first person to surrender at Stalingrad. You need to finish it, it is what separates you from the rest. The world does not need another Jordan Peterson." "We don't need to have another Sophist like Jordan Peterson. Stick to logistics." "Life is not fair. The world doesn't need another Jordan Peterson. Stay on Stalingrad. Delay your gratification." (I actually responded to him on this one, but of course he ignored me because he's not here for debate) "Please get back to Stalingrad!!!!!!!" "Right about the dialectic, wrong about Gnosticism. Nazis and Stalinists were Hegelians, not Gnostics. Get back to Stalingrad!" (Hegelians are Gnostics, so this guy is clueless) "Stick to Stalingrad!" "Thanks for getting back to Stalingrad. Leave the Gnostic crap to Jordan Peterson." "Stick with Stalingrad. Leave the Gnostic crap to Jordan Peterson." "Oh my, the Gnostic crap again. Get back to Stalingrad." "Edit out the word "Gnostic" and you have a great video." (This being on the Auschwitz video, which is interesting because it's the only non-"tank" video he's commented on where he hasn't said "stick to Stalingrad" or similar.) I mean, this is shameful behaviour from a so-called human being, and there's no room for debate. The one time I previously tried to address him, he ignored me. He's not bringing anything valuable to the table, he's not contributing to the debate, and all it's doing is annoying me. It's pointless noise, so why should he get a voice? The more he cries about Stalingrad, the less inclined I am to make them, and the more inclined I am to make the non-military videos. (This is called "psychological reactance".)
    3
  9053. You've never said anything positive on this channel, it's all negative. You're saying I'm another Jordan Peterson, which is nonsense. Your opinions are wrong and unwelcome, and I don't understand why you're here. If you just want Leftist "history", go watch Three Arrows or something.
    3
  9054. (Spoilers below) They didn't pay the reparations. And even if they had, they couldn't pay the reparations in fiat currency, only gold and other commodities. Thus, the hyperinflation had nothing to do with reparations.
    3
  9055. It's pointless when one side is unwilling to place their emotions aside and reconsider their stance.
    3
  9056. In a nutshell, yes. Although it makes sense in the context. The Germans traditionally see themselves as one big social group who were told that they are amazing and can conquer all (stemming from the rise of Prussia and the old Monarchy and then Socialism of the 1800s). This was fine until they lost WW1. At that point, all the propaganda they had consumed was called into question, but instead of accepting that their world view had been wrong, they doubled down and blamed everyone else (Western Allies and the Jews) and the Treaty of Versailles. To give an analogy, it would be like suddenly realizing that everything you ever believed about yourself was wrong. Let's say that you thought you were an amazing tennis player and everyone around you built this persona about you because you could beat everyone at tennis in your school. But when you played other tennis players from other schools, or after you finished school, you discovered that all these other tennis players could beat you without breaking a sweat. Instead of realizing that the people at your school just weren't interested in tennis and weren't really trying or practicing it much (they were easy opponents), and that you had been fed a load of lies by your friends and peers, you instead look for scapegoats. You'd say, "it was my faulty tennis racket" or "they have an unfair advantage because they've got better shoes" or "my coach is of a different race" or whatever excuse you can come up with.
    3
  9057. They weren't "punished". They lost the war and the victors wanted loot (reparations). When someone assaults you, you sue them in court. Why? Because you want compensation (reparations) for their aggression.
    3
  9058. Germany invaded neutral Belgium. They IMPOSED the war on the western powers. But they weren't "guilty" for starting the war. They lost the war and should pay, just like France lost in 1871 and was forced to pay Germany.
    3
  9059. It was anyway. Hardly anyone in the real world cares about your GCSE results, including most employers.
    3
  9060. From my end, it looks like you're second by a second!
    3
  9061. Well, I can understand why they don't tackle this. To come out and say this is actually to make a target for yourself. But my principles as an advocate of proper history definitely outway my concerns.
    3
  9062. You're mistaken. I welcome different opinions. The issue here is that these aren't opinions, they're ideological beliefs. Opinions (or interpretations) are based on facts and evidence (and are a central part of history and historiography); beliefs are not. Denialists, Distorians and Socialists (Marxists, Fascists, or National Socialists) mask their beliefs as opinions, but they're not. They have no evidence to base their beliefs upon (much like flat-earthers) and so they are not valid.
    3
  9063. By reading actual history books by actual historians and avoiding hate speech and works of distorians
    3
  9064. Because I can only live a successful life by looking at the world the right way.
    3
  9065. Nope. As explained, this has been in the making for years.
    3
  9066. I've not seen Fredda's video, but I've heard about it. Several people have told me that it's just a "hit piece" and is full of fallacious arguments. Whether it is or isn't, what we must remember is that he didn't make that video to attack me, but to defend his cherished beliefs. The ideas of socialism and altruism cannot be tarnished, otherwise how else can they prove to the world that they are 'good' and 'caring' people at heart.
    3
  9067. I'm not confident doing live debates with other YouTubers yet, but maybe I'll get experience while doing more videos with Axiom. Zulu was in the comments though, and I did chat with him.
    3
  9068. Moses's book is listed in my sources. Yes I've read it - it was the first I turned to when I burnt out. He doesn't provide an answer to this problem, which is why I remained burnt out. We do study the sources using our senses, otherwise you wouldn't be able to see them. Yes, history could have happened differently, but this is a meaningless statement. You can only prove what you can prove, not what you can't. It does no good to speculate on what could have been, since there's no way to prove it.
    3
  9069. Or, Napoleon is wrong.
    3
  9070. You need to restudy philosophy because you're talking nonsense.
    3
  9071. I did place Peikoff's book there as a recommendation because I think it's a fantastic book. Obviously Glantz and so on are on there for a reason, but not every book on the shelves are placed there because I recommend them. They're mostly there because they have to be.
    3
  9072. Did you watch the full video? I'm not a believer in "material reality" (which is a religious concept based on monism) but reality as it really is (not supernatural). And I'm absolutely not coming to the Christian world view. I'm not sure how you concluded that based on this video.
    3
  9073. If it's subjective (based purely on personal opinions and feelings), then there's zero reason to use any evidence at all. As explained, if history is subjective then you're basically doing fiction, which is why I burnt out 4 years ago.
    3
  9074. Yes, it might, if it wasn't a pile of half-truths and inaccuracies, or if it was produced better than it actually was. I had to watch it in half-hour increments because the stupidity of the thing caused my brain to melt out of my ears. Still haven't had to patience to get through the whole thing, although I have notes on many of the inaccuracies I've observed so far.
    3
  9075. Yes! I have the first two, and am eagerly waiting for the third. Not had time to dive into the second one yet though, but I will now. Thanks!
    3
  9076. Don't know about that last bit, but I'm fairly certain that the Duke of Windsor is involved in the Hess Affair, even though there's currently no direct evidence for it (there is some indirect, plus the fact that the Royal Archives remain locked, and it's the only theory that really fits...). This could explain the Dunkirk situation too, although I'm not sure.
    3
  9077. FIRST! And I hope you enjoy it
    3
  9078. Stalingrad may not be down to battalion level like Crusader was (or it might be, I haven't decided yet), but it will be at division and regiment level for the most part. I intend to make it as detailed as possible though, and it will be very similar to Crusader in the way it looks :) Unfortunately, Courland definitely won't be at battalion level because the limited sources don't allow it (I'm going to stick to division-level for the most part). I really wish I could read Russian and German
    3
  9079. I get it :)
    3
  9080. @Yathy, didn't think of that. But I would say in that case they would need to complain to their government. Plus, while the Nazi flag is banned for toys and games, it's not banned (or, at least, shouldn't be banned) for historical documentaries.
    3
  9081. Thank you! I'm doing my best with what I have, and I'm always seeking to make improvements :)
    3
  9082. Yes, you are correct! Good spot :)
    3
  9083. Third time lucky?
    3
  9084. Yeah... In the past I've put up the 48 star flag and people have complained saying it's the wrong flag
    3
  9085. Question 1 - "where in the US constitution does it say income tax isn't allowed...?" 'Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states: "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken." ' from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/income_tax Income tax was illegal prior to the Federal Reserve and the 16th Amendment (both in 1913). --- Question 2 - "where in the US constitution does it say... that only gold and silver can be used as currency?" Quote - 'No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts...' https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec10.html --- Question 3 - "Is there any country that isn't socialist? Beside Somalia?" You don't seem to understand. A STATE (country) is ALWAYS Socialist, since Socialism is the State. Every Country (meaning, nation) is ALWAYS Socialist, unless the State has voluntary taxation and doesn't control the money/currency supply (which they all do). Please see my "Public vs Private" video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y --- Question 4 - "I'm asking because it seems you've watered the definition of "socialist" down so far, "Hitler was a socialist" isn't even wrong anymore, it's just a meaningless statement." It's not meaningless. Some people want more State control, others want less. Those who want more are called Socialists. Those who want less are called Capitalists. I'm not sure why this is so hard for people to grasp.
    3
  9086. @jim Also, the situation is made more complex due to the dollar being the world reserve currency. In a lot of ways it's similar to Germany in WW2. She hyperinflated her currency, but the rising prices only really occurred in 1944-45 because they were the European reserve currency.
    3
  9087. Have you seen this? https://youtu.be/WV9J6sxCs5k
    3
  9088. Chernobyl is really interesting. RBMK to the moon 🚀
    3
  9089. I don't. The roads are crumbling, the National Socialist Hell Service is just a bureaucracy that's intent on killing the elderly (such as both my grandfathers), and I've spent my entire adult life unlearning everything I was taught in the propaganda prisons known as State schools. The more I unlearn, the happier and richer I become.
    3
  9090. Restricting health care to the State results in less efficient and more expensive health care than when left to the private sector https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    3
  9091. They were my Christmas presents from my friends 😂
    3
  9092. In an era of competing narratives, remember to think critically and not believe anything any State-owned or financed media outlet is telling you. That basically means you should be highly skeptical of EVERY mainstream outlet on both sides, and ask yourself why they are pushing their particular narrative?
    3
  9093. Lux, nah! I meant that my jokes are terrible, so I'm glad you find them funny
    3
  9094. I didn't even get that in school. Our WW2 lesson (just one) talked about the nuclear bombs at the end of the war. Have never been so disappointed. School and education are not the same thing.
    3
  9095. By that logic, socialism is impossible since if individuals exist in the socialism, that makes it capitalism.
    3
  9096. Yeah, once again, I understand what you're saying, but you've missed the point. Once it goes public, it becomes a state. It doesn't need to be part of the central state to be classed as a state in itself. A PUBLIC traded company isn't private, because it's public. It's a state. Whether it's owned by individuals or not (it's not if it's on the stock exchange) doesn't matter because it's a state.
    3
  9097. I'm surprised you didn't bring up the "Coca-Cola death squads" argument
    3
  9098. Yes, but they often don't state the meaning, but just simply ridicule the opponent for providing a meaning of a word. So in the end, there's no conversation or debate because their "definition" is deliberately undefined. If they do give a vague definition, and then you say "what you just said actually leads to this" then they deny it and proceed to ridicule you again. So the issue isn't that we don't agree on the meaning of words, but that some are trying to mask the true meaning of the words we use or change them to cause harm (like with the word 'inflation').
    3
  9099. True. I'm not on about that though. When the definition of the word is in the dictionary, and is supported by historical evidence, and also common sense, then that is the definition. If someone rejects that current definition because they want the word to mean something else, but then proceed to not define the new meaning of the word, then we have a problem.
    3
  9100. That's incorrect! (I had to google it though to discover you were wrong though, I'll admit that)
    3
  9101. References: AC/DC BB King Black Sabbath Carlos Santana Deep Purple Muddy Waters Rory Gallagher ZZ Top ...
    3
  9102. You'll get over that soon. Just keep at it. Learn the pentatonic scale and watch YouTube videos or TV while running up and down it. Then when you get used to it, learn how to use the pentatonic scale to solo, and away you go!
    3
  9103. I was tempted to sing something... but I'm glad I just stuck to guitar
    3
  9104. Glad you think so!
    3
  9105. Haha I'm only having a bit of fun with Freyberg, he was actually one of the better generals in this battle. I like to be critical of everyone and everything (just my nature). Compare my treatment of Freyberg vs my views on Pienaar or Rommel (coming later) and you'll see a world of difference.
    3
  9106. Yes, after losing it (and nope, that statement is correct).
    3
  9107. I didn't bother monetizing it because I didn't want to give them an excuse to take it down. Hopefully they won't but best to be prepared for the worst. Thanks for subscribing to my Bitcute! All new videos will come up on there, and I'll be slowly uploading my old ones to there too.
    3
  9108. "Firstly, nazism is the socialism is a debunked bit of rhetoric. Just because it put socialism in the title doesnt make it socialism. Its national fascism." Fascism is socialism. And it's not debunked, I've just shown you that denying Hitler's socialism is denying the Holocaust. Are you saying that the Holocaust is debunked?
    3
  9109. Yeah, as Steven has proven, all they do is deny it. But these socialists also fail to connect the dots that Democratic Socialism doesn't really mean democracy either by the same token that North Korea isn't democratic.
    3
  9110. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 107 sources, 350 direct references, and more notes and quotes etc. I may babble, but I'm not an idiot.
    3
  9111. Because I am https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    3
  9112. Hahaha, sorry :D
    3
  9113. "Tik have you been drinking? Got dumped? Going into a manic phase?" None of the above. "Not going to argue about Nazis and commies being the same but you are going crazy here." I didn't say they were the same. I said they were both socialists - one class-socialism and one is race-socialism. They manifest themselves slightly different and so aren't the same, but they are socialisms.
    3
  9114. "WRONG. In history, there are only facts." Please watch this all the way through https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    3
  9115. Here's a link to a video of mine with a section called "National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw" where I explain why National Socialism doesn't even work on the ideological level, let alone the practical level https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Now please explain to me why me explaining what National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw is, is somehow me "apologizing for fascism"? Oh, that's right, you're talking rubbish. National Socialism and Fascism are Socialism, and all Socialisms are evil.
    3
  9116. First, define your version of socialism and capitalism before we continue. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) control of the means of production. A free market is capitalism. Socialism is the socialization of the means of production, and there are varients of this initial idea based on class, race, gender, nationality etc. Socialism cannot operate on its own. The private sector (and especially the middle class, bourgeoisie) is forced to prop up the dying public sector, which constantly proves itself unable to fund itself. This is why socialism requires force - taxation - to exist, because it cannot generate wealth for itself. No monopoly can generate wealth, and socialism cannot calculate its own economy, as Mises pointed out in his book "Socialism". So, all socialist states like Britain, Denmark etc, are propping up a failing public sector with a hard-pressed private sector. This is why tax rates are so high - we're trying to keep the house of cards from failing. This is why there's so much inflation, because the public state debt is so high in order to fund these wonderful socialist programs, that the wealth of everybody (even children) is being sapped by the invisible tax (inflation). Socialism is not democratic. If I want to leave socialism in order to create my own business, I can't do that. Capitalism is democratic, because the people (the individuals) have the power to do what they want so long as they do not harm anyone else. Yes they have to work for society in order to generate wealth, but the benefits are vast.
    3
  9117. Anarcho socialism is "non-state state". As I showed with the factory part of the video, by rising up in the revolution, the workers become the state. You cannot have a non-state state (anarcho-socialism).
    3
  9118. If you want a full-sourced and backed up video, here's one with 107 sources, 350 direct references, timestamps in the description, numerous quotes and more detailing exactly why Hitler was a Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9119. Socialism is nothing other than social ownership of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y What you're referring to is Marxism, which is one version of socialism which talks about "class" (but this is actually race) https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Fascism is not the same as National Socialism, and there are major distinctions between the two ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  9120. Thanks, I'm glad to have you on board! 🙂
    3
  9121. Almost right, but the economic controls were implemented in the mid-1930s. If you go into the description of the video I'm about to link, and find the timestamps, skip to the "Privatisation" section. I go over the policies they implemented as soon as they got into power https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 In fact, as I explain in that video, these policies actually compelled the Germans to go to war because their economy was on the verge of collapse in 1938. Only by invading Czechoslovakia, Poland, the West, and especially the Soviet Union, and by exporting their inflation and importing/stealing goods from the rest of Europe, did they temporarily stop the collapse until 1944/45 when their currency hyperinflated.
    3
  9122. "YES! YES, YES, YES! Thank you for this post and how you have framed everything in easy to understand concepts." Glad you liked it robby! "If you were to do another one of these I'd spend a few minutes on a "Shrinking Markets" crash course." What exactly would you like to see in such a video? I covered the shrinking markets in the why Hitler had to go to war video. Or do you mean something different?
    3
  9123. I don't hate the Germans. I recently asked a Austrian German to help me with this video https://youtu.be/TMCx-LGuFRk I don't hate any "nationality", or "race", or "class", or "gender", etc. Why? Because I believe we're all individuals, not groups https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9124. Right, but people do the same thing here in the west. People mistakenly think that the Nazis were Fascists, but this is not the case. So this isn't a Russian-speaking issue, this is a global issue. Plus, there's little indication (from the terrible sources I've seen) that the UPA were fascist OR Nazi. The authors are just name-calling.
    3
  9125. Despite being my second Battlestorm documentary, I still think the Operation Compass video holds up
    3
  9126. They're not unbiased because the Second Polish Republic didn't treat the Ukrainians (or other minorities) very well.
    3
  9127. Does it? Because a totalitarian state that doesn't have consent is still totalitarian. Also, since you'll never get 100% consent by that definition, that means that no state can ever be totalitarian.
    3
  9128. Huh... interesting. Which livestream was this? It does sound like a bit of jealousy or people being mad over the Hitler's Socialism videos etc. I wouldn't mind, but I don't just do WW2 or the Eastern Front videos. In fact, I have a multipart series planned for a non-WW2 topic and have spent months working on it.
    3
  9129. I did, but it was only for 2 weeks
    3
  9130. Yes you were! Congratulations!
    3
  9131. Exactly!
    3
  9132. Except, as this video shows, they weren't importing enough food. And as my oil videos have shown, they weren't importing enough oil. Even with Soviet supply, and Romanian supply, if there had been a second Romania, they still wouldn't have had enough oil to meet their minimum requirements. This is why they ran out of oil in the October of 1941, and why Hitler was so desperate to get the food of the Ukraine and oil of the Caucasus. And, as I've outlined in my "The REAL Reason Hitler HAD to Start WW2" video https://youtu.be/PQGMjDQ-TJ8 Hitler's entire ideology was geared towards Lebensraum in the East. Without it, he knew he would fail. That's why he started the war, and why he was going East.
    3
  9133. Welcome back! What were your original views? What made you revise your views? And how have they changed?
    3
  9134. There's actually a couple of Patron questions relating to WW1, so I'll be answering them at some point. However yes, I've got my hands full at the moment with Stalingrad!
    3
  9135. @Gipsy Danger - I haven't read it, but I've added it to my shopping list. Thanks!
    3
  9136. I was not wrong https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9137. They claim they have debunked me, but when I do fight my corner their arguments always seem to fall flat, like Nigel Askey's did
    3
  9138. First!
    3
  9139. It sounds like you'd enjoy Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" if you haven't already read it. As for the lady, she was young when it happened, so there's a chance she was just ignorant of the facts at the time. But yeah, it was clear to a lot of people what was happening.
    3
  9140. You haven't watched the Hitler's Socialism video. Please watch that because your argument simply doesn't work in the face of the evidence presented in that video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9141. Because you can understand it. If I, a worker, work all day, only to have the lords and ladies (the "comrades") take my hard earned wages off me, then that's not only unjust, but it incentivises me to not play along. I can down tools, or make things as uncomfortable as possible with everyone sticking up for this fascist system, like you.
    3
  9142. The problem in that case would be a aimlessness and restraint (due to a lack of self) not "freedom". The solution to aimlessness is not to SELF-sacrifice and have a dictator tell you what to do, but to make a decision and decide for yourSELF how you want to live your life.
    3
  9143. Yeah, the only one here that I've actually ever used was the free market one, but this is a noun, not an Ideobabble concept. I can explain to you the concept of the free market in a sentence: people who are free to trade and cooperate. Is that so hard to understand? I've never used the "it's natural" argument. Never appealed to authority or Any Rand. And while mortality is a pie in the sky idea that isn't grounded in objective reality and actively hurts people, I've never once said "I'm the most important person". Yet somehow, others (none of which are subscribed, so clearly they don't actually watch my videos) agree with you... so clearly you must be right.
    3
  9144. In that case, all animals would be moral.
    3
  9145. I've never struggled with my mental health. I've been burnt out, but that's not a mental health issue, that's fatigue from working and dealing with ideologues.
    3
  9146. I don't think you have watched these videos. I understand them, and am addressing them. The issue isn't an understanding, it's a calling out of the obfuscation tactics they use to hide the true nature of their narcissistic need for control. Perhaps you weren't smart enough to grasp such a simple concept. Well done.
    3
  9147. It's not self-censorship. YouTube's policies compelled me to pre-censor it, otherwise it'll end up like my Greek video - restricted and not recommended. Or even worse, deleted.
    3
  9148. "If ppl dont like it, they can leave." That's how it should be. But that's not how it is. I must adhere to the policies (stated or unstated) of our central planners.
    3
  9149. 1.4 to 1.9 million German women R'd by the Soviet Union and the Western Allies 10 million Soviet women R'd by the Germans.
    3
  9150. National Socialism is Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 107 sources, 350 direct references, more quotes and notes etc. So don't try and spout rubbish at me.
    3
  9151. I also mentioned it in the video
    3
  9152. Wait, are you saying I'm a Wehraboo? Glad you thought the video was worthwhile making :) sadly, the Nazis on 4chan seem to believe heavily in the myth of the "wonderful Wehrmacht" and aren't even watching the video, which means this video wasn't very effective vs Wehraboos, even though it has the numbers to support what's being said
    3
  9153. I'm not sure why you think the dislikes were higher last night because they weren't. When I went to bed there was only about 500 dislikes. When I got up this morning, it wasn't even at a thousand, let alone 1,600. And I'm not a Leftist because I don't believe in Socialism, unlike National Socialists.
    3
  9154.  @vassilizaitzev1  Absolutely! You have to use all perspectives. That's why I still use Beevor's "Stalingrad" even though people complain that I do. And I do like Snyder, and don't think Richard Evan's criticism of him is fair.
    3
  9155. Exactly. And that's what they're saying in the comments - that this video is "disinformation propaganda"
    3
  9156. And I'll just leave these facts here - 1.4 to 1.9 million German women were R'd (by both Western Allies and Soviets). 10 million Soviet women were R'd by the Germans.
    3
  9157. Yes, you are!
    3
  9158. When I use secondary sources I get told I'm not using primary sources. When I use primary sources or a combination of both, I just get dismissed. This is because the enemies of reason have the belief that politics is primary, which goes hand in hand with their doctrine of emotionalism and ignorance.
    3
  9159. Yeah, the film isn't bad (one of my favourites), but it does get a fair bit wrong.
    3
  9160. Yes, as John said, the Germans had practically nothing at the bridge at the time, so taking it wouldn't have been an issue. Only later did the Germans arrive. But because they didn't set off for several hours, the Germans beat them to the bridge by a handful of minutes
    3
  9161. I do say, but the answer currently is "some report". I don't have more details than that at the moment.
    3
  9162. I haven't had time to watch either. I did start watching Theirs is the Glory, but I can't watch films while working on videos, so I turned it off and concentrated on my work.
    3
  9163. I can't learn every language!
    3
  9164. According to the books, Model wanted the Arnhem and Nijmegen bridges for a counter attack.
    3
  9165. I needed to redo it because many people hadn't seen the originals, and this one is a far better quality than the previous two, plus more in-depth.
    3
  9166. I do want to touch upon the Spanish Civil War, and I do also want to do a video or two on the Blue Division. But not sure when they'll be yet, sorry
    3
  9167. The interesting thing with the quotes in the video is that they couldn't even agree on the tonnages involved!? 300 tons was the absolute minimum needed just to subsist without being able to fight. 500 tons was the minimum to get by if they were to continue the siege. And 750 tons would be needed to fully supply the 6th Army. During the 71 day siege, the Luftwaffe transported 8,350.7 tons of supplies, which is 117.6 tons per day. (figures from Glantz's book two of the Stalingrad Trilogy, which include several sources)
    3
  9168. Yes, except the way it's written doesn't lead the reader to the conclusion that Jeschonnek persuaded Hitler that the airlift was possible and that Hitler then refused to go back on what Jeschonnek had said. The bit you quote starts halfway through the first paragraph (it's not its own paragraph). Then the next paragraph is the one I quote in the video (it's its own separate paragraph). Not only does Beevor fail to mention that Hitler was initially persuaded by Jeschonnek - "persuaded" being the important term, instead Beevor uses the term "indicated", which is not the same thing - but by setting the Göring story in its own paragraph leads the reader to assume this was the important part, and that it was Göring who persuaded Hitler. If it had been written to say "Jeschonnek's initial decision was what persuaded Hitler" then "Göring called a meeting and agreed with Jeschonnek" then that would have been fine. But it's not written like that. "Indicated" is not the same as "persuaded". It's suggesting that Jeschonnek lead to the Göring conference, and that it was Göring and his conference which then persuaded Hitler. That's not what happened.
    3
  9169. Haha thanks! I'm planning on learning it fully, getting lessons. Eventually I also want to learn Russian. That way I can use both German and Russian sources, and make these videos even better
    3
  9170. Yeah, I'm working on my German, so sorry about that. Apparently I've done a lot better in my more recent 6th Army Order of Battle video
    3
  9171. Coincidentally, today's video (out at 5pm GMT) answers your question.
    3
  9172. Glad to have you on board :)
    3
  9173. What's interesting is that a good portion of the transport aircraft were pulled away from Stalingrad and used to transport reinforcements to Tunisia after El Alamein and Torch. Essentially, the Luftwaffe was stretched way too thin in November/December 1942, which led to significant losses for the entire force and is arguably the turning point for the Luftwaffe in WW2.
    3
  9174. No worries! Thank you for calling me epic - not many have! :D
    3
  9175. So long as I can come with you... and suddenly have the ability to speak and read Russian and German
    3
  9176. That's exactly how I see it. Hope you enjoy it! It'll be out Monday
    3
  9177. That's not what happened at all.
    3
  9178. Thing is, Crete was in late May, so it's been argued that the Balkan Campaign delayed it. The only opportunity for them to invade in June. However, the point I mentioned in the video is that the Germans lost in the first coupe of month, regardless of the weather.
    3
  9179. So... It's the fantasy element that's appealing? As someone who was never really a fan of fiction, I'm trying to understand :(
    3
  9180. The problem is that they were in an oil deficit even with Soviet trade, so if they waited they would have been unable to attack anything.
    3
  9181. Well, I'm certainly happy you're considering supporting me :) perhaps tomorrow's video will convince you one way or another
    3
  9182. If only it was as easy as that!
    3
  9183. History is perceived via the evidence, which we use to make logical conclusions. While there is some room for speculation, we cannot base history on speculation alone, and have to rely on what we can prove from the evidence. I talked about this in my video "But how do you know you're right?" which I would recommend you watch if you haven't seen it https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI?si=BPrnfTFFyRKSvkn7
    3
  9184. I discussed Antony Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    3
  9185. History is only what we can prove, not what we can't. While governments have tried to keep secrets, evidence exists for those activities. Sure, there would have been more evidence had they not burned the documents, but there's usually ripples that they couldn't get rid of. Diaries of the wives of the people involved, witnesses, double agents and that sort of thing. The fact we have none of that here indicates that this isn't something that happened.
    3
  9186. Glad it was helpful!
    3
  9187. I've discussed Antony Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    3
  9188. No, it was a stenographic record (admittingly problematic). I've talked about that here https://youtu.be/a8EWd-IH6HI
    3
  9189. I think it's because I'm getting frustrated with all their lies, and I don't like it when there's so many distortions being spouted by so-called "educated" people. It just annoys me
    3
  9190. Yes, here's my video on Sutton https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA?si=4GxD-zk_i5DvZ8tb
    3
  9191. I've already talked about Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    3
  9192. I talked about Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA?si=1ZnQ3f37NM34Aopo
    3
  9193. They were reduced in number, and what remained was radicalised into supporting socialism. Let's not forget that Lenin, Marx, Engels, Rosa Luxemburg and numerous other socialists throughout history were from the Middle Class.
    3
  9194. Considering that most of the middle class had been destroyed by the Weimar Hyperinflation and wanted to do away with "the capitalist system", and considering that plenty of workers voted for the National Socialists too, your further attempt at saving your distorted view of history is not very effective.
    3
  9195. They were nationalised at that point under the policy of Gleichschaltuung https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=iDpRw2l2zfMSgtYT
    3
  9196. The "Reichwing" 😂 Hitler's a Third Positionist, but don't let the evidence hit you on the way out!
    3
  9197. I know about Gamergate 2, I've actually been watching Clownfish TV's coverage of the topic. But it's not surprising that Wikipedia is siding on the woke side. However, is this just in this instance, or is it across the board? I've seen Wikipedia use primary sources in some history articles, so I'm questioning if this is a official policy, or an excuse?
    3
  9198. There was a military video last week, and Gazala is a huge video that's still in the works. My editor has been working her rear off, as have I, to produce it.
    3
  9199. Go on then. Provide those records for me. The burden of proof is on the person claiming that something happened when it didn't.
    3
  9200. I agree with you. There is a distinction between the free market and big business, and I'm all for the free market and against the socialist corporations. That's why I now say "I'm not a capitalist, I'm a free market guy". But since most people think capitalism equals big business, I think we should let them have it. By making the distinction, we now present three options: free markets, capitalism and socialism/communism. And since capitalism and socialism are more or less the same, the true alternative is a free market.
    3
  9201. Are you a bot? Or are you suffering a mental breakdown? I've provided quotes from three mainstream historians, two of whom are famous. One took part in the David Irving trial. The other wrote one of the most popular and best selling biographies of Hitler ever. Yet here you are spamming comments saying I've provided no proof!? Besides, I never said there was a consensus, nor ever claimed a consensus is required. The objective facts are clear. You can either accept them, or ignore them. You're choosing to ignore the evidence, and that's on you. I'm choosing to stick to the evidence as provided.
    3
  9202. This is quite possibly the most poorly researched, mind-numbingly propagandistic comment I’ve ever seen. The burden of proof is on you, racist. If you want to claim that Hitler was funded into power by a cabal of capitalists, show me your receipts. Please, give me the evidence. We're waiting. Oh wait, you can't. The only evidence you have was shown by Turner to be dubious at best. And as I said, historians like Richard Evans (quoted in the video), Ian Kershaw, George W. F. Hallgarten ( https://www.jstor.org/stable/2113790 )... I mean, there's many more. Let's quote from Hallgarten: “Down to 1929 [Hitler’s] party appears to have lived, in the main, on membership dues and individual gifts, mainly from local South German producers. A donation by Fritz Thyssen in 1923 remained an isolated fact. Even the party’s increasing intimacy with Emil Kirdorf did not change the picture... Compared to the increasing indebtedness of the party which by 1933 rose to 70-90 million reichsmarks, these payments were only a drop in the bucket.” And let's quote from Kershaw (p358 of Hubris), who is actually referencing Turner here: "The story put about in the memoirs of the later press chief Otto Dietrich of Hitler ceaselessly touring Germany in his big Mercedes in the second half of 1931, cultivating big business leaders and breaking down their resistance to the NSDAP, was no more than part of the myth that Hitler had won power by conquering the hearts and minds of every section of the German people. No more solidly founded ws the view of the Left at the time that the Nazi Movement was the creature of big business and sustained by its funding. Most leaders and executives of big business were shrewd enough to spread their funding round as a form of political insurance, once the Nazi breakthrough had taken place. But most of it still went to the Nazis' political opponents on the conservative Right. The leaders of big business were no friends of democracy. But nor, for the most part, did they want to see the Nazis running the country." On p359 and p360, Kershaw then says funding came from its own members and entrance fees to party meetings, and apart from Thyssen and other donations to individual party leaders, Kershaw has to admit that there was no large scale funding to the NSDAP from big business. He tries to speculate that Hitler received funds, but is unable to provide any proof for big business involvement.
    3
  9203. Taxation and deficit spending (printing currency, and thus inflating it).
    3
  9204. "I even know Blender fairly well. I wouldn't have even thought to use it for 2D animation like this." That's interesting! I assumed (especially with Grease Pencil now updated) other people would be using Blender for more 2D animations like what I'm doing, but I guess not!
    3
  9205. Never knew that! Just watched a tutorial and tried it out, and it worked. Thank you!
    3
  9206. Yeah, I started the research in early 2017, I think. Crazy how long ago that was!
    3
  9207. Try NaNoWriMo (you don't need to do it in November, start it whenever you want). It's good practice for realizing that consistent daily effort is the key to success
    3
  9208. We're no where near the end. There's almost two months of battle to go. And at the end of the day, other people (and me) want different content. I'm burnt out with this series. I need a break from it, so it is what it is.
    3
  9209. You were second though!
    3
  9210. https://m.imgur.com/rLlDlcQ
    3
  9211. History is economics. They are one and the same. Also, just because you disagree, doesn't mean that economics is not for me.
    3
  9212. I couldn't remember the name, but I mentioned the "Odessa Area" in the video
    3
  9213. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    3
  9214. Still waiting for the map to be finished. As soon as it is, I'll give you a date when the first episode is coming out
    3
  9215. Thank you for the suggestion! I've added it to my book list for Stalingrad :)
    3
  9216. +ODDBALL SOK see this as more of a theory for discussion :)
    3
  9217. It is! Glad you agree
    3
  9218. Oi! Where's your references and sources?
    3
  9219. Absolutely you can have my permission to translate! YouTube offers an option for viewers to contribute subtitles. Not sure if YouTube is still banned in China though? (Although there are VPNs)
    3
  9220. Because history is so vast, it's not possible for an individual to read about everything. So history theory states that we should specialize in order to gain 'mastery' over a particular period of history. Therefore, I (currently) focus on the European Theater of WW2 (including North Africa), and only on the land conflict. As a result, I've read next to nothing on the Far East Theater, and you probably know more about it than I do. So my honest answer to your questions is - I don't know.
    3
  9221. I use Blender (free 3D software available on Steam, but also here https://www.blender.org/ ) and then I use Premiere Pro to bring it all together. Blender was not easy to learn when I learnt it, but has gotten much better recently after release 2.8
    3
  9222. Yes you are!
    3
  9223. It's more that I've only got a limited time to explain everything rather than cherry picking as such. I get your concern though. I was tempted to do a follow up where I go more in depth regarding the sources, especially the meeting of the corps commanders, but I might wait until we've gotten further into the debate.
    3
  9224. Thank you sir 😊
    3
  9225. I didn't know this, so thank you for pointing it out!
    3
  9226. The Socialists have no idea what they're talking about, call me a liar and a Nazi, while they selectively quote and distort history. Honestly, they're projecting their own characteristics onto me.
    3
  9227. The Italians were certainly poorly equipped, and except for their artillery units, they were poorly led. From what I've read, the Italian artillery units were very well trained and led.
    3
  9228. I'm glad you think so :)
    3
  9229. True. But his reasoning kinda makes sense in context. He thought that the British were on their last legs. He believed that Germany was about to knock them out of the war. He gambled for the good of the Italian people... and lost everything because he was wrong
    3
  9230. As far as Egypt was concerned, all he wanted to do was hit the British quickly before the surrender happened. It didn't really go beyond that and as I said in my Operation Compass documentary there was no strategy involved. If anything, he destabilized the German southern flank.
    3
  9231. I agree, although, having been a Socialist, I recognize that the majority of Socialists have probably been indoctrinated and don't realize that they're believing a bunch of lies. My hope is to educate them and get them to understand that they've been lied to, so that some will realize the error and renounce the cult they're in
    3
  9232. They're simply ignoring the video. They can't even read the title, and continue to spout the old counter arguments that this video refutes. There's no hope for these religious fanatics
    3
  9233. The SA marched into the industries and took them over from within. On the surface, they appeared to be private, but in reality the "owners" of the factories became "shop floor managers", and they had to do the bidding of the Nazi Party. As I've shown in numerous videos now, the profits were being stolen by the Nazis and redistributed to the poor. They were being heavily taxed and weren't being kept by the "owners" of the factories.
    3
  9234. Glad you enjoyed the video! Yes, the ideology is alive and well in Left-wing politics, which is why wannabchomsky is so eager to insult people and make a mockery of the concept of free speech, just like a true interNational Socialist
    3
  9235. Also, I'm a reactionary now? I'm not the one calling for more State health care, State pensions, State unemployment benefits, State regulations, State taxation, State inflation, State education... I want to end all that as any actual revolutionary would. Yet somehow, I'm the "reactionary"?
    3
  9236. I messed up and looked in the wrong section. I have just accepted them now, so give it 15 minutes and it should come through!
    3
  9237. "sorry if I misunderstand but under that defintion no country is capitalist as all states/nations/government's own land wether that be in the form of military bases, police stations, fire stations or national parks." Yes. No country (State) is capitalist.
    3
  9238. Did you expect anything different? I certainly didn't
    3
  9239. Except I came to this conclusion while I was a Socialist before I'd read anything about Austrian economics. Only after I came to this conclusion did I go Austrian, and that's because I realized the true nature of Socialism. (By the way, it's built upon Anti-Semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg )
    3
  9240. "You have made me realize that I have strongly held beliefs but haven't thought out or researched enough to defend. Good work." Even if you still don't agree with my argument, I'm glad to hear that you realize this, because it proves I'm making you think - and that's the main goal of this channel
    3
  9241. As I said in the video, if you disagree with the definitions, watch this one - https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y That video gives you the historic definition of Socialism and Capitalism and is fully backed up by sources. And the Central Bank manipulates the market, driving up inflation (and thus, tuition fees). And the State is the Public Sector. So the public (including you, the citizen) is the State. That's the trick. You don't need to vote for it, but Socialism (Publicism) is the State. The linked video will show you this in full.
    3
  9242. Yes, and you may find this other video very interesting too, since it confirms it https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9243. Adam Smith isn't a Socialist. And yes, I was miseducated at college and university. Luckily I realized that Capitalism freed the slaves, and Socialism wants to bring them back.
    3
  9244. I'm glad you disagree because it shows you're thinking. However I also disagree with you. The USA is not an entirely Capitalist country. Your healthcare system is mostly socialist, for example, which is why it's so expensive https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ You have Socialist minimum wage laws which hurt the workers and cause unemployment https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ And the Socialist Federal Reserve is basically the world (interNational) Socialist Central Bank. These are just a few examples of the Socialism in the USSA, but there are more. Here in the UK it's even worse! The State steals ~35% of your wealth off you as "income tax", VAT, and inflation tax, and gives you nothing back except for the National Socialist Health Service, and Social Services which steal your kids. I had to pay my MOT the other day (another pointless tax) and the State asked "how well did we provide a service to you?" I replied: "You haven't provided me a service. Putting a gun to someone's head and ordering them to hand over their hard earned money is not a service, it's slavery". All I want is for those who work to keep 100% of the wealth that they earn, instead of it being stolen from them and redistributed to the wealthy Socialists (our Social Elite). That doesn't mean life in Capitalism is going to be "a paradise" or anything like that. I'm realistic enough to know that the universe isn't perfect. But it'll be far better than what we have now. Ending Socialist Serfdom and freeing up the individual to actually keep his hard earned income, will improve the working man's lot considerably.
    3
  9245. You honestly think they'll surrender? I doubt it. Stalin told them never to surrender - NOT ONE STEP BACK!
    3
  9246. 1. The video is 5 hours, not 4. 2. It took that long because I not only provided a ton of evidence (107 sources, 350+ references), but I also smashed the ridiculous counter arguments that Marxists make when they claim Hitler was a Capitalist 3. I also nailed down the definitions of Socialism and the other words, linking to my Public vs Private video as backup, where I clearly showed what the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism are, and why they are that, and why they're NOT what Marx said they were https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 4. I also took the time to destroy Marxism, since tackling the core tenants of Marxism also tackles the core tenants of National Socialism. Plus, one of the common counter arguments was "Socialism is better than Capitalism, therefore Hitler was a Capitalist". So I had to show why all Socialism is based on lies.
    3
  9247. For someone who claims not to be a Socialist, you have certainly bought into their view of the world. All your talking points have been addressed, either here, in my other videos, or with a quick Google search. For example, private property is derived from the individual. The State takes private property away in the form of taxation, inflation, fines, confiscation and outright seizure in some cases. So to say that the State protects private property rights is simply absurd, since the State is the greatest threat to the individual and his property.
    3
  9248. Except, National Socialism didn't have private industry or private corporations, as I showed in the video.
    3
  9249. Capitalism is the antithesis of the State. A ruler obviously can't have totalitarian control if there is a free market, and you can't have a free market if everything is controlled by the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Also, China isn't Capitalist, which is why they recently shut down their economy, and wiped out for-profit private teachers. The State is in control, not the market.
    3
  9250. Worse, democracy is 'people power'. By 'people', they mean 'public'. And 'public' means 'state'. Democracy is State Power. This is why Hitler called for a 'People's State'. He was democratic. That's why North Korea is democratic. All Socialist regimes are democratic, since the State is in power. My Public vs Private video explains why groups are Public, and by Publics are the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9251. Here's the video you need to watch to understand these terms better https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9252. Yes, and morons like the guy who replied to you don't even realize that Fascism (National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism) and National Socialism are two distinct ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko If only he'd bothered to watch this video in full, he'd realize that everything he said in his comment was wrong and disproven in the video - hence the title "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments". But hey, it's hard to get know-it-alls to actually pay attention long enough to even read the title of a video, let alone expect them to sit and listen for 5 hours.
    3
  9253. Ah, but if you call them out for it, you're wrong... because yes
    3
  9254. I agree with King Orange. Technically 'full' socialism is when the State owns everything (totalitarian public sector control). But the parties and policies that move the economy to that end-goal would also be classed as Socialist. The SPD (the German Social Democratic Party that Karl Marx was in) had a policy of gradual reform of the system in the same manner as Hitler's party did. To class them as not being socialist because they never achieved 'full' socialism, or to say that the policies they tried to implement weren't socialist would be a mistake. And no, as I explained in this other video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 not all civilizations are Socialist. If the end goal is moderate State control, or feudalism, or whatnot, then that's not Socialism.
    3
  9255. Karl Marx called for Central Banks in the Communist Manifesto. All those currency units being added onto the screens that distort the economy, all the regulations, wage controls, price controls, taxes, 'social' (state) security, pensions etc... This isn't a free market. So when you're complaining that the STATE locked us up and wiped out all the small businesses and self employed (at least here in Britain), and then you turn around and call for most State control, don't complain that the only jobs out there are "garbage collectors and McDonalds workers". Jeff Bezos is being funded by the State Central Banks - he is part of the problem. However, he doesn't deserve to have his property expropriated. Instead, the market needs freeing up to allow the small businesses and self employed to compete against him, which would (if the market was truly allowed to compete) quickly destroy his corporation, or at least bring it back down to reality. - ""the market" doesn't set wages. The political power of the group of workers sets wages." Yes exactly, we don't have a free market.
    3
  9256. Yes, they nationalized and centralised the states and unions, and murdered their Communist and Capitalist opposition. I explained this in the video and gave plenty of evidence for it.
    3
  9257. Try watching the full video before commenting, as the Nazis did all the things that Socialists normally do - lockdown the economy, steal off the bourgeoisie/Jews, nationalize the industries, nationalize the trade unions, created a welfare state, and so on. And I'm not a Conservative. Conservativism is the old-Left wing. I'm a Capitalist, and thus definitely not a Conservative. A nation is a social group. Nationalism is Socialism. If you think nationalism if Right Wing, then Socialism would be Right Wing too.
    3
  9258. You're incorrect. Socialism is inherently State control, as I explained in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9259. No, but evidence would. That's why this video has 107 sources, 350 direct references and enough logic and reason to destroy the Denialist counter arguments (hence the title)
    3
  9260. Yes, or they don't actually watch the video and assume it's wrong, which I think is what the majority have done. We live in a "TLDR sound bite" world
    3
  9261. Considering most of those dislikers didn't bother to watch the video, but proceeded to tell me about their irrefutable arguments that I refuted in the video, yes I would say I'm doing just fine 😂
    3
  9262. Capitalism is private (individual) control of the means of production. Is an individual a State? No. Therefore I am right, and your criticism is invalid. Please watch the Public vs Private video for a full historical explanation of why you're wrong https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9263. This video came out after that one. The arguments presented in this video address all the ones presented in that one.
    3
  9264. Why did Lenin kill Mensheviks if he was on the Left?
    3
  9265. I think you're incorrect. If you read Mein Kampf, you'll quickly realize that Hitler did put a lot more though into this than people assume.
    3
  9266. "a fascio is a bundle of political viewpoints" No, a fascio is what the Italians called their trade unions. That's why Fascism was national syndicalism, as I have explained (with references) in the Fascism Defined video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "Nationalism is a far right policy" A nation is a society. Nationalism is Socialism. Socialism is also Nationalism. So-called "international" socialism doesn't even exist. 'One nation under God' is still a nation. So internationalism is nationalism. This is the political spectrum you think exists https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-o3ksdRetlXA/UwyeyC9seOI/AAAAAAAAA-Q/fAbadsmxY-g/s1600/left_right_political_spectrum_011.jpg Here is the actual political spectrum https://external-preview.redd.it/JwvmcHW_pxJ_IaFx98PzW2xuwksdIdokwBLa8jAqjHk.jpg?auto=webp&s=145cd5b20c38a0e9cbe0010a6e21021968226399 Or better yet, this one https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DXEHWxpqEG0/T9r5qgXcKAI/AAAAAAAAAro/af7uDzwOo-g/s640/TheTruePoliticalSpectrum.png So no, nationalism is a Far Left policy, even though it has been painted as a Far Right policy. - "The Nazi's did it to be able to use policies from the whole spectrum to please everyone to get voted in to power." They did that to get voted in, yes. But that's not what they actually wanted. When they got into power, they implemented Socialism for the German people, because as Hitler said - Nationalism was Socialism and Socialism was Nationalism. They were one and the same thing. - "The socialists in the Nazi party were ultimately minoritised and later murdered." No. If you go to the Ernst Röhm timestamp listed in the description of this video, you will learn that that's not what happened at all. Conservatives and capitalists were also murdered in the Night of the Long Knives, which had nothing to do with "Capitalism vs Socialism" but was about "peaceful revolution vs violent revolution". - "Hitler was a capitalist-leaning centrist (economic policy) and deeply conservative nationalist (social policy)." Abolishing private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree and seizing the means of production, and implementing socialism is capitalism now? You are spouting Marxist myths and lies. WATCH THE VIDEO. Hitler was not in any way a capitalist. - "the German conservatives voted in favour of him seizing complete power." Yes, and they quickly realized their mistake. Hitler tricked them. They were not one and the same. Hitler did not like conservatives, but used them for his own purposes.
    3
  9267. Corporations are 'corporate', meaning 'group', as in 'Public', as in 'State'. Corporations are 'the body of the people'... Body, corpse, corporation. 'Body of the people' as in Public, which means State. Corporations are hierarchies of society that consist of thousands of people who are collectively controlling the means of production, owned by shareholders who are collectively owning the means of production. They're not Capitalist (private individual control) they're Socialist (collective control). https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9268. North Korea is a democracy. I've been over this in this video you didn't watch, Mike - Democracy is 'people rule'. Except the people are the Public and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State rule. I also spell this out here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And here https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I But continue to live in ignorance with your Denialist views.
    3
  9269. I've covered the Ernst Röhm Putch that you're referring to in the video. I explained that the Marxist view of why it took place is a misrepresentation of the incident, and I'm not the only historian to say that. The rest of your comment is logically flawed. How do you know I'm wrong if you haven't watched the video? Also, how can you possibly trust what I say in the Battlestorm videos if you obviously think my history is poor? Why would you trust my Battlestorm videos if I'm not a "real" historian? And why would you trust my Battlestorm videos if you believe that my politics is bad (since war is an extension of politics and economics)?
    3
  9270. It's called "spam". Stop it.
    3
  9271. It's fair to say that when I realized the true nature of Socialism, I stopped being a Socialist. I was then told that I was a follower of Mises, which I wasn't. Curious as to why, I started reading what he wrote, and realized that I had been lied to about the true nature of Capitalism as well as Socialism. It's all backwards. Socialism doesn't help the poor, Capitalism helps the poor. Capitalism isn't for the rich, Socialism is for the rich. It all became very clear that I'd been tricked, just as you have.
    3
  9272. That's exactly how I thought of Mises too, until I came to the conclusion that Hitler was a Socialist, and everyone accused me of reading Mises when I actually hadn't. I then started reading him and discovered why the Left are so eager to not have anyone read him. He presents arguments the Left have never been able to answer. He destroyed Socialism in his book "Socialism" in 1922, and the Left never could answer him. So the Left must persuade people not to read him. Unfortunately, I had independently come to the same conclusions as Mises, and if I had read him earlier I would have saved myself a lot of trouble. I'm kicking myself for not having picked up his books years ago.
    3
  9273. You've obviously not read him. I'd recommend that you start with his book "Socialism" which you can get online for free.
    3
  9274. Fascism and National Socialism are two different ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  9275. Exactly. Lenin killed Mensheviks, so I guess that makes him a Capitalist too? The logic makes no sense, and the reason why is because it's not about being right, it's about mocking your opponent and throwing them off guard (especially if they aren't as knowledgeable about the subject)
    3
  9276. Lenin killed Mensheviks. Guess he wasn't a 'real'Socialist either...
    3
  9277. Fascism and Nazism are two different ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko And no, a lot of historians know that Hitler's Socialism was actually Socialism. If you bother to actually watch the video, you will see that.
    3
  9278. Of course he didn't watch the video. He definitely also hasn't seen this shorter video on Karl Marx's Socialist anti-semitism either https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9279. That's not what I said. Vegetarianism didn't lead to the Holocaust, Socialism did.
    3
  9280. Except Hitler nationalized the industries, did destroy small business (which is anti-capitalism), abolished private property rights, consolidated all power into the 'organs of the state' (the organs, bodies, corpus, corporations - that's where the word comes from, it means organs of the state), nationalized the trade unions into the state trade union (the DAF) and crushed all those that didn't nationalise... and more. And I showed all of this in the video you didn't bother to watch. Collective ownership is State ownership. A State is defined as a "organized political community under one government" (Oxford dictionary). Well, a "collective" is a politically organized community, and thus a State. I've been over this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y So you're asking how collective/State ownership caused the Holocaust? I'd ask you to read a book because that's exactly what happened - the State caused the Holocaust, not the free market. I'm not a flat earther. I follow the evidence rather than make stuff up like the Marxist Socialists have done. 107 sources, 350 direct quotes and notes and more, and all you do is dismiss it with stupid questions answered by the video itself. Try watching the video first before commenting.
    3
  9281. @Jeff jr - that's right, you're willfully blind.
    3
  9282. You're arguing with a 50-cent troll. Just ignore Slater, he spends all day and night in the comments of this video, although coincidentally stopped commenting when Hu Jintao was purged the other day, then has come back again. Strange that. It's almost as if all the Chinese trolls were told to take to Twitter to push the narrative that Hu Jintao wasn't purged or something... I guess my video wasn't as big as a priority during that time period.
    3
  9283. Everything you said is the old Marxist lie. It turns out that all that is incorrect. If you look at the timestamps in the description, you'll see that I address each of your points. You'll also see, if you go to those points, that I have citations at the bottom of the screen as I speak. Yes, this video is fully supported by 350 citations coming from 109 individual sources. The video shows that they nationalized the unions and crushed those that refused to nationalize. The so-called "private" corporations were all ran by National Socialist Party members as well as taken over by the SA shop-floor militants which means they were defacto nationalized, and they did kill non-National Socialist socialists, but also conservatives, capitalists, liberals and so on. Socialists kill other Socialists all the time (e.g. Stalin vs Trotsky) so this isn't a point against them being socialist. They set up a welfare state, tried to implement price controls, set up massive amounts of regulations and central planning... There's tons of evidence that they were Socialists. All you have to do is listen and you'll see.
    3
  9284. Profits were distorted anyway since the Third Reich was inflating the currency supply. There was a hyperinflation in 1945 for a reason. So they may have been profitable in nominal terms, but it's unlikely they were in real terms.
    3
  9285. Corporations aren't capitalist. They're part of the public sector. In this case, as explained in the video, they were nationalized in all but name. Try watching the video before commenting.
    3
  9286. And again, I've addressed the Night of the Long Knives - see the timestamp
    3
  9287. I'm using the historically correct definition of Socialism, the one that everyone (including Karl Marx) agreed is the definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y If union busting is anti-socialist, then Lenin wasn't a socialist because he did the exact same thing as Hitler - abolished the private trade unions. You can deny history all you want, but the evidence is clear - the National Socialists were Socialist.
    3
  9288. Or two seconds of the video... They didn't even get to the point where I said there's Timestamps in the description, because if they'd read the timestamps, they wouldn't still be pushing the 'privatization' or 'Ernst Röhm' fallacies.
    3
  9289. Yes I do https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9290. "except none of his focus was on any of the socialist aspects" Yeah, try actually watching the video first because this statement is ridiculous. " a worker controlled economy, worked controlled industries, a worker controlled government." That's Marxist Socialism, which came AFTER socialism. Socialism doesn't require class, it only requires State control of the economy. " "but when he privatized nazis owned the industries!!" we have card carrying liberals and conservatives here too who own business and industry. I guess that's "socialism"" As shown in the video, he didn't privatize the industries, even though that's been claimed a million times, and corporations are not 'private', they're 'public' corporations, which is why Hitler's centralization of them is socialism. Again, watch the video to understand why your argument doesn't work. "He was a totalitarian authoritarian fascist and extreme nationalist." You cannot have totalitarianism without total control of the means of production (socialism). Fascism is not National Socialism as explained in the video. Nationalism is Socialism. "take socialism out and the Nazi model still functions perfectly as a authoritarianism and fascism with a German twist" Take socialism out and Hitler doesn't even get elected, let alone go to war. As I explained in the video, if you deny Hitler's Socialism, you're (perhaps unwittingly) denying the Holocaust.
    3
  9291. The Founding Fathers of America knew that democracy was bad, which is why they called their government a Republic. You won't find the word "democracy" in the Constitution for that reason (I explain why in the linked video). And yes, I am against State Power, since State Power is Totalitarian Socialism.
    3
  9292. I'm not a Conservative.
    3
  9293. I would also recommend that they watch that video too. My biggest regret is that I didn't put that video at the beginning of this one so there would be no room for the critics to wriggle out of... I assumed people would be reasonable and actually be happy to watch it separately. But that was a mistake, and I give people too much credit.
    3
  9294. Socialism literally calls for the slavery of the individual to the collective. How is that not slavery? It doesn't matter if the slave wants to be a slave, it's still slavery.
    3
  9295. I think you'll enjoy this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    3
  9296. @George Christoforou - yes, I know the dictionary definitions, in fact I have an entire video called the Public vs Private video where I dived into the definitions of Socialism and Capitalism to fully explain what they are. And in that video I quoted directly from the dictionaries https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "The differences between communism and socialism are still debated..." I've talked about that in this video, and the Public vs Private video. In a nutshell, both words meant the exact same thing until the First World War. That's why it's "still debated", because there's actually little to no difference. It's just a split within the Left-wing socialist/communist movement. - "but generally English speakers use communism to talk about the political and economic ideologies that find their origin in Karl Marx’s theory of revolutionary socialism, which advocates a proletariat overthrow of capitalist structures within a society;" Which is why communism and Marxism are synonymous. Therefore, when I say that Hitler was a Socialist, I'm not saying he was a communist or Marxist.
    3
  9297. I actually explained North Korea in the video towards the end, since it's a common counter argument that Fascists make, and this video is about defeating the 'Denialist Counter Arguments' (see title).
    3
  9298. According to the stats, most viewers didn't watch past the first minute (suggesting that they didn't come to watch it, but came to downvote and leave). Those that did watch, watched all the way through (with a gradual drop off, of course)
    3
  9299. By your logic, all collectives are made up of individuals, therefore all collectives are capitalism. That's a ridiculous argument. Please watch the public vs private video and you will see why (linked in previous comment) "@TIK So EVEN IF a bunch of people VOLUNTARILY put a bunch of money into a pot, elect a pot-manager, who is accountable to them, to make investments that will profit them, people who can sell their stake in the pot if they so choose, this is somehow NOT CAPITALISM?" Is this a hierarchy? Yes. Well, the hierarchy of society that's in control of the means of production is socialism. "Should I get someone from r/anarchocapitalism to explain your own anarchocapitalist ideology to you?" There are plenty of anarcho-capitalists who are watching this video and are agreeing with me.
    3
  9300. If you watch the video, you'll see that nationalizations and expropriations did occur in the Nazi regime. In fact, I've provided a timestamp to the "Privatization" section in the video. Try watching the video before commenting.
    3
  9301. I don't think so. I can't even upload shorter videos to my Bitchute channel at the moment because of some processing error, so there's no chance of uploading this there at the moment
    3
  9302. "Actually TIK is a proovable Monarchist." No. Absolutely not.
    3
  9303. Spotted the anti-Semite
    3
  9304.  @slaterslater5944  "TIK might just be trolling" I'm not trolling. - "or he might actually believe this insane web of tortured definitions, misrepresentation and plain dishonesty that he weaves." I go where the evidence takes me, which is why I converted from Socialism to free market economics. You rely upon emotional arguments and name calling, which is why you're not able to convince me that I'm wrong. You should be presenting evidence and facts that convince me that my argument is wrong. But just like above with the DAF and Strasser things, you're presenting arguments that have already been refuted in the video, and then wonder why I'm standing my ground. The reason why isn't because I'm trolling or whatnot, it's because I'm choosing to stand with the evidence, not with my emotions. Put your emotions down, and start using critical thinking. Watch the video, and actually listen to what I'm saying. Try to understand it.
    3
  9305. Correct! That's why the two guys that responded to this video acted the way they did https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    3
  9306. As an ex-socialist, I understand why you would think this. The issue though is that you have no idea what I said in the video because it's obvious you didn't watch the first few minutes, nor did you read/understand the title in full. If you had, then you wouldn't have said any of the things you said. Also, it's 5 hours, not 4.
    3
  9307. That would be interesting. He was the one who talked about Zitelmann's book and the Vampire Economy https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    3
  9308. "TIK, the dept collector of academia" Can that be my official title? :D
    3
  9309. ​ @GodKitty677  "Wow that is full of alarm bells. Using yourself as a source being the least of them." I'm not "using myself as a source" - the videos are fully backed up with sources, just like this video is. Instead, what I'm doing is linking to a fully sourced and backed up video that explains the concept I'm trying to get across to you - that Fascism and National Socialism are two separate ideologies. I mean, I could sit here for an hour or two explaining the same thing I've already explained in a fully backed up video, or I could just link to the video that I've already made that already explains it. Either way, you're not going to listen and learn because you already assume you know the answers, which is why you're trying to call me out for "using myself as a source", which seems to be the new "aha gotcha" from the Left since they've got no counter-arguments to the actual points being made. And to address the "alarm bells" point, without a free honest and open debate, you cannot know the truth. The reason why nobody trusted what came out of the Soviet Union during the Cold War was because everything that came out of the Soviet Union was sanctioned by the state (it was propaganda). There was no open and honest or free debate, and so there was no way to know whether what the Soviet Union was saying was true or false (and most of it was false). Similarly, if history is "peer reviewed" (censored) then the same thing applies. In fact, "peer review" censorship goes against the very idea of history as I've laid out in my history theory video. Of course, I would link to that video, but I don't want to "use myself as a source", even though, again, my history theory video was based on reading several history theory books, plus my own education during college and university. If you're so inclined, the link to that video is already available in the description.
    3
  9310. Here it is: $1,000,000
    3
  9311. "1) A "heirarchy" is not synonymous with a "public sector state". A family is a heirarchy, for example." No, a family it isn't a hierarchy. It's also not a "public" entity. - "One would emerge as the largest and annihilate all competition. Thus is why states need to intervene in the free market to prevent the inevitable trend toward monopolies." The history proves you false. I'd recommend the book "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom. That book will explain to you why free markets DESTROY monopolies, including State monopolies if the entrepreneurs are bold enough to circumvent the law. The State itself is a monopoly, yet it doesn't prevent itself, does it?
    3
  9312. "Notice that you have to redefine words into TIk newspeak in order to support your essentially circular argument." No, you're the one redefining words. For example, notice that the Oxford English dictionary doesn't say anything about profit. Yet you included that because you've bought into the Marxist lie.
    3
  9313. "No, I am using the correct dictionary definitions." No I am using the correct dictionary defintions, not you. I took pictures of the Oxford dictionary definitions of the words and displayed them in the Public vs Private video. Here they are again: Oxford: "Private - adjective, 1. belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only." (So yes, it means individual.) "3. (of a service or industry) provided or owned by an individual or an independent, commercial company rather than the state." (So corporations, which are collectively owned by Society - the public - and are regulated, funded and directed by the State via their laws and central banks, are not private.) "ORIGIN: late Middle English (originally denoting a person not acting in an official capacity): from Latin privatus ‘withdrawn from public life’, a use of the past participle of privare ‘bereave, deprive’ from privus ‘single, individual’." (To withdraw from public life, meaning it cannot be public, which McDonalds hasn't done. McDonalds has gone public. It hasn't withdrawn from public life.) Source: Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. p1413.
    3
  9314. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production. There can still be a State in Capitalism, but it would only be classed as Capitalism if that State had zero ownership or control within the economy (no tax, no regulation, no inflation, no monopoly on law etc). Please see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9315. Again, I'm using the historically accurate definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I also talked about the "North Korea" argument in the video itself! And democracy in another video https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I Please learn the historical and actual definitions of Socialism and Capitalism because if you think Socialism is anything other than State control of the means of production you haven't done your homework.
    3
  9316. " I wonder how this theorie can explain Speculation with Grain on international Markets... who really needs and wants this? Of course we need some people to trade (and prices are produced this way) but I don’t see how speculation benefits anyone but those who extract value by it..." The problem with the current stock market is that it is artificially inflated by the central banks. Printing currency goes into the stock market and then into the capital goods industries, which is why agriculture, oil, housing, academia, and more are in bubbles. Thus, nothing is it's actual price, and speculation is the only way to trade. This is why recessions happen, as the market collapses to fair value. I would highly recommend you read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" because he explains it way better and in much greater detail than I can possibly do here.
    3
  9317. It does now, but when Amazon started off, it wasn't like that. My point is that it would be wrong to steal wealth off Bezos. The solution to the problem would be the stop the Central State Banks from propping up their 'organs of the state' (organs, bodies, corpus, corporations - that's where the name comes from) and let the free market compete on an even footing with Bezos. Amazon wouldn't last five minutes in a true free market.
    3
  9318. I'm glad you liked it! I thought it was a very useful text too and I'm glad to hear you did :)
    3
  9319. @lovablesnowman - the "economists" you speak of are Socialists, and thus aren't educated in economics, only ideology. Everything on economics that I have presented is based on facts (evidence) and opinion (interpretation) which is perfectly in alignment with the Theory of History and Science https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    3
  9320. It frustrates me how the Austrian School has been smeared as a "cult". Prior to me looking into it, I got the impression that it was a bunch of mad-hatters talking debunked ideas. How wrong that impression was! In reality, it's about as opposite as a cult as economics can be. Them and the Chicago School are not cults. The Socialist economists are in the cult, even if they pretend they're not. The widespread cult-ish belief is that Capitalism is evil and doesn't work, when in reality they have no idea what Capitalism is.
    3
  9321. I'm not fussed whether you watch a video or not. However, Axiom is conservative, I'm not. I'm also not "right wing" in the way you mean it. As an ex-socialist, I can tell you that your biggest problem is your inability to dive deep into economic and political views you do not adhere to, nor understand. You've made assumptions about us and the way of the world that are simply not true.
    3
  9322. Thanks for the tip! It's because we're using two new microphones that I've only just got and haven't got mic-arms yet, so we had to place them on the desk. I guess we could have held them, but that could have caused other issues...
    3
  9323. You mean like Rollo Tomassi and co type "red pill" content?
    3
  9324. It's valuable feedback, thank you! Out of curiosity, do you find my accent hard to understand in this or other videos?
    3
  9325. "You make it sound like the successor states were just as multiethnic as Austria-Hungary had been, when in reality, they replaced a system where power was held by the Austrians and the Hungarians - especially after the Austro-Hungarian compromise of 1867, with a system were power was placed in the hands of the new majorities - i.e. Czechoslovakia was ruled by the Czechs and the Slovaks, etc." Right, so you have just confirmed that one big multi-ethnic state devolved into multi-ethnic states, which was exactly my point. If being multi-ethnic was bad, then these states should have instantly dissolved further into monoethnic states, and yet they didn't do that (until after the Cold War with two of them). "You correctly mention that ethnically homogeneous states would have been impossible because there had been too much population mixing in the centuries of the empire's existence. However, it is disingenuous not to explain WHY the successor states were created the way they were." How is it disingenuous? I explained that nationalism and ethnicity were a factor in the new multi-ethnic states, but that they weren't the central factor for the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. "There was another aspect which you didn't mention, which was the legal existence of a "Czechoslovak ethnicity" - a legal fiction to make it look as though the Germans were a relatively minority in a fairly ethnically homogeneous country, not a large group in a multi-ethnic state." This is debatable. Highly debatable. For starters, I showed a map with the multi-nationalities inside Czechoslovakia, and other commenters are pointing out that they hadn't realized just how many minorities were in the borders of Czechoslovakia. Also, if you're arguing that the multi-ethnic state of Czechoslovakia (with Czechs and Slovaks) is one nationality, then I could also argue that Austria-Hungary was in fact one nationality too (Austro-Hungarians are a nationality, just like British is a nationality comprising of multiple nationalities). "Nationalism was clearly an important factor" I did say in the video that it was a factor. But it wasn't the ONLY factor, and that other factors were as (if not more) important.
    3
  9326. Well, I hope it's worth it!
    3
  9327. Hey Steven, sure you have my permission! I already have one high school teacher who occasionally frequents my channel. Wouldn't mind another :)
    3
  9328. Actually, you're wrong, it wasn't Kursk. You need to do more research.
    3
  9329. I have a video coming out soon explaining
    3
  9330. All sources are biased since all sources are written by humans. However I prefer Mises because he actually makes sense, unlike Keynesian economists.
    3
  9331. The Soviets were Marxists and therefore were fighting a war of extermination against the Capitalists and the bourgeoisie. This didn't stop in WW2, which is why they allied with the Nazis at first to conquer Eastern Europe and ship a lot of Latvians etc to the slave labour Gulag camps
    3
  9332. The reason why I asked people not to jump to conclusions here is because people already have jumped to conclusions about that very point. I covered Order 227 years ago in its own video, and everybody took what I said to mean that I was saying the Soviets weren't shooting their own men. That's not what I said at all. So I wanted to clarify it. Original 227 video for reference https://youtu.be/JOKAIDpOY80
    3
  9333. Yes. And it could be argued that the Battle of Stalingrad wasn't a battle, but a Campaign, which is actually my preferred term. There are many battles in the "Battle of Stalingrad", so it probably should be called "the Stalingrad Campaign", and the Battle of the Don is (in my opinion) the first battle in that campaign.
    3
  9334. Well, reading that quote, I'm not sure it's referring to rye bread, so I also assume it wasn't your regular rye bread, but filled with substitute ingredients and so on. Otherwise there's no point in mentioning that it was of poor quality etc
    3
  9335. "The only item on the ration card which the state did guarantee to provide was bread. It was poor quality and black, made with inferior grains, but four-fifths of the calories and proteins that people obtained from their rations came from this bread." - Collingham, The Taste of War P329. I took that to mean the bread was black because it was of poor quality and made with inferior grains. But I don't eat rye bread. Is rye bread a poor quality bread made with inferior grains?
    3
  9336. That was good timing then!
    3
  9337. What are you talking about? The sources are clearly listed above. If I'd had sunken low enough to rely on Irving, I would have listed it above. As proven in court, Irving shouldn't be trusted.
    3
  9338. Thank you Vali! The NS is S videos only had a minor impact on subscribers to be honest. The thing is, I've always had videos like that. The first video I made (Market Garden) didn't abide to the common narrative. I went against the grain with the "Germans weren't superior" videos, and the Manstein is at fault videos. So the NS videos are just another 'controversial' video of mine and nothing more. The reason it was blown out of proportion was because a lot of subscribers of mine are Marxists, or mistakenly think Marxism is the only form of socialism, which is wrong. And just because people believe in something, doesn't make something correct. If I have an argument, people need to counter it, not call me names and link to videos that don't disprove anything I've said. Not a day goes by where I don't get the urge to redo the NS videos. I now have the research and the evidence to counter the arguments made against my argument, which I've been using to good effect in the comments sections where I've been winning the debates quite easily. Although I think I'll keep doing more research before I do make them just to make sure the argument is solid and I have sufficient backup evidence.
    3
  9339. It's a genuine Patreon. And yes, I assume it's a joke on their part, unless Mr H has risen from the grave
    3
  9340. Cheers! Nice video on Mannerheim btw. I'm your 7th subscriber :)
    3
  9341. I'm sorry to say that all the music in this video was made by me, and isn't based off anything. But I'm glad you think it was as good as some game music somewhere!
    3
  9342. Also Gott wasn't specifically targeted for assassination (I don't think)
    3
  9343. Yeah, I don't get the obsession with Rommel. I mean, I can understand it at the time, but not now. And no, don't know of any specific assassination. The only one that's super interesting is (spoiler) Gott's death, just because it's a great - "what if he hadn't died when he did?" - sort of thing
    3
  9344. If you haven't already, check out Gregory Mannarino's channel. He seems to be doing well in this market https://youtu.be/twwmuc-JW9E
    3
  9345. That has been addressed numerous times. In fact, the book "The Myth of the Robber Barons" shows some real world examples of how the complete opposite is true. The only monopoly is a government monopoly. Corporations are funded by the State's Central Banks, and therefore are the State.
    3
  9346. I have seen it, and have had it on my book-buying list for a while with the intention of getting it at some point. In fact, I thought about buying it the other day... I've just not got to it yet. I will though, especially after your positive recommendation. Thank you 👍
    3
  9347. Not sure if it outranges, but according to the stats I have, the Panzer III's KwK L/48 actually has a higher armour penetration than the T-34's 76.2mm F-34 L/41.5 at both 500 and 1,000 yards (1km), so I would imagine it wouldn't.
    3
  9348. @Therworldtube Patreon has messed up big time in the past, and it's scary what they did. I only stuck with Patreon because most of the support still comes from there. However, with the current court cases going on, it may be better if my Patreons swapped over to my SubscribeStar
    3
  9349. That's what I've always encouraged you to do. This is why I put references at the bottom of the screen so that you can check up on where I'm getting the information and do your own reading around it. You will find this video extremely useful https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    3
  9350.  @Flow86767  There's a book (which I've only just got and not read yet) titled "Hitler was a British Agent". It's by the authors "Greg Hallett and The Spymaster" (yes, some guy called "The Spymaster"). You can get this book on Amazon... It's actually quite a thick book, but I've no idea what the contents are like yet so only get it if you're super-curious on this particular topic.
    3
  9351. Yeah, I won't delete a response (unless you're spamming etc), but YouTube's auto-filter will delete you before anyone even sees it, including me. Taking out links and not swearing will increase the chances of your response being posted.
    3
  9352. Yes, Hitler wasn't a Marxist, he was a Socialist.
    3
  9353.  @slaterslater5944  "Are you sure it isn't the Jews?" No Slater, the Jews are not running academia. Stop with your socialist anti-Semitic conspiracy theories please.
    3
  9354. If you ignore all the persecution of ethnic minorities, like the Jews or the Cossacks or the Crimean Tartars, then yeah skin colour didn't matter in the Soviet Union...
    3
  9355. "Because either you're wrong here or there's something very interesting I've missed entirely." Yeah, so this question is a really good one, but it's simply too complicated a topic to actually explain in a YouTube comment. I did touch upon this in the 5 hour video, and I am planning to do a full video on Hitler's views of women... However in a nutshell, Marxist Socialism says that everyone's equal, but Hitler says that this isn't true because the idea of equality is a Jewish plot to destroy civilisation (Mein Kampf, Jaico edition, p296 and p347). So he says the German social race should take over the means of production (socialism), but that individuals of the race are not equal. Therefore, men and women should work for the preservation of "the race" (Mein Kampf, p269), which means women should stay at home and raise children (Mein Kampf, p376).
    3
  9356. "Are shares private property, by the way?" You're the anti-Semite, you tell me.
    3
  9357. Socialism/Communism is just neo-Feudalism. Karl Marx said as much. Therefore, Marxists are the reactionaries.
    3
  9358. They were booted, proving that the state was in control of the economy. If this was a free market with private ownership of property, then the state wouldn't exist, let alone have been able to remove them from their property.
    3
  9359. Yes, although they'll dismiss anything Goebbels says as just propaganda, so it's difficult to use him as a source.
    3
  9360.  @petervote7914  Check out this video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Fasci were trade unions in Italy. Fascism = trade unionism (syndicalism), which is why James Gregor defined Fascism as "National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism". In a nutshell, Fascism was Socialism but with a different name.
    3
  9361. Except it wasn't a profit-driven economy.
    3
  9362. He's trying to find excuses because he doesn't want to accept what the evidence is showing, so he's writing this rant to deflect attention away from the facts.
    3
  9363. "It doesn't really matter if Marx put a small anti-sematic flair in" Let me explain this again in a different way. Historically speaking, the "bourgeoisie" (or "townsfolk") were the Jews, because the Jews were forced to live in towns as a result of old-fashioned anti-Semitism (they couldn't own land in Christian Europe). They were also deemed to be "the money-changers" because in order to survive, they practiced usury - the lending of money and charging interest, which was banned by the Pope. So the only people in Christian Europe who could be the "bourgeoisie" were the Jews. That's why an alternative name for the "bourgeoisie" was "cosmopolitan Jew". Thus, because of old-fashioned anti-semitism, the Jews were called "the bourgeoisie". Karl Marx just called them a different name. Instead of calling them "Jews", he called them "capitalists". "Das Kapital" is "the Jew". So, to be "anti-capitalist" is to be anti-Jewish, because "anti-capitalists" believe the "capitalists" (the Jews) are stealing money off the "workers" (the natives). Socialists are anti-capitalist, and thus are anti-Semitic. That's why Karl Marx was an anti-Semite. That's why all socialists are anti-Semites, and that's why the National Socialists mixed the Jews up with the capitalists and called them the "Judeo-Bourgeoisie". Look at this Nazi propaganda poster https://images.app.goo.gl/BLJa1EBsMPiwJsMU7 It's pointing at the Jewish guy, but look at how he's dressed. He's not in stereotypical Jewish outfit; he's dressed like the Monopoly man. He's wearing a suit and a top hat. He looks like how many Socialists view the "capitalists". Here is another poster with the same thing - the Jewish guy looks like a capitalist https://images.app.goo.gl/kno9tj6g1T2vZ4817 Another propaganda poster here shows a Jewish person holding gold coins ("capital" - money) https://images.app.goo.gl/xY3pGw5utsghnQb47 Another propaganda poster with a "Jewish-capitalist" being depicted as the puppet master of the German people https://images.app.goo.gl/xYdzpWTeJJEdrYLfA And if it's not obvious yet, here's another https://images.app.goo.gl/hFGG9p5sPky9LRTh9 The Jewish person is clearly a capitalist, his top hat fallen on the floor as he's sat on a bag of "geld" (the German word for money, but derived from "gold", which is what Marx said was "capital"). The Nazis said the Jew wants to "become the king of money". The overall conclusion is that "anti-capitalism" and "anti-semitism" are one and the same thing. The same arguments Socialists use to show that the capitalist are bad, are the EXACT same arguments the National Socialists use to show that the Jews are bad. A socialist cannot argue against what the Nazis did to the "Judeo-bourgeoisie" because they themselves are advocating the same policies towards the "Bourgeoisie-Jews". And as soon as I realised the anti-Semitism inherent within the doctrine of Socialism, I abandoned the faith. I'm not an anti-Semite, have never been a racist, and as soon as I woke up and realised I had been tricked, I immediately stepped away from socialism. - "Karl Marx, was an Economist" No, he was a theologian. He was educated in "philosophy", but was focused on the religions. He edited Hegel's "Philosophy of Religion". The original name for the Communist Manifesto was "The Communist Confession of Faith" before Engels decided to change it. Even now, it's full of religious terminology, as is Das Kapital, and many other of his texts. To call Marx an "economist" is quite simply wrong. Marx created his own anti-Semitic religion known as Marxism. That's why it's incredibly difficult to get through to socialists and wake them up from the cult that they're in, because they don't realise they're in an anti-Semitic cult and falsely believe that anyone who disagrees with them are racists and fascists. NO DUDE - the reason you cannot find Nazis to punch is because you're not looking hard enough in the mirror.
    3
  9364. As I just responded to someone else: I think it was him who said not to listen to me, but to read James Gregor on the definition of Fascism... not realising that I'm using James Gregor's definition of (Italian) Fascism, which is "National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism". The fact that he said this proves that he hasn't read James Gregor and hasn't watched my videos.
    3
  9365. The evidence (as shown) doesn't support that narrative.
    3
  9366. We should end taxation and allow the workers to keep their surplus.
    3
  9367. Communism is Marxism. Back in the day, Communism and Socialism used to be synonyms, and there's only minor differences between the two today. Fascism is National Syndicalism (trade unionism) and I've explained this here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  9368. If you'd bothered to watch the video, you'd see that the German Labour Front of the National Socialist German Workers' Party was one of the largest trade unions in history, and it was in control of the industries. Private property had been abolished, and the "owners" were entirely subservient to the Party. Many were also replaced by Party members, meaning that the workers were in control. This was syndicalism, and they were aiming for full socialism (although they didn't get there, since it's impossible to get to full socialism without your entire economy collapsing).
    3
  9369. There's a difference between patriotism and nationalism. I'm neither patriotic or nationalistic, but I would say that patriotism is understandable, since you can love the land and people you're in without loving the government or state. Patriots can still be racist of course, but it's not necessarily a requirement like it would be with National Socialism. There are a lot of problems with nationalism in general, but German nationalism certainly has a stigma due to what happened in the early to mid 20th Century, which explains your family's shame. It sounds like you're in two minds about this whole thing. If so, I would encourage you to stay flexible and consider different ways of looking at the world before you fully commit to any one of them. Certainty I'd consider reading Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" as well as the concept of "individualism", which is a nice balance against the patriotism and nationalism you might be feeling. Most people who are patriotic, nationalistic, or socialistic in outlook tend to think of their community, and (at least in their heads), place others before themselves. At first glance this may seem like an altruistic thing - a good thing. How can putting others before yourself be considered a bad thing? Right? I'm a little unusual in my outlook. Everyone assumes selfishness is a sin, but economics shows us that selfishness is actually a good thing. Selfishness means you don't give away anything for free, but TRADE with others, who also have a right to say 'no' to the transaction. On the other hand, I would argue that charity is a selfish act, because you give to the needy because you feel shame about the fact you have more than them. Thus you give to the poor only to make yourself feel better. It's inherently selfish, and is usually only done because the individual has deep seated insecurities, brought on by their unchecked altruism, and lack of "selfishness". There are articles online indicating that altruism (a lack of selfishness) is leading to depression. When it comes to pride, I think there's a difference between that and arrogance. The proverb is that "pride comes before the fall", and that makes sense because if you're proud of your country's football team, and you brag about how great they are etc, and they lose, you look like an idiot and then get angry. I think you can be proud of your achievements, but there's a danger of it moving into arrogance, which is too far. So moderation needs to happen. You can be proud to be a German, or you can be proud to be an individual - either is fine. But arrogance is where you think Germany or you are the best, or unbeatable, which is a recipe for failure. Hope this helps!
    3
  9370. But the Left believe that you can't trust their word. They think they're trying to trick them. In fact, they think everyone is trying to trick them regardless of who they are or what they believe, which is why they don't believe anything I say.
    3
  9371. Nazis are not Marxists. I explained this. They are Socialists, not Marxists. Class has nothing to do with Socialism, which predates Marxism.
    3
  9372. Yes, and that theme was Socialism
    3
  9373. There's a difference between National Socialism and Fascism. While they borrowed ideas off each other, they were two distinct ideologies with different origins https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  9374. The people are the public, and the public sector is the state. Thus democracy is a slight of hand. A trick to get you to vote for your own enslavement to the state https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9375. That's not what I meant. Are you saying that Hitler didn't create a totalitarian state? Because if he created a totalitarian state, then he created a "democracy".
    3
  9376. @HobbsO - Hitler created a democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    3
  9377. "Economically or culturally?" Both. - "I don't really understand how a political ideology reactionary to progress and diversity" It's a revolutionary movement, not reactionary. It's for progress, but not diversity. - "advocating for traditional values" What? Like the synchronization of all businesses into the Party, the creation of one giant nationalized trade union with 32 million members, the abolishment of the price system, wage controls, rent controls, the abolishment of the concepts of employer and employee (replaced by political "leaders" and "followers"), the centralised distribution of all goods and services...? - "and race segregation are socialists?" Yes, this is exactly what the woke Left are advocating today. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10317507/Segregation-schools-spreading-writes-professor-Wilfred-Reilly.html https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/woke-college-are-backing-segregation-now-tomorrow-and-forever/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/28/racial-segregation-college-campuses-ethnic-division-racist-civil-rights-column/4587577002/ - "Left is right and right is left?" This is the political spectrum you see https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*vh33g6fmpP9Xz5zMZjgHFg.jpeg These are more like the spectrums we see https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-462e5331aba54d9e1ed4263f40e64c7c https://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/a6oM03e_700b.jpg https://images.app.goo.gl/YBuSn4QMgwnN4kyb9
    3
  9378. I did that and the critics didn't watch it https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I made an entire video explaining the history of the words and how it came to be, and they didn't watch it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y They didn't even watch one minute of this video and continue to spout the lie that the Nazis privatised the industries... I've tried everything to get them to listen, but they won't, because they're religious fanatics.
    3
  9379.  @threemeters1425  "Here’s a dangerous but perhaps worthwhile idea: bring an actual Third Positionist to state their opinions on socialism as a whole." There's two problems with that idea. One, I don't do live streams and my content isn't geared towards interviews or similar. It just isn't for me. Two, since we live in clown-world, inviting a Fascist or Nazi onto the channel would probably result in myself being branded as a Fascist or Nazi-sympathizer. I mean, they're already accusing me of being Fascist and Nazi, and I've seen others say that Sargon was a Nazi because he talked to Richard Spencer. So, it's just not possible. However, if you or someone in your camp was willing to make a video explaining your positions (either here, or on another safe site), or even just a written document, then I'm happy to make a response to that. If you wrote out where you stand, why you stand there, why you class yourselves as socialists and third-positionists, and where you disagree with the Marxist narrative of what Fascism is, then that would be really helpful. Alternatively, if there's a book or video that already explains this, let me know so I can take a look.
    3
  9380.  @stephanedaguet915  "Socialism: economic system characterized by collective ownership of the means of production. Capitalism: economic system characterized by private ownership of the means of production. The Nazis are indeed in the capitalist camp." The Nazis nationalised the industries under their Gleichschaltung policy. They didn't "privatise" the industries, as I proved in the first minute of the video. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO before continuing to spout lies.
    3
  9381.  @threemeters1425  Despite not agreeing with Fascist ideology in any way, I must acknowledge that you are correct on this point - the opponents of Fascism are not interacting with their opponents, and this is leaving them extremely exposed.
    3
  9382. "Political scientists have described Nazi economic policies were nationalistic driven." Nations are societies. Nationalism is Socialism. There's no difference between the nationalisation of the means of production, and the socialisation of the means of production. Also, I really don't care what some "political scientists" say. Other political scientists like L. K. Samuels say that National Socialist policies were socialistic in nature. - "In peace time it leaned toward growth. With natural resources being state managed whilst other industries were privately owned but had economic oversight." No they didn't. Watch the video. The industries were nationalised. - "Aka, you could own a business but if you posed a threat to the national interest the government would step in." The government stepped in regardless. If they did like you, you could keep running the business on their behalf, but you had to bow to their rules and accept their Party members in your business. They dictated the price of your goods, the wages you paid yourself and your workers... Again, watch the video. - "These policies were collectively called Corporatism. A middle ground to right wing capitalism and left wing socialism." Yeah, that's what the fascists themselves said to distinguish themselves from the socialists. But just because they said this doesn't mean it's true. - "This is why to a capitalist, nazi economic policy looks socialist, and to socialists they seem capitalistic." There was no free market. This wasn't capitalist in any way. The socialists BELIEVE it was capitalistic because they're operating on a set of false assumptions. They BELIEVE that Hitler didn't nationalise the industries BUT HE DID. Again, watch the actual video.
    3
  9383. You didn't watch the video.
    3
  9384. Not a bad idea, thank you. I'll think about it
    3
  9385. I never said the National Socialists were Marxist - I made it blatantly clear in the video that you didn't bother to watch that they were Socialists, not Marxists. If you cannot grasp this simply principle, it's pointless talking to you.
    3
  9386. "This would be a less laughable face palm if all your heroes werent Communists (Austrian Economists)." I'm confused by this statement. What do you mean? Are you suggesting that Austrian Economists worship Communist leaders? - "Socialists KNOW they are Nazis." I think the socialist leadership know this, but the run of the mill socialist follower does not. I certainly didn't realize the anti-Semitism inherent within the ideology when I was a socialist. When I discovered the truth, I abandoned the faith and later became a free market guy. I think most casual socialists just don't understand their own ideology and are only in it because they've been told "capitalist bad" and "you've got to help the poor" by "stealing off the rich".
    3
  9387. Thanks and welcome!
    3
  9388. So now they're arguing that "privatisation" was made in the Thatcher era? Why do socialists keep changing their tune? Plus, National Socialism and Fascism are two separate ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    3
  9389. "you love Hitler just as much as bat shit JP does... Come just say it, you like Hitler." I don't like Hitler, he was a terrible man - almost as bad as Mao, Stalin, Lenin and Karl Marx. You're talking out your backside. - "Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that the death toll under communism has been greatly exaggerated. In fact, many scholars and historians argue that the number of deaths caused by communism is likely far lower than the figure of 100 million that is often cited." No, I'm not dealing with people who downplay the numbers and deny the history like this. You're no different than a Holocaust denier, and then you're trying to paint me as some sort of Hitlerite. I'm not tolerating such behaviour. You're getting banned.
    3
  9390. That's because socialists are trying to hide the true nature of socialism. If they admit it's state control, then they're admitting that they're totalitarians, which they can't do. They therefore convince themselves that it's "not real totalitarianism", and come up with all sorts of mental gymnastics to say this. Fact is that Engels wrote both the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital vol 3, where he makes it clear that socialism is state ownership. But we're all meant to just ignore that...
    3
  9391. You claimed democracy didn't mean "people power". I showed you conclusively that it does mean that. And instead of admitting your mistake, you double down on a load of nonsense. Worse, in every comment you've made on this channel, the same thing happens over and over. You spout a load of nonsense, get called out for it and shown the truth (with evidence), and then you resort to insults and ad hominem attacks. Why are you so insecure that you can't even admit when you're wrong?
    3
  9392. "For a 'free market' to be free there needs to be a referee - normally the Gov't (courts, etc.)" I disagree, but even if we accept this idea, why does the government's criminal justification system have to be involved? Why can't we have multiple free market courts and police services to enforce the contract?
    3
  9393. "Other socialists, from the very moderate SPD to the far-left" No, dude, the SPD was the socialist party of Germany. It was the party that the Communists (the KPD) emerged from. They were one and the same. As I explained in-depth in a video on the Weimar Republic, the SPD didn't implement socialism because the Russian Revolution forced them to deny what it was https://youtu.be/pwJf8O1S6eA
    3
  9394. "However, the more pro-worker, pro union wing of the part, who were still Nazis, but believed in a right wing socialist system, were purged during the very early days of the Nazi‘s rise to power." That is an outright lie. You are distorting history. That didn't happen. As mentioned in the video, the Ernst Röhm thing had nothing to do with capitalism vs socialism.
    3
  9395. "Socialism is the transfer of control of the means of production to the working class" Nope, that's Marxist Socialism. Socialism itself predates Marxism and has nothing to do with the "workers". I explained this in the video. Please watch the video before commenting nonsense.
    3
  9396. Shirer's book was published in 1960. Taylor discovered in the 1980s that the old narrative was wrong and had simply been made up. Now, all mainstream historians (including Richard Evans) accept that Hitler's funding came from the grassroots of his party. It's true that Hitler tried to get money off the major industrialists, but only Fritz Thyssen gave his support prior to the seizure of power. Some smaller industrialists bribed lower-down party members for various reasons, but again, there was no outright support for the Nazis from "big capital".
    3
  9397. They'll respond with "it was State Capitalism", and say there are different types of capitalism, or that free market capitalism leads to big government... This is why it's difficult to get through to them because all roads lead to the same conclusion to them due to their faulty sat navs.
    3
  9398. I'm not an AnCap.
    3
  9399. I'm not a libertarian.
    3
  9400. Private "owners" who were members of the National Socialist German Workers' Party which didn't really own the industries but were managing them on behalf of the State.
    3
  9401. "TIK doesn't understand the difference between totalitarianism and socialism." In order to implement the socialization of the means of production you need a totalitarian state.
    3
  9402. I don't know why you're incapable of replying to the other comments. That's on you, not me or YouTube, as nobody else is having that problem. As to who is funding me, I get my income from YouTube ad revenue and my Patreons/SubscribeStars. But I'm not beholden to them, and I don't even know who they are. You're implying that someone is controlling me, and I can assure you that I'm merely sticking with the facts as shown by the copious amounts of evidence given. Now, to talk about the history question... As explained and proven via the evidence shown in the video you didn't bother to watch, private property rights were abolished in the Third Reich. In addition, corporations are "public" entities, not "private" entities. In order to be a corporation, you have to be "public", as this is a fundamental requirement of being a corporation - they are public entities. I've been over the definitions of public and private in another video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y?si=dU6qRhQ5g8rG6XZF The profit situation is not discussed in this video. However, as Götz Aly explains in the book "Hitler's Beneficiaries", profits were taxed heavily in the Third Reich, and wealth was actively redistributed to the poor. Mass welfare systems were created. And as shown in Gunter Reimann's "The Vampire Economy", businessmen were struggling to cope. While the odd business did make more money in this centrally controlled economy, many of them did not, and even the Deutsche Bank saw revenues fall, as did the Reichsbahn. It's also difficult to tell because of the rampant inflation going on, as while nominally it looks like they gained, in real terms they probably did not.
    3
  9403. Don't you know? You're only allowed to read books that the Communists have approved of. That's where I went wrong, you see. The Communists want me to dismiss sources, with Nick saying I shouldn't even use Oswald Spengler (a primary source).
    3
  9404. Shirer's book was published in 1960. Taylor discovered in the 1980s that the old narrative was wrong and had simply been made up. Now, all mainstream historians (including Richard Evans) accept that Hitler's funding came from the grassroots of his party. It's true that Hitler tried to get money off the major industrialists, but only Fritz Thyssen gave his support prior to the seizure of power. Some smaller industrialists bribed lower-down party members for various reasons, but again, there was no outright support for the Nazis from "big capital".
    3
  9405. Yeah I don't get it either. It's like they say pre-programmed nonsense and don't think about it before they speak
    3
  9406. Don't give them ideas 😂
    3
  9407. What ideology do I hold exactly? I don't have any "compatriots", and I'm certainly not interested in bringing in Fascism, which is why I'm explaining that Fascism is just a modified form of Socialism. Without totalitarianism, you cannot have either Fascism or Socialism. Hitler nationalised the trade unions, which is the exact same move Lenin made. Yet when Lenin does it, it's socialism/communism. When Hitler does it, it's "free markets" 🤣 Who were the bourgeoisie? I know, let's ask Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg?si=HRzTKAL3CZHbPPyl
    3
  9408. Well, as a man with self-respect, I'm against "government" in all forms, since it violates my life. So, I must disagree with Hayek here.
    3
  9409. The definition of socialism is, and always has been, the social ownership of the means of production. The fact that socialists don't know this is a testament to how effective the brainwashing is.
    3
  9410. 110 sources, defeated by Wikipedia, one Guardian article, and one quote from one of Hitler's speeches, many of which I've used numerous times in my channel, and it's obvious you haven't read them. No actual counter argument. No addressing of anything said in the video (because you haven't watched it). No understanding of concepts like Gleichschaltung, or Betriebsführer, or Reichskommissars. No, because you're absolutely ignorant of the topic at hand. But well done, Ben. Well done.
    3
  9411. "It is a very important one because it shows how much he hates socialist ideas that are per definition egalitarian and internationalist." No it doesn't! All it shows is that Hitler didn't agree with the Marxists. THAT's my whole point. Hitler WASN'T a Marxist, he was a Socialist. This is where you're going wrong. - "Socialism is for equality between nations and individuals." No it isn't. It's social ownership of the means of production. - "You clearly see that he values his nation more than the international working class." He values the German workers more than the foreign workers, yes, because that's what National Socialism is. Again, he's not a Marxist. And the Marxists value the working class over the nation - meaning they're not for equality or the rights of others! - "Its not in the quotation but he is also against equality between individuals which is anti socialist and more generally anti leftist." He is against equality, but only because he believes it to be a Jewish idea (Mein Kampf, Jaico edition, p296 and p347). So he says the German social race should take over the means of production (socialism), but that individuals of the race are not equal. Therefore, men and women should work for the preservation of "the race" (Mein Kampf, p269), which is his socialism. Equality isn't a requirement for social ownership of the means of production. It is anti-Marxist, but not anti-Socialist or anti-Leftist. - "Adolf is a (socialist) nationalist." No, he's a racial Socialist, believing that nations are races (social groups). His nationalism is his socialism, and his socialism is his nationalism. By denying one, you deny the other. - "Yes Adolf is fascists" No, he's a National Socialist. He's not a Fascist because he doesn't believe in National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism, which is what Fascism is https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Again, Fascism and National Socialism are two separate ideologies, but Marxists don't realize this because they're unwilling to actually look at the evidence. - "adolf opposes the unity of the nation to the class struggle." Adolf thinks the class struggle is brought on by the Jews (Hitler, “Mein Kampf,” p53-54, p536-540). He thinks that by removing the Jews from society, the class struggle would end since there would be no classes any more. Everyone would be 'equal' in the sense that they would all be of the German working class. This is the complete opposite of what you stated. - "Not a single socialist would be against it and a true socialist would take the side of the workers in the class struggle. Adolf does not take the side of the workers." Yes he does, he's taking the side of the German workers vs the Jews. That's what Hitler was doing. - "You can clearly see that he is not taking the side of the workers when looking at the wage shares during his rule, they decreased significantly (from around 50% to 40%, dont remember exactly)." I ANSWERED THIS EXACT CRITICISM IN THE VIDEO. You're not taking into account the central planning wage controls, price controls, huge subsidies for the poor, heavy taxation of the corporations and the rich, and massive amount of regulations designed to siphon wealth from Europe to the German workers. WATCH THE VIDEO. It's as simply as this: watch the video and you'll see that what you're saying is completely wrong. I don't understand why you would attempt to "counter" my argument when you don't even know what it is, or haven't seen the overwhelming amount of evidence I've presented. You're putting your head in the sand, and there's no need for it. Please just watch the video.
    3
  9412. "Look at what Adolf says about socialist and social-democrats." You mean Marxists and Social-Democrats. - "As you will see, Socialism is anti nationalist." If you had bothered to watch this video, you'd understand why this statement is incorrect. WATCH THE VIDEO. - "That is a main difference between socialism and fascism (and the particular brand called national-socialism)." Fascism isn't the same as National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "You can not just look at economic policies and then declare that it is the same." I'm not just looking at the economic policies. - And as far as randomly quoting Mein Kampf, let me try: “The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung.” “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” Hitler, Mein Kampf, p406 of the Jaico Edition. Again, Hitler is NOT a Marxist, he is a (National) Socialist, and he's just laid that all out right here.
    3
  9413. Reimann was a Marxist, so despite showing all the Socialism in the Third Reich throughout his book, he concludes "it's not real socialism". This is why you should always look at the actual evidence, not the opinions on the author.
    3
  9414. You can hear what Marx wrote here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9415. "Socialists want to take industry out of private hands. They also want to put control of it in the hands of the workers. Nazis want to take it out of private hands too. But they put it in the hands of their friends." No, they both put it in the hands of the Party.
    3
  9416. You're coming from the Numbers video, aren't you? Did you actually watch the video? I only ask because you'll find no bias here. Do me a favour, watch this video and then tell me how "dishonest" I was. Sources in the description.
    3
  9417. Been studying German in general, although had a break from in recently to concentrate on this video. Will get back into it shortly. And not really grasped them yet, but will get there. Mainly struggling with word genders and word order
    3
  9418. I'm certain someone out there will marathon it. I think I might do as a bit of a celebration :D
    3
  9419. For the reasons above, you'll probably love tomorrow's video 😂 I think most won't, but I don't care
    3
  9420. I don't take medicine unless it's serious. I prefer to fight disease naturally when possible in order to boost the immune system for future battles.
    3
  9421. Thank you. I could do with getting over this because I really need to crack on with next week's video. Glad I decided to do bi-weekly Battlestorm videos otherwise I would have been stuck this week
    3
  9422. Did you also have wage controls (e.g. minimum wage)? Did you also have taxes? Did you also have central banks printing currency and handing it to big businesses so that the small businesses couldn't cope? What I'm trying to get at is that there may have been other reasons why the lifting of that particular piece of legislation may have resulted in small businesses being unable to compete. Had ALL the shackles of the State been taken off the economy, then yes, big businesses wouldn't be able to compete (unless run very efficiently, but such corporations are rare and usually don't exist for very long).
    3
  9423. You made me laugh out loud, it's so true. Take a heart
    3
  9424. Glad you liked the video! Sadly it's not just Argentina - a lot of people from all different countries are getting this wrong :(
    3
  9425. I haven't looked at Pinochet so I'm talking off the cuff, but assuming he did privatize the economy, then he must have privatised the army, privatised the law services and the judiciary, privatized the roads, privatized the schools, eliminated public taxes, reduced state regulations, eliminated the bureaucracy... No, he didn't do that. Instead he freed up some of the economy and kept the rest under public sector control. Therefore that's not a capitalist economy with authoritarian rule, but a mixed economy with authoritarian rule. If you have a king which collects taxes, then you're not economically or politically free.
    3
  9426. Millions of people work for Amazon and millions own Amazon shares (a giant public). They are classed as a "public" business. And the concept of corporations comes from Syndicalism (left wing trade unionism). Yet for some reason everyone thinks they're "private" and capitalist, and when they're presented with these facts, they simply cannot accept them because... well, they just can't. That's how deep rooted the propaganda is.
    3
  9427. I've been considering it. Won't happen yet though. Stalingrad must come first :)
    3
  9428. @aurell - I haven't deleted any comments. Some automatically get marked as spam and end up in the spam folder (which I occasionally clear), but nope, I haven't deleted a comment in months. And I disagree with OP. Despite my attempts to get the doublethinkers to either think properly or leave, they've chosen to stay and continue to spout rubbish in my comment sections. No, turns out I'm not convinced by poor arguments which contradict themselves and aren't supported by the evidence I've seen. Threats and insults won't convince me either, and neither will slander or claiming I'm doing things like deleting comments. All these tactics are designed to undermine my legitimacy, but these Social Justice Nazis haven't figured out that I'm not interested in my social status - I'm interested in history and figuring out the truth. If you don't like it, convince me by forming a coherent argument that doesn't contradict itself and actually is supported by evidence (including the evidence I have) and holds up to scrutiny. And while we're waiting for the impossible to happen, I'll be strengthening my own arguments and creating more history for you to hate and cry about.
    3
  9429. "If I work for a company, no matter how big or small, typically I will not own anything from that company. Is that capitalism?" If the company is privately owned, and if you're choosing to work there and get paid for working there, yes. If you're enslaved by the company, or it's collectively owned by its shareholders, then no.
    3
  9430. What's scary is that the people who wrote that didn't see the contradictions in their own narrative. They're living in an illusion
    3
  9431. Exactly. It's got to the point where they're saying Socialism isn't real Socialism, and they don't know the definition of Socialism because they're having to distort and lie about it, otherwise they'd have to admit it doesn't work. Crazy times.
    3
  9432. I promise you, your comments are not being deleted by me.
    3
  9433. Judging people by the colour of their skin is racist, since science says human subraces don't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label And https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
    3
  9434. I'm not sure who was first so I'll let you have it
    3
  9435. That is a very good question. It normally does show up, but for some reason it isn't now. How odd
    3
  9436. @Rockwell, so calling a thief a thief is extremism now?
    3
  9437. Yes, there's a reason Karl Marx called for central banking in the Communist Manifesto
    3
  9438. Historically your statement isn't true. Capitalism reduces the gap between the richest and poorest. I suspect that you think Corporations (hierarchies of society) are Capitalism. No, Capitalism is private control. Corporations are hierarchies of society, not individuals. Also, Central Banks (again, Socialist, which is why Marx called for them) redistribute wealth from everyone to the Centre, creating universal impoverishment. Taxation (Socialism) does the same. If you tax the rich, you tax the poor, just like if you tax a parent, you tax the child. Our 'societies' (States) tax children. Yet, our Social-elites (Socialists) claim this is "fair". This would be unbelievable if it wasn't true.
    3
  9439. "We need government regulation to protect ourselves from ourselves." I couldn't disagree more. Government regulation doesn't do anything except for ruin an economy and destroy the freedom of individuals to act. It is a hostile invasion of people's private interests. "There's more than just workers in society - if you wish them to suffer and die for the sake of efficiency, you are an evil man." The idea of Socialism is that it's good to steal the wealth off those who work and redistribute it to those who don't. I think this is immoral. Let the workers keep their earnings.
    3
  9440. "the terms right and left... progress towards equality for poor people vs freedom for established investors to do as they please" Yes, the Right is for equality of poor people (anti-slavery and anti-serfdom in favour of a free market) and freedom from established investors to do as they please. The Left is for identity politics (inequality, anti-bourgeois, anti-kulaks, anti-races, pro-gender conflicts) and pro-investors (state and corporations).
    3
  9441. That's simply untrue. The NHS has had a consistently higher budget every single year, even though they claim there's budget cuts (there isn't, a "cut" is simply the budget not going as high as they wanted). There service is awful to the point of murderous. And you get nothing from a state education except lies and deceit. I've discovered that the more I unlearn the state school indoctrination the richer and happier I become. Everything they taught me was quite literally the opposite of the reality. If I ever have children, they will not be going to school, they'll be home schooled, which is cheaper anyway. Listen to this, and read the comments https://youtu.be/2yL8h_NbpsU I understand the fallacious argument about the lying politicians needing to regulate businessmen and workers and prevent them from making profits, but it seems that you haven't heard the numerous alternative arguments. As I always recommend, read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, and "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard.
    3
  9442. That's the lie they tell you, yes. In reality, if you buy something from a shop, the Capitalist benefitted you. If you didn't think Capitalists do benefit you, then stop buying their commodities.
    3
  9443. Correct! It is imperialism
    3
  9444. Thank you for quoting all of this, it's... concerning. Again, even if we thought that Hitler and Mussolini weren't "progressives" or "socialists" and if we thought that they were on the Right, that still doesn't explain why they think National Socialism and Fascism are the same ideology. It would be interesting for them to point out anywhere in Gentile's works (the guy who invented Fascism) where he calls for the removal of non-Aryans from society. Or why it was only after Mussolini was isolated from the international community (Ethiopian incident) and met with Hitler in 1938 that he implemented the racial laws in Italy. Why did it take him 16 years to do that? Surely, if he believed in the Racial Theory of History, that would have been one of the first things he would have done. In reality, these are two distinct ideologies. Calling Hitler a Fascist would be like calling Lenin a Social Democrat. "Left vs. Right classification in historiography is a social policy issue." Even if we accept this, it still doesn't make sense to say Hitler was on the Right. The Left wants to implement social policies, the Right doesn't (or wants to "undo them", to use their own words). So they're saying that Hitler didn't implement any social policies? I can hardly believe that. Hitler wanted to implement social policies (the big obvious one being the removal of the Jews from society in order to create a Volksgemeinschaft). There's no way that this was a "return to older values" as they described it. National Socialism was something completely new in history, and I don't remember any older ideology calling for the conquest of Lebensraum in the East and the mass-enslavement of the "inferior" races of Europe. As Zitelmann points out throughout his book, this was a new Revolutionary movement, not a reaction. And even if it wasn't, a counter-revolution is still a revolution. I've hearted your original comment. Thank you again for all the quotes.
    3
  9445. I see, so you're saying that there has to be a giant corporation with total monopoly control of the courts and the police and the army in order to dictate the law to the rest of the people? And you're saying that multiple police, and multiple courts, and multiple armies, and multiple citizens armed and ready to defend their own property, can't maintain order?
    3
  9446. There are multiple volumes of Das Kapital.
    3
  9447. In my opinion, no. When you have State Bank manipulation of the currency supply (artificial interest rates), currency printing (giving them to the corporations, which is an unofficial nationalization), massive tax and regulations, laws preventing you owning your own property (a tax on houses shows that you're only renting them off the State), and more... it's hard not to conclude that this isn't a free market nor Capitalism.
    3
  9448. One much bigger Marxist trigger coming soon...
    3
  9449. Why is being free bad? Being free allows the individual to do things that they couldn't do as a slave. Don't let the slave masters convince you that being free is 'bad' or 'greedy' or 'selfish'. Do your own research. Do your own thinking. You can start here https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    3
  9450. "@TIK The foundation of the right is a rejection of egalitarianism, not economics. The Nazis were radically anti-egalitarian." So are Marxists - the Bourgeoisie Kulaks don't have equal rights to the workers.
    3
  9451. "though I think most of those have already drifted to the far right or far left." As I explained in the video, the Far Right are anarchists. I think you mean the Far Left (Fascists, Nazis and Marxists).
    3
  9452. "Why do you say the NHS is inefficient and expensive. In many comparisons with US private health care it is much better value for money. Free market businesses are more efficient than public "businesses" usually only when they do not involve monopolies. Private monopolies are worse than public monopolies. Private monopolies will extort as much profit as the market can bear. If you are ill you can not leave your treatment on the shelf and decide to buy it when the price comes down. You have to pay for health care even when you can't afford it and even make yourself bankrupt, which happens often in the US." The evidence contradicts your conclusions https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    3
  9453. @Dean Mulready - maybe not, but that doesn't mean that socialism/communism is not inherently flawed or collapses in on itself because, since it cannot create wealth, it has to sustain itself by stealing off of the workers.
    3
  9454. "In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance." Orwell, G. "Nineteen Eighty-Four." Penguin Books, 2000. P198.
    3
  9455. It is supported by history. Check out the book "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom for examples. He actually talks about Standard Oil.
    3
  9456. "USSR didn't loose the winter war." - considering that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact allowed them to annex the whole of Finland, which they wanted to do, and they didn't do that, and got badly beat up during the war by the Finns, I'd say they failed in their overall mission, even if they "won" some territory.
    3
  9457. @Phil Gray - I have the third installment of that series for Stalingrad, and it's a pretty good book.
    3
  9458. Nope, it's definitely Kalinin.
    3
  9459. Thanks for the feedback. I actually did try to talk about the events, which is why I focused on the pilots in the first half of the video. The sources though were mainly on about the numbers, as per usual :)
    3
  9460. Glad you like it! The best part is I only started this yesterday... yes, yesterday afternoon. Granted it's a small battle/campaign, but effectively, I could make one of these every couple weeks. Crete is very tempting. I'm torn between making that a full Battlestorm video though because I could make the Crete island look really nice using 3D animation. The invasions of Denmark and the Netherlands and definitely something I can cover in this though.
    3
  9461. Yay! I'm glad you like it :) I only started this video yesterday and finished it today (yes I did it on a whim) and I'm pleased with the results. I did make mistakes, but at least I know it's possible to do one of these videos very quickly. I agree that it's nice to see a battle/campaign that's not often talked about. Is there any "forgotten" battles/campaigns you want me to cover in this "Lite" series?
    3
  9462. @Johnny - great! I'll work on the NATO symbols :)
    3
  9463. No worries! Glad you found it useful 😊
    3
  9464. Yes, which just happened to be what the German generals after the war wanted us to believe as well
    3
  9465. Good to hear, glad you liked this, and thanks for subscribing :)
    3
  9466. Haha, I think you'll like my video coming next Monday as I go into that somewhat :) and thank you for your kind comment!
    3
  9467. Glad you enjoyed the video, but the reason is because people want to learn the terms. Plus the fact that everyone has heard of "Blitzkrieg", even though it wasn't an official term or doctrine. But "Bewegungskrieg" was a real term and doctrine, and few people have heard of it.
    3
  9468. Can tell you didn't watch the video.
    3
  9469. I hope the algorithm is listening to you! :D but seriously, glad you've found the channel and I hope you can join in with some of the discussions going on around here. And remember, don't always take my word for granted! I encourage you to go out there and do your own reading and come up with counterarguments (or extra evidence in support!). The more people talking history, the better!
    3
  9470. I'm glad you liked it! More to come :)
    3
  9471. Even with Soviet oil imports, they were still running a huge deficit. A whole second Romania would not have been enough to cover the deficit in oil
    3
  9472. Britain and the United States also fought on two fronts. Besides, where's the second front in 1941-1942? North Africa? Three divisions is barely a front.
    3
  9473. Oh yes, I'm not dismissing the Romanian oil supply - it was vital. But what I'm saying is that it wasn't enough. Interestingly, the Romanians produced less oil as the war progressed. It seems there was a backlash against the Germans because Romanians didn't want their resources going to them, although I've not looked into it much.
    3
  9474. But if there had been two Romanias giving the Germans oil, they would still be in a deficit of oil. That's how massive the German oil deficit was!
    3
  9475. I've actually considered doing that as a video: I write my own script on a topic, then give it the same source material and ask it to do the same, then contrast and compare.
    3
  9476. We're absolutely going all the way until February 1942 :)
    3
  9477. And thank you for watching! I also find it difficult to imagine what was happening just by reading books... Putting the units on the map, and seeing them move, is by far the best way to understand what was going on
    3
  9478. I should have explained this. It's not a village. It was a milk farm that got taken over by the Germans. So it was called the Milchfarm by the Germans.
    3
  9479. Hardly ever get much rest. Currently suffering from eye strain as a result of reading/editing too much 😂
    3
  9480. That was a very popular video. What did you think about it?
    3
  9481. Yes, comrade! You get a Red Heart
    3
  9482. Thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying this! And thank you again for your support - I'll be adding your name in the credits of the next video :)
    3
  9483. Thanks! I'm hoping to go even more in-depth once we get into the city (which should happen next season I think)
    3
  9484. We're almost there! Almost... :)
    3
  9485. History 101: never dismiss a source of information. We should always question them, but there is value in every source, even the ones we don't like. Beevor wasn't always right, but he wasn't always wrong, and in this case he brings up a good point.
    3
  9486. "@TIK I wouldn't be so hasty, there will likely be a big fiscal stimulus to keep things ticking over (certainly the banking sector at least)" There already is; they're printing vast sums of currency to keep the system liquid and prop up the stock market. The problem is that, if it persists, such measures will lead to (hyper)inflation and negative interest rates (which we are about to go into, and people won't want this because it'll cost them to keep their money in the banks). People will finally realize their cash is being eaten away and will pull their cash out, causing a bank run. Then the whole rotten banking system will either be shut down, or hyperinflate. Now, this may or may not happen (can't predict the future), but just like with Covid-19, it would be much better to be safe and withdraw some cash now BEFORE the crisis fully hits than to wait until the last moment. See, last year I understood that the market was going to implode at some point and saw it was beginning to slide down in December-time (inverted yield curve etc). At that point, I considered stocking up on food and other supplies, but decided to wait a little longer on the food. Now I'm kicking myself. (I did get some other supplies, but didn't get any food.) Well, now I'm not taking any chances with the cash situation. True, it might be a few weeks or months away before there's a credit/debit freeze and a general financial collapse, but it's best to get ahead of the curve than not to. Besides, having SOME cash on standby at home is always a good idea just in case you lose your wallet or something.
    3
  9487. China is the world's biggest polluter, yet China also has one of the world's most powerful governments https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/05/chinas-carbon-pollution-now-surpasses-all-developed-countries-combined/ If the climate doesn't care whether we're pro or anti-big government, then let's not be in favour of the monopoly corporation we call government. Removing government will actually help the climate, not hinder it https://mises.org/library/privatizing-climate-policy-0
    3
  9488. You didn't answer my questions. So, I will ask them again: Are you denying that people starved to death every year between 1917 and 1949 in the Soviet Union? Are you going to deny the Soviet health minister (directly quoted towards the end of the video) saying how bad the Soviet economy was in the 1980s? "but people like you attribute this large scale and extremely destructive wars as the proof that socialism is bad and murders innocent people." Socialism started the war. But not only that, why is it that the Soviet economy didn't recover like most of the other economies did? France was smashed in WW2, but recovered. Britain was heavily bombed in WW2, but recovered. Italy suffered from a Fascist revolution and was fought over, but recovered. West Germany recovered. Japan recovered. The Soviet Union didn't, and neither did many of the Eastern European countries, nor China. Is it just coincidence? I think not.
    3
  9489. "( how much is the cost of patreon ? )" It's as little as $1 (you get your name in the video for this), although there are tiers for more ($5 for Q&A questions). Check out the links in the description
    3
  9490. They only responses they've really got now is to argue that humans are animals whose minds and thoughts are entirely "instinctual", and to insist that human "subspecies" truly do exist. However, our thoughts are clearly not "instinctual", and they have no evidence of human "subspecies" besides looks. The counter is simply that: our minds are not determined by our bodies, and therefore we should be judged by our individual character, not by our skin colour.
    3
  9491. The references are in the video. There's book written on this topic, and the Soviet government even admitted it.
    3
  9492. Thank you for helping me out! Very much appreciated 👍
    3
  9493. True
    3
  9494. THANKS FOR WATCHING! DON'T WORRY, I WILL KEEP DOING THESE VIDEOS. ANOTHER WILL BE OUT SOONISH
    3
  9495. I think the reason they had only two options was because they had no equipment, and therefore no compasses. They were following the tracks in the sand made by the other trucks in the LRDG. Had they gone in a random direction, they may have never found a settlement at all. And I'm not certain if this was the second longest. But it's long enough! I will cover the SAS in the desert at some point, as well as finish this series on the LRDG, so we'll probably find out
    3
  9496. I thought the lie was that the army shot at the miners, not that they were sent there?
    3
  9497. That's what I thought, especially since a number of people have raised this question. I might do more like this in the future if needed
    3
  9498. Yeah, Hitler was trying to blend nationalism and racism together. That was a major portion of Mein Kampf, because prior to that era, a nation wasn't seen as "race", but as a collection of people in a given territory with a similar culture or language.
    3
  9499. I'm not a race, I'm an individual. I may have white skin, but I'm not part of some "white race" social group. Judge me for who I am, not for what my skin colour 'says' I am supposed to be. Ethnicity is not the same as some "racial group".
    3
  9500. If you're part of a "race", you're not an individual, since by being part of the "racial group" you're giving up your individual sovereignty to the "blood". So, what are you, an individual or a race? I'm an individual. I belong to no group.
    3
  9501. @Peter - first off, I want to make you aware that I'm not picking on Croatians or Croatia or anything like that. I've covered the Croatian Legion (regiment) in the past, and as far as I can see, they didn't commit any mass atrocities, so I've stood up for that regiment against critics (see the comments of my Croatian Legion video). However, the books I have do mention that the Croatian regime in WW2 committed crimes in their own territories. Now yes, maybe there's some debate around this, and perhaps some of it has been refuted. But I can only go off the books I have read... If you have any books that refute this narrative (preferably in English because I can't read Croatian) I'll be happy to take a look at them.
    3
  9502. The science says otherwise https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/
    3
  9503. I'm not sure because I lost count
    3
  9504. Well done again Jamie!
    3
  9505. No worries, and thank you for watching! It's good to hear you're enjoying the videos 🙂
    3
  9506. No problem! I hope you get something out of it
    3
  9507. "We run a mixed market economy, that heavily favours free market economics." Our tax rate is currently over 50%. Every transaction in the economy is directed by the interest rate, which has been set artificially low by the state's central bank. So every single transaction is manipulated by the state. How is that a free market? We even use their fiat currency! This isn't, in any way, a free market. You've been told it's "capitalism" and you believe it's "capitalism", but even by Karl Marx's own definition of capitalism, we don't have capitalism. And I've been over this here https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA - "We have done for decades under both Labour and Conservative governments." Because they are one and the same thing. Don't let the slogans fool you. The Commie-servatives are no different than the so-called "worker" party. Boris implemented almost every policy Corbyn called for in his two manifestos. - "There is no point engaging with the other nonsense you've argued for here." Yes, just ignore all the evidence and dismiss it as "nonsense"... What's wrong? Does reality not confirm to your false beliefs? - "You've clearly either neither read or understood Marx" You mean, this video of mine where I quoted all his anti-semitic racism and showed how he thought the bourgeoisie were the Js, and called another socialist leader a "Jewish n*****"? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "[You] have little understanding of politics, ideology, or the history behind any of these movements, socialist, communist, Liberal, or fascist." No, it is you who's ignorant of this. I'm trying to educate you, but your faith in social-schism is blinding you to the truth. - "I've enjoyed some of your history videos, but this is just pure right wing propaganda. Absolutely laughable. Have a nice day" I'm not "right-wing", so that's a swing and a miss. Technically, according to your political spectrum, I'm on the extreme left-wing https://imgur.com/rLlDlcQ
    3
  9508. The Nazis also rounded up conservatives and free market liberals. The Wehrmacht generals who fought back were all conservative types. Yet you conveniently forgot to mention that. Keynes got his economics from the Nazis, as explained by Sennholz in Age of Inflation. That's why the UK and many other places have socialist economies. What, you think the UK isn't socialist? Why is the income tax rate ~35%, the sales tax 20%? Why do we have a council (Soviet) tax? Why do we have a tax on house, car and tv ownership? Why do we have a 40% inheritance tax? Why do we have wage controls, price controls, pension controls, and regulations coming out our ears? Why does Network Rail have a monopoly on the railways? Why does the National Socialist 'Health' Service exist? Why does Goebbels's propaganda ministry (the BBC) exist? Why do we have state insurance? State pensions? State housing? The state central bank (the same thing Karl Marx called for in the Communist manifesto) is centrally planning and directing the economy. They reject the use of gold and silver (money/capital) and use stste fiat currency. They set the price of that currency and influence every transaction through the joint policies of inflation and interest rate manipulations. Yet somehow, you think the UK has a free market 🤣 Class is irrelevant to socialism. Socialism came before Marx, who introduced the idea of class to socialism. Before him, the socialists said that socialism was state ownership of the means of production, and I've been over this in another video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y In other words, your criticism is not only completely invalid, but the evidence simply doesn't support it.
    3
  9509. Yeah, realising that the Nazis were Socialist is what made me snap out of the spell. How can a socialist say that killing the Js is bad, but killing the bourgeoisie is good? How can class socialism be acceptable, but racist socialism not be? The same concept that leads to the socialist revolution also leads to the Hbof WW2. Once I made that connection, I snapped out of the dream and instantly rejected socialism. But it wasn't an easy transition from being a socialist to a capitalist. Taking the Red Pill isn't fun. I had no choice in the matter - I did it by accident - and I go where the evidence takes me, so there was no chance of me spitting the pill back out. But it's absolutely understandable why others either refuse to take it or have difficulty taking it. It's a bitter pill, and it shatters your entire world view and turns everything upside down. It also places the burden of life on you rather than other people. As a socialist, you can blame others (e.g. the Patriarchy) for the reason you're poor. But you can't do that anymore. You're the reason you're poor, and there's no excuse other than you didn't work smart. That's not an easy thing for the ego to accept all at once after years of indoctrination.
    3
  9510. They socialized the businesses under a policy of synchronization (Gleichschaltung) and made them state corporations, but you're selectively choosing sources that 'accidentally' forget to tell you that. And instead of accepting the facts, you double down on your ignorance. It's no wonder you believe in Karl Marx's anti-semitic religion (Marxism) https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9511. "Free market governments set ration size and price when there was a shortage." Then they're not free market governments!
    3
  9512. "It wasn't running a socialist regime as was understood in 1930s." Abolishing private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree, socializing the industries in a policy called Gleichschaltung, forcing all the businesses to comply with the state, implementing price controls and wage controls and numerous other controls... none of that is socialism now? Then why does every socialist regime do this then when they seize power? The reality is that it was a socialist regime in the 1930s. I've provided more than enough evidence of that in my videos to paint that conclusively - and not just using sources from the Mises Institute, but mainstream sources too.
    3
  9513. Socialism predates Marxism. Even Karl Marx wrote about this in the Communist Manifesto. There were Christian Socialists and Bourgeois Socialists, plus others. So yes, there are different versions of socialism, and "class" (race) isn't the only version.
    3
  9514. Have you seen this, Chillin? https://imgur.com/rLlDlcQ I didn't create this, by the way. I found it online, but it does a good job of representing how I see things. I don't 100% agree with the layout of the second graph - I would rearrange some of the ones in the middle - but it's much better than the original one. And I also disagree with the political compass idea for reasons I won't get into. But I do think you're incorrect to assume that I'm "ignorant" of all this, or haven't thought things through. I also understand that not everyone is interested in politics or economics. That's fine. However, I am. I also really don't see how you can separate the military stuff from the economics and politics. Warfare is an extension of politics, and has economics written all over it. Ignoring the latter just renders the former pointless. This is partly why I'm tempted to throw in the towel with the military stuff. People want me to "stick to tanks", but what's the point? The fun of the military stuff is figuring out why it happened (politics & economics), and why they messed up (tactics & logistics). Sticking to tanks removes 3 of the 4 reasons and makes us come to false conclusions. I can't do that.
    3
  9515. Wow, joint first it seems!
    3
  9516. I think that's because it's a division-and-up game. I'd like to play a mod that allowed you to play at battalion level, and actually used a decent order of battle system (the one in HOI3 was better, but way too clumsy). They also need to actually factor in logistics too, as well as sort the resource system out to include food resources, and make the oil situation more desperate for Germany and Japan.
    3
  9517. Stalingrad's going well! I have over 90 pages of notes from Glantz's five-part-trilogy and I'm only a slither of a way into book two of five. I have plenty of OOB's and tables showing various things. And that's just Glantz. I've done many more pages of notes from other authors and other books. The list of books I have bought and have yet to read is growing, and I'm now on Day 5 of trying to learn German so I can read German books too. After that, hopefully I'll conquer Russian. I have one map more-or-less complete, and have several more to make. Can't even fathom how I'm going to make the Stalingrad city map yet. Plus, I've got hundreds of units still to make. It's simply unreal. I spend hours on my days off from work just making notes. Completely dedicated. When I go to work, all I want to do is go home and do more. I'm pushing myself to make the TIKhistory videos in order to give myself a well-deserved break and keep everyone up to date with it, otherwise you'd wonder where I've gone for years. Not a day goes by where I don't spend at least an hour working on this. Usually it's many more than that. My key problem right now is time. If only I had more time I could do so much more... That's why I'm asking for patience from everyone and demanding so much from myself. NOT ONE STEP BACKWARD!
    3
  9518. Yes! Small battles are interesting in their own right :) and the next one in this series will be interesting as "Moore's March" has become a bit of a legend of the endurance shown by special forces troops.
    3
  9519. I've been ill. Plus it's Xmas season so it's busy at my work. If people could stop buying stuff, that would be great
    3
  9520. Knowledge is gained by hard work and study. Do a little each day, and specialize on a particular subject, and you'll be there in no time
    3
  9521. Then they become the Frenemy
    3
  9522. If you go to Episode 1 of this series, you'll see that Kletskaya is the first place that the two sides clash. It's just to the left of where Paulus and the 375th Infantry Regiment is in the region map of this episode. Actually Left of the 1st Romanian Cavalry Division as the map zooms in to see Paulus at 30:00
    3
  9523.  @computerengineering390  It's not even that - they're not listening to what I'm saying. This guy thinks (and he's not the only one) that I said I was a Leftist in last Tuesday's video. I didn't say that at all. They're simply not listening.
    3
  9524. "Why germans always get cought by farmers same happend to rudolf hess"They also lost to peasant farmers of the Soviet Union, so clearly farmers are the German's natural kryptonite ;)
    3
  9525. " I presume theres going to be a episode focusing on the germans and their plans end up being even more retarded then the brittish" Nope. Next week's video will be on the Axis and, while they do have their own issues prior to the battle, their plans aren't really that bad compared to the British. It makes the fact that the Axis lost this battle even more spectacular.
    3
  9526. It's an absolute possibility... but it'll be after Stalingrad, and after Kharkov
    3
  9527. 1. Because they were trading beforehand and it simply wasn't enough. 2. Why trade when you can just invade the backwards Soviet state and defeat them in like 14 days and then just ride off to the sunrise and take the oil and food you need and you won't even need to fight really coz the red army is bad and can only win by mass-wave attacks against our panzers? In this case, desperation and overconfidence were two sides of the same coin.
    3
  9528. Yes, that analogy was 100% mine. But it does make a lot of sense. Encircle all you want on a Go board, but that doesn't equal victory.
    3
  9529. Possibly. But I would say it was more that the nature of the terrain (as in, the vastness and the lack of infrastructure) on the German-Soviet Front was not suited to Blitzkrieg-style warfare in the first place.
    3
  9530. Yes he did, which is where he manipulated the world's views to suit his own needs. This is why the early texts about WW2 say Halder being sacked was a bad thing... but was it, really?
    3
  9531. Said nobody ever.
    3
  9532. The idea initially was to convert the oil to fuel locally and to supply the local units (Army Group South), which would then ease the logistical pressure on the whole of the Eastern Front.
    3
  9533. YouTube needs to be put on trial
    3
  9534. That's taken out of context (as you said, a half sentence). Perhaps I should have used the word "was" instead of "may have been", but don't for a minute think I'm defending him on anything other than his strategic military mindset. I'm only showing that he wasn't "mad" (like the generals said he was) and that he knew exactly what he was doing.
    3
  9535. Thank you, glad you enjoyed the video :)
    3
  9536. True: the scale was massively different in the East. But don't be fooled though, a "Panzer Army" wasn't all panzer divisions.
    3
  9537. Oh yes, in fact, once Operation Crusader is out the way, I'll be working on a campaign in 1944-45 which may have some parallels with Stalingrad (which is why I want to cover it).
    3
  9538. Happy holidays to you too! And thank you again for your support 👍
    3
  9539. I use them all! If they contradict each other, then it depends on what they say. Sometimes it's possible to look at a map and say "that unit isn't where that book said it was" and then favour the other book. Sometimes it's not possible to determine, so I'll present you one account and say "the sources vary" (like in this video with the Lopatin account, where Krylov thinks Lopatin wasn't arrested). Other times it's about weight of evidence - if four sources say one thing, and the fifth says something else, then it's probably best to go with the four, unless the fifth makes a really good case.
    3
  9540. I haven't decided if I'll include what's going on in the west after Manstein failure yet if I'm honest. After a point it no longer becomes relevant to the story of Stalingrad... but it may still be interesting to cover. I'll decide nearer the time
    3
  9541. Cameron Thompson Thegamer8324 Yes, it's on the East coast of Afrika next to Sudan. It's only tiny, but it was mentioned on an episode of the Simpsons once! Djibouti's claim to fame
    3
  9542. Yeah, I wasn't that impressed with that book either.
    3
  9543. Yeah, I suck haha
    3
  9544. I'm miles behind with their questions so I don't know if I'll ever catch up ☹
    3
  9545. Adam Smith and Karl Marx are out of date because they were before the Marginal Revolution in economics (introducing the concept of marginal utility). Anything before that point is simply obsolete.
    3
  9546. Weimar is on hold until after Stalingrad because I'm trying not to burn myself out with too many difficult subjects at once. Battlestorm takes most of my energy, and the Weimar "BankWars" series was basically a bank-battlestorm. There's no way I can do two Battlestorms at once, which is also why the third installment of the Korsun Pocket won't be done until after Stalingrad.
    3
  9547. Without free market prices you cannot have economic calculation. Socialism is impossible outside of a small family unit.
    3
  9548. Gradual? We've been "democratic socialist" since the 1940s, if not earlier!
    3
  9549. Specifically, which part of the video do you disagree with? I'm not actually discussing Anarcho-Capitalism in this video, I'm simply pointing out that the counterargument that Hitler wasn't a socialist because the UK privatised the rail network is a silly argument due to the fact the UK didn't privatise the rail network. And the only reason I've been doing these recent videos on lighter topics is because of Stalingrad. I can't do in-depth research on 50 different topics, I have to concentrate on one or two at a given moment. Stalingrad is taking up 80% of my time, and the eugenics video is currently taking up the rest, so I pulled out this old script I had written in 2021 and published it this week (that's why I have the quotes about prices from 2021). I explained all this in a recent video https://youtu.be/rOySICBQ_1s?si=nvrZr0i0BERtIolt
    3
  9550. Again, the roads in France are owned by the state, they're just leased to "private" companies, none of whom are truly private. It's the exact same trick.
    3
  9551. True, but I'm not a 13 year old girl in school 😂
    3
  9552. But Railtrack wasn't "privatisation" either. It was a "public" company that was listen on the stock exchange. It was regulated, and it remained a monopoly (thus, not private) over all the railways. There were no private railways, it was all operated under what was essentially a government corporation that had just been allowed to operate for profit - that's not a private entity. And so, once again, the term "privatisation" doesn't apply. The rest of your nonsense about the EU is irrelevant.
    3
  9553. Bad times are needed now and then to remind us of how good the good times really are
    3
  9554. I'll agree with that
    3
  9555. @Trucker Nick - Ah yes, because as we all know, Murder Hornets are just like a seasonal flu, which is why they'll have magically disappeared by the 6th of July
    3
  9556. Well, that's a better argument than I get from most Marxist Socialists
    3
  9557. I'm fairly sure your comment will annoy some Alpini supporters... (but you have a point)
    3
  9558. Of course! Praise be the Manstein
    3
  9559. I'll add a disclaimer in the description
    3
  9560. Wikipedia is proof that a collective conscious perception of history is bad. A consensus - even written and agreed to by a collective - does not mean it's right. And I'd rather warn people not to use Wikipedia and explain why than try and correct all it's flaws.
    3
  9561. Not a 'Brit' - I'm an individual
    3
  9562. I guess, compared to what had gone on before, it was stable in the city. Chuikov's army continued to attack practically every day (but Seydlitz's corps was fairly strong and Chuikov's army was very weak at that point, so the battle in the city remained pretty stable). However, outside the city was a different matter. The Soviets tried to break the siege a few times, with a period in December as a bit of a break, simply because of Manstein's relief attempt. But even with the battle like that, there's still a lot going on. Jason D. Mark included days in the book where 24th Panzer wasn't engaged in fighting, and they didn't detract from the book.
    3
  9563. Thanks for the recommendation! Having recently got Panzerkrieg volume 1 by Mark, I do really think his "style" or process suits battalion level units. Divisional level seems a little too big, although that might just be me.
    3
  9564. Good to see you're still around sir! I'm still collecting them, so the list would probably change each week! :) I haven't forgotten that I'd promise to do a note-taking video... it will happen eventually!
    3
  9565. Tutorial!? :) but yes, it's going to be epic
    3
  9566. Excellent timing then! If you get the physical copy, will you let us know how it is? And yes, good suggestion! I'll change it in future. Thanks!
    3
  9567. "Can you point to anyone who criticized your work justly?" No, I can't. That's the problem. I'd genuinely enjoy it if someone who was being intellectually honest would sit down and offer a valid critique of my work in a friendly way. None of the critics I've seen have been anything but outright hostile, which means they're letting their emotions cloud their judgement. They're not even willing to see my point of view, indicating that they've not even considered what I've said because they've been too busy trying to find fault with every word I say so they can "debunk" the entire argument. I've only seen the first part of NonComplete's "TIK takedown" series, but it's the same as that OwningDishonestShills guy - not worth even bothering with because no valid points were actually raised, as you said. Plus the fact he jumps to conclusions about me personally just shows that he's ideologically driven and not willing to be persuaded (the point of an honest discussion). Evidence won't persuade someone like that, so it's pointless.
    3
  9568. "It can simply just be the workers of the company." Incorrect, that's not socialism. Worker ownership of the means of production is Marxist-Socialism, and in that regard, it refers to the entire structure of the society, as dictated by the state. The "workers" are, in fact, the state that's run on behalf of the workers, not the other way around. Again, you have been lied to as to the true nature of socialism, just as I was. - "But that does not mean that it has to be prices dictated by a central government, the prices can be set by the owners of the company, just now its the workers. So free market prices can still exist, and I perfectly agree that free market prices are much superior to a centrally planned price." If prices are set by the workers, then there is no free market, since on a free market the price would be set by the economy - the laws of supply, demand and subjective value - rather than by the workers (the defunct labour theory of value). - "I think its important to understand how people use the words too, so yes you can say socialism involves public state ownership, when people say the words public state ownership they interpret that as a big government owning and dictating the economy. So although your technically right to say that socialism is public/state ownership, I think that's misleading as people would interpret the wrong thing." Remember, I was a socialist too prior to 2018. I believed what you believe now. Unfortunately, you have been deceived. Socialism is nothing other than state ownership of the means of production. It always has been, always will be. You might try to say that the "workers" own the means of production, but the workers are society, which is a public, which is a state. Once you see this connect, you cannot unsee it. That's why I recommend that you watch my public vs private video.
    3
  9569. No, what you described is the bad side of revisionism. The good side of revisionism re-evaluates and revises the evidence, or brings new sources to the fore, which thus changes our interpretation of the past. I see I'm going to have to do a more in-depth video on this explaining it since a lot of people only know of the bad revisionists.
    3
  9570. Yes, exactly!
    3
  9571. Yeah, agreed. Distorians definitely do that
    3
  9572. Why are you getting your history from TV? Stop that. Stop that right now.
    3
  9573. Fun fact: I used to play the banjo a little. Boil them cabbage down. But I'm more of a guitar guy.
    3
  9574. I've actually been looking into this recently. Sadly the lack of English-translated-Italian sources, and the fact that I can't read Italian, is getting in the way of it. But I can confirm I've found at least a few points that do challenge the view that the Italians were bad soldiers - one of which is especially interesting because it also challenges the traditional German narrative. But again, more time is needed, and sources.
    3
  9575. It's hard to say about 'accuracy' when someone is pioneering the subject. Nobody else has done what he's done at Stalingrad, so if you want to know where a unit was at Stalingrad, go to Glantz (except with some German units, you can go to Jason D Mark, and it's good to hear both Mark and Glantz don't contradict each other). Because nobody else can give you the operational details at the same level, you'd be crazy not to use Glantz. But as sit stands there's no real way to know how accurate his work is. I'm sure he got elements of it wrong, however, since he is pioneering the subject, you kind of have no choice but to read him unit the next historian comes along and verifies his work. Sadly, it seems that might be a while away. All that said, I don't agree with all the conclusions Glantz makes. It's one thing to describe an event, and it's another to interpret that event. Hope that makes sense.
    3
  9576. Haha I think so too 😁
    3
  9577. Glad you saw that :)
    3
  9578. People don't like my opinion on certain subjects, and thus use the Revisionist-card. For example, in my 'Numbers Say it All" video, I argue that it was a myth that the Germans were "superior" to the Soviets. The conclusion at the end basically says the Germans had an early numerical advantage (which they exploited very well, to their credit), but once the Soviets recovered from their initial losses, they fought back, and they didn't really have vast-hordes-of-rifles-and-tanks. But, people (in this case, Wehraboos) didn't actually watch the full video and proceeded to cry that their beloved Wehrmacht was being attacked by a revisionist. The problem is, that's not what happened. If they'd watched the full video, they'd understand. But they didn't. Link https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    3
  9579. Week after next. Doing a book review of Breevor's new Arnhem book next week. Needs to be done because... yeah... Why, Beevor, why?
    3
  9580. Thank you, everyone :) I'd heard about the debate, but didn't realise it was this guy. Cheers!
    3
  9581. Outdated views are the worst! As history tutors though, they should have known better. And thank you for supporting me on Patreon! I'll be sending you a message on there soon (probably tomorrow now), but seriously, thank you!
    3
  9582. I don't know about the War of 1812, but someone else mentioned there were several different narratives on it. So yeah, clearly there's a debate to be had there. But in regards to Churchill, he's the perfect historical figure which proves there's always two sides to every coin. Churchill has been viewed as a great British icon (which, I guess, has some truth to it from the British perspective). But the problem is that 98% of the British population do not know about the Boar War, or Galipoli, or Greece, or North Africa, or India, or numerous other campaigns and battles where this guy was a menace. For me, the guy is an important historical figure, but he also isn't a "good" historical figure. For me, he is a constant reminder how truth, myth, legend, bias, agendas and so on can slip into the historical narrative and warp our perception of the figures of history. Again, the reason we should question everything.
    3
  9583. I'm concentrating on Operation Crusader at the moment (mostly), but I'll be coming back to the Eastern Front soon. Patience :)
    3
  9584. Glad you noticed! I wanted to try out something new, and I like the way it turned out. But it took me two full days to edit this 7 minute video - so don't expect this quality on every video haha
    3
  9585. Wait, the world's round? :O
    3
  9586. Wow! I didn't know about this, but now I'm looking forward to seeing what they find about the Finnish SS. Could you do me a favour and let me know when they publish something on this topic? I will eventually get around to doing videos on the Continuation War, (as well as the other Balkan countries, since I'm committed to looking into the Courland Pocket after Crusader) and this is probably going to be useful for that. It wasn't a mistake to point out the error of their ways. The mistake would be if you hadn't pointed it out and let the conservative elements (non-political use here) get away with just keeping the narrative as it is. Feel free to link to my video if you do argue about it, I'll do my best to back you up.
    3
  9587.  @damyr  Why do you think greed is bad? Why do you think being selfish is bad? Is it because the Bible says so? Otherwise, why? When people give to charity, they do it for their own selfish reasons. They feel guilt and shame that they have more than other people, and so by giving to "the poor", they can feel good about themselves. Charity is the ultimate form of selfishness. Equally, you cannot be rich without giving to other people. Nobody will hand over their cash to you unless you provide them something in return. Thus, being greedy is actually an act of charity, since to collect other people's cash, you need to give them a ton of products and services. But the fact that you even say half this stuff shows that you've never listened to anything I've said. The fact you said in a previous comment (6 months ago) that you believe the world we live in is "90% capitalist" and has been "for 99% of human history" is proof in the pudding that you haven't been paying attention. The taxation rate in the UK is 63%. There is no free market. There is no capital (no gold or silver - commodity money, as Marx defined capital), and so no capitalism. The corporations are controlled by the State, yet you blame the "free market" for their wrong-doing. And on top, you're recommending a BBC documentary... why? Is only content from Goebbel's Statist propaganda ministry allowed? I'd recommend "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. They will set you free.
    3
  9588. But then again, I'm burnt out with Stalingrad so a break is needed either way
    3
  9589. I talked about it in a previous episode. Also, YouTube censorship 👍
    3
  9590. I'm subscribed to RLM, but yeah I think I'll skip the RoboCop 2 review
    3
  9591. Happy Birthday! Hope you have a good one!
    3
  9592. Oh wow, I didn't realise people were rewatching them
    3
  9593. We'll probably hit episode 50, but whether we'll go beyond that...
    3
  9594. I talked about Soviet Storm in this video https://youtu.be/wFgV2enGRhI
    3
  9595. No, I don't think it is. I think claiming that Marx wasn't an Anti-Semite, and that Socialism in general wasn't an Anti-Semitic, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is anti-Semitic.
    3
  9596. The logic is sound. Marx said that "Money is the jealous god of Israel". And since he says that money is Capitalism in Das Kapital, that therefore means that Capitalism is Jewish. His hatred of the Capitalists is his Anti-Semitism made manifest.
    3
  9597. As explained in the video, Socialism is Anti-Semitism. Thanks for playing
    3
  9598.  @colinmcewen24  Most socialists don't realize the nature of their own ideology. That's the point of this video - to point it out.
    3
  9599.  @jerry250ify  You'll find that I did.
    3
  9600. But you missed the point. Socialism is inherently anti-semitic.
    3
  9601. Great! Thank you! I hope they enjoy it over there 👍
    3
  9602. That's a good idea! I'll think about it
    3
  9603. I don't believe in the "horseshoe" theory. I just see something like this https://images.app.goo.gl/AUY8TZg44zhpp4B89
    3
  9604. I already have https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9605. That's funny because all the Marxists have been screaming at me that the opposite is the case. They were accusing me of "not reading Marx" prior to me starting to use quotes of Marx to undermine their arguments. Now that I'm doing this, suddenly Marxists are saying that they're no longer anti-Semite totalitarians who want State control over the populace. Strange that, isn't it.
    3
  9606. Watch the full video, ninny
    3
  9607. "Now will you admit that Ludwig Von Mises praised fascism and was a racist? Or must you not criticize your prophet." I disagree with Mises on several points - including his belief in democracy. So I have no problem criticizing Mises and admitting when he is wrong. The reason why is because praxeology is the study of human action - a study, NOT a religion. It is very much the same as history (the study of the human condition), which is based in science and also interpretation of the evidence. Thus, unlike the religious belief in Socialist ideology, disagreement is part and parcel of the whole practice of science, economics, history and so on. This is why Rothbard wrote "Man, Economy and State" - he disagreed with some of what Mises wrote, and wanted to update Mises' "Human Action". The point is, I have no problem saying Mises is wrong. That said, your statement that Mises "praised fascism and was a racist" doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as I will show here. In his book "Liberalism" (written in 1927), Mises wrote - "Let them [the Russian Bolsheviks] do what they want in their own country. But do not let them pass beyond the boundaries of their own land to destroy European civilization." - Mises, "Liberalism," p176. Why did he say this? Well, Mises explains here and elsewhere that Socialism destroys civilization, since civilization is founded on the principle of private property, and without private property, you do not have civilization. This is why he says - "The fundamental idea of these movements [Marxist, Socialist and Fascist] — which, from the name of the most grandiose and tightly disciplined among them, the Italian, may, in general, be designated as Fascist—consists in the proposal to make use of the same unscrupulous methods in the struggle against the Third International as the latter employs against its opponents. The Third International seeks to exterminate its adversaries and their ideas in the same way that the hygienist strives to exterminate a pestilential bacillus..." - Mises, "Liberalism", page 71. He was thus warning about all these versions of Socialism, saying they will destroy civilization. Then - and this is important - at the end of a chapter where he says that Fascism won't work and is stupid, he then says - "It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aimed at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has for the moment saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history. But though its policy has brought salvation for the moment, it is not of the kind which could promise continued success. Fascism was an emergency makeshift. To view it as something more would be a fatal error." - Mises, "Liberalism", page 51. In his first sentence, Mises is correct: the Fascists (and later, the Nazis) believed they were saving European civilization from Marxist-Socialist Bolshevism. It is true that some of the national states in Europe would have succumbed to Marxist Socialism had Fascism (which does allow the veneer of Capitalism on a coffin of Socialism) not emerged, and their economies (and thus, millions of innocent people) would have been murdered and destroyed. This is why he says that Fascist policy "brought salvation for the moment". And, writing this in 1927, Mises was correct at the time that Fascism was the lesser of the two Socialist evils (Fascism and Marxism), since Mussolini's Fascism only ever arrested 12,310 people prior to 1940, and only a handful of them were sentenced to death (Farrell, “Mussolini: A New Life,” Chapter 11). Compare this to the 14 million people murdered in what Timothy Snyder calls ‘the Blood lands’ by the Soviet Union and National Socialist Germany between the years 1933 and 1945 (Snyder, “Blood Lands,” P409.). Stalin alone put 680,000 people to death during 1937 and 1938, in what is known as his ‘Great Terror’ or ‘the Purges’ (Snyder, “Blood Lands,” P408). So, Mises was correct when he wrote in 1927 that Fascism (not Nazism) had saved Europe from destruction. But he was wrong to say - “The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history.” Hindsight is a beautiful thing, and Mises (who was Jewish) couldn’t have predicted in 1927 what was to come. However, him saying that Fascism was right in 1927 doesn’t mean he was a ‘racist’, as you claimed. As I’ve made clear, Fascism (not Nazism) was an ideology with a philosophy of Actualism. The technical definition of Fascism, as I’ve explained in my Facism video, is “National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism” (see https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko or the book “Mussolini’s Intellectuals” by Gregor). Well, Actualists are not racists. This is why Gregor writes - “Fascist “racism” throughout the period between 1922 and 1938, however distinctive, was essentially benign - and shared little, if any substance, with the malevolent racism so prevalent across the Alps. None of the major Fascist intellectuals were racists of the sort one found in National Socialist environs. In fact, since many, if not most, of the principal ideologues of Fascism were Actualists, they had principled objections to attributing human behavior to material - that is, biological - causes. They simply could not accept the proposition that an entire population, characterized by ill-defined “racial” traits, could be held, as a body, guilty of anything.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” P193-194. “The form of anti-Semitism adopted by Fascist Italy, as a consequence, was singularly different from that of National Socialist Germany. However indecent, it shared few of the genocidal traits that have horrified the civilized world. Italian Jews suffered innumerable indignities and material losses, but there is scant, if any, evidence that between 1938 and 1943, any Jews died at the hands of Fascists simply for having been Jewish.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” P217. So, Mises wasn’t being ‘racist’ when he said that Fascism (not Nazism, which is different) had ‘saved European civilization’. Only by taking him out of context, and failing to even define Fascism (mixing it up with Nazism, which is a separate and distinct ideology) can you possibly claim that Mises was “praising fascism and was a racist”. Thus, what we have here is a person claiming to be a “Democratic Marxist”, believing in the Anti-Semite prophet known as Karl Marx, denying the Anti-Semitism inherent in his own religion, whilst trying to project that ‘racism’ (classism) and Anti-Semitism (Anti-Capitalism) onto others. And the only answer you’ve provided so far is ignorance and dismissal. I will therefore ask the question again: please explain why Karl Marx wrote - "The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money." - Karl Marx, Das Kapital, page 107.
    3
  9608. "No, that is your claim that you have invented. Capitalists, according to Marx and Engels, are those who own the means of production, according to the Marxist definition." You obviously haven't read Das Kapital, or Marx's OTJQ, or listened to the evidence presented in this video. Marx says that "Money is the jealous god of Israel" in 'On the Jewish Question'. He then says in Das Kapital vol 1 that money that's used to buy and sell commodities becomes capital (page 104), and that a person who possesses money ("the possessor of money becomes a capitalist" page 107) or accumulates it ("it is only in so far as the appropriation of ever more and more wealth in the abstract becomes the sole motive of his operations, that he functions as a capitalist" page 107). He then says "Capital is money: Capital is commodities", and then "The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money." - Karl Marx, Das Kapital, page 107. You're therefore making up the definition of Capitalism, and not sticking to the Marxist scripture. You're a heretic of the Marxist faith when you claim that Capitalists are "those who own the means of production". They are not - according to the Prophet Karl Marx, they are those who possess and seek the accumulation of more money.
    3
  9609. "Again, you literally claims that capitalism=Jews....an anti-Semitic and vile claim." No, that's what Karl Marx claimed. I'm just pointing out what your prophet believed.
    3
  9610. Okay, can you explain the "inwardly circumcised j.." quote for me? If it wasn't what I said, what was it's true meaning?
    3
  9611. I don't think so. I'm focused on Courland and Stalingrad at the moment and I think they're the priority for this channel.
    3
  9612. In my head I kinda lumped maintainability in with reliability, but you're right that it's probably best to keep them separate.
    3
  9613. Your account isn't blocked. YouTube automatically blocks comments containing certain words and phrases. My advice is for you not to swear etc
    3
  9614. I mentioned this in the video
    3
  9615. What does Britain not being a superpower have to do with anything? I hate the State, so I'm glad it's not a superpower. In fact, I don't want any superpowers, because I understand that Socialist Nationalism is bad.
    3
  9616. I'm familiar with German unification (studied it in college), but not on the UK's involvement, so I'd have to do some reading.
    3
  9617. Don't get annoyed, it's just business.
    3
  9618. Correct. The Scots need to understand that the Socialist National Party is pro-EU for a reason. Also, I'm happy for Scotland to leave the UK if they want. Maybe other provinces of the UK can leave London to rot too.
    3
  9619. Ah, but don't forget that Hoggan and his associates don't care about the lives of non-Aryans. They also deny that said events happened.
    3
  9620. Yes, it was 1939, not 1938. It's a habit of mine to say a wrong year in every video 😣
    3
  9621. :)
    3
  9622. While I haven't looked into them, my gut instinct is to say they're overstated. We do know that German pilots flew more missions than the Allied ones because they were desperate enough to keep using the same pilots over and over, which then would increase their kill counts, but even then I'd still hesitate to say they were accurate
    3
  9623. In that case, socialism is on the right as well, since Marx, Engels and all other other "progressive" socialists stood for racism, misogyny and elitist thought.
    3
  9624. I know, I've sort of been going back and forth between shorter and longer videos recently. There's a few factors for that, but I do think it's good to have a variety. There was quite a while where all I posted was hour+ long videos, and a lot of it was waffle or not properly scripted or properly edited. Now, I'm trying to make the videos as well-edited as I can, and only as long as they need to be. For example, I could have pulled up a few more comments for this video and talked about them, but most of the main points were already raised so they wouldn't have added a lot more to the discussion. Thus, they were cut. Saves you and the others a bit of time, and me a bit of time editing too so I can work on other things (like the scripts for the next season of Battlestorm Stalingrad!)
    3
  9625. Yes you are! And thanks!
    3
  9626. All it would take is the US government to say that they were targeted at kids (which they weren't) and I'd get a $42,000 fine per video, due to the COPPA law regulation. I don't trust any government and so I'm playing it safe.
    3
  9627. Apart from the fact I'm working on the Stalingrad scripts for the next season, I'm also working on a big video which will probably be an hour or two long, and that will be coming out in the next couple weeks. So I'll make up for it 👍
    3
  9628. Yes, I've been posting a mix of longer and shorter videos recently, which is unusual. Some people don't like shorter videos, but others prefer them. I think a mix of the two is probably right
    3
  9629.  @alexfilma16  You'll be surprised, but 2010 and 2011 is still out of date considering that half the Soviet archives were still not accessible at that time (as Glantz explains in the updated version of When Titan's Clashed). I talked about this in my Nigel Askey video.
    3
  9630. You obviously have never lived in the Greater Manchester area, nor have heard about the stuff I can't talk about without getting my entire channel purged from YouTube.
    3
  9631. Yet I'm getting my scripts checked by a French historian who can read Russian (Anton Joly) and a Russian historian (Egor Kobiakov) both of whom have access to the Soviet primary sources. And I don't "love" either 'side', I'm just trying to tell the history, even if that annoys you.
    3
  9632. I mentioned this in one of the answers to last week's 10 questions video. Here's the link https://youtu.be/-6jityjzH1Q and it's the answer to the first question, so just watch from the beginning for about 5 minutes
    3
  9633. Why? What does Mark Felton say? I don't actually watch his content (only because I don't have time).
    3
  9634. I've only just really discovered Voegelin, so I'm behind the curve a little. But yes, it's good stuff. The one book I've used so far is not an easy read though!
    3
  9635. You've got a point. I would counter by saying that the 'spell' was probably broken for some in the final weeks or months of the war, and the instinct for self-preservation was also there. Many of those who survived until 1945 probably weren't entirely spell-bound as the fanatics who had fought and died previously. But it does explain why many fought on fanatically all the way to the end (or took their own lives rather than surrender, like many did).
    3
  9636. Oh yes, people lost faith towards the end - I'm not denying that. The spell became broken, and there was some level of desperation and self-preservation. Arguably the most fanatical had already fallen earlier for the cause, and so the less-fanatical were left. But despite this, I think the concept of Struggle goes a long way to explaining why many still remained motivated until the final days.
    3
  9637. "When you realise Engels and Marx coined the term socialism as it's known today (not the little tidbits of socialist theory before them, they're basically irrelevant) and your entire argument is predecated on the idea that Hitler was a meanie socialist and not a 'Marxist Socialist', this argument falls flat on its face. There's no such thing as a 'Marxist socialist'." That's right ladies and gentlemen. Marx wasn't a REAL socialist.
    3
  9638. Hey Gamer! Yes, and according to one of my friends, a post criticizing me and my recent videos ended up on the front page of Reddit. These "enlightened" Redditors all denied that Hitler was a REAL socialist of course, but not one has offered any explanation as to why Hitler believed in the socialist concept of the Shrinking Markets that Marx himself believed in. If he was a capitalist he wouldn't believe in it. So the points I raised still stand. But they don't see it like that and continue to dismiss everything instead of opening their eyes
    3
  9639. @PigletCNC "Because it is something he made up himself. It's not something old he brings up, it's something new he fabricates himself." Yeah, I'm only quoting from what Marx, Hitler, Goebbels, Rosa Luxemburg, and a ton of other people said - see the pinned comment for all the sources.
    3
  9640. This is factual https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9641. "TIK youre funny... in capitalism group of people, super rich capitalists, a CLASS GROUP" Individuals are rich. They're not a group. I'm not a group, you're not a group, they're not a group. Individuals act - that's what history is, the story of individuals acting. Groups don't exist without individuals, but individuals can exist without groups.
    3
  9642. In a nutshell, Fascism is nationality socialism (non-race), and National Socialism is racial-socialism.
    3
  9643. I've done some research on him in order to fully understand Fascism. I wasn't thinking of doing a video on him specifically, but now that you mentioned it, it's got me thinking... May take a while to do, but I think I can do it. Thanks for the idea!
    3
  9644. Damn it! Thanks for pointing it out... but too late to change now :(
    3
  9645. "one problem! most historians dont define socialism as you define socialism. and yes by the original defenition you are right, however the normallaty sets the defenition." Yes, and that's because most historians don't understand basic economics. They've taken the socialist slogans at their word instead of questioning them and doing research on them. Some have, but the majority have not.
    3
  9646. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    3
  9647. Great counter argument 🙄
    3
  9648. Yeah, I've noticed that too...
    3
  9649. Well, see for yourself https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9650. "The problem you have is that once Fascism actually took power it was very related to the Burgeoisie. Industrials and such used fascism readily as a way to prevent strikes and going after trade unions. Only one trade union was to be: the fascist one." Exactly, this is the problem with 'syndicalism' and 'socialism'. Once the trade union (soviet) is created, then the workers technically lose all rights to protest. Because obviously, the regime is set up in the name of the workers. So if the workers revolt or go on strike, then this would prove that the regime is not for the workers. This is why Lenin also forbade strikes, and shut down non-Bolshevik unions. "Its extremely complex and as for many complex thing many prefer to have simpler, even if foundamentally wrong, answers." I understand that. But life isn't always so simple.
    3
  9651. "fascism = Cromwell" I see, so Fascism was created before it was created? Okay then... Fascism is National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism. I'm fairly certain that neither Cromwell, Hussein or Pinochet were for that.
    3
  9652. I think you'll find that Marxism is inherently anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9653. Of course it is https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9654. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9655. "I will just study Latin while listing to TIK" Maybe this will inspire you https://youtu.be/PbEKIW3pUUk
    3
  9656. Yes. You can be a slave to your own thoughts and emotions. If everyone is in chains, that doesn't mean that nobody is a slave.
    3
  9657. Yes, correct. Their origins are all similar, and really were made manifest as a result of the French Revolution (although some of the principles came before that)
    3
  9658. Materialism is NOT correct.
    3
  9659. And yet, in that same text, Gentile said the Fascist State was a "democratic state par excellence!" Why is that? Is it because democracy isn't at all about "the will of the majority", and that's just a slogan to get you to buy into totalitarianism? No no, it couldn't be... Democracy is totalitarianism. Always has been, always will be. That's why the Founding Fathers made Republic, not a democracy. The flaw in their system was the democratic elements, which have all but taken over, destroying what once was in the pursuit of power. Fascism says the nation IS the people, not the majority, and in that sense they are correct. The people are the public, and the public sector is the state. This "voting" is not required under democracy. And indeed, it isn't.
    3
  9660. The definition of an animal via Google includes the line "an animal as opposed to a human being". Same with Merriam Webster, which says "one of the lower animals as distinguished from human beings".
    3
  9661. You'll be surprised. I think it's a growing movement, and the only reason it appears there's not that many of them is because you're not allowed to set up a "Nazi Party" in most governments. So many Nazis just end up joining the 'Leftist' parties, which in turn causes them to screech that everyone but them are Fascists.
    3
  9662.  @tomhalla426  "She did not really have an alternative theory to work off" Her epistemology and metaphysics is superior to the subjectivism of the Libertarians. So I'm assuming here you're referring to her economics? I'm not a fiction reader (I despise fiction), so I agree that her novels could have been a lot shorter. However, my focus has been on the non-fiction, which I think is fantastic.
    3
  9663.  @384Freak  "What even is Objectivist Epistemology?" I'd recommend reading Ayn Rand's "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" or Leonard Peikoff's "Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand". - "Didn't Ayn Rand famously just ignore arguments" Nope. People say the same about me. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I don't understand your point. Similarly, just because Ayn Rand rejected the unworkable epistemology of intrincism and subjectivism, doesn't mean she didn't understand it or ignored the arguments.
    3
  9664. Thanks for the re-sub!
    3
  9665. "animal is described as "things that moves"" So... planets are animals? Clouds are animals? Electrons are animals? I will say that there's clearly a definition issue here, but in this case, please refer to the English definitions. First off, regardless of how intelligent an octopus might be, it's clearly no-where near the level of a human. And someone who is extreme low-IQ (or metally disabled) would still be classed as human in terms of their bodies, but clearly their minds aren't where they normally would be. Feral children, for example, are "feral" - in a wild state.
    3
  9666. Because people will use other roads that don't have such restrictions, meaning you'll lose profit and go out of business.
    3
  9667. Somehow this doesn't fill me with confidence
    3
  9668. Must have been a dull party!
    3
  9669. He was an anarchist who wanted socialism, calling it "collectivist anarchism" or something. You know, because a community (a state) all working together is "anarchy" now.
    3
  9670. A majority dictatorship is still a dictatorship. Also https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9671. I won't debate someone via a live conversation. That's not a debate, but a slanging match. If they want to debate me, they can write an essay or create a video response, and assuming it's good enough and not just a load of BS, then I'll respond to that.
    3
  9672. As much as I would like to do so, I don't think my style is suited to live broadcasts. I much prefer having time to plan out what I say, and back it up with references
    3
  9673. Okay, if you want to avoid the word "socialism", the problem remains the same. A society/people/state that collectively and centrally plans and controls the economy prevents economic calculation from occurring, effectively seizing up the gears, bringing almost all economic activity to a halt. This was explained by Mises in 1922 in his book "Socialism" which you can get online for free. History has shown time and time again that this always happens, regardless of which variant of Socialism/central control and planning you use. The fundamental problem of ALL Socialism is that it's anti-economics. It places politics above economics, resulting in a collapse of almost all economic activity. And as I said, it doesn't matter which version of Socialism we're talking about. From democratic socialism, to anarcho-syndicalism, to communism, to collective anarchism, to Labour Party socialism, to Scottish Nationalism, to Fascism, to National Socialism, to Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism... You name it, it doesn't matter, because even though they're all different shapes and sizes, fundamentally they are all broken bottles.
    3
  9674. First! And technically, joint first too, which is a first in itself
    3
  9675. I've not heard that one before, but it's the best of both worlds!
    3
  9676. In terms of the Stalingrad Campaign, Hitler was beginning to realize it now, as I'll cover in future episodes. But it's not clear if his generals had realized yet.
    3
  9677. I honestly have no idea
    3
  9678. You were given them! Wow that's good! The third volume was quite difficult to get when I was purchasing them, so I hope you find a decent copy. Would recommend you read them along with this series because Glantz's maps aren't particularly great. All is well with me, yourself?
    3
  9679. Yes, quite a coincidence! I wish I could have done it like I did with Market Garden and release each video on the day it happened so people could follow that way, but it simply wouldn't have been possible :)
    3
  9680. And, when I released my previous video on the subject of the Panzerfausts/en, everyone was complaining that it wasn't PanzerfaustEN. So, I don't know https://youtu.be/aDiSwl09bR4
    3
  9681. I release these videos at 5pm just to catch you out with dinner
    3
  9682. @Not Today - I never said it was easy. But your comment highlights the reason why everyone should avoid debt in the first place, and this is in the 'good' times, let alone the bad times which will soon arrive.
    3
  9683. Operation Crusader is still longer at the moment, but Stalingrad is fast catching up and will definitely surpass it in length. Not sure what the longest documentary ever made is. Wonder if anyone else knows?
    3
  9684. Thanks TJ! Not quite as much fighting as last time, but definitely a turn in the wrong direction
    3
  9685. Happy final-quarter TIKMonday! :D
    3
  9686. Who said that the offensive didn't work? ;)
    3
  9687. Well done Jamie!!! First time in a while!
    3
  9688. I backed up my points with numerous sources, quotes, references, and logic. I showed the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y then provided a five hour video full of evidence confirming what I said https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 and the best response I've got so far is this https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 Taking the evidence and coming to a conclusion that other historians should have come to had they not been pushing their own ideology (as I've called out numerous times now) is not insanity. Ignoring what I say and continuing to believe and push a false belief simply because Socialism must be so great, despite the fact that millions die under Socialism every time it's tried, and despite the fact that Capitalism has brought millions out of poverty, I would class as insanity.
    3
  9689. True, but the difference is that my video is fully backed up with evidence, and the Marxists haven't actually bothered to watch my video. If they had bothered to watch it, they wouldn't be making the same counter-arguments I had already addressed in the video they didn't bother to watch. So the main thing here is that I'm willing to give alternative points of view a shot, and willing to change my views if needed (I was a socialist until I realized Hitler was a socialist). The Marxists and Socialists in general are unwilling to do that.
    3
  9690. Glad I could help 👍
    3
  9691. Thinking back, this was definitely a missed opportunity! 😂
    3
  9692. He had a lot of hobbies!
    3
  9693. Except gravity does exist, but "races" have no scientific backing.
    3
  9694. What, all of them? 😂
    3
  9695. Oh yes, I did read it. I wanted to see if there was any truth to it so I took it seriously... until I couldn't any more
    3
  9696. TIK is three letters. T is number 20, I is number 9, and K is 11. If you add all that up, it comes to 43. Therefore, TIK must be the answer to the universe and everything.
    3
  9697. I'm glad I wasn't the only one to lose it at that point!
    3
  9698. To be fair, prior to the first National Socialist was Socialist video I was a socialist. I wasn't really "apologizing" for the Soviet Union (just like I'm not apologizing for the Soviet Union now), but I do feel sorry for the Soviet people caught between the Soviet regime and Hitler. There was no way out. Even running to the West wasn't an option (see: Operation Keelhaul - I'll be making a video about it soon)
    3
  9699. Nobody expects sexy Göring!
    3
  9700. I know, but last week was an hour-long video and hardly anyone watched it :(
    3
  9701.  @poki580  It also lists 26.6 million civilian deaths, but whether that's an accurate number or not, I'm not sure.
    3
  9702.  @poki580  In Chapter 7 of "The Price of Victory" (a great book on the casualty discussion) the authors calculate that 14,534,600 Soviets were killed, captured or missing during WW2. It didn't take sick or wounded into account because a soldier can be sick or wounded multiple times, so it's not possible to use them in the final analysis. It's 8,653,800 dead and missing, plus 5,880,800 captured. I would say that the Price of Victory is probably more accurate than Wikipedia's numbers, which seem to be using Krivosheev's numbers or similar. The Price of Victory argues convincingly why Krivosheev downplayed the losses.
    3
  9703. See this video https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    3
  9704. It's not the size of the tank, but how you use it
    3
  9705.  @adaw2d3222  I'll agree with you on that!
    3
  9706. I'm glad you like them! I'm always disappointed when I make short videos because I assume everyone wants longer ones, but it doesn't always appear to be the case
    3
  9707. @Stalin I've just double-checked, and I can confirm his was the earliest comment that was published at my end (except my Pinned Comment). It's probably true that YouTube's timings vary though, or comments from various parts of the world take time to show up.
    3
  9708. I highly doubt it
    3
  9709. That deserves a Heart :)
    3
  9710. Congrats!
    3
  9711. I don't know why, but I like bad jokes. The worse a joke is - either in terms of just awefulness or in terms of out-of-place - the funnier it is to me. Not sure why. My humour is odd haha
    3
  9712. @gil I'm sure covering the topic wouldn't offend you, and probably 99% of the historical community, who understand that I approach things from a debate-perspective. But imagine if I said something that got taken out of context and broadcasted on old media (e.g. TV) which then brought about another ad-pocalypse (this has happened before a few times now). YouTube (the business) needs to protect itself and its creators from the moral and financial backlash, so they're playing things very safe at the moment. While I would love to cover that topic, I'm fairly certain that said video would probably be borderline channel take-down if I got it wrong.
    3
  9713. I was debating doing a video or several on the topic or similar, but aon is quite correct that it would be very risky. I also suspect YouTube wouldn't be particularly happy. They've just 'banned' gun channels (still waiting to see the fallout for this) so I think they'd come down hard if anyone took offense.
    3
  9714. It may not happen soon. I'm planning to move into 1943 once Battlestorm Stalingrad is out the way, and I'll be looking into Courland shortly too (as a bit of a contrast to Stalingrad). I'm sure it will happen eventually though.
    3
  9715. David Glantz's Stalingrad 'Trilogy'. The reality is it's not a trilogy, but a five book, four part series, with the fifth book the appendix to the last two. They've also released a condensed one-volume version which apparently is just as good, so if you're interested and don't need ALL the details, I'd recommend it. Since nobody else has gone into this much detail before, this series is my main source of information (when talking about where units are on the battlefield) for my upcoming Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary. Otherwise I have a large collection of English-language texts on the battle, and I'm learning German now, plus will learn Russian later in order to flesh it all out further
    3
  9716. It will be part of my Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary, don't you worry
    3
  9717. Let him who is without sin cast the first kilogram
    3
  9718. Well, thank you for subscribing now Vincent :)
    3
  9719. You're right. Off I trot to go make next Monday's video
    3
  9720. I'll rein in the puns next time
    3
  9721. They don't sell German bread in England!
    3
  9722. You're welcome! Greece is a great country :)
    3
  9723. History doesn't repeat...?
    3
  9724. Not had chance to see that video yet, but will. I guess this is a nice follow-on to that
    3
  9725. Technically I have - the video "Did the Soviet Union EVER Recover from WW2?" was about the Soviet economy during that time
    3
  9726. About the cigarettes: it's an addition, plus a morale factor. However, addicts will always remind you that "cigarettes are an appetite suppressor" as though suppressing appetite somehow prevents starvation. If you look at the comments of my Stalingrad rations video, you'll see quite a few people spouting this line... really annoying
    3
  9727. Clarification: Göring wasn't addressing Mussolini, he was addressing other Germans
    3
  9728. I'm actually working on a video on Yugoslavia for a Patreon question, although it's not specifically on the occupation like this one was
    3
  9729. Thank you for sharing! Considering that YouTube has just Age Restricted the video, sharing this out will help a lot
    3
  9730. Yes, over the course of several videos https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw https://youtu.be/1uzO0gLTEGc
    3
  9731. Go away, racist https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    3
  9732. Thank you for defending me and the history!
    3
  9733. I have considered making a shorter version. But that has its own problems. If I don't mention something, that opens me up to ridicule from the critics, even though I probably gave the defense in the longer version. Also, I won't be able to give as many quotes, and it'll subtact from the overall quality. For these reasons, I'm reluctant to do it.
    3
  9734. https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/ And yes, I've heard of 731, but not looked into them
    3
  9735. Oh no... Maybe you should show him something like this https://youtu.be/xVDZVhdT2gY
    3
  9736. Or, maybe he became anti-semitic as a result of the end of WW1, which is a possible theory. In fact, this is quite a big historical debate. From what I've read, he was definitely anti-semitic before he joined the DAP (prior to NSDAP). And considering he blamed the Jews for everything bad right up to his suicide in the bunker, I don't think he was faking it for support.
    3
  9737. True... although that was a while ago. There is a slight inflation with gold as they dig more out of the ground, but it's much less than what the central states are doing to the currency supply
    3
  9738. Most of the "You're a Commie" comments come from my Order 227 video. Most haven't watched the full video, and jump to conclusions. The best part is, I deliberately waited until the end before calling Stalin and his regime "evil" in the video so that I could catch people out who don't watch my videos all the way through. Typically though, it's my most watched video right now, so I get a lot of insults thrown at me from that... The Marxists don't like me because I said Marxism and National Socialism are basically the same, just one for class and one for race. So they're the ones calling me a Nazi or Fascist. The best part is that some of them call me that on the videos where I'm saying the Holocaust happened and that denying it is not possible, and that National Socialism and Fascism are bad. But they're so blinded by their ideology that they didn't realise that Nazis and Fascists were joining them in their chorus of hate towards me.
    3
  9739. I'd buy one, take the black hole out of it and throw it at the next customer who asks to speak to a manager
    3
  9740. Haha I hadn't thought of it like that. I guess there's a silver lining to most things
    3
  9741. This is why I don't often do non-scripted videos :D
    3
  9742. I don't think closing the gate requires a driving license!
    3
  9743. There was no security. We had to call the police a lot though, although I avoided doing that unless I absolutely had too. Most of the police in our area are too busy thieving and robbing people to catch themselves, let alone respond to a genuine call. I didn't like to bother them.
    3
  9744. I'm actually surprised that the automated voice you get between the waiting music on phone calls doesn't say "I'm sorry you've been waiting X amount of minutes but our average wait time is X and thus you have roughly X amounts of minutes left to wait..." and actually tell the person waiting how long they've been on the phone and roughly how long they have left to go. That way they're not waiting "forever" but can know exactly how long they have left to wait. Of course, if the "average" time is 10 minutes, you bump the "average" to 15 minues in order to under promise and over deliver, but that should be standard practice. Then again, I'm sure this has been thought of before... I'm just curious to know why it isn't a thing.
    3
  9745. I don't care, they're not getting a refund!
    3
  9746. I honestly couldn't believe it when it happened. The customer had only just left when I read the email
    3
  9747. Mat - read "the Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reinmann or "Wages of Destruction" by Tooze. Both will show you that the German-Aryans (socialized men) were in common (public, state control) control of the means of production. "Private wealth" is not in the definition of socialism. Making a profit is allowed under socialism (but may not be under Marxist-Socialism).
    3
  9748. You are, but well done nonetheless!
    3
  9749. Thank you! Greetings to you too!
    3
  9750. "That's what you're up against." What? People not actually listening and misrepresenting my position? Yes, I've been saying that for years!
    3
  9751. I provided a direct quote from both Marx and Hegel confirming that they embrace contradictions. I have called out the contradictions of Marx numerous times in the past. Yet, this evidence is rejected by you, because as a Postmodernist, you believe that 'evidence' is a sign of the Judeo-Capitalist Patriarchy. Also, invoking the "strawman" argument is in itself a strawman.
    3
  9752. "You did indeed just say that. Gotta love how you're constantly rubbing it in. :D" More to come on that particular issue ;) - "Your style might be unapologetic and abrasive, but I've trusted you ever since I've started watching your channel." I'm not apologetic when it comes to certain topics that I've researched and know a lot about. Market Garden, Stalingrad, Nazism etc. Other topics that I don't know much about (e.g. Far Eastern Theatre or the Balkan conflict or something), then I'm happy to admit that I don't know or could be wrong. When it comes to the Marxists though, my patience has worn very thin. With the other Socialists, so long as they're civil (which is not always) then I tolerate them. But the Marxists are on thin ice. And I'm completely unapologetic to the Marxists because I can see through their lies, and because of the way they continue to treat me and others. - "You have no idea what a relief it is - as a Frenchmen that has argued with Werhaboo for years - to see an English speaking person actually getting it when it comes to the Versailles treaty. And it tells me you're actually doing your due diligence, instead of going with what the overwhelming majority of people have been brainwashed into thinking about the poor victimized Germans just defending themselves against France by invading Poland (smh)." I'm glad you approve! Yeah, I don't think the Wehraboo narrative is correct. I'm not saying France or Britain or whoever get off completely, but they can't be blamed fully for what happened. Clearly the German State takes a significant portion of the blame. - "There are great french books debunking the Keynesian bullshit about reparations, but they've never been popular in English, especially compared to the super-star economist (loved by people that really do like stars ... flying high on a field of red, over bodies without numbers)." Those books don't happen to have been translated into English, do they? I'm sure though I could find books in English debunking the reparations=inflation myth.
    3
  9753. I can certainly relate...!
    3
  9754. So you're saying that the Czech National Socialists were neither Nationalists nor Socialists? Because from what I can see, they were both Nationalist and Socialist, and thus were Nazi. Not all National Socialists are anti-Semites as I explained in the video. Please listen before jumping to conclusions.
    3
  9755. 1. The Labour Party is Marxist. Jeremy Corbyn was literally a communist anti-semite. 2. As I said in the video, the Czech Nazis weren't anti-semites. Because not all Nazis and Fascists were anti-semitic as I have said multiple times. 3. What makes them Nazi is the fact that they are both nationalist and socialist. Those two things put together makes them National Socialists and therefore Nazis. 4. Doesn't matter if they contained Leftists or not, the fact remains that National Socialism is Socialism as I have argued for many years now https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9756. You think it's perfectly fine for 155,000 people to be scammed by someone stealing work off multiple content creators and then hurting legitimate competitors? How would you react if a history creator was passing off other people's work as their own? Would you trust such a person? Would you be happy to donate money to the guy? And if he's done nothing wrong, why has he deleted ~15 of his own videos and is deleting every comment calling him out on his channel? Plagiarism is a really bad thing, and we don't want liars and cheats in our community. Yes, it's in a different language, but nonetheless I don't want to see 155,000 people being scammed.
    3
  9757. Lies are bad, and liars are untrustworthy. My concern isn't with him, it's with his audience who are being deceived by a scammer. If I pretended that everything I did was off my own back and pretended that I didn't use any books by historians, only primary sources, then I'd be lying, and you wouldn't trust me. Plagiarism is bad because the person doing the plagiarism is lying about where he got his information from, making him a liar, and therefore extremely untrustworthy.
    3
  9758. It's also ruined a lot of history content creators for me too for the same reason! I genuinely don't trust other creators now (there are a few exceptions because several are citing sources).
    3
  9759. Yes, which also proves his guilt!
    3
  9760. It is, except it's also a problem. In this case, the guy is asking for money from his audience, and they're clueless that he's stealing scripts off other content creators.
    3
  9761. I'm not 100% following along here because of the language-barrier, but I will also point out that the British had a very good anti-aircraft gun too, similar to the 88mm, and they had it right from the beginning of the war. But they never deployed it to take out enemy tanks. Instead they relied on their pee-shooter 2-pounders to do the work, and paid heavily for it. That said, I think the reason you hear about the 88's more than the 85's is because the Germans dominated the post-war Western historiography. Plus the Allies didn't go up against the Soviet 85's, and only the 88's, so had no reason to discuss them either.
    3
  9762. I haven't studied them specifically, but they weren't "legendary" at all. They were brutal, indoctrinated, fanatics. However, the Wehrmacht wasn't shiny-clean either.
    3
  9763. They were an innovative concept. I don't know enough about SS divisions, but it's good to specialize on certain aspects of the war. I find that that's when you get the most insight out of history - focusing on one topic or question.
    3
  9764. Not quite ;)
    3
  9765. How do you do it!?
    3
  9766. I'm with Kaczynski on this one. Socialists want to divide society into groups who don't talk to each other. The best way to do that is to paint opponents as people who cannot be reasoned with.
    3
  9767. Numbers are always disputed, and we can talk about that. But the ballpark seems to be 5.5 - 6.2 million. That range isn't completely out of the question when you realise that of the 3 million Soviet POWs taken in 1941, ~1.5 were starved to death in the Nazi prisoner and slave camps by the end of that year. Similar high numbers of people are starved across Europe, including the Greeks and the Dutch. Now, I'm not saying there's no wiggle-room, but unless you've got significant proof otherwise, there's no reason to think it wasn't on a scale of millions.
    3
  9768. "This will be funny i wonder what retarded thing he is going to coment." They're either so smart that they're going to fail at basic logic again, or they are trying to get me to slip up and then use that against me. Either way it's clear that they have been crushed in this argument. That's why they're resorting to calling me names. They've got nothing left. Their arguments have no weight to them because they're based on a failed economic system written by "social-revolutionaries". Whereas I get my economics from actual economics books.
    3
  9769. @plexusranger - "@TIK By that definition Nazi Germany was definitely on the Right, since the Nazi-controlled state privatized almost all but a few critical industries." The Nazis abolished private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. The privatization that took place was a slight of hand. They privatized the industries back into the hands of Nazi-party members or those loyal to the regime, and had state-officials inside the businesses running the show. The Nazi state bureaucracy was in total-control of the economy by 1935.
    3
  9770. This is military content.
    3
  9771. Or individuals
    3
  9772. Then I'm doing my job right ;)
    3
  9773. Fascism is socialism on the national level, for the nationality-group. It doesn't have race inherent within the system, but Fascists can be racist. National-Socialism is also national, but defines its citizens on race instead of nationality. And yes, Mussolini and Oswald Mosley both started off as Marxist Scialists and became Fascists. This is because tehy went from being international-socialists to being national-socialsts (non-racial). Hitler mixed race into the equation, which is why National Socialism and Fascism are not the same ideology.
    3
  9774. If Germans truly directed the economy through the free market (as you're saying) then I must be wrong. I guess they didn't abolish private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, nor sent state officials into the industries to take control in the name of the state (regardless whether they were "privatized" or not), and the regime wasn't totalitarian. Huh. Or I've done my homework and there's flaws in the Marxist narrative. Also, socialism was forged in the French Revolution - 50 years before Marx put pen to paper. If Nationalsocialism isn't socialism, then Marxism isn't socialism either.
    3
  9775. "@TIK I see. So the word "common"( as per your definitions in your pinned comment) is really meaningless and can be replaced with "class," "race" or "nationality" or whatever happens to define these "some people who are in charge."" No, you just don't understand the origins of the words. An individual is as decentralized as you can get. Taking power away from individuals and giving it to a community (a "public", which means non-individual, and is where the definition "public sector" comes from, meaning state) is centralization. The origins of the word "public" go back to Greece and Rome, and means "of the people; of the state; done for the state," and "a commonwealth; public property," https://www.etymonline.com/word/public" As the book "Inventing the Individual" makes clear, it means the state. Google's definition of it is here "of or provided by the state rather than an independent, commercial company." Collectivization (which is what socialism is) is as centralized as you can get, since it is anti-individual and thus anti-decentralization. So when the socialists say "common" - they mean state. To quote Das Kapital v3 - "socialised man, the associated producers," in "common control," of the means of production. A social groups is things like "class" "race" "gender" or "nationality". In Marx's case, his social group was the class, and in Hitler's case it was the race. These are both social-groups, or collectives. But the point is, the class or the race are in "common" control, which means public-sector state control. So it's socialised-worker state control of the economy = Marxism, and socialized-Aryan state control of the economy = National Socialism. The only murkiness in all of this is that people don't know the definition of socialism, because the socialists are keeping it especially vague in order to trick people into thinking it's all sunshine and rainbows. The reality is it's anti-individual, anti-freedom and pro-slavery and murder. It's all power to the state, with no property rights, nor freedom to even spend your hard-earned money the way you want to, since in theory they want to take it all off you. If you have no money, no property and you're forced to work for a centralized power - is that freedom or is that slavery? And the best part is they're actively saying they want to murder people of different social groups! Now I don't know about you, but murder and enslavement is bad regardless whether you're murdering the wives and children of the bourgeoisie or Jews.
    3
  9776. The word totalitarian was coined by Mussolini to describe his own Fascist regime. Mussolini described it as "all within the state, none outside the state, none against the state." This does not mean, everything in the state except the means of production. It means all within the state. And if the economy/means of production are in centralized state control, that is socialism. But IF this is not the case, as you may argue, then that means that the only totalitarian states we've ever had have all been Marxist Socialist states.
    3
  9777. “Vlasov and his million followers never accepted Nazi doctrine and never promised to serve Hitler’s interests after the war.” - Epstein, Operation Keelhaul, p63.
    3
  9778. "What the Allied did is not a war crime. The subsequent treatment of the exchanged by the USSR might qualify as a crime, but it too is technically not a "war crime"." Please point to the part of the video where I said it was a war crime. That's right, I didn't. I said it was a "crime against humanity". Get your facts right. - "First, "Operation Keelhaul" itself refers to the last forced repatriation action and involved one thousand Soviet citizens who had served in the German Army." ONE THOUSAND!? No, you are well off. There were way more than a thousand Hiwis and members of Vlasov's ROA. - "But much more importantly, to call the repatriation of citizens a war crime is an absurd conclusion." Again, I didn't. I called it a crime against humanity. Can you not read? - "Stalin was threatening to hold Allied POW's liberated from German camps unless the citizens, whom he considered traitors were returned." Yes. I'm going to cover this in PART 2 of the series. So why are you using this against me? Oh, that's right, because you don't want me to talk about this topic because it's embarrassing to adherents of glorious anti-Semitic Marxism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "Basing an opinion on Julius Epstein's work is a very risky approach. He was a prominent anti-communist researcher of the Hoover Institution." Irrelevant. Attack the arguments, not the man. - "He is also know for accusing the USSR of losing a dozen or more cosmonauts in space." He also proved that the Katyn Massacre was conducted by the Soviets, not the Germans, as the Soviets claimed. He is the real deal. - "While this is an event that is important to study, such retrospective judgement is a sign of immaturity." I see, I'm a child now because I'm not suckling Stalin's breast. - "Please consider downvoting this video due to its bias and factual inaccuracy. If TIK is a fair as he usually is and does more research, he might remove or rewrite." Says the guy who's just made numerous factual inaccuracies and clearly didn't watch the full video, nor pay attention if he did.
    3
  9779. The difference is that it was the victims of the crime who were demanding compensation, not the descendants of slaves. If the descendants of slaves are to be compensated, then I can't wait to be compensated either, since 99% of the European population were slaves at one point too.
    3
  9780. According to Karl Marx's own definition of Capitalism, we don't have Capitalism. To learn what capitalism is, see this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    3
  9781. Read Mises's "Socialism" and find out. Follow the link to find a free PDF copy of his book https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis
    3
  9782.  @kiankier7330  Believe Royeaux and do not question him. He is the ultimate truth, just like Glorious and Heavenly Manstein. I am 100% wrong in everything I do and say. And he is 100% right and can walk on water. You should definitely not read any books written by Austrian economists, even if a lot of them are available for free online because they're trying to promote the truth rather than make a profit. Thou shalt not read them because He has pronounced them "WRONG". You should remain holy in ignorance. Praise be.
    3
  9783. The point was to show the Idea of the Socialist "New Man", which was still a concept the Soviet Union agreed with. Lenin night have died, but his influence lived on Trotsky might have been banished and murdered but his influence lived on.
    3
  9784.  @QuizmasterLaw  1. It was against the Geneva Convention. In fact, the US government told the Soviets this in 1944, as you'll see next episode. 2. I don't care if it was "legal" or not. It wasn't right to shoot prisoners and civilians who refused to go back to certain pain, suffering and death. It also wasn't right to force them against their will to emigrate to the prison camps of a Third World country.
    3
  9785. It's funny how people have an issue with every single source I use in every single video, be they primary or secondary sources. They're all biased and wrong!!! Or, more likely, your own bias is clouding your judgement. Never dismiss a source just because you don't like it. Even if it's wrong, you have to use it, because that's the only way to get an all-round perspective of history. That said, I'll be discussing the problems with these sources in part 3 of this series, so I'm certain you'll enjoy that video.
    3
  9786. This was technically after the trenches
    3
  9787. I'll try not to!
    3
  9788. And Rotterdam! https://youtu.be/2B5OeSpf4PM
    3
  9789. Yes, Canada. If that Soviet newspaper is correct, then Canada was involved too, which proves that the archives are sealed since we don't have details about that.
    3
  9790. No no no no no! I'm not playing that card! haha
    3
  9791. Haha yeah. Not sure how I misread it but I did
    3
  9792. Yeah, I can imagine he had a few enemies. In my upcoming Operation Battleaxe video, I discuss this very issue with Churchill and the impact he's had on the North African Campaign. He's certainly prolonged the campaign at the very least
    3
  9793. +Peorhum he wasn't good when he dabbled in military matters, but was good at politics
    3
  9794. This series isn't ended here. I've just not had the opportunity to do the next one! Battleaxe and now Stalingrad have been the priority
    3
  9795. I think you were fourth, but good effort!
    3
  9796. It's not dead, just postponed until after Stalingrad.
    3
  9797. Yes you were! Congrats!
    3
  9798. And by that, I mean you're second, not shit!
    3
  9799. This video will explain why https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    3
  9800. First!
    3
  9801. I'm sorry to hear you suffer from that disorder. It's not my place to tell you what to believe, but I'm glad it's not Gnosticism any more, and I wish you luck in your pursuit.
    3
  9802. I knew a free mason who invited me to join the group, and when I asked if it was a religion, he instantly parroted some saying about the "Great Architect of the Universe", and which point I declined the offer to join.
    3
  9803. No problems, I'm glad you took a look at his stuff :)
    3
  9804. The Hindu religion has millions of gods. A quick Google search would have told you that. To say that Hinduism is atheist is simply false. And I do know what atheism is. I don't know how you got the idea that I didn't.
    3
  9805. This isn't a hill I'm willing to die upon, but the two sources I had that mention it do both say that John was Gnostic, not just for the Book of Revelation, but for the Apocryphon of John.
    3
  9806.  Ho Lee Fukk  Sure, why not - we're all first today!
    3
  9807. "Treaties only bind contracting states, not third parties ffs." Right, so the Allies who signed the Geneva Convention weren't allowed to inhumanely treat prisoners, which they did by beating and shooting them. Thus, this was a crime.
    3
  9808. It's always Halder!
    3
  9809.  @purplefood1  You probably got the notification because this isn't a "serious" topic, unlike some of my previous videos which people didn't get notified for...
    3
  9810. The objective was to get across the Rhine and reach the coast (technically a lake), which would trap German forces to the west. Because they failed to get across the last bridge, they failed to do this, thus it was an overall failure. Taking ground, by itself, doesn't always count as a victory.
    3
  9811. Your parents were very wise
    3
  9812. I honestly don't know. Was having a similar conversation with Anton Joly. Think I'm just so used to reading and talking about bad things that you get used to it
    3
  9813. See the comments in my Wehrmacht crimes against women video. Several people pointed out that I was being targeted by 4chan https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU
    3
  9814. That's precisely what socialist unions are! Socialism isn't for the workers - I'm glad you're seeing through the lie.
    3
  9815. Deny the history all you want, fascist, but I'm going to rely on evidence rather than opinions. Even Leftist historians are forced to admit that the SA marched into the factories. Professor Junker was kicked out of his own factory, being the first one to be nationalised. Private property was abolished under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. I've shown this and gone through the evidence here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    3
  9816. Yes, the nationalised union served the socialist Party, correct.
    3
  9817. A free union cannot exist in a socialist state, since everything must be socialized into one. If you're socialized into one entity, then you're no longer free.
    3
  9818. And if the State is a socialist "dictatorship of the proletariat" state that's working for the workers, then what...?
    3
  9819. Yeah he nationalised the trade unions into one giant syndicate - the ultimate goal of the socialist trade union movement. You can't have private trade unions under socialism, they have to be nationalised.
    3
  9820. Gold and silver ounces are an alternative. Unfortunately, while they are technically "legal tender", the UK government doesn't allow you to use them as a means of exchange at their real value for tax reasons. It's all about tax.
    3
  9821. Talked about that in this video https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    3
  9822. It's still important to read/listen to it because it gives you the narrative that practically everyone still subscribes to. So, to understand what the majority of people believe, it's a useful source, even if it's deeply flawed. My favourite bits are where he says "I've just got off the phone to Halder, and he said...!"
    3
  9823. Not really. If I did that, I'd be skipping over parts of the battle. The point of these videos is to go as in-depth as possible, which no one else has done before.
    3
  9824. I've gotten better since the publication of this video, and I've started learning German.
    3
  9825. Awesome! Thanks for subscribing! Just so you know, I'm currently working on a Battle of Stalingrad Battlestorm documentary, so obviously it's taking time to make. But it's going to be epic once it's done :)
    3
  9826. Wow that must have been a long time ago because he's had a lot of subscribers since I can remember! I don't think you should give up watching him though. He's still good in his own way. It's also good to get alternative perspectives
    3
  9827. At least your soul is satisfied! I'm working in Operation Crusader right now. And the big Stalingrad documentary too (although that's a while away yet) so don't worry, many more to come
    3
  9828. Australia has white stars, which they have in the video.
    3
  9829. They certainly do. I'm working on Battleaxe and Stalingrad right now and there's Kampfgruppen for days
    3
  9830. Absolutely. Especially when your commander rushes you into battle without proper planning or support, at the end of an already exhausting drive and fight through a couple hundred miles of desert. Technically, this is part 2! Part 1 is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71kdhj27rk And don't worry, the next one will be at least the same level of quality - if not better! I won't rush it
    3
  9831. Compass, Rommel's first operation in the desert, Brevity, Battleaxe, the Long Range Desert Group... And soon will be Crusader :) The other videos in the North African Campaign aren't quite like this graphics wise (Brevity is) but you may enjoy my video on Fort Eben Emael as that's down to the individual squad level. Also, there's no "guys" it's just me. Which is why it takes so long to make these videos!
    3
  9832. In this case (and in my newer videos), I'm using Blender. You can find it on Steam in the software section. It's also free... But be warned, it has a very difficult learning curve
    3
  9833. They're Patreon and SubscribeStar questions. They donate and keep the channel going, and I answer their questions.
    3
  9834. No, I'm not socialist any more. I wasn't ever hard-core socialist either... but I lost my 'faith' in mid-2018, a couple weeks before the original "National Socialism was Socialism" video.
    3
  9835. "...I see the levels of corruption and decadence increase not in spite of what our elites are doing but because of them." Our national and international elites are the problem. So your solution is more of the problem? This is what I don't understand about nationalists or internationalists. You're complaining about the current national or international states, but instead of realising that the state is the problem, you double down and want more of the same. "This time it'll be different". No, it won't. The problem is that humans are irrational! And so the State will always be that too. - "humans are irrational beings" Exactly. This is an argument against spiritual nationalism, not for it. If humans aren't rational, then they can't make a rational state. Thus, the solution is not to change their nature, but to accept it, and embrace freedom from the irrationality; freedom from the state. The individual, as flawed as he might be, is forced to comply with nature. And a natural free market rationally regulates him far more than a so-called "rational" state ever could, because the free market doesn't require human rationality in order for it to be rational.
    3
  9836. I'm surprised to hear your mom watches my stuff 😂 only because most of my audience is male, and with it mostly being about war stuff, it's not something I'd assume she'd like.
    3
  9837. I actually wish I could have gone more in-depth on this, especially on how the Soviet commanders felt about this organisational difference and the impact it had.
    3
  9838. Danke! I won't be speaking German much in the videos (at least, not yet) but if you hear me say something incorrectly in a video, correct me. That'll be enough help for now :)
    3
  9839. Hate to say it Matthew, but Andi beat you to it :(
    3
  9840. No worries, good to hear you're looking forward to them! Cheers!
    3
  9841. It's something I'll be exploring in a future video, but Soviet "Tank Corps" were actually divisions, not corps-sized units.
    3
  9842. That is something I do want to cover one day. Think it'll be a while off, but I bet it's an interesting campaign when you get down to battalion level
    3
  9843. What made Panfilov a good general?
    3
  9844. Excellent! What's your next doc? ;)
    3
  9845. Why? What would be the point of that? And you make it sound like he could have done it, but just wasn't allowed. Realistically, how would one US army commander defeat the entire Red Army? Bearing in mind the Red Army had numerous armies within it, and the Germans couldn't beat the Soviets, it's simply not possible for Patton to do that.
    3
  9846. I've heard he's quite effective at stopping the a central European power, apparently.
    3
  9847. It was demonetized before it even went out! I self-limited the monetization just in case
    3
  9848. Race is a social group. So if you believe in the social-constructed concept of race, you believe that society (the State) is divided artificially into racial social groups. And since a social group is a society, and society is the state, you are already believing in National Socialism. This is why the Critical Race Theorists are rapidly coming to the same conclusions that Hitler did. When you believe in race, and you believe in the Labour Theory of Value (which is inherent to racism, because without it, race is a pointless concept) then you will logically come to the same conclusions Hitler did. Hitler was wrong and evil, but he wasn't a "madman". He believed in the false concepts of race and the Labour Theory of Value, and logically came to the conclusions Hitler did. Well, many Marxists and Socialists believe in race and the Labour Theory of Value, and as this video shows, they're rapidly coming to the same conclusions. History is repeating.
    3
  9849. Glad you agree! Cheers!
    3
  9850. Haha glad you liked the video! I actually used Google translate for Luleå, but it clearly didn't do a very good job... Thank you for clarifying the pronunciation :)
    3
  9851. Not planning to make such videos right this moment, but I guess I could at some point. I will be doing more economic videos in the future, related to the WW2 and similar era
    3
  9852. Thank you! Also, first!
    3
  9853. Not quite with the rifles. The Kar 98k, for example, was designed in 1935. The Gewehr 98 (the older version of the Kar 98k which it was derived from) was made in 1898. But there's a substantial difference between the two, since the Kar (carbine) was smaller than the original. British Lee-Enfields also got shrunk down, all as a result of WW1. Sweden's rifles (going off the source) hadn't been updated, and so were the big old non-carbine rifles from the 1800s.
    3
  9854. Yes, working on it
    3
  9855. I see Operation Pessimistic is proceeding well
    3
  9856. Doverlord
    3
  9857. Thank you! Glad you liked it!
    3
  9858. I agree, John you need to stop with the belligerent attitude. I would say Monty's attitude was a factor, even if there was also a solid practical reason for crossing the Rhine.
    3
  9859. Sosabowski may also have been salty with his superiors because at the time the Warsaw Uprising was happening. The Polish paras wanted to paracute into Warsaw, and the British denied them the opportunity. And I'm glad you enjoyed this and my other videos :) more to come.
    3
  9860. I spent most of the two hours talking about the battle and less than 20 minutes on the "blame game" as you called it. I think that's reasonable.
    3
  9861. In what way was it "Anti-American"? I think you need to watch my other video where I explain my views on the battle and the "anti-American" label that people keep throwing at me https://youtu.be/WHCVKPIY6Pk Also, "goes DIRECTLY against first hand witnesses, most notably the US officer who made the offer." is incorrect. The claims by the US officer were made after the war. This source of information is not only disputed by the British tankers and eye-witnesses there at the time, but it also doesn't make sense. The US paras who got across to the opposite side of the Nijmegen bridge were ordered to hold the bridge in case of German counterattacks. They were not ordered to go north. It's also worth noting that even if they had they gone north with the tanks, this battlegroup wouldn't have got past Elst (since there were German forces there), or even if they'd somehow got through Elst, they wouldn't have broke through to the British at Arnhem because German forces occupied the area south of the river. Four tanks and a squad of American paratroopers wouldn't have changed the outcome of this battle at this point.
    3
  9862. I actually talk about Market Garden's true purpose here https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM As far as I can tell, it wasn't about racing off to Berlin, or even into Germany. I do think the troops were told the "end the war by Christmas" thing so they'd be willing to partake in the operation - or it was possibly over-optimism since they'd done so well in the previous weeks. And yes, blaming the Poles was completey wrong. Thanks for commenting, and glad you enjoyed the video :)
    3
  9863. Thank you Pablo! Glad you enjoyed it! Be sure to check out my other Battlestorm videos. I'm currently working my way through the North African Campaign in order to see how commanders like Monty and Patton compare to those who came before.
    3
  9864. Well that's great to hear! My videos tend to be as long as they need to be for me to explain everything, so I'm glad you didn't get bored :) your conclusion is completely agreeable, the Germans certainly played their part in the victory. I've actually got a 12 minute video on Kampfgruppen coming this Monday (which is good because I won't have to explain what they are in every video!) and I do conclude that it was the German Kampfgruppen that saved the day for the Germans during Operation Market Garden.
    3
  9865. Hi Flip, thanks for commenting. Just so you know, I'm not trying to shift blame. I think the plan could have been better, I think the execution of the plan could have been a lot better, and I think that Montgomery definitely dropped the ball on this one. The RAF, 1st Airborne and Browning epecially, really messed up. However, despite a lot of mistakes by pretty much every commander and unit across the entire operation, in my opinion the evidence suggests that the main reason for failure (not the only one, just the main one) was that Nijmegen Bridge wasn't taken on the first day. This lead to a 36 hour delay, by which point the battle was lost. This is a fact that has been left out - almost covered up - by a lot of the early histories of this battle. The reason why remains unclear, although it's probably Gavin trying to protect his reputation. And if you're not happy with the fact that I'm English (and you're absolutely right to be sceptical as I may be biased, even though I'm trying not to be) there's a Dutch historian who also shares this view. I'd recommend you read his book, even if you disagree, simply because it explains the battle at Nijmegen in more detail than any other book I've found so far https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Nijmegen-rethink-operation-Market-ebook/dp/B005EH7CIW
    3
  9866. Zepter, why are you having a go at me? All I've done is praised Sosabowksi and the Poles in WW2. And I'm the last person who you'll find defending the actions of Westminster.
    3
  9867. +Agrippa Maxentius I'm no expert on the Napoleonic Wars but I could certainly give it a shot! Honestly not heard of the Carnation Revolution until now either... interesting!
    3
  9868. tigerhunter77 at Arnhem, yes that definitely happened. And the opposite was true too. I mention it in the video, but it was joked at the time (around day 4) that both sides should swap weapons as the Brits were using scavenged German weapons and the Germans used captured British weapons. The Germans had the British landing grounds and the German logistics wasn't keeping up with demand. What's interesting was that there was no water source at Arnhem as the Germans had cut it off. So (according to Kershaw P231-232) the Germans were able to use captured signals equipment to request additional water to be dropped to resupply their own men. The RAF were taking orders from the Germans!
    3
  9869. True, but the Polish brigade contributed a lot at Market Garden, saving 1st Airborne Division. Had Nijmegen bridge been captured and victory gained, they would have been a vital part of a major battle that would have shortened the war for everyone, including Poland. Landing in Warsaw would have just added to the casualty figures and gained nothing.
    3
  9870. I know the Polish brigade wanted to do that and were disappointed that they couldn't, but it's unlikely their presence would have changed the outcome of the uprising
    3
  9871. That's the issue I grappled with. In the end, I decided I'd rather make the type of documentary that I want to see - which is a documentary as detailed as I could make it whilst not overwhelming for the viewer and also make it relatively entertaining. I also knew that the subscribers I already have are mostly interested in history anyway and probably have the patience to sit through as detailed a documentary as this (you've got to have patience to play Close Combat after all). That might make my videos very niche and possibly never make it "big", but that's not the point of them. For me, the satisfaction comes from knowing there isn't another Market Garden documentary out there as detailed as this one. My advice for you is to figure out what you really want. If you want videos that appeal to the majority, it needs to be very light on details. The way TV documentaries do it is probably the level of depth you want. If you want to be controversial, you need to plan your videos around that. If there's some other goal, then plan for that. Figure out exactly what you want and write it down. Then whenever you get to a point in your process and wonder if you're making the right decision, turn to your goal and ask yourself "does doing this help me achieve my goal or not?"
    3
  9872. Poulussen is a Dutch historian who wrote the book "Lost at Nijmegen" which details the 82nd Airborne's operations around Nijmegen. He states - "Giving priority to defending the Groesbeek Heights - instead of a swift capture of the Waal Bridge - was the point of departure when Field Order No.1 of the 508 PIR was written." and "General Gavin was responsible for the shift in priorities during the planning, and not - as until now always been assumed - his superior, Lieutenant-General Browning. This peculiar shift would have far reaching implications." If you could explain how "British propaganda" somehow made a Dutch historian to come to this conclusion, please do so.
    3
  9873. So what you're saying is, it's everyone's fault? Very middle-ground of you :)
    3
  9874. I would like to point out that Gavin has two superiors, Browning and Brereton. And Gavin cleverly doesn't mention which "corps commander" approved his plan. You'd think he'd say his name, rather than referring to him as "my corps commander", but he does not.
    3
  9875. Hi, I have a few more Battlestorm documentaries on my channel, which you can find in this playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y I'm still making more (I'm actually just taking a quick break from researching the next one right now) so I encourage you to subscribe. Also, if there's any particular battle you'd like to see, let me know. My intention right now is to continue going though the North African Campaign in order, work on the battle of Stalingrad (already started research for, and yep, it's colossal), continue with the LRDG, and maybe do some other battles in between, like St Nazaire. As John says, I've listed my sources in the video description, although I will point out I have read more books on the topic than that as I've been reading about this battle for years. Those books were just the ones I found most useful for creating this series, especially It Never Snows in September. The maps and units were all made in photoshop, based on maps made at the time, and mostly hand drawn. Yes, they took a long time to do. The Arnhem map is special as I was able to get a decent map and select the green and turn it into forest. The roads are drawn by hand. It's very accurate https://twitter.com/TIKhistory/status/779968260540366849 I also have a short "behind the scenes" type video on how I do the scripts + research for these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZyhAdOXxnA For Market Garden, there definitely was a lot of bad planning from above. Monty shouldn't get off for the plan as it certainly could have been better. But the point I hope people take away is that even with the plan as bad as it was, it could have succeeded... if the plan had been followed at Nijmegen.
    3
  9876. +HoboTango originally I actually considered using game play footage rather than animations because I knew the animations would take so long... glad I didn't though :D however, there's nothing stopping me doing "ahistorical documentaries" like that in the future, especially since I like things like what-if scenarios, roleplaying games like NationStates, and also playing Close Combat :)
    3
  9877. +John Burns and yet Sosabowski was the only General of Market Garden to lose his job...
    3
  9878. The issue is that there's only a handful of German guards at Nijmegen bridge on the first day. But because the 82nd delays sending anyone towards the bridge for several hours, by the time they get there, the 10th SS Panzer Division arrives from the north, crosses the uncaptured bridge, and they sets up shop in the park right next door to the bridge, preventing anyone from taking it for the next four days. The point is that IF the 82nd had got to the bridge first, the Germans wouldn't have been able to cross the bridge and fortify the city of Nijmegen. XXX Corps couldn't advance over Nijmegen bridge once 4 (one was knocked out, so 3) of it's tanks had crossed because 4 tanks can't advance without infantry support. The infantry were still fighting the 10th SS Panzer Division at Nijmegen and couldn't cross to support the tanks. So to say they were "too slow" in this case doesn't add up. If the 82nd hadn't been "too slow" to take their primary objective which they failed to do, XXX Corps would have been across Nijmegen bridge at the beginning of day 3. What happened at Arnhem was the British landed against resistance from the 9th SS Panzer and reserve battalions which halted their progress towards Arnhem road bridge. The British at Arnhem were poorly led and were too slow on the first day. The exception was Frost's Battalion and the units that did make it to the bridge. At Nijmegen though, there was very little between the 82nd and the Nijmegen bridge, and there were only 12 Germans guarding the bridge itself. But NOBODY moved towards Nijmegen for several hours. That's the point.
    3
  9879. Peorhum A semi-long post, but wanted to clarify the facts as stated in the sources I used. The 504th crossed over in boats (along with British sappers of 615 Field Squadron and 11th Field Company, Royal Engineers) and moved off in various directions. At least two companies moved towards the Nijmegen Bridges. At the Nijmegen Railway Bridge, the 504th played a decisive role. Some of the Germans in Nijmegen saw the crossing and decided to flee across the railway bridge straight into the American guns. According to Ryan, at least one company was set up and helped kill somewhere in the region of 250 Germans on the bridge itself. We can probably assume some of the kills came from both direct and indirect fire from the south, but little is said on the subject. This bridge was taken about two hours after the initial crossing. Interestingly the sources I used aren't clear when it comes ot the 504th getting to Nijmegen road bridge. John Burns has said his piece, and perhaps the events didn't happen the way we think? There's certainly a discussion involving whether arguments were had between the US and British troops once the tanks were over - and in my humble opinion, there needs to be more detail surrounding that event and the taking of the Nijmegen bridge itself. But for now, here's what my sources say: - Neillands says "As the enemy were pushed out of Nijmegen, [XXX Corps] were able to cross the bridge and reinforce the SS troops fighting with the 504th paratroopers on the north bank, who now stood in urgent need of tank support." Later he says "a troops of Guards' tanks... crossed the Nijmegen bridge under fire, arriving at the far end just as three troopers of the 504th PIR ran to meet them." Ryan mentions that at least 2 (or 3) 88mm guns and a self-propelled gun were firing from the opposite bank, with the British tanks exchanging fire. So the far bank wasn't completely cleared at the point of crossing. But when the tanks got over the bridge, and had just knocked out the self-propelled gun, the American paras jumped up and hugged and kissed the tank. The kissing event seems silly - when you consider they were in the middle of a firefight - but it is mentioned by Neillands and other sources so it could be true. Ryan's book (as good a narrative as it is) can't be trusted 100% of the time. Some of the events didn't happen the way he describes them, since he was reliant on interviews conducted many years after the events. And as we all know, memories fade or change with the passing of time. But even in this case, Ryan doesn't suggest that the 504th took the other end of the Nijmegen road bridge. He makes it clear that the fighting was still going on as the tanks passed over the bridge. It seems that a handful of US paras made it to the bridge, but the Germans were still in the area too and it certainly wasn't secure. But just so we're clear, there's no doubt in my sources that the 504th contributed significantly to the taking of the Nijmegen bridges. They took the northern end of the railway bridge and delt the Germans a severe blow as they tried to flee. And even if they didn't completely secure the other end of the Nijmegen road bridge before the tanks crossed, they were in the area and their presence was felt. They unhinged the Germans' defence and made it easier for the tanks to cross, and sped up the taking of Nijmegen city. For the moment, I'm going to side with Ryan and Neillands. That is, unless John Burns or someone else can provide us with evidence to the contrary??
    3
  9880. ODDBALL SOK John seems to be pushing a pro-British+anti-USA argument, which is why I've not been getting heavily involved in the discussion between you two as that's not what I'm here for. I'm trying to make sense of the battle, and for me, the mistake at Nijmegen is a big one that's traditionally been overlooked. In this video, I'm bringing it out into the open so everyone knows about it, since every other documentary out there doesn't even mention it. Even if you don't agree with this argument, that's fine. The point is that at least you're aware that it exists. I'm not arguing that the British are best or somehow not to be blamed for this. In reality, there are numerous reasons for failure. However, if I was to pick just ONE reason as the biggest, I'd say Nijmegen bridge was the one that tipped the scales. To me, that one just makes the most sense at the moment given the evidence. That doesn't mean I'll defend this argument to the death. It doesn't mean I'm somehow pro-British or anti-American or anything else. All it means is that until someone can persuade me otherwise, this argument makes the most sense to me from a purely tactical point of view. That is all. If you haven't seen this other video of mine, please do as it explains my stance quite clearly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHCVKPIY6Pk
    3
  9881. Okay pal, but I did talk about that in the video. Even still, the purpose of a job is not to gain some rationalist philosophical enlightenment, but rather to earn a wage. The higher the wage, the better the job.
    3
  9882. Yes, going to uni to become a doctor would be fine as the average salary is something like £76,000 per year in the UK.
    3
  9883. I can't go through every single profession for every single country or locality. That's impossible. My point was to show the method and let you do your own calculations based on the job you were considering. Speaking generally, lawyers and doctors are currently good professions vs a plumber, but are much harder professions to study for than what is typically required for most degrees these days. My point is that 70% of the degrees out there (including English, unless you do plan on going abroad to teach it) are generally not worth it.
    3
  9884. If education is the end in itself, then don't go to university and buy a bunch of books instead, and save yourself thousands getting a superior education that way. There are some exceptions to this, but generally for the vast majority of degrees out there (especially "social" and "arts" degrees) it's a far better move.
    3
  9885. William the Conqueror was sometimes called William the B****
    3
  9886. I'm glad you liked it! And disagreeing with me is great! It shows you're thinking, and that's ultimately the purpose of this channel - to get you to think. I would ask that you listen to my arguments in full and be civil in your response, but otherwise I'm more than happy for you to think for yourself and disagree
    3
  9887. I gave you the link so that you could watch it now and understand what I'm saying. Yes, it isn't the 1800s, but the Tory Party hasn't changed. That's why, despite supposedly being the "right-wing" party, the Tories have just implemented almost everything Jeremy Corbyn proposed in his two manifestos (one being a racial one). There's a few Socialist policies they haven't implemented yet, but they've talked about them, so I expect that they're on the horizon. They're definitely not opening up the economy (capitalism) that's for sure...
    3
  9888. "Don't tell me your a "Libertarian", for Gods sake's NO !!" I believe in individual freedom, not collective slavery. Call me whatever name you want.
    3
  9889. No, I'm not "Tory" because I'm not Left-wing.
    3
  9890. Good to hear! Which sources were you reading?
    3
  9891. 1. This isn't the "Russia" channel. 2. I don't consider this "boring". 3. My Patreons are the ones funding this channel and making it possible. If they ask questions, I answer them. Otherwise I will have to stop producing videos.
    3
  9892. The views lag for the first hour, I'm actually at 2k. But this is actually typical of my usual videos.
    3
  9893. He's on there
    3
  9894. Let me know how you get on! I recommend Glantz's one-volume book on Stalingrad (the 5 book, 4 part "trilogy" is amazing, but also not necessary to answer this question).
    3
  9895. Oh no, don't burn it! It's still a source, even if it's unreliable when talking about Stalingrad
    3
  9896. This nonsense came from the books listed in the pinned comment, including the official German history of the war.
    3
  9897. I get overwhelmed by Wehraboo comments too. If you want to have a laugh, go check my "Your Perception of the Eastern Front is wrong" and my "Numbers say it all" videos. Their comment sections are warzones
    3
  9898. Yeah, I recorded this video and last video together. As I said in the comments last time, I didn't know when I recorded it. People pointed out it's more like Vikes, or as you put it Vykes. I'll know for future :)
    3
  9899. Of course. However, it takes time to do research. After getting hammered by comments in the National Socialism videos, the last thing I want to do is publish a video which isn't comprehensive and overwhelming with evidence. Therefore it will take a while. Plus, Crusader is next (just finished the script: 75,423 words).
    3
  9900. I'm looking forward to doing it. However it may be a long time before I get to it. The good news is that the script for Crusader is done, and it's 75,423 words. One step closer :)
    3
  9901. I have it :)
    3
  9902. -Wikipedia ಠ_ಠ Also, the sources used were two of Patton's biographies, both of which are no-doubt biased towards Patton. Axelrod, Alan (2006), Patton: A Biography, London: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 978-1-4039-7139-5 Blumenson, Martin (1972), The Patton Papers: 1885–1940, Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, ISBN 0-395-12706-8
    3
  9903. Are you refering to me? You're severely mistaken if you think that.
    3
  9904. The same applies to any source that doesn't list its sources.
    3
  9905. Your initial comment was - "Nazis were not national socialists they were fascist. You should really start using correct terminology if you want to be treated as scientific channel..." This isn't an argument, this is a statement. Therefore, the counter to said statement is either 1) not to respond, or 2) to point out that you've not got an argument. The same applies with the other people who told me to "Neck myself" or "Unsubscribe. Red scare bullshit" (two genuine comments). The "counterarguments" were - "Marx said" (which is irrelevant to the discussion of National Socialism), or "The Nazis were capitalists because they had industrialists, private property, and killed 1,000 socialists out of the 3,000,000 *in their party*". Needless to say, I countered the second argument by pointing out that this wasn't Marxis socialism and therefore explains all three counter-points. So, now I'm left with people like you who refuse to engage in actual discussion and just troll the comments.
    3
  9906. I agree 100% with Zet0s. Mat, this isn't a discussion. "No, you're wrong" is not an argument.
    3
  9907. I'm hoping that the next hyperinflation video comes out the week after next (although no guarantees)
    3
  9908. Yes, there's a few like that. But I would suggest that you cannot rely on one or the other, you have to use all. And I think the secondary sources are better, even if they're pushing their narratives
    3
  9909. Come on, you can do better!
    3
  9910. Just to clarify, I didn't really make a mistake here. I've discovered a forgery, which has ended up compromising some of my previous videos. That's not really my mistake. If it had been my mistake, I would definitely have admitted it though, as I've done in the past.
    3
  9911. Nobody is unbiased, but we can overcome the bias by using multiple sources. We have to use all the sources, including the ones we're most suspicious of
    3
  9912. "Armchair Historian did a short animated video based on this diary. Won't he be embarrassed." There's no need for embarrassment. He wasn't to know. I didn't know until a few days ago. It's just one of those things. - "Btw, has anyone ever confirmed that there was a Wilhelm Hoffman? If so, why would the Russians pick some random common soldier to fake a diary? You'd think that if they wanted to myth make, they'd pick someone with more status." Probably because it would be easier to fake a random soldier than a higher-up. I'd imagine that we would have realized it was fake far sooner had they chosen someone like Paulus rather than Hoffman.
    3
  9913. I'll be returning to the Weimar Hyperinflation after the next Stalingrad video, so hopefully in two weeks time if I can get it done for then
    3
  9914. "My dear doctor, they're all true... especially the lies." - Garak
    3
  9915. Yes it is. Some people refused to watch the separate videos until I put them all into one full video, so here it is
    3
  9916. You may also enjoy my Operation Crusader documentary which is 9.5 hours long. And my Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary is about to begin
    3
  9917. Anan pokhrel correct! Denmark it is! And yes, the Nepal flag is interesting - the only flag not to be rectangular. My favourite is the Libya flag. It's simple design is so elegant :D
    2
  9918. starcraft2own Denmark is correct! Glad to see the legend of Daisy lives on though :)
    2
  9919. Daniel Thomsen What do Dan and Mark have to do with this? :D
    2
  9920. You've been slacking recently, Jamie
    2
  9921. Thank you! And Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you too!
    2
  9922. Good luck for next time!
    2
  9923. I've been back a couple of weeks! It was only a two-week break. I think the algorithm isn't happy though and hasn't been recommending my videos as much. Of course, the YouTube engineers say that it's fine to take a break, but the evidence is clearly against them
    2
  9924. I don't know exactly, but I suspect it was because the Germans had to pull their night fighters back to Germany, as mentioned in a previous video https://youtu.be/HUwjcCOm2gg
    2
  9925. You're not the only one, apparently. Others have said the same thing...
    2
  9926. Welcome to early club! Put your feet up and make yourself comfortable
    2
  9927. No, the video starts at 00:00 and this discussion is important for two reasons. 1, because it reinforces the idea that Chuikov had a crisis of confidence in the previous video, which some people doubted. And 2, because there are a lot of myths about Zaitsev, including when he first picked up the sniper rifle, so it's necessary to highlight this in order to paint an accurate picture.
    2
  9928. Who said I thought "he alone" considered retreating? I never said that, nor do I think Chuikov was wrong to consider retreat. Chuikov was a good commander who was placed in a difficult situation and let down by Eremenko.
    2
  9929. Yes, it was over a few weeks ago! It was only 2 weeks off
    2
  9930. What's a "sesqua"??
    2
  9931. At least you agree :D
    2
  9932. To clarify what Rex said - the full English idiom is: "Don't judge a book by its cover."
    2
  9933. Yes, I'm actually reading his "Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East" right now (inbetween doing everything else, so I'm going through it at a slow pace). I'll be using it in an upcoming video to talk about the planning of Barbarossa. It is a good book!
    2
  9934. Thanks guys! That's my first FIP :D
    2
  9935. Great! :D
    2
  9936. Finland also had their own concentration camps. Not sure about the other nations to be honest.
    2
  9937. But it's true. There are people who don't work and live in the woods, hunting and fishing. In fact, that's what our ancestors did. But if you want electricity and a roof over your head, then you need to exchange wealth. In order to exchange wealth, you need to produce wealth. You must choose to work. But it's still a choice.
    2
  9938. Really?! Which country is that? And why? What about SubscribeStar?
    2
  9939. It will be coming on Monday. As I said, it's a bi-weekly series.
    2
  9940. I hope so! Although I don't think YouTube is really sharing this one out, so not many are seeing it
    2
  9941. I plan to, although will need some more patron support first, although part of me thinks hiring a research assistant might be a better option... I need some time to actually think about it.
    2
  9942. But the more you do something, the more you get better at it. Repetition is the key. So doing it is better than not doing it because you're over thinking it. Boeing has got to the point where they should be doing it right, since they've been doing it for a long time. If you or I started making planes, making a jet engine 747 would probably be the wrong first step. Start with a kite, then a model plane, then a bi-plane, a single engine, then a jet, then...
    2
  9943. I'm working on it. I can't do one a week, it takes too long. These three videos I recorded the same day, and don't take anywhere near the same amount of time to edit.
    2
  9944. starcraft2own wow thank you! I'm glad you enjoy this concept! I don't mind if you don't answer, so long as you enjoy the videos These videos are easier to make than the animations, and for now I'm trying out different things and seeing what works and what doesn't. Tomorrow's question is completely different again - I don't know if people will enjoy that as much as the history/continent ones but I may as well ask anyway! Again, thank you for the feedback :)
    2
  9945. I much prefer constructive criticism, but in some ways I'm grateful for the abuse I got here because it forced me to go back, double check my interpretations, find more evidence, solidify my definitions and sharpen my arguments. I'm not done with my research just yet, but when I've got everything ready I'm coming back to this for an epic takedown. Why? Because it is socialism through and through, and many socialists don't realise what socialism actually is.
    2
  9946. I'm aware of the posts made on that subreddit, and I'm aware of the other response videos people have made. However, as the new pinned-comments (and my responses to the counterarguments) show, there is definitely a lot of validity to what I'm saying. I've promised my Patreons that I won't make more videos on this topic for a while, simply because the point has been made, and the arguments are just going around in circles (the Marxists are relying on rhetoric and postmodernist tactics, rather than evidence, and are dismissing the points I'm making). But I'm not over with this. I'm going to do what I did in the past when the Wehraboos disagreed with me - go back to the regular military videos, and use them to show why what I said here was the case. I may not say "this is the socialism in National Socialism", but it's evidence that supports the point, so that eventually I'll be able to tackle this with overwhelming evidence.
    2
  9947. "What kind of a point is that to reply to?" - that was the vast majority of the people asking questions in the previous video. "Hitler was a supremacist and an imperialist" - Lenin invaded Poland. And as I explained in the video, the supremacism is his socialism. "the British aristocracy I presume" - no, the race. He was a socialist and didn't get along so well with the upper classes (e.g. the German artistocratic generals). "his notion of expansion would have made most Germans wealthy land owners who would be served by other subjugated nations" - the German 'workers' (swapping the term for 'workers' so you can see the logic) would be wealthy landowners. The other peoples (in Hitler's mind) weren't people, and so don't count. This then is making the 'lower class' or 'Aryan German' wealthier, and in power. Socialism.
    2
  9948. Thanks Ancient :) feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall with this.
    2
  9949. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    2
  9950. Hitler redefined what socialism meant for him. It is a branch of socialism. In Hitler's mind, it is a class struggle as a result of race. Therefore, remove the race, end the class struggle. You're assuming his socialism is the same as the 'orthodox' socialism. It is not. It is a separate religion but with the same roots. But it is still socialism.
    2
  9951. Socialist theory is not the same as socialism historically.
    2
  9952. By the definition the Marxists in the comments are using, the Soviet Union wasn't socialist either. NEP capitalism, the fact that the workers were not in possession of the means of production (since the state owned it), a gulag slave economy, and the fact that they targeted ethnic minorities like the Volga Germans and (as the Ukrainians will argue) the Ukrainians during the Holodomor. They were also not internationalist - socialism in one country. And they were an authoritarian imperialist state (Finland, Baltic countries, Romania prior to the Great Patriotic War, and expansion into Eastern Europe) not democratic. In fact, by their definition, it sounds like the Soviet Union was actually more National Socialist than Marxist Socialist.
    2
  9953. I was talking about National Socialim in this video, not fascism. And yes, I'm aware there's no uniform fascism, National Socialism, or socialism in general.
    2
  9954. Thank you for the recommendation Earl! I've added it to my shopping list :)
    2
  9955. "The NEP was not an act of privatization but a hold on the ongoing nationalization/collectivization." allowing privatization to continue, as well as small businesses etc... so a continuation of privatization, which therefore (by the logic of others) makes him not a socialist.
    2
  9956. But how can I cover military history now? I can't say anything at all about Hitler's decisions or anything because explaining his reasoning will be 'wrong' in their eyes. And I'm committed now to covering the Holocaust, which means I'm going to have to explain National Socialism's ideology as part of that. So this is a major issue. Every video I publish from now on is going to be hit by 'orthodox' Marxists crying that their definitive version of Marxism isn't definitive like they claim it is.
    2
  9957. Yes, although that's still an ongoing debate ;)
    2
  9958. Tooze's Wages of Destruction "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - P112 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 Capitalism was no more. And as I explained in the video, no more class struggle either. Clearly, this wasn't capitalism. It's almost as though it's a form of socialism...
    2
  9959. But, according to Marxists in the comments, the Welfare state does not class as a socialist policy... which is absolutely not true - it is a socialist policy. It was founded in the late 1940s (1947-48 I believe) by the Labour Party, which believed in socialism and Keynesian economics. The workers didn't rise up and seize the means of professional medical practice, but a state-controlled industry should absolutely be classed as socialism. It certainly isn't capitalism, that's for certain (although it appears the government are currently trying to tear it down and make it private business, but that's a different debate).
    2
  9960. Which is why socialism is bad in general. Traditional Liberalism is the way to combat it, since many socialists are actually liberals at heart who have been duped into thinking socialism is their ideology. Equality under the law so that every individual can achieve anything they want without being judged by their sex, skin colour, nationality or class, and be able to work how and where they want and receive the full reward for doing so ... Yeah, that's liberalism, not socialism. The reality is that socialists have cleverly hidden the principles of what socialism actually is, and everything they say is the exact opposite of what they're aiming to do. Help the poor? By taxing the economy to death. Free the workers? By centrally controlling and enslaving the means of production (the workers themselves). Once you see it, you understand that everything the socialist ideology says is a lie.
    2
  9961. I will not shy away from saying what needs to be said. That has been my policy since the beginning and I have no intention of changing that now. Cheers Mark!
    2
  9962. "If you would have read Marxist works you would have understood right away that it's not the same as Nazism." - I never said it was. I'm not arguing that Marxism and National Socialism are the same.
    2
  9963. You missed the point I made: two countries that share the same ideology can go to war against each other.
    2
  9964. "If both Hitler and Stalin were socialists, as you claim, then why did Hitler invade and try to destroy another socialist country?" If Hitler and Churchill were capitalists, as you claim, then why did they both try to destroy another capitalist country?
    2
  9965. *same video
    2
  9966. "Most of them didnt even have URLs" - those that did would have been held back. And the fact that you posted 7 comments in the same may have made YouTube decide that you were spamming, which can cause it to hold back comments too. I've cleared the backlog, so check now and see if they're visible.
    2
  9967. I wasn't deleting comments.
    2
  9968. No worries! I don't get a lot of time to respond to comments any more, but I do try :) I believe you about the Reddit thing. There's a guy in these comments somewhere who is Marxist in the Labour Party who was trying to tell me that the "social democratic" Labour Party is not socialist. I'm thinking - hold on, if it's not socialist, why are you a part of that party? The default accusation that the Marxists and the Nazis have is to call people out as either a "commie" or a "Nazi". This is a simple, yet effective, tactic to discredit you in the eyes of other users. I've found that the best solution to that is to show them how you reject the idea of the "social group" (race, class, gender, whatever) and instead praise individualism to the extreme. And if they complain or cry about it, just tell them that their opinion doesn't matter because they're not individuals - they're just numbers, and numbers don't have the right to freedom of speech. They really hate that, plus it completely undermines their entire argument on a fundamental ideological level.
    2
  9969. This sort of thing has happened before, so I'm used to it :)
    2
  9970. See this https://imgur.com/rLlDlcQ
    2
  9971. Actually, there are several Nationalsocialists who are agreeing. That was my mistake with these videos - thinking they didn't know what they were. They know exactly what they are. It's the Marxists and others who don't know what Nationalsocialism actually is.
    2
  9972. Surprisingly, it's not a pushback from the Nazis, but a pushback from the Marxists that is why the video is downvoted as much as it is. I honestly thought people knew the definition of "socialism", but apparantly I was mistaken.
    2
  9973. "Believing that the Jews are the cause of class antagonisms doesn't make you Socialist or Communist, because it goes against what Socialists and Communists say." - what Marxists say. "Socialism is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and a Centrally planned economy" - Hitler changed this to be dictatorship of the Aryan race and a centrally planned economy. "Socialism is the next stage of development since it not only further socializes production like Capitalism, but it also socializes ownership." - the 'social' Aryan race are both producers and owners. Again, I'm not saying National Socialism is Marxist Socialism - because Hitler even said it wasn't. But I am saying it's a form of socialism.
    2
  9974. I reformed my argument and came back with a different explanation (since, in a lot of ways, what I said was misunderstood). This is what historians do.
    2
  9975. No, a few socialist policies doesn't not make a country socialist. There's a dial. However, I would point out that a private fire brigade/department (for example) is actually possible in a capitalist country, and yet is not something that happens. The Labour Party in Britain was socialist, and introduced socialist policies, but doesn't fit the Marxist definition of socialism.
    2
  9976. Like bees in a hive
    2
  9977. I guarantee it will be similar. But next time I'll be able to say "answered this in the video at X time" ;)
    2
  9978. I can see why people disagree, although having done substantially more research since this video (because people were telling me I was so wrong) my views stand. I will be doing a better version of these videos at some point with an absolute metric ton of evidence and sources to really hammer it home. And I won't be making the mistake here where I aimed the video at the National Socialists only, but address it to all.
    2
  9979. Yeah, I know that. What I meant was, he didn't get the 'state' to take control of the businesses (although they did have a heavy hand in the businesses, since this was a centrally planned economy).
    2
  9980. Thank you Scooter! It's people like you that make this all worth it :)
    2
  9981. I know. This is despite the fact that, when I have stood my ground, I've won the debate. The Marxists brigaded me and mass-downvoted the video with multiple accounts (I have some screenshots proving this), and told me to "neck myself" and that I'm a liar and clearly a Nazi (which isn't the case). It was quite surprising that they didn't request any evidence in a nice way - they assumed I didn't have any. They chose to act like babies, swearing and ridiculing. But again, when I did stand my ground, they lost. I was chatting to one guy just before. I knocked back everything he said with additional explanations, evidence and sources. He was completely defeated, and yet still couldn't admit that the evidence presented was overwhelming. Why? Because of his political beliefs. Sure, these videos weren't 100%. I should have clarified, and I will make a better one in the future. But the poor reaction from that certain ideological-community was completely unwarranted and unfair. This was socialism, and the Holocaust happened, whether they want to deny it or not (which they are doing by claiming Hitler wasn't socialist).
    2
  9982. Thank you for correcting me on that :) it's been a long time since I studied these two predominantly pre-WW1 political ideologies, and coupled with the rushed response video, I didn't double check and swapped the two names around.
    2
  9983. The Labour Party is full of Anti-Semites, and Corbyn did nothing to stop it, since socialism is fundamentally Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  9984. No worries :)
    2
  9985. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    2
  9986. Glad you enjoyed the video, Chris even if you didn't agree! Haven't read Kotkin yet, but do have his books. He's got a couple of lectures on YouTube and I've watched them though.
    2
  9987. "Most Nazis and Fascists do not believe in state ownership of the means of production." The Reichstag Fire Decree abolished private property rights and, as Gunter Reimann's "Vampire Economy" makes clear, they expropriated property if it didn't suit the state. In reality, while the term "privatization" was invented by the Nazis, they used it as a cover for what was really going on - the nationalization of the industries. By 1935, Schacht (minister of economics) said that the bureaucracy "really ruled" the Third Reich. Wage controls, price controls, resource controls, Autarky, workers battalions, Hitler Youth (state-control, end of private youth organizations), state-trade union (abolishing private trade unions), nationalized railways, nationalized media (censorship)... There's no way you could claim that this wasn't socialism, unless you believe the lie that the Marxist Left are putting out there that this was somehow capitalism and wasn't "real" socialism. Some quotes - "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 "Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” - Reinmann, Vampire Economy "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583
    2
  9988. Hey Martin, yes, I can't reply to all comments, but I'll reply to yourself. "Are you actually saying that the social systems of countries such as Stalinist USSR or Communist Yugoslavia, and Nazi Germany were so similar in functioning that we can call them both the same term?" - there are parallels with some of them. So yes, I think you can call them the same umbrella term. And there is a historical debate (which I will come back to at some point) that says Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union was so similar that there's little to no distinction. I don't know (yet) if I agree or disagree with that, but that debate exists. "Because I believe that's the main issue here. 90% of your arguments are about what Hitler thought, and not about actual economic policy, not about the state of the economy, about the control of resources, which is 100% the most crucial thing for leftists when discussing... anything. You, on the other hand, focus on ideology, and how Hitler and probably other members of the Nazi party understood the struggle between antagonist groups and how they defined them." - what Hitler thought/said/did, was his socialism. And this is what Martin Bormann said to his son at the time (which is documented). Hitler reinterpreted the socialist ideology and created a new form of socialism out of it. But I'm not just focusing on ideology here - his practical implication of that ideology is actually socialism too. It's not the 'Marxist' socialism or whatever, but there's nothing to say it ISN'T a form of socialism. As I said in the video, they implemented their version of socialism on central and Eastern Europe (not so much in the west, because Hitler was looking East). If you look at what both the Soviets and the Nazis did in Poland, arguably there's not a lot of difference between the two regimes (killing the Polish intelligentsia and implementing their own form of socialism). "If you look at it from the position of those who criticized you - primarily materlist leftists I suppose - you cannot be surprised because you are essentially saying "Hey, that most basic thing that matters, it doesn't matter, move on." That's from where the criticism comes, not from you being super wrong about anything, but from a complete misunderstanding of what is actually discussed - and what are the implications." - possibly, but I suspect it's more that they think there is only one definitive version of socialism and there are no alternatives. But of course there are alternatives, and NS is but one alternative, which was definied in the 1910s to 1940s.
    2
  9989. Well, this was an off the cuff response to the previous video where people were calling me out. I assumed it's because they couldn't grasp it, which is why I was repeating to hopefully get it to click. Turns out, once the analytics came through, that they didn't even watch the videos at all, and were just getting offended at the title of the video.
    2
  9990. Great response. Your entire argument so far has been "I believe" and then insulted me by saying your grandma is a better historian. There is no discussion here, only claims not based in reality.
    2
  9991. "My grandmother is a more historian than you." And? Look, either provide evidence that supports the idea that National Socialism was capitalism (ha) or admit defeat.
    2
  9992. "Haha copies a old comment, nice!" It's called evidence. It's what historians use to prove a point, rather than just saying "I believe" like people with "ideologies" do.
    2
  9993. "Unsubscribe. Red scare bullshit, and I was actually watching and enjoying your videos. It is 2018 and people still think nazism is socialism, it is not and have been debunked over and over." - The 80's Wolf So, why are you back here? And it hasn't been debunked. I've done a significant amount more research since these videos, and can now debunk the debunking arguments over and over. Therefore, Nationalsocialism is Socialism.
    2
  9994. Yes, this wasn't a critique of socialism. I was only saying the ideology and practice were socialist, not ALL socialisms are racist.
    2
  9995. Not rude to me :) It's a drooping eyelid. Had a stye in it ages ago, and since then it just droops. Don't want to burden the chronically-underfunded NHS with a minor problem like it though. It gets worse when I'm tired. Had less than 5 hours sleep last night due to replying to comments.
    2
  9996. Check out my replies in the pinned comment. The argument I've made stands.
    2
  9997. Nice way to address the core of my counterargument - by ignoring it.
    2
  9998. They're not interested in reality. Socialism is a religion and their beliefs come before facts.
    2
  9999. Yes, he wanted resources. Slaves and oil are resources.
    2
  10000. Norbert, nothing you said has any relevance. Knowing what National Socialism actually is, helps people fight against it. Believing that half of the ideology doesn't exist is a distortion of history. And I'm not just reliant on Mein Kampf. You're assuming I haven't got a ton of books on this subject
    2
  10001. I have addressed the counterarguments. See my reply in the newly-pinned comment.
    2
  10002. Thanks Shelia. Yeah, it's a matter of interpretation - which is a big portion of history! It's good to hear you disagree with my interpretation though :)
    2
  10003. Yes, it is the reason he went to war. Hitler explains his reasoning in Mein Kampf. He wants to get out of "international Jewish finance" (capitalism), bring in socialism (which he does by 1935) and go East to steal the resources of the Soviet Union. This is the main motivation for uniting the German peoples and then invading Poland in 1939, Hitler no longer wants to trade for resources (capitalism), wants to destroy Marxism and seize the resources of the East. Socialism is the reason Hitler took Germany to war.
    2
  10004. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    2
  10005. I did not. If they had listened, that would have been bad (or M.A.D.)
    2
  10006. Mate, seriously, come back to the real world.
    2
  10007. I should have clarified that I don't have much information on the Far Eastern Theatre as my speciality is the European Theatre. But yes, the bombing of Chinese cities was earlier from what other commenters have said.
    2
  10008. Third, sorry :)
    2
  10009. Gibson SG Special that I got in Texas 🙂
    2
  10010. A cliffhanger? What you mean by that?
    2
  10011. Yes, I'm working on a Courland Pocket series coming (hopefully) in February. After Courland is done, I'm doing the same with Stalingrad.
    2
  10012. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    2
  10013. Yes, I plan to (although might just include them within the Battlestorm Stalingrad series). If you haven't seen it, I've already done a video on the Croatian Legion which fought in the city of Stalingrad itself. Link: https://youtu.be/bVbqdD6CmOI
    2
  10014. Try Beevor's Arnhem. I'm of the opinion that he was wrong regarding who he blames in the book, but it's a great and compelling read. I would recommend his Stalingrad too because it's a also a great read, although it's old and has quite a few myths within it, so maybe watch some of my Stalingrad videos if you pick that up just so you get up to date.
    2
  10015. Yes you were! Nice one
    2
  10016. National-Socialist commenters on this channel have made it clear that they don't like the term. From what they've said to me, it's because it was made up by their enemies (Marxist-Socialists) and is used as a slur to discredit their version of socialism.
    2
  10017. That's good to hear! What are you reading at the moment?
    2
  10018. Been to Texas. Great state 👍
    2
  10019. You'll have to let me know what you think of those books! Both of the ones you listed that I've recommended should be a good read. I haven't read Shattered Sword though, and don't really know enough on the Pacific Theatre to can't comment on it
    2
  10020. You were 3rd, sorry :(
    2
  10021. Well, that's not entirely true, as I show in the video
    2
  10022. Because you already know about them. The point of this was to provide an alternative view, and answer the original question talking about poor combat performance.
    2
  10023. Because of COPPA I decided to play it safe and take them down. The US government can sue creators up to $42,000 per video if THEY deem that videos are made for kids. Now, you and I both know that my game-play videos aren't made for kids, but the beaurorats of the US government are morons, and if THEY decided that game-play videos were aimed for children, then I'd be sued into the ground. I'm not willing to take that risk
    2
  10024. Fantasticalness, thanks for letting me know!
    2
  10025. You'll enjoy Monday's video then :)
    2
  10026. But the population statistics are what they are. I can't lie and say that the Soviets had more population than they actually did. And the food in question may not have gone directly to the troops, but might have just gone into the economy, sustaining the population. It's not clear.
    2
  10027. "How do you think Apple determines the price of the iPhone?" Initially, I'd say they would do cost of product plus whatever they thought they could sell it for based on previous iphone and competitor sales. But if no one bought their products because the price was too high, they'd have to lower their price. This is why prices usually start high when they first come out, then get lowered over time (in theory, they could be increased too, depending on demand). Prices are determined subjectively by the consumer, not by the seller. "Do they do a free market magic incantations or they estimate how much it costs them to make an iPhone and the result is minimum possible price at which they can actually sell the thing without going broke in the process?" They know how much it costs them to make a product because they can accurately calculate that based on the free market prices of the materials and labour costs. They can charge more than their competitors because they're making what the consumer subjectively thinks is a 'quality' product. The reality is, if they didn't make quality products, nobody would buy their products, and they'd have to reduce prices. If they reduced prices too much, they'd start making a loss, and that product would be a failure. A good recent example of this is Valve's Steam controller, which originally launched at $49.99 but is now on sale for $5 because nobody wants it https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/27/valve-steam-controller-sale-discontinued/?guccounter=1 "...Kirov plant story..." Again, only one buyer. The value of a good is not determined by what the state thinks its worth. And again, the cost of the tanks the factory was producing could not be calculated, so the government guessed at a price, the government rejected that price, and the government 'recalculated' an impossible calculation. That's not 'the same' as what happens in a capitalist country. "Seriously, TIK, you need to read actual stuff on Soviet economics instead of general abstract critique of socialism that you are seemingly rely currently." You cannot calculate prices without a market economy. The Soviet Union did not have a market economy. Therefore, the prices in the Soviet economy did not reflect the value of the goods. This is why they artificially 'priced' their goods based on what the price of the goods were in western markets. And I have read 'actual stuff' on the Soviet economy. The problem is that the numbers are meaningless since the Soviet Union did not have a market economy in order to determine prices or value. This isn't 'abstract' at all, it's basic economics.
    2
  10028. "The price was determined... by combining how much labor and materials that were used in the production of the item costs. And then adding a margin of profit for the producer and any intermediaries involved." Exactly. So the price was arbitrary. "The price was determined the same way it did in market economies..." That's not how prices are determined in market economies. If the way you described how prices come about was the way that prices did come about, then no company would ever be able to make a loss, since there would always be profit. "And yes (horror!) Soviet industries were actually selling their products for profit to the state." But the price was meaningless. So their profit was equally meaningless. "In fact Soviet industries, factories, construction bureaus were even competing against each other for the state orders." A quota is not economic calculation, nor does it tell you the actual price or value of something. "Soviet military in fact was in the constant struggle against MIC because they wanted their hardware to be cheaper but they were loosing in that struggle more often than not." Are you honestly arguing that the Soviet Union had a free market economy?
    2
  10029. How would you know the cost of the materials? How much is a lump of steel? How do you know the price of that lump of steel is that price? The only way we know the price of a good is because we exchange those goods with other people. Buying and selling generates prices. Without a free market in which to buy and sell millions of goods with millions of people, there's no way to know the price of something. But let's say that they somehow knew that the cost of the materials was £1, and the labour was £1. That's a £2 tank, right? Not if nobody buys it. The value of something is subjectively determined by the buyer, not by the cost of material or the labour time. If the tank is only worth £0.50 to the buyer, then the tank is worth less than the cost of the materials and the labour. In a capitalist economy, the tank business would go out of business, thus saving the waste of the material and labour which is now freed to be put to more productive use elsewhere in the economy. But in a socialist economy, they wouldn't know to stop producing, since there are no buyers (everything is owned by the State, or the commune). They would continue to build tanks which are artificially costed too high, wasting the resources of society, and they wouldn't know because there's no way for them to determine the actual cost of the tank. Yes, the price tag of the tank is £2, but it's not actually worth that.
    2
  10030. You must be new to this channel.
    2
  10031. "We see absolutely crazy income gap between poor people and rich people. For the first time in the history the top 5% of richest people in US own more wealth than the whole middle class. Money flows into secondary financial instruments and never hits the real economy." That's because the State is artificially counterfeiting currency (inflation), secretly redistributing purchasing power from everyone in society to itself, and then 'stimulating' the capital goods industries (making the bubble). This robs savers (the middle class) and hurts everyone except for those elites running the show. When the artificial State-created bubble eventually pops, living standards will increase for the poor and savers. See: Rothbard "America's Great Depression" for a detailed explanation of this process. If you do read it, and actually grasp what Rothbard is saying, I think you'll finally understand that we're actually on the same side, but it's not 'capitalism' that's the problem, it's 'State-Capitalism' (socialism).
    2
  10032. @Artiom - Don't assume that the USA is capitalist or that, because I advocate for capitalism, that I'm advocating for the US economy. The manipulations in the dollar will soon bring the economy crashing down again (if it's not already). Recessions are caused by the inter-national banks and the currency inflation of the fractional reserve banking system. It's not the free market that causes booms and busts, it's the State control of the economy (socialism). The dollar is artificially priced, and (like I keep saying) without accurate prices you cannot have economic calculation.
    2
  10033. @Erich Kirk, "Also, you're basically telling us that views you used to have are wrong, and views you have now are right. What an interesting coincidence!" During my college and university years, I was taught a very Marxist-Socialist/Keynesian view of history, and most of the history books of the 20th Century are also written with those views in mind. I was converted to socialism, like so many others were. I have since that time learnt a lot more about economics, and realized that socialism is exactly the opposite of what it made itself out to be. It is against the workers. It is against the poor. It is immoral. And I discovered that the people who were capitalist were actually for the workers, for the poor, and aren't immoral. Since I favour stronger arguments, I go with the capitalist one. "You fully understand socialist economics, since you used to be a socialist? What argument is that?" It means I've read Marx, Engels and many of the other Marxist Socialist economics books. People are pretending that I'm ignorant about such things, but they are deeply mistaken. "The way WE generate prices is by trading with each other. So basically, there's no other way to calculate prices, because that's how WE calculate prices? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks that it's your entire argument." That's how prices are generated. What's your counterargument exactly?
    2
  10034. I do need to do one. I promised I'd do one years ago
    2
  10035. I've just replied this to someone else - I haven't got any of his books (except his translation of Keitel's memoirs). But I have read about his court case, and it was proven in that case that he was deliberately manipulated evidence to prove his theories. This is a big 'no no' in my eyes, and renders him completely untrustworthy.
    2
  10036. Yes, but they need to use them. This is why I said most of the books on the Eastern Front won't get the full five stars.
    2
  10037. Thanks for hte recommendation! I'll try it
    2
  10038. Possibly, although I've not finished it yet. Concentrating on Operation Crusader now, so a lot of books I've been reading recently are on that battle.
    2
  10039. Yes, agreed, Overy is great
    2
  10040. Is TIK a russofan?
    2
  10041. Glantz's "When Titan's Clashed" is great. I've also read the Stalingrad Trilogy, and I'm just reading his condensed version of it (which is just called "Stalingrad"). I've not finished it but I do think it's as good as the trilogy, and you're not losing too much detail, so I'd recommend that too. Just know that Glantz is not your narrative-style historian. He's detail, detail, detail (kinda like what I do with the Battlestorm videos).
    2
  10042. It's all thanks to my Patreons. Without them, I'd have like 8
    2
  10043. Thank you Mr Philip :)
    2
  10044. No worries! If you get it, I hope you enjoy it and find it as useful as I did :)
    2
  10045. No worries :) yeah I think I've seen all those films too. The point of my videos is to explore the battles and discover what really happened (lots of myths and inaccuracies in films - and some books too). Sometimes books aren't as good as documentaries, and I want to bridge the gap between them.
    2
  10046. Either that, or insane!
    2
  10047. A lot of my books are on Kindle or Google Play as well
    2
  10048. You think? I can't see what damage comment trolls can do, especially since I could just remove all their comments with two clicks. And I don't care if my videos get a billion dislikes. I'm doing this for myself more than anyone else, so that's no threat either.
    2
  10049. I got Beevor's D-Day because I was debating whether to do Battlestorm D-Day (and decided to do Stalingrad instead). Haven't read all of it, but even if I had, I've not read a great deal on D-Day anyway so I can't say whether I recommend it against any of the others or not.
    2
  10050. I can tell you that in Hasting's Armaggeddon, ignore what he says about Market Garden because he's wrong. The plan wasn't 'rotten' at all. And the only part that was poorly executed was the failure to capture Nijmegen Bridge on Day 1. The rest went very well, until the tanks got to Nijmegen and got delayed by 36 hours. And yes, I'll be reviewing Glantz's books at some point. If I'm honest, I can't recommend a book on D-Day yet as I've not read enough on them to know which are good, bad or ugly, so sorry about that.
    2
  10051. Yes, I will at some point. I recently got his condensed Stalingrad book so that I could read it and compare it to the larger 5-book "trilogy" and see if there's a loss of detail. So far so good.
    2
  10052. Calm down, calm down, it's just a book review!
    2
  10053. Great to hear! Yeah, "the kampfgruppe" is a little unnecessary. But Kershaw's book is one of the best books on Operation Market Garden in my opinion :)
    2
  10054. I have Buttar's Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II. Not read it yet though. "I refuse flat out to use bs Soviet sources - never" Then you should also flat out refuse to use the German sources too. Or you can do what you should be doing and treat both the German and Soviet sources with equal amounts of suspicion. They're no better than each other.
    2
  10055. Excellent! Antony Beevor's "Berlin" book is recommended for the Battle of Berlin. David Stahel's books on Barbarossa are good too, and modern. For Stalingrad, go with Beevor again first (his "Stalingrad" book), but progress onto David Glantz's "Stalingrad" (which is a condensed one-volume book of his 5-book series on the battle) after that. The two Stalingrad books will have big, but important contraditions again ;) I'm not sure about the language issue. Overy is very popular in the west, so it could be available. I honestly don't know because, apart from my recent interest in German, I've no experience with foreign languages. If you can get Citino's book in Bulgarian, I'd be very surprised if you couldn't get Overy too. I hope Glantz publishes in Bulgarian as he's currently the leading expert on the Eastern Front. A word of warning with Glantz though, he goes into the details, and is more interested in where battalions are on a map than what the average soldier was "feeling", if that makes sense.
    2
  10056. This book is about Stalingrad and Fall Blau, so technically no. However, from next week I'm concentrating on videos related to Operation Crusader in preparation for Battlestorm Crusader coming out.
    2
  10057. @UCw4inBkeKEJ_hfkNaraFuzQ "Citation very much needed." For what, exactly? The quote from Marx? Marx said that socialism was - "socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature..." (Das Kapital vol 3, p593) Or did you mean that military logistics is not run by a centralized bureaucracy? In that case I gave the reference to the Soviet central logistics bureau in the video. Or did you mean that using prices would overcome the socialist economic calculation problem? Okay, see last week's video for references (link https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ ) and see Mises Socialism (all of it - https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis ) but I guess Part 2 The Economics of a Socialist Community (p97-108) although there's more elsewhere in that text. I'd recommend you read the full thing. - "Citation very much needed. No military in the world ever operated this way. If anything modern militaries centralised logistics even more. You can read it in the lessons the US drew from the war. https://history.army.mil/html/books/070/70-29/CMH_Pub_70-29.pdf" That doesn't prove anything. Politicians constantly draw the wrong lessons from history. E.g. printing your way out of a depression... - "MORE standardization of material and procedures and elimination of double supply lines. It underlines the importance of logistics as a military science and the expertise required for planning such operations." Right, but implementing prices would do this by itself without the military needing to 'learn' it and 'plan' it.
    2
  10058. "1) Ok if bulk of lend leas come at 1943 that mean we can totally can compare logistics in 1941-1942 right? right? " I guess so, yes. In which case, both sides were terrible. - "2) If u fight on ur own territory that don't mean that you supply line is shorter - for instance Novosibirsk is farther from Stalingrad than Berlin." True. - "3)Duude duude its like Soviet army was depleted too - they actually was depleted MORE than german army due to overwhelming losses during 1941-42 (4k divisions was almost norm during 1945 offensive), and if (if) they encountered less resistance - well its speak that they was more effective as combat system." Right, but they had MORE divisions overall. So their divisions were smaller, but they had a lot more than the Germans, thus had more men in the field. - "4) Soviets didnt fight two front war- that true but they still was forced to keep considerable amount of people in resources on far east just in case and they keep them there all war (rotating ocassionaly) and germans did that too 1941-1943- so its very comparable" No it's not. I've seen stats showing that the Germans had a 40/60 ratio of troops in the west and east at times during the last years of the war. But even if it was 30/70, the point is that the Soviets didn't have that ratio of troops in the Far East. - "5) So Soviets was kinda good at taking strategic objectives (they take Romanian oil fields) - their logistic allowed them to do that - and german one dont." Right. - "And Unsubbed - sadly buy u definitely unable to deal with ur biases in professional manner." Bias is inherent in the craft of history https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc In fact, you're letting your own biases cloud your judgement, which is why you've decided to unsubscribe rather than present a compelling case for why I was wrong.
    2
  10059. I tend to look at them the same way a disappointed mother looks at her children when they do something stupid. I hope they will grow up and start thinking. Their insults are water off a ducks' back.
    2
  10060. Correct. Government creates the problem, not the solution.
    2
  10061. Did you seriously just call Hugo Chavez "great"? Look what his Socialist ideology has done Venezuela! You have some nerve calling Socialism and their leaders great, then pointing to a country that has been ravaged by Socialism. In fact, Venezuela is a textbook example of why Mises and Rothbard were right. I mean, just look at the price of gold in Venezuelan Bolivars!
    2
  10062. Okay, I won't like your comments if you insist 😂 but I'm glad to see someone enjoyed the truck off commie bit!
    2
  10063. @Jaroslav Paleček  Yeah I'm afraid I can't help you with any of them unfortunately 😕 I hope she does well with it though!
    2
  10064. @Yora  Ahhh I see 😂 yeah, no it was definitely Lend!
    2
  10065. Yes, although they only paid a bit of it back 😂
    2
  10066. The guy you replied to wasn't me, it was a spammer. He has been blocked/removed. I won't ever promote cryptos
    2
  10067. I'm not sure I'm keeping up because there's a lot of them, but yes there's a lot of clearly false claims and double-think being thrown out there. In addition to my videos, people need to do their own homework and read the books (not Wikipedia or some other random site)
    2
  10068. No, none of their economies were market economies at this time, and their military logistics were certainly not.
    2
  10069. Yeah, I mean, the books I have show that British Lend Lease was important, but it doesn't matter. Sovietaboos will deny it even happened. Got one claiming I "lied" and that 75% of all trucks were Soviet made, not Lend Lease. No sources though 🙄
    2
  10070. I've already sort of covered this https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    2
  10071. Yeah, I've removed him, and been warning others. May have to make a video about this
    2
  10072. Yeah I think some of it was my fault. Part of the reason why is because I didn't want to repeat word for word what I'd already said in my History Theory video, which is why I've linked to it for clarification. My phrasing and argumentation wasn't exactly on point, hence the confusion. That said, my ardent critics were totally off the mark. At no point did I even hint that the Table Talks were reliable.
    2
  10073. History isn't broken. If you watch the original video all the way through, it's clear that I don't think history is broken by the end. The point of the video was to take the viewer on a journey to show history being broken and then to fix it with them. I thought this would be more engaging that just laying out the theory like I did in my original History Theory video.
    2
  10074. Alfried Krupp was a member of the Nazi Party and joined the SS in 1931. After the National Socialists gained power, the SA marched into the industries to take them over, and private property was abolished under the Reichstag Fire Decree. Massive regulations, taxes, wage controls, and price controls were implemented, and the unions were nationalized into the State trade union - the DAF. Hitler also signed a special law in 1943 making Krupp sole heir of his corporation. I mean, I don't know how much more nationalized you'd need to be in order for you to consider it nationalized.
    2
  10075. Awesome, thank you!
    2
  10076. Hahaha not quite
    2
  10077. That's the problem, the ports were needed for the supplies. Monty offered Ika a plan which would outflank the German 15th Army and cause it to fall back or surrender, thus freeing up the ports and opening the supplies.
    2
  10078. No, it's not the lighting - I'm bloody knackered! Working solidly trying to get these videos out, and what you're not seeing is the work going on behind the scenes. I'm simultaneously working on the biggest Battlestorm documentary I've ever attempted (Crusader) and am eager to get back to the even bigger project (Stalingrad), whilst trying to do these Monday videos. I'm conscious that people are demanding I cover all different projects, and aren't satisfied that I'm not covering the Eastern Front right now (trust me though, Crusader will blow your mind when it's done, regardless whether you're interested in the North African Campaign or not). And I don't want to let anyone down. Nor do I want to let myself down, so I'm doing 70-80 hours a week. On top all this, Monday's video was a disaster, which has knocked me back. It's hay fever season, and my right eyelid droops anyway. All of this is why my eyes look puffy. So yes, you're probably right about waiting for a video. But I don't know.
    2
  10079. There was no suit, nor threat of a suit, just the potential of one in the future. The smartest move was to fall back and regroup, and this time Hitler wasn't there to stop me ;)
    2
  10080. That's a nice way of putting it
    2
  10081. Thanks, I'm glad to hear that!
    2
  10082. I'll flesh that part out a bit. The more I think about it, there could be an alternative reason. So I'll explore them both.
    2
  10083. Shhhh!
    2
  10084. I did but only briefly because that was the point I was debating whether to take them down or not. I can (the video is just private) and will re-read it. My question becomes, if he did make the decision, why did Gavin say the opposite? And why didn't Beevor present the evidence showing it? And why didn't he explain it?
    2
  10085. I took it down in case the author saw it. Better safe than sorry. But yes, the buffering was an issue for some reason, and I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of the book's conclusions
    2
  10086. I appreciate your enthusiasm! However I don't agree entirely with John Wayne. Don't apologize in the middle of a fight, but backing down when appropriate can be good. Bruce Lee - "Be water my friend".
    2
  10087. I wasn't threatened, but I removed them as a "just in case" to be safe. You never know.
    2
  10088. Haha I'll try not to be arrested. And yes, those phrases will probably come in handy
    2
  10089. Radu, you're probably right about the hours thing. Breaks are something I feel guilty about taking and then I end up burning out. But I can't delay Crusader for too much longer! And actually no, I actually thought Breevor's book was better than Ryans. A couple people disagreed, but I thought it was the most up to date narrative, even if it's account of what happened at Nijmegen is questionable.
    2
  10090. Apart from the fact I've worked 70+ hours a week for three weeks straight and I'm tired, my eyelid has been like that for years
    2
  10091. Don't worry, just watch next week's and you won't have missed anything important
    2
  10092. Thanks! I think it would be 'revising yourself', or there's another phrase that may be more appropriate. You probably don't see it from your end so much, but I'm always asking myself how I can improve, or if I've done the right thing, or if I can change something to make it better. I make plenty of mistakes, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. But this was probably the first big mistake, enough to warrant taking the videos down.
    2
  10093. I'm going to expand of the Gavin vs Browning issue, and explore it a little more. Plus speculate why Beevor came to said conclusions, because there may be more to it than the simple reason that I said.
    2
  10094. Absolutely! I've always said, if I make a mistake I'll hold my hand up. No shame in that. I'm more annoyed because it feels like I've wasted a week, and I don't want to let you guys down.
    2
  10095. You can't even explain the Hitler Youth if it's not Socialism, let alone the war or the Holocaust. I'm only explaining Hitler's own ideology - what he said himself - which is backed up by an economic grounding which works in both theory, practice and history. The alternative is based on dismissal, ignoring evidence, contradictions and double-think. As a historian, I must choose the best arguments and theories, and there is a clear winner here.
    2
  10096. And first comment :)
    2
  10097. It's alright, hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  10098. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist. And I don't believe in the "invisible hand". That's nonsense talk. I'm for a free market, not capitalism.
    2
  10099. Helping others by itself is not altruism. Altruism is the idea that everyone else comes first, that you don't matter, and that you must self-sacrifice for the sake of others (and society). If you have a strong sense of self, and then you decide to help others in order to gain selfish joy from that, then that's not altruism. Altruism requires self-destruction.
    2
  10100. I'm happy to do that. Regardless, none of those things were required to enable the free market to operate. They were byproducts of an older statist order that hadn't yet been abolished. Sadly, due to collectivism, we seem to be reinstating such a system again...
    2
  10101. For a racist collectivist like OP, what matters is the racial "soul", which he would describe as "the blood". Obviously this is complete nonsense. There's no such thing as a collective soul.
    2
  10102. The British government is as evil as any other government.
    2
  10103. What do you mean by "acrylics"? I've not heard that term before
    2
  10104. The solution isn't censorship, it's to engage with them and convert them away from their racist collectivist religion.
    2
  10105. Why would I read those two Hermeticists? I'll stick to objective reality, thank you. And yes, I do hate the strict hierarchical systems.
    2
  10106. Because what's more relevant is the ideology that these people subscribed to, not the so-called racial "soul" they supposedly had.
    2
  10107. A market is a buyer and a seller. A free market is a buyer and seller exchanging freely without a commissar dictating what they can or cannot do, or demanding payment for his "services".
    2
  10108. I don't believe in collectivism. I only see individuals. Even if some Jews were behind this, that doesn't mean all were. Also, the fact is that none of these people were practicing Judaism - they were all ex-Jews, or only related to Jews (like in the case of Lenin). So I'm not sure I'll be coming to your conclusions. Also, I studied the Russian Revolution in both college and university, so I'm not new to the topic. That doesn't mean I won't discover things I didn't know before, but I already have a fairly decent grasp of the history. I also don't believe that you have to study the Russian Revolution to fully understand 1930s Germany, so that's also not a "realisation" that I've come to.
    2
  10109. I mean, they're doing that regardless, and I've given up trying to get through to them. What's more important is educating those willing to listen to recognise what drives them to these beliefs, and my current investigation is uncovering a clear correlation between all the leading socialists.
    2
  10110. In fairness, they were attempting to get to Socialism first, before eventually reaching Communism. They failed to even get to Socialism because Socialism always fails. But Lenin was definitely a Communist, even if he never implemented Socialism or Communism.
    2
  10111. I haven't seen it. Have you got a link?
    2
  10112. That's good to hear! I currently have 4,233 videos in my watch later...
    2
  10113. First!
    2
  10114. Just edited my comment to give another link
    2
  10115. Glad you liked it!
    2
  10116. In an ideal world, I would get the historians I quote from to read out their own quotes! But I think that's a little too ambitious and impractical (at least at the moment)
    2
  10117.  @nukclear2741  Ah... well I hope you're doing okay
    2
  10118. Here, let me pin it on you 📌
    2
  10119. You mean the Glantz speech? How!?
    2
  10120. If I were you, I'd ask Anton Joly to do a video on that unit, because I only heard about them because of him. I'm sure he's got some decent info on it, or at least could get a hold of some. EDIT: and happy holidays to you too!
    2
  10121. You tell me! :)
    2
  10122. Yeah, someone else mentioned this a video or two ago. I think Premiere Pro has a problem with those letters. I'll have to try and sort it in future
    2
  10123. I jokingly said that this series would be 24 hours long, and then said that I was wrong, and that 48 hours is more likely to be right. Now I'm doubting whether I can finish it within a 48 hour series 🤔
    2
  10124. From what I can see, it appears that they just assumed the 76th was with the 71st. I'll be sure to watch out for more references to the 76th in the books going forward, since the city fight is only just beginning, and that's where they thought it was
    2
  10125. Thank you! I will get it right going forward 👍
    2
  10126. 1. No. It's going to be as many as needed 2. A Battlestorm Battle of Berlin wouldn't be a one-off, it would be an entire series too. Obviously it wouldn't be as long as Stalingrad, but yes I'd be happy to do it. It is on my eventual list of battles to cover. I think though it will be a while away because I want to get back to North Africa, then do Sicily and Italy, then Normandy, plus more on the Eastern Front
    2
  10127. @Julian The Apostate  At the minute, the only way to do that is to do a one-off payment via SubscribeStar (there's two options - one being a one-off payment, the other being a subscription). But either way, thank you very much for at least considering supporting the channel 👍
    2
  10128. Yes, the reference bar is a bit of a pain to do, but it's worth it. Best idea I think I've ever had 😂
    2
  10129. In 100th Jäger Division's area along the Don. They don't enter the city until later.
    2
  10130. I'll be covering the reinforcements issue in the future, but basically all the reinforcements at this stage were going to Army Group Centre
    2
  10131. Almost all of them 😂
    2
  10132. Interesting 🤔 thanks for letting me know. I'll wait and see if anyone else complains about this
    2
  10133. From what I can tell, he only got shot (by the SS) as they entered the city - after the bombing
    2
  10134. That's not how it works. Crusader was a much smaller battle. Stalingrad has a lot more going on. There will be stalemates where I'll be able to do several days in an episode, while others require a more in-depth analysis of each day. Right now, it's been daily, but in an episode or two, it may not be, because the situation changes.
    2
  10135. I did mention Dresden in the video, but it looks like Gryffster hasn't got to that part
    2
  10136. That's exactly what I said at the end
    2
  10137. I definitely can't see what you're playing... Honest 👻
    2
  10138.  @nonautemrexchristus5637  The National Socialists will downvote everything I put out. The question is: will my regular viewers agree or disagree with me when they get to the end of the video?
    2
  10139. I was going to do one, and even bought the books... but after the failure of this video (probably restricted by YouTube), I'm reluctant now ☹️ Also, you should watch the full video
    2
  10140. Glad you agree! I think it's best to show various aspects of the topic before getting to the heart of it
    2
  10141. Next week. It's every 4 weeks.
    2
  10142. You clearly haven't watched all my videos. Here's some that do feature it https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8 https://youtu.be/qtACBI1Txrc https://youtu.be/zI53M85CW6A
    2
  10143. @Chaptermaster Pedro Kantor  At least I'm not the only one 😟 this is the first time I've seen likes disappearing
    2
  10144.  @seremking  Yeah, I think it went live fine, but was restricted about 1 hour or so afterwards
    2
  10145. I'd say it's wrong, yes. As is blockading a country, which starves civilians.
    2
  10146. I answered that in a video a while back https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    2
  10147. Unfortunately, that would be extremely difficult to do because the sources don't allow it in a lot of cases
    2
  10148. YouTube isn't broken... much!
    2
  10149. I do plan to cover it at some point
    2
  10150. I knew someone would comment on that! No, the 6 to 1 odds are for the whole of the area between the Volga and the Don, not for Moskalenko's forces vs the German regiment and three/four battalions in the area.
    2
  10151. Yeah Anton Joly told me, but I keep forgetting :(
    2
  10152. Thanks for letting me know! A few people have said this too, so you're not the only one
    2
  10153. Yeah sure!
    2
  10154. At some point in the next 3 episodes I'll be talking about how bad the state of some of the Germans actually are, and the numbers are shocking. They lost most of their men before the battle for the city even began, but just kept on losing more. I'm not sure yet if I'll talk about the reinforcements at the same time I'll be talking about the state of the divisions, but I do intend to cover the reinforcement/logistics issue at some point. It'll probably come up a few times because it's very important. But yes, German logistics are that bad, and there's possibly more to it too...
    2
  10155. Sticking to them!
    2
  10156.  @picklejarmonsterfanboy9367  I don't think video games are necessarily a waste of time, but I'd rather concentrate on making more substantial videos. They're definitely a good way to relax at the end of the day, so long as you've done a ton of work during the day itself.
    2
  10157. Wow! Thank you for your great comment, and thank you for choosing to support! If you were hyped for this one then you should be doubly-hyped for the next ones because your own name will be in them 👍 cheers!
    2
  10158. Blender 3D software for the animations, then Premiere Pro to put the whole video together
    2
  10159. Hope you're having a good day too!
    2
  10160. https://www.quora.com/Do-we-pronounce-g-in-strength-length-etc?share=1
    2
  10161. You were second by ONE second 😂
    2
  10162. I've no idea when this series will finish either! But currently, my intention is to focus on the European conflict. I'm not saying the Pacific isn't something I'll get to one day, but it might be a while away.
    2
  10163. No, that's just me messing up. It's "Winterfeld". I'll correct it going forward
    2
  10164. I showed the events before the battle of the city began in the earlier episodes. The reason I didn't mention this was because there was never an opportunity for 4th Panzer Army to do what you described. The Soviets were in the way, and the army had to guard it's flanks. So I'm not sure where you heard that from, but I would say it was incorrect.
    2
  10165. They were only in discussions. They never got to the operational planning phase because, as I said in the video, the Poles and the Germans couldn't come to an agreement over who got what. Poland may have wanted to remain neutral. Makes sense. But Poland may have also been discussing options for non-neutrality, and that makes sense too. I'm sure these Polish historians who all agree can explain why Poland cooperated with the Germans in the carve-up of Czechoslovakia, and with the attempt to take Lithuania. Because it does seem to be the case that, prior to about March 1939, the Poles were working (at least partly) with the Germans. There are proofs that Hitler wanted to invade Poland at the beginning of his rule? Funny because Pilsudski also had plans to invade Germany at this time. Now, I totally understand why. However, to make the claim that ALL Polish historians think that Polish foreign policy was to remain neutral clearly have missed that part out. And yes, Müller did provide proof. Interestingly enough, he quoted from a Polish historian - Frank Golczewski, "Deutsche und Ukrainer 1914-1939" (Paderborn, 2010), p. 681, n. 10. Perhaps you can check that yourself, since I can't read Polish.
    2
  10166. As Müller explains, Poland may have been the one to propose to the Germans about an invasion in the East. Yes, it could have been diplomatic speak, but the point is that the talks happened
    2
  10167. DAMN IT :D wouldn't be a TIK video without a silly mistake
    2
  10168.  Arbane's Sword of Agility  "I don’t have a religion sir" National Socialism is your religion. Are you denying that you "believe" in the magic of the "Aryan blood"?
    2
  10169. Ah yes, that Marxist anti-semite again. No he didn't debunk anything. I'd rather stick to the primary sources and see what Karl Marx himself had to say https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  10170. Unfortunately you were 4th, I think :)
    2
  10171. Andy Jacobs haha yeah it's not always obvious until someone points it out :)
    2
  10172. The Green is for Chechnya (where most of the regiment was from), and the yellow half of the card is the standard "cavalry" symbol (like the X for the infantry or the circle for the armour, but for cavalry it's the bottom right of the card).
    2
  10173. Thank you! Your comment hasn't come across as fanboy-ish to me, but I could be wrong :) glad to hear you're enjoying this series!
    2
  10174. Actually the original maps are in the public domain. But by using my own version of the maps, I can avoid any false copyright claims, and in my opinion they look a lot nicer than the originals. Plus the original maps were from the 1950s so I had to change some of the terrain back to as it was in the 1940s.
    2
  10175. Are you referring to the unit movements, or the front lines? I only ask because those moving front lines look great, but take an absolute age to do :)
    2
  10176. "Sure, he ripped off an aircraft with the wing of he's aircraft. Of course, every day, Sorry but i'm finish here. (6mn)" Yes as GWTPict said, ramming of enemy aircraft did happen. And if you disagree with one of my sources (all listed at the bottom of the screen to back up what I'm saying) that's not a reason to abandon watching the video. Just ignore that one part of the video and carry on.
    2
  10177. Relevant link to the 53 degrees in the sun video https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    2
  10178. Sorry for slow reply. I haven't played that game, no. And unfortunately I don't get time to play games these days. Too busy working on videos to have fun! :D
    2
  10179. Hahaha yeah, I forgot
    2
  10180. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10181.  @goldreserve  I posted this link above. You should watch it https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10182. Texas isn't capitalist. The dollar is owned and manipulated by the Central Bank (interest rates and printing), there are taxes, regulations, and "laws" preventing the market from operating freely. The State of Texas has also imposed lockdowns. Lockdowns are the opposite of a free market.
    2
  10183. 1. Monopolies and cartels are only created by the State https://youtu.be/eJa65E2TKv4 2. The Nazis weren't Fascist, they were National Socialist https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko 3. National Socialism and Fascism didn't have market economics. They had a centrally planned economy https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10184.  @matthewbadley5063  Only just seen this. The National Socialist economy WAS a command economy. I've been over this in great detail here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10185. If you close your eyes and don't look at the stock market, the bond market, the property market, the commodity market, the second hand goods market, the art market, or every other market, then there's no inflation 😂
    2
  10186. Every transaction in the USA requires dollars. Central Banks have manipulated the dollar through artificially adjusting interest rates and printing more currency. So EVERY transaction in the economy is manipulated by the state. Therefore, Texas doesn't have "unregulated capitalism". Also, Texas has taxes, regulations, and a million other state interventions. Calling it "Capitalism" of any kind is simply false.
    2
  10187. Corporations are not individuals. Therefore they're not private. They're publicly/collectively owned by their shareholders. See this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10188. You should watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10189. When you make something "free", you make demand for it infinite. When you have infinite demand, but cannot supply infinite services, then you have shortages. All the "funding" (aka theft of the taxpayer) in the world will not be able to overcome this problem because there isn't an infinite amount of scarce resources that have alternative uses. The more you steal off the actual economy, the poorer people will be, and the more the economy will faulter and die... which is exactly what the communist-politicians want here in the UK.
    2
  10190. We can, but then we'd have to talk about Lend Lease and how all the boots, trucks and more came from the United States, which I've mentioned in previous videos
    2
  10191. The indoctrination is strong with this one
    2
  10192. No, it was about German logistics. The National Socialist Health Service only made up a fraction of this video
    2
  10193. "Maybe this is why big companies might be inefficient, but you know, not all big companies are inefficient." No, they are, because as you rightly point out, they don't have an internal price system. This is EXACTLY the point that Mises made - there's an economic calculation problem with anything that gets too big. Corporations/Syndicates (collectively owned by their shareholders, which is why they're public ownership of the means of production, otherwise known as Socialist, or corpus, corpse, body, organ - organs of the State, see https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y ) are inherently incapable of competing in a truly free market against smaller competitors for this exact reason. In a free market, there wouldn't be giant corporations. Only in an unfree market like we have now, with wage controls, price controls, regulations, 'laws', manipulated interest rates (the price of currency) and currency printing by the central banks and the central states, can giant monopoly corporations exist. And that State encourages this because it knows, just like the Marxist Syndicalists and Fascists realized, that it's easier to control a handful of Corporations/Syndicates than it is to control millions of small businesses. Therefore the State and Central Banks deliberately create the conditions where monopolies exist, then blame it on 'capitalism'.
    2
  10194. I've explained this in the past. See 13:44 of this video https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    2
  10195. There are no undistorted prices because the central state bank is manipulating interest rates (the price of currency) and printing currency. They're also buying assets, controlling yields, and directly manipulating the price of commodities. This destroys the price discovery mechanism, making EVERY price in the entire economy wrong. And that's just the central banks. The State is also intervening with price controls, wage controls, regulations, laws, and in a million other ways to distort the economy. That's why they're calling this bubble the "everything bubble" because the distortions are so bad it's impossible to know the true price of anything. And this is by design to kill the so-called "Capitalist" system and usher in Socialism. And when you make something "free", you're basically making demand for that thing infinite. Since supply isn't infinite, you get shortages and poor quality products and services. This is the NHS in a nutshell.
    2
  10196. I LIKE TRAINS https://youtu.be/vyItidbjxLM
    2
  10197. All that's in your opinion. Waging a war inefficiently will result in a colossal waste of both resources and men, which is why the 20th Century was a bloodbath. Modern armies are not as efficient as they think they are. You just said about ammunition shortages - yep, that happens a lot nowadays, along with insufficient body armour or poor equipment (see the British Army). You can't fathom the concept I've outlined because you've done zero reading on basic economics. Rational decisions are not being made under shellfire right now, and I've offered a workable solution to this problem.
    2
  10198. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10199. "TIK, you overlook the fact that the Soviet Union made better use of their scarce resources, and ended up with better logistics than the Wehrmacht." That has nothing to do with the video. And the only reason the Soviet Union did better was because the USA supplied all their boots, trucks and a lot of food. I've been over this before https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w and https://youtu.be/usBKGE4w5NI
    2
  10200. Yeah, I get 1 day deliveries consistently. I don't think they've ever delivered late. The rest of what you wrote is easily refuted by facts. I didn't just use the Austrian School here. The phrase "scarce resources that have alternative uses" comes from Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics" which is the Chicago School of Economics. History theory shows the flaw in just "sticking to facts" (empiricism). I've been over this in my history theory video (made BEFORE I converted from Socialism and Keynesianism to Capitalism) https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc In a nutshell, if you use purely empiricism for a complicated subject that you can't possibly know everything about (the knowledge problem described in the video) then you have no choice but to rely upon interpretation of the evidence. The old historians (and continental ones currently) fell short because they tried just using facts. But even they failed to practice what they preached because it's impossible to not provide interpretations of those facts. Praxeology fills the gap. We know that humans act. To deny this would be to deny the human condition, and history itself. Yes, we could just rely upon 'belief' ("Hitler's a madman") but it's actually better to view the events as the result of human actors ("Hitler had goals, and made the best decisions he could to fulfill those goals, even though he had incomplete knowledge, was a racist, and didn't understand basic economics"). Of course, if we come to silly conclusions, then we reassess. The problem is that other schools (notably the Keynesian and Socialist ideologies) don't do that. This is why we still have people calling for "more Socialism" despite the repeated failure of that system. This is why we still have people calling for inflation, despite the fact we know that interest rate manipulation and currency printing causes the boom bust cycle https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  10201. Gladly https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10202. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Then listen to this https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    2
  10203. Yeah, I mentioned this in the pinned comment 😂
    2
  10204. In this hypothetical example, both routes are the same length. The point is for you to understand the economic calculation problem first before you apply it to different scenarios. But yes, a longer route would require more guards and coal and so on. But it may still be better in certain circumstances if it goes through major cities or not. It all depends. Prices will help you determine all of this.
    2
  10205. Ahh yes, increased spending is decreased spending. Thanks for pointing out your double-think
    2
  10206. Second!
    2
  10207. "Fiat currency has no innate value, it is a medium of exchange with various enforcement controls. I'm not trading my chicken for dollars, I'm trading it for it's value relative to other commodities or services." A couple of things. 1. a chicken is a commodity. So in the same breath you're saying that you're not trading commodities for dollars, you're also saying you're trading commodities for dollars. Which is it? 2. You're correct that fiat currency has no innate value, and is simply a medium of exchange. Exactly, that's my point. 3. That particular medium of exchange you have chosen to hold is rapidly devaluing as a result of central bank inflation policy, so why are you holding onto something that is losing value? Why not trade it in for commodities that retain their value? - "TIK you have a great understanding of wwii history but your economics is lacking." It is not me who lacks an understanding of economics, sir. Far from it.
    2
  10208. Yes, the government is the monopoly wanting to stop monopolies 🙄 When you walk upstairs, do you inflate? When a plane takes off from the ground, does it inflate? Does an elevator inflate when it moves to a higher floor? No. Because something that goes up is not an inflation. Prices rises are NOT inflation. An inflation is an expansion of something. And an economic inflation is the expansion of the currency supply. I point this out because this shows you how terribly wrong lamestream "economists" are. Relevant link https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA You would do well to realize that everything you said is the typical Keynesian position and easily refutable by just learning the basics of language or economics (I would also encourage you to not use Wikipedia because it's not a source and is often incorrect). This is because the Keynesian position is not economics, but rather an excuse for government control as a way to empower the elite. I therefore refer to is as Kekonomics, because it's keck. I would suggest listening to the audio books of "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. Links - https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U and https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA In regards to "market failures", what you're actually referring to is the failure of government. To learn why, read the first ~60 pages of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". Link to free copy https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression As a great Keynesian economist, I would also love you to explain the solution to the Socialist economic calculation problem. You may find Mises's book "Socialism" extremely interesting in this regard https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis And finally, here's a response for your last paragraph https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  10209. "How would a military make a profit, it costs money to maintain a military and would do so regardless of whether it was ran efficiently or not." Just like anything else that makes a profit, it would need to provide a service that people actually want, and then not waste the resources of society.
    2
  10210. Also this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10211. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10212. The size of a military has nothing to do with the efficiency of its logistics.
    2
  10213. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ then read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. It will help you understand.
    2
  10214. Also, first!
    2
  10215. But by attacking Poland, who had her independence guaranteed by Britain and France, he knew that his attack on Poland would result in war with the British. He was attacking Britain's ally! Even after the attack, Chamberlain asked the Germans to indicate that they would withdraw their troops to prevent a war, warning them that if they didn't that a state of war would exist between them. That's a Prime Minister trying to avoid war, not start one. Hitler and the Germans didn't reply, which is why in his speech Chamberlain said that a state of war now existed between them. So in reality, Hitler knowingly started the war with Britain by attacking her ally https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chamberlain-war-declaration.ogg "I am speaking to you from the cabinet room at 10 Downing St. This morning the British Ambassador in Berlin handed the German Government a final note stating that, unless we heard from them by 11 o'clock that they were prepared at once to withdraw their troops from Poland, a state of war would exist between us. I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received, and that consequently this country is at war with Germany. You can imagine what a bitter blow it is to me that all my long struggle to win peace has failed. Yet I cannot believe that there is anything more, or anything different, that I could have done, and that would have been more successful. Up to the very last it would have been quite possible to have arranged a peaceful and honourable settlement between Germany and Poland. But Hitler would not have it; he had evidently made up his mind to attack Poland whatever happened. And although he now says he put forward reasonable proposals which were rejected by the Poles, that is not a true statement. The proposals were never shown to the Poles, nor to us. And though they were announced in the German broadcast on Thursday night, Hitler did not wait to hear comments on them but ordered his troops to cross the Polish frontier the next morning. His action shows convincingly that there is no chance of expecting that this man will ever give up his practice of using force to gain his will. He can only be stopped by force, and we and France are today in fulfillment of our obligations going to the aid of Poland who is so bravely resisting this wicked and unprovoked attack upon her people. We have a clear conscience, we have done all that any country could do to establish peace, but a situation in which no word given by Germany's ruler could be trusted, and no people or country could feel itself safe, had become intolerable. And now that we have resolved to finish it, I know that you will all play your parts with calmness and courage." - Chamberlain
    2
  10216. I said this in the video. Kershaw is a good historian too
    2
  10217. Of course! I mentioned this in last week's video, so go back and watch that
    2
  10218. Historians revise history all the time. But the "Institute for Historical Review" doesn't revise history, it distorts it. That's why their source that I used in this video doesn't stand up to scrutiny. And it's not the only one. So yes, revision happens, but denial and deliberate distortion doesn't. Relevant videos - History Theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Revisionism https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    2
  10219. You may be interested in this video which discusses the functionalist debate https://youtu.be/U8LNFjFyGU8
    2
  10220. UK and France are not innocent for their crimes. But neither is Nazi Germany. Denying Nazi Germany didn't commit crimes or waged wars of aggression is just as ridiculous as saying the British government didn't cause the starvation of Indians in WW2. And yes, free trade (Capitalism) was on the decline. But it was Germany that implemented Autarky, with Hitler calling for 100% Autarky because he hated Capitalism. I've been over this https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10221. Thanks Anton! I need to reply to your emails, and I'll make it a priority tomorrow!
    2
  10222. It would... if only I hadn't come to the conclusion that Hitler was a Socialist BEFORE converting from Socialism to Capitalism. It was the backlash from the original "National Socialism was Socialism" video that prompted me to look into Austrian School economics because I was being accused of reading Mises and Rothbard, which I hadn't at that point. But because I was being accused of it, I decided to look into it, and instantly realized why the Socialists don't like Austrian School economics (it thoroughly destroys the entire idea Socialism).
    2
  10223. Yes, YouTube automatically deletes comments. It deletes my comments some times if I quote from Karl Marx for example (he was very anti-Semitic). I'm an advocate for free speech so I'm not happy with YouTube over this either, but I can promise you that I'm not deleting comments
    2
  10224. Also, glad you liked the video!
    2
  10225. Do you have a link to the story about the Principal?? I'd like to read about that
    2
  10226. Some are, some aren't. Taylor (one of the Historians in the video) thought the Holocaust happened, but didn't believe the Hossbach Memorandum and thought Hitler was reacting to events rather than leading them. But a significant number of those who think Hitler was reacting to events are Holocaust Deniers too.
    2
  10227. Bodglin o'Ite You got Venus right!
    2
  10228. "Does that mean breed doesn't exist either, since all dogs descended from wolves? Do you honestly believe that?" 1. Humans are not dogs. 2. All dogs are dogs. A pit bull is not a 'cat', and a poodle is not a 'fish'. They're all dogs. 3. Dogs are pets that have been subjected to deliberate in-breeding strategies, and also breed faster than humans (dogs only live ~12 years). This means that it's possible to see physical changes quicker in dogs than with humans. 4. All dogs can interbreed - showing that they are closely related and thus are the same species/"race". 5. On human terms, it's not worth talking about "race" or even "breeds", since we're all so closely related to each other and have interbred. 6. Culture does exist, as do ridiculous belief systems, and there are cosmetic differences between individuals who inherit the cosmetic traits of their forefathers, but that doesn't mean that "races" or "breeds" exist.
    2
  10229. "Thats one teory that we all came from Africa, another says that we didnt" But either way, on evolutionary terms, we're all so related to each other it's not right to talk about different human "races"
    2
  10230. OH NO!!?!?!?!?
    2
  10231. EXPOSED 😂
    2
  10232. Thank you! Although it's technically a "Craft", which is a combination between science and "art". I explain this in my History Theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  10233. There's numerous videos I've done confirming I'm not a Nazi or a Fascist etc (which I've said are Left-wing). However, I'm still right-wing, assuming capitalism is on the right https://images.app.goo.gl/aCo3p5qRLhmTueps6
    2
  10234. Ohler says he drank beer in 1943 - “[Hitler praised] his own vegetarian diet, which his personal physician, who received a tax-free allowance of over 100,000 Reichsmarks on 30 January 1943, had recommended on the basis of its vitamin content and restorative properties.1 To calm his nerves he had the occasion to neglect the rules that had once seemed incontrovertible: after dinner Patient A now sometimes drank a beer, or knocked back a slivovitz, which had previously been analysed by the field laboratory, acting on the Führer’s orders, for methyl alcohol.” - Ohler, “Blitzed,” P166-167.
    2
  10235. You realize that in that same Klaus Schwab video that I showed, Prince Charles is there later on saying the same thing? Is Prince Charles a Socialist now? Or is this a "conspiracy" too?
    2
  10236. Well it is technically a primary source, so it's a little bit different to them
    2
  10237. Great! It's funny because I did the exact same - decided to buy a physical copy of that book even though I had the PDF
    2
  10238. It's surprising how many people have criticized me in the comments of previous videos for pointing out this glaringly obvious fact. The amount of people unable to open up a dictionary, or understand the etymology of the words, or even just use logic is astounding.
    2
  10239. I'm not an AnCap.
    2
  10240. Hitler's not a communist. Hitler is a socialist.
    2
  10241. Profit means you are benefiting the customers and the economy as a whole, because profit means your goods don't take excessive amounts of resources, and are in demand. Losses are due to goods not being in demand, or you're using up excessive resources. Labour is a resource. If you waste it by having the workers sip lattes and debate social philosophy, then profits go down, the customer loses, and the business ultimately becomes unsustainable. This is why socialism doesn't work, because without profit you have loss of life.
    2
  10242. No they're not. Please see my Public vs Private video, which will explain why they are competing revolutionary movements. Link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10243. He's a little before the era that I normally study, so this is the first time I've actually heard of the guy. However, now that you've pointed him out, I will add him to my list of people to look into. Thanks!
    2
  10244. Corporations are not capitalist, and I think you need to watch my other video which will set you straight https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10245. See pinned comment!
    2
  10246. Yeh, it shud be spelt "Saeed" if that's how it's sed. Stoopid Inglish!
    2
  10247. It's funny because lot's of people are agreeing with me in the comments. French politics is stupidly complex and it's not worth covering for a video like this.
    2
  10248. Thanks! If one person likes it, it was worth making :)
    2
  10249. More!? I'll get to work then!
    2
  10250. Thanks!
    2
  10251. Thank you for the link! I had come across the site before, however, it doesn't list references to where it's getting its information from, so while it is nice and very detailed, I'm not sure I can use it.
    2
  10252. I don't know, I haven't figured out what I'm doing regarding putting them all into big videos yet. I know I can't do one big one at the end because YouTube now has a maximum video limit which they never used to have
    2
  10253. Only heard about them a couple weeks ago, but I've found their latest videos to be fantastic.
    2
  10254. In this case, it was the UK Column
    2
  10255. The one book I would recommend for the entire Eastern Front is "When Titan's Clashed" by David Glantz. There are small battles that are missed, simply because it would be impossible to make one book covering every battle on the Eastern Front, but a fantastic book and great starting place overall.
    2
  10256. Here in Britain you get arrested for walking down the street. And there was that guy in the USA who was arrested for being in a boat alone in the Ocean just off the coast. And the guy arrested for being at the park with his daughter https://youtu.be/pilK1tbYJe8
    2
  10257. The point is, we're slowly moving into totalitarianism, since that's what democracy is - a People's State (People as in Public, as in State). One step at a time, the State is taking away the freedom that made "Western liberal democracies" what they were in the first place. The 77th Brigade is but one example of this. For another example - The UK has just abolished many human rights under the pretence of helping people. Don't believe me? https://youtu.be/m_51gGZKTyc
    2
  10258. "And the part about the race is just not working I think." Just seen this. If you haven't, check out Farrell's book. I think he makes a very compelling argument, which I can't do justice here. And yes, semantics :) I actually think a lot of my problems is me not explaining myself clearly and using the wrong words. I also think there's language barriers which end up muddling the translations and so people misinterpret what I say.
    2
  10259. Thank you! Glad you liked it
    2
  10260. I should have said there was no "death camps" rather than concentration camps. Sorry.
    2
  10261. He wasn't wrong. Orwell is my favourite fiction author, even though he's a socialist. His writing style is straight forward and effective.
    2
  10262. I don't have the numbers to hand, but it's still not on the scale of what happened in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. The Marxist in Italy were killing too, so if the Fascists are evil because of that, so are the Italian Marxists.
    2
  10263. It is complex, and trying to boil it down is even harder, but I'm trying. I have a degree in history and then started doing this as a hobby. Thanks to my Patrons it has now become a "full time job". It's not really because I actually work ~70 hours a week, and a lot of that is focused reading and studying, as well as editing videos etc.
    2
  10264. Conservatives are socialists. Elements of the Conservative Party in the UK are for the free-market, but the majority are socialists and have been since at least the 1800s. The Liberal Party converted to socialism in the 1890s (roughly), and then declined as the Labour Party took over. Since the Liberal Party's conversion, we have not had a pro-free market (capitalist) party in Britain.
    2
  10265. I can't wait for them the tell me he was in love with corporations (which is true, but they don't realise what corporations actually were back in the day)
    2
  10266. Let's discuss "state capitalism". Capitalism is the private (individual) control of the economy. Private means individual, which is also non-state. Capitalism is anti-public. So "state capitalism" litereally means "state non-state". It's an oxymoron. A state is defined as a "politically organized community". A community is a group. A group is non-private, and therefore "public". Public comes from the Latin word Publicum, meaning non-individual and state. This is why we call the state the "public sector". A politically organized group (e.g. workers' group, or racial group) is a state. Socialism is the state-control of the economy. So having a "state" means non-private/public. And having capitalism is private non-state. These two are complete opposites. State capitalism is therefore not a thing. If you have state control over the economy, you no longer have capitalism. Capitalism is the free market (free individuals who get to decide what they do with their wealth). When a state starts regulating or interfering in the economy, you no longer have capitalism. A black market is a free market within a state-controlled economy. If you have a black market, you know your economy is not free, and therefore is no longer capitalism. Both the US and the UK have black markets for drugs. This is an indication that they are not capitalist economies.
    2
  10267. ANTIFA are National Socialists, which is why they're all white. That's why they claim to be anti-fascist, because they're not Fascists, they're National Socialists. It's actually a very smart play by the Nazis.
    2
  10268. Every argument you've presented in the comments of all my videos has been awful. Lots of viewers have debunked your claims, I've debunked your claims, we've provided you tons of evidence that goes against your arguments, you've dismissed us, made false accusations, and are still preaching nonsense now. A strawman claim is a strawman argument in itself! But again, you're just repeating what other Socialists have said in the past, even though such points don't work. Claiming that I've redefined words, when it is the postmodernist Marxist-Socialists who have been PROVEN to have redefined the words, as I've shown, and as others have shown, is a joke. You can't "correct" history with insults. You can't "correct" history by claiming that Hitler privatized the industries when I've shown that he actually nationalized them. You can't "correct" history by claiming that 2+2=5 when I've shown my workings out and proven your maths is off. Most Socialists don't know what Socialism is. They can't agree on the definition. When they claim it's one thing, and I show them that what they claim actually means State control, they say "no" and change the definitions again to avoid the reality. It's classic postmodernist tactics, and I can see straight through it. Your Denialism is laid bare for all to see. The best part is that when I was a Socialist, I knew what Socialism was! I knew it was State control. I just assumed that State control was the way to go. I have since realized I was mistaken, but at least I was honest with myself. Socialists in the USA especially seem to think Socialism isn't State control as they call for State control. Yet it is me who apparently has it wrong. Seriously, I've no idea why you keep commenting. You're not going to convince me that Socialism isn't State control without using logic, which you can't do because the logic says it's State control. So you're doomed to keep repeating the same rubbish over and over. If you've got an argument that says Socialism isn't State control, and if you think it will stand up to scrutiny, give it to me. Otherwise start accepting the truth.
    2
  10269. Yes, and ownership and control are the same thing. If you haven't seen it, here's my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10270. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    2
  10271. @Aidan B. - As I said to others, not once does Umberto mention State control (socialism). He also says the Nazis were fascists, and that all fascists were racists - two statement which are incorrect (one of Mussolini's mistresses - Margherita Sarfatti- was Jewish and 10,000 Jews were members of the Italian Fascist Party). This is why I prefer to rely on the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    2
  10272. You've copied from Wikipedia. But I would suggest you watch this video instead which will give you a far better definition of Fascism that's not based purely on conjecture https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  10273. "OK as long as we agree on the long term move towards being surfs. Thanks for your thoughts!" Yes, the central banking sector (which Karl Marx called for in his Manifesto) run by the State is creating debt slaves. The way to free ourselves from that is destroying the central banking sector, and freeing up the economy from State control. Wolff is calling for more serfdom/socialism.
    2
  10274. As an ex-Socialist, I have listened to Wolff several times, and he's spouting the same old nonsense that I used to believe in. It's not capitalism turning workers into serfs, it's socialism turning people into serfs.
    2
  10275. Early on, he was more Communist (describing himself as an "anarchist"), but much later on he seems to have moved to the Centre-Left. I could be wrong, but he never seems to have given up his Socialism, even when its evils stared him in the face and he wrote about it.
    2
  10276. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    2
  10277. @MrZauberelefant - exactly, why trust politicians who are enemies of the ideology you're studying? It's like asking a Socialist what a Capitalist believes. A Socialist is not going to say that the Capitalist thinks the best way to help the poor is to lower taxes to zero, give them 100% freedom from the slavery of the State, and end corporate monopolies. But a Socialist won't say that because they don't understand what Capitalism is. Similarly, a Marxist isn't going to know what Fascism is, which is why I let the evidence do the talking - Mussolini nationalized two thirds of the industries. Hitler nationalized most of them too, as I've shown in my Hitler's Socialism video.
    2
  10278. @Aiden B - no they don't, they describe themselves as "Third Way" between Capitalism and Marxism.
    2
  10279. Or I could just use the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    2
  10280. "I'm guessing neither of you are familiar with Umberto Eco's work? I mean, I guess when you define fascism as totalitarianism, fascism is just when the government does something. Big brain take." From what I've seen, not once does he mention State control (socialism). He also says the Nazis were fascists, and that all fascists were racists - two statement which are incorrect (one of Mussolini's mistresses - Margherita Sarfatti- was Jewish and 10,000 Jews were members of the Italian Fascist Party). Mussolini and the Fascists invented the word 'totalitarian' to describe their own regime. It means total State (society) control of the means of production. This is why Mussolini was also a Socialist (non-Marxist). And this is why I prefer to rely on the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    2
  10281. And a nation is a society. So Nationalism is Socialism.
    2
  10282. Well, this is just me reading Orwell out loud for you, so this really isn't much compared to a typical video
    2
  10283. Correct. I don't have to agree with Orwell to quote from him, and I'm able to make my own assessments based on the evidence I've read
    2
  10284. Fascism is a variety of Socialism, but Socialism isn't necessary Fascism.
    2
  10285. Yeah, I was hoping to get Stalingrad out next week, but I think it may slip to the week after :(
    2
  10286. That was the original plan, but YouTube now has a video limit of 12 hours, and the series is already over 7 hours long and we haven't even got to the city yet! The old limit was 24 hours, which changed to 12 in the process of me doing the reading for the series https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/71673?co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop&hl=en#:~:text=Maximum%20upload%20size,12%20hours%2C%20whichever%20is%20less.
    2
  10287. But he didn't. The only part in this 13 page essay where he was correct on was the NKVD needing to be added in for ONE of the three sources I used. But that doesn't change the overall conclusion I came to, and it only slightly alters one of the ratios. This wasn't me being "caught" or "wrong", it's just a minor issue that didn't warrant a 13 page essay where he proceeded to tear down me video and say that we should have the NKVD numbers, but then NOT include the SS or the Security Divisions, or many of the other German formations.
    2
  10288. And you can't calculate army logistics because the only way to calculate economically is by having prices and a free market (as Mises explains in his book "Socialism"), which obviously military logistics don't have
    2
  10289. It's perfectly fine with me :)
    2
  10290. The book did support my conclusions. So I'm not sure what you're on about.
    2
  10291. Not quite. My video will give you more history theory than you'll get at university, for free, meaning that you don't need to study at university to learn the process or theory of history. The only reason you'd want to go to university and get into a ton of debt is for accreditation (a piece of paper with a grade on it for employers), but considering there are not jobs like that now for graduates (see link below) then it's a colossal waste of time and money. Better just learning the theory and then start buying your own history books and doing your own reading (which you do at university anyway, so there's literally no reason to go to university now). https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-graduate-jobs-drop-by-more-than-60-084158691.html?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly91ay5maW5hbmNlLnlhaG9vLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAKPJ51DU4c_J4gRMPQgO8LFsRqMNlyniQm7e_-PBzJAmPIHKQyTr8K5ZZgJTS07Msqpc4zUITXsQNvB4EK1rW336KSRFUg1RkWvYzuzfd2SufZoSzqgU1sKqXbQgxABg0OBh8rWtMvK9CKz6AM4HIc_pU7XTL1vdYn7ec-WEB8Q3&_guc_consent_skip=1597076702 .
    2
  10292. :)
    2
  10293. I explained why I responded now in the video. Please watch it before commenting. And I didn't "underestimat[e] the Wehrmacht's combat power based on flawed sources" as explained. Again, please watch the actual video before jumping to conclusions.
    2
  10294. Here's my rebuttal https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10295. Really old video of mine explains that I went to university to study history https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M I also put at the bottom of the description of every video that I have a degree in history - not that it matters because it was a waste of time and money, which is why I don't encourage people to study history at university. In fact, as I've said several times now, you'll learn more history theory in this video of mine about history than you will at university - that's why I made it https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc And you can see my name in the first minute of my first ever documentary (Market Garden) https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc
    2
  10296. Go on then, have a heart :)
    2
  10297. So you admit that you haven't watched the video, in which I show exactly where he says those things. There is no "strawman", which is itself a strawman argument... And Askey didn't "review" my work, he attacked it and insulted me. If he had acted like an actual history and showed some respect, I wouldn't have refuted him in this way. Again you need to actually watch the video.
    2
  10298. "You assume that the nazis were strict adherents to their own political and economic theories." No I don't. I know Hitler placed politics first before economics, which is why he compromised on the economic front when necessary, and will cover than in the future. Hitler was a pragmatist - but that doesn't mean he wasn't a National Socialist and thus a capitalist or loved the free market.
    2
  10299. Inflation only comes from the fractional reserve banking system (currently under state monopoly in the central banks). The other things (e.g. minimum wage) only create shortages by increasing prices (e.g. less employment, since the cost of wages have gone up, so businesses can't employ as many people). The central banks and parties like to blame businesses and so on for the inflation because it gets them off the hook. Don't believe them. The only way you currently get inflation is from the printing press of the central bank. I'm not planning on doing a video on inflation, but maybe I should. That said, I am working on a video which will explain why recessions happen. The reason recessions happen is because of inflation. So you may be interested in that, once I make it
    2
  10300. "So clearly hitler was not Keynesian as it was not consumer led. It is Statism there is a difference." You cannot have socialism with the state, since socialism is the socialization (state control) of the means of production. You also cannot have Keynesianism without the socialization (state control) of the means of production. They are not the same, but they are so similar that these Cambridge historians felt the need to defend the difference, as did you.
    2
  10301. "Law=state intervention. By your standards the only capitalism is anarchy." Law does not have to be made by the state. A free market can provide a law.
    2
  10302. "Then you are searching for unicorns." I'm not searching for anything. I'm just using the terms correctly.
    2
  10303. Tooze does support my view. He said it's state control. He claims state control is capitalism, which is wrong, but he gives plenty of evidence for it to be socialism. You just have to ignore the Keynesian ignorance of economics and just pull out the facts. Same with Evans and Kershaw etc.
    2
  10304. "Hitler's regime IS NOT CAPITALIST ... none of these people are saying that ... the government and the economy ARE NOT the same thing IN ANY COUNTRY. How is this SOOOOOO hard for you TIK?" They are, because the government controlled the economy.
    2
  10305. "US per capita Healthcare expenditure is almost double that of the UK, " Yes, because the government has regulated it to death https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10306. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10307. You may be interested in my Public vs Private video, which discusses the definitions more than it does in this video, showing the etymology of the words and the history from ancient times until today.
    2
  10308. "Doesn’t your statement that taxation and inflation interfere with a free market mean that no markets are totally free since they all feature some form of control" Yes, yes it does. A state controlled/manipulated economy is not a free market, and thus not capitalism. And state control of the economy is socialism... which means that people think the world we live in today is capitalist, and it's not. They've been kidded.
    2
  10309. alkafluence I did. And now the highest temp I've seen is 73°C whilst rendering videos using practically 100% cpu. I'm monitoring it though, just in case
    2
  10310. Because they had nothing to replace them with. I explained this in the first few videos on the series, plus also this standalone video on the Fall Blau Campaign https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY
    2
  10311. @Matthew Mischnick  haha I knew you hadn't had time to watch the video yet, but I should have also said something like "great minds think alike" at the end of my comment because it's great to see you hit one of the points I brought up
    2
  10312. Yes, the world wars are arguably the first wars for oil. You can't drive vehicles without fuel, so countries without sufficient oil (like most European countries) are in trouble if cut off from external oil sources
    2
  10313. British Summer Time has changed back to normal GMT, so that explains why there's an hour difference
    2
  10314. To annoy you
    2
  10315. If there had been a second Romania, they still wouldn't have had enough oil to meet their basic requirements
    2
  10316. If the Allied leaders say stupid stuff that could get my audio taken out of context by my enemies in order to get me deplatformed, then I will simulate evil voices. For example https://youtu.be/vB2zZWk9TfU
    2
  10317. The good news is that I'm planning to :)
    2
  10318. Agreed
    2
  10319. Oh yes. Surprisingly though, he's not really mentioned much in many of the texts, beyond making the decision where to place units on the first day.
    2
  10320. Great! Hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  10321. Glad you liked it Barry!
    2
  10322. +Ivan Zaitzev yes that's it, signals! Sorry for getting that muddled up. Not read those! Middlebrook's book is good, but again only on Arnhem area. I used that for this though
    2
  10323. +tigerhunter77 I do honestly think it's required reading on Operation Market Garden. I wish more history books were like this
    2
  10324. Rex1987 the "A Street in Arnhem" one or It Never Snows in September? And happy birthday for 7 days time, mate :)
    2
  10325. +Gary Thomas Great! Let me know how you find it :) I've just gone on a spending spree and bought several new history books... Think I'm addicted to buying new ones - I'm never going to have time to read them all lol
    2
  10326. Thank you for asking the question! Sorry it took so long to get to you! (others have been waiting longer... 😣). Glad to hear you're getting the Death of the Wehrmacht. If history is just a hobby for you, I think that book will be the best choice, even if most of it isn't specifically on the Caucasus. It's a great book overall, it covers the whole of the Eastern Front/North African conflict during 1942, and Citino is a great author. If you find it's not quite as in-depth as you'd like, then there's always Glantz 👍
    2
  10327. It's your lucky day! I actually have a video on study tips https://youtu.be/4nJ582vu_0o
    2
  10328. I actually bought it years ago just as the channel started taking off, and didn't get time to ever download or play it. I seriously don't get much time to play games now. If I do, it's usually just fun, relaxation games that I can play for 10 minutes or so, then come back to them (e.g. Dorfromantik, which I got into a couple months back)
    2
  10329. Some of them, yes. I've answered quite a few questions that weren't 2 years behind, but a few of the more difficult ones that I'm researching are actually 2 years behind now, and many are over 1 year
    2
  10330. This video was recorded and was being edited before that previous video. There was no video last week because I was working on this and other things. The issue is still here and I'll be updating everyone this week. This isn't for views - I genuinely cannot continue at the pace I'm doing, and I'm not just going to "roll over" either.
    2
  10331. Yeah, this is what I'm considering right now... I'll be doing an update in the next few days.
    2
  10332. Haha nice try
    2
  10333. New Zealand freedom buyback scheme concludes
    2
  10334. Correct. In other words, it's your wages and savings going down.
    2
  10335. All I'll say is come back on Monday
    2
  10336. No, but it's in preparation for tomorrow's video which I've been working on for a very very long time and just so happens to be on the same subject
    2
  10337. Come back on Monday
    2
  10338. When he advocated social 'public' control over the means of production and made an entire career advocating it
    2
  10339. Just to clarify, it isn't specifically addressed to the Time Ghost video, but it should address it nonetheless
    2
  10340. Come back on Monday
    2
  10341. That's precisely it. You're spot on. And yes, I'm mostly focused on the war anyway, so any political or economic videos will be related to that, or the build-up to war etc.
    2
  10342. My intention is to keep making economics videos (or a mix of military and economics in one video, like the German logistics one). The priority will be the military stuff of course, but only because that's what the majority want to see.
    2
  10343. Yes, Socialism is a bad religion, which is why Socialists claim to be 'atheists'. They're not atheists - they're Socialists.
    2
  10344. Renaming my channel "STIK to tanks"
    2
  10345. You have no idea how long I've been wanting to make this video. It was the right time, given the video that's coming tomorrow, which will be another mic drop moment
    2
  10346. I'm not super familiar with Scandinavia, but I would consider anything that's state-owned or controlled (regulated, directed or financed) to be socially (State or corporation) controlled. So while there may be some parts of the economy which are 'free' or 'private', I think the majority of the Scandinavian (or UK) economy is socially controlled. That's why the (free) black market exists. So while it may not be "full-socialism" (as in, full-ownership by the central State) it is still socially controlled, and thus would be classed as a more "limited-socialism". The 'official' economy is the 'social' economy. The 'black' market is the 'free' economy.
    2
  10347. I'd be interested to hear what you think of this other video on health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Also school https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI Also minimum wage https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    2
  10348. While tomorrow's video isn't specifically on that, it does mention it and goes on to show how the concept of 'Social Darwinism' is actually the Achilles heel of National Socialism. So you may want to watch it
    2
  10349. If you watch my original National Socialism was Socialism video, you'll see where the criticism began. But it has persisted. Also, if you google search for TIK on Reddit, you'll find more criticism that goes way beyond the realm of reality. I need not tell you that I strongly disagree with their points
    2
  10350. Oh yes, I'm a regular viewer of AA. He made a response video to my (admittingly awful) old video on economics
    2
  10351. Yes, that's it. I'm just disappointed that it took me so long to realise. Cheers!
    2
  10352. Thank you! But you know, I have never actually played Donkey Kong :)
    2
  10353. You're not the first to mention it, and yes I absolutely will. I'm not sure yet when I'll introduce it, but its parent division is the 100th Jager Division, and that sees action right at the start of when I'm beginning the documentary. Interestingly, the 100th Jager was also the only Jager division at Stalingrad too.
    2
  10354. I will. The 100th Jager Division that the 369th is a part of plays a vital role in the fighting outside the city, which is the bit I'm currently researching, and I have no doubt both play a major part in the fighting in the city as well.
    2
  10355. But we will be hearing about 22nd Panzer Division later
    2
  10356. Oh yes, see the 22nd Panzer Division (but this wasn't engaged in the Don Battles)
    2
  10357. "I don't know why you indulge them." I don't do it all the time. But when multiple people are saying the same thing, I kinda feel like I have to respond to correct what is clearly a false allegation
    2
  10358. The best part is that Marxists criticize me for reading Mises and Rothbard, and say that, because I'm a capitalist and Nazis are capitalists, this makes me a Nazi who hates Jews. Well, they clearly don't realise that both Mises and Rothbard were Jewish, so they can't even get that theory right
    2
  10359. Actually this video is monetized. Most of my other ones aren't, but this one is, even though I mentioned Mein Kampf. Logic much
    2
  10360. Yes, they were getting converted to tank-destroyers or training or command tanks. However, they were still useful in reconnaissance and taking on infantry and light vehicles.
    2
  10361. I don't have to face them face-to-face, but I still have to deal with them. But unlike my old job, I can call them out on their BS ;)
    2
  10362. I honestly haven't had time to play it, but I do intend to at some point. I've seen some favourable reviews of it though, so I remain optimistic
    2
  10363. Thank you for your recommendation!
    2
  10364. "tik I love your stuff it's funny watching nazis and commies getting all upset because somebody didn't put something the way they like" I enjoy making both Nazis and Commies work together, while they pretend they're completely opposite and don't agree in any way
    2
  10365. I'm glad to hear that! And I hope I've contributed to your understanding of WW2/history, because that's my ultimate goal :)
    2
  10366. Glad to hear that! It's good to be back
    2
  10367. "This decision cost Britain its empire, it’s wealth and its functionality as a superpower." That may have been the final straw that broke the camel's back, but it was the 1870s abandonment of the classical liberal ideas of free markets, laissez faire economics, and the increasing use of fiat currency that destroyed the British economy and rendered her empire irrelevant. No point having an empire if you're against trading with it and think you can print your way to prosperity. Central planning and heavy taxation/inflation destroyed the empire.
    2
  10368. Just wanted to clarify about the research: that 'first' most-indepth book is probably the slowest part. Once that's out of the way, it's then pretty easy to do the rest, because you only need to note down what conflicts with the first book, and insert references which back up the first in the essay. Also, if you do in-depth notes for all important books that you may think you'll need again (for me, that would be books like Mein Kampf or Zitelmann's book on Hitler, which explains his ideology to a tee), you can use them over and over for future essays. But if you think "I'm never going to use this book again", then maybe just read the relevant bits and add in quotes/references as you go, rather than do in-depth page-by-page notes
    2
  10369. Tips: Do everything on computer (I use Google docs). It does vary from topic to topic. For Battlestorms, or if I come up against a new subject, I pick one book which I think is the MOST detailed account I need on a topic. I go through that and make extensive notes in one docs file with reference etc. Then I pick a second one and (depending on how in-depth the first was) I do the same. Usually, after two to three books, you have the basis for what's needed. Then I create a docs file for the script (the final essay), import the notes into that, and start editing. It's easier to edit when you've got a basis for what you need, rather than starting from scratch. Then, after those books are in, I pick up others (one at a time) and go through them, adding anything I think is useful into the script, or adding additional references in conjunction with the ones I already have. Recently though (and I'm not sure if this is a better method or not), I've just been writing what I want to say, backed up by page references and quotes. However, I don't normally do this until I've fully gone through that first most in-depth book in order to get a full picture. I hope this makes sense. Also, don't read full books if you don't need to. Skip to the relevant bits. No point reading about 1941 if you're looking at something in 1943. Also, get up early and work work work. Work until your head hurts. I've heard that people can only concentrate for 2-3 hours a day. That's true, but it's only applicable to one topic. If my head is "full" of one topic, I try to switch to another, or go for a walk and think about what I'm going to say. It also helps that I practically lock myself in my room for hours or weeks at a time. See the book "Deep Work" by Cal Newport for more info. Also, look up "NaNoWriMo" and the concept behind it. Even though it's meant to be for fiction, it's surprising how much you can get done if you do a little each day. Also, set artificial deadlines and stick to them (e.g. I will get 4,000 words of research done each week, or else!). Then use procrastination to your advantage. Leave everything until two days before, and use your "oh no!" moment to cram cram cram :D In addition, I'm considering doing a video soon about my "personality type" which might be of interest to you, because it'll explain a lot.
    2
  10370. Clarification: I picked up the guitar and learnt to solo in the 6 weeks of intense concentration from dawn to dusk in the middle of a school holiday. My classmates couldn't believe it when I returned to school and I was playing blues solos. I was lucky though to stumble onto and fully grasp what the "Pentatonic scale" was meant to be for, which helped greatly. But yes, I class that as learning to play guitar up to an average skill-level in 6 weeks. The rest of the years were then spent improving upon that initial breakthrough. It's not because I'm "awesome" though. I have no inherent talent.
    2
  10371. Andy Jacobs Finally Andy! I've been waiting for you to reply to me so I can reply to you haha. Just so you know, atm I can only reply to your messages if you put a "+ TIK" in them like you did now. Your other messages I can't reply too at all. I think it's a privacy setting somewhere in youtube or google+ you need to change :)
    2
  10372. Let me just tackle one element of your argument here. I wouldn't need to pay people to build new roads for a journey to wherever, I would just pay for access to the roads that are already be built. The roads would still exist under private ownership, they would just be owned and maintained by the multiple people who own each section or individual road, rather than by the State. As an analogy, in a Capitalist economy I don't pay for people to build new restaurants every time I want to eat out, I just pay the restaurants that already exist for the food I order, and they maintain the restaurants, provide good food, and build new restaurants if profit indicates there's a demand for them.
    2
  10373. Why? Because you don't like the facts I've presented, backed by evidence?
    2
  10374. He was an atheist from what I can tell. I'm going to do a specific subject on this in the future
    2
  10375. "This analysis primarily relies on one book and on book only to support the crux of his thesis, which is Socialism caused the Holocaust and Nazi warmongering." No it doesn't. It uses these specific sources - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XSfE7i6CagK9WqeHqZuoBfarSAsm7L2DDWtwrq5K6Nk/edit?usp=sharing "TIK seems to overlook the fact that Germany’s citizens retained individual property ownership, and that’s not socialism." You seem to be forgetting that the Reichstag Fire Decree abolished private property, and that the Nazis only let individuals keep their property IF they toed the line. Anyone who didn't meet their criteria would see their property seized for the Reich (expropriated) and find themselves in a Gulag (sorry, concentration camp).
    2
  10376. I suspect my channel will eventually go the way of all the other channels that dared to say things the establishment don't like. Even though I back up everything I say with references and a bibliography, I think it's just a matter of time.
    2
  10377. You need to learn your history then. The answer to both your points are in this video right here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10378. Except, Hitler's economy was a planned economy, and he was going East to get the resources he needed to implement full Socialism. Hitler was a Socialist, even if the Third Reich economy didn't implement full socialism (because that's impossible anyway, as Mises has explained in his book "Socialism").
    2
  10379. It absolutely can be wrong when empirical data proves otherwise
    2
  10380. A boycott doesn't work for a country that's fashioned itself to be autarkic based on an ideology that outlined this policy years before it got into power.
    2
  10381. I've never "promoted the Nazi ideology of Social Darwinism". Social Darwinism is pseudo-science. There are no groups, there are only individuals. The fact that you somehow came to this conclusion proves you either weren't listening or are lying.
    2
  10382. No, And the reason why is because it's better for people to respond via articles or videos, and then I respond to that, rather than do a live debate. Can't really get to the meat of the matter in a live video, nor provide evidence
    2
  10383. Yeah, I provided references with plenty of evidence explaining this, but of course, my 'belief' in the evidence is wrong because OP has provided a super-compelling and definitely not-flawed argument based on belief rather than evidence which definitely stands up to scrutiny and isn't contradicted by copious amounts of other evidence. Well done OP.
    2
  10384. The dollar is the world's reserve currency. Effectively the USA is exporting her inflation to other countries, which is why they all need to inflate together. It's similar to how Nazi Europe was run. History repeats itself...
    2
  10385. The US dollar is the reserve currency. It's doing something similar to what the Third Reich did, except it has the whole world to support it. However, the system is beginning to crack now, which is why they needed to lockdown the economy when they did (spike in repo market 17 Sept 2019 prompted a response - anyone watching this saw it coming). If they hadn't done that, all the currency printing would have hit consumer prices... Luckily the virus came along at just the right time for them!
    2
  10386. I have several videos questioning Suvorov's thesis, including one specifically on his take on Keitel (the origin of his theory) https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA But others like the Red Army Air Force video, which shows just how unprepared the Soviets were https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw Considering how unprepared they were, it's unlikely they were planning on striking first
    2
  10387. China is freeing up her economy, while the western world is intent on socializing theirs. It's no wonder the markets are shrinking in the west but growing in the east. But again, people haven't read Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" and Sowell's "Basic Economics", and definitely haven't read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard even though that last one is available online for free, and the other two are available as audio versions on YouTube...
    2
  10388. Stuff costs more because of inflation. We don't produce as much because of manipulated interest rates, regulations, wage controls, price controls, and inflation (currency printing).
    2
  10389. Unfortunately, I think you'll find that those people will still refuse to accept the facts. One thing I've learnt from doing this video (and others) is that you can't beat an emotional mindset with a logical argument. That's why they revert to whataboutisms - what about monopolies, what about greed, what about worker rights... It's all an emotional belief that they're already won the argument before it's even begun
    2
  10390. Sadly, many see Austrian economics as 'fringe', and believe it is advocating things that it doesn't advocate. They also think that because something is popular, it must be true, and something that isn't popular, must be false. It's hard to get through to people like that.
    2
  10391. My name is Lewis. I hate all tribes - nations (including UK), international ideologies (Marxism and Socialism), I hate monopolies (government and corporate), and am pro-freedom for the individual (liberty and Capitalism). My allegiance is to truth https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  10392. I didn't forget it. I put a visual hint in the video about that. And I intend to come back to that issue and address it because it's not really hard to explain
    2
  10393. Irving writes in a book too. Therefore, by your logic, what be writes must be false https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    2
  10394. Blitzkrieging makes them feel good!
    2
  10395. I plan to do the odd 10 minute video here or there, but unfortunately, a lot of the topics do require an in-depth discussion
    2
  10396. Thank you for commenting again!
    2
  10397. I actually answered that question as part of this video https://youtu.be/fJdixJuXsmI
    2
  10398. Thank you, I appreciate it
    2
  10399. Assuming nothing goes wrong, it should be out next week :)
    2
  10400. Okay fine, spoiler: Zhukov is going to be blamed by me later, but I wanted the viewers to see what happened first before I did that. Stalin though is also to blame and can be blamed immediately because he was the one pushing for the attack to go in rather than wait a while, although this is counter-balanced by the fact that the Kotluban Offensive massive impacted the attack on Stalingrad, and so technically you could say Stalin was right to do what he did. Happy now?
    2
  10401. Yes, the text is wrong, and what I spoke was correct
    2
  10402. "As for economics, yes you don't know as much as you think, after all you think a plc and a state owned company are the same thing. In a plc the shares are traded publicly on a stock exchange and in a state owned business no shares are traded. Which means they are not the same. Yes a government can retain a share in a plc, like they did with the Royal Mail until quite recently." 1. Collective ownership of the means of production = socialism. So a company that's 'public' (a State) and is collectively owned by their shareholders, is a Syndicate, or Corporation. A Syndicate or Corporation is a trade union (a fasci) which "embodies the nation"... body, corpse, corporation, which is where the name comes from. 2. Royal Mail is owned by the State. It's part of the FTSE 250, meaning that it is directly being funded by the State through the Bank of England's "stimulus" packages. If it is funded by the State, it is the State. 3. A hierarchy of society is not a private individual. It is a public body. This makes it a State. Regardless of whether a Corporation is a Central State or not, it is a State in and of itself. So note: I'm not saying that two States are the same, which is what you're accusing me of saying. I'm saying that a Corporation itself is a State. - "It's amazing that You Tube is so bothered by your comments they have taken no real action" They've been deleting my comments, they've been restricting my videos, they've been limiting my ad revenue in an attempt to suppress the content. - "after all they are a private business, a Limited Liability Corporation," They're not an individual, and thus they are not private. They are a Corporation (a public group) which is a hierarchy of society consisting of thousands of people, which embodies the people, and is collectively owned by their shareholders. I'm not sure how you could possibly claim that YouTube is an individual human being (private). It's quite clearly 'public'. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "and can legitimately silence you without infringing your freedom of speech." Silence is speech now, is it? - "But they don't seem to have done this, although they did make it harder for people to see your video about the Greek famine in WW2 by not recommending it this is not censorship to all but thinnest of skinned conspiracy theorists." Censoring a video (and more videos besides) is not censorship now? And how does them censoring my video make me a conspiracy theorist exactly? Please connect the dots for me because the evidence is clear that they're suppressing my content. - "You Tube, is there to make money for its owners, Google, and films about famines or other disasters including wars are not money makers for them." Incorrect. YouTube and Google and Alphabet have embraced what is known as 'Stakeholder Capitalism'. Apart from the fact that this oxymoronic phrase isn't even possible, and definitely isn't capitalism, the fact is that they don't want to make a profit. You must remember what Karl Marx said about money... which I can't repeat because YouTube deletes my comments when I criticise Karl Marx... so I can't quote him directly and will just have to give you the PG version. Marx believed money was bad, and profit was bad. Well, the believers of so-called 'Stakeholder Capitalism' think the same, and set out to not make a profit. YouTube doesn't make a profit - or, if it does, not much of one. From Business Insider: "Even as Google disclosed YouTube's ad revenue, it kept other key information about the business close to the vest, most notably declining to provide information on whether YouTube is profitable or not." https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-ad-revenue-15-billion-2019-google-breakout-2020-2?r=US&IR=T The point is: if YouTube doesn't want to make a profit, then it doesn't matter if they monetize a video or not. And I honestly don't care if they monetize a video or not. What I do care about is their censorship and suppression of my content (and other people's content), and the deletion of my comments on my own channel, or the deletion of other people's comments on my channel. And they're not doing this to protect the viewer, they're doing it for blatantly obvious political reasons. They have no trouble showing some of my videos when talking about starving civilians in Leningrad or Stalingrad etc but as soon as I start mentioning a Socialist lockup of the economy being the direct cause of famine, oh no, can't have that because that goes against their beloved 'Stakeholder Capitalism'. Also, they don't seem to like criticism of Karl Marx, but perfectly allow comments praising him or defending him and the horrid policies he called for (which I can't quote due to threat of deletion), for some reason... But the AI algorithm isn't biased or anything.
    2
  10403. ***** perhaps. I'll experiment a little more. But it's good that you can literally turn a cartoonish looking map to a realistic one by just moving one dial haha
    2
  10404. crackwiser yeah, I'm thinking of doing the Arnhem Sector first (maybe including the Polish Drop) then seeing how it goes. The maps are the same as CC2, just re-scaled, because everything in the Matrix CC's are 60% bigger in scale. I've also modified the colour because people have told me they don't like the "cartoonish" colour of the original maps, so I saturated them by about 50% and the palette is a bit more realistic now
    2
  10405. Yeah, it's in a similar line to last week's video on Order 227. Lot's of myth about Pavlov and his apartment block
    2
  10406. True, but then do you need a degree to learn not to trust sources? Someone could just tell you "don't trust the sources and be wary of the author's agenda/bias"
    2
  10407. I'm going to cover it next week. But I think I answer most of them (I actually managed to do that video in advance), although not specifically.
    2
  10408. He's a good strategic and political figure, but he sucks at the operational and tactical levels of command.
    2
  10409. Yeah, it's not really a book that can be written from cover to cover. It's more of a reference piece. It's also from their point of view (that's kinda the point, since they're the focus). However, there's no other detailed book on the 24th Panzer Division, and few like it on other units, so it's invaluable.
    2
  10410. Originally the channel was a gaming channel with the name 'The Imperator Knight'. I just wanted a name that sounded impressive really, and when you consider 'imperator' means 'he who commands all's in Latin and is where the English 'Emperor' comes from, it makes sense. But nobody could pronounce it. Or find the channel. So I shortened it to TIK.
    2
  10411. But then, you could also argue that the French were biased in favour of the reparations because it was benefitting them the most, in term of both economic, military and political domination of Germany (their recent enemy). This may explain why they were critical towards Keynes, especially considering Keynes would go on to be a successful and proven economist (in terms of Keynesian economics post-war).
    2
  10412. Not sure what it's made from, but it's not metal or plastic I don't think. I can't even tell what the company name is because it's written in weird font. I got it from the Leeds Royal Armories gift shop.
    2
  10413. They were tanks because technically a 'tank' hadn't been defined yet. Post WW1, and really by WW2, tanks were defined as having a turret. That's still the case today. But the first tanks were still tanks. However, if you look at what the original tanks were designed to do - infantry support and breakthrough of the trench system - you could say they actually fit the assault gum role. Again, it's early days with the AFV, but certainly by WW2 tanks were said to be vehicles with turrets.
    2
  10414. You're not the first to suggest that. I probably could write one quite quickly to be honest
    2
  10415. If you remember, let me know!
    2
  10416. That's very true. And I really really enjoyed making this video too. So I guess you're right :)
    2
  10417. Nein, ich kenne ihn nicht.
    2
  10418. It's not clear if they understood the severity of the deficit. The Soviets were aware because Germany was asking for oil oil oil during the Molotov-Ribbentrop trade deals. I think that the German synthetic oil industry mostly kept Germany afloat so it wasn't noticeable until she conquered most of Europe, which is when things started to go south.
    2
  10419. Unfortunately, last time I did that, it decided half way through to change itself and go completely out of focus and the video was ruined. Basically I need a new camera - so better get saving
    2
  10420. I have since I'm interested in Greece (lovely country). I want to cover the Battle of Crete and was actually going to do it, but people voted for Stalingrad so... Sadly, I think it will be a while off before I get to it though now.
    2
  10421. And I said I would do a tank series. Just haven't gotten around to do it. When I do, I'll cover assault guns.
    2
  10422. You're welcome Serafim! I hope my answer was useful! As I say, I will cover it in a future video because it's a good topic. Not sure when it will be, but I will
    2
  10423. K Gib - I agree, zero chance without economic instability.
    2
  10424. For Germany these are probably the most relevant. Books - Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Articles - Hayward, J. “Too Little Too Late.” From Journal of Military History 64 (July 2000): 769-94.Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012.Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854.Toprani, A. “Germany’s Answer to Standard Oil: The Continental Oil Company and Nazi Grand Strategy, 1940-1942.” From the Journal of Strategic Studies 37 (December 2014): 949-973. Not sure on Japan, sorry.
    2
  10425. I bought them for D&D, but haven't played it in a while. Just thought they looked good there :)
    2
  10426. Good question, and I'm afraid I do not, although I've not been looking to be fair. If you know of one, let me know
    2
  10427. I was going to say, it's a long one this time and it's only been out 16 minutes!
    2
  10428. Maybe :D
    2
  10429. I'm not super fast at replying, I'll be honest but I'll get back to you when I can. The only reason I'm here now is because I spend the evening after a video release in the comment section of the video to speak to everyone :)
    2
  10430. Your point about them all being Panzer 1s is actually untrue, they had reserves of Panzer 3s and 4s. In fact, they only committed 68.1% of their Panzer 3s and 71.6% of their Panzer 4s to Barbarossa. You could be right about making more divisions, but we know that they also ran out of oil in October/November, so the original hypothesis is not invalidated.
    2
  10431. The first and fifth blue ones are actually the same book (got sent it twice by accident). The one between them is the appendix to the brown and blue ones. So while it's visually out of order, it's definitely in order :)
    2
  10432. He certainly had his flaws, but he was also better than most Allied generals who came before him (with the exception of O'Connor).
    2
  10433. Breaking the German codes and Enigma were definitely important imho. Almost every battle I've looked into involved both sides trying to gather intelligence or crack each other's intelligence. And, along with signals equipment and unit organisation/communication, this is a really under-considered aspect of the war (although, I would say the Enigma bit is well covered, but the general intelligence gathering part is overlooked). And while I haven't studied the Battle of Moscow specifically, the influx of fresh troops to the Moscow area at a vital time is often considered to be vital in the literature. I can't really say for certain if they were what turned the tide, but I'd be surprised if the Soviets could even mount a counterattack at all without them.
    2
  10434. I was thinking of doing that at some point. It'll probably be after Stalingrad now though. I'm too far in to change course.
    2
  10435. That's an alright but also out of date view. For example, historians now believe the Germans lost during Barbarossa - before Moscow.
    2
  10436. All that might be true, but it was still a defeat overall. They failed to take their final objectives.
    2
  10437. Apparently there's a few individuals that did. One mentioned by Glantz says he managed to get back to friendly lines only to be killed by a mortar bomb a few days later.
    2
  10438. Churchill is a good politician and is good on the grand strategic scale. But he's exceptionally poor on the operational and tactical level.
    2
  10439. Kelly's Heroes is top. Nothing at all wrong with WW2 cowboys. Nothing at all :)
    2
  10440. I only read one book on the topic myself, which was Zulu Rising (which I distinctly remember buying from Leeds Royal Armories' gift shop). I can't tell you if it's the best book on it or not since it's the only one I read, but I'd say it would be quite an important one to get since it seems quite popular on Amazon. As I said in the video, best thing for you to do is specialize - so but several books on the topic and just soak it all in. See which ones contradict and the different accounts. I wish I knew more on the historiography, but I guarantee if you read several books on the topic, you'd quickly figure out what the debates are.
    2
  10441. You're welcome!
    2
  10442. Yeah, I've actually marked it down as a potential future topic to cover :) I'd have to do a bit of research on it of course, since it's been 10+ years since I looked at it But you're right, it is interesting, especially in showing the dark side of the western allies
    2
  10443. It will. I try to answer everyone in the first few hours after a video is launched. As I said in the video, I've studied it and know it's effects. Are you saying I should make a video on it??
    2
  10444. That's only because they started feeding starved people, and didn't realize that that would give them a shock to the system. It wasn't a deliberate act to kill them, unlike the Germans. And you're incorrect, they did deliberately starve both foreign workers and POWs. And while there was a food crisis overall, that doesn't excuse their actions, since they didn't need to uproot these people and bring them to the Reich and then starve them.
    2
  10445. That could be it. For me, it's definitely the "how long can they hold out" bit.
    2
  10446. Yeah, but I'll have to finish it first before I can split it up ;)
    2
  10447. It's a drooping eyelid. It was ok, but I think it's beginning to affect the vision in my eye now :(
    2
  10448. I don't know enough about Truman to discuss this, but it's pretty hard to turn back the clock once something like that is created.
    2
  10449. Yes, I've actually been working on Operation Crusader today! That's going to be the next Battlestorm, and explains why it's taking so long because it's probably the most complicated and ridiculous battle in history. Research was over 92,000 words for it. Already got two Order of Battle videos up about it, and several videos in the past few weeks that are related (like German and Italian division sizes). At parts of this battle several of the historians throw their hands up and go "yep, I've no idea what's happening right now!" But I'm not one to give in. I expect this will be the longest Battlestorm video I've ever done, and I'm estimating now that it will be about 6 hours in length. :)
    2
  10450. If Gavin had secured the bridge on day one, Horrock's tanks could have pushed on 36 hours earlier.
    2
  10451. They held Arnhem Bridge with one battalion. They held several other bridges with one battalion. Why is one battalion dug in defensively not enough?
    2
  10452. And this is why everyone should click the little bell icon to get notifications. Bit of a hint for you, I'm releasing videos on Mondays (probably 4pm, 5pm, or 6pm)
    2
  10453. Thank you! I have Poulussen on Twitter, and he never bothered to correct my pronunciation of his name :)
    2
  10454. I'm not anti-American. I'm critical of everyone equally. I've even called Churchill out several times. Judging by the first sentence of your comment, it is you who has patriotic bias. Please take that elsewhere - this has nothing to do with nationalism or politics.
    2
  10455. And how did you find it? Was it as good as the hype? :)
    2
  10456. If the 82nd had captured Nijmegen Bridge on day 1, it wouldn't have failed. That's the answer.
    2
  10457. That's probably an indication that you need to pick a different goal. You should want to achieve something for your own reasons, not for others, or because you think it's the right thing to do.
    2
  10458. I'm certain you can send $2 or $3 if you wish, even if there's no tiers for them. Patreon (and I think SubscribeStar too) allows you to give what you want.
    2
  10459. I guarantee you'll be asking that again next episode
    2
  10460. Yes, I will be creating an all-in-one video at the end like I did with my Market Garden videos. I'll be correcting the (so far minor) mistakes within the individual videos, re-rendering them, then uploading the big final video (hopefull) the week after Crusader is finished.
    2
  10461. Well, it makes sense, especially regarding the second half of the video :)
    2
  10462. And this one is going to be worth the wait. Next episode is longer than this one, and what happens in it is going to be insane.
    2
  10463. You even beat me! I didn't get time to pin my own pinned comment!
    2
  10464. That's a good suggestion, thank you! It's probably too late for Crusader because I don't have much time to edit the script now, but I'll work on that for future Battlestorms. Thanks
    2
  10465. When I did my first history video (Market Garden), it was split up like this. Then at the end I put it all together. Since then though, I've been sticking to one video per battle. I was going to do the same for this, but the difference was that I've committed to uploading weekly. People seem to have forgotten that it took me months to do the other BATTLESTORM videos, and I often "disappeared" for weeks without uploading a single video. I'm now of the opinion that I can't take several months off publishing videos in order to create one big video like I did with the previous ones. So I realised that the only way I could get this done is to upload in parts, which (in the end because I was reluctant to do so) I finally accepted that I had to do and committed to it. Thinking about it, because I'm going to be uploading longer BATTLESTORM videos in the future (Courland and Stalingrad for starters), I'm absolutely going to have to do them in weekly episodes, otherwise they'll never get done. Of course, I will upload an all-in-one video at the end after finishing the weekly uploads.
    2
  10466. You know, I didn't even realise that the two panzer division symbols looked like "4D". Damn! That's an opportunity lost
    2
  10467. If you think this is bad, wait until you see next week's episode!
    2
  10468. If you think this week was bad, wait until you see the end of this video ;)
    2
  10469. Glad you thought so :)
    2
  10470. No worries, I should have made it more clear in the video
    2
  10471. As I showed in the video, the Soviets were not in a position to attack in 1941. They were outnumbered by the Germans.
    2
  10472. Well, welcome! I hope you enjoy your stay :)
    2
  10473. The stats I have don't specify, unfortunately :(
    2
  10474. Yes, except the whole of Kursk was 6,143 tanks and self-propelled guns. At Prokhorovka though, was 1,156 tanks. And Dubno-Brody was ~5,600. How many clashed at the same time though, I haven't figured out. But several historians are now saying that Dubno-Brody was the biggest tank battle of the Second World War, so we need to study it in more detail to figure out the truth.
    2
  10475. The T-34 was there at the beginning. It fought at Dubno-Brody 1941, which was in the first days of the war. There are pictures of them having been taken out by the Germans. Lend-Lease Shermans didn't arrive in large quantities until 1943. In fact, at Stalingrad, the Soviets were relying on US Stuart light tanks, and British Valentines (technically an infantry tank, but designed to be a cruiser tank). And you're right about Blitzkrieg tactics, although you forgot the most important element (which I brought up in the video). Infantry were more important than tanks. This is part of the reason why the Soviets also turned to smaller mechanized brigades, although that was also to give their commanders more experience, starting with smaller units.
    2
  10476. Wow, I didn't expect anyone to say that! Really glad you found it useful, thank you :)
    2
  10477. I think they do include support staff, but I could be wrong. Unfortunately, the sources do not specifically state this is the case or not.
    2
  10478. I keep saying it, but it's true. It is making a massive difference, so thank you :) Also, I do think the credits scrolled a little too quick in this video. I'll try slow it down in future because you deserve to be on the screen a little more.
    2
  10479. Yeah, since I started releasing videos on a Monday, I decided that this would be the only day I'd stay up a little later to reply to comments :) so pro-tip: if you want to be (almost) certain to get a reply, reply in the first few hours after a video is released
    2
  10480. Glad you agree :) I was honestly shocked to see how many they made compared to other weapons.
    2
  10481. No, the Soviets had 2,743,000 on the Axis-Soviet Frontier (including Finland). They had 5,700,000 troops in total. This at a time when the Axis had 3,957,910 men on the Eastern Front, and the Germans had mobilized 7,309,000 men in the Wehrmacht. If they hadn't mobilized at all, they would have had 930,000 total men everywhere (as they had in 1936). It's a good job they did mobilize prior to the German attack.
    2
  10482. I'm not anti-German. You're only saying that because you clearly have a dislike for "Britons". And while that's understandable (Britain has a terrible history) it's also not a healthy historical outlook. The only way to find truth in history (or anything) is to observe it, not to be touched by it. If you are touched by it you will let it colour your vision, and that will obscure the truth. I have respect for all sides who took part in the war (and any war). I also observe their pros and cons, and have no problem discussing those elements of history others may shy away from. And while I have been critical of some German generals, I have also been critical of others who are British, American, and even Italian. And I will continue to be critical, because that criticism provides the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of others, and that's what I'm here to do. https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  10483. Glad you enjoyed it! You're right, I didn't mention radios (or flags!). But in fairness, there's not many history books out there on tank radio equipment. Perhaps a topic for another day
    2
  10484. Let me know if it was worth a second watch :)
    2
  10485. They didn't. The armoured forces would encircle the enemy infantry and other units, so that when the German infantry engaged the pocket they came across a unit that had little to no ammunition, food, or other supplies. The Soviets trapped in said pockets had a few choices - flee/breakout, surrender, fight to the death, or go to ground and keep fighting as partisans. The point is, the German infantry only 'massacred' the Soviets when the going was good - when they faced units which were cut off from their logistical supplies and couldn't offer more than token resistance. Once the Soviets learnt to deal with the German panzers, the German infantry had little advantage over the Soviet infantry formations.
    2
  10486. Oh, you think this is a tank on tank war?
    2
  10487. Stalingrad is coming. Next week is a Stalingrad video (not the main one, but an important on in the lead up to it)
    2
  10488. As I said at the end, the point of tanks is the exploitation part - not the tank vs tank bit. I also said infantry, AT and artillery all working either with or against the tanks. I didn't say the word "doctrine", but that's what it is. Yes, they were outnumbered if you hold up two numbers and say - "this is the number of men who took part on both sides of the war". The point you're missing is that if one side outnumbers the other, they're going to deal more pain to the weaker side. The Soviets in the first months of the war were feeding men into the front, and losing a lot of them. But the Germans had superiority in numbers. This gave them the advantage in the battles they fought, which goes some way in explaining why they won those battles. This situation changes in December 1941, which is when the Germans are no longer advancing. (Side note - they advance during Blau, but I'll get to that in another video. Main point being they concentrated in the south, while the Soviets concentrated in the north) I don't think I have them (might have the first) so I'll take a look at the books, thanks :)
    2
  10489. Yes, you're right, as I showed in the video ;)
    2
  10490. Multiple sources are the key!
    2
  10491. Yes. Best to call it the Axis-Soviet Front.
    2
  10492. Hi Jamie! Glad to see you're back on the ball :)
    2
  10493. Panzer III's and Panzer IV's were classed as medium tanks, and they had no heavies at that point, so the rest are light. Deployed on the Eastern Front on the 22/06/1941 the Germans had - 2,007 light tanks 1,412 medium tanks 225 command tanks 259 self propelled guns For a total of 3,903 tanks+SPGs This was 64.5% of their total tank and SPG stocks at the time.
    2
  10494. It was 7.3 million strong. I have several sources, including the German official history, saying that's the case.
    2
  10495. Did you not watch the video? The Soviet Union was in no position to attack in 1941.
    2
  10496. Yeah, that's sort of what I was getting at, although I didn't mention the organisation directly. Soviet tank forces in 1941 weren't ideal. Too many tanks and not enough infantry and artillery or support services.
    2
  10497. :D glad someone got it
    2
  10498. Thanks Edward! And don't worry, I'll certainly try my best to keep them coming :)
    2
  10499. Yes, the term is "tank desant". I don't know how "standard" it was, but a good way of transporting them. There is a quote in (I think) Anthony Beevor's Berlin where Soviet troops do ride the tanks in Berlin, but I'm not sure it was a very effective tactic under fire. Usually it would be adviseable to get off the tank prior to an engagement and then fight on foot in support of a tank.
    2
  10500. I don't want to undermine your praise of me, but I do want to clarify a few things. The videos are monetized (adverts by YouTube). However, you're correct that I don't place several adverts within the videos themselves, or do the "and now a word from our sponsors" thing, even though I've had companies ask me to do that. I do have a Patreon, and my Patreons are the ones keeping this channel afloat, and allow me to do pump out videos weekly. The money I make off the YouTube adverts is minimal and I wouldn't be able to make this channel on them alone. But you're correct that my priority is the viewer and the quality of the history, not the dollars. Extra money goes back into the production of the videos, either in terms of quality (books, software, hardware) or quantity (actual manpower hours to make the videos). I currently work 74 hours a week on average for just over minimum wage if I was working 40 hours. I've also taken a large pay cut to do this full time. Despite this, I recently got accused by someone of "selling out", which makes zero sense. People have actually been asking me if I can sell merchandise, which I don't because I know I'll just get accused of "selling out", even though the extra money would be used to hire an editor to make the videos faster (maybe 2 or 3 a week). But yes, people are actually asking me to sell merchandise, and I'm not simply because I don't want a false label! Considering I've spent more money on YouTube than I've ever made, "selling out" is not what's happening here. So yes, long message, but I want you to be fully informed about how I finance this channel so you're not under a false impression.
    2
  10501. True. This is why I've started calling it the "Axis-Soviet Front".
    2
  10502. Thank you!
    2
  10503. Surprisingly, according to the statistics I used (from Mawdsley's Thunder in the East) the Katiushas were listed seperately to artillery. They only had 3,600 Katiushas on the 1st of January 1943 (700 had been lost by this point too).
    2
  10504. I'm glad you enjoyed it, Tony!
    2
  10505. Awesome! Glad to hear you're playing catch-up. To be honest, I can tell by the stats and the comments that people are distracted with current events and aren't watching the videos as much. I'm not the only channel affected by this issue either, with some with worse stats than mine. A little worrying, but I'm hopeful that next week's video might be able to bring a few people back. Really tempted to have a couple weeks off again as people are distracted, but I also don't want to make things even worse by not publishing during the lull. Hill's book is decent, although I've only read bits of it, mostly relating to Stalingrad and similar topics.
    2
  10506. Not yet, but there will be at some point
    2
  10507. Hey Douglas, I'm quite surprised by the response too, considering this was more of a reference video. But it seems there's genuine interest in the order of battle, and of Stalingrad in general :) And yes, I didn't have an accurate map for the 23rd of July, so actually it's the 24th of July. This is why it's slightly out. I should have made a note in the video, but I was pressed for time and forgot. I did make a note of it in the pinned comment.
    2
  10508. Thanks! I wanted to cover as much as I could :) just a shame I didn't have the manpower numbers for this time
    2
  10509. Thank you m, and yes, it also shows the scale of the conflict too, which was truly massive. More to come :)
    2
  10510. Good spot! And thank you! I will correct it now :)
    2
  10511. I hope it doesn't disappoint. Let me know if it does!
    2
  10512. I hope it lives up to expectations! A lot of information in it
    2
  10513. Except it's wrong
    2
  10514. You're welcome!
    2
  10515. That's dangerous! You may not like this one!
    2
  10516. Great! Hope you like next week's video - little bit different again, so you'll have to let me know :)
    2
  10517. I wanted to do so much more on the commanders (and units etc), but there's not a lot in English. My German isn't good enough to read German yet either :(
    2
  10518. Yes I can and probably will when I do more Order of Battles or videos on the Stalingrad Airlift :)
    2
  10519. Well, I'm impressed!
    2
  10520. I laughed :D (and thanks for the link)
    2
  10521. There are a lot of people who are complaining about my stance on the squeaky-clean Wehrmacht, so it's good know you appreciate what I'm trying to do here. Thank you!
    2
  10522. Will do! Glad you liked it!
    2
  10523. Oh no! Hope you get better soon!
    2
  10524. That's the unit symbol. According to this website, the NATO marine symbol is an anchor http://www.niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html
    2
  10525. Thank you, I'm glad to hear you agree. A lot seem to gloss over that, but I won't be pulling any punches - for both sides :)
    2
  10526. I may do seperate releases and some recaps in the middle of it, but I certainly can't publish anything until the whole documentary is finished. Absolutely have to do the full research and get everything perfect before I commit to publishing. Also, let me know what you think when you do watch this video :)
    2
  10527. It wasn't easy, but it was fun :)
    2
  10528. I hope you meant "continue" :D
    2
  10529. Unfortunately, "I was simply following orders" is not an excuse. Both sides committed atrocities. Therefore both the regimes, and the individuals committing those crimes, are responsible.
    2
  10530. Thanks! And, yes sir! :)
    2
  10531. They held the flanks of the Sixth Army as part of Army Group B. Third Romanian Army was sat along the Don (stretched thin because it had a massive distance to cover). And the corps I mentioned in the video sat in the Lake area south of Stalingrad. Once Operation Uranus got underway, they fought to stabilize the fronts. Romanian 1st Armoured Division and Romanian 1st Cavalry Division fought exceptionally hard in Third Romanian Army area, alongside 22nd Panzer Division (rat-eaten division). The Romanian divisions mentioned in the video were about to form a Fourth Romanian Army. However, Uranus prevented that from happening. So, those documentaries that say Fourth Romanian Army existed, are technically wrong. The remnants of some of these Romanian divisions helped form the outer shell of the Stalingrad pocket, and fell back into the city during the final collapse of the final few days.
    2
  10532. The Jack is my favourite of theirs
    2
  10533. If you think this is confusing, I'm currently working on the British order of battle for Operation Crusader - and it's probably more confusing!
    2
  10534. Again, thank you GM! Not sure how I didn't find that
    2
  10535. Absolutely! I think you will enjoy next week's video sir :)
    2
  10536. No, they're about right in terms of infantry. Three regiments, with three battalions each. I didn't show the infantry battalions because that would have doubled the length of the video! Plus I wouldn't have been able to get the info on most of them. Italian divisions tend to only have two regiments of infantry (which was their downfall). And I'm currently working on the Operation Crusader order of battle, and what strikes me is that the British use a lot more artillery per division.
    2
  10537. Haha thanks
    2
  10538. Thanks Tony! A video is about to be released in a couple minutes, so don't worry, I am keeping it up :D
    2
  10539. Yes, someone else pointed that out too and I've corrected it now so it won't be like that in future videos. Thank you though :)
    2
  10540. Thanks! Why was it hilarious? I quite enjoyed it. It was one of my favourite films as a kid, even though it wasn't 100% accurate
    2
  10541. I've read Lloyd Clark's book a while ago (lost it though, unfortunately) and the relevant chapters in Frost's book. Both pretty good in their own right. I actually quoted Frost's book in my documentary, and referred to it in this video
    2
  10542. Awesome! Any recommendations?
    2
  10543. Remember kids: it wasn't a REAL alliance!
    2
  10544. Sorry Jamie :D not seen you for a while, where have you been?
    2
  10545. I'm not talking about "company ownership", I'm talking about private ownership. Get with the program https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10546. They instituted government control because the elite were losing their power under a free market and needed a way to impoverish the poor again. That's why you have people like Lord Baron Keynes promoting Socialism - an ideology that leads to the impoverishment and starvation of the bottom 90% of the population.
    2
  10547. The issue of stealing things that aren't needed is exactly how the military operates now. In fact I gave examples of this in the video. If the soldiers had to pay for what they needed instead, you wouldn't see any more theft, because unlike under Socialism, theft is illegal under a free market system of private property ownership.
    2
  10548. As shown in the video, primary sources closed to the event are in the C tier.
    2
  10549. No, the majority of the audience isn't interested in how history is done, only in the history itself (and even then, only certain topics).
    2
  10550. Yes, see my video titled "But how do you know you're right?"
    2
  10551. You stopped watching just before I started the Stalingrad series? Yeah, you've missed a lot! Welcome back
    2
  10552. You don't have to read absolutely every book I recommend! Just pick and choose the ones you're most interested in
    2
  10553. This is the concept of the "primacy of politics" over everything else. They believed that the problems in the economy or the military etc were because the people running the show weren't driven by "the Idea" or the National Socialist "world view" (the Weltanschauung). They thought that if they put their guys in positions of responsibility, then this would sort out their problems. Of course, we know that that's not how things work.
    2
  10554. See this https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    2
  10555. I've seen some videos on the situation in Iran and I am very much aware of the hyperinflation there. You can't do anything to stop the government from hyperinflating, but you can do things to protect yourself, and that should be your priority. I suspect you're already doing many of them - like spending your currency as soon as possible, buying goods with it for barter later, and improving relationships with your friends, family and neighbourhood. Picking up extra skills etc, or leaving the country if that's an option. Educating people about what's happening, and assume that the government has no intention to fix things, which means the situation will only get worse. If you haven't done already, read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which explains the causes of the recession and the reason for inflation. You can get a free PDF copy from here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression Gold is the usual go-to commodity to protect your wealth in the long term, so ideally you should find bullion, but if not, jewelry is okay too. It may not go up at the same rate as inflation, but it will 'pop' as the inflation gets worse. Without getting too technical, it's really only in the aftermath that you'll see it has preserved your wealth, if it doesn't beforehand. I intend to do more on the Weimar hyperinflation, but it may be too late to help you. I'd suggest watching this video from the 12 minute mark https://youtu.be/pUfn_aKQCjg (while it is on Mises, this guy gives a non-Austrian view of hyperinflation and how to solve it which might be worth watching to get an alternative perspective) And this guy's family survived hyperinflation in Romania https://youtu.be/Vcn8EQ_d0W4
    2
  10556. A lot of people do this to their friends or family. You may have even done it yourself - not said something that needs to be said because you're concerned about upsetting their feelings. And some people don't want to be told. So this is a natural human habit. But it's a bad habit. Honesty requires courage, and accepting feedback requires humbleness, which a large section of the population don't have.
    2
  10557. I wondered if the reference was too subtle, but obviously not 😂
    2
  10558. I'm afraid you were third, but good job!
    2
  10559. Haha that made me laugh!
    2
  10560. I've been researching about Hitler and Christianity, but I'd suggest watching my video on the Aryan Religion https://youtu.be/fGUq3V8kl30
    2
  10561. I also think Churchill is overrated. But if they didn't go into Italy in 1943 to early-1944, what would they have done? Overlord wasn't ready until mid-1944. Are you really going to sit there and do nothing for a year and a half? Going through Italy seems like a logical choice, especially since the armies were already in North Africa at this point. What do you think?
    2
  10562. Ahhh, but I didn't really blame him ;)
    2
  10563. That's the idea :)
    2
  10564. You're absolutely correct. It's a cope on their part
    2
  10565. I'm sure some have access to VPNs
    2
  10566. 785 U-boats were taken out during the war. That's 68% of the entire fleet (1,162). Yet the manpower casualty figure for the U-boats was 30,000 (75% of their total manpower). Nobody with any sense would deny the significance of the U-boat war. Yet based on the casualty figure alone, you could argue it wasn't important. This is why casualty figures alone don't tell the full story.
    2
  10567. Nope, no bias against the Soviet Union specifically, I just don't think they won the war alone.
    2
  10568. According to Wikipedia: "Clickbait is a text or a thumbnail link that is designed to attract attention and to entice users to follow that link and read, view, or listen to the linked piece of online content, being typically deceptive, sensationalized, or otherwise misleading." My video wasn't deceptive, sensationalised or misleading. A Patreon supporter asked the question (you know, the people making this channel financially viable), and I answered it. It would have been clickbait if I hadn't answered the question, but instead talked about what I had for breakfast... But because I directly answered the question, it's not classed as clickbait at all.
    2
  10569. +Sneaky Scaper ok I've done more reading, and I think I may have been wrong. I can't find where I read about the French Resistance, at least not referring to the Market Garden Operation. The intelligence was right in this case, but the Allies couldn't trust it because of previous issues with the Dutch Resistance. Several sources say the Dutch Resistance was compromised at various times before and during the early part of 1944, including the Resistance in Arnhem too. It turns out in hindsight that they could have trusted the Dutch, but of course they weren't to know that at the time. However, British intelligence did reveal the presence of the Panzer Divisions so the argument still stands that British intelligence wasn't poor, just ignored.
    2
  10570. +Gary Thomas I won't disagree, that's for sure!
    2
  10571. +Ayda Williams This is very true. XXX Corps has to get through, and you're right that at this stage, they're already behind schedule :)
    2
  10572. +Rex1987 awesome! Hope your exam went well :)
    2
  10573. My "All Episodes" video of this has just become the most-viewed/most-watched/most-liked/most-disliked/most-commented on video on my channel, so it's doing pretty well :)
    2
  10574. Tomorrow!
    2
  10575. Yes you were!
    2
  10576. Wrong. Indian troops were not "spineless". Chuchill was an idiot, and I've said this numerous times. Pay attention.
    2
  10577. I had to mention racism because if I hadn't I would have been accused of being racist. Because I had to mention racism, I knew that I would have to explain that Britain was in India primarily for economic reasons, not because they wanted to enslave them. Thus, I would be challenging the Leftist Woke narrative that says that only white men can be racist. I therefore provided that quote to stop the Left dead in their tracks prior to me explaining the attitude of British racism at the time.
    2
  10578. You were, congrats!
    2
  10579. Perhaps I'm wrong here, but if I'm reading this correctly, Cyrus the Great only freed the slaves of Babylon when he took that city. I hadn't heard about in those two Greek States. And the fact you even admit that slavery returned proves the point - it wasn't a fundamental change. The British abolishment of slavery was the first in history whereby the entire society decided that slavery was morally and economically wrong thanks to classical liberalism and capitalism.
    2
  10580. They've deleted some of my responses as well. I cannot write "knoh" backwards for some reason
    2
  10581. I did mention them briefly
    2
  10582. The sources don't say, and I think it would be quite difficult to find out the number for such a specific event to be honest.
    2
  10583. It's more complicated than that. Paulus originally wanted to pincer the city, and the pincers would pince through the city itself, trapping 62nd Army outside the city and crushing them. 24th Panzer Division sliced up from the south as the spearhead of the southern pincer, and it's reasonable to assume they could have achieved this if the northern pincer had pinced too. But the northern pincer didn't pince because of Zhukov and the Kotloban offensives (four of them). These seemingly suicidal attacks caused a lot of Soviet blood, but resulted in 14th Panzer Corps (16th Panzer Division, 3rd Motorized Division, and 60th Motorized Division) having to dig in in the North. This northern pincer then had almost no influence on the battle in the city. So, Paulus has no choice but to send in Seydlitz-Kurzbach's 51st Army Corps (infantry divisions) into a frontal assault on the city. And by the time this happens, 24th Panzer Division and the southern pincer were getting pretty and unable to really break through anymore. This all results in a brutal set-piece battle where taking chunks of the city (mainly where 51st Army Corps were fighting) was the name of the game. There were a few other factors, but the north part of Stalingrad became the focus. I hope that answers your question
    2
  10584. Haha I'll remember the German Ur bit :)
    2
  10585. The main factor was that there were Soviet troops in their way and they stopped them.
    2
  10586. Hey! Only just seen your comment. Yes it was nice to meet you. I'll be going there again, don't you worry :) I'll be announcing it on the channel next time I go too, so be sure to keep an eye out for that.
    2
  10587. I don't think he was being serious. The Mighty Jingles uses this expression all the time, but probably originated from somewhere else
    2
  10588. Funnily enough, I don't know which record it was they played. If I'd known that I would have put the music in the video
    2
  10589. I'm just sorry I can only manage one a week right now. I'm working on bigger Battlestorm videos behind the scenes and they're taking up my time
    2
  10590. Nah, I get it :) the way I look at it is that, while certain things like Pavlov's House may lose a little of their charm, you'll discover other interesting facts that didn't know of before. Such as my video on the Bruneval Raid where I crowned the German guard 'Moron of the Year 1942'. No way you'd discover that hilarious episode if you didn't dive into the nitty gritty or more realistic-elements of the battles.
    2
  10591. Yeah, it's a good map that one!
    2
  10592. He didn't 'retreat'. The section of front he was on at the beginning of the battle was practically pushed back to the Volga. He needed to move up the bank, but it simply wasn't safe to do so. So, overnight, he crossed the Volga, moved up a bit, then crossed back. I think this only happened once, as far as I'm aware, and as I say it was very year on in the battle.
    2
  10593. A newspaper run by the state, the same state that didn't let people into the archives for 50 years after the event in question. And let's not forget the survivors of the house who were left out of it all, so knew all along something was wrong but couldn't correct it.
    2
  10594. See, apart from the Gavin incident, his book on Arnhem was fine. Have got his Crete book, but haven't read it. I think, except for the Eastern Front, Beevor's not too bad and does quite well. Just that he's biased against the Russians/Soviets
    2
  10595. No worries :)
    2
  10596. Possibly, but there's no excuse for the historians coming later to not question the official line.
    2
  10597. True. It was a fantastic mission though
    2
  10598. May not be next, but I do plan on looking into it
    2
  10599. Oh, I wasn't refering to the policy. I was talking about the people involved. They came from all over the USSR, and weren't just Russian. That's why it's best to refer to them as "Soviets" rather than "Russians", even if the majority were Russian.
    2
  10600. According to my channel's About page where I record some milestones, I reached 4,000 subscribers on 02/08/2017. So in less than a year, the channel is x10 as large.
    2
  10601. It was my favourite map/mission in any Call of Duty game, and wished they did more "hold on as long as you can" missions like that. Also loved annoying people in the multiplayer on that map.
    2
  10602. Cheers Rich :)
    2
  10603. It wouldn't surprise me :)
    2
  10604. Thanks for the feedback! Have you seen my Battlestorm documentaries?? Specifically Battleaxe and Bruneval. That's the type of video I'm working on behind the scenes, and they're exactly what you're describing. The next one will be Operation Crusader, then I'm doing one on the Courland Pocket, then finally Stalingrad
    2
  10605. Spooky coincidence :)
    2
  10606. No worries! And John, yes but it's a good introduction to the topic, which is why I'm recommending it first. It's short sharp and sweet, and will give a very good overall view of the war, from which people can dive in deeper.
    2
  10607. Start with Overy's "Russia's War" (only problem is it should be called "Soviet's War"). I would normally recommend "Ostkrieg" by Fritz after that, but you specifically said you wanted stuff on the Soviet Union specifically and that's more about the kind of war the Germans were waging against the Soviets, so it's optional unless you're happy to read more about the German perspective first. After that, I'd probably recommend "When Titan's Clashed" by David Glantz. Beyond that, it's up to you :)
    2
  10608. The way I look at the issue of trusting sources is this - accept a source as right, but never commit 100% to believing it. Don't dig yourself into the ground and become immovable. Always be ready for the possibility that a fact may change once new evidence or a new perspective comes along. So basically, just be ready to change your perspective if new information becomes available.
    2
  10609. Thank you! Glad you're enjoying them :)
    2
  10610. I hadn't heard about it until today. Sadly, I'm not really looking into the battle of Moscow at the moment
    2
  10611. Glad you liked it!
    2
  10612. Ok, but even with Beevor, it would be wrong to say not to use him. I understand that Beevor is biased and is anti-Russian. And I have been critical of Beevor in my Arnhem review https://youtu.be/fr92BwihIoU That said, there's no reason not to use him. His numbers and his telling of the events are out of date, but sometimes he's also correct, and this can support what others are saying. Apart from the massive element he missed out in Arnhem book (which changes the conclusion), the book itself is great and trustworthy. Another good example is the Fate of the Stalingrad Civilians video; I compared and contrasted the different numbers from different historians, including Beevor and Glantz. Of course, I trust Glantz more than I trust Beevor in that case because Beevor's book is older, and I know he's biased against the Soviets. But his numbers aren't a million miles away and help provide the viewer with a clear conclusion that lots of civilians were killed.
    2
  10613. Unfortunately, I highly doubt it
    2
  10614. Never forget
    2
  10615. My pleasure :) seem to be on a steak at the moment with good videos
    2
  10616. Hahaha
    2
  10617. Great to hear that :)
    2
  10618. There is (apparently) a Looneyville in West Virginia. I wasn't referring to the entire population of West Virginia.
    2
  10619. Lenin sent Budyonney's 1st Cavalry Division to Jewish villages to "steal the women's underwear" (read between the lines). Stalin later promoted Budyonney to a field marshal, and he commanded the forces in the Caucasus during the Stalingrad campaign. And don't get me started on Beria, or the sexual crimes committed in the Gulags. You are incorrect about the Stalinists not being sex offenders. I understand that some Marxists disagree with the woke, but the entire cult is corrupt to the bone, so the odd person within it who's not completely insane is hardly reason to reject the aforementioned conclusion.
    2
  10620. If that's all you think the dialectic is, you're wrong. It's not "just the exchange of logical arguments". That's precisely what it isn't. It sounds like you're getting "Dialectics" confused with the word "debate". Dialectics is not debate.
    2
  10621. I'm not an AnCap, but nice try.
    2
  10622. Third Positionists have taken the "White Pill", not the Red Pill. They don't understand basic economics, and still believe in collectivism, pretending that their version of it is somehow different than the Marxists, simply because they believe in some "Cosmic Order".
    2
  10623. I did define it. I didn't do that at the start because it's more important to understand the history, which gives you the context as to why it was created in the first place.
    2
  10624. The prices charged by the US health system is due to the extreme regulations placed upon it by your government https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  10625. Yep, that's precisely what it is. It's designed to confuse you. And I tried to keep it as light and simple as I could!
    2
  10626. And then they wonder why I don't respond... It's all just projection. They don't understand where I'm coming from because they've done ZERO reading or research outside of the approved reading list, and therefore can't wrap their heads around very simple concepts. Thus, no matter what I say or do, I'm wrong. Okay, whatever then. There's no point debating with such dishonest people who wish to remain ignorant.
    2
  10627. Antonio, you're incorrect. In pre-industrial times, southern French peasants were hibernating in the winter because they didn't have enough food. Between 1870 and 1914, the amount of food condemned by an Englishman doubled. DOUBLED. This is why the human population has boomed since the industrial revolution - things were getting better when we had free(ish) markets. The more they implement a controlled economy like they're doing now with all the taxation, inflation and regulation, the worse things will get. Dialectics as a "therapy" tool have only come about recently (much to my horror). But Marx, Hegel and others earlier than that were talking about the dialectic. It's absolutely not a therapy thing. It's a cultish world view, which is why some Marxists call it a "Weltanschauung".
    2
  10628. What are you chatting? Can you write normally please and start having coherent arguments. Most of what you wrote is not relevant to the discussion.
    2
  10629. Seems to be a few Marxist-antisemites in the comments today.
    2
  10630. Yes, let's read what Marx wrote https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  10631. They are utopians, but Marx claimed they're not, because they think they can build the utopia. Since "utopia" means "no place", then because they think they can build it, it's not a utopia any more. The problem, of course, is that they can't build it, since their entire economic, social and political system is flawed in numerous fundamental ways.
    2
  10632. Obviously I disagree with Fascism but I'm happy to see you're finding my videos useful. May I ask, what does Fascism offer you apart from Duty?
    2
  10633. Materialism isn't evil. The fact you think it is, is the problem. Get out of your head and get back into the real world.
    2
  10634. "Time ghost seemed rather trollish and hurt over this issue, a bit childish" I can understand it from their perspective. I've been hit by Marxist trolls as a result of this issue, so they're probably getting the other side of it. Maybe they're wrong to react in the way they're doing, but it's only because they're frustrated that (in their minds) people aren't taking them seriously over this issue. Perhaps my upcoming video may make them reconsider their stance.
    2
  10635. The term is "Auftragstaktik"
    2
  10636. He'll be addressed when I get to him in the Stalingrad videos
    2
  10637. Please my Public vs Private video. Socialism and totalitarianism are the same thing. You cannot have totalitarianism without total societal control of the economy https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10638. Which is why I'm making many more videos with evidence that proves this to be the case.
    2
  10639. My eyelid droops as a consequence of a bad stye I had a few years ago.
    2
  10640. I'm neither pro-Soviet nor pro-Nazi - I'm actually just trying to look at this objectively. I do agree though that a lot of commenters here are definitely on the far-right of politics, which explains why they object anything that downplays their perception of the Wehrmacht.
    2
  10641. Interestingly I've made a video about how Enemy at the Gates was fiction - The Myth and Reality of Joseph Stalin’s Order No. 227 “Not a Step Back!” https://youtu.be/JOKAIDpOY80
    2
  10642. You may enjoy my video that'll be out today at 5pm GMT... towards the end of the video is a bit of a revelation about Soviet artillery numbers... (sort of, don't want to give too much away)
    2
  10643. Shhhh! Don't say that too loud or they'll hear you! (but in all seriousness, right from my first history video - Market Garden - I've not been afraid to speak unpopular opinions. I only do it though when I have sufficient evidence to back it up. What I said in this video is right, and I will return to the topic one day once I'm ready to tackle it in a different way. Clearly, the way I went about it here annoyed a lot of people, especially in the immediate follow up "Numbers" video. In the future, I intend to leave no stone unturned though. The evidence will be hard-hitting and decisive, and my argument will be unassailable. To say I've learnt my lesson is an understatement.)
    2
  10644. Manstein took part in Operation Barbarossa, so not sure what you're getting at. The plan was to destroy the Soviets on the border, which they did. The issue was that the Soviet Union was too big and German logistics too meagre to actually keep the armies in the field. But the German generals knew this beforehand and still went for it anyway.
    2
  10645. The purpose of the thumbnail and title is to get people to click, with this being the first time I've ever used a thumbnail like this. And the title is not incorrect for a lot of people - as shown by the comment section here and the comment section of my latest video (which actually goes into the numbers, since people were complaining that I didn't have statistics to back up what I said here, even though I did https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds ). So while you may already know that the Wehrmacht wasn't inherently "superior" to the Red Army and that there's more to it than that, a good portion of people out there do not, and so, for that portion, their perception of the Eastern Front really is wrong
    2
  10646. I have a real job. This is just a hobby for me, since YouTube pays in buttons. If you don't like it, don't watch
    2
  10647. Day 1 of the war - 2,743,000 Soviets vs 3,957,910 Axis troops (3,118,910 of which were German).
    2
  10648. You really like Tooze, don't you?
    2
  10649. You do not agree with this view?
    2
  10650. The good news is I'm planning on doing a follow-up video with data/statistics and examples. And strangely enough I've already seen your video as I watched it a day or two ago - but will watch it again. Just subscribed as forgot to do that.
    2
  10651. Yes I have https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o?si=MYE-5FKpEKP3v48h
    2
  10652. By not understanding the free market and by not having seriously read any books on the subject written by people in favour of it (e.g. Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt), it's clear why you would come to such an erroneous conclusion.
    2
  10653. 😁
    2
  10654. Orphism was definitely involved, but I'm still looking into it so I can't really say too much on that. Pythagoras himself doesn't seem to be mentioned in the Nazi texts, but he obviously did impact Plato.
    2
  10655. "Kant never ever denied the Ding an Sich, just our ability to perceive it" Right, so just like Hegel, he denied reality. If we cannot trust our senses or our reason in order to perceive reality, then reality is nothing other than an illusion of the Demiurge. Hence his famous phrase: "I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith." - "You are a great military historian. You are not a great intellectual historian." I don't think you're a good judge of character.
    2
  10656. That's irrelevant to the discussion, since we're not debating the science as such, but whether it influenced the origins of Nazism.
    2
  10657. Sort of. Darwin didn't argue for a individuals though, he argued for species. Darwinism is Social Darwinism.
    2
  10658. I'm actually in the process of researching the history of philosophy in order to try and figure out a solution to a fundamental problem with history theory. It's likely that I'll do a video relating to this at some point. Beyond that, I'm not sure, but I'm not against your idea.
    2
  10659. I haven't - in fact, that's another Patreon Q&A I have to answer soon!
    2
  10660.  @kaustubhillindala2643  That's probably what this is, although feels more like flu.
    2
  10661. Tomislav I'll have to come up with some tougher WW2 questions ;)
    2
  10662. Haha all I'll say is that it was extremely good timing that I paused it when I did as life has thrown some curve balls at me recently... Nothing major, just time consuming stuff
    2
  10663. "Monty wanted a powerful 40 division thrust." Initially, yes. But this was reduced to a much more realistic 18-20 divisions.
    2
  10664. It was Gavin/Ridgway/Browning's fault, but Monty still takes responsibility for not ensuring that Gavin went for the bridge with at least one battalion.
    2
  10665. Well, he did blame it on his corps commander... the question is, which one? He technically had two corps commanders. And if it was the American one - the one who hated Monty...
    2
  10666. Now you've said it, it does look like a Muppet!
    2
  10667. You could say the same with every general on the Western Allied side after 1942. They consistently faced an inferior opponent and had massive manpower and equipment superiority. Practically every American division had armoured support, whereas only a select few German divisions had panzers. Compared to the British generals before him, Montgomery was actually fairly decent. But as I said in the video, he wasn't "great".
    2
  10668. I was in two minds about it because it could be frowned upon to add extra words into a quote... however, you can see the original text on the screen, and it really does provide context without having to explain everything in-depth
    2
  10669. I have, yes. I think a backup channel would be good as a 'just in case'. Does Rumble have an automatic move-videos-from-YouTube feature?
    2
  10670. One got destroyed on the 19th of June by a storm, so I would say they were unreliable overall
    2
  10671. Damn you! :D
    2
  10672. The peasants. The guy who owns the land doesn't pay his own rent, he invents laws that extract as much wealth from the serfs as possible, and that theft is called taxes.
    2
  10673. That is the excuse, yes. It's the same excuse used with the Bengal Famine too, even though there was a war economy...
    2
  10674. "A fellow You Tuber refers to the professional politicians as the Uni-Party" Yep, that's about right.
    2
  10675. Which party are you referring to? Every single one of them advocates this.
    2
  10676. If you don't like the videos, feel free to go away. Nobody's keeping you here, certainly not me. But every comment I've read of yours has been overly negative and arrogantly incorrect.
    2
  10677. Read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell and you will get your answers.
    2
  10678. Also, I mentioned this in the "Getting owned" video in response to another socialist https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  10679. I did respond. The 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video was the response. If you watch the first few minutes, I actually have screenshots of comments written by the FinnishBolshevik in the video (although he's under a slightly different name if I recall). The reason the video goes into the Labour Theory of Value and all that nonsense is because it was a response to Finnish Bolshevik's points. I just didn't address the video to him because I didn't want to give a dishonest Bolshevik any viewership.
    2
  10680. "it at least increases taxes on those who consume more." Everyone is hit with a flat 20% tax, and if you're on low pay and spending all your money just to survive, 20% of your money is going to the pockets of the rich. Also, if these business owners are registered for VAT, they can claim that back as a "business expense". The King or the aristocracy aren't really going to be targeted for tax evasion, so they're able to get away with it. According to this source, only a handful of people are actually charged with tax evasion https://www.patrickcannon.net/insights/uk-tax-evasion-statistics/ In one financial year (2018), approximately £1.7 billion of tax is "avoided" and £4.6 billion is "evaded" (not sure what the difference is). But over a decade the tax enforcers only recovered £3 billion in "offshore tax evasion". In other words, this is rife, and you'll note that they seem to be focused on "companies" not the aristocracy. In this case, "One single aristocrat just avoided more in inheritance tax than the entire NHS deficit" https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2016/08/12/single-aristocrat-avoided-more-entire-deficit/
    2
  10681. What he had for breakfast is not relevant to understanding why he turned to fascism. He started off as a Left winger as most Third Positionists do, and then he converted to Fascism.
    2
  10682. "we have too few people fighting the Nazi apologists" The main reason why is because YouTube restricts such content, meaning it's not profitable to actually make those videos. This is partly why my focus is elsewhere and I only talk about it here or there, because if I dedicated my channel to that topic, I'd be out of a job (like other channels that attempted to do the same thing).
    2
  10683. Similar situation here in the UK, and shortages of goods keep popping up here or there as house prices go to the moon, suggesting that the economy isn't strong or "recovering" and that DA BOOM is being fueled by inflation and imports from abroad.
    2
  10684. I may have to do a video like that for next week. At some point there will be one where I'll be answering a bunch of patreon questions on economics... so I know my critics will enjoy that one
    2
  10685. Bodglin o'Ite nope ;)
    2
  10686. johnny onetothree haha nice!
    2
  10687. Thegamer8324 oh yes!
    2
  10688. Rex1987 tis not a planet :P
    2
  10689. Ville metsänmiettijä I would have said the same tbf
    2
  10690. Altruism is baked into the culture.
    2
  10691. No, they weren't brought back. Hitler collectivised the entire economy. I've been over this numerous times with plenty of evidence. You can ignore the evidence all you like, but I refuse to do that simply because you wish to remain willfully ignorant.
    2
  10692. Specifically articles 115 and 153 were to do with property rights, and these were abolished.
    2
  10693. Yes, two of the articles abolished were to do with property rights.
    2
  10694. Property rights were abolished in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933.
    2
  10695. I explained in the last video https://youtu.be/6QUrntk4U5A
    2
  10696. It sounds silly, but I actually enjoy admitting my own mistakes. And I enjoy debating "debatable mistakes" if people think they're a mistake but I (and others) think they're not
    2
  10697. First! And no, thank you for watching
    2
  10698. That's a great saying! I'm going to write that down!
    2
  10699. You think it will surpass Battlestorm Normandy? Or Battlestorm Barbarossa?
    2
  10700. If I skip forwards I'd have to go back. But I can't because I'm under orders to take NOT ONE STEP BACKWARDS
    2
  10701. I do use searches, but Pronounce Names are often hit or miss. A lot of times they don't have the words and sometimes use robots which don't pronounce things well
    2
  10702. We always get the weather a day later than they predict it
    2
  10703. I only asked about the music because one guy was screaming at me during the Courland series that the music was too loud and that music doesn't belong in documentaries at the same time people were telling me (like you) that they didn't even notice it. I like music in documentaries, which is why I make my own and put it in. However, I've also realized that the music comes through louder on certain devices. Through my speakers I can't hear it at all, but through my headphones it's quite loud. So I'm curious to see what everyone thinks about it
    2
  10704. Thank you!
    2
  10705. That's interesting how, in just one generation, the language has changed. I wonder if German will do the same at some point
    2
  10706. Take your heart and get out
    2
  10707. Yes, I would rather have accuracy too. I'm not compromising on accuracy. Cheers!
    2
  10708. He also getting paid to spread lies from Putin, even though he can't pronounce Chuikov correctly. EXPOSED
    2
  10709. I'm not sure I suit a mustache
    2
  10710. The way I thought of it originally was that Season 1 would be 3 episodes so I could see how I'd get on. I was (and still am) thinking that bi-weekly episodes for editing Stalingrad are way too frantic a pace to be done indefinitely, so I thought that I could commit to 3 episodes without burning myself out too much, then take a break from the editing to work on future Seasons, then get back to it once I was ready. It also made sense because I had just about enough information to make 3 episodes of the initial July fighting at the Don. So I designed Season 1 to be 3 episodes and Season 2 to be 3 episodes as well. I also almost finished the script for Season 2 prior to getting the map from Terri. However, Anton Joly is now helping me and is giving me a lot of extra sources which has changed things. Therefore Season 2 may be 4 episodes rather than 3. I guess that I do want the Seasons to cover certain periods in the fighting, but at the same time, I don't want to burn out. So I think 1 to 5 episodes is about right for the length of a Season. And I will try to finish each season at a place in the fighting which makes sense to have a break (e.g. cliffhanger or something). That said, I won't compromise the details or the action just to fit into episodes. I will fit in the details which I think are necessary and then plan the episodes around that. If I can't fit something in, then I'll move that bit to the next episode or season. Also, video scripts are currently +5,000 words for about 45 minutes each video, which is longer than Courland videos were. I may reduce this slightly just to make things more feasible/practicable. The more I frantically do the editing between episodes, the more likely I am to burnout and begin to hate the project. Therefore, since we're in this for the long term, it's best if I adapt for the marathon now rather than sprint and give up.
    2
  10711. @Standing TNT Kliment Voroshilov would be happy with that
    2
  10712. Thank you for being one of them Derk!
    2
  10713. I highly doubt it. It's become a bit of fun for people to put jokey names in there, which do give me a bit of a laugh if I'm honest.
    2
  10714. Well, technically I have my part-time graphic designer now, which wasn't planned so I'd need more to hire an editor. But I don't just need an editor - I need a history-loving editor who's willing to figure out unit positions and get things to be as accurate as possible. So basically I'm looking for a historian who's primary role is to edit videos quickly, which is a needle in a haystack kinda thing
    2
  10715. Not sure about a merged video for each season. I will correct all the errors for the final all-in-one video, but as I said that's going to be a while off (months, if not years by the time this is all done)
    2
  10716. FIRST!
    2
  10717. Great point! Glad I didn't mention it, though, I would have got slammed for bringing up the dreaded 'S' word...
    2
  10718. So am I! It has parallels with Stalingrad, and will allow me to practice doing Battlestorm at the Army Group level (which I've only done once before in the Fall Blau video)
    2
  10719. 1914 BC
    2
  10720. Of course it is. And yes, I've done tons more research.
    2
  10721. Oil powers tanks and trucks, not soldiers. The infantry kept on fighting. They had some oil, but not enough to wage the mobile war needed to win.
    2
  10722. I displayed that because I think it's a good primer for people looking for a good basic book on economics. Why? What's wrong with Hazlitt?
    2
  10723. They were fighting for their beliefs, hoping for miracles. They didn't want National Socialism to die, or if they did, the regime (which had total control of the economy and society) wasn't willing to die.
    2
  10724. He is Indeed!
    2
  10725. There's one like this coming because a few Patreons have asked too
    2
  10726. Gibson SG Special . I've been meaning to make a video of me playing guitar (I promised someone I would) but just haven't had the time to spare!
    2
  10727. 1. Language is fluid and changes over time, like Uranus 2. There are multiple accepted ways to say Uranus https://www.google.com/amp/s/melmagazine.com/en-us/story/from-your-anus-to-urine-us-the-rebranding-of-uranus/amp 3. I don't care. I'm saying Uranus the way I say it regardless
    2
  10728. HOW?!
    2
  10729. Hey! Some of us like dried out carboard!
    2
  10730. But the answer could also be no. This isn't a rant, this is a debate - which is what history is all about.
    2
  10731. Mystery solved! 😂
    2
  10732. Thanks! Out of curiosity, which YouTuber are you referring too?
    2
  10733. Yes, I'll be taking a break, and then we'll cover Gazala
    2
  10734. The casualties for the Germans were light during the Fourth Kotluban Offensive, but the German divisions were already in a dire state prior to the 4th Kotluban Offensive, so the few casualties they took only made the situation worse for them.
    2
  10735. Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it
    2
  10736. Actually, no. I only took two weeks off and I've been working almost solidly since I returned mid-November, and after this episode I'm feeling the burn-out again. I'm going to try and get next week's video done early though so I can have a day off at the end of the week, and hope that that's enough of a break to recover for the week after.
    2
  10737. No I don't https://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Personenregister/S/SchwerinGGv-R.htm
    2
  10738. Yes you were! Nice!
    2
  10739. I was tempted to say that what he wrote here is most-likely propaganda, but I have no proof against it other than the fact that it's a little dramatic. It could be true though.
    2
  10740. "TIK: How is a weak economy the best outcome for citizens of a nation?" Coming out of the EU would allow Britain to reduce VAT (since the EU requires a 10% minimum VAT rate). Doing this would grow the UK economy by 83.8 billion a year (or more, since I can only see budget spending from 2008 from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_Kingdom). It would also allow her to set her own tarriffs - meaning she could reduce tarriffs to 0% (free trade) and potentially bring an economic prosperity unseen since prior to the First World War. But this would require a reduction of the socialist welfare state, which our two biggest parties are committed to keeping. Thus, while Brexit has the potential to lead to economic prosperity to the UK, our government will not capitalize upon this opportunity. And I like the way I said "weak government" and you took that to mean "weak economy". Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economics). Socialism is not what I'm suggesting - which is why I'm saying that coming out of the EU has weakened our government massively, which is good because socialism is bad. Instead I suggest we take the inefficient and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats out of the economy and allow businesses and private individuals (all of which can adapt much quicker than the government) the chance to thrive. That sounds like it will benefit the economy immensely, as history has shown multiple times. If you disagree with taking the idiots in power out of the economy, I suggest you read: "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt
    2
  10741. I've done Fort Eben Emael, and I do want to cover them in the future, but the plan right now is this, Courland Pocket, then Stalingrad. After that, possibly
    2
  10742. True, however I've seen a massive increase in viewers, comments and likes compared to other videos in the first hour of the video. Plus, as someone who doesn't do live streams, I've actually seen massive benefits in being able to interact with everyone in ways you can't do in these comment sections (although I wouldn't do away with the comment section for obvious reasons). So, from my point of view as the creator, while there are obvious downsides (which I will consider), simply being able to interact in the chat like that - this has been one of the most enjoyable video launches I've had. Doesn't mean I'll do it again - I'm going to think about it properly. But while some definitely don't like it, some definitely do.
    2
  10743. That's a very good point Dentist
    2
  10744. You should read Barnett - he pretty much has the same views.
    2
  10745. Sort of, although it's more because they operate in small groups and kinda just appear out of nowhere. Plus, the documentation for them doesn't really go into detail on their individual actions and only talks about their overall performance. So putting them on a map is going to be exceptionally difficult because usually you don't get told where these groups are operating from. If you watch my videos on the LRDG, you'll see how Battlestorm videos on small raiding groups do work. But the literature is far more rich and in-depth than it is with partisans, so it allows it to happen.
    2
  10746. Just because I'm a "Brit" doesn't mean I can't give the "British" some stick!
    2
  10747. I feel like I'm getting nearer a proper answer for you. I've just bought a new book called "The Sting of the Scorpion" by Mike Morgan, and in it it states that the Qattara Depression was discovered in the First World War by Captain Claud H. Williams, who commanded the 5th Light Car Patrol. He wanted to see if Siwa could be attacked from the east, but failed to get through the salt marsh and realised the Depression was impenetrable to wheeled vehicles. It's also mentioned that "it was a full ten years before they made a proper survey and could verify William's key discovery, about which he wrote a War Office handbook - Report on a Military Geography of the North Western Desert of Egypt." But then doesn't say what he'd discovered - other than the depression itself. So it's unclear if Williams found the route through the Depression. Later in the book, it says that at the end of the Long Range Patrol's first trip into the desert they went across the Qattara track. In Clayton's own words - "We left Siwa on the 18th to Cairo for lunch on the 19th, by the fast route across the Qattara Depression which Ali Fudail and I knew so well from our detailed survey work there twelve years before." Going off Clayton's words, the route through Siwa was discovered by himself and Ali Fudail (whoever he is) in 1928. In the book "The Men Who Made the SAS: The History of the Long Range Desert Group", it quotes Kennedy Shaw - 'In the basin the heat is stifling... No hill gives shade, no tree breaks the monotony of the salt marshes. Drive your truck two yards from the beaten track and it will be sunk to its axles in the quicksands.'
    2
  10748. I really should :)
    2
  10749. A nation is a society, is it not? A nation is a society, is it not? Nationalism is Socialism, and Socialism is Nationalism. That's why there's no difference between the nationalisation of the means of production and the socialization of the means of production. They're one and the same thing.
    2
  10750. I think it was done deliberately, as some kind of insult. I just don't understand the insult
    2
  10751. I honestly think that was the best part of the video. I can't believe how close they were to seeing the world for how it really is!
    2
  10752. The Fed is the Central Bank, meaning it's a State by itself. So even if they weren't working together (they are) then the Fed would still be classed as a State by itself for being the top of a public hierarchy. Please watch my Public vs Private video to fully understand this concept https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10753. Good question! And I actually have been thinking about this sort of issue myself. I strongly recommend that you watch my Public vs Private video, because I somewhat explain this, although not exactly. There comes a point as the hierarchy gets bigger that it can no longer be classed as 'private'. Where that cut-off is, I'm not sure if I'm honest. But I would say that if a hierarchy (a corporation or business) has more than say 50 or 100 employees, can we really class it as a private anymore? Is it an individual, or small family? Is 1000 people a "small family"? If a tribe had 100 people in it, would we say it was 'private' or 'public'? Would we say it was a family? Maybe, but I honestly don't think so. Right now I don't want to put a number on it, but I'd say that once you get over so many employees (100, or perhaps less), it really can't be classed as 'private' any more. It shifts to becoming 'public'. This is the case even if it's not on the stock exchange, simply because there's a bunch of people in the hierarchy. Another way to see it would be looking at the Public vs Private video and seeing the 'Gentes' class. It's sort of border-line (the crossroads) between public and private. I hope that makes sense.
    2
  10754. You've bought into the Socialist lie when it comes to the definitions. Time to learn from history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10755. Considering his actions, I've decided to deleted the guy and prevent him from spamming the same nonsense over and over. He's not saying anything of substance and is getting on people's nerves so no point tolerating him any further.
    2
  10756. Except a lot of historians do agree with this assessment. The problem is that you haven't read them because they're not on the approved reading list handed down from your God.
    2
  10757. I agree. Although I do think that he holds mistaken beliefs rather than deliberately being a bad person.
    2
  10758. Except his third position was still Socialist. It's just that he didn't want to be associated with the Jews https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10759. Well, at least watch the final 10 minutes - as I said in the pinned comment, I think that 10 minutes is golden. And yes, I do plan to do videos on Lenin in the future. May be a while away yes because I'm struggling with everything else, but it's on my list of things to do
    2
  10760. Socialism is the idea that society should be centrally organized, rather than left to the free market (what Marx/Engels called "nature" in Das Kapital v3). The synchronization (gleichschaltung) of the industries and the trade unions with and into the State was part of that process. This was why Lenin did the exact same thing in the Soviet Union as Hitler did in the Third Reich. Private unions were either crushed if they opposed the State or forced to nationalize/socialize. This is what socialism does - it crushes the workers.
    2
  10761. Yes, but apparently this is an incredibly difficult concept for people to grasp
    2
  10762. Thank you for the link! Yeah, it's critique-ception at this point. I appreciate the response, but the guy is making similar mistakes to "Owning Dishonest Shills", in that he hasn't watched the videos in full (especially the Public vs Private video), and has muddied the terms (totally not his fault, he just hasn't researched this). This is why I think it's important to watch my Public vs Private video because I have done the research and it clarifies a lot of this. For example, if a hierarchy of society (a "corporation" with hundreds or thousands of people working for it) is actually "capitalist" because it is owed "privately" (run by a leader), then by this logic that means that every State that has ever existed has been capitalist because they've all been run by leaders. Millions of people working in the "public sector" of the UK government would therefore be "privately" owned and therefore "capitalist" because they have a Prime Minister and a Queen. It would also make feudalism capitalist, and every political party capitalist... I could go on. BUT, a million people cannot be classed as "private" because they've got a leader. The million people themselves are a "public". Thus, a hierarchy of society (a "body" of the people, a "corpse" of the people, a "corporation") is public, regardless if one guy is in charge of it or not. Where the terms got muddied is in Fascist/Syndicalist ideology, where they decided that a "body of the people" is a "body", and therefore an "individual" (a "private"). Thus, by the Fascist/Syndicalist world-view, corporations and States are individuals, and therefore are a "living organism". This giant "organism" is viewed by the Fascists/Syndicalists as superior to the individuals that make it, and therefore deserves more rights than the individual. The leader of the "Corporate State", is thus the "embodiment of the people" and the owner of "the people", and all must bow to him, which is why Mussolini said "All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State". This is where I've stepped in and, after doing research into the words themselves, have said "no" to this. A million people is not a "private" entity, it is "public" because a million people in a hierarchy of society is always "public". A State or a corporation isn't an individual, nor is it classed as "private" just because some guy runs it, because the "body of the people" itself is "pubic". This view not only rejects the Fascist worldview, it also clarifies that not all States in history are privately owned and therefore "capitalist".
    2
  10763. I know, it's not like Socialism hasn't got a bad name already!
    2
  10764. 1. it was either this or no video at all this week. 2. Battlestorm is every 4 weeks now (to allow me to breath) 3. These guys aren't "trolling". They actually believe they're correct. And I know this because I used to be in the same camp they were. I used to believe what they believed. I want to help people realize their mistake, and I think the final 10 minutes of this video will do that.
    2
  10765. There's more to it (e.g. the system being rigged against them), but at a basic level that's how they see it, yes
    2
  10766. But we're not different enough to warrant a distinction. People come in all shapes and sizes. As scientists realized, there are more differences between individuals of one so-called "race" than there are between them. Someone with blue eyes is not a different "race" from someone with brown eyes. Someone with brown hair is not a different "race" to someone with black hair. Someone who's white and over 6 foot tall, is not a different "race" to someone who's white but under 5 foot tall. Ultimately, while there are minor differences between individuals, we're all part of the same species, homo sapiens. It is disingenuous to claim that there's a significant genetic difference between one group and another when there factually isn't. It may be hard to accept, but we are all individuals, not groups. There are no genetic "races" or "groups" within the human species, only individuals cooperating and associating together. Those individuals may vary in shape and size, but that doesn't mean they are "different" enough to warrant as an entirely different species or "race".
    2
  10767. Different cultures exist. Different individuals exist. And there are variations of skin colours. But ultimately, we're all individuals as part of the same species (homo sapien). If you go back more than a few generations, you'll discover that we're all quite closely interrelated. There is no scientific basis for human "races". Skin colour is not a "race". Just like "class", "race" (in the human context) is a social construct. Pretending that there is a scientific basis for human "races" is denying reality.
    2
  10768.  Wulf  That was it. There are bigger fish to fry, but I thought I had a chance of getting through to these two. Maybe not, but there are a lot of my viewers who share the same views as them, so hopefully I got through to them too
    2
  10769. It seems so obvious to us, but when I was plugged into the Matrix, I couldn't see it either 😟
    2
  10770. That is certainly their belief. And I used to see the world like that too. I accidentally Red Pilled myself though. And the question I have is: how on earth do I break through to people who are still plugged into the Matrix??
    2
  10771. Once again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10772. There were so many times in the last 10 minutes where he contradicted himself and his own argument that I lost count. But when you're blinded by your beliefs you cannot see it
    2
  10773. I'd encourage you to watch my Public vs Private video which will explain this in more depth, but 'private' means individuals or small family-like groups. So a few people forming a business and working together is still private. It's only when a large hierarchy forms that it becomes 'Public'.
    2
  10774. I think it's done deliberately as an insult. Not sure why it's meant to be insulting, but it certainly is strange
    2
  10775. At least he didn't have a scouse accent, then you'd really be complaining!
    2
  10776. As an ex-Leftist, I can assure you that many of them are blinded by their ignorance. You cannot see the light if your eyes are closed. This is why I'm trying to reach them, and help them open their eyes for the first time
    2
  10777. The key thing I wanted to get across to people in this video was that we shouldn't be responding to people's emotions, only the facts and the debate itself. You're correct that the internet is full of emotions, but we need to set a standard. If you don't let people get to you, they won't be able too. I've probably persuaded more people by being calm and collected here under a hail of insults, than if I had responded with anger and rage. I don't know how to get through to these people, but I do know that responding to their emotional outbursts won't work.
    2
  10778. - Didn't watch the video - Spouted a bunch of unhistorical propaganda that's been refuted - Wonders why people ask him to actually watch the video TIK: watch the video! Especially this one after you watch this one https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  10779. It's whatever the Party wants it to be!
    2
  10780. I honestly think the final 10 minutes is some of the best video content I've ever made. Unfortunately, you really do need to watch the rest of the video to fully appreciate it. So as much as it may hurt, I think it'll be worth it.
    2
  10781. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it
    2
  10782. But you're not free to own your own stuff. You don't own a house, the state owns it, and you pay rent (tax) to the state for the privilege of being in it. The "money" you have isn't money. As Karl Marx himself says: money is a commodity. Well, our current fiat currency is not a commodity. You don't have money, you have currency. You can't go anywhere without a passport (something introduced in WW1 by the State), and currently you're severely restricted because of the State's response to the economic crisis. You are simply not free, not at liberty, and can't even say what you want without the threat of being censored. And you are subscribing to the ideology that says that the State can provide everything you want to you. That ideology is called Socialism. The difference between what we have now and Capitalism is that we would all be better off without the shackles of the State impeding us. The currency that we have is slowly being inflated away (along with our wealth), and taken overtly via income and consumption taxes. This is the mechanism which keeps the poor poor, and the rich richer. You want more of that system? I don't. I want a system where I'm free to earn cash without having it stolen off me by our overlords.
    2
  10783. Which is why I remained calm throughout. The only thing that's frustrating is their inability to actually watch the video before claiming victory. That's partly why I did this video, to hold up the mirror and get them to realize how silly they are being. I hoped it would help, but it appears that it hasn't.
    2
  10784. I don't have time to full explain this here, but I would suggest you watch my Public vs Private video which will explain the definitions a bit more clearly https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y but essentially, a small group of people (e.g. you and three others) would still be classed as "private", not public. And I'm fine with naturally generated corporations. The issue is that we don't have that right now. The State takes our purchasing power via the tax and inflation machine, and throws this wealth at the corporations in order to increase their size and have them dominate society. In a free market economy, corporations would exist, but they would be tiny compared to what they are today, because in a free economy small businesses have natural advantages over large, bulky, inefficient businesses.
    2
  10785. I'm not just dismissing Wikipedia without considering it. I usually use Wikipedia to see how everyone else sees a particular topic, and then show how things really are. It's a good way to contrast against the truth. So I'm not dismissing it, there's many reasons why it's a poor source. YouTube videos can be poor sources too. If they're poor, then yes, dismiss them. But I fully back up what I'm saying for a reason - because this means you can't just dismiss what I say without good cause, as the guys in this video have found out this week.
    2
  10786. Awesome! Glad to hear you can now see the world for as it really is!
    2
  10787. Lenin killed Mensheviks! Therefore Mensheviks aren't real Socialists!
    2
  10788. Precisely! I hope you enjoy the video, feel free to skip the intro and whatnot if you must, but if nothing else I hope you see that I've put a lot of effort into it (and the Public vs Private video too)
    2
  10789. I'm not sure what you're asking. As I explain in the video, Google isn't 'private'. In our current economy, with mass government inflation (currency printing), it's possible for small businesses to grow into huge corporations (funded directly or indirectly by the State). But under a truly capitalist economy, such corporations would be rare, and would probably not last more than a generation or two. Most of the corporations we have today would be gone tomorrow if the printing press was shut off - since most of them are not in profit and have never made a profit.
    2
  10790. Well, what do you think? Public hierarchies running the show - is that public or private control of the economy?
    2
  10791. If you watch this video you're on (specifically the area around 19:19) you will hear me say I've already made a response to Finnish Bolshevik.
    2
  10792. What about him?
    2
  10793. Ahh but Engels lied elsewhere saying the opposite, so clearly this must be false!
    2
  10794. That's precisely why I wanted to do this video - to show people how to behave like rational human beings in the face of an emotional argument. There were other reasons, of course, but this was one of the main ones
    2
  10795. Yes, several people were banned for pushing too hard for answers from BadHistory. It's sad that censorship is the name of the game, because without the debate, those guys cannot be sure whether their views are right or wrong
    2
  10796. I didn't clarify it in this video, but if you see my Public vs Private video that should clarify it a bit more for you. It's not just the case of whether a company is on the stock market or not, but the fact that the hierarchy of a company itself is public. Think about it this way - 100 people in a hierarchy is not a 'private' entity. 100 people is definitely 'public'. So 100 people in a "private corporation" that hasn't put it on the stock exchange would still not be classed as 'private' simply because it's a hierarchy. Whether they buy and sell part of the company or not is mostly irrelevant here, because the hierarchy itself is the 'public'. I only said that "corporations are publicly owned" to help make the connection in people's minds. Capitalism is not the buying and selling of things (or parts of companies), it is the private ownership of it. So listing, buying and selling part of a company doesn't make it inherently capitalist by itself. I hope that makes sense.
    2
  10797. Oh, I said that "everything is Socialism"? I mean, perhaps you thought I said that, but that doesn't mean I did https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10798. Yes. They see it as somehow "winning". I don't get it. One day I will lose a debate, and people are going to be surprised at how I react. It won't be tears, it will be "congratulations - this guy beat me! fantastic!"
    2
  10799. A lot are saying I should have just ignored them. But I think that misses the point. I want to persuade people, not dismiss them. I think I can get through to these people, and, if I can, the other detractors in my audience may rethink their stances too. So yes, I think it was worth it
    2
  10800. https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  10801. The Austrians (or others who use logic) may 'win' the debates, but they (like me) are just being dismissed as crazy loons. THIS is the problem. Had I not been dismissed as a crazy loon, I wouldn't have ever picked up Mises or Rothbard. I think the main problem is the stigma - we're automatically seen as 'wrong', so we can win the battles you like, but it feels like we're losing the war.
    2
  10802. Probably... except he nationalized the trade unions into the DAF. And, if you watch the Hitler's Socialism video, I provide you with plenty of direct quotes and references outlining exactly what Hitler believed. He wanted true socialism, once he had conquered the land and resources he needed to implement it
    2
  10803. Sorry to interrupt, but I think it would really benefit you to watch this video in full Montez, especially the ending. That is all. Enjoy your debate 👍
    2
  10804. And the State is a corporation, corporations are syndicates, and syndicates are trade unions. Socialism is the State, because Socialism is the Public ownership and control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And Fascism is National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism. National Socialism and Fascism are not the same ideology as I have explained in great detail here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  10805. @Jakub the difference this time is the fact no generation prior has had access to the internet. It's not "the young" that's the issue, it's the fact that our brains weren't designed to deal with something like this before. It's destroyed people's attention spans.
    2
  10806. I think it's meant to be an insult, but I don't get it either
    2
  10807. Yeah, but the point is that the vast majority of my critics are exactly like this. My hope is that this video will make them realize - like holding up a mirror to an irate customer in a shop. I also think this video is valuable to my supporters too, especially for the ending. So, I know it's hard to listen too, but I think it's worth it.
    2
  10808. I understand your concern. A lot of people who are pro-free market now refuse to call themselves Capitalists for this reason. I'm also tempted to drop the term when describing my own views, and instead just say I'm pro-freedom
    2
  10809. We have a veneer of Capitalism on a coffin of Socialism.
    2
  10810. I agree 100%. Most people want quick emotional answers, but oftentimes the required answers are neither quick nor emotional. I've learnt to distinguish between someone who wants the truth vs someone who just wants to feel good. When people argue their case, a lot of the time they're doing it to make themselves feel better (either by presenting themselves as superior to the other person, or they're doing it to let out stress, etc).
    2
  10811. ANSWERED IN THE VIDEO(S). PAY ATTENTION. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  10812. Ah, but they think state control is capitalist control, so they must be automatically right because there's no way to refute the idea that Statism and Capitalism is the same thing!
    2
  10813. And mercantilism isn't totalitarian social ownership of the means of production.
    2
  10814. Explain to me how having a politically organized community (a commune) is anarchism? Anarchism means - against politics, against organizations, and against community. It's not possible to be an anarchist but also be for non-anarchy (a commune) at the same time. And absolute monarchy is not totalitarianism, nor is it necessarily socialism. Having total political power doesn't mean having total economic power.
    2
  10815. If you watch my Public vs Private video, you would know the answer. Louis XIV was not a socialist. Protopkin was a socialist. Protopkin wanted a village style socialism without a centralized State, which is fine, except that's still State control, since the size of a State (be it a nation or a village) is irrelevant - it's still a State.
    2
  10816. "When more companies became public, they became more statelike." That's a fantastic way of putting it. I may borrow that phrase, if you don't mind?
    2
  10817. The reason tuition fees went to the moon was because the government stepped in to give everyone access to university, via laws, grants and loans. Therefore the university system is actually an example of Socialism, which is why it's no wonder that professors are pushing it - they're gaining from the State, their income is dependent on the State, and without the State they'd have to cut prices and their own wages.
    2
  10818. Race is not genetic, and it's rejected by the scientific community. https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label Another source explaining that race is a social (socialist) construct, not based on genetics (science) https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/ The point to take away from the previous source is that ancestry and "race" are two distinct things. Geographic ancestry is not the same as "race", and as other sources explain, there are as many differences between people of the same "race" than there are between the "races", and that's because we're all individual human beings (that's our race). Our individuality is more important than our supposed "race" (which is mainly based on skin colour and other cosmetic features). We're all human - that's our race. This is why the Nazis themselves had to distinguish based on religion because they couldn't determine who was Jewish or not simply by looking at their physical features.
    2
  10819. They are, but the point of this video wasn't to get through to them...
    2
  10820. I can remember being in their shoes. Honestly, ignorance is bliss sometimes. I've certainly had more problems and worry since Red Pilling myself than before.
    2
  10821. It is because they represent the vast majority of the criticism I'm getting. I wanted to highlight the problem more than anything else, as well as show them (and others) that their arguments aren't working because they're coming from a place of ignorance. I also think the video (especially the last 10 minutes) offers other lessons for people to take away.
    2
  10822. For the historical definitions of the words capitalism and socialism, see https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y For the differences between Fascism and National Socialism, see https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko And for a history of the Soviet economy, see https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w All these videos are fully backed up (just like this one) with a list of sources (a bibliography) and references for what I'm saying in the bottom of the screen.
    2
  10823. Except it wasn't State Capitalism in the slightest. They nationalized/socialized the industries in all but name. If Stalin's state was Socialism (which it was, it wasn't "State Capitalism" either) then so was the Third Reich
    2
  10824. This was more of a one-off thing to highlight to everyone the main problem I'm having right now on the channel. There's more to it than that, but I wanted to produce this for that reason - to show people what I'm dealing with. There's thousands of commenters just like them (there's many in this comment section spouting the same nonsense they came out with), so this is a problem, and I wanted to highlight it.
    2
  10825. That's a good idea about arguing from their point of view. I could certainly do that. I'm not sure if this will be the end of this drama or not, but I'm sure the debate over Hitler's Socialism will continue, so it will be worth explaining the position of those who disagree so that they can see that we do understand where they're coming from.
    2
  10826. But it wouldn't have been a flat 60% rise at all times. As I said in the video, at points the Axis were only losing 6% of supplies across the Mediterranean. It was 61% at it's peak, but less than that overall. Even then, the Axis in North Africa aren't swimming in supplies, so supporting additional formations wouldn't have been an option. This is especially so since the ports on Africa couldn't take much tonnage. Tripoli could take the most and that was miles to the West. Tobruk and Benghazi were minor ports at this time. So no, I'm not convinced that, had supplies not been interdicted, that the Axis in North Africa could have gone much further than they did, although it certainly would have changed things and helped them out.
    2
  10827. Ah yes, the Pomodoro Technique :) it's surprising how much that helps so I'm glad to hear you're using it
    2
  10828. Not bad though!
    2
  10829. I've considered it, but I do think that having maps and stuff is necessary at the very least, so I'm not sure. But a low-edit video idea would be great right now. Spend way too many hours each day editing editing editing
    2
  10830. Spain was neutral (mostly).
    2
  10831. I can just tell you what my analytics says, and it's about 1.1% under 17
    2
  10832. Yeah I should have waited until later this month to release this 😂 well, this can be my early Thanksgiving video for everyone!
    2
  10833. I don't think 3 divisions would have done much against the entire Turkish Army
    2
  10834. True!
    2
  10835. It's more difficult for me to record myself than it is audio-only. It's also more time consuming. So I favour audio-only. If I'm explaining certain simple concepts (with few foreign names) and there's not much I can put on the screen (like maps or quotes), then I'll record myself.
    2
  10836. He said that in 1941, not 1923.
    2
  10837. I explained point 1 in the video. Regarding point 2, Tungsten came from Spain (not saying Turkey didn't have any, but it wasn't mentioned in the sources I have). Point 3 (the mountains), again I mentioned that in the video.
    2
  10838. I'll be covering the Italian Campaign once I've finished the North African Campaign as that follows it, and then you'll have the context. I'm not great when it comes to air or naval warfare, but I'll add it to the list
    2
  10839. Thanks! Any person/event/unit you'd like me to cover?
    2
  10840. Yeah, only one reference in this video though. I want to make this "Their Story" series as an introduction-series that's a bit easier to make than the Battlestorm videos. That way I can get them out quicker without taking too much time away from Stalingrad
    2
  10841. All I'll say is that I don't know enough about the Far Eastern Theatre of WW2. Hadn't heard of this battle until now. Although I did know that Germany supported China prior to the outbreak of WW2.
    2
  10842. Is it "fortress" or just "pocket"?
    2
  10843. Thanks! More coming soon :)
    2
  10844. Tomislav SS-Captain Viktor Eberhard Graebner made a mistake. Never forget :P
    2
  10845. It's actually very filthy-detailed, that I can confirm!
    2
  10846. Let me just turn my computer on to check the stats that I have on that... OH SHHH!
    2
  10847. Also, I got it 3-4 years ago, so it could be the same batch.
    2
  10848. You may enjoy this https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/890851-corsair-grey-label-cx750m-burning-smell-fault-finding-and-repair/ Don't know if it is that yet, but suspect it is so
    2
  10849. You're going to hate the ending of this next episode ;)
    2
  10850. Specifically on Army Group South? I'm not sure if one exists that isn't super-biased. There's one by Werner Haupt called "Army Group South" but he's so pro-German he's practically cheering on the German formations in the hopes that history will change. For good books which talk about Army Group South in 1942, you may want to pick up Citino's "Death or the Wehrmacht", or if you want a lot of details, Glantz's "Stalingrad", which covers the Blau campaign up until 6ths Army's demise.
    2
  10851. Exactly, although I thought it was the CPU overheating first, so took it out, cleaned it, then broke it while trying to put it back in (snapped one of the white plastic leg things). So I ordered a new CPU fan, which came today. But it wasn't that, so it's actually set me back two days now :( And while I'm not bad with computers and built this one, but not super experienced either, so lesson learnt - I shouldn't have just assumed it was the CPU fan. If I'd realised it was the PSU, I would have fitted a new one today and everything would have been fine. Grrrr!
    2
  10852. I hope you mean the PSU and not me!
    2
  10853. I must admit, that was impressive. A random time during a day I don't upload on... Got to give you credit for that
    2
  10854. WTF how!?
    2
  10855. No worries Mr Cupboard!
    2
  10856. Fantastic! I hope you get as much out of it as I did
    2
  10857. "To me the question of redistribution is still unclear. I would say that socialism takes both." In that case, read Gotz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" because the whole book is basically evidence of that redistribution. I also covered this in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video in the "privatization" section (see timestamps in the description).
    2
  10858. To say that corporations are capitalist is wrong. My grandad used to work for the "corpy", meaning he used to work for the local council, which was also known as "the corporation" as it was known. The State is a giant corporation, yet that's not a free market nor private control of the means of production.
    2
  10859. I see. So nobody is on the Left? There are no social democrats, no Critical Race Theorists, no Marxists, no Labour Party members, no Democrats, no Central Bankers, no politicians, no civil servants and no feminists, nobody at all on the Left believing in central planning or state control of the means of production? Oh yes, that's right, there is.
    2
  10860. The German edition of this book is the one you listed: "Hitler, Self-Understanding of a Revolutionary" or "Hitler, Selbstverständnis eines Revolutionärs".
    2
  10861. It is, but I would say it was worth it at that price. I bought it for £27 a few years back, and don't regret it. Obviously, read the free sample and the description of the book to see if it's the right fit for you, but I would say the information and discussion inside is worth it.
    2
  10862. Hope you find it as useful as I did!
    2
  10863.  Yukio Mishima  Democracy is "people power". Except the "people" are the "public", and the "public" is the State. So Democracy is actually "state power". That's why almost every communist, socialist and fascist regime in modern history has described itself as democratic. North Korea, China, the Soviet Union, Fascist Italy, National Socialist Germany... they all described themselves as democratic. Giovanni Gentile, the philosopher who invented Fascism, described it as the highest form of democracy. Hitler said the same thing about National Socialism, as I outlined here https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  10864. Correct. Putin might be a bad guy, but he isn't "mad". However, because the Western State is trying to bang the war drums, it's bought and paid for media can't explain to the populace Putin's actual reasons, otherwise the sheeple would wake up and realize that they're being lied too by their own governments. And it's the same in Russia where Putin has to trick his own people into supporting him. It's all a game.
    2
  10865. I never said Hitler was a Marxist. So in no way have I "disproven" myself. I said Gunter Reimann was a Marxist hiding in Germany. Reimann describes and gives plenty of evidence of how the Nazi economy was a Socialist economy, but then says it wasn't "real" socialism. Sorry but it was. It wasn't a Zwangwirtschaft style socialism, but a Gleichshaltung style of socialism. A free market exists in spite of the state, not because of it. Democratic Socialism is Marxism, as I've explained in depth during the Weimar Hyperinflation series that I'd recommend that you watch.
    2
  10866. I've said "sudoku" before in a few videos because I don't know if I can say seppuku, or if it would hurt the performance of the video. I know I certainly am not allowed to say "s u i c i d e".
    2
  10867. It did. The date in the corner is incorrect. But thank you for letting me know.
    2
  10868. Yes. Can't say s u i c i d e, and probably can't say seppuku, so sudoku it is!
    2
  10869. Hope you liked it Lenin :)
    2
  10870. The plan did need improving, and you can blame Montgomery for that. However, the plan as it was would have worked had Nijmegen Bridge been taken. That's not "bull", that is fact. And I'm not saying the British didn't make mistakes. They made plenty. However, the critical mistake was at Nijmegen. That's why we have historians saying that the battle was "Lost at Nijmegen" http://amzn.eu/2wfmRjc
    2
  10871. It also required everyone to stick to the plan rather than decide not to take the bridge they needed and instead go after a small rise in the terrain.
    2
  10872. As I said in the Purges video, US generals were usually removed from command as punishment for messing up. But they ended up back in command of another unit not too long afterwards. It was a good system, and it's surprising they didn't do that here. Same with Gavin's subordinates since Gavin claimed Warren ignored his pre-drop orders, which to me at least would warrant a sacking. But he gets off scot-free.
    2
  10873. Ok, I'll post the script for my Operation Market Garden video here (got to split it up because YouTube won't let me post it all in one go for some reason). Please note I may have changed some of the sentences in the video so may need to double check.
    2
  10874. Translating it to Polish? That's awesome! Thank you so much! I can provide you with the script if that would make it easier for you? Circa 20,900 words
    2
  10875. "But rely on quotes." Historians use documents as evidence, and then interpret those documents. Thus, relying on documents (and quotes) is exactly what history is. Since the past is gone and cannot be recreated, you can't prove anything happened without sources.
    2
  10876. The premise is that the plan could have worked as it was, if they'd taken Nijmegen Bridge on Day 1 as ordered. I'm reserving my assessment of Montgomery until I get to him - that's why I'm working my way through the North Africa Campaign, so that I can assess him compared to what came before. I've already said Churchill was a poor military leader (although good politician) so I have no problem laying criticism on Montgomery. And he may be the worst general ever, but I'm not so such Market Garden was as bad a plan as people make out. I do think it could have worked, had Gavin decided that a hill was more important than one of the main objectives. And that's the point, Gavin's task was to take the bridge - but he chose to go for the secondary objective first, costing the operation.
    2
  10877. Good point, here's the link for anyone interested https://youtu.be/fiFeYxlPYy4
    2
  10878. Maybe, maybe not. It's pure speculation at this point. The Germans may have been on the retreat, but they certainly had some reserves left. I'm fairly certain they would have used everything in their possession to counter a thrust to the Ruhr (probably on the scale of the Ardennes offensive). And I'm not convinced that the western Allies intended to get to Berlin anyway, so it's unlikely the war would have ended by Christmas 1944 regardless, even if Market Garden had succeeded, or if Patton had had priority.
    2
  10879. Will happen at some point. Focus right now of course is Stalingrad
    2
  10880. TheMegaSuperPickle that was a good guess :D
    2
  10881. I'm not in 100% agreement with either side to be honest, but it's hard to say that the British didn't screw the Poles over in WW2. Now, I understand why they did what they did, and I'm not sure helping Poland in the end was even an option, but still.
    2
  10882. Yeah, I want to eventually get around to all those things, although I need to do more work on the German economy first because the financial bleeding of the German economy is what motivated them to occupy Austria, the Sudetenland etc when they did
    2
  10883. I know. A bit unusual but I wanted to try cover a few different things
    2
  10884. Hi Juan!
    2
  10885. I'm not an AnCap. See how easy it is to "misinterprete" a source? It's funny because someone else was having a go at me elsewhere in the comments for saying socialism was anything other than state ownership of the means of production... But once again, you two aren't here for honest discussion.
    2
  10886. Except, the quote in question isn't from Hitler Speaks, which is a problematic source. This source isn't perfect (no source is), but I'm not convinced he's lying here.
    2
  10887. I'm not libertarian, nor materialist. Could you explain to me how you came to the conclusion that I am either of these things?
    2
  10888. No, but Freud got his ideas from the same esoteric mysticism as Kant and Hegel, as did Carl Jung, which is why most modern psychology studies and therapy models are nonsense. There is no "shadow" self, no "inner child", nor does the solution lie in religious medication or the dialectic, which are often the subscribed "cures". The whole thing is cult-like from top to bottom.
    2
  10889. If a cult doesn't call itself a cult, worships God but doesn't call him God, has adherents to the faith who don't realise they're adherents to the faith, and is just a mixture of several different mainstream religions, can we really call it "atheist"? I've heard them referred to as Puritans before, but Quakers may be more appropriate.
    2
  10890. If you willingly give money to someone selling you a good or service in return for that money, that's not "taking other people's stuff". Allowing the government to take the money you've handed over in the mistaken belief that you'll get some back (when in reality the government just keeps it and everyone gets poorer as a result of the subsequent loss of production) is theft. Working and producing your whole life in the hope to give your children a good start in life is not "wrong". Jealous and envious people who didn't have parents willing to put in the work who then demand the government take money from those who have in the name of "equality" is both theft and immoral.
    2
  10891. Glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  10892. Good luck! No rush, but I patiently await the follow up comment confirming you've managed it :D
    2
  10893. It should have popped up as a card at the end of the video? But I've just added the link in the description.
    2
  10894. Welcome to early club, put your feet up!
    2
  10895. People starved in Russia and the Soviet Union every year between 1916 and 1949.
    2
  10896. Gazala first, but Terri has started the map for the Third Battle of Kharkov
    2
  10897. Hahahaha! Truth
    2
  10898. Good point! I think I may start doing that :) have yourself an extra FIP for the suggestion
    2
  10899. Gesundheit! :)
    2
  10900. Now distribute them evenly amongst your comrades
    2
  10901. +Gary Thomas good question! I actually don't know how he chose the name Stalin. I think it explains it in Young Stalin, but I don't recall
    2
  10902. I wish I could but I really don't have time right now. I'm working almost non-stop on the script and map (as you can see in this video, it's not finished yet)
    2
  10903. Yes, a lot of the Market Garden books don't really mention it, and the details are sparse. It's a shame.
    2
  10904. Well I'm certainly glad you enjoyed this :) working on the next Battlestorm video (Operation Crusader) right now, so hopefully won't be too long to wait.
    2
  10905. Thank you, sir! Glad you enjoyed it :D
    2
  10906. I'm quite proud of this one :) this and Battleaxe. Been working on Battlestorm Operation Crusader today too, which will be similar to this but about 7 hours long.
    2
  10907. Thank you Raven! More to come :)
    2
  10908. Thank you! I'm glad you liked this one. I'm working on Battlestorm Operation Crusader right now :)
    2
  10909. I'm not on FB, but you can private message me on Twitter if you like https://twitter.com/TIKhistory
    2
  10910. Great! And yes, ask me anything! Absolutely stay off Wikipedia. That site can by written by anyone, with or without an education in history and with or without bias and agenda's to push. Stick to history books or articles (you can use Wikipedia to see which books are being used), or the primary sources if you can get access to them. If you're doing something in-depth and accurate like what I've done here, then I highly encourage you to read and take notes from every book on the topic you can get your hands on. After you've done that, then write your script. If you're doing a quick-general-history video that's not in-depth, then you can probably get away with using a few books. The reason is because when you go in-depth you find a lot of "contradictions" in the narrative. Was that unit here or was it actually there? Why was that decision made? Who's to blame for this going wrong? As an example, Frost makes the decision to withdraw in this video - but why? All the sources differ in their opinion, leaving me to make a decision on it. And this is just a small operation, imagine the amount of times you'll come across similar decisions during the D-Day operation. I can tell you that in my research, Stalingrad is a whirlpool of contraversial decisions, mistakes, lies and opinions. And this is the heart of history for me. You can play it safe and do a short "Stalingrad started in August of 1942 and this is roughly what happened" or you can dig deep and do a big video that says things like "some historians argue that the battle of Stalingrad was lost before the first German set foot in the city" or "It's time to ask the question: was Paulus as passive as history has written him to be? The reality is...".
    2
  10911. My pleasure :) working on the next one now (Operation Crusader) and I think it's going to be the longest Battlestorm video I've done.
    2
  10912. In Russian it is "Uran". Not sure who Ann is but she's got an operation named after her.
    2
  10913. I agree. The whole mission was held together by duck tape and string. If the Germans hadn't helped them, it probably wouldn't have worked.
    2
  10914. Thank you sir, glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  10915. One thing that Britain seemed to be good at throughout WW2 was intelligence gathering and deception. However, to what extent this impacted the US decision to join the British is something I don't know. Could the US have joined the German side? My guess is that the U-Boat war made that an improbability - that and Hitler's autarky policy made trade with the US less likely.
    2
  10916. First successful airborne assault on occupied Europe, I was meant to say :)
    2
  10917. It's all good :) glad you liked the video, and more to come!
    2
  10918. If that was true, then why send the other spies in? Sadly, I honestly do think this sentry was just a plain and simple moron.
    2
  10919. Hope this doesn't distract you too much from the cleaning :)
    2
  10920. I don't have an official email, but you could private message me on that if you have twitter @TIKhistory
    2
  10921. Awesome! What do you think of Paul Harrell's channel? I know it's not a historic gun channel, but he seems to be quite an expert and brings up several interesting points.
    2
  10922. Richardsen was first, Jamie. Beat you by four minutes
    2
  10923. Haha that is a nice ratio. But think of it this way, you could be the first to start the trend to 500 to 5 ;)
    2
  10924. I'm working on Battlestoem Operation Crusader now. I just didn't expect it to be 92,000+ words of research and then a super-confusing battle, that's why it's taking me so long :( but it's getting there
    2
  10925. I'm getting better at it, as you can see in my more recent videos :)
    2
  10926. At some point I'll be taking another break from Stalingrad. When I do, I will work on Crusader. That is my promise to you, sir Duke, since you've been so persistant in this request.
    2
  10927. Oddball is an amazing character though to be fair
    2
  10928. "Battlestorm" is the name of the series. If you see that name, it means I've put everything I have into the video to make it as "filthy detailed" as possible. Usually it means several sources, if not ALL the available sources (Compass), are used. With lots of research to back up the script, the maps and battles are very accurate. I also tend to set the bar very high with these videos, which is why they're unlike anything else on this channel. Currently the only Battlestorm video that is not like this is my video on Somaliland which I made in a single day as a bit of a challenge to myself (again, setting the bar high). Most of the rest took weeks if not months to make. Fort Even Emael took 5 months to make.
    2
  10929. Operation Colossus wasn't a success, especially since nobody made it back. Bruneval was a success because the guys made it back.
    2
  10930. Click this link to go to my Patreon page, which explains most of what you need to know https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory And any questions or suggestions, just ask! :)
    2
  10931. I do too, that's why I make these :D I'm not going to put a hard date on the Stalingrad video because it's too early days yet. I'm expecting to finish all research by the end of January, then begin work on the script. Considering it's taken me since April to get to 332,000 words on the research, it's going to take me several more months at least. But don't worry, I've taken breaks from it to make other videos, and I've no doubt now that I'll be doing that again. Afterall, I can't keep you waiting too long for another Battlestorm video!
    2
  10932. Thanks! And FIRST
    2
  10933. The title of the video was literally what the question was - and is Putin's views
    2
  10934. I'm actually not a fan of Chaos! Although I've never tried to paint or play them so maybe I would have been... I don't paint or play anymore though
    2
  10935. It can because Marx is a Hegelian. He actually says just before the "inwardly circumcised J" part that it doesn't matter if it's hoarded or not. That's his "Hegelian logic" at work, and allows him to hold two contradictory statements together at the same time. He does try to explain this, but his explanation isn't great, let's just put it that way. However, I guarantee that 99% of Socialists and Communists have never read to this point in Das Kapital, so it's not like they would have noticed.
    2
  10936. Yeah this is why I'm wondering if I should just give up trying to explain things like this anymore, and move on. It all seems pointless because they're not even listening
    2
  10937. They're using it ironically, in the sense that they're saying "we're the ones being attacked"
    2
  10938. Thank you for your comment! Surprisingly, I've not actually read The Road to Serfdom. I started reading it a while back, but had to prioritize other things. While I'm editing the next few videos, I'll give it a listen.
    2
  10939. We don't have a free market. Everything is taxed, regulated and inflated to death. We don't even use "Capital" as Marx defined it, and thus don't have "Capitalism". You have been convinced that we have a free market, even though we clearly don't, because that's how powerful the propaganda has been.
    2
  10940. They're in a cult. I don't think I can get through to them...
    2
  10941. Yes, it'll be drop-down/top-down point of view. I've got a video coming explaining what I'm going to do and I'm using your comment as an example :)
    2
  10942. ftffighter - to be honest, I get so little "revenue" from the channel as a whole that it's not even a factor to consider. Until you get millions of views per video, you earn hardly anything from YouTube. At the moment, the amount I earn off YouTube doesn't even cover half the cost of my internet, let alone the books or equipment I'm buying or the time I'm spending on all this. The other thing you mentioned about splitting it up would make more viewing time isn't right - look at any of my series videos (e.g. Let's Plays). Half the viewers don't watch the second video. Half again don't watch the third. Same goes for my LRDG videos. It makes more sense to have all the viewers just go to one big video than to split them up. Anyway, it's nice to know that some of my videos are popular. I'd like to think that when the epic Stalingrad video does eventually get released it will do somewhat well and also provide the internet with an epic video few people will be able (or stupid enough) to replicate :)
    2
  10943. Yeah, and then after Italy, it's Western Europe time. Obviously this is a long-term goal as it will take years to get that far... but one day it will happen :)
    2
  10944. Where's the Soviet bias? In numerous videos I've called the Soviet Union and the Marxist Socialist ideology "evil" or similar. How is that a pro-Soviet bias?
    2
  10945. Haha we really do
    2
  10946. The terms 'Socialism' and 'Communism' meant to mean the same thing back in the day (they still do in my opinion, but Marxist Romancers say there's minor differences). If you're against communism, you should also be against National Socialism, which is effectively 'Racial Socialism'. Yes, the Germans didn't want state "ownership" of the means of production, they wanted state "control" of the means of production. Again, slightly different but not by much.
    2
  10947. What I'm saying right now is false
    2
  10948. @PolarisC8 - There's a reason OP is getting a lot of likes... I suspect it's the Extreme-Wehraboo types. Also, I believe the seller on Amazon is also a pro-Nazi, looking at the reviews of his service.
    2
  10949. You don't need to. The book probably isn't 5-stars (more like 3 or 4). I'd say, only get it if you're interested in that particular topic
    2
  10950. I touched upon the numbers of the divisions and units for the 13th of September in the previous video (E18). Here were the numbers for the 13th - 38th Motorized Rifle Brigade - 2,370 men 6th Tank Brigade - 18 T-34s 399th Rifle Division (now a 'regiment') - 565 men 272nd NKVD Rifle Regiment - strength not known, but probably no more than 1,500 men, if that Soviet total - approx 4,500 men and 18 T-34s x2 regiments from 295th Infantry Division - a guesstimate of 4,000 men x1 regiment from 71st Infantry Division - a guesstimate of 2,000 men We know 38th Motorized Rifle Brigade had 1,100 men at the end of the 13th, and 6th Tank Brigade had just 3 to 6 tanks left. We also know that there were no more than 29 StuGs in 51st Army Corps, so it's reasonable to assume ~12 were in this area in question. So, based on this, I'd say that the Soviet counter-attack strength was roughly 3,000 men and either 3 or 6 T-34s, and the Germans had around 6,000 men (could be less, maybe 5,000) and probably 12 StuGs.
    2
  10951. Yeah, I have been considering changing the name of the channel for that reason. But then again, if it keeps the channel small then that's also an advantage
    2
  10952. If you didn't know this, I wonder if you can guess what happened next? If not, you should really enjoy the next episode
    2
  10953. "TIK u seem to down playing German loses. 3 out of 26 is over 10% 600 men lost from front line is also a large # to lose in just one day" I'm confused. So you're saying that I should say that the Germans lost 41 StuGs (which is what Popov claimed) even though they only lost around 3? How exactly is stating facts "down playing German losses"?
    2
  10954. It's sat on the Don not doing a lot at this time. Don't worry, I've not forgotten about it, nor the Croatian Legion
    2
  10955. Glad you're enjoying it!
    2
  10956. Yeah, I prefer videos that get straight into it rather than messing around for too long... Although a few people have told me not to do videos like this, so I guess it's all about preferences
    2
  10957. HOW DARE THEY!
    2
  10958. Well, since I have been to uni, there must be a reason (or two) why I'm not referencing "correctly". Why would you think that is?
    2
  10959. I have been to uni yes. In the description you will see that I have a degree in history. You will also find links to the bibliography which lists the sources in full.
    2
  10960. I've often said that memoirs are secondary sources, not primary sources (even though they are classed as primary sources). The reason I've said that is because I know they're problematic. The problem is that people buy into memoirs quite a bit, so we have to use them. You can't ignore a source - you have to use them all. This is a fundamental principle to history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  10961. "I would just like to comment that I stopped watching the Stalingrad series at the beginning when you supported the 227 order "not one step back"." You must have misunderstood me. I didn't 'support' Order 227. Explaining what it was, as opposed to what it wasn't (e.g. the way 'Enemy at the Gates' portrays it, or Beevor) doesn't mean I support it. It's wrong to take a life. However, it was designed primarily for the officers, not the men under them - and you will see concrete examples of this next episode. - "If I remember correctly, according to Antony Beevor (whom you also insulted in the introduction), the final Soviet plan of November to surround the city was based on that of the Soviet expert of mobilized deep battle principles of Mikhail Tukhachevsky who had been killed in the purge at Stalin's orders. This just goes to show how the purges seriously impacted the Soviet performance while causing needless loss of life. Stalin not only did away with Tukhachevsky himself but also discredited his principles until this point." Hold on, are we talking about Order 227 or the Purges? You seem to be mixing the two up here. The Purges happened before the war, and I've covered the effects of this on the Red Army here - https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ Again, the Purges were terrible for everyone involved. However, the effects of the Purges (like Order 227) were somewhat exaggerated in western histories. Again, discussing a topic and correcting previous mistakes that historians have made doesn't mean I support the policies I'm discussing.
    2
  10962. That's the only downside of Glantz's works (and books in general). It's much easier to see how the battle flowed in videos, which is one of the main reasons I'm doing this series, and other Battlestorm videos too
    2
  10963. And the "intro" is actually the beginning of the battle, but has been neglected in the history books 😂
    2
  10964. Jones' book is really good, especially when it comes to things like Pavlov's House, but also how Chuikov was important to the battle
    2
  10965. Mostly internet images, with some people here helping out, and Anton Joly too. I don't like taking pictures from books because it feels a bit wrong. I'm already heavily reliant on secondary sources as it is, so taking their pictures is too much.
    2
  10966. Life is not about "struggle".
    2
  10967. I'm sorry to hear about your friend. It's never easy losing someone... The fact that his friends came together to remember him is a good sign though. My condolences to you all
    2
  10968. "Israel isn't a desert" Well... Yahweh originally comes from Sumer, which is in southern Iraq. That was the whole point of Abraham's journey - he brings the old Sumer Gods to Canaan.
    2
  10969. Thank you! More to come
    2
  10970. "Tell me, Einstein, who invented the term "critical thinking" and started selling it as equivalent to "free thinking"? If you answer correctly, I might just continue this dialogue" I'm not sure, but according to Wikipedia, Plato said it was Socrates who came up with critical thinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking And I like the way you're doing this whole - "jump through my hoops and I'll give you my secret knowledge" thing. Marxists and National Socialists do that a lot, usually because they don't actually know what they're talking about and are just stalling for time after making a blatant mistake. In your case, it was assuming I was a Marxist when I'm anything but that.
    2
  10971. Glad you're enjoying the videos! I have a 2:1 Bachelor's degree in history. People have said I should go on to get a masters or whatever, but honestly I think my degree is completely worthless and I wouldn't recommend that anyone get a formal education in history while the State is artificially inflating the cost of 'education', especially when it's not a proper education anyway.
    2
  10972. No, because the definition of click-bait is something else. It would only be click-bait if after clicking on the video it had nothing to do with Monty's blunder, like if the video was on a completely different topic (e.g. what I had for breakfast). The debate is whether Monty did make the blunder or not. It's literally in the title and the video. So it isn't clickbait at all.
    2
  10973. Not read Zaloga but I'll put that book on the list. I pretty much already agree with him though. You can tell by just looking at the map that the 6th Panzer Army was basically half of the offensive force, and barely went anywhere. I mean, just look at this map https://images.app.goo.gl/1fseLBxGjqDwco218 The offensive was stopped at and around Elsenborn.
    2
  10974. Nothing in the pipeline, but I would eventually love to do something on WW1, or Korea, or the American Civil War. I think they'll be far in the future though if I'm honest, since the priority is WW2 and the interwar period
    2
  10975. Yes, I've been doing far too much Stalingrad, so I've got 1942 drilled into my brain!
    2
  10976. I have Stalingrad on the mind :D
    2
  10977. Well, I don't think my current title is catchy enough anyway, so I'll change it. However no, a deployment means you're being deployed - as in, brought to the area. You can't deploy into a withdrawal, that's like saying I "advanced backwards".
    2
  10978. Yeah I'm not sure on the "draw" thing. I agree with Neillands on his assessment on Market Garden, but I'm not so certain about the Bulge. And don't worry, I intend to do more BankWars stuff shortly.
    2
  10979. I've just this minute been informed that it's a YouTube error that has affected other channels too (not sure how many). So it wasn't because I changed the title after all... Still, I appreciate your support!
    2
  10980. That's a good theory! Everyone was scoring natural 1's throughout this battle. DM had to call an end to the session 😂
    2
  10981. Yes a typo! But I'll leave it in so that your response makes sense :)
    2
  10982. Thanks TenaX! You're from Serbia? I'm curious if you've watched my Croatian Legion video? It's not political (it was just on the regiment itself), but I got a ton of hate from that video when it released and was wondering what you thought of it.
    2
  10983. Sorry for the wait! At least you're getting a longer episode this time :D
    2
  10984. Thanks Mike! Merry Christmas to you too! Luckily I can swim, otherwise I'd be drowning in books
    2
  10985. Now you can Google to your heart's content. Enjoy!
    2
  10986. Thanks for the suggestion! That was the thing I did with the Stalingrad series, started putting the distances in the corner so people can gauge how far things are. I wish I'd thought of the info bar back when I did this series, but it wasn't until the Public vs Private video (not long after Courland) that I came up with the idea, then much later (Stalingrad) when I first put ranges in the video.
    2
  10987. I think it's to do with the way YouTube promotes channels through their algorithm. Hard to figure out exactly how it works. I also suspect they've been testing my channel recently (they do tests with their algorithm on certain channels), which might explain the sudden promotion. Don't know for certain, but it would explain some strange goings on in the analytics.
    2
  10988. Oh I'm not taking a break. I've got to finish research, script and prep for the next Battlestorm (Courland), but videos are coming every Monday regardless.
    2
  10989. I am not, no. With all the history, I don't get time to play many games anymore :( although I am still waiting for the Bloody First to come out.
    2
  10990. Glantz's "Stalingrad"? Actually it's a 5 book, four part, trilogy. The 5th book is an appendix to books 3 and 4 (volume 3)
    2
  10991. Bit of a break from Battlestorm as I prepare for the next one - Courland Pocket 1944-45, which is coming in February. Next week is a more in-depth look at the Pienaar situation/debate. And other history videos coming in the other weeks, including a couple on history theory (mainly to set the record straight on points people seem to misunderstand all the time)
    2
  10992. Thank you Neil! but I can assure you I won't be resting much. The next two videos come out on Christmas Eve and New Years' Eve, plus my New Years Resolutions video on New Years itself, and got to get prepared for Battlestorm Courland 1944 which is coming in February, and there will be other videos in the meantime. Busy busy busy :)
    2
  10993. I have some recommendations for the North African Campaign in the Pinned Comment, plus I have a video about some Eastern Front books here https://youtu.be/KQWyAez9mCA
    2
  10994. Dowly thanks Dowly! I hope you're not disappointed it didn't turn out to be a mod for CC :P at the end of the day, you were the first person to suggest I do a documentary so you can't complain too much! Also, I was going to do a Market Garden mod for GWTC, but I then learnt that it's practically impossible to mod the strategic system. So that plan's gone out the window :(
    2
  10995. I only have a couple of books by him, but I'm not impressed. What he said about Operation Market Garden in his Armageddon book was completely incorrect.
    2
  10996. If you read it on a Kindle or a phone, no problem
    2
  10997. TIK: answering questions you never asked ;)
    2
  10998. Great! Hope you enjoy them!
    2
  10999. You're welcome! Hope you have fun reading them :)
    2
  11000. If you're amazed by the information in Overy's book, wait until you see the others :D
    2
  11001. Great! Happy reading :) I'm not saying forget about them, but please be very careful with memoirs. You've got to remember that they're biased. See the pinned comment.
    2
  11002. I mentioned this in the pinned comment. Memoirs should be avoided until you've got a firm grasp of the war and the historiography (what historians think).
    2
  11003. Not sure yet. I'm working on Operation Crusader now, which will be the last North African Campaign Battlestorm before Stalingrad. That should be out in the next month or two (it's going to be about 7 hours long).
    2
  11004. I can't recommend on that topic as I only have a few on Crete myself. I was going to do a Battlestorm video on it, but decided to cover North Africa instead
    2
  11005. Got to have those trucks.
    2
  11006. I think so. As but one example, if they hadn't rejected "international Jewish finance" (capitalism) they could have traded with the west during the 1930s and stockpiled more oil for the war. If you stop exports, you can't have imports. So their ideology prevented them from gathering the oil they needed to fight and win the Blitzkrieg in the Soviet Union, and even led to the demotorization of their units.
    2
  11007. Yes I do play and I've already promised I'd play it for people at some point. It's an SG special I got in Texas. Great guitar, and light
    2
  11008. Yeah, I got it before I did any history videos. It's the one I use for any video where I don't appear on screen. Don't normally put it in shot in the videos, but I've got sick of my other mic (since it doesn't sound as good) and finally accepted to abandon my perfectionism - "people will think I'm unprofessional if they can see the mic". Blue Yeti mics are great. Best mic I've ever had by far, although this one is falling apart at the base.
    2
  11009. About four years ago, why?
    2
  11010. He always does it!
    2
  11011. They also built gas-powered vehicles http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/gas-powered-fahrschulwanne-tanks.php
    2
  11012. If they're on Patreon I'll get to them. I'm behind with the Q&As, but probably will be within the next 2 or 3 Q&A episodes. Just due to the nature of it, I'm always going to be a few weeks/a month or two behind when you post a question.
    2
  11013. I wish I could read Russian and Isaev's works :(
    2
  11014. Hi RealH!
    2
  11015. Yes, Gibson SG Special, purchased in Texas
    2
  11016. Because some think that the Germans were not all nazis... and that's a distortion of history I need to tackle at some point, and would have done by now if I hadn't been deflected by the other major distortion I'm looking into at the moment.
    2
  11017. @chillin chum - how about "collectivist"? If I could prove that the Nazis were collectivist, rather than individualist, would that make more sense to you?
    2
  11018. I listen to feedback, although I will say that while the focus will always be on the military history, I don't want to be stuck with just covering that and nothing else. As this video has sort of shown, that if you stray into other fields, you get answers to your questions that military-alone cannot answer. Also NS isn't Fascism, and Fascism isn't NS. They're two distinct ideologies, which I can absolutely confirm.
    2
  11019. Not making enough money = incapable of looking after themselves or providing goods and services to other people in exchange for money.
    2
  11020. In such a hypothetical scenario, work is not eliminated. The old jobs go away, and new ones emerge. And even in the scenario where machines are able to do everything a human can, that's fine, as the machines will effectively become our slaves. Each individual will be able to allocate their AI slaves to do work for them, allowing humans maximum leisure time. But even in such a scenario, artificially redistributing wealth from those willing to work to those unwilling, effectively encouraging inefficiency and corruption, is not a morally good economic policy.
    2
  11021. I'm not a capitalist. And as an ex-socialist, I do understand altruism as I'm still trying to purge the indoctrination I received when I was younger.
    2
  11022. 🤨 Alright. But that was the point. They lost their faith and remained altruist, without any of the other components of their religious upbringing. It looks like I hit a nerve, which is a good thing, as hopefully it makes you think.
    2
  11023. As I said, stay poor and ignorant. If you refuse to understand actual economics or history, and falsely believe that socialism is the reason civilization has improved, you deserve nothing else.
    2
  11024. Had she earned the love and respect of others? Or did she not work for it and expect it all the same?
    2
  11025. I was meaning to do so. Thanks for reminding me!
    2
  11026. Yes, obviously Mao and Pol Pot were Lutherans /s.
    2
  11027. Reform are "far right"? I've already voted via postal vote and spoilt my ballot because all the parties are exactly the same. Just been for a meal with three friends, and they all said the same. There's no difference between any of them - politicians are all lying scumbags.
    2
  11028. What exactly makes this a shaky argument? The pattern is clearly there with all of them, and with others not mentioned, like Che Guevara.
    2
  11029. You were 5th on my end!
    2
  11030. I've only just started reading Rand in the last few months. I independently came to the conclusion that the altruism that was indoctrinated into me as a youth was evil, and it was this realisation (plus the fact someone recommended Peikoff's "The Cause of Hitler's Germany") that made me finally pick up the Objectivist literature. So no, I'm not in a bubble. As an ex-socialist, I've been across the entire "political spectrum" so to speak.
    2
  11031. Yes, a lot of what people say is projection. I don't fully understand the phenomenon, but I've noticed it in real life. For example, it's well known that if someone accuses you of cheating on them when you're not (or becomes controlling of your time, demanding to know where you are at all times) this is because they're cheating on you (or they're about to). Another example, my critics will tell me to "read a book" as I'm clearly wrong on everything. Yet it is they who are too lazy to read the books. They tell me to "read Karl Marx", not realising that I have read it - and they haven't!
    2
  11032. At what point did I say it was exclusively their religious upbringing?
    2
  11033. Gleichschaltung.
    2
  11034. Are you denying the identified pattern? Did all of these socialists not have religious upbringings, an altruistic morality system, parental issues, and a fear of independence that resulted in indolence?
    2
  11035. Everything you've said in your comment is wrong. You're clearly not familiar with the concept of socialism.
    2
  11036. It's alright, we all have bad days, and I admit I'm not having the best either! I could have done more in these videos to explain things, like the philosophy aspect. I have explained this in another video, and think a problem I have is that I assume people have watched my previous videos, when in reality the majority have not. I'm glad you liked the Mosley video, and I intend to do more on him soon.
    2
  11037. If you have more than others, the altruist hates you and despises you to the core. Altruists believe themselves to be morally superior and close to god - it is, fundamentally, a religion. Socialism isn't neo-pagan. It's built on Neo-Platonism (itself influenced by the Orphics) just like Christianity. This is why many of the ideas are shared with the Orphic religion, such as the idea that man had a low part (body), and a high part (soul). These two parts are in eternal conflict. The soul is akin to God, but it sinned and fell from grace. As a punishment, it was included in the body on this earth. The body is therefore the prison, or tomb, of the soul. We will go through a series of reincarnations - the “Wheel of Birth” - until the soul can escape this earth and reunite with God, achieving true happiness and salvation. They believed that “purification” of the soul by living an ascetic life (a pleasure-denying life), which will allow us to go back home [to go back to Eden]. There were rituals they had to perform to achieve this... I mean, you can see the influence.
    2
  11038. Partly, yes. Altruism is a disease that crushes the self-esteem of every individual that gets indoctrinated into it. Religions usually have a get-out-of-altruism card, such as "God loves you", and so they mitigate the damages. But the point is that, should someone lose the faith but retain the altruism, they also lose the mitigation, leaving them with self-hatred.
    2
  11039. That's interesting, and I'm sorry to hear that you had a bad father. Who taught you to be ashamed of yourself? Or was it more than one person?
    2
  11040. I have an entire playlist with videos explaining why Hitler was a Socialist, backed by hundreds of citations. The first video on the list gives a good overview and I'd recommend you watch that, since it answers all your points regarding Hitler's actions https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgxP4QadjKhk4bI6x2PbScO
    2
  11041. That's not the conclusion you should be coming to. The conclusion is that the free market works when allowed to function. The problem is that the State monopoly on power prevents it from functioning.
    2
  11042. "If who produces the thing is to determine whether or not the thing is counted as being part of GNP" Interestingly, our State doesn't count all things that relate to GDP or GNP. For example, as far as I'm aware, nobody has counted my YouTube videos as contributing to GNP, even though they technically should be, since it is a product or service that's going to the consumer. "does that mean that privately-produced health care services should count towards GNP, but government-produced (such as what the UK has) should not?" I don't think either should be counted towards GNP. Curing two patients with different ailments is not the same. One might have a headache, the other a broken leg. Clearly, counting both as equally towards GNP would be silly. And, for me, all GNP or GDP numbers are stupid anyway, since value is subjective. If we produced a ton of bicycles, but nobody wanted them, then our GDP would be high, even though we've made little of value. "I'm currently employed part-time as a delivery driver, but I lost my other job because of Corona, so I'm eligible for unemployment benefits (far more than I would be normally, as of two days ago)." I'm sorry to hear that, and I hope you quickly find another job! "Let's talk about unemployment payments... Here's the problem: my benefits are reduced dollar-for-dollar with what I earn at work, which means that I'm essentially working for free. In fact, I'm losing money because I still have to come out of pocket for gas and mileage." Yes, it's a stupid system. "Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce benefits by seventy-five or fifty cents per dollar earned, so as to encourage people to take part-time work to supplement their income during a job search?" Probably. My other thought on this would be that: if you knew you'd not receive unemployment benefits from the State when you lost your previous job, and were not paying tax, you'd have saved some money (now not being taxed from you) for a 'rainy day'. While you'd now be living on your savings, you'd at least have a roof over your head, food in your belly, and would have an incentive to get a job asap - part-time or not. The State tax-system has not only robbed you of your savings, but has already disincentivised you from saving, and being in a better financial position before you lost your job, then has made it worse for you to find a job (through economic manipulations) and is further disincentivizing you from finding worth through its benefits system.
    2
  11043. Well, at least you apologized 🙂 quite a few people are arguing me, saying that the 1946 Depression didn't happen and that this proves once again that I'm economically illiterate. People really need to learn to watch the video before commenting, because by their own arguments, the Keynesians are economically illiterate (and I would agree)
    2
  11044. "Only stupid or willfully ignorant people think GDP is a representative state of the actual economy." Correct. This is why Keynesians are willfully ignorant of economics.
    2
  11045. Good luck to you too
    2
  11046. You mean - kept oil prices up. You must have heard of the "Petrodollar"? Prices went up after WW2, slowly came down until the mid-1970s, then wen up massively since then (except for times of recessions, which I explained the reason why in my Recessions video) https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-chart
    2
  11047. It was a boom time!
    2
  11048. (try watching a little more into the video... You'll find that I'm an Austrian School follower and that the first few minutes were a set-up)
    2
  11049. We're not "officially" in a depression, because the Central Banks haven't declared it. However, UK GDP is expected to drop by (at least) 15% this year. There's also other factors (e.g. inflation) to consider. So, I'll be very surprised if they don't call 2020 the start of a Depression (GDP prediction) https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-economy-coronavirus-impact-covid-19-business-gdp-2020-unemployment-120159367.html
    2
  11050. This is about tanks. Not only do I mention tanks, but I also explained why building tanks didn't get America out of the Great Depression. Just because this video is titled about the 1946 Depression, doesn't mean this isn't about WW2. I was tempted to name this video: "WW2 didn't get America out of the Depression". This video will also lead to more US WW2 economy videos (e.g. tank production videos)
    2
  11051. You are correct. I believe farmers in the US still get paid by the State to destroy their crops, even though poverty and hunger still exists in the world
    2
  11052. I'm actually pro-gun. The point I was making was that grenades, tanks etc are not typically the priority for civilians
    2
  11053. Driving down prices (back to their actual level) does cause a decrease in profit, which is bad for companies and States which are in massive amounts of debt, yes. However, high prices hurt everyone (consumers) and companies or governments in massive amounts of debt are clearly run by idiots who deserve to go under. Under normal circumstances they would go under, but since the government can just keep printing currency into existence (fraudulently) they can prop every one of their mates up and steal wealth from the rest of society https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs I like that you think "oversaturating" the market is a bad thing. Either people get more stuff cheaper, or the business cuts back on producing things people don't want or need, saving society's resources for more efficient use elsewhere. As Thomas Sowell says: "...the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses". Consumers don't want tanks. They don't want battleships. If they did, the State wouldn't need to have built them because they'd already exist due to consumer demand. The war didn't create a consumer demand for weaponry - the State stole money from the consumers and spent that money on tanks and battleships. I'd recommend you watch my What Causes Recessions or Depressions video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs And I'd recommend you read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression", which is a great read and will explain the arguments in full
    2
  11054. Yeah, unfortunately most people have been convinced by my Marxist-troll critics that I'm not good at economics (which they call 'politics' for some reason), so these videos don't get much attention and fewer still actually listen ☹️
    2
  11055. The point is that what they count is irrelevant. Nobody has ever asked me how much I produce in any job I've had, so how do they know? Clearly they're not counting all production, just certain things in order to 'prove' whatever narrative they want to push.
    2
  11056. Glad you liked this! There's a difference between school and education. My purpose is to get you to think, not obey 👍 more to come like this. And those beers sound good haha, cheers!
    2
  11057. It's not just the American government either. We're all in trouble right now :(
    2
  11058. I'm glad you found the video useful! I do think this is one of my better videos, although the views don't reflect that.
    2
  11059. Glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  11060. It would have given them a couple months of extra fighting from October onwards. Could have allowed Moscow to fall. And what do you mean by Soviet tank superiority?
    2
  11061. The German officer corps ended up being twice the size of the entire German army in 1935. As explained in Enduring the Whirlwind, they had to call back to service all the WW1 veterans to fill out the ranks of officers. So while I'm certain the Germans were prepared to some extent, they were suffering from their expansion too.
    2
  11062. I do want to cover battles about the Pacific theatre, but unfortunately I'm not well-versed in it. Maybe after Stalingrad I'll give it a go
    2
  11063. Of course it did, but what was more impactful than the Purges was the expansion of the Soviet armed forces. The Purges were nothing compared to that.
    2
  11064. Thanks! I really enjoyed making this video. Think it's one of my better ones :)
    2
  11065. No worries! By the sounds of it, I think you will probably enjoy that video by Thomas Ricks, and his book too (links in the description)
    2
  11066. It's spelled "Lieutenant". Lie-oo-tenant 😂
    2
  11067. Really? Just wait until I get to cover that operation during my Stalingrad documentary :D
    2
  11068. One of these days I will catch you out
    2
  11069. Awesome comment :) On your points - 1st Point: for numerous reasons (which I intend to visit in a later video) I still think the Red Army would have had a hard time in 1941, even with different leadership. However, you're right to point out that more "modern" commanders would have helped things, and I agree with that. 2nd Point: This is the critical point for me. I am convinced that it wasn't the Purge of the officers that did the most damage to the Red Army, but the introduction of Commissars and their heavily negative influence over those officers. But is this part of the Purges or a separate issue? The Purges were over in 1941, yet the Commissars remained. It was only in late 1942 that they were removed, paving the way to the first real Soviet offensive victory of the war. 3rd Point: In the US Army, a lot of the old pre-war generals never came back. But during the war, a lot of sackings took place. However, these generals weren't removed, they were recycled. Placed back in other divisions and given a second, third, fourth chances. A "sacking" in the US Armed Forces wasn't a career-ender, it was more of a slap on the wrist - and a very effective one at that. At least, this is according to Ricks (see description). The same applied in the Red Army, although in a different sort of atmosphere.
    2
  11070. On Mondays after a video release I try to reply to as many people as possible for a few hours :) As part of my research for Courland, I've looked into some of the Latvian SS units, although I need to go a bit further. But yes I do want to cover the volunteer and Osttruppen units at some point, much like I did with my Croatian Legion video
    2
  11071. To be fair, I link to it in the end cards :)
    2
  11072. You're welcome haha
    2
  11073. Hope you enjoyed this :)
    2
  11074. And that's without the Pienaar video!
    2
  11075. Yes, yes you are
    2
  11076. The songs are my own (except in the Market Garden documentary). I've only uploaded one song to the channel, but it is the Crusader theme https://youtu.be/0OavdLkkNQE
    2
  11077. Haha thanks! I don't watch TV anymore either (haven't since university). YouTube is superior in every way
    2
  11078. Yes, I can't wait for them either!
    2
  11079. Well done! 🏅
    2
  11080. Great! There were a few fixes, but I sadly didn't manage to catch all of them in time. Still, I hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  11081. I did paint Churchill as pretty bad here. But remember, he was looking at the strategic picture, not the operational. He was looking over the entire British Empire which would change his perspective.
    2
  11082. Haha you caught me! Well, I just hope you get at least a couple hours sleep before waking up that early. I used to get up at 4am some times for my old job, and I don't think I've recovered since
    2
  11083. :) sorry to keep you awake
    2
  11084. Good to hear! Well done for marathoning it!!!
    2
  11085. You're very welcome! Glad you're enjoying the video!
    2
  11086. That's not a bad idea! Sadly, YouTube doesn't count how many people made it to the end of a video, only the percentage. But I could put that in the description or something. I'd imagine it would be quite low for this video, like 1% or something haha
    2
  11087. Thank you sir!
    2
  11088. No, because the Canadian government only wanted troops deployed on the European mainland.
    2
  11089. Good luck :)
    2
  11090. Thank you for your kind comment🙂
    2
  11091. I'll take that to mean you're going to watch this from start to finish ;)
    2
  11092. One of the finest examples of mobile battle!? It was all over the place!?!?
    2
  11093. I salute you o7
    2
  11094. It'll be the whole campaign, and the campaign leading up to it. It won't be in as much detail as this video simply because the sources don't allow it, but it'll be at divisional level for the most part. Will probably look like a bigger version of my Fall-Blau video.
    2
  11095. And thank you for your great comment!
    2
  11096. But that will only leave you 6 hours left to watch ;)
    2
  11097. As I said in the pinned comment, I couldn't put them in because of glitches in the YouTube video editor itself. Please see the independent Crusader videos which do have subtitles.
    2
  11098. Nice!
    2
  11099. And it'll probably get 8 views. Then I'll make a video on what Patton ate for breakfast and that'll get 8 bazillion views. Good old YouTube
    2
  11100. Absolutely! 9 hours of a documentary on what is probably the most ridiculous battle in WW2
    2
  11101. Yes, which is why I've been working on my Stalingrad documentary for about two years now. Hopefully will be out this year, after the Courland Pocket series (starting this coming Monday)
    2
  11102. on my own
    2
  11103. Thank you Zachary! I hope you enjoyed the remaining portion of the video :)
    2
  11104. Glad you enjoyed it! I'm concentrating on Stalingrad right now, but my intention is to continue with the North African Campaign when I get a chance. It's Rommel's Second Offensive though before we get to Gazala
    2
  11105. Good luck!
    2
  11106. The next Battlestorm series is Courland and that will be coming in February
    2
  11107. Yep! This is my longest finished documentary. But the ongoing Stalingrad series is currently over 18 hours 👍
    2
  11108. Glad you liked it!
    2
  11109. Too long... My computer was like a potato for the whole of last week
    2
  11110. ODDBALL SOK "a few hours". It's a significant amount of time for parachute operations, where their task is - to surprise and seize their objective, then dig in and wait for relief. This doesn't happen at Arnhem (apart from Frost) and the British paras are beaten back by forces with superior firepower. This doesn't happen at Nijmegen bridge and again the paras are beaten back with superior firepower. Paras are lightly armed units who's only strength is surprise. Once the surprise is over, they must dig in and wait because they don't have the firepower of a normal infantry division and so will be overwhelmed if they continue to attack. But because it's easier to defend, and they do have some firepower, they can hold a position for quite a while - especially if supplied and relieved soon. I never suggested moving more than a battalion to the bridge. One battalion would have been enough to secure it. Sadly, in the event, only two companies out of one battalion went towards the bridge on the first day, and one of them got lost. So only one COMPANY of paras went for their objective SEVERAL hours after surprise was lost. The 82nd defended Groesbeek without Warren's battalion. So there was zero need to delay that battalion on day 1. That delay cost them the capture of Nijmegen bridge until the 4th day (realistically the 5th day by the time Nijmegen city was cleared) and Groesbeek was never seriously threatened until AFTER XXX Corps had arrived.
    2
  11111. +ODDBALL SOK in fairness, all the bridges were the priority. And there is still a dispute whether Warren received predrop orders or not, which is why Warren may be to blame rather than Gavin
    2
  11112. akgeronimo501 Wow, when/where did Hastings say that? If he did say that, he deserves a slap.
    2
  11113. akgeronimo501 of course, if I sat on the Groesbeek Heights for several hours first for no reason, then less than that
    2
  11114. ODDBALL SOK Except akgeronimo501 hasn't "dealt" with anything. Since neither of you have presented evidence to the contrary, the argument still stands. The 82nd had the chance to take the Nijmegen bridge on the first day. They didn't (for reasons unclear) and so XXX Corps weren't able to reach 1st Airborne on day 3, which they could have done had the Nijmegen bridge been secured on Day 1.
    2
  11115. akgeronimo501 Yes, that's my point. It would take too long. And that's exactly what happened. The lessons learnt in the early years of airborne operations that state airborne forces need to drop as close to their objective as possible to seize it as quickly as possible before the enemy has time to react. This was the lesson at Arnhem (where the British messed up). This was the lesson at Crete, at Eben Emael, and even the ones after, like the Operation Varsity. Nijmegen wasn't captured because the paras didn't move on the bridge until many hours after they'd landed. And that's not because they were too far away. They just didn't move towards it until it was too late.
    2
  11116. akgeronimo501 as it says in Poulussen's book (as well as other books) the 505 PIR said in their report they were asking civilians and searching the forest for the 1000 tanks they thought were in there. Considering that none of the reports said there was anything in the forest (there wasn't), we're left with assumption that their superiors must have feared a substantial counterattack from the Reichswald. It makes sense when you consider a large portion of the 82nd just sat at Groesbeek instead of moving to the bridge.
    2
  11117. +Gripen85 I agree with the names, so thanks for the constructive feedback :) I'm already working on the next documentary... if you check my Twitter, you'll see what I'm working on ;) Ah, you think the 82nd made the biggest mistake then??
    2
  11118. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews. But they killed millions more than that. That was only part of the wider Nazi atrocities. Millions of Ukrainians were starved to death, 180,000 civilians were carted off from Stalingrad alone to the slave labour camps of the Reich (more would never see their homeland again), and there were many murders across Europe. And the number of Red Army executions, as stated in the video, was 158,000.
    2
  11119. That's not an effective counter-argument.
    2
  11120. No worries, glad you enjoyed it :)
    2
  11121. Every person is different. I think people forget this. We're all individuals. There are bad doctors just as there are good doctors. Good policemen, and bad policemen. Well, some people want to be ruled by fascists and others want to be ruled by communists. Some people probably hated the Soviets more than they disliked the Germans. But I would argue they were being ignorant about Nazi intentions. Let me explain - A cursory glance at Hitler's Mein Kampf will show you what he planned to do with the Slavs, which he deemed to be nothing more than slaves. In Hitler's view, Slavs couldn't run their own state, and had to be ruled by another race. In the case of the Soviet Union, this was the Jews - which is where the term Judeo-Bolshevism comes from. His plan was for Germany to wipe out the Jews and claim his prize - the living space in the East, the resources, and, of course, the slaves he needed for his thousand year Reich. If Germany had won in the East, those people who had supported the Germans may have been spared. But they still would have been enslaved, and would have watched millions of their fellow countrymen being starved, deported to the slave labour camps of the Reich, and executed. But at the same time, I understand why they also wouldn't support the Soviet regime because the Soviet regime had also starved them. Realistically, what these people are probably better saying is that the Ukraine needs to be independant from both Germany and Russia, and, given the history, that is absolutely correct.
    2
  11122. Sources I used are listed in the pinned comment.
    2
  11123. Glad you liked it :)
    2
  11124. You didn't watch to the end of the video, I see
    2
  11125. What do you mean? I presented the balanced view here, rather than the pro-German view.
    2
  11126. Yes, probably.
    2
  11127. Since I cannot add annotations (YT has removed that feature) I would have to remove the entire video. It's not worth it for one (admittingly big) mistake, so we'll have to put up with it unfortunately :(
    2
  11128. I do list my sources in all my videos. Early on they were in description (I was using less sources) but now they're in pinned comments because of the word limit. And I would use pinned comments like that, but you can only have one pinned comment, so I prioritize the notes and links first before the sources. Usually there's further explanations or I point out mistakes I made, which I think should be priority in the comment. The sources are at the end just like you'd get in a book.
    2
  11129. They're listed in the pinned comment. I can't put them in the description because there's a word limit.
    2
  11130. Wow thank you! I'm glad you liked the video. I think you'll like next week's video too - on Pavlov's House :)
    2
  11131. Except I called him evil in the video. But I only did it towards the end to catch out the people with short attention spans. If you watch my videos, watch them all the way through, otherwise you'll come to the wrong conclusions.
    2
  11132. Except most Germans died in the East. That's not to say the other powers weren't involved, but certainly in 1942 the losses in the West were nothing compared to the East - "Total German losses including prisoners number 13,488,000 men, representing 75 percent of all mobilized forces and 46 percent of the 1939 adult male population of Germany. Of these, 10,758,000 fell or were taken prisoner in the East. Today, the stark inscription "Died in the East," carved on countless thousands of headstones in German cemeteries, bears mute witness to the carnage in the East, where the will and strength of the Wehrmacht perished." Glantz, D. "When Titan's Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler." University Press of Kansas, 2015. P357
    2
  11133. Let me know what he thinks. Be sure to show him the sources I listed in the pinned comment.
    2
  11134. I think you'll find that Hitler's philosophy of conquering the lands of the East was the reason for the war. And, while you are correct about not justifying Stalin's actions, you're wrong to assume I did justify them. I explained them; I never justified them. You're therefore wrong in calling this 'bullshit'.
    2
  11135. As I said in the video, Stalin and his regime were evil. I was merely showing their perspective of the war, rather than the German perspective. I've cited my sources, and I think they're right.
    2
  11136. I keep talking about Stalingrad, saying 1942 over and over. The one time I need to say 1941, and I say 1942. If you overlook that, the rest of the video is fine.
    2
  11137. Nope.
    2
  11138. I didn't. You need to watch the full video
    2
  11139. Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members. “This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all. “This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses. “The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement” https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
    2
  11140. "Nothing else about their doctrines are the same." LOL. Economically, they are basically the same. Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation Would you like me to go on? Politically, they are slightly different, but that's only because of the "social group" they see as their enemy. Marxists hate the bourgeoisis while the Nationalsocialists hate the non-Aryan races. This leads to slightly different political policies, but these differences are cosmetic. "respect for private enterprise" See above. They abolished private enterprise. "The differances between Italian Fascism and German National-Socialism are pretty much non-existant" Except that the Italian Fascists weren't racists. The first Italian racial law only came in 1938, and that was only because Hitler put pressure on Mussolini.
    2
  11141. "@TIK The Nazis did not have a coherent economic philosophy, and to conflate Nazism with Socialism/Communism neglects the essential economic foundation of Socialism." "He collaborated with privately owned businesses and insured their continuation (and private, not group, ownership) after he took power." "As long as it takes some control of the economy, then I guess it's socialism." Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Let's explain Nazi "privatization" for you - ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ...
    2
  11142. Oh, and Fascism and Nationalsocialism are not the same thing. You'd think a Nazi would know the difference, but apparently not.
    2
  11143. Wyatt Earp. There's little difference between the two ideologies. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Both are at the expense of the individual and see everyone in groups of people. Groups are just numbers, and numbers can die. The reality is that both the National Socialists and Soviet-Marxist were bad. Neither were good.
    2
  11144. Yep, and the same applies with Stalin. He's murdered millions of people, but let's all make up stories about how he eats babies and kicks dogs just to make him look worse
    2
  11145. Pretty much, yes
    2
  11146. No worries :)
    2
  11147. :) thanks! Great to hear!
    2
  11148. I agree. Although it makes sense given that the Germans were capitalist. Being Nazis does not threaten the US economy like communists do. The irony being that you have a nation that was founded on freedom and immigration, who's now closing her borders. Will freedom be next?
    2
  11149. And now so am I! Nuts!
    2
  11150. You're in this comment section too
    2
  11151. You didn't watch to the end of the video.
    2
  11152. Two new kids!? Wow, you have been busy haha! I've been good thanks. I guess the big new is that a couple months back I left my job of 11 years to do this full-time. Not earning enough to survive right now so I'm rapidly eating into my savings. But I'm gambling I can make it work in the next 6 months or so. Working 70-80 hours a week to try make that a reality! But it's all fun :)
    2
  11153. Hey LC, long time no speak! How's things???
    2
  11154. Some comments have been deleted, for obvious reasons. Denying the Holodomor is not acceptable. Note, I did not delete your comment Mirsky for disagreeing with me, only comments that aren't appropriate in the civilized world.
    2
  11155. Thanks! :)
    2
  11156. Yes, I'm not a fan of the film either, obviously
    2
  11157. haha poor Jamie
    2
  11158. Seems unlikely that they could stop an entire division. If they could, probably best using them on the front lines to fight the Axis!
    2
  11159. Yes, there's no point doing history if you're going to push an agenda on it. You'll just come to the wrong conclusions, and what's the point in that? May as well be writing fiction at that point.
    2
  11160. I would say that history is written by the survivors, not necessarily the victors. In WW2's case, Franz Halder had a massive influence on post-war and Cold War perceptions of the Eastern Front which still persist to this day, simply because he became an advisor to the U.S. Army Historical Division, who wrote the early histories of WW2. In the book "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", the author (Shirer) actually writes on a couple of occasions that he's just got off the phone to Halder and Halder said X Y and Z... And many of the other generals were brought into line with Halder's thinking, which is why many of the German memoirs cannot be trusted.
    2
  11161. Shocking, isn't it. The hatred of 'others' is forged in war.
    2
  11162. GNU, cite your sources. Also, most Germans died on the Eastern Front. Regardless of AFV losses (although by your own stats that means 65% were lost in the East) or of aircraft losses (assuming your figures are correct), the majority of German foot soldiers perished in the East. To quote Glantz - "Total German losses including prisoners number 13,488,000 men, representing 75 percent of all mobilized forces and 46 percent of the 1939 adult male population of Germany. Of these, 10,758,000 fell or were taken prisoner in the East. Today, the stark inscription "Died in the East," carved on countless thousands of headstones in German cemeteries, bears mute witness to the carnage in the East, where the will and strength of the Wehrmacht perished." Glantz, When Titan's Clashed, P357 If you consider that the Soviet military deaths were 14,534,600, that's comparable. Obviously, you have to take into account civilian deaths too to get the true scale of the disaster wrought upon the Soviet Union, but at least it gives us an idea. In addition, the Chinese did a lot of damage to the Japanese, and the Soviets only got involved in the closing weeks of the war in the Far East, but still achieved a stunning success in Manchuria - arguably one of the main reasons the Japanese surrendered. Sources: Glantz, D. "When Titan's Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler." University Press of Kansas, 2015. Kavalerchik, B. "The Price of Victory: The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War." Pen & Sword Military, 2017.
    2
  11163. Considering I've already shown how he's manipulated Keitel's memoirs to prove his worth, I think Suvorov isn't good and I aim to do a much bigger video some day disputing his whole work. Link to the Keitel memoirs video https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    2
  11164. That it is :)
    2
  11165. Sorry, but you're wrong. Day 1 of the war the Red Army had 2,743,000 on the Axis-Soviet Front, and the Germans alone had 3,118,910. Combined Axis numbers on the Axis-Soviet Front on the first day of the war was 3,957,910. This remained like this until December 1941. In 1942, Germany occupied a great portion of the Soviet Union. This portion was also the most dense in terms of population (62,400,000). This meant that Germany (75,400,000) and Italy (43,400,000) alone had a larger population (total of 118,800,000) than the unoccupied Soviet population (104,600,000). Total Axis population including Finland was 147,800,000. The Soviets had more tanks and planes, but they also got wiped out early. Why was that? That's because the Germans were fully mobilised and prepared, and struck an enemy that was completely taken by surprise and unprepared for war. Many Soviet tanks didn't have any ammunition, and a good portion broke down before they even reached the battlefield. Their motorized infantry didn't have any trucks. So it's not hard to see why the Soviets lost as much as they did in the 1941-2 period. Sources - Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. (Table N Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Soviet German Front 1941-1945) Harrison, M. "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison." Cambridge University Press, 2000. (Table 1.2. National and colonial boundaries of 1942, showing populations and GDPs of 1938.) Isaev, A. "Dubno 1941: The Greatest Tank Battle of the Second World War." Helion & Company, 2017.
    2
  11166. I was comparing that perception to the reality in order to show the difference between the myth and the reality. Plus the thumbnail gives it away, so not sure why this would put you off.
    2
  11167. You're welcome :)
    2
  11168. You're very welcome! More next Monday :)
    2
  11169. Exactly!
    2
  11170. Ah yes! That one's one of my best. Probably recommend the Oil video after that, which many say is my best :)
    2
  11171. Glad you liked it and thanks for subscribing! Be sure to check out my other "TIKhistory" videos and my 'filthy-detailed' "Battlestorm" videos too, I think you'll like them :)
    2
  11172. Yes, it does appear that one regiment of Batiuk's 284th Rifle Division didn't have enough rifles prior to being committed to the front line in Stalingrad. And a portion of Rodimtsev's 13th Guards Rifle Division was lacking rifles. But none of the sources say they fought without them. They certainly didn't charge them forward as shown in Enemy at the Gates. You also have to remember that a machine gun, a mortar, an anti-tank gun etc, required two or more men to operate. So the number of men without any weapon at all are probably even less than what Urrah states.
    2
  11173. But fought with the Axis, was supported by the Axis, and fought against the Comitern (and was at war with Britain and her Commonwealth). I count that as part of the Axis.
    2
  11174. You're telling me.
    2
  11175. Some people reject the idea that people are individuals, and see the world in terms of skin-colour, class-background, your sexual gender, or which nation you come from. "Stereotypes" is just another name for someone having a socialist mentality. And unfortunately videos like this attract socialists (national, racial, class, or gender socialists) and they are just the worst non-human Borg-collectivists. They truly are racist-sexist-classist-nationalist-zealots, but apparently individuals who believe in classic-liberalism and reject the idea that we are social groups are the "real" Fascists... yeah ok.
    2
  11176. Well, I'm glad you're impressed! The only videos that won't have English subtitles will be my Q&A videos, because they're not scripted and I don't/won't have time to subtitle them unfortunately, but the rest will be subtitled. If you liked this video, be sure to check out my Battlestorm videos because they're my best-quality videos and the ones that many of my subscribers are waiting for (my latest ones are the better quality ones - also I'm currently working on Battlestorms Operation Crusader and Stalingrad) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    2
  11177. Glad to hear you enjoyed it!
    2
  11178. It was an evil totalitarian regime, but I wouldn't say it was a source of "all" evil. There's evil in every village, town, city in every country in the world. If you focus on nothing but the negatives, that's all you'll see, which is why it's easy to paint your enemies as bad/evil etc
    2
  11179. As I said in the video, the Soviets had a smaller population compared to Italy and Germany combined in 1942. That means they don't have "millions of theese guys" to spare. So implementing an order that kills millions of his own men would be stupid, wouldn't it. And this is supported by the statistics, which clearly show only 158,000 Red Army men were executed by the Soviets throughout the whole war. Do the math, and 158,000 divided by 1419 (the number of days in the entire war) and that equates to 111.3 men per day on average. While that is a lot of men and is obviously a terrible waste of lives, it is not on the scale shown in Enemy at the Gates. It's also nothing compared to the 6098 men the Red Army lost per day on average throughout the whole war (from 8,653,800 KIA or MIA source: Kavalerchik, B. "The Price of Victory: The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War." Pen & Sword Military, 2017.). And that was the point of the video, to show that the effects of Order No. 227 have been exaggerated, leading to a false perception of the Axis-Soviet Front.
    2
  11180. Anyone who thinks News companies (any of them, not just Fox or the BBC) are presenting correct information are kidding themselves. The media only exist to entertain or get you worked up about something (which is another form of entertainment), nothing more nothing less.
    2
  11181. "Yes, you called Stalin an evil in the very end of the video after almost half hour pro Bolshevism propaganda just to look like you are not biased." No, I did that to call out people who didn't watch the full video. I also didn't do pro-Bolshevism propaganda. The statistics do not back up the German idea that the Red Army soldier only fought because they had guns pointed at their backs. "Did you mention the close to million Russians who defected to Germany to fight the Russian communists" No because that's not relevant to Order 227, and the rest of your comment misses the point too. I do think that the Soviets forced people to fight (force is what socialism is at its very core, since it's a rejection of capitalism - trade) and forced people don't like to fight, much like any conscript army. That said, making stuff up about Order 227 is not acceptable, and that's what this video was about.
    2
  11182. Yeah, I'm not saying it didn't happen at all, or that it didn't happen in other wars. But it's definitely an unusual event, and unlikely to have been the norm.
    2
  11183. Nope. The Holodomor happened in the 1930s, and the Hunger Plan happened in the 1940s.
    2
  11184. Right, but for many people starting to look into history and Stalingrad, they're most likely going to pick up Beevor's book over many others because it's on the bookshelves of the history section in every book store, unlike many of the others. These new readers won't know the difference, and will come away with the wrong impression. So yes, while you and I know the difference because we have read more widely, they will not. And for many casual readers, they many only read Beevor's book and not pick up another on Stalingrad again. So they will get the wrong impression.
    2
  11185. I don't ban people who disagree at all.
    2
  11186. Murdering innocent civilians is never right, regardless of treaties.
    2
  11187. Yes, because talking about the events of the past must dictate my economic doctrine.
    2
  11188. Exactly. There's enough evidence of evil to drown Stalin in without making him out to be even worse. And you're right, patriots will stop at nothing to defend their country.
    2
  11189. The reason you couldn't find where I got my information from is because I didn't get my facts from Reddit or Yahoo or anywhere online. I used the history books listed in the pinned comment, as I said in the video. Your accusations make no sense, either because they're wrong, or because I did actually mention those things. It wasn't 800,000 executions, it was 158,000. Again, see the sources listed in the pinned comment. What people need to realise is that opinions on forums or Yahoo or Wikipedia are unreliable and should not be trusted. Equally you shouldn't necessarily trust me either, however I've stated where I got my information from, so if you do not believe what I said, you have the ability to fact check them from the sources I used. And, just so we're clear, this is a history channel run by someone with a degree in history who is trying to create content above and beyond what you'd get on the vast majority of the internet. Therefore, I'm approaching this as I would an academic essay, and thus am not one to just make stuff up. Everything I said in the video (except the fact I misspoke at the beginning and said 1942) came from history books and sources. Please consider this factor before you accuse me of lying.
    2
  11190. You're correct that people jump to the Holodomor when thinking about famines in Ukraine. And yes, this is one of my earlier videos where I don't have references displayed at the bottom of the screen as I'm talking to back up everything that I'm saying, but you have to admit that having a knee-jerk reaction of just dismissing something as being false, when in fact it could (and was) true, isn't a healthy way to learn new things.
    2
  11191. I haven't made any, but I want too. Sadly, not a lot seems to have been written on them. The official German history gives just a couple of pages on them in 1942 :(
    2
  11192. No, that was exactly the point. The officers were retreating. Stalin told them to stop that. They stopped retreating and then forced their men to stand. It was a classic middle-management technique.
    2
  11193. That's how I was. It was a good film, but I just wish it was set in a sci-fi setting or something, so it doesn't distort our perception of the Axis-Soviet Front
    2
  11194. But you should equally scrutinize the writings of the German veterans too, especially their generals. Take Manstein for example, no mention in his memoirs of the war crimes he committed or the years he spent in prison for his crimes.
    2
  11195. It's a really good book!
    2
  11196. Did you hear me say that Stalin and his regime were evil in the video? Try watching the full video before commenting
    2
  11197. Technically true, but they were fighting against Soviets at the same time with German support and backing. They certainly weren't neutral.
    2
  11198. He was a general in the Russian Civil War though, as well as the Soviet-Polish War of 1919-1921.
    2
  11199. Glad you found it useful!
    2
  11200. If you'd bothered to watch this all the way through, you would have seen me call Stalin and his regime evil. I'm not a Russian, nor a troll, and I don't support National-Socialists (the Nazis in Germany) or Marxist-Socialists (the Soviets).
    2
  11201. You mean the 48 hour documentary!
    2
  11202. Well, I hope it lives up to expectations!
    2
  11203. It appears that two divisions out of all those what went to Stalingrad arrived without their full-complement of rifles and other equipment. These were elements of Rodimtsev's 13th Guards Rifle Division and Batiuk's 284th Rifle Division (the one Zaitsev was in). Fine. However, that doesn't mean they went into battle without them. Parts of the units went into battle, but the bits that didn't have weapons didn't. They received their weapons within a couple of days and then were committed into battle. So again, this is an exaggeration by Hollywood and isn't real history at all.
    2
  11204. Yes, the Eastern Front is not a solid line, as you might imagine. This is why it can be "easy" to get around a flank. But in this area, there's little to no logistics. Few roads etc. Thus, it wasn't really a threat, and one division was enough.
    2
  11205. Read the pinned comment. I'm not biased against the Germans, I'm against the lies the German generals spouted after the war. The German army marched East with a policy to seize the land and resources, and enslave and wipe out millions of people. That was Lebensraum in a nutshell.
    2
  11206. It's a lot compared to the western allied powers (only a handful were executed in WW2, although many more in WW1), but not as many as portrayed in the film Enemy at the Gates, which was the point of the statement.
    2
  11207. Because I covered the Purge in another video https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ
    2
  11208. Great! Thanks for subscribing :) detailed is the way I'm approaching everything, that's why my Stalingrad documentary still hasn't arrived, despite working on it for over a year now
    2
  11209. Pretty much, yep.
    2
  11210. Well, I can tell you didn't watch the video all the way through, otherwise you wouldn't be saying I'm a communist or loyal to Russia. I'm also not Scottish, nor sound Scottish, this isn't false, Antony Beevor's Stalingrad is out of date, Glantz and House's Stalingrad is far better for audiences these days, I've made videos showing my committment to a future Holodomor documentary because I'm sick of people denying Soviet atrocities https://youtu.be/cmwogdxsUbA , and revising history is actually what historians do https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    2
  11211. Knowing that the archives were only fully opened in both Germany and the Soviet Union in the late 90s renders the myths promoted in the Cold War mute. New evidence and new interpretations are coming to light now because of this. Out with the old and outdated, in with the new.
    2
  11212. Yes, as I said in the description, I misspoke.
    2
  11213. Oh good :) also, I intend to set the record straight in the future, but I have also already explained my stance here https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  11214. WhyM
    2
  11215. I didn't argue FOR Order 227 at all. Try watching until the end, where I called Stalin and his regime evil
    2
  11216. Now that would be interesting. I could sell a guitar case with "But is this really the Case?" on it?
    2
  11217. Didn't watch to the end of the video, I see.
    2
  11218. History isn't written by the winners, it's written by the survivors. The German generals had a massive and disproportionate influence on western perceptions of the Axis-Soviet War, mainly because the west wasn't willing or able to consider the Soviet side due to the Cold War.
    2
  11219. If that is the case, then since you're also preaching history on YouTube, we can also safely dismiss your comment as an equally opinionated piece. "Read books with actual footnotes" - sources are listed in the pinned comment, which I shall assume you didn't bother checking otherwise you wouldn't have accused me of using books that didn't have actual footnotes. "a very large numbers of Russian soldiers were executed or sent to camps" - source please. "Stalin was happy to throw as many Russians as it took" - source please. I'd love to know what source you have where Stalin says 'I'm happy to throw as many Russians-only (not any other nationality) as it takes at the Germans'. "You can't get history from Youtube." - why not? What's stopping you from learning history via video? If you watch my video, then get encouraged to read the sources (again, listed in the pinned comment, and throughout the video), what's the issue? The problem with the internet is that you don't know the anonymous author and you don't know their motivations, meaning you could be reading or watching something by someone with an agenda. And that's a very valid point. However, the same applies with history books. You don't actually know the author and you don't know their motivations. And actually, the benefit of a video is that you can see and hear the author, and this author has also made it clear what his motivations are https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M So, in actuality, if a video author does it well, video can actually be superior to books. In fact, as this video points out, several books got things wrong, and I used other books to show this. That makes this video a Tertiary source (similar to the value of a textbook). In other videos where I have used primary sources, my videos are actually secondary sources - and valid ones at that. Therefore, if done correctly, there is little to no difference between a book and a video. And I would argue video is much more entertaining, especially to younger generations.
    2
  11220. I did say Stalin was evil. You watched until the end, right?
    2
  11221. Except the event shown in Enemy at the Gates is complete fiction and didn't happen. Another example, Zaitsev crossed the Volga at night and didn't get shot at by even one bullet during the crossing, which even surprised him.
    2
  11222. It's a rare sight :)
    2
  11223. Yes, I misspoke and didn't catch it in editing :(
    2
  11224. Hitler's socialism was the reason he wanted to take the resources of the East. That's not a myth.
    2
  11225. I am going to do a brief summary section at the beginning of the video 👍 and yes, Stalingrad was way too long!
    2
  11226. Yeah, I'm half-way through Atlas Shrugged, have some other books to read, and am working my way through some lectures by Peikoff. Obviously I read "The Cause of Hitler's Germany" by Peikoff a while back too.
    2
  11227. Yea, I do intend to finish the Weimar series, and I also enjoy making the politics and economic content, so that's not going away. It's just about priorities.
    2
  11228. I'll do a video on it once I've got it more ironed out
    2
  11229. Barbarossa may not be possible at Battlestorm level... The maps would be too huge to make or load up in Blender
    2
  11230. Yeah, Stalingrad was way too long... Most battles are not Stalingrad in length or size, so we shouldn't have that particular problem again.
    2
  11231. I may do that, but I guess it depends on what I've got to show for it. Others may not want too many updates. I'll discuss the frequency in the mid-December check-in
    2
  11232. Technically that's not happened yet ;)
    2
  11233. I'm actually half-way through that lecture series :) But I'll check out the book by Robert Tracinski, thank you
    2
  11234. "TIK's Table Talks :P" I would, but my enemies would use that as "proof" that I'm a "crypto-fascist" :D However, you've got me thinking that something like "TIK's fireside chats" might work
    2
  11235. It wasn't rambling at all! I think you hit all the points of the original post, and the additions are fantastic too. I do hope I get the opportunity to use it in the video. Thank you! :)
    2
  11236. By the way, I'm not saying I absolutely would use your comments in the video, but I'd like to reserve the usage of them, because it would be good to give people an example of someone else having this issue as well. It's all about multiple perspectives.
    2
  11237. No, it was actually really good! I was going to ask if you could elaborate further, and if I could use both of your comments in the video I'm going to make on this history theory problem? :) I'm not saying you should re-write it again, but it is nice to hear that there are others struggling with this too, and I am interested to hear your take on all of this. The "paranoia" you mentioned about not wanting to read certain histories or authors is a problem I had to overcome as well.
    2
  11238. That's odd. I was making a detailed reply to your comment, but because your comment disappeared, my comment encountered an error and was lost. Did you delete your third message?
    2
  11239. Point me to a person who isn't "biased"! Everybody is biased when you subscribe to the Subjectivist theory of history. And the reason for my burnout was because the current theory of history says that to overcome the biases inherent within the sources and the history books, we must debate it. The problem is that this debate is democratic in nature, and therefore doesn't work. If everyone discounts your "opinions" because they think you're "insane", then the consensus is that you're wrong. But a consensus is meaningless; if everyone thinks the moon is made of cheese, that doesn't make it so. So this Subjectivist theory of history - that history lies in the heart of debate - results in the conclusion that history cannot be done at all. All history is arbitrary and pointless if there is no objective reality and everything is just an opinion or limited perspective. "Debate" cannot overcome this inherent flaw in the doctrine as every individual is seen as trying to push their own particular biased political or ideological agenda, hence the reason for my burnout. There has to be an objective reality, and we must be able to grasp it. The Objectivist theory has shown me that reality can be grasped, and that history does not lie in the heart of the debate. Debate can be useful, but it's not the main element in history, neither is "interpretation". My old views (as presented in my videos on history theory) are now obsolete. Richard Evans was (once again) incorrect in his "In Defense of History", and I realise that I was completely misled by his dialectical teachings. This realisation - that reality is graspable, that history can actually be done, and that my work isn't just my "subjective interpretation" - is what has brought me out of my burnout. If objective reality exists, and if "subjective interpretation" (opinion) is replaced with logic and reason, then the mind can grasp reality. In such a case, I can now trust myself and my senses to detect the flaws in any given source of information (including Leonard Peikoff's bias). Once detected, I can overcome them through logic, reason, and the use of more sources of information. Thus, history isn't a Subjective postmodernist soup of biased opinions that can all be thrown out, but a real tangible thing.
    2
  11240. I've not fully gotten my head around the entire philosophy yet, but I intend to do so.
    2
  11241. And to add to that, I apologize for not getting to your question. By abandoning the publish-every-Monday schedule, I should have more time to do reading on the Q&As.
    2
  11242. I'm way ahead of you - I'm more than halfway through that lecture series :)
    2
  11243. Thank you for your feedback and advice! And thank you for forwarding the question to others. I've had some suggestions, but not much concrete yet. Someone else was explaining that they were having the same problem with history theory too, so it's certainly not unique to myself.
    2
  11244. Ration strength is the overall number of men including support rear units and non-combat personnel. Combat strength is the actual number of guys who are fighting on the front lines and in the artillery etc. It's good to give both sets of numbers because just providing the lower number could be viewed as being misleading since more guys were in the units.
    2
  11245. You do realize that the title is a question, and that I made it clear in the video that the Romanians didn't flee? In the video, I actually addressed the widespread myth that the Romanians fled. So you have reported me for saying the Romanians fled, when in reality I didn't actually say that. Well done.
    2
  11246. The 1944 plot was known as the "colonels plot" because most of the generals were loyal to the regime, so the colonels and other lower officers had to organise the resistance.
    2
  11247. I'm working on the script right now
    2
  11248. "Your libertarian ideology with its hostility toward duty and the collective good has no place in an army, which relies on duty as a principle and exists for the collective good." This so-called "collective good" of yours is what led to the deaths of millions of people. The thousands of soldiers who died at Stalingrad were fighting for the "collective good". Their blood is on your hands, since you're the one unable to learn from history.
    2
  11249. I've already done a video explaining this: https://youtu.be/rS_59PHhO4M The death-rate percentage for non-Stalingrad German prisoners who were captured by the Soviets was about 11.5%. The Stalingrad death ratio was 95.37%. Why? Well, the Germans who surrendered at Stalingrad were the exception, not the rule. Most of the lower ranks at Stalingrad didn't survive captivity, while the majority of their officers did, because their officers received better rations (and fought less) during the siege, preserving their strength for what came next. Most of the Stalingrad prisoners died of typhus or because of they were on the brink of starvation when they surrendered. Of the 107,800 who were taken prisoner at Stalingrad, only 15,000 had survived by the May of 1943. Obviously, if only 13% had survived in the first two months, then the question becomes: how come 33% of that 15,000 survived the next decade or so? Why wouldn't the death-rate or survival rate stay consistent? Obviously, it's because something killed the prisoners in the first few months after surrender, and then whatever that was disappeared after that. This suggests that typhus and/or starvation was the cause.
    2
  11250. Except, most of them died in the immediate aftermath of typhus and starvation, both brought on by the siege and airlift.
    2
  11251. I have not. Does he cite his sources?
    2
  11252. Gazala is next
    2
  11253. I'm currently reading into it and wanted to give a nod to those who are.
    2
  11254. "Arguing against the advice of doctors when you're not even in the same field, is another thing." Many doctors were against the lockdowns. You just didn't hear from those particular doctors because of the political mass censorship. As but one example out of many, Dr Peter A. McCullough (who is far more medically qualified than either Anthony Fauci or Matt Hancock) has been dead set against the lockdowns and the jabs. The question is: why are you so eager to dismiss alternative points of view? Why are the adherents of the socialist faith worshiping self-censorship rather than looking at this from all sides as you should be doing? And this isn't even a medical issue, it's a political issue. This was nothing other than a power-grab and a way to save the pension system. Totalitarianism isn't the answer to a flu virus. Any doctor saying that totalitarianism is the answer, isn't a doctor that I trust. Since I'm more qualified than they are in the field of history, you should take a look at what happens when doctors have full reign to do what they truly want to do in their profession https://youtu.be/eYLlpviqulQ
    2
  11255. Trump, Biden... They're all the same in my eyes.
    2
  11256. Not in British English. When a name ends in an "s" you just add an apostrophe.
    2
  11257. Yes, I know. I'm going to talk about that in the next Battlestorm Stalingrad episode
    2
  11258. YouTube went public in 2005. It's not a private entity. And yes, r/SadHistory is no different than those others you listed. Denying the causes of the Holocaust is Holocaust denial, and they are denying that Hitler's regime was totalitarian or collectivist (the Aryans are the collective). You can't have private property or a free market in a totalitarian regime, otherwise it wouldn't be totalitarian. And then you find that Hitler didn't just abolish private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree, but he also stole property off the Communists, the Socialists, the Conservatives, the Churches, the businessmen, the Jews, and other people too. Somehow, r/Bad history is denying these unfortunate events. They're just ignoring all the evidence that doesn't support their beliefs - all in the name of their antisemitic ideology. And they'll even deny it's antisemitic because how can a "workers' democracy" be antisemitic!? It can be antisemitic when you actually read the literature and see the antisemitism inherent within the religion. But these ignorant Marxist-fanatics haven't even read their own literature, because they're too bone-idle and lazy to do any actual work.
    2
  11259. Yes, I apply the same to those authors. In my video on David Irving, you'll find that I only talked about his content https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8?si=6hKjfJhRBr9hPmNq
    2
  11260. Criticize the content, not the author.
    2
  11261. You can turn them off; there's an option in the settings of the video. Click the "gear" icon if you're watching this on PC. Can't remember how to turn them off on the app, but there's a setting somewhere. Might be called "captions".
    2
  11262. Episode 12 comes out later today
    2
  11263. See the pinned comment. I knew about this issue when I published. Newer iterations of Premiere Pro are buggy as hell, and this text and picture resizing issue is a real pain
    2
  11264. Awesome! I hope you have a good time in Arnhem. I've never been, so I'm jealous
    2
  11265. Nice to have you along for the ride!
    2
  11266. Considering this took 5 months to create (yep), it may be a long time before I attempt something like this again. I will be doing more of the other types of Battlestorm videos - the ones like Battleaxe and Bruneval. In fact, I'm working on Operation Crusader right now, and have been working for over a year on Stalingrad. However, when they're done they won't be like this particular video.
    2
  11267. It took about 5 months (in spare time) from doing the research, learning the software, and creating it
    2
  11268. He seems to be focusing on ancient battles?
    2
  11269. 7 months worth of effort to be exact :)
    2
  11270. Thanks! Not heard of Fort Driant before. Will add it to my ever growing to-do list though :)
    2
  11271. Happy New Year to you too Rikki :) I'm glad you liked it - the next one will be better. Promise!
    2
  11272. Happy New Year to you too!
    2
  11273. Yeah, I mention this towards the end. I think they're similar in concept in that they're both specialist-type vehicles
    2
  11274.  @vassilizaitzev1  Oh good! It's annoying when you're stressed about an external pressure you can't really do anything about.
    2
  11275. I am much better now, thanks Vass! How's things with you? Have you managed to catch up with the videos? 😂
    2
  11276. I'm a bit surprised considering who's in the title!
    2
  11277. Are you referring to Greg Hallett? If so, you may enjoy last week's video 👍
    2
  11278. Thank you! I'll go get that book
    2
  11279. I can increase the volume using a limiter (in fact, I used to) but people then complain that about the EQ.
    2
  11280. Disney was a fan of the Nazis, which explains why all their movies are pure propaganda
    2
  11281. And Halder! Don't forget poor Halder!
    2
  11282. Stick to thanks!
    2
  11283. The reason why is because I don't get much time to reply, especially right now since being ill for a couple weeks has really set me back, so I'm focused on the videos. The problem with the megalomaniac idea (using the definitions you've provided) is that it's a vague term. It could apply to almost every State leader in history. Most of them (especially the ones that believe in central planning) all delude themselves into thinking they're of a higher importance than they really are, and are omnipotent over the 'ignorant masses".
    2
  11284. @Nicolai Myshkin  Well, to be fair, my job is to question everything! 😂 But I have got some of Antony Sutton's books. As much as I want to believe what he writes, I'm quite skeptical.
    2
  11285. I'm working on it. They're every four weeks for a reason
    2
  11286.  @jamesmackenzie1536  I didn't "conviently turn to wikipedia" - I like to use the "even Wikipedia says this" because it's unusual for Wikipedia to actually get something right. That's the point. I will get the book you mentioned. But there are books I can recommend to you too. E.g. Zitelmann's "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction", Hitler's Table Talks, Goebbels' diaries (he says that visiting the Pope is "evil" on the 5th of April 1942 for example) and there are many more.
    2
  11287.  @jamesmackenzie1536  "the churches were all in bed with Hitler" That's not true. Hitler waged a war against the Church. I really need to do a video on this topic because people keep bringing this up and it's simply not true. Surprisingly enough, even Wikipedia actually has an article on this (although I'm not sure how accurate it is) and even mentions the "war on the church" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_persecution_of_the_Catholic_Church_in_Germany
    2
  11288. But if there's a conspiracy, and you try to explain it, that does technically make you a conspiracy theorist, even though the phrase now has connotations that make it sound as though the theorist is a nutjob. To me, it's just name calling. All it does is prevent people from considering that there may be something wrong with an official narrative, which is bad because you cannot tell if something is true or not unless you can question it.
    2
  11289. I'm not "liberal" in the way you're using it, not anti-German, and not globalist, so I think you've misjudged me.
    2
  11290. It's the city I always start in when playing Patrician 3 👍 (don't get time to play often these days though, sadly)
    2
  11291. I've got his book, and I actually posted a comment on his video when he first announced it. I haven't managed to read all of it because I've been working on everything else in between, but I'm very much aware of him 👍🏻
    2
  11292. That's a very good way of putting it, and I agree, if I can move the needle slightly away from totalitarianism, then that'll be a job well done. Thank you
    2
  11293. Oh wow, I'm surprised - I didn't think there were many people who disliked my conclusions for the Biscari video! But that's fine, I'm more than happy for you to disagree with me on that :) I'm certainly not perfect... and you might be right about letting the cards/chips fall where they may. I think that's what I need to do from now on and ignore the obvious haters.
    2
  11294. Yeah, I've listened to some of his lectures, and I've got his "Race Marxism" book. I got it the day that he did the video announcing it on YouTube, and I left a comment which was very popular at the time https://youtu.be/oOWvYHCyfgE I've not had a chance to read it fully, but I have been meaning to finish it off at some point.
    2
  11295. I mean, if anything, that's what private property is! To be honest, I don't want to watch the show and give them a view/engagement just to see this, so I'll just take your word for it.
    2
  11296. Interesting. I'm wondering if Gleichschaltung came later due to the failure of these programs? We know they abandoned the idea of nationalising the economy during WW1 as a result of the Hindenburg Program and Lenin's Socialism destroying the economy in Russia, so maybe they evolved these programs later, then Gleichschaltung after that?
    2
  11297. I don't just say things without backing them up. I have sources saying that the Jews were not allowed to own land in Christian Europe, weren't allowed into the crafts, and so were forced into jobs like minting coins, money-lending, banking and being merchants. Now, those sources might be incorrect, however that's the reason why I said it.
    2
  11298. Yeah I literally can't get through to them either. There will be loads of them in this comment section soon saying this too. One's just said that "The first people Hitler rounded up were the socialists". As I say in this video - let them rot. If they can't be bothered listening, let them rot.
    2
  11299. I understand that not everyone is interested in this topic. I would actually say the majority are not, which is why I tend to only do an economics video every few weeks. The battles will always be there, and will be a significant portion of the channel (say 75% of the content), but at the same time, I do think this stuff is the more important things I'm covering, simply because it's a critical debate and has a much wider impact.
    2
  11300. Of points 1, 2, 1 and 2 - the only one National Socialism doesn't fit in is the second 2. It does fit with the other three. And that final 2 isn't a description of Socialism - it's a description of the Marxist-Socialist world view. Hitler wasn't a Communist, he was a Socialist. So his ultimate aim wasn't Communism, it was Socialism. Thus, transitional phase or not, Hitler's a Socialist. And nationalism is socialism. Again I've been over all this in the videos.
    2
  11301. I would say that this is accurate, and is something I've come to realise. Perhaps I've been mistaken in believing that most socialists were like what I was. Clearly they're not. They're selfish and greedy people who only want what's best for their tribe. I've still not fully internalized this though, so I need to do so... Thank you for your comment
    2
  11302. That's not the definition I'm using. This is the definition I'm using https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11303. That makes sense to me! Why don't you think they apply this term to the Soviet Union, the GDR, and so on?
    2
  11304. That's a very good point about there being all these Leftist factions. If there's so many groups, why can't one of these (the National Socialists) be counted as 'real' socialists too? It doesn't make sense to exclude them, especially since the various Leftist factions hate each other's guts. Also, I do read the comments, and I enjoy doing so. Sadly I don't always get a chance to respond, so don't feel bad if I don't :)
    2
  11305. Thank you! I've seen some of Lindsay's stuff, but not that one.
    2
  11306. Yeah you were right back then, and you're right now. We've got to look to the future generations because the current generation is beyond hopeless
    2
  11307. That's a great idea! I'll add it to my list of things to do. I've already tackled Bel a couple times in the videos, but a stand-alone video that smashes it completely would be good. Thank you
    2
  11308. I was learning it, but had to give up because I've got too much on my plate
    2
  11309. I think that's it. I think I've been taking them too seriously, but I shouldn't. They want to remain ignorant, so let them rot.
    2
  11310. The German Army was 100,000 men strong at this point, and was in social and economic crisis with a weak government. So if the Polish Army had failed at Warsaw, the Red Army would have wiped out the tiny German Army. That's what the author of the book is saying, and that sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me.
    2
  11311. *know
    2
  11312. I've heard of it, but it's always mentioned in passing, but never in detail. Or at least, I've not come across a book specifically about it in the shops (although there's probably a few online)
    2
  11313. That is interesting - tbh, I didn't realise that the Luftwaffe went to Iraq. Will have to look into it
    2
  11314. The Winter War is also on my list of things to cover in a Battlestorm video, although I'm not sure when I'll get to it. It's not so much forgotten, but it isn't a common topic that people discuss in detail
    2
  11315. Good question. I'll consider my answer and let you know in an upcoming Q&A video :)
    2
  11316. Except, it was the British State that caused the Irish famine, not the non-existent free market.
    2
  11317. I actually started with her "The Virtue of Selfishness" rather than her fiction for reasons I won't get into. I do want to read her fiction though. Some of the lectures and videos from the Rand Institute (as well as others by critics) indicate that there are problems with her economics, I'll agree with that.
    2
  11318. Looks like I've caused it to get bought up! It's a reprint and condensed version of "Ominous Parallels" though, so you could try to find that instead.
    2
  11319. I agree with your criticisms of Objectivists. That said, I do think Peikoff and Rand are not questionable sources, but rather a different and welcome perspective. Peikoff's book was very good, and I can't throw it out just because of their anti-religious stance. The human condition is neither subjective nor objective. It's both. So I disagree with Rand and Peikoff who say it's entirely objective, but also with your assertion that it's entirely subjective and emotional. Reality is objective, but our interpretation of it is subjective. And this isn't some Kantian synthesis either; mere observation of the facts. You can't live entirely in your head, and you cannot live entirely without your head either. There is a balance to be made.
    2
  11320. Plato's Republic was the first book I ever read all the way through when I was a kid. I've read it twice, but I don't know where my copy's gone... Anyway, if I remember correctly, isn't there only three social groups in Plato's Republic? Gold, silver and bronze? The philosopher kings, the warrior class, and the artisans? Maybe I'm misremembering.
    2
  11321. I haven't considered it like that before. But that's an interesting take, and certainly makes more sense than them just censoring reality to defend their ideals.
    2
  11322. You say this on the video after it was proven conclusively that the majority of the audience don't want Battlestorms https://youtu.be/kVKToZyVj-k I also like that you dismiss me, the sources I use, and logic. Yes, there is a clear connection between Hitler and Hegel and so on. Denying this is denying the facts because your feelings are more important to you that reality. And if you think this video is bad, then you must also think my Battlestorms are bad, since you reject the process of history I use (objective evidence + subjective interpretation). Therefore you'd better stop watching all my videos, since you neither like my evidence nor interpretation.
    2
  11323. Is he a Nazi or similar? Because reading his book I get that impression. He seems really apologetic and writes in a way that seems to be promoting the ideology, but I can't be certain.
    2
  11324. Definitely start with Peikoff's "The Cause of Hitler's Germany".
    2
  11325. I didn't realise Tom Woods was a Catholic until I read your comment. But yes, I'm a listener of his podcast and have a couple of his books.
    2
  11326. "maybe he lost his nerve but that dont proof that he is a coward or a bad general" I never said he was a coward or a bad general. And I don't think he is a coward or a bad general. I think he was a good general who was also human, and under a lot of pressure. I think anyone else would have cracked under the strain, so it's not necessarily because Chuikov was a coward or whatnot, but more because of the sheer weight of what was happening.
    2
  11327. You're letting your emotions cloud your judgement. I think Chuikov was a decent general. He was, however, a flawed human being who made mistakes. It's not a "cheap shot" to point out what happened.
    2
  11328.  @satanicmuffin9309  "all I could really gather from it was that they were asserting that Nazis were not Socialists without any concrete argument to back it up." Yes, I got that impression too. They just stated things without backing them up, and as I've shown, when you look into the details, the statements they (and many others have made) don't hold up to scrutiny. And I don't blame them because I used to believe the narrative I was taught in college etc. I'm hopeful that if they dived deep, they'd see that the alternative was true.
    2
  11329. I pronounced it like that earlier in the series, and people said I was wrong. So I swapped to this, and now you're saying I'm wrong. Can't win. Worse, if you go to Forvo dot com and search for his name, you can find 2 Russians, a Belorussian and a Ukrainian all pronouncing it differently.
    2
  11330. In his heavily edited memoirs, Chuikov says he wanted to withdraw parts of his HQ. But the actual request at the time, quoted at 18:54 doesn't say that. He only asks for permission to withdraw.
    2
  11331. You weren't first, but thank you for your thank you!
    2
  11332. Ironically, it is you who's letting your emotions cloud your judgement. The fact is that I didn't say that Chuikov wasn't right to request a withdraw, or that he was wrong, or that Eremenko wasn't to blame (I actually told you that Eremenko was wrongly keeping reinforcements across the Volga). Nor did I give any opinion on whether Chuikov was an "idiot", or a coward, or anything else. All I was doing was providing the facts as they are. However, you have falsely assumed that I was trying to disparage Chuikov in this instance, but that is far from the case. I believe most human beings placed in Chuikov's position would have also requested a withdrawal, and I think that his willingness to make a last stand at the Volga's edge after being refused the right to withdraw shows that he was anything but a coward. It is actually a good thing that Chuikov lost his nerve, because it makes what comes after this even more remarkable. The fact that he stayed in Stalingrad and managed to hold on for another month (when Uranus began and stopped the German attempt to take the city) means he managed to overcome the overwhelming odds he faced. That's a decent general.
    2
  11333. @a witcher  Ah, I see! Yes, yes you were 😂
    2
  11334.  @awitcher5303  Really? On my side, he's first?
    2
  11335. Sorry!
    2
  11336. Stalingrad was last week
    2
  11337. FIRST!
    2
  11338. I'm not against doing more videos on history theory, but I've already got a few videos on it already. I'm not sure what else to talk about https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledj5IaYPsLLYUrdb7yOr1Pq_
    2
  11339. May the 4th be with you https://i.redd.it/5fu21gsc24x61.jpg
    2
  11340. Thank you for the suggestion! I'll add it to my reading list
    2
  11341. Did he? I did not know.
    2
  11342. I have found it on that podcast site, thank you!
    2
  11343. Dismissing sources you haven't read is a sign that you're not doing history correctly. Stop running your mouth, and read Gellately. Educate yourself, and remember: nobody's coming to save you.
    2
  11344. Good spot!
    2
  11345. Glad you think so!
    2
  11346. First hand sources aren't the best sources, as I explained here https://youtu.be/CcwmbqxF9so
    2
  11347. Hitler was in the Bavarian Army, which was under Eisner's control, and later the Bavarian Soviet Republic. It doesn't make sense for them to spy upon themselves. If any spying occurred, it happened later. And honestly, it's very odd how Hitler's unit, which was predominantly socialist, elected the one "capitalist" spy in their ranks to represent them, twice.
    2
  11348. I called that book out in the video. And in my recent video on sources, I have a section explaining several flaws of Shirer's book https://youtu.be/CcwmbqxF9so?si=nsIxlt7p6sdCI0cQ
    2
  11349. Yes you were! I'm a bit slow today (been busy)
    2
  11350. Such a lazy response. The person with the evidence and logic supporting him is called "ill informed" by someone relying on beliefs he's pulled out of his rear. How about you stop being silly and start studying the topic? If you can't afford to buy the books, listen to my videos, as I provide a lot of evidence and quotes to support what I'm saying.
    2
  11351. You don't read. Instead you make stuff up and jump to incorrect conclusions, then wonder why people who have actually read the history and studied the period disagree with you 🙄
    2
  11352. The USSR's blockade was self-imposed, as that's what socialism is - economic blockade. Trade ground to a halt within the Soviet Union, let alone outside of it, due to socialism, which self-imposes autarky. Also, you're forgetting all the aid that was sent to the USSR, from the United States (future president Hoover was in charge of the aid). You're also forgetting that, during the middle of a famine, Lenin was still trying to export his Revolution abroad, spending money he didn't have to finance wars and foreign agents across Europe. The Communists in Germany, for example, were funded by Lenin and the USSR. Lenin invaded Poland as millions were starving under his regime. Why don't you consider these facts? Oh, that's right, because you're ignorant of what actually happened. Again, go read a history book.
    2
  11353. Yeah, you don't read history books. That's why you're not in a position to grade me, since you're ignorant on the topic. Go away and do your homework.
    2
  11354. @ocumstweezers And yet you cannot see the propaganda you're spewing. Try reading something like Robert Gellately's "Lenin, Stalin and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe" before you accuse me of presenting "propaganda".
    2
  11355. That's the book Turner called out in 1985. They claimed to have visited archives they had never visited.
    2
  11356. I think you'll enjoy my upcoming videos with my friend(s) which will be exactly on this. I'm probably going to put them on a second channel though, as I have a lot of people who seem to think that history should only be about tanks.
    2
  11357. I've got a fairly mature audience who can engage in good discussions. There's a few bad apples, unfortunately, but I'm happy with my comments (except on the videos talking about socialism, which is where the anti-work crowd hang out).
    2
  11358. I actually did check my pronunciation of Marseilles on Forvo.
    2
  11359. You were 1st and you know it!
    2
  11360. Yes, I've said previously that it's basically an alliance in all but name.
    2
  11361. Tomislav wow that was a quick response! :D
    2
  11362. What are you doing up at that time!? I haven't woken up at that time since I worked in retail
    2
  11363. Ok, it's too late for this video (obviously) but I'll definitely make sure to turn the music down for the complete video. Thanks for letting me know!
    2
  11364. That could be true. I'm just a little sceptical of the idea (from Nash) that Gott had nothing to do with it, especially since Playfair says he did.
    2
  11365. Peorhum - fascists are nationalist-socialists, as opposed to internationalist-socialists. And, the Germans weren't fascists, they were National-Socialists, who are racist-socialists. But they all share socialism in common, which is the state ownership of the means of production.
    2
  11366. In English usage, it is.
    2
  11367. If you think this is bad, wait until you see Thursday's video
    2
  11368. It is. This is why Clement Attlee's Peanut Farm in Tanganyika failed.
    2
  11369. That's not how it works. If Destiny was to accept my definition, he'd instantly be smeared by the Left as I was, would be called a fascist and a capitalist and a sellout and a shill... The Left banish those from the religion that go against the faith, even when the evidence is clearly against them.
    2
  11370. Hello!
    2
  11371. Oh yes, I have. Before I made them private, I had some multiplayer gameplay videos on here of HOI4. Good game
    2
  11372.  @Shinji_1943  "I've not read the comments section thoroughly enough on your economics and logistics videos to see the individuals and their arguments you refer to but would be interested in seeing what they say." See the guy above? He's an example of someone with a strong opposing viewpoint who is willing to ask questions (which is good on the one hand) but it's a question that's easily answered by understanding the very basics (which is bad because it shows he hasn't done any reading into the subject, doesn't know what the opposing viewpoint is, but has a strong opinion that it must be wrong, even though he doesn't know what my response may be)
    2
  11373. Imagine if I'd just said that and then ended the video, the video would have been even shorter 😂
    2
  11374. I think I explained this in my Fall Blau video. The short answer is - Halder 😂
    2
  11375. Correct! I mentioned this in my Operation Compass video
    2
  11376. The woke-mob have been wanting to censor me for years. I'm used to it.
    2
  11377. There's literally no alternative. They're all the same. There's only one Party - the "Uniparty".
    2
  11378. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    2
  11379. No, all the previous leaders are at fault too, as are their parties. The entirety of Parliament, the Establishment, and everyone who's worked in their many departments are all guilty of failing the British people.
    2
  11380. Exactly. Next you'll be prosecuted for breathing.
    2
  11381. My eye is fine, it's just my eye lid that droops. It's been like that for at least two decades. It gets worse when I'm tired, which I was when I made this, as I only slept a handful of hours each night due to everything going on.
    2
  11382. Absolutely
    2
  11383. I have seen some, but not many.
    2
  11384. How long have Labour been in Rotherham? This problem has been building for 40 years. The actual solution is to end the welfare state, but the people will never ever do that.
    2
  11385. Not entirely. It's the entire Establishment's fault (all the parties, the State, the civil service... the whole lot of them), and this has been building for 40 plus years (I would argue that the ideological routes of the problem go further back than that). However, Starmer's response to this has been terrible, so he also takes the blame.
    2
  11386. The entire Establishment is responsible as this has been building for the past 40 years. Starmer is responsible for his poor response to this latest crisis, but also for his actions as MP and opposition leader in former years.
    2
  11387. Fascism is the collectivist synthesis between National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actual Idealism. Nationalism is Socialism, as Hitler, Mussolini, Edward Bellemy and many others have pointed out. The nationalisation of the means of production and the socialisation of the means of production are the same thing. And "international" socialism is nonsense - one nation under God is still a nation. So they are nationalists (racists). They're also syndicalists. Labour's all about the trade unions, but also local councils and corporations. These are all syndicalism. They're collectivists. I shouldn't need to explain that one... And so they tick all the boxes except the "Actual Idealism" bit - that's where the Fabian philosophy is slightly different. Actual Idealism is a variation of the Hegelian dialectic idealism. The Fabians have a more Marxist varient of the Hegelian dialectic idealism. So they are Fascists, just with a variation in their philosophy.
    2
  11388. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    2
  11389. Fascism is National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actual Idealism. I've been over this https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko And I'm not the "controlled opposition". I'm genuinely concerned that I'm going to get arrested for daring to challenge this Fabian-Fascist State's narrative.
    2
  11390. As I said in the video, all the Parties and Politicians are at fault, since this has been in the works for 40 years.
    2
  11391. He's been a Member of Parliament for years. And all his friends are in the government and have been for years. Starmer was the one in charge of CPS when it let Jimmy Savile off for his crimes.
    2
  11392. Try watching the video first before "reacting". I blamed the Establishment, not just one party. All the Parties are the same Party. Tories, Labour, Liberals... there's no difference here. It's all a sham. And this has been building for 40 years. Starmer just so happens to be in power, but it's irrelevant since he's been in government for years, and his response to this crisis was absolutely disgusting. He's inflamed the situation.
    2
  11393. Conservatives are just as guilty. This video isn't about one Party or another, it's about the whole Establishment over the past 40 years.
    2
  11394. George V?
    2
  11395. I'm not a communist
    2
  11396. Labour, Tories, Liberals - who cares! They're all the same. They have the exact same policies, they all lie, and none of them are tackling the causes of the multiple problems we face. Starmer let Savile off the hook. Labour were in power for decades in the places where the riots took place, and actively tried to cover up the illegal activities going on under their rule for the past 40 years. To try and claim they're somehow innocent or different from the other parties is just playing into their hands.
    2
  11397. It's where you get your fish and chips. Or your sweet and sour chicken with boiled rice.
    2
  11398. Reddit is a woke hivemind. None of them have a single independent thought, and none of them can question whatever the lamestream narrative might be. Half of them are bots too, or as dumb as a bod, which is why it's not worth engaging with.
    2
  11399. That is a genuine possibility. I hope they don't, but there's no telling what the regime will do.
    2
  11400. They're not fascist rioters - that's the point.
    2
  11401. I agree. I'm baffled that people still subscribe to the legacy newspapers.
    2
  11402. Tories, Labour, they're all the same. This isn't a Party political issue, but an Establishment issue. The whole lot of them are responsible for this, as the economic, social and political issues started decades ago and have slowly been building over time by design (thanks to the Fabians). Starmer's totalitarian reactionism to these events is pure evil. Crushing freedom of speech, crushing the peaceful protests, and then being violent towards the rioters in this instance whilst bending the knee to other violent rioters, whilst turning a blind eye to all the crimes being committed against women and children across the country, is sickening. But I'm not surprised that a Leftist like yourself is supporting the enablers.
    2
  11403. Scouse is actually a meal. However, it has become a regional dialect, and also a culture. Me calling these people "scousers" is referring to the 'scouse' culture and the dialect (which are entwined) even if they're not from Liverpool itself.
    2
  11404. This problem started 40 years ago. They're all in on it. This is an Establishment problem, not a Party problem. The Labour-shites, Commie-servatives, Libtard Demorats and the Red-Green dives - they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    2
  11405. The Tories are to blame too, and I said this in the video. The entire Establishment is at fault.
    2
  11406. It's a small world!
    2
  11407. Considering they attacked a temple, it's more likely to be about religion than race.
    2
  11408. Very soon. A week or two. And I've managed to finish the script for the one after, although not recorded it yet due to this week - I've been massively disrupted with these events.
    2
  11409. I blame him for his handling of this situation. But I blame all the Parties, the government, the State and the Establishment for the build up to this over the past 40 years.
    2
  11410. Unfortunately, there's a chance I will be. It'll only prove me right if they do it, but they may still do it.
    2
  11411. I agree. It's like me calling Starmer "Mein Führer", clearly I'm being sarcastic as I say it.
    2
  11412. You didn't watch it.
    2
  11413. Yeah, I know. But they should stop doing it as it's only giving the media more ammunition.
    2
  11414. "My advice: the peaceful protestors [who are 'anti migrant-stop-the-boats'] should form their own movement, and make a public announcement condemning all crime" The "peaceful protestors" have all been labeled "far right", which is why there were so many people now ironically hashtagging "#FarRightThugsUnite". As shown in the video - many of these so called "far right" protestors were Indians, black people, Jews and others.
    2
  11415. "If you have 300 000 commiting violence in a protest movement and only 5 march in peace" There was no violence from the London protestors, it was the police who were cracking their skulls, as shown by the video evidence. The government's response to the peaceful protestors was to call them all "far right" (which is an absolute travesty) and escalate the violence. The people who had watched their daughters get R'd for decades then rose up violently, and so Starmer is at fault here. - "So only one person was arrested among the left wing last night, does it make the marchers/the left wing/pro-migrants thugs or anarchists? no." A Labour Party politician, Richy Jones, has called for the throats of right-wingers to be cut. Video included in the Tweet https://x.com/MahyarTousi/status/1821492715244179623 There's plenty of evidence of the Left rioting in the past, and yesterday too, but it's not shown on the lamestream media, and it's also not condemned. There are mobs with swords roaming Bolton and Manchester, and the police are letting them attack people. It's two-tier policing at its finest.
    2
  11416. Hitler wasn't a Fascist, he was a National Socialist. And yes, there is a difference as I've outlined in previous videos, like this one https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  11417. Define history
    2
  11418. Your ignorance is astonishing. I did say "Fabian Fascism" and "Marxist Fascism" in the video. I also disagree - the Fascist and National Socialist governments of Italy and Germany treated both the lower and middle income earners terribly. It wasn't their aim, but it's what happened in reality, because SOCIALISM DOESN'T WORK no matter which brand it is. I have entire videos on this, so don't pretend I've not covered this before.
    2
  11419. Ignorance is your strength. Give the video a chance. Listen to the evidence. Understand what's being said and why, since the vast majority of people have already come to the conclusions I've spoken about- I'm just collating their thoughts.
    2
  11420. https://youtu.be/ZrHmcpRAZNs
    2
  11421. Think you for pointing out my spelling mistakes! ;)
    2
  11422. No, it was my mistake. They weren't Stukas they were Ju 88s
    2
  11423. Early club ;)
    2
  11424. Yes you are! Congrats!
    2
  11425. Yeah I messed up. They weren't Stukas, they were Ju 88s
    2
  11426. I explained this in previous videos, like https://youtu.be/rK0SuYi4Hho
    2
  11427. TopBunk, sorry, I actually had the intention of doing that video and even started drafting the script, but others have taken priority - namely Crusader and the other Monday videos. I will do a video about this at some point in the future though. LT, having hit 51k subscribers I'm getting flooded with comments and sometimes I miss a few. Plus, now that I've committed to doing videos on the Holocaust, my workload is through the roof, meaning I have to prioritize. I would appreciate it if you would think twice before accusing someone of doing or not doing something with zero evidence.
    2
  11428. *Quote
    2
  11429. It's either Blurple or Reurple, in my opinion
    2
  11430. No, it was Montgomery's fault.
    2
  11431. Oh? You love Red do you, commie?
    2
  11432. There's always one
    2
  11433. But what does it need, more red or blue? :D
    2
  11434. It probably didn't have time to notify you because you were already here
    2
  11435. So what you're saying is people should do research and gather evidence first before jumping to conclusions... ...and then burn anyone who disagrees?
    2
  11436. There are some questionable entries on that list. "You" is one of them.
    2
  11437. Perhaps. They're going to be disappointed on Monday though
    2
  11438. "On the "Nazis were socialists too- its even in the name" I'd suggest viewers also watch the Time Ghost history -Why the Nazis Weren’t Socialists - ‘The Good Hitler Years’ | BETWEEN 2 WARS I 1937 Part 2 of 2" I'll see you on Monday...
    2
  11439. That's coming in two weeks time
    2
  11440. Don't forget, this is early days. The British Army had maybe 2-years worth of tank experience in WW1, and then not much until 1940. So they probably only had 4 years worth of experience, plus a bunch of generals who hadn't used tanks before. Their organisation at the regiment to brigade-level was fine, it was just division and higher where the problem lay. And yes I'll do a video on infantry tanks, as well as tanks in general, in the future :)
    2
  11441. Excellent! Hope you like it when you get around to watch it. It's the first of a few videos on Crusader
    2
  11442. Morshead did a good job at Tobruk. But I wouldn't class it as a "British victory", since the siege only ended during Operation Crusader.
    2
  11443. Ah that makes sense now. I was wondering why the Canadians weren't in North Africa
    2
  11444. Thanks Christian! Never thought I'd get this many! :)
    2
  11445. Well, if anyone from the US Air Force is watching, once you've gained air-superiority, close-air support is the way to go. It's the only reason the Germans got to Stalingrad - they would have struggled even to get to the city without it. Not heard of Swinton before. Very interesting :)
    2
  11446. Well, I'm glad you're happy haha
    2
  11447. Because Tobruk was about to be attacked by Rommel on the 20th of November, so they launched Crusader to relieve the siege. Plus Churchill was impatient. And they were trying to do those things too.
    2
  11448. Short answer: when I say "battalion", I do mean battalion. And the British unit names are confusing, so I actually changed the unit names (at least, the way you say them) in order for you (the viewer) to make more sense out of them. Long answer - So when the British Army says "1st Battalion of the Buffs Regiment", it means 1st Battalion, but this is from a regiment called The Buffs. To me, this is long-winded as confusing. So I changed it to "1st the Buffs Battalion". Notice though that this battalion is in a brigade that isn't the Buffs regiment. Why is this? Well, I'm not 100% sure on this, but I'm going to give a "this is roughly right" explanation - You have units I will call "mother regiments" - e.g. the Buffs. These will be raised at home and can have several battalions (if not more). But imagine that a mother regiment was wiped out - an entire community would be devastated. So what the British did was take battalions from different regiments, cobbled them under a "field" regiment or brigade, and send them off into battle. So you might have 1st Battalion of the Buffs Regiment fighting with 1st Battalion of the King's Own Rifles [Regiment], under such-a-such brigade. Again, not 100% certain on this, but either way, the battalions in the video are battalions, and have been renamed accordingly.
    2
  11449. Thanks! And welcome, hope you enjoy your stay :)
    2
  11450. Watched it! You got many of the main events right and it was good overall. Taking the Crimea in 1941 was wrong, and I liked the disclaimer at the beginning ;) but you did well, considering we all have rough starts (see my first video for a real rough start haha). If you're wanting to do this more, I would recommend you getting something like Photoshop, and get a book called "The Animator's Surivial Kit" by the guy that made Who Framed Roger Rabit. It's not specific to map-making videos like yours (it's more about how to model humans), but it talks a lot about frame-by-frame animation (which is what you're doing) and about why selecting the right FPS is important for animators. It also talks a lot about spacing and stretching of characters, and while you may not be making characters in your videos, the same techniques could be applied to put a bit more 'spring' into your animations. I would also seriously consider getting Photoshop or something similar (but maybe cheaper) for the drawings. And Premiere Pro or similar for better editing. Hope that helps :)
    2
  11451. Thanks Johnny, I'm glad you think so. I'm certainly trying to go as in-depth as I can with these videos, and the good news is Crusader is shaping up to be the longest and most-detailed Battlestorm video so far :)
    2
  11452. Thanks! I've added to my shopping list :)
    2
  11453. Nice! I'll look out for them
    2
  11454. Glad you liked this one. I'm actually focusing on finishing Crusader at the minute, so not doing much on Stalingrad right now. But I shall return to it soon :)
    2
  11455. Yeah, someone else pointed that out. I looked it up, then forgot when I came to present the video, because I'm an idiot :)
    2
  11456. If you think this is bad, wait until I do the Soviet OOB for Stalingrad ;)
    2
  11457. My pleasure! If you think this is bad, try looking up Operation Compass, or Rommel's first desert offensive in 1941. Except for my videos on those battles, nobody's really covered them - especially not in TV documentaries.
    2
  11458. Is it?
    2
  11459. In the distant future I will cover 1939 and 1940. At that point, I'll do a OOB video for the Netherlands. But not before - got enough to do with Crusader, let alone Stalingrad!
    2
  11460. Unless you can visit the military archives, chances are you're not going to find them in books - although Glantz does provide maps like this in his Stalingrad Trilogy, and Antony Joly in his Stalingrad books.
    2
  11461. Oh yes you can. Just most don't bother. Have you not seen my 6th Army OOB? https://youtu.be/DCDjAqTUCmw Also, the Axis Crusader OOB will be in two weeks time
    2
  11462. It wasn't "von Paulus", it was just Paulus. Paulus wasn't a nobleman. And in the case of Moscow, Hitler was correct in not allowing a retreat, as many historians now believe. The difference was, at Stalingrad, the Luftwaffe and von Manstein convinced Hitler that staying in Stalingrad was the correct course of action. And I've already covered Kampfgruppen in another video. That doesn't contradict anything I said in this video.
    2
  11463. You're welcome! I just use Google and avoid ones with watermarks (which I'm personally against when it comes to historical photos)
    2
  11464. I think they were all taken from Google images, with the exception of the green-background maps
    2
  11465. Edwin, these videos have nothing to do with gaming. All information came from historical sources, which are listed in the pinned comment. The purpose of this video was to dispell several common statements about the war which are questionable at best.
    2
  11466. I could and would! Sadly, I don't have much info on them at the moment. I'll keep an eye out for more info on them though. If you or anyone else reading this have any pointers where I can get articles or books on this topic, please let me know
    2
  11467. I thought she'd been struck by a Smooth Criminal?
    2
  11468. Thank you Braden! I'll certainly try!
    2
  11469. I honestly don't know a lot about Cold-War and modern Russians units to make a fair comment. Perhaps someone else can let us know?
    2
  11470. Thanks for the feedback! I'll bear that in mind next time and darken the yellow somewhat :)
    2
  11471. Why would they be censored?
    2
  11472. How is this video anti-German?
    2
  11473. I have bought it, but never had time to play it
    2
  11474. I love you too Nom
    2
  11475. This is not it, but this video is related.
    2
  11476. I think there is, and I think the limit is quite small. This is probably why the Soviets had trouble in the mid-war period, since their army commanders were controlling way too many units (as I've suggested in the Soviet Army Size 1942 video). And I suspect the reason there's not much discussion on TOE's or divisional structural evolution is because it's a relevant and very important topic that the militaries around the world don't want to discuss in the open.
    2
  11477. Right, so shipping was strained, but they could add in another rifle division? The point still stands: if they could do send a rifle division across, why not give Rommel an extra panzer battalion?
    2
  11478. Well, in that case, why didn't he just ask for another Panzer battalion or two rather than a full division?
    2
  11479. Possible, but then the same applies for the infantry, since they were extra mouths to feed too.
    2
  11480. I don't mind if people disagree with me, but what annoys me is when people snark without even watching the video. They see the title, watch the first 3 seconds, then proceed to tell me how I'm wrong, even though a lot of what they're accusing me of is stuff I actually mentioned in the video :(
    2
  11481. Yes and yes, but they will be after Stalingrad now.
    2
  11482. I think you should see a doctor about that!
    2
  11483. Again, that's still tank-heavy. The goldern ratio seems to be around 1 tank battalion to every 1 or 2 infantry battalions.
    2
  11484. Well, it won't be Marshal Graziani, that's for sure.
    2
  11485. Good old Heinz 'Punchbag' Guderian :)
    2
  11486. "Do the books analyze how the scheduling change affected the outcome? Or what the Allied plan was?" Yes! Read Taylor's book and you'll get those answers. Reversing the order may have saved Dresden, as the Dresdeners wouldn't have been as badly hit during the American raid and could have recovered. That experience may have been enough to have prepared them for the night attack by the British, or at least given them an indication that they were about to be hit and got extra sand buckets ready, etc. It's not clear if that would have been enough to save the entire centre of the city from a firestorm, but perhaps casualties would have been reduced.
    2
  11487. So am I!
    2
  11488. No, not really https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    2
  11489. I was tempted to say a little more, but behaved myself... I mean, why would anyone click on a video that's clearly not going to be pleasant expecting it to be pleasant?
    2
  11490. That's included in the 25,000 figure
    2
  11491. You obviously didn't watch the video, and it's questionable that you can trust anything Irving wrote as I explained here https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    2
  11492. "I don't trust anyone as everyone lies, is biased or censored" Everyone is biased. That's just part of human nature. You can't get away from bias because everyone has a limited perspective on the world. I've explained this here in my history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - "What we do know for a fact is that we live in a propaganda state where the authorities lie to us, especially when it comes to things like war" Correct. I absolutely agree. However, when people lie they create contradictions or have to excuse evidence. When you see them doing that, you know that they're lying, or have got something wrong. It's easy to spot. - "Irving is no doubt flawed, but I'd far rather read his books than some official propaganda piece" If you're concerned by someone lying, being biased, or censored, then Irving fits the bill. He's manipulated, made up and straight up ignored tons of evidence to push his biases. He is a living propaganda piece. That doesn't mean that the academic historians aren't propaganda pieces either, or that they're alway right. But if we're choosing between the two, I'd rather take the lesser of two evils, and that's the academic historians. Yet, you're choosing Irving because he fits with your biases, even though his account is worse than the academic historians due to all the evidence manipulation and misinterpretations of that evidence. - "People should be encouraged to read his books - which can be found for free - and make their own minds up" I have some of his books, but I can't trust them. Because he has been caught out manipulating or straight up fabricating evidence, everything he's saying is questionable. He ruined his own reputation by deciding to go down the postmodernist route. - "As for the total number of deaths - we have no idea, no one even knew how many people were in the city at that time" No, we do know. The SS counted the number of deaths, and got to 22,000 bodies, and estimated a total of 25,000 in their Final Report. They were very meticulous with this report, even recording how much money someone had on their person. That is the evidence we have. It's roughly 25,000. It's not substantially higher. Why? Because we don't have ANY evidence that says its higher, that's why. We can only go off the evidence, not off people's feelings or beliefs. - "What we do know is that it was one of the biggest war crimes in all of recorded history, and it wasn't a one off" As opposed to the 3+ million Soviet prisoners of war starved by the Germans? https://youtu.be/OeRR100incE - "If you are going to criticize Irving, then why not also criticize all the other historians who literally lie for a living" I can tell you're new here. I've criticized numerous historians, which is why I'm in the bad books. Most recently, I criticized the likes of Ian Kershaw and Richard Evans (again) in this video https://youtu.be/UpuGRO72GbA (Richard Evans being the one who was at the Irving vs Lipstadt trail, by the way) I criticize them when they make mistakes or dismiss evidence, and I'll criticize Irving when he does the same (or when he just straight up manipulates the evidence). I'm not on one side or another - I go where the evidence takes me, which is why (again) I'm in the bad books. - "I again point to the Kattyn Forest massacre as just one example where 'professional' historians lied to the public for decades" The same guy who proved that that incident was caused by the Soviets also tried to uncover the secrets behind Operation Keelhaul (an Allied and Soviet war crime). And guess what? I've covered Operation Keelhaul in three videos right here https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM So yes, "professional" historians do lie. But that doesn't mean that Irving is right. He is also wrong.
    2
  11493. All professional historians might be biased and pushing the Marxist narrative, but that doesn't mean Irivng is correct. He falsified evidence, continues to give bogus numbers that have been proven to be incorrect, and is denying large portions of history simply because it doesn't fit with his world view. He's willing to dismiss evidence, yet you believe in him? That's not something I can agree with. And while the exact number at Dresden might never be known, the approximate number is 25,000 as the SS themselves reported after meticulous analysis. Irving is pushing a figure five or more times higher than that based entirely on feelings and speculation alone.
    2
  11494. Do yourself a favour and watch this video. It will explain to you what history is, and why historians do what they do https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  11495. TLDR: it's probably not true, but it may have been a factor. So, for time purposes I cut out this discussion because it's somewhat complicated and I'm not convinced it was one of the main reasons for the attack on Dresden, if it was a reason at all. I would say that the politicians and Bomber Harris didn't discuss this reason, but some of the veterans did say that they went to Dresden to show the Soviets how powerful the west was. The problem is that these accounts were all written well after the war was over, during the Cold War, which may have influenced their opinions. And the only contemporary evidence we have for this view is this: “The intentions of the attack are to hit the enemy where he will feel it most, behind an already partially collapsed front, to prevent the use of the city in the way of further advance, and incidentally to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do.” - Part of the briefing to the squadrons prior to the Dresden raid, quoted from Taylor, “Dresden,” p464. However, this statement is problematic because it actually contradicts other evidence we have, and also doesn't make logical sense. If they were going to show the Soviets how powerful they were, why didn't they keep bombing German cities in the East right up until the last day of the war? It just seems a little strange. So, it's more likely that the crews got told this because the Soviets had asked them to bomb Dresden and this might have been a way for the junior officers to flex. But I don't think it really played into the reason why Dresden was targeted specifically. For a full discussion on this, read Frederick Taylor's book on Dresden, pages 463-466.
    2
  11496. Article 25 of the 1899 Hague Convention says: "The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited." Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp
    2
  11497. Thanks Jamie!
    2
  11498. Thank you! What work do you do? How come you've not taken breaks?
    2
  11499.  @mvfc7637  Also, I'm completely ignorant about what's happening in the Ukraine, so I'm not really in a position to give an opinion.
    2
  11500. ​ @KuroiReaper  "what are you quoting makes no sense" It's called cognitive dissonance. I'm telling you something that goes against your previous beliefs, and so you're concluding that what I'm telling you must be false, rather than accepting the facts. And I'll show you why what you've just said makes no sense, and actually undermines your argument. - "If what author which is quoted saying is true then why would they allow UK and not US?" They didn't allow UK or US, except in certain situations, like Operation Benedict (as you pointed out), or American bombers in the Ukraine (as I pointed out in the previous reply to you). - "UK RAF and soldiers fought together on soviet soil during ww2 near Muramansk. look at operation Benedict and such." Then why wasn't this allowed again? Think about it. Operation Benedict was in 1941. Yet, from then onwards, Stalin forbade Allied troops on Soviet soil, except in the odd circumstance. Why? If it was allowed in 1941, clearly Stalin trusted the British enough then, so why didn't he trust them in 1942, or 1943, or 1944, or 1945? And yes, the British did have troops spare. There was an entire Army in the Middle East that jointly conquered Iran with the Soviets. The British could have sent troops to Russia, and the US certainly could have done. And yet, they weren't allowed. Clearly, it has nothing to do with Stalin asking the West to come to the Soviet Union and the West not wanting them to. It is an internal reason. The West asked and offered to send troops several times, but Stalin declined. And if the west didn't like Stalin or the Soviet Union, why did they send them supplies of Lend Lease? That makes no sense. So you've undermined your own argument, and the internal inconsistencies with it suggest that it's not true.
    2
  11501. You were fourth, but very close!
    2
  11502. Once I've finished, I'm going to sort out as many of the (so far minor) mistakes I've made, and then upload an all-in-one video for you to bing-watch to your hearts content :)
    2
  11503. I covered this in a recent video https://youtu.be/8pS54t-a3Z4 they couldn't supply 3 German divisions in North Africa at the best of times, so there's little chance of 150 being sent there.
    2
  11504. Glad you liked it!
    2
  11505. That would be a good option to have. Cheers!
    2
  11506. Yes absolutely! I'm quite proud of them, even if they didn't get a lot of views. I'll give you the link to the North African Campaign playlist. All I'll say is - sorry about Brevity, I kinda screwed that one up (was experimenting) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    2
  11507. Entertaining though, right? It gets very interesting from next week haha
    2
  11508. Hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  11509. It's insane. This is why I think it's unique in history. I honestly can't think of a battle that's anything like this. And it just gets worse!
    2
  11510. I enjoyed editing that 😂
    2
  11511. Well, as of next Monday you'll be able to watch the full series in all its glory in one video, with all the (minor) mistakes fixed :) Don't be googling the battle beforehand; I recommend that you let it all play out as you watch it because you won't believe what happens haha
    2
  11512. Yes, those South American. Spanish and Greek dictators were all businessmen where they? No, they were the government. This is why, in your own words they "put strong censorship to anything was not ideological correct or good for the country" because they thought their centrally planned economies would be better than a free market economy. That's socialism. I'm not religious, so I wouldn't use terms like "satan's work" anyway. But you do realise that sticking exclusively to an ideology is itself a form of belief? Socialism is a new religion. It is based on belief, not facts. I prefer evidence and the scientific method. "You sound like that or even more as far-right." I'm not a socialist, so I cannot be on the "far-right", assuming that you're now trying to paint me as a Nazi. National-Socialists are Far Left. Therefore, if I was on the right, it would only be because my political compass places freedom of the individual on the right. "You don''t actually know their political beliefs, you assume that based on something and you express it publicly." Their actions state their political beliefs, on top of the fact that they have expressed that "hate speech" will not be tolerated. "Hate speech" is just another Marxist-Postmodernist word for "censorship". Freedom of speach is therefore something they wish to attack. "Telling simple that "Patreon are retards because they are closing accounts for no reason and I don't like it," for me will be the best opinion." I never called them "retards". But luckily, this being a (mostly) free country and I can express my opinion. You don't have to agree, but my opinion is backed by the evidence I have seen, not by making stuff up, which is what you're accusing me of doing despite having no evidence for that. "Not as political correct (which I hate as current trend) but as an unbiased/unpolitical approach of a revisionist historian towards all of your viewers and supporters." Yes, telling the truth and calling out distortions and problems when I see it, which is what I've always done. I owe this to my viewers and supporters since that is the basis of my entire philosophy on history. "I would glad read your response but this will be my last comment on this." Ok, was nice chatting to you.
    2
  11513. Of course there will be Lend Lease. There was a reason I did the recent economics video. But I didn't see the need to make it a New Years Resolution because it will be coming at some point.
    2
  11514. I will admit that I didn't clarify myself properly in those two original videos. I did a lot more research to solidify the ideas into a more concrete form, and can now explain it fairly efficiently. I still have a bit more research to do on some minor elements before I make a final all-in-one video on the matter that will act as a go-to video for anyone wishing to dispell the myths made up by the socialists who have done little research on the topic (privatisation, Hitler killing socialists, it was capitalism, they got rid of trade unions etc), but I do want to make that video, despite the arguments that I should "stick to military history". I'm here to correct distortions, and Nationalsocialism being capitalism is a big distortion.
    2
  11515. Two weeks until next Courland (but another video next week). Sorry for the wait but I need to get it edited as well as possible
    2
  11516. Arguably the Nazis may have been worse, but that doesn't mean both weren't evil.
    2
  11517. From what I read, they went to Britain but docked in Sweden on the way. I also think that they didn't have any navigational equipment because that had been taken off them in Estonia, so it took them weeks to make the trip.
    2
  11518. @Margus-Matis Roo - I genuinely just laughed out loud
    2
  11519. I've read some of his works. I think he's a socialist ultimately. Considering he started off in the Labour Party and progressed to nationality-socialism (Fascism) this makes sense. I do think he's been misrepresented in the media and history books, but his economic policies are terrible, simply because they are socialist in nature. He doesn't seem to understand what capitalism is - freedom for the individual - or rejects that concept.
    2
  11520. Thank you. I don't want this to be a "purely military channel" as some are arguing it should be, since the economics and politics directly and massively impact the military aspects, and are all very interesting. I've studied all three, so sticking to one doesn't make much sense (although the focus will always be the military bits).
    2
  11521. I will correct the mistakes for the final "complete" video. However, while I did make some silly mistakes, many of the mistakes are actually due to the sources I've used, which are limited in English.
    2
  11522. Thank you! I do insist on truth, accuracy and fairness, even if it proves unpopular with a lot of people. I'm not here for popularity-points, I'm here to discover the truth myself, so I insist on stating the truth even if it's detrimental to myself.
    2
  11523. @Didymus Sumydid - ok, I made my definition simple so Mr Guana could understand it and see the difference/similarities between the two socialisms. Does that really warrent such harsh words? Are you having a bad day?
    2
  11524. Greetings to you too
    2
  11525. Heims meanz beanz (hopefully British people will get this joke)
    2
  11526. TeamFakeCry supporters of the world Unite!
    2
  11527. That's actually good, because people normally complain I speak too fast.
    2
  11528. Well, the emphasis is on Courland/Latvia. But don't worry, I'll be covering the retreat from Estonia in later vidoes
    2
  11529. The phrase you're looking for is - "That wasn't REAL socialism"
    2
  11530. Now I feel bad that this video isn't on a super-happy topic!
    2
  11531. I have no problem admitting the British government or any other government or army committed crimes or did things wrong. I've said this to you before. I'm not sure why you still think I wouldn't admit this. I suspect you think I'm unwilling to be critical about my own country or "ideology", and you are mistaken. If anything I'm MORE critical of my country than anyone else's, because we have to be vigilant against any government gaining absolute monopoly over power.
    2
  11532. I'll accept that criticism. I've already started to try pronounce the names better in the recording of the next video by listening to people on Forvo pronounce them. Not perfect, but better.
    2
  11533. Sources are listed in the pinned comment. Someone else (pro-Msrxist) said it was 10,000 in Estonia (my sources put it much higher and are not pro-Marxist). The population was roughly 1.1 million. So it was either 5.4% of the population, or just under 1%. Also, National Socialist and Soviet archives are not reliable and cannot be trusted anyway.
    2
  11534. It's almost like I addressed the "North Korea democracy" argument in the Hitler's Socialism video. Gee, if only my critics would actually sit down and watch my content first before religiously dismissing it, I wouldn't have to keep saying to WATCH THE VIDEO https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And no, the content isn't "ruined". It's only ruined for you because you can't accept the facts as I have laid out for you.
    2
  11535. I'm sending you a new one in the post
    2
  11536. Vern Etzel "@TIK lol "the evidence", you mean by reading Mein Kampf?" No, by reading these sources - Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. There may be more, these are just the ones I've listed specifically for this topic, since I've been building up to making a much bigger video on it. I've also been reading the primary sources - such as the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, which banned private property. "You had it backwards. I used to think like you for decades. 33 years as a libertarian activist and candidate. let's hope its not that, right?" Exactly, this is where the problem lies. You're heavily invested in your perspective. Anything that goes against it is instantly dismissed. The problem is that if you listen, I promise you your entire world-view will be rocked (just like mine was when I grasped it) and you'll see the distortion for what it is. While I don't agree with the National Socialist ideology at all (or Fascist, or Marxist ideologies), I do think they have a point when they say that the "academic historians" are biased. They actually are biased, because most don't grasp the fact that there's a difference between "socialism" and "Marxist Socialism". When you see National Socialism for what it really is, you'll see Marxist Socialism for what it really is. But again, I was more-socialist-leaning in my youth. Realising the true nature of National Socialism made me wake-up to the reality of what socialism actually is. And if you really want to help the "workers", you should read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. If nothing else, pick up that book and give it an honest go. It doesn't mention National-Socialism etc at all, it's purely a book that explains economics.
    2
  11537. But he couldn't do that because he was a racial-socialist and saw them as slaves to be enslaved. This mentality is built into his core ideology. To change it would be to change his entire ideology, and prevent the war from even happening in the first place - since he wouldn't have gone East at all if he wasn't socialist.
    2
  11538. You're getting a heart for knowing your history.
    2
  11539. @Kingslayer, that's not what makes them socialist or not. Socialism is common control of the means of production. Profit, class, or anything like that is irrelevant. All that matters is if the state was in control of the economy, which it was, and that's why the National Socialist state was "totalitarian". You can't have "total" control without total control.
    2
  11540. He actually gives examples of animals mixing blood and creating "inferior" species, saying that this was nature's way of telling us not to mix "blood". He then uses this to explain why people of a "race" shouldn't mix blood with another "race". See pages 257-259 of the Jaico edition of Mein Kampf. Quote - “If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile. History furnishes us with innumerable instances that prove this law. It shows, with a startling clarity, that whenever Aryans have mingled their blood with that of an inferior race the result has been the downfall of the people who were the standard-bearers of a higher culture.” (Hitler, Mein Kampf, p259)
    2
  11541. Thanks Lemmon! More to come on this particular subject. I also need to do an update on Patreon or something soon. Hard to balance everything. Behind on the Q&As too
    2
  11542. Thank you! And yes I've been working on understanding National Socialist ideology for a while as it's quite essential for understanding both the era and WW2.
    2
  11543. Yeah, I told you it's not easy to get a hold of. Interestingly, I paid just £27.80 for it, but that was in 2018.
    2
  11544. Yes, and I will be doing soon
    2
  11545. Look at the sources I used, then look at the two sources they "used" (one was Wikipedia which is socialized and therefore unreliable, the other a source was one I used and they didn't read properly, and is clearly biased) and tell me that they don't deserve the name "bad history".
    2
  11546. Worse, the history has been distorted by the "postmodernists" (aka Marxists) so as to push this narrative, whereas the reality was much different to how it's portrayed. We're living in an Orwellian nightmare of doublethink and ignorance is strength
    2
  11547. But why did he invade Poland? For the fun of it?
    2
  11548. Good point! I will in the follow-up video
    2
  11549. Don't worry, I'm working on a video which will annihilate that 6 hours of excrement.
    2
  11550. You're correct that debt economies are bad. But you're not seeing the full picture. Inflation (which causes the problem) comes the public (state) sector central banks (social-control of the economy: socialism). It's the crisis of socialism which is causing the crisis of capitalism. If you want further explanation of the process, read Rothbards' "America's Great Depression". Rothbard explains it all very well. Bottom line: capitalism isn't at fault, but it's being blamed.
    2
  11551. You're mistaking Hitler's views for my own. I don't believe in the shrinking markets concept because I'm not a socialist. So yes, the food to industry ratio thing is a load of rubbish, but that's what Hitler and many Marxists believed. The reason it's not taught in socialist (state) schools is because they don't want you to see that Hitler was a socialist.
    2
  11552. Thank you! And will certainly try to keep it up :)
    2
  11553. Tell me about it. Also some people calling me a Nazi, even though that's clearly not the case either.
    2
  11554. So how does Versailles force the Germans to go East? And why does it happen in the 1940s after Versailles was dismissed, rather than in the 1920s at the height of the Versailles reparations issue. The theory you gave simply doesn't work. The shrinking markets makes more sense, and explains a lot more than Versailles. Plus, now that I've explained it to you, and you understand it, I can now simply say "the shrinking markets is why". I can now give you the slogan now that you understand the slogan. It's very simple once you understand it.
    2
  11555. Not quite https://youtu.be/1N8nuPdV5Ow
    2
  11556. How is this propaganda? Socialism is for the Socialist Social-elites, which is why Hitler was a Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  11557. Glad you think so, Jay! And thank you for watching
    2
  11558. And some other people say that Hitler himself was a Rothschild https://youtu.be/pAZsANgpOVw In reality, Hitler invaded Poland knowing full-well that Britain would go to war over Poland which Chamberlain had guaranteed earlier in 1939. Then he was shocked that Britain reacted by declaring war on him. Therefore, Hitler started WW2 by insisting on war with Poland over territory that had historically been Polish territory prior to 1776. I've covered this in numerous videos, such as - ‘But TIK, the reason WHY Hitler started WW2 makes no sense!’ https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0 Why Britain wouldn’t just let Hitler go East https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    2
  11559. The channel has been deleted?? Wow. Wonder why that was 🤔
    2
  11560. I'm not sure what you mean when you say there's a contradiction. Hitler says that the 'Jewish' Capitalist system is creating the shrinking markets problem so that they can implement socialism, dilute the blood, and cause the downfall of civilization. Therefore, in order to solve this, he's going to go East, get the land and resources he needs to implement socialism, and thwart the Jewish plot. He also says he's pro-slavery and so on, and thinks that the Soviet Union is run by Judeo-Bolsheviks. Thus, the whole thing is set up as a crusade against the Jews.
    2
  11561. Sources are listed in the Pinned Comment.
    2
  11562. I think you'll enjoy the book "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly
    2
  11563. "Hitlers drive to autarchy was impelled by a belief in national-race wars. Not scarcity or shrinking markets." That statement is contradicted by the sources.
    2
  11564. Yeah, I've left them because I think they undermine themselves. One guy was telling me that the real reason Hitler went to war was because of the Polish trains... Yes, those infamous Polish trains...
    2
  11565. Keynesian economics is Marxist economics, and led to 2008. We've been Keynesian since WW2. That's why we had the baby boom, but future generations are now paying for the previous generations' prosperity, because in order to make their economics work, Keynesians have to steal wealth from the future. It has stifled the economy since 2008, which is why living standards haven't recovered from that recession. I agree that the 1% benefit from socialist governments by implementing laws, taxes and regulations that stifle competition, leading to a vast wealth transfer to those that came first. Corporations and central banks are evil, and can only be brought down through a free market, not through a protectionist one which bails them out by printing currency into existence, thus stealing the wealth off everyone else in the economy. A 2% inflation steals £200 of wealth off you per year if you earn £10,000 and gives that directly to the government or the central banks without you even knowing about it (inflation is an invisible tax). Under a free market, the law wouldn't favour any corporation or bank. Regulations preventing each individual from starting their own businesses or building their own houses wouldn't exist. We would use money (gold and silver) not currency, thus preventing the invisible theft that's going on right now. Competition would prevent companies from getting too big. The harder you worked, the more you would get paid - thus reducing the inequality that we currently have where certain groups get paid more for doing less (minimum wage, long-term unemployed, inefficient governments and bureaucracies). To say we're in a free market capitalist economy today is simply ridiculous. If you truly believe that your eyes are closed. You would do well to listen to Hazlitt. And if Marxist economics is so superior, you have nothing to fear by giving it a shot.
    2
  11566. Only because I understand both Marxist economics and actual economics, whereas you don't. If you knew how economics actually worked, you wouldn't be a socialist. Also, Austrian or Chicago - it doesn't matter at this stage. The primary point is to get people to see how an economy actually functions. You'd do well to give Hazlitt a shot. And then Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics after that for some evidence.
    2
  11567. He later regretted it, saying he "backed the wrong horse" - source: Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction" p436-438.
    2
  11568. The German economy is the correct answer :) although I'm fairly certain you wouldn't have guessed exactly why
    2
  11569. That's why I didn't mention it because I knew it would cause a backlash. Instead I took the phrase "show, don't tell" to heart :) however, I will be mentioning it again in future
    2
  11570. I'm just glad there's people out there like yourself that see it too. It is sad that many are blinded by their ideology. Hope you enjoy Crusader!
    2
  11571. Excellent! I hope you enjoy Ostkrieg! If you happen to come across Zitelmann's book, consider picking it up because it's a rare one.
    2
  11572. I'd be surprised if there's not a few angry people in the comments because of this video... but we can hope!
    2
  11573. I fully expect it. This is why I need Patrons and rely upon them.
    2
  11574. Will do in the follow-up video
    2
  11575. The link to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson is in the description
    2
  11576. "the nazi party did not seize the factories and businesses. maybe you should look that up first." They did. Maybe you should look that up. Read Temin, Reimann, Tooze, Barkai... just to name a few
    2
  11577. Exactly, and yet many people still think like that, which is why I linked to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson at the end and in the description. Hopefully a few people will open their eyes :)
    2
  11578. I quoted directly from Hitler in the video, in fact it is a long quote which spelt out the shrinking markets idea. I also listed the sources I used in the pinned comment, including Mein Kampf.
    2
  11579. Private means individual. Capitalism is the private control, meaning individual control. Private coming from the Latin, meaning individual. For example, I am a capitalist because I own my own means of production - my camera.
    2
  11580. My diet is fine (I actually went on keto at New Year and lost over a stone, which explains the weight loss). It's the lack of a sound sleep that's plaguing me, and the stress of constant work. The latter two are related to each other. Plus the idea that at any moment the entire channel could be deleted at the whim of some mini-dictator, and that it's more likely to happen the more I talk about topics such as this, is a constant worry. Not good when this is your job.
    2
  11581. Yes. The book "Hitler's Beneficiaries" by Aly makes it clear that they did indeed run out of other people's money.
    2
  11582. Because it makes logical sense in terms of why Hitler HAD to go to war, even if it's still based on a flawed understanding of economics.
    2
  11583. I've covered the Gleiwitz incident, and it's questionable at best https://youtu.be/QevMycFrWRM
    2
  11584. Libertarian? Hazlitt isn't a libertarian. He was a classic liberal, and there is a massive difference.
    2
  11585. And people say they only had "Socialism" in the name because they tricked the workers. Those same people then take the Nazis at their word when they say they "privatized" the factories. Double-think.
    2
  11586. They simply deny it. Evidence and logic must bow to their feelings. They're not living in the real world.
    2
  11587. Absolutely, that's part of the answer. However, I would say the shrinking markets is part of the justification for implementing his socialism in the first place.
    2
  11588. Except, currency always ends up being hyperfinflated, since it's not money (physical gold or silver). That's what's going to happen with the current system, as every fiat currently has in history - hyperinflation. Keynesians and socialists think that won't happen, even as Venezuela is crashing right now. As history shows us, socialism and printing currency into existence only creates starving millionaires. The Nazis knew this because they'd lived through the hyperinflation of 1923. So while they did secretly inflate their currency quite significantly, as Courland video 9 (coming Monday) will explain, they knew it would lead to economic ruin if they kept it up. War was the only solution to the problem. Like all socialists, they had to rob wealth from others to keep their utopia going. Socialism always leads to theft and murder - either domestically or through foreign conquest - and printing money (like the central government and central banks are doing right now) robs the poor to feed the socialists in power. It then has the nerve to blame it on the "free market". Considering that the people don't have gold and silver money, that we're relying on fiat currency which the central-state "private" banks are devaluing daily, we're not in a free market. If this was a true free market we wouldn't have black markets, since black markets are free markets. They can only exist in a state-run socialist economy.
    2
  11589. If you liked this, you may also enjoy this one which explains why Hitler was a Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  11590. Typically I would suggest you watch the section before the part I'm about to tell you to watch, but I'm hopeful that you might watch this part, then realize that the argument I have is solid and fully backed by sources, then go back and watch the section before. But we'll see. The timestamps are in the description, and the section I'd like you to watch is called "Privatization", timestamp 02:10:18
    2
  11591. I did go on a diet at the beginning of the year and lost over a stone in weight in about 5 weeks (good old keto diet). But I've been maintaining since then.
    2
  11592. Hope you enjoy it!
    2
  11593. Because Corbyn was an Anti-Semite
    2
  11594. "You don't need to learn about economics to become a wage drone." The link to the audiobook of Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" is in the description.
    2
  11595. "This is actually the best explanation I've seen/heard for WW2" :) if you're really interested in this particular subject, Zitelmann's book is definitely worth picking up. "So this is the same argument for colonialism, even if they didn't know it." I'm not so sure. In the case of the British (going off memory when I studied it in university), the British wanted open markets for free trade. This free trade would disrupt the local economy of, say, the Burmese, who would suffer a recession. The local leaders would complain to the government, who would be forced to act. Now, if you understand basic economics, you know that once the recession was over, free trade would massively benefit the Burmese population. But governments always overreact. So the Burmese government would close their borders. The British would then ask for open borders again in the name of free trade. The Burmese would say no. So the British sent in the gun boats to force the borders to open. Free trade is good once it's in operation. But governments (and a lot of people) don't understand why. So colonialism only happened because of the misunderstanding of how economics works, not because of the shrinking markets idea. If anyone has read this and doesn't understand, again - Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson is the book for you.
    2
  11596. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  11597. The Google Archipelago strikes again
    2
  11598. Marxists
    2
  11599. I guess you could class a belief in Socialism as insanity, but a lot of people would disagree with you
    2
  11600. I've read Umberto Eco. He's way off the mark and a terrible source for Fascism or National Socialism.
    2
  11601. Thankfully I got it at £29 a while back
    2
  11602. Except he didn't do that. He kept the Reichsbank, printed a ton of currency, then exported the inflation to other countries, which is why he starved so many people (like the Greeks). I've covered this (in part) in this video here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  11603. Ok, I'll work on it
    2
  11604. Richard Evans in his book "The Coming of the Third Reich" says that, unlike the Communists (who's members were unemployed), the Nazis got their money from the workers who worked. They paid for their membership. It was only later on, pretty much when they were almost in power anyway, that they got some funding from some of the industrialists.
    2
  11605. I'm losing sleep worrying about censorship on YouTube and elsewhere. I'd hate for this channel to be taken down simply because the power's that be are pro-censorship.
    2
  11606. Yeah, you can tell I'm tired. I meant PSU
    2
  11607. I'm not sure why they'd ban me for this. I mean, it's clear that I'm against Hitler, not for him, so there's no reason to.
    2
  11608.  @jinno4594  Ah okay, I didn't know that. I remember him saying in one video that he was a Christian, but maybe I'm misremembering? Perhaps he said something else and I misheard him?
    2
  11609. No chance at the moment. It's something I want to get to eventually, but right now the priority is finishing Stalingrad, doing more Patron Q&As, and then covering topics like this.
    2
  11610. Incorrect. I've done a full video on the debate surrounding the Table Talks and they are a valid source https://youtu.be/a8EWd-IH6HI
    2
  11611. Socialism is built on the foundation of altruism (a core tenet of religious belief), and also the idea of utopian paradise (Heaven on Earth) which comes after death (the Revolution). The whole doctrine is Gnosticism all the way down.
    2
  11612. I'll let you off ;)
    2
  11613. Yes! And because I've taken time to do Crusader, I'll be able to pick it up before I finish the Stalingrad research :D
    2
  11614. I've created a playlist for Stalingrad related videos. Here's the link - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhLd1zG3MeeRSbIei6lHhxO But obviously not done the main Stalingrad video yet!
    2
  11615. I'm looking forward to it too! Glad you're along for the ride, and I hope not to disappoint :)
    2
  11616. I think that when it does come out, I'll be disappointed because the project is over. The journey so far and the journey ahead are pushing the boundaries on what I thought possible. There is no doubt in my mind that this will happen, it's just a question of time.
    2
  11617. Also, unlike my other Battlestorm documentaries - the longest of which is Market Garden at 2 hours - Stalingrad is shaping up to be well over 24 hours long.
    2
  11618. Did you not see the end? I'm working on a "Battlestorm" documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad. If you haven't seen one of my Battlestorm videos, here's my latest one on the Bruneval Raid https://youtu.be/6EiOG_yvT04
    2
  11619. True although most are gameplay videos! Hope things are going good for you too :)
    2
  11620. In that case, the Pomodoro Technique is something you need to look at. It's something that's helped me out immensely. Not sure if you've seen this video of mine either https://youtu.be/efY-KnqrI-0
    2
  11621. Haha no :(
    2
  11622. It's a good idea, but apart from support on Patreon, I'm not sure exactly how anyone can help :/ any suggestions??
    2
  11623. I've been working on a Stalingrad documentary since March of 2017. Current work count is show in the video. It will be in the style of my more recent Battlestorm documentaries, specifically Bruneval (British para raid with John Frost) https://youtu.be/6EiOG_yvT04 or Battleaxe https://youtu.be/lqGo57Drs24 Watch one (or both) of them, and then imagine the same style but for a 7 month campaign of epic proportions. THAT is what Battlestorm Stalingrad will be.
    2
  11624. Agreed. The west seems focused on Normandy and El Alamein (but not the other desert battles for some reason). I think the language barriers are a crucial factor, as was the Cold War
    2
  11625. While I certainly don't expect that to happen, things would be different. To do just 33,000 words on Crusader last month is next to nothing. I'd do that in 4 days if I wasn't in work.
    2
  11626. I'm fairly certain it'll be out before then... fairly. But yes, no sacrifices in quality allowed
    2
  11627. It's not one book, but Barrie Pitt's the Definitive History of the Desert War is a good series and probably the one I'd recommend to you. Otherwise, no I've not come across one book that does the North African Campaign justice. Maybe I should write one
    2
  11628. Sadly, no. But I will come back here when it releases and demand you watch it all in one go ;)
    2
  11629. You sure did! I'll add your name to the list
    2
  11630. Asking the important questions
    2
  11631. I'm not always that quick at replying :) I think the Marder isn't classed as a tank - it's classed as a tank destroyer. You could call it your "favourite armoured fighting vehicle" though
    2
  11632. No worries :)
    2
  11633. I have contemplated writing a book, but I'm not in a position to do that properly yet. But I won't run out of steam for quite a while - I've barely got started! And you've seen nothing yet!
    2
  11634. Thank you very much Intellectz :) I intend to keep Crusader and Stalingrad to the same quality as my more recent Battlestorm videos (Battleaxe and Bruneval especially). Obviously, this takes time, but I'm hopeful it'll be worth the wait for you - and me! I can't wait for this to be out either!
    2
  11635. Glad you're enjoying them!
    2
  11636. If you're contributing then you should receive the benefits of the trade... unless your wealth is being stolen from you through taxation and inflation (a tax on savers). Abolish taxes and have a stable money supply, and you get to reap the benefits of your hard work. Alternatively you can keep having everything taken off you and wonder why you're not getting anywhere. It's at least a 40% tax rate in the UK right now, although it's impossible to calculate with all the steal taxes and fudged inflation numbers. I don't like having nearly half my income taken from me without my permission. If I had that amount back, maybe I'd be able to afford private health care.
    2
  11637. It sucks. YouTube even automatically deletes my own comments, even though I have it set up to "allow all"
    2
  11638. So 'the fate of German prisoners of war' would mean Soviet prisoners to you?
    2
  11639. @68walter - ask her if she has a degree in hard sums... and then dive for cover ;)
    2
  11640. Thank you!
    2
  11641. Why do you say yikes?
    2
  11642. Yes, I think "self interest" is a better phrase. But I understand why she used selfish.
    2
  11643. The love of money isn't the root of all evil. The theft of money is the root of all evil.
    2
  11644. Here's a source of Ayn Rand on libertarianism http://aynrandlexicon.com/ayn-rand-ideas/ayn-rand-q-on-a-on-libertarianism.html
    2
  11645. 🤨 I've talked about central banking in my "What Causes Recessions and Depressions" video. I also understand the debt based economic model. However, none of that is relevant to this particular topic, and as I said, Freud is a Hermeticist.
    2
  11646. Ah yes, I knew I'd miss some ingredients!
    2
  11647. What do you mean by sugar?
    2
  11648. Aren't you forgetting that many Christians are arguing that Christianity has nothing to do with altruism? Which is it? Is Christianity altruistic or is it not? I brought up Paul in this video. Have you watched it? And again, it wasn't "one-sided". There were non-Christians in the video 🤦🏼‍♂️ You just (wrongly) perceived it as an attack upon Christianity. And the question is: why? Is it because you're subconsciously upset that people can lose the faith in Christianity, and you're worried you may do the same? Or is it because you're scared that the altruism (that may or may not be within Christianity) could be a factor for why the socialists I talked about turned socialist?
    2
  11649. Altruism is about giving to those in need. And since they're poor, socialists are the ones in need. So they're not expected to give, and they are expecting to receive.
    2
  11650. It's because I wanted to get this out as quickly as possible, since so many people brought up the points I addressed here.
    2
  11651. DON'T YOU DO IT!
    2
  11652.  @paulweaver1843  Yes, but you were so close!
    2
  11653. By that logic, since the jet engine was invented by the British (Frank Whittle), the Germans only copied the design.
    2
  11654. Yeah, I'm currently using a Sony FDR-AX700. I was using the FDR-AX33 originally, but the pictures always turned out slightly blurry. The AX700 is definitely a good camera, but expensive, and in theory the AX33 would be fine if the pictures weren't blurred. EDIT: To clarify, the AX33 blurs when using auto-focus. If I manually set it, it's fine, but then I could go out of focus if I move too much, so it's frustrating. The AX700's auto-focus actually works properly!
    2
  11655.  @paulweaver1843  No, the T-26 was the best tank EVER
    2
  11656. It sat in port most of the time due to a lack of fuel
    2
  11657. YOU'RE JUST SAYING THAT BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT AN AGENDA
    2
  11658. You were second by about a second or two, but so close!
    2
  11659. He's a genuine Patreon, and he's probably done it as a joke, but continues to support so, fair enough :)
    2
  11660. It's tempting. I'll see
    2
  11661. Wow, I can see why you swore. And yes, I've sworn at customers once or twice... I used to have a lot of patience, but I gradually lost it working retail.
    2
  11662. The most effective way to support channels is on Patreon, without which I certainly wouldn't have the time to be able to make weekly videos, or have anywhere near the number of books/sources that I need to do the research. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it: my Patreons make these videos possible. Here's the link to my Patreon page - https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory If you do decide to support me, thank you!
    2
  11663. Thank you for the recommendation! I'll pick it up
    2
  11664. I used to play it :)
    2
  11665. I told you not to mention that in public, Fulcrum
    2
  11666. Do it! As I said, I could definitely make a video on the topic
    2
  11667. I did used to play 40K. Started at 2nd Edition with the Ultramarines - before they became smurfs in 3rd.... typical! I'm not sure I'll be going backwards with North Africa (to Mechili) although I touched upon that in the Compass documentary. Dubno would be good though!
    2
  11668. They really should produce medals for jobs - that would actually make a lot of sense
    2
  11669. Cheers OM!
    2
  11670. That's basically what I answer in the video. Without it, they'll get chewed up by infantry and anti-tank guns.
    2
  11671. Dubno 1941 by Isaev paints a pretty clear picture. However the translation is pretty poor
    2
  11672. I think most history books skip those parts. Not sure why
    2
  11673. And my merch website, TIKtac
    2
  11674. If you are, wake up and watch the video!
    2
  11675. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    2
  11676. He didn't, but he was one of the first to lure the tanks into anti-tank guns using their own tanks, which von Herff seems to have come up with. But the concept of using combined arms wasn't Rommel's, no.
    2
  11677. The British at the time thought that infantry tanks were slow, meaning the cruisers would have to slow right down in order for the tanks to stay bunched together if used as one group. This is why they split the infantry tanks from the cruisers. This arrangement worked well during Compass and to some extent in Crusader etc. But it meant the British diluted their tank strength. Of course, there are solutions to this, and it worked for others, but the point is that the British at the time didn't realise this. This meant half the tanks weren't where they needed them to be. It affected the tactics and strategies used in both Battleaxe and Crusader. And it's all about them tactics.
    2
  11678. Very interesting story! Thanks for sharing :) a tank used incorrectly will definitely become a coffin
    2
  11679. Agree with your points Sushi. Does seem they repaired their tanks a lot more. And you're right about the British generals.
    2
  11680. Bryan, even if half the Panzer III's were equipped with 37mm guns, that doesn't change the message of the video. And there definitely were more Panzer 4's that you're making out. Again, you missed the point of the Panzer 4, and the point of the video by the sounds of it. Tanks shouldn't be taking on tanks.
    2
  11681. The British certainly didn't, no. I think the Soviets did learn to use combined arms a little earlier than the British, but they had many other issues.
    2
  11682. Thanks! I'm absolutely amazed by this milestone. Can't believe it
    2
  11683. I'm surprised you didn't break down before then
    2
  11684. Glad to hear that Arnar!
    2
  11685. There's always something new to learn :) glad you enjoyed the video
    2
  11686. Glad you liked it :)
    2
  11687. Again, cut from infantry and artillery, the T-34s suffered the same fate as the T-26s. This is why I'm not convinced that these battles were lost because of poor tanks, rather poor tactics (and in the case of the Soviets, lack of fuel and ammunition because they were caught by surprise).
    2
  11688. Wow thank you again! I owe you!
    2
  11689. Thank you!
    2
  11690. Hop on board the Siberian hype-train, comrade!
    2
  11691. Apologies if I came across as blunt. I get a lot of disparaging comments and it's difficult to see who's being genuine or not from this side of the screen. I assumed you were being hostile, and I shouldn't have done, so sorry about that. Karl Marx invented the term "Capitalism" to disparage the idea of economic freedom, so that he (and others) could justify their strive for power and Anti-Semitism. I think the best thing here is for you to watch this video all the way through if you haven't done already https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y It will explain most of your questions, or lead you in the right direction.
    2
  11692. Yes, I quoted Tooze in the video. Sadly, he doesn't explain the problem fully like Mierzejewski does, so he's not quite telling the full story. In fact, as Mierzejewski shows, the problems occurred before 1939, and there weren't as many troop movements during the winter months as implied by Tooze.
    2
  11693. That's what Gotz Aly shows in "Hitler's Beneficiaries". Had they not gone to war and stolen the resources off of the rest of Europe, and exported their inflation, then their economy would have imploded
    2
  11694. He is the one who says that economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses. He says this numerous times in his "Basic Economics" book, which I highly recommend
    2
  11695. You're going to be shocked when I tell you that the so-called "Capitalist Powers" weren't capitalist...
    2
  11696. @Nicolai Myshkin Yes, it's popular here in Britain, although I haven't had any for years. Too expensive
    2
  11697. Trains must stick to tracks
    2
  11698. The books and authors? Or the animations (e.g. the letters falling)?
    2
  11699.  tokul76  "your way of argument cost you a subscriber. Good luck with Stalingrad and other series. I will probably look for other places to entertain myself. Maybe cats will help." What argument? I only pointed out that it was clear from your previous comment that you haven't done any research on the topic in question. You know this to be true because my previous comment (containing just 5 words) was enough for you to get upset, delete your own comment, unsubscribe and then cry about how my "argument" triggered you. I would suggest that you calm down and maybe consider rethinking your stance.
    2
  11700. A bit like the Labour Party turning Tanzania into a giant peanut farm!
    2
  11701. Me too. But I'm absolutely determined to correct this distortion because (as you will see) it changes our perspective of WW2 quite dramatically... I'll say no more for now.
    2
  11702. Glad you enjoyed it! More to come. And yes, many are saying things that are simply not true, such as Hitler wanted to create farms... I knew they would say that, which is why I mentioned it in the video. It's not true, as I will explain in a future video
    2
  11703.  @day2148  "The black market is hardly an example because the black market is not in charge of maintaining social stability and tackle problems like crime, whereas real governments are." It doesn't matter what governments do or don't do, all that matters is that a Black Market is a free market, and that one can only exist if you have a non-free market. And that's just the start. There are plenty of indicators that show that we don't have a free market - central planning, regulations, artificial wage hikes (e.g. minimum wage laws), debasement of the currency (we're no longer on the Gold Standard), interest rates and other steal taxations, price controls... all of this stuff is artificial public state-control of the market. It's also similar or the same as how the Nazi economy operated. It's non-free. "There is no direct democracy in a realistic capitalist society, because your bosses will tell you who to vote or you'll be out of a job." That's such rubbish. No boss I've ever had has told me which way to vote, and even if he had, it's a secret ballot anyway so he wouldn't have known which way I voted. Plus, of course your boss will tell you what to do - you work for him! If you don't like your boss, there's a door you can walk out of and you can get a different job. It's a free market. Once the state takes over, the state becomes your boss. If you don't like your boss, you can't walk out because there's no other job out there other than those controlled by your old boss - the state. "Frankly, it amazes me to see how someone who understand that military science is tied to many, many factors, could be so single-minded and flat in their view of economics." Frankly, it amazes me to see someone accuse me of not understanding Marxist economics, even though I do fully understand it. I can fully explain why Marxist economics hurts the workers. I can explain why it causes more unemployment. I can explain why it causes bubbles in the economy (like the big one we're in right now). I can explain why it causes the economy not to grow (like the economy that hasn't grown at all since 2008). And I can explain why it's absolutely immoral to its core. In fact, it is you who doesn't understand how the economy works. If you did, you wouldn't be a socialist. I know, because I didn't understand how economics works, and I also used to be a socialist. But I've learnt how an economy works, and I cannot go back to an inferior and immoral way of looking at the world. What's also interesting is that I actually studied non-military history (e.g. economics of Britain, Russia and Germany) during my college and university education, and have accreditation in that. I have no accreditation in military history, just a keen interest in it. And yet you 'respect' my military history, but chastize my non-military history. The only reason you do so is because I'm providing evidence - like in this very video - of a truth running counter to your own dogma, and it's a painful pill for you to swallow.
    2
  11704. ​ @day2148  Capitalism is private control fo the economy. That is the definition. Capitalist thought is, if you have state-control of the economy, you no longer have capitalism. Marxist thought is that the state can control capitalism, and therefore 'state capitalism'. Ok then. So please explain to me how state control of the economy and now private control of the economy are the same thing. Please explain how you can have state (non-private, public) private control of the economy. How you can have public-private control of the economy... And, if capitalism isn't 'private control' that's fine, then capitalism is also on the Left, since it's lost it's individualism.
    2
  11705. The issue is that the socialist definition of capitalism is wrong. Marx's redefinition of the word 'capitalism' to a meaning that it isn't actually what it was, nor historically was, and thus is wrong. This is why the Marxists in the comments are having trouble - their definition of capitalism is incorrect because Marx redefined the free market (individuals free to live their lives the way they want) to be evil and slavery... somehow. It's literally an illogical "Freedom is Slavery" defintion, to use George Orwell's term. China may be freeing up its economy, but it's still very socialist at the moment. For example, YouTube is banned in China. A state cannot ban YouTube unless it has control over the market. State control of the market is no longer private control, and thus that is clearly NOT a free market. It is therefore not capitalism.
    2
  11706. Anarcho-socialism doesn't exist. Go and watch videos by anarcho-syndicalists etc and see exactly what they say. They talk about the revolution, then forming a society based on the unions and federalism and whatnot... which isn't anarchism. You can't have a trade union under anarchy because if you have a central organisation, you no longer have anarchy. They think a state is the central government. No. The state is whoever's in charge. A state can be as small as one factory, or as large as the universe. A union is a politically organized community. If they are the highest authority, they become the state. Anarchy is not the lack of a central government, it is the lack of all organisation within society. Every man for himself. Chaos. A union is an organisation, it is not every man for himself, and it is not chaos. It is there not anarchy. You cannot have anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-communism, nor anarcho-socialism. They are oxymorons. And the feudal kings didn't nor couldn't have total control over every market/person. For that you need a giant bureaucracy. Kings didn't have that. Slavery is more akin to socialism (a 100% tax is a fair wage after all), but again the state didn't have total control.
    2
  11707. A black market is a free market within a non-free state-controlled (socialist) economy. Doesn't the US have a black market for drugs? Doesn't the UK have the same?
    2
  11708. You may want to watch this video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  11709. Unfortunately Marxist theory on why the war started (Hitler just wanted war so geared up his economy for war, therefore not Socialism) is also wrong. I will cover this in an upcoming video. For now, consider the fact that Mussolini didn't want war at all, but still used the state to control the economy. Hitler was the same - he didn't need to control every aspect of the economy, but he did.
    2
  11710. A black market is a free market within a non-free state-controlled socialist economy. You cannot have a black market without socialism. Doesn't the USA have a black market for drugs?
    2
  11711. Maoism and Leninism are different ideologies, but are still socialism. Fascism and Nazism are different ideologies, but are also still socialism. To say the Nazis were fascist would be like saying Catholics are Protestants. No, but they have the same origin - the Abrahamic religion.
    2
  11712. Feudalism manifests itself differently to capitalism and socialism (serfs aren't free but are tied to the land, lords of the manner, merchants etc). This is why it has a different definition. But even if it didn't, the King is the state, so if he owns all the land, so technically he'd be a socialist (again, if it wasn't feudalism). This is why Robin Hood doesn't steal from the rich and give to the poor, he steals from the state and gives the money back to the tax payer. Also, the Fascist corporations idea (syndicalism) was from the Marxist "revolutionary syndicalist" ideology of trade unions for both employees and employers. They got their idea from the medieval idea of corporations... Just wanted to point that out :)
    2
  11713. Are they a politically organized community? No.
    2
  11714. History is the study of the human record. A historian is someone who studies what other humans wrote or recorded.
    2
  11715. ​ @MidKnightblue0013  Absolutely. They have capitalist (private) parts of their economy, and socialist (state) parts of their economy. Some more than others. What we've seen since the 1880s is that governments have crept more and more socialism (state) into their economies, and now we're starting to see their economies stutter and crack. Our economies are reaching breaking point because the capitalist parts can't pay for the socialist parts. This is why workers are seeing their incomes not match inflation. Why? Because currency (fiat) isn't money (e.g. gold), and printing paper in order to cover the huge public debt that every western nation is in doesn't work and only leads to starving millionaries (e.g. Venezuela). The pension crisis, the welfare state, and the inflating bubble caused by massive public spending and debt... none of this equals financial stability. It is 1923 Weimar Germany all over again, and very few seem to have learnt from history.
    2
  11716. Yes, no nation has ever been capitalist. There has always been state control. The closest we got to capitalism was Britain in the 1880s, but the Liberal Party then got took over by socialists.
    2
  11717. Really? And what was the consensus? I'm guessing there wasn't one
    2
  11718. Feudalism is different again as it's more like a vassal system (neither free nor state controlled) with serfs tied to the land etc. The King doesn't have control of the entire economy, because for that you need a giant bureaucracy, which feudal kings didn't have.
    2
  11719. Yes it's definitely a problem of definitions and understanding. As I said, Socialism came before Marxism, and therefore the Marxist idea of Socialism has no bearing on the Nazi version of Socialism. This video has been received well because I've shown my workings out. But a lot of the criticism I'm still getting is from people who refuse to budge on the idea that Marxism isn't the only form of Socialism. I'm not sure how to make people understand, and I know few people have watched this video, so it looks like I'm going to have to explain this again in the future ☹️
    2
  11720. Because if I had just said that, the Marxists would be out for blood screaming that I don't have the correct definition of Socialism and that "that's not REAL socialism". They're in the comments now saying that my definition of capitalism is wrong because Marx defined it differently (he was wrong) and trying to squirm out of the idea that socialism is state control. This is why I had to go in-depth with it, to make sure they couldn't do this.
    2
  11721. Fascism has nothing to do with race. You can be a racist Fascist, but Fascism is just socialism on the national level. National Socialism is has racism built into the ideology. While they do manifest themselves in similar ways, they're two distinct ideologies which grew separately. Most people haven't studied the two ideologies and don't realise this. And even historians and high-profile figures haven't looked into it and get it wrong. Worse, because of the obvious stigma attached to both ideologies, people ignore or don't listen to anyone who was a Fascist or a National Socialist. Thus, you end up with a situation where the two names are used synonymously - which is wrong. (Another reason why censorship backfires) In effect, calling Nazi's fascist is basically broadcasting that you don't know what you're talking about to actual Nazis and Fascists. Another one is - Nazis don't like being called Nazis. They prefer to be called National Socialists. Why? Because they want the world to know what they actually are.
    2
  11722. "because in that sense also stock companies and companies owned by many people (shareholders, partnerships etc.) would be socialist states," Not true, because they're not the central political power. A "politically organized community" is a state. Being organized and a community doesn't make a state unless it's political. And also, I'm using the Oxford Dictionary definition - "A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government." The size of a territory could be as small as a house. The head of a household would be the (private) government of that house. But a collection of private interests would be "public" - state. Please see the formation of society as discussed in "Inventing the Individual" by Siedentop which explains this in a lot more detail. "you are not the person entitled to decide ultimately what capitalism and socialism actually is." The many sources I used give the multiple definitions of socialism and capitalism. The confusion lies in the fact that the Marxists are deliberately trying to rewrite the definition of socialism to hide its true meaning. Sadly, history doesn't lie, and their attempts at changing the language will not wash. I have explained the etymology of the words in the video, based on the colossal amount of research I have done on the subject. I have nailed down the definitions, which is why Marxists are crying in the comments because a solid definition is the last thing they want. Why? Because if people realise that socialism is the totalitarian state-control of the economy, and that it's ideology is based on the immoral ideas of murdering and stealing from others of different classes, sexes and classes to themselves (the "Revolution"), and it is the rejection of individuality in favour of group authority, then socialists won't be gathering much support for their campaigns.
    2
  11723. A politically organized community. That is the definition, and it makes perfect sense. A state is not a far of central thing. A state can be as small as a factory. That's why the owner of the factory was sometimes called a 'governor', because he organised his community. If he was politically at the top of the whole of society (e.g. his factory was all that existed in society) then he would be the government. When the workers rise up and take over the factory, they become the government. Socialism.
    2
  11724. "So any war economy is socialism? I don't get it." A black market is a free non-state economy. A black market is an indication that you don't have a capitalist economy, but a socialist one (run by the state). You don't get it because you don't understand the definition of both capitalism and socialism (non-Marxist). Regulation is state control. Wage control is state control. Price control is state control. Taxation (especially VAT) is state control. None of this is private (non-state) control of the economy. It is therefore not capitalism. As Malinski66 said, we are not living in a capitalist society.
    2
  11725. The lessons of history are never learned by those who need to learn them most.
    2
  11726. I'm not, which is why I said it got bits wrong. However a lot of the stuff it's describing is backed up by other sources, like in Wages of Destruction and Zitelmann's "Hitler Politics of Seduction". Whilst Reimann doesn't understand Nazi ideology and thinks it's capitalism, there's no reason not to believe the stuff he's describing about the economy itself because this is also what others are saying.
    2
  11727. He was a member of the Communist Party. Even Wikipedia says this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Reimann
    2
  11728. He was actually a Marxist Socialist, not a Capitalist. He provides all the evidence that "Fascism" (actually Nazism) was Socialist, but then claims it's "Capitalism" 😂 that's why it was published by the Mises Institute - the evidence is important, not the incorrect interpretation that Reimann provides.
    2
  11729. "I can agree that NS was not capitalist." Ok. "But i cannot stand the idea of putting it in the left-wing of the political spectrum." Why not? Is Marxism the only thing allowed on the Left? "The Third Position, and German National-Socialism specifically was centered towards race." 'Race' which is a social-group like 'class', 'gender' or 'nationality', and thus a collective like all other Left-wing ideologies. The Nazis did try to paint themselves as a 'third way' between capitalism and Marxism. However, their ideology was definitely a Left-wing ideology because it is based on socialism - public state-control of the means of production. Socialism isn't on the Right and it's not in the middle, and it's not in some random 'third position'. It's simply on the Left.
    2
  11730. Incorrect. Socialism has a definition. The problem is that our Socialists Social-Elites are trying to mask the definition to hide it from people. I've explained the definition in this other video of mine, after going all the way back to pre-history and forward to the modern day in order to explain it in-depth https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And "State Capitalism" is an oxymoron. Capitalism is "private control of the means of production". And the word "private" means "individual". A State is not an individual, therefore it's not private. All States are Publics. Again, I've explained this in the linked video.
    2
  11731. Hitler's socialism wasn't Marxist Socialism, so it didn't manifest itself the same as the Marxist socialists you listed. But it's still socialism because it's a rejection of individual control of the economy in favour of social-group control of the economy.
    2
  11732. Glad to hear! More to come
    2
  11733. Please watch my Public vs Private video, which defines the words socialism and capitalism, and shows you why the term "State Capitalism" is definitely oxymoronic https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11734. Babeuf - the so-called "grandfather" of socialism. Also worth looking up is Robert Own's "New Harmony", which was a socialist 'paradise' in the USA. Neither talked about class because they were before Marxism.
    2
  11735. It's seriously a very interesting read. I would highly recomend the other books I recommended in the pinned comment, especially Zitelmann's book. That one especially will give you a solid grounding on National Socialist ideology, and of the evolving historiography (up until the late 1990s at least).
    2
  11736. Nationalization is not socialism. If the state controls the economy, that's socialism. That's why Hitler didn't see the need in nationalization. Although, it's worth remembering that he did nationalise the industries when it suited him - to replace unloyal capitalists with loyal state-servants.
    2
  11737. Is "Blacula" a thing?? I'm not a big film watcher
    2
  11738. Glad you agree. I'll be doing more on this in the future :)
    2
  11739. Are the shareholders political? Nope. They're also not the highest power, thus not part of the state. They are the government of their own private business though. That's why factory owners were sometimes called Governors.
    2
  11740. "Given that large chunks of the German economy were actually privatised under the Nazis," No they weren't. You've been fed a lie by Marxists. The state went in and took over the industries from within using bureaucrats and officials. They had wage controls, price controls, manpower controls, state unions etc... then when theindustrialists complained, the state stole the industries off them and replaced them with members of the Nazi Party or people more loyal to the state. They called this process "privatisation". That's not privatization. "a form of Corporatism influenced by Italian Fascism" The Fascist corporations came from the revolutionary Marxist-socialist syndicalist idea of having a trade union socialism. Nowadays the "corporation" is associated with big businesss. That wasn't the case in the Fascist days. This is why anarcho-syndicalism is on the Left.
    2
  11741. Classic liberalism is about individuals. I am an individual, therefore I am not a group. Thus I'm not a race, gender, class or nationality. Being an individual is not an ideological stance because it is a fact of life. I am an individual and so is everyone else. That's not ideology, that's scientific fact.
    2
  11742.  @DZ-yk2ew  "it is simply ridiculous to even call taxation of private enterprise Socialism." If you tax an industry so that it is discouraged from producing their products (e.g. tobacco and alcohol here in the UK) then that is state control. State control is socialism. In addition, taxation is not a trade. Nobody wants to pay taxes. They are forced to pay taxes. Tax is theft. It is anti-cooperation. It is also a reduction of the reinvestment of wealth back into the economy, thus shrinking the economy. It is anti-capitalist. It is anti-individual. It is pro-collective, pro-state, and thus pro-socialism. "One can only do this if they believe the ahistorical and utopian notion of an utterly free market, and a return to a State so irrelevant and underfunded that what you really would get is Anarcho-Capitalism." Incorrect. It's simply knowing what the terms mean, instead of pretending they are something that they're not (which is what Marxists do). I don't want no state. I believe a state is necessary. I am not an anarcho-capitalist like Marx, who wanted a state-less (non-group, therefore private) society. "I engage with Neo-Nazis and Fascists all the time, my own brother converted to the movement." It's not hard to move from Marxism to Fascism because all it is is a rejection of the internationalism of Marxism and the trading of class for nationality. This is why Mussolini, Mosley and the Christchurch shooter all went from Marxism to Fascism. "For you to call them Left Wing Socialists does them LOADS of favors as they are presently trying to infiltrate the Andrew Yang movement in the United States, because they think UBI will be good for white people and also will trigger strict immigration control." Because UBI is state control of the economy, and thus socialism, that's why they're in favour of it. Marxists and Fascists have the same goal - socialism. They're on the Left, which is why the Right (at least, those who understand what capitalism is and are in favour of it) oppose UBI. Me explaining the nature of Fascism and Nazism as socialism is explaining that Marxism, Fascism and Nazism are all evil, and why they're evil. Stealing from others is wrong. Murdering others is wrong. Destroying economies is wrong. It's immoral, it's horrible, and nobody who is conscious should support any of these evil ideologies. "This is ideological reconstruction of history based on your interpretation of that ideology, Anglo-American Liberal Conservatism which is oriented chiefly on the size of the government." It's based on knowing what the historical definitions are. That's not reconstruction, except I've explained what the actual definitions are and why they are what they are. If anything, this has corrected the distortions of history created by the Marxists, who said capitalism is not what it is and claim that nothing is REAL socialism. And I'm not a conservative. I'm a progressive, which is why I'm a classical-liberal. "Capitalism has needed a lot of government intervention over its history," No, it's HAD a lot of government intervention (socialism) in its history. This has destroyed it's potential. Worse, every government failure in history has been blamed on the free market. When the Soviet economy collapsed, Marxists claimed that it wasn't REAL socialism and was actually capitalism ("state capitalism"). The closest we came to actual capitalism was Britain in the 1880s, and this was why the economy BOOMED during that time. "Government does not equal Socialism" An organized political community does not equal an organized political community... ok, sure, whatever you say. "It is merely looking at it through the modern "Classical liberal" goggles and declaring what you see to be so." Yes, I'm an individual who's done his research. Thank you for the compliment.
    2
  11743. Socialism is state control of the economy. When a state takes tax from those in the private sector, or forces them to do things that they wouldn't do naturally (e.g. compulsory state pension schemes), and/or they create a government run business (monopoly, means of production) then you have a government in control of the economy. Socialism.
    2
  11744. I think I mentioned this in my Fall Blau video. The debate about this is that the Red Army and the Soviet economy may have collapsed in 1943 if the Axis had captured the Caucasus. It's hard to tell due to Lend Lease, which was basically propping up the economy. But even so, the Soviets would have been in real trouble, and it could have meant victory (at some point) on the Eastern Front for the Axis.
    2
  11745. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 This 5 hour video has 107 sources, 350 direct references, lots of notes, quotes and discussion, timestamps in the description, and a PDF of the script you can download, that provides you with a ton of evidence that explains everything regarding Hitler's Socialism. There's a section specifically on the 'Privatisation' Vs Nationalization debate, although I'd ask that you at least watch the section before that to get the context.
    2
  11746. Same!
    2
  11747. And a nation is a society. So Nationalism is Socialism.
    2
  11748. Watch this video, it will clarify everything for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11749. Nope. What is the problem?
    2
  11750. "To me it does not look like Nazis took over whole economy. Most of it but not all and not totally." So it was MOSTLY socialism, but because it wasn't Total it was capitalism? "And also if you read really well you will notice that Nazis, especially Hitler, cared very much about the private economy." Hitler called capitalism, and thus the private economy "international Jewish finance". He didn't like it. He tolerated some private property on the condition that it worked towards the state. If it wasn't beneficial, the state could expropriate it. That's not a free market, nor capitalism. "They had no real strategy. Economic or military." And this is where your theory (popular among Marxist-circles) breaks down (as explained in-detail in Zitelmann's Hitler Politics of Seduction). The reason they went to war was entirely because of their economic ideology. Without the economics, you wouldn't have had WW2 at all. No spoilers as I will be covering this in a future video.
    2
  11751. State non-state? Yep, just another word meaning Socialism.
    2
  11752.  @stefanb6539  ​"You are the one, who claims, that all socialists are one group. That is YOUR claim, not a socialist claim." So socialists don't believe in the working class now? Jeeze. Make up your collective minds. "You point with one finger, 3 fingers point back at you." I don't believe in classes, races or sexes. I believe that everyone is an individual and should be judged by their individuality, not by some pre-determined racist, classist or sexist artificial social group. "What makes a socialist an evil group clone, while an upperclass Victorian Londoner, who is worried about degrading his familiy name by marrying into a lower class is still an individual?" This hyperthetical Victorian Londoner would be wrong because we are all individuals and so class doesn't exist. People should be judged by their individuality, not by some social group. "The guy you call "socialist" may not even think of himself as member of a group, while the upperclass snob surely does!" Exactly. Group think is wrong. "So the one thing that derives the socialist of his individualism is solely YOUR arbitrary judgement." No... Socialists believe that they are part of classes - bourgeoisie or proletariats. They believe that these groups should have all the political and economic power. They therefore give up their individuality and submit to the power of the group. They are thus no longer individuals. This ridiculous mindset is built straight into the immoral ideology of Marx, Hitler and Mussolini. "You may not be especially racist, but you surely balance your fragile ego on extremely hatefilled stereotypes against people who disagree with you." Socialism is an ideology - a belief. There is no stereotype. I fully understand the ideolgy, so I'm judging people based on their own beliefs and actions - which, because individuality is made up of actions and belief, this therefore is a judge on their individuality - their personality - not on some 'stereotype'. Individuals who believe in this immoral religion that promotes murder and theft need to understand that their world view is immoral precisely because of that religion. That said, any individual who's willing to open their eyes, learn from their mistakes, and convert back into a normal moral human being is very willing to do so and can fully redeem their sins. Unlike 'race' or 'sex' or 'class' where you are born into it and cannot change that (except artificially), you have a choice to change your beliefs. Therefore, I am judging people on their beliefs and actions - their personality - rather than their cosmetics. And also, no I'm not "especially" racist - I'm not racist at all. As far as I'm concerned, 'race' doesn't exist on the social level. I won't judge and will refuse to judge people by their skin colour, regardless on how much you are begging me to do that. "How would capitalism have saved this people?" Hitler went to war to implement his socialism. If he had been a capitalist, he would have had no reason to go to war in the first place. Thus, capitalism would have saved millions of lives. "You decided to make it a joke about socialism, you spit on the innocent's grave by attacking their political views instead of looking at the situation they found themselves in." I made the video to show the horrors inflicted on the innocent people in Leningrad who were caught in the middle of a socialist war. Is it "spitting on the graves" of victims to point out that those who caused their deaths?
    2
  11753.  @stefanb6539  "You are NOT curious about their individual motifs or aspirations," Socialists are not individuals. They don't believe in individuality. They believe in the collective. They cannot have individual mofits or aspirations. All that matters is what the group demands. "Oh, someone is wary about the extremes of capitalism?" You don't know what capitalism is. And I am wary about the extremes of capitalism. But the solution is not totalitarianism, which is collectivism and group murder. "Oh, someone wonders how gender roles influence the behavior between people? HITLER; HITLER; HITLER!!!!" So sexism is good is it? Is that what you're saying? And racism is good is it? I think not. Again, I think we should judge people not by cosmetics, but by how they act, how they think and how they behave. In other words, I think we should judge people by their individuality, not by their skin colour. And that's because I'm not an immoral racist or sexist or classist. "Socialism has a damned long history, from Robert Owen, Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier until today. How much of that have you actually shown curiosity for and researched?" So far I have researched Babeuf, Owen, Marx, Bukunin, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Pol Pot and many others in between. And I'm continuing to research and study. Interestingly, the more I study them the less I find their immoral ideology appealing. "YOU found the simple explanation, the shoe, that fits them all." As opposed to "everything that isn't Marxism is Fascism" lol. "All one group, all socialists, murderers, thiefs, HITLER!!!!" All socialists are murders and thieves. That's what the REVOLUTION is all about. "Meanwhile you smirk at people starving in Leningrad" No I didn't. I made that video with the purpose of showing how innocent people who are caught between two socialist regimes were treated. A rock and a hard place. I laughed at the fact that the Marxist Socialist government was so corrupt it kept itself fed, refused to allow the civilians to evacuate the city, and then let the workers starve, whilst claiming to be for the workers.
    2
  11754. "There are racist stereotypes, but not all stereotypes are racist." Yes they are. You're judging individuals by the colour of their skin rather than by their individual personalities. I don't judge people positively or negatively due to the colour of their skin - because I'm not a racist. Apparently you do, and that's because you believe in groups. This is why Mosley, Mussolini and many other Marxists ended up later becoming Fascists or racists and Nazis, because when you see people as groups (e.g. stereotypes) rather than as individuals, it starts you moving down a very dangerous path. "George Best was both an individual and a member of Manchester United, which is definitely an organized group." Yes, but he is an individual, not Manchester United. If another memeber of the Manchester United team commits a crime, George Best doesn't go to prison for it. The group is made up of individuals, rather than the group giving the individuals their traits. Individuals associate in groups, but they are not the group. The 'group' is not a being in itself. "No, they aren't all the same and evil" Oh? So you're saying it's ok to steal from and murder the bourgeoisie, or men, but it's not ok to murder and steal from the Jews? Do you not see the contradiction there? The latter is bad because that would be racism, but sexism and classism is perfectly fine is it? Murder and theft is wrong and immoral. Socialism advocates murder and theft as the basis for its ideology. It is therefore wrong and immoral.
    2
  11755. That might be the case for some, but not for me. I judge people by their individuality. Their skin colour, for example, is just a cosmetic feature, much like their haircut. I don't go around thinking all bald people are smart, and I don't think all people of the same ethnicity are the same, because I'm not racist. I also refuse to judge people by their sexuality, because I'm not a sexist.
    2
  11756. I use the historic definition of Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11757. And that's why I gave up learning German 😂
    2
  11758. Acrobat did aim to drive into Tunisia in conjunction with landings in Morocco and Algeria under Operation Gymnast which was set to occur at the same time but was postponed and then renamed Operation Torch.
    2
  11759. "How big was the impact of the Air and Sea supremacy over the Area?" Air power was quite limited over the land area at this time. This battle took place at winter, and there was plenty of bad weather and mud, which restricted air take-offs and flights. However, the sea and air impact on the supply situation was quite severe. The Royal Navy and Air Force, plus Malta, was what was limiting Axis supplies in North Africa. I've covered this partly in a recent video "MALTA's Impact on the North African Campaign WW2" https://youtu.be/8pS54t-a3Z4
    2
  11760. "are there any programs you use for the animations" Currently I use Photoshop and Premiere Pro, although I have recently purchased Vegas Pro and am wondering if that would be better (not tried it yet). "I would like to know where you bought the big green battle map in your backround in older videos?" I'm glad you think it's real ;) I actually took pictures of the maps in the history books and used what's known as the "green screen" technique. I place an unfoldable green sheet behind me, record the video, then remove the green in Premiere Pro (it's not the only program that does this) and then place a map on the layer below. The reason the map is green is because my lighting is poor and my room small, so the light reflects from the green to give me a halo of green in the video. Colouring in the map green prevents you from seeing this most of the time. If you check out this video, this guy pretty much explains the process https://youtu.be/0GQgATAGyyQ
    2
  11761. Hope you enjoy your drink and the video :)
    2
  11762. Pitt's 'Crucible of War' series is by far the best I've come across. Definitely recommend that 100%.
    2
  11763. Seriously, some of the pages have an exclamation mark in almost every other sentence.
    2
  11764. Yes! Is it working?
    2
  11765. Really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    2
  11766. Thanks Scipio! Some don't want it in the videos at all, so I'm glad to hear you like it
    2
  11767. Why would I talk about Allied crimes in an Eastern Front video? When I get to Allied crimes, I'll call them out on them, no problem.
    2
  11768. Somebody screamed "antidisestablishmentarianism" at him and he melted
    2
  11769. I don't like football, but I do like ale, so I may find a bit of time to relax at some point... Maybe after the next Stalingrad episode
    2
  11770. Communism is tyrannical. It's fundamental to the ideology.
    2
  11771. Haha you'll enjoy the pinned comment
    2
  11772. Ahh okay, that makes sense! Thank you! That does lead to one more question though. If the fruit grants them the knowledge of good and evil, then surely they wouldn't have known that going behind God's back and biting the fruit in the first place would be wrong? Surely they can only be blamed for the sins committed after gaining the knowledge of what sins are? It appears that they are being retroactively punished for a sin committed before they could consciously know that they're committing sins. Or am I misunderstanding something again?
    2
  11773. I did know what those terms were, I just thought they were both good and compatible. Socialism was state control, but I didn't want too much state control because I understood my history enough (and had read Orwell) to know that Communism was too far. So essentially I wanted a welfare state without the "capitalists" (the lords in government and the corporations ruling over us). The difference now is that I understand that socialism doesn't work and actually empowers the lords in government and the corporations, so now I'm for the free market, which hurts both of them. I'm also against the welfare state, seeing it as both unnecessary and the road to serfdom.
    2
  11774. Glad you enjoyed it! And welcome to my channel!
    2
  11775. I'm glad you enjoyed the video! I hope you'll be curious enough to read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. Cheers!
    2
  11776.  @AngryCrazyRussian  I laughed. Thanks for that!
    2
  11777. You have no idea what capitalism is. As an ex-socialist turned capitalist, I can tell you that you're unwittingly criticizing socialism, not capitalism. I would link to other videos of mine explaining this, but you're triggered, meaning that your eyes are closed. I cannot get you to drink at this time. Come back when you've calmed down
    2
  11778.  @espressodepresso8294  "And I just happen to think that in order to achieve more opportunities for the downtrodden and systemically disadvantaged, to minimize market failures and externalities, as well as corporate corruption, we do need socialistic policies and regulations in a stable democratic state." But is this really the case? Have you read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt? If not, be curious.
    2
  11779. Of course, because everyone is biased. Bias is baked into the cake https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  11780. "Why should we allow 8 people to own more than 3.8 billion people?" We don't, that's why we're against socialism. - "Why should we allow 22 thousand children to die due to poverty every single day?" We don't, that's why we're against socialism. Capitalism has brought billions of people out of poverty for the first time in human history. The 1700s were worse than the 1800s for a reason. Socialism (statism) is trying to put is back into the dark ages, and capitalists are standing up against it. - "Capitalist ideology only works for the very top percentage of people, while the vast majority of humanity is forsaken to work earning less that 8 dollars a day?" No, socialism is doing this. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT CAPITALISM AND SOCIALISM ARE https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y YOU HAVE BEEN MISGUIDED.
    2
  11781. You need to bite the bullet and read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt or "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. The reason you're conflated is because you know your old beliefs aren't right but you assume things about the non-believers that aren't true. If it helps, remember that the National Socialists are Third Positionists - they're not Right Wing. I don't agree with a single policy that the Fascists or Nazis have.
    2
  11782. This is why I won't debate them in a live stream or similar setting. Like I did with the "Getting Owned over Hitler's Socialism" video, I'll take my time to think about what I want to say before saying it. I won't show too much emotion, maybe only strategically, and I'll respond with facts and evidence. The goal has been not to get through to those I'm debating, but to convince those who are on the sidelines that the Leftist narrative doesn't work. But that still leaves the problem of the more stubborn Leftists who point blank refuse to even consider the possibility that they might be wrong. As you said, it's impossible to get through to them. And debating them just gives them opportunities to use "whataboutisms" and "gotcha" arguments. There's no real debate with them, and it quickly devolves into an emotional argument. I've considered using some other tactics, but I've realized that you can't use reason to overcome emotions. It's a real conundrum.
    2
  11783. "I see, anyone you don’t like is a socialist" No, socialists are socialists. - "And you will meet very racist right wingers who are in no way socialists." If you're talking about Nazis, they are Left-wingers, even if they don't realize it https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 If you're referring to another group, e.g. some Republicans, as I said, they're not Right-wingers. Conservatism is the old Left-wing from the 1800s. It has now evolved to be the "far right", but in reality it is still Left-wing. Few know what the Right actually is any more.
    2
  11784. Which "extreme" ideas are you referring to exactly?
    2
  11785. We live in a capitalist system, right? Right? https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA (I know the title of the video seems a bit random given what we're discussing, but it is the right video. Follow that up with this one https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y )
    2
  11786. I have, but it didn't really help.
    2
  11787. Thank you for your comment. I've just subscribed and will watch some of your content tomorrow 👍
    2
  11788. No, you've misunderstood. I was arguing what their world view is, not my own. I know Fascism is different to National Socialism, and that the latter was the only one that's racist, I made a video on that very fact https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Fascism isn't the end stage of capitalism, but that's what they believe. EDIT: I think there's a language issue here. Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough in the video that I was arguing what they think and was being a little sarcastic when I was saying that stuff.
    2
  11789. I think you've misheard me. I'm not on the Left. I was an ex-socialist, but now I'm a capitalist who follows the Austrian School of Economics. So you have unsubscribed because you weren't paying attention to what I actually said.
    2
  11790. It's an easy choice, and I look forward to my forced retirement from YouTube
    2
  11791. The Socialist government created inflation. Inflation robbed the people of their wealth. https://youtu.be/pK_CgcHrgNA https://youtu.be/1cXFdcgltyc
    2
  11792. I don't disagree. I've come to the same conclusion. This is, in fact, one of the disagreements I have with some of the Austrian School economists - they assume that people use logic, but many people don't. The mantra is feels before reals...
    2
  11793. I'm guessing you shared it on Reddit? They all hate me over there.
    2
  11794. Just to clarify, I abandoned it two weeks before the original "National Socialism was Socialism" video https://youtu.be/dlXqFgqOviw not the 5 hour video. The 5 hour video came 18 months later after a ton more research.
    2
  11795. Awesome! Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it
    2
  11796. Oh wow, that's good news! I'm glad to hear it! I often wonder how many are actually listening and thinking, as I get the impression it's not that many. What was it exactly that helped you realise the error?
    2
  11797. Yes, you are right. The 242 is the Panzer III. Sorry about that
    2
  11798. Thank you, that's great feedback! And yes, the maps help a lot, which is why I think people struggle to fully comprehend the battles in the history books as there are never enough maps. I obviously have a lot of books, but I think there's a future for history in video format. I just wish more historians realised this.
    2
  11799. Wow thanks! Sorry for keeping you up so late 😂
    2
  11800. I also plan to do a unit size and nato symbol guide as that's actually a Patreon question
    2
  11801. The km/mile measurements are in the bottom left-hand corner next to the date.
    2
  11802. I'm grateful, especially because I was worried people would think this wasn't worth waiting for. But it looks like people want to wait for quality rather. So thank you for your support!
    2
  11803. I also saw that video. However, while they may or may not have called it that at the time, they did adopt the name at some point. There's a quote I gave in the video from a Major Shan Hackett. Well, prior to the point I quote in the video, he says this: "I was then commanding 'C' Squadron of the 8th Hussars, in Honeys, working with the 11th Hussars, the KDGs and the South African Armoured Car boys - all very good regiments." - Major Shan Hackett, commanding ‘C’ Squadron, 8th Hussars, quoted from Neillands, “Desert Rats,” p108.
    2
  11804. The 2 Pounders weren't issued with HE ammunition, but as far as I'm aware the 6 Pounders were issued with HE ammunition (at least later). You're the second person to say that they weren't issued with HE ammunition, so I'm curious to know where you read this?
    2
  11805. Thank you, I'm sorry for your loss too. I use Premiere Pro for editing most of the video, and Blender for the map animations
    2
  11806. "Coming back strong with a light bit of economic theory on boom/bust cycles i see." I was very tempted to do a video warning other YouTubers not to expand during the lockdowns, but I get laughed at every time I talk about economics, so kept quiet. I feel bad about what's happened to those channels who are now suffering, but it's one of those situations where you get told you're wrong so many times that you just think "well, they won't listen anyway". So you just do what you think's right and come out on top because of it. Still feel guilty though.
    2
  11807. "It's not just you now if you fuck up. You have others to think about that depend on you." That's the scary bit. - "It's good for the soul." I don't know about that. It's definitely a worry. - "I don't get the "three week" training time. I think you'll find that's not necessary." She's picked up the normal video editing stuff quick. The problem isn't that, it's the Blender stuff. The animation process is complicated, and the accuracy I need her to achieve for the Battlestorm videos isn't easy at all to teach. Terri (the one who does my thumbnails) took one look at it and said no way. She thought it would have been quicker for me to do the animations than to tell her what I needed her to do. That's not true, but that was her impression.
    2
  11808. I do have a BitChute, but unfortunately it won't let me upload any more videos so it's stuck where it is. Saying that, I'm reluctant to split my audience up between multiple platforms
    2
  11809. I hope so! Right now it's all work and no play, which isn't great. I think this has the potential to give me a bit of down time (which will refresh me) and allow me to increase the quality and/or frequency of the videos. Cheers!
    2
  11810. Make every day count with her, and I wish you both the best of luck
    2
  11811. It's cheaper if you build it yourself because you're not paying someone else to do it, and I enjoy constructing them. Plus, I've not been able to mentally concentrate on the work this past couple weeks, so this was a productive distraction.
    2
  11812. Views declined last October and November as the lockdowns ended. This was before the Ukraine situation re-escalated.
    2
  11813. Why are you sorry? I'm the one who's sorry!
    2
  11814. "Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit." So, which private business owned the concentration camps, the death camps, and the gas chambers at Auschwitz? "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." Exactly, the German Aryan (the social-bit) owned the means of production. "The German people wanted blood to make up for the years of humiliation, the German business elite wanted to end socialism, thus a compromise, a fair deal was struck: The German elite made the German people feel worthy and the German people went out and tried destroying the Soviet Union." No, they wanted to end Marxist-socialism not all socialism.
    2
  11815. *the bit about Churchill being an idiot that is.
    2
  11816. "Britain today? NHS. The British Government currently tampers with the market by directly providing healthcare instead of relying on private corporations to do it. Britain is, therefore, a Socialist state. Does this not fit the working definition of socialism as you present it?" Yeah, Britain in a socialist state. And I should know because I live here. And yet, despite being a socialist state, it also has capitalist elements in here too. I know, it's unbelievable! A magical place where both the NHS (public ownership of the means of production) and businesses (private ownership of the means of production) can live side-by-side. Where social-welfare policies can co-exist with wage labour. We have a capitalist Conservative Party which is all about dismantling the welfare state, and a socialist Labour Party which is about reinforcing the socialist state. To say that the Labour Party isn't socialist, is moronic. To say that the Conservative Party isn't capitalist, is moronic. To say that Britain doesn't have socialist policies within a capitalist system is equally moronic. It's almost like there isn't a switch between socialism and capitalism - turn on the socialist-switch, turn off the socialist switch. No, it's a dial. Turn up the dial, and you get more socialism. So, if someone says Britain is capitalist - I'll agree with that. And if they say Britain is socialist - I'll agree with that as well (moreso if you're talking about Britain from the 40's to the 80's). Now, returning to the National Socialists in Germany, you can have socialists and capitalists working together. Britain shows that is possible, and so does 1930's and 1940's Germany. But to deny that the National Socialists weren't socialists because there were businessmen in Germany is moronic, just like denying that the Labour Party is socialist because Britain has businessmen.
    2
  11817. "I think we already answered that. It wasnt any individual business, it was the nazi government that worked in the interest of several private businesses." Really? So, it was in the interests of several private businesses to mass-exterminate a portion of the population during wartime when they're all suffering from a critical labour shortage? "what is not related to any definitions is your absurd claim that Hitler took marxist concepts" Hitler read Das Capital. He says so in Meim Kampf (page 198). From this, he becomes anti-capitalist and is against globalization - which is why he believed in Autarky and wanted to conquer the East (to get resources so that they don't need to trade any more). "or that NS was a branch of marxism" Branch of the same tree, but not are not branches from one another. "that is based on a historical mistake that i pointed out many, many times, and you keep ignoring it on purpose." I'm not ignoring it - I've just explained it to you again. You're ignoring me over and over, and then claiming that I am. "if this was the case then we would have to say that we dont live in capitalism anymore for more than a century at this moment" I can't speak for other countries, but Britain has recently fought back against socialism, and is currently trying to dismantle the NHS (which is a shame, because that was a good socialist policy). As I've said many times, the capitalist to socialist dial can be turned up or down. Some small amounts of socialism (socialist policies) are still socialism. To deny that the public has the shared means of production in certain areas is just not possible, and yet you do. "But this is where we have ultimate disagreement on definitions, which unfortunately cannot be resolved." My definition hasn't changed, and is the same as yours. The issue is, you're driven by ideology to deny certain forms of socialism as being 'not-real socialism'. This is the postmodernist-way of doing things. Why? Because in order to defend socialism, you cannot use evidence (since that will just prove that Marxist-socialism hasn't worked) and thus you then rely on ideology (belief) over fact. So you can change the goal-posts all you like, but the fact of the matter is, historically, National Socialism is a form of socialism as definied by (even by) wikipedia. As I said - "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." In National Socialist thinking, Aryans (the social-bit) seized the means of production from the Jews, and now owned the economy (social ownership), then self-managed the means of production. By doing so, they had to rid the Jews from society - so, their removal of the Jews from society is evidence of their socialism.
    2
  11818. Don't worry, it'll be up again on Friday, but better this time :)
    2
  11819. I actually want to cover them at some point - the whole Alan Turing thing etc. But I honestly haven't looked into it so I don't have any information about it at the moment unfortunately. Sorry
    2
  11820. I mentioned the 76mm guns, but I'm not sure if it was refering to that one specifically. It wasn't about the individual guns, but the numbers and the formations etc
    2
  11821. How dare you play the enhanced edition of World of Tanks! Shame on you! ;)
    2
  11822. NoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOo...!
    2
  11823. I forgot. What's my pun-ishment?
    2
  11824. Thanks Jackson! I just wish I'd realised before releasing the video, but oh well
    2
  11825. Thanks! I value honesty so I'm glad you think so :)
    2
  11826. Hallo
    2
  11827. That's good to know :) it will be longer this time because I'll be talking about the ammunition as well (may as well talk about it since I messed that bit up!)
    2
  11828. "you completely deny that the State IS a tool of the Capitalist system for the interest of the Capitalist Class and their respective corporations." So what's a socialist state for then?
    2
  11829. "Have you still not studied the atrocities in Congo Free State?" Oh, here we go again with the Congo atrocities. So, what you're saying is that the Belgians wanted to remove every single last Congoease (don't know the term people from the Congo, so I'm guessing at the name) from society in order to Aryanize the people? No. They did it for profit. Plus a large portion of them died from disease, rather than systematic killings, because systematic killings is not something that's profitable. "The Holocaust made a profit for the perpetrators" So that was the reason they did it then? Ok then, so why then hasn't the USA (the biggest capitalist country on the planet at the moment) not done the same? If it's so profitable to mass-murder people, why hasn't it been marketed elsewhere? And, fogive me, but which business owned the Holocaust again? If this was capitalism, surely a business would have run the thing - because private ownership is the definition of capitalism?
    2
  11830. Again - wikipedia - "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." In National Socialist thinking, Aryans (the social-bit) seized the means of production from the Jews, and now owned the economy (social ownership), then self-managed the means of production.
    2
  11831. So Sokami, you're saying that IBM was entirely responsible for the death camps? Or the Opel Corporation? Come on, which one owned and marketed the death camps? And how did supply and demand and free market capitalism result in the death camps?
    2
  11832. I don't know about other YouTubers, but I'm all about discovering the truth. So, if I make a mistake, I have no problem admitting it. Obviously, if it was a minor error (context is key), I probably would have just made a note in the pinned comment. But a major mistake like this deserves an apology, because the last thing I want is people coming away with the wrong statistics or conclusions (in this case, luckily, just the statistics).
    2
  11833. Thanks Edward!
    2
  11834. They replaced them with "Cards", which are those things that pop up in the corner of videos. Cards are (apparently) better somehow. Old videos will still display annotations, but new videos cannot have them. And if you remove them from old videos, you can't get them back.
    2
  11835. Fair enough, thank you. Now, I do know what class and a classless society is. But the solution to the problem of class changes depending if you are a Marxist or a National Socialist. For a Marxist, the workers would socially own the means of production and end the class struggle (because they'd be the only class left, and thus not be a class). For the National Socialists, they thought that the Jews were instigating the class struggle. So if they removed the Jews from society, they would end the class struggle. Yes, you'd have business owners and labourers, but there would be no divisions between them because they would be of the same race and everyone would be looking after each other for the good of the social-community. And that's not taking into account that the state would intervene in businesses to ensure that everyone was working for the community. And this is my point. It is still socialism. It's not Marxist Socialism, but it is still socialism. It's absolutely not capitalism.
    2
  11836. "There is no other way you can believe NS was truly classless, apart from being a convinced nazi yourself." I'm not a National Socialist. Please retract this false statement.
    2
  11837. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different. - "You completely ignored my point. May I interpret that as you agreeing to the fact that "since all apples are fruits, all fruits must be apples?" Thank for clarifying that up, you're logical thinking is completely screwed up." and "Just as my ideology and belief is preventing me from seeing a potato as an apple. My narrowminded fundamentalism prevents me from seeing the truth: that a potato is really just an apple. Hell, in Dutch a potato is called an "aardappel", which translated would deliver 'earth-apple'. Clearly, a potato is really just another sort of apple, just not a tree-apple." They're both food though, aren't they? They're not the same, but they're similar in the fact that they're both edible - and that's what I'm saying. National Socialism and Marxist socialism are not the same, but they are both socialisms. "I refuse to see NS as socialism, really because no one does. I refuse to see NS as leftwing, really because no one does." So, you admit that you're refusing to even consider it. And this is the problem because you're not the only one. The Earth is flat and you're refusing to even consider the reality. "It would topple al other political thinking. I would need to redefine myself calling leftwing. I would need to redefine myself calling a socialist, even though everyone else I meet in person gets the right understanding. I would need to explain to them all that everything they were thinking up till now was wrong. Their definitions would need to be redefined as well." When I realised my mistake, I had to reevaluate everything too. But, I promise you, once you do it, you won't regret it. "There is a reason why people try to use more or less the same definition. It is the prime advantage of using the DSM in psychology. Before the DSM, all therapists and psychiatrists were talking beside each other, using different definitions. " Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. "Now you are equating state intervention with social ownership of the MOP." and "State ownership does not necessarily mean worker's control of the MOP." Yes I am, because that is a by-product of it. That's why every single socialist state required heavy state intervention. In order to prevent people from owning private property (this is my pen and you can't have it) you need to have a state that goes in and prevents that from happening. Equally, this is why the state had to remove the Jews from German society because capitalism doesn't do that naturally. This is actually opposite to what "Marx said". Marx was arguing that socialism would be a classless and stateless society. But in order to have an artificial classless society where nobody owns anything, you need to have a massive state bureaucracy to enforce it. This is the paradox of Marxist socialism. The irony being that National Socialism 'solved' this problem - although not entirely because they only did that by conquering other countries. "Bureaucratic control of the MOP is not the same as collective control." You have 5 farms with 5 families. How do you then turn that into 1 farm with 5 families? State intervention. Then how do you prevent those 5 families from deciding to split their 1 big farm into 5 separate farms? State intervention. Therefore you need a bureaucracy to administer this, which is why socialist states had large bureaucracies, secret police and armies, all to enforce collective ownership. "Socialism in the marxist sense specifically calls for worker's control, bureaucracies do not provide that." If one worker has a side racket, saves very hard, and buys the factory and then employs workers - who's going to step in to stop that? "In history, a common mistake scientist warn about is transposing our own reality on historical frameworks." History is not a science. It has scientific method in it, but it also has 'artistic' theory in there too. That's why I have a Bachelor of Arts Degree in History, not a Science Degree in History. As Evans points out in his book "In Defence of History", History is actually a 'craft'. Therefore, there is no law in preventing us seeing history from our point of view. In fact, we cannot help but do that, because we are not 100% objective. For example, if I proposed that everybody in today's society should have free bread (subsidised by the state), that would be counter to the capitalist way of doing things. Therefore this is a socialist policy. Interestingly, Ancient Rome gave free bread to the citizens of Rome (the city). This only stopped once North Africa was lost. Now, you tell me, would you class this policy as capitalist or socialist? And the Roman Republic had private armies that fought for the state (private ownership - capitalist). Only later were armies owned by the state (public ownership - socialist). And if you go back even further, Marx said himself that tribes were naturally socialist. Whether you believe that or not is up to your interpretation, but clearly it was alright for Marx to go back and "transpose" his reality on history. "You know what I just said about transposing our own reality onto the past? That is is a big major historical error?" Shame on Marx then. "All major WW1 belligerents curbed the free market and performed state intervention. Their war economies required this - the free market could not sufficiently provide. So according to you, WW1 was a war between socialist nations?" I would say they have socialist policies, yes. I wouldn't class them as socialist nations though - that came later with heavier state intervention, such as Britain after WW2.
    2
  11838. "You are inverting everything. All socialist states use heavy state intervention in the economy, so all forms of state intervention in the economy must be socialism." So, what you're saying is my definition of what socialism is fits perfectly. Thanks for validating that. "That's were we disagree. I can agree to the fact that Hitler and the Nazi's might have believed themselves to be socialists. I disagree to the fact they actually were. They were mistaken." So, what you're saying is, they were socialists because the facts say they were, but you don't want to believe that they were socialists, and that's because your ideology and belief is preventing you from seeing them as socialist. "They aren't to most current-day fascists and national-socialists, who absolutely despise socialism." They despise communism/Marxism. But they do, in fact, have socialist policies. America has a centralized-state-controlled postal service. 'Socialist' Britain has a privately owned Post Office. Socialist policies exist within the capitalist system, and denying that is wrong. Again, it's about the amount of socialist policies that makes a state socialist or not. Like a dial which you turn up. The more to the left you go (and the more socialist policies you have), the more socialist you become. "The only way to be socialist is according to the state intervention theory, to which I disagree." Which is the definition of socialism - the social ownership of the means of production. State ownership is social ownership. That's why it's called the 'public sector'. "That theory would make Qing China, all major European World War 1 belligerents and the Palace Economy of ancient Crete all socialist." It depends how many socialist policies they have. Some have said that Sparta was similar to National Socialism. I don't know about that, but perhaps it's true. "The last definition would be to call them socialists simply because they considered themselves to be socialists. That alone does not constitute enough basis to validate a definition." So you're saying Marxists are not socialist either just because they claim to be? Then by your own logic, we could say that National Socialism was the correct version of socialism and Marxist-socialists aren't socialists _just because they called themselves socialists_. "They weren't socialist in the view that communists were working class activists" That's Marxist-socialism, not socialism as a whole. "Do you know of any other definition of socialism that I may have missed?" Social ownership of the means of production. "That's why I made my earlier remarks about you agreeing with Hitler about what was socialism, but disagreeing with current-day Americans on what is socialism about. Hitler was right, the Americans are wrong!" Perhaps the average American has been led to believe that socialism isn't the social (public) ownership of the means of production? "It confirmed my view that you hold some opinion of what is 'true socialism' and besides that there exist a bunch of definitions that are beside the essence." Social (public) ownership of the means of production.
    2
  11839. "This is why I argue that Nazi Germany had a very complex mixed economy coordinated by a dictatorial regime with a heavt socialist element, in other words in a Nazi form." I agree Strategic Culture, but what you need to remember is that the limited capitalism in National Socialist Germany was German capitalism. It wasn't Jewish capitalism or foreign capitalism - but German capitalism. And limited German capitalism could exist within its socialism. Why? Because Germans were Aryans, and the Aryans had seized the means of production. So long as they were German, they could own private property and businesses (although, even then the state intervened). “We, National Socialists, would reverse this formula and would adopt the following axiom: A strong national Reich which recognizes and protects to the largest possible measure the rights of its citizens both within and outside its frontiers can allow freedom to reign at home without trembling for the safety of the State. On the other hand, a strong national Government can intervene to a considerable degree in the liberties of the individual subject as well as in the liberties of the constituent states without thereby weakening the ideal of the Reich;” Mein Kampf P510-511 By Hitler's logic, a German can have property etc, but ultimately the state could take that away from them.
    2
  11840. You'r probably right. But I have no problem admitting mine :) cheers!
    2
  11841. You know, while I have heard of the meme, I don't really know much about it. Can you actually conquer the world in HOI4 with artillery-only divisions?
    2
  11842. So you're saying that IBM was entirely responsible for the death camps? Or the Opel Corporation? Come on, which one owned and marketed the death camps? And how did supply and demand and free market capitalism result in the death camps? I like the fact you're avoiding my question.
    2
  11843. SORRY!
    2
  11844. I haven't heard of them! Do they differ from what I said in the video?
    2
  11845. To be honest, when I started looking into the North African Campaign, I always viewed it as a side-show. The only reason I got into it was because I want to eventually look at Montgomery and decide just how good or bad a general he is. To do that, I knew I would have to compare him to the generals that came before him. In order to do that, I'd have to study the battles they took part in - the North African Campaign. So this series is a massive build-up towards the Italian Campaign, D-Day, and eventually Market Garden (where I started). But, having done Operation Compass, I realised just how interesting this campaign actually was. Before that video, I honestly didn't have much interest in the campaign. Now I do. And I hope you will too.
    2
  11846. That's good to hear! Thank you :)
    2
  11847. Thank! Yeah, I'm not sure why I said Marder 1s, it was Panzerjäger 1s. I just wish the sources I had specified what equipment they actually had.
    2
  11848. Hope you enjoy it (despite the technical glitch)
    2
  11849. Thanks! And yes, that's the only reason I appear in the videos - there would be large spaces where nothing's happening!
    2
  11850. Glad you think so! I don't understand it, but it gets worse as the video goes on. And I didn't touch the camara settings!
    2
  11851. More will be coming. I'm knee deep in the chaos that is this battle right now, as research is done and I'm wading through the script. I've never seen a battle like it. It's a swirling maelstrom of awesomeness! But damn confusing.
    2
  11852. I'm actually planning on doing a video which explains it, as well as why oil and trade shaped the modern world and why WW2 began. I've started it but it's turned into a massive monster of a video which I've had to shelve for the moment while I work on Operation Crusader. So won't be out for a while yet sadly.
    2
  11853. :( you weren't first :(
    2
  11854. Just to clarify, this coming Monday's video - in two days time.
    2
  11855. According to one source, it was due to the Tobruk siege. However, I actually talk about this in Monday's video (the video isn't specifically about this, but I do mention it). I think, if you watch this Monday's video, you'll get a much better understanding as to why he asked for more infantry than I could possibly explain here in the comments.
    2
  11856. Glad to hear you're looking forward to Mondays :) sadly, this video suffers from one big technical issue from about 9 mins in...
    2
  11857. Gary Thomas ok, let me do some quick maths for you. (X + 6) x 121.5 = ? (that's a big clue btw)
    2
  11858. Exactly!
    2
  11859. Tell me you didn't watch the video, without telling me you didn't watch the video 🙄
    2
  11860. Glad you liked it!
    2
  11861. Just wait until I do my follow up video on why National Socialism absolutely WAS Socialism even if Marxists-Holocaust-deniers won't accept it. You think this was a takedown, you ain't see anthing yet.
    2
  11862. Sorry to say, but you were second :(
    2
  11863. *Brigadier
    2
  11864. Merry Christmas meanstarfish!
    2
  11865. You'll see me next Monday (last day of 2019)! But I know what you mean :) Merry Christmas to you too Benjamin
    2
  11866. Honesty is vital. There's nothing wrong in saying "I don't know" and then saying "this may have happened". I admire authors who admit that they don't know for certain if a certain thing happened but decide to include it anyway just so you know that it could have happened, but maybe didn't And yes, the internet's helping a hell of a lot. If only I wasn't exhausted with work lol
    2
  11867. And a Russian speaker too. I'm tempted to start learning another language
    2
  11868. That's good to know. It's a nice book
    2
  11869. State Capitalism is an oxymoronic term https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11870. If lots of people want houses, this increases demand. This then causes house prices go up as people are willing to pay more for something they want. This in turn (if unhindered by regulations) causes profits to be made, which then signal to the house builders to increase production of houses to fulfill the demand. Thus, consumer spending is actually both consumption and investment. But how does the government know what you want? It takes your money off you, then decides what to spend it on - e.g. stuff you don't want, like arsenals, railroads, ports etc. If you wanted any of those things, then that would have caused prices to go up for those things, causing people to build those things. The fact that those things don't already exist is proof that the consumer doesn't want them, and is an indication that they shouldn't be wasting resources on such things. Thus, all government spending is the consumption of resources stolen from the consumer.
    2
  11871. Not in the near future, no. But I will do something on it at some point. I also want to cover the Battle of Crete, but feel like I can only really do that after covering the full Balkan Campaign
    2
  11872. Actually, there's a Patron question asking about politics, which I'll be covering soon. I'll tell you what, I'll answer your question properly in that video as well, because it's related to what was asked, and I want my answer to your question to be heard by more people who watch this channel
    2
  11873. "'Everything it builds is consumption rather than production'. So I guess in the great capitalist West, people just sat on the shit they built instead of consuming it? Really TIK?" 1. no need to swear. 2. As I replied to someone else - If lots of people want houses, this increases demand. This then causes house prices go up as people are willing to pay more for something they want. This in turn (if unhindered by regulations) causes profits to be made, which then signal to the house builders to increase production of houses to fulfill the demand. Thus, consumer spending is actually both consumption and investment. But how does the government know what you want? It takes your money off you, then decides what to spend it on - e.g. stuff you don't want, like arsenals, railroads, ports etc. If you wanted any of those things, then that would have caused prices to go up for those things, causing people to build those things. The fact that those things don't already exist is proof that the consumer doesn't want them, and is an indication that they shouldn't be wasting resources on such things. Thus, all government spending is the consumption of resources stolen from the consumer.
    2
  11874. "Wait, so capitalists nations don't regulate farm goods pricing and build 'roads to nowhere'? Not sure that's reality." Capitalism is the private control of the means of production. "Private" means "individual". A state is not an individual, it is a collective. When the collective controls the means of production through regulation, taxation and inflation, we call this Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11875. Socialism enriches the few and impoverishes the many by stealing from the producers (the workers) and giving to the rich (cronies of the State and their corporations) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  11876. "The point here was not that the Bolshevik regime or the USSR as it became had a relationship with big capital but the particular elements of global capital they did." By 'big capital' and 'global capital' you're referring to central banks and corporations, both of which are 'public sector' (socialist) entities. These require the theft of wealth from the private (capitalist) sector to survive long-term. "you appear to be commenting theoretical Austrian spergery instead of dealing in specifics. Cheers." I Am stating the specifics. Public sector corporations and central banks (hint: the term 'central') are not "capitalist" (private) organizations (in the sense of the 'private sector' economy). That's why Marx called for central banks in the Communist Manifesto. For more information, my Public vs Private video explains the specific histories and evolution of the terms socialism and capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "You should read Sutton's works and then comment" You need to watch my Public vs Private video and understand the terms you're using.
    2
  11877. Haha thanks Braden!
    2
  11878. You are right, and I was tempted, but it wasn't used in that role from what I can tell.
    2
  11879. Glad you liked it :) can't wait to actually get into the battle bit now
    2
  11880. The British weren't that bad! (Disclaimer: the Italians weren't as bad as the Germans made them out to be, and really it was Mussolini's fault for going to war without being prepared in any way shape or form)
    2
  11881. That's what I thought!
    2
  11882. Exactly. You'd think someone would learn something after the first or second failed attempt. "Ok lads, what did we do wrong?" "Nothing! Let's do it again!"
    2
  11883. And stay as far away from the tanks as possible, apparently...
    2
  11884. Battlestorm has and always will be about details and accuracy. It's not about the 'punch', as many of my other videos are. This is about the details. In fact, people have been craving this type of video for ages, including myself and I've put it off for too long. Dull or not, it will remain as it is - filthy detailed and super accurate.
    2
  11885. You know, I didn't register that until now, but yes he did
    2
  11886. Ah ok, that's interesting. You like playing as the underdog?
    2
  11887. As which nation are you playing as?
    2
  11888. And thanks Paul, I wish I could make these quicker, but I genuinely can't edit much faster than I'm going now.
    2
  11889. Yes, I will be covering it in future videos, and will be mentioning it in the Stalingrad video for the reasons you listed :) I also find it difficult to balance between the operational size of warfare, and the human side. I'm going to try my best from now on to have both human stories in my documentaries to try personalize units and battles etc.
    2
  11890. Vargsohn, you know I never played the orginal Panzer Generals. I played the demo to People's General, and then more recently Panzer Corps.
    2
  11891. Which is why I think video is the way forward to changing that perception. Maybe I'm not the most entertaining person ever, but I want to make academic history available and interesting to everyone. I'm a long way off that reality, but it's good to have ambitions.
    2
  11892. I played the original Call of Duty. Used to love the Pavlov's House map, which I just found fascinating in both single player and multiplayer. Something about trying to hold out against overwhelming odds while defending a desperate position is exciting! Guess that typifies the Battle of Stalingrad though :) Have you got an answer to your own question? I'll ask you another difficult one - is war a necessary evil?
    2
  11893. I spent many an hour reorganizing the order of battle for HOI3 :) good luck with your military career. Definitely keep your interest in and study history, especially from as unbiased a perspective as possible. It'll certainly give you an edge :)
    2
  11894. Nice to hear you work in a museum! Might one-day come for a job ;) I once wrote an essay on Greek independence a long time ago. Don't remember much about it to be honest, but I've been to Greece twice (Kephalonia and Kalymnos) and it's a lovely country with a deep history. In fact, I've been tempted to make a video about one of the islands of Greece during WW2, but don't yet have enough information. What sorts of things do you collect?? And I don't mind long comments! I don't always reply to everything, but I do read them!
    2
  11895. I agree, Toby :) you can't learn unless you learn from your own or other's experience. History is a door to the lessons of multiple lives who endured multiple setbacks and victories. To not learn from them is to risk repeating those same mistakes
    2
  11896. Absolutely! And if you specialize on one subject/topic/battle/event, you will discover a lot of interesting new things very quickly
    2
  11897. It's the NATO symbol for the size of the unit. Four X means Army Group. Three is Army. Two is division. One is brigade. But there's other NATO symbols as well. I'm actually using a variation of NATO symbols that's called "niehorster" http://www.niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html
    2
  11898. Yeah, I get that. I don't think the education system (especially in the UK, and especially history) is adequate. Which country are you from?
    2
  11899. Thank you for subscribing Nikolai! And I agree, I do need to learn Russian. I'm going to learn German first, just because that's similar to English and I've not learnt another language before, plus I've already started it. Then I'm going to learn Russian. Quite an ambitious undertaking, but I'm eager to do it. I've seen the Soviet Storm series a while back. It's quite good, but still not in-depth enough for my tastes :)
    2
  11900. See, I wasn't as a kid, which is why I started this channel - I wanted to get better at it. Think I got pretty good, since a lot of people were saying I was. Probably ended up better than average at least.
    2
  11901. Oh don't get me started on the YouTube arguments! Interesting stuff though, didn't expect anyone to say they're a physicist. If you like chess and strategy games, have you ever looked at the game Go? If you want variables, this is the game for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)
    2
  11902. That's definitely a part of it! I agree :)
    2
  11903. Clearly it's because they're ghost UFOs
    2
  11904. Glad you enjoy them! Dispelling myths and generally presenting the information in a more accessible way is definitely another reason I'm doing this. History will fade, which is why it would be nice to get more people into it, so it has less chance of fading over time.
    2
  11905. Kirchubel's Atlas of the Eastern Front. It's quite good, but they're more like snapshots of parts of the battles rather than full explanations of battles, but still good.
    2
  11906. Not sure if you've seen them, but I'd recommend David Stahel's books on Typhoon and Moscow 👍
    2
  11907. Except the Germans referred to it as the Western and Eastern Fronts, and that's why we call it that. The Soviets called it the Western Front, for example. To use your own example, it would be like calling the Eastern Coast of the USA the Western Coast of the USA because it's West of Berlin.
    2
  11908. Because you're so used to saying "The Eastern Front" which is wrong, unless you're a German from WW2.
    2
  11909. That's it, and that's why I recommend it :) cheers!
    2
  11910. Actual logistics (currently it's not a factor), a far better order of battle system (similar but more streamlined version of HoI3) and more resources/an actual economy (Britain was bankrupt in 1941 for example).
    2
  11911. Absolutely not. I will tell you Stalin's and the Soviet's Regime's rationalization of it, and help you understand their logic, but I will never say mass murder or starvation is correct.
    2
  11912. :)
    2
  11913. Part of the reason for the short length of this video is because I'm working on a massive Battlestorm video (Operation Crusader) which will be around 7 hours long by my current estimate. So, while this may not be 'content', it is useful for new people on the subject, and it allows me time to work on Crusader.
    2
  11914. Great! I hope you enjoy them! In terms of the memoirs, that's what I was saying - you need to have a clear grasp of the events before you go anywhere near them because they will manipulate your perception of the events. Therefore, anyone coming new to the topic should avoid them.
    2
  11915. Yep ;)
    2
  11916. Awesome! If you like Stalingrad by Beevor, be sure to (at some point, maybe after these three) pick up Glantz's Stalingrad (just get the one-volume version, the 5-book 4-part 'trilogy' isn't necessary unless you're insane like me). It's an entirely different book compared to Beevor's book, but the detail is fantastic.
    2
  11917. Glad to hear you're happy about it :) sadly, no myth debunking this week (unless you're willing to read the three books I recommend, in which case you'll find them)
    2
  11918. Also, while attendion spans are short now, there are some who have been fighting back against the problem for quite a while.
    2
  11919. Plus, if you knock out the electricity, a good deal of information will simply vanish.
    2
  11920. I know :) I must have spent half of last week on Crusader at least. The script is coming along nicely. Should be around 7 hours long. Maybe less if I can cut bits
    2
  11921. @James Callen - it's because Soviet Tank Corps were division-tier units, not corps-tier units, even though they were called "corps". They are the same tier as Soviet Rifle Divisions at this stage of the war. To add to the confusion, there were Soviet Tank Divisions earlier in the war, and tank corps which were actual corps-tier, but not at the Battle of Stalingrad. For more information about this, it's probably best to read "Colossus Reborn" by David Glantz.
    2
  11922. That was deliberate. You berth a boat after all 😉
    2
  11923. "Chuikov presented these reports to Stalin, and would have no doubt been adjusted to be more favorable than in reality. 1,000 without arms vs 2,000 without arms. Which was more likely to be reported to Stalin?" I think you've misunderstood. Chuikov reported that there was a shortage of 1,000 rifles. Rodimtsev confirms this, as does other reports. It was Craig (the historian who wrote "Enemy at the Gates") who said it was 2,000. I've not seen another report say it was 2,000 except Craig. And since Craig wrote his book years after Stalin was dead, I doubt Stalin got to read it. - "Fair enough on German troops numbers, but I'm distressed slightly, that you failed to mention most of the German units being under strength, while mentioning Russian units being under strength." I told you what they were two episodes ago, and have been stating the casualties since then when they are available. It shouldn't be "distressing" for you, unless you think that I've favouring the Soviet 'side' over the German side'. I can reassure you that I'm not. I'm not taking sides, just trying to be balanced and get it right rather than make stuff up or spout the old myths of the battle. - "8 and 9 being more or less the same, these numbers were reported to Stain, and those reporting it would have likely under counted unpatriotic incidents, then accurately reporting it to Stalin." Why would they under-count? Stalin would want to know so he could take action. It doesn't make any sense that they would under-count. If anything, they're incentivised to exaggerate to show that their jobs behind the lines and away from the action were worth doing. - "In short, I'm suggesting that you should have added a gain of salt to your commentary." I think you're taking 'sides' rather than being objective here. I'm doing the best with the sources I have. I can make conjectures, but only based on evidence. For example, I know that the Germans under-counted how many tanks and other vehicles they had because we have evidence of them doing that during Operation Market Garden. - "But I am skeptical that they would allow a Russian in these instances to man a machinegun that could be used against the Germans in battle. Is it possible, that she manned the machinegun after the crew was killed or abandoned the weapon? Absolutely. Is it possible they let a Russian man a machinegun in their rear while they attacked? Unlikely." 1. I showed you a picture of a Hiwi with a rifle, and if you google search you will find more just like that, so this isn't uncommon. 2. It may not have been a machine gun. The NKVD reported she was an "automatic weapons man". It sounds to me like she was a submachine-gunner, or even just had an automatic rifle, rather than a MG-34. - "The battles of Stalingard, reminds me a lot of the Battles of Berlin, reports given to Hitler, were as sugar coated as they could be made." I don't doubt that. But what's being said in this NKVD report isn't beyond comprehension. We have evidence that Hiwis helped the Germans elsewhere, so why not at Stalingrad? We also know that the Germans recruited spies among the civilian population at Stalingrad. We also have the possibility that the high casualties sustained by the Germans, and the fact that Volodina spoke German, could have been enough to persuade them to recruit her as a fighter. It's not an impossibility.
    2
  11924. "1) The rifles were loaded already?" Possibly, although it is just a film and not based in reality. - "2) Any chance that the Russians (Chuikov) understated the amount of soldiers without arms?" No, because he was getting the information from Rodimtsev and we have other sources confirming this. - "3) Do you suppose that Chuikov embellished a tad?" Possibly. - "4) As you stated some report were more realistic than others?" Yes. - "5) Shooting the pilot of the boat that refused to go further, do you suppose that the Russians on the ground might have done the same to their soldiers?" I also gave a report of NKVD shooting their own soldiers in this episode. However, Order 227 was aimed primarily at the officers and generals, not necessarily the men. But yes, some of the men did get shot too. - "6) Rearranged history? Do you suppose that this was the only instance of it?" I don't know what you're referring too. Can you be more specific? - "7) I also noted that you mentioned many Russian units strengths, but fail to even mention German units strengths." It's not always possible to give unit strengths. The sources don't allow it. Worse, the Germans record their strengths by saying they're "strong" or of "medium" strength and so on, which is a really bad way of doing it in my opinion. - "8) Why would the Russians with no water or food other than meat cut from dead horses, be concerned that the NKVD would be waiting for them at the Volga, if they retreated?" As I said, some of them got shot. Most though were turned back and told to keep fighting, which they did. But that doesn't mean that they threw soldiers into combat in unarmed waves and then gunned them down when they retreated. They shot a couple as an example and sent the rest back to fight. - "9) And would the numbers reported executed, be patriotically adjusted?" Possibly. The Soviet Union had a habit of exaggerating their numbers to meet centrally set quatas. - "10) Ammunition carried per man was what? 50 rounds per riflemen and maybe 200 rounds per machine gunner, or less?" It depends, but probably. - "11) The Germans allowing Russians to fight for them, at best, is doubtful. Had the woman in question been gang raped by Russians, or had family members murdered by the Russians, it's entirely possible that she, on her own accord, picked up a weapon to extract revenge on those who that had persecuted her and/or her family. Hell has no fury, than a woman scorned." We know that the Germans did recruit Russians. The only question is, did they recruit them at Stalingrad. We have evidence here that they did. We also have evidence of the Germans committing the crimes you mention - https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU
    2
  11925. It's to do with Friday 13th when the Templars were taken down. But in certain countries (like Greece), the number 13 is a lucky number.
    2
  11926. Yeah, your comment made me double check and you could be right. I've got it down as a 'steel mill', but this may be a misread of 'steam mill', because the mill was powered by steam.
    2
  11927. Haha Terri made that graphic, and I know she stalks the comments, so she's probably upset now you questioned it 😂
    2
  11928. I've added all the addendums to the Addendum playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzalediZoyADnyjDkVq5mmrbLLIo I did miss one out, but I've just added it :)
    2
  11929. Yeah, the film's questionable at best. The way I understood it from watching the film was that one guy got a rifle, and the other guy got bullets. Then 'when the one with the rifle is killed, the one without the rifle picks up the rifle and shoots'. This implies one guy didn't have a rifle but had bullets, and the other guy had the bullets but did not have a rifle. However, when I was editing this video, you can actually see some of the men reloading their rifles during the charge (and this is before the men start getting mowed down). So, unless some of the guys with the rifles had received bullets, or unless they believed that the rifles would fire just by going through the motions of reloading them... I've no idea. The film is questionable at best, and none of it matters because it's fiction anyway.
    2
  11930. And people complain I can't say foreign words correctly!
    2
  11931. "If 62nd can be reinforced and supplied quickly, they are in with a good chance of holding on against the Germans. Paulus needs to consolidate his gains and reinforce his troops before really seeming to make any kind of push." Yeah, I'm going to come back to this at some point and discuss it in the series. I like to let events play out before I comment on them, which is why I've not said much about 1st Kotluban yet ;) but you're correct, it'll soon be a race for reinforcements
    2
  11932. Zhukov's men were armed and had ammunition. Attacking in waves and attacking in unarmed waves where there's 'one guy with a rifle and one without' are not the same thing
    2
  11933. Yes. He was way too eager about the current crisis, but he saw it coming a mile off, and he was right. Central bankers just managed to kick the can down the road for far longer than anyone thought they could
    2
  11934. Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. The rest of the population has to be forced into slavery to support a selfish individual who chose to get into the position she did knowing that the State would enforce everyone in the collective to comply with her promiscuity. The worst part about it though is how so many people will defend her or the State for creating this situation in the first place - blaming us "selfish" people for calling out the BS. It's pure insanity
    2
  11935. Minimum wage results in high long term unemployment and the destruction of businesses https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ So if you want to help the poor, you'll be against minimum wages. The same thing applies to other government interventions. Health care costs in the USA skyrocketed as a direct result of Obama Care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ So if you want good quality, cheap, affordable health care, and doctors who actually care about the patient, then you'll be against government control or ownership of the health care industry. This is the principal of the seen and the unseen. Yes, the immediate affect of a policy may seem to have good intentions, but the CONSEQUENCES are disastrous. The CONSEQUENCES of the policies that the Left advocate are devastating to the very people they claim to help. This is because they don't want to help the poor. They've tricked the poor and middle class into hurting themselves. And who are "they"? The very elite the Left claims to be fighting. Those in power (the politicians, the aristocracy, the rich). Government is a tool to keep you poor, controlled and muzzled. It keeps them in power by stealing your rights, liberties and wealth from you. Wake up.
    2
  11936. Yes, and just like children, they need caring for. This is why we need to steal 40% of people's wealth from them, redistribute that to the State, who then gives maybe 5% of the stolen wealth at best back to those who really need it, and causes recessions in the process. Thankfully we have a State that does that because what would we possibly do without a State
    2
  11937. Monday
    2
  11938. "There have been economic downturns and crises for far longer than there have been central banks and modern monetary policy." You missed the central point - it's not necessarily central banks, it's the fractional-reserve banking system. It's fiat currency. Central banking makes it a lot worse, and central banking can't exist without fractional reserve banking, but it's not central banking or Keynesian or Monetarism that cause's recessions, it's currency creation. We've always have currency creation. There's never been a true 100% backed Gold Standard.
    2
  11939. The economy was imploding before the virus was a thing. The stock market crash came after the economy was already falling, and was blamed on the virus, but signs of the impending failure were there months ago. At best, you could say the virus was the pin to the bubble that was already in a room full of pins
    2
  11940. This is both history and economics
    2
  11941. Yes!
    2
  11942. Well, those who understand economics do have a massive advantage over those who don't. This is why the Austrians are just nodding their heads right now, rather than losing them, like a lot of people are in the stock market. I, for one, have saved up for this current depression in order to ride through it because I could see it coming a mile off
    2
  11943. I'm not here to give you financial advice. But cash savings get devoured by inflation. It would be best to put your cash savings in gold (or perhaps in stocks etc if the stock market is going up, but that depends on the situation, because right now it would be stupid to be in the stock market)
    2
  11944. I don't mind if workers want to artificially increase their wages beyond my ability to pay for them, unwittingly forgetting the basic economic principal of supply and demand. Increase price of labour means lower demand for it and increased supply, resulting in mass long term unemployment, especially for the young. However, I think it would be better for the workers if the workers didn't artificially increase the price of labour, but instead worked on becoming self-employed, since that's what Capitalism is - private ownership of the means of production.
    2
  11945. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  11946. I agree with everything you said. Add Murray Rothbard to the list of greats though :)
    2
  11947. This article will explain why artificially increased increased consumption doesn't stimulate the economy https://mises.org/wire/saving-%E2%80%94-not-spending-%E2%80%94-engine-economic-growth There are more articles and books about this particular issue, but the bottom line is that savings stimulate the economy, whilst artificial increased consumption does not. Lowering interest rates and printing currency also causes recessions and depressions. That's why we're in the biggest depression we've ever been in, and even though the economy suffered a 33% drop (from their own numbers) the stock market is pretty much back to were it was before the crash. It's not back there because the economy has recovered, it's back there because they've pumped trillions they didn't have into it, and the bubble will collapse again... perhaps sooner this time.
    2
  11948. House prices, stock market prices, second hand goods prices, oil and petrol prices, tuition fees... many other goods and services. But, of course, the Keynesian bankers don't count these things when they tell you that inflation is less than 2%. Two articles you may enjoy (relating to the USA, but applicable to the UK and EU) - "Where's the Inflation? It's in Stocks, Real Estate, and Higher Ed" https://mises.org/wire/wheres-inflation-its-stocks-real-estate-and-higher-ed "Fed-Driven Asset Price Inflation Means You Can Now Buy Less House Than You Could Before" https://mises.org/wire/fed-driven-asset-price-inflation-means-you-can-now-buy-less-house-you-could
    2
  11949. It's looking real bad for most western countries right now. No idea how this will play out, but hyperinflation seems likely for at least some. And capitalism will be blamed for the crisis created by socialism. Marx and Keynes's plan to fool the poor into believing in central totalitarianism is doing well ☹️
    2
  11950. Hi!
    2
  11951. Keynesians like to make things complicated. Marx was the same, which is why Das Kapital is a terrible grind. The reality is that socialists make things complicated to confuse people and hide what they're truly saying. Hayek crushed Keynes over and over again, and is quite damning of Keynes here https://youtu.be/y8l47ilD0II
    2
  11952. "Still crazy low inflation period" House prices, tuition fees, health care/insurance, second hand car sales, stock market and oil prices (until about a month ago)... there's lots of inflation which is very high. The problem is, our governments don't count these things. They only count food prices and stuff which they've fixed prices for, so that they can claim that inflation is below 2%.
    2
  11953. We cannot learn from the past if we're "educated" by the same people who are stealing from us
    2
  11954. Except, the worker doesn't need to work for someone else. They can own their own cow. The problem is that most workers aren't willing to own their own cow, because they've not willing to take the risk of owning something that could get sick, or die, or stop producing milk, or people decide that milk is bad and stop drinking it, or the bucket used in the milking process gets a hole in it, or bad men come and steal the cow, or an official comes and demands payment of half the cow in taxes in order to "redistribute the wealth" to the politicians... That's why most workers work for someone else, because owning your own business and creating things that others actually want and need isn't as easy as people who haven't ever done it think it is.
    2
  11955. 1. Yes you do. There is a delayed reaction though, and the State also uses price controls and regulations to mask their inflation. 2. At a 2.8% inflation rate, you'd half your wealth in 25 years. Coupled with the fact that official inflation just so happens not to count all the things that have been inflated - house prices, stock markets, tuition fees, second hand cars, health care... The real inflation rate is easily 5% if not higher. But this is masked or suppressed by price controls on every day items like food and toilet rolls, which is partly why you're now seeing shortages in the shops.
    2
  11956. "If loans are given out by banks through fractional reserve banking, how does the central banks' interest rate impact the market rate ? Shouldn't the banks have enough leeway to set their own "market-style" interest rate ?" "Regarding the gold-standard: isn't that effectively fixing either the value of gold or the currency and therefore eliminating free-flowing exchange rates (aka market prices for currencies) ?" In a free market, you're not 'fixing' any price at all. You're letting gold fluctuate just like any other product. In a free market, you'll see slight amounts of inflation and deflation (normal ups and downs in a typical market). However, gold will 'stabilize' roughly at a given price due to normal market operations. That stability is what's crucial and will basically eliminate inflation. (Clarification: there will be slight inflation because we're constantly digging more gold out the ground, but the rate is so low that any 'crash' that happens will hardly be noticeable, unlike current recessions and depression which affect us for years.) "Maybe I haven't put enough thought into gold-standards yet" Well, just so you know, the "Gold Standard" of the 1800s wasn't a true gold standard. Fractional reserve banking still existed. So when people cry that the old gold standard didn't work, they're correct, but not because it was gold, but because of the fractional reserve banking. That's why the 20th and 21st Centuries so far have seen recessions WAY WAY WAY worse than anything in the 1800s, because we came off gold completely. "if the government wanted to increase their gold-backing to give out more currency, how would they buy it ?" Again, fractional reserve banking is what causes the problem. The point I'm making is that we don't want them to give out more currency. Gold prevents them from printing more, which in turn prevents recessions. "What if nobody wants to sell the government their gold for the fixed price ?" The government will have to increase the amount it's willing to pay for gold. But in a true gold economy, you'd be swapping gold for gold, which wouldn't make any sense. The government would have to actually provide goods and services that people wanted to pay for in order for people to give the government their gold. So again, this benefits the people, rather than benefiting the State like in our current economy where the State just steals wealth off people.
    2
  11957. By "the People" and "the collective" you mean the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I want to help every "private" individual, especially the poor.
    2
  11958. You mean, like it is now in the UK? It won't last. House prices will crash when the debt bubble pops. However, nothing says you should remain on a low wage. If you want more money, create wealth and sell it to others by being self employed or create your own (small) business.
    2
  11959. Inflation is the expansion of the currency supply, not price rises. Prices can stay the same, but a recession still occurs because of the currency printing and the manipulated interest rates.
    2
  11960. They're not private, they're Public. If they're controlled by the State, they are are the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And, of course, these Public State-sector banks are allowed to do that because the Central Bank grants them permission to do that. If actually-private banks were allowed to be established and use non-State-sanctioned money, you wouldn't see inflation from them. That's why the Central State and Banks have laws in place to prevent individuals creating their own bank-business. That's why some call it the "International Banking Cartel".
    2
  11961. Inflation is created by one thing and one thing only - the fractional reserve banking system. You cannot have inflation if the currency supply remains the same. If there's 10 people with £100, even if you doubled or halved the number of people, you'd still only have a total of £1000 in the economy and thus no inflation. Only by printing more cash or adding digits to a screen can cause inflation. As I said, we all have a personal interest rate. The market (buyers and sellers) have their own interest rates, and they collectively determine what they are. But when a central state bank dictates what interest rates are, they artificially make them higher or lower than what the marker (the people) want. For example, I've been saving for years because I personally am a saver. I only spend if I have to. No matter how low interest rates go, I'll never take out debt again, and I'm only going to spend if I need to, or buy gold and silver to protect my wealth against inflation. So they can drive rates into negative territory all they like (which they are about to do, it seems), but that's not going to change my habits. My personal interest rate remains high, regardless of the central bank. But because interest rates are so artificially low right now, this is causing manipulations in the market. I'm pulling most of my cash out of the system. Others are getting into tons of debt that they may not otherwise be in. Corporations thrive on debt. But now the system is crashing, those manipulations are about to bite the people and businesses that went along with the central bank's policies. That's why heavily debted corporations and people are now in trouble, but I'm fine. Those who were smart with their money will be fine. Those who weren't, won't be. And that's rightly so. Let the bad businesses fail!
    2
  11962. Yes, but they won't last years. Gold can be stored for centuries, or millennia. Plus, it's hard to give half an egg to someone in exchange for something. Relatively easy to split a bullion gold coin in two, which they used to do in the medieval and ancient era http://www.grunalmoneta.co.uk/history.html
    2
  11963.  @josephsarra4320  Wait, I think I misread your original question. I thought you asked if I could add this to the Addendum playlist that I've already created, but I think you're actually asking if I can CREATE a playlist for the Stalingrad Addendum videos, which I already have. There is already an Addendum playlist and I've been adding videos to it since I first started doing Stalingrad Addendums. I've just added this video to the playlist https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzalediZoyADnyjDkVq5mmrbLLIo
    2
  11964. If you haven't watched my video on Operation Compass 1940, I'd recommend it. The British could have won in North Africa in 1940/41 before Rommel had even been sent there.
    2
  11965. "@TIK a lot to read, on hiring someone, do as the evil capitalist and out source that to a lower cost country and run with it :-)" Exactly, the government forces employers to seek employees outside of the country through its taxation policies. I mean, I couldn't do that anyway because it's not practical and I'd rather manage my employees personally so that I get train them to be more efficient, productive, and personally give them financial incentives as a reward etc. However, technically the choices I have right now are: hire someone at above minimum wage and dodge taxes (illegal), hire someone at less than minimum wage in order to cover additional taxation (which is illegal), or hire no one at all. So, the UK has one additional unemployed worker, and there are less history videos on YouTube for you (the consumer) to consume, and that's entirely because of socialism. Socialism hurts the employer, the worker and the consumer, and lowers the standard of living for everybody.
    2
  11966. Robert, the first thing the Nazis did was ban private property. They then nationalized the industries in all but name. Yes, the guys in charge of those industries may have made profits, but the same thing happened in the Soviet Union. Without incentives, you don't have efficiency and production. It's not about supply and demand, it's about efficiency and production. Socialism leads to lower living standards because production and efficiency is less because politicians and bureaucrats aren't efficient or productive compared to individuals and businessmen, and don't know how to increase the productivity (that "evil exploitation" socialists talk about) of their work force.
    2
  11967. "@TIK Nope, they didn't eliminate the system of social classes, in fact the Nazi era was a golden age for the German burgoisie when it came to their profits." But they did. Hitler removed the Jews and made one social-group state - the German people. See, this wasn't Marxist(class)socialism, this was National(racist)Socialism. They're not about profits or eliminating the bourgeoisie. Their "bourgeoisie"-equivalent was the Jews. However, the fact remains that they were socialist. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production. The Nazi government was absolutely in control of the means of production, all businesses, and the economy as a whole. It wasn't left in the hands of the private sector (capitalism), the state was in control. "Nationalising the industries doesn't necesarily mean public propierty" Of course it does! The state is the "public" sector. That's what it means. If you have a bunch of workers rise up and take ownership of the factories, they then form councils (soviets) of workers which band together to form a government. You then have a new public government. The public is the government which represents the public. The public is the state. So when an industry becomes nationalized, it becomes public-state property. There is no difference between the "public" and the "state". But there is a difference between the state and the "private" sector, which is non-state control of the economy (capitalism). "taking the formerly public systems and giving them to a few capitalists friends of the leader." Yes, because (and I know this will sound shocking, but) private individuals who specialise in their industries and learn how to manage people, hire employees, maximise production and sales etc can run businesses and enterprises better than uncaring bureaucrats and lying politicians. Politicians can't run businesses better than individuals. That is a fact. "specially if the system you have is that the state provides the legislative and administrative means for the burgoisie to exploit the workers even more" This YouTube channel is a business. Technically I'm one of those "evil capitalists" who is currently looking to hire another worker (even though I can't actually afford to since I'm on minimum wage, but I'm willing to take a pay-cut to do it). That's not exploitation, that's great! I'm increasing employment, and I'm growing the economy, since every additional video made as a result of me new employee will bring in additional revenue, which will go back into the business and/or employee to further increase production, employment and revenue. But then the government taxes me heavily if I hire an employee. I would hire one right now, but I know I have to pay such heavy taxation that I can't do it until I earn a lot more. Therefore, socialism has actually prevented one worker from being employed by me (even though I can recruit them at more than mininum wage if it wasn't for the taxation). In addition, the socialist EU is bringing in Article 13 in January, which will destroy YouTube. They're trying to prop up the inefficient and dying television and music industries. As a result they will stifle innovation and destroy jobs. Yes, instead of leaving it to the private sector to run businesses, let's prop up dying industries,shrink the economy and cause more unemployment. Yay, socialism! Article 13: https://youtu.be/gBTJb08VYUU "Going by this, UK would have been socialist during both world wars," Of course it was! That's why when the Labour Party won the 1945 election they brought in nationalization and socialism. "state capitalism" No such thing. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. If the state owns businesses, it's no longer in private ownership, and therefore cannot be capitalism. State ownership of the means of production is socialism - that is the definition. "is it public in order to increase the rights and position of the workers so a society that's not based in explotaition can rise or is it public so it can be better used in the event of war?" If I was saying it was Marxism, you might have a point. But I'm not saying it's Marxism - I'm saying it's socialism. Socialism has nothing to do with the working "class", since class is what distinguishes Marxism from normal socialism. "most of the German industrialists not only didn't go into hiding, they were hired and took an active role in the government" Oh, so it was state ownership of the means of production? Thank you for confirming that.
    2
  11968. Nyet, it's Leytenant, comrade!
    2
  11969. As Sun Tzu said - "The less shitty General wins Pyrrhic victories mostly"
    2
  11970. Surprisingly there aren't that many pictures of the Afrika Korps online. Couldn't find much in the way of infantry pictures, nor tank pictures, so this one had to do :(
    2
  11971. Yes, I do plan to tackle that question
    2
  11972. China?
    2
  11973. YouTube doesn't like links in comments, so this may not be specific to these videos. Try sharing a different, non-controversial video and see if your comment remains up
    2
  11974. Yes, I've covered Hitler's drug use here https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    2
  11975. I agree. There's too much screaming and drama these days
    2
  11976. Absolutely, however I currently don't have time to continue research, scripting and editing another Korsun (or Battlestorm) video while continuing with Stalingrad, the regular Monday videos, and training up the new editor/animator. So unfortunately we may have to wait until after Stalingrad is over before I finish with Korsun.
    2
  11977. Hey Anton! Yeah, totally totally random ;)
    2
  11978. It's your lucky day because I've actually answered this question before! https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  11979.  @vassilizaitzev1  I've not read that one. But I've just added it to an Amazon shopping list for the future. Do you think Buckley's premise is correct?
    2
  11980. No worries, and I'm well but up to my neck in Stalingrad right now and it's going to be a struggle to get the video out on time, so this scammer guy couldn't have picked a worse time. Just replying while having food, then back to editing. How's things with you?
    2
  11981. 1. Hitler's not a Fascist, he's a National Socialist. 2. Marxism isn't progressive nor enlightened. 3. Britain fought with the National Socialists in 1940 as the Marxists were allied with the Nazis and carving up Eastern Europe. 4. "Soviet progessivism had been stunted by economic instability"- yes because Marxists fail at basic economics and can't make their theories match reality. 5. Lend Lease did prop up the collapsing Soviet economy. Soviet troops were malnourished and consumed half as much food as a US soldier did in WW2, even WITH Lend Lease supplies. (Tuyll, H. “Feeding the Bear: American Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945.” Greenwood Press, 1989. Table 39. Supplies Consumed by Average Soldier (Long tons per soldier, per month)
    2
  11982. I haven't got a video on Crete at this moment in time, sorry. Years ago, I put a poll up on the channel asking viewers which battle I should do next. The list included both Crete and Stalingrad. Most of them voted Stalingrad, which is why I committed to doing that. I will get to Crete one day though, as well as the Balkan Campaign as a whole.
    2
  11983. I haven't read it. What did you think of it?
    2
  11984. This is it. They've not got any grasp of history theory, and they're obviously unwilling to watch my history theory video. For them, they have ego-invested in nationalism and/or socialism, and this series has clashed hard with their ideology. I'll be explaining why in more detail in the next video (part 3).
    2
  11985.  @dmitriyparfenov  Oh good! I'm glad you do! I should also explain that for many of the old history books or the old sources (e.g. back in Orwell's era) it was probably not done as an insult to the non-Russians in the Soviet Union, but it's more of a short-hand for "Russian peoples". It has generally fallen out of favour because I think people realized that it wasn't an accurate enough term, but you may still find some historians innocently using it today. That doesn't necessarily mean they are bad historians- they may simply not be aware. A good example is the term "the Ukraine". I once got chastised for referring to the Ukraine as "the Ukraine" because, apparently, it implies to the Ukrainians that the Ukraine is a province of Russia. That is incorrect. It's hard to explain in typed text, but if I said "I am going to Netherlands", people would correct me and say it's "the Netherlands". It's also "I'm going to the Vatican", not "I'm going to Vatican". And it's "I'm going to walk the dog," not "I'm going to walk dog". Well, for the same reason, it's "I'm going to the Ukraine". If it was "I'm going to Ukrainia", then that would work because the ending of the word "Ukrainia" would make it sound right to native English speakers to not use a "the" before the name. But because of the way the word "Ukraine" sounds by itself, it requires a "the" before it. Again, it's not done maliciously, it's just good English. And even though I understand why the Ukrainians are offended by it, I think they've misunderstood the intent. I can't call the Ukraine "Ukraine" by itself because it just simply doesn't sound right in English. Well, for the same reason, "the Russians" implies all the people who were formerly within the Soviet Union (perhaps with some exceptions, like the Polish or similar). Again, it's not necessarily done maliciously. There are historians who are using it deliberately though; they tend to be the 'pro-German' historians. You'll have more to worry about when reading their works than the use of "Russians"... So sometimes the use of the word "Russians" could just be because of inaccuracy, or old-usage, or it could be an indication that the author has a bias against the Soviet Union or the Russian Federation today. It does depend on the context. But I do wish more people in and around Russia knew this because I think English speakers get a lot of flak over this, when sometimes it wasn't done maliciously.
    2
  11986. I do actually intend to cover the Atomic Bombings at some point in the future (not sure when to be honest). And I can't promise anything right now because I've got a lot of projects on the go. But I have downloaded a copy of that book, so thank you for the suggestion.
    2
  11987. Honestly, looking at the strategic picture, it makes a lot more sense to go for the Scheldt estuary, because without logistics your armies can't march forwards. I do think Market Garden shouldn't have aimed at crossing the bridges of the Rhine, but instead should have concentrated on securing Allied logistics. One thing I would point out though is that people often say that Market Garden was "a rotten plan, poorly executed", which is what I disputed in the documentary. The tactical plan could have worked in my humble opinion. But yes, strategically there were other objectives that should have been prioritized.
    2
  11988. I don't understand your point about the paratroopers having nothing to take on armour. Their PIATs and Bazookas can take out tanks. Plus they landed with AT guns like the 6-pounders the British carried into Arnhem. Tactically, if the 82nd had taken the Nijmegen Bridge on the first day, XXX Corps would have been over the Nijmegen Bridge at around 10am on the third day. They may have been at Arnhem later that day, or may have been at Arnhem the next day. Certainly, they wouldn't have suffered the 36 hour delay at Nijmegen fighting an urban house-to-house battle to take the city. I'm not saying that the play couldn't have been better - it absolutely could have been. The 1st Airborne landing closer to Arnhem could have prevented the SS from driving down to Nijmegen, for example. What I'm saying is, with the plan as it was, it could have worked. It didn't work because Nijmegen Bridge fell into German hands on the first day of battle, and this could have been avoided if a unit of the 82nd had been ordered to go to the bridge right from the start. A lot of people say the plan was doomed from the start when in reality, it was only doomed when Nijmegen Bridge fell into German hands.
    2
  11989. I agree. But even where a country doesn't perform well, that's not a bad reflection of the country or the people, but usually circumstance (Luxembourg had no chance in WW2, let's be honest) or poor decisions made by leadership (Mussolini sending his country to war when it simply wasn't prepared).
    2
  11990. Fair points. But could you explain 'overcomplicated' for me? I've heard this phrase said a lot about Market Garden but not heard people explain why they think it's overcomplicated. You could sum in up in one sentence - "Capture bridges and cross the Rhine." Try doing that for other battles!
    2
  11991. I like trains https://youtu.be/vyItidbjxLM
    2
  11992. What? Is he not a good source of information for current views from the Nazi perspective?
    2
  11993. Oh, and just to clarify - the answer wasn't that they were already fighting. The answer was that Hitler believed that the USA declared war on him. That's not the same thing.
    2
  11994. Is he not a good source of information for how Nazis view the war?
    2
  11995. I didn't want to talk about the 'war economy' issue in this video because I knew my haters would jump on me if I did. But yes, the USA kept its "military industrial complex" after the war, even if they did unshackle the economy from the restraints that Roosevelt and Hoover put on it during the 1930s. (Not sure if you saw the video of mine about the US economy before, during and after the war, but I'll like it just in case https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw )
    2
  11996. If I'm explaining something from the Nazi perspective, providing quotes from a Nazi to show confirm what Nazis believe is a good idea.
    2
  11997. Well, all historians are revisionists - that's literally what historians do, revise history. See my history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc and my "Why we need a new term for Revisionist Historians" video https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 The Nazi historians decided to take on the title "revisionist" to try and legitimise themselves, and also undermine the mainstream historians. By doing so, they can claim that mainstream historians are "rewriting history" to "suit their agenda". But of course, "rewriting history" is what historians do, and everyone has biases and agendas (my agenda is to tell in-depth and super accurate history). So their argument doesn't work, but it does work if people don't understand history theory, which is why my history theory video and the revisionist video was created - to educate people against the lies.
    2
  11998. Awesome, glad to hear it! :)
    2
  11999. It's all a distraction from the economic collapse currently going on but nobody's talking about (in the Lamestream media). Look over here, not over here https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    2
  12000. Did he get banned/deleted!? I knew he was in trouble, but didn't realize he'd been banned. Insane
    2
  12001. Before you do, you may want to watch this quick 3 minute video of mine https://youtu.be/lj7bHzW0V6c
    2
  12002. Surely, if Buchanan was those things, then he'd understand Hitler's reasoning, and thus would be a good secondary source of information for the Nazi perspective?
    2
  12003. There's a difference between 'school' and 'education'
    2
  12004. Exactly, that's why I used him - he gives the modern Nazi perspective. I don't agree with him, but if I'm to tell you what the Nazi perspective is, then I need to know the Nazi perspective.
    2
  12005. Yep! Congrats :)
    2
  12006. David Irving can't read German. If he could, and if he had been an honest man as you claim, he wouldn't have misread or even messed up the quoting in the sources he used.
    2
  12007. Historians do have biases, and that's fine. What they don't do is deliberately alter the evidence to suit their narrative, like Irving has been proven to do. Here's a link to my history theory video. I'd encourage you to listen https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  12008. Irving is changing the evidence to suit his interpretation. Historians don't do that. The evidence can be interpreted, but it cannot be changed or distorted. By changing the evidence, Irving is basically changed his 'history' into fiction.
    2
  12009. As Evans explains in his book, Irving falsly claimed that the victims of the raid were 10x higher than they actually were, and was called out for it by multiple historians for simply believing one very very bad source. Yet, you say it's a masterpiece??
    2
  12010. I don't think the number is anywhere near 20%. More like 2%, if that. I've scared them away several times now. And don't forget that my enemies (e.g. Marxist and National Socialist) use multiple accounts to make their numbers seem larger than they are. I've seen several instances in the past where different (but similar) usernames are posting the same copy and paste comment. A lot of the people commenting here are not regular viewers.
    2
  12011. They're all tainted.
    2
  12012. It's very out of date now. Worth it if you want to hear what people thought of the war in the 1950's and 1960's. Will give you the pro-German and Halder's point of view (everything being Hitler's fault).
    2
  12013. His claims are exaggerated. The death toll was only something like 5,000. And yes I have been looking into it for a future video on the subject.
    2
  12014. Yeah I would be very surprised to ever see them post favourably about this channel again. Those Reddit Marxists don't like me any more.
    2
  12015. And thank you for your comment! Good to see viewers who are equally as passionate about history as I am 🙂
    2
  12016. "I don't expect everyone but only those that talk about history to do that... I read some of the transcripts but didn’t see anything wrong" Well, there you go. The average person (even those interested in history) are not going to be able to do what you're asking, and if they do, they're not all going to be capable of spotting the problems with the primary sources, which you admit you're incapable of spotting yourself. Richard Evans explains clearly how Irving misused (and changed) the primary sources to suit his agenda, and I've given you three clear examples in this video, and yet you ignore that and proceed to claim that you can't see the errors. Perhaps you should allow the specialists on these subjects to guide you (that doesn't mean you have to fully agree, but at least allow them to steer your in roughly the right direction). And given his falsification of the evidence, Irving is not classes as a specialist: he's a fiction writer.
    2
  12017. Actually I did mention it. Evans debunks Irving's claim in his book.
    2
  12018. The Dresden number Irving came up with was ridiculous! He was just given a source from some guy, declared it was genuine, and ran with it. I also enjoyed reading that part. Might do a video on that at some point because the Dresden thing comes up often
    2
  12019. Yes! Glad to hear you've already read Evans. What did you think of it? I think his argument is pretty solid against Irving.
    2
  12020. David Irving is definitely a postmodernist. He has no respect for evidence, and 'belief' and ideology is more important than facts. And yet, people defend postmodernism...
    2
  12021. Yes, and they're all spouting the same usual dribble 🙄
    2
  12022. Technically I used Irving as a source here in this video...
    2
  12023. That's the problem of the "subjectivist" theory of knowledge. There can be no objective truth, since everyone's opinion is "de truth".
    2
  12024. Did you watch the video? The issue isn't his "interpretation" of the sources. He literally changes the words, or says the sources said something different than what it actually said. If he's doing that, he may as well be writing fiction.
    2
  12025. I don't disagree that those TV documentaries were rubbish. There's a reason I decided to make my documentary videos as accurate and as detailed as possible - because I was frustrated with the old documentaries too! But yes, Irving isn't the only one doing what he's doing. However he's the one the Deniers hold up to the spotlight, as though everything he says is blessed by Hitler's spirit. It's ridiculous.
    2
  12026. "TIK Pls stop making political statements as they do not make any sense." It's not politics, it's economics. "Maybe because you are not putting as much effort into understanding Soviet politics as you do with getting purely military side right." Politics and military are an extension of economics. Without economics, you do not have the others. "Firstly what country isn't national socialist (nazi) in a sense? Every country!" No, only those with a State-planned economy led by the racial collective which believes in the Racial Theory of History. "Except Nazi Germany which was neither Nationalist nor Socialist..." It was nationalist in the sense of race, not 'bourgeois nationalist' to use Hitler's term. It was socialist because it was nationalist. "To be truly national socialist it should not have been run by creme dela cremes (sxuse my French) of oligarchs with Hitler as their puppet." So it was international socialist now? "Nazi Germany was neo feudalist state with huge imperial ambitions." Oh I see, Hitler didn't go East for Lebensraum or to found a racial paradise, he went East for the money. "Thicker bones thrown or promised to be thrown to the masses does not mean socialism in any meaningful way." Absolutely. Socialism was designed to impoverish the economy, not improve their lives. "Secondly, for that particular reason Nazis do not get to call themselves Nazi. Not their call. sorry." You're right, they don't call themselves "Nazi" because that's what their enemies use to describe them. They call themselves "National Socialists". "Fascists fits and describes them better." Fascists do not believe in the racial theory of history. There were Jews in Mussolini's Fascist Party. "You made very subtle transition from Soviets as though adopting national socialism (which is a crazy idea) to Jews being killed including Sabine Spielrein." You're right, technically they were fascists in this era. They only killed Jews in the Russian Civil War (the White Army did kill more Jews, but as Gellately shows in the book "Lenin, Stalin and Hitler", the Red Army also had pogroms against the Jews) and later after the war when Stalin persecuted Jews.
    2
  12027. "Being able to buy into a company on the stock market (public) isn't socialism, man." Oh okay... collective ownership of the means of production isn't socialism then? It must be capitalism. " It just means anyone with the money can buy into a chunk of the company .... words have meaning and common usage in English." Yeah they do. Again: "Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism" https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "The term socialism refers to any system in which the production and distribution of goods and services is a shared responsibility of a group of people." Yes, like corporations. "Socialism is based upon economic and political theories that advocate for collectivism." Collective = group. Group = "public". Public = the hierarchy of society (a State, like a corporation). "In a state of socialism, there is NO privately owned property." Corporations aren't privately owned. They're collectively owned by their shareholders. Also Hitler abolished private property under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, which was why he was able to seize 'private' property off the Jews to enrich the German 'race'. "Shareholders of a corporation provide financial backing to a company in exchange future dividends they don't control the means of production and distribution of even that one company, much less the entire nation, though the directors that do control it CAN also be shareholders but they don't have to be." All collectives are made up of individuals. Just because there are individuals inside the collective, doesn't mean that it isn't a collective. Making money is not capitalism, and making no money is not socialism. Socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production. No one individual (a 'private') owns a 'public' corporation (a corporation that has shareholders) because the shareholders collectively own the corporation. "Private companies can still have shareholders where multiple people own the company" They're not 'private' then. 'Private' means 'individual'. To use your own words - "words have meaning and common usage in English." "which is what the Nazi era bigger companies were." A collective of people forms a hierarchy, as I showed in the public vs private video (link above). The Nazi corporations were hierarchies. They were public sector States, not private sector entities. A thousand people working for a giant hierarchy is not a 'private' entity. "all the small sole propriety businesses ... WERE STILL privately owned sole propriety businesses under Nazi Germany." Which is why they were getting destroyed under the Socialist economy. You must remember though that Hitler only wanted to implement full-socialism AFTER the conquest of Lebensraum. So, while there were still technically 'private' property in Third Reich (although technically private property was abolished), their days were numbered. Once Hitler conquered the East, he would have the resources needed to implement full-socialism. He makes this very clear in Mein Kampf and his Second Book. "It's hard to see your points when even Germany's arms manufacture like airplanes and tanks were private companies that had to design prototypes, compete with each other, and bid on contracts all throughout the time of Nazi Germany." States compete with each other. That doesn't make them 'private'. It's hard to see how you think hierarchies of means of production that consist of thousands of people can be classed as 'private'. They're not private, they're public. "Caring about factual information doesn't make a person pro communist, ya bag of doorknobs. Fuck socialism, and communism, AND Nazi Germany." But you're not being factual. You've done what I did - listen to the collective and not question what you were told. Don't make the same mistake I did and assume that Hitler only put socialism in the name to "trick the workers". It's a myth. Watch my Public vs Private video. Wait for my upcoming videos on National Socialism, which will clarify my points and destroy the "counterarguments". It's not what they tell you, it's what they don't tell you.
    2
  12028. "The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible." By "private" of course you mean corporations which are collectively owned by their shareholders, which is why corporations were embraced by the Fascists, National Socialists, and the Marxists - “The basic institutions of the Soviet economic system took shape in the First Five-Year Plan (1928/29-32). Subsequent modifications were numerous, but not substantial. Basically, the whole economy was run like a single giant corporation - USSR Inc. As corporations go, USSR Inc. was of exceptional workforce size and was a conglomerate with the most extreme range of activities, yet it was run in a more centralised way than most.” - Hanson, “The Rise and Fall of the The Soviet Economy,” Kindle P8.
    2
  12029. "TIK ... plugs ears with fingers nuh uh! Socialists!!" Just you wait... (no spoilers)
    2
  12030. https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12031. Also, check back every week at 5pm GMT. I haven't missed a Monday since I made my New Years Resolution on the 1st of January 2018 to upload every Monday. (Twice there's been technical issues causing delays, but I still made videos warning people those videos would be late.)
    2
  12032. Yes, they're all mine (except the national anthems, obviously). I wanted to avoid copyright so I had to use my own music
    2
  12033. What on earth are you on about? I've never once said NS Germany is like Germany of today.
    2
  12034. With limited time, it's a catch-22
    2
  12035. I designed these videos primarily as sleeping pills, so it's good to know they work
    2
  12036. The Soviets did counterattack, although not at the beginning. I might be wrong but I do think Citing is referring to the early period and Glantz is referring to the later period of Blau.
    2
  12037. I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    2
  12038. I will explore this in the future, but according to the stats in the video at least, this doesn't seem to be the case.
    2
  12039. I've got news for you bud, Britain is currently no where near the left of the political spectrum, I can promise you that.
    2
  12040. But the National Socialists and the Fascists lost it, which is a good thing.
    2
  12041. No, it really isn't Oricand.
    2
  12042. Good question. I'll see if I can find out.
    2
  12043. I'll explain that in full on Monday
    2
  12044. Considering there was only one railway line to Stalingrad from Rostov, the reinforcements probably did arrive piecemeal. Again, a strong argument for the logistics side of things. Not sure about the street cars, but tens of thousands of civilians died in the bombings before the German troops reached the city. The city was also in ruins as 24th Panzer Division made its way up through the south as the southern spearhead (really the furthest unit forward in the city). Looking at the accounts in "Death of the Leaping Horsemen" by Jason D. Mark, it's highly unlikely the street cars were running, but I could be wrong there.
    2
  12045. It's alright, I'm working on them :) learning German at the minute, and will be learning Russian later, in order to dive into the sources properly and make these videos even better
    2
  12046. Of what? Everything!? Or German names?
    2
  12047. I'm not sure if Hitler made the decision to take those 11 divisions away himself or not, but it was a dumb decision in my opinion.
    2
  12048. There's been a lot that's been coming out of the archives in the past 20 years or so. This means the books written before that are out of date. Plus a lot of historians focus on the battles that sell - e.g. the battle within the city of Stalingrad, rather than more-important Blau campaign (which today's video is going to be about).
    2
  12049. Hi
    2
  12050. I'll be exploring why they didn't do that next week :)
    2
  12051. Thanks sir!
    2
  12052. Agreed
    2
  12053. Maybe but there are Soviet myths too. I just haven't got around to them yet.
    2
  12054. I'll be coming back to this later, but the Romanians actually fought hard, despite the odds against them.
    2
  12055. FIRST!
    2
  12056. Fantastic! Given the nature of the video I'm surprised you got the notification to be honest
    2
  12057. I would disagree with some of them. Mussolini was Fascist, not capitalist.
    2
  12058. Hitler abolished private property, nationalised the unions and industries, implemented widespread wage and price controls... and more. I have a video showing all this, backed by over 100 sources, and it also refutes the the usual counter-arguments (Ernest Rohm, "privatisation", "crushing the unions" etc) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And no, I'm not any of the names you attempted to call me. Stop name calling and denying history, and listen to the evidence.
    2
  12059. Again, you've bought into the religious lie of socialism. The reality is that socialism is the economic system designed to hurt both the poor and the middle class and redistribute wealth to the elite. I know this sounds foreign to everything the priesthood has told you, but once you see it, you cannot unsee it. Socialism is actually what you attribute capitalism to be.
    2
  12060. Take "international" socialism. What is it when you have one nation under God? A nation. International socialism is nationalistic. And National Socialism was actually international (it conquered most of Europe after all, and had multiple nations within its borders). Plus, Marxist Socialism and all other Lefty socialisms are inherently anti-semitic. Who did Karl Marx say were the bourgeoisie? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg In conclusion, it's not me who doesn't know "basic political theory". It's you. You spout nonsense, and I correct you. You then claim I don't understand, when it is, in fact, you who not only doesn't understands what I'm saying, nor listens. So let me make this clear: I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE YOU ARE WRONG. I don't know how else to make that clear.
    2
  12061. I agree, and here's the CEO of YouTube herself at the WEF admitting her censoring content https://youtu.be/Pi72kfigcL8?t=694
    2
  12062. Were those errors in the German version, or the English translation? I've seen some history books have poor translations before.
    2
  12063. I haven't done a video on it yet. I watched about half of it (in small chunks) because it was that bad my brain melted out my ears. I will get around to finishing it and then doing a video on it at some point.
    2
  12064. @nobdy204 - oops! Yes, I meant the Henschel 129, not the Bf 110s. Thank you. (Corrected my original comment)
    2
  12065. I believe it was Stukas and Henschel 129s (edit: I originally said Messerschmitt Bf 110s instead of Henschels, so corrected)
    2
  12066. It was just a farm, not a village
    2
  12067. Hi Masada! Enjoying the series?
    2
  12068. Not from them, no. I've heard from Anton Joly (obviously) and more recently Dann Falk
    2
  12069. I'm aiming for Monday 17th August
    2
  12070. Yeah, I don't think they had the range to hit Moscow. They barely had enough range to hit London, which is partly why the British were eager to take Belgium in 1944.
    2
  12071. I know nothing about the Battle of Savo Island... in fact, hadn't heard of it until now :) I really need to do more reading on the Pacific Theatre
    2
  12072. I've not read that one yet! His Operation Barbarossa and Moscow books are good though
    2
  12073. Perhaps it was used oil? Or captured diesel (since they used petrol)? Or olive oil or something else entirely? That's what I assumed when I read that.
    2
  12074. You refuse to watch any video except the Stalingrad ones?
    2
  12075. I think it was a different Willi Brandt (could be wrong though)
    2
  12076. The reason the Germans had to go East in the first place was to get the oil and food they needed because they decided to reject free trade capitalism and embrace autarkic socialism. So yes, the reason there were problems over the Don (and also before the Don, which you are ignoring) was because socialists don't understand basic economics. If they did, there wouldn't have been a Second World War.
    2
  12077. Yes, I talked about this here https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    2
  12078. I knew of this controversy, but I don't think it applies to his work on Stalingrad. Hayward explains his version of events here, and I think it's worth a read https://www.joelhayward.com/myoverviewoftheaffair.htm
    2
  12079. Yes, one Willi Brandt was a soldier in Stalingrad, and another was in Sweden and later became the chancellor later. It's just a coincidence that they had the same name.
    2
  12080. Actually, just realized, that was the wrong link. That one's where Glantz talks about the entire war on the Axis-Soviet Front. This is the one where he talks about Kursk https://youtu.be/H1_JyTFbgcs
    2
  12081. I actually don't know. I've hearted your comment in the hopes that someone else might spot it and know the answer
    2
  12082. That was probably me mistyping, or the software autocorrecting.
    2
  12083. Thank you for the suggestion! I'll check it out
    2
  12084. The book I used directly says they were fearful of being branded Anti-Semites after the actions of the others and therefore fought the British Fascisti. And it's a book written by a Marxist-sympathiser.
    2
  12085. First!
    2
  12086. Maybe ;)
    2
  12087. You're calling me a "bastard" now? Well, I'm banning you from commenting ever again on this channel. Respect is earned, not taxed.
    2
  12088. This video isn't about "the Maori Battalion", but on the whole of the New Zealand Division. There were 10 other battalions in the division, yet apparently you only want me to focus on one? The reason for the focus on Freyberg is because he was the commander, and the books focus a lot on him. I've also promised to cover the New Zealanders in more detail when I cover the battles in the Battlestorm series, like I did during the Crusader video. Again, you're jumping to conclusions for zero reason. Check your biases.
    2
  12089. Why is it that none of the New Zealanders in the comments have complained, yet you have? Is it because you're letting your bias cloud your judgement? Everyone else has praised me for even talking about New Zealand, yet apparently that's a bad thing. Perhaps I shouldn't have talked about them at all - just completely ignore their contribution, and maybe that would have made you happy? And it's not "my" wars. I'm not an "Englishman". I'm me, not a group. Yes, being from England, I give an non-New Zealander perspective, but I'm not nationalist. And considering I used mostly New Zealand sources, and gave a lot of praise to New Zealand, I'm honestly not sure how you could come to this conclusion.
    2
  12090. "What is more damning in my opinion is that Tik seems to have deleted his lengthy response to me, which strikes me as odd." Just seen this. YouTube is automatically deleting my comments. They're trying to censor me.
    2
  12091. “Hitherto my acquaintance with the Social Democratic Party was only that of a mere spectator at some of their mass meetings. I had not the slightest idea of the social-democratic teaching or the mentality of its partisans." - Hitler, “Mein Kampf,” p46 (Jaico version).
    2
  12092. I've done a couple of strictly economic videos, but they haven't performed well, indicating that people don't want to watch them. For example, there's my video on what causes recessions and depressions https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  12093. You know what, no, I'll go easy on you, because you won't be able to find it. Hitler was in the army, and the army he was in was the Bavarian Army, which was in Kurt Eisner's control. And Hitler was elected into Kurt Eisner's government as a respresentative of his army unit, which (as I just said) was under Kurt Eisner's control. So, Kurt Eisner's not going to spy on himself, thus Hitler was not ordered to spy on Eisner. The spying part was only done later, after the fall of the Bavarian Soviets.
    2
  12094. Alright, please provide me the primary source evidence that says Hitler was sent to spy on Kurt Eisner's government by the army.
    2
  12095. He didn't get sent there to spy on Eisner's party by the German Army.
    2
  12096. So it's the "tool" society?
    2
  12097. That only seems to have happened after the end of the Soviets, and as far as I'm aware, the German Labour Party might have been the only instance of him doing that. I could be wrong on that latter part, but it's something I do want to cover in the future.
    2
  12098. Except, there's no real evidence of this "spying" idea. I need to discuss this in a future video. Do you have suggestions for books on the historians who hold this particular view?
    2
  12099. If the anarchists are on the Left, then as someone who wants free markets (economic anarchism), I'm on the Left.
    2
  12100. The spying (if it did happen) only came later, after the Bavarian Soviet fell.
    2
  12101. Yeah, I've seen their posts. There's one recently arguing the same thing, this time backed by sources. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny, but I will admit that it's good to see them actually putting some effort in for a change. The fact that they're quick to dismiss all "Austrian" school advocates is proof that I've put them on the defensive, and that they can't actually address the arguments so are resorting to damage control.
    2
  12102. Karl Marx never practiced Judaism. He was also very Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12103. He hadn't joined that service yet at this point.
    2
  12104. I agree, but unfortunately this is the case. Getty Images and similar will crack down on you if you use "their" historical images without consent (paying them). And obviously YouTube's algorithm is insane when it comes to using footage that's in other videos, which is why I avoid using all video footage of historical events and stick to pictures.
    2
  12105. I was actually tempted to put that reference in the video because it's appropriate 😂
    2
  12106. "In June 1919" That's AFTER the Soviet fell. If you're claiming Hitler was an anti communist agent sent in to spy on Eisner and the Bavarian Soviet, then you need to provide evidence of this prior to their collapse. - "If you seriously believe anti Communist Industrialists, Bankers, Clergy or Monarchies, domestic and international, didn't support Hitler's anti communism, the only question I have for you is who is paying you to produce and spread such garbage?" Again, as shown in my video, backed by copious amounts of evidence, the idea that Hitler was funded into power by the capitalists was debunked in 1985. That narrative relies on dubious memoirs and distorts history https://youtu.be/fNvfzJwyzX8?si=ikRPuiClLE-WbV_H When you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you. And don't link to Wikipedia, it's garbage. If you're going to present evidence, provide the actual evidence.
    2
  12107. This is praxeology. Hitler was elected into the Bavarian People's State (a Socialist Soviet) and then the Bavarian Soviet Republic (a Communist Soviet). His actions here make him a Socialist and a Communist. The ones doing the psychoanalyzing are the historians who are trying to excuse his actions, and I highlighted them doing that towards the end of the video. So you're attacking me for doing the thing you're asking me to do, and then are ignoring the historians that are doing the thing you're criticizing.
    2
  12108. Whether the photo is real or not is irrelevant because other evidence exists. We know that his regiment voted him into the Soviets, twice. And you are assuming that the German Army was counter-revolutionary, despite being in service of the Revolutionary government headed by the SPD (the Social Democrats). The Army was Socialist, which is why it sent a socialist to spy on a nationalist party...
    2
  12109. Yes, except I don't have the time to sit there typing out every word from every Russian book, just to see if it's relevant or not...
    2
  12110. Fantastic! Thanks for chasing that up
    2
  12111. Stalingrad was 7 months long, so Tali-Ihantala was no where near the longest. Apologies for making you cringe.
    2
  12112. I'm not sure they'd want me, considering we don't see eye to eye on the Hitler's Socialism debate
    2
  12113. I'm a capitalist, and I'm close to the anarchist camp, but I understand that States (hierarchies of society, e.g. corporations) will emerge naturally. So rather than being anti-State, I'm anti-coercion. A State can exist, so long as all involved are cooperating with the State. Once force (e.g. taxation) is involved, it becomes a criminal entity in my view, which is why I'm against all current governments, and corporations using the "law" to gain an unfair advantage in the unfree market
    2
  12114. A nation is a tribe
    2
  12115. You're saying this on a video on Stalingrad, bearing in mind the Germans were defeated tactically, operationally and strategically over the course of this battle. They obviously won some of the tactical and operational battles, but they lost a lot too.
    2
  12116. Good to hear! More to come :)
    2
  12117. It'll be here next Monday :)
    2
  12118. I was reading/making notes from it the other day. Not finished yet, but I think it's pretty good. You won't be disappointed with your purchase. I'll do a proper review on it at some point
    2
  12119. You're probably right :)
    2
  12120. I hope it's worth the wait :)
    2
  12121. I know who he is and I know I need to study him because of his involvement in the failure to spot the Soviet buildup for Operation Uranus. My German is slowly coming along though, danke! I even know what a Geschichtsbuch is now!
    2
  12122. Sorry :D got to be done though haha
    2
  12123. I've just re-read them. Sorry for not replying. I honestly don't have enough info to answer whether the Soviets had a lack of people working on the fields (although I suspect it was because the Ukraine and North Caucasus were overrun). But I do know the US shipped food. Lend-Lease is actually not well documented. Everyone talks about how great it was and so on, but you try find a book about it. I'll keep looking though, and when I get your answers I will do a video on it :) Good luck with your exams! Danke!
    2
  12124. The reason you view him the way you do is because of the way he presented himself, and because of Cold War politics. The reality is that he doesn't mention his own flaws, mistakes or his own war crimes. He also manipulates the 'facts' about Stalingrad that he presents to you in his memoirs. I'll be talking about it more next week, but essentially Manstein isn't as perfect as he makes himself out to be.
    2
  12125. Yes, it does. I have the quotes. And also Manstein saying that Paulus requests permission on the 26th is wrong (he was requesting permission straight away) and there's several other problems with Manstein's text. I cover most of this in part 2 (next week) so please watch it.
    2
  12126. Certainly the intelligence is (at least partly) to blame for the encirclement in the first place.
    2
  12127. Not entirely certain, but there are hints (and I also suspect) they had better rations than the men. A lot of them survived, whereas most of their men didn't. I'll see what I can dig up.
    2
  12128. Silhouette too obvious?
    2
  12129. Thank you! I hope it's worth it :)
    2
  12130. Yes, really is Manstein :)
    2
  12131. From what I've come to understand, a Wehraboo is someone who believes the Wehrmacht was pretty much invincible and the best army in history. You can still have an interest in the Wehrmacht and not be a Wehraboo.
    2
  12132. It was Mr Blobby
    2
  12133. Hey Tomislav! My question would be, why is talking bad about von Manstein not allowed? And obviously I'll point out now that both Glantz and the Official German History came to this conclusion too. If you still don't agree after part 2, let me know :)
    2
  12134. I know Manstein is lying about Stalingrad. And that he committed war crimes. Just not sure what else he's lying about.
    2
  12135. While it is a game and I understand why, the reality was they were both good generals. Paulus was a staff officer (which has been used by some to claim he was a bad general) but the reality was that he wasn't bad. Maybe not the best, but not bad. Chuikov was also a good general.
    2
  12136. Thanks for subscribing! I hope you enjoy my other history videos too (and part 2, next Monday)
    2
  12137. So, is that "vy-k-s" or "vis-ks"???
    2
  12138. Thank you!
    2
  12139. Except, all history is biased, since it is written by individuals. Do not assume that because I started off with military history that I know nothing about anything else. I don't have a degree in music, but I make music and play guitar. This video is about the economics of WW2, yet only you and one or two others are complaining about it.
    2
  12140. I know, I screwed this one up :(
    2
  12141. Haha well, I currently read every comment. Can't always reply, but I read them :) luckily this is such a small battle that it's not super-important. The only thing you need to know about this battle is actually explained in my Battleaxe documentary (the next one), and that is that Von Herff uses the panzers to draw the British tanks into his anti-tank guns. Rommel sees this and starts using the same tactic.
    2
  12142. Of course they were. But that was in November. The Axis weren't tearing holes in their own lines in September.
    2
  12143. They're part of the 100th Jäger Division. They're moving into Stalingrad now, but they came into play right from the beginning of the campaign (episode 1 onwards). They've just been on the Don for a few episodes
    2
  12144. I put manual subtitles in. The problem is that the auto-generated ones appear only AFTER the video is published and so I have to delete them. But you can still select the manual ones
    2
  12145. If you ignore the reasons for the war, yes
    2
  12146. Oh no! What happened?
    2
  12147. I don't know. But judging from the diary of the 6th Army, it looks like they wanted this anyway, so it doesn't matter if Hitler gave them permission, or if he ordered it in the first place
    2
  12148. I've added it to my wish list, and don't worry, just because there is an English version (Blood Red Snow) doesn't mean I won't purchase it at all :)
    2
  12149. I do need a hand on a couple of things actually. I need to know which Russian books are the best (unbiased or truthful) on the battle of Stalingrad, and I will also need help in pronouncing certain names - especially place names. I'll come up with a list at some point
    2
  12150. Well, when I've learnt German and move on to the Russian, I'll demand every one of your comments to be in Russian ;)
    2
  12151. I won't be mentioning any names... mainly because I don't want to create 'drama'. I just want to tackle the historical arguments ("Hitler privatized the economy!"), and maybe address some of the smears (e.g. "TIK hates Jews!" - yes, people have been saying that, and it's ridiculous.)
    2
  12152. But I am a Capitalist, since I'm a private individual worker who owns his own means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12153. You don't know the historic definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12154. I know, but there's no room :(
    2
  12155. Because dominion countries weren't in Europe. The British were alone in Europe, not the world.
    2
  12156. @Ryan To - not had time to play it, sadly. Barely got my PC running at the moment!
    2
  12157. @Vinny Siracusa - you must have heard of Coppa and the FTC issue?
    2
  12158. Critical thinking time! Let's start with Hitler - you don't think that Hitler, writing in December 1941 (after the invasion began) is a reliable source here? Again, he's writing after the events - hindsight 20/20. And doesn't want to come across as the aggressor. Show me evidence of Hitler saying this stuff before the invasion. And I don't normally quote from Wikipedia, but the fact their article is entitled "Stalin's alleged speech of 19 August 1939" I think says a lot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27s_alleged_speech_of_19_August_1939 And Stalin gave a speech at the Frunze Military Academy at the Kremlin did he? That's two different locations. Therefore I'm calling into question your source.
    2
  12159. Maybe I'm misreading this. Are you implying that the Germans may have had incentive to invade the Soviet Union, but there's no proof that they did invade?
    2
  12160. The question - why the British (and France) did not declare war on the Soviet Union for invading Poland? - is a very good question that needs exploring. It has often bugged me too.
    2
  12161. Well, I'm glad you think so :)
    2
  12162. The purpose of this video was to knock down Suvorov's starting point - which was Keitel. I have followed up this video with others which shows the flaws in Suvorov's argument. For example https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw (More links in that description, plus mention videos in the video itself)
    2
  12163. Sounds like something Bob Ross would say
    2
  12164. 50,000 tanks? You mean 22,000. And as I showed two weeks ago, over 20,000 of these were obsolete light tanks. And, considering the Soviet Union was a huge landmass that had enemies in different directions (Germany, Japan, and even Britain) it makes sense they have a large army... In 1941. Let's not forget that they had mobilised AFTER the Germans had mobilised. Prior to that they only had an army of 930,000 men.
    2
  12165. No, I'm saying there's no evidence to support the idea that the Soviets were going to attack in 1941, and that the Germans didn't know for certain the Soviets would attack them either. Thus, I'm showing that the Germans really were the aggressors and Suvorov's thesis doesn't hold up to close scrutiny. And yes, I will tackle Suvorov's full thesis in a future video.
    2
  12166. I'm British. And I will qualify my criticism of memoirs in a future video. However, my question to you is this - what about the 9th of September 2001? What about the 1st of September 2002? The reality is that Keitel can't even remember the dates properly, and memoirs as a whole are not as trustworthy as other sources. But like I said in the video, every source needs to be scrutinized, not just memoirs. Blindly accepting things at face value will lead you to the wrong conclusions. "People remember significant events." - Maybe, but that doesn't mean they will speak the truth. You're questioning what I'm saying (which is fine), but you're not willing to question memoirs just because they were written by someone from the time? What Keitel says Hitler said, is just Keitel's opinion. That is the reality of the situation. In regards to the "massing on the Soviet border" idea, and Suvorov's thesis in general, I'll quote Glantz because he makes it clear that it's false - "There is no question that Soviet dogma had long spoken of "liberating" capitalist Europe by an offensive that would inspire the workers to revolt against their masters. In all probability, Stalin intended to enter the war at some future date when Germany was so overstretched that a Marxist revolution appeared possible. It is equally true, as described earlier, that the Red Army hada theoretical and organizational bias in favor of offensive action, if only to ensure that future wars were fought on foreign soil rather than that of the Soviet Union. This bias may have made Stalin and his generals overconfident until Zhukov recognized the imminent German threat in May. Having said this, there is little convincing evidence that either the Germans or the Soviets thought the latter could initiate such a conflict in 1941. On the contrary, as this chapter has documented, both sides were acutely aware of the weakness and unpreparedness of the Red Army and VVS. If anything, the German success against France and Britain caught Stalin by surprise, forcing him to confront his ideaological foe long before he had expected Hitler to defeat the West. Moreover, the Germans had been preparing their invasion since mid-1940, long before there were any indicators of Soviet preparations to attack." - Glantz, When Titan’s Clashed, P47
    2
  12167. Then be someone that encourages those people to do something
    2
  12168. And you think blind obedience in an army is fine do you? So if someone orders a soldier to shoot civilians, the soldier must do it? There's a difference between completing a military objective and committing crimes against humanity.
    2
  12169. How is this anti-German propaganda?
    2
  12170. It wouldn't be a TIK video if there wasn't a spelling mistake, or a mispronunciation of a German name.
    2
  12171. Actually Harold I do. Not everyone needs to be introduced to the topic of critical thinking, but a lot do. I have numerous people in this comment section arguing that Suvorov was correct, with only opinions to back up their claims. Clearly there is a lack of critical thinking going on. And many people are also thanking me for the video because it's opened their eyes to critical thinking. So I apologise if you found this tedious, but I suspect you're only saying that because you agree with Suvorov. And to answer your question, I'll quote from David Glantz's "When Titan's Clashed" P39 "One of the scenarios that Stalin feared most in 1941 was a German provocation, a seizure of some small salient of Soviet territory instead of an all-out invasion. This concern reinforced the tendency to plan a continuous, frontal defense along the border rather than teh type of fluid maneuver battle that had made the Red Army so effective during the Civil War. Despite belated efforts in teh spring of 1941, the new border defenses were far from complete when teh Germans attacked, and the divisions assigned to occupy those positions were scattered in garrisons throughout the border area. Forward rifle forces had garrisons as much as 80 kilometers (50 miles) away from the frontier. To avoid any provocation to the Germans, the actual border was thinly manned by NKVD secruity troops, and on 22 June, the forward Soviet defences were in many instances overrun before they could be manned." From Page 47, in a portion of Glantz's book that directly addresses Suvorov's ideas - "There is no question that Soviet dogma had long spoken of "liberating" capitalist Europe by an offensive that would inspire the workers to revolt against their masters. In all probability, Stalin intended to enter the war at some future date when Germany was so overstretched that a Marxist revolution appeared possible. It is equally true, as described earlier, that the Red Army hada theoretical and organizational bias in favor of offensive action, if only to ensure that future wars were fought on foreign soil rather than that of the Soviet Union. This bias may have made Stalin and his generals overconfident until Zhukov recognized the imminent German threat in May. Having said this, there is little convincing evidence that either the Germans or the Soviets thought the latter could initiate such a conflict in 1941. On the contrary, as this chapter has documented, both sides were acutely aware of the weakness and unpreparedness of the Red Army and VVS. If anything, the German success against France and Britain caught Stalin by surprise, forcing him to confront his ideaological foe long before he had expected Hitler to defeat the West. Moreover, the Germans had been preparing their invasion since mid-1940, long before there were any indicators of Soviet preparations to attack."
    2
  12172. I'm very much aware of the dark shadows looming over British history.
    2
  12173. I have videos explaining how Churchill was an idiot, and how the British Empire committed crimes against humanity (e.g. Dresden, and Operation Keelhaul). Swing and a miss on your part. So, rather than pretend to have watched my content, why don't you close your mouth and watch this playlist of videos detailing in extreme detail why the Red Army was totally unprepared for war in 1941, and why (therefore) Suvorov's preventive strike idea is wrong on multiple accounts https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp
    2
  12174. You're very welcome :)
    2
  12175. Thank you! You're the first to say you like my accent, most don't haha. And just so you know, I'm aiming to release a video every Monday :)
    2
  12176. You're welcome, I'm glad you found this useful :)
    2
  12177. Thank you for your amazing comment. Let me guess, a Suvorov supporter?
    2
  12178. That question doesn't make sense. Hitler's policy was autarky and living space. This meant he didn't believe in trade and wanted Germany to have all the food and oil it needed within its borders - two resource that she lacked. If Hitler didn't invade the Soviet Union, it would fly against everything he'd done so far. In fact, he may as well not have started the war to begin with and just traded. So your question makes zero sense.
    2
  12179. Mis-steak ;)
    2
  12180. True, but people have been refering to him by his pseudonym, so I've gone with that.
    2
  12181. Exactly! Don't even take what I said as right. Go do some research and find out the truth.
    2
  12182. I hope so too, but if not, it's good to know you thought so highly of my video. Thank you
    2
  12183. I have tackled Suvorov on many occasions, not just in this video. https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw
    2
  12184. The factories only got moved after the invasion began.
    2
  12185. I have thought about doing one (or more) on the Winter War. However, it won't be until after Stalingrad at the earliest. Struggling enough as it is now to find the time to get stuff done (working a more-than full time job), so can't really commit to something new right now.
    2
  12186. It's not a belief. He did. It's belief to believe he didn't.
    2
  12187. I've been publishing videos every Monday at 5pm GMT since I made my New Years Resolutions video. I'm not sure how long I can keep this up, but I'm certainly going to try. Since making this decision, work has slowed on the "Big One" as you put it. However, it is still happening. Been working on Operation Crusader today as well.
    2
  12188. Thank's Wotan! More to follow :)
    2
  12189. Not seen that film. Would recommend the books 1984 and Animal Farm by George Orwell if you haven't read them. They don't explicitly state you should question things, but I came away thinking "am I living in a similar but different dystopian society too?"
    2
  12190. That's the question!
    2
  12191. Thank you Thar, good to hear you're enjoying these videos :)
    2
  12192. I'm not a fan, if that's what you're thinking. I just don't subscribe to the view that he was insane. He was very much deliberate in his actions, which is why he became as dangerous and as evil as he was.
    2
  12193. I cover this in the video towards the end, but essentially Keitel was following Hitler's orders, but that's not an excuse for his actions. Plus Keitel has reason to lie when he states this. Most likely, he wasn't just following orders, and was in agreement with the policy. Only after the war, when the noose was getting closer, was he playing the "It wasn't me" card.
    2
  12194. I find it annoying too. Especially because the people who think this do not provide hard evidence to support the claim, only opinions. I will follow up with a video in the future which goes into the whole debate, but I hope this video has gone some way to show that argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
    2
  12195. Please watch my Oil video too, because that explains why https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg But essentially, the British were struggling to ship the oil of the Middle East home in order to process it, so there was equally no chance for the Germans to do that too if they had gone that route. And they were struggling to supply Rommel's two to three divisions in North Africa, let alone make a major effort with larger forces. They would have had to take the Middle East by the Autumn of 1941 as well, which would have been an extremely difficult task to accomplish given the number of British troops in the area.
    2
  12196. It's not the full dismantling, just the Keitel part - which is apparently what gave Suvorov the idea for his entire thesis. I will be revisiting Suvorov in the future to properly tackle his full argument.
    2
  12197. But the Soviet army was smaller than the German army in 1941. It mobilised AFTER the Germans did, certainly as a reaction to them. It makes sense considering Germany overran western Europe and made their intentions clear they wanted living space in the East. The Germans were the aggressors.
    2
  12198. I was considering whether to bring Hess into this, but didn't have enough evidence or enough time to look into it properly. I definitely want to do a video on Hess in the future though. Don't know when it'll be, but it will happen :)
    2
  12199. In a nutshell, he's a Soviet defector (from prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union), so he hates Stalin and the Soviet Union and wants to pin the blame on them.
    2
  12200. Second!
    2
  12201. Great! Unfortunately, British Summer Time will come to an end later this month, so that may throw things out a little
    2
  12202. I had to abandon my attempt to learn German simply because of the overall work load of the channel. I got the basics down, but I couldn't grasp the odd sentence structure or the need to make every word a gender that had no bearing on reality (women are female, but girls are not, apparently, according to the German language). That's why I thought I'd get Lukas to translate the sources instead. If I didn't have the colossal workload, I would have continued. But there's only so many hours in a day.
    2
  12203. I answered that question in this video https://youtu.be/dm0H9oblK8E
    2
  12204. I answered that at the end. Since the USA was unwilling to go to war with the Soviets (because they liked the Soviets initially), and the USA was actively trying to dismantle the British Empire, Britain had to deal with its own problems.
    2
  12205. I know that, which is partly why I responded.
    2
  12206. I answered that at the end of the video.
    2
  12207. I found it on Reddit a while ago but not sure which post. So I've uploaded it here for you https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LtnEd8jXaAY0HnnwMIGOHTBj01bt6GAf/view?usp=sharing
    2
  12208. Monopolies are formed via state intervention https://mises.org/wire/blame-government-not-markets-monopoly
    2
  12209. Thanks! And nothing wrong with your conclusions. The point of the video was to see the full perspective of the battle and challenge the original perceptions people have as to why it failed. So long as you have your facts straight, all is good :)
    2
  12210. Rommel formed a 60km corridor into enemy lines along one road with three armoured and one motorized division in his dash to the wire on the 24th of November 1941. He went 60 miles in one day - the same distance to Arnhem. His corridor was also harassed from both sides. But he got there. I guess though the difference is that Montgomery's plan required Gavin to do his job and capture the Nijmegen bridge - which he failed to do. So the blame goes to Gavin, and possibly Browning.
    2
  12211. It wasn't the "Brits", it was some of the commanders within the British Army. National-social groups do not exist.
    2
  12212. You're possibly right. That said, I like to start debates because it gets people interested, and it's great to see people doing their own research to back up their positions, so I will maintain my position at this time ;)
    2
  12213. +Gripen85 glad you enjoyed it! :) I will be doing more documentaries, don't you worry! It's good that I made you at least consider an alternative view on the battle. So many people just hear the first argument and go "yep, that's it. Case closed" whereas the reality is a little different. You don't necessarily have to stick to one thing either, you can say it was a combination of Gavin at Nijmegen, ignoring Dutch resistance, and an overly ambitious plan that lead to the failure of Operation Market Garden. The only reason I concluded it was Gavin is because it's nice to say "this is the MAIN reason for failure", if that makes sense
    2
  12214. +Agrippa Maxentius thanks Agrippa! Really glad you think that :D How's things with you??
    2
  12215. +Dowly it does, but there will be more :)
    2
  12216. +99Ole99 probably. I was taught to come to a definite conclusion when I was doing my degree, so for that reason I wanted to pick one person as the one to take responsibility. Realistically it's probably a combination of factors. The point I would make though is that the battle could have been won, and it wasn't a bad plan just because it failed.
    2
  12217. I put this entire series into one video - https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=vTUC79o4Kmc And I've put the complete video into one playlist full of BATTLESTORM videos - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y And I'll admit, I was tempted to blame Browning as well as Gavin, since apparently he accepted Gavin's decision not to go for the bridge. Browning makes a host of really bad decisions in this operation, so he should shoulder a good portion of the blame. It's no wonder he tried to make Sosabowski a scapegoat after the battle, which is totally unfair.
    2
  12218. And where were you the other day?
    2
  12219. crackwiser yeah I didn't know until I checked it out, but interesting stuff
    2
  12220. Hitler's regime controlled the industries, whether they were nationalized or not. Adam Tooze's "Wages of Destruction" makes it very clear that the economy was controlled by the state within the first couple of years of its existence (definitely by 1936). Most of the criticism I'm getting is from Marxist-Socialists. Not because I'm wrong, but because they think "Marxist-Socialism" is the only form of "socialism" (since, that is their socialism). But Socialism came before Marxism, and they are distinct. I'm not saying National Socialism was Marxism, I'm saying it's a form of socialism. Many of the counter arguments made have been rendered invalid because they were providing proof that it wasn't Marxism - which I wasn't saying it was. Even some prominent academic historians get this distinction wrong. When they say "it wasn't socialism", they're actually saying "it wasn't Marxism". They treat Socialism and Marxism as synonyms, and they're not.
    2
  12221. "Just watch the video from Three Arrows about this topic." I've watched his video, and I disagree with it strongly. He thinks Socialism is Marxism. Marxism is a form of socialism, but it's not what I'm refering to when I say Socialism.
    2
  12222. "they also claim that fascism is corpratist." Oh yes, it's a way of distincing "real socialism" from failed socialisms of the past, including the one which was based on race. It's not surprising such views were expressed in a school/university, since many of the tutors are socialists. I had the same problem here in the UK. They're recruiting generations of students through state-education systems. It's disgusting when I think back that I paid to have history lecturers teach me distorted history. "What do you make of the sort of use of evoking the NAZIs by pro communism and socialism writers as the logical end point of capitalism. Has that narrative had any effect on history?" Well, that argument doesn't make any sense to me, since we know that National Socialism wasn't capitalism. How can state-control be the natural end-point of capitalism? "State Capitalism" is socialism. It's purely a way of distancing themselves from National Socialism, distance themselves from state ownership (which is socialism, but by denying it they can keep promoting the ideal of socialism which attracts so many people) and continue to spout the evils of capitalism by dumping a failed socialist regime onto the Right and calling it capitalism. Socialists do this all the time - saying something that's in direct contradiction to the reality of the situation in order to blame their opponents. As another example, the idea that Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor (making him good). But when you look at it, he stole from the Sheriff (Shire Reeve, or state official) and gave the money back to the tax-payer (rich or poor). Somehow this was twisted 180 degrees to promote socialism, which then ironically implements high taxation policies on everyone in order to fund their wellfare programs. The historical literature of the previous 100 years is full of socialist propaganda and word-twisting, so it's definitely had its effect. I'm not saying all academic historians studying this period are socialists, but a lot are. This makes sense since they are funded by the state (the public sector) which is common control. Those that aren't socialists have been massively influenced by the Left's view of history to the point that they don't even realise it. In Richard Evans' recent Third Reich books, he says - "Despite the change of name, however, it would be wrong to see Nazism as a form of, or an outgrowth from, socialism. True, as some have pointed out, its rhetoric was frequently egalitarian, it stressed the need to put common needs above the needs of the individual, and it often declared itself opposed to big business and international finance capital. Famously, too, antisemitism was once declared to be ‘the socialism of fools’. But from the very beginning, Hitler declared himself implacably opposed to Social Democracy and, initially to a much smaller extent, Communism: after all, the ‘November traitors’ who had signed the Armistice and later the Treaty of Versailles were not Communists at all, but the Social Democrats and their allies.” - Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Yes, National Socialism has a lot of socialist traits, but Hitler was anti-democratic, and anti-Marxist, therefore wasn't socialist? I respect Evans a lot for his work in the Irving vs Lipstadt Trial, and I think he's a great historian who knows his stuff about the Third Reich, but from this quote it is clear that he doesn't understand that while Marxism is a form of Socialism, it isn't Socialism in itself. Up until this point in the book, he was describing socialism over and over, and then the "it's not real socialism" comes out. There are so many books like this or similar that I'm beginning to worry about the future. I'm glad I'm not the only one pointing out this huge distortion of history, but it's worrying to say the least. It has had its effect on today's politics. By placing the National Socialists on the Right-wing of politics (where they don't fit), they can then paint the entire Right as evil-racists. Again, this confuses a lot of people because most people on the Right are not racist, while a lot of the Left are racist. Identity politics is all about racism, sexism and classism! You're not racist for thinking one race is better or worse than another: you're racist for judging people by the colour of their skin, even if it is favourable to that "race". Luckily, with time, the distortions of history are corrected (usually once the emotions are taken out of the picture). I'm confident that people in the future will look back on our era and say "these idiots thought that National Socialism wasn't socialist!"
    2
  12223. Private ownership was abolished and those companies were controlled internally by the bureaucracy of the state. They weren't free independent corporations at all - they were controlled by the state. Therefore it was Socialism.
    2
  12224. Yeah, I've seen their arguments. They're not using the correct definition of (pre-Marxist) socialism, and think Marxism is the original Socialism, which it is not. This is the reason why National Socialists are critical of academic historians - because most academic historians are looking at National Socialist ideology through a Marxist lense.
    2
  12225. The best squad
    2
  12226. Exactly. Thanks for commenting
    2
  12227. If you believe in equality - that everyone should have an equal chance to do and achieve anything you want to do - and shouldn't be restricted or judged by the colour of your skin, gender, nationality or class, and that people should receive the fruits of their labour (get paid for how much you work), and that you shouldn't have your pay forcefully taken from you, and that you are fully responsible for your own life, then you are a liberal. This is called liberalism. If you don't support individual freedom, if you support government-control of individual people (the means of production), and a restriction of individual rights and freedom, and believe that people should be guilty by association because they are part of a "bad" social group ("all people of this class, race, gender or nationality are bad"), and believe that people should be judged by the colour of their skin or gender or class or nationality etc, and think that the fruits of your labour should be forcefully taken from you to be given to others, and that you're not responsible for your life because the government is, then you are a socialist. This is called socialism. Mild socialism (roads, fire brigade and army) is fine, but too much doesn't work, because when you have a community/public/state suppress people's lives and take everything from them, they live in misery, poverty, and slavery.
    2
  12228. I try to be, but it's impossible to be neutral. That's why I use as many sources as I can to try and strike a balance.
    2
  12229. Don't worry, I've been working on it. I should have a video coming on Tuesday which might not seem relevant at first, but actually is. Because NS isn't Marxism, but is a form of socialism, it manifests itself slightly different. That said, Hitler's regime did have control over the German economy, and actually crushed capitalism (which he referred to as "international Jewish finance"). Yes he didn't formally nationalize the industries, but he was still in total control over them by using state officials to run them from within. And that's the point - we've got a bunch of Marxists telling us that a totalitarian regime wasn't totalitarian. You can't have a totalitarian regime without total control of the economy. Either Hitler was in total control of the economy (socialism) or he wasn't totalitarian. And because people are denying his socialism, it's creating massive distorts that are having huge effects, as I will discuss in my Tuesday video.
    2
  12230. martaxsasLT almost! I would have said that too tbh
    2
  12231. Toni112007 good suggestion! I will do ;)
    2
  12232. That's the belief I had too when I was a socialist. How wrong I was... You will benefit most from the economics videos if you pay attention
    2
  12233. I've done a video outlying the definition of Fascism (Wikipedia is totally incorrect by the way) and showing why National Socialism is not Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12234. See bingobango's comment if you can, he explains it well. It helps big business and the Central Banks. Also, the knock on effects of "monetary policy" are even worse! Too complicated to explain it here, but I've explained the consequences of "monetary policy" in a previous video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  12235. Fantastic! I'm really glad to see you absorbed in the books!! They're truly eye opening, especially for anyone who's not heard of the concepts before (e.g. me when I was a Socialist)
    2
  12236. When you say "Capitalist", I'm assuming you mean "Western", since none of the countries are capitalist. Name a country that uses capital (gold) as it's means of exchange, and does so on a free unregulated market without taxation or fiat currency, and then you can start talking about capitalism. Right now, the international corporations are creating the most pollution, with China leading the way. Global warming might be happening, but the solution is deregulation, not more regulation. Regulations actually lead to the increase of emissions. This happens indirectly through the principal of the "seen and the unseen". You may also consider the arguments presented here https://youtu.be/IfGySQ8qHZU
    2
  12237. The best one in English is probably Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries". But Mises's "Omnipotent Government" has sections on it too, and he really makes the connection since he was Austrian and fled when the Nazis took over. I recently got "The Age of Inflation" too, which has sections on the Nazi economy too. Unfortunately, there are very few books on the Nazi economy in English. And most of the books on it (e.g. Wages of Destruction by Tooze) show the Socialism, but then try to persuade the reader that it was Capitalism, which is a false conclusion, as I explained in my Hitler's Socialism video. As Zitelmann explains in "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction" (a very hard book to find in English) historians have largely neglected the Nazi economy, which explains why there's hardly any books on the topic. Zitelmann's book is all about Hitler's ideology, and really dives deep on the principles of the ideology in relation to economics, but doesn't go into the economics of the Third Reich. Still a recommend read if you can get hold of a copy.
    2
  12238. The Nazis nationalized the economy under the policy of Gleichschaltung (synchronization), creating a Zwangswirtschaft (compulsory economy). I outlined this in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video, using 107 sources, 350 direct on-screen references, and numerous quotes and more from historians. Here's the link https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I know other people, and Wikipedia, and some historians think Hitler was a Capitalist, and that's what I once believed too. Then I did my homework and discovered that the narrative I was spoon fed at college and in the books was wrong. Take a look at the timestamps in the description of that video and you'll see I cover quite a lot of topics to convincingly explain Hitler's actual ideology.
    2
  12239.  @tyvamakes5226  Mosley was a socialist. He was a Labour Party member before becoming a Fascist (a bit like Mussolini).
    2
  12240.  @tyvamakes5226  Well, people have asked me to do a video on Oswald Mosley, so I think that will be the first video of mine where the vast majority of the sources I use will be primary sources
    2
  12241. "I support free markets but they need restrictions too." Then you don't support free markets. - "Otherwise the wealth eventually concentrates into oligopolies or monopolies." No it doesn't, not in a free market. You only get oligarchies and monopolies in a state managed market, and every single instance of a monopoly you can think of was created because of state intervention. Standard Oil, German Cartels... it was the State that made them what they were. - "Both of which end up being almost as bad, if not as bad, for society as communism. Which is the ultimate monopoly." Monopolies are bad, but hardly as bad as the Killing Fields of Cambodia. - "History shows that people get lazy, mean, and authoritarian (to maintain dominance) in both situations." You mean like right now? If you get rewarded for working, you're not incentivised to get lazy. The free market rewards you for working, unlike the state managed economy which altruistically steals from the producers and gives it to the lazy looters. - "It’s competition and a certain amount of government anti-trust over-site in a free market case that keeps people honest and ambitious." The government is dishonest and has no competition, resulting in a lack of trust, and a terrible economy when they do intervene. This concept of yours has been debunked numerous times and shown to only make the problem worse. - "The above said, history clearly shows that there are aspects of an economy where a socialist approach is best" Socialism ALWAYS makes the problems worse. Never, in any situation, is socialism the better result. Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics" shows this (amongst others). - "I reject your argument that they are mutually exclusive and if you have any historical evidence of a modern nation sized society to support your contention I’d like you to reference it." If you don't have evidence of a motorcar I guess we shouldn't invent the wheel. - "As far as the people who say that things like the police can be privatized. Sure that works for the wealthy, who can afford private security, but ends up being a disaster for the poor and eventually for all of society." Meanwhile the state police in the UK are cracking the skulls of the poor and are implementing a racist and sexist two-tier system at the bidding of their pedo-overlords. There are actually more private security forces in the UK than there are state policemen, since businesses and individuals have realised that the state police are completely worthless and are only out to get them. - "Just look at the degradation of communities that have recently defunded the police in the US." They still steal their money off them in the form of taxes and inflation. So this isn't an example of a free market, because in a free market, they would have their money back, and would have the freedom to form their own police forces. The state takes their money and leaves them to it, which is not a free market.
    2
  12242. It does. Wake up.
    2
  12243. "Shareholdeer capitalism is wrong and has to be ended. I strongly disagree with you in this regard." I want shareholder capitalism to be ended too. We need a free market, not capitalism.
    2
  12244. America doesn't have free market healthcare.
    2
  12245. The German people didn't own the industries? Who did then? The National Socialist German Workers' Party was in every industry running them. The German people were in charge. Stop being ignorant.
    2
  12246. I'm not identical or interchangeable with any other person on this planet.
    2
  12247. Capitalism is bad. Free markets are good.
    2
  12248. Individuals have different noses, penises, medical conditions, IQ and testosterone. You have no argument.
    2
  12249. If you read "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, he'll give you the specific policies, dates and impacts. That's actually why I recommend it in the video. His work (not just this one book) is systematic in it's approach and hammers you with the facts. And just like me, he's an ex-socialist too.
    2
  12250. "TIK has an idealized, unrealistic view of humans, separated from uncomfortable biological facts." Facts like the fact we are individuals with brains, not brain-dead collectives. - "Among others, there is the fact that we are indeed, undeniably, a type of animal." Our bodies have natural processes, but our minds are capable of thinking, separating us from the animals. - "A pack animal." No we're not. - "There is nothing "magical" about us." Exactly! There's no collective 'racial soul' uniting us in "spirit". - "As a group we function by instinct." We don't need to operate in groups, and instinct is an animal response, not a human response (outside of car crashes and such). - "It is why libertarian, ancap views (what TIK might term 'true/actual capitalism') never have and never will resonate with us." These are not libertarian nor ancap view, and I'm sure the libertarians and ancaps will back me up on that, since my argument doesn't come from their ideas.
    2
  12251. "There are distinct differences between different peoples" Yes, and that distinction goes right down to the individual level.
    2
  12252. Even though those speeches were available before this point... AI just made them into video format. I've had Hitler's translated speeches in PDF form for years.
    2
  12253. "I think the main issue you forgot to mention is the social degeneracy that is rampant in the West." That's because of the welfare state. The reason why people are emigrating to the West is purely because the State rewards unproductive members of society - a thing most people want. The Nazis are pro-welfare state, as are most religions, and the vast majority of the people in society. I'm seen as "evil" for calling for a free market, yet that is precisely the thing you chastise me for, unwittingly reinforcing the immigration policies you don't like.
    2
  12254. "Aren't you in favour of a social hierarchy based on merit? You yourself said that taxing the rich means taxing the poor (I agree). You weren't absolutely explicit on it, but I would be surprised to learn that you somehow still want the successful business man to have the same social status as a cleaner. You don't have to advocate for legal priliveges for aristocrats or Aryans to be in favour of social hierarchies." There are business hierarchies, but they're economic hierarchies, not social hierarchies. And those hierarchies only apply to the individual businesses, not some grand hierarchy that incorporates society. The business hierarchy also does not assume that individuals within it are all part of the all-consuming "collective". So no, the rest of your argument falls apart. Individuals can be higher economically and have more social status than others, but there is no grand "hierarchy".
    2
  12255. I guess there are some benefits to a planned economy. Perhaps controlling every aspect of the economy is a little too much, but a healthy dose of state control (e.g. NHS or utilities) is a good thing. But don't forget, there's little point in producing more tanks if you don't have the fuel to run them https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    2
  12256. Haha if it entices at least one person to click, then I'm happy :D
    2
  12257. The Red Army was in his way. One of his pincers didn't even get going. The other barely reached half way.
    2
  12258. Just wait until I get my Stalingrad documentary out ;) if you haven't already, check out my other 'Battlestorm' videos (assuming you haven't already) if you want to see the style of the documentary I'm making. A good example is my latest one on the Bruneval Raid https://youtu.be/6EiOG_yvT04
    2
  12259. I'll be going into a lot more detail in my Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary (when it's finally done - still miles away yet), but effectively 6th Army is ground down inside the city as it slowly but surely fights through to the Volga over many weeks and months. This allows the Soviets to prepare a massive counterstroke in late October to early November (Operation Uranus) which then encircles 6th Army. Essentially, Chuikov's purpose inside Stalingrad was to buy time for a counterstroke - although it's worth noting that survival was the aim of the game at the beginning of the battle and it only became a delaying action later.
    2
  12260. Thanks Edward!
    2
  12261. I've tried tackling the myth of superior Wehrmacht in a couple videos and it didn't go down too well. I will return to the topic some day. Which books and papers are they?
    2
  12262. Thank you! I certainly will do my best. And if you liked this one, I think you'll like next Monday's video
    2
  12263. Thank you sir!
    2
  12264. I wanted to make it simple, and get straight to the point :)
    2
  12265. Thank you!
    2
  12266. I'll be doing a video next week on this exact topic ;)
    2
  12267. Where was the western front in 1942? If you're talking about North Africa, Rommel had 3 German divisions. During the Stalingrad airlift, the Tunisian campaign had barely started, and there were no serious losses there until later.
    2
  12268. Well, I'm glad you didn't call it a "fault" with the video, at least :) My aim is to get one video out every Monday (this was actually my New Years Resolution, and I've stuck to it so far). Obviously that puts a lot of pressure on me, but I'm wanting to do it more and more. I definitely could have trimmed this by 5 minutes or more. And it frustrates me because I want things to be at least 99% right, you know? But you're right in your third sentence - the goal is to get something out each week. Slight errors or (in this case) some imperfections have to be accepted for the greater goal. As someone once said "don't get it right, get it written" (nanowrimo) and I think that's right. Obviously getting it right is the aim too. Quite surprised you hadn't heard of Demyansk! You know what, I never thought that people wouldn't have heard of it and now my forehead hurts from slapping it so hard. Why didn't I think of that!?!? Thank you for your feedback! I'm going to take it away and do something with it for future videos :)
    2
  12269. You've very welcome, thanks for watching!
    2
  12270. Thanks! Will do
    2
  12271. Thank you!
    2
  12272. But they managed it at Demyansk?
    2
  12273. Think there might be an issue with the Stalingrad breakout... considering it didn't happen!
    2
  12274. It's all to do with the opening of the Soviet archives. New information is coming out. Let me add a couple names to that list that you should read - Robert Citino and David Glantz :)
    2
  12275. I highly recommend them if you want to know more about the operational side of these battles. I haven't read the one-volume version of the Stalingrad Trilogy, but I've heard good things. If it's anything like the 5-book-trilogy, then it'll be solid. He's really detailed and thorough, which is what I like, and I'm sure you'll like it too :)
    2
  12276. I was counting both aircraft and sorties.
    2
  12277. Hi Thomas! It's definitely something to consider. Have played some HOI4 and have videos on my channel of it. They weren't particularly popular, and I'm interested in the history more than gaming now (little time!). But I'll certainly consider doing another HOI4 video or two in the future
    2
  12278. Good question, and I don't know. I have a book on Burma but not had time to read it. As it currently stands, my focus is on the European Theatre so I've not done any real studying of the Far Eastern Theatre. Wonder if someone else could help answer this?
    2
  12279. I'm not decided yet. The only reason I may not is because by the time the Battle of Nikolayevka happens, the events outside the pocket no longer really have an impact on Sixth Army. That's not to say I won't cover it AFTER I've done Stalingrad. I do want to go beyond Stalingrad and cover the Third Battle of Kharkov and so on. So it would be good to do an intermediate documentary on the event between Stalingrad and the Third Battle of Kharkov, which would then cover Nikolayevka, if that makes sense.
    2
  12280. If you like this, you'll probably enjoy next Monday's video too :)
    2
  12281. Thank you sir!
    2
  12282. Spoiler: no, they didn't.
    2
  12283. Un-notification squad!
    2
  12284. There's a scale in the bottom left corner
    2
  12285. johnny onetothree I'm deliberately trying to ask questions that trick you haha
    2
  12286. Gary Thomas nope!
    2
  12287. Everybody's Fascist, except for the Fascists!
    2
  12288. Free markets don't evolve into capitalism naturally, only unnaturally via the intervention of the state. At the very least, what is needed is a separation of Banks and State, just like we have a separation of Church and State.
    2
  12289. Thank you! I'm genuinely trying my best here to understand, unlike the breadtubers!
    2
  12290. Fascist corporations are not the same as their modern equivalents. Fascist corporations were owned by the State. Mussolini even said two thirds of the Italian economy was nationalised.
    2
  12291. Later narratives say it happened on the 31st of August. But during Naujock's first interrogations, he said it happened at least two weeks before the start of the war, putting it in mid-August rather than the 31st.
    2
  12292. What flavour?
    2
  12293. My thoughts exactly
    2
  12294. It's important because lots of people still push the narrative that Hitler had to go to war due to the"fact" that he was being attacked. Thus Hitler was acting defensively, not aggressively. Well, as this video shows, that's not really the case
    2
  12295. Yes, my own comments are being deleted
    2
  12296. Pretty much, yeah. ~22nd July 1942 to ~2nd February 1943 is a long time.
    2
  12297. Yes, possibly. I need to message him, which I will do soon
    2
  12298. It's right there in episode 1 :)
    2
  12299. @Gameer 00 - ah okay, I was wondering how they could be covering 1939 in June if the war only started in September (assuming they're not covering the Japanese, who started in 1937). I wonder what their "day to day" coverage of Stalingrad will look like when they eventually get to it
    2
  12300. That was actually my mistake. I made a false assumption
    2
  12301. Battlestorm Retail would be far too bloody. Would make Stalingrad look like a child's playground
    2
  12302. Off the top of my head, I believe it ends up in either the Italian 8th Army or the Romanian 3rd Army. I think it stays in the Serafimovich area until after Operation Uranus begins.
    2
  12303. It's a small village north of Stalingrad. Not sure if it's counted as part of Stalingrad's suburbs or not, but it's close
    2
  12304. I have not, no
    2
  12305. They weren't at full strength at the beginning of the Stalingrad Campaign (from ~22nd of July 1942), and it's not even clear if they were at full strength at the start of Fall Blau (28th June 1942).
    2
  12306. My editor has been slowly working on the next episode but is struggling with Blender. I still need more time to recover from it, so I can't commit to returning to it right now.
    2
  12307. I did mention them! And I mentioned them in the Facsism Defined video.
    2
  12308. Labour unions are a hierarchy, and hierarchies ultimately lead to a small group of people at the top controlling the whole structure. It's simply power. All about power and control of a faithful populace.
    2
  12309. Yes you are! Congratulations!
    2
  12310. That's not happened yet. They get to the airfield around Christmas time if I remember correctly.
    2
  12311. Second! But very close!
    2
  12312. I had music in the background at the beginning of this series, but a lot of people were very adamant that I stop putting music in it, so I did. Apparently, they found it too distracting. I disagreed, but realised that I can save a good amount of time if I don't put music in it, since I have to create the tracks myself and then add them in, which is difficult on a tight schedule. It certainly doesn't help that this series is over 30 hours long, and is a huge battle with many moving parts. Crusader was complex, but a little more manageable. This, not so much. I'm aware of the "edutainment" issue though.
    2
  12313. Holy Manstein must save Princess Paulus!
    2
  12314. I said I was pausing it, not ending it.
    2
  12315. "Therefore, as you can see they did intensive research and I think you are being rather unjustly harsh in your comments." Where is the harshness? I don't understand how you can say I'm being harsh for stating that there are no enemy units between Pienaar and the Sidi Rezegh area? Secondly, I'm not saying they didn't do intensive research, but relying on phone calls to von Mellenthin and Schmidt many years after the battle (which is actually the same flaw that Shirer does with Halder in the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) does not bode well. Ultimately it comes down to the simple fact of - which Axis unit is between Pienaar and the Sidi Rezegh area? Do the books you have state which unit was between Pienaar and Sidi Rezegh? "You cannot blame SA history for being biased if you have not yet read the book." All sources are biased, with zero exceptions. However, the point is that the Official South African History has the motivation to defend Pienaar, which means it will do anything and everything in order to eek out an excuse. This is why I'm not convinced by the excuse that there was Axis units between Pienaar and Sidi Rezegh - because none of the other sources I have say there is. And I have searched again and have managed to find a second hand copy of the Official SA history. Once it arrives, I will read it and let you know what I find. (Cannot find a copy of Crisis in the Desert - the only one I can find is +£200 and, if I'm honest, I'd rather remain ignorant than pay that amount)
    2
  12316. Motives? Ok, for one, I didn't consult that source because I couldn't find it (and still can't, do you have a link?). Second, in retaliation to your last sentence claiming that this source speaks the golden truth, that is complete rubbish. No one-source holds the truth - and that is the only truth about sources. You need a convergence of evidence, and all the other sources make it clear what actually happened. Now, I'm neither for nor against what Pienaar did. In this case I'm only an observer. Apart from being entertained by Pienaar's actions, I have deliberately remained neutral on the matter here. I think a strong argument could be made for or against his actions, however an argument cannot be made in favour of the excuse you (or the SA history you quoted) stated. On the one hand he was looking out for his men, on the other he let the New Zealanders down. That's the centre of the debate. If you want to talk about that, fine, but right now I haven't made my mind up. That said, his motivations are obvious - and his decision wasn't aren't affected by the actions on the battlefield. You can quite clearly see by looking at the map that there are no enemy units in his path. The Germans and Italians aren't in that area, which is confirmed by every other source on the matter. There was nothing blocking his path at all until he got to the Siding Rezegh area. So it has nothing to do with units blocking his route. This means that the SA history has nothing to offer in this debate except confirm that it (as a source) is biased in favour of Pienaar's actions and is willing to state that the path was blocked, even though it wasn't. But that cannot be argued as that is simply not true! And it also doesn't need to be argued anyway because there's a reasonable argument to be made for Pienaar's actions, so all the SA history does it prove it's own bias. We don't need bias; Pienaar's motive was simply to keep his men from danger in a battle he thought had been lost. Inventing the idea that there were units blocking his path is a distortion that isn't required to defend his actions if you wish to defend them.
    2
  12317. Well, he didn't really need either any more.
    2
  12318. Did I said "Cockburn"? It should be "co-burn"
    2
  12319. Yep!
    2
  12320. I didn't know Shirer was in France, but yes, William Shirer
    2
  12321. Next episode is the preliminary operations - one German and two British, so there will be "action" next week. But the actual battle will start the week after.
    2
  12322. Glad you liked it :)
    2
  12323. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    2
  12324. I will explain this ‘privatization’. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    2
  12325. Interestingly, so do I. Get to chat to lots of people. It's work, but it doesn't feel like work :)
    2
  12326. I must admit it does look like some WW1 stuff they found lying around.
    2
  12327. Sorry! 😁
    2
  12328. It was a lot of work, although it wasn't as bad as some of the previous weeks. I actually got ahead slightly and managed to have half of a day off yesterday (still did 3 hours work though - normally I do about 10 hours or more a day, every day)
    2
  12329. Especially since they HATE me now - "Operational military history guy doesnt know much about political science, philosophy and economic history, and starts by reading the wrong guys (he sources Jordan Peterson, a conservative psychologist, in a discussion about interbellum political history)." https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitWehraboosSay/comments/96zy3l/uhh_tik_you_alright_there_buddy/e44h2f3 None of the above is correct. I only posted the Peterson video on Postmodernism because it's the Postmodernist tactics of Holocaust denial that I'm now going up against. I didn't link him as a source - since sources are listed in the Pinned Comments, whereas I linked to him in the description. I also have studied both economic history and politics at college. Just because I decided to listen to what Hitler was actually saying and figure out exactly what Nationalsocialism is (which I should have done a lot earlier), doesn't mean I'm suddenly anti-socialist, which people now think I am.
    2
  12330. Are you shaking your Tiktags at me?
    2
  12331. Some history tutors can't teach. And a lot choose really boring topics for some reason.
    2
  12332. Haha possibly. Bit strangeone person has disliked the video this early. I wish people would leave comments when they dislike a video, just so I know why. So far, I don't think there's been any negative comments.
    2
  12333. I may do in the future. But this project is taking up almost all of my time right now. Plus, after Crusader comes Courland, then Stalingrad, as I've promised.
    2
  12334. Why?
    2
  12335. Thank you :)
    2
  12336. You can get it at the site leapinghorsemen.com
    2
  12337. This wasn't a division, this was a regiment.
    2
  12338. Thanks Seto!
    2
  12339. Not right now, but eventually. I am a little reluctant after the reaction I got from this video though...
    2
  12340. Yep, but it's an amazing book. Not a good narrative, but a fantastic reference piece. Wish a lot more books were like that. You pay for quality.
    2
  12341. Nice suggestions, Phil. Any recommendations for books on these particular units? I'll be mentioning the Russian Paratroopers in WW2 who fought at the Battle of Stalingrad, during that video. You did know they got converted to Guards Rifle Divisions, right?
    2
  12342. Thanks!
    2
  12343. Tried :D
    2
  12344. Thanks sis!
    2
  12345. That's not a bad idea to be honest
    2
  12346. Hey Kirk, see 15:35 of this video here https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY where I explain what my future battlestorm plans are/were
    2
  12347. My second video in this series will show you where he was https://youtu.be/wMv9YN11xkY
    2
  12348. Thank you, glad you liked it :)
    2
  12349. Haha thanks 😂
    2
  12350. One thing to note is that I only have the British perspective. I cannot read Italian, nor are there Italian sources translated into English. Their perspective may shed light on the situation. That said, I think the answer lies in surprise, supplies, and taking out the Italians piecemeal. And the fact that half the Italian units were Blackshirt units (so, not as well trained), plus those that weren't only had two regiments, not three. So when you see an Italian division, it's smaller than a British one, meaning two need to go up against one British division to have a chance of defeating it. Although, I am talking in general and there may have been exceptions. It also sounds as though the infantry didn't have adequate antitank guns, and the Italian artillery (which were well trained and lead) didn't have adequate anti-tank rounds to knock out the Matilda tanks, and were also isolated once the infantry were overwhelmed. But again, only the Italian perspective will confirm this or not.
    2
  12351. +BakEsteR1984 next is Rommel's intro to North Africa. But the Battle of Crete would be great to cover, especially since it started on my birthday (not the same year, obviously)
    2
  12352. They will be coming later. I'm working on the battles in chronological order so I can fully understand and appreciate everything prior to getting to the later battles like El Alamein. If I skipped ahead, I don't think we could fully grasp how the campaign had progressed, nor how commanders like Montgomery stacked up to previous ones like O'Connor.
    2
  12353. Yeah I don't know why, but I will get it right the next time I have to pronounce it :)
    2
  12354. Thank you very much for the feedback. Constructive criticism is great! I'll do my best to pronounce the names. Sometimes it's difficult, since some of the place names aren't in existence now, or I couldn't find the correct pronunciation online. If I can't find them, I may have to guess. The reason for the black screen where the maps ended was because of the animation software I was using. I'm going to (attempt to) use different software for the next one which will hopefully make everything look better anyway. I'm not sure I can add colour since it is a desert war, but I'll see what I can do. And I can't change history and make the Italians win :P
    2
  12355. They didn't have a good army, which is why even Graziani managed to win there ;)
    2
  12356. I've got it on my wishlist and I will buy that book when I get to 1942/43. I've only just reached 1941 and have the whole of the Western Desert Campaign to get through before the US landings in Vichy France territory. I wish that book covered the whole of the "War in North Africa" like it claims because as I keep saying on my Twitter, there aren't many that do :(
    2
  12357. I think that's fine if you want to blame Browning overall. But point 2 is incorrect because the bridge was clear. It was the delay of 6 hours of not moving to the bridge that allowed the SS panzer division to move down to take it. If they had sent the battalion to the bridge straight away after landing, and not had that battalion sat defending the Grosbeek Heights for no reason (since the other units could have and did defend the drop zone) then they could have taken the bridge no problem. This is my point: the SS panzer division wasn't waiting for them at the bridge. The bridge was clear - the battalion just didn't move to it.
    2
  12358. Yes I've watched some of Sargon's videos. Good guy, and I agree with him morally on a lot of things. He does need a course in capitalist economics though, and to realise that the National Socialists are on the Left not the Right (despite claiming they are). If he realised this, and understood what capitalism actually was, he'd have a much easier time of it, and wouldn't be slipping into the nationalist camp (I think he's confusing nationalism with patriotism, which is dangerous).
    2
  12359.  @despooked  Private control is capitalism. If the government has control, it is no longer private control, and therefore not capitalism. A state is an organized community - a group. It is non-private. This is why we call the state the "public sector". The word "public" comes from the Latin word "publikum" which means "non-individual, and state". A group of people - workers (class), Germans (race), women (gender), Italians (national - Fascism) - in charge of this community makes them the state. This is what socialism is - it is public/collective/group/common/state control of the economy, usually in the name of the group. The state in control of the economy is therefore not-capitalist, and is socialist by its very definition. Central economic planning isn't private control, it is state control therefore it is not capitalism. And since state control of the economy is socialism, central economic planning is therefore socialist. So, while Japan and South Korea may have economies that are mostly capitalist, they can have socialist policies, like their central planning.
    2
  12360. @despooked None of that disproves that the Nazi-state had total control of the economy. The only one that touches upon that is your third point, but as the sources in my previous comment make blatantly clear, the Nazi economy was absolutely controlled by the state.
    2
  12361. "@TIK I would love to see those publications that confirm Hitler was a socialist" Gunter Reimann's "Vampire Economy" (written 1939 by a Marxist hiding in Germany, so primary source document you can get online for free). The Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933 which abolished private property rights. Adam Tooze's "Wages of Destruction." Temin's “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” Zitelmann's “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” I could go on but that's enough for now. "@TIK Nazism rejected the Marxistconcepts" Yes, because Socialism came before Marxism. I'm not saying Hitler was a Marxist, I'm saying he was a Socialist. Socialism has nothing to do with class. It is simply state-control of the economy. And Wikipedia is not a trustworthy source. As I've said many times, the people writing Wikipedia articles think Hitler was a Fascist. Hitler was not a Fascist, he was a National Socialist.
    2
  12362. Being neutral in my agenda does not mean I'm neutral in my arguments. My agenda is to find the truth, for my own sake, so I can learn from history. All that matters to me is evidence, interpretation, and a solid argument. The evidence, interpretation and argument in favour of Hitler being a socialist completely crushes the idea that he wasn't. And trust me, I know counter-arguments very well. They're based on distortions, lies and the agenda to deny that anything was "real" socialism.
    2
  12363. Classic Liberalism isn't Libertarianism. Libertarianism is basically socialism at this point.
    2
  12364. "We are not natural born killers, it's not an instinct, we can't hunt," You have a very very naive view of the human condition. The fight or flight response is very real. We have the instinct to survive. It is built within us. Starve a human and see how long it takes them to find a big stick. "can mowgli suddenly realise that he is not an animal," You're mixing the word "social-group" with the term "learning". These are not the same thing. And your point three is just a statement and nothing more - a statement that I disagree with.
    2
  12365. Our human instincts are built on fight and flight responses. Our ancestors killed to survive. However, in a modern society murder is a crime because crimes are fundamentally a rejection of the idea of civilisation (us cooperating together). So as civilised people we consciously decide to go against our instincts of murder and theft, in order to reap the benefits of a civilized society. It's a conscious effort. Well, just like we consciously decide not to commit crimes, we can consciously decide not to believe in artificial social groups. Dividing society into groups splits it, and is (again) fundamentally a rejection of the idea cooperating in a civilized society. Please make the conscious effort to be a part of this society.
    2
  12366. And I'm saying it doesn't.
    2
  12367. Someone's gender, skin colour etc is about as relevant as someone's hair cut. It's a cosmetic feature, nothing more. Social creatures cooperate. That doesn't mean they lose their individuality.
    2
  12368. @The Colonel. Individuals make up groups. Forming groups is good. But the group should serve the individual. The individual should not become a slave to the group.
    2
  12369. You mean, if you value your psychological health, don't split the world into artificial social groups that don't exist and them blame them for your own inadequacies or for conspiring against you. Believing in groups is an instant agenda-mentality. Don't do it
    2
  12370. Thank you, glad to hear that 🙂
    2
  12371. Don't fool yourself: the archives are not reliable. Every source is written by flawed human individuals.
    2
  12372. I know you're having a laugh, but I actually don't drink tea. I use "cheers" on occasion, but rarely-if-ever the word "mate" because it annoys me (sometimes use it as a joke though). And I have no turf to guard. Clearly I ain't a Brit mate, cheers! [drinks tea]
    2
  12373. No, I have bias, I don't have a 'bad' agenda. There's a difference there. And no, I don't think being British is ingrained. I speak English, but I have no affiliation with "my" country.
    2
  12374. This isn't about bias. Everyone is biased. This is about neutrality in agenda, which is massively different to bias.
    2
  12375. Apart from the fact that my Patron asked the question, being a classic-liberal is absolutely the way to look at history from as neutral a perspective as possible (since it does mean you can still be critical of other classic-liberals and not undermine your own ideology, if that makes sense). If more historians approached history with this mindset, I think it would benefit the entire community and the way we perceive history. Many historical topics (especially WW2) would be seen in a completely different and more neutral and honest light. But it does have the added benefit of reducing the "criticism" I get of people accusing me of being pro-this and anti-that. This was a secondary consideration for me, although I did want to talk about this at some point. So paradoxically, talking about individuality over collectivism not only clears my name (a selfish reason) but also benefits everyone by promoting a great mentality to have in history and in life (a selfless reason).
    2
  12376. Since murder and slavery is wrong, I am against those things. And I believe that the best way to protect the individual from such horrors is to give them individual rights equal to all other individuals. I believe that no group should not take away those rights in favour of themselves, because history teaches us that when you remove the rights of individuals, you end up with Gulags, death camps and Great Leaps Forward.
    2
  12377. No, I'm not defending a group, that's the point.
    2
  12378. Ok, so which group am I defending then?
    2
  12379. You mean the ideology of "we are all individuals and aren't part of a group"? Damn, I must be so biased towards a particular group or something.
    2
  12380. Yes, because everyone is biased. But your agenda can be neutral.
    2
  12381. I could but it's too long a word to be honest, and means the same thing in my head at least.
    2
  12382. Yeah I don't get the open hostility towards Ancaps, or Moses and Rothbard. I'm not saying I agree with them completely on everything, or that they didn't make mistakes, but I've seen nothing that warrants the scathing hatred that people display towards them.
    2
  12383. On the topic of selfishness, it's probably best to listen to this https://youtu.be/HiVX4mLaZ0k I'm also not an AnCap for the reasons you stated, although I am close.
    2
  12384. According to you, what this guy did was impossible https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI
    2
  12385. The tax rate here in the UK is 60%, and if you say bad words online you get beaten up and go to jail. What's the tax rate under your protection racket (your State)?
    2
  12386. Yes you are! Congrats!
    2
  12387. I hearted your comment when you replied to someone else, but I'll heart it again. I think it's an interesting observation.
    2
  12388. As an ex-socialist who was taught Keynesian economics, I hope one day you can read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt.
    2
  12389. I mean, punk is meant to be "anti-establishment", which means socialist, and therefore pro-establishment. It's always been a farce.
    2
  12390. You don't understand the history of the United States.
    2
  12391. I actually haven't played HOI4 since 2019... I was tempted to go back to it a while back, but I don't have enough time to commit to long-term campaign type games, or many games for that matter.
    2
  12392. Third, sorry!
    2
  12393. I answered this in the video. You could also search for "Mises Market for Security" on YouTube or Google.
    2
  12394. You don't have a free market health care system in the US https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  12395. It's on my reading list 👍
    2
  12396. Both.
    2
  12397. Children are dependent on their parents until they fly the next. Adults are not dependent on the State, unless they haven't grown up.
    2
  12398. Well, I'm not a capitalist. I'm for the free market, so I agree with you.
    2
  12399. Why am I utopian?
    2
  12400. I've seen your comment and will have a look at the article when I get a chance. I think my immediate response is to say that the "cartels" were government mandated and led, and the rules were imposed by the State, thus not making it a free market by any stretch. That said, I've come to realise (as I've explained in this video) that people don't know what Capitalism is, and think Capitalism is just when money does stuff. Therefore, I think my new stance is to say to these people: "If you still think it's "Capitalism" I can't convince you otherwise. I will insist though that it isn't a free market. And if you think Capitalism is the free market, you're clearly incorrect because in no way nor form was this a free market. You've somehow managed to convince yourselves that Socialism is Capitalism. Therefore, Capitalism and/or Socialism are bad, and what we need is a free market."
    2
  12401.  @GeneralBongmeister  If the company doesn't pay you, you walk away from the company. The company loses all its workers and goes out of business. But if a lawsuit is needed, then private law firms perform the lawsuit. There would still be law and order in an AnCap society. Please watch the video because I explain this in the video.
    2
  12402. You've not presented a sufficient case. Being "extreme" is just a slur, and a dismissal, not an intellectually honest argument.
    2
  12403. Socialism isn't evil because it's a utopia. Socialism is evil because it requires force, doesn't work, and results is mass starvation and violence. The opposite of all that is a free market - a buyer and seller transacting without a commissar dictating what they should do or demanding payment.
    2
  12404. Precisely! I've never taken drugs, but it's sad that those that do have to skirt the law just to get them. That's so-called "freedom" for you.
    2
  12405. The Patreon who paid me money to make this video cares. Therefore, I make this video. The free market has spoken.
    2
  12406. http://www.closecombatseries.net/Hosted/TIK/ My site has died, I'm afraid. Luckily, Mooxe's CCS is still alive :) give him support by subscribing to his channel as well https://www.youtube.com/user/CloseCombatSeries
    2
  12407. And there's another bunch of books added to my wish list lol. What would I do without you, Ivan!? They do seem expensive, but hopefully the quality is good. Interestingly, I'm aiming to pick up this book as well "Death of the Leaping Horsemen" https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01HP3EGWM/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_x_JTR2ybN3V4H8F
    2
  12408. Oh really? I bet that was interesting. When was that? I will come back to the Bulge at some point, probably after Stalingrad though. Priority must be Stalingrad.
    2
  12409. Great! I'm glad to have you around. I may need your help going forward, especially with the pronunciation of German names. I do wish I could speak/read German :(
    2
  12410. That last sentence lol. Talk about a punchline
    2
  12411. And that's absolutely right, but I think there's a few people out there that don't understand that. This is another reason why I need even more books on Stalingrad - to make sure I get an all-rounded outlook on the battle.
    2
  12412. Sadly, I don't. Not seen an academic journal since I did my degree. Maybe jstor is something I should consider accessing. Codes??
    2
  12413. You could be right :)
    2
  12414. It may not have happened, but here we have a guy who was there saying it did :) it's almost like we can't trust memoirs or opinions of people made ages after the event
    2
  12415. That was a long shot! The Germans hadn't fought Americans yet, so no chance for bazookas. Not heard of Adrian von Fölkersam before?
    2
  12416. Thanks! Old wars are certainly interesting :)
    2
  12417. Makes up for the fact you failed to be first in the first video of 2018 ;)
    2
  12418. Glad to hear that!
    2
  12419. Leopold von Ranke invented the way we do history today, and his first book was published in 1824.
    2
  12420. It's the year history was born... The year Leopold von Ranke released his first book. A very obscure reference, but I put it in there just to see if anyone would get it.
    2
  12421. What do you mean? I don't agree with postmodernism.
    2
  12422. "On the one hand, using primary sources should be the only way, of writing." No, because other authors will help you fall into the traps laid by the primary sources. For example, I've helped you here with regards to the Table Talks. If you didn't have me helping you out, and you couldn't use Nilsson or Carrier or any of the other historical books, it would be extremely difficult to figure out whether the Table Talks were real or fake.
    2
  12423. The graphs in the video included the Axis allies, so the Soviets outnumbered Axis 2 or 3 to 1 for the most part, as shown. But the point was that I don't want people freaking out and claiming the Germans were outnumbered 13 to 2 in the comments based on the number of divisions alone.
    2
  12424. Math and Maths are synonyms ;)
    2
  12425. Well, technically he screwed up Barbarossa, so yes
    2
  12426. What a strange glitch. I've repinned
    2
  12427. Yes it was! Here's the Reddit post with a link to the original (now unwatchable) video and some explanation of which countries were restricted from watching it, and then talk about how it was a violation of YouTube policies somehow https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/959c6t/battle_of_the_bulge_1944_documentary_2018/
    2
  12428. When it comes to freedom or slavery, of course TIK will support freedom (Capitalism). TIK is anti-slavery and anti-racist, so TIK will not support Socialism.
    2
  12429. I make them! Recently they've been based on topographical maps, but the large European one wasn't (obviously)
    2
  12430. It's actually because the heads of the generals covered the final Army X. I've corrected the unit symbols for the future videos, and will rerender this for the final all-in-one video.
    2
  12431. Really? So in 1941-1942, where were the Axis fighting? Two fronts - the Eastern Front (where the vast majority of their manpower was), and the North African Campaign, where just three to five German divisions and one Italian army were, fighting the British. So no, the Axis were focused on the Soviets, and the population argument is relevant.
    2
  12432. The sources make it clear that that's what they did. The sources could be wrong, but I can only go off what the sources say.
    2
  12433. Ich brauche zusätzlicher biere!
    2
  12434. No worries :)
    2
  12435. No, the 147,800,000 includes Greater Germany, Italy (but not colonies), Romania, Hungary and Finland. Technically it was more (Croatia and Slovakia etc) but I don't have numbers for the other states.
    2
  12436. Photoshop for the images (including the map) and Premiere Pro for the animations/editing. And yes, as shown in my previous North African Campaign videos, Wavell was a decent commander and didn't deserve to go. It was a shame that he was removed.
    2
  12437. I do want to cover it one day, and Crete. But current plan is to do this, then the Courland Pocket, then Stalingrad.
    2
  12438. Now that's a topic I know absolutely nothing about! You're going to have to make videos teaching me about it
    2
  12439. Fair enough! History course? Or other?
    2
  12440. And I'm not a fan of reading. Think about that.
    2
  12441. Auchinleck didn't have the knowledge because every general in the desert at the time (except maybe Gatehouse) didn't have much knowledge of armoured warfare. Plus British tank doctrine was out of date, so even if he had the knowledge it wouldn't have done him much good. Every source I have that mentions his experience says he wasn't knowledgeable about tank warfare, and he certainly didn't have the experience fighting with tanks.
    2
  12442. Well, this series will definitely cover it (in-fact, we're just getting into those battles now in the latest videos). But don't forget about the huge infantry battles there too!
    2
  12443. Thank you Michael! I'm trying to make the TV documentaries I wanted to see as a kid but never had. So it's nice to know that you and a lot of other people want detailed documentaries as well and that you appreciate them. Cheers!
    2
  12444. Glad you enjoyed it Kevin!
    2
  12445. Glad you approve! I know you've been waiting for this :)
    2
  12446. Being a YouTuber I have an incentive not to say this, so take this as strong advice. You shouldn't be watching anything whilst doing any sort of work. Pomodoro until you've earned a half-hour break, then watch a video if you must. But during work-time, you must teach your brain to concentrate, so turn off all devices, videos and music. That's the way to learn and achieve results https://youtu.be/efY-KnqrI-0
    2
  12447. If I could physically create and publish videos every day of the week to give you something to look forward to every evening, I would.
    2
  12448. "With history like this, who needs fiction?" Exactly. This is why I no longer read fiction. Reality is far more interesting.
    2
  12449. Glad to hear it was worth it :)
    2
  12450. Don't worry, next week's should be about 40 mins.
    2
  12451. Great! Let me know if you make a video! All you need is Photoshop and Premiere Pro, plus books, an internet connection, and a lot of patience :)
    2
  12452. In this case, just Premiere Pro. I used to use Blender (free), and before that Anime Studio (not free). Honestly, Premiere Pro is the easiest to use in my opinion.
    2
  12453. True, but I did put "(London Time)" for this reason
    2
  12454. "On the off-chance that TIK reads this, if you can ever arrive at a figure from all your reading on the Mediterranean war of how many Axis soldiers were killed, wounded, and captured in that theatre in the duration of the war I'd love to hear it." I don't have a figure yet, but total Axis will probably be a lot, as you have said. Considering we don't even know exactly how many men were in the Africa Korps at any one moment in time, no figure will be entirely accurate. However, what you have to realise is that, even if it was 900,000 total, that's over two and a half years long. Germany alone reportedly lost a million men in the first six months of the Eastern Front (although less than half of that was KIA or MIA and it seems a portion of the wounded and sick returned). So yes, it may be a lot, but it was also over a much longer period of time. Normandy was only a couple months long, so it would be better to compare Normandy to Tunis rather than the whole of the Western Desert Campaign.
    2
  12455. Currently the plan is to cover all of it - the formation of the pocket, all the battles and the surrender. Given the fact I have very limited sources on it (and it doesn't seem like there's going to be many more I can get my hands on) I'll probably stick to divisional level rather than diving down to battalion level like I've done here, so it probably won't be as long as Crusader to create or in length.
    2
  12456. I've covered the British retreat of British Somaliland already https://youtu.be/k_xy7RCm5Ho but I'm not sure if I'll be going back to East Africa until well after Stalingrad.
    2
  12457. Oh yes, but we're going through the North African Campaign in order, so there's going to be a bit of a wait. Also got to cover Courland and Stalingrad after this.
    2
  12458. That's good to hear! I know some of my other videos are too-quick to get into the battle and don't provide good context so I wanted to make up for that. I did put a lot of effort into the editing of this, since it's the video I've been working all year on so I want to get it spot on. And yes, Wavell didn't deserve to go in my opinion. But, at least for Crusader, Auchinleck wasn't a bad choice. He might have been later, but not for Crusader.
    2
  12459. Well, I hope you enjoy it Ckiane :)
    2
  12460. Oh? You mean that good old Zuiderzee? [Yes, it's the Ijsselmeer. Stop crying]
    2
  12461. And thank you for watching! Hope you enjoy it and the upcoming videos :) Definitely can confirm that this video required lots of editing...
    2
  12462. Next week's video will be about 40 minutes long (probably) because the script wasn't designed to be split into separate videos like this. But yeah, decided that this way was the only way I was ever going to get this finished.
    2
  12463. Damn. My grandad had Alzheimer's, and it ain't easy. All I can do is wish you luck with that. But, I can understand why you get up so early. I used to do the same back when I was living with my parents - nobody in their right mind would be up early hours, so it's a great time to get some hours in playing Civ2 and Close Combat 2. You have to have some time for yourself.
    2
  12464. You pulling an all-nighter, or you off to work? Hope it's not the latter because I used to do that for my last job, and it sucks getting up at 4am to get in for 5am. But you're correct about Churchill ;) glad you enjoyed the video!
    2
  12465. But the MG 42 was superior to any machine gun the Soviets had.
    2
  12466. Thanks Malloc! Glad you enjoyed it
    2
  12467. All 5 books in the trilogy? I hope you enjoy them!
    2
  12468. "Why such a focus on just Soviet submachine guns though? You make it sound like Soviets had no Mosins, SVT, DP, Maxims...." 1. because that was the question. 2. because the Maxims etc were not as good as the MG 42s that the Germans had and built their squads around, and the Soviets were at a massive firepower disadvantage compared to them, which I did mention and explain in the video.
    2
  12469. I've seen your comment. Thanks for letting me know! I'll be honest, I'm not 100% on all the small arms version designations, so I didn't know about that :)
    2
  12470. I can understand your reluctance. But I wouldn't really say it was a spoiler because it's just the primary source documents, and without seeing exactly where the units were on the map at the time, it doesn't really give you the full context. Plus, opinions may change again by the time we get to that period in the series anyway.
    2
  12471. Ah, thanks for clarifying!
    2
  12472. Probably a good idea. I would recommend the "Public vs Private" and "Hitler's Socialism" ones too, in case the channel is removed at some point.
    2
  12473. What Socialism is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Why it's Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12474. Sometimes it does feel like that, but I'm hopeful. Plus, this was a patreon/subscribestar question, so the guy deserved an answer, and I think it was somewhat funny that the evidence he presented "proving" his point turned out to be written by a guy who later went against the denial. It was interesting to me, so hopefully others found it interesting too.
    2
  12475. I've not even bothered to monetize it because I know it's not worth trying
    2
  12476. I don't delete comments. YouTube does automatically. It even deletes my comments too, so stop jumping to conclusions. Disagree with me all you like, see if I care.
    2
  12477. How does helping grandma and paying your taxes do that? Helping grandma doesn't benefit the children. And if you read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, you'll understand why taxation doesn't help anybody but the tax man.
    2
  12478. I've got that book (you may be able to spot it on the shelf behind me in the video). Sadly I'm not well versed on the Ardennes Offensive [yet] so can't give you much comment beyond that, except to say that I bought this and other books so that one day I can cover the battle in one of my documentaries.
    2
  12479. I also think that Greece was a lost cause, although Crete could have been won (been reading up on it recently)
    2
  12480. Except when they attacked, the Germans (and Axis) outnumbered the Soviets. The point was that the Germans were only superior at the beginning when they outnumbered their opponent. Once the Soviets recovered, the Germans lost their superiority.
    2
  12481. Exactly, that's what I said at the end
    2
  12482. You should never rely on one source. That said, yes I highly recommend them. Robert Citino stated that we're living in the "Glantz era" of WW2 military history, since he's been that influential. In my opinion, there's nobody else out there that goes into that much detail (except maybe me in my Battlestorm videos haha). Thanks for subscribing :)
    2
  12483. Glad you agree and like the video, and yes another video is on it's way - this time about the Purges and it's impact (or lack of) on the Red Army
    2
  12484. Really? Where was the second front in 1942? North Africa had like 3 German divisions compared to the +150 on the Eastern Front. And no, I'm clearly not Russian.
    2
  12485. Yes, 1945. But what about 1941? Germany loses the war in 1941, yet as shown in Table 3, they don't outnumber the Germans.
    2
  12486. Yes, that's the point :) however, most of the haters aren't history buffs, they're what's known as "Wehraboos". These are people who do not like the idea of the German Wehrmacht not being this perfect wonderfully efficient mechanized machine that wiped out all before it and never committed war crimes. That's why the video has been downvoted as much as it has.
    2
  12487. No, but there are traces due to proximity
    2
  12488. You're not the first to point it out, FlippyWarbear, you're not the first
    2
  12489. Here are my motives https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  12490. Tell me, did you watch the full video? Clearly you didn't.
    2
  12491. I can't mention everything in a 44 minute video. But I am very much aware of the strategic situation, and what you mentioned doesn't alter what was said in the video.
    2
  12492. Thank you sir! Your comment is very kind :) I'm certainly trying to raise the bar with history documentaries and video lectures. I'm not counting the number of subscribers, but it's nice to know people appreciate what I'm trying to do here. And if you're wondering why I've gone quiet recently, it's because I'm working on the next Battlestorm documentary, which should be out on the next few weeks... Won't say too much more on that as it'll be a bit of a surprise! Thanks for watching and commenting :)
    2
  12493. Thanks. Someone else requested that too. I don't have the numbers for the Western Front, but when I get a hold of them, I'll do it
    2
  12494. Also, Ensuring the Whirlwind explains that Germany had to call up all the old veterans of WW1 to fight their war because of the lack of manpower at the beginning of the war. Those veterans weren't all young or fit, although they had at least some experience.
    2
  12495. Actually I do wonder, since the tank statistics are incorrectly showing that fewer tanks were in the East than their should have been, if the Germans also downplayed their own losses in individual battles. No way to prove that with the current numbers or sources but it's an interesting thought. And don't forget the Germans also shot themselves towards the end of the war.
    2
  12496. I'm currently at 250,058 words on my research for my Stalingrad documentary. I have a mountain of WW2 history books in physical form, and a load more on the Kindle. These were just the most relevant. I have a degree in history, as previously stated, and I've made several documentaries online of several WW2 battles which have had a lot of praise from the small community of viewers. To accuse me of not having any source material, or not knowing enough about the subject, is hilarious. In reality, it is you who's making a fundamental mistake that even 1st year students at university wouldn't make. Instead of providing a counter-argument and invoking a discussion, you're attacking the author of the work on a personnel level. Fairly certain you wouldn't get very far in university starting your essays like that. Your paragraph starting "You also seem not to grasp how battles work" is quite ironic given the first sentence of that paragraph. Some people would call it "waffle". I'd call it irrelevant. Your final paragraph is so full of errors and punctuation mistakes, I haven't the patience with you to even read it. You do not sound like you have multiple masters degrees. Come back when you've actually got an argument. Oh and as a side note, Robert Citino has said we're living in the "Glantz era" of WW2 Eastern Front history because he's been that influencial. I'd suggest you start reading up on this "lousy dude" because he's rewriting the history of the Eastern Front to actually reflect the truth - a truth that's neither pro-German, nor pro-Soviet.
    2
  12497. Yes. Yes they did :/
    2
  12498. RouGeZH , I've tried searching for this "amazing" comment from you that showed all my errors and showed how wrong I was. Could you make a comment (copy it if needed) without responding to someone else's comment? That'll make it easier for me to see it and I'll respond to that.
    2
  12499. Soviet accounts and statistics are equally as bad as German accounts and statistics. That distrust you have of Soviet sources is the exact the same level of distrust you should have towards German sources. The fact that you don't have that level of distrust is proof in itself that bias has crept in. You should treat EVERY source, no matter the subject, with suspicion. No source is reliable, not even German sources. Guderian lies through his teeth about Barbarossa. Manstein lies through his teeth about Stalingrad. Raus gets his dates mixed up - a period of 3 days of combat near Stalingrad is made out to have actually taken place in 1 day in Raus's memoirs (13th to 15th of December 1942, but he says all that combat occurs on the 13th) - let alone numerous other holes in his and other accounts. In some of these scenarios, the Soviet accounts are actually more reliable than the German ones, although again they're not 100% trustworthy. This is why it's vitally important to look at every source with equal reservation. Now, this bias may not be your fault. As I've just said to someone else - Pick up an English-language history book on the Eastern Front of WW2 (there are some exceptions but these are more recent and few) and you will find that they are relying almost entirely on German sources. Go to Amazon and look up WW2, you'll get biography after biography on German generals, and German units, and German operations. Then try find the Soviet biographies, units or operations... There's barely any! There is a massive bias towards the Germans in the history books. Because that is what sells. If you're still not convinced, fine. But just, for 10 minutes, consider this. What's the point of studying history? Isn't it to get to the truth? If it is, then how do you get to the truth if all you have to work with is lies? The only way to do it is to gather all the lies and compare them to each other. Somewhere in that sea of lies is the truth.
    2
  12500. Thank you Paul, I'm glad you liked it :) more to come
    2
  12501. "Western fighters totaled 3,204 aircraft, or 63.5 percent of the entire Soviet air defense force inventory (Protivo-vozdushnaia oborona, or PVO), in the course of the war." Glantz Page 197. If you wish to dispute this, fine. But please provide sources for your information.
    2
  12502. Not necessarily. Some historians argue that the Germans were beaten in 1941 before the Russian Winter came. The German army was also not on top of it's game during Blau in 1942. Really, from July 1942 onwards, it was all down hill, even if they did reach Stalingrad and the top of the Caucasus after that.
    2
  12503. No, it's because there's a lot of people who either don't like and therefore don't trust the Russians/Soviets (Cold War propaganda), think the Germans are more trustworthy (Cold War propaganda), have read more German-influenced books and sources (again, thanks to the Cold War), have been influenced by the opinions of the surviving post-war German generals who were racist and lied (led by Halder, but inludes Guderian and Manstein), are racist, or don't want to imagine that the German army in WW2 was anything other than a 'superior' mechanized force. But the reality is it was neither mechanized nor superior. It achieved strategic surprise in the first days of Barbarossa, and outnumbered her opponent. Once strategic surprised was lost, and once the Soviets had enough numbers (equal or slightly more as shown in the video) they were able to stop the Germans. My video coming out today shows that by the summer campaign of 1942, the Germans were making massive mistakes. And the tactical and operational 'superior' German generals were out of touch with the type of warfare going on on the German-Soviet Front, and were simply not up to the task - as Hitler himself was saying at the time.
    2
  12504. Maybe, but why then did they start losing at the end of 1941?
    2
  12505. So what you're saying is that every single Soviet soldier on the Eastern Front fought on the front lines and there were none behind the lines at all? That they didn't have logisticians, mechanics, or administrative tasks or other areas in the Soviet Union to guard, and that the Soviets didn't have a defense in depth or reserves? But that at the same time there were barely any Germans on the front lines because they were all behind the front?
    2
  12506. Thanks!
    2
  12507. Huh, and most people are calling me a Nazi after my National Socialism is Socialism video.
    2
  12508. I'll talk about some of the things you said in an upcoming video, but you're right about the mass distraction thing. You may be interested in this video (and the guy's channel tbh) as he talks about this problem https://youtu.be/8UsI9CXHm6o I've checked out Steel Division but haven't got it yet. I do plan to get it soon
    2
  12509. The State he forged is still in power today? The State didn't step down, just because the individual did.
    2
  12510. Do you mean the Nigel Askey video? That was a while ago https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    2
  12511. I'm not a fan of any politician
    2
  12512. Haha don't you mean this? https://youtu.be/uwklBQpo-NY
    2
  12513. "So ANTS have almost a physical body, they share the same ADN." What? I'm sorry, but an ant colony is made up of thousands of individual ants. It doesn't operate as one, even if they work together. And besides, HUMANS ARE NOT ANTS OR BEES.
    2
  12514. There were 3 in the folder, but none were yours unfortunately. My recommendation is not to use certain words (especially swear words). My own comments get deleted if I quote Karl Marx because of his blatant racism.
    2
  12515. "Are you deleting comments that critices the video?" Nope. Some may get auto-suppressed by YouTube, either outright deleted, or may end up in the 'Held for Review' folder. I'll check if there's any in there now.
    2
  12516. He wasn't a fascist https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12517. I'm on Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    2
  12518. It's a bit longer, but if you haven't seen my Public vs Private video, it should make things clearer https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12519. Well, for starters, Corbyn is a Marxist and therefore an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg This is why the Labour Party is full of Anti-Semites in the first place. In his own Twitter statements he confirms that Anti-Semitism exists in the Labour Party, then denies it, then says it's exaggerated, then says he was right not to do anything about it, has done nothing about it, and has been sacked (partly) for his inaction Various sources explaining it https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13051489/corbyn-suspended-echr-report-labour/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Labour_Party https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/26/antisemitism-labour-everything-you-need-to-know https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-antisemitism-report-ruling-ehrc-corbyn-jews-latest-today-b1419138.html https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labour-and-antisemitism I mean, the fact that Left wing sources like the Guardian are saying it, pretty much confirms it at this point.
    2
  12520. Good question! And currently I have no idea
    2
  12521. Or banging drums for Cadburys
    2
  12522. It's to stop people taking the audio out of context and say I love him or am a racist or whatever
    2
  12523. Haha her surname is an interesting one to spell
    2
  12524. "only a very small portion of the german people actually went as far ahead politically as to join those organisation" The SA had 3 million members by the end of 1933, with the Nazi Party at similar numbers, so these weren't small organisations. The SS obviously wasn't sizable at this time, but grew large later.
    2
  12525. Complete nonsense. Here's a playlist of videos showing that Suvorov's preemptive strike idea doesn't hold up to the facts https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp
    2
  12526. Good point!
    2
  12527. A lot of sources I've found online say it was done as an act of defiance. If it was, though, it's odd though that the Germans didn't correct it at some point.
    2
  12528. Yes, I commented on his video. I intend to make a response video soon (possibly next week). He sort-of answered my questions, but I'm still wrapping my head around a few concepts.
    2
  12529. So, is this how Hegel was using the term?
    2
  12530. Awesome, I found it really useful, so I hope you do too 👍
    2
  12531. No, that's the exact opposite of what I said.
    2
  12532. I only do that for evil people, and I do it so that bad actors can't take my voice out of context and claim that I was advocating those things.
    2
  12533. Yeah that's something I'm going to do a video on. Gellately goes into this a lot in his book.
    2
  12534. You were actually 3rd
    2
  12535. Yes, it's exactly the same view as I showed here https://youtu.be/6C0c9HmWeJY And this is the source of that viewpoint https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12536. I was born on the British isles, that's why. But I'm not a nationalist and don't believe in nation states.
    2
  12537. Also, I used to be nice with my critics, but no more. If you're going to falsely accuse me of nonsense, you will be corrected, and if you continue, you'll be silenced. Consider this your only warning.
    2
  12538. Marxism is essentially selective socialism. Proletarian got a pathetic social safety net. Bourgeoisie - not so much... https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12539. I'm not just relying on Lindsey. Eric Voegelin and the authors of the book "Gnosis and Hermeticism" come to the same conclusion. Hasn't Academic Agent fallen for Julius Evola?
    2
  12540. I don't care about Thatcher. But today there's loads of so-called "workers" who are collecting welfare cheques stolen from those who do work. Many who work part time, wanting more hours, but when you give them more hours they complain about it. Then there are plenty in full-time employment who drag their feet yet demand equal pay to those who work harder, and then think they're entitled to steal off other people or businesses. They cheer when someone's small business goes under, and vote to raise taxes on the middle income earners. Such people are not "workers". Even when I was a socialist I could see the hypocrisy, but remained firm that socialism was economically desirable. Now I see that it isn't viable, and one of the reasons it isn't is because socialism turns everyone into these so-called "workers", which brings down the entire system.
    2
  12541. +martaxsasLT it is! Hope you like it :)
    2
  12542. +Firmus Piett thanks! Only three days to go, then the episodes will hit you one after another :D
    2
  12543. +braccada I'm glad you think it looks great! :D I worked so hard to get this done, and I'm proud of it so far.... but I can't help myself, I've started on the next one :) And I think you'll approve of my choice of battle ;)
    2
  12544. +Ayda Williams I think this is something people often forget - yes, Market Garden failed, but it did still have a chance of succeeding. It wasn't a sure thing either way. The Normandy landings were a gamble (and Eisenhower even prepared a statement saying he would take full responsibility if they failed) but we celebrate them as a great military venture even though the plan had faulty elements to it. Whereas with Market Garden, because the Operation failed people instantly start to poke holes in the plan. The reality was that the plan did have a chance of succeeding, like you said, but enough mistakes were made to cause it to be a defeat.
    2
  12545. +KarlssonDeLaRosa thanks! I was going to mention it on closecombatseries.net but never got round to doing that
    2
  12546. The panzer crews were on drugs that kept them awake (I have a couple books that mention this), and this could have warranted a short rest. But I'm not sure that would have been a reason for a 3 day halt.
    2
  12547. "The quickest and most effective way to end that problem, and incidentally put Germany on its strongest footing for attacking the USSR, would have been defeating Britain." This is hindsight speaking. At the time, Hitler believed that the Soviet Union would collapse in a matter of weeks, and that this would grant the Germans all the land and resources they'd ever need. "Overthought conspiracy theory." Where's the conspiracy part of this theory?
    2
  12548. It must be true. Our beloved Halder said so
    2
  12549. Yes! I agree, it all fits in... if it's true
    2
  12550. "If Hitler wanted Britain as a decoy then why did he bomb it? It makes no sense." Because he couldn't just leave the British be. If he was to remain at war, then the fighting must go on.
    2
  12551. And that's at best. In reality, the public sector is less efficient with other people's resources than the private sector, since they don't care about profit or loss or overspending (if they overspend, they just increase taxes). Thus, society as a whole wastes more resources, and gets poorer.
    2
  12552. The crashes during the 'gold standard' weren't as bad as the ones that happened after the end of the 'gold standard'. The Great Depression was the worst recession in history (up until today's Greater Depression of 2020-2021 and beyond). And the booms and busts have been much more volatile than they were prior to coming off gold. However, the 'gold standard' wasn't actually a 'gold standard', even though that was the name of it. Over 60% of the means of exchange was FIAT currency (cash, cheques and non-tangible assets). Less than 40% was gold or silver. So there was still room (60%) for currencies to inflate - causing the boom and bust cycle https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  12553. You've not heard that phrase before?
    2
  12554. "TIK, the reason why people say "stick to tanks" is because you can't seem to stay neutral when covering these topics and resist slipping your own personal politics into the content." But is this really the case? 1. Gavin was the reason Market Garden failed. 2. Hitler was evil but wasn't a 'madman' when it came to military stuff 3. The German generals were wrong 4. Oil was the main reason Germany lost the war (economics by the way) 5. Churchill was an idiot 6. "Numbers say it all" video 7. Battle of Stalingrad started in July 1942 There's more besides this. I've never been 'neutral' because it's impossible to be neutral, as the theory of history shows https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - "The whole first half of the video was basically completely unnecissary to answer the questions in the second half. A brief 30 sec summary could've covered it without the massive forays into your personal economic opinions." The first half not only showed why Schleicher didn't destroy the democratic order (one of the Patreon's questions) but also set up the context for the second half. Context is vital because it leaves no room for opponents to squirm out of it.
    2
  12555. True, because the 'Gold Standard' wasn't truly 'gold'. Over 60% of the world's 'money' was actually currency notes, not gold or silver. That's why there were recessions and depressions prior to WW1 - because governments and central banks, and even smaller banks, could print notes in excess of the gold in their vaults (inflation).
    2
  12556. It wasn't just that though. It also started with the Bank of England asking the Federal Reserve to lower rates to stop the gold flowing from Britain. So technically it was the willingness to inflate the currency supply during WW1 that caused most of the problems (and having Central Banks in the first place).
    2
  12557. AnCaps and Randians may be similar in some respects, but are not equivalent. The fact that you're saying this proves that you haven't done sufficient reading on the subject. There's actually bitter rivalries between the two factions, with Rand publicly chastising Libertarians (AnCaps) while she defended the State (she was more of a "conservative", while the Rothbardians are more radical). And as I said, Rand was an objectivist, while AnCaps are subjectivists - these are opposing ideas. There's even a (bad) Wikipedia article on the division https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_and_libertarianism
    2
  12558. In that quote, she says that things exist and that we perceive those things. She's not stating (or even implying) there's a synthesis. Also, I don't think "agitation" always leads to progressive regulation. I'm not denying that AnCap might be using dialectic (I don't know), but Ayn Rand isn't AnCap, she's Randian. AnCaps are subjectivists, while Rand was an Objectivist, and these are opposing sides. I'm also not sure how you can conclude that AnCap is a free-market destroyer that creates cartels, when it is regulations that create cartels, and AnCaps are opposed to regulations (as well as all things State).
    2
  12559. Could you elaborate, especially on the idea that Objectivism being Dialectical Materialism or gnostic? Or point me to a source explaining this, as I'd like to investigate.
    2
  12560. I explain this in the video
    2
  12561. You're incorrect. I provide the evidence here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12562. I can see why you're so loyal to Prince Andrew.
    2
  12563. "Who enforces the Non Aggression Principle as the law of the land and by what right?" If you attack me, I'll defend myself. This is natural laws and natural rights. The State strips us of our natural laws and natural rights, and only grants us 'privileges' in exchange. Here in the UK, we're not legally allowed to defend ourselves, and if we do, we'll end up in years of court battles, with a highly likely chance of being thrown in a cage. It's total insanity.
    2
  12564. I love how, in the mind of a religious fanatic, everything is blamed on the "evil enemy" that operates in the shadows... All this prejudice and hatred of economic middle men just because you're too lazy to pick up a book that will explain to you basic economics 🙄
    2
  12565. Hitler wasn't a Zionist. Here's an article explaining why the Haavara Agreement wasn't done because of "Nazi Zionism" https://theconversation.com/labour-antisemitism-row-there-was-nothing-zionist-about-hitlers-plans-for-the-jews-58656
    2
  12566.  @tristanthamm505  This video was more a response to Liquid Zulu rather than a deep dive into AnCap policies and so on. I wanted to confirm that these Associations were a thing before moving on. I actually agree with you that there is a likelihood of these associations just devolving into using coercion (a monopoly on force) and thus becoming normal states again. The AnCap theory is that multiple associations would exist, all compete against each other, and so if one decided to initiate violence, people would stop supporting it and flock to the other ones, which would then use their own powers to overcome the bad apple. I'm not saying this would work in practice, but that seems to be the theory. Regardless, I see no downside in trying to implement an AnCap system. The worst thing that will happen is that we'll go back to as we are now, and we'll have impressive growth and prosperity in the meantime. Therefore, even if I accept your argument, the reality is that it's worth a shot. Plus, rather than ending up as we are now, there's also a chance we'll just have a bunch of nightwatchman states like what the Randians want. Thus, I'm happy to take the chance.
    2
  12567.  @hafizihilmibinabdulhalim1004  Thanks for the recommendation. There are two confirmed Third Positionists that I'm aware of, one of whom I've been watching (as I explained in the recent video on the Facsism "Socialism of Duty" book). But I'll add Zoomer to the list.
    2
  12568. I don't want my customers to die. It's unethical and bad for business. Thus, businesses are incentivised to not kill their customers. Those that do (e.g. OceanGate) rapidly go out of business. Regulations don't actually work so well. In many cases, they can make things worse. They often stop innovation and force us to continue using inferior products. Numerous nuclear accidents have been caused by state employees. Chernobyl was a state run enterprise, and that was the worst. Aeroplanes are a complex issue and I haven't got time to go into it here, but again, companies often create their own regulations. You don't need bureaucrats to make regulations when companies will regulate themselves to remain in business.
    2
  12569. Marx was the ultimate scrounger - a true hero for the long-term unemployed!
    2
  12570. Good comment! You highlight many of the issues that need addressing, like the fact that the corporations shouldn't be defended. When you boil it down, most of us are on the same page in terms of the problem, but we disagree on the solution. Georgism doesn't make sense to me because it's non-voluntary, and therefore criminal. All resources are finite, not just land. And a tax on land will only drive up the costs for everyone. If you tax the landlord, he puts up the price for the renter. If you tax farmland, everyone's food goes up in price. And for what? The State isn't required, and therefore taxation isn't required either.
    2
  12571. Taxation is feudalism.
    2
  12572. May I ask what caused you to lose interest?
    2
  12573. I've been tempted to do something like that, but I don't think I'd be very good at live streams
    2
  12574. Some of the speech bubbles had quotes from Dawn of War 1 in them. Specifically, there's a few when I talk about the 13th Guards Rifle Division attacking at Mamayev Kurgan near the beginning. Can't remember if there's any more later on, but there's about 3 or 4 references in there.
    2
  12575. Thank you very much for deciding to support the channel! I put the message in the videos when the list goes up, and it's true, Patreon/SubscribeStar support makes these videos possible, so thank you for helping keep this going
    2
  12576. Possibly. But you're forgetting that the Germans were recruiting from Soviet prisoners of war, and they were drafted from all over the Soviet Union. It's likely that many Red Army recruits came from central Asia
    2
  12577. But for other units the report specifically said when they hadn't been in combat. Thus, some of the units on the list are specifically noted of not having been in combat, but other units on the same list don't say that, but instead say "performed well" or similar, suggesting that they had.
    2
  12578. "How can you believe comments from comment section, TIK??" As I said, I don't believe all of them. But I've no reason to assume these particular comments were lying
    2
  12579.  @internetstrangerstrangerofweb  Ahh yes, that would make sense!
    2
  12580. And Egor!
    2
  12581. I think you misunderstood. I wasn't talking about Romanians post Operation Uranus in November 1942. We know Romanians fell back into the city at the end, with the 20th Romanian Division surrendering at the Grain Elevator. Nobody's questioning that. The question is: were there any Romanians fighting in the city during September 1942? And were any fighting at the Grain Elevator in September 1942, since only two Soviet veterans claim that they were? No other German or Soviet source says Romanian units entered Stalingrad in September 1942.
    2
  12582.  @Astro75mm  Thank you! That's an interesting bit of information. I was wondering if the Germans had recruited Romanians for some reason, but this would make sense. It would make sense to create a 'Hiwi' unit of Romanians formerly fighting in the Red Army... although, why wouldn't they just hand them over to the Romanian units?
    2
  12583. Correction, there's been 7 prior to this. I miscounted 😣
    2
  12584. Yes! Here's the playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzalediZoyADnyjDkVq5mmrbLLIo
    2
  12585. I'm aware of the Keynesian arguments, but I disagree with them. They claim that we need a "stable" price level because of the supposed horrors of deflation, yet that argument simply doesn't hold up. Falling prices is good for consumers, just like rising prices are bad for consumers. They're happy to rise prices to keep people poor, but they're not happy to have prices fall? So clearly the "price stability" excuse doesn't work since we don't have and have never had "price stability" under the rule of the Central Banks
    2
  12586. Exactly! Yet people claim we live in capitalism and need more socialism. They're calling for the thing that we already have and is slowly impoverishing us!
    2
  12587. It definitely helped, and has convinced me that I need to take more breaks every so often in the future just to recharge
    2
  12588. "The current amount of currency in the world is 40 trillion USD. So if we were to replace currency with silver it would be at an exchange rate of a gram of silver is 40 000 USD. And that would definitely deny its industrial use." And yet, the price of silver is currently $0.71 per gram (lower than it was in 1980 and 2010). Let's hope that there's no hyperinflation and people abandon the currency, because otherwise the price of silver will go a lot higher. - "Silver is mostly mined for its industrial value and only secondary as an investment or jewelry or silverware." Well, maybe because it's not being allowed to find its fundamental value. https://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/jpmorgan-fined-126-billion-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/jpmorgan-pay-60-mln-settle-precious-metals-spoofing-lawsuit-2021-11-19/ https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jpmorgan-to-pay-%24920-mln-fine-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market-2020-09-29 JP Morgan alone has been fined somewhere in the region of $42 billion for artificially suppressing the price of precious metals in order to keep you in the dollar. Perhaps, if we allowed silver and gold to actually trade freely and to find their proper price level rather than constantly manipulating them lower, then more people would invest in them?
    2
  12589. Yes, I actually tried to get some for this, but haven't been able to find any
    2
  12590. True!
    2
  12591. I've heard that argument before, but it comes from Socialism (Prussian or otherwise), which is not surprising. People who think money/currency is debt do not understand money or basic economics, and view capitalism with disdain. I would recommend that they put their emotions to one side and take a serious look at what Mises and Rothbard wrote.
    2
  12592. Looks like Royeaux's arguments haven't aged well considering gold's recent move. It's hit all time highs in the Euro and many other countries, and almost has in both the Dollar and Pound. Gold is a HEDGE against inflation, meaning that it gains during a crisis and gains purchasing power in periods of deflation.
    2
  12593. "Which tells you gold is a losing investment. Betting against manipulation will destroy wealth, not create it." Gold isn't an investment. It's a hedge against inflation. The manipulation is a buying opportunity. The manipulation will end when people abandon the currency, which they'll do if the inflation continues. - "I had gold investments when it was above $2000 an oz, it has never gotten close to that again. Anyone who hopped onto the gold train at that time lost because the doomsayers are splitting their money with crypto." So you bought at the peak last year, and it's come down off that peak, and you're complaining? Okay, don't but at a peak then. The trick is to buy low and sell high, not buy high and sell low. But the good news is that if you hold onto your gold long-term, you'll see that you bought at an okay time. The trick is to SAVE in gold long term as a hedge against inflation. If you want to invest in other speculative assets, that's fine, but you cannot complain about "investing" in gold if you don't understand that it's not an "investment" as such. - "If you let your ship sink during a rising tide, you'll still be losing, even if you are hedged against a coming disaster." Gold went lower during the initial stages of the Weimar Hyperinflation, then took off. You'll see this action in this series. Again, the point is that you have to hold LONG-TERM as a HEDGE against inflation. Abandoning ship just because the ship COULD sink is a poor strategy. - "Better to rise with the tide, then leave." Exactly, and you didn't do that with gold. You bought at the peak of the wave. In other words, you messed up. - "Instead of letting politics dictate your investments, invest in the winners, them dump them when they are no longer winners." But you are letting politics dictate your investments. They've manipulated gold lower, so you're not buying. The commercial banks and the media are all pumping crypto, so you're pro-crypto. Do you not see that you're doing the exact opposite of what you're saying here? - "Inflation has gone up, gold has stayed down. Gold is not your inflation hedge at this juncture." Correct, it's a LONG-TERM hedge. You have to hold it for a while. Again, let them manipulate all they want. At some point, they won't be able to keep the price down any longer and it will go up. - "TIK is pretending it's near an all time high, but gold has continually lost value during this highlighted inflationary period, this at a time when other commodities and investments are skyrocketing upward." In the short term (this year), yes it has come down slightly off it's ALL TIME HIGH in US dollars. However, measured in 'Pound Sterling', it's actually been going up (if you didn't buy at the peak). Same with Euros. And in many other countries, it's currently at an all time high. It's only in the heavily manipulated market of the world reserve currency that gold has seen a loss since the peak of last year. Give it time, though, and there will be a new all-time high. The key word here is patience. - "Gold was over $2000 oz. It is not anymore and hasn't approached that value all year. TIK's own chart supports this fact. Golds running at nearly a 10% loss from it's peak and that was before the heightened inflation." Yes, for YOU it is down. But I bought BEFORE the peak. And I bought AFTER the peak. So, for me, gold is actually up this year (in GBP). Here's a tip: buy gold when people are selling rather than when people are buying. If you do that, you'll see better results.
    2
  12594. You can melt the gold down and use it in electronics, or in jewelry, as dental fillings, etc. It's a commodity, so it can be used for things just like any other resource. It's also impossible for them to inflate gold, since gold can only be created in the hearts of stars (or similar). Paper that has a fancy design on it isn't a commodity. Apart from burning it, or using it as wallpaper, it's rather useless. And it can be inflated away with ease. Unlike gold, paper (or digits on a screen) can evaporate, taking your wealth with it.
    2
  12595. Yes, they're definitely complaining about this one. Apparently this video is "libertarian nonsense"
    2
  12596. Thanks for informing me about that. I'm going to have to change my channel name at some point
    2
  12597. Name calling is irrelevant. You still haven't explained how having to pay tribute to your lords doesn't make you a serf.
    2
  12598. It wasn't very popular so I abandoned it
    2
  12599. I would say that they were more centralised when the Soviet Union was around, but I agree with the sentiment
    2
  12600. "the currency is actually based on the labor services in a country" No it isn't. The Labour Theory of Value has been debunked. Value is subjective. - "currency is just a way to exchange services" Then why are they allowed to print more currency? Are they magically providing extra services by printing those extra bank notes?
    2
  12601. Paper that's been written on isn't a commodity any more. It would be more useful if they were blank pieces of paper. And how exactly are digits on a screen a commodity?
    2
  12602. Nobody ever has enough of everything
    2
  12603. Hopefully the week after next
    2
  12604. The reason why they abandoned it was because they realised that you can't deflate AFTER an inflation, otherwise it leads to a bust. So they had to keep inflating https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  12605. Good spot!
    2
  12606. Actually, I'll be addressing the socialist/communist definitions in the next episode of this series, as we'll be seeing the founding of the Weimar Republic and the Spartacist Uprising. I've also already explained that Socialism and Communism were the exact same thing (until 1917) in the Public vs Private video, and have similar goals even today.
    2
  12607. History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes. It's not clear if we're going to have hyperinflation, but we will probably have a period of high inflation. Any long term savings will be devastated (along with wages), and it's difficult to get a return of +6% on the stock market (assuming inflation is 6%, even though the official numbers are far too low). Gold has historically done well in times of crisis, and protected the holder's purchasing power over time, so in my opinion it's a relatively safe bet. I'm not recommending anything though other than that you should look into it and do your own research.
    2
  12608. Yes. Luckily many turks seem to have bought gold, so I hope they'll be able to weather the storm https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-currency-gold-analysis-idUSKCN25A0GW https://greekcitytimes.com/2020/08/16/turks-think-of-selling-their-houses-to-buy-gold-as-economy-declines/ https://ahvalnews.com/turkish-lira/turks-persist-gold-buying-spree-threat-lira-rally
    2
  12609. If it's your house, why do you owe the state money for that house? Why are you paying rent (tax) to live in your own house? I thought you owned it, and yet here you are paying someone else to live in your house. It's not really yours, you just think it is. If you want someone to take your garbage away, you can pay them for that service. If he doesn't do a good job, you can cancel the service and get someone else. But if the garbage man puts a gun to your head and demands you pay him every month upon threat of kidnapping or stealing your house, and doesn't take no for an answer, then you're no longer the customer, but the slave of the garbage man. If you truly owned your house, you could stop paying the state and get someone else to pick up your trash. The fact you can't do that is evidence that it's not really your house, you're just managing the house on the state's behalf.
    2
  12610. 1. Gold is a commodity because you can use gold for things like electronics and jewelry. You cannot do that with paper currency. 2. Why is paper more practical than gold? Gold cannot be burnt to a crisp, cannot be fraudulently copied, cannot be inflated, and in the case of digital currency cannot be wiped out by a computer failure or EMP. 3. He knew that a war would come which was why he was trying to implement nationalized control over the banking sector. He may not have known precisely when it was going to kick off, but the sources make clear that he knew in advance that war would happen, and had plans to take Germany off the gold standard when that happened, going so far as to reduce the amount of gold in circulation prior to 1914 as discussed.
    2
  12611. But they're not money, and thus are not capital. Just like the corporations (corpse - organs - organs of the state) are public (syndicates - socialist), not private ownership (capitalist).
    2
  12612. Possibly. This video is by far the worst performing video of mine of the past 10, which is probably because it's not a WW2 video so people aren't clicking on it. That said, if YouTube isn't sending out notifications, that might explain it too.
    2
  12613. That's pretty much it. I actually think this will take more work than the typical Stalingrad video... which means I must be insane to even start this series right now!
    2
  12614. Yes, it certainly does seem that way. Of course, now we're drifting into so-called "conspiracy theory" land, so best not to jump to any conclusions. I don't know if they were all cooperating, or if there were factions within them, but it would not surprise me at all if this was a big con.
    2
  12615. Absolutely! I think you'll enjoy the second episode because Hitler will be mentioned when I talk about the 1918 Revolution
    2
  12616. Are they commodities?
    2
  12617. Yeah bro
    2
  12618. What do you think of the alternative argument? https://mises.org/library/deflating-deflation-myth
    2
  12619. Yes, I may have bitten off more than I can chew here, but I wanted to dive into this subject since inflation is a hot topic right now and I personally want to know what to do to protect myself.
    2
  12620. I had a two week break! Although I do think I'll need to have another break next year...
    2
  12621.  @nikolairostov3326  I did do my research, but there's still a chance that I've got bits wrong. Also, there's definitely a debate surrounding a lot of this so I'm happy to talk about things if there's any major push back.
    2
  12622. @Mikael Arkanghel "Could you please gather some historical insight on how the Weimar hyperinflation also specifically influenced and inflamed the hatred of Jews in Germany thru to the 1930s? " I'll definitely be touching upon this subject in the second video 👍 and I'm sure the topic will come up later in the series too
    2
  12623. Yes, I thought I'd try something new! Are they good? Bad?
    2
  12624. Are you on Reddit's wallstreetsilver? Gold might be the safer bet, but there appears to be some potential in the silver market.
    2
  12625. Yeah, I have hundreds of private gaming videos still behind the scenes, and some animations too. Good times
    2
  12626. I did reference him though! I was actually tempted to copy into this video his video on the changed definition of inflation because it's fantastic https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA
    2
  12627. YouTube is a public company. To "go public" is to put your corporation on the stock exchange. The word "corporation" also comes from Fascist terminology and means "organ of the state". So in no way can YouTube be classed as a private company. But regardless, just like a socialist will criticise his own boss for paying him, I can criticise YouTube's ridiculous censorship policies, especially since it's clear they're deliberately hindering this channel's growth. I will also never forgive them for blocking my video on the Holocaust in Greece, which shows the true nature of the so-called "progressives" leading this company.
    2
  12628. I agree that Capitalism is bad. What we need is a free market, not more of the same.
    2
  12629. Why is it that every other name that starts with J is pronounced Y (e.g. Johanna), but Jenny is meant to be "J"enny?
    2
  12630. Could you explain the Betriebsführer for me? If Hitler didn't nationalised the industries, what were the Betriebsführer about? What about the Betriebsgemeinschaft? The official policy of Gleichschaltung? The near lack of information you possess on this topic is the problem. And the fact that you think the Invisible Hand of daddy-government can make all of the "inequality" disappear and pull wealth from a hat is highly revealing.
    2
  12631. Me and my editor are constantly working on the next Battlestorms. And I'm not an AnCap.
    2
  12632. What do you mean?
    2
  12633. Get a job.
    2
  12634. It's absolutely true that they're not watching the videos, and I think that their constant need to write out a rebuttal before having even watched it is interesting. It's as if they're trying to justify their ideology to themselves, thinking that if they prove that just one thing is wrong, then they can dismiss the rest. Rather than actually sitting there and taking in the information, they're on 'defense mode' from the very beginning, which shows that this is a religion, and their faith is unshakable.
    2
  12635. "Well, here's where the analysis of reality itself you've given is flawed, Sir" Yes, the analysis of reality I've given was the MATERIALIST analysis of reality, and it is flawed. I'm NOT a materialist. Reality is OBJECTIVE. - "reality is a construct; sure, but it truly is real" Reality is not a construct, it is real (objective).
    2
  12636. Everyone says we live in capitalism. But if the essence of capitalism is the free market, then we don't live in capitalism, since we don't have a free market. I'm for the free market, and I'm against capitalism, because capitalism is the current system. The current system is a state-managed economy. Sure, it's not pure socialism, but it's almost there. And I don't see why anyone would advocate for more of the same, when more of the same just results in a stalled engine. The State managing the economy is Capitalism, apparently. And Socialism is dialect, but means both non-state and state at the same time... but ultimately is a state controlled economy. Capitalism and Socialism are, therefore, two sides of the same coin. They are different, but both put the state in charge of the economy. Cutting back on government results in a freer market, and thus, less Capitalism or Socialism. A free market is, therefore, the antithesis of both Capitalism and Socialism.
    2
  12637. Except the youth and the politicians and the media and the civil service and half the voter base... all believe in Marxist Socialism. The UK has just elected a Marxist Party into power (the Labour Party).
    2
  12638. I'm anti-Establishment, which is why I'm anti-ideologies that are pro-government, such as socialism, communism, fascism and national socialism. If a government body like the "CIA" tried to fund me, I'd expose them immediately. The last thing I want is my own stolen money being offered back to me to say a certain thing.
    2
  12639. Yes, although some people deny it was written by him, and (just like Mein Kampf) it's a rambling mess
    2
  12640. Awesome! Thanks for the feedback
    2
  12641. Wow, thank you! I also wasn't impressed by my university lectures. I've learnt more doing these videos than I ever learned during my 'school' years, and that's because there's a difference between 'school' and 'education'.
    2
  12642. Because YouTube is auto-deleting comments. They've been deleting my own comments
    2
  12643. Ha! You weren't first! Can't believe you missed being first in the the first TIK video of 2018. Terrible!
    2
  12644. The Stalingrad video is going to be stupidly big in size and scope. Nothing else I've ever done will come anywhere near as close, and I doubt I'll ever be able to commit to something quite as ambitious again. I'm aiming for October and will put everything I have into hitting that target, but don't be surprised if I have to delay it. It's not a question of if, it's a question of can I get enough time to work on it. I'm debating making some pretty serious decisions just to find more time to work on it!
    2
  12645. Cheers Rikki! Happy New Year to you too :) how's things??
    2
  12646. I don't want to do it in parts because I'd prefer it to be one giant video. But I will start doing small videos in the coming weeks which start talking about various aspects of Stalingrad in the build up to it. May as well make use of the research I've done
    2
  12647. Thanks James! I agree with most of your points. But greed isn't necessarily what makes ALL entrepreneurs tick. A good portion maybe, not not all. There's nothing to say that it has to be greed. A lof of the people who advocate for social change would make great managers and leaders, but they're too busy trying to change the world. Their focus is elsewhere, while the greedy people are the ones focusing on the money. That's perhaps why more greedy people end up as entrepreneurs, but even then I wouldn't say we could stereotype all entrepreneurs that way. That's like saying all teachers are smart... because we know that's definitely not the case.
    2
  12648. Neither do I. I'm just glad I have a choice on where I spend my money. If I don't like one business, I'll go elsewhere. I have that power in a free market. I don't have that power when it comes to the state.
    2
  12649. He's also just done a response video https://youtu.be/QPqPnWTaMrE
    2
  12650. I have read it. It can't even explain how a Manchester United shirt is more expensive than a normal t-shirt. It sucks.
    2
  12651. Yes because reading the works of social revolutionaries is way better than learning actual economics
    2
  12652. All I said was that governments don't help the economy, not that there should be no government.
    2
  12653. Where?
    2
  12654. Co-operatives aren't socialism. They're just a novel way of managing a capitalist business. They're also not great at retaining their managers because their managers are paid less than the industry average, to compensate for the increased wages for the lower workers and inefficiency in production. While they're doable, they're less efficient than normal businesses.
    2
  12655. This statement proves you've not worked a proper day in your life
    2
  12656. Thank you. However the problem isn't the facts or the evidence - they reject facts and evidence, and place their faith in their ideology. They'll simply say that whatever socialism your parents suffered under wasn't "real socialism" and carry on ignoring reality.
    2
  12657. I didn't. I was merely pointing out that the larger the government, the lesser the production of the economy.
    2
  12658. Exactly. The same principle applies to all part of the economy. Why would you pay more for healthcare when you could just give directly to the doctors and nurses? But apparently it's wrong to think like this.
    2
  12659. Secretaries and teachers don't need to be owned by the state. They can operate without state ownership. In fact, they will operate more efficiently for lower costs when they aren't owned by the state because the consumer pays for what they want, not what they don't want but are forced to pay for https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI
    2
  12660. "That said, communism (not socialism), as shown through many experiences, tends to work only in small coherent communities. It has failed for obvious reasons on larger scale. That said, capitalism is not a perfect system: it can get out of control and become an outright plutocracy, but hopefully the world can fix the oddities here and there." I pretty much agree with everything you said here, although I would point out that I haven't looked too closely at communism on a small scale (except the Owenites, but not sure if you would class that as communism or socialism). Capitalism isn't perfect, and the 'plutocracy' element is something that needs to be addressed because we don't want governments being bribed by capitalists to bend the rules in their favour, just like we don't want governments bending the rules in their favour. Basically, government is bad news in general, which is why it's probably fair to call it a "necessary evil". The problem with socialism and communism is that in order to make those things happen (since they don't happen narturally, otherwise we'd all be socialist and communist) you need a community that dominates the other part of the community. Force is built into the philosophy. Whereas with capitalism, it's mutual cooperation. We work together - one supplies the time+skills, while the other supplies the money. Trade is the fundamental element of capitalism, which is why, if people don't want a particular thing, they can just not spend money on it. You can't not spend money on something in socialism because the "community" (state) decides for the individual. "In practice, socio-democratic countries, which are are not 100% socialists, work fine at the moment. A rather free economy, but with a social democracy." They work, but they're not great. The working poor in the UK right now are working harder for longer, then having their money taken off them and given to those who do not work (but get houses for free? and don't pay for services like the NHS or dentists?). The elements of the "social"-democracy is the main problem. Yes it works, but only because the non-social-side of the economy is keeping it afloat. "Because, yes, socialism implies a democracy no matter what detractors will twist it to be." Socialism doesn't necessarily have to be a democracy. For example, if you have a council of workers who seize a factory, but then they unite to have a Union of Soviet (council) Socialist Republics (the USSR), you don't get a democracy out of that. There is nothing that says it has to be democracy. In fact, I suspect the term "democracy" isn't being used by communists and socialists the same way that Western philosophers use the term, since the very nature of socialism prevents individual people from having a say in how they live their own lives.
    2
  12661. "Force people to do what you think need for the nation using not covered terroristic dictatorship of ruling capitalist reactionary circles - it's fascism." Actually it's this - "Force people to do what you think need for the nation using not covered terroristic dictatorship of ruling socialistic reactionary circles - it's Fascist-Socialism, National Socialism, Marxist Socialism and/or Feminist Socialism." Then you said - "@TIK it was a property and was person who owned it and make profit from it despite being forced by the government to make certain products. So what the difference?" Except the person didn't own it (I've shown previously that the socialists abolished private property), it was owned by the state. Socialism is the force of government, since the government owns the economy in a collective. As Engels says in Das Kapital volume III, it is communal-ownership rather than private ownership. Hitler also says this, but instead of it being the workers who own the means of production communally, it is the Aryan-German race that owns it communally. It's a form of socialism.
    2
  12662. Agree to disagree on the fundamental premise of the video and the principle of economics people are saying I'm wrong over (even though it's clearly not just me saying it)? I'm not going to agree to disagree since both the logic and the weight of evidence is clearly in my favour here.
    2
  12663. Right, but all you've done is robbed from Peter and paid Paul. Paul's living standards have increased, but Peter's have gone down. So there has been no net increase in living standards. In fact, you've discouraged Peter from working, so Peter doesn't work as hard, resulting in a shrinking economy. Whereas, if you boost production, you benefit both Peter and Paul.
    2
  12664. How does robbing Peter to pay Paul result in higher living standards?
    2
  12665. "I'd strongly suggest you buy an ACTUAL economics textbook like Krugman and Wells" History clearly indicates that Keynesian economics is completely incorrect. It works about as much as Marxism. "1. Where are the pounds coming from?" Academic Agent’s “The Origins of Money” https://youtu.be/fWDn1-dyXDg (watch first) and “Understanding Inflation” https://youtu.be/nnisOz2nGFc "2. Why are capital improvements the only factor in productivity? Wage satisfaction on the part of the worker, in this case analogous to the morale of a military unit, are a critical component in how productive the worker is." A worker can work twice as hard and produce two pins. Great. Technological innovation can create conditions where 4,800 pins are created. Are you suggesting that a worker would work 4,800 times as hard if he was paid more? "3. Seriously, the evil capitalist has no consumption needs and is a magic conduit through which capital improvements can be imported into the closed economy in exchange for cash?" Of course he consumes, but it's not relevant to this particular scenario. Realistically, as I said further into the video (which you clearly didn't watch all the way through) if you win the lottery you'll go and buy luxury items. You won't go to the local supermarket and but all the food. Why? Because that would be a pointless act. The capitalist is not depriving the workers. All he's doing is buying very scarce items with his money, which the workers wouldn't have access to anyway because they are scarce. "Advancing the video another 3 minutes, I see smilee with sunglasses can become an additional capitalist who can also summon capital improvements through the impermeable barrier of the hypothetical scenario. So it isn't THAT arbitrarily foolish." Incorrect. Entrepreneurs are a thing. Valuetainment’s “How to Start a Business for under $500” https://youtu.be/rKAAzZFLPEs "Of course, the other glaring problem with your sunglasses starting a clothes factory scenario, which is even more true if you are using gold coins, is that you've just caused 50% deflation." No he didn't. The workers didn't receive any money while they're unemployed, and only received wages once the clothes factory was back online. No inflation occurs in this scenario. It only occurs if the government prints money to give to the workers who are unemployed. "It's unlikely that sunglasses' new industry is going to be that productive that quickly, so the evil capitalist will just hold onto his pounds, thanks." No, that was to make it simple. Supply and demand still occurs. In this scenario, let's say they made one article of clothing each. Then in that case, the article of clothing would be worth £10. If they made 10, it would be worth £1 each. If they made 100, it would be worth £0.10 each. Productivity floods the market, reduces scarcity, bringing down the price of the items. This was the basic premise of the video and a fundamental economics principle, which (despite reading Keynesian economics books) you've still failed to grasp. "4. Why doesn't the altrusitic doppelganger of the evil capitalist just borrow the surplus cash from the workers?" Because they may not want to give their money to him. Or, if you're suggesting that they shouldn't get paid, then they have no incentive to work. "This is where your scenario disintegrates." No, you've missed the entire point. The purpose of the video was to show you that money is irrelevant to living standards. If we all had £1,000,000 but nothing to buy, they that money is worthless. Money is valuable because, like I showed in the video, it allows you to trade for other commodities. If you wanted to buy bread off me, I'd give you the bread, and you'd give me the money. In effect, you're buying bread with money, and I'm buying money with bread. If you increase the money supply, all you do is cause inflation. The price of goods goes up to match the inflation rate, as described in the video. Your next paragraph just complicates the situation, isn't relevant and doesn't undermine what I'm saying. The point of the video is to point out that money isn't what causing living standards to rise, and production is. You're trying to criticize the scenario I designed rather than the premise, which is that production is the most important factor, not money. It appears that you've failed to grasp this even now. Stop reading Keynesian economists and start reading books that are based on principles that actually work - and for you personally I recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson". "The entire argument that capitalists MUST be allowed to eat all the pie for the economy to progress is predicated on the assumption that free financial markets don't work." I never made that argument at all.
    2
  12666. Taxes are spread evenly, that's true. And that means the damage is evenly distributed across the economy. This hurts every other business and every other worker just to save some workers in one industry. Your opinion that the government can run certain industries better isn't something I can agree with. You mention healthcare. Ok, look at the NHS... what an absolute disaster! Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    2
  12667. But if you increase taxes to boost production to one industry, you take production from every other part of the economy. Plus, having a bureaucracy to manage all this makes a net loss in production and living standards.
    2
  12668. "If your point is that printing money creates inflation, you are right," That was part of what I was getting at, but you've somehow missed the main point - that inflation (more money) doesn't increase living standards for everybody. "but the only entity that can print money is a central bank." In a modern economy, yes. But this doesn't have to be the case, because as history shows us, money doesn't have to be paper or electronic (which is clearly what you think money is). Precious metals can be used for money, as can shells, gems, or (unhistorically) bottle caps... Almost anything that can be easily divisible that doesn't perish can be used as money, as explained in this other video https://youtu.be/fWDn1-dyXDg (the Origins of Money) "Transferring the existing money does not increase the money supply." If the workers get double their money as a result of a "fair wage", that increases their money supply by double. But the point I was making (which you seemed to have completely missed) is that this doesn't increase their living standards, as living standards aren't defined by how much money there is. We can be swimming in paper notes, but starving because we don't have any food - as is the case in Venezeula at the moment. Increasing the money supply cannot increase the amount of goods; only increasing production can. That was my central point. "This is why I asked whether you really understand what money is." No, you asked that because you wanted to try and discredit me in the eyes of others. It's actually a typical socialist tactic, and I'm used to it. Are you a socialist? Today, money is a non-consumable product (not always in the past) that has no value by itself (in the past it did e.g. gold), but is used as a go-between to exchange goods (which I actually covered this in the video you didn't watch). However, much like any other good, the quantity of money (e.g. printed) available determines the 'value' of the individual notes of money - but doesn't affect the value of other goods (doubling the amount of money in the economy just halves the value of the money in relation to other goods). The video link I gave before (the Origins of Money) explains this very well too. "@TIK Could you please point out an unreasonable assumption or a wild claim I made?" The wild claims you made started right from the beginning. You said that you were "a fan of your history videos" but that this channel "makes me doubt the validity of the rest of your channel." Ok, why is that? If the rest of my videos have nothing to do with economics (supposedly) then why would that undermine the validity of them? You've failed to grasp the concepts put forth in an economics video, which you are supposedly well-versed within, and yet this somehow translates to you not trusting any of my military videos. The logic in this sentence of yours just isn't there. Also, why are you echoing all the other socialists in the comment section with this statement? They're saying the exact same thing. Are you a socialist? Also, you're such a big fan that you've never once commented on my channel before now. But you've come out of the woodwork to criticise a video that takes on socialism. Very very coincidental, don't you think? Are you a socialist? And the fact that you watched this video and failed to understand anything that was said within it, and then assumed I was wrong, says a lot about your character. In fact, I'm now certain that you haven't "been teaching economics for 11 years" at all, not just because your understanding of economics is pitifully poor, but actually because your attitude has been awful from the start. Even if I was wrong, no teacher worth his salt (also used as money in the past btw) would actively try and discourage or discredit someone for the attempt. A good professional teacher would politely explain where someone went wrong and offer improvements. But instead, you "cringe" and go on to accuse me of things like not knowing what money is (the irony). You have no concept of "teaching" because you didn't set out to teach; you set out to discredit. What a great teacher you are! (no sarcasm at all) The best part is what you said in your second message - "I did not understand the "production" part of the story at all, so I am reluctant to discuss it". Yes you didn't understand it because you're not a very good economics teacher. In fact, judging by the way you've presented economics so far, you've clearly been drinking too much Marx-juice. Got news for you Rahmi, Marx wasn't an economist - he was little more than a social revolutionary who didn't hold a job and bummed money off Engels his entire life. He didn't have a clue how economics worked. That's why his entire theory fails at the first hurdle - the Labour Theory of Value (lol). "You are trying to explain many complicated phenomena (inflation, labor productivity, innovation etc.) and their interaction in one extremely simple model where in reality economists have difficulty trying to understand any one of those using several well formulated models." Yes, because these concepts are incredibly hard to grasp (sarcasm). Surprisingly, I don't have difficulty in understanding them, which is why I designed a simple scenario explaining this concept to people. Incidentally, a lot of the non-Marxist people here and even other YouTubers have managed to grasp what I said, but the socialists and the amazing "economist" who's been teaching for 11 years has not. And the Marxists have deliberately closed their ears and gone "no, you're wrong" without actually having offering any valuable counter-arguments - only attempting to discredit, because really their agenda is to prevent the spread of criticism against socialism. This is because their belief in their ideology clouds their judgement - socialism has become a synonymous with the phrase "rejecting fact", as I've explained in other videos (which haven't been downvoted because socialists conveniently only watch the obvious "anti-socialist" videos of mine). The fact that you have closed your ears to this video as well is making me question your allegiance. Are you a socialist? No seriously, are you a socialist? If you are, that would explain a lot. If you are, please tell me where you teach economics so I can tell people to avoid going there. The last thing we want is state-sponsored socialism. And this is assuming you are actually a teacher. If you are, this emphasizes my point about state-inefficiencies exactly, plus I genuinely feel sorry for your students. Also, a book I would recommend to you personally - "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. If you couldn't grasp the concepts in this video, you seriously need to go back to basics.
    2
  12669. I understand your points, but I'm not sure you understand mine. If someone has £10 and spends it on what they want (e.g. cars) then they will create jobs in the car industry. If the government takes half that money off them, and spends it buying something they don't want or use (e.g. trains), plus the cost of taking the money in the first place (government and taxpayers and bureaucrats) how does that increase their living standards? The cost of paying the government to do that is more than the return. Worse, it's not what the taxpayer wants in the first place. If they wanted it, they'd spend it on those things. For example, my internet provider is Virgin Media, who are independent. They installed their line to my home and I paid for that because they offer the best service in the UK. But I still pay my taxes, part of which goes to Virgin Media's competition - British Telecom (BT). BT cannot provide the same level of internet speeds as Virgin, and yet I'm forced to subsidize a failing company. This is promoting inefficiency, and is a waste of money because I've effectively paid twice for the same service. Similar examples exist throughout the economy. Train usage is declining in the UK, but the government subsidies them through taxpayers money. I don't use the trains, but I'm paying for them. I don't watch the BBC but I'm subsidizing them (technically they are my competitors, being a TV company). I've paid "national insurance" (tax) for over 12 years, but have only used the NHS 2-3 times in that time. It's horrendously expensive and inefficient. Worse, if I was to go to a private surgery, I'd have to pay again - rather than just paying once for the service. This forces me to only use the NHS, limiting my choice as a consumer. Ultimately it's much more efficient for people to pay for what they need or want, not what they don't need or want. If there is competition in an economy, and someone can provide the same service for cheaper, then I will use that service. But government monopolies prevent that from happening, and are a huge expense for workers like me.
    2
  12670. It's an expression https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_rob_Peter_to_pay_Paul?wprov=sfla1 Another way to look at it - If you take £10 off me, how does that increase my living standards?
    2
  12671. Thank you sir! There's been a bit of a backlash already, but I'm glad you enjoyed it and think it's a simplistic but undertandable model. That's what I was going for.
    2
  12672. "@TIK "Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism." - Adolf Hitler, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939 pg. 93" And? Socialism is an economic theory meaning the social ownership of the means of production. Marxism is a type of socialism, but with worker (class) ownership of the means of production. Nazism is a type of socialism, but with Aryan (racial) ownership of the means of production. Marxism is not the only socialism, and is not all socialism. Hitler was a socialist, but was against Marxism.
    2
  12673. Yes, and they didn't actually watch the video, as the analytics make clear. They just come along and mass-downvote any video that goes against their ideological beliefs.
    2
  12674. "ignoring context" You missed the part of the video (about half of it actually) where I expanded upon the basic premise. The reality is, it's easy to see the benefits of production when there's 10 workers. It's much harder to see the benefits of production when there's 7 billion. However, the principle still stands. When technology and innovations increase production, everyone is better off.
    2
  12675. But their living standards don't increase by paying everyone more, so it's pointless. Plus, those 10 people are not specialists at creating new inventions or creating plans or developing new processes or coming up with decisions. That 1 guy's job is to invest money where it will be put to greater use. He's a specialist at doing that, which is why he's rewarded with more money. You're effectively advocating removing the doctor and giving the job of health care to the patients.
    2
  12676. ​ @donaldgrant9067  Does everyone become unemployed at the same time in your economy? In reality, unemployment doesn't and cannot hit 100%. Those who lose their jobs (let's say 20%) are in trouble for 6-8 months, while the remaining 80% have an increase in earnings. This, of course, only happens in a free economy. Once you throw socialism into the mix (high regulations, high tax, high inflation they're hiding etc etc etc) then the recession is not allowed to do its job, and thus you get a slow growth economy, which is what we're seeing right now (since 2008). You need to look beyond the first step, and look to the next. Yes, when someone is immediately made unemployed, this is bad. But this frees up part of the economy to create more jobs, and thus the unemployed person finds another job (again, if the market is actually allowed to do its job). You're saying to me about robots taking our jobs, but I'm actually in a new job, and I'm looking to employ a non-robot soon. New jobs are being created, just not in the old industries. They're being created in newer industries, and industries that haven't been born yet, but will be due to technological increases. Even if robots did take all our jobs, are we just to sit there and rot? No. We will find new things to do that robots can't do - such as entertainment, social, and creative works, if not service and investment etc. The only reason robots are taking our jobs is because the minimum wage just keeps rising artificially higher and higher for zero reason. The UK government has just raised it by 38 pence per hour, which is an absolutely insane amount, especially when there are so many unemployed people looking for work. I would have happily hired someone. But this has forced me to rethink my own hiring, since I cannot afford to pay that amount with the old target I had on Patreon. I would suggest you listen to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson: https://youtu.be/8_u2a4uQFNI
    2
  12677. Economics isn't a zero sum game. The employment of robots reduces the price of produce, which means the consumer saves money on that product, giving them extra money that they can spend elsewhere. That extra money then leads to higher demand in other areas, which then leads to more jobs. Of course, in Marxist economics, the workers can't create their own non-robot businesses or seek employment in new businesses, so of course they starve to death. But in the real world, the economy expands. And, due to Keynesian economics (a deeply flawed system), the bankers are actually giving money out left right and centre, which is why we have a massive credit bubble which will burst one day and cause a massive global financial crisis. So that part of your criticism is also untrue - in fact the opposite of what's actually happening. Credit is too easily available. That's actually the problem with our economy, and it's precisely because of Keynesian economics and the fact we (the entire world) no longer have a capitalist economic system, and haven't had one since the ~1920's. It's true that the global economy will collapse, but the cause is socialist economics, not capitalism - which is actually the only way to get out of the crisis.
    2
  12678. "Everybody can communicate with each other." So it's not about communication or nationality then? "But one part earns just enough to pay for rent. Other two and half times more." If it's not communication, then it must be something else that you're not telling me - or you don't understand or haven't factored in. As a former employer, the only reason I'd pay an employee less for the same job is if they're not as skilled, didn't work as many hours, or didn't produce as much as someone else. The other possibility is if they'd been working at the place for a while, as it might be beneficial for me to pay them higher to keep them on board, rather than have to train someone else. That is it, unless there's an artifical wage increase being imposed on me by a third party. "Because otherwise others wouldn't work and others are okay with the pay." So they're happy to work? If they want to work there, leave them be. If they were being exploited, didn't like it, and could get better jobs elsewhere, they'd leave. It sounds like they have no alternative. "Because they come for poor countries and the market is smaller and less profitable." Ah, so it is an artifical wage increase being imposed on them by a third party. Do the people from your country have a minimum wage? Do these foreign workers not get paid minimum wage? "You cannot justify it by any means." Let's say there's 10 foreign workers in this business of yours, and they were on $5, while the rest of the native workforce got $10. You come along and double the wages of the foreign workers to $10. Then 5 foreign workers would be let off (unemployed) as a result of the artificial extra cost. This would then decrease the amount of goods being produced, increasing the cost of the goods for the consumer, meaning less sales, less chance of competition in the market, meaning further job cuts, or pay decreases. It's a spiral of death for the company, leads to more unemployment, and it hurts the consumer, decreasing living standards overall and shrinking the economy. This is exactly what happened in the USA when minimum wage went to $15 https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ Also, in this current system the foreign workers are now earning experience in your economy, meaning they can go to other employers and show them their previous work experience. By depriving them on jobs, you're depriving them of a chance for decent living. So, if this is the case (I don't know, I'm only guessing based on your limited descriptions), you're best leaving them be. Intervention will probably hurt more than help everyone in that situation, especially if you deprive them of jobs, because in their country they may be even worse off (e.g. $2 not $5). I would also recommend Thomas Sowell's “Economic Facts and Fallacies" which actually talks about similar situations where intervention was bad.
    2
  12679. "Wait, but how does this apply to let's say a software company, where the production is basically infinite because software is copyable." Take for example South Park. When they first made that show, it took like 6 months to make a video. Now, thanks to advances in technology, they do it in 6 days. One of them actually says this in this video "6 Days to Air: The Making of South Park (2011)" https://youtu.be/RIo11liUA0c
    2
  12680. Glad you enjoyed it Clive :)
    2
  12681. He has 100 in savings for starters. But I took cost out of the equation to make it simpler. If we add cost back in, the same production principle is still the way living standards rise for all, but the numbers would change. It would make things unnecessarily complicated for zero gain as an example, which is why I cut it out of the scenario.
    2
  12682. "So, I'm sure I'm going to get pounced on for not watching the whole video" Absolutely, because everything you criticised is answered in the video or the pinned comment. "Let's set aside the fairly obvious fact that workers don't consume the entirety of the products they produce." Yes, but these 10 workers represent the entire economy. All products get consumed. "What is the evil capitalist doing with his money?" Wow, you didn't even get to option 2? Jeeze, your attention span is poor. Option 2 explains what he does with it. Plus, if you watch the rest of the video, you'll see what happens when we expand the economy. The problem here is that you didn't watch the full video. You therefore have undermined your own criticism. Watch the video fully.
    2
  12683. "Let's say Britain dropped all social security and deregulated the economy and labour laws. That would lead to mass exploitation of the poor ala the Victorian era, subsistence wages, identure, etc." You mean in an era where real living wages increased by in the region of 42-50% between 1850 and 1883?
    2
  12684. Happy New Year to you too Ebrohim!
    2
  12685. "And you even haven't considered economy out of market economy." Yes I did. See the last third of the video. "Please stick to history or you will ruin your channel." Economics is a part of history. Military history and economics history and political history go hand in hand. I cannot cover Lend Lease without all three.
    2
  12686. I know, because YouTube won't let me post it for some reason
    2
  12687. Profit. If he doesn't boost his own production efficiency, then that's a clue that his business is going to fail, or at least not grow. If he's investing his money elsewhere, it means he's lost faith in his own business (maybe people aren't buying his products). If he is investing in his own business, then he's still in the game.
    2
  12688. Marx has been predicting the end of capitalism since the 1860's. Even Berstein (who buried Engels at sea, and who wrote the fourth volume of Das Kapital) realised that workers under capitalism were seeing their living standards rise, not fall (as Marx predicted, which was why he 'knew' the revolution would come). So it doesn't matter what Marx said because he's wrong. And this is the same Marx who, in his first volume, confirms the now disregarded Labour Theory of Value, which is absolutely wrong, as I explained in the pinned comment. And the BBC is government funded, through taxation (sorry, they call it 'Licencing'). So yes, that is a socialist propaganda source. Secondly the Guardian is a Left-wing newspaper. So no, it's not "surprising", it's empirical evidence. "not surprising from the man who thinks th e Weimar and the USSR were juat two socialist countries slugging it out." What are you on about? The Weimar Republic was before Nazi Germany. National Socialist Germany was racial-socialist, while the USSR was class-socialist. They're both "totalitarian" regimes, because total state control of the economy is socialism. There's little difference between the two. Even Stalin persecuted Volga Germans and murdered millions of Ukrainians, amongst others, let alone what he did in the Baltic States, Poland and Prussia. To say that they can't be socialist is just silly. Hitler's racism is his socialism. The two are linked. To say he's not socialist is to say he's not racist. This is why I always point this out to Holocaust deniers, because when I say "so you're saying Hitler wasn't a racist or a socialist then?" they soon backtrack and lose the argument. Socialism is actually so fundamental to Hitler's ideology that you can't even explain why he wanted to go to war without it.
    2
  12689. "By following current events I'm not talking about doing it through the BBC and the Guardian." Sources are listed in the pinned comment. Note, I didn't nor don't get my news from socialist-propaganda sources like the two you listed. You're accusing me of reading this stuff with zero evidence. Is that how you study history - by making stuff up? "You're still going by the trickle down effect which western economics teach" Thomas Sowell explains that the “Trickle Down Theory” is a myth made up by Marxists here https://youtu.be/nZPDpk8NA-g "There's no point debating you, you're too far gone." There is no debate here. You've rejected my points by bringing up myths and distortions as counterarguments. I go where the facts take me. I don't believe in fiction. Postmodernism and Marxism are enemies of the scientific method.
    2
  12690. "Being good in one field does not make you an authority on others. I would not ask my doctor about economics, nor an economist about medicine. But that is my opinion..." I've not been in the military. I guess I should stop doing military history videos as well - which is actually an argument some have made in the past. Of course, when I pointed out their flawed logic, they soon realised their mistake.
    2
  12691. That's not true. Capitalism doesn't need markets to expand into new territory - it can expand internally through innovation and new technologies, as I explained in the video. The idea than an economy is zero-sum, which is what you're describing, has been disproven many times over, as this video explains. Also, Capitalism is simply private control of businesses. As in, individuals in control of their own lives. You're suggesting that it's an out of date concept and that individuals shouldn't control their own lives and work. What's the alternative? The state controlling their lives, which is socialism. Well I'm sorry but that's simply tyrannical.
    2
  12692. David hit the nail on the head. If we can't even agree on how living standards rise, what hope do we have!?
    2
  12693. Yeah, I did that on purpose ;)
    2
  12694. Yeah, I haven't planned a 100k video, so this can be it :)
    2
  12695. Yeah, there's definitely going to be more than 2 seasons!
    2
  12696. It wasn't my error, I got the information from Beevor who said it. My degree is in history, not temperature
    2
  12697. A hell of a lot of episodes! Not much is written on this part of the fighting too, so I couldn't go as in-depth as I actually wanted! Season 1 and 2 are therefore pretty light compared to what's to come once we get to the city. Season 3 onwards is when the bulk of the books start their narrative, so that's when we'll probably end up spending one episode per day of battle... but at this point, who knows!
    2
  12698. See the pinned comment. Not my error, but most likely a mistranslation
    2
  12699. Soviet tank "corps" were the size of Soviet rifle divisions. They were divisions and not corps-level units.
    2
  12700. See the pinned comment and discussion underneath. It was probably a mistranslation (but not my error!)
    2
  12701. No, they do not!
    2
  12702. Yes! Probably the best idea I've ever had haha
    2
  12703. The Stalingrad region map (the main one showing the Don Bend and the roads etc) is based on maps from 1952. Yes, 10 years late, but they were the closest topological maps I could find of the region. I tried to correct some of the additions, but I suspect there's more roads than there should be
    2
  12704. That was the whole essence of Lebensraum - living space for a German farmer-lords to rule over the slave-peasants they had captured, and force them to work the land. If they had succeeded, tens of millions more would have perished, and tens of millions more again would have been enslaved.
    2
  12705. Imagine the Soviet Army and/or British Army assisting the Turkish Army in the hills of Turkey... not sure that would have been good for the Germans. Also, there was talk of Turkey siding with the Axis if Germany took the Caucasus - so a potential ally had Fall Blau been a success.
    2
  12706. Hope it's been worth the wait Ricky!
    2
  12707. You may want to see Toprani's lecture on the issue because he addresses why it wasn't practically possible to get the oil from the Middle East https://youtu.be/RgxEBGAXNRU
    2
  12708. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It was probably a mistranslation from the German (not my error though!)
    2
  12709. Glad you enjoyed it! Not a lot is written on this period of the fighting, but I've done my best to show it as best as I can. Think I got it mostly right. That said, while the fuel issues were a problem, what's about to happen (next two episodes) is also something to be considered as to why the Axis were stopped... Not going to spoil it though :)
    2
  12710. And that bibliography has grown since. I'm now at over 100 books that have been (or will be) used specifically for this battle. There are some general texts in there too, but my full-source list of all my WW2 (and related) history books can be found in the description.
    2
  12711. Keep watching. Halder gets his own section later on ;)
    2
  12712. Yes, yes we are :)
    2
  12713. Beevor's Arnhem book is good! I just think he missed the ball on the Nijmegen problem, and so, while I do recommend it, it can't be the only book you read on Market Garden (which is why I suggest Neilland's Battle of the Rhine, which fills you in on the Nijmegen problem to give an all-round perspective).
    2
  12714. I actually plan to cover this sort of question later, so I'll go into more detail when it comes up. But from what I've read, I'd say it was like Verdun in terms of intensity and both sides throwing more and more into the mix, but it wasn't like Verdun in the sense that the Germans hoped to bleed the enemy to death. As you will see, the Germans were advancing in Stalingrad right up until Operation Uranus began. Yes, their advance was slowed and slowed as time went on, but Chuikov's forces were gradually being pushed back. I don't think the Germans ever intended it to be a meat-grinder bleed-out battle
    2
  12715. @dronfim - I (tried) to pronounce like this guy did https://forvo.com/search/chuikov/ Sounds like "Chookov" to me. I know some documentaries say "Choo-ee-kov" and that's how I used to say it. But that Russian speaker says "Chookov", so I went with it
    2
  12716. @Ann Onymous - 22nd July 1942
    2
  12717. Has UoC 2 been released? Great! I know Close Combat The Bloody First is close to release (or maybe it has been too?)
    2
  12718. Definitely "Stalingrad" by Glantz/House. I'm using their trilogy, but the condensed one-book version is still great. Highly recommended reading and will compliment what you see throughout this series (their maps suck, but mine don't!)
    2
  12719. First time I've paid someone else to help me out, and it was well worth it for the quality of the maps :)
    2
  12720. Haha thanks Julius! Hearing all this great feedback makes the effort and the long hours worth it in the end 😁 cheers!
    2
  12721. It comes from Beevor, Stalingrad, P87. Definitely says 53 degrees in the sun, apparently quoting from Helmuth Groscurth, who was XI Army Corps' chief of staff.
    2
  12722. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!
    2
  12723. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!
    2
  12724. Enjoy the popcorn! (and the video!)
    2
  12725. Well, I broke off the research to do Crusader and Courland etc, but yeah. Last week I crunched 83 hours in order to get this done for today
    2
  12726. Stalingrad comes before Hollywood!
    2
  12727. Happy that someone spotted that :)
    2
  12728. :D
    2
  12729. Turns out I have the book but forgot I purchased it 🙈
    2
  12730. The original video had nothing to do with this topic. This topic is 'controversial' in the sense that people have very strong views about when the war started, mostly based on their country of origin, or how they define what a 'world war' actually is.
    2
  12731. Don't delete comments! We live in a world where most people seem incapable of thinking, and you can't show any sign of weakness or you'll get set upon... so I argue hard (perhaps too hard) simply to try and make people reconsider their stances. Regardless of our differences, I'm glad to see you still here.
    2
  12732. Weren't the Napoleonic Wars originally referred to as the "Great War"?
    2
  12733. @slovene ball - to clarify, Paulus probably (debatable) wasn't to blame for the 6th Army not breaking out of the pocket. I'm looking forward to going into more detail when we get to that point in this series
    2
  12734. Tank Corps are divisional sized units. They are not Corps level units. So yes, it is intentional :)
    2
  12735. I actually fill in that gap next episode where the first part is about the Soviet situation. The Soviet logistics were also a mess at this point, and as you'll hear next episode, the rail lines to the Caucasus Front were cut, meaning the Soviets had to concentrate on reinforcing the Stalingrad area if they were to put pressure on the Germans entering the Caucasus.
    2
  12736. Bad feedback forces me to raise the bar. Good feedback convinces me to raise the bar. No feedback is an indication that the bar was too low to begin with. If the bar is too high to reach then I've got a lot of work to do to catch up. And I will never allow myself to lower the bar because that goes against my personal goal in life. Therefore, the bar either stays where it is or goes higher. Either way, there's work to be done.
    2
  12737. I didn't say Hitler was communist in this video, and I made a huge effort to differentiate between the two ideologies. You would have realised that if you'd actually watched the video. I have joked and called them "National Communists" before (to their faces too, which gets them really upset), and said they were pretty much the same as the Marxist (which they are, since Marx was incredibly racist), but they are technically not the same. They are both Socialist though.
    2
  12738. History tells us what the definitions of Socialism, Communism, Marxism (notice - it's different again), and Capitalism. I've been over this in a previous video backed by sources at the bottom of the screen. You assume you've already won this argument, and think you are making good points. But you would do well to listen and learn, since I've already countered your arguments within these videos https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12739. Stalingrad hasn't delayed by this. I've been working on this video for a year, way before Stalingrad episode 1 came out!
    2
  12740. Here's another video where I explain the differences between Hitler's Socialism and Mussolini's Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12741. Hey kiddo, see the timestamps in the description? There's one called "privatisation" which you should watch. The Nazis nationalized the industries - they didn't privatize them.
    2
  12742. @DemocraticSocialist01 - YouTube seems to have deleted my reply... Let me try again. You're trying to deflect from the fact that you are the anti-Semite Marxist who believes - “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital, P107. You believe, as Karl Marx states, that the offspring of the Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews". You believe that the Jews/Capitalists are stealing money off other people, which is classic anti-Semitism. You believe that the Jews/Capitalists should be removed from society - “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Socialism calls for the removal of the bourgeoisie/Jews from society. You believe in Socialism - then you believe in anti-Semitism. So YOU are the anti-Semite here, not me. Look in the mirror before you accuse others of being anti-Semitic.
    2
  12743. @DemocraticSocialist01 Not one of those accusations is true. I'm not even sure who "soros" is? The Jews didn't own all the factories of Wiemar Germany, but the Nazis believed they did. And the problem with Eric Hobsbawm is his awful history and writing style, not his "race" ("race" doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ ) or religion (his faith in Marxism, itself anti-Semitic). Jeff Bezos is not a "hero" for Capitalism either, since he's not even a Capitalist anymore (he owns a corporation, which is a 'corporate' group, not a private entity). My point was that he managed to build his business up from scratch, so if he could do it, anyone can. Plus, it would be wrong to steal his business off him, as you and your fellow Social-elitists believe.
    2
  12744. @Aiden B. I've just read through most of this rubbish, and once again, nothing of any note is being said. No evidence is presented for any accusations made, and no evidence in favour of your own defense is being made either. All you're doing is jabbering on and on, and not actually saying anything that makes logical sense. So to save time with you (which will allow me to reply to worthwhile viewers), I'm just going to focus on the one thing that undermines everything else you've ever said - "You made multiple videos, yes, but I guess I missed the "in-depth argument" part. When you start counting Sargon as a quote, well I don't know what much to tell you." The first part of this is an open admission that you've not watched any of my videos, especially this one, which is very in-depth. But the second sentence is the best: it's proof that you definitely haven't watched any of my videos. Apparently, according to you, I quoted Sargon. Could you point to where I supposedly quoted Sargon? Could you give me a timestamp? What exactly did I quote Sargon as saying? Oh wait, no you can't, because I didn't quote from Sargon. I've never quoted from Sargon, and you would know that if you'd bothered to watch the video. Now, I know what you'll say - but I referenced him. And yes, I referenced a live-stream of his. However, I didn't quote from Sargon. What I did was I mentioned that the three Socialists (two of which have YouTube channels) on the live-stream that Sargon was hosting couldn't agree what Socialism was, and each had differing views on it (showing that Socialists have no idea what Socialism actually is). But I never once quoted from Sargon. And again, you would know this if you bothered to watch the video. If you can't even get this right, there's no hope.
    2
  12745. "im an anti semite now too?" All Socialists are anti-Semites, whether they realize it or not. I've presented my evidence in the previous post where I quoted Karl Marx, and have defended that position against Aiden's "counter-argument". If you have no argument, then stop with the anti-Semite trolling. Otherwise, prove me wrong.
    2
  12746. @wannabchomsky "look at this pathetic drivel. There is so much wrong it's impossible to address. a rant or gishgallop of misinformation, misconceptions, redefinitions and libertarian nonsense." You haven't addressed anything I said, anti-Semite. Please explain to me why me directly quoting from Karl Marx is misinformation, misconception, redefinition or libertarian nonsense? I mean, Karl Marx himself is talking a load of rubbish, just as you are, but me quoting directly from Marx is not me doing anything you accused me of. Again, you have no argument. You're just an immoral troll who's advocating the theft and murder of the bourgeoisie (who Marx said are the Jews).
    2
  12747. Thank you for your comment. Ignore the two anti-Semites above
    2
  12748. Yes I do. Should I stick to tanks? https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  12749. Let me know what you think 👍
    2
  12750. You haven't read Mein Kampf otherwise you'd know he hated Capitalism.
    2
  12751. If you did this to one person, you might get away with it. That customer would stop going to you, and you would lose a small amount of profit as a result. However, if you did this on a large scale, you would soon find that people stop coming to you for business. You're now not making profit, and thus would be out of business. Haven't you done any research or thinking through on this at all? I mean, I have, clearly. You haven't, which is why you're still asking basic questions like this.
    2
  12752. In that fictional scenario, it would be very silly of your law firm to lie like that because opinion in the community would quickly side against such a dishonest law firm. If I and my own law firm expose just how corrupt and dishonest your law firm was, warning other customers and users to stop using your law firm, customers would leave, since their reputations would be on the line too. The law firm would soon lose profit and go out of business, just like how a bad restaurant goes out of business because of word of mouth or online reviews. Negative reviews impact the profitability of a business and boycotts are very powerful. Therefore, the incentive of your law firm would be to not lie. If you came to them and said that you did give me the goods, they would want you to provide evidence that you did provide me the goods. Inventory checks, manifests, witnesses... You obviously wouldn't be able to provide all that because you're lying. The law firm would then say that you should hand over the goods. But besides that, your reputation is also on the line. If you lie and say you gave me the goods when you didn't, I'd post online reviews and tell people about your dishonest nature. People would stop shopping at your shop, profits would fall, and you would be struggling or out of business entirely. It is, therefore, in your best interest to maintain your end of the deal, lest you want to be out on the street.
    2
  12753. "Huh, either tick or YouTube is censoring." Why are you spamming multiple comments? Just restrict it to one, and only use multiple if you meet the word-limit for each post. I'm not censoring you, so YouTube must be, and it's probably because you got triggered and started spamming multiple comments. So don't be a spammer and respond with some dignity. "Ignoring the fact that under your OWN DEFINITIONS a criminal gang would be a state" No, my definition does not say that a criminal gang would be a state. Again, you haven't listened to what I actually said. - "your model for your libertarian paradise is a market where you never know whether you get what you're paid for, if you get ut at all" If you pay for something and don't get anything back in return, you'd go to the private law firms and seek compensation. For some reason, you have in your head that without a State there would be no private police or law firms. Again, you've done zero research on the topic. - "and where at any point you can be robbed and or murdered,and where eventually people are enslaved by whoever has the most capacity for violence? Brilliant." Yes because robbing, murder and slavery definitely doesn't happen right now in our beloved socialist paradise. Oh wait. What do you think taxes are? Robbery and slavery. That's why the British State had to redefine the definition of the word "dishonest" in the Theft Act of 1968 to say that if the State robs you it's not dishonest and therefore cannot be classed as theft. Here's the quotes: "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it..." And here's the definition of dishonesty they redefined: "A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest... if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;" Source https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60 So yes, if the State steals your possessions, that's fine because the law (which they wrote) says they can, and that's definitely not "dishonest" because they've redefined the word to mean that if the State does dishonest things its not dishonest. And in the Modern Slavery Act of 2015 the meaning of exploitation is defined as multiple things, including if: "The person is subjected to force, threats or deception designed to induce him or her— (a)to provide services of any kind, (b)to provide another person with benefits of any kind, or (c)to enable another person to acquire benefits of any kind." Well, that's precisely what the State does. We're forced by threat and deception to provide taxes/inflation (a service/benefit) to the State, which enables them "to acquire benefits of any kind". source https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/3/enacted So yes, the State currently robs and enslaves you, yet your eyes are closed to all this. You project your insecurities about your own socialist utopia onto a caricature of the free market, which in reality isn't what the free market would look like. But because you've done no research on the topic, you're jumping to false conclusions, which is very intellectually dishonest of you. - "Hitlers Germany certainly was Capitalist, as the majority of the means of production remained under private ownership." I see. Members of the Nazi Party (the State) ran most of the means of production, and oppressed those not directly under their control, and that's "capitalism" now is it? Excuse me while I laugh. - "Oh, and Hitler may or may not have been a Capitalist, but it was Capitalists who put him in power and a capitalist economy under his regime." Well, I disagree, but yeah that's fine. I actually made this distinction in the video you didn't bother to watch. I said: Hitler is a Socialist even if the Third Reich wasn't. Now, I think the Third Reich was Socialist for all the reasons given, but regardless, Hitler was a Socialist. Just because he failed to implement "full" socialism doesn't mean he was a capitalist, it just makes him a failed socialist like all the others - Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot etc.
    2
  12754. Glad you think so :)
    2
  12755. Yes, Oldguy is correct. Their racism only developed in 1938 because Mussolini met with Hitler. The Fascists in Italy had Jews in their party, as I discuss in the video.
    2
  12756. All Socialists are Anti-Semites https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12757. Exactly! Thanks for watching!
    2
  12758. Socialism is total state control of the means of production. Capitalism is private control of the means of production (private property, meaning anti-state). A free market is capitalism. Taxation isn't a free market. Therefore, we've never officially had capitalism. We've had black markets though, which are free markets. Taxation is a state market. Therefore, we've always had state control. Now, we've not always had socialism because socialism is total state control (totalitarianism), which only started happening in the 1900s, but we've always had statism in one form or another. The first time in history when nations began to reduce the power of the state was in the late 1700s and 1800s, and look at the massive progress that occurred. Through most of human history people were on the brink of starvation. But by nudging the economy towards capitalism, billions of people were brought out of poverty, and the population skyrocketed. https://populationmatters.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_image/public/Historical%20human%20population%20growth%20-%20no%20logo_3.png?itok=Hjwf0HYI If a partial capitalism resulted in that, imagine what full capitalism could do. Yet, there is a significant effort by a bunch of political ideologues to return the world back to the period before capitalism even occurred. That's why every time socialism is implemented the system collapses and everyone starves. Yet, because they call themselves the "progressives", people assume they want progress. Nope, they want regression. A two-tier society of the haves, and the have-nots. Taxation and inflation are statist policies, which under capitalism would not exist. Socialists want more state control (moving us towards total state control), therefore taxation and inflation are socialist policies.
    2
  12759. "So why are you bringing up Marx and taxation?" Because you're arguing that corporations paying taxes to Hitler is capitalism, even though Karl Marx said it was Socialism (and it is Socialism).
    2
  12760. Thank you. Don't forget the PDF (link in description)
    2
  12761. It's postmodernism at it's best. Ideology, feelings and belief, vs evidence, logic and reason.
    2
  12762. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12763. You ignoring the nationalized industries, the nationalized businesses, the nationalized trade unions, the centralised planning, wage controls, price controls, welfare benefits, redistribution of wealth, the abolishment of private property, the regulations, the giant bureaucracy, the state central banking (also called for by Marx in the Communist Manifesto) and the fact that I exposed multiple other lies that have been spun by the Left to explain away why Hitler wasn't a Socialist (e.g. Röhm wasn't killed because he was a Socialist)? Timestamps are in the description.
    2
  12764. Probably a good idea. Don't forget to save the PDF too (link in the description)
    2
  12765. Because it's oxymoronic to say you have both. They mean completely different things, as I have already explained in great detail https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12766. Democracy? https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  12767. I present a lot more info in this video than I have before, and several viewers have got through it and said they agreed with me (or at least mostly did and found it useful). The people disliking aren't my regular viewers, as I explained in the Stick to Tanks video. And a consensus is irrelevant - they can downvote to hell for all I care. What matters is the debate and a solid counter argument, which I'm looking forward to
    2
  12768. Here's another way of thinking about it. We pay are taxes because "you've got to contribute to society". But who do we pay our taxes to? The people? No, the State. That's because the State is the Society. The State is Socialism. The "community" is the State.
    2
  12769. "I’m fine with worker coops as a means of socialism, doesn’t make them a state." Yes it does. For your cooperative to be classed as socialism there could not be any private property, correct? So if the workers are in cooperative they must live there too, since otherwise they would live on private property and thus it would be capitalism. Therefore, the collective would have to live and work in the cooperative, which would mean that this is a "public" - in this case, a small tribal state. - "Also you said yourself that Marx was just outright lying when he described an anarchist future society, so what else could he be lying about?" A lot of things. For example, he's being very cryptic when it comes to the word "bourgeoisie" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "I genuinely do not care what Marx thought, he’s not god." Then it doesn't matter what Marx said. But regardless, lots of socialists define socialism as the State ownership of the means of production. ‘Democratic socialism’ as defined by Bernie Sanders was “anti-individualism” - implying a ‘collective’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQs_lmpQh6Q “When a population collectively owns and controls the means of production, and distributes the end result proportionally. In practice however, control is usually delegated to the state...” by NowThisWorld https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBYmeLBWjeI “Socialism can be defined as "a system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control." In other words, it's a state-controlled economy in which the state controls the means of production: factories, offices, resources, and firms. There are also forms of socialism in which the means of production are controlled and owned by workers.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/whats-difference-between-socialism-democratic-socialism-new-york-democratic-primary-a8425416.html Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism Three socialists define socialism at 1h 35m into this debate here https://youtu.be/z6gB3gA9UZg The first socialist is Xexizy (who admits there’s all different definitions of socialism) defines socialism as 1. the abolition of production for exchange, 2. worker ownership of the means of production (democratically and collectively), 3. worker control of the state’s apparatus (media, police force). Worker’s state essentially. He lists the Paris Commune, Catalonia, German and Hungarian communes (1918-1919) as socialism. He says that the Soviet Union wasn’t socialist, but says it was a socialist-revolution. The second socialist is Badmouse who doesn’t actually define it, but doesn’t disagree with the others, and later on in his closing statement (3h 47m) does say workers control of the means of production. He says Venezuela wasn’t socialist. At around 3hs in, he does define capitalism as the private ownership of the means of production. The third socialist is Finnish Bolshevik defines socialism as (and he says the classic Marxist definition is) the collective ownership of the means of production. He lists the Soviet Union, China, Eastern European Countries, Cuba as all socialist countries (contradicting Xexizy). - So yes, a "collective" which is an organized political community on a given piece of territory (the literal definition of a state according to the Oxford dictionary) is how a lot of these socialists define socialism. Well, what do we call the community that enforces collective ownership? A State.
    2
  12770. It's not a mangled definition if that's how it was historically. I do like the fact that British socialists and (actual) Marxists fully accept that it's state ownership of the means of production, but for some reason a lot of so-called American socialists don't have a clue what socialism actually is. They just seem to think it's when there's no money, even though that directly contradicts what Karl Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital.
    2
  12771. Been working on this since 2018 haha. Cheers!
    2
  12772. "Don't be so bloody silly." So you are denying that the Germans seized the means of production from the Js? You're denying that their private property rights were taken from them in the Reichstag Fire Decree, allowing the Germans to steal their buisinesses and their property as they centrally planned their destruction. This was a massive redistribution of wealth from the "Judeo-Bourgeoisie" to the "Aryans", yet you insist on denying history in favour of a hateful and anti-semitic Marxist ideology https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12773. The H happened, Slater. Removing the Js from the means of production and replacing them with Germans was the seizure of the means of production. Stop denying the H.
    2
  12774. Of course that's how it works. Just because socialists don't understand basic economics, doesn't mean that people who do are "retarded".
    2
  12775. They're getting a fair pay. If they weren't they'd be able to get better paying jobs elsewhere.
    2
  12776. Hitler actually believed that they had "backed the wrong horse" with regards to Franco. Zitelmann shows that clearly in his book. According to Hitler, Franco had betrayed the Revolution.
    2
  12777. I think it's good to see how much the State is stealing off of you and your neighbours. I hope all my neighbours are paying tribute to our lords and commissars, otherwise we should notify the Gestapo at the earliest convenience. It is your duty to ensure every citizen slaves away half their working week and wage for the elites
    2
  12778. "My economics professor, who got his PhD in Ethiopia told the class: "How do you make everyone equally rich? By making them all equally poor"" Well, at least he was being honest with his Socialism
    2
  12779. The reason money/capital ends up in fewer hands is because of the State Central Bank, which prints currency out of thin air, redistributing wealth from the poorest in society to the elites who are seeking total power over society, and they're doing this in the name of the poor.
    2
  12780. Talking to Aiden is like talking to a brick wall. It isn't worth the effort.
    2
  12781. A nation is a social group. Nationalism is Socialism. And Fascism is different to National Socialism, which I explained here in great detail https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12782. Yes, I agree. But that's how Hitler and others used it (pseudo-scientifically). Perhaps I should have put in a disclaimer saying it's not what Darwin thought etc
    2
  12783. Are state owned schools classed as free market capitalism in your eyes?
    2
  12784. Socialism is the public ownership or control of the means of production. Schools produce education. If education is publicly owned, then yes, that would be classed as socialism. That's why Karl Marx called for public education in the Communist Manifesto, and while the "English" public schools are teaching Marxist Critical Racist Theory to their inmates.
    2
  12785. I'm not actually defining anything; I'm just telling you what the history, the ideologies, the dictionary, and the evidence shows. They all point in the same direction https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And the two are the same because race and class are both social groups, making socialism both about race and statism. Karl Marx himself said the same thing https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12786. I think you'll find that I have read Marx and understand him more than most https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12787. Sweden certainly isn't socialist https://youtu.be/0lxD-gikpMs
    2
  12788. Hurray! I'm glad wannabhomsky and Aiden B have found each other. Now I can point to this one comment thread and say: yep, here's the two biggest trolls in my comment section all in one place. Well done chaps! Keep REEEEEing!
    2
  12789. I'm not saying Bezos is perfect. However the point still stands - if his workers don't like him, they don't have to work for him
    2
  12790. You're asking a lot of questions, which suggests that you haven't asked these questions before. If you had, you wouldn't be asking me, for you would know what my response would be. I would encourage you to seek the answer to your own questions by figuring out what the Capitalist answer to them are. You can start with "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt.
    2
  12791. Tell them to stop complaining and listen!
    2
  12792. To clarify, look at the date of that video, then look at the date of this video. I address the arguments made in that video within this video.
    2
  12793. Correct
    2
  12794. Good to hear! :)
    2
  12795. Yes, Socialism is PUBLIC ownership of the means of production. Correct. So Hitler was a Socialist, as thus video shows. By the way, you've accidentally added the term "worker" to your definition of Socialism. The "workers" have nothing to do with Socialism. As you said, Socialism is PUBLIC ownership of the means of production, nothing more. The "workers" part is unnecessary, since the term PUBLIC is more accurate. Of course, some people don't understand what the term PUBLIC means, which is why I made a video explaining exactly what it is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12796. A market is a buyer and a seller. The only seller was the State of the Soviet Union. So yes, technically a market existed, but only one. There was no competition, and thus there was no free market.
    2
  12797. @SpyMonkey3D - I'm happy to do normal reviews, but I'm not happy to censor others, which is what 'peer reviews' are. There's a difference between reviews and 'peer' censorship 'reviews'.
    2
  12798. "This is coming from a "historian"... let that sink in." I value reviews. But 'peer reviews' are not reviews, they're censorship. Censorship is not freedom. I want historians to be free to debate whatever they need to debate without the hammer of censorship preventing them from doing so. I am defending history here, not propaganda, censorship and ideology (which 'peer reviews' are designed to be). "I bet he's just bitter that one of his diatribes was shredded in peer review XD" I'll be happy to take that bet.
    2
  12799. "Except no, Mussolini, although starting out as a socialist, eventually denounced socialism and adopted an imperialist position" Imperialism is Socialism. And Mussolini never denounced socialism. In fact, Farrell says this about Mussolini in 1945 - “For Mussolini, Fascism remained an anti-bourgeois revolution whose aim was to eradicate the bourgeoisie. ‘If, when I was a Socialist, I had not had a purely theoretical knowledge of the Italian bourgeoisie dictated by the reading of Karl Marx, but a genuine physical notion such as I have now, I would have launched a revolution so pitiless that, by comparison, that of Comrade Lenin would have been an innocent joke,’ he told Ciano.” - Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015, Chapter 14. Edit: To clarify the above quote - Mussolini is saying he 'was' a Socialist (because he is now a Fascist). However, while Fascism remained Socialist in character, it was a step down from Marxist-Socialism economically (due to the complete failure of the Bolshevik Revolution's economic policies). Therefore, Fascism allowed a small amount of economic freedom (think NEP) so as not to collapse the entire economy. BUT that doesn't mean it was 'capitalism', or wasn't a version of Socialism, which is why Mussolini was still anti-Bourgeois. - "while Hitler promised the capitalist elite that they will not be robbed," Except he did rob them. See Professor Junkers, as just one example of many. - "and instead strove to achieve social prosperity through conquest." Exactly. This is Socialism in a nutshell - since Socialists believe that the markets are shrinking and that the only way to create wealth is to steal it from others. This is exactly what Rosa Luxembourg wrote in her Accumulation of Capital. - "The idea of extending the benefits of one's rule onto the less fortunate, as well as the idea of dictatorial rule itself, although shared between Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin with their respective ideologies, are NOT socialism. The welfare aspect is an aspect of identitarianism and is not unique to the 19th/20th century (think for example the Roman empire with its benefits towards Roman citizens over other people groups), while the dictatorial aspect is plainly and simply authoritarianism." So you're saying that Lenin's "dictatorship of the proletariat" is not Socialism? - "That said, I might still look through this 5 hour long video regardless (but not through any other one) and see just where does your argument fall apart. Me guesses somewhere within the first 10 minutes, but still, I am willing to give this a second chance, since you did put a lot of effort into it." Thank you, I'm glad you're giving this another chance. If you're still unsure about "my" definitions, I would encourage you to watch the Public vs Private video first. My biggest regret was not putting that video into this one, since the ONLY counter-argument I've had to this video that's not addressed specifically in this video is that I don't know what Socialism is... even though the Public vs Private video confirms the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism, and does so backed by a ton of evidence.
    2
  12800.  @Tsskyx  "I think I gave up by now. In that one other video, he claimed that syndicalism = trade unionism = fascio commercio = fascism. Which is about as historically accurate as the History channel." Yep, that's right. Just dismiss all the sources, all the evidence, all the quotes, all the discussion... then throw an insult at me by claiming I'm just making stuff up like the Alien Conspiracy Channel. Well done. I'm really glad to see that postmodernism is alive and well.
    2
  12801.  @dr1flush  "notice how all he does is send you to another video . Never an explanation or anything besides" I'm right you're wrong" here's another video pleases watch. . Tik is a DENIALIST or a moron" Again, I link to the videos which explain the points precisely, backed by evidence. There's no point in me wasting my time repeating myself in the comments when I have already done the work for you.
    2
  12802. "HondaMu$ic" I haven't deleted any comments. I welcome the debate because history lies in the heart of the debate, and I'm disappointed that my critics haven't actually got an argument at the moment that I can debate with. This video crushes their arguments, so I'm left waiting for them to come up with a new one.
    2
  12803. No but I can sum it up for you here. Hitler was a Socialist. He nationalised the industries, even though Marxists claim he privatised them. He nationalised the trade unions, but Marxists claim he "crushed" them. Corporations are not individuals (private), they're collectives, and thus socialism. Most of the leaders in industry were also members of the Nazi Party, and thus the industries were owned or controlled by the state. There were wage controls, price controls, kommissars, tax incentives, departments that allocated resources, collectivisation attempts, an imploding economy and the poor were helped as much as possible.
    2
  12804. You can't deny that Hitler nationalized the industries and the trade unions, as shown in this video. Please don't spout Marxist propaganda about the Nazis "privatizing" industries when the evidence shows the complete opposite of that.
    2
  12805. Yes, all Socialists are violent to opponents and put them in camps.
    2
  12806. Not quite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12807. I don't say it enough, but I do really appreciate all the support I get from my Patrons
    2
  12808. "matrin2" I never said the Right hasn't done anything wrong. However, as this video shows, Hitler was a Socialist.
    2
  12809. That's not how monarchy worked. The king didn't own everything - they parcelled land to their subordinates, who did the same to their subordinates... So the State didn't have total control of the means of production. Control wasn't centralised. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12810. I'd recommend you actually watch this video before trying to claim that the Third Reich "maintained" "other capitalistic ideas", or that "National Syndicalism" was anything different to "corporatism" (which is syndicalism, or State control) or "mixed". It was purely socialism, but failed to implement it fully, since it needed to conquer Lebensraum before it could implement it (which Hitler himself made clear in Mein Kampf that that was why they were going East - to get the resources needed to implement socialism). Sincerely, Not a National Socialist, but someone who understands the ideology
    2
  12811. Government is the public sector. So there's no confusion on my part. I think you'll find that the board of directors at Krupp were all Nazi Party members. So members of the Nazi Party (the state) were receiving the profits.
    2
  12812. He didn't leave most of the industries in private ownership. They were all under public control, with the so-called "private owners" as figure heads and puppets, exactly as happened with some industries in the Soviet Union. If Slater Slater had watched the video, he would have known this. But he hasn't watched the video, despite claiming that he has.
    2
  12813. Yeah, that's similar to how conversations go here too. It's a good job they don't know what "democracy" actually means, otherwise they might realize that North Korea is a democracy just like the Third Reich was as well https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  12814. The Revolution is the elimination of the bourgeoisie. Are you denying that Marx wanted a revolution? To quote user "Nicolas Caous", who says "I'm a communist, not someone who just says they are a commie, I'm actually a member of a communist party and I work in said party political activities (analysis of current political context, the proposal of actions, recruiting, etc...)." He said: "As you said, we are not stupid. We think that a lot of wrong courses of action were enacted in the soviet union and China and Korea. However, we don't shed tears for the spilled blood of Kulaks, Aristocrats, Big Land Owners, Factory Owners, Big Monopoly Shareholders, and the like... We don't hide in the fact that we want to physically exterminate these groups of people. That is revolution. I personally think that, if a factory owner voluntarily relinquishes his private property and becomes a worker like everyone else, he can be pardoned. At the same time, I would not hesitate to be the executioner of those who refuse to do so during the revolution. We are "die-hard communists" after all." He said this in response to my other video here https://youtu.be/MNTpimOe7eY and I have the screenshots before you attempt to declare that it's fake. And if you believe a fellow Communist Party member is wrong, then answer me this: what happens during the Revolution to the bourgeoisie trying to hold onto the property they've worked hard and earned? Unless, of course, you're advocating a "peaceful" revolution like Hitler did...
    2
  12815. If you bothered to watch the video, you'd hear me explain the difference between Marxism and Socialism, since Socialism did come before Marx. I also said that if you don't accept my definitions in this, that I have explained the ideological routes of Socialism and defined it in a previous video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12816. I agree, although other commenters have informed me that Time Ghost are not receptive to this idea and dismiss such arguments outright. Marxists in general also dismiss the Nazi 25 Points by saying the Nazis didn't implement them. This video shows that they did implement them, or at least attempted to do so.
    2
  12817. "socialism is unnecessary to this equation. Hitler was a racist, nationalist fascist. Who built Germany around a race based model. the model still works the same there is no resemblance to any classical worker socialism." And Hitler's racism was his socialism. Eventually you're going to have to actually watch the video to have the slightest chance of debunking it.
    2
  12818. @wannabchomsky, you realise that Conservatives were the old Left, which is why they're moderately Socialist today? Of course you don't.
    2
  12819. "This is super accurate if you don't understand political history or the history of ideas." It's super accurate if you do know political history, the history of ideas, and the actual definitions of the words, as shown in the video, and in my previous Public vs Private video which details the definitions of Capitalism and Socialism by going right back to the dawn of time https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12820. "Oh no the video is fine. It's just that I was having an argument with someone and suddently the comments disappeared. The last response that I saw was the guy I was talking to saying that you were deleting his comments." @Vlad, yeah they probably deleted themselves. It's a tactic deliberately designed to undermine my legitimacy. The reality is that I welcome all counter arguments. In fact I'm disappointed that there isn't any good ones so far, because history lies in the heart of the debate, and their arguments (currently) are defeated.
    2
  12821. Great! I hope you get through it and find it all useful :)
    2
  12822. "Hitler literally said Leftism would lead us to our complete destruction." Yes, because Hitler saw himself as a Socialist that was in the center of the political spectrum, as I explained in the video.
    2
  12823. "Turns out your critics, as you point out in this video, do not actually watch your videos. They read the title, and try to gleam the gist from the comments." Exactly. Most of my replies to these people so far have been saying - 'please watch the video you haven't watched and you will see why your arguments don't work'. Maybe eventually they'll get the hint.
    2
  12824. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  12825. He did attack the industrialists. He took their businesses off them, or took over them through nationalization, as I showed in the video. Please watch it. Skip to the "privatisation" section - timestamps in the description. And by the way, it's not like Leftists don't ever attack each other... Lenin vs the Anarchist Socialists, Stalin vs Trotsky, etc.
    2
  12826.  @owningdishonestshills7435  As I said in the video itself, I'm using the historical definitions as I've explained in detail in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Again the weight of evidence provided therein, your "Wikipedia definition" of Socialism doesn't stand up to scrutiny. - "The Nazi's did a massive round of privatization as well." That's a myth, as I explained in this video. They socialized the industries and the trade unions. - "The Nazi's were not egalitarian." They were as egalitarian as the Marxists. The Marxists also wanted to murder the Judeo-bourgeoisie https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "TIK's definition of capitalism being none state is just wrong. Capitalism is a economic system that can only exist with state regulations." See my Public vs Private video. But again, if you're using the incorrect Marxist definition of Capitalism, then you're incorrect about Capitalism being an economic system. Karl Marx says that "Money is the jealous god of Israel" in 'On the Jewish Question'. He then says in Das Kapital vol 1 that money that's used to buy and sell commodities becomes capital (page 104), and that a person who possesses money ("the possessor of money becomes a capitalist" page 107) or accumulates it ("it is only in so far as the appropriation of ever more and more wealth in the abstract becomes the sole motive of his operations, that he functions as a capitalist" page 107). He then says "Capital is money: Capital is commodities", and then "The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money." - Karl Marx, Das Kapital, page 107. Thus, Karl Marx's definition of "Capitalism" is: Judaism. That's why he wanted so 'socialize' man - it was a way to "emancipate society from Judaism" (Karl Marx, 'On the Jewish Question'.) The historic definition (and conception) of capitalism is somewhat different to the oxymoronic idea that it can only exist with state regulations. Please watch the Public vs Private video to learn what Capitalism really is. That link again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12827. They weren't 'debunked' at all - they were argued against, but not debunked. As I said - I could see through the lies spouted at me by the ideologues. But yes, I do provide a ton more evidence here and show why the Marxist counter-augments don't work.
    2
  12828. Liam, they always hurt workers. https://mises.org/library/union-myth
    2
  12829. Unions hurt the workers https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ and https://youtu.be/RPndzQVeVMY
    2
  12830. As I explained in the video, the economy wasn't mixed, it was centrally planned. https://images.app.goo.gl/QySdVKPaQ6DVNXuF9
    2
  12831. I'm guessing OP hasn't read Karl Marx properly, even though he's recommending that we do https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12832. Thank you Diego! I wish more of my critics would see this and start taking note
    2
  12833. Great to hear you got through the video and found it useful! I don't expect you to agree with me on everything, so I'm happy to hear you're thinking critically about some of my points :) Regarding the "free market utopia", I'm not actually an ancap. Even if we had a totally private economy, I know a public hierarchy will arise from that. Rather, I think the economy should be totally voluntary. No individual should be forced to do something for someone else. It should be 100% cooperation, not force. Currently the State forces us to pay tribute (tax) either directly or indirectly, and we don't get a choice about this. Since all government spending is consumption of resources that could be better used elsewhere (as Rothbard makes clear), then having voluntary taxation would force the State to provide a good service or go out of business. It would keep it small, granting maximum freedom to every individual, much like the United States before the Civil War when there were no income taxes at all https://mises.org/library/origin-income-tax Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I think it is possible to build a society through cooperation rather than force. Cheers!
    2
  12834. Hope you enjoy it! Although it might be worth watching due to the colours in the text... but your choice :)
    2
  12835. "@TIK Yes. Was Krupp lying?" She's lying because you say so? Alfried Krupp was a member of the SS, therefore Krupp was nationalized.
    2
  12836. Is this lady also lying? https://youtu.be/TEcQS9GDtK8
    2
  12837. The black market is a free market. If you have a black market, the 'official' economy is not free. Now your challenge is to name one country without a black market. If you can, that's capitalism ;)
    2
  12838. Marx said it in the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, and in his other works where he hated on the Js https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12839. Great! I'd recommend Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" as a starter (an Austrian School economist). And anything by Thomas Sowell (Chicago School). Also, here's a good economics channel, with this particular video explaining the Austrian Business Cycle Theory https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc Alternatively, you could watch my video on what causes recessions and depressions, which explains the same thing but differently https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs And Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" is absolutely amazing in my opinion. And even if you end up disagreeing, I think you'll have a good time listening to an alternative argument to the 'mainstream' (Keynesian/Socialist) narrative
    2
  12840. I'm just going to leave this here https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    2
  12841. How is stealing from people "fair"? And how does stealing wealth from businesses not result in unemployment or fewer jobs? In fact, I could employ a second part time worker right now if the State wasn't stealing from me so much. And I'm not even a member of the bourgeoisie - I'm just a self employed worker! So government theft is creating unemployment and lower wages, and you think that's fair.
    2
  12842. @wannabchomsky - Conservativism is bad, I agree. I'm not a Conservative and never have been.
    2
  12843. Democracy is People Power. However, the 'People' are the Public and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State Power. That's why North Korea is Democratic. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12844. Perhaps you should watch the video before talking nonsense in the comments
    2
  12845. He said he was going East, so I guess by your logic WW2 and Barbarossa didn't happen?
    2
  12846. The historic definitions of Capitalism and Socialism can be found here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12847. It's exactly as I described National Socialism here. It's not Capitalism in any way shape or form, just because they allow 'profit'. Nothing in Socialist theory says Socialism can't make a profit - in fact, the "paradise" it's supposedly aiming for is the profit. The fact is it doesn't make a profit because of the Socialist calculation and incentive problems. Capitalism isn't about profit or loss either - it just allows you to calculate profit and loss (unlike Socialism). Capitalism is about private (individual) sovereignty without the "law" or the State breathing down your neck. The Chinese people don't have Capitalism.
    2
  12848. Did you say democracy? https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  12849. There's timestamps in the description. I'm debating whether to do a cliff notes version, but you may find this response to a response video more relevant if you don't want to sit through the entire thing https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  12850. Marx never practiced Judaism, and was Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12851. As shown in the video, they didn't privatize anything
    2
  12852. "How does murdering part of society benefit all of society, you dimwitted , slug-eyebrowed, Scouse slaphead?" This is what I'm asking you, Slater. How does murdering the bourgeoisie benefit society? That's what socialists believe. And if murdering the bourgeoisie somehow benefits society, then how was the Nazi persecution of the Jews any different to what you extremists are advocating?
    2
  12853. Well, that's why I'm currently trying to provoke them a little ;)
    2
  12854. @Paid Government Shill_69 Have you actually watched the video yet?
    2
  12855. Thank you too!
    2
  12856. Hitler socialized the industries and the trade unions, as shown in the video. But apparently that's not Socialism because Socialists have no idea what Socialism actually is.
    2
  12857. Try watching the video before making assumptions. Hitler nationalized the industries, and the trade unions, and was aiming to implement full-Socialism after the conquest of Lebensraum (which he failed to conquer). All is explained in the video
    2
  12858. Yes, and then they complain that you're taking too long to explain everything, and so they don't watch the video... Then they complain when you (and others) tell them to actually listen and watch the video. Ignorance is bliss
    2
  12859. No, but I know socialists who call themselves capitalist - Andrew Yang, for example.
    2
  12860. True, the issue is the State. No state, no monopoly.
    2
  12861. That doesn't mean anything. Socialism is the public control of the means of production, which is exactly what the Nazis strived to achieve, and almost did.
    2
  12862. @rettson22 - my critics are claiming they've 'won' this debate. Well, they haven't. Right now, they're losing this debate, and don't even realize it yet. So I'm trying to provoke a reaction from my critics, with the hope that they'll give me an actual counter argument that can beat mine. Unfortunately, they're not responding... because they don't actually have a counter argument. The reason they don't have a counter argument is because I've defeated them all (hence the title of the video)
    2
  12863. Yeah, my critics haven't realized that I'm winning this debate. When they do, they're going to be very disappointed :)
    2
  12864. No, he was a Capitalist in the same way he was a Christian. Whatever works for Marxist Socialist propaganda. Since Karl Marx hated the Jews too - “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Marx,On the Jewish Question. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx is saying here that the people who trade goods for money (in other words, capitalists) are Jewish, and are on the side of “tyranny”. Yes, the reason he hates capitalists is because he thinks they’re Jewish, and the reason he hates Jews is because he thinks they are capitalists. And he says this again in his last book, Das Kapital: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital, P107. Karl Marx has said that the products of the Capitalist are "inwardly circumcised Jews". In other words, the offsprings of the Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews", because they Capitalists are Jewish. But why did Marx believe that? Well, Marx believed that Capitalists were the bourgeoisie (boroughs, townfolk) who practiced Usury (lending of loans and charging interest). Since Usury was banned by the Pope in the Dark Ages, and since Jews were not allowed to own land in Christian Europe, they were forced to live in towns and became "money changers". So, for Karl Marx, the bourgeoisie were the Jews. This was why the offspring of the bourgeoisie were "inwardly circumcised Jews". And what did Karl Marx call for? Oh yes, that's right - REAL Socialism: “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx was calling for the removal of the Jews/Capitalists from Society. This will allow him to usher in Socialism. ALL SOCIALISM IS ANTI-SEMITISM. That is why, when I realized that Hitler was a Socialist, I realized the true nature of Socialism and what it was really calling for.
    2
  12865. The reason money/capital ends up in fewer hands is because of the State Central Bank, which prints currency out of thin air, redistributing wealth from the poorest in society to the elites who are seeking total power over society, and they're doing this in the name of the poor.
    2
  12866. He put National Socialists in concentration camps. Does that mean he wasn't National Socialist? He put Germans in concentration camps. Does that mean he wasn't German? If you listen to what I've said in the video, you'll quickly learn that he was an enemy of 'Social Democracy' (one version of socialism) and 'Marxist Socialism' (another version of socialism). But he was for a different version of Socialism - a National Socialism.
    2
  12867. A trade union which is an organ of the State. An organ, like a body. A body like a corpse. Oh, a corporation. Corporations are literally organs of the State. It's in the name! Another one for you. Trade unions are a union of workers. A group of workers. A bunch of workers. You may even say a bundle of workers. Like a bundle of sticks. That's why Italian trade unions were often called "Fascio" and is where we get the name "Fascism" from. Fascism is literally "trade unionism". And giant Fascist trade unions are corporations - organs of the State. I'll be talking about both these concepts and will provide sources to back them up in tomorrow's video.
    2
  12868. r/BadHistory on Reddit is appropriately named BAD HISTORY
    2
  12869. Jordan Peterson? Are you referring to the Postmodernism? No, I actually read up on postmodernism years ago via Richard Evans (the guy who took down David Irving at the Lipstadt trial) in his book "In Defence of History", which was written to defend history from being rendered fiction. I talked about this in my History Theory video an age ago https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  12870. I see you :) I don't expect you to agree, I expect you to think for yourself and come to your own conclusions, which you seem to be doing. And that's great! Many of the other critics I get aren't thinking... they're just reacting. I think their reactions speak volumes to the state of our 'education' system, which clearly hasn't taught them how to respond to ideas they may not like hearing
    2
  12871. I would argue no. I explain why in the video, but basically National Socialism could technically be classed as international in nature since it wants to unite the 'race' on an international level
    2
  12872. Covered this in the video 04:43:42 You realize there's timestamps in the description, right? Or did you not get 10 seconds into the video where I said that
    2
  12873. Marx was also Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  12874. Yes, if you simply search for "Hitler capitalism" or "Hitler capitalist" in either YouTube or Google search you'll see that a lot of people think this.
    2
  12875. They agree to work for a price. If they don't like the price, they can go elsewhere and work for a higher price. If they can't find someone to pay them a higher price, that's because they don't 'deserve' the higher price - since they're not contributing enough value to society.
    2
  12876. It seems that YouTube automatically decided to delete my first response to you... Let me try again. Marxists don't believe that any other version of Socialism is REAL Socialism. Utopian Socialists, National Socialists, Fascists, and even moderate Socialists are all rejected by the Marxists. Thus, Marxists do a poor job of identifying Socialism, and often lie through their teeth to confirm their views. And I would encourage you to watch this video in full, since I actually provided my sources (107, plus 350 references and lots of quotes).
    2
  12877. If the majority think the moon is made of cheese, that doesn't make it so. Fascism was a completely different ideology https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  12878. As I said, watch this video if you disagree with the definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12879. Great rebuttal. Try watching the video.
    2
  12880. I never said Hitler was a Marxist Socialist. I said he was a Socialist, not a Marxist. This is why you need to watch the video before attempting to criticise it. Socialism is totalitarian Public State control of the means of production, as explained. So, are you saying that Hitler wasn't a National Socialist? Because if you're saying he wasn't a Socialist, then you're saying he wasn't a Nationalist either, since a nation (or race) is a society. Also, you can claim that information for the early days of Hitler's regime isn't available, but I've given plenty of evidence for his Socialization of society in the video. Maybe you need to actually watch it.
    2
  12881. Lenin killed Mensheviks. I guess Lenin wasn't a Socialist either. You are letting your emotions get the better of you.
    2
  12882. Awesome! That's a great attitude to have! You get to see things from all different sides. Regardless whether you agree with this video, I only hope that you found it interesting.
    2
  12883. No, it's entirely Left-wing. The culture was crushed in Germany unless it was what the Nazis approved of. Jazz music for example. That doesn't sound morally or culturally free to me, so it wasn't on the Right.
    2
  12884. I'm using the historical and actual definitions of Capitalism and Socialism, as opposed to just making them up like most people do https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12885. The means of production were socialized, and weren't in private hands as I said in the video. Yes, there was an accumulation of currency, but currency isn't capital as I explained here https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    2
  12886. Everything you said here was refuted in the video you didn't bother to watch. See the timestamps.
    2
  12887. The nation is a society, society is the people. Fascism is a form of Socialism, just like Marxism and National Socialism. But Nazis aren't Fascists.
    2
  12888. @GameRanger - I'm sure I'll do more videos about this topic, but I think I gave enough evidence of all that stuff in this video. The issue is that most of my critics didn't watch to those parts and just assumed that the whole video was me discussing definitions, which it wasn't.
    2
  12889. You are right. Surprised I didn't catch that 😂
    2
  12890. Haha thanks for making me laugh! It's true, there are some battles in here, and a lot of salty tears
    2
  12891. "Hitler was a Fascist." Fascism was a different ideology. As I said in the video "..Fascists aren’t always racist, and there were plenty of Jewish members of the Fascist Party in Italy." (Information from Farrell, “Mussolini,” Chapter 10 + 11.)
    2
  12892. Hey Aiden, have you seen my latest video? I think you'll like it, since you're in it! https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  12893. Oh look, someone so smart they didn't watch the video or understand the fact that everything you said was addressed in the video, which is why it's titled "Defeating the Denialist Counter Arguments". If only you would stop pretending you know everything, you might learn from this video (which has 107 sources, 350 direct references and a ton of quotes and notes etc) that the Marxist Socialist wartime propaganda you're spouting is a complete and utter lie.
    2
  12894. Haha I hope you enjoy this video :) What did you think of Crusader?
    2
  12895. I actually mention Pinochet in the video in the "Whataboutism" section at 04:14:44
    2
  12896. I hope it is what you expected!
    2
  12897. But that's simply not true. The profits of the companies were taken by the National Socialist Party and State. Taxation went through the rough. The Nazi Party had shop floor managers controling the businesses Everything from wages and prices to production quotas and more. To say that they weren't in ownership is splitting hairs. This was a "Zwangswirtschaft" - a compulsory economy. This was German Socialism. And you say it yourself - the social group (German race) was the be all and end all. So it was Socialism. The Führer (just like Lenin, Stalin, Xi and similar) benefitted from this, and had his own cult following. This is precisely what socialism is.
    2
  12898. Nothing says you have a weak argument like dismissing a video with 107 sources, 350 direct references, and a ton of quotes and logical interpretations of both primary and secondary sources because it hurts your feelings.
    2
  12899. "McDonalds and Amazon are examples independent companies" Yes, they're "independent" in the sense that they're controlled by state laws, state regulations, state taxes, state inflation, state wage controls, state price controls, state pension schemes, state mandates, state lockdowns, state funding via their state banks which print currency into existence with a touch of a button and hand it directly to the corporations as the expense of the poor and middle income earners... But yes, they're totally "independent". And since I'm used to you deliberately misinterpreting what I'm saying, I'll point out that the previous sentence was sarcasm. They're clearly not independent of the state in any sense the of the word.
    2
  12900. So are you denying that the word "private" means individual, but then still quote the Oxford Dictionary as saying that the "private sector" means "owned or managed by an individual person or an independent company rather than by the state", which is exactly what I'm saying. And that's your own quote, not mine. As the dictionary says: "private" means individual. And as I've pointed out, it also means small group, hence why an "independent company" (so a private company, rather than public company) is also under the heading of the "private sector". Yet you're denying this fact.
    2
  12901. "Your assertion is that "private" is synonymous with "individual" because it is etymologically derived from "Privus'' (which doesn't mean individual, but never mind)" Once again, a quote directly from the Oxford Dictionary for the word "Private": "ORIGIN: late Middle English (originally denoting a person not acting in an official capacity): from Latin privatus ‘withdrawn from public life’, a use of the past participle of privare ‘bereave, deprive’ from privus ‘single, individual’." (Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. P1413.) Do you, or do you not, accept this FACT?
    2
  12902. If you watch the Public vs Private video, you'll get your answer
    2
  12903. I think you're asking too much of people, but I also have the same hope. Thanks for watching :)
    2
  12904. They're trying to pin various labels on me. I'm pro-freedom for the individual, and believe every individual should be able to do whatever they want so long as they don't harm anyone else or their property. And I believe that no individual should be controlled by others, or forced to submit to the wills of others. We should all cooperate together freely for each others benefits. I also want to help the poor and those that work. Therefore I am a capitalist, and this is why I'm against socialism. Capitalism gets people out of poverty, socialism wants to put people back into it.
    2
  12905. Government organs don't always obey the central office. That's called "politics".
    2
  12906. Stats are not complete this early on because YouTube doesn't update properly in the first few days, however currently the average view retention (incomplete) shows just 24 minutes (8.2%). So most viewers haven't watched the video fully. Going off the comments I've read, very few of my critics have given it move than a few minutes, because those that have said they have watched it have admitted that my argument is good and that they currently don't have a counter argument to offer. That's a good sign :)
    2
  12907. Democracy is "People Power". Except the 'People' are the 'Public', and the Public is the State. So Democracy is "State Power". This is why North Korea is a Democracy, and why Fascists and Marxists can claim that totalitarianism is the truest form of Democracy (because they're right). Voting is not Democracy. Voting is voting. You can vote in a Republic, like in the USA, who's Founding Fathers knew that democracy was bad, which is why they called their government a Republic. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12908. Have to do it to prevent haters from taking the audio out of context and making accusations
    2
  12909. I have to put a voice on when quoting bad people otherwise my enemies will take the audio out of context and claim I'm the one saying the things being said (as if I wasn't quoting them). Thus, rather than being "cringe", this is a deliberate policy to protect myself from liars and cheats.
    2
  12910. To provide the evidence to support the thumbnail
    2
  12911. Very true. And it's a shame because they had their part to play in this story.
    2
  12912. "TIK I'm talking about previous video and I gave examples of your twisted, convoluted illogical claims." So why didn't you dislike this video then?
    2
  12913. The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists - was my grandad's favourite book. I've got a copy but haven't read it.
    2
  12914. "seriously, TiK, I felt so bad for you everytime I checked on the comments sections of those last two videos." I'm glad to hear that. It's been a horrible week if I'm honest. Probably the worst week I've had on YouTube since I began. Even the Wehraboo hordes weren't this barbaric. The most positive thing to come out of it was this video, and the conviction to do what I did when the Wehraboos didn't listen. "I do wonder though if, considering what is likely to be a much inflated refugee count, if the Soviets could feasibly have done anything to evacuate those people?" Yeah, if it was a million people, it's no wonder so many got left behind. There were so few Soviet troops in the city. Chuikov's 62nd Army never had more than 54,000 men after the 23rd of August, and not much more before that when they were outside the city. If many hundreds of thousands were in the city, it's no wonder they couldn't get them all out across the Volga. Also, it's worth considering that Moscow forbade an evacuation until the last moment.
    2
  12915. Yeah, it was a typo. I always get one date wrong lol
    2
  12916. Sevenfm, thanks for the recommendation. But what fiction? I haven't read fiction since I was in college.
    2
  12917. Thank you May, I will get it :)
    2
  12918. "Actually, I did say that" - Stalin.
    2
  12919. Yes, I will at some point :)
    2
  12920. Glad to hear that Depression! (strange sentence)
    2
  12921. True!
    2
  12922. Well, as Glantz said, a secret NKVD report shows the number was probably as high as 75,000. I'm inclined to think it's between the two numbers, favouring the second.
    2
  12923. Mstislaw's answer is the correct one. It does seem that Moscow left the evacuation too late, resulting in problems once the evacuation was allowed. If there truly were 1 million civilians in the city, and just 200,000 were left inside it - that's a miracle in itself.
    2
  12924. What do you mean?
    2
  12925. Thank you, glad you enjoyed it
    2
  12926. Not sure about the civilian population. Interestingly Krylov (62nd Army's Chief of Staff) was also the Chief of Staff at both Sevastopol and Odessa, and therefore had plenty of experience in similar situations.
    2
  12927. haha
    2
  12928. Thanks Katie, will do!
    2
  12929. It's been three years since I went full time on here, and the most I've had off in one go was a 4 day camping trip in the first year. Other than that, there's been a few times I've had two days off in a row, but mostly just the odd day here or there. In the first year I only had 20 days off. The second year, only 22. And I don't think it'll be much better this year So yes, a holiday would be nice 😂
    2
  12930. Yeah, I actually think this is what I'm going to do
    2
  12931. It didn't get lost. I may not always reply but I do read most of the comments 🙂
    2
  12932. And don't forget the "Churchill deliberately starved the Indians" and "this is why Capitalism is bad" narrative... even though those are two contradictory statements? Many have asked me to do a video on the topic, and I will, but not sure when. It's clear though from your comment that the Indian public school system has a nationalistic agenda and, just like a lot of the historians talking about this subject, has ignored the elephant in the room.
    2
  12933. Sadly, YouTube took that feature away a couple years back. Only old videos still have annotations now.
    2
  12934. The main issue with that is, at best, I'd only be able to do a Stalingrad video every other week (and that would be pushing it). Part of the reason this channel has been successful is because of the Monday uploads. It's no coincidence that as soon as I started doing the Monday uploads that YouTube rewarded the channel with more viewers and I was able to go full time. This is why I'm reluctant to abandon the weekly/Monday uploads because failing to keep up with the schedule could see views decline massively, and then I'd have to find another line of work.
    2
  12935. Another Cyberdyne Systems Model 101 has been sent back in time to educate you.
    2
  12936. I'll take your advice on that. Spent way too long on this video and it's first edition.
    2
  12937. It's interesting that the source you quoted, quotes from another source that I can't access on any device, using two different internet service providers. Your figures (which, except for the 6,700 Komsomolets, I can't find in the source) suggest that the Soviets had 100% of their transport needs, which is in direct contradiction to the sources I have, which also used the Soviet archives. As Glanz makes clear "In June 1941 combat formations had only 37.8 percent of their required tractors." Stumbling Colossus, P161. Glantz lists Soviet archival sources throughout his book, so I'm inclined to believe him.
    2
  12938. McMarcin, no they didn't. If you have a source that says otherwise, please provide it.
    2
  12939. That's not a typo. Someone with the username "Adolf Hitler" is a Patreon of mine.
    2
  12940. "In their view social pressure is a form of oppression." Yes, and the Left "liberals" use societal pressure to shame everyone they don't like: e.g. white cis gendered males whom they incorrectly brand as "fascist" in order to get them to comply. They are not "liberal" at all. And both the Left "liberal" and Right "Conservative" will use terror, propaganda and a police state to enforce their tyranny. I'm not "ignorant" of this; we just went through 2.5 years of this exact thing. No matter what type of government was in power, they all marched in goose step.
    2
  12941. I like that term, "watermelons" 😂
    2
  12942. Hypergamy is competition within the "race", which proves my point. We're not working together, 'we' are competing against each other, thus showing that 'we' are not the same. We are all individuals. So it's not a "misunderstanding". I understand precisely what you mean. I'm disagreeing with you because there are no "races" or other groups, only individuals.
    2
  12943. Okay, but I'm not sure what this means, could you explain it?
    2
  12944. That's thanks to Terri. She's good at them and does most of them now
    2
  12945. I think it was this one https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0
    2
  12946. It's (probably) not the actual Elon Musk, just someone with that username. Here's the old video https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0
    2
  12947. The government is the Tragedy of the Commons. The "commons" is "public" property - it's owned by no one, meaning it's public (State) property. The reason it's a tragedy is because when land isn't owned, it gets abused and falls into disrepair. In contrast, private property owners have an incentive to maintain their property. So if the "commons" was privately owned, they tragedy would go away.
    2
  12948. Interesting. What's your thoughts on this? Is this healthy skepticism or willful ignorance in your view? https://www.zerohedge.com/weather/global-warming-northern-hemisphere-snow-cover-56-year-high
    2
  12949. Keep dreaming because it's literally impossible. It takes me a week (sometimes more) to write the script for each episode
    2
  12950. Here you go https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0
    2
  12951. You may want to check out my video on him too https://youtu.be/gP0WxmqDg5s His relative was responding to people in the comments
    2
  12952. He made it clear in Mein Kampf that by "the East" he meant the Soviet Union, and specifically mentions the Ukraine. Given this context, I would say in his speech "the East" means both - East Prussia, and the Soviet Union.
    2
  12953. Good to hear you agree!
    2
  12954. A couple of socialist policies does not make you a socialist. Slight state intervention classifies you as a liberal. Bigger state intervention classifies you (certainly in the WW1-WW2 era) as a socialist.
    2
  12955. I'm not going to comment too much on current world politics, but it's hard to ignore when (as you can see by the likes/dislikes ratio on this video) there's a lot of people who are not happy that I pointed out that Hitler and his party said they were socialist. It's fine if modern day politicians and people want to get upset, but I'm not bowing to it. I'm publishing history, not fiction.
    2
  12956. Cheers Kim! No worries, and I guess you thought this was the case before the video? :)
    2
  12957. This is only one aspect of it. Normally I'd encourage you to read the sources, but this one is just terrible in every way. Awful written book. So read it if you really want to, but honestly I think this time I'm justified in saying don't. If you do get it, good luck.
    2
  12958. Sadly, they're not listening. And even if they were, they have their agendas to push.
    2
  12959. In my opinion, if it's taboo to show the Swastika, it should be taboo to show the Hammer and Sickle, or any other socialist flag. There's only minor differences between the socialisms, and violence is at the very heart of the ideology.
    2
  12960. No, Nazism and Fascism are not the same thing. For example, Italy didn't have any racial laws until 1938, after being put under pressure by Hitler.
    2
  12961. ZANIAK, if you have an actual counterargument backed by evidence, please present it, or leave this discussion. You failed to address the evidence I presented previously, and here you are again doing the same.
    2
  12962. "By the way, social state is a common goal in europe for centuries right?" This is linked to the rise of "socialism". Now when you think of socialism, you instantly think of Marxist-Soviet-Socialism. We must put that aside because it isn't correct. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. To go back to an earlier point you brought up - "Just because he had done something for common workers does not make him leftist." Socialism does not necessarily mean "the workers". Racial-socialism just favours the race, not the workers. Hitler does not believe in class, and therefore aimed to create a classless society, but one which still had a ladder, because he knew that Marxist-Socialism's lack of a ladder didn't give incentives to individuals, which meant they didn't work hard. Since Hitler was very much about Germans working hard for their community, he had to give them incentives. Therefore, this is still socialism, even if it does look different to Soviet-socialism.
    2
  12963. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    2
  12964. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    2
  12965. "Socialism is the public ownership of the means of production under state control by the dictatorship of the Aryan race" - is how Hitler saw it.
    2
  12966. Murdering the Bourgeoisie counts as social justice now does it? Socialism has nothing to do with "social justice". It is an economy theory which means "common-control" (public-state-control) of the economy (the means of production). It is state control of the economy. Marxism took that to mean that the workers should take control, and Hitler took that to mean the German-race should take control.
    2
  12967. But he did nationalize the banks later on... https://youtu.be/mbCpvbaRe_s
    2
  12968. Yes Anon, you're correct :)
    2
  12969. Cheers cyco! I've actually made a response video to the comments here https://youtu.be/4_eQ7weo_ys
    2
  12970. Great :) btw, if you want more on this, someone else found a good video https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    2
  12971. Hahaha, good question
    2
  12972. Haha far from it. Marxists brigaded the two videos, and used multiple accounts to comment and downvote the video and upvote their own comments (I have screenshots to prove the multiple accounts). Sadly, despite their efforts, they actually lost the argument when I chose to stand my ground, and there's still more likes than dislikes on the videos. Even people who are Nazi agreed, who I was surprised to hear accept that they are socialists. That was my mistake - making the video towards the neo-Nazis. They know what they are; I should have made it towards the other socialists denying this fact. But, live and learn.
    2
  12973. That's good to hear :)
    2
  12974. You're very welcome sir :)
    2
  12975. I agree. But I don't make the rules :(
    2
  12976. It's the actual swastika that YouTube's bot will detect and remove, not the full badge.
    2
  12977. Socialism isn't about class either. Marxism is about class, but socialism predates Marxism. Socialism is nothing other than societal (collective) control of the means of production (economy) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12978. "law, taxes" are not the type of state intervention we're talking about here. There's the old conservative attidue of Laissez-faire - or leave alone - is no government intervention. Then came lberalism, which was slight state intervention (small amounts of welfare, but we're talking very small amounts). Then liberalism got absolutely wiped out in the WW1-WW2 period in Europe. Its replacement was socialism (and the like), which advocated much more state intervention in the economy and society etc. This was in response to the economic, military, social and political catastrophy of the WW1-interwar period, plus the mass poverty across Europe at the time. State intervention (regardless of ideology) promised a way out of this. This is why the Labour Party in the 1940s was classed as socialist, and intervened in the economy post-WW2.
    2
  12979. Good points. Thanks
    2
  12980. The racism is the socialism. Hitler saw 'race' as the Marxists see 'class'. When you realise that these two are interlinked, you will see what I mean.
    2
  12981. Yes, exactly
    2
  12982. Great counterargument. You may as well have written "no, you're wrong", it's mush shorter.
    2
  12983. Nations are societies. Nationalism is Socialism. It's on the Left https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  12984. I haven't lost any arguments. Being swamped with comments and not being able to reply to them, does not make a "loss". Also, Garlic, if you think there's a definition in a dictionary that explains every iteration of socialism or every iteration of communism etc, with zero room for exceptions, you're going to have a bad time.
    2
  12985. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what National Socialism was. Mr Brad, you're mixing communism with socialism - they're two different things. Also, fascism and Nazism are also not the same.
    2
  12986. Haha you're probably right :)
    2
  12987. Luke, I'm not getting "smashed" at all. And it seems you and the others have communism and socialism mixed up (or think they're the same, or think there's a definitive "socialism). Jonathon - cheers! Glad to hear you've discovered Glantz :)
    2
  12988. Cheers Jonathan! I'm ashamed for not having realised this earlier. Why didn't you tell me!? :D
    2
  12989. To be fair, I believed the lie too until a few weeks before I made this video. I can remember my tutors telling me that it was capitalism in college! I've done a ton more research since this video, and I can confirm that it is socialism in two sentences - Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is also socialism.
    2
  12990. Socialism and communism are the same thing. They used to be synonyms. They only changed meanings after Lenin and Stalin got in power. The excuse as to why most of the Soviet people were in poverty was because they were in the socialism phase, and were heading to the 'paradise' communism phase. But it was a bad excuse, since they're both the same thing: collective control of the means of production. Relevant link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  12991. Which is why I used more than just Mein Kampf. There's a convergence of evidence to say this was socialism.
    2
  12992. Probably all of the above. Also people who didn't watch the video at all, got annoyed at the title and decided to tell me that I don't know what socialism is (even though, they themselves are getting confused between communism and socialism).
    2
  12993. I didn't monetize it at all. Last week's video on tank warfare got demonetized by manual review. So if that got demonetized, why bother.
    2
  12994. "Trying to make socialism look awful like National Socialism by doing comparisons is honestly not going to work, because they are very seperate ideologies with completly different goals." - yes, which is why I said, Britain was also socialist. Socialism isn't necessarily communism or racism or whatever. State intervention in the economy can be good, but too much, or in the wrong areas, and it can be very very bad.
    2
  12995. Probably within the hour
    2
  12996. Cheers Simon! Got another coming out in response to the backlash, soon
    2
  12997. Cheers Mitchell! Thing is, I only realised this myself about a week or so ago, after reading Mein Kampf. The penny dropped. I somehow never made the connection, but now I have and I'm not looking back.
    2
  12998. I've actually seen that the extreme right or left are using multiple accounts to both dislike and comment (at least one guy slipped up and posted a comment twice on two different accounts). It's really sad that they have to do that, but it won't change anything. Glad you enjoyed the video :)
    2
  12999. Ignorance is strength https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13000. That's because ANTIFA are as Fascist as the Fascists they claim to hate.
    2
  13001. Thanks! I'm actually making a much bigger and better video right now which will crush all their "counter-arguments", so be sure to check that out. Should only be a few weeks away
    2
  13002. "I love when non swedes points out that sweden is socialist... I wonder where my socialism is at?" Wolf should listen to one of his own economists https://youtu.be/vG51uCrYxVM
    2
  13003. How high's your taxation? If it's high and the government is running parts of the economy, that's socialism. There's no getting around it, socialism is state ownership and control of the economy. It's the opposite of capitalism, which is the private ownership of the economy.
    2
  13004. "I still don't get why your being salty about this." I've been brigaded by Marxists, and the best part is, their most effective counter-arguments are to accuse me of saying or being things I've not said nor am. And, when I state my case, they fail to counter it, which shows that I've actually got a point. The other day I wanted the Three Arrows video on this topic (he wasn't talking about me specifically), and at the end he said that anyone who thinks that National Socialism is socialism is either a neo-Nazi or a pro-capitalist (or something along those lines). It frustrates me because I don't accuse people who think the opposite view of denying the Holocaust, even though they are (unknowningly) doing so. Because ultimately this is why I started down this path in the first place, to beat the Holocaust denialists and prove that the Holocaust happened. Central to that idea is Nationalsozialismus (one word, as it is in German, and I think it's important that we don't split it). So I'm not a neo-Nazi or pro-capitalist. My motivation is purely there to prove one of the worst events in human history happened, and I now know it is impossible to do that without accepting that Nationalsocialism is socialism (not Marxist socialism, just socialism). The best part is, I used to get denialist comments on my channel all the time. Once I published my NS videos, those comments have trickled to almost none at all. Those that do comment, clearly haven't seen those videos because as soon as I point them out and say something like 'you can't fool me', they back down. I can beat the denialists without even talking about the Holocaust itself - just the central ideology behind it. The reality is that the Nationalsocialists know what they are - they are socialists. They know they can't deny the Holocaust to me because, as I said to one of them, 'to deny the Holocaust is to deny that Hitler was a socialist, which is to deny that he was pro-German.' The only reason they deny the Holocaust isn't because they don't think it happened - they know it happened - it's because they're mocking people's incorrect perception of Nationalsocialism, and they're poking at people's misconceptions. Worse, they've twisted it and use this misconception to recruit to their cause. So denying it cannot happen any longer. "Can you please explain... Hitler's actions in the Spanish civil war" While I haven't studied the Spanish Civil War specifically, I will answer as best as I can. Hitler fought against Marxist-Socialists. Hitler is racial-socialist, so to take an educated guess I would say he was on the side of the Spanish race against (what he saw as) Jewish-led Bolshevism (Judeo-Bolshevism - class-socialists). "the definition that includes workers isn't the Marxist definition it's the generally accepted definition from the labour party to anarchist federation neither of which are Marxist." So, you're finally admitting that there are varient forms of socialism? "dude you can't pretend to not have an ideology" I don't see the world in groups. I don't believe in putting all my faith in limited beliefs or groups. I will look at each issue individually, as an individual. For example, I think the NHS should not be dismantled (as the Conservatives want it to be), but I also don't see the need to nationalize the postal service (one of Labour's current policies). However, I may see the need to nationalize another industry, or de-nationalize another industry, depending on the individual situation. I will vote for any party, and will freely critizise or praise what I want, when I want. And, my views on a particular issue will change over time, again depending on the situation. This 'ideology' of mine, is incredibly freeing. "that means that you don't understand what an ideology is because by definition everyone has an ideology" I guess my only ideology is that I don't want to correct the distortions of history, because without truth, what's the point? This is why, once I realised that I had been wrong in my assessment of National Socialism being capitalism, I stood up against the grain and said Nationalsocialism was socialism. And I still stand by that decision and assessment, even if it has lead to problems. And, as an observer, I absolutely can understand what an ideology is. I just don't fit into any, and reject the idea that I should pick one and then conform to the group. "anarchists are people who want an abolition of all hierarchy including the abolition of capitalism" What about anarcho-capitalists? They're not abolishing capitalism. "and replace it with a stateless form of socialism" You can't have "stateless socialism" - that's a direct contradiction (which you correctly predicted, see my next point). ""Stateless socialism" is an oxymoron with your definition but it happened historically." No it didn't. I don't know what you think a government is, but if you have no 'state', but do have a worker's council (or soviet) in a factory, that's a government. Even if it's just for that one factory and independent, that council governs that individual factory (assuming there isn't a higher state government). That's a group of people in charge - governing. It's a local government, but it's still a government, even if it's democratic or whatever (unless it's a warzone and nobody's cooperating in any way whatsoever). Socialism cannot exist without some form of government, simply because if a human being decides that the shirt on his back now belongs to him, then someone from the social group will have to step in and say 'no, that belongs to the group'. That act is a form of government (plus contradictory to the idea of 'stateless socialism'). So, as soon as you had this 'stateless socialism', it would have all the potential to revert into a primative form of private ownership (capitalism). "This means that your definition is not only innacurate but historically wrong." No, because they weren't true anarchisms. See the point above. Anarchism is the "abolition of all government and organization in society" - to quote from Google. If you have any form of organization (which is, by definition, socialism - a 'social' 'group') you can't have anarchism.
    2
  13005. "You seem to have confused collectivist with socialist" What are you talking about? I didn't mention collectivist. Again, socialism is the social (public, state) group ownership (control) of the means of production (business/economy). I'd love to see your definition of socialism, because I guarantee it mentions "workers" or "class", which is actually Marxist-Socialism, not socialism as a whole. "your opinion is based off the mises institute which considers anything other than a completely free market socialist." I will repeat myself again, socialism is the social (public, state) group ownership (control) of the means of production (business/economy). I don't know what the Mises Institute actually defines capitalism and socialism is, but the definition I'm using makes sense historically. It may not fit into Marxist ideology, but I'm not here for ideologies. "You still haven't managed to explain what anarchists are." I didn't even know I was asked that question. I get thousands of comments a day now, let alone the stupid amount of 'neck yourself' comment I received after I posted these videso, and can't possibly keep up with them all. As far as I'm aware, anarchists are anti-government and law in favour of the individual. "Your only explanation was that "socialists have splits so they infight" which is just completely invalid cos the trots, Stalinists anarchists and demsocs all worked together" Are you drunk? Socialists have the splits so they infight? When did I ever say anything like that?
    2
  13006. I understand what you're communicating, but your ideas contradict. It's clear that you've misunderstood what socialism actually is, and you have a vague understanding of what Nationalsocialism is. The fact that you said the Nazis are willing to kill other races, is itself, a sign of their socialism. If you don't know why this shows their socialism, you don't understand what Nationalsocialism is, nor what socialism is. Socialism is the social (public, state) group ownership (control) of the means of production (business). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership (control) of the means of production (business). Yes, it is actually the amount of state control in the economy. This is the basis of the definition! Socialism is a direct response to capitalism, where the state wouldn't get involved in the economy. Capitalism was 'failing', and the state could change that. If it is the (class) workers state ownership or control of the means of production, this is Marxist-socialism. If it is the "people's state" or racial group (to use Hitler's words) ownership or control of the means of production, then it is Nationalsocialism. Do you understand me?
    2
  13007. Yeah, I've seen that video. Here's a better one that's backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and more https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13008. Mein Deutsch ist nicht gut. But I've hearted your comment because you admitted you made a mistake, which I wish more people would do. Danke!
    2
  13009. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “The government of a totalitarian State would not be “authoritarian” if the courts still functioned independently, as they do under liberal capitalism.” “The division of power between the executive or legislative branch on the one hand and the judicial branch on the other was formerly a guarantee to the owner of private property that his property rights would be protected even against his own government. The totalitarian State, in abolishing this separation of power, abolishes the sanctity of private property, which thereupon ceases to be a basic principle of society fundamental to State morality.” “Constitutionally the businessman still enjoys guarantees of property rights. But what is the value of such constitutional guarantees without courts that dare to defy the omnipotent bureaucracy or to enforce laws that are “out of date”?” - Reimann. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). National interests are - “made mainly by the Nazi party, or, rather, by its leaders, that is, by the State bureaucracy. It is a principle that only Party members shall occupy key positions in the government and in all organizations where the State influences the distribution of jobs. They must be engaged whenever there is a choice between the Party member and non-Party member.” “The influence of the Party cannot be seen in laws, but in practice, and personalities are the important factor. A large number of the ministers [at present all ministers] are Party members.” - Ministerialdirektor Sommer, spokesman for Rudolph Hess, in the Deutsche Juristenzeitung of May 21, 1936. “The capitalist under fascism has to be not merely a law-abiding citizen, he must be servile to the representatives of the State. He must not insist on “rights” and must not behave as if his private property rights were still sacred. He should be grateful to the Fuehrer that he still has private property.” “This state of affairs must lead to the final collapse of business morale, and sound the death knell of the self-respect and self-reliance which marked the independent businessman under liberal capitalism.” - Reimann “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    2
  13010. Yes it did.
    2
  13011. I'm still looking into it, but yes, there is a difference. And it's quite funny when you realise that they're only united by anti-communism. Interchanging the two, I think, is wrong.
    2
  13012. Yes, that's one of the points to take away :) thanks Neves.
    2
  13013. And individual rights are crushed for the greater hive.
    2
  13014. What's the difference between the nationalisation of the means of production, and the socialisation of the means of production? Oh that's right, nothing. One nation under god (internationalism) is still a nation (nationalism). Socialism is neither national nor international, it is state control of the economy https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13015. The majority of the commenters are Marxists who didn't watch the video (I now have the data) and who are ideologically opposed to accept this because they know it will be further damning to their cause. On top of it, I have an incredibly strong arguement for it which is growing day by day, whereas their argument is nonsense (again, because they didn't actually watch the video and didn't even listen to what I said). So no, I'm absolutely not admitting that I'm wrong to a bunch of babies, just because they used multiple accounts to downvote the video (which hadn't worked because the majority still liked it) and spam a bunch of "no, your wrong" comments, or bad arguments telling me what the Marxist definition of socialism is. Great, not interested in the Marxist definition.
    2
  13016. Not seen that (I don't watch TV) but it wouldn't surprise me. There are a lot of bad documentaries on TV, which is why my aim is to create good ones, backed by actual evidence.
    2
  13017. Agreed, Marshall. They're also mixing up socialism and communism.
    2
  13018. I've made a response video to the comments. Hope you enjoy the further explanation there https://youtu.be/4_eQ7weo_ys
    2
  13019. Cheers Jack. Just posted a response video https://youtu.be/4_eQ7weo_ys was downvoted within the first minute (showing they're not willing to listen)
    2
  13020. Currently, not as many as dislikes. But most of the people disliking the video haven't actually watched it. Or don't know what socialism was (thinking it was communism and doesn't have any capitalism in it).
    2
  13021. It really is a badly written book. And yes, people are calling me out for not know what socialism is, yet they themselves think Marxism is the only form of socialism, even though socialism predates Marx and doesn't necessarily need to be based on class.
    2
  13022. Socialism is the state control of the economy (in my recent Mussolini video I explain in detail why this is the case so I shall leave the link below). You cannot have totalitarianism without total state control of the economy. As Mussolini said "all within the state, nothing outside of the state" (Mussolini invented the term totalitarianism). This means that the state also controls the economy. That's why the only totalitarian regimes in history have all been Fascist, Nazi and Marxist, because they are all socialists. Mussolini video https://youtu.be/06vJY9nLMXU
    2
  13023. And, they both murdered the Poles in much the same way during their joint conquest and occupation of that country.
    2
  13024. "So... You ARE redefining Socialism to include Hitler's "version" of it. Neat." No, I'm using the historic definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "The definition of socialism is an economical, not a historical issue, and you're viewing it as one." Capitalism is private control of the means of production. A private is an individual. Socialism is collective control of the means of production. The collective is a group. And organized group is a hierarchy. The hierarchy of society is the State. Again: https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "Capitalism doesn't mean international "free trade" and Socialism a lack thereof." If the State regulates the economy and prevents private people trading with each other, that's not capitalism, that's socialism. "So you see,an internal commodity economy based on wage-labour production, even with monopolies or oligopolies, and certainly oligarchies, with limited and preferential international trade even at peace time, is still capitalism." No it isn't. Capitalism is the private (individual) control of the means of production. A corporation or an oligarchy etc is not a private individual. Corporations, for example, are collectively owned by their shareholders, which is why the USSR was one giant corporation (Hanson, “The Rise and Fall of the The Soviet Economy,” Kindle P8), and why the Fascists and Nazis also embraced corporations. "Brutal, end-state, overpowered, pre-globalisation national Capitalism, such Capitalism as there existed for the majority of the prevalence of the Capitalist economic system and mode of production." Nationalism and socialism are the same thing, as are internationalism and socialism. They are all a collective's control of the means of production. "I won't even deign to compare and contrast the National "Socialist" organisation to the Socialist one" Yes, because you can't. Ignore the fact that they had price kommissars and allocated resources. Ignore the fact that you cannot kill Jews on a mass-industrial scale without a central collective State running the economy. Ignore the fact that most members of the corporations in the Third Reich were members of the Nazi Party, and thus were the State. "CLASS STRUGGLE" Socialism has nothing to do with class struggle. Marxism is about class warfare. Socialism predates Marxism and has nothing to do with it. Socialism is only societal control of the means of production. "So no, the bloody Nazis weren't Socialists." No need to swear. "Before you make such statements,you need to freshen up on fields of study other than your own, otherwise it's like,I don't know,trying to determine the personal psychology of an individual using sociological terms; incomplete at best, pointless at worst." This video was aimed at the Nazis. It wasn't aimed at the Marxists. I wasn't expecting the Marxists to rally to the defence of the Nazis, yet that is exactly what happened. But they're not REAL Socialists or anything. Also, you need to actually learn the definitions of the terms you're using. Capitalism is not when the State does stuff, which is what you've claimed. "Please, please stop propagating such nonsense. They're not only dangerous, they aren't just misinformed, they are FACTUALLY WRONG. And you do seem to be better than that. I hope." Follow up videos which will make you rethink this stance https://youtu.be/PQGMjDQ-TJ8 https://youtu.be/go2OFpO8fyo https://youtu.be/qtACBI1Txrc I'm also working on more videos which will show the true nature of the socialist economy in the Third Reich, using actual sources, not wikipedia or Reddit (lol).
    2
  13025. Thanks Lluís :) some people don't like it, but unfortunately I've got to talk about the politics at the time. It's part of the history!
    2
  13026. I know you're joking but actually it didn't. That's why they needed to conquer territory, because economics became a zero-sum game.
    2
  13027. Thanks! Not sure if you've seen it, but if you liked this video, you should check out my more recent Why Hitler went to War video (it's very relevant to this particular subject, as you will see if you watch it and then the follow up video on the shrinking markets). Link: https://youtu.be/PQGMjDQ-TJ8
    2
  13028. No it isn't.
    2
  13029.  @The80sWolf_  I'm looking forward to you actually making a sensible rebuttal to any of the points raised by me this evening instead of promoting state ownership of the economy (socialism) across my videos, and then denying that socialism is state ownership of the means of production. It really does sound like you don't know what the actual non-distorted definition of socialism is, 80's Wolf.
    2
  13030. From what I can see (although I still need to do more research), Fascism is "national" socialism, as in, a socialism based on the nation. Nationalsocialism is "racial" socialism. This is why Mussolini only introduced race laws in 1938 (after Hitler started to influence him), because Mussolini wasn't as interested in race, and regarded Italian "citizens" as Italians no matter their race.
    2
  13031. Haha I'm glad you're enjoying this :)
    2
  13032. LOTR and the Hobbit that is
    2
  13033. It sucks!
    2
  13034. You're correct. And my videos often spark big debates with long comments. However, this really isn't much of a debate. One side is claiming I said National Socialism was Marxism, which I never did, but they're not backing down. So you're right that they didn't watch the video.
    2
  13035. See pinned comment to show that National Socialism wasn't capitalism, nor was it "Socialism in name only".
    2
  13036. Haha thank you for being respectful with your disagreement :) the triangle idea is a possibility. I was contemplating doing something like that (HOI3 style) but knew it would get shot to pieces. And you're absolutely right about your assessment of Mein Kampf. Unfortunately it looks like I'm going to be using it a lot more, and his second book.
    2
  13037. lol
    2
  13038. A National Health Service is a form of socialism.
    2
  13039. You assume I haven't seen it already. He confirms it isn't Marxist-Socialism, but he doesn't prove it isn't Socialism (which pre-dates Marxism).
    2
  13040. I will admit, I didn't actually realise until about a week and a half ago. I'm a little embarrassed by that too
    2
  13041. I demonetised it prior to releasing it. Last week's video on tanks was demonetized (zero idea why) so I didn't even bother with this one.
    2
  13042. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is in contrast to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy).
    2
  13043. That's how I discovered it. I then had a penny-drop moment when I read his (what I thought were) 'socialist' policies (meaning I thought they were just socialist in name only too). I then assumed he was communist (I was mistaken at first), then did more research and figured out exactly where he sat on the 'political spectrum'. This was all just over a week ago, and I'm ashamed I didn't realize earlier :)
    2
  13044. I'm not getting smashed at all. They're arguing that socialism and communism are the same thing. They've fundamentally misunderstood what the difference between the two are.
    2
  13045. This is exactly it. Most are just opinions not backed by evidence. Those that do offer counterarguments rely on Hitler killing socialists (specifically 1,000 out of 3 million - Röhm), trade unions and "privatization" (which they think was actual privatisation). These counterarguments are quite easily debunked, which I've done several times now in the comments.
    2
  13046. Yeah, got it just for this joke ;)
    2
  13047. Thanks Johnny. Many of those unsubscribing haven't realised what this channel is fundamentally about.
    2
  13048. This video is out of date. See my updated video on the topic here. Turns out that the workers did control the means of production https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=fWsl3hxusle-Q_sC
    2
  13049. Because otherwise this video wouldn't exist at all. I think that would be obvious.
    2
  13050. It's not controversial. The left and right (as the current spectrum is) have reasons for this not to be the case.
    2
  13051. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era.
    2
  13052. Yeah, I expected as much :)
    2
  13053. Yeah, I suspected this would be their reaction :) some are using multiple accounts to spam the same comments, and also downvote the video. It won't change anything because now that I've realized that NS is socialism (only realised the other week, which is embarrassing because I'm shocked that I didn't connect the dots beforehand) I can't unsee it. Everything makes more sense than it did before - absolutely everything about WW2!
    2
  13054. Glad you liked it. I've got plans for more videos on this topic coming at some point, since I've done substantially more research than I did here and (thanks to the criticism received here) I'm now able to combat the counter arguments quite effectively. I want to show why this makes more sense, and why this was vital to understanding the Holocaust.
    2
  13055. Yes, it does look like that, doesn't it.
    2
  13056. Fascism is socialism on the national level. Nazism is socialism on the racial level. Marxism is socialism on the class level.
    2
  13057. It was difficult to cover - it's a bloody terrible book!
    2
  13058. You're welcome :) however, I suspect (judging from the dislike bar) a lot of people aren't willing to listen. I also have realised people don't know the difference between communism and socialism. And I can also see a lot of right-wingers are pulling out their usual "going to use multiple accounts to spam the same comment in the comment section and downvote the video" tactic. Oh well, doesn't change anything
    2
  13059. Glad you liked it Brian!
    2
  13060. Says the guy who commented on the other video - "Comrade Stalin did nothing wrong" - yes, you very smart.
    2
  13061. Thanks Samuel! You're right about the alt-Right and alt-left flooding the comments and dislike bar. They're actually using multiple accounts, which is just sad. One guy messed up and used two accounts to post the same message. It's really sad.
    2
  13062. No worries sir :)
    2
  13063. Bye.
    2
  13064. Cheers Neo! And yes, they're getting communism and socialism mixed up, and failing to grasp that there's multiple branches of socialism.
    2
  13065. I thought so! Not done customer service, but I can imagine how bad it is over the phone. Used to make the odd call to customers, and they have no restraint and are so ridiculous in their demand. They don't realise that maybe, just maybe, they'd get more help and support if they were nice to us. But no, they don't think of that. Trust me though, being there in person doesn't make it any better. You'd think it would, but it really doesn't. They're just as rude, and they think they can shout and scream and threaten you with physical violence to get what they want, because you're "meant to serve them" and the "customer is always right". Well, I used to shout back and tell them they're acting like idiots. If they threatened us we gang up on them, or get the police to escort them out if it came to that. On rare occasions my coworkers had to tackle them to the ground, although sadly I never got that opportunity. It's good there are no guns in the UK, that's all I'll say on that... I've heard that in Japan they put mirrors up behind the counters so that people can see a true reflection of themselves. They're supposed to see what a idiot they're being and calm themselves down. Unfortunately we didn't have mirrors, so we had to be the reflection ourselves. Very grateful I don't work retail now. However, I now get the same thing over the internet. People telling me to "neck yourself" and so on because I say things that go against their beliefs. Yippee. Certainly has an impact - but drives me to do further research to prove them wrong. So the stupidity of others can be is a nice source of motivation.
    2
  13066. Sounds like you've worked in retail too
    2
  13067. Please watch these more up to date videos if you haven't already because they address most of your points. First, my "Public vs Private" video, which explains what Capitalism and Socialism is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Then my "Hitler's Socialism" video (5 hours, 350 references, 107 sources, 18 months of work) which shows you what National Socialism was on a political, economic and social level, plus shows why the industries were nationalized and owned by the State, not "privatized" as the Marxists claim https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13068. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. Elements of capitalism exist just like they do with British socialism, but National Socialism was still socialism.
    2
  13069. No it doesn't. It only says National Socialism was socialism, not that it's the only socialism, or that socialism is bad. I even said in the videos that the Labour Party and Britain were socialist, but they're not evil. You're reading into it what you want to hear, not what was actually said. And this is the point: the Marxists took offense and brought their multiple accounts to downvote the video because they see it as a threat to their socialism. But it isn't, unless National Socialism is actually socialism and is similar to their socialism...
    2
  13070. You're not wrong. Didn't realize there were this many of them.
    2
  13071. I didn't even bother this time. YouTube demonetized last week's video on anti-tank warfare. If they're going to demonetize videos like that, there's no chance with videos like this. All power to my Patreons!
    2
  13072. Egg - I'm not lumping them together. I am seeing a lot of people who don't know the difference between socialism and communism, and a lot of fake accounts downvoting the video and "unsubscribing" from a video they weren't subscribed to. Also, if people are unsubscribing because I said something they don't like, they've completely misunderstood the purpose and meaning of this channel.
    2
  13073. Thank you sir!
    2
  13074. Yes, I read about that too. Just didn't see the need to bring it up. However, you're right. Cheers!
    2
  13075. I had to censor it, or change it for a different flag, because I knew YouTube wouldn't be happy with a swastika in the video. Technically they don't mind it in a historical "documentary context" - but considering they demonetized the previous video on anti-tank warfare for zero reason, even though it's clearly in the historical documentary context, I'm not taking any chances.
    2
  13076. I get why you're concerned but I never said communism doesn't work. That's not for me to decide. I'm here to define what National Socialism (and other political ideologies like Soviet Socialism/Communism) was at the time, not now.
    2
  13077. I don't think this will kick them off, but I get your sentiment :) cheers di rect!
    2
  13078. Oh yes, because the socialist governments in western seized private property. You're thinking of communism. And yes, socialism was characterized by heavier state intervention compared to the earlier liberal and conservative models. It's not the only version of socialism, but claiming there's a textbook "one size fits all" definition of socialism is incorrect.
    2
  13079. No, socialism is not that. Communism is the anti-capitalist "seize the means of production" state. Socialism is a blend of capitalism and heavy state intervention in society and the economy, which is exactly what National Socialism was.
    2
  13080. Yup, agreed.
    2
  13081. Prager U is awful. This is not like them at all.
    2
  13082. Bee happy :)
    2
  13083. Basically, no. All action there was minor at this stage.
    2
  13084. It was this one https://youtu.be/3PCP2yXL3O4
    2
  13085. What was your username back then? Or is it the same? Interestingly, I recently saw that someone did a speedrun of Close Combat 3 several years ago and I was tempted to learn how to do it. It's a good run, but he definitely made several newbie mistakes and you can tell he wasn't a regular player of Close Combat, so I bet I could take the time down if I was so inclined.
    2
  13086. Glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  13087. You should absolutely see my BATTLESTORM video on Operation Crusader https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho and the follow-up video on the South-African general, Pienaar https://youtu.be/LlOZdrvnIfk (definitely see Operation Crusader first) because the South Africans play a big (and controversial) role in Operation Crusader so I talked about them a lot there. Obviously going forward I will be talking about them again in the future, as after Stalingrad I intend to do more videos on the North African Campaign.
    2
  13088. Ah, that's not good! I was hoping it would have brought up something new... That's a real shame
    2
  13089. "I know that this comment is somewhat unrelated, but I feel like certain meme history channels have been getting a little out of control." Yeah, I don't watch them, but I've seen a fair few pop up recently. One or two might be okay, but it seems to be a growing trend, and I'm honestly not sure what people are watching this "content" for, other than the "laughs" (if you enjoy that style of humour). I mean, it tends to not be good history. If it was good history plus memes, fair enough, but often times it's not even that.
    2
  13090. I doubt it. While it would be fun, I think I've angered so many people it wouldn't go well... :)
    2
  13091. That is correct, yes. They didn't raise taxes and paid for the war through currency printing.
    2
  13092. Because there's more to the United States than it's central bank.
    2
  13093. I was trying to mimic what he actually sounds like https://youtu.be/0PYSFqCSsGU But I didn't want to do an accurate rendition because people would have assumed that I was taking the mick out of him, even though he does sound like a stiff-upper twit
    2
  13094. "Though the term 'guilt' is not mentioned there is a direct implication in this statement that Germany was responsible for the war - something that is highly debatable, given that Russia was the first country to mobilise." There is no mention of war guilt, or that Germany started the war, only that Germany would pay for the damaged she caused in the west. - "The War Guilt Clause was added in order to get the French and Belgians to agree to reduce the sum of money that Germany would have to pay to compensate for war damage." Oh, so the Allies wanted to reduce the amount of reparations? Maybe this is because the Allied politicians didn't want to punish Germany, which is exactly like I said in the video. And again, there is no "war guilt clause" in the treaty. - "TIK prattles on about the Germans needing to pay for the damage that they caused, but can he please explain HOW you could fight a war WITHOUT causing any damage?" You can't fight a way without causing any damage. That's why wars are bad. However, generally the side that loses the war (e.g. France in 1871) is forced to pay reparations to the victor (which the French did to Germany). But when it came to WW1, the side that lost the war (Germany) was let off the hook because the Allied politicians betrayed their own people. The war in the west was ultimately fought for no reason at all, except maybe Alsace–Lorraine. - "It was bitterly resented, however, by virtually all Germans, who did not believe they were responsible for the outbreak of the war." Yes. But the clause wasn't actually there. German propaganda pretended that it was, so the myth of Versailles caused the German public to be outraged. - "This article was a constant thorn in the side of the Weimar leaders who tried to meet the terms of the agreement while trying to have these terms modified." The Weimar government wanted to pretend that the war guilt clause was there so that they could use this "crisis" to gain government support. All the Germans rallied behind the opposition to the fictitious "war guilt clause", ultimately uniting the German people together during Weimar, and then again under the next government (Hitler's). It was a well-played piece of theatre by the German establishment.
    2
  13095. No, just the loss and damage that she caused on France, Belgium and similar. It's not "guilt", and it's not saying she started the war.
    2
  13096. 1. You didn't give the full quote. You're distorting the evidence. 2. This doesn't prove anything. Germany and her allies escalated the war beyond where it needed to be. Germany invaded France and Belgium. 3. Germany should pay for France since Germany lost the war. After France lost to Prussia in 1871, Germany imposed massive reparations on France. The French paid. Winner takes all. Yet, in this case, the French and British soldiers fought for nothing because the Germans refused to pay, and the Allies politicians were eager to betray their own people by not enforcing the terms.
    2
  13097. I agree 100%. Never believe anything the "news" media are telling you. They're all ignorant and bought and paid for anyway.
    2
  13098. "You know what Nazis also do TIK? They never stop complaining about socialism and communism." They complain about democratic-socialism and communism (Marxist Socialism). They don't complain about Socialism. They praise socialism, since they are National Socialists https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 - "I don’t believe you’re a Nazi just because some of you positions may sound similar to some of the stuff they say." None of my political or economic preferences are similar to the National Socialist position. I want a free market, not a totalitarian state-planned or state-influenced people's community. I want freedom to every individual, not freedom to a particular race or class. I want private property and private ownership of the means of production, not state/social ownership of the means of production and the destruction of private property (the Nazis abolished private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, as I showed in the video linked above). And I'm against corporations, since corporations aren't privately owned, but publicly owned https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I'm not a Nazi, and I don't believe in any of their policies. - "If you dislike socialists, please make an honest critique based on the positions of whatever branch of socialism you are critiquing, not a broad smear because they have a single crossover in Nazi talking points on one specific issue." Socialism itself is the problem. It doesn't matter what branch of socialism, be that a national version of socialism, or a class version of socialism, it doesn't matter - it's all socialism. And I've explained this in numerous videos. So my criticism isn't of socialists, but of socialism. Remember, I used to be a socialist myself, until I did my homework and realized that Hitler was a Socialist, and that everything I had been taught and led to believe about his ideology was incorrect. So I don't have a problem with socialists, necessarily. I have a problem with Socialism specifically for misleading people into thinking it's for the poor, when it's actually enriching the rich. - "I’m sure as a historian you can’t deny that the first people the Nazis removed were socialists, communists, and trade unionists." Again, watch the first linked video above. The Nazis removed democratic-socialists, communists and those trade unionists that refused to nationalize and socialize into the State's trade union (the German Labour Front or DAF). Lenin did the exact same thing with the democratic-socialists, and non-Bolshevik communists and trade unionists and trade unions. But when he does it, he's a "real" socialist. When Hitler does it, he's a "capitalist" somehow... Hitler didn't remove every socialist. He didn't remove National Socialists, he also allowed many democratic socialists and communists to merge into the party, and he also arrested and killed conservatives, monarchists, liberals (capitalist ones), and others during the Night of the Long Knives, not just Ernst Röhm. But again, you don't hear this in the lamestream narrative because it's taboo to consider Hitler as a real socialist, even though he was. - "Being a good historian doesn’t make your right in your political beliefs." It's not a belief, it's an observation. History is a praxeology, not an ideology. I'm challenging your ideology with facts and logic, and that's why you're upset because your political beliefs are being undermined by the evidence I'm presenting.
    2
  13099. That was the original reason, as I explained in previous episodes of this series, but that idea had been abandoned in early October.
    2
  13100. Thanks! Someone else pointed that channel too, I'll check it out
    2
  13101. They can do what they want on their own channels. But they're not spamming mine - that's the point.
    2
  13102. Left wing is Holodomor denial, or denial that the Soviet regime or Stalin caused the famine. It's usually for political or racial reasons. They also do the same as the Holocaust deniers do - claim the real academic historians are spouting propaganda, and then quote their deniers or people who have been refuted, like a distortian called Tottle.
    2
  13103. Hahaha thanks :D
    2
  13104. 100% agreed
    2
  13105. I actually removed a ton (sadly) before I decided to make this video, so these are just the dregs. I do have a lot of screenshots of ones recently though, and some are worse than pictured here, but are longer so weren't appropriate to add into the video at that point.
    2
  13106. Says the communist.
    2
  13107. I've called out the distortions of the socialist-denialists (Marxist and National), which explains why 10% disliked the video.
    2
  13108. Yep. Distinguishing between them is difficult. Some are trolls, some are just naive, and the last bunch are the true believers. It's hard to tell the difference.
    2
  13109. Mocsk it's not criticism, it's spam.
    2
  13110. My focus is on the European Theatre. I'm not sure why studying the Bengal famine would allow me to progress to the other atrocities. I'd rather just dive into the European atrocities, since they're what I'm most familiar with.
    2
  13111. Thanks, glad you found the channel too, and will do!
    2
  13112. It was shortly after this that I realised that Hitler was a Socialist and then went up against the mainstream https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13113. Yesterday's video was 2. This is 2.5 because the questions were all on this topic
    2
  13114. https://images.app.goo.gl/eG3Qg39XpoukNm5s9
    2
  13115. Actually, I've decided to leave them up. I've realised that when people read rambling National Socialist comments, they instantly get turned off to the ideology, so it's more effective to leave them up. I have faith in freedom of speech and the minds of smart individuals to come to the right conclusions.
    2
  13116. Cheers! Some of the videos I linked are long, but I found them to be great.
    2
  13117. :) thanks for the vote Neil!
    2
  13118. Don't worry, I will remain as unbiased as possible, as I always attempt to do.
    2
  13119. Your comment doesn't deny the events but is criticism of my views on whether Hitler's and Stalin's regimes are equally evil, therefore I won't delete it. However, they're both evil, and one being less evil than the other does not make it "good".
    2
  13120. That's a good point. Thanks!
    2
  13121. I do not think it should be illegal. It gives them ammunition (like what Andrei is saying above). Of course, it's only actually been illegal in certain countries since the 1990's. Before then it wasn't illegal and still the vast majority of people still thought it happened.
    2
  13122. They're also claiming they're not racist. I guess they don't exist either.
    2
  13123. I'm not advocating denialist laws. Free speech is good. However, if they want to spam offensive comments towards other races and distort history, they'll have to do it on another channel.
    2
  13124. No worries, I'm happy to receive criticism etc. And I need to make another video about Market Garden showing the counter arguments to the Nijmegen issue :)
    2
  13125. Thanks for the sympathy Lars. It's nice to know I have some strong support :)
    2
  13126. Thanks Stalin! (neven thought I'd say that) I agree, we owe it to the victims not to deny these events.
    2
  13127. It's many shades of grey... you know, I'm sure there's a book on that
    2
  13128. I think you've misunderstood what John Galt was doing. People weren't willing to walk away on faith, they had lost their faith in a world that was draining them of their lives. Galt merely offered them an escape, which they logically look, with no faith required.
    2
  13129. Thank you for your support!
    2
  13130. The Marxists are Materialists. I know reality is real (it's objective), and it's not the fake "material" that they believe it is. You think "material" means "reality". It does not. Materialism is a religious concept that says everything is fake. Under materialism, everything derives from "the One" (monism), and so the "material" which makes up everything we sense is, therefore, an illusion from the One. The Marxists wish to overcome this fake reality (materialism), which is why they also believe in the dialectic (transcendence). To be a "Dialectic Materialist" is to believe you can transcend (Dialectic) fake reality (Materialism).
    2
  13131. No, I'm not a materialist. Reality over materialism.
    2
  13132. Plato said reality wasn't real. I'd rather listen to people who live in the real world rather than someone who thinks we exist in a fake "materialist" spiritual realm.
    2
  13133.  @fakeorchestra4260  "Empiricism is a flawed... because it can only give us knowledge that is incomplete. It also does not claim to be able to give us a full understanding of reality, merely knowledge that is at least the most probable of being objective." Yes, I explained exactly this in the video. Please watch the video before commenting and asserting stuff which I've already addressed. I'm NOT an empiricist. - As explained to the other commenter, hallucinations are a fault of the mind (the conceptual level) not the sensual or perceptual levels. Your mind has departed from reality, which is why you "think" you saw something, when in reality you did not. Thus, it isn't our senses or our perceptions that are at fault, but sometimes our minds can misunderstand something. This does NOT mean we don't perceive reality ALL the time. A healthy human being perceives reality correctly, and conceptualizes it correctly MOST of the time. This is the important distinction between your philosophy (Kant's) and everybody elses. We live in reality, while you (apparently) can see realities we don't see.
    2
  13134. "empirical studies in psychology as well as neurobiology" Yes, and as I showed, empiricism is flawed as a way of gaining knowledge, which is why psychology (in academia) is a complete joke. - "Our brains interprests the signals we get from the environment and creates a perception of reality, not reality itself." This is nonsense. And if you think this, there's no point talking to you, since you live on a different reality to me.
    2
  13135. I would also add that the current mainstream history theory also says we're not studying the past, only the records of the past, which leaves open the possibility that the past was something else. But this new objective theory of history closes the door on that since we can now perceive the past through the sources.
    2
  13136. No, I knew there was an objective reality, but the current mainstream theory of history cannot allow us to get to that truth. If knowledge is subjective, and if "history lies in the heart of debate", and debate is proven to be impossible in the postmodern world, then you truth cannot be found. And before you say that this was just a "me" problem, it wasn't. You'll find other historians, history teachers and history students in the comments saying that I've just solved the problem for them too.
    2
  13137. That's the subjectivist theory of history again, and it's false. Under subjectivism, we merely gather the records of the past, and these are seen as not the "real" past, just the records. Thus historians are missing the past and can never get to the truth. This new objectivist theory of history says: we study (sense) the records of the past, and can then perceive the past through those records, allowing us to come to logically validated conclusions about it. Thus, history IS reality.
    2
  13138. Yes, I can understand your hesitation. That's why I'm a little put off too. But in my view, we can take their philosophy and separate their personalities from it, if needed. The philosophy itself (at least from a metaphysical and an epistemological point of view) is fantastic.
    2
  13139. If you know nothing, then you know that you know nothing, and thus know something.
    2
  13140. No, that's not it at all. You didn't listen.
    2
  13141. But all the sources are valid. And if he had problems with my logic or conclusions, then he should have presented these points in a far more respectful manner. He did not, and that is his fault.
    2
  13142. I haven't seen the veratas video, but I do intend to. I myself am questioning the full gnosticism narrative (although it is true that Guido Von List was writing for the journal "Gnosis" when he selected the Swastika). According to my other viewers, Fredda's video isn't worth watching. Apparently it's just a hit piece and a load of fallacious arguments that my viewers have said are easy to refute. The fact he thinks I'm a Libertarian and an AnCap is a clear indication that he's talking out his rear, since I'm neither of those things. Therefore, since it's clearly in the F tier, I have zero reason or intention to even watch it.
    2
  13143. Watch the video.
    2
  13144. You've assumed my views on the gnosticism situation haven't changed since I last spoke about it months ago, which they have. However, I'm not in a position to say anything yet.
    2
  13145. It does, since you've departed from reality. You've entered Tier F, the discard pile. Kant "made room for faith" and enabled Hegel, and any denial of that is simply an outright falsification.
    2
  13146. No, because synthesis is the merging of two contradictions. That's not what we're doing with integration.
    2
  13147. Usually these hallucinations are on the conceptual level rather than the perceptual. It's a problem within the mind of the person, rather than the eyes or the ears.
    2
  13148. Yes, that's more or less what happened.
    2
  13149. I've also watched half of Veritas's video, and it's awful, which is why I stopped watching. I considered making a response, but again, it's so obviously self-refuting that I honestly don't see the point in wasting my time on it. A "free market" is not a "vague term". A market is a buyer and seller, and if they are free to trade without anyone else involved, then that's a free market. When a state commissar gets involved and tells them what they can and cannot do, or demands tribute off them in the form of "taxes", and then seizes the printing presses and inflates the currency supply, that's when we no longer have a free market. Watch the channel called "China Uncensored". China's economy is not what it seems. The government statistics are not trustworthy in the slightest. And I'm not saying their economy isn't growing at all, but it's simply not the case that their economy is as good as they make it out to be. At the same time, due to increasing government involvement in the economy, the USA is also in decline. The more the state gets involved, the worse the situation will be.
    2
  13150. If this was commented on my Hitler's Socialism video, it would be perfect :) But I don't think those challenging this theory are necessarily those you speak of. This theory is a new theory, and the evidence hasn't confirmed (or denied) it yet. The debate must go on!
    2
  13151. Oh and letting the British Army get away and thus somehow allowing peace to happen, wouldn't then indicate to Stalin that Hitler was coming his way - which is equally as complicated
    2
  13152. Good question, but I don't know the answer to it. Proving that the theory works and has evidence to back it up is my first priority, then (assuming I can do this) I can see if anyone else apart from Hitler knew about Hitler's strategy
    2
  13153. Considering that the previous video has currently got 100 dislikes, I think this will get more than 5 :)
    2
  13154. @Mikko, most lecturers hate Wikipedia (as do I; it's really inaccurate), and I can understand their hesitation, but there are lectures out there by historians (e.g. this one by Glantz https://youtu.be/H1_JyTFbgcs ). If they are acceptable, why not others?
    2
  13155. @Pekka, what would be their reasoning?
    2
  13156. If I won the lottery I don't play, I'd hire 10 people and make a video a day.
    2
  13157. Thing is, this used to be my hobby. Now it's my job. When I force myself to take a break, I find myself unable to do much else, and I'm itching to pick up a history book and start making notes... even though I'm fatigued! If I go insane, you'll know why
    2
  13158. But what happens when a minority of your viewers believe that Nationalsocialist Germany was capitalist, when the reality was it was socialism, because they've been brainwashed by Marxist-Socialist propaganda? I'm against distortions of history, not for promoting political views. Period.
    2
  13159. Oh wow, yeah you've got enough to worry about at the moment. Are you subscribed to Academic Agent? He did a good video on "the Economic Policies that Ruined Venezuela" https://youtu.be/pK_CgcHrgNA although you probably know more than we do first-hand.
    2
  13160. Yeah, but they nearly killed me!
    2
  13161. And I encourage them to do that. In fact, commenters already are, and it's great.
    2
  13162. Well done :)
    2
  13163. A lot think I'm no good at economics :)
    2
  13164. The US State is, and the US "official" economy is. Obviously there's a lot of black market activity, and many people don't pay their income taxes because they've realized that income taxes are against the Constitution (as is Fiat currency, since only Gold and Silver may be used as money, even though the State has ignored the Constitution), but overall, yes
    2
  13165. First!
    2
  13166. That I will agree on, and they're not the only ones
    2
  13167. Glad you liked it! 👍
    2
  13168. I took them down to see how COPPA would play out
    2
  13169. I haven't played it recently, no. What are the updates?
    2
  13170. "Saw a documentry a while back which claimed that Britain was out-producing Germany in aircraft production in 1940 because British factories were running triple shifts whilst Germany was still on single shifts." Hitler didn't want a 'stab in the back', and didn't want industrial unrest (remember, he's a socialist, and his regime was for the workers, not the 'bosses' like capitalist Britain would be - not that Britain was capitalist, but you get the point). So this is only proof that National Socialism treated workers better than Britain did... if you read Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" you'll see plenty of examples of how the regime did its best to reward the civilians in order to not have unrest during the war. And Hitler had also got the workers back to work in the first place in the 30s - and had capped their hours (which is a very socialist move). In capitalism, the workers would work as many hours as they could get - for money/profit. Socialism is against this. So while there was a "war economy" - it benefited the worker, just like all socialist economies supposedly do (but actually don't).
    2
  13171. "But aren't all words basically made up?" What are you, a postmodernist?! :) 'Blitzkrieg' is used in 'modern' armies to depict how it was described in the video - breakthrough, hitting C3 etc. It just can't really be applied to WW2 because the Germans at the time used Bewegungskrieg, and the concept of 'Blitzkrieg' as used today hadn't been invented yet.
    2
  13172. Glad you agree! And yes, it explain the logistics issues, and a lot of other things too. The more I think about it, the more it makes sense... but I'll do more research on it to fully flesh it out
    2
  13173. Hello Nobleman!
    2
  13174. Yeah!
    2
  13175. While not perfect, see this political spectrum https://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/a6oM03e_700b.jpg
    2
  13176.  @Chud_Bud_Supreme  No, not really. I have the two in case Patreon decides to randomly delete my account like they did to Sargon and others.
    2
  13177. First!
    2
  13178. You might enjoy this video https://youtu.be/Q0bFP5WhYcQ
    2
  13179. Glad you like it :) I'm trying to do a few a week. If there's anything you want me to talk about, let me know
    2
  13180. Yes, congrats! :) Sadly, I don't know enough on the Pacific theatre to really go in-depth with your question. One day when I've done read more on it, I'll come back to it
    2
  13181. Oddly enough, the link has now appeared! Yeah I watched another video by that guy, but I'll watch that one too
    2
  13182. The YouTube bot is deleting the links, that's why your comments were getting deleted. Just write the name of the video, and don't swear in your comments because that will trigger the bot too.
    2
  13183. Yes, but it might be a while away. I'm happy in-fact to cover battles, wars and the economic and political situation in the period 1905-1953. Although I'm specialising on European Theatre WW2 battles.
    2
  13184. That's too broad to give a definite answer. There was probably around 3 in each corps in Sixth Army, but this varies considerably. Why?
    2
  13185. Actually that's not the case. I'm actually planning on doing a video on the food crisis soon where I'll show you just how bad the food crisis was for both Axis Europe, and the Soviet Union, as it was quite severe and many starved.
    2
  13186. Yes, sort of. I mentioned this briefly in the video, but it's mainly directed at what 4th Panzer Army got up to.
    2
  13187. The Red Air Force (VVS) was annihilated in 1941 in the opening stages of Barbarossa. See https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw So there simply wasn't "a fleet of thousands of planes of different kinds, and much more fighter planes than the Germans" in 1942.
    2
  13188. If they were organised societies and collectively owned, they were states. Thus it is state ownership and control of the means of production.
    2
  13189. In that case, I'm a Left Wing Free Market guy.
    2
  13190. And history theory shows there's not objective truth and that history is subjective... We need a debate to confirm what happened in history, but the postmodernists have destroyed the concept of having a debate, thus rendering the process of history impossible (theoretically at least). Yet history marches on regardless.
    2
  13191. I'm also not in the military, so I guess I should stop talking about military stuff.
    2
  13192. Slater Slater is so smart, he's now going to explain why the 1.5 million people working for Amazon are a "private" person.
    2
  13193. Society shouldn't be organised. Let people do what they want to do without central planner tyrants telling you how to live your life. Also note: the question was "Then how should society be organised instead?" By "society" they are implying that society should be organised, and that organisation is the duty of the State. The State has therefore organized society, making it one with the State, and thus, the society becomes the State.
    2
  13194. Hey Vass, thank you. I do wonder if I should take a break from the Battlestorms for a bit to allow me to recover... but I don't know. How's things with you?
    2
  13195. That's what I used to believe too... Until I did my homework and realized that the free market wasn't what I assumed it to be. I would recommend the book "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
    2
  13196. Once again, someone didn't watch the video.
    2
  13197. But they're not private companies. They're public companies. Profit is irrelevant. The only reason socialists don't like profit is because socialism doesn't make profit, which is why it always fails. Consuming more than you produce results in impoverishment and starvation. Also, socialism only benefits the rich, which is what it's designed to do. Therefore if 89% of the wealth is owned by the top 10% as a result of public corporations implementing socialism, then that just confirms what I'm saying.
    2
  13198. Over 50% of the American population owns shares. Are 50% of the American population classed as "rich capitalist investors" now?
    2
  13199. "I am going to dispute that "The Commons" have anything to do with the State, and the commons are certainly not in the public sector (at least not exclusively)." I know you've written this early, way before you would have finished the video, but if you continue to watch the video, you'll see that I agree with you. HOWEVER, that's not how society sees it. There are two meanings for the word "public" ("common" being a synonym in this case), and the two meanings have been merged together. That's not my fault, that's just how it is. So Statists have claimed that the State is society, and society is the State. I don't agree, but that's how the majority (unfortunately) see it. But yes, I agree. Despite being a "public" figure, I'm not a member of the State. Despite walking down a "common" road, the road isn't the State. But people believe that the roads are owned by the State, so they are.
    2
  13200. No, they're opposite from each other. I'm not a Commie-servative or a Keynesian like Truss.
    2
  13201. "It's weird how you say the state controlling the private sector means its socialism" That's not what I said.
    2
  13202. That's a nice theory. If true, this explains why some of the viewers I lost a while back have come back and now agree with me. They may have gone through this process
    2
  13203. Except, the meaning of the word "Fascism" (which he was referring to) has been deliberately lost. So there is no current meaning. Even Wikipedia fails to define it. Therefore, the correct definition would be a choice between 1, the historical definition, and 2. no definition. If I choose 1 I'm not wrong. But apparently to him I am.
    2
  13204. "A couple of things here. You must first agree on definitions and assumptions before engaging in a debate. That is how proper debates, especially about language and meaning, have to work." Exactly. This is why debates with Socialists don't go past the definitions stage, because as soon as they start defining words, they're done. "I do think if you debated with an historian on the meaning of fascism and socialism you will run into issues." Exactly, because these words are not being used with their historic and actual definitions, but have 'lost' their meaning because modern 'academics' reject any and all definitions of the words.
    2
  13205. Don't fall off!
    2
  13206. Gary Thomas no, but I did visit Greece twice
    2
  13207. Yes, AC/DC are one of my favourites 👍
    2
  13208. I swear that a lot of my critics are paid trolls. If not, they're indistinguishable from paid trolls and really need to reassess their lives
    2
  13209. Read the pinned comment
    2
  13210. Is it unusual? Never realized! I can use either, but I have more control of the pick that way.
    2
  13211. Toni "TIK" Iommi
    2
  13212. Thanks for that! 😂 Whole lotta Rose or Love?
    2
  13213. This was the mistake I made too. I explained this in an earlier episode. The British Tank Regiment is the mother unit, which sends out battalions. But they named those battalions like this - "3rd Royal Tank Regiment". It's not, it's 3rd Battalion of the Royal Tank Regiment. There is only one Royal Tank Regiment. It also gets confusing when a "Regiment" goes up again an enemy Regiment, because that's not right. The "Regiment" will be outnumbered two or three battalions to one. So, after discussing the problem with my Patreons and having them vote on it, the decision was made to call them what they should have been called in the first place.
    2
  13214. "hey tik, i checked some Italian sources. They all state that the 8th Bersaglieri Regiment was composted by the 5th, 12th and 3rd Bersaglieri battalions. One source says that the 3rd battalion was a motorcycle battalion, while an other claims it was a weapons support battalion ( 20mm cannons, HMGs and 81mm mortars). The second source seems more credible and maybe it explains why it wasn't mentioned in your sources, being a support battalion (just speculating)." "So the only possible VII batallion is the one in the 132nd Rgt of the Ariete. BUT the 8th Bersaglieri regiment had in fact another attached batallion (a third, together with the V and XII) called "III Battaglione armi d'accompagnamento" (basically light artillery), that is the one overwhelmed in the initial phase because it didn't have enough time to dig in. (Source: "Le operazioni in Africa Settentrionale, vol. II-Tobruk", Mario Montanari, pp. 349 and 426)." Thank you, both of you! Very interesting stuff. It looks like we have a convergence of evidence here. Until proven otherwise, let's assume it was a "3rd Battalion" rather than a "7th". But this does leave the question - how or why did Walker (Iron Hulls) get this so wrong?
    2
  13215. I wouldn't be too quick to praise Rommel...
    2
  13216. Did it unsub you? I've heard of that issue but didn't realize it affected my channel too
    2
  13217. Yeah I was actually going to include scales like I did in some of the previous Crusader videos, but ran out of time due to my psu burning up over the weekend - which is why this video was up on a Tuesday rather than a Monday. Hopefully there should be some scales in next week's episode :)
    2
  13218. I know! One of my favourites! We'll be seeing that battalion a little later on
    2
  13219. The operation begins here, but the series does not. There's 5 episodes before this explaining the context, setup, the plan, the forces, and preliminary operations etc. Playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL
    2
  13220. Glad to see you're excited!
    2
  13221. No problem, I hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  13222. Thanks for pointing that out!
    2
  13223. Got an actual argument? No, and neither do the rest of the trolls from Reddit
    2
  13224. Yes, but I needed to get this sorted and ironed out before we moved onto the usual Holocaust stuff or even the war, because otherwise it's impossible to explain properly without the socialism. Now I've explained it, and people are accepting it / opening their eyes, it is now possible to move onto discussing the Holocaust, the rise of Hitler/Nazism and how WW2 came about, plus how WW2 progressed
    2
  13225. Just to clarify, were you unsubscribed by YouTube, or did you decide to unsubscribe and then come back?
    2
  13226. The only way for a capitalist to make money is to provide wealth for society. Workers choose to work for him to create wealth for society. They don't have to work, but they choose to. That's not stealing, that's called cooperation.
    2
  13227. Education would be cheaper and better https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI Health care would be cheaper and better https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ What about the roads? https://youtu.be/7a2EhgADVFY And it's possible to have private law (in fact, we do in some cases) which is both cheaper and better than Public Sector "law" https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ What causes recessions and depressions? https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs And finally, the audio book of "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt that you need to listen to https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    2
  13228. Individual (private) control of the means of production (economy). I own my own camera (means of production), thus I am a capitalist, even if I'm poor. A free market is capitalism. Buyers and sellers are free to buy and sell what they want without interference.
    2
  13229. In his early days, he was a Socialist. But he himself said he was more an anarchist. But like all socialists, he seems to have taken a Red Pill or two by the end of his career. He may still have identified as a Leftist, but Animal Farm and 1984 (and even some of his earlier books) were 100% against totalitarianism - which is socialism.
    2
  13230. Glad you enjoyed the video! And yes, the only way they can deny this is to deny reality, which is what they are doing. It's very sad to watch
    2
  13231. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13232. "monopolization of market" Can only happen if the state gets involved in the economy. Monopoly's are impossible in a free market, as Mises explains. "couter-cartelization laws and role of government in ensuring of fair competition on markets" A cartel is a monopoly-like entity. Cartels end up dissolving themselves because, again, a true free market is bad for cartels. See the book "the Myth of the Robber Barons" for examples of government cartels/monopolies being taken on and destroyed by the free market.
    2
  13233. If you haven't seen my "Hitler's Socialism" video, I'd recommend it. Goes into a TON more detail, and gives plenty of evidence, and simultaneously tackles the ideology of 'socialism' as part of the package, since my main critics are Marxist Socialists.
    2
  13234. Well, I hope you enjoy this one... even if you disagree, I did put a few jokes in it
    2
  13235. I did present the facts. Why don't you accept them? https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13236. Thank you!
    2
  13237. Haha thanks!
    2
  13238. I did address his arguments, but not in one video. See my - Keitel and Suvorov video https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA Soviet "war winning" tanks https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 How big were Soviet units https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI The state of Soviet Artillery on the eve of war https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Red Army Air Force on the eve of war https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw This is how I tackle debates whilst trying to hit the deadline of releasing videos every Monday. I slowly but surely add additional information on to the argument to the point where the alternative argument begins to collapse. Same with this video's argument, which I've added too more recently with the "Public vs Private" video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13239. Yes, I agree about Tom Woods. Very good channel. So is Mises' channel too.
    2
  13240. Hitler also murdered capitalists and conservatives. Just because he implemented socialist policies and tried to implement full socialism, but failed, doesn't mean he's a capitalist. He abolished private property, nationalized the industries and trade unions (just like Lenin did), and regulated the economy with things like wage and price controls. His aim was to go East to get the resources he needed to implement full socialism. I've outlined this in my 5 hour video on Hitler's Socialism using 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous notes and quotes from historians and Hitler himself, and I've shattered the Marxist argument that Hitler wasn't a socialist. Here's the link https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (timestamps in the description)
    2
  13241. Yes. Check out the comments in the previous video, and my old National Socialism was Socialism and follow up videos... it's horrifying how "adults" behave these days.
    2
  13242. Don't comment if you're going to tell me what not to say or do. The more people tell me to stick to tanks, the more likely I'll stop making military history videos and fully commit to doing the economics videos.
    2
  13243. Yeah, and I ended up responding here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Note: I didn't officially state that I was responding to him or the others in the video, I only revealed that in response to another reaction video later, which you can see here https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 For several reasons, I'd actually recommend you watch the second video first. But the first video is perhaps one of my best and is fully backed up with on-screen references.
    2
  13244. Just watch this other video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13245. True. Plus, even if the emphasis is on the word "national" - nationality (or race) is a social group, so it's still on the left, assuming the left is the socialization of society.
    2
  13246. Socialism is state control of the economy. It is. They will deny it, but it is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The Marxists want total state control of the economy, and so did the Nazis. Yes, they operated slightly differently because Hitler's racial theory allowed some competition between individuals, but it was still state control. And yes, I was reading a history of Auschwitz yesterday. The amount of state control, state subsidies to IG Faben, state grants, state laws, state theft of property, and tax exemptions to make that place happen is unreal. To turn around and say "nope, the state had nothing to do with it" is a huge distortion of history, which gives ammunition to the Holocaust deniers.
    2
  13247. You know, considering the hate I've had over this, your comment means a lot. Thank you
    2
  13248. "Btw, are you also looking into other periods in history that you're interested in?" I'm not right now, but I am tempted to do a few non-WW2 related topics. I think WW2 will always be the focus of this channel, but WW1, Korean War, ancient history, 1800s... this stuff is intereting and appeals to me
    2
  13249. Thank you sir!
    2
  13250. Only if you pay my salary voluntarily rather than from the theft of the taxpayer
    2
  13251. Thanks, and yes they're unable to counter it because Hitler believed in the Shrinking Markets, which most socialists believe in too. The only way out is for socialists to disown the shrinking markets, which would then be an admission that the Revolution will never come.
    2
  13252. Yes, I'm actually looking into the New Deal etc as part of it's impact on the US economy in WW2. Higg's book "Depression, War and Cold War" is a fantastic read if you're interested in this
    2
  13253. Haha glad you liked it!
    2
  13254. You get it!
    2
  13255. Conservativism is bad, I agree. What we need is a revolution, not more reactions to progress. The poor are getting a bad deal and need helping, so all the barriers to helping them need to be removed. Public vs Private https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13256. Whoever thinks socialism isn't state control of the economy doesn't know history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13257. You can either create your own wealth, or work for someone else (e.g. a corporation). True freedom and wealth come when you create your own wealth (although taxes and inflation rob you of that wealth and redistribute it to the corporations). This isn't "bullshit" - this is correct. Now, it's not easy to create your own products and services, and then sell them. It requires hard work and sacrifice. But if you want riches, it's the only way short of winning the lottery, or rising to the very top of the corporate ladder (at which point you may as well have started your own business). Now, you don't need to jump right into creating a factory. Start small and work up to that. And many products and services don't require a factory in the first place. But it's entirely possible. Lots of people have done it. Factories aren't natural phenomena. They don't build themselves.
    2
  13258. Bingo! And it makes you see the entire conflict in a completely different light.
    2
  13259. I also cited Marx, a social revolutionary who claimed to be an economist even though his entire theory doesn't work because it's based on the Labour Theory of Value which is wrong. Thus, as a historian, I go with the evidence and interpretation and arguments that actually work and make sense - the Austrian school of economics and the Chicago school. Not only do their theories work and make more sense, but unlike with the Marxist theory, the evidence we have for Hitler's own ideology and actions fit together much more coherently, rather than requiring doublethink to simply understand them. I'm simply siding with the better argument and interpretation, which is what a historian should do. The Marxist influenced historians have blinded themselves and haven't done this. The fact we're arguing whether Hitler was a National Socialist or not 80 years after the events is proof that they have failed to grasp Hitler's ideology.
    2
  13260. Yeah, I know they'll brush that aside, which is why I made sure to include several other things they'd need to tackle too, such as why it's ok to steal off and kill the Bourgeoisie but not the Jews. Quite hard for them to justify that one.
    2
  13261. I haven't seen that video, but I'll go watch it and see. If possible I'll make a video about it too :)
    2
  13262. Socialists are trying to argue that Keynes want a socialist. The word "blind" comes to mind... Thank you for your comment
    2
  13263. They scream that Hitler only put the word "socialism" in the name because he wanted to "trick the workers", even though there is no evidence of this claim. These same distorians also say that Hitler invented the term "privatization". So they're happy to take the Nazis at their word when it comes to privatization, but not when it comes to socialism. The double-think is unreal.
    2
  13264. The socialists would tell you you're wrong because (according to them) socialism is a money-less, commodity-less society. But then again, other socialists say it's state-ownership of the means of production, but yet other socialists say it's when the workers control the means of production, while other socialists say it's when there's a one-world government, and even more socialists say it's when there's no government at all... Oh, and taxation is stealing. I'm sure you'll disagree, so go ahead, try to justify theft.
    2
  13265. Exactly. But the Marxists can't accept this, which is part of the trouble I'm having.
    2
  13266. Thank you! Actually I'm already subscribed to Schiff :)
    2
  13267. You've not read Keynes. He didn't like Capitalism and believed in State control, which is why his economics skewed to justify state intervention in the economy.
    2
  13268. Capitalism is anti-state. It's private (non-State, individual) control of the economy. Look up the word "private", and it's origins in ancient Latin and Greek, and you will understand.
    2
  13269. That's it exactly. However it makes it impossible to explain the Third Reich or WW2 because they're effectively denying that Hitler rearmed (he couldn't rearm without a state army, or a state bank to finance it, or control over the armaments industries etc, all of which is socialism - state control of the economy). So basically they're denying WW2, and they don't even realise it 🙄
    2
  13270. Shut up Socialist!
    2
  13271. Then you know that "the commi" ISN'T "the winner as predicted" because I didn't pick a winner. As I said, I only put the points in there to annoy the Wehraboos - and judging by your comment, it's mission accomplished.
    2
  13272. No, it's "the Ukraine". If it was "Ukrainia", then it wouldn't require the "the", but since it's called "Ukraine", it requires the "the".
    2
  13273. The primary purpose was to provide details about these two guys and the battles they fought, but yes: I don't know 👍
    2
  13274. Yeah I said Eric (and may have spelt it that way in the video). It should have been "Erich" - which in English is pronounced "Eric", as tripod said
    2
  13275. It would definitely be Zitelmann's "Hitler The Policies of Seduction". There's no better book discussing Hitler's ideology, and even though I don't fully agree with him, it was a fascinating read and I've used it substantially throughout my videos. Hard to get hold of in English though, unfortunately.
    2
  13276. Except, that's poor English. The sound of the name "Ukraine" makes it necessary to put a "the" before it to avoid the speaker sounding like a baby.
    2
  13277. Jamie's back in the game
    2
  13278. Autarky policy (both in Germany and USSR) and the British blockade. This caused an oil and food shortage. Axis Europe simply couldn't feed itself. And Hitler knew this way before he got elected. He spoke about it in Mein Kampf and his Second Book, and I've covered this in both my "Why Hitler HAD to go to War" and "Hitler's Socialism" videos
    2
  13279. "Unrelated, but what do you think about the current coronavirus scare going around? ...the economic repercussions could be quite significant..." In terms of finances, it's just an excuse that's being used to direct attention away from the fact that State Central Banks have been inflating the Everything Bubble for years. Now that that bubble has burst (partly because of the virus, but mainly not) and the law of nature is trying to bring everything back to fair value, they're blaming the 'collapse' (actually gain) on the virus. Well, no. Today is being hailed as 'Black Monday' because the markets tanked. But I'm going to call it 'Gold Monday' because that's what it really is. https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    2
  13280. The fact that they were controlling prices and keeping prices low to try and please the poor, definitely made the situation worse. Not only did it lead to shortages in the shops (hence rationing), but it also led to less profits for farmers etc, who couldn't reinvest in their profits to increase production. In fact, it disincentivized them, probably causing a fall in production (like similar policies did in the UK and elsewhere). Coupled with a lack of trade due to Autarky, it's no wonder things got bad and they had to steal off of others.
    2
  13281. "Wow, first you claim Nazism is socialism, then you claim Nazism is social democracy?" No, Hitler claimed Nazism was Social(ism) Democracy (a People's State). I just pointed that out to you. I said that all Socialism is Democracy, and Democracy is Socialism. Social Democracy is just Socialism by another name. "Do you have any idea how many socialists and social democrats were killed in concentration camps?" Nazis were also killed in the concentration camps if they crossed Hitler. You weren't put in a concentration camp because of your political views necessarily. "No, Nazi Germany wasn't a social democracy. That's why today's Nordic countries don't look much like it." The Nordic countries don't have a welfare state? Or central banks? Or nationalized public transportation? Or Corporations (trade unions)? "Why do you fell this compulsive need to lump everyone who disagrees with anarchocaptitalism together? Is that the only way you can defend your own anarchocaptitalism?" I don't lump them all together. Monarchists are not Socialists, for example. I just say that all Socialists are Socialists, and all Socialists should stop trying to claim that they're not REAL Socialists when I have the evidence and the facts to expose them for the liars that they actually are. Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "you equate, obfuscate and muddle until "not anarchocaptitalist" becomes "socialist" or "social democrat" or whatever you want." Incorrect. There are other political doctrines. But people calling for State control are called Socialists. They may claim that they're not, or claim that they are, or pretend that others who called themselves Socialists weren't 'real' Socialists, but I'm not falling for it.
    2
  13282. The Nazis and Fascists also wanted the State to work for the betterment of the people (e.g. a Volksgemeinschaft). In fact, they said that the State was the people, and a totalitarian State was therefore a true democracy. And this is correct: the People are the Public and the Public is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y So what's the difference?
    2
  13283. 3 people died yesterday in the UK. 3. Better close the world down and starve millions of people in a "biblical famine" https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1062272 https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/07/1068601
    2
  13284. Donkey or Elephant doesn't matter. Giving Boris a landslide in the UK just allowed him to implement Corbyn's policies. Giving Trump a landslide in the next election will do the same. Politics is not the solution to the problem of politics. The State is taking over, one step at a time. The flu gave them the excuse, which is why they were willing and able to lock up the economy (Socialism - State control).
    2
  13285. Democracy is 'People Power'. Except the People are the Public and the Public is the State. Democracy is 'State Power'. A trade union is a group of workers. Another way to say a group is to use the word 'bundle'. In Italy, prior to Mussolini, the Italians called their trade unions 'bundles', or 'Fasci' (bundles of sticks). Fascism is 'Power to the Trade Unions' (Fasci). What do we call a trade union that embodies the nation? Body, corpse, corporation. Oh okay. Another word for a corporation is a syndicate, as in anarcho-Syndicalism (Marxism). So why am I promoting a video that explains what Hitler's Socialism was like, and says the Democrats (and all Leftists) are Fascists? Because the words we use mean something https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And she was right https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13286. Yep, I'm not surprised. The algorithm doesn't like it when I mentioned certain words, like Hitler or the Holocaust
    2
  13287. See pinned comment
    2
  13288. Can't fight Fascism if Fascism takes your weapons away from you
    2
  13289. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13290. You didn't read what I put on the screen correctly. Read this again: Money printing is inflation. Price rises is NOT inflation. Inflation doesn't immediately lead to price rises everywhere at once. It can lead directly to immediate price rises, or it can get soaked up in other ways... like the stock market, or the real estate bubble, or the tuition fee/academia bubble, or second hand goods bubble (e.g. cars), or other asset bubbles. Of course, some would point out that the rise in prices in these sectors of the economy would indicate that price rises are happening, and that might have something to do with the amount of currency being directly funneled into them by the Central Banks and the Central Banks... And when those asset bubbles and stock market bubbles pop, you not only get a recession/depression, but (after an initial period of falling prices) a massive spike in spending, which will cause rising prices, and either a complete collapse in the economy and/or financial system, or hyperinflation (if the Central Banks choose to keep inflating). But you've done the "maths", so you choose what you want to believe.
    2
  13291. Devon Ziegler sorry for being stupid, but who are the Greenbay Packers? :P
    2
  13292. YOYO MAN lol I really want to ask you another question now which is kinda similar, but I'll do it for next week to see if you spoiler fall for the trap
    2
  13293. When did I say that the sloth/lazy person is "immoral"? I never said that, and that wasn't my argument. The reason I'm against the sloth/lazy person is because, in other for that person to be a sloth/lazy person, we must have an institution that steals wealth from me and "redistributes" that wealth to him, actively encouraging his and others to be righteous in their "victimhood". This is a self-preservation issue, not a moral one.
    2
  13294. If you're free to enslave others, then others are not free. Therefore, that's not an excess of freedom, but the authority of one man - tyranny.
    2
  13295. Synonyms are bad? Should language stand still? Let's get rid of words and phrases like "Google it", "download", "cryptocurrency" and "deepfake" /s
    2
  13296. No, we have researched them, and we have understood them, and we reject them for the reasons explained. You can't be bothered listening or thinking, that's on you.
    2
  13297. If you fail to communicate in a coherent way, and then claim others are idiots for not understanding you, you're the problem and should be called out for it. Ideobabble is an appropriate word for that. This isn't a case of ignoring an argument, but rather it is holding people to a standard and forcing them to ground their ideas in objective reality. That's why you're against this, because libertarianism is not objective, it's subjective.
    2
  13298. I've not seen anyone else ever use the term before, it's not in any dictionary, and the only results I'm getting are from people sharing my videos from today and yesterday.
    2
  13299. If you're free to enslave others, then others are not free. Therefore, that's not an excess of freedom, but the authority of one man - tyranny.
    2
  13300. When 63% of your wages are being stolen off you via tax, you're being censored left right and centre, and a mob forms if you say some basic and logical things, to claim we have "more liberty" than ever before is laughable.
    2
  13301. If you write complete gibberish (e.g. Hegel or Karl Marx) because you're not grounded in reality and think you're so superior to everyone else that you can speak in riddles, then you deserve to be called out for it. Ideobabble is the perfect word for just such people.
    2
  13302. Edit: Somehoe replied to the wrong person :D let me try again Thanks! And don't worry, I don't intend to stop any time soon
    2
  13303. @Warren Piece  No worries! It's uploading now so should be up within 30 mins (depending on processing) 👍
    2
  13304. I actually think I kept this fairly PG-13. I didn't talk about individual cases or anything like that (although I could have). More about the overall situation and the numbers.
    2
  13305. Possibly. It could have been planned to ask this question, then when it came up, brigade the video (as 4chan has dutifully done). Or it could just be that this person genuinely believed that the Wehrmacht didn't commit any crimes. There are a lot of non-Nazi Wehraboos who believe that the Germans were innocent in WW2.
    2
  13306. I agree with most of your comment, except the last part. It benefits the discussion to have voices that don't have skin in the game. People from Germany and Russia will have biases (e.g nationalism for their own country) that others are less likely to have.
    2
  13307. If you watch the video, you'll hear how many people were R'd in Germany, which includes the number of Soviet crimes AND Western Allied crimes too.
    2
  13308. Sure!
    2
  13309. This is why I asked at the end: is it with the benefit of hindsight only? But then again, Chamberlain probably should have realized that Hitler was up to no good when he kept upping his demands
    2
  13310. Yeah, I suck! The map is accurate for 1920, but not for 1934 :/
    2
  13311. I'm okay thanks, yourself? I'm just struggling with the workload as usual 😂
    2
  13312. I didn't realize that was a thing! Well done to Paradox for putting that in there
    2
  13313. Hello mike!
    2
  13314. Maybe, but then Hitler wouldn't have been ready for war in 1938, and wouldn't have been as prepared as he was in 1941. So, while he would have had more oil, I can't see them doing as well. Plus, the logistical issues would still have plagued them
    2
  13315. It only focuses on the Arnhem drop, not the full battle, so overall it's only useful if you've read up on the full operation.
    2
  13316. I try my best, but yes it isn't easy at all, and unfortunately I think it will only get worse as I gain more subscribers. The best time to get a reply from me is in the first few hours after the video releases on a Monday because I dedicate the evening to replying to people. Currently I do read all the comments, but it's getting harder and harder to keep up! Also, some people assume because I haven't replied to their counter-arguments that it's because I'm ignoring them because what they're saying is correct. Well, no, it's because it takes longer to create a decent well-argued comment, so sometimes I have to put it off until later while I reply to the majority of comments that don't require too much time to reply to. I'd rather reply to many comments than just a handful.
    2
  13317. I will cover it eventually, but probably after Stalingrad now.
    2
  13318. Not as far as I know! If he does say something I'll let you know ;)
    2
  13319. And you're correct. Having the British drop closer to the Arnhem bridge, and block the panzers from rolling south is a good counter argument. Sadly, it's one that only a very select handful (maybe 5 people ever on my videos) have ever made. So congrats for identifying it!
    2
  13320. No worries Birkby!
    2
  13321. Yeah it's built in automatically, and for good reason! There's a couple options, but basically any comment with a link (even to other YouTube videos, or even video timestamps) instantly gets hidden until I approve them. Swearing, threats, and certain topics or using words that might be considered offensive are also hidden. And spamming is hidden too. So, if you cut and paste a comment a ton in the comment section, or reply a few times to the same comment without anyone replying, your comments might get held for review. Makes it nice and easy for me to delete hateful comments and the like, and I can block users completely if they're idiots. I don't block people often though, and I've only blocked a handful in the entire existence of the channel (2012 - I've probably only blocked about 30 in all that time, and most were from one particular video recently about revisionism). It's only really reserved for repeat offenders, or people who are going out of their way to spread misinformation across my channel (like the "Earth is flat, here's proof!" kind), or people with extreme social or ethnic views (yes, the revisionism video again). I have no problem with people disagreeing with my point of view, or even calling me out when I get things wrong, so long as people are civil about it. Same applies to other people's comments. Ideally I want everyone to have a nice argument - and yes, I'm sure that's an oxymoron! Therefore don't worry about your comments so far, just try to be nice :)
    2
  13322. Wessd, some of Birkby's comments have been automatically 'held for review' by YouTube, probably because his comments contained links or the bots though he was spamming. I've just approved some, so you might want to check to see if you can see his comment now.
    2
  13323. Graebner was 9th SS.
    2
  13324. Graebner travelled down to Nijmegen on day 1. Then returned to Arnhem the next day, where he got wiped out.
    2
  13325. Yes, he seems to be pretty good to be honest. Maybe not my first pick though, unless you're interested in learning about Hitler first.
    2
  13326. Arguably that was Brereton's fault, or the Troop Carrier Command commander (a guy called Major General Williams), for not dropping the paras closer to the bridge. But yes, I agree that if they had dropped closer it could have changed the course of the battle.
    2
  13327. *Next
    2
  13328. Oh good! Better than last week's videos then
    2
  13329. I've done a video on him already. Although I do plan to revisit him some day and properly crush every inch of his thesis.
    2
  13330. 30 Corps was on time. They got to the 82nd on the morning of day 3, around 42 hours after they started moving. They still had the rest of the day to go to get to Arnhem, which was 10 miles away. They'd averaged 25 miles each day over the previous two days, and now went 0 miles for the next 36 hours. So in the first 42 hours of the operation they went 50 miles, and in the next 36 hours they went 0. Therefore the main issue with Market Garden was the failure to capture the Nijmegen bridge on day 1.
    2
  13331. That's another point. It definitely comes across as someone trying to squirm out of a tight spot.
    2
  13332. Haha sorry! But Lost at Nijmegen has you covered there ;)
    2
  13333. Sorry!
    2
  13334. Of course, Montgomery still takes overall responsibility, and Browning messed up at Nijmegen. But the point is, you can't ignore Gavin's role, which Beevor has.
    2
  13335. You mean the maps I made? I use this for reference http://www.niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html
    2
  13336. You misinterpreted what I said to be a hissy fit. That wasn't the case. I was merely pointing out the flaws in your argument.
    2
  13337. Then why did you click on the video if you didn't want to even entertain the idea put forth in the video? Plus, Glantz, and the official Germans history say this is the case too.
    2
  13338. Thanks!
    2
  13339. Noted, thanks for the feedback :)
    2
  13340. Brilliant question! It is a very complicated question though. I will make a note of it and make a video on it in the near-ish future. I promise you that
    2
  13341. Some even claim TIK may be covering this in an upcoming video.
    2
  13342. Yes you are! Congrats!
    2
  13343. You're easily pleased :)
    2
  13344. It is on there because that's where I got it from. These are the two I have “Germany and the Second World War: Volume IV/I, The Attack on the Soviet Union.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. I believe the one I was referring to at that point was the second one.
    2
  13345. Well, a source on Soviet-urban doctine may exist, but I've not seen one. I'm fairly confident that no doctrine existed before Stalingrad though.
    2
  13346. Haha yes, and as soon as I see a question I want to write a reply! I just wish I had a better answer for you, but the sources I have don't have anything specific on the urban warfare doctrines, other than what Chuikov does
    2
  13347. If they'd gone straight for Moscow, there would have been a million men on Army Group Centre's flank. This would have made it impossible for them to get to Moscow, and maybe would have lead to disaster. Everyone was saying they needed to sort this out, except good old Guderian.
    2
  13348. Going to start calling it the Frost-Front
    2
  13349. I'll be covering them a little during the Stalingrad videos, although not in a super amount of detail (simply because I can't read Italian and little is written on them in English). That said, I'll do my best!
    2
  13350. Haha fair enough :) I can't possibly reply to everyone anymore but I try to spend the first few hours after a video release to be around to reply. Like now, since today's video is about to go up
    2
  13351. Not sure if this is complicated enough to be in a video, so I'll let you know. If a regular Rifle Division did well in combat, it could be promoted to become a Guards Rifle Division. They supposedly received priority in reinforcements and the like, and supposedly would be more experienced, but that's really the only difference. In reality, Rodimtsev's 13th Guards Rifle Division at Stalingrad had been almost wiped out in the Summer of 1942, reinforced, and sent back into Stalingrad, so it had mostly raw recruits when it entered the city. So there's always exceptions to the rule.
    2
  13352. Er ist ein Mann.
    2
  13353. I do not assume to know everything about the Second World War. In fact, I know very little about the war. Incredibly little about the war. So little that I never assume I'm right, and must back up everything I say with tons of research, evidence and examples. That's why I put a lot of effort into research. However, while I am learning German, I mispronounce English words occasionally too. It's just human nature to be imperfect.
    2
  13354. Why did Lenin and Stalin kill communists and socialists, and court the British, and court the Nazis, and attack the Js? Do the math.
    2
  13355. And yet, there's no evidence that the capitalists funded Hitler. As shown, the evidence that we have for this is terrible. Apart from Thyssen, there really wasn't a connection between big businesses and Hitler.
    2
  13356. The lack of evidence is proof that the narrative is wrong. If our corrupt and incompetent state-run criminal justification system can't understand this basic fact, then that's further proof that we need a more rational free market law system.
    2
  13357. A lack of proof is proof that your narrative is wrong.
    2
  13358. The burden of proof remains on you. You can claim that the moon is made of cheese, but that doesn't make it so without sufficient evidence. The lack of evidence is proof that it didn't happen, and thus it is false to conclude that it happened. And as shown in the video, we have proof that Finck and Schmidt promised 5 million Reichsmarks to the Nazis in the event of a leftist uprising. They never gave the money because an uprising never occurred, but we have that evidence. What we don't have is any evidence of a mass capitalist funding of the National Socialist Party, and in the context it doesn't make any sense to conclude that, since the business leaders were liberals and conservatives, not socialists or nationalists. “The story put about in the memoirs of the later press chief Otto Dietrich of Hitler ceaselessly touring Germany in his big Mercedes in the second half of 1931, cultivating big business leaders and breaking down their resistance to the NSDAP, was no more than part of the myth that Hitler had won power by conquering the hearts and minds of every section of the German people. No more solidly founded was the view of the Left at the time that the Nazi Movement was the creature of big business and sustained by its funding. Most leaders and executives of big business were shrewd enough to spread their funding round as a form of political insurance, once the Nazi breakthrough had taken place. But most of it still went to the Nazis' political opponents on the conservative Right. The leaders of big business were no friends of democracy. But nor, for the most part, did they want to see the Nazis running the country.” - Kershaw, “Hitler: Hubris,” p358.
    2
  13359. The more the mainstream pushes woke, the more the pushback will be, and the obvious alternative to woke is racism. That's why it's important to push back on the Leftist narrative, and provide a free market alternative. Concerned viewers have brought up Zoomer Historian before. I've not watched his videos, so I can only go off what I've been told, but it sounds like he's regurgitating David Hoggan's views. I don't really like making direct responses to YouTubers. But since a lot of people are asking me about him, I have considered looking into it.
    2
  13360. Yes, I do. Thanks for commenting.
    2
  13361. Individuals did vote for the party, so in that sense you could say it was supported by "private" interests. But you could then say that the Communists were supported by "private" interests, because individuals voted for them too. The distinction needs to be made on ideology. Even if a movement is supported by "private" interests, this is irrelevant if the movement is fundamentally "public" in ideology. Regardless of their funding (and the screams of the Marxists who will deny this), Communism and National Socialism are pro-State ideologies, and thus shouldn't be classed as "capitalist", unless your definition of capitalism includes the "state and corporations doing stuff".
    2
  13362. It's a good book, and I still recommend it. Hope you have a nice time!
    2
  13363. Battlestorm Gazala is still in the works, and I'll have an update soon about it. I've also started work on the Fall of Tobruk, which will be a short Battlestorm video after Gazala.
    2
  13364. Come on OP, you're better than this. If you watch the video, you'll find that most mainstream historians now agree that Hitler wasn't funded by the capitalists. Those that continue to push the lie have no evidence, and what evidence they do have is incredibly dubious as shown in the video. All it takes is for you to put your emotions away and actually watch and listen.
    2
  13365. Yeah you're referring to Antony Sutton, which I talked about here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA
    2
  13366. As I explained in the video, Fritz Thyssen's memoir was ghostwritten and was contradicted by Fritz Thyssen himself at different times.
    2
  13367. I've covered most of these in my recent video on "Nazi privatisation" https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=HTmF3wsPT9LVzaeP
    2
  13368. Gazala is being worked on by my editor. It will be out in a few weeks.
    2
  13369. No, but I did read Sutton's other books and discussed them here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA?si=LZf0ljS-XLOtMCpk
    2
  13370. No, they didn't want Soviet-style collectivisation. They believed Marxism was Jewish. What they wanted was a German style of collectivisation, which was a "synchronisation" of all the economy in with the state. This was the policy known as Gleichschaltung, which I've covered here https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY with an entire video on the definition of the term here https://youtu.be/HNrOvGkxqac And regardless of whether they wanted their property confiscated or not, it was confiscated. Private property rights were abolished in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, expropriation of property occurred across the entire economy, and everything was centrally planned. I've explained all this with a substantial amount of evidence here https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w Rather than ask for more information here, please watch the videos as the evidence is provided within them.
    2
  13371. "There is just zero evidence for this." You mean, you haven't seen the evidence. Try watching my videos on this subject, I have a playlist here with the relevant videos https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgxP4QadjKhk4bI6x2PbScO And I'm not saying EVERY single German wanted this. Obviously, a lot did not. But a huge portion did want this. Capitalism was seen as bad, and so German socialism seemed appealing.
    2
  13372. "Hitler was funded und promoted by the german industry." Show me the recepits. As shown in the video, apart from Fritz Thyseen and (in 1928) Emil Kirdoff, there is no evidence of the German big businessmen funding the National Socialists. - "He has sent the unionists , Communists and Social Democrats into concentration camps to break their organizations." He nationalised the trade unions into the German Labour Front (the state trade union), and crushed those that refused to nationalise. I covered this here https://youtu.be/wXIoVEKIpMg He sent the Marxists into the camps because they were international socialists rather than national socialists. They were his competitors, and he thought they were Jewish-influenced. But Lenin and Stalin murdered other socialists, does that mean they weren't socialist either? Killing other socialists (and the workers) is precisely what socialists do.
    2
  13373. Talked about Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA?si=7Tml4ewTp3Q6xdHA
    2
  13374. Someone else pointed out that Wikipedia's official policy is to reject the primary sources. Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#:~:text=Wikipedia%20articles%20must%20not%20contain,not%20stated%20by%20the%20sources. "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented." Later it says: "In general, the most reliable sources are: Peer-reviewed journals Books published by university presses University-level textbooks Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses Mainstream newspapers" So, according to Wikipedia, a mainstream newspaper - which is literally the second worst source out there after memoirs - is better than any of the primary sources.
    2
  13375. Show me the receipts. I'm saying there's no evidence. The burden of proof is now on you. If you want to claim that Hitler was funded into power by a cabal of capitalists, go ahead and provide the evidence to support your claim, and we'll see if it holds up against scrutiny.
    2
  13376. I also don't appreciate a racist Marxist falsely accusing me of being a "Nazi apologist" whilst denying history. The National Socialists are evil, and it's clear that Marxists are just as bad.
    2
  13377. The industries were nationalised under the policy of Gleichschaltuung. I've explained this numerous times, including here https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=sEwIoWC_H3woUira
    2
  13378. Fascism and National Socialism are two separate and distinct ideologies, and I have a video explaining the differences here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko?si=XHAhuhbV3W0DDw2a
    2
  13379. It was 2 million, and yes it did happen. Are you claiming Hitler wasn't Chancellor at this time, yes or no?
    2
  13380. "If the elections were irrelevant why would Nazis even bother to show up? Clearly they had some significance, even if only solidifying Nazi grip on power." You answered your own question. It was to solidify their grip on power. But they were already in power at this point, which is why they were able to solidify their grip on it. - "I too don't believe in that grand conspirasy yet the fact remains: German industrialists donated a huge sum of money to Nazis." The entire video is here showing you that this claim is complete nonsense. Please watch the video before commenting. - "But noo, they all agreed to give money to Hitler even after explicitly being told that Hitler was gonna end democracy" You have ZERO evidence to support this claim. Your "evidence" relies on one ghostwritten memoir and another one from a propanganda chief. There is literally no proof of these claims AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO. The burden of proof is now on you. Provide me with the evidence that supports your lies. It really frustrates me when ideologues regurgitate lies as if they are facts. Stop commenting and watch the video, and then maybe you'll realise just how wrong you actually are.
    2
  13381. Hitler was in power in January 1933. The election that followed was not free, so this meeting is irrelevant to the wider argument. But even if you think it is relevant, don't you think it's a bit odd they waited until then to help out their "main man"? It doesn't prove that he was consistently funded into power over years by a cabal of capitalists. The most you could possibly say (after moving the goalposts to March 1933, which is nonsense anyway) is that he had a bit of help at the 11th hour. This clearly isn't the grand conspiracy the Marxists make it out to be.
    2
  13382. This meeting was AFTER Hitler got into power when he was threatening to take their businesses off them, which he would later do under his Gleichschaltung policy. Taxation is not "funding the Nazis into power". As shown in the video you didn't bother to watch, the Nazis did not receive substantial funds from the capitalists. Fritz Thyssen and possibly one or two others were the exception, not the rule, and even then they didn't give that much. Mainstream historians now accept this reality. Please watch the video before commenting.
    2
  13383. Okay, I'll bite. What on earth are you on about?
    2
  13384. It's frustrating when the Marxists give that argument and then proceed to be as racist as the National Socialists
    2
  13385. Yes, but the Marxists are denying they acted like a socialist when they got into power, using the "Hitler was funded by capitalists" as a get-out-of-jail-free card. Showing the evidence that they're wrong on this account as well further forces them to accept the reality of Hitler's regime.
    2
  13386. Well, when Stalingrad's done, you'll see plenty more regiments on the map... Plenty more! It will be like Market Garden's style, with updated graphics and a few new additions. And, of course, it will be a lot longer. Battleaxe will also be in the same style
    2
  13387. Oh don't worry, I've got several multi-terabyte hard drives filled with backups of everything. I didn't mention this because it's not well organized, but I make two backups of every video, in addition to putting the videos on YouTube.
    2
  13388. Glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  13389. I appreciate your advice, but I don't think it all applies here. Maybe I didn't make it clear in the video, but I do all the research, throw that into a document in order, then script. So the research is done first (which for Battlestorms is absolutely necessary) and then the scripting is done. For other videos that aren't reliant on the maps as much, you can do a bit of research, script, and then fill in the gaps with research, but not in the Battlestorms, since they have to be done in chronological order. There's no way to do anything else before the scripting is done, since everything will be out of order. And because I'm now working with an editor, giving them the recordings first to allow them to get the Premiere Pro stuff done is essential because that takes time (especially putting all the references in), so when I've done that I then work on the screenplay. Maybe now I'm not publishing more episodes of Stalingrad I could do the screenplay before I give them the recordings, but that doesn't really change anything. To summarize, this isn't fiction. This is history. You can't do everything else first, then script. You've got to script first, because the script is the research and narrative combined. I don't know all the events or the all the timeline until I've done the research first, which means creating a script.
    2
  13390. I'm TIKhistory and Wikipedia is my favorite store on the Citadel.
    2
  13391. Battlestorm is the name of my most in-depth battle documentaries. Here's the Stalingrad series https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledi9jQeOzCUtBP2pxYdCYiXX And here's the rest of my Battlestorm videos https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    2
  13392. 😁 I should clarify, I was meant to say the 3rd Mountain Division, but I went to say "3rd Motorized Division" by mistake There's loads more bloopers - they were just for episode 42!
    2
  13393. I cover this in the video. I have a new editor, but it's not really reducing the amount of work for the reasons explained
    2
  13394. Most jobs give you weekends off and holidays
    2
  13395. Awesome! As they say in NaNoWriMo, don't get it right, get it written!
    2
  13396. You know, I was thinking about that. There was a video a while ago I made and gave to Terri to edit (she didn't some editing for me a while back). I mis-spoke and said something absolutely ridiculous and couldn't stop laughing for a few minutes, forgot about it and sent it her, only to have her tell me "thanks!" for making her laugh too!
    2
  13397. I don't disagree. It's also more difficult because you usually don't want to do it, whereas if you want to do something and are passionate about it, you'll get it done.
    2
  13398. Views are down post-Covid, but this more recent drop is more to do with the fact that I'm so overwhelmed and burnt out with Stalingrad that I've missed the odd week here or there publishing videos. As a result, the algorithm is punishing me. I've got to take a break from Stalingrad, party to rest and recover, but also consistently publish weekly videos again to save the channel from a decline, so that I can continue to do Stalingrad.
    2
  13399. No surrender, just a lull in the fighting
    2
  13400. "Would it be easier to use digital copies of texts because of the ability to copy and paste relevant text rather than to type each and every word?" Yes, absolutely! Some videos I get to use PDFs and can simply copy and paste, but obviously most books aren't PDFs. Kindle and physical books are the main sources I use, which require me to type out the information. I did try voice to text years ago, but it just wasn't adequate. I think this is also why many people rely on internet articles as their sources, and why information that's readily available in the history books doesn't make it to Wikipedia. It's a time consuming process to type up the information, so the information that does become available is written by people who are getting paid to do it, e.g. communists writing Wikipedia https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49921173 https://www.breakinglatest.news/news/wikipedia-cleans-up-the-ccps-internet-forces-insiders-reveal-details/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58559412 https://gizmodo.com/wikipedia-russia-ukraine-propaganda-suspicious-edits-1849673060 https://www.wired.com/story/wikipedia-state-sponsored-disinformation/
    2
  13401. Thank you! That's actually a good way of putting it. I wouldn't give this up for the world, but it ain't simple
    2
  13402. Yeah, it was an old gamer tag. I made a video about it https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    2
  13403. Oh I'm still a tax slave ;) if fact, I have to pay them this month...! But I appreciate the sentiment. I'm hoping I can sneak in a couple of days off in the next few weeks as I work on 'normal videos' before returning to Stalingrad
    2
  13404.  @utvara1  I can, but what does this have to do with Evola and Hyperboreans?
    2
  13405. Yeah, I respect AA and have listened to one of two of his videos on Evola, but I'm not convinced that Evola is where he should be spending his time. Anyone believing in Hyperboreans and all that jazz is clearly not level-headed enough to be taken seriously.
    2
  13406. Yes, he didn't believe in a lot of this stuff, but he did believe in "the blood builds nations" and how the "Aryans/Nordics" were "superior" etc. Well, those ideas are built upon the ideas of the mystics who came before him
    2
  13407. A lot of people dismissed my "Was Hitler a British Agent?" video, but I for one enjoyed making it and I think it's enjoyable in its own right
    2
  13408. "Tik apparently doesn't understand governments do the same thing so its okay if businesses do it but not okay if government does it." The government not only takes a cut from the "investing" it makes, but also invests poorly, creating the bubbles that then pop. Thus they cause the recession. Glad you're beginning to understand now. "He also thinks apparently central banks are owned by the government they are not." Central banks are not central now. Please explain how they are not central banks?
    2
  13409. Please see this video which explains that they are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    2
  13410. Yes, yes it did. Funny how some reject it, but then fail to explain why capitalism magically results in recessions. "It just does!!!"
    2
  13411. "No TiK. There is something preventing people from starting their own businesses: LIMITED RESOURCES, MAN." Produce something that people want (demand) that nobody else is providing (supply). Anyone can do that. Doesn't have to be something big: it could be something like food, or baskets, or YouTube videos on niche topics, or whatever. There are limited resources, which is why people need to produce things - by starting their own businesses (I'm counting being self-employed as starting a business, although that technically isn't correct). "Please, enlighten me, how would those people get resources for 'their new businesses'? And keep in mind. This is the industrial age. You need raw resources for the economy." Buy seeds for food or flowers and plant them in a garden to sell. Buy a hammer and start crafting things to sell on eBay. Go out and start window cleaning (you need a bucket of water, some cleaning equipment, a sponge and a ladder). Offer to clean cars. Buy a camera to record your own videos. Take up knitting. Teach something. Bake cakes. DO SOMETHING. Find something that's in demand and fulfill that demand. You don't have to build skyscrapers; start small and work hard. "Also, what's with that bloody nonsense of 'capitalis is failing. That's not true'. Errm? The great depression of 1920s to 1930s? Ever heard of that?" Ever heard of the "Roaring 20's"? The clue is in the name. Governments around the world spent spent spent spent spent - inflating a huge bubble which burst in 1929. Capitalism didn't "fail". Capitalism burst the socialist bubble. The Great Depression is proof that Socialism always fails.
    2
  13412. I share Antoine Dunand's opinion - Germany only recovered after WW2, in the West
    2
  13413. "Funniest part: even within mindset of Austrian school, TIK got it wrong. He should blame gov not for causing crisises through spending policy but through expansionary monetary policy." That's exactly what causes recessions. You don't actually understand the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, yet you criticize it. "This school created a few valuable ideas that went to mainstream economics..." You mean the Subjective Theory of Value, which completely destroyed the Labour Theory of Value and thus rendered Karl Marx's entire ideology completely null and void. "but what is left is mostly considered as ideology but not a science. " You cannot calculate prices without the free exchange of goods in a free market. If you have socialism, you have no prices. Without prices you don't have economics, and thus cannot "scientifically" measure the economy you're attempting to control. "By occasion, crisises actually appear naturally within capitalism." No they don't. Please see this video on Austrian Business Cycle Theory https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc "Yes, gov can mostly mitigate that," No they can't. They cause the recessions in the economy, and then blame it on capitalism.
    2
  13414. You're not part of society unless you contribute to it. If you're not productive, you're not part of society. That's not because of a race of people (you said the Jews) is holding you back, it's because you are lazy and selfish. You expect the individuals in society to hand over their wealth to someone who does nothing of value. Well, it turns out that the individuals in society do not value people who do little or nothing. If you want to be rich you have two choices - steal wealth (what the Public Sector Socialist Central Banks and States do) or trade for it (which requires that you produce something that others want). I think it is immoral to steal, which is why I'm against the Public Sector (banks, corporations, governments) and for the Private individuals who work. You might want to wake yourself up to the reality https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13415. No worries! Thanks for you question! Please watch this video on the Business Cycle Theory to understand why Recessions are caused by central banks and central states https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    2
  13416. https://m.imgur.com/rLlDlcQ
    2
  13417. "Economic recessions occur no matter what government programs are in place." Exactly. Which is why we need to stop the government from implementing programs which cause the recessions. "Before government spending to influence the economy, the business cycle of boom/bust was every 3-5 years." Name one era when there wasn't a central state or central bank that was spending money. Name one. Because I can't find one. "After government interventions the cycle moved to 10-15 years and the downturns were less harsh." The Great Depression was the worst recession, and that was caused by government spending. The only reason the US got out of the rut after over 15 years was because the economic controls came off at the end of World War II. Please read "Depression, War, and Cold War" by Higgs for more information. And please see this video on Business Cycles to understand why recessions are caused https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    2
  13418. "Once again use an actual political compass not just this dumb left and right spectrum." You cannot have a free economy in a authoritarian state, and you cannot have a centrally planned economy in a free political state. That's oxymoronic. If the King is in charge, then you're not economically free. If you can't leave the collective farm, you have no political freedom, even if the state was truly democratic. The political compass gives a false view of politics and economics. "Fascists/NS also got much support from what we would in modern day call conservatives even though they had opposite economic ideas." Most Marxists, including Marx, Lenin and Trotsky, were members of the bourgeoisie. In other words, they came from the "conservative" "class". "The reason why is because they agreed with them on their other policies (i.e anti immigration, anti jew, pro nationalism, pro militarism)." Would it surprise you if I told you that Conservatives (at least here in the UK) are socialists? "You would understand this if you bothered to use a political compass." I understand what you're saying. I understand your views, because I used to hold them too. But then I realized the true nature of it all. You haven't grasped what I'm saying or what my views are. When you do, you'll understand why I can't go back to the old socialist view of the world.
    2
  13419. While I do need a new CPU, I'm not the one making the map. Thanks to my Patrons, I've been able to commission an old colleague of mine who is a graphics designer to work on it, freeing me up to get more research and script writing done. Because of this I've managed to finish the Stalingrad script for Season 1 (and most of Season 2) and work on a lot of other things behind the scenes for future videos.
    2
  13420. "Or was it because of technological advancements and the desire BY EVERYONE to improve standard of living." Capitalism brought about the advancements by rewarding people who innovate, encouraging them to create more innovations. Socialism is economic slavery. That's why the standard of living decreases under socialism, because slaves don't reap the reward for working hard.
    2
  13421. You're not crazy
    2
  13422. Capitalism is an economic system calling for the private individual to control their own economy. Small business owners and independent traders owning their own tools, businesses and money. It's not political, it's economic. The reason it fails is because governments want power and thus use "laws" to force people to hand over their wealth and freedom. Well, it turns out that governments cause the recessions, and then blame it on "failing" capitalism. Please see this video which explains the process https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc And the Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    2
  13423. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    2
  13424. I am planning on doing a guitar video at some point because I promised I would, but not sure when yet
    2
  13425. Dickens is an elitist and his books are a load of tripe. Cannot stand his terrible writing. Sure, there was poverty in England during the 1800s, but there was a lot less of it compared to the 1700s, and less of it compared to the 1600s. Why? Capitalism.
    2
  13426. Well, in that case, the same can be said for all generals and politicians from every country. And let's not forget, the British had sacked many a general before Montgomery. They could easily have gotten rid of him if he was incompetent.
    2
  13427. And yet was allowed to remain as a Field Marshal, and command an international army? If that was the case, you think he would have been dismissed, right?
    2
  13428. Who you gonna call?
    2
  13429. Sorry for the delay
    2
  13430. Congrats!
    2
  13431. It's hard to tell how many videos there's left to do. We've not even got to the city yet, which is when most of the books start. Ideally, I want to go to battalion-level when we reach the city fight, if that's possible.
    2
  13432. Fourth time watching the same video? Wow ok! And maybe I'll do the Order of Battle for the Soviets at the end AFTER it is all done, because then I'll have all the unit cards made and a full list of the commanders at various times. The German Order of Battle doesn't really change, but the Soviet one changes constantly.
    2
  13433. Right, but AFTER the war, he manipulated the evidence (even going so far to make incriminating documents "disappear") and encouraged historians (e.g. Shirer) to paint a narrative of WW2 that simply isn't true. Shirer writes several times that he's just got off the phone to Halder over an issue. Then when it comes to the reason Halder was sacked, it's entirely "Madman Hitler's" fault, and good old Halder was always right! The guy messed up Fall Blau. He messed up at Stalingrad. He messed up the reinforcement issue. He messed up the Don flank issue, even claiming everything was quiet, despite the fact that he also noted that the Soviets were across the Don in several places. To say that all this is completely unrelated to the topic at hand is simply false - several of those issues were highlighted throughout this video, and have been discussed in previous episodes. It is entirely relevant.
    2
  13434. Halder distorted the reason for the loss at Stalingrad. He even helped distort the narrative to be "the Germans had no problem until they got to Stalingrad, and then it was Hitler's fault". That's totally incorrect! He's to blame for what happened at Stalingrad as much as Hitler was. He also messed up the reinforcement issue, as explained in the video. So it is totally related to the topic at hand.
    2
  13435. Yes you are!
    2
  13436. I found it online and thought I'd put it in for laughs. Not sure why someone made it in the first place though
    2
  13437. Yeah, I randomly found that flag online and decided that it was better than showing the hooked cross
    2
  13438. Of course, and our wise governments know exactly what's best for us and are benevolent and loving
    2
  13439. Hope you enjoy it!
    2
  13440. We'll be going all the way to February 1943. No idea when we'll get to that, but I'm releasing one Stalingrad video every four weeks, so it'll probably be in a year or so before we get to November
    2
  13441. I'm sure I used that book in the Hitler's Socialism video. I can't remember if I read it all though, so I'll check out that audio book version. Thanks!
    2
  13442. I found it online and thought it was funny. No idea why it was made in the first place, but I just wanted to put it in there to confuse you, and also avoid putting in the hooked cross to satisfy the censors
    2
  13443. Congrats!
    2
  13444. I believe that the next video was Brevity, then Battleaxe, then Crusader. Here's the playlist (in order of events) https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe Brevity was in my "experimental" days, so I'd encourage you to skip it. Battleaxe is fine, and Crusader is probably my best completed Battlestorm series (over 9 hours). I think I mentioned Paulus in the Battleaxe video, but can't remember.
    2
  13445. Yeah, have x3 Season 1 FIPs :D and since I put almost everyone's comment in it, I guess everyone's a winner
    2
  13446. If I had medals to award, you would have gold, sir. Absolutely fantastic. Thank you so much! :)
    2
  13447. You could upload a video to youtube :)
    2
  13448. Yeah, and I think he was saying to Manstein how it's been a long road, getting from there to here...
    2
  13449. You only just noticed that? It's been there in the past couple of episodes 😂 The real name is Bobrovskii
    2
  13450. No worries, let me know if they help. I've worked out a few things since this video. May have to do an update at some point. I also worked 91 hours on my channel last week as well, which might explain why I look so tired all the time, but Pomodoro's definitely help. Make sure you take the breaks, if you can :)
    2
  13451. Great! Glad you're along for the ride :)
    2
  13452. Oops! Sorry! Quick tip: place your phone somewhere out of reach while you work (unless you're in public) and put it on silent so that only the noises from "Tide" can be heard
    2
  13453. You can find Pomodoro videos on YouTube as well :)
    2
  13454. This is where the Pomodoro Technique is really powerful. For 25 minutes, your phone is essentially off-limits, allowing you to focus on the work at hand. It's interesting because you'll have the urge (and sometimes do it without realising) to check your phone, even during the 25 minutes
    2
  13455. Yeah, I've heard warnings from a few people about Glantz (with some people saying he's not liked by a portion of the community?) but a quick search of the internet provided nothing. Is there any substantial evidence out there against him I should be aware of? Or is it just opinions and hearsay?
    2
  13456. Hey look, more EXCUSES from Jamie
    2
  13457. I think you'll find that my other comment was first ;)
    2
  13458. Though addressed to the audience, I mainly did the disclaimer for the censors at YouTube. It's clear that they don't want true historical content on the platform, and so me saying "I'm not showing graphic pictures" was a way of helping them see that I've self-censored the video to meet their "guidelines".
    2
  13459. ***** Just looked it up, very clever :) I should have done that
    2
  13460. Gary Thomas I'm curious... at a guess, I'd say a pack?
    2
  13461. Bodglin o'Ite I should have guessed you'd be first to comment haha :)
    2
  13462. Oh yes, absolutely. But that came slightly after they went into Egypt. It was definitely a factor though that impacted the Western Desert Campaign, especially when Rommel enters the scene... which is what my next documentary is about!
    2
  13463. See the timestamps in the description. The final part is a basically a TL;DR
    2
  13464. Yep, and that's the reason why I put on "the voice" when I quote Hitler, to show that I don't agree with him, and to prevent my enemies taking my audio out of context in order to say I'm in favour of the ideology. It's hard to fight emotions with facts.
    2
  13465. As explained in the video, Hitler saw himself in the middle of the political spectrum, but only because he thought the bourgeois-Marxists were on the Left and the bourgeois-Capitalists were on the Right. Hitler, as a real Socialist, thought he was in the middle. That's why he condemned the Marxist Left, not because he wasn't a Socialist. Marxism was only one version of Socialism.
    2
  13466. Very good comment, thank you.
    2
  13467. Because the intro lasts longer than 3 minutes. There's a reason this is 5 hours - because I provide a TON of evidence further into the video. 107 sources, 350 direct references, and a ton of quotes.
    2
  13468. Yes, their arguments are destroyed, but they still think I'm wrong. Interesting logic
    2
  13469. Please watch the video before commenting. The Corporations were nationalized by the Nazi State. And of course the workers were forced into syndicates - that's what you get when you nationalize the trade unions. Socialism is Slavery to the Society (the State).
    2
  13470. Two things: first, you accept the idea I presented saying that the State is the extension of the people (the Public). This is an admittance that Socialism is State control, and that totalitarianism cannot happen without Socialism. Second, you'll never get 100% of the people to agree on anything. So if just one person disagrees with State policy, tough, that person is dictated to by the State and the "will of the people". That person is oppressed under socialist and totalitarian control. In the example you gave, you're saying that the minority must be forced to pay for a larger State and government control, even though they don't want it. How exactly is this freedom? How is this not control over them? And how is this "fair"?
    2
  13471. But whoever is in the majority vote wins, and gets to dominate the people who voted against them. And whoever gets in then has total control over the reigns of power for however they're in office for. It's still totalitarian control, just for a time limit, and then you get another vote to elect the next totalitarian regime. Also, Democracy doesn't necessarily mean voting. You can vote in a Republic (like USA, which isn't a Democracy) or even in a constitutional monarchy (like in the UK).
    2
  13472. A parliament can have total control. Voting makes the majority have total control of the minority. Nation States are not Capitalist. They can rule over Capitalist economies, but States themselves are not Capitalist. States are inherently non-market (Socialist) entities.
    2
  13473. See this more recent video https://youtu.be/S2CkQqgCA7I
    2
  13474. He nationalized the industries.
    2
  13475. Yeah I was going to say, the Crusader documentary I did was longer. Think Courland was longer too
    2
  13476. Nationalisation is Socialization
    2
  13477. The reference to Sargon's live debate shows three socialists unable to define socialism. That's why it was a reference. Also, it's intellectually dishonest to dismiss an argument based on the sources alone. You have to tackle the actual argument, which currently the trolls on Reddit are failing to do, since all their counter arguments have been defeated by this video
    2
  13478. They haven't realized that they're losing this debate yet. When they do, things are going to get interesting :)
    2
  13479. Swearing like that proves you're too emotional to listen to a reasoned and logical argument.
    2
  13480. Watch this, it will explain it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13481. Right, but the old economists are wrong, value is subjective.
    2
  13482. Ah thanks for the translation! I think I've accepted it...? Currently the only way to to notify me is in the comments. I rarely go on Twitter (actually considered deleting it to be honest) and I can't give my email out because of potential doxxing attacks. Do you want me to list you in the description as the translator?
    2
  13483. See: Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression".
    2
  13484. They're trying. They really are, but they seem to be slowly realising that I'm not giving in
    2
  13485. Here's my counter argument https://youtu.be/TEcQS9GDtK8
    2
  13486. Another person who didn't bother watching the video and just presented arguments that have been refuted in the video he didn't watch 🙄
    2
  13487. They're desperately trying, and failing, to argue back. But I've taken the wind out of their sails with this :)
    2
  13488. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. It takes all ownership away from individuals and gives them to the "society". But as I have demonstrated, "society" is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And yes, the elite in the Soviet Union had everything at the same time the peasants starved. That's the point of Socialism - all power to the elite. Don't know about Reagan, but Thatcher wasn't a Capitalist by any stretch. Capitalists are against taxation, and she introduced the Poll Tax.
    2
  13489. And I've done an entire video on Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13490. The beginning is setting up for the wave of facts that come later. You can skip to those parts if you like, but I wanted to tackle the Marxist narrative first. Also, we're talking about National Socialism here; Fascism is a different ideology https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  13491. As I showed in the video, it wasn't a successful economy. In fact, it was imploding, which is why they went to war.
    2
  13492. Oh, and it also completely destroys the denialist counter-arguments (hence the title)
    2
  13493. Note that this video came out after that one... And this video uses lots of sources (107 to be exact, plus 350 direct references, and quotes)
    2
  13494. What are you talking about? The Soviet Union was a Marxist Socialist 'dictatorship of the proletariat' (aka a democracy). It's regime wasn't Capitalist, even if Lenin had to back track on the Socialism after destroying the economy.
    2
  13495. Because then people would only watch one part and say I'm wrong for not having covered things I explained in other parts. They're already doing that for this video because they haven't watched the Public vs Private video for the definitions. Also timestamps are in the description.
    2
  13496. As the others said, socialists exclude the Kulaks and the people they call the "bourgeoisie" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13497. Hahahaha good luck with that!
    2
  13498. Hitler's democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  13499. Here's why https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM
    2
  13500. There are 507.15 million Amazon shares right now, currently "issued by the company and in the hands of the public" https://ycharts.com/companies/AMZN/shares_outstanding While there are "insiders" (board directors and senior management) and these own 10.2% of the shares, there are 3,000 "institutional investors" (corporations with hundreds of thousands of people) which own 58.7% of the company, and the "General Public" (millions of people) which own 31% of the company as well. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/052816/top-4-amazon-shareholders-amzn.asp https://audioeditorfree.com/how-many-shares-does-amazon-have/ So no, Amazon isn't a private company, and thus doesn't have private property. It's a public institution and has public property that's collectively owned by its millions of shareholders. Yes, you may not be able to walk into an Amazon warehouse, making it "private" in the sense that it's not accessible to its shareholders. But that doesn't make it "private property" in the economical sense, which is what we're referring to here. It is a public corporation, and thus has public property.
    2
  13501. Yes, yes they do https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 Some historians go so far as to call him a Capitalist
    2
  13502. This lady also lived through it https://youtu.be/TEcQS9GDtK8
    2
  13503. About the same amount of power they had in the Soviet Union 02:44:33
    2
  13504. Thank you for your comment Ivan! I can't stand lies, especially one so big. This is why I can't just 'stick to tanks'. It's too important to ignore
    2
  13505. Did the free market do it? Or did the State do it?
    2
  13506. YouTube is censoring the comments. YouTube deleted my comments too, especially if I quote Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13507. Yes, see the public vs private because I explain the concept. Here's the link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13508. "Controling an economy to wage war on neighbors while expelling vulnerable is different from controlling an economy to protect the vulnerable." Socialism is the control of the economy in order to exploit the vulnerable. That's why it is evil and always fails. As I said in the video, I'm not longer a socialist because I realized that Socialist propaganda was telling me lies. Socialism was never to help the poor, and that's why I'm now against it.
    2
  13509. Yes, we get to all that. There's a reason the video is 5 hours long and why you need to get more than 16 minutes into it.
    2
  13510. Great! Thanks for your feedback so far. Himmler's views are actually different to Hitler's, and I intend to get to him another time :)
    2
  13511. Saying that, they did set up a welfare state to improve the lives of the working class, but this was part of the reason why the economy started collapsing and why they were compelled to go to war.
    2
  13512. No, because that's a myth as several historians have shown (e.g. Gotz Aly and Richard Overy). By 1937 the German economy was imploding in on itself, as I showed and explained with plenty of evidence in Section 5. See timestamps in the description. I've also explained this in subsequent videos, again backed by in-video citations, such as the video on the German coal crisis, the one where I read out passages of Goebbels's diaries, and others besides.
    2
  13513. Ah, but it doesn't, Jeff. I actually addressed the whole "he thinks everything is socialism" argument in this video, because these two made the same ridiculous argument https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 If you actually bothered to WATCH the videos, and LISTEN to them, you'd understand why your emotional responses are doing nothing against the empirical data.
    2
  13514. Capitalism is private ownership. Since you must pay taxes on property, income and business revenue, that proves that you don't own your own property, income or business. You're only renting property from the State. You're a working slave to the State, which is why you have to pay them when you earn anything. And the business isn't yours, which is why they can dictate to you that you must pay minimum wage to you employees, or say how you have to run things via regulations. We don't have private ownership, we have State ownership. Karl Marx himself defined capitalism as the system where money is chased for the sake of having money by the capitalists (Das Kapital volume 1). However, he also said that money (capital) is a commodity. Well, since we do not use commodity money (gold or silver) as our means of exchange, by Karl Marx's own definition, we do not have capital, and thus, cannot have capitalism. Karl Marx also called for central banking in the Communist Manifesto. Why? Because he wanted to use a fiat currency system rather than money (gold and silver). That's where we are right now. We live in a fiat currency world - meaning that we live in a central planner world (Socialism).
    2
  13515. Again, as I've said in the video, and in the comments, and in other videos responding to criticism over this, the definition of Socialism is incredibly clear, and all you have to do is watch the Public vs Private video and I will explain it for you, fully backed up with references at the bottom of the screen https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13516. "If the basis for your arguments are fundamentally flawed then there is evidently not much merit to them." Stating it's flawed doesn't make it so. Oh wait, you can't, and neither can anyone else. "Considering the many flaws others have pointed out with the arguments themselves and how other videos of yours on similar topics are similarly terrible I don´t really feel the need to watch 5 hours of almost certainly very repetitive drivel." Others haven't pointed out the flaws at all. I'm actually disappointed that nobody has actually managed to come up with a valid counter argument yet. My other videos might be flawed (they're not), but this video DEFEATS the denialist counter arguments that were presented to those videos. Now, the denialists (the socialists) have NOTHING left. You have no argument. I'm winning this debate right now.
    2
  13517. Dismissing the sources is an invalid move. You must tackle the argument or admit defeat.
    2
  13518. Why do we need a state for those things? Fire services used to be done by the free market. Roads certainly can be, as can the military https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ
    2
  13519. And if they're fully sourced, and I'm fully sourced, guess what that means? It means that this is an academic historical debate. And in such a debate, there's no room for insulting each other, or dismissing evidence, or calling each other "stupid", "pathetic", or "insane". It also means that there is no consensus (not that that matters anyway) and that the debate needs to be had on this subject, rather than ignoring it. So it isn't me that doesn't understand how this works, but you Jeff, and all the other socialist trolls who don't watch the videos either.
    2
  13520. Of course there's value in labour, and that value is subjective.
    2
  13521. People are needed to create things, but the value of an item (e.g. a can of coke) doesn't come from the people who made it. Otherwise, if you found a natural diamond on the floor, that diamond would be valueless because nobody made it
    2
  13522. And thank you for your comment!
    2
  13523. And you've ignored everything I said in the video and just argued the same arguments I defeated in the video. Please watch the video before trying to argue against it, otherwise you're just wasting time.
    2
  13524. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Here's a video of mine (with plenty of sources) showing you why Socialism is ALWAYS State control https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (I even said in this video multiple times to watch that video if you disagree with the definitions, but I'm being ignored...)
    2
  13525. Fascism is a version of Socialism. I explained this in the previous video you still haven't watched. Unless you bother to watch it, there's no point commenting, since you don't understand my argument and therefore can't challenge it.
    2
  13526. There are worse passages which I can't repeat in the current climate of censorship. If you're interested, Heaven on Earth is a good book which talks about this a little more, and is a good book overall
    2
  13527. Didn't expect anything different
    2
  13528. Yes, the same Animal Farm. The Anarchist/Socialist Orwell (my favourite 'fiction' author) was warning the world about the problems of Socialism. And he described himself as Socialist, but nearing anarchist, in the Road to Catalonia
    2
  13529. @Dave Baby - if the individual is at the top of the hierarchy, then that individual is a Public individual because he is part of the hierarchy. Only those who are at the bottom or are not part of the hierarchy are classed as private individuals
    2
  13530. Yeah, try watching this video before you comment. Everything you said is debunked by this video.
    2
  13531. A collective is an organized community. And an organized community is a State. A worker collective is a State, since it is a self-governing body (body = corpse, corporation/syndicate). See my Public vs Private video for further details https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13532. They gave out free bread and hyperinflated their currency supply... Not saying it was socialist, but they implemented similar policies and it severely weakened their economy
    2
  13533. Awesome! Sadly, I don't think it will work. Many of them are not listening, as this other video shows https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  13534. https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression There's others, but that pretty much sums it up. An incredible read.
    2
  13535. "As a history student I believe that a historical discussion should never turn into a real fight." I think the same. There are some genuine people in here trying to have a discussion (even some Marxists who admit I've got a valid argument), but they're being drowned by the zombies who haven't even watched the video, and are proceeding to copy and paste the very arguments I countered in the video! "Please keep up the good work and don't let these people deter you from your well-sourced and interesting research." Oh don't worry, I'm enjoying this. You know you've done something right when your opponents (currently) have no counter to your actual arguments ;)
    2
  13536. Considering this video is getting hate-brigaded by ideologues from Reddit, so I think you're going to be disappointed
    2
  13537. Yeah the timing was just coincidence. I've been working on this on and off since August 2018 after the first backlash from the Marxists.
    2
  13538. "This vid does not deserve all the downvotes it has even if you disagree." People are entitled to their opinion, but they're down voting the video without even hearing what my argument is. Then they're spewing the same "counter arguments" which were completely defeated in the video itself. As you make clear, if they actually watched the video, they'd probably realize that yes, I don't actually deserve the down votes.
    2
  13539. This will be VERY informative to regular views as well as to my critics. So, while I have framed this against the Marxists, the regular viewer is the actual intended audience.
    2
  13540. @Діма Базалюк Why don't you watch this video, and find out if it is or isn't?
    2
  13541. Your definition of capitalism is incorrect. You're using the false Marxist definition of capitalism. I'm using the actual and historic definition. But yes, I'm the one who's "redefined" the term. I'm a private individual. My property isn't mine because the State is constantly stealing my property from me. Well, if someone wants to steal my property, they'll have a hard time... I don't need a State to "enforce" anything on my behalf. In fact, if the State went away, I'd not only have more property and income (since my money wouldn't be stolen from me every month) and I'd have the freedom to purchase arms and defend myself. As Thomas Sowell explains, Britain is a "burglar's paradise" because the people are not allowed guns or to defend their property. I don't need the State to "enforce" private property, since it isn't doing that. Instead, I will enforce my own private property which is my natural right as a human being. Also, profit is still made in a socialist society. It's just that what pathetically little profit is made in a socialist society is then stolen by the State from the people, and then withheld from the people in the name of the people. In Capitalism, profit can only be made if people provide other people with goods and services that other people want. It's 'terrible' that people are getting paid for giving people goods and services that they want. And it's 'great' how the State is allowed to seize the wealth from the people, keep most of it, and then provide a few terrible services which they claim are "free". I point this out to people, and I'm the one who's "got it wrong", apparently... And then I get lectured all the old arguments which I used to believe in too about how the State is great, and how we all need expensive nationalized (but not real Nazi) socialist State health care, and how people will starve if we don't allow the State to steal 40% of wealth from the poor workers and redistribute that to the State in the name of the workers. All I want is a better life for the poor - the very consumers I'm trying to service - and that makes me an evil capitalist. Well, I disagree https://youtu.be/L6Lw-QAHzk4
    2
  13542. Only at the beginning. Then we get to the meat of the debate, where I show how the Nazis nationalized their economy rather than 'privatize' it like the Reddit trolls claim
    2
  13543. All thanks to Terri (who also edited this video)
    2
  13544. The free market doesn't result in imperialism. Imperialism can only occur when a State decides to send it's armies to fight https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13545. "What are you talking about? this isnt about Reddit or losing? you are just wrong." Give me an actual counter argument that proves I'm wrong. Reddit trolls haven't been able to do it. Look at this - https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/f95ax3/tik_crosses_the_event_horizon_the_nazis_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitWehraboosSay/comments/f8uhg4/tik_just_uploaded_a_5_hour_video_about_hitler_and/
    2
  13546. Corporation = 'organ' of the state (corpus, body, organ). https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  13547. Marx also hated the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13548. Marx wasn't a real socialist either
    2
  13549. If you do not provide value to your community, your pay will be low.
    2
  13550. Exactly! Their arguments don't work
    2
  13551. It's a PDF. Link in the description
    2
  13552. Thanks Eric!
    2
  13553. You know, Jeff, ad hominem insults aren't effective. Plus, me citing 350 references, numerous quotes and more from 107 sources, is not an appeal to emotions. Calling me "pathetic", however, is. You sound just like some of the other trolls who said similar sorts of things (e.g. Aiden or Mike McMike). North Korea is a democracy. The power lies in the people, the public, which is the state. I've been over this https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  13554. Please watch the video. Rainer Zitelmann says they're not capitalist, although doesn't commit to them being "full" socialist (he picks the "third way" option, which I disagree with, as explained in the video).
    2
  13555. Yes they do. They understand their own ideology better than the Marxists do
    2
  13556. Socialists won't let children work, but they will tax their pocket money; directly through the power of inflation, and indirectly by taxing their parents. If you tax the parent, you tax the children. But of course, you MUST steal off children and redistribute the wealth of the poor to the banking-State elites and then claim that it's to benefit the poor. Also, recommended reading for you: "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom
    2
  13557. Those large capitalist enterprises weren't private, they were public, thus they weren't capitalist. Try watching the video before commenting
    2
  13558. "Just a time next to a commenter's comment." That would be a fantastic innovation. They'll never do it, but it would revolutionize the platform for sure.
    2
  13559. The world economy right now is not capitalist, and hasn't been for decades. Central Banks (what Marx called for) are bailing out the corporations and the States, at the expense of the people - the market. Thus, it is capitalism.
    2
  13560. "You're falsely attributing evan's evidence as supporting your argument and your narcissism is hearing what you want to hear." If someone provides evidence of State State State State State, but concludes it's non-State, why would I believe their conclusions? Evans does exactly that - he provides tons of evidence of State control of the means of production (Socialism) and then concludes it's capitalism. Well, I'll take his evidence and use it, and explain why his interpretation of the evidence is incorrect. That's not narcissism. Saying 2+2=4 rather than 5 is not narcissism, it's simply correct. "i've also read mein kampf." Well done. So have I, as you would know if you actually watched the video. "My stepdad's father was a pow in a nazi prison. He developed leukemia years later from malnutrition in the camps he was tortured in and it later killed him. I worked with the last great generation in an old folks home and was always fascinated enough to not be a narcissist, unlike you. You guys play the biggest victims bc you're a boomer that reaped the benefits of social programs that had the greatest gap analysis in any point in history." Completely irrelevant, except it proves that you're relying upon emotions rather than logic and reason. "Let me clear up your ideology. Capitalism..." 2+2=4 is not an ideology. "If you're arguing that private corporations are in favor of socialism and against statists, you're brain dead." They're in favour of socialism and are pro-State, since Socialism is the State and corporations are States. Corporations are not individuals (private) - they're hierarchies of societies (States). I've been over this in my Public vs Private video, which you would know if you actually had bothered to watch this video. Link to my Public vs Private video (which I know you won't watch, but here's to hoping you decide to listen to my argument) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13561. Again, see 04:18:16
    2
  13562. Thank you HE1NZ! Didn't realize that Richard Pipes thought the National Socialists were Socialists too
    2
  13563. You also assume we have Capitalism today. Please point to me a place with no taxation, where the means of exchange is gold or silver, and then we can start talking about Capitalism.
    2
  13564. Anarchism isn't chaos, it's individualism. The issue I have with the term anarcho-socialism is that these are polar opposites. By definition, Anarchy is non-socialism, and Socialism is non-anarchy. So the point is, those who claim to be anarcho-socialists are in fact just Socialists.
    2
  13565. I'm just going to leave this here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13566. If you bothered to look at the sources, you'll see that I used Richard Evan's books. If you'd bothered to watch the video, you'd see that I disagreed with Evan's assessment of Hitler's Socialism. If you'd bothered to listen to what I said in the video, you'd have known that I explained in-depth the definitions of Capitalism and Socialism in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And finally, it is you who should stick to military history https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  13567. An economy can be mixed, but Hitler is still a Socialist, and his ideology is still Socialist
    2
  13568. Hitler was allied to Italy and was trying to ally with Spain for strategic reasons. Hitler needed allies. But that doesn't mean he wasn't critical of Fascist ideology. His main concern was going East, not south or west, and he makes that clear in Mein Kampf and his Second Book. So your argument isn't valid.
    2
  13569. I want to cover it in future. Zitelmann talks about it in his book. Hard to get hold of it though in English, sadly :(
    2
  13570. Thank you very much Dale! It's funny how you managed to argue with and defeat some Marxists over this without knowing enough about the subject at the time. Now you should have an easier time of it 👍 glad you enjoyed the videos. I still think this and the Public vs Private video are two of my best (along with my History Theory video too) even if they're not the most popular
    2
  13571. Did Napoleon have total monopoly control over his economy like Hitler did? If you don't believe me, perhaps you might believe an Austrian German who lived through the experience https://youtu.be/TEcQS9GDtK8
    2
  13572. Only just seen this because of your recent replies. So in response to your original points - 1. Watch my Public vs Private video for a clear understanding as to why Socialism is the definition I've used https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 2. The NHS is a bloated mess, and is so bad that the government had to recently nationalize the remaining private sector, because apparently the NHS didn't have enough resources. As people clapped in the street in support of National Socialism, the monopoly continued to spout lie after lie, covering up systematic failings within the hierarchy itself. It has now been announced that NHS doctors were taking bribes from drug companies to sell their products to the NHS and make millions off of us tax slaves. The phrase "Don't Trust a Doctor" is now mainstream. And the NHS is incredibly more expensive than the alternatives https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ 3. To put it crudely: group is a society, and a society is Socialism. Well, a gender-group is a society (a collective). And, since this particular society wants to control the means of production, it is socialist. 4. I'm not sure why you're even asking me to talk about them? But, since you asked, I guess I'll answer. I don't agree fully with everything they say, and I think Peterson and Sargon especially need to learn basic economics. Don't know as much about Molyneux as only watched a few videos, although I do know he's been cancelled. Peterson and Sargon have been smeared by the Leftwing Lamestream though. If you think Peterson or Sargon are Nazis, you have no idea what Nazis are. 5. I answered that within the first minute of this video. Me realizing that Hitler was a Socialist is what woke me up. I realized I'd been indoctrinated by the Leftwing State miseducation system, and fed a bunch of lies that said Capitalism was evil and was doomed to collapse. At first, I didn't look into Capitalism. In fact, I just released my original videos on Hitler's Socialism. But when everyone started accusing me of reading Mises and Rothbard, I decided to take a look at them. Once I did, I realized there was no going back to the old lies.
    2
  13573. Industries were nationalized and private property was abolished. I covered both of these things in the video, backed by 107 sources.
    2
  13574. All Socialism is slavery. You must submit to the society/collective/state. That's the opposite of freedom. It'd inherently oppression and slavery. Fascism is just Socialism on a national level. That's not oxymoronic, that's just fact. And National Socialism is Socialism on the Racial level.
    2
  13575. In that scenario, it wouldn't be individualism because you're surrendering your individualism to the collective "racial group". In the example you give (which is the way the National Socialist would probably argue it), the collective "race" still exists, and thus the "individuals" in society lose their individual sovereignty to it. Therefore they're not individuals any more, since they supposedly belong to "the blood". Even if the group embraces the idea of survival of the fittest, and declares themselves to be individuals, that's not individualism, since they're admitting that a racial group exists to which they supposedly are a part of. Well, if they're part of "the blood", then they have the "soul" of "the blood" (to use Himmler's terminology) and are no longer individuals. Individualism renders any "racial group" void, since individuals are not groups.
    2
  13576. It's actually 5 hours
    2
  13577. "I know the quote you selfrigtious arse" And there we go. Someone who doesn't want to engage in debate, but is more interested in insulting his opponents. I'm not going to waste my time with people who can't be civil.
    2
  13578. "@TIK The Democratic Socialist's attempt yo debunk you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGdUsmJuaCk" Wow... emphasis on "attempt"... He's the second YouTube Marxist-Socialist to accuse me of being racist as part of their "rebuttal" of me... If only he actually had an argument that would stand up to scrutiny, he wouldn't have to resort to such intellectually dishonest tactics. His argument about the Third Reich being capitalist doesn't hold up to the mountain of evidence provided in this video. "TIK doesnt have the guts to answer." His arguments fall flat against the weight of evidence provided in this video, and in my Public vs Private video, which he hasn't watched because I did say in this video that if anyone disagreed with my definitions to go watch the Public vs Private video which would show you more in-depth why they are what they are. We know Democratic Socialist hasn't watched that video, otherwise he wouldn't also be accusing me of not knowing anything about Ancient history. So, it's not that I don't have the guts to answer - it's not worth repeating the answer I've already given in another video when I've already given the answer to his arguments in these two videos. This video is called "Destroying the Denialist Counter-Arguments" for a reason. The Denialists actually have to come up with a brand new argument. Their old arguments don't work. And pretending that socialism isn't public-control of the means of production is quite frankly ridiculous, given the evidence I've provided here and in the Public vs Private video.
    2
  13579. Good question. I'm working on a video that goes into the differences between the two ideologies. While they are both similar, they've actually got quite a few differences, and I currently don't think it would be correct to say the National Socialists are Fascists. Mussolini's mistress was Jewish and there were 10,000 Jews in the Fascist Party of Italy. The Fascist Party of Italy only became racist in the late 1930s, mainly as a result of Hitler's influence over them. Prior to that, the Fascists and National Socialists didn't see eye to eye, and Hitler wasn't exactly happy with Fascism, or Mussolini. He actually hated Franco.
    2
  13580. The means of production were socialized. Marxists continue to push the lie that they were privatized, but they simply weren't.
    2
  13581. @Chonk Daddy - do you actually have a counter argument, or are you going to continue crying like a sore loser in the comment section?
    2
  13582. Come on Cunningham, he's not a moron, he's just caught up in the lie of the Matrix. Unfortunately, I did try to unplug people, but unless they want to be unplugged, it's impossible to get them to see reality (or watch the video). Also, we're clearly the same person since I respond to you a lot, so you already know all this 😂 because obviously, even though I work 60+ hours a week making videos, I have all the time in the world to create sock puppet accounts and reply to everyone (including myself) as well! Thank you though for trying to get through to people 👍
    2
  13583. Yes, racial and class rhetoric, just like the Democrats in the United States, of the Labour Party in the UK
    2
  13584. "capitalism has never been tried" The black market exists, does it not? A State cannot be socialist, but that doesn't mean a country is not. "We however do believe, that the contradictions of capitalism will grow, and we will see it through both the economic environment, and the natural environment as the result of an irrational economy." Yes, and I debunked this Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall fallacy in the video. "Which is what you see today with oil banking business supressing fusion development in the east. All capitalism is crony capitalism." Corporations and central banking are socialisms, as I explained in the video. Try watching the actual video before commenting.
    2
  13585. History says otherwise. But you're entitled to your ignorance of basic economics.
    2
  13586. "You actually believe that corporations, where capitalists voluntarily pool their capital together to make collective investments and collective profits, are somehow, socialism? I did not expect this level of insanity even from you." You actually believe that thousands of people organized into corporations, where the shareholders collectively control their means of production, are somehow individuals (private)? Maybe you should think before you speak https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13587. TexasPROUD is correct, and I explained this in the video. There's timestamps if you want to skip to the 'privatization' section.
    2
  13588. Jeff, the citations are in the video. This is why everyone is telling you to actually watch the video, because if you had you wouldn't be making such mindless comments.
    2
  13589. Politics is corrupt, so I can't corrupt it any more. Also I did not say that Marxist Socialism and National Socialism were the same - I made it clear that they weren't. Yes they have Socialism in common and they're both anti-Semitic Left-wing ideologies that call for a Revolution and then the creation of a paradise, but they're not the same. You're incorrect about National Socialism incorporating Capitalism. As I showed in this video, it did not. Capitalism is inherently non-State, since a State is a group/collective/public whereas Capitalism is private/individual. Corporations are hierarchies of society and are therefore Public, which is why they're not Capitalist. As I said in the video, for clarity on the definitions, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y You can't "save" me from the evils of knowing the truth and no longer being ignorant enough to believe in the false religion of Socialism. A monarchy is a State, therefore not Capitalist. Not sure why you think a feudal hierarchy of society that consists of thousands of people would be an individual person. Your bias is ignorance. Learn what the words mean. Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13590. I actually did a video showing the difference between Fascism and National Socialism. Here it is https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  13591. Let's hope they pay attention. Cheers!
    2
  13592. Wow thank you, P mar! The script did take forever, but with reviews like this, it does feel worth it :)
    2
  13593. Also, primary sources like "The Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reimann show that Tooze is incorrect when he says that businesses were not under threat by the central state (i.e. the Four Year Plan). I could go on, but you get the picture. If you actually watch the video, you'll hear many quotes from the Vampire Economy and Tooze himself showing why it was Socialism.
    2
  13594. When you quoted Tooze saying about the Reich industrial association, you do realize that the Germans implemented Autarky, right? Autarky is the complete opposite to "unhibited capital movement and multilateralism". So which is it? Was it Autarky? Or was it not Autarky? Also, Tooze is a Socialist himself, currently calling for an end of the "market revolution" in favour of a strong state https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/21/the-guardian-view-on-pro-market-thinking-ministers-want-it-to-survive-covid This is why you should always check the author's bias because, as I showed in the video, and in another one, Adam Tooze is often incorrect when he mislabels what is clearly Socialism as "capitalism".
    2
  13595. "Why is capitalism defined as "private individual's control of the means of production" and not "capitalist control of the means of production"?" Because capitalism isn't "capitalists" in control of the means of production. A self-employed worker is engaging in capitalism, since the worker privately controls his own means of production. Again, as I said in the video, I've been over this in depth in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "We can break down capitalist too, someone who owns capital." You're using the Karl Marx definition of capitalism. Okay then, if that's what you want to do. Unfortunately, you haven't read Karl Marx correctly. Marx makes clear in Das Kapital that money/capital is a commodity. Well, since nobody uses commodities as money these days (all fiat currency is just a means of exchange and is therefore not a commodity), we do not have capital or capitalism, and neither did National Socialist Germany since they were using fiat currency too.
    2
  13596. "Seriously? You spent 5 hours arguing semantics." Try watching the video before making a stupid statement.
    2
  13597. We don't have capitalism https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA And it doesn't melt down every few years, that's the free market trying to fight back against the Communist central banks https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  13598. "Now that's useful and interesting content" Thanks :)
    2
  13599. A nation is a society. Nationalism and Socialism are the same thing. So when Griffen says Fascism is ultra-nationalism, he's saying it's ultra-Socialism.
    2
  13600. And there you go. According to you, Slater, the Soviet Union wasn't socialism because you've got it into your head that socialism is "good". And since Socialist-tyranny is bad, therefore anything bad cannot be Socialism, even though Socialism is tyranny (the 'dictatorship of the proletariat', just like Lenin and Marx called for).
    2
  13601.  @jonathanmason3495  "And it wasn't a gaslight TIK, I had a very dear friend pass away not too long ago and before he took his own life he ended up jumping down a rabbit hole of "cultural marxism" and white replacement theory. It is genuine concern, because the video subject and portions demonising established institutions reminds me very much of him." I'm genuinely sorry to hear about your friend. It is depressing that a lot of people are convinced that Socialism is a good thing (and as an ex-Socialist, I can say that I was one of them). However, I wouldn't call it a "rabbit hole". I knew that my professors were Marxists when I was at college and university, and they were teaching us that Socialism was the way forward, and at the time I believed them. Many others are having the exact same experience, as a lot of my friends, family, and viewers have said. So, this isn't a "rabbit hole" - it is actually the case. No professor should be convincing kids and young adults that Socialism is a 'good' thing, and yet many are. - "And you also pretty much parrot Hitler when he rejected Strasser's arguments in that debate." Did you know that Strasser was also massively influenced by the Socialist concept of the Shrinking Markets, just like Hitler, Luxemburg and Bukharin? (Source: Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," p276.) Yes, Strasser was more about the violent revolution rather than Hitler's 'legal' revolution, which is why they fell out (Zitelmann, "Hitler: The Policies of Seduction," p65-66.). It had nothing to do with one being a Socialist and the other not being. Strasser was more like the USPD (Independent Socialists + Spartacists) and Hitler was more like the MSPD (Majority Social Democrats) during the November 1918 Revolution and Spartacist Uprising. That's what the difference was about and why Hitler rejected Strasser.
    2
  13602. I do feel like I've done a good job with this video
    2
  13603. You remind me of these two https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  13604. There are one or two moderate socialists in the comments here saying that it has changed their mind. And there are more who have admitted that the video has made them rethink things, even though they still think I'm wrong somehow. But for the most part, the Leftists (especially Marxists) haven't even watched the video. Wannabchomsky is one such Leftist, who is clearly unemployed (or a paid troll), since he spends many hours a day replying to people in the comments of this video, rather than actual watching the video and learning why he's wrong.
    2
  13605. Anarchists are anti-State. Therefore they're Right wing and cannot exist on the Left, as I explained in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13606. There's a PDF in the description which you can download 👍
    2
  13607. Relevant links https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  13608. Bezos also gets paid by the State Central Banks, and is thus controlled by the State. However, that doesn't mean the workers are entitled to steal his business from him.
    2
  13609. My critics are losing this debate.
    2
  13610. I hope you like salty tears
    2
  13611. Never! (okay, sometimes I fail, but in theory never!)
    2
  13612. Thanks for explaining the situation in your country. And yes, the assumption everyone has is that "Capitalism is bad" for various reasons... But IF you look into it properly, and understand economics (Chicago School and especially the Austrian School) you'll soon realize that it is Socialism that is flawed, not Capitalism. Sadly, the original assumption dies hard. It's made worse because people who understand Capitalism become businessmen. Those who don't become teachers, miseducating the youth about things they don't understand and have no real experience with. Cheers!
    2
  13613. If you'd bothered to watch the video, or even read the description, you'd see that I'd covered the Ernst Röhm debate in the video. I needed 5 hours because I wanted to be thorough and overwhelm the opposition with evidence of the socialism, not because I was struggling. There's so much evidence on my side that I could keep going for day. Denialists would need to keep dismissing the evidence and make more of the same illogical arguments just to keep up. And you don't like my battle videos, some of which are longer. If you don't like what I've done here, then there's no reason you'd like my battle videos either, since I've actually used more evidence here than I have in any of them https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  13614. "Capitalism is the private control (or distribution) of the "profit" of production." No it isn't. Capitalism is well defined as the private control of the means of production. Hundreds of sources I have make that very clear. "And socialism is social distribution of profit." No it isn't. I have hundreds of sources that say it is social/collective ownership of the means of production. "In essence, Capitalism means whoever owns capital owns profits. Therefore, it is possible to have State-Capitalism = State control of means with private distribution of profit." No it isn't. A hierarchy of thousands of people is NOT an individual (private). Therefore a hierarchy of thousands of people is not Capitalism. A hierarchy of thousands of people is public. Therefore a hierarchy of thousands of people (the State) is socialism.
    2
  13615. Thank you sir! Glad you found it useful 👍
    2
  13616. A "libertarian" "free market socialist"? Now I've heard it all 😂 Socialism is submission of the individual (private) to the society. By doing this, the individual is no longer free, and thus the market isn't free. So you literally cannot be a libertarian free market socialist. Also, as the timestamp in the description make clear, I've covered the "Ernst Röhm" fallacy you brought up. Hitler didn't kill the Socialists first, he only killed the Marxists (Communists), not his own Party members.
    2
  13617. 1) you haven't watched the video 2) Hitler wasn't a Fascist, he was a National Socialist
    2
  13618. "It seems strange to say collective means state. Mainly, at what point is it collective enough to be the state?" Again, as I said in the video, I've been over this in depth in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Is Facebook a state as it is a publically ran organization, or is it still private because they are just shareholders?" It is collectively owned by its shareholders, which is why it's Public. Think about it - is it an individual (private), or is it an public organ-ization? "Organ" - "body" -"corpse" - "corporation". Clearly it's a corporation, and thus is 'public', which in turn makes it a collective. The collective is the state. Facebook has authority over its users. It is a community that "regulates its interchange with nature" to use a Karl Marx quote. It isn't the central state, but it is an internet state. - "To me, State has held an important feature, the allowed or sanctioned use of violence and force." YouTube can forcefully terminate my channel without warning or reason. Facebook can delete your page. The terms and conditions you sign are threats of violence and force. They're also funded by the stock market, which is funded by the central banks and governments (tax and inflation). Tax is the forceful and dishonest appropriation of another person's wealth, and inflation is a hidden tax that stealthily steals your purchasing power and wealth. So, these companies are profiting via the theft of other people's private property.
    2
  13619. Because every time they have done that, their mini-Corporate State collapses. See the book "Heaven on Earth" for examples of small Socialist village utopias that failed. And worker ownership is State ownership. The Public is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Glad you enjoyed the video!
    2
  13620. I obviously disagree with Paid Government Shill with regards to the "confusion" part, but he is correct that I'm not racist. I've been on record saying that human races don't exist, and here's why https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label And, to clarify, a race is a social group. Therefore Racism is Socialism. And this is apparent when you look at what Karl Marx said https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13621. https://images.app.goo.gl/QjLSXVMGXGYSSq6N9 And yes, you're getting it! Also ignore wannabchomsky, he's just a troll
    2
  13622. Your argument is irrelevant. Hitler is a Socialist.
    2
  13623. Please, just watch the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And the black market exists outside of the State, because the black market is a free market.
    2
  13624. Haha I'm not sure how I did that :) cheers!
    2
  13625. Please watch the video before spouting nonsense in the comment section
    2
  13626. "Of course Hitler was a socialist....its odd its even a debate..." It is odd, and yet there's a lot of people who don't 'believe' it.
    2
  13627. Oh yes they are. It's brilliant seeing them not able to counter argue with any valid points
    2
  13628. @Muhfucka Jones - as I explained in the video you didn't watch, Hitler himself saw Nazism as the middle of the political spectrum. So the Left wing were the Marxist-Socialists (which Hitler wasn't - he was a National Socialist), and the Right were the Capitalists. So that quote doesn't disprove what I said at all, in fact it reinforces my points.
    2
  13629. Again, if you had just watched the public vs private video, all of this would have been explained to you fully backed by sources. Instead, you insisted on wasting my time in arguing what is now being confirmed to be a lost cause. You have slandered and mocked me throughout this comment section for getting the definitions wrong, and I have just shown you to be incorrect with them. And the worst part, you're so ego-invested that you won't admit that you're wrong.
    2
  13630. "A family is an heirarchy. Does that mean it's run by the government? What is your premise here?" Not unless it's an extremely large family. Then it would evolve from being a small private family to a large hierarchical public family. Again, WATCH THE PUBLIC VS PRIVATE VIDEO https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13631. "Apparently this means it is an individual according the you, though I disagree." No, you're saying it means an individual (private). I'm the one saying it's public. You're disagreeing with yourself because you're using false definitions and are slowly realizing that you're wrong.
    2
  13632. "Amazon is owned by a relatively small group of people." No, there are 507.15 million shares of the company right now, currently "issued by the company and in the hands of the public" https://ycharts.com/companies/AMZN/shares_outstanding It is not owned by a small group of people, but a collective of shareholders.
    2
  13633. ". and "wife" used to mean "man", but words change in usage. No one will agree with you that "individual" means "a group". No dictionary definition will support you, and your constant self-referencing circular argument doesn't help. You are just being silly." No, you're misunderstanding me here. Let me try and explain again: An "individual" and a "small family", are BOTH classed as "private". So private can mean individual AND/OR small family. It's not just individual by itself. So, when the individual worker owns his own hammer and works for himself, he's a private contractor or private self-employed worker. When a family lives in one house, that's classed as a private abode. The dictionary AND the history books support me on this.
    2
  13634. "No, a small group of people is a group, not an individual. Therefore private is clearly, unarguably not synonymous with individual. You are just being silly." Actually, in history, a small group was perceived to be the same as an individual. Specifically, everyone was a member of their family, which was deemed to be the "private" individual. But it later evolved to mean individual AND small family like group. Again, I've done my homework, WATCH THE PUBLIC VS PRIVATE VIDEO https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13635. "No, businesses that make a loss are still run FOR profit. They just didn't succeed and so they weren't run AT a profit. Stop being silly." Exactly, so if they had been run for profit then they wouldn't have got started in the first place. And again, this is all irrelevant, because it has nothing to do with the private sector. States can run a profit too, but that doesn't make them private.
    2
  13636. "Are you REALLY arguing that Amazon is a government owned and controlled organisation?" Are you REALLY arguing that it's not a hierarchy and is an individual?
    2
  13637. "1) A small group of people isn't an individual. Therefore clearly "private" is not synonymous with "individual"." Yes, again, watch the Public vs Private video and you will understand why https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "2) The Oxford dictionary definition places no limit on the size of the group." Yes because it's not being precise. It also claims that paid-for schools are "public schools" which is a complete joke. I, on the other hand, am being precise and accurate by using history to back up what I'm saying. Again, the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13638. And no, the Oxford Dictionary isn't the SOLE source for my definitions. I used a TON of sources in the Public vs Private video. Watch it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13639. "The Oxford dictionary is not the sole source of definitions. Can you name a privately owned company which is not run for profit? (Other than charities)." Yes, every business that has ever made a loss and failed. Also, can you name any socialized society that didn't run for profit? Yes, every single one of them, which is why millions of people always starve to death under Socialism, since feeding the population is "greedy profit" apparently.
    2
  13640. "No, corporations are not states in themselves (although the largest would become so in a free market Libertarian society)." 1. Yes they are. They are hierarchies (public sector states). The word "corporation" itself means "body/organ of the state". 2. In a free market, corporations would actually remain small because of competition. In today's economy, corporations are large because the Central State's Central Bank has a legal socialist monopoly on law and is therefore able to enforce that fiat currency is the only lawful method of payment. Thus, the Central Bank can print all the currency it want and throw it at the corporations to make them bigger, which is exactly what they're doing. In addition, the monopoly law enforces wage and price controls, and lockdowns for small and medium sized businesses, which destroys the private sector in favour of large corporations which are easily Centrallly (Socially) controlled.
    2
  13641. ""One particular person OR GROUP OF PEOPLE". Clearly it isn't synonymous with "individual"." Again, I said this. An individual or small family like group. This is backed up in the Public vs Private video by historical sources showing that it meant small group rather than large group. - "the part of the economy that is run by individuals and companies for profit and is not state controlled. Therefore, it encompasses all for-profit businesses that are not owned or operated by the government. " (Investopedia) How does e.g. McDonalds not fall under the private sector?" It doesn't, it's public https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/investors/stock-information.html Also, it's not run by individuals. It's collectively owned by its shareholders, it's operated collectively by hundreds of thousands of people. It is a hierarchy (a public), not an individual (a private). Also, I will point out that Investopedia's definition not only contradicts the Oxford English dictionary, and Cambridge Dictionary, and also all the historical evidence, but also itself. What part of the economy is not run by "individuals"? Even in a purely socialist economy, every part of the economy would be run by "individuals". A worker collective would still have individuals within it, so this is a sloppy definition that breaks all logical sense.
    2
  13642. Private sector Oxford: noun, the part of the national economy that is not under direct state control. Cambridge: noun, businesses and industries that are not owned or controlled by the government. So even if we say that corporations are not states in themselves (which they are), since the corporations are funded by the State Central Banks, and must adhere to the State's rules regarding wage and price controls, regulations, and state monopoly laws, they are controlled by the government, and thus would not be classed as part of the private sector.
    2
  13643. "No, profit is highly relevant. The corner shop is not run to make a loss, it is run to make a profit. It can of course be unsuccessful." Yes, it may not be run to make a loss, but it can make a loss. Thus, profit is irrelevant to the definition of private. Also, again, the Oxford English dictionary doesn't mention profit in regards to private.
    2
  13644. Also, profit is irrelevant. A corner shop making a loss is still classed as private, and a corporation making a profit or loss is still classed as public.
    2
  13645. Because you're using the incorrect definitions. The word 'Private' means an 'individual' - as in an individual human being. Historically, it also meant a small family-like group. It also meant non-State, which includes non-collective, non-syndicate, non-trade union, and non-corporation. Therefore, a corporation is inherently public, a mini-society if you will, even if it's not the Central State. Another way to think about it - a tribe is a mini-nation State, even if it's only got a handful of people in it. What makes it a State is the fact that it's a public. Whereas, an individual hut within the tribe would be classed as a private abode. When it comes to our times, an individual house or corner shop is classed as private. But when thousands of people come together, that's classed as a public. A corporation isn't an individual house or corner shop, it's thousands of people coming together to form a societal structure (a hierarchy), which is a public. They're also collectively owned by their shareholders, just like McDonalds has been since 1965, and Amazon is now. Again, I've shown the historical definitions here in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and I again explained this in a different way in response to the two guys who, like you, challenged me and refused to accept the historical definitions https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    2
  13646. McDonald's went public in 1965 https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/investors/stock-information.html
    2
  13647. Because it's not an individual. It's a public company.
    2
  13648. I replied to your other comment explaining this. McDonald's isn't an individual, and therefore cannot be in private control, since private means individual. The corporations do not control me, yet I'm part of the private sector. Millions of self-employed people are not controlled by the corporations. The local council is also called "the corpy" here in the UK, because the idea of corporations is just the fascist word for syndicates, and worker's councils (Soviets). The State is one giant monopoly corporation. Yet despite all this, you say the corporations are in control and are all private. Ha. So the State Corporation can never be a public then? You're honestly saying that 'worker' Socialism cannot ever be, since a 'class' is a 'public', and publics cannot be publics, otherwise the State Corporation would be classed as a public, which you have rejected. In other words, according to you, workers' corporations (Soviets, councils, syndicates whatever you want to call them) can never be public? And if the corporations are private sector, why do they call them publicly owned corporations? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_company And see the American definition here. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/public-corporation
    2
  13649. Loving the TIKsuckers insult. Not heard that one before, so thanks for the laugh!
    2
  13650. Wait, I think I misread. Investing in the stock market is a job. If they do a bad job, they lose money. Thus, investors need to be good at what they do. Novice investors lose, because they invest in the wrong things and go bankrupt. So investment is needed, and people who are good at it are needed for the economy to function
    2
  13651. Thanks! I do explain the banks and business situation in the Reich in the video, and also there's timestamps in the description that may help you navigate 👍
    2
  13652. Watch the video and you will find out
    2
  13653. I can confirm that I don't believe in the State 🙂
    2
  13654. I am keen to get back to them too. Stalingrad for now though... maybe at some point I'll do a quick North African Campaign video just as a break from Stalingrad
    2
  13655. Top tip: only read the parts that are relevant to whatever it is you're looking into. A cynic may say that this is "cheating" or "lazy" or whatever. However, history theory (and reality) tells us that we only have a limited time on this Earth, and we can't possibly consume all the materials available to us. Therefore we must specialize on certain topics. That's why, if a book talks about both the European and Pacific Theatres, I ignore the sections on the Pacific. Or, if the book talks about naval warfare (which I don't cover) as well as the land war, I skip the naval parts. There are many books I've used hundreds of times now, yet haven't read the non-relevant sections. Arguably this is more the power of specialization. Know what you want to achieve and ignore or get rid of all the other things in your way. Also, working several hours everyday, with few breaks, with culminate in a vast amount of words read... and then lead to burnout haha 👍
    2
  13656. That's because I'm a Lewis
    2
  13657. I'm glad to hear that! I've never looked into Brazil's role in WW2. I'll write that down as an idea, thanks!
    2
  13658. Just because the light hasn't reached you yet, doesn't mean that the light is off. It is on. So, if it is on, it cannot be off. The issue in this case is not the light, but the observer... and quite possibly the OP...
    2
  13659. I have, but I didn't find the 5 minute breaks very useful. Plus, when I get absorbed in the work, I tend to work until I get hungry or my head feels "full", then take a bit of a break. I'm not saying the Pomodoro Technique isn't useful - it is, and I've used it before - I just have grown beyond it
    2
  13660. No, they believe in National Socialism, which is Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13661. A market is two people - the buyer and the seller. If you buy things, or sell things, then you are part of the economy. To say that you don't live in the economy implies that you live as a slave or a slave master, since the only way to get food is to either trade it (Economics) or steal it (theft/taxation/Politics). To then say that, without the constant theft of our wealth by the giant corrupt monopoly Corporation that calls itself a "government", there would be no buying and selling, is a fundamentally incorrect assumption. The market exists outside of government control, which is why the Socialist is always scheming to find ways to control and destroy it. Also, to argue that the Judeo-Capitalist is stealing wealth from the workers is false. I've explained this numerous times, such as here (see timestamp to "The Value Debate" section) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13662. Yeah I want to know why Tom Scott blocked you too
    2
  13663. It's not just Rand, it's every fiction author from every genre. It's all boring to me, since they're writing fake stories, and usually with pretentious writing and tones. It's just a waste of time. I could be learning something useful. Same (usually) applies when watching films, although they're less time wasting, being shorter.
    2
  13664. That's how it appears to outsiders, but it's based on the concept of helping others and putting everyone else first before themselves. This is what I had to explain to Axiom a while back, and it's difficult for outsiders to fully understand.
    2
  13665. Yup. It's 100% an algorithm suppression, and their own analytics show it. This video, and other recent ones, have the same "click-through" rate as any of my other videos, meaning that when the videos are recommended to people, people are clicking on the video as normal. The question then is, why are the views on certain videos lower than normal? And the answer is because: the algorithm simply hasn't recommended them to people. Worse, this phenomenon is so totally random that there's no way to predict it. Previous videos have flopped simply because the algorithm randomly decided not to tell anyone about the videos. My subscribers have complained about not being notified numerous times, despite having the bell icon fully clicked. One video on a particular topic can get a million views, and another video on the same topic (even better made videos) will get next to nothing. Some of the videos on Oswald Mosley, the Weimar Republic, Hitler, or certain Battlestorms, just performed awfully for zero reason, while others did exceptionally well. It's so random that it's not possible to blame it on titles or thumbnails or something, because as I say, the click-through rates can be fine (or even higher than normal in some cases) yet it gets fewer views. In some cases, videos that get a lower click-through rate end up getting recommended more by the algorithm. It almost seems like they're deliberately pushing my bad videos. And frustratingly from my perspective, several times now I've worked exceptionally hard on a video, only to have the algorithm kill it. All that hard work down the drain. This is why "easy" content like this is actually better in a lot of ways. If it flops, oh well, I only spent 3 or 4 hours on it. If it does well, great. But I can spend multiple weeks on the other videos, hundreds of hours, only for them to get suppressed. This is why many content creators just create "easy" content rather than put a ton of effort into their videos, and I don't blame them at all.
    2
  13666. When the workers band together, they form a state. So Socialists can redefine the definition all they like, it's still state/social control of the means of production. My definition is the historical definition. It doesn't apply to every state in history, only those states that controlled the means of production, which they couldn't do until certain advancements were made. Thus, my definition can only ever be applied to states within the last 200 years, since before then there were no state police, and the bureaucracy required to form a "worker's paradise" wasn't sufficient yet. And your distorted view of how economic history works is so flawed I can't even be bothered to argue with you on it. Believe what you want.
    2
  13667. That's a very good question! I'll let Axiom know 👍
    2
  13668. It was recorded in the evening of the 3rd of January 2024, three days ago.
    2
  13669. I haven't any plans to go to America any time soon, but if I do, I'll check them out
    2
  13670. I'm also very happy with the Hitler's Socialism video. I just wish the critics would actually watch it. Most have not. They just go onto the video, downvote it, and assume that I'm wrong for ridiculous reasons, and then wonder why I'm not convinced by them... I don't know if that video will stand up to scrutiny, since nobody has seriously and honestly attempted to challenge it. I look forward to the day they do though, so we can get a good debate going. Cheers!
    2
  13671. You've just confirmed that it wasn't nationalism. If they became multinational/multiethnic states, then that undermines the idea that they didn't want to be in a multinational/multiethnic state
    2
  13672. "This is the second time you talk about overly centralized planning of distribution making the situation worse" This is not the second time I've said this - I've covered it loads of times! Here's a list of videos where I've documented this (there may even be more) - “Send us Wheat or Coffins” | The Axis Occupation of Greece WW2 https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk Did the Soviet Union EVER Recover from WW2? https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (About halfway through, I talked about Lenin centrally controlling the Soviet economy...) The Rations and Fate of the Civilians at the Siege of Leningrad https://youtu.be/nnyJ-qlzZGk "I wonder if anyone ever got it right or managed to get a unregulated market sort itself out" Centralized planning basically shuts down an economy and makes the situation a lot worse, which is why I mention it. In a free market, if a harvest fails, you'd just import food from elsewhere, which you can't do in a closed, centralized economy. Plus, rising food prices will give incentives producers to produce more food (since they'd be rewarded for doing so), and cause consumers to cut back on buying food. This will prevent 'hoarding', reduce shortages, and also ration out the food more evenly, reducing the likelihood of more people starving. (This is what socialists seem to misunderstand: free market prices are a ration system.) Of course, a common argument is that, if a State is at war, you couldn't just get more food from abroad. And that's correct. If the State (which is Socialism) takes you to war, then I don't see how that can be blamed on Capitalism (non-State).
    2
  13673. Yes I have that book by Mises 👍 he was way ahead of his time
    2
  13674. Wow that was an interesting read! Yes, history theory (which I've covered here https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc ) says we use the scientific method AS WELL AS interpretation of the sources. Interpretation requires logic and reasoning, which is what I adhere to. Unlike Marx, I believe that if something contradicts itself or another point already made, then this is an indication that something is wrong or distorted. The narrative of Hitler being a Capitalist doesn't even make logical sense, and certainly isn't backed up by the evidence. I like that TimeGhost is just dismissing the sources, rather than refute what they say. This is a classic Socialist technique of ignoring evidence that contradicts their own narrative. Sure, the evidence I present might be incorrect, but that is why we debate it. When many people brought up that "Against the Mainstream" article as "proof" that Hitler privatized the industries, I didn't just dismiss it. I spent several minutes in the video dissecting it and pulling it apart, showing why it was flawed and contradicted other sources. If TimeGhost wishes to refute what I say, then they also need to do this. Dismissing someone's argument without actually addressing it, doesn't work. And I agree. Socialism is similar to a religious cult. Facts, logic and reason don't matter. All that matters is faith.
    2
  13675. National Socialism is not Capitalism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    2
  13676. I didn't say that Socialism resulted in the collapse of the Empire. Some people don't listen and then assume that's where I was going, but you're wrong. Watch the full video. And yes, the German Reich also socialized it's economy and hyperinflated it's currency supply, which is why prices started rising during the war and immediately after WW1, to then be made worse by the Weimar Republic's increased spending on "Social" projects.
    2
  13677. "YUGOSLAVIA SPLIT INTO 6 NEW COUNTRIES, TODAY FAR MORE HOMOGENIC THAN THEY USED TO BE;" Yes, but not until WW2 or the end of the Cold War (1989) "HUNGARY WAS, BESIDES AUSTRIA, THE MOST HOMOGENIC OF NEWLY FORMED COUNTIRES AFTER THE END OF WW1" The sources I have said it had massive minorities within Hungary, and both of these nations had lots of Jews in them too (at least, prior to the end of WW2). "SO REALLY ONLY A FEW MINORITIES REMAINED WITHIN HUNGARY AT THAT TIME;" The books I have actually talk about how they were oppressing the minorities within Hungary with "Magyarization" "IN EUROPEAN CONTEXT A NATION IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE;" Again, this is hotly debated, with the sources I have saying that this may have been the case in 1848, but it certainly isn't the case today. "YUGOSLAVAS ARE LINGUISTICALLY EXTREMLY CLOSELY RELATED AND ITS A MATTER OF ARBITRATION, DEFYING THE CONECPT OF EUROPEAN NATIONALSIM," Exactly, so it doesn't make sense for the Croatian and Serbian 'nationalists' to create Yugoslavia
    2
  13678. Nations are societies. Nationalism is Socialism, Nationalism is Socialism. However, I didn't say that the Czech National Socialist Party was the same as the German National Socialist Party, or the British National Socialist Labour Party.
    2
  13679. What precisely would you like me to cover?
    2
  13680. Good question. The Allies definitely painted the Germans as the 'bad guys' in WW1, which I don't think is fair. Austro-Hungary, Serbia, Britain, Russia, and France all played their part. But that's why I've recently picked up some books that say that Britain (mainly) and France were the culprits who started the war. I used the book "Prolonging the Agony" as a source, because its authors are of that opinion. I'm not sure I totally agree with their narrative as I'm still looking into it, but it's a popular view which also impacts WW2 (since it implies that the Nazis were pushed into doing what they did) so I thought I'd dive in and see if it had any merits.
    2
  13681. Didn't know that. Thank you
    2
  13682. In fact, they pre-date the Fascist Party of Italy, and were originally anti-Semitic, but then apparently became Zionists later on (?). I need to look into them a bit more...
    2
  13683. Kursk is multiple battles.
    2
  13684. I may do at some point. For now, I'd recommend the Jack of War video (link in description). He gives a nice overview of the battle. May not be in-depth enough, but still worth a watch
    2
  13685. Ah :) well, if you liked it, I will carry on making videos with clipping books then!
    2
  13686. Apologies for that. I'm trying to improve my setup, but sometimes things like this get in the way.
    2
  13687. Hi Ronid, they're mostly off Amazon to be honest. http://www.leapinghorseman.com.au/ has very specialist books on Stalingrad (expensive, and usually not in-stock) if you're interested in that battle. They're the only sites I've used so far. Hopefully others can recommend more
    2
  13688. "The Court failed to attach value to the importance of historical debate to the right to freedom of expression, which may include questioning or challenging assumed historical facts." :(
    2
  13689. No. In fact, the only person I can definitely say has a job in education and who comments on my videos is Simon Baker, a history teacher from Australia who pops in to give words of encouragement now and then. Not sure if any other regular works in education, but I think there's a few people (like me) with degrees in history. And don't worry, more videos like this to come :)
    2
  13690. I actually went back and did the maths after I made this video, counting up every single tank Isaev listed in his tables. Both Glantz and Isaev's numbers match. I just wish Isaev had published an overall figure, rather than forcing the reader to do the math themselves. And while you're right to point out that Soviet sources are biased and could have been changed, we also know that German sources are biased and could have been changed. For example, I'm constantly coming across tank numbers in the North African Campaign that make the Germans look like they've lost fewer tanks in individual fights than they actually did.
    2
  13691. Dil Dar, he did focus on Soviet sources at the beginning, but his more recent works have factored both in, so your criticism of him is itself outdated
    2
  13692. I have not, but it's on my wishlist. Concentrating on other battles at the moment. Will come back to this one day though. Thanks for the heads-up anyway :)
    2
  13693. And you should have equal distrust of German sources
    2
  13694. +bakters - It does take a lot of work, yes :) ultimately I want Battlestorm to be like no other documentaries out there, which is why I'm putting so much effort into them (especially Stalingrad). Want it to be right, so got to do the work. Stalingrad's a bit different than the others I've done, simply because it's a much bigger battle (actually, I'd call it a campaign) and it's a much longer battle than anything else I've done. The only other battle that might be bigger would be the entirety of Barbarossa, so once I've made this at least we'll know I'll be able to do anything. Market Garden was approximately 28,000 words, and that was two hours long. If this is anywhere near the 260,000+ words it is now when I've finished it, then we're talking over 24+ hours on this one "battle". I suspect it'll be longer than that.
    2
  13695. You watched it all the way through. Poor soul :D
    2
  13696. Awww :( Everyone really liked it - I can tell that by the number of likes, comments and the amount people watched the video. The problem is is that it doesn't get a lot of outside views (who's searching on YouTube for "Market Garden" anyway?) and I'm no good at self-promotion... May have to do some promotion with the next one
    2
  13697. Yes I agree, it is like punching water. That's a good way of putting it! But I do think it's necessary to tackle some of those arguments rather than leave them be. Can't do it for everything of course. Also makes things interesting, since history lies in the heart of the debate Sadly, can't take a break right now. Got secret YouTube projects going on behind the scenes and a funeral to go to this week too. So there's no rest for the wicked... or YouTube historians :D might try to plan a proper day off soon though
    2
  13698. True, although I would say Operation Uranus was a "turning point" of the 1942 campaign, and the Battle of Stalingrad as a "swapping" of Hitler's and Stalin's view of the war. Hitler slowly realizes that he's totally lost the war, and Stalin slowly realizes that he's won it. But yes, it wasn't a sudden change, more of a process of attrition like you said
    2
  13699. Higher ground is lighter. Darker ground is lower.
    2
  13700. I made it very clear in the video that I thought the Soviet Communists were bad. I believe I also called their regime "evil" in the video. If not, I have called both evil in the past. So no, I don't prefer them to the National Communists Socialists at all. They're both as bad as each other.
    2
  13701. Not sure yet, I need a break from the relentless battlestorm schedule, and need to finalize the scripts for Season 2. However, I don't think Kotluban will be covered until Seasons 3 and 4
    2
  13702. I subjectively value your comment as not very valuable
    2
  13703. Yeah, I literally mentioned it in last week's episode https://youtu.be/63yv9w-6_3U
    2
  13704. "Being able to see how both sides made mistakes and had bad luck is more relatable than stories where everything goes well (except, of course, when it's a lucky timing that nobody foresaw- then it's equally surprising to the audience)" You're going to love Crusader ;) "I'm just happy that this is about a forgotten, but important, part of the war." Yes, I think that's important! I think Crusader is an amazing battle. Certainly, I would describe it as a "unique" battle in history. By episode 7 or 8, you will see why. And I can't wait until it's finally finished so I can rewatch the whole thing from start to scratch and see it all in motion. It's one thing seeing it in a script and imagining it in your head, and another seeing it in motion. Hopefully, once it's all done, and people see just how interesting this battle is, people will recommend it to others and we'll have more people talking about it. It deserves to be talked about in my opinion.
    2
  13705. "Regardless he is still a historian." I disagree. He is a distorian - someone who deliberately distorts history. "This is exemplified in your narrative which is pretty identical to a chapter in the book I mentioned previously." Have you considered that perhaps my sources used the same sources he did? Or that he used the same books and sources that I've used? "I mean you no ill will. I only wish to make you think laterally instead of being closed minded." You don't mean me ill will, but you're promoting David Irving for no reason in a comment section of a video that has nothing to do with the Holocaust. And why exactly am I being closed minded? I've used every other source I could find on the North African Campaign, regardless whether I agree with them or not (e.g. 'Panzer Battles' by von Mellenthin). Surely you realize I want to make my videos as accurate as possible and that I will avoid using the books written by someone that was proven in court to deliberately distort evidence to suit their racist-socialist agenda? "Believe me, you do not need a degree in "history" to be a historian." I agree. But it's not his lack of a degree that's the reason David Irving should not be trusted. And now it's my turn. Why are you suddenly bringing up David Irving in this video? David Irving wasn't mentioned at all in the video, and has no relevance to any discussion at all. Mentioning this distorian makes no sense within the context. I suspect the reason you've brought him up is to promote him. People reading this will think "who is David Irving?" "Why is TIK so against him?" And they'll go away and look him up and potentially be recruited to the cause. So, instead of discussing relevant historians like Pitt, Butler and Playfair, we're now discussing someone who is completely irrelevant to the North African Campaign. And then, here you are about to claim that you're defending David Irving against the mean-old 'establishment' (like me, which isn't the case) who are trying to paint him as someone who is bad, simply because he 'actually' has 'the truth'. You will appear to be 'fighting for a cause' in the eyes of those reading this. Well, sorry, but that's not going to wash. The reality is, I'm not part of the 'establishment'. I'm independent of it. I don't work for a university or any other company. I'm 100% independant, thanks to my Patreons. And if there was some sort of 'truth' that had to be said, I think I've proven many times that I'm the guy who will come out and say it. I've said Gavin of the 82nd Airborne was at fault for Market Garden, against the grain. I've gone against the grain and stated that the Germans didn't have this amazing unbeatable army, nor were they necessarily outnumbered or swamped by Soviet riflemen and numbers alone. More recently I've even come out and taken a massive hit from the Marxists when I said National Socialism was Socialism (which it absolutely is). And I've done that because it's quite clear to me that the Holocaust happened and it was central to the socialism that Hitler had. To deny the Holocaust is to deny that Hitler started the war - it was central to the reason he went to war in the first place. So, unlike what David Irving has said, the Holocaust happened, there is no grand Jewish conspiracy to take over the world (which, interestingly, it's exactly what Hitler thought too), and anyone who deliberately distorts history in order to deny an event like the Holocaust for the simple reason that they see the world as a group of races, is not someone anyone should trust. All this is why I'm not using his books (until I come to show his distortions) and why I don't want to hear about David Irving or any other Holocaust denialist in the comments section of videos that aren't relevant to that discussion.
    2
  13706. Once Crusader is done, it's back to the Eastern Front. But I'm 100%ing Crusader first. If you watch the next 2 to 3 episodes of Crusader, you'll understand why I've got to do this first. Every part of me wants to put this battle into video. It's so good!
    2
  13707. You ain't seen nothing yet ;)
    2
  13708. Joff-tchoff-tchoffo-tchoffo-tchoff!
    2
  13709. Yes, yes it was. The goggles Rommel wore on his cap were also captured British (if I remember correctly)
    2
  13710. Why not?
    2
  13711. I learn from the best
    2
  13712. I'm not saying what you should or shouldn't do. I'm only advising you to do your homework.
    2
  13713. No because inflation (the expansion of the currency supply) causes distortions in the economy that leads to bubbles, and those bubbles pop, causing recessions and depressions. This occurs whether prices increase or not, and these hurt everyone, especially the poor. See either my video on What Causes Recessions https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs or read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression", which you can get as a free PDF using the link in the description.
    2
  13714. It's probably just a minor pullback. Hard to go down when the Central Banks are buying it all.
    2
  13715. I never said that they didn't, so not sure why you think I'd be against this idea.
    2
  13716. As an ex-Socialist and ex-Keynesian I can assure you that this has nothing to do with ideology. I was taught incorrectly when it came to economics. Luckily I accidentally Red Pilled myself and stumbled across the Chicago and Austrian Schools of economics, which is why I no longer believe the old garbage argument that "deflation" is bad (it's not even "deflation", just lower prices). I'm not advocating for the destruction of money or currency, only to stop printing (stop inflating). But the idea that there would be too few currency units in existence that nobody would use the currency is just ridiculous. Venezuela removed numerous zeros from their currency, and there was still plenty around. People stopped using it though because it was hyperinflating.
    2
  13717. Yes, I actually said exactly that in this other video, although people didn't believe me https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    2
  13718. It's been money for millennia for various reasons. It's a commodity that's used for things like electronics and jewellery, plus is rare. What you described though was fiat currency. Paper or digits on a screen have zero use and only have value because they used to be tied to gold. The users of the currency were tricked into thinking fiat currency would have value after redemption of gold was removed, and the trick worked. But once an individual sees through the illusion, there's no going back. Fiat currency is backed by nothing and is devaluing your wealth without you even realizing it.
    2
  13719. Incorrect, inflation did mean the expansion of the currency supply, but was changed only a couple decades ago as this video shows https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA
    2
  13720. Watch this https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    2
  13721. Not sure if it's shadow banning, or if it's just type of videos. Shorter, less-detailed videos tend to appeal to a wider audience.
    2
  13722. The price of food has gone up, but the CPI doesn't reflect it. The loaves of bread I normally buy went up by 4.79% last year, but the CPLie said food prices had come down. Plus, as I said in the video, the government is regulating the price of goods and services, artificially keeping them lower. That's why there's shortages of goods and services.
    2
  13723. I actually started watching it and taking notes in order to do a video on it. It's that bad though that I couldn't stand to watch it for longer than 15 minutes at a time. Got part way through and had to shift focus to other things... I intend to finish though at some point and do a video about it.
    2
  13724. Welcome! I hope you enjoy the videos :)
    2
  13725. Thanks! I'm always trying to think of ways to improve the videos, so if you have any suggestions let me know!
    2
  13726. Haha yep!
    2
  13727. Oh look, it's Captain Fokin himself ;)
    2
  13728. Very true
    2
  13729. @Ann Onymous - being second isn't bad! :)
    2
  13730. Well, considering that I did mention all those things in either this episode or in previous episodes of this series, you're incorrect.
    2
  13731. Favourite one to pick on!
    2
  13732. You'll be happy to know that I'm working on a big video or series (not sure which yet) on a major inter-war event... Still a while away from finishing the research on it yet, but it'll happen at some point
    2
  13733. Races don't exist, but racists do. As I have been saying for years now, Socialism is Racism and Racism is Socialism. A "race" is a social group. So note, I'm against the ideology that makes "racism" a thing, not against "races" which don't exist. See the difference? The Chinese Communist Party is a problem, but that doesn't mean that the Chinese people are. Those that buy into Communism might be, but not all. Judge the individual for their actions, not based on what others in a group do. To put it another way, a lot of Americans voted for a particular party. Does that mean that all Americans are bad? No. Does it mean that everyone who voted for that particular party are bad? No. But the people who are in that party and are doing bad things are bad. And those that support such a party are also questionable. But not all Americans are bad. You cannot judge everyone just because they supposedly belong to a group.
    2
  13734. Andy Jacobs almost! :) Good guesses though
    2
  13735. TheMegaSuperPickle you're one year too late there!
    2
  13736. LordCucumber77 tell me more! :) Seems I've managed to catch everyone out with this question lol
    2
  13737. crackwiser my pleasure :)
    2
  13738. Rex1987 I used to play 40K back in the day. I'll take a look. What's the game called??
    2
  13739. Yes, as Sebastian said, I'm bogged down in the European theatre right now. I'd have to do a lot of reading on Japan first in order to do videos on the topic, and the issue is that I'm struggling with the reading as it is. There's not a great deal of extra time for vastly different topics.
    2
  13740. Marxism already blames the Judeo-Bourgeoisie and says they're the capitalists https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13741. You just said in response to me elsewhere: "So it's just the "Marxists" that are running academia, as per your claim then? You know you Hitler blamed for Marxism, right?" So you're now agreeing with Hitler and saying that the Marxists are all Jews.
    2
  13742. The ones who get elected are called "Socialists" and they don't protect private property at all. They steal my property off me on a daily basis!
    2
  13743. The entire video is full of evidence, and there's references at the bottom of the screen. So to claim that you watched 5 minutes "waiting for some definitive argument or evidence" is BS. You didn't watch the video, which is why your "counter argument" (if we can even call it that) is a load of rubbish. No, it's not "pure opinion" - the evidence is overwhelming. You're just unwilling to actually listen.
    2
  13744.  @Anglo-Saxon9  Okay, so you're not denying that they were forcibly removed from their homes, had their possessions, businesses and private property stolen off them. You're also not denying that they were placed in ghettos, and then camps. You're only denying the extermination after this point. And that's why I linked to the Eric Hunt video, because Eric Hunt had the exact same view as you do right now. He made a series of videos exposing the historical narrative surrounding the Holocaust, and posed some really good questions that I've not seen answered by the mainstream historical profession (not that the answers aren't out there, just that I've not seen them). However, he also realised something I think you also need to consider. As the knowledgeable National Socialist that you are, I would be extremely grateful if you could watch that video and let me know what you think about the problem Eric Hunt came across. Here's that link again https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o
    2
  13745. You're talking to someone who despises the current Establishment as well as the criminal justification system, so while I think you're wrong to deny the Holocaust, I agree that it shouldn't be a criminal offense to believe that history didn't happen. However, just because your views are being censored doesn't prove your case. My video on the Holocaust in Greece was censored by YouTube, and I was trying to prove that it happened! YouTube censorship (which is just the Establishment censorship) swings both ways. But the problem with censorship neither proves nor disproves anything. If I say the moon is made of cheese, and YouTube deletes my video, that doesn't prove the moon is made of cheese. So it's wrong to say that the Holocaust didn't happen just because your opinions are being censored. But we can agree that censorship is a problem. I would also ask a very simple question: if National Socialism isn't about helping the race, and isn't about emancipating society from the Jews, then what is the difference between a National Socialist and a Marxist Socialist? Without this element - without the fundamental idea of a pure national racial group that's all working together towards the betterment of the 'blood' - then all you're left with is Marxism?
    2
  13746. Eric Hunt was a H denier too, until he realised that the National Socialist argument had a glaring hole in it https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o
    2
  13747. And now Ben sees the problem. Denying the true nature of socialism (that it's inherently Anti-Semitic and murderous) also allows National Socialists to deny that nature of their Socialism. Well done Ben and the Left for helping the National Socialists!
    2
  13748. Hitler embraced central banking, inflation, and all the other various Socialist policies that are supposed to "help the poor", but in fact just enrich the elite. As a free market guy who wants to see everyone prosper in a true economic sense, in no way do I like Hitler, Paul.
    2
  13749. Lenin's Soviet Union banned strikes.
    2
  13750. And I actually did give the historical definition of Socialism: which is the social ownership of the means of production. I've got a 1.5 hour video explaining the definition and proving it conclusively https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13751. Yes, we all know you've bought into the propaganda image of what a democracy is. But listing all the things you think a democracy should be in the ideal propaganda sense, doesn't mean that that's what democracy is. Democracy is nothing other than "people power" (State Power).
    2
  13752. North Korea is a democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  13753. You've stated that there's a difference between socialism and statism, which is true. However you've not explained why Hitler wasn't a socialist. If he and the German people had social control of the means of production, then why are they not socialists?
    2
  13754. Maybe https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  13755. https://youtu.be/pAZsANgpOVw
    2
  13756. "Adam Smith and every economist on the planet defines economic value..." They used to define value as "labour", but that was wrong. Just eight years after Marx's Communist Manifesto, the Austrian Economists realised that value wasn't "labour" but was subjective, and since this was correct, ever since then economists have used the Subjective Theory of Value. The Labour Theory of Value is old, incorrect and completely out of touch with reality. - "In Marxism, the surplus value also counts for the amount that the worker is paid." There is no such thing as surplus value. - "Karl Marx thinks that all of that should go to the workers, and not the capitalist" Yes, he wants to give all the money to the Aryans not the Jews, just like Hitler. - "I say it with total confusion... Because I am confused how you could read Marx, find a "dark truth to his meaning", and yet miss all the obvious things you were meant to understand by reading him." You're confused because you're not listening. It's not that I don't understand Marx - I was a socialist. I fully understand what Marx is saying. The difference is that I DISAGREE with what Marx says, because I'm now better educated in economics and history than I was when I was a socialist. I can see through the lies and expose the anti-Semitism inherent within the doctrine. That's why you're confused because you believed that you were "the good guy". No sir, you're the Nazi that you hate so much, you just don't realise it. Again, when I realised that Socialism was inherently anti-Semitic, I abandoned the faith. I encourage you to do the same. I know it's scary to challenge your own world-view, but realise that Socialism is a lie. It doesn't help the workers, it hinders them. It empowers the rich and the corporations. You just think it helps the poor, but it doesn't. It's actually a mask designed to hurt everyone (the poor, the middle-income earners, and the Jews) in favour of the rich and powerful.
    2
  13757. Anti-Semitism is inherent within Socialism. Watch this video where I explain why https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13758. FDR lived until 1972? No, there was a transition away from Hoover's and FDR's policies immediately after the war https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    2
  13759. So, you've just ignored 99% of the evidence, to pick out one quote that was more of a conclusion to everything else, and then laughed at it. Well done. This is why I'm tempted to abandon the "tank" stuff in favour of this subject.
    2
  13760. "Ancaps are literally insane." I'M NOT AN ANCAP. I don't know how many times I have to tell you this. Start listening.
    2
  13761. Yea, Mises was wrong when he wrote those words. Well done. But he was only talking about Fascism, not National Socialism, since Hitler hadn't got into power at that point, and Fascism at that point had nothing to do with racism (Mussolini's mistress was Jewish - Margherita Sarfatti). And this doesn't change the fact that Hitler nationalised the unions, the industries, and the entire social system of Germany.
    2
  13762. I would say no - a National Socialist would have to be a racist. A socialist is racist even without the nationalism because anti-capitalism is entwined with anti-semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13763. I 100% agree. They're currently calling me a fascist, because they genuinely believe that people who believe in freedom and free markets are just like Hitler. It's absolutely crazy.
    2
  13764. 1. There were trade unions. There was a 32 million man strong trade union in the Reich. 2. There was a democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I 3. Slavery and labour camps are exactly what you get when you have "social" ownership of the means of production. 4. There's an upper race (the workers) and a lower race (the bourgeoisie) in Marxist Socialism.
    2
  13765. “The sacrifice of the individual existence is necessary in order to assure the conservation of the race.” - Hitler, “Mein Kampf,” p147. See, the narrative you're pushing that Hitler didn't believe in equality is incorrect. It's more nuanced than you're letting on. Hitler believed that individuals of the Aryan race would work together equally for the preservation of their race. But he also knew that there was a struggle BETWEEN races - not individuals. So Hitler's Socialism was a GERMAN Socialism. He didn't believe in equality for all everyone - he believed in equality for the individuals in the "Aryan race", just like Marxists only want equality for the workers, not the farmers or the bourgeoisie or the rich or whatever. There is no total "equality" for the whole of humanity in either Socialism, Marxism or Nazism. It's equality for the specific social group that each ideology holds up above the rest.
    2
  13766. "Sorry, professor, that's a poor source because didn't James Gregor indulge in pseudo-scientific beliefs about innate differences between racial groups?" Surely a Fascist or Nazi would know what a Fascist or Nazi is? Why are you so keen to throw out a source talking about Fascism just because the author holds a contrary view on a completely different topic? He can be right about Fascism and wrong about his racial beliefs.
    2
  13767. "Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism" Yep. Because Fascism isn't Marxist (class) Socialism. It's "National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism" (to quote historian James Gregor). Fascism is also different to National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  13768. Did the Roman Empire have social ownership of the means of production?
    2
  13769. No, it's history. That's why when they say "you have to contribute to society", they don't mean give money to the people, they mean pay your taxes to the state.
    2
  13770. To answer the original question, because the alt-Right are Socialists. As Ben has seen, there is the odd National Socialist in the comments here confirming that they are indeed socialist.
    2
  13771. The amount of people who are firmly stating the opposite of what the evidence is suggesting just proves how mislead they were by their college professors, the media, Wikipedia, and the rest of the mainstream.
    2
  13772. Karl Marx was racist and anti-Semitic, as we're Lenin and Stalin. Who were the "capitalists" you hate so much? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg?si=7H7OLGdNmSqFKOWa
    2
  13773. I have been over the definition in depth elsewhere, and I did give the definition in the video here. So the fact you think I didn't, shows that you didn't watch the video.
    2
  13774. "Nationalisation of assets isn’t socialist." Yes it is. It's the socialisation of the means of production. That's literally where the name "socialism" comes from. - "State intervention in the economy isn’t socialist either, because by that definition every single economy in human history would have been socialist." I'm not saying the Roman Empire socialised the means of production. - "but if a profit incentive remains the market remains capitalist in its function." Right. So the Nazis were socialist then, because that's what they were aiming to abolish. - "TIK definition of free market sounds like all or nothing Laissez-faire economics, with everything else being socialism." No, socialism is, and always has been, the social ownership of the means of production. If the State socialises the means of production, then that's socialism. Don't confuse my anti-Statism with anti-Socialism. While there is overlap, they are not the same thing. - "TIK is again confusing collectivism with socialism. Socialism is collectivist, but that doesn’t make every collectivist system socialist." No, the "collective" is a social group. Socialism and collectivism and communism, and many other isms, are just synonyms. This was how it was before 1917. Then Lenin came along and socialism failed, so the socialists split into various factions, and that's where you get the differences from. But I don't care about the minor distinctions - socialism is what it is. - "This is basic political theory and it’s hard to understand how TIK keeps making this misreading..." It's not a misreading. I'm DISAGREEING with you. That's not the same as "misreading". I'm stating that you are wrong, and that socialism is what it is. You can disagree, double-down on your nonsense and call it "misreading" all you like, but I'm not going to back down because the EVIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING. Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. - "The Nazi state only served itself making its elite both an economic and political elite." Exactly! All socialisms are just the same! I've said it before and I'll say it again: socialism doesn't benefit the poor or the workers. Socialists pretend it does, but it doesn't. It's a scam. - "The history of state intervention in the economy is long in Germany, and had its “official start” during Bismarck who is considered the father of the German welfare state." Yes, which is also the reason why the SPD couldn't implement "full-socialism" in 1918 or 1919 during the German Revolution - because they already knew that socialism had failed during WW1. The Germans had socialised their industries in WW1, and socialism had failed. They were called out for it, and that's why, when they got into power, the Social Democrats did absolutely nothing. They couldn't, because they had to deny what socialism was and pretend it was something else. Except it's not. Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. - "...Bismarck who is considered the father of the German welfare state." Oh, so when Bismarck does it, it's socialism. But when the Nazis do it, it's not socialism. Gotya. - "The only thing that changed with the Nazis was that the industrialists now had to swear loyalty and subserviency to the new German state." Yes, a state which was socialist and for the GERMAN WORKERS, hence the name National Socialist German Workers' Party.
    2
  13775. Except this isn't a "theoretical" video. This is all about concrete facts and evidence. You are quite literally dismissing copious amounts of evidence of how the National Socialist economy operated to brand this video as "lacking in conciseness and cohesion". I'm sorry, but that simply doesn't make any sense. What's the point of having a debate over the definitions if nobody knows how the economy actually operated, and incorrectly assume that the National Socialists "privatised" the industries? I have to show what they actually did before I talk about the definitions. That was my mistake in the 5 hour video, and in the Public Vs Private video - I put the definitions first, and they dismissed them because "the Nazis privatised the industries"... Except they didn't.
    2
  13776. @Florentino Perez I think he's referring to this one https://youtu.be/h1lWBEdNuFE
    2
  13777. I never said Amazon was owned by the workers? It's owned by the public, but not the 'workers" (I mean, there is no unified class of "workers" anyway, so it makes no sense to even say that). And again, you still haven't explained why dismissing sources is acceptable. All sources that aren't actual forgeries are valid. They might be wrong, but they're still valid, so you cannot dismiss a source just because you don't like it. I explained why fully in this video here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI?si=qUBFZHT17mtRO2mv
    2
  13778. I might do
    2
  13779. "In Germany there were ALWAYS private property and private corporrations." Literally, this was debunked within the first minute of the video. WATCH THE VIDEO.
    2
  13780. It's rare to see someone admit they made a mistake, so I would like to say thank you for that! If I could shake your hand, I would do. However, I will fully admit that I'm a former socialist, and there are former socialists in the Austrian School of Economics. While you might see this as an issue, it actually holds many advantages. I have a friend who has never been a socialist, and he gets frustrated sometimes and says "why don't the Left not see the flaws in their own narrative - it's so obvious!" But when I explain to him how a Leftist sees the world, he then understands why they don't see the flaws in their argument, and realizes it's not because they're stupid, or evil, or anything like that. He understands that they have been tricked, miseducated, and outright lied to. Instead of being angry at them, he then becomes sympathetic, which is a good thing. Now, he's not an Austrian and he's not interested in economics as a whole; he's just looking at it from a perspective of trying to work hard, earn money and pay as little tax as possible, which is fair enough. But my point here is that, just because someone has changed their mind, or has taken the Redpill (which is how I describe it) and sees the world for how it really is, doesn't mean that they've got no integrity, or that they're wishy-washy etc. No, it means that they hold the truth above all else. I stopped being a socialist when I saw the evidence of Hitler's Socialism and had an epiphany - Socialism is Racism, Racism is Socialism. Upon seeing that truth, there was no going back (to remain a socialist would mean I would have to embrace racism, which I obviously wasn't willing to do). After the backlash, people accused me of reading Mises, so I got curious and discovered that the Austrian School was completely different than what I'd been told by the Left. While I don't fully agree with Mises and Rothbard in all respects, I have to say that the two of them are intellectual heavyweights. Perhaps the word "geniuses" is too much, but they're above and beyond anything I've seen elsewhere, like from Thomas Sowell (who I think is brilliant, and he was an ex-socialist too, but just not on the same level as Mises and Rothbard). My point is to say that someone admitting that they used to be wrong, and changing their mind, is actually a sign of strength, not a bad thing. So if someone is a former Communist, or a former Socialist, or whatever, then that's actually a sign of sincerity.
    2
  13781. The reason it's called the "Austrian School of Economics" is because that's where Mises came from. Mises was Jewish and fled the Nazis after the Anschluss of Austria, and moved to the USA. However, Mises was a pro-free market guy (more so than even the classic liberals). I'm sure there were communists in Austria, and there definitely were Fascists, but Mises was neither. If you read his book "Socialism" written in 1922, it crushes Socialism and Communism. His book "Omnipotent Government" crushes Socialism, Communism, Fascism and Nazism all at the same time. The Austrian School isn't Communist in the slightest - they're about as anti-Communist, anti-Socialist and anti-Fascist+Nazi as you can get. I'm not fond of the name "Austrian School", and I can see why it's confusing to people. Leads people to wrong conclusions. Really it should be the "Freedom School" or something. But yeah, don't let the name put you off. They also aren't nationalists either - they have no affiliation with Austria. It's only because that's where the movement originated.
    2
  13782.  @frostnova8300  And neither was Hitler. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Marxist.
    2
  13783. I love the irony of calling someone who's pointing out facts is a "liar". I guess if you believe in dialectics, everything is a lie.
    2
  13784. Tooze writes for the Guardian. I don't know if he's part of some "cultural Marxist conspiracy" or not (I'm not even sure what that conspiracy is), but the Guardian loves him. He's obviously a Leftist, which is why his book shows a bunch of state intervention, but concludes it's "capitalism".
    2
  13785. You didn't know the guy was Jewish, even though he said so in his comment. Can you not read? You certainly don't have the mental capacity to watch two minutes of my video before spouting nonsense, so this doesn't surprise me. As a hateful anti-semite who's modus operandi is to spam comments for years on my videos (that you haven't even watched) and to insult people as a way to overcome the lack of purpose and meaning of your life, you're a detriment to any cause you support. But the brainwashed ideologues who like your comments are equally as blind and miserable, which is why they're upvoting you and your racism.
    2
  13786. What gets me is that your socialist comrades are actually liking your comment. The mask has slipped https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13787.  @slaterslater5944  Calling a Polish Jew a "clown", whilst also stating elsewhere that the Jews were running academia (I have screenshots) is not acceptable behaviour Slater.
    2
  13788. Yeah, after their mass inability to watch two minutes of the video, I'm rapidly coming to that conclusion.
    2
  13789. And corporations are easier to control than thousands of free market businesses, which is why the Socialists love Syndicalism (Corporatism).
    2
  13790. Democracy is totalitarianism. I've explained this at length https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  13791. Also there were no "employers" any more. The state (run by the German Workers'Party) was the employer. There were only "leaders" or managers now, who ran things on behalf of the state, just like you had in the Soviet Union.
    2
  13792. Without Hitler's Socialism you do not have the Holocaust, since without central planning, centralised control of the means of production, or the society in ownership over property, you cannot have the removal of the Jews. This wasn't when people exchanged goods back and forth on the stock exchange (which was closed) and then suddenly Auschwitz, it was all centrally planned and ordered. The Jews had their private property taken off them, and then their lives. They had no rights under this society - it was a German Socialism. Wage controls, price controls, central distribution of goods... It was Socialism.
    2
  13793. Rick, your entire comment is irrelevant. Yes, then didn't have a clear plan when they started, and it evolved over time, but by the Wannsee Conference, we have plenty of evidence that this was central planning from the start. It wasn't that they were all buying goods back and forth and then suddenly death camps, they planned it out. The first concentration camps sprang up within a couple months after Hitler got elected. And I reject your personal attack. This is on you. If you can't accept evidence and logic, and instead rely entirely on your emotions and ideology, then that's on you. I can lead a horse to water but I cannot make you think.
    2
  13794. I agree, he does
    2
  13795. Alfred Krupp was a committed Nazi Party member, and Hitler was the one who put him in charge of Krupp industries by decree in 1943. It was known as the Krupp Law.
    2
  13796. At Peter, you keep asking this in the comments. The Nazis were against profits, which is why they centrally planned the distribution of goods.
    2
  13797. The Industrielleneingabe was at the 11th hour, and doesn't prove that Hitler was funded by them at that time, or before. Again, EVERY mainstream historian now has to admit that Hitler's National Socialist German Workers' Party was funded largely by the grassroots, and by copious amounts of loans. I've concluded that, had Hitler not became Chancellor in January 1933, his party would have imploded from all the debt they had accrued.
    2
  13798. Yes, I've read Samuel Mitcham and Shirer. And yes, they're old sources with huge problems with them. As part of this Monday's video, I'm going to be going over some of the problems with Shirer's book, which was published in 1960. 1960 is BEFORE 1980, when Taylor looked at the sources in depth and realised that Hitler hadn't been funded by the industrialists (except Tyssen). And Shirer's was one of the first books I read on the topic, and it's full or errors. But you wouldn't know this because you've not read this subject in any real depth.
    2
  13799. "Uhh, libertarianism? "Anarcho"-capitalism is a libertarian ideology. Right-wing libertarianism is really just classical liberalism in disguise." Again, I'm none of these things. I'm not libertarian, not AnCap, and not a classical liberal. But no, keep saying that I am, and just believe everyone claiming that I am, because you enjoy making stuff up as you go along.
    2
  13800. "Apparently you never heard of the Secret Meeting of February 20 1933 after which capitalists gave the Nazis 2 million Reichsmarks." Did this happen before or after Hitler was in power? As I said, prior to Hitler getting into power, the only major industrialist to support him was Fritz Thyssen.
    2
  13801. Also, as Turner showed in the 1980s, and as all mainstream historians now accept (including Richard Evans), only one capitalist funded Hitler prior to the seizure of power, and that was Fritz Thyssen... who then ended up in a concentration camp. Again, had you bothered to watch the video, you would have seen this.
    2
  13802. Socialism predates Marxism. So Marxism is just a variant of socialism, like fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13803. We don't live in a capitalist world, and the fact you think we do is a signal that you don't know what capitalism is, how Karl Marx defined it, and don't even know what money is https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    2
  13804. Your ignorance of free market economics is telling. Instead of assuming that everyone who understands history is evil, have you considered looking into the alternative point of view? Have you read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, or "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell? If not, I would recommend them before jumping to conclusions about the "evil" capitalists.
    2
  13805. We live in a capitalist world right now, correct? Yet, the market isn't free. We've got copious amounts of state taxes, state laws, state regulations, minimum wages, interest manipulations, currency printing... and loads more distortions and interventions by the state. So, if the free market is capitalism, how can you call this capitalism? We don't have capitalism, since the market isn't free. Yet you think this is capitalism? Clearly then, there must be a separation between the term capitalism and the free market. Thus, I'm for the free market, not capitalism.
    2
  13806. By the way, I'm not a capitalist either. I'm for the free market, not capitalism.
    2
  13807. Mises didn't usher in Fascism. He prevented the Fascist leader at the time implementing a full socialist doctrine 😂 Maybe you should read the full chapter that Mises wrote rather than selectively quoting him.
    2
  13808. Again, Mises was wrong. I don't know why you think this is, somehow, an "attack" against me. I don't agree with Mises on all points, including his views on "democracy" and history theory.
    2
  13809. @друг "Dr Pepper" CAN'T STAND THAT STUFF!
    2
  13810. Highest peak in the Alps, but sadly not the answer
    2
  13811. I'm actually working on the follow up to this battle - Operation Crusader. It's going to be 7 to 8 hours long, which explains why it's taking so long!
    2
  13812. Not really. The officers here were just bad. Should have been purged before the war like the US and USSR officer corps were.
    2
  13813. Glad you enjoyed it :) working on one on Operation Crusader now, hope it'll be out in a few weeks
    2
  13814. I'm working on the next one's (Operation Crusader, and then Stalingrad). Crusader is next, and will be the longest Battlestorm video I've made ever. Stalingrad will be at some point after that, and again, will be even longer!
    2
  13815. Thanks Jurij! Glad you're enjoying my videos. Spread the word if you can :)
    2
  13816. Glad you liked it!
    2
  13817. Really glad to hear you enjoyed it! Not sure if you've seen, but I'm currently publishing videos on the following battle after this one, Operation Crusader. I'll leave the link to the first video https://youtu.be/_pBfn6UVktY
    2
  13818. Yes.
    2
  13819. Interesting. The sources I've used definitely say they're using 50mms.
    2
  13820. No worries about the English :) I'm working on the follow up to this video now. It'll be Operation Crusader, and will be 7-8 hours long.
    2
  13821. And I'm working on the next one now. Operation Crusader. Will probably be the longest Battlestorm video so far too :)
    2
  13822. Will do! In fact, I'm working on the next in this series right now - Operation Crusader :)
    2
  13823. Good to hear! The start to the follow-up to this battle will be out next week (Operation Crusader) :)
    2
  13824. I'm doing the North African Campaign in order and there's battles in between this one and that. But I will get to it eventually :)
    2
  13825. Congratulations!
    2
  13826. Sorry for the wait, Stalingrad is kinda distracting
    2
  13827. I will at some point, and have a wish list of books ready for it. My intention is to cover the WDC and the Middle East before progressing into Tunisia, Italy and then eventually Western Europe. All this while simultaneously covering battles on the Eastern Front
    2
  13828. Thanks Steven! I'm concentrating on Stalingrad at the moment, but I will be doing other campaigns after that. 1940 would be interesting, and I do intend to cover it at some point
    2
  13829. Wow, thank you! That's a compliment-and-a-half :)
    2
  13830. Oh don't worry, I will :) and thank you
    2
  13831. I'm glad it was better than expected :) As I said in one of my previous videos - I kinda want you to be scared to click on the Stalingrad video when it comes out, because you know you'll be sucked into watching a good-quality 24hour video :D
    2
  13832. Everyone is biased. But history theory (and I'm assuming Mises too, I haven't read that particular work) explains how we can overcome that bias, and we do that using a free, open and honest debate
    2
  13833. It's funny how the media never refer to them as Socialists, even though you can find images of them waving their Socialist banners online
    2
  13834. The issue is that they didn't enter the debate as equals... They don't debate! Their idea of a debate is an emotional outburst! And that's obviously not what a debate is ☹️ It's not necessarily that IQ dropped, it's poor teachers who are ideologically driven. The miseducation system is the problem more than anything else
    2
  13835. "They were active in both sides." History is the study of the human condition. This is why Mises (who was Jewish) called his book "Human Action", because humans act - that's part of the human condition. So, of course Jewish people were active on both sides! They acted/reacted to what was going on. When the Nazis took over, many Jews fled to the west. Mises fled when they invaded Austria, and they burnt his library down. So, they influenced other governments and Jewish communities in the west, who then acted/reacted to what was going on. BUT this doesn't mean it's some sort of 'grand conspiracy' or coordinated action. They didn't operate as a group, they operated as individuals placed within a particular environment, and then acted/reacted accordingly. This is similar to the concept of the free market. People go to shops and buy things all the time. It's not coordinated though. They don't all go to the same shops, or buy the same things. We're not acting collectively, but individually within our given surroundings. "...we must realize that all actions are performed by individuals. A collective operates always through hte intermediary of one or several individuals whose actions are related to the collective as the secondary source." - Mises, Human Action, P42. "We can see a crowd, i.e., a multitude of people. Whether this crowd is a mere gathering or a mass (in the sense in which this term is used in contemporary psychology) or an organized body or any other kind of social entity is a question which can only be answered by understanding the meaning which they themselves attach to their presence. And this meaning is always the meaning of individuals. Not our senses, but understanding, a mental process, makes us recognize social entities." - Mises, "Human Action," P43.
    2
  13836. Not for yourself because you get it, but it is required for others
    2
  13837. Out on time, this time 😂
    2
  13838. It could be. Unfortunately I can't verify whether the Soviets did or didn't seek peace at this time. It would make sense, given the fact that the Germans were on the retreat and Finland was willing to negotiate. But I have no proof either way.
    2
  13839. It's always Halderp
    2
  13840. How long did that take you to do?
    2
  13841. Have a bonus FIP for not being an assholian :D
    2
  13842. It must be a real shame to be the last of anything. Imagine being the last in charge of an "empire" that had lasted a thousand years, and you're the one that has to dissolve it.
    2
  13843. Yeah I agree, it doesn't really make sense to judge an entire population based on the actions of one event, which was almost 80 years ago, and had nothing to do with the "morale decay" of the country anyway. Good old nationalism haunting the narrative as usual.
    2
  13844. It sucks doesn't it. This one seems to last longer than usual as well.
    2
  13845. This is a historical video. Sources are listed in the first seconds of the video, plus references are at the bottom. The reason the views are low is because it is poorly titled, which I'm aware of.
    2
  13846. "Try to build a transnational railroad across America on investment alone." See Chapter 2 of Folsom's 'The Myth of the Robber Barons' for a great example of just this. James Hill did exactly that. "Try to built the entire backbone of the internet on your own." I don't understand your point. The internet is not owned by a state. It was originally created by the military, however it's no longer owned by the military. The private sector took the idea and ran with it. The internet is an example of the potential of the private sector if left to do its own thing.
    2
  13847. He's pretty good in my opinion
    2
  13848. The racists you support are calling for "affirmative action" against "white cis-gendered males" and saying that they're the reason for all the problems in the world. They're not asking for equality, but rather a "Social Revolution", which as history teaches us always leads to millions of deaths. Yet, apparently, this isn't racism or sexism for you? Wake up.
    2
  13849. The socialist police are a community mob. The reason medical services in the USA are changing so much is because you no longer have a free market in health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ The NHS doesn't need reform, it needs dissolving. And the Public sector is the State. Society is the State, hence the word "Social-ism" meaning State control. And before you argue that it doesn't mean that, you've just spent this entire comment section arguing for State control, so yes it does. Socialism and Public control are the same thing, as the video you're commenting on shows. Sharia law is a public law, not private law. In a free market, the individual decides whether to obey the rules that others are trying to impose upon him. Since he owns his own body (his own private property), he can decide whether to obey or not. A Socialist law system will simply impose laws upon him, since his body doesn't belong to him, it belongs to the social group (the State). The Mafia isn't private. It's not a small family group, or an individual. It's an example of a public body vying for power from another public body.
    2
  13850. The means of production for the NHS is health - either medicine, doctors, beds, ambulances... You could argue that it provides a service rather than a good, but in economic terms that's still a means of production. So because the NHS is nationalized, the means of production are in the public sector. The courts, police, and prisons are publicly owned, and again, are socialist. We don't have a private court system, or a private prison or police services. We have a publicly owned system. (You may find this video interesting https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ )
    2
  13851. There are numerous rebuttals of the idea of natural monopolies. Here are some articles explaining this. https://mises.org/library/piketty-wrong-markets-dont-concentrate-wealth https://mises.org/wire/problem-robber-baron-narrative https://mises.org/library/five-ways-create-monopoly https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
    2
  13852. Fantastic! Welcome, and put your feet up 😊
    2
  13853. Yes, the comments in that subreddit are terrible, and I will deal with them at some point. Not sure if you watched the video fully but I showed the history of the terms and gave the definitions, and that's why they don't like it - because I've nailed down the terms. Postmodernist Marxists want to avoid the idea that Socialism is totalitarian state-control of the economy because they know it will alienate people, so they will shame and slander anyone who makes the claim, even if there's a ton of historical evidence in support of that claim. Worse, they can't even give a definition of socialism themselves.
    2
  13854. Anarchism = anti-state. The State is authority/authoritarian. So to be an anarchist, you need to be against authority. Communism isn't anarchy. A community that has collective ownership prevents (i.e. has authority over) the individual from owning his own property (including his own body). These two concepts are fundamentally in opposition to each other. But the reason a lot of Socialists are anarchist is because they either don't know what socialism is, haven't thought through their own ideology to it's logical conclusion, or because they want the Revolution (temporary anarchy) which then leads to totalitarianism. They think they're against the capitalist State, therefore they're anarchists in their own mind. But in reality they're not.
    2
  13855. Marx was an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  13856. 1. Corporations are the Public. YouTube (or, more accurately, Alphabet, and Google) is an internet-State. 2. Counterfeiting the currency supply (inflation), and then causing mal-investment in Corporations like Alphabet, who normally would have collapsed if the State hadn't been propping them up with debt-currency.
    2
  13857. Good question. First, the criticism I received had some merit to it, since a lot of historians have concluded the same thing, and I still hear people say that central banks and corporations are 'private', when they're 'public'. Therefore a solid argument needed to presented. I also think part of the reason is because I want to educate people, or at least get them to start thinking critically. My critics don't do that, so I've tried to get them to start doing that. And some of it is for my own sake - I want to see if my argument stands up to scrutiny. This video and my Hitler's Socialism video have so far. Their only counter arguments are that I'm racist (which I know is not true) and that my definitions are incorrect. Considering they can't even define Socialism, I think I'm alright with that one.
    2
  13858. And they'll "refute me" using wikipedia and ad hominem attacks
    2
  13859. He was one of many. I could literally do video after video of just hammering bad comments like that.
    2
  13860. "Public property is property that is managed democratically in some way. All manage it. It is public." Nope, that's not what it is at all. I explain what it is in the video. "So a dictatorship is the private property of the dictator, not the public property of the state." In that case, if the dictator is democratically elected, then it must be public property. "There's no state in a dictatorship, the dictator owns it individually, often even passes it down as inheritance the way all private property is handled." Yeah, you don't understand the difference between Public and Private. Please watch the video where I explain it in detail.
    2
  13861. Not CtrlAlt Debug, but I'll give this a shot. "The only system which would be normal and truly humanist in nature, is when everyone would work for benefits of community, rather than for themselves." Only by giving things to others will they give you money in return. You have to fulfill their needs, and they will reward you for doing that. Working hard for your community is called capitalism. Socialism is elitist in nature (centralized control). It creates state-monopoly (corporations, or bureaucracy), and creates "leaches" (to use your own term) by removing incentives for people to actually work for their community. Why work when there's no incentive to do so? You see this at minimum wage - hard workers are paid the same as lazy workers, which is why hard workers despise lazy workers and often times slow down their own pace of work to match the lazy worker's pace. Since there's no incentive to work faster than the slowest worker, why work faster? "For example, in theory, communism is close to perfection." Working all day for no reason or reward. I agree, it's the perfect nightmare. No wonder humanity doesn't want it. "In practice, anarcho-capitalism is a paradox." Individual workers working for their community without a government preventing them from doing so. I'm not sure there's a paradox there. Capitalism is not monopolistic as I showed in the video. The only reason you think it is is because you think corporations are capitalism. Corporations are not capitalism. I also addressed why Anarcho-Syndicalism was a paradox in the video so I would encourage you to watch it fully if you didn't finish it. "after some time of filtering and battle for profit, a new structure will arise and try to establish total control (monopoly)." 1. it won't be a monopoly if everyone else has rights and freedoms. 2. if you don't want a monopoly, why are you pro-state? 3. you're assuming I'm an anarcho-capitalist, which I'm not. I recognize that some sort of state will emerge from total anarchy. So my view is that we need to hold the state to the same standards we hold the rest of society. If it's wrong to steal from others, then taxation and inflation should be outlawed. If I'm not allowed to murder someone, then a state should not be able to either. If I'm not allowed to fraudulently print my own currency, then the central banks are not allowed to either. Just like we do with other entities in the economy, we should have the option to voluntarily give our money to a state if we think it's doing a good job, and refuse to if it's not. Under such a system, states would have an incentive to actually do what's best for the populace, rather than do what's in their own interests. If they failed, they would collapse and be replaced with a better state. Currently, states can do a bad job over and over, and they continue to exist (e.g. the British government).
    2
  13862. Who is Bruch?
    2
  13863. What are you talking about? Markets aren't a "set of regulations". A free market is a buyer and a seller. A non-free market is a buyer, a regulator and a seller.
    2
  13864. Everyone is biased. Bias is inherent in humanity. Stating that someone is biased is equivalent to saying they're human and not a god https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    2
  13865. Now that's the kind of response I want from my videos :) cheers!
    2
  13866. No, but you would be part of the Public Sector rather than the Private Sector.
    2
  13867. "When you say Socialism you exclude workers co-operatives and the British Co-operative Wholesale Society?" Is two-girls one-cup real socialism? A small group of workers working together is not socialism. That's just a very bad way of running a business. You can tell it's a bad way of running a business, otherwise all businesses would be running it that way, which they don't, and those that didn't would struggle to compete. In reality, "cooperatives" are inefficient and unfair, which is why they struggle to retain their managers and employees. If it's a large corporation which classifies itself as a cooperative, but has shareholders, then that's part of the public sector. If then all of society was a "cooperative" (aka, Corporatism) then that would be socialism (either Fascist or Marxist, depending on if it's a cooperative on the national level, or a cooperative on the international level). "When you say Capitalism you exclude big bs and bivg government " Yes, since Capitalism is Private Sector control of the economy, and corporations and governments are Public Sector entities.
    2
  13868. "A capitalist business can only be a small business, a big business is not capitalist, it is a state?" Basically, yes. Capitalism is 'private' (individual or small-family group) control of the economy, and thus small businesses and self-employed individuals (who are free to operate independently and naturally without restrictions) would be classed as capitalist. Big business is no longer individual or a small-family, and thus isn't 'private'. Big business is a hierarchy, and thus a 'public'. A Public is a State. If you think about it, working in a corporation is like working for the government - complete with internal politics, miscommunications, and a chain of command. "I know you have covered this but to me a state is a government, or it could be a region like a US state?" Yes, and that's correct. Now imagine that the US government was called something like 'Law Inc'. The only difference between it and another corporation is the money-making business it's dealing in. "So a truly Capitalist country would consist of only small businesses like shops or small factories maybe?" Short answer: yes. But technically, a free market economy doesn't prevent 'Publics' (States) from existing. So Publics and States can emerge in such an economy. "What if you needed something big like a shipyard or a place to build planes or trains, or cars, mass production, like the big textile Mills we had, would they be capitalist or not?" Big businesses can emerge from the free market, should the natural demand exist. (Big businesses these days are propped up by regulation and central bank money printing.) Now, does big business count as capitalist? Probably not. Hundreds or thousands of people organized in a Public State is not capitalist. The economy as a whole could still be classed as capitalist though, so long as there was no forceful theft or enslavement (tax, inflation, slavery etc).
    2
  13869. Thank you! The only problem with having my own university is that I'd not have time to videos at the same time, and I'd rather do the videos 😂
    2
  13870. Was that their actual response, or are you paraphrasing? I mean, even if they genuinely thought it was capitalism, calling Hitler and the National Socialists "Fascists" is simply wrong in itself. The fact that National Socialists are inherently racist, whereas Fascists don't have to be racists should be a big RED flag to them (pun intended).
    2
  13871. I will ignore bad arguments. For example, I ignored TheFinnishSocialist until this video, then I took his comments and destroyed them, even though there was no substance to them when he originally posted them a year ago. (I took the screenshot at the time, not recently.) There's no point responding to poor arguments which either misrepresent what I say or are contradictions in themselves.
    2
  13872. Doublethinkers and fanatics. For some reason, they refuse to see reality and continue to believe in a fantasy utopia they can imagine in their heads.
    2
  13873. Fundamental mistakes - using evidence, thinking logically, and not accepting at face value counterarguments that are full of holes, contradictions and mistaken beliefs, glued together by the "belief" that Socialism is not inherently immoral.
    2
  13874. "also can you give evidence for a country using a free market economy producing a military that was competitive with other militaries in modern times." No, I can't, for two reasons. 1: because the public sector state does not like private competition. And 2: because under capitalism, the military would be small and private (e.g. citizens owning their own weapons like in Switzerland or the USA), so you wouldn't get massive destructive and horrible wars like in WW1 and WW2 where millions of lives were wiped out. Under a free market economy, military adventures would have to be short, sharp and sweet, otherwise it would cost too much. There wouldn't be huge standing armies, and there would be more incentive for both sides to come to a deal than it would be to resort to armed conflict. And that's exactly the point. This video is a nice explanation https://youtu.be/VgpThFkZmbc "how does one distinguish a facility that can only come from collectivization? what is the criterion?" I don't know what this means? Could you ask it in a different way? Or maybe clarify what you mean?
    2
  13875. Welcome aboard 👍
    2
  13876. At this point, I give little value to the opinion of people who 'hate' on me after watching this video. The best they can do is call me names. Their 'counterarguments' are pathetic, contradictory and unconvincing, yet it's somehow my fault that I won't change my mind. Fanatical belief in the evil of socialism is a big problem, and it's almost impossible to get people to see just how evil it is
    2
  13877. Human "sub-races" don't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ If you think they do, you are what we call a "racist".
    2
  13878. I will admit, I have deleted comments in the past when I got the first backlash on my NS was S videos, and I did delete some Nazi Holocaust denial comments too a while back. However, I realised that I was going against my own principles to delete comments, and it was also silly because it takes time to delete them which could be better spend researching history. So now, I don't delete or block anyone from commenting, even though I'm pretty sure YouTube has deleted channels for not policing their comments sections... but I'll cross that hurdle if and when it comes
    2
  13879. @Nexus, no comments are getting deleted by me. Some comments automatically (and randomly) end up in the spam folder (which I go through and accept the comments once every so often), and other people can always report a comment and get it removed that way, but I'm not deleting comments because I can't be bothered.
    2
  13880. "Building a road network can only be done at the direction of the public sector." Who's going to build the roads? https://mises.org/wire/who-will-build-roads-anyone-who-stands-benefit-them And another https://youtu.be/BcGvfoZISR8 And another https://youtu.be/sj7wuHFn6pI And just look at all these people thinking that roads can be built without the State! https://youtu.be/rKoTYMKyVh8
    2
  13881. Thank you! I do think that this one in particular is one of my best videos, so I'm glad you rate it highly
    2
  13882. Yes, the BBC is both racist and sexist. Goodbye.
    2
  13883. "To call Milton Friedman a socialist or to call him in some senses against capitalism for supporting a role of the state in supporting the rights of such entities, doesn't feel right. Not that you have said this, but it seems a logical consequence of what you are saying." Yeah, this is you jumping to conclusions, and I disagree with you on this statement. So let me clarify. Milton Friedman was a good economist, and I think he was right in a lot of regards. However, with regard to corporations, Friedman (and many other capitalists, including many Austrian economists too) are mistaken. This doesn't mean that they're not 'real' capitalists or anything like that, it just means that they didn't look into the origin of the words, or the meaning of the words that they used. They said they were for capitalism (private control), and believed that corporations were capitalist. Well, that's just an honest mistake, they're not capitalist. That's why this video is important - it clarifies the words. It's not an accusation against those capitalists who don't realize that corporations (corpus = body = public = state) cannot be private (non-state), rather it's meant to educate and clarify to everyone that capitalists should not be in favour of corporations because corporations are not capitalist. So in no way am I accusing Friedman or anyone else of being a Socialist for thinking corporations are capitalist. This is just a correction to this false belief.
    2
  13884. We don't have a free market and never have had. So long as people use the State's manipulated currency, and obey the State's laws, then a free market cannot exist.
    2
  13885. Ah ok, thanks! I guess he mentioned my videos recently, since there's a sudden influx of people saying his name
    2
  13886. Who's Bruch?
    2
  13887. Incorrect. You've described Socialism in two different ways. Capitalism is the absence of government in the economy.
    2
  13888. "you can be a socialist in favor of a limited government, greater individual control of the economy, and greater democratization of our lives." Care to explain how you can have greater democracy (state control) and limited government (anti-state control) at the same time? And if you have greater democracy (group/state control), then this is also opposite to individual control. So could you explain that too?
    2
  13889. I'm preparing to tackle some Eastern Front battles :) and by preparing, I mean buying some of the books and realising just how titanic the battles are compared to what I've covered so far and curling up into a ball and crying for several hours... Koenigsberg is something I'll add to the to-do list I've got going. I think I may cover some earlier Eastern Front battles first though
    2
  13890. I did do that with the old software I used for Market Garden and Compass docs, but I may not be able to do it now. I'll experiment and see what I can come up with though. If I can and it doesn't take forever I will
    2
  13891. @Ngo - not heard of that battle before. I will have to take a look
    2
  13892. Thank you! I will certainly try! :)
    2
  13893. Thanks! Glad you liked it
    2
  13894. It still wasn't enough. If there was a second Romania supplying oil to Axis Europe, they still would have been in deficit https://youtu.be/URBlC-wjXiQ
    2
  13895. Haha I was considering discuss it in more detail, but didn't think it needed more than a "they couldn't fuel the vehicles they had" point. I do think I'll make another video on German production though :)
    2
  13896. Yes, I have a degree in history (2:1). I'm not involved in a research program or anything, this was just a hobby for me, which has just recently (since April) evolved into a full-time job. I just have a passion for history, and WW2 in general. I mostly explained my background in this video, which you might be interested in watching https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  13897. Wrong Trousers was better.
    2
  13898. Good to hear, thanks for watching :)
    2
  13899. You had to use the word moist, didn't you
    2
  13900. Thanks for subscribing! And your comment certainly wasn't a TLDR. Be sure to check out my Battlestorm series, especially the latest ones. They're the ones I'm most proud of :)
    2
  13901. But the same could be said for Leningrad, Kiev, or Kharkov, or Rostov on Don... Taking these logistical centres did not result in the collapse of the Soviet Union. Same applies with Moscow. And Moscow is heavily defended - moreso than those other cities. And even if Germany takes Moscow, she's still in a fight with the Red Army, and she's still without oil. So, strategically it makes sense to not go for Moscow, and it makes sense to go for the oil fields and the food in the Ukraine.
    2
  13902. As I said in the video, the Dunkirk bit was just a theory. The rest was not though.
    2
  13903. Thank you sir! So good to hear you're finding these videos informative :)
    2
  13904. Excellent! Let me know their opinions on it :) my focus is on the European Theatre which is why I didn't include Japan in this. I simply haven't read enough on the Asia-Pacific Theatre to do a video on it. Maybe in the future at some point though. Thanks!
    2
  13905. Even with Soviet support, the Germans were going to run out of oil anyway. If they didn't attack when they did, they would have suffered under a massive economic crisis, and their army wouldn't have had the fuel to launch the attack later. Yes, he absolutely should have considered the oil shortage before invading Poland, although Göring can be blamed for not stockpiling enough oil prior to the outbreak of war. Glad you enjoyed the video :)
    2
  13906. HOI4 is probably the correct call given the context of this video :)
    2
  13907. Nice! Glad to hear that :) I publish videos on Mondays, and currently working behind the scenes on a 7-8 hour documentary on Operation Crusader, which I'm hoping to publish soon. Just thought I'd let you know :)
    2
  13908. I would have, but I haven't studied the Far Eastern front, have limited sources, and don't have sufficient information to back up anything I would have said on Japan. Otherwise, you're correct, they did have similar oil problems
    2
  13909. The British blockade prevented overseas imports. Romania was shipping all the oil they could, but it wasn't enough. And they were buying oil off the Soviets, but they weren't getting enough. Plus, Hitler's whole philosophy was that Germany shouldn't be relying on the other powers for resources. That's why he started the war in the first place - Lebensraum and Autarky. If he had relied on Soviet oil, then he would be dependent on the Soviet Union - the very nation Hitler wanted to destroy; a slavic-communist nation. So from Hitler's perspective, it makes total sense. But you're correct, it's very overoptimistic to assume you can defeat the Soviet Union in a few months. But then, they had defeated France in six weeks.
    2
  13910. They had small amounts of oil coming in, but not enough to fuel the entire war machine. That's why Barbarossa in 1941 was the attack of three Army Groups, while Fall Blau in 1942 was the attack of one army group (which split in two), and why Kursk was an attack by just two armies. They found themselves increasingly without the fuel to attack as time went on.
    2
  13911. Yes he does, although I think he still doesn't agree with my assessment that the oil factor was the primary reason the Germans lost the war (but he may have changed his mind since the last time we spoke).
    2
  13912. Agreed! If you enjoy this topic you'll like the Toprani lecture video https://youtu.be/RgxEBGAXNRU
    2
  13913. Yeah, I'm trying to approach these like I could a history university essay, except making things a little more entertaining (hopefully)
    2
  13914. The interesting part is that even if there had been a second Romania in 1941 they still would have been critically short. Romania provided 5,200,000 tons of oil in 1941. The Axis European shortfall was 9,558,000. A second Romania would only have reduced this to 4,358,000 tons. THAT'S how short they were.
    2
  13915. Thank you, glad you liked it :) I'm concentrating on the European Theatre for now, which is why I didn't mention Japan. That's not to say I won't ever cover the Far East Front, but I have to prioritize.
    2
  13916. Unless the EU disintegrates. Brexit, then possibly Dexit might start a cascade.
    2
  13917. Also just to clarify, I am not from Liverpool.
    2
  13918. As shown in the video the Germans were not producing enough oil. This meant they had a massive shortfall. In fact, if Romania had doubled it's production of oil, it still wouldn't have been enough. It would actually have needed to triple it.
    2
  13919. "This turds hypothesis..." If you disagree with me and the other historians saying this, that's fine. But there's no need to call people names. Such childish behaviour is not appropriate in the civilised world. If you can't be a decent human being, don't watch or comment on my videos again. I only want viewers who can think, not people who think they already know all the answers.
    2
  13920. You're very welcome :)
    2
  13921. I'm glad you liked the Dunkirk bit. A lot of people didn't, although I will come back to it one day and make a proper decision on it after a ton more research.
    2
  13922. MHV's channel is awesome :) and thanks Rune, it would be nice if I could reach a wider audience. I want more people talking about history. Especially WW2 history
    2
  13923. Ich sprechen night gud? :D I am learning, but Duolingo can only help me so much! I don't need to know what Brot und Wasser means, I need to know how to read books like "Stalingrad: Mythos und Wirklichkeit einer Schlacht". Stupid owl!
    2
  13924. Glad you liked it :)
    2
  13925. I read every comment! I may not have time to reply to them all, but I do read them :) I'm glad you took the time to write all of that. I'll pick out some points. The British deciding to hold out after Dunkirk is a critical one, with the blockade by the Royal Navy being the main factor. Whether it is the "turning point" of the war or not is up for debate, but preventing oil shipments coming into Germany meant that the European Axis powers had to do something before their oil ran dry (athough it's worth noting that their food and other resources were limited too). Whether Hitler should or should not have crushed the British at Dunkirk is a debate I don't know enough about. But I do think it's interesting that if the USA hadn't been so clearly on the British side prior to 1941, the war may have been different. If the USA had decided to remain purely neutral (not fake neutral, as it actually was), then how would things have turned out? Britain was bankrupt in 1941 and entirely reliant on the USA. It could have been a close-run thing. When I said Hitler wasn't mad, I just meant about some of his decisions. He was clearly a very evil man, and probably quite mad in 1945 - but who wouldn't be when you're facing defeat as well as your own demise? I'll counter your point about WW1 by saying that Hitler's views on WW1 are still relevant. Even if it was a myth that the Germany army wasn't defeated, these were Hitler's views, so it's still a valid point. And I haven't studied the Italian fleet in great detail, but I do know that it was suffering from the fuel crisis. They clearly had enough fuel to do some things, but as you point out, as the war went on they became constrained by morale and the lack of fuel.
    2
  13926. No, they had oil, but they didn't have enough. I'm not saying they didn't have a single barrel of oil. Plus I actually explained this in the video. Please watch it.
    2
  13927. If there were two Romanias supplying oil to Germany, they still would have been in an oil deficit. That's how much they lacked oil. So no, Germany having no oil is not a myth.
    2
  13928. Glad you enjoyed the video. I just think it's funny that they would have needed nearly two more Romania's producing oil in order to cover the shortfall
    2
  13929. Thank you, and agreed
    2
  13930. I'm going to have to do a video on this eventually because you're not the first to ask. But essentially, Hitler's whole philosophy was to take the resources Germany needed for herself. This was the purpose of Lebensraum and Autarky, and the reason he went to war in the first place. Trade was not a long-term option. And, in addition, they were trading with the Soviets. But the amount the Soviet Union could trade to Germany simply wasn't enough to satisfy the whole of Axis occupied Europe
    2
  13931. They had some oil, but not enough to mount offensives on the scale of 1941. Kursk in 1943 was tiny compared to Barbarossa or Fall Blau.
    2
  13932. Puts everything into context, doesn't it :)
    2
  13933. Thank you! Great to hear :) And thanks for sharing, hope your friends enjoy this too
    2
  13934. I agree with the overstretch (in fact, today's video is about that!) but I disagree that taking the oilfields wouldn't have done anything. Germany's oil deficit meant that they were considering demechanising their army, and towards the end, the Luftwaffe didn't have enough fuel to fly. Taking and holding onto a new oil source would have given Germany the major natural resource it was in desperate need for.
    2
  13935. The Germans took Maikop (which the Soviets destroyed) and were extracting 750 tons per month by the time they were forced back. The Germans didn't actually take Grozny, but they bombed it to prevent the Soviets from using it themselves. And yes, the term "revisionist historian" doesn't make sense! Glad you agree with that!
    2
  13936. That's really good to hear :) I'll endevour to keep giving you info, if you keep studying! Deal?
    2
  13937. It definitely puts things into perspective :) I highly recommend "Stopped at Stalingrad" by Hayward. Yes, it's on the Luftwaffe, and obviously what happened at Stalingrad, but it gives a good explanation of the economic situation and is a good read
    2
  13938. Manstein needs to get closer!
    2
  13939. It won't be modern political videos, it'll be history videos talking about political elements like National Socialism, Fascism, Mosley, Japan etc. And I'm sorry to hear about your financial situation, but I totally understand. You can only help others when you've first helped yourself.
    2
  13940. That was another option, but I also want to get it finished asap so we can move on and the channel can grow again, so I don't really want to delay the release of Stalingrad videos any longer than I have to.
    2
  13941. I'd guess another 10, but possibly more.
    2
  13942. Yeah I don't want to take on business debt, especially with the economy the way it is. Also, as I said, if I have writers or researchers, they're not going to interpret the history the way I do, so they're going to miss things or come to false conclusions. At that point, it's more trouble than it's worth.
    2
  13943. That's exactly what I'm doing now (a Battlestorm every four weeks). But as I said, it's too much
    2
  13944. Sure, why not :)
    2
  13945. Also, great question! Thanks for asking
    2
  13946. Well, we'll be seeing the performance of the 10th NKVD Division when we get into the city-proper, but they were basically a police/militia unit, so they didn't performance so well
    2
  13947. Did you not see last week's video?
    2
  13948. Yes they do, and I'm surprised nobody else has noticed/said anything. Here's the reason for that - as of this episode I'm using Blender for the map animations (there's various positive reasons as to why). The good news is that I figured out why it was making the images blurry yesterday, so all should be well again in the next episode.
    2
  13949. SPOILER ALERT! :)
    2
  13950. Be happy!
    2
  13951. Sorry it took so long. It takes time to do this series
    2
  13952. Finger's crossed you'll be okay, and I wish you well. Also you may want to watch this video https://youtu.be/Oza9kjcXCRY
    2
  13953. Someone has to be
    2
  13954. I have started looking into it. Not sure when I'll get to it though
    2
  13955. Haha okay :)
    2
  13956. The only thing is, I don't upload directly to it, and for some reason some of the videos don't automatically go across to it, which they should. Not sure why :/
    2
  13957. Well, I'm glad you decided to join us because otherwise you may have been waiting a long time before this series gets finished. And the best part about giving in is that you get to eagerly wait until the next one comes out, and be upset when a few weeks pass between seasons ;)
    2
  13958. See this http://niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html (especially the right column)
    2
  13959. Thank you! Glad to hear it - not one step backwards!
    2
  13960. I haven't done any economics videos for a while... maybe I should
    2
  13961. Actually the name changed after the war. It was Spartakovka at the time, and became Spartanovka later. Ref: Glantz, Stalingrad V1, P336. Edit: got the names the wrong way round. Very confusing!
    2
  13962. "By the way, what TIK is saying in regards to prices and scarcity is very relevant today with the coronavirus. Many places have laws against “price gouging” which is why we have empty shelves of toilet paper and hand sanitizer. You keep the price low and some idiot douchebag fuckface is gonna buy it all." Absolutely correct! You'll like my video coming Wednesday which explains what causes Recessions. I recorded it in December and was going to publish it before the next recession, but it's already happening so I'm publishing it this week
    2
  13963. Are you going to move into Chaz? Seattle's "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone" 😂
    2
  13964. Basic economics is not propaganda https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    2
  13965. Also, taxation is both theft and slavery. If you have no choice, you are not free. If you're not free, you are a slave. Do you have a choice whether to pay your taxes or not? Of course not. And thus you do not own your person, nor your property (you're just renting it off the State). If you stop paying your taxes (rent), then you lose your property, any 'freedom' you may have had (imprisonment), and even your life (depending on the whim of your particular government). As section 3, paragraph 5 of the 2015 Slavery Act makes clear, being forced, threatened or deceived into providing a service, or benefits of any kind, is exploitation and thus slavery. Taxation is exactly that.
    2
  13966. "I love these. Very interesting, especially since I disagree." Great! Keep questioning! "If I had to find one thing, it’s, printing money is not stealing, it’s taxation 😉 which is different, if in a democracy we actually collectively decide what we want to spend it on. Streets, Healthcare, Public Transportation, Social Security are all incredible luxuries I gladly pay for." But I didn't decide anything, and I'm certainly deciding against paying for the terribly overpriced and completely awful 'luxuries' that the government provides (which you listed). The State roads are awful, which is why toll roads in the UK are much better. The National Socialist Health Service (NHS) is a bloated bureaucratic mess that's an expensive waste of money. It's providing a terrible service to its patients, yet I'm forced to pay for it, when I could put my money in cheaper and better alternatives https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Public transportation is terrible, which is why I don't use it, yet I'm forced to pay for it. Social security is an absolute disgrace, with entire generations being paid by the taxpayer to sit around doing nothing except watch daytime tv and voting for socialism. As I mentioned to someone else, I know a social worker who's had to take abused kids off the crack addicts, who's addiction, house and lifestyle the government funded through "social benefits". Why on earth would I support such a corrupt and dishonest system? I wouldn't if I had a choice. There is no democracy; it's the tyranny of the state in the name of the people. There is no 'collective'. Only power. "And please don’t stick to tanks." Okay :)
    2
  13967. "I hope I am misunderstanding this, the US needed these things (minus the camps dear god the internment camps) to win the war. If we don't win the war, we can't exactly ensure prosperity for our citizens." The point was that people claim that building things makes you more prosperous. Thus, the logic is that military spending is good for the economy because you build lots of tanks and planes and ships. The problem is that that's absolutely not the case. Building ships and then sinking them in the ocean doesn't make wealth. So yes, these things were needed for the war, but it's false to then claim that the things built to win the war also "got America out of the Great Depression". They did not, as Higgs explains. "You can't defend yourself with a privately ran military." I completely disagree, but I'm not going to get into this argument here because I don't have the time right now. "you seem to hold gold on this strange pedestal." Come back on Wednesday. I have a video coming out explaining what causes recessions which will hopefully provide you with the context needed to understand why I prefer actual money (gold) to currency (paper). "It can't be eaten, can't be used to build proper structures or goods the same way other metals can. It is simply a "shiny thing" that looks pretty." Paper currency can't be eaten, or used as building materials, and looks nice. The difference is that gold preserves your wealth, whereas currency doesn't. (Again, come back on Wednesday for explanation) "Lastly, I would like to hear your opinion on labor unions." Complete waste of time. Here's why https://youtu.be/jElVTVLMknw "they are technically a free market element." Absolutely. I'm not advocating banning them. In fact, I'd encourage all my critics and rivals to join unions. With them shackled by the union, I'll be happy to out-compete them.
    2
  13968. "The game Monopoly wasn't known in Soviet Union! What the hell is author talking about?" Of course Communist Monopoly is a thing! https://youtu.be/35KHCULrdWI (But seriously, that's what the book said, so I assume it's correct. Not sure if it is or not. Perhaps someone can verify.)
    2
  13969. "If Stalin's era statistics are wrong.. then how would you explain that USSR was the youngest country in the world by 1941, with 35% of the population being under 15 yrs old." When parents are starving, most prioritize food to their children. Plus a lack of contraception. Also, as I showed in this video, Soviet health care was disastrous, which probably meant that most people didn't live until old age.
    2
  13970. I had one guy claim that an individual worker owning his own tools was Socialism, and that I was therefore a Socialist because I own my own equipment. I kid you not. They've distorted the definitions so much that some Socialists think Capitalism is Socialism
    2
  13971. "Typical Soviet Union economy is bad because I know everyone in the Soviet Union was starving and I don’t need to prove any of those claims type of video." Are you denying that people starved to death every year between 1917 and 1949 in the Soviet Union? Are you going to deny the Soviet health minister (directly quoted towards the end of the video) saying how bad the Soviet economy was in the 1980s?
    2
  13972. Venezuela has been under economic attack from it's own Social-Elites (Socialists) for some time. And you know that.
    2
  13973. "I amorally sick of people misinterpreting what he means by " I don't like Socialism"." I'm not sure they've entirely misinterpreted my views. To clarify, I'm against socialism because it's forceful control of the individual. If government was run like any other business, and wasn't based on force (e.g. taxation was voluntary, just like paying a shop money for goods is voluntary), then I wouldn't necessarily be against it - I'd only be against those governments which then failed to provide services that I've paid for, like all current governments. "There are many variants of socialism and one can has socialist policies in a free market capitalist society." If you have socialist policies, you don't have a free market. E.g. if the State dictates that guns are illegal, then the market for guns is no longer free. "He is not in favor of governmental good redistribution but that does not mean he is not in favor of strong governmental intervention such as regulation or public schooling." Actually I'm against all those things. Take schools for example, why would I pay a lot more for a worse service? Public schools provide a terrible education, and are massively expensive (but people think they're "free", which they're not). So yes, I'm against public-state schools. (Not against schools in general, just government-run schools.) And government intervention always leads to unforeseen consequences - Thomas Sowell has provided many many many examples of how government intervention usually does the opposite of what they intend, simply because those who do not understand basic economics can't make it as businessmen, and end up as politicians and bureaucrats. If you haven't already, I'd check out my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And if you haven't already, Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" or Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics".
    2
  13974. Wikipedia also thinks National Socialism is Fascism. Please watch my Public vs Private video for the definitions https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    2
  13975. "Regime? The Soviet Union was a democracy." The tyranny of the majority is a regime https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13976. Which countries are Capitalist? Please let me know so I can move there. Remember, Capitalism is when there's no forceful coercion of money (e.g. taxation) and no monopoly (e.g. multiple court systems rather than just the State's one), since Capitalism is the Private (individual) control of the means of production. The former Soviet block never had Capitalism and doesn't now. Giant hierarchies of society that dominate a region and the economy cannot be classed as an individual (Private) and therefore not Capitalist. Again, see the link in my previous comment, which will provide you with the correct historical definitions of the terms.
    2
  13977. The Soviet Union wasn't Capitalist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  13978. Pay very close attention to what I say in this other video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  13979. Welcome to Early Club, enjoy your stay
    2
  13980. Third!
    2
  13981. You've misinterpreted what I said. I said that our minds cannot live without our bodies, but there is no duality. We are what we are. But that doesn't mean that my skin colour determines how I think. The issue here is the false dichotomy of senses (body) vs concepts (mind). That's the source of the body-mind schism you refer to. But humans operate via perception, which does rely on senses, but also incorporates the mind. So our mind and body are physically connected and operate together. But that doesn't mean that our bodies do the thinking for us, or that our "blood" determines how we act. The mind commands the body, not the other way around.
    2
  13982. Your loss
    2
  13983. You don't have the same genetic code as anyone else on the planet. Are you a different species from your parents? No. There's not enough difference in genetic code to class any humans on the planet as a different species or "subspecies".
    2
  13984. Guilty! 😂
    2
  13985. I'm really not - I've just entered the weird part of exhaustion where I see the fun side of everything 😂
    2
  13986. Yeah, they don't make men like they used too
    2
  13987. It's not easy trying to catch you out
    2
  13988. Just about :P
    2
  13989. Commonwealth countries are classed as "British". If you want to talk about specific nationalities, you missed the Scots, Irish, Welsh and English off your list. In fact, "Britain" doesn't really exist, as it's not a nationality, but an international grouping of people. And yes, the Czechs, the Poles, the Free French, and numerous other nationalities fought with the British at this time. However, it's still true to say that "Britain fought alone" because no other INDEPENDENT COUNTRY fought with Britain during this period.
    2
  13990. Have you clicked the bell icon and set it to 'all'?
    2
  13991. Haha sorry, it was just a quick video today. Monday's will be longer
    2
  13992. Oh that's dreadful, truly dreadful. I'm so sorry for your loss Richard. It's never a good time to lose anyone, but to lose one of your children, and on a day like Christmas Day too... I have no words... And I'm hearting your comment purely out of sympathy, not because I "liked" what happened. I wouldn't want you to misinterpret that.
    2
  13993. Bodglin o'Ite Burg KhaKinga
    2
  13994. starcraft2own sadly not. In fact, India doesn't even have one in the top 100 tallest buildings lol!
    2
  13995. I'm no snowflake. Nor am I stupid enough to understand your meaningless and irrelevant point. Perhaps you should think before you type.
    2
  13996. If you steal half the wealth off the natives via taxation and hand that money and give free housing etc to the immigrants, who do you think will be able to have more children? This is not the problem of liberalism (in the classical 1800s sense), this is the problem of socialism. And no, the west isn't 'free'. If you do not have a choice, you are not free, and if you are not free then you are a slave. Do you have a choice to not give tribute to your lords and masters in the state? No, you must pay taxes. Therefore you are not free.
    2
  13997. I'm not a race. My skin colour and ancestry doesn't matter. All that matters is what I do as an individual. It's neither smart or sensible to judge someone for who they're not based on what their ethnicity is telling you they're meant to be. Judging people like that isn't "realism" or being "conscious", it's simply racism.
    2
  13998. Yes... well, sort of. Technically the Nazis initially rejected Lithuanians for being too "Polonized". But later (when they needed any manpower they could get their hands on) they decided to recruit Lithuanians. But the Lithuanians weren't stupid and realized that the Nazis were losing the war by that point and didn't join. So it's actually a little from Column A, and a little from Column B.
    2
  13999. "So tik is a crypto-fascist(" No, I'm against socialism in all its forms.
    2
  14000. A lot of the volunteers, yes. But Himmler's reasoning, no :)
    2
  14001. I'm not a race. Are you a race?
    2
  14002. Oh? What did they say about it? I've tried to keep up with the comments on the video itself, but there's too many
    2
  14003. Solid answer from Cary. They generally had 2 infantry regiments throughout the war, and no artillery. But they did have anti-tank and engineer companies. Some of the ones in this series took part in the Holocaust, as detailed in episode 2.
    2
  14004. It would also result in my videos getting flagged for copyright, so can't do it. Good old YouTube.
    2
  14005. Yes, and in addition, I've been over the definition of socialism in this other video and explained why it's not "worker control" https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14006. Yeah, I'd say that's close to what it is. I summed it all up as "racial socialism", which is what you described in more detail.
    2
  14007. Yeah, it's a rare one, but the last couple of questions have been a little easier to answer than previous ones, so I thought I'd do two videos in one week.
    2
  14008. Again, Mises was actually Jewish in faith, and a Holocaust survivor. You're mocking a Holocaust survivor and calling them "Fascist". Marx's father converted from the faith, and then Marx went on to denounce the religion and call for their removal from society. Yet somehow, Mises is worse in your eyes? Why? Because he was living in Austria and was trying to persuade the Fascist government there not to implement all the policies they wanted to? In fact, I actually read from the primary sources and showed what Mises at the beginning of the regime at the end of this video https://youtu.be/cFBGvK5jX6Q And whether I'm Jewish or not is irrelevant. I know to a racist anti-semite like yourself, it seems like every capitalist is Jewish, but you've got to understand that Karl Marx was wrong - not every capitalist is Jewish, and not every Jew is capitalist. Plus, even if they were, it's not relevant to this discussion. Someone's race doesn't determine whether they're right or not, so to imply that I can only call out Karl Marx's anti-Semitism if I was Jewish, is both racist and a defence of Marx's outright anti-Semitism. Further, I'm not the only one saying that the Nazis socialized the businesses. But even if I was, that doesn't make me wrong. If everyone believed that the moon is made of cheese, and I pointed out that it was made of rock, that wouldn't make me wrong. Standing out from the crowd and telling the truth might invite criticism, but by itself doesn't invalidate the argument being made. Bottom line: this isn't a popularity contest, and you need to rethink your faith in your anti-Semitic religion (Marxism). Check your racism.
    2
  14009. The oligarchs are the state. Socialism benefits the rich.
    2
  14010. I was learning it, but I got to a point where I just didn't have the time to keep it up
    2
  14011. It's technically a combination of the two. He made his own observations, but also quoted directly from others who were there (e.g. the letters of German businessmen). I'd still class it as a primary source document though.
    2
  14012. But it doesn't have power and complete control if the businesses are FREE to do what they want.
    2
  14013. I really appreciate when people say they have YouTube Premium (I do too). Not only do you get around the adverts, but you do support the creators that way. I am actually looking into a way to increase the output of my videos (and have been for a while). Got something in the works that might end up helping, but I don't know if it will... Time will tell
    2
  14014. If only they would listen!
    2
  14015. All sources have a slant. That's why I use all the sources I can get my hands on, including the ones I don't agree with, like the one in the video. Socialists pick and choose their sources, ignoring or dismissing any they don't like. Yet you side with them?
    2
  14016. Don't worry, I'm working on Stalingrad right now, and the next episode should be next week
    2
  14017. Hurry up and win the lottery then :P also, if you want to support (but can't afford to support me on Patreon), let the adverts play when you watch my videos. It's not much, but currently every penny I get off this platform goes back on the books needed to make these videos happen
    2
  14018. I will continue it at some point. When I need to take a break from Stalingrad, I'll do this
    2
  14019. Glad you're enjoying it :) According to Wikipedia (yes, I know, it's not a reliable source) the reason the Auto-Saharan Company didn't use their patrols as much or as effectively as the LRDG, is because the Italians ran out of fuel. I've no further information from the sources I have, but it could be true. However, there's no excuse for not using the ASC more aggressively at the start of the conflict when fuel was available.
    2
  14020. Not right at the minute, but I may do at some point. I'm guessing you're Russian? Can I give you a shout when I need help?
    2
  14021. Feel free to rank them here, but that's not the purpose of the poll. I want you all to tell me the ONE type of content you like the most.
    2
  14022. Wow that was a long time ago! I do miss the gaming days
    2
  14023. Thanks for your comment. What exactly about my content helped you the most in deradicalising? I'd like to know so I can help others.
    2
  14024. No I'm not. I'll explain in the follow up video to this.
    2
  14025. Oh yes, I'm very much aware of that. The poll on the channel is also potentially getting voted on by non-subscribers as well.
    2
  14026. Well, if the comment war doesn't happen, then great! I'll somehow have dodged a bullet 🙂 but as far as the "who started it" thing is concerned, I don't know the answer to that.
    2
  14027. I actually find these topics the most interesting because, if there's a heated debate, that means history needs to be done!
    2
  14028. Well done Jamie!
    2
  14029. You tried!
    2
  14030. It can take time to write a lot of words. How long per day or week do you spend writing?
    2
  14031. I'm also surprised by this outcome. A bit of a miracle! I did expect a bit more conflict in the comments, though I'm not complaining because I'm very happy with how mature people have acted
    2
  14032. "Tito began with a small popular base, and his basic strategy was to remove the party underground from the cities to the poorly supervised rural areas, seek support in the villages and among the roving groups of refugee Serbs, and create enough disorder to stimulate German reprisal actions, which would further radicalize the civilians and create more recruits for the Partisans.” - Milazzo, “The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance,” Kindle Chapter 2.
    2
  14033. I will get to them at some point :)
    2
  14034. Well, I'll be honest, I only used a few sources (and there's not particularly new either), and I was completely new to this particular topic, so I'm sure there are mistakes. I thought though that I'd put out the video, see what the criticisms are, then I could proceed to fill in the gaps. But as it stands, I've no idea what the counter-arguments are going to be, so it's hard to know what to look out for
    2
  14035. No worries! Glad to hear you're finding it enlightening!
    2
  14036. That doesn't prove that the Communists didn't care about civilians, only that the Chetniks didn't. Also, were your relatives Serbian?
    2
  14037. First!
    2
  14038. I have replied to your first two comments, showing them to contain many errors. I will reply to this one too shortly...
    2
  14039. "You must understand that to be on the left means to care about people, helping the poorest in society." That's also what I want to do too. Right wingers want to help people too, including the poorest in society. The Left doesn't believe that, but it's true. And, in fact, despite projecting their want to help the poor, it is the Left that implements policies that are directly impoverishing the poor (e.g. wage controls, price controls, regulations, taxation, inflation etc etc). - "There is a strong ambition to help out society in any way they can." Yes, and the people are the public, and the public is the state. The Left doesn't want to help "the people" (meaning, the individuals in the economy), they want to help "the people" (meaning, the public sector, which is the State). The Public is the State - the Society is the State. I've explained this in the "Public vs Private" video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y So Socialism isn't about helping hte poor. It's about empowering the State. Socialism is a war in the name of the poor, against the poor and the middle class, for the benefit of the rich and powerful. - "One small example of many, is the supposed "housing crisis" in the USA as well as in the UK, even though there are more homes in both countries than homeless. The real problem is not that there is not enough houses, but that there are companies and landlords that are just buying up homes, as private property, to keep and wait till the price rises in order to sell it or as a way to store their money." Right, but how are they able to do that? Oh, that's right, follow the money. They're getting their money from the Central Banks, which Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto. The Central Banks print currency into existence, which is then used to "invest" in the economy. The economy, therefore, is centrally planned. But the point is that, when more currency units chase the same number of houses, the price of the houses goes up. Couple this with rent controls, regulations, central planning permission (which we have here in the UK), and what you have is a huge housing crisis created by the Communist Central Bank, that's blamed on the "greedy landlords and corporations", even though the corporations are the "organs of the State". "Organ" - "corpse" - "corporation". Socialism is causing the crisis, and capitalism gets the blame. We do not have capitalism. We have Socialism. - "Do you know how many leftists wanted to kick the doors down on some unused privately owned houses, and simply give it to a homeless person?" When a Leftist destroys private property like that, it becomes public property. The Public is the State. So the Leftists are fighting for State property. They are agents of the State. - "Do you know what it would feel or look like for something to simply be done?" Fascism. - "No one wants to wait for some supposed "invisible hand" to achieve something as if we are living in the days of Adam Smith - we can simply do it ourselves." There won't be an "invisible hand" in a centrally planned economy. When the "stock market" crashes, freeing up the resources from the corporations and given them back to the real economy, that's when you'll see the invisible hand smash the central planners. Again, see my "What Causes Recessions and Depressions" video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs - "What I just wrote above is what someone on the left is thinking when you make a pro-capitalist statement." Yes, exactly. - "Of course someone on the left would either think you are ignorant or are the problem." I know. That's what I said in Tuesday's video. - "They think how can anyone be OK with that, it is possible to provide society with what it needs and meet (at the very least) the basic needs of everyone." It is, you just have to prevent the central planners from politicizing the economy. If you let the economy do its thing, the gap between the rich and poor will decrease, and everyone will be much richer. Capitalism has pulled billions of people out of poverty for the first time in human history. Socialism wants to drag us back into the dark age. - "Just look at how much the government takes as taxes away from you..." Tell me about it... Theft on a grand scale. - "Just look at how much the government takes as taxes away from you, yet they cannot provide free healthcare." They do here in the UK. Trust me, you don't want it. I now refuse to go anywhere near a doctor or dentist unless it's an emergency. I would go private, but there are no private services any more. Everything that is "private" is regulated/run by the State to such an extent that it's impossible for them to do their jobs correctly. Plus, I don't get a refund on my taxes if I use a private service, so I'm paying three times as much for the same service. Therefore, I just pay twice as much for a rubbish service, which I then don't use. And that's "free healthcare" by the way. - "Yet tons of: money, food and resources are being wasted on the rich." Maybe we should stop all taxation and inflation then? Oh yes, exactly what capitalists are calling for. Strange that, isn't it. - "Think about it, how can they provide billions of vaccines to be given multiple times for free, yet cannot feed the world - something is seriously wrong." Because Socialists don't want to feed the world. They want to control it. Has it sunk in yet? - "you should not group together everyone on the left as if they are one people." I don't. But when all the Left share the same trait - they all want an all-powerful State/society that rules over everything, hence the word "socialism" - I can group them all together. Yes, there are some variations, but the Left wants totalitarianism, even if the "anarchist" Left or the "social democratic" Left don't realize that that's what they're calling for. - "And it is because of this belief of: helping others in need and wishing for a better society and future, which is why it is difficult to change a leftist." Except, the Right wants that too. The Leftist doesn't realize this, and I cannot get through to them that they're actually calling for totalitarianism without realizing it. As I said in Tuesday's video - the Left have been deceived. - " Because for a leftist to change, that person has to accept that the way things are is how it should be and always will be, even though people on the left believe it does not have to be like this." No, they don't have to change. I still want to help the poor, and the children, and the puppies, and end pollution, etc etc. The only difference is that I see Socialism for what it is: totalitarianism. And I also see capitalism for what it is: freedom to make the change. The Left has been brainwashed into believing the exact opposite. - "Billions of people do not have to die of preventable diseases, starvation, or lack of basic necessities. A better society is possible and achievable." But only under capitalism. Socialism will not bring the utopia socialists believe it will. Socialism doesn't work.
    2
  14040. I've replied to your first comment, showing it to contain many errors. I will reply to this one too shortly...
    2
  14041. I actually explained this here https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    2
  14042. A march battalion is just a reinforcement battalion. It's called that because the French originally had their spare battalions marching behind the front, but the German march battalions at Stalingrad were coming from the Reich.
    2
  14043. Interestingly, I wish I actually had more personal accounts of the battle; I do think I'm a little top-heavy with this series. Which unit was your grandfather in?
    2
  14044. That's a good question, and I honestly don't know. I know the Italians had some infantry divisions in other parts of Libya, so they may have had units at Benghazi. As far as I'm aware though, all the main Axis units (including all the German ones) were in the Tobruk-Sollum area
    2
  14045. The red line near Sollum is the border between Egypt and Libya. The grey lines are main roads, brown are tracks/trails, and white is railway (which turns red at one point in this video to distinguish it). I'm deliberately not putting a "front line" in the video because in reality there wasn't one. There were unit positions surrounded by a sea of no-man's sand (pun intended).
    2
  14046. Thank you Padro! I'll add you to the Patreon list from next week onwards. It's a bit of a weird time at the moment, with Crusader being the focus and being a lot of work, so I'm being stretched in all directions, but I do hope to have a Patreon update next week.
    2
  14047. "I'd rather see these kind of videos being purely made by TIK than to have some big network guy add/change things for 'dramatic effect' in all honesty. I Love the authenticity in this!" Glad to hear! I went down the 'dramatic' path a while ago with the experimental early-North African Campaign videos. Never again :)
    2
  14048. Hey David, do you mean like this map? https://goo.gl/images/d2rJKR according to the Wiki-Gods, Marmarica is the ancient name for the region, which suggests it isn't called that now. Is this correct? Or is it still called Marmarica?
    2
  14049. And yes, it should be every Monday from now on until it finishes, unless I mess up and have to insert an emergency Monday video in there.
    2
  14050. The current plan is for it to be about 12 to 15 parts, depending on how the battle progresses. But, if the battle bits take too long to make (since they're more complicated), I may have to split them up into more videos. So it could be longer than that.
    2
  14051. Really!? Now that is surprising! I normally get called out for mispronouncing things haha
    2
  14052. You've misunderstood me. Tank vs tank was present in the early war period, and tanks can take on tanks, and perhaps should. But it's cheaper and just as effective to use an anti-tank gun (mobile or not). Anti-tank guns are cheaper to produce and replace than tanks, and probably have larger calibre guns. Therefore, it makes more sense to use them in the battles, and use tanks to exploit once the main battle has been fought. SPGs and TDs are also cheaper than tanks, but are more maneuverable, therefore they make more sense in a mobile division. They perform the same role as a anti-tank gun, which they should work together with. However, even then, it makes sense to use your anti-tank guns, tanks and SPGs and TDs all at the same time, rather than saying "ok, SPGs only in this fight, and don't use any infantry or artillery". Guderian wants more Jagdpanzers, but isn't saying he wants to prevent infantry and artillery from cooperating with the tanks and tank-destroyers because "Jagdpanzers only take on tanks".
    2
  14053. :)
    2
  14054. Normally I'd say read up on stuff, but honestly I'd wait until after the Crusader videos are finished before you do, only to keep the suspense. Seriously, this battle is probably one of the most unpredictable battles ever. It's all over the place!
    2
  14055. This is the only downside of ordering books from Jason D. Mark - you have to deal with the Australian Post. Had to wait many many weeks just to get the books (and it's not the distance that's the issue, it's their slow service).
    2
  14056. Yes, in theory they would
    2
  14057. In the pinned comment
    2
  14058. Manstein yes, and 1939 might be a while away, but a definite possibility
    2
  14059. Stalin and high command seem to have planned a constellation of counterattacks for the winter campaign of 1942. Operations Uranus, Mars, Little Saturn (it was meant to be Saturn, but had to be changed to be less ambitious) and Jupiter etc.
    2
  14060. How quickly can you build an entire navy?
    2
  14061. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    2
  14062. Don't be sorry :) No, but my right eyelid droops slightly. Been like that for a while and haven't figured out exactly why, however I did have a stye years ago and I think that's what caused it.
    2
  14063. No, at this time he was commander of the 64th Army. He got replaced (actually made deputy commander of 64th Army because he performed badly), and then ended up as 62nd Army commander later.
    2
  14064. That's awesome, thank you!
    2
  14065. Thanks! o>
    2
  14066. Hope you enjoy the video as much as the snacks!
    2
  14067. Glad you liked it, and thanks for subscribing!
    2
  14068. Those historians would be wrong.
    2
  14069. Well, I'm just happy that you're still watching since I made the transition to history videos. I was fearful I'd lose many viewers from the gamer audience, which would be a shame because the topics are quite similar.
    2
  14070. Haha it looked the nicest!
    2
  14071. Absolutely, that's the goal (or any other biases)
    2
  14072. Let me know what you think of it :) and while this is a long one, it's also a mini-Battlestorm video (with units moving around at around). So it's been a while since I've done a video like this. Hopefully it's worth it
    2
  14073. WW2 China
    2
  14074. I'm also making my big 24+ hour documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad, so plenty more to come :)
    2
  14075. Great! Hope you like the remaining half. More to come on the Soviet side, but I wanted to clear up several points on the German side first.
    2
  14076. No worries Al - history is all about debating after all, and while I may disagree with some, that doesn't mean you couldn't (hard to do in a YouTube comment section) prove me wrong :)
    2
  14077. [Spoiler alert] at the end of the video, I come to some startling conclusions about the Battle of Stalingrad, related to the "turning point" point you raised... :) Good to hear! I've been debating getting the single volume myself, only so I can compare it to the 5-book "trilogy" to know if I'm recommending the right book (either that or the trilogy).
    2
  14078. In a nutshell, it is. But there's a few more things going on, and the consequences are interesting. And you're welcome!
    2
  14079. While I would love to, I'm kinda committed with my channel at the moment, and don't really have the time to help them out. Maybe I could contribute slightly (assuming I was even offered to help) but I'm not sure I could fully commit
    2
  14080. There is that element to it. But is that hindsight or was it know/accepted at the time?
    2
  14081. He was prior to the war, but it wasn't enough to cover the deficit. Plus, why would you want to be reliant on the one state you hate the most? Especially when you could just conquer it.
    2
  14082. Someone last time complained that my videos were too long (on the one that was 25 minutes). Well, sadly for him, they're as long as they need to be - and Battlestorm Stalingrad will be a lot longer!
    2
  14083. Glad you enjoyed it Rick :)
    2
  14084. Thanks! Will do :)
    2
  14085. That's good to hear! I'll be making more videos on the North African Front soon (Battlestorm Operation Compass is coming), but yes there's a bit of a focus on the Eastern Front at the moment
    2
  14086. Thank you! Hope you enjoy my other videos :)
    2
  14087. I'll certainly be discussing the resources aspect of WW2 in an upcoming big video (might be a few weeks away yet as need to do a lot of research on it). Intelligence is also something I can talk about as a book on German intelligence has just arrived today. However, I will be focusing on WW2 (and possibly some of the wars around it) as a general rule for the time being.
    2
  14088. I cover this in other videos, but essentially no. Assuming their logistics could get them there (doubtful), the oil in the Middle East would need to be shipped by sea to Germany in order to be processed, which would be a major bottleneck problem. The Caucasus has enough refineries in the area so it can be processed locally, and there would be a direct land connection with Germany.
    2
  14089. I'm glad you enjoyed the video, and I'll certainly be doing more video like this in the future. I'm of the same opinion about TV documentaries - they're just too narrowly focused, and the viewer doesn't get the full perspective :)
    2
  14090. This is exactly it. Some historians are now saying the "turning point" happened before Moscow. Either way, the failure in 1941 dictated that Germany could no longer fight a short war against the Soviets. And failure in 1942 dictated that they would no longer be able to win. Why then Hitler didn't seek peace with the Soviets in early 1943, I'm not sure. Perhaps Stalin wasn't willing to strike a peace agreement, especially because he knew he could fight his way to Berlin.
    2
  14091. Just seen your comment, and thank you! I will admit that in some videos I do come across as arrogant, but that wasn't the intention. I do a lot of reading on the topics and then make a case against the alternative arguments. The way I argue or state my case may make me sound cocky, and I'm aware of this, but it's not arrogance, more taking a firm stand. History lies in the heart of the debate after all. Can't have a debate if one side appears weak! Cheers!
    2
  14092. 4th Romanian Army was never formally created. It was scheduled to have been created on the 20th of November 1942, but Operation Uranus got in the way and prevented that from happening. To quote Glantz in Volume 3, Book 1 of his Stalingrad Trilogy - "The defeats suffered by Romanian VI and VII Army Corps during the first two days of the Stalingrad Front's offensive were so crippling that Fourth Romanian Army was never able to form and take control of operations south of Stalingrad." P297
    2
  14093. Thanks! Glad you liked it!
    2
  14094. Except Hitler was a socialist, not a capitalist.
    2
  14095. The best? Really?? That's great to hear :) I couldn't do the music or the explosions and stuff (like in the Battlestorm videos) because of time restraints, but ideally I would. The frontline moves all the time and certainly isn't a "line", so it wouldn't be practical. And no, if it's not shown, I don't have insignia.
    2
  14096. Congratulations! Hope it goes well for you, and I hope they enjoy the videos too 👍
    2
  14097. No, that was a mistake :(
    2
  14098. I hadn't heard about his diary. I'll get it though! It could be that his regiment was sent north from his division earlier than when I showed it - I did show a regiment from the 94th go north, but not as early as you mentioned. The books I have show the divisions where they are for this period. And yes, that's probably why the Romanian 20th expanded it's front, to relieve the 94th.
    2
  14099. Well, this season isn't over yet! But I'm abandoning the idea of the "seasons" as I'll explain in the next Addendum video. I'm just going to work on one episode at a time from now on, and release them whenever they're finished.
    2
  14100. I didn't call anyone a madman
    2
  14101. Don't worry, there's another coming at 5pm 😉
    2
  14102. Devon Ziegler Oh yes! Do you play any instruments?
    2
  14103. David Ohlsson good call, and I haven't heard of it. However it's not fully independent as it's owned by the UK, plus its full name is "Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia" which would mean it begins with "A"
    2
  14104. Nice!
    2
  14105. Dowly Wow, it is? :) I think I could do it. Not sure what type of history lesson videos I would do, but I'll certainly think about it because it's a good idea
    2
  14106. Dowly Yes, it's soccer :P History lesson videos? That's an interesting idea :)
    2
  14107. As I've explained elsewhere, the concepts of 'capitalism' and 'Judaism' were entwined historically, so people who hate one have no excuse not to hate the other.
    2
  14108. I messed up 🙈
    2
  14109. Yes, because of the central banks that Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto. Murray Rothbard explains in "America's Great Depression" why everything is coming apart. You can read the PDF here for free https://mises.org/library/book/americas-great-depression
    2
  14110. "wtf is this, unsubbing" Your feelings can't handle facts. Goodbye.
    2
  14111. It might have been capitalism, but it wasn't a free market.
    2
  14112. Absolutely not, bigot. I advocate for the abolishment of taxation so that is serfs can be free at last. Social Darwinism is nonsense.
    2
  14113. It's illegal for someone to start your "private" car without a government license.
    2
  14114. Many were saying that the previous two videos were actually some of my best. Proving that value is subjective
    2
  14115. @Stephen - the link to the full book list is in the description of all my videos
    2
  14116. Great! Did you enjoy it? How's the quarantine treating you?
    2
  14117. I'm actually not sure, but probably most are dirt paths. The problem is, the base map I used was made in 1954, which was the earliest map I could find that was this detailed, so a few of the roads may not have been made yet (in 1942)
    2
  14118. See the link in the description
    2
  14119. @Vlad - wow, so a couple of people you knew saw it coming too. Congrats. Keynesians (the mainstream) and socialists (the mainstream), didn't see it coming. Plus, the only School of economics that I've seen who consistently said it was coming were the Austrians. Not only did they predict this recession, but they predict every recession due to their Business Cycle Theory. What theory does your group use? I like that you say I'm in a cult. That's absolutely not true. Saying 2+2=4 doesn't mean I'm in a cult, it means I'm favouring what is right. The alternative arguments are flawed and I can see through them. Now yes, perhaps there's an argument out there that I haven't heard which is superior. But the mainstream socialist narratives are rubbish and I can see straight through their lies.
    2
  14120. Yes. See the pinned comment. I intend to cover those things (especially the radios) in upcoming videos. I was going to cover more of this stuff in this video, but decided to do them in separate videos during the editing process.
    2
  14121. "The SMG is a high fire rate short range weapon, more suited to combat in built up areas and woods." Yes. And, if you take these out, the German Gruppe has an even higher rate of fire compared to the others. This is why I said that the Soviet SMG squads would be deadly once they got into range, but before that they'd be toast.
    2
  14122. I will get to that when I cover platoons and companies in a future video
    2
  14123. Why did the chicken cross the playground? To get to the other slide
    2
  14124. Is negative sarcasm still sarcasm?
    2
  14125. It's anti-Nazi.
    2
  14126. Exclamation Man to the rescue!!!!!
    2
  14127. Don't worry, more Stalingrad-related videos will be coming out soon. In fact, next Monday's video will be something you'll want to see ;)
    2
  14128. Honestly, I wish I got the physical version anyway. The other physical books by Mark are amazing and well worth it
    2
  14129. "That is true, but you could quite accurately predict the outcome of 1000 football matches using maths. Betting shops do it all the time." There are odds, but the reality is that nobody knows for certain. Nobody (literally nobody) expected Evander Holyfield to beat Mike Tyson, and the odds were 25 to 1. Yet, Holyfield won. The maths was wrong. - Your point about Japan is true, however nobody would have predicted Japan's surrender after the first atomic bomb, or the second. There's even dispute whether a third bomb may have had to have been used. Arguably Japan only dropped out of the war because of the Soviet Union's entry, or the Emperor's decision to intervene and call a stop to the fighting. Many in Japan wanted to continue. So again, the math may have indicated an eventual Allied and Soviet victory, but not when or at what cost.
    2
  14130. "They can not predict actions of an individual, but they can predict averages and probabilities of actions of combat forces." Averages and probabilities based on what? Make-believe? There is no "average". Probabilities exist, but not in the non-sciences which warfare is. If they cannot mathematically get the individual right, they cannot scale that up. It's simply impossible, which is why their plans and calculations are hardly ever right. - "They are decided by volumes of fire per square kilometer, expenditure of ammuntion and fuel per hour, probabilities of detection and probabilities of hit." Yes, but none of that dictates for definite if the soldiers on the receiving end get hit, or whether they rout, or whether they actually continue to fight. It doesn't predict the units that their faulty intelligence didn't pick up. It doesn't account for the weather - because as everyone knows "you cannot predict the weather". (That's a saying for a reason.) You can calculate all that, but you cannot predict whether the plan succeeds or fails, and the reason why is because war is not a hard science, as I explained in the video. - "You can be the best, the smartest, the bravest soldier the world has ever seen. But you will last the same as any human being under a barrage of thermobaric rockets." Not if all those rockets miss because my spies told me when you were going to attack, so I pulled back from where you thought I was. - "Also, mob psychology is a thing. Humans tend to act according to how other humans behave themselves around." They do in a military where individual initiative is frowned upon. But if everyone is a volunteer, fighting for a worthy cause, for their own private property, and knows their local area like the back of their hand, you'll be surprised what damage individuals can do. That's why the Soviets failed in Afghanistan. That's why the Americans won their independence. - "This is often used by propagandists or by marketers." Which is why I encourage people not to believe the propagandists and marketeers. Andrei Martyanov is a government employee (he worked for the Russian military), which makes him a politician (anyone who works for the polis - the state - is a politician since that's where the word comes from), and therefore is a propagandist. He is pro-Russian, after all, and his book "Losing Military Supremacy" is blatant pro-Russian military and anti-American military propaganda. Plus, the fact he's selling books also makes him a marketer. But continue to believe him wholeheartedly though as your masters wish you to.
    2
  14131. I'm not "out of my depth". If Martyanov's got the ability to calculate human action, please ask him to calculate the results of every upcoming football match. If his equations can't do that, then they cannot predict the outcome of a battle.
    2
  14132. You've just proven my point. You cannot simulate war, which means the math is off. The math will always be off because you cannot calculate human action.
    2
  14133. Well, I'm glad to hear that! This video was more of an in-depth discussion about one of the theories of history, so if you could understand this you're doing well. And your English writing isn't bad - in my opinion, you're doing better than some native English speakers! So keep it up :)
    2
  14134. That's a good way to think about it. I just question everying I see, hear, or read - "but is this really the case?"
    2
  14135. I'm glad you liked it :)
    2
  14136. Haha fantastic! Crusader research done, I'm at 91,300 words of research - and I'm working on the script right now :) got a book review next week (not Crusader, sadly) but I will get back to it soon, don't worry.
    2
  14137. I assume you mean for WW2? Highly recommend Glantz, Citino, Hayward, Fritz, Ian and Robert Kershaw, as well as most histories written in the past 20 years. Ignore David Irving and co until you've read up on the subject. Also, until you've got a grasp of the historical debate, avoid the German generals diaries and memoirs, as well as history books from more than 30 years ago (e.g. Shirer) because these were highly reliant on the German generals and were awash with Cold War politics that distorted their view of the Soviets.
    2
  14138. Benjo, I will copy urbandictionary's definition of a Wehraboo - "A history or alternate history fan who is firmly entrenched in the belief that Nazi Germany's Wehrmacht was the best military in history, without a single flaw. Effectively, a Wehraboo is any obsessive Wehrmacht fanboy/fangirl who doesn't like historical facts getting in the way of his militaristic fantasies. While not necessarily, many Wehraboos can become Nazi apologists."
    2
  14139. Yes we shall!
    2
  14140. Thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying them :)
    2
  14141. I haven't really studied the air war to be honest. It's something I want to look into after Stalingrad
    2
  14142. But that's simply not true. Immediately after the war, Franz Halder and his cronies deliberately distorted history to make out as though the Germans were amazing, the Soviets were idiots, and that Hitler was a madman who was to blame for everything that went wrong. We now know this isn't the case, that they were saying that stuff because it was what the American audience wanted (Halder worked for the US Historical Division) and it was to save their own reputations. The reality was, Halder and his cronies were to blame for the military failures, not just Hitler, and that in a lot of military matters Hitler wasn't mad - but actually correct. We also know now that the German Army wasn't passive and actually participated in the Holocaust and other atrocities. So to say that history was better written soon after the events is simply untrue. The same sources historians had back then are available now, including more that weren't available back then. More is being discovered all the time. This is why history should constantly be revised, updated, and discussed, because we want to correct the mistakes the earlier generations of historians made (in the majority of cases, through no fault of their own).
    2
  14143. Well, thanks for subscibing whenever you did. I hope this time you'll stick around a little longer :)
    2
  14144. No, because they're incorrectly using the sources (or not using them at all) so they fall under the distorian category. You could link to my other videos were I clearly show the Wehrmacht was not as great as Wehraboos think it was. So if they link to this video, you simply say "yes, as TIK clearly points out, you're a distorian" and proceed to tell them why.
    2
  14145. Yes! Although I think I'll stick to the polite word "Distorian" if you don't mind ;)
    2
  14146. I just wish I could respond to everyone, but I'm swamped!
    2
  14147. Again, I think you've misunderstood me somehow. Historians couldn't research the early medieval period because they could only read latin. Since this language barrier left a big hole in their history of this period, they referred to it as "The Dark Ages" - maybe best described as the "blank ages". Once historians began getting around that language barrier (by using the other native languages) they discovered new documents and sources that made the "blank age" not so blank. The "dark age" was no longer so "dark"/"blank". Does that make sense? It has nothing to do with what actually happened during those times, just the lack of sources due to the language barrier.
    2
  14148. Glad you liked the term Distorian :) The term "Dark Ages" referred to the fact that there wasn't much written about the era. So people call it the Dark Ages because, to early historians, they didn't know much about it. But this was because they only looked at latin sources. Once they started looking at other native languages, the term became defunct. It hasn't got anything to do with what actually happened in those times (with plagues etc).
    2
  14149. Thank you Stalinium!
    2
  14150. Glad you agree :)
    2
  14151. Yes?
    2
  14152. The BBC isn't revisionist, they're pushing their own agenda. Let's not forget that the reporters say what the guy in charge of the BBC wants them to say.
    2
  14153. Wait? That's not what happened?
    2
  14154. I agree. But sadly, I don't know anything about Sutton. What was his story?
    2
  14155. Revisionist = rewriting history correctly. Distorian = rewriting history wrong.
    2
  14156. It's my pleasure. Glad to hear you're enjoying them :)
    2
  14157. 1984 and Orwell is interesting. My favourite fiction author. People have viewed him as an anti-socialist, when in reality he was only anti-totalitarian or anti-Soviet-communism. He was still very much left-wing (if you subscribe to the political spectrum). But I can clearly remember watching a documentary as a kid where they were painting him as a right-winger because he was anti-Soviet-communist. Clearly whoever made that documentary had only read 1984 and hadn't read his early works like Homage to Catalonia. Or they'd chosen to ignore his earlier works (since the viewers probably hadn't read all his books) to favour and push their own political beliefs and agenda. Again, another way people can distort the truth.
    2
  14158. Cheers Croatsky! Glad I could clarify it for you :)
    2
  14159. Sadly, since this video has been viewed by YouTube as "potentially inappropriate", I've decided to remove some comments from the comment section, specifically those of Lars Agerbæk and David Icke in this thread. Their arguments (based purely on opinions) were complete nonsense anyway, and wouldn't have lead to any serious discussion. The video was only about the distinction of the term "revisionist" being misused, which can be applied to historians studying topics throughout history. It doesn't actually mean those studying a race-specific part of a wider WW2 atrocity, which is what those groups call themselves (trying to give some legitimacy to their evil baseless cause). I hate having to take said action, but here we are :(
    2
  14160. Yeah I do want to cover Bagration at some point. It'll definitely be after Stalingrad now though
    2
  14161. Well, conspiracy theories are just theories because there's no actual evidence, or they twist evidence to suit their needs. They're distorians, or followers of distorians, because they're allowing their beliefs to take priority over the evidence. Now obviously, evidence could appear that proves any theory right. However, logic dictates we should find the evidence first, then come to our conclusions - not, come to conclusions, then try to find the evidence.
    2
  14162. What do you mean?
    2
  14163. That's actually not a bad suggestion. I'll make it law as soon as I'm elected
    2
  14164. Well, I'm glad you realised! But again, I just want to emphasize, there were/are good revisionists too. This is the problem calling the denialists revisionists because everyone now associates revisionists with them, which isn't good.
    2
  14165. Yes, but as you said, there are good revisionist historians. And because the term implies revision of history is bad, the term should not be applied to denialists. Your point about the pedophiles would make sense if, say, pedophiles referred to themselves as "child minders". Then you'd have good and bad child minders, and I'd probably be arguing that we should have a separate term for bad child minders - pedophiles. I hope that makes sense.
    2
  14166. Fine then. Historians and Distorians. But the term revisionist implies that revising history is bad, which it isn't. So either call regular good historians revisionists (which some are known as that anyway), or get rid of the term completely. Calling the distorians "revisionist" is just encouraging people to think that revising history is wrong.
    2
  14167. That's the point, they're distorians, not true revisionists.
    2
  14168. Putin has a pet bee that's reluctant to speak. It's his cagey bee.
    2
  14169. I don't know what it is, but I like really really bad jokes. The worse they are the funnier in my opinion. For example - What do you call a sad cow? An emoo
    2
  14170. Yup! And a historian in 100 years time will have even more. But that doesn't mean we can't work with what we have today :)
    2
  14171. That is it - the influence of the German generals, the inability for western historians to access the Soviet archieves, and the distrust of the Soviet sources because of Cold War politics has warped our perception of the German-Soviet Front. When I've tried to readdress that balance (not favouring the Soviets, just trying to get it in the middle), it's caused a backlash.
    2
  14172. Well, I hope your mind is ok! Haha
    2
  14173. Fight you? I'm on your side!
    2
  14174. A review of Beevor's new book "Arnhem". All I'll say for now is, wow Beevor... wow....
    2
  14175. That's interesting! I hope you don't mind me asking, but which country are you from?
    2
  14176. Sorry it's so short this week. You may like next week's video(s) though, which is on Beevor's new book on Arnhem/Market Garden (involving the Polish).
    2
  14177. I suppose, but that would be taking it to extreme. I guess, if we go the next step, calling good historians "revisionists" all the time is a bit pointless. We could just call them "historians" and bad historians "distorians", and get rid of the revisionist title altogether. But either way, revising history is actually good. And more people need to realise that.
    2
  14178. The difference being that as soon as you look into Stalin's regime, the question becomes not if millions were killed, but how many millions were killed.
    2
  14179. But he is.
    2
  14180. I've not heard of that one. What was so controversial about it?
    2
  14181. Some people don't want history to change (I guess, as a result of a conservative mindset). But, the rest of politics aside, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of history and the role of a historian. History is a debate, new evidence is always coming along, and the role of a historian is to find new evidence and present new interpretations based off that evidence (or the reinterpret the evidence they already have). So those people refusing to accept the new evidence (those calling it biased or something) are missing the point entirely. And just to point out - all evidence is biased. That's also a fundamental truth.
    2
  14182. Exactly! If you can give me examples of counter-revisionist-historians, I'll talk about it :)
    2
  14183. A lot of people are asking this question. Yes, from what I've read, yes he is.
    2
  14184. Exactly!
    2
  14185. Yes, it was a hard decision. I've decided I'm going to redo them in less harsh language and I'll have a video up later explaining my reasons. The book is "Lost at Nijmegen" by Poulussen :)
    2
  14186. He's a distorian. Honestly, read anything on the subject by proper historians first before you go anywhere near his works.
    2
  14187. It's all about motive. In this case, the newspapers are pushing for a story, and the guy is perhaps trying to cover his tracts (depends on the act). This is why you can't blindly trust the media since they're deliberately trying to provoke outrage, and will distort the facts to make it appear more controversial. Even the beloved BBC is insanely guilty of doing that. A good early case to study if you're interested in the way the media distorted things and sensationalised the case is Jack the Ripper.
    2
  14188. Partly, but probaby not just them. I'm not sure on the exact history of the term, but it's also used in a lot of different ways by people who don't like history (or, insert other academic subject) to be revised.
    2
  14189. Historians back in the day could only read Latin. They called this period the Dark Ages - or the "blank ages" - because there were no Latin texts for the period. So their sources, and then their history books were "blank" or "dark" when it came to this period. It has nothing to do with the events of the time. It's just an admission that there was a lack of sources as a result of a language barrier.
    2
  14190. Exactly!
    2
  14191. Oh absolutely. I wouldn't trust anything that guy said (but obviously, his views and memoirs are still important).
    2
  14192. :) when I say I will do something, I will. It may take time (Stalingrad) but I will do it.
    2
  14193. It's rewritten to correct the errors, the embellishments and fix the mistakes that historians made when writing their histories. It also allows the injection of newly discovered evidence into the story, which will change the interpretation massively. That's why most newer history books are significantly better and more balanced than the older ones. Access to more sources, figuring out of the distortions... It's a constant improvement over the old as we move towards the truth. I have a video on history theory coming on the 14th of January 2019. You'd do well to watch it because I'll be explaining why history uses the scientific method, but isn't just a science. It cannot just be a science, as many of the pre-WW1 historians realised themselves.
    2
  14194. I'm not sure about that. Thing is, movies may be bigoted or whatever, but they were products of their times. To deny that is to distort history - and that is a bad thing.
    2
  14195. "I don't like the idea of an open-ended "pause" that may never resume." I understand your concern, but it won't be for long. Episode 43 has already been recorded, and my new editor can now get to grips with Blender without too much pressure. I'll also be able to script future episodes at my own pace once I've got a couple of other videos done and have recovered a bit. So this is a pause from publishing, and a slowing of the pace of production, but not a stoppage. I have no intention of abandoning this series. I just need to reduce the work-load so I'm not constantly doing 60 hours weeks forever more without days off. - "Indeed, many of the intervening videos in between our monthly Stalingrad fixes are weak by comparison." Yes, and that's because of Stalingrad. All my effort has gone into Stalingrad, so the other videos were rushed and neglected. Worse, I ran out of time to research, so many Patreon Q&As and other topics I've wanted to cover have been left behind. What's the point of starting something if you know it'll take too long to finish and you don't have the time? That's why I'm pausing the Stalingrad series, to concentrate on the other stuff. When I can get the time to actually focus on these other videos, you'll see the quality jump up again to where they were in the past. Recently the Dresden and Aryan Religion videos did well, and that was because I decided to work every hour I could on them the week prior. But I can't keep that pace up. I have to lower the work-load, which is what pausing Stalingrad will allow me to do. Plus, it's these other videos that bring in new viewers, so it'll help drive traffic to the Stalingrad series, and help save the channel. The channel isn't in "decline", but the number of new subscribers coming in has halved in recent months after all the times I missed publishing. I need to save the channel from a decline in order to continue the Stalingrad series, because if the channel declines and the revenue dries up, it'll be back to retail and Stalingrad will then have to be abandoned.
    2
  14196. I won't be abandoning it, don't worry. I just need to take a step back. Episode 43 has already been recorded, so my new editor can slowly work their way through that without much pressure and get used to Blender
    2
  14197.  @benz.  Thank you very much for your response! I do often wonder if some of my videos are too detailed
    2
  14198. That's kinda what's happened here, although part of it is my own desire to get the series finished. I have let the audience - specifically the "stick to tanks" crowd - get to me in the past. Even though I'm sailing the ship, the wind was blowing in a different direction. Now I'm going to stop fighting the wind and let it take me where I need to go.
    2
  14199. Oh good! I'm glad people are getting notified this time
    2
  14200. Yes, it was the one and the same. He was very lucky because the planes stopped taking people out only a few days later.
    2
  14201. Yes, it's because the Germans stop reporting, and the Soviets self-censored, so there's a dearth of sources for this period of the fighting. And to be fair, no fighting of any significance happened in the first 9 days of January.
    2
  14202. Thanks! My new editor suggested it and yeah it looks great
    2
  14203. I'll be sure to read it. I've read "The Virtue of Selfishness" and "Anthem", I'm part way through "Fountainhead", and have purchased "Atlas Shrugged". Stalingrad is nearly over, and I'll be happy when it is. The channel is growing, but that growth has been rapidly declining because I'm not able to do much beyond Stalingrad. I've got an idea for next week's video and have been working on it, but the research isn't finished and I've still got to do Stalingrad screenplays for the next episode... It's impossible to do everything.
    2
  14204. Except, Hitler wanted to stamp out the Marxists because he thought it was a con. He thought it was a Jewish plot to take over the world, and therefore his anti-Marxism was his anti-Semitism
    2
  14205. No I didn't.
    2
  14206. Is it? Can you back that up with actual scientific evidence that's also not refuted by other scientific research?
    2
  14207. It has massive implications
    2
  14208. You would be correct. They're coming from external sites, downvoting the video without watching, then claiming things I refuted in the video that they didn't watch
    2
  14209. You clearly didn't watch the video if you can't see any evidence of Marx being an Anti-Semite Racist
    2
  14210. It's not just me and Goebbels. But I understand why a one off quote might make you think that.
    2
  14211. Okay, I guess it gives a bit more information relating to his grandfather being a Jewish rabbi from Nijmegen which I said in the video, but it doesn't offer us any further information about why Marx's father abandoned the faith.
    2
  14212. Thank you! Yes, I do see this sort of content as important, especially with the current bid for totalitarianism. Sadly, Marxist YouTube has suppressed this video - subscribers have confirmed that they weren't getting notified about it. Of course, there's no agenda at YouTube or anything...
    2
  14213. It's worth pointing out that Turkey was in control of Palestine at this stage. Britain only took over after WW1.
    2
  14214. He wasn't Jewish. As I said in the video that you clearly haven't watched in its entirety, Karl Marx never practiced Judaism. And race doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label
    2
  14215. "One interpretation of a single quote, that can be interpretated in so many ways... This strange conclusion does not correspond to historical methods, man." I'm glad to see the Postmodernists have arrived. Sadly, there's only a handful of VALID interpretations to a source, not a million. And this interpretation is clearly valid. Here's a video about History Theory you should watch https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc "And why all socialism is anti-Semitic? There were and many socialists before and after Marx, even Jews and even religious socialists." Yep, you didn't watch the video in full, or if you didn't you didn't grasp the message because you were too busy forming a reply. Try stopping, thinking, and grasping what I'm saying before knee-jerking a response in the comments. Other people have managed to grasp what I said, so I know it's not because I didn't explain it clear enough.
    2
  14216. Wow, thank you for your comment! And thank you for supporting me and making it possible to do videos like this :) I'm doing my best to speak the truth, but it's not easy because we like in an age of censorship. YT has already deleted several of my comments in this comment section... But I will continue to speak the truth for as long as I can!
    2
  14217. You have to also read Das Kapital and more to get the context. Marx said that "Money is the jealous god of Israel" and then said that money was capital/Capitalism in Das Kapital. Therefore, to translate Marx's words: "Capitalism is Judaism", which is why he then proceeded to say that the products (offspring) of the Capitalist are "inwardly c- Jews" (YT censors my comments if I quote Marx in full). I will be following this video up with another about the two 'P' words, which are definitely used vs the Jews. It's blatantly clear that Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite, and not just in the way you're implying.
    2
  14218. It absolutely should! The reason it hasn't is because our State Education Systems in the West are an absolute disgrace
    2
  14219. They're definitely suppressing it. Couple of people said they haven't received notifications, and it's one of the worst performing videos I've had in a while. Looking at the analytics, it's clear that it's not being recommended as often as previous videos, even though people are watching a significant portion of the video, and are engaging with it (likes and comments) more often. It's performing similar to the Greek video, which was definitely suppressed and age restricted around 30 minutes after publication. This hasn't been age restricted (yet), but it wouldn't surprise me at this point
    2
  14220. I have read Marx. Not all of the rubbish he wrote, but I've read his racist Manifesto, his "On the J Question", and Das Krapital volume 1 (the one he wrote) and 2+3 (the volumes Engels wrote). I've also read some of his other articles. Once you understand that Value is Subjective rather than based on Labour, you'll understand why his entire theory falls apart.
    2
  14221. Perhaps, however, he called "German Socialists" (which are proto-National Socialists, as I can prove that with other sources) "Philistines". This links the two concepts together. And the idea that Marx is just using the "uncivilised" definition of Philistine is undermined in another passage in Das Kapital on Page 161 where he says - "One year previously, in his “Outlines of Political Economy,” written for the instruction of Oxford students and cultivated Philistines, he had also “discovered, in opposition to Ricardo’s determination of value by labour, that profit is derived from the labour of the capitalist, and interest from his asceticism, in other words, from his abstinence.”" Note the phrase "cultivated Philistines". Isn't this a contradiction of terms? In another passage, he calls Jeremy Bentham an "arch-Philistine", even though the guy was clearly not "uncivilized" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Bentham Jeremy Bentham though was an advocate for economic freedom and liberty etc. One of his students was John Stuart Mill. So it's clear that he was a supporter of "Capitalism", which then suggests that Marx viewed him as a practitioner of "Judaism"
    2
  14222. Yes, but the word has historic connections, and Marx's use of the word (especially in the second usage in this video) makes it clear that he's using it in the historic connections too, since he is applying it to anti-Semites
    2
  14223. Don't cry, anti-Semites
    2
  14224. As I've said in the pinned comment of this week's video - "I’ve read your comments, and my interpretation of the two ‘P’ words hasn’t changed for reasons I will explain in an upcoming follow-up video to that one. Cheers!"
    2
  14225. As I said in reply to you elsewhere, that's a really good video. Nonetheless, it doesn't contract what's said here.
    2
  14226. It was when you consider the Italians had 150,000 troops, and the British had 30,000 (and only 20,000 at any moment in time).
    2
  14227. PIATs weren't great for the user, but they were still effective and could have taken out a lone Tiger.
    2
  14228. I think you'll enjoy Wednesday's video :)
    2
  14229.  @ivannot-a-bot32  I know :)
    2
  14230. "Conformed"? And I don't even drink Coke let alone do drugs.
    2
  14231. Damn, I'm really sorry to hear about your dog ☹️ there's never a good time for that to happen though, and doesn't mean the rest of the season will go badly. It could mean you start focusing on the negatives, which then makes you think things are worse than they are, which is confirmation bias. Probably best to focus on the positives, like remembering all the good times you had with him/her, and catching those fires!
    2
  14232. Thanks Hobo! How's things??
    2
  14233. It's technically not a tank, but it's my favourite assault gun of the war
    2
  14234. For it's time. It's all about time!
    2
  14235. The 2-Pounder Crusader wasn't great. The 6-pounder yes, but by the time they got that gun they'd already slipping into out-of-date territory.
    2
  14236. I had not, but thank you very much. Kotkin is great.
    2
  14237. Courland Pocket is bi-weekly.
    2
  14238. Congrats!
    2
  14239. The British people wanted to keep their sovereignty, and so pulled out of the international socialist community that's increasingly centrally planned and controlled. Of course, their politicians and social elites didn't want that, which is why the media (bought and paid for by the elite) were throwing everything they had at those who wanted out of the Fourth Reich.
    2
  14240. Yes!
    2
  14241. I explained that in the video. They had to tackle the more immediate problem first (Hitler), and hoped Hitler and Stalin would end up fighting each other.
    2
  14242. Just watched that before on the recommendation of another viewer. Also read books on the subject (including the 'Hidden History' book that this documentary mentions and shows the author of). In a nutshell, while I'm not against the idea, I'm not convinced by the books nor the evidence presented. There's too much wishy-washyness in the theory
    2
  14243.  @benh5366  They quickly lost that anyway, since the age of empires was coming to an end
    2
  14244. 1. I was taught that this was the British strategy in college. 2. I spent the whole video arguing against the Nazi narrative. David Hoggan is a Nazi.
    2
  14245. I've only ever played one game of Diplomacy, but it's a great game. Also watch the small DiploStrats channel, although haven't finished watching their longest game series yet
    2
  14246. ""Keep Europe divided" ... there's the secret plan of the UK all along." Yeah, but I would argue that it's not really a secret. Everybody knows this. I was actually taught this in college (one of the few things my formal education got right).
    2
  14247. They also had no oil to power that navy, which is why it sat in dock for most of the war.
    2
  14248. Except everything you said was the opposite of what I said in the video. Please pay attention.
    2
  14249. I did not. I was a Socialist back then. However, now I absolutely would vote for it.
    2
  14250. First, the video on Winston Churchill actually backs up what I'm saying in this video. The British wanted the Soviets and Germans fighting each other because it would weaken the two great enemies on Continental Europe without the British haven't to get directly involved. As I said in this video, the British knew that Hitler was going East. So when the Germans AND Soviets invaded Poland in 1939, Britain only declared war on the Germans, knowing that the Germans would end up in war with the Soviet Union eventually (as happened). In the video on the Hess flight, the idea that the British deliberately kept out of all the fighting prior to 1944 is simply untrue. Britain was fighting throughout 1940 to 1945, in North Africa, Italy, Sicily, the Middle East (in Iraq, Syria, even Persia), in the Far East, and, of course, in the Atlantic and in the air. As mentioned in this video, Britain didn't ever have a large enough army to defeat Germany, and so had to rely on allies (like the USA and the Soviet Union). So the British, by themselves, could never have mounted the invasion of Normandy. They needed outside help, and only got it later in the war. In regards to the Hess part, there's other contradictory evidence that refutes this claim. It's too complicated to fully explain here. But for example, in the book "Rudolf Hess: Truth at Last", the authors make a compelling case that Hess was trying to make contact with members of the Royal Family (plus the Poles and others) loyal to the abdicated King Edward VIII, rather than the British establishment (e.g. Churchill). But because he bubbled the flight, he was caught. So Hess may not have been trying to get in contact with Churchill or whatever, but actually plotters inside the Royal Family. This is further backed up by the fact that the Hess files remain locked up inside the ROYAL Archives, which are not subject to any of the acts of Parliament granting access to files after so many years (e.g. the freedom of information act). So, to answer your question: "What the heck happened to you??" In short, nothing. You've jumped to silly conclusions and assumed I'm speaking in ignorance. Yes, I don't know everything, and I've never pretended that I know everything. However, what you've said only reinforces what I said here, it doesn't undermine it.
    2
  14251. Sorry! I'll admit that it's not the most accurate map. I actually spent the whole day yesterday expanding it
    2
  14252.  @shorewall  That is precisely it. This video allowed me to catch up with the Stalingrad scripts, have some half-work days last week to recharge, and expand and update the 'simple' maps shown in the video. I don't think every video of mine will (or should) be a massively long deep-dive video. A balance is needed. And I do need to do more for the newer history enthusiasts, since many of my videos go straight over their heads. But I do understand why some of my dedicated in-depth viewers are disappointed.
    2
  14253. Interestingly, this was what I was taught in college. And also, I'm not a "Brit". I'm human, not a social-nationality.
    2
  14254.  @alih6953  I saw that video when it came out. In fact, I commented on it thanking him for the shout-out in the video. Not sure I need to do a reaction to it since I agree with all of it
    2
  14255.  @benevolentnick1  First, the video on Winston Churchill actually backs up what I'm saying in this video. The British wanted the Soviets and Germans fighting each other because it would weaken the two great enemies on Continental Europe without the British haven't to get directly involved. As I said in this video, the British knew that Hitler was going East. So when the Germans AND Soviets invaded Poland in 1939, Britain only declared war on the Germans, knowing that the Germans would end up in war with the Soviet Union eventually (as happened). In the video on the Hess flight, the idea that the British deliberately kept out of all the fighting prior to 1944 is simply untrue. Britain was fighting throughout 1940 to 1945, in North Africa, Italy, Sicily, the Middle East (in Iraq, Syria, even Persia), in the Far East, and, of course, in the Atlantic and in the air. As mentioned in this video, Britain didn't ever have a large enough army to defeat Germany, and so had to rely on allies (like the USA and the Soviet Union). So the British, by themselves, could never have mounted the invasion of Normandy. They needed outside help, and only got it later in the war. In regards to the Hess part, there's other contradictory evidence that refutes this claim. It's too complicated to fully explain here. But for example, in the book "Rudolf Hess: Truth at Last", the authors make a compelling case that Hess was trying to make contact with members of the Royal Family (plus the Poles and others) loyal to the abdicated King Edward VIII, rather than the British establishment (e.g. Churchill). But because he bubbled the flight, he was caught. So Hess may not have been trying to get in contact with Churchill or whatever, but actually plotters inside the Royal Family. This is further backed up by the fact that the Hess files remain locked up inside the ROYAL Archives, which are not subject to any of the acts of Parliament granting access to files after so many years (e.g. the freedom of information act). So, to answer your question: "What the heck happened to you??" In short, nothing. You've jumped to silly conclusions and assumed I'm speaking in ignorance. Yes, I don't know everything, and I've never pretended that I know everything. However, what you've said only reinforces what I said here, it doesn't undermine it.
    2
  14256. The British Establishment did not want to leave Europe, but the referendum forced them to. That's why the Establishment have been so punishing in the last few years against the people here in the UK, gaslighting them and calling them dirty, diseased, "white" racists, etc. If the Playdohs in Parliament could, they'd put themselves back under the thumb of the international socialist European Fascist Union, and so I'm not sure they're fighting to bring the EU down.
    2
  14257. You presume correct (I've put a correction in the description and pinned comment)
    2
  14258. King Nevermore - That's not a bad idea. I'll look into it!
    2
  14259. No comments are getting deleted. They're automatically ending up in the spam folder (especially if you swear or post links etc) despite the fact that I've set it to allow all comments. I occasionally clear the spam folder, but it's a pain to do and super-long winded, and I have other priorities.
    2
  14260. Glad you appreciated that one :)
    2
  14261. Actually both the Theory of History and the Austrian Theory of Economics agree that statistics and records are only as good as the authors who wrote them, and recognise that all authors are flawed, since all humans are flawed and biased and have a limited perspective of the world. (Mises started off as a historian after all.) Now, you might disagree with the Austrian School of Economics... But I would seriously question the value of a school of economics which disagrees with and refuses to accept the fundamental principles of the Theory of History - such is all the socialist ones, and Keynesian Economic Theory. If you change history to suit your ideology, then history loses it's meaning, and so too do the statistics you've pulled out of a hat.
    2
  14262. @Huntermad - he's talking about the idea some people have called "collectivism". People who think all people of a certain 'gender', 'class', 'race', or 'nation' are 'the same'. This leads to judging people who are not of your 'gender', 'class', 'race', or 'nation' as different or wrong. You then dehumanize them, leading to Death Camps and Gulags. The alternative idea is the idea that we are all individuals, and that our skin colour, or sexuality, or nationality, or background doesn't matter. All that matters is who we are as an individual person. Judge me by my actions, not by the actions of others. If we all did that, we would cooperate, rather than hate.
    2
  14263. hello kanewhchampion!
    2
  14264. The word 'eugenics' was coined by Francis Galton, an English "scientist", in 1883.
    2
  14265. Of course there will be videos on the fighting in the city. The series is still ongoing. I'm working on the scripts for season 5 now. The Germans haven't reached the city yet!
    2
  14266. "Not true but revisionism is good for clicks." Good to see postmodernism is still alive and well!
    2
  14267. How dare you use my cupboard sticker against me!
    2
  14268. I think they needed to hold the northern flank, so I'm not sure the 6th Army could have gone south
    2
  14269. Yes, but that would have meant more Soviet reinforcements for the city itself, so it would have ended up similar to the point Yugster78 brought up in the video
    2
  14270. Come on Vass, keep up! ;)
    2
  14271. Back? Where have I been? I've been consistently posting weekly!
    2
  14272. @tokul76 - that's a good point. The western bank of the Volga was much higher than the eastern bank, so a railway bridge across it may not have been practical
    2
  14273. Sadly, without a free market and prices you cannot make economic calculations (see Mises, "Socialism," P103-105). So even if that data was available, it wouldn't tell you anything meaningful, because there's no free market in State military logistics.
    2
  14274. People like being "1st" in the comments, and then people who miss it go for 2nds, 3rds etc. It's just a bit of fun :)
    2
  14275. Indeed it is! Did a 13.5 hour day yesterday getting it finished!
    2
  14276. Yes I have, and I think I mentioned this in one of the questions in last week's video. If not, I think it's pretty much similar to what I said about the World at War Series and all other TV documentaries - a good introduction to the topic, but out of date, limited in detail, and you need to dive into the books.
    2
  14277. I was debating adding it to it, but I don't think he was in direct danger here. I think he was in a bunker. Had he not been, then yes
    2
  14278. @Christ's Kingdom is Coming! "Hitler reportedly always kept a copy of Blavatsky's writings by his bedside and was greatly influenced by her writings" I've not heard this before. Do you have a source for this information?? - "The Thule society as well as the Vrill likely held Gnostic beliefs among others. If this is the case, then these Ideas have very much influenced Hitler's world view and helped shape the man he became." Yeah, but Hitler didn't enter the Thule. Some of the ideas may have originated from that, but it can't all be blamed on that because the evidence doesn't support the conclusion that Hitler was directly influenced by the Thule.
    2
  14279. I haven't read that book, but I'll pick it up. Thank you for the recommendation! And yes, I agree with the rest of your comment, and hadn't heard of the concept of polysemy before.
    2
  14280. I also thought the same as you. He did persecute the churches - he wasn't a Christian. But I've realised now that National Socialism is itself a religious cult, and that the invoking of the "Almighty" isn't just an added extra, it's actually central to his Movement.
    2
  14281. "TIK learn to use a political compass. I know you are smart enough to know what that is so you trying to simplify it down to left vs right is just extremely disingenuous." You cannot have a libertarian left or an authoritarian right. That's a contradiction. If you're economically Right (freedom of the markets), having a tyrant prevents you from being economically free. And if you have a tyrannical economic system where the individual has to bow to the collective, then you're no longer libertarian.
    2
  14282. "The Finnish Bolshevik actually debunked your video on socialism a while ago" No. No he didn't.
    2
  14283. Thank you. Interestingly, Hitler's Nationalism was his Socialism, and both of them meant the same thing = the race. He wasn't a nationalist in the traditional "bourgeois" sense where multiple "races" could exist in the same nation. His nationalism was his racism, just like his socialism was his racism. That's why he called his party the National Socialist party - they both mean "Race".
    2
  14284. @Lettuce Boi, glad you're finding it all useful!
    2
  14285. "No TIK, denying Hitler's antisemitism is denying the Holocaust." And denying Hitler's socialism is denying Hitler's antisemitism. Hitler's socialism is his racism. "I fear we are moving into rather dark areas, particularly your reluctance to confront the antisemitism in the comments of your last video." You say this on a video where I completely undermined Holocaust Denialist ideology. Why would I waste my time in the comments replying to hundreds of denialists individually when I can make a video tackling all of them simultaneously?
    2
  14286. Thank you! Glad to have your support - I'm going to need it considering who we're battling here :)
    2
  14287. Glad to hear! Cheers!
    2
  14288. "you're just trolling both sides now Hahaha. Brave man." Yup, pretty much. "Please don't go kamikazi and get your channel shut down cause I really like your non political content." I won't be. This will be the last of these for a while. I just needed to get over the it's socialism issue before moving on to actual policies and things within the war. Without getting over this hurdle, the rest wouldn't be possible.
    2
  14289. I mean, it's already happened. Just look at the comments in some of my old videos - like the Hitler's Socialism video, or the original National Socialism was Socialism video
    2
  14290. Fascism is a version of Socialism. It's Syndicalist. Therefore, it's little different than Marxism. So the criticism that I "put fascism in the bad light" is invalid because Fascism itself is an ideology based on a total lack of understanding of basic economics. One thorough and honest read of "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt will explain why Fascism and Socialism are bad economic ideas. Follow this up with Mises' Socialism, and it's dead. So notice, I'm not even tackling Fascism in other ways (I could), but just from an economic point of view Fascism is bad for the workers and consumers, and is the destruction of freedom for men. I would even go so far as to say that it turns men into boys - it stunts them by taking away their individual freedom.
    2
  14291. It was a crime, definitely. I wouldn't say it was "racist" though, since it was aimed primarily at enemy troops (with civilians getting caught in the crossfire). If this was "racist", then surely the use of gas in WW1 would also be seen as "racist"?
    2
  14292. Looks like no Marxist truly understands their own ideology or has read Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg This is why education is important - to kick you out of your brainwashing
    2
  14293. But prior to calling themselves Fascist, they were simply Socialists. This is my point. The bundle of rods idea was applied to workers trade unions
    2
  14294. The socialisation of the means of production IS state control. I've been over this, in depth, here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14295. Watch this https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I Then watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14296. Almost! It's that, but on the national level. If it was on the international level, then it would be Revolutionary Syndicalism (a form of Marxism).
    2
  14297. If that one doesn't clarify it, then try this one https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14298. Probably the best video to watch to understand this concept is this one https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  14299. Yes, pretty much!
    2
  14300. Socialism has nothing to do with Marxism. You're comparing Fascism to Marxism and then saying it's not the same, which is true. Fascism is socialism, not Marxism. Oh and Marxism isn't actually about "class" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg And the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14301. Is it? Well, stupid comments that are answered in the video(s) that they didn't watch are inbound then
    2
  14302. Eco was incorrect, as I explained in the video. Pay attention.
    2
  14303. A Syndicate is a State, in the same way that a tribe is a State. Socialism is always "State Socialism" since it's inherent within the concept - Society is the State. I've explained this here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14304. "90% social housing." Sounds like Oldham
    2
  14305. Yes. He says "Fascism being different from Socialism in that the private ownership is there but the government tells people what to do." I would argue that control and ownership are two sides of the same coin, and so this is a distinction without a difference.
    2
  14306. Correct. Hitler hated Franco too, and actually said that he wished he'd supported the other side in the Spanish Civil War (Zitelmann, "The Policies of Seduction," P436-437)
    2
  14307. I think so too, especially with the power-creep that's been happening everywhere... but sadly I don't think many will see it
    2
  14308. Both the Democrats and Republicans both want more state control. That's why Donald Trump doubled what Obama spent, and Biden will do the same again. Just like here in the UK, you have a one party state pretending to be a multi-party system. The game is rigged.
    2
  14309. "Hi Lewis, I used to be one of your "stick to military history, TIK" guys. I have to admit, your political and economic videos are well researched, reasonable, and, yes, refreshing, and have convinced me of your great worth as a historian and historiographer. Thanks for your videos!" That's actually really good to hear! I've been concerned that I had irreversibly lost a significant portion of my audience simply because of the early videos where the response was bad... but to know that you have changed your mind (and you're not the only one) really makes me hopeful that I can claw back some of my other 'lost' viewers. Thank you :)
    2
  14310. I'm VERY surprised anyone has been notified about this video
    2
  14311. Many people have fallen for it, and it's almost impossible to get people to realize that they've been lied too because they have a shield made of cognitive dissonance that's hard to get around.
    2
  14312. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14313. You were second on my end :(
    2
  14314. No they didn't work, because their ideology permits them to sponge off the hard work of others, calling it "moral".
    2
  14315. "The Matrix"
    2
  14316. "Go attack Fascism/NatSoys as much as Marxism and other Soyialists and Coomunists." I am. All these ideologies are just as bad as each other.
    2
  14317. I don't "struggle to understand", I reject it. I'm not an idealist, nor an empiricist, nor a Kantian. Truth is not subjective as you asserted.
    2
  14318. Technically not, since I exist too and saw it first 😂
    2
  14319. And yes, while we evolved consciousness to help us survive better and we must use the gift of free will, by denying our consciousness and lowering us to "breeds", the National Socialists and racists make us out to be animals in the biological and consciousness sense.
    2
  14320. I'm not purposely misunderstanding. As part of the Google definition of animal it actually says "an animal as opposed to a human being". Merriam-Webster: "one of the lower animals as distinguished from human beings"
    2
  14321. "We are, however, animals in the biological sense, mammals specifically... [and] yes we very clearly are the most intelligent animal on earth - certainly so far as we're aware! With that intelligence comes less and less reliance upon instincts." Yes, I agree with you here. - "Again, my point is NOT that we are animals and therefore unthinking beasts who can't be held accountable [...] but rather that we are the most intelligent of animals AND THEREFORE have the highest amount of individuality AND responsibility for our thoughts and actions." I agree again. - "In this case, I think you may be speaking on a philosophical level while the commenters in the video are speaking on a biological level, both using absolute language that goes past one another. [...] They're working off ideology and twisting logic to fit it." I agree, and that is the problem. What they're doing is conflating our biology to our minds/intelligence. So I'm having to make that distinction. And I will point out that the dictionary definition of "animal" according to Google and Merriam Webster is "an animal as opposed to a human being" and "one of the lower animals as distinguished from human beings".
    2
  14322. Then I'm not wrong because I actually got onto the "spiritual and cultural" argument shortly afterwards.
    2
  14323. I've actually given the steelman arguments in previous videos, which I actually got some praise for by the Third Positionists.
    2
  14324. As an ex-socialist, I understand those issues, but disagree with you. To find out why, you're going to have to stop projecting and go read the books.
    2
  14325. There's plenty of ways. Supermarkets can't make a profit unless customers can get to them. So a supermarket could build a road and maintain it so that they can make a profit to the road users.
    2
  14326. Toni kireE Lahtinen yeah and "patience is a virtue"
    2
  14327. Thanks! And... yes?
    2
  14328. YouTube is killing its own platform. If they just left the viewers to make up their own minds about what they watch and believe then everything would be fine. Sadly, they think their viewers are children, and think they need to "guide" you, since apparently they think you can't think for yourselves. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence, and it's arrogance on the part of our YouTube overlords
    2
  14329. I can understand the dislikes on some of my videos, but others (like this one) I'm not so sure. I think I just have a bunch of haters following me who dislike everything I say or do.
    2
  14330. Thank you! You are correct, this really is a marathon. That's a good way of seeing it
    2
  14331. Or, the books exist, and I don't, and am just a figment of your imagination...
    2
  14332. It's worse when I'm run down or tired (or burnt out), but it's just a drooping eyelid. Had it for years
    2
  14333. The longest documentary is called "Logistics" and is 857 hours long. So I don't think we'll be winning any awards ☹️
    2
  14334. I don't walk on water, but only because I'm too busy turning wine into water
    2
  14335. Some do exist, but they're not as good at the moment. YouTube has the best platform, but they're ruining it with their own policies
    2
  14336. Sadly it wasn't, I just didn't type it correctly :(
    2
  14337. Stalingrad is every four weeks. I don't know how many times I have to tell people. FOUR WEEKS. I can't make them any quicker.
    2
  14338. I'm pro-free market. Socialists are pro-corporation, which is why the call for all the policies that causes monopolies to form in the first place, such as wage controls, price controls, inflation, taxation, and other such measures against small businesses and the self-employed workers.
    2
  14339. Was it information overload? I have been wondering if I give too much detail per video 🤔
    2
  14340. I haven't, no
    2
  14341. "somehow citing only the ones he was comfortable with their superficial comments, ignoring completely all those that pointed out his concrete mistakes..." That's not true. The Hitler's Socialism video was a direct response to multiple comments AND multiple videos from numerous Marxists, including the Finnish Bolshevik, which is why it's 5 hours long. I've been engaging in the comments, and the vast majority of the critics haven't actually watched the video. The few that have are having a very difficult time, with the only counter-argument that "my" definition of Socialism is wrong... even though I've quoted Karl Marx's own definition of Socialism, which is fully in alignment with the historical and even dictionary definition of Socialism as I outlined in the "Public vs Private" video. - "at the most one can expect him to refer you to one of his former videos as a source for his claim..." I see. So you're complaining that I'm not responding, but when I do respond, I'm told that I'm not allowed to link to a video that explains my counter-argument? What do you want me to do then? Do I have to write out the exact same counter-argument in the comments to each and every unique commenter, wasting numerous hours of my life just to be completely ignored by a bunch of lazy trolls who can't be bothered to even listen to my arguments let alone try to understand them? And the times that I do counter them in the comments, the comments end up getting lost in the vast number of comments, and then my opponents can claim that I don't respond to them. It's a colossal waste of time. And it really does amuse me that you've literally just complained that I don't respond to people, but when I do, you complain that I provide an answer to the argument that can be summed up in one simple sentence - WATCH THE VIDEO. Perhaps if you WATCHED THE VIDEO in the first place, instead of straw-manning my arguments, you wouldn't get such a response.
    2
  14342. I've watched several of Jame's videos. Really good stuff
    2
  14343. Yeah... I mean, if your definition of capitalism is "any economy with money in it" then they were right. If, however, it was the historical definition (private ownership of the means of production) then they were completely off.
    2
  14344. The historical definition of Socialism/Communism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14345. I don't know if they recently changed it or not, I didn't check. And I'm not surprised they've removed those quotes and references about Hoover, since Hoover heavily intervened in the economy to try and stop the Great Depression, even though I (and many others) were taught that he sat around and did nothing. It's a game - they hide the truth to promote their agenda.
    2
  14346. First! And technically, joint first too, which is a first in itself
    2
  14347. Right okay https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg And yes, as an ex-socialist, I have read Marx's Communist Manifesto, as well as Das Kapital (1-3, not bothered with 4 since Marx didn't write that anyway), and plenty of other of his texts too, as that video makes clear. The SPD was Karl Marx's Party. As I explained in the video, they were one and the same until 1917, and fundamentally still are the same. You can deny this fact, but you're not kidding me.
    2
  14348. You obviously haven't read Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    2
  14349. Why is there an economic crisis all around the world at the same time? https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  14350. "Libertarian" Socialism is still authoritarian. Forcing people into a collective, and abolishing their property rights, is not freedom. Freedom is the right to have property. A "community"/"society"/"STATE" that stops people from having property rights is totalitarian. So it's not a case that I don't know that Libertarian Socialism or Leftist Anarchism exists, it's a case of me pointing out the inherent contradiction in their ideologies. Libertarian Socialism is totalitarian. Leftist "Anarchism" isn't anarchy - it's totalitarian, despite how much they claim it isn't.
    2
  14351. I need to do a video on why Wikipedia is a terrible source. But no, history theory shows that it's better to have a publication that cannot change what it once wrote. Too complicated to explain here, but if I do that video I will endeavour to explain why
    2
  14352. Welcome to early club!
    2
  14353. Poor Tommy... never got the chance to fulfill his dream
    2
  14354. Early bird gets the cake!
    2
  14355. It's actually based on a map from 1952, which was the most accurate topographical map I could find that was closest to the time at the right scale. So yes, there are probably more roads than there were in 1942, but it's fairly accurate.
    2
  14356. First! And glad to hear it!
    2
  14357. There's not much difference between Patreon and SubscribeStar, although Patreon itself is in huge financial and legal trouble at the minute, so there's a potential that it might be going under soon. Either way, you get your name in the videos and Q&A's etc depending on the tier... although I massively behind with all that stuff :( And yes, a lot of the critics are nasty pieces of work who don't have manners and have no appreciation for evidence or a serious debate. In short, they're typical Syndicalists! I think it's ironic that they hate Fascism so much, when Fascism is literally the same thing. Another word for a trade 'union' (syndicate) was trade 'bundle'. A 'bundle' in Italian was the word "Fasci", which was a 'bundle' of sticks, and trade unions were called 'Fasci' prior to Mussolini coming along. Fascism is literally "power to the trade unions" - or Syndicalism/Corporatism. It's no wonder Syndicalists are so eager to say they're not Fascists.
    2
  14358. You'll be happy to know that I've been intending to do a video about the difference between Fascism and National Socialism for a Patreon Q&A, but wanted to do a bit more research first because everyone complains if I don't use a million books to support what I'm saying when it comes to politics, economics and social history
    2
  14359. It's a separate unit that was attached to the 24th Panzer Division
    2
  14360. Two weeks :)
    2
  14361. Probably. It's not always possible finding photographs specific to the Stalingrad region, so I use what I can find
    2
  14362. "LETS GOO" What are we gooing?
    2
  14363. Also, most of those "documentaries" in the longest list are ridiculous. I wouldn't call half of them "documentaries".
    2
  14364. "Longest documentary seems to be rated at 52k minutes which is about 8.5 k hours." It could be my bad maths, but isn't 51,420 minutes 857 hours? Either way, I doubt that Stalingrad will be anywhere near that long. Perhaps I could claim longest single battle documentary, or longest WW2 documentary, or something?
    2
  14365. I don't want to spoil anything, but this battle starts to change. Infantry becomes more important very soon...
    2
  14366. :) I eagerly away the after video response
    2
  14367. If you're just starting, I absolutely definitely recommend Barrie Pitt's "The Crucible of War" series of books. It's by far the best in terms of quality and information. It cannot stand alone, but is a fantastic starting point.
    2
  14368. Hope you enjoy it :)
    2
  14369. Stalingrad won't be quite as all over the place, but yes, imagine Crusader but about x10 as large ;)
    2
  14370. Stalingrad is mostly on hold at the moment because any spare time I have is going onto Courland (the next Battlestorm). Once Courland is done, it's 100% Stalingrad.
    2
  14371. But 60 miles... Single road... Nijmegen Bridge... :(
    2
  14372. Yes, here's a link to a video recommending three Eastern Front books https://youtu.be/KQWyAez9mCA and if you want more info on the North African Campaign, Barrie Pitt's "The Crucible of War" series (three books) is probably the best out there right now.
    2
  14373. You were third, but very close!
    2
  14374. You were second I'm afriad! But good attempt
    2
  14375. You were actually 5th! You're slipping Jamie
    2
  14376. Are you sure you're not all Rothschilds and deconstructing people? Hallett says you are, so obviously it must be true
    2
  14377. Well, I can't make the previous parts of the day better, but I hope you at least get a chuckle or two from this
    2
  14378. Haha neither have I! Glad you enjoyed it
    2
  14379. I bet the number of cases you deal with has increased since the Australian State went totalitarian. Either that or cases dropped because people no longer trust the State. Either way, I don't blame them.
    2
  14380. What exactly is your hypothesis? Yes, you're saying that we should be critical (which we are), but just saying that Churchill has a secret network doesn't mean anything by itself. What are you trying to say? And why are you saying all this without actually providing the conclusions of what you're saying? Why are you treating this as though only you know the secret, and you can't say it because it's so "secret" that nobody else can understand? Perhaps if you presented this information properly, backed by sources, and didn't present it in one giant paragraph with no breaks and also broken grammar and punctuation marks, then this would be more helpful and others would be able to understand what you're saying.
    2
  14381. That's actually me trying not to laugh!
    2
  14382. That would be amazing if it were true! Honestly I don't think I'm capable of writing a book this glorious 😂
    2
  14383. You may want to watch from the 48:30 mark for about 5 minutes, and from 56:50 for about 7-8 minutes
    2
  14384. Yeah, I don't get it. They shouldn't be banning any books at all
    2
  14385. "I tend towards the Sowell view of the interconnections between economic activity and society hence the need for an orderly but not planned society" Sorry for slow reply. By "order" and "planning", you mean the same thing. So I disagree. What I want is a free market, which is more orderly in its "anarchy" than the "order" (actually chaos) of central planning. - "...hence your more questionable video on German logistics." I don't understand the connection. You just said you wanted an orderly but not planned society, but are complaining when I point out to you the failures of ordered planning. The question is simple: do you want the government to run the show, or do you want individuals to run the show? I want individuals to run the show, because government has proven time and time again to be a colossal failure, as Thomas Sowell makes clear in all his books.
    2
  14386. How would you like me to expand on it?
    2
  14387. Glad you agree! And that's awesome, what's your book on?
    2
  14388. Yes you were! Congratulations!
    2
  14389.  @chrishoff402  I believe that they were counted as civilians, in which case they were part of the 29.6 million Soviet civilians who died (according to "The Price of Victory" chapter 8).
    2
  14390. Guilty as charged!
    2
  14391. The Price of Victory (great source that's dedicated to the casualty numbers) calculated that 14,534,000 Soviets were either killed, captured or missing. That's obviously discounting the wounded and sick. [See Chapter 7]
    2
  14392.  @adamjaquay4279  Correct. This is discussed in the Price of Victory - because a soldier can be wounded and sick multiple times, it's not really possible to count them towards the overall losses (for both sides).
    2
  14393. See my video "Did the Soviet Union EVER Recover from WW2?" because I mention the inflation/shortages and gold, plus other things https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    2
  14394. I do not watch TV and haven't done in years. Occasionally I might be at a friend's house and see the news or whatnot, but that's the exception. Old TV documentaries were good back in the day because there was nothing else. Now, unless it's really informative or down to the nitty gritty details, I'm not interested.
    2
  14395. Since I have Patreon and SubscribeStar, I didn't see the need. But if you prefer it, I shall look into the Join feature 👍
    2
  14396. 5th ;)
    2
  14397. Just seen this now, but that's awesome!
    2
  14398. "if you type in 'Mein Kampf' in Amazon.ca search, the first hit is 'Nineteen Eighty Four' " Wow? Seriously? That's awesome :)
    2
  14399. Democracy = people power. But people is plural, meaning group or Public. Public = State. Democracy is State power https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14400. From what I've head/read, many of the Nazis themselves didn't read it back in Hitler's day. They just had it on their shelves to show that they're adherents to the faith. And that's why Hitler was advised not to publish his Second Book, because nobody had read the first, and so sales of the second book might hurt sales of the first, rather than add to sales
    2
  14401. And yet, lots of people think Hitler was a capitalist because the historians are saying he is. One read of Mein Kampf will show how that's not the case. If they ban Mein Kampf and other primary sources, they can keep pushing a false narrative and nobody will be able to challenge them.
    2
  14402. Yes, this is what I said in the video - that it will backfire and give ammunition to the Nazis. It was a bad move in my opinion, and there were other options available other than outright banning
    2
  14403. I don't mind criticism if it's a genuine argument, like yours is. I don't like criticism when it's insanely illogical, contradictory or when every other word is a swear word :) So, here's something to think over. Can you define what a "qualified" historian is. Many say I'm not a "qualified" historian, even though I have a degree (not that that matters, I actually think having a history degree is worthless). Also, why should the State decide who's qualified or not? The only way to become "qualified" is for State-sanctioned and State-funded academics to "qualify" the person in question. That would be terrible for freedom of speech and flies in the face of history theory, since there would be no counter to whatever the State says. History would all be "official" State-sanctioned history, and would be as worthless as the history that came out of the Soviet Union. This is why I think anyone should have access to any reading material they like. Yes, some impressionable teens may end up reading the Communist Manifesto and then proceed to call for State monopolies whilst claiming Socialism isn't State control... but we can deal with them. It's better to know what we're dealing with than live in ignorance
    2
  14404. You were second by 1 second, sorry :(
    2
  14405. Yeah, the advise I received was to skip the first 200 pages because they're mostly irrelevant anyway. That said, the second half isn't much easier :/
    2
  14406. Amazon is a corporation. It's not 'private', it's 'public' https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y But yes, they can sell what they want. However, Amazon only did this because the Holocaust Educational Trust (backed by British Politicians - so, the State) pushed for them to ban it.
    2
  14407. Yes, but the point is that they were pressured into doing (perhaps by the British government? The source isn't clear)
    2
  14408. It truly is a terrible book. This was by design of course, so that adherents of the faith could just point at it on their book shelves and say "it's in there, stupid". Most of the Marxists I've spoken to haven't read it, but claim to have read it, and then accuse me of not reading it. I have read it (a while back, admittedly) but can't claim to fully understand parts of it because it's so badly written. For example - “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” (Karl Marx, Das Kapital V1, P107.) I've read this a hundred times and I'm still not sure exactly what he means. Does he mean that capitalists are inwardly circumcised Jews? Or does he mean commodities are inwardly circumcised Jews? If it's commodities, that doesn't make any sense. If it's capitalists, then how is he any different to Hitler? Again, the vagueness of what he wrote hides his true meaning, and that was definitely by design (as Muravchik explains in his book “Heaven on Earth”.)
    2
  14409. Will China and America ally themselves in their invasion of Poland?
    2
  14410. I'm not deleting comments. Some comments automatically get put into the spam folder, which I only clear periodically. But other people can click the three dots next to your comments and report them, which will remove your comments.
    2
  14411. "Very despicable for a store to be used to push a political agenda." They were pushed into doing it by the Holocaust Educational Trust, which supposedly have the backing of British politicians
    2
  14412. I actually use kgs for object weights, and stones for body weight. That's as a result of the poor education system in the UK. However, the sources I used stated lbs, which is why I went with them. Most of those sources are actually from US historians.
    2
  14413. You're quite lucky because I don't have a lot of time to reply these days and I'm overwhelmed by the number of comments! Even so, I thought I'd best reply to your comment. I don't mind alternate arguments or views (in fact, I encourage them, since history is all about debating what happened). However, I do think you got the wrong impression from the video. I'm not "bashing the Germans" because of some political agenda. I want to present history the way it was, and I'm not going to pretend something didn't happen just because it offends people. Same applies to the Allies or the Soviets. Plenty of war crimes to go around. But again, the Wehrmacht wasn't "clean". If you haven't seen it already, you may want to watch my "Why I'm passionate about history" video. I explain what my motivations are https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    2
  14414. As I said in the video, the British, the Americans and the Soviets are all guilty of war crimes too. And I will get to that in a future video. That said, the idea that the Wehrmacht was "clean" is false. This has nothing to do with Germans before or since, only those that were there at the time. The German people now do not have to feel guilty for what the Third Reich did, since that's a different generation. If your brother commits a crime, you're not guilty by association. Only he is guilty.
    2
  14415. Welcome aboard!
    2
  14416. They may reduce hunger, but they won't prevent starvation! Glad you enjoyed this video. And considering I haven't even started next Monday's video yet (not had time yet), I hope you enjoy it too, whatever it is!
    2
  14417. No worries, a lot more to come on similar lines
    2
  14418. @TheSovietSpy I did say sauces instead of sources, but then changed it @nicolas I agree about the calorie thing, which is why I mentioned that calories may not mean much. But thank you for going into depth about the different types, plus the ketone topic - I've watched a few videos about it (mainly from this channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqYPhGiB9tkShZorfgcL2lA ) and sort of understand it. @bakters you could be right, I'm just going off the sources. I suspected that if 2,500 calories is what the NHS recommends for the average man, then a soldier would need more, but Glantz did say 2,500 and I couldn't find an accurate German soldier's WW2 diet, so had no choice but to go with it.
    2
  14419. No, thank you :)
    2
  14420. It's because there's a war going on on the internet for our hearts and minds. Sadly, the alt-Right (Nazis) are actually gaining traction and they're using all sorts of tactics to do it https://youtu.be/583X6DGjits
    2
  14421. Absolutely, I can see why you're thinking critically about my channel. And I encourage it! I will make mistakes and I will get things wrong though (I am human) so let me know when I do. Also, while we all have biases, I'm trying to be as neutral as I can be when approaching these subjects. I mentioned this in my recent "why I'm passionate about history" video, which you might want to watch because it'll show you where I'm coming from and what I'm trying to do https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M Also I always list my sources in the pinned comments (or in the video itself if it's an old one), along with extra notes and so on. And as I said, I encourage a debate so if you disagree, let me know! One of my aims is to get people passionate about history and debating it because more people need to be learning from it :)
    2
  14422. I just hope that if I do ever say anything you disagree with, you'll tell me before you unsub, so at least I know. That said, I'd rather you not unsub and debate it with me, since that's one of the main pros of history - arguing!
    2
  14423. It's funny because the sources are from the USA and Germany, and yet they don't mention kilograms. They only refer to pounds and stones.
    2
  14424. Yes, but without food, you will die. Cigarettes may suppress appetite, but they won't stop you from starving to death. Since there's limited transport capacity, the priority was the food, irregardless of the morale cost of not giving the men cigarettes.
    2
  14425. I'm not American but I understand both systems and use both, so I didn't think to convert it. However you're correct that I should have done the conversions in the video and I've learnt that for future reference. For example, in my recent Operation Crusader videos, I list miles and kms as the map measurements.
    2
  14426. Thanks, glad you liked it :)
    2
  14427. And cures starvation?
    2
  14428. True, but Glantz does say they were getting a ration of 2,500 calories... Wonder why this is? They must have been getting food from somewhere, otherwise they'd be starving before the siege even began. Perhaps then they were supplimenting their rations by robbing from the local populace and starving them instead... oh wait. Yep, that's it.
    2
  14429. 100% accurate
    2
  14430. Heer's one I made earlier :D
    2
  14431. Don't forget the Hiwis!
    2
  14432. And yet, it's not a resource in Hearts of Iron series. "Supplies" are, but you can just "build" supplies as much as you want
    2
  14433. Eat the heels!
    2
  14434. Probably not... but a worthy topic nonetheless
    2
  14435. Hi!
    2
  14436. Love your videos too! We're watching... 😉
    2
  14437. I can sort of understand the age restriction, but don't understand why they didn't at least notify all my subscribers
    2
  14438. It's frustrating because I'm now wondering if I can or can't do videos on similar topics ☹️
    2
  14439. I think you now know why
    2
  14440. Wow! Thank you for your very generous compliment!
    2
  14441. To be fair, the internet mobs have already declared "everything" I've ever said to be a "lie", so I can't really do much worse than that
    2
  14442. Okay thank you!
    2
  14443. Awesome! And no, thank you 👍
    2
  14444. I knew they'd age restricted it, but didn't realize they were suppressing it too
    2
  14445. The National Socialist Health Service is the government. Also, if you watch the Public vs Private video, you'll get the sources in the first seconds of the video, and I've put references throughout the video. Democracy is "People Power". Except, the People are the Public, and the Public is the State. Democracy is "State Power". That's why North Korea is a Democracy. And it's why the Founding Fathers knew that democracy was bad, and called their government a Republic (not that a Republic is much better).
    2
  14446. "you're either joking, or you can actually substantiate that otherwise factually incorrect assertion" I've explained this in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "Is the NHS authoritarian, as a socialist institution?" The doctors have just locked the entire country up in quarantine, and from the 24th of this month they are dictating that we have to wear masks to go into shops. Yes, the National Socialist Health Service is totalitarian.
    2
  14447. Socialism literally means authoritarian rule, and thus abuse. You're submitting to the "collective" corporate group.
    2
  14448. I've covered the Madman Druggy Hitler idea in its own video https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    2
  14449. The one ringleader to rule them all!
    2
  14450. Most can't. However, I have defined National Socialism here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And have explained the difference between National Socialism and Fascism (providing the definition of the latter) in this video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  14451. Oh really? Because I've addressed the "Madman Druggy Hitler" idea here https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik And I've just recently released this video on what Hitler did immediately after the First World War https://youtu.be/UpuGRO72GbA
    2
  14452. Yes, I started to watch that video and saw through the BS straight away. However I can see why people would fall for it. It's something I'll get to one day.
    2
  14453. Yeah, I know. I don't think the guy didn't deserve to be fined by the Playdoh establishment here in the UK.
    2
  14454. That's precisely it
    2
  14455. There's quite a few to be honest. The Holodomor for example...
    2
  14456. I haven't been, but it's somewhere I do want to visit. In fact, my friends and I were talking recently about going at some point.
    2
  14457. It hasn't happened yet, but they will. Britain only came off the gold standard in 1931, and the US dollar only came off in the 1970s, and Keynesians have got very good at masking and manipulating the markets, so it's early days yet. But it's just a question of time. Unless they do a reset, the only way out of the massive amounts of debt they have created is to hyperinflate the currency supply. In fact, the Fed is due to announce whether they're going to inflate the currency supply tomorrow or not. Good chance they will, considering this - https://usdebtclock.org/ https://usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html
    2
  14458. I've not read anything on the making of the bomb, so I've added that to my Amazon book wishlist for the future, although in some ways I don't know if I should read it now...
    2
  14459. If you work in retail for more than 5 minutes, you'll see it for yourself.
    2
  14460. The loneliness of the internet is great! :D And yes, I can imagine logistics being quite nice (part of my former-job could technically be classed as logistics, and that was the nice part)
    2
  14461. Haha thanks! Had fun making this :)
    2
  14462. Well, you did ask! I was going to screenshot and put your comment into the video, but I don't think it would have worked
    2
  14463. You were actually second!
    2
  14464. "you were so non-PC! Don't ever change." Haha I don't hold my punches! (which often gets me into trouble as the history of this channel shows)
    2
  14465. Yeah, have you seen my "FIRST 3 Eastern Front Books you should read" video? Link: https://youtu.be/KQWyAez9mCA
    2
  14466. After the CEO incident I gave up and started refunding anything and everything. My superiors weren't happy, but I just explained this scenario and that soon silenced them.
    2
  14467. CLOSE THE GATE!!!
    2
  14468. YOU'RE HIRED!
    2
  14469. While editing these videos, I either work in silence (especially in the mornings) so I can concentrate, or if I must listen to something (usually in the afternoons) I search for "instrumental concentration music for study" on YouTube and go for whatever. Anything with lyrics is a no-go, and generally I avoid music on a whole while working if I can because I think it detracts from my focus. But I play guitar: Blues, Rock, and a bit of Metal. I'm into Jazz theory but can't stand listening to Jazz (it makes me feel uneasy). I also enjoy more modern metal-epic-orchestra type music like Audiomachine, and I do enjoy some Classical music, but have to be in the mood for that.
    2
  14470. Well, welcome :) I'm still researching Stalingrad, but that's why I'm thinking of doing the Courland Pocket series (starting next week) bi-weekly, in order to get more Stalingrad research done in between.
    2
  14471. Huh... didn't know that. And I probably should have known it since I've been on a diet since New Year (first 5 weeks, lost a stone in weight - 14 pounds/6.35kg). Didn't need to count the calories though - was on a Keto/Low Carb diet.
    2
  14472. At the moment they cut the city off, Hitler turned all his attention of Moscow, so the strong mobile units of Army Group North went southeast. The remaining units weren't strong enough to take the city on their own, especially without the help of the Finns.
    2
  14473. The video may be old, but I appreciate your comment :) the Leftists don't like me very much, although they were completely unable to counter my more recent Public vs Private video, which did the thing they hate most - defined socialism and capitalism historically https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14474. Where did they get their military equipment from? National Socialist Germany. (To be fair, I've not looked into the Finnish economy - they could have been National Socialist - but this would be the first I've heard it.)
    2
  14475. Had a lot of fun doing that 😁
    2
  14476. Exact same applies to the Baltic States, which I'll be covering in my Courland Pocket series
    2
  14477. I'm not a libertarian or AnCap, so I disagree that I'm publishing "lolbertarian propaganda" 🤦‍♂️
    2
  14478. Thank you! I've actually been pondering a question I've had about the fatigue of the fighting soldiers at Stalingrad, and I've got a theory that might be provable. But I'll wait until we're deep in the city first before I talk about it. Either way, you're right that the effectiveness of the 6th Army's soldiers must have been drained by this point of the campaign, through combat fatigue, disease, the heat, and probably a host of other things too. And the same could be said for the Soviet side - especially those divisions that had been in combat for a long time.
    2
  14479.  @TruthNTime  The political video two weeks ago (12 Jun 2023) has 237,828 views, which is higher than every Stalingrad video since 4 Oct 2021. The only reason last week's video on AnCap did poorly is because everyone was fixated on that stupid Titanic submarine story. In fact, this video is currently performing worse than last week's video did by this point (it had 54k views after 2 days, whereas this has 44k).
    2
  14480. Not sure exactly, but at least half a dozen, but probably more.
    2
  14481. Second, but very close!
    2
  14482. Yes you are!
    2
  14483. I like to celebrate the release of a video by talking to people in the couple hours after release. It's a bit of a reward to myself after working so hard, and it's really the only time of the week I feel I can relax, which is why I usually crack a few jokes.
    2
  14484. The CNSP wasn't a fascist party, it was a National Socialist Party. There is a difference https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Also, yes they supported democracy, just like Mussolini and Hitler both did https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    2
  14485. Yes you were! Congratulations!
    2
  14486. “The main resistance to Himmler’s obsessions occurred in the south, for the Italians were never won over to anti-Semitism; in any case there were barely 50,000 Jews living in Italy. The Italians had refused to co-operate in the South of France, and Eichmann was forced to complain once more of their ‘sabotage’ in Greece and Yugoslavia. Although Mussolini had created his own anti-Jewish laws in 1938 under the influence of Hitler, he did not want to become implicated in genocide.” - Manvell, & Fraenkel, “Heinrich Himmler,” Kindle p205. “The form of anti-Semitism adopted by Fascist Italy, as a consequence, was singularly different from that of National Socialist Germany. However indecent, it shared few of the genocidal traits that have horrified the civilized world. Italian Jews suffered innumerable indignities and material losses, but there is scant, if any, evidence that between 1938 and 1943, any Jews died at the hands of Fascists simply for having been Jewish.” - Gregor, “Mussolini’s Intellectuals,” p217. There are more quotes I could give besides these. Again, I'm not seeing how I gave the wrong impression in this video.
    2
  14487. Only just noticed that now 😂
    2
  14488. According to other commenters, it's a lot :(
    2
  14489. No I didn't copyright claim it. He's taken some of his videos (about 12 that I can see) down himself.
    2
  14490. Sadly his audience is probably still unaware... but it's out of my hands now. It's down to his fellow countrymen to get the word out about what he's doing.
    2
  14491. My source IS the spymaster
    2
  14492. Yes, we should send this guy to fight on the Eastern Front!
    2
  14493. I'm sorry to hear that you were deceived! He's taken the video down now. But I think other plagiarised videos may still be up (I'm not sure)
    2
  14494. It's worse than that. I've gained 3k subs this last month, he's gained 30k. I've had 830k views, he's had 6.6 million. Crime is paying right now. My channel's stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/theimperatorknight Historiou's channel stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/channel/UC0iM_O9JXilI9_G4mt5naXw
    2
  14495. Would you trust a content creator who was taking other people's content and passing it off as their own? If you were one of the Portuguese competitors who couldn't compete with someone who was unfairly plagiarizing other people's work, wouldn't you kick up a fuss?
    2
  14496. No need, the free market will handle it. In fact, it already has. He's self-removed a dozen videos already, and the Portuguese-speaking community are being informed. Word will soon spread, and he will have to answer to his audience.
    2
  14497. And I didn't even have to report him :)
    2
  14498. Nope, recommendations are good with me, so long as they're legitimately decent channels 👍
    2
  14499. If he is 16, then he's learnt how to be a very successful criminal. I've gained 3k subs this last month, he's gained 30k. I've had 830k views, he's had 6.6 million. My channel's stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/theimperatorknight Historiou's channel stats https://socialblade.com/youtube/channel/UC0iM_O9JXilI9_G4mt5naXw
    2
  14500. Do you believe that his audience should know what he did? I think his audience should know what he did.
    2
  14501. I haven't watched yours, but I'm fine with people taking clips to use in a response video. My concern here is the guy's plagiarism and his audience.
    2
  14502. Glad you liked it Christian!
    2
  14503. I haven't studied Soviet tactics in the late-war, so I can't comment on them. But certainly during the Stalingrad Campaign, there was no real example of a Soviet-kampfgruppe-like-battlegroup. There were a few Soviet battlegroups (such as Chuikov's Southern Group) but as I mentioned in the video, they weren't the same (in Chuikov's case, it was more of a corps-level command). Spontaneous task-orientated formations, from what I can see, did not exist in the same capacity. I do not recall many (if any) examples of Soviet regiments being placed under the command of other regiments. Nor can I recall examples of battalions from regiment being loaned to another. I know regiments were supported by battalions from the Army-level, but it's certainly not made clear whether they were subordinated to the regimental commander. Maybe they were, but I don't have any hard facts saying they were. And maybe there were some in Stalingrad itself at the battalion-level and lower, but it wasn't a common thing outside of Stalingrad. There were examples of Soviet battlegroups being formed for attacks - just like the Oasis Group I mentioned in the video - but these were deliberate formations, and not made spontaneously in the middle of battles or as a result of crises. And there were a few examples of Soviet generals of higher ranks in say divisions being commanded by Soviet army commanders of a lower rank. That's actually quite interesting to me, and something I want to do videos on in the future. And, of course, I could be wrong. Unfortunately though, there's very little written from the Soviet perspective in English, and I can't yet read Russian. And I'm quite certain that the British didn't practice this spontaneous-battlegroup-concept at this time either.
    2
  14504. A ship in a bottle in a ship in a bottle in a ship in a bottle would be unsinkable!
    2
  14505. I didn't start with Stalingrad. I started at Market Garden, which is even later. But even so, I've been working on Stalingrad for over a year and haven't even finished the research, but you want me to do Barbarossa which is at least there times the size?
    2
  14506. True, but then they used them early in the war too.
    2
  14507. I'd love to hear examples of the guerrilla warfare. Do you have any?
    2
  14508. Not really. Technically it could be any size. You could have a company or battalion size kampfgruppe, or even a division-sized one (apparently, there was a division-sized one in 1945, but I don't know the details).
    2
  14509. Not until after the North African Campaign, I'm afraid :( Good luck with your essay though!
    2
  14510. I will ask you all the question you ignored - How is being forced to pay tax a choice ? I'm really not seeing how having no choice is freedom.
    2
  14511. Yeah, let's try and establish this. How is being forced to pay tax a choice ? Can someone explain this to me because I'm really not seeing how having no choice is freedom.
    2
  14512. @The Slovenian Imperator Knight - Now I know what it's like to fight the Borg collective. I honestly think I'm speaking a different language to these socialists. They don't know the difference between public and private, think that totalitarianism is freedom, and don't realise how little they know their own ideologies. Some are denying that Hitler was totalitarian, others are saying he is, but privatized the industries (even though that is a blatant lie), and some are saying I don't understand the meaning of the word, even though Mussolini coined the term and described his own regime with it - and he definitely had state-control over everything, since that is the definition of the term "totalitarianism" which is what he coined. One guy in here somewhere actually said that privatizing the economy was centralization. I kid you not. But apparently they're not changing the meanings of the words or anything, and they're definitely not Marxist-Postmodernists or anything. No, it's all me - I'm the one who doesn't know that it's perfectly fine to murder the women and children of the bourgeoisie. Blame others, not yourself - the Socialist motto.
    2
  14513. "@TIK that's completely wrong, early socialism was typically communal in character and wanted to decentralize production into community workshops, etc., rather than leave it in the hands of a few capitalists. You're insanely out of your depth." An individual is as decentralized as you can get. Taking power away from individuals and giving it to a community (a "public", which means non-individual, and is where the definition "public sector" comes from, meaning state) is centralization, not decentralization. The origins of the word "public" go back to Greece and Rome, and means "of the people; of the state; done for the state," and "a commonwealth; public property," https://www.etymonline.com/word/public As the book "Inventing the Individual" makes clear, it means the state. Google's definition of it is here "of or provided by the state rather than an independent, commercial company." Collectivization (which is what socialism is) is as centralized as you can get, since it is anti-individual and thus anti-decentralization. So no, I'm not out of my depth at all. You don't know the meaning of the words you're using. "@TIK it's unbelievable that you continue to repeat the blatant falsehood that the RF Decree "abolished private ownership by law". This is an appalling, self-serving fabrication. Are you going to respond to this at all?" There's nothing to respond too. "No, you're wrong" is not an argument. The law was abolished, and it had dire consequences for the industrialists, as Gunter Reinmann makes clear in his book "the Vampire Economy" written in 1939 which you can get online for free as a pdf. He even says that the industrialists were so scared that they would have their property seized off them that they took to reading Das Kapital in order to try find clues on how to survive in the socialist economy they now found themselves in. The best part is - he was a Marxist, so he knew what he was talking about.
    2
  14514. "@TIK I think your definition of "Totalitarian" is too narrow." Then you would be wrong. Google's definition - a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state. Wikipedia's definition - "a totalitarian regime attempts to control virtually all aspects of the social life, including the economy, education, art, science, private life and morals of citizens." "Totalitarianism, form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to the authority of the state." State control of the people (common-control of the means of production).
    2
  14515. "Marxist socialism does away with the private economy in order to ensure maximum equality among the working class, Nazism has no such precondition." Again, read my above comments. The Nazis abolished private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933.
    2
  14516. Yes, as was Oswald Mosley, and that recent shooter in Christchurch. They all converted from Marxist-Socialism to Fascism... which is interesting because the only difference between Marxism and Fascism is whether it's national or internation socialism.
    2
  14517. Like every business in the Third Reich, it was taken over by the state bureaucracy. Wage controls, price controls, if they wanted resources they had to go through the state, if they wanted employees they needed to go through the state... If the owner didn't comply he would have his business taken off him, much like what happened to Professor Junkers in 1933. So they had to comply with the National Socialist state. Are you telling me this wasn't government control of the economy?
    2
  14518. "Have you ever seen the 2D political chart?" Yes, this is the traditional political spectrum - https://goo.gl/images/Tz444x And (while I'm not 100% correct) here's a few that actually make sense and are closer to the truth https://goo.gl/images/JnYTmT or https://goo.gl/images/uxhKkS or https://goo.gl/images/sFRK9g or https://goo.gl/images/AeU9Zb
    2
  14519. Haha I'm trying to do so Bradley, trying to do so
    2
  14520. Yes. And they're that desperate for National Socialism to not be socialism, that some of them are now saying Hitler's regime wasn't totalitarian. Others are trying to redefine "totalitarian" to means total-control except for the economy ... which is just stupid.
    2
  14521. The only reason I haven't is because I've focused on Europe and am a bit overwhelmed with the topics I'm already covering. That said, I have taken a glance at it, and I'm certainly not against doing it.
    2
  14522. And therefore he can't have a totalitarian state then. Or, the "privatization" argument is a distortion (which it is).
    2
  14523. Tokkin, so that means that government control of the means of production isn't socialism then. So those who believe in the privatisation argument are actually arguing that Hitler's regime must be socialism. Thanks for clarifying. All those other socialists have been wasting their time after all.
    2
  14524. Yes, the UK, the US, Italy and Germany all implemented planned economies in WW2. So, Tokkin, you're saying that a planned economy has nothing to do with socialism?
    2
  14525. Awesome, glad to hear that :)
    2
  14526. That's because government control over the economy is socialism. "Public Sector" - state-control of the means of production.
    2
  14527. I would say they're not ignorant, just blind. Once they open their eyes, they'll see.
    2
  14528. Yes it does. Mussolini invented the term and said "all within the state, none outside the state, none against the state." From Britannica - "Totalitarianism, form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to the authority of the state." https://www.britannica.com/topic/totalitarianism There cannot be a free market under a totalitarian regime. This is why all totalitarian regimes in history have all been Marxist, Fascist or National Socialist - because they're all Socialist regimes.
    2
  14529. I wouldn't have a chance. Considering all the parties in the UK are socialist, I'd have to run as an independent.
    2
  14530. I'd be happy to add "Confederate pregnant Anne Frank" next to the other joke-names "Adolf Hitler", "Jeremy Corbyn" and "Maow" (there's more but these are the ones off the top of my head.
    2
  14531. "as the economy wasn't completely nationalized." Or was it? (Hint: the "privatization" argument is deeply flawed, read "The Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reimann, which you can get free online as a pdf)
    2
  14532. "But who actually owns the house? For most people, the bank does." You've taken out a loan from the bank, so you're in debt with the bank. But nobody's forcing you to take out a loan/mortgage in the first place. You've decided on your own free will to take out that loan. You could have rented, stayed with your parents, lived in your car, or sleep in the street. You're free to trade/deal with the bank or not deal with it - that's your individual choice. Nobody's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to deal with the bank. The bank lends you the money on the condition that you pay it off. When you pay it off, you get the house. So this is a free-trade - an agreement - between you and the bank. You don't have to enter than agreement if you don't want to. "How do they get all that money? By owning money. Not by working in retail." That's not how people make money. The only way you can lawfully attract money to you is if you offer you a good or service in exchange for that money. So, if you want bread off me, you give me money. In this small hyperthetical economy, you would get all the bread, I get all the money. Is that me exploiting you? Socialists would say yes... but is that really the case? Now, in the case of buying a house, you want the bank's money in order to do that. So how do you attract the banks' money? You say "hey, I'll give you more money in the long run if you lend me a big sum of money now". In effect, you're offering the bank money in exchange for a service (giving you a house to live in). This is a trade. A more complicated trade than the bread example, but it's still a trade. The top 1% only attract money by offering people goods or services that they are willing to pay money for. This is actually a sign of a healthy economy, not of "exploitation". There is no exploitation going on in a trade, since you (the individual) exercise your choice in each instance. If you don't want to give your money away for goods and services, then you are free to stop doing so. If you want to stop buying things, then that's your choice and is entirely your decision to make. But if you do buy products and services, you cannot complain that the person you gave money to somehow "exploited" you. That's absolutely not what happened. Of course, there's another way to attact money, which is unlawful. This is called stealing or theft, and can be summed up by the term "force". Someone forcefully reaches into your pocket and takes money. You have no choice in the matter (unless you fight back) and this is not a trade because you get nothing back in exchange for the taking of the money. If you don't like a certain good or service (e.g. a bad restaurant), you can choose not to use that service again. This is a decision that you can make as a free-market citizen. However you cannot choose your government, and whether you like the service that your government gives you or not, they will reach into your pocket and take your money from you. This is not a trade because you have no choice in the matter and you many not get anything back in exchange for the taking of the money. And whether you get a good or bad deal from this is (1) out of your hands, and (2) if you don't like it, you cannot choose to not use the service again (like with the bad restaurant). Now, we do need some government to keep law and order so that we can do other trade. But the problem is that a government limits the freedom of its citizens (the more money forcefully taken from you, the less freedom you have to do the things you want to do) and if a government gets too powerful, it can take all your money off you - effectively making you a slave. The best way to prevent a government from gaining too much power is through property-rights. If the government doesn't own factories, banks, businesses or your arms, then it hasn't got much power. Socialism is all about total-control of the means of production, and property is seen as "theft". Well, once you give up your property-rights, the state owns everything, can take everything from you, and there's nothing you can do about it. You'll have effectively given up everything you could have used to fight back against it. This is why socialists are all over the abolishment of property rights. Worse, they even claim that property is theft!!! The opposite is true. So yes, you rightly point out that there are flaws in capitalism. But these are nothing compared to the flaws in socialism. You cannot have totalitarianism without total-control of the menas of production. Socialism is slavery by another name. "But I think you should also be critical of capitalism. It's too easy to just say that socialism means oppression, and capitalism means freedom." The freedom of individuals to earn money and spend their own money the way they want to is capitalism. Economics is not a zero-sum game (like the socialists believe). Everyone can produce something and get rich if they want to, but most choose not to do that. Instead they get a 9 to 5 or whatever (which is technically them deciding not to produce for themselves), and take the more easy path of not taking risks and having stability. That's fine in the short-run and can be a good place to start, but most people stay there for the whole of their lives. And that's their choice, but you can't then blame the people who get more than you because they choose to work until they drop, live in in-stablitiy, take massive financial risks and create something that other people want to purchase from them. In fact, without you realising it, we have just traded. I sold you a product (a video) and you gave me your time in return. You had a choice of not watching this video, but you did. In a free-market with individual choice, you were attracted to my video. Now, if this was socialism, you wouldn't have had a choice. Either you would have been forced to watch my video, or I would have been forced to say a certain thing that doesn't challenge the collective-state (which would make my videos less valuable to you). Again, this wouldn't be good for the consumer (you) or the product-creator (me). In fact the only party that benefits would be those in power. This is why socialism means oppression and why capitalism is in-fact freedom.
    2
  14533. A "wartime" economy in 1933? I disagree. And either way, it doesn't matter, because the term "wartime economy" just hides the fact that the state had control of the economy, which is socialism, and makes this regime both socialist and totalitarian, regardless of the reason why.
    2
  14534. Fascism isn't National Socialism, and Fascism doesn't have anything to do with race (although you can be a racist-Fascist like the Christchurch shooter). They're two distinct ideologies. I'm going to have to make a video about this because a lot of people don't realise that Fascism and NS are different :( Also, according to Hitler, the terms "Nation" and "Social" are the same, and both mean "Race".
    2
  14535. I'm not a libertarian, and this is economics not politics. Socialism was born in the fires of thee French Revolution 50 years before Marx put pen to paper. Marxism isn't socialism, but is a version of that original socialism. National-Socialism is another version of that original socialism.
    2
  14536. They're pushing a narrative which has an obvious distortion in it - e.g. Hitler was blonde. Denialists are calling them out on it by saying "Hitler wasn't blonde, so therefore he didn't exist and you can't believe he did". But historians don't want to fix the error because they're invested in the idea that blonde is best due to the fact that they grew up in an era which praised blondes. Best way I could explain this without stating it. I will explain all when the time is right.
    2
  14537. Liberal socialism is actually a partial socialist economy but with some elements of capitalism and (depending on type) probably a non-authoritatian state. The socialism parts will be controlled by a central authority, and capitalism parts in the hands of private individuals. Again, not totalitarian (if the political authority is not a dictatorship and whole economy is not under state rule). Just to clarify because you seem to have missed the point. You can only get totalitarian regimes with total control in every part of the state. So you listing regimes that don't have total control in all aspects isn't working. The definition of totalitarianism is solid, go look it up.
    2
  14538. I'm really glad to see someone else actually understands what I'm saying and agrees. I don't know how much clearer I can make it to people, but I'm now of the opinion that many simply aren't listening or willing to consider what I'm saying. The fact that Marxists are now saying National Socialist Germany wasn't totalitarian, and are trying to squirm away from this idea, is evidence that they have their beliefs and that's that.
    2
  14539. I will be referring to it as both, and will not only cover the murder of the Jews, but place it within the wider Nazi-atrocities too, with a detailed explanation of National Socialist ideology.
    2
  14540. Except he didn't run a market economy. Private property was abolished in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, Nazi bureaucrats took over the businesses from within. State sanctioned wage controls, price controls, manpower controls, state unions, state youth organizations (Hitler Youth), state railways, state "workers battalions"... That's centralized and total-control over the means of production, socialism.
    2
  14541. Morgan Chalmers how so?
    2
  14542. I've just learnt that a PDF version is available somewhere on the internet
    2
  14543. "so to start it i find that this video bit short as in lacking compared to your other video" It's the first in a multi-part series. So I'm going to explain the British and American reasoning behind implementing Operation Keelhaul next time. Parts of point 1 (relating to the cross-checking of sources) and all of point 2 aren't possible to answer due simply to the active suppression of evidence. We only have a limited amount of sources that are available, and for some events we only have one or two accounts of what happened. There's probably more in the archives, which remain closed. I'm actually intending to talk about this in episode 3 (assuming I don't change the plan) because I want to do a "counter-arguments" episode. You're correct that I'm only really using sources that are "against" the Allies 'side'. Technically though, only Solzhenitsyn is against the Allied side, the others are not so much, just against this crime. It would be nice to have more authors cover this, but because of the secrecy, it's not likely to happen soon. Again, I'll be discussing this in episode 3. Point 3 is something I can address now, and will again bring up in the future videos. The Americans actually told the Soviets in 1944 that sending Russian prisoners of war captured in German uniforms is against the Geneva Convention. British politicians also had debates over this, but in the end both conceded for reasons I'll be going into in the next episode. While I didn't talk about this, Julius Epstein spends about half his book making the legal case for why it is against the Geneva Convention, and why it's also against several national and international laws as well. Because international law is a boring topic, I probably won't cover this in in great detail in this series, but apparently (according to other commenters) you can find a PDF version of Epstein's book online if you want to dive into the details. What I will say is that it was immoral even if it was found to be "lawful", and I would still class it as a crime against humanity even if no national nor international State officially does.
    2
  14544. The Cossack individuals who had committed crimes should have been punished for the crimes that those individuals committed. However, not all of the Cossacks should have been punished just because they were Cossacks. If you commit a crime, your parents are executed as well. Why? Because we're all individuals. Punish the individual criminal, not everyone else he associates with. And do you want to know who also targeted the Jews during the Russian Revolution? That's right: the RED ARMY. Semyon Budyonny’s Red cavalry division committed many crimes against the Jews. His men stole possessions (including Jewish women’s underwear), tortured the men, and the general himself attempted to shoot one man who threatened to report him to the higher ups, only failing to do so when his pistol misfired. Rather than be punished by the Soviet Socialist system, Budyonny would later rise to the rank as Marshal of the Soviet Union, take part in the Second World War, and die in 1973 having completely got away with his crimes. In other Red cavalry units, the prettiest girls were simply taken - either in the streets, or carted off first. And I'm masking some of my language here to get around the censors - see Engelstein, “Russia in Flames,” p516, and p532-539. In fact, Marxist Socialism is inherently anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg But, of course, we're going to send ALL the Cossacks back to the anti-Semitic Soviet Union for punishment because some individuals within them ill-treated the Jews, even though the Soviet Union also targeted the Jews both during the Russian Revolution and after the Second World War and can in no way be considered a legitimate moral authority. In addition, the British POWs were starved by the Japanese. Yet I don't remember many of them turning traitor. And yes, the Germans and Italians did treat the prisoners from the West well, which is why it was wrong for the West to send the Soviet POWs back to the Soviet Union because they had fought for the Germans - many were basically forced to do so. That said, many also joined up because they genuinely hated the Soviet regime. If they didn't hate the Soviet regime, then why did many of the civilians not want to go back and actively tried to escape before they were given back? Also, why were the Soviet troops at the border R'ing the women and shooting the civilians who were handed over to them? I look forward to your response "red russki".
    2
  14545. I hate my country and despise every state in existence, yet somehow I'm a "patriot". What planet are you on? Fascism is Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  14546. If it's true, then by the sounds of it, they (and you) were lucky. Were your family from the Baltic States? There may have been exceptions for the Baltic States.
    2
  14547. Never dismiss a source. Even if you don't like a source, you should consider it's points. I don't like Haupt or Halder or Manstein, but I have to use them. You've got to look at history from all angles. And yes, you're right that they were anti-Soviet. So was George Orwell, who reported about it at the time. That said, they're not making this up. They have primary source documents and accounts from the victims. Letters were sent to the Queen and Prime Minister of England. There was "debates" in Parliament. This event happened. Perhaps their bias skews their perspective. Maybe. The only way to know would be for the archives to open up and allow historians to go read the documents related to this case. Of course, said documents remain under lock and key, so I guess we'll have to wait.
    2
  14548. They're just dismissing everything, which is to be expected. The Nazis are also in the comments saying things like "and guess who was pulling the strings!?" 🙄 They're so predictable!
    2
  14549. That's a different Julius Epstein.
    2
  14550. "Tik you keep making claims certain things were said ,but you dont give a source note as any scholar would" The sources are at the bottom of the screen, and the bibliography is provided in the description (there's a link). Your points on Katyn are silly. As Epstein proved definitively, the Soviets had to have committed the crime in 1939 because the Polish officers were wearing their winter clothing - showing that it didn't happen in the heat of summer 1941.
    2
  14551. So the civilians forced into the Nazi labour camps deserved it, in your opinion? The women deserved to get R'd at the border, and the elderly shot, when the British handed them over to the NKVD?
    2
  14552. If I'm talking about one Allied crime, why must I mention Allied bombings or camps for the Japanese? And if I had mentioned them, you would have said "oh but you didn't mention Bengal".
    2
  14553. Are you saying that I'm going to end up in a Gulag?
    2
  14554. "Now if you only covered the millions of murdered German prisoners of war, that would really be something. There may be hope for you yet TIK." I have covered them. I made a video about them in 2019 https://youtu.be/rS_59PHhO4M I also did the Soviet prisoners of war in German hands https://youtu.be/OeRR100incE
    2
  14555. It'll be out next Monday. Videos every Monday 👍
    2
  14556. It's not just the west who are brainwashed - most of the world is too
    2
  14557. The shortages are being caused by inflation (currency expansion) and government regulation and manipulation of the market, but the liars in the British Establishment don't want anyone to realise this, and blame it on Brexit and the virus. But yes, I would call the British Establishment a bunch of criminals too.
    2
  14558. They were the 30 drunken misfits he was referring too
    2
  14559. It's almost like I said exactly that in the video... But yes, despite the fact that I've done videos on the treatment of the POWs, the fact that I mentioned this in the video itself, and the fact that the history books I'm using also say that it was in part due to the failure of Communism, you're 100000% right, and it's me who's the one who's blinded by my "ideology", even though I don't have one and you're only using that accusation because you don't have any rational counter to the argument being made so you're resorting to an emotional response 🙄
    2
  14560. "I cannot say that I am biased." You are biased. Everyone is biased. The fact that you think you're not, is your bias. See my video on History Theory, it will clarify things for you https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - "The problem with the source in the form of Solzhenizen is that he did not conduct any significant research on the topic..." I never said that the Gulag Archipelago was a "perfect" source, since no perfect source exists, and memoirs or similar are problematic texts. However, again, the issue here is no with the full text, but with the section on Operation Keelhaul. If you have some evidence that refutes Solzhenitsyn, fine, but until then, it doesn't matter if he was wrong with the rest of the the book, if he is correct when it comes to Operation Keelhaul. - "I just want to understand how Stalin knew where to look for these Cossacks who do not have Soviet citizenship? What channels of communication was used to build such a large-scale operation to return unwanted people back to the territory of the USSR? Where did the British military get the lists? Why did these Cossacks live in Austria and did not end up in concentration camps under Nazi rule?" The British and Americans had the Cossacks and other Russian prisoners and civilians in camps in both Germany, Britain, and the United States. They were talking to the Soviets throughout 1943-1945 discussing what they would do with them. It's rather a complex negotiation period, so I can't possibly replicate the entire event here, but if you read "Victims of Yalta" by Tolstoy (a much easier book to get hold of than Epstein's book) he provides a detailed explanation. - "After all, if you think the Nazis did not consider them as people, but the fact that the British and the USSR knew where to look for these Cossacks, why not recruit underground partisans from them?" The USSR rejected the idea outright because they viewed them as enemies. The West considered this as an option, but knew it would annoy the USSR. In fact, the Soviets accused both the British and Americans of recruiting the prisoners into their armies, or of giving them anti-Soviet propaganda. The Soviets didn't want the world knowing that these people existed because it was an embarrassment to them.
    2
  14561. I didn't say that, I said that Socialism, Communism and Marxism are all the same.
    2
  14562. It's all the same. I've explained it in detail here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14563. Except, if it wasn't about ideology, then the Soviet prisoners wouldn't have renounced Socialism, which is what they did. They would have still been Socialists against Stalin, and yet they weren't.
    2
  14564. You'll enjoy episode 2 of this series
    2
  14565. The Weimar Republic was Socialist - it was founded by the SPD
    2
  14566. Americans and British soldiers shooting civilians and prisoners of war who do not want to be forced to go to the torture houses, the slave labour camps, or the gallows of a terrible third-world country that some of them had never been citizens of, is not a crime? Your pro-Socialist bias is showing.
    2
  14567. I understand the sentiment, but I'm not sure if revenge is the answer. Self-defence is one thing, but stooping down to their level and committing murder is another.
    2
  14568. Oh wow, I hope you have a good night! Can't beat curry and beer haha
    2
  14569. Haha I've honestly not heard of this guy until now, but everyone's commenting about him
    2
  14570. Yes you are!
    2
  14571. Democracy. People vote, and the idiots get elected.
    2
  14572.  @DaveSCameron  I'm not a Commie-servative.
    2
  14573. Wooo!
    2
  14574. Further evidence https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=TEZtK9gEtwG1AXhH
    2
  14575. You made a good comment so it deserved to be highlighted! I also think she'll do well if she can think for herself, so let's hope
    2
  14576. I agree that you could answer the questions in a neutral way. "Common consensus is that..." "It's widely believed..." "It's often stated..." Again, I would say it's not lying, just passing the ball back. I would also say that passive non-enthusiasm is usually enough to show your disagreement with something. Arguing isn't always necessary.
    2
  14577. Thanks! I'd say, if you enjoyed this, you should check out Aaron Clarey here on YouTube because he's got numerous videos on this subject, and I think you'll find him entertaining to say the least
    2
  14578. That's a good example! I think part of it is people being unwilling to consider the possibility that they might be wrong, as their self-worth is based on the idea that they're always correct, which is probably the result of the way our "education" system praises those who never make mistakes.
    2
  14579. Second by two seconds! Well done though!
    2
  14580. So, the engines only ice over for the transports and none of the other planes? Does that sound right to you? Revisionism is part of the historical process. You cannot do history at all without revision, since to deny revision is to deny every history book written after the first one on a subject. It is not "cringe", you just don't understand history theory.
    2
  14581. That would make sense, if the rest of the planes on both sides weren't able to take off. But since all the other planes could take off, does it not seem strange that only the transports couldn't?
    2
  14582. Oh, there's numerous song lyrics in these videos, and there's a second one in this video too!
    2
  14583. Just to clarify, I only missed last week's video. The week before that was Stalingrad. But yes, Stalingrad is a nightmare.
    2
  14584. Yep!
    2
  14585. History happened, but some of the narratives are wrong. That's why it's our job to find the right narratives.
    2
  14586. Yes you are!
    2
  14587. I'm not even sure the USA threw Eastern Europe under the bus because the only option was a brutal Third World War which would have dragged on for years and cost a lot of American lives. Realistically, you can't blame the West for what the Germans and Soviets did to Eastern Europe.
    2
  14588. Atomic bombs weren't invented yet in the April and May of 1945 when Operation Unthinkable was planned
    2
  14589. I can tell you guys have been reading Antony Sutton's books haha
    2
  14590. "...your comments on Christianity were a weak part of this video in my opinion." Voegelin and Saint Augustine criticise John's millennium reign idea, which is central to his book. Thus criticism of it renders the whole piece questionable, since if the millennium idea is wrong, then that implies that what Jesus said to John was wrong, thus placing doubt on everything else John claimed. However, "my" comments on Christianity are non-existent. I didn't make any comments on Christianity. John is not Christianity. John is John, nothing more. And John admits in the Apocryphon of John that Jesus appeared before him and gave him gnosis. So how exactly is this not gnosticism? Surely anyone who claims to have received divine REVELATION (gnosis) is engaging in Gnosticism? So to state that it's not Gnosticism is simply false since the title of the book tells you exactly what it is. Yes, some "secrets" are kept by the elite, but not all. Hitler and Marx were not exactly secret about their gnosis either. As I said, you get drip fed the information to keep you engaged.
    2
  14591. Sure!
    2
  14592. Ideologies are religions. Nice try Komrade.
    2
  14593. You were nowhere near! But nice effort :D
    2
  14594. It's simple. The National Socialists never saw themselves as "Right-wing"; they are Third Positionists. Through no fault of his own, Jordan Peterson doesn't understand National Socialism and has bought into the Marxist propaganda regarding it. That said, I'm not defending "the Right". As I explained in the recent video on why Mosley turned to Fascism, I don't believe in the Left-Right spectrum any more. I look at the views and policies of any one political entity and judge them for what they are. And since they're all pro-tax, pro-elite, and pro-state... I judge them all to be batting for the same side. So, in my view, "the Right" (whatever that is) isn't innocent. However, even by that traditional terminoloy, the Fascists and National Socialists are not "Right-wing", they are Third Positionists, and I think it's important that everyone understands this.
    2
  14595. I'd like to hear it. Do you have a book recommendation that covers this?
    2
  14596. You were second by a couple of seconds! Sorry!
    2
  14597. Gnosticism doesn't just belong to Christianity. It predates Christianity, and is in all the Abrahamic religions, as well as others. And while you could be correct in your criticism, you've not offered a concrete solution. You've not spelled out what Nazism is. Saying "it's a bit of everything" doesn't really work. In fact, that's what the Nazis themselves tried to say about their ideology, even though it clearly wasn't a bit of everything, and even went against some of the things it claimed to accept.
    2
  14598. I never said there was an unbroken line. I never said there was a dynasty. In fact, I made it clear that it wasn't one monolithic religion. You're jumping to conclusions instead of actually listening.
    2
  14599. To be honest, I might lose a few subs from the thumbnail... Some are praising it, others are complaining!
    2
  14600. I'll be doing a follow up video to explain this, but you're assuming that "race" is a biological thing rather than pseudoscientific. When the Nazis referred to races, then we're doing so in a highly spiritual way, and the reason for the "purification of the blood" bit was because that would get them closer to God. They're not pagan either. They don't believe in Goda for every object, belief or concept like the pagans do. And they fought against the church, which they believed was an offshoot of Judaism. It is more complex than that explanation, but it'll have to do for the purposes of this comment.
    2
  14601. Here's your crisis of capitalism https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    2
  14602. We had this discussion in a previous video. People were saying it's fine to say it, but YouTube was censoring their comments, suggesting that it's not okay to say it. And considering that YouTube is currently going on a rampage against any video that has a "swear" in it, I've got to play it safe. But technically you're correct that this isn't the full n-word. Still, I don't want to give anyone any excuses to take my channel down.
    2
  14603. Two of my book sources on Gnosticism mention it (one written in the 1960s, the other in the 1990s, the second one being written by multiple professors), James Lindsay calls it a parasite religion, Saint Augustine says the book of John is "ridiculous fables" because of it's gnosticism, Martin Luther says it, and in the Apocryphon of John, John says that Jesus appeared and gave him gnosis. I mean, they call could be wrong. Or they may have a point.
    2
  14604. But is your mind?
    2
  14605. Glad someone caught that ;)
    2
  14606. Well done!
    2
  14607. Have you actually got an argument or are you just going to make threats about what Russian communist bloggers might do? I don't care what people think about me, I only care about the facts. When the socialists decided to throw everything they had at me after my first "National Socialism was Socialism" video, I spent the next 18 months crafting the 5 hour "Hitler's Socialism" video. If these Russian communist bloggers want to criticize me over socialism again, I'll make another video detailing exactly why Socialism doesn't work which will leave no shadow of a doubt and will be fully sourced and backed up by historical examples. And don't think I wont because I'm driven enough to do it.
    2
  14608. You don't know me very well if you think I'm a centrist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14609. True, and I would argue that they were only "rioting" because the British and Americans were going to ship them to the USSR knowing full-well that they would be enslaved or killed, which forced them into a do-or-die situation. Clearly, the Allies shouldn't have put them in that position in the first place, and this goes back to episode 2 where we have to ask why they were so in-bed with Stalin?
    2
  14610. That's not what either of them are. Your explanation doesn't make sense when you consider such facts like the" Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" was Communist, yet it had socialism in the name. Before 1917, socialism and communism were synonyms, and the only reason there's a difference now is due to tactics. Ultimately, whether the advocates of these cults admit it or not, it's all about the accumulation of power in the hands of a set few. We call this "power" a "state".
    2
  14611. Here you go https://i.imgur.com/rLlDlcQ.png
    2
  14612. 1) I'm not a monetarist (which shows you haven't been listening). 2) Goodbye.
    2
  14613. But the theory and the history (the evidence + interpretation) are both in alignment. It's not a coincidence that every time you abolish private property you abolish civilization and the people within it. The evidence doesn't contradict the theory that Socialism doesn't work, it reinforces it.
    2
  14614. "duh." Soz.
    2
  14615. Again, Stalingrad is every 4 weeks. I can't make them quicker.
    2
  14616. KingSNAFU ah, that's why I said the steam "engine" so I'm covered ;)
    2
  14617. KingSNAFU Oh yes! Correct in both ways :)
    2
  14618. But there wasn't 1 tank in the woods.
    2
  14619. I do sometimes include comments in my videos from viewers that make good points (in fact, there's going to be a few in the next Stalingrad Addendum video). So it isn't just one way or another. But that said, I only 'punch down' on viewers that have a poor attitude. As I said, if this guy had simply given the evidence and asked me to talk about it, I wouldn't have had to address the attitude at the end.
    2
  14620. Yes, it's certainly been a while! But I enjoyed it
    2
  14621. Yes I agree. People dig themselves into a position and refuse to move when they get outflanked (like the Maginot Line)
    2
  14622. Maybe, but it probably would have worked had the Nijmegen Bridge been taken on the first day.
    2
  14623. Well, considering that I was called a 'conspiracy theorist' for stating that the 'official' narrative surrounding Rudolf Hess is clearly a load of rubbish... why not!
    2
  14624. Technically it still counts as a primary source because it was written by the chief of staff of the 82nd Airborne - someone who was there. But yes, you're correct to point out the problems of this source. As I've said, primary sources shouldn't always be trusted
    2
  14625. "If Lindqvuist 1000 men cant take the bridge at 18 september 02:00 am (as there are MUCH MORE than 50 SS..but say...1500 ???)" Yes, but they could have marched to the bridge several hours earlier on the 17th (not 18th) and taken the bridge BEFORE the SS arrived. Because they sat on the Groesbeek Heights for several hours, they left it too late. I honestly don't understand why you can't grasp this simple concept.
    2
  14626. I actually know next to nothing about the American Civil War, however that's partly why I want to do something on it one day - I'd be starting completely from scratch with few (if any) prior assumptions.
    2
  14627. I gave the quote in this video - SHAEF intelligence said they believed 1000 tanks were in the Reichswald
    2
  14628. Except the reason Patton's tanks were stopped was because of the poor logistics because the islands near the port of Antwerp weren't in Allied hands. That was why Market Garden was launched - to encircle German forces in the Antwerp area. In addition, Ike supported Monty's plan, so Ike should technically get the blame too.
    2
  14629. The plan was to take the bridges. Someone didn't take the Nijmegen bridge, but went for a nearby hill instead, and thus didn't follow the plan. Therefore you blame the plan? The plan wasn't perfect and could have been done better, but that doesn't mean that someone not following the plan means that the plan was wrong. Clearly it was the guy not following the plan which was the main cause of the failure of the plan.
    2
  14630. FIRST!
    2
  14631. Unions are never controlled by the workers, just like the "worker's state" never bows to the workers either. That's the point of socialism - to trick people into becoming slaves of the state.
    2
  14632. I'm against fascism as much as I'm against socialism, since fascism is practically the same thing. National syndicalism with a philosophy of actualism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    2
  14633. Oh, they're certainly trying... I don't blame them, but I do think they should put their emotions to one side and actually listen to the evidence
    2
  14634. I like the term "Commie-servatives" because that basically sums it up
    2
  14635. There's a difference between National Socialism and Fascism, and the two are not the same, with historians making that clear https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Or is that a conspiracy theory too?
    2
  14636. I didn't cite Sowell or Friedman, and neither of them were liberals? The Irish famine was caused by the British government, not the liberal "free market", since there was no free market in Ireland. Part of the reason they were still exporting potatoes while there was starvation was because the tariffs and taxes implemented by the heavy-handed British government were geared for export. It's also why hardly any food came from abroad - the taxes and tariffs made it too expensive to import food. Had there been a free market, importing food would have been profitable, and thus entrepreneurs would have flooded food into the country. That didn't happen because there was no free market.
    2
  14637. It should, but for so many people, it doesn't
    2
  14638. As you will find out in the next video of the Battlestorm North African Campaign series which I'm working on now, Operation Crusader. Should be the longest video I've ever done, at around 7 hours :)
    2
  14639. Apparently it's pronounced "Strike". At least that's how I pronounced it in my video on Battleaxe and nobody complained
    2
  14640. Gariboltcutter?
    2
  14641. Yes, I'm not a fan of Churchill. Good strategically, but tactically lacking. I do need to look into the Bengal famine because it is often brought up and I want to address it in a video at some point
    2
  14642. After this is Brevity, then Battleaxe - both of which are in this playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe Bit of a warning, I messed up with Brevity, but it's only short. Battleaxe is one of my best though.
    2
  14643. Glad to hear you like it :) I'm working on the next in the North African Campaign now - Operation Crusader (having already covered Brevity and Battleaxe)
    2
  14644. Thank you for watching, glad you enjoyed it!
    2
  14645. So that YouTube doesn't have an excuse to take the video down.
    2
  14646. As you'll see in my upcoming video on Lieutenant General Frederick Boy Browning, I pronounce the British lieutenant as "Lef" and the US lieutenant as "loo".
    2
  14647. Yeah this was in my "experimental era" 😂
    2
  14648. Thanks :) I'm not sure if you've seen my other Battlestorm documentaries but I'll leave the link. My more recent ones (Bruneval and Battleaxe) are the better ones, and are the way I'm doing it moving forwards. Currently working on the next one too: Operation Crusader, which will be around 7-8 hours long https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    2
  14649. It's not called anything. It's my own music
    2
  14650. In what sense? The Italians dominated the Med, so most of the British supplies went around South Africa already. And it was down to the Italians to supply Rommel's Afrika Korps, and they were barely able to keep them in the field.
    2
  14651. Great! Don't forget the video on Operation Compass, which was the operation in North Africa before this one. It was arguably the greatest British victory of the war - yet, few people have heard of it.
    2
  14652. I believe so too. However, I'm reserving my judgement until I get to El Alamein in these documentaries (and possibly until I study his other battles after) before making a decision. His performance at Market Garden was mixed, but apparently that was out of character anyway. On the flip side, a lot of the mistakes during Market Garden aren't really his, as I pointed out during my documentary, so it's hard for me to judge him yet. I do have his memoirs, and as I said in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f79KgQVL3MM he does lie in them about a few things
    2
  14653. Oh no! You'll have to rewatch this one after Compass again ;) Yeah I agree, leadership is crucial. I also want to approach these battles with as few preconceptions as possible. I know Rommel is famous and what not, but even though he's seen as a legendary commander, he's still human at the end of the day. Every human has good traits and bad traits. And if we don't see both the good and the bad, we won't appreciate the reality of how this individual overcame the odds. And part of the reason I've not published videos this past week or so is because I've concentrated on doing the animation for Fort Eben Emael. More than half way through it now :)
    2
  14654. I'm working on Operation Brevity now (while I'm rendering the animation for Fort Eben Emael) and then I'm doing a BIG battle after that. Once that big battle is done Battleaxe is next. Also, you may like to see this behind the scenes video about the way I do my scripts. I show part of the script for Brevity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZyhAdOXxnA
    2
  14655. It's alright, I'm here to help :) you probably already realise this but the only reason I didn't go into more detail is because the sources I used didn't allow it. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the majority of these books are bad. Even with the bigger units and battles, most contradict each other, or even contradict themselves. Also, you may have realised that I don't have access to the primary sources. If I did have access, I'd use them, but I live in Southport, which is in the Northwest of England so travelling to London isn't something that happens often. Although I do think if he was part of the 9th Australian Division, the documents for that will be in Australia (probably?). And I wonder if the German archives have anything, because the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion are involved. Interestingly, I actually made a video a while ago about the issue of finding sources on the North African Campaign (actually history in general, but I used the example of the Western Desert Campaign). I actually explain the issue quite well, although you may not enjoy the conclusion. But I'll leave you the link https://youtu.be/LLwSUfbXO5E Feel free to private message me. I can't make videos from anecdotal accounts, but it would be interesting to hear the stories anyway. I believe the way to do it is to go to my channel's "About" page where there should be a button somewhere to send me a message. If you do send me a message, comment on here to let me know because it doesn't notify me when people send me private messages.
    2
  14656. Hey, I'll help where I can, however I'm limited to the sources I listed in the video description. I'll be honest, finding information on this battle/operation was tough; it deserves a new historian to go into the archives and then publish a lot more information.
    2
  14657. I'm glad you asked because I should have put the link in the description! I'll do that now. Part 1 isn't 3D and I'm in the video, but I hope you enjoy it nonetheless :)
    2
  14658. I don't see why not :) the only issue is, the more units on the field of battle, the longer it takes me to make the video
    2
  14659. And just to be clear, I know Fort Eben Emael is in Belgium, but it's all linked into the same campaign and it's capture was vital for the fall of France
    2
  14660. It's true. The Support Group did a lot in the first battles of the campaign. Maybe this is why William "Strafer" Gott was considered for promotion, despite all the losses
    2
  14661. Lol how are the Hyperboreans doing?
    2
  14662. Yes, and a lot of English speakers have no concept of sarcasm either. I think it's a cultural thing.
    2
  14663. "In other words, it means to be awake to sensitive social issues, such as racism." Yeah well the modern dictionary definitions are about several millennia off. Woke comes from the Gnostic and Hermetic tradition, which has its origins in Ancient Egypt (and possibly Assyria). It means to be 'awoken' to the knowledge (gnosis) of the Spirit of the True God, and the ability to create a Heaven on Earth.
    2
  14664. "I am curious if you are inclined towards a watchmen state or if you are an Ancap?" This is one of the Patreon questions that I'm planning to answer soon, so I'll let you know.
    2
  14665. "LOL...hate to disappoint you, but there are lot of us who use algebra, trig, and calc in our jobs." Yes, so let's teach it to every single child in the whole of the whole world, most of whom don't want to learn it and have zero reason to do so, just because 1% of the population actually need to use these things. Also, let's assume that people who need to learn these things can only learn them by being imprisoned in a boring classroom for 16 years of their youth, instead of having a passion and motivation for the subject, buying books and learning it themselves off their own back for a fraction of the price.
    2
  14666. +Devon Ziegler thanks Devon! I hope you like the last episode too when that comes out. It's the one I'm most concerned about lol
    2
  14667. +alkafluence It does. Looking at the way the Poles performed, it's hard to see why Sosabowski was treated so bad by his peers
    2
  14668. +Ayda Williams haha you mean General Gavin :D well, let's see if you're right when the last episode comes out on the 30th
    2
  14669. +Skylor Edwards it will be out on the 30th. I've just had to redo it because I wanted to correct some errors, but it will be here, don't worry :)
    2
  14670. Yeah I understand, but it would be nice to have more, even if it was biased :(
    2
  14671. I'm guessing you're new here. Check out this playlist, which has most of my better "TIKhistory" videos in it - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhpvGA5suvZusGG1EjsLlWj And if you like super-accurate and in-depth battle documentaries, check out my "BATTLESTORM" series. The latest ones (Battleaxe and Bruneval) are the better ones, although everyone still loves Market Garden (my first, and longest) - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    2
  14672. One day I might make a bad video though, and you may have to unlike the video
    2
  14673. No need to apologise, I can see why you came to that conclusion - especially when alcohol is involved! I just hope you enjoy the videos :)
    2
  14674. Do the monster maths (it's a graveyard smash)
    2
  14675. Rokossovsky has a biography which had been translated into English. Zhukov has one too. But as far as I'm aware, not even Koniev has one. Few do. So while Rokossovsky might have been underrated, he does at least have a biography out there for him.
    2
  14676. Well done!
    2
  14677. Thank you. I'd be happy if that happened :) I'm sure once I get my main Stalingrad documentary out I'll have a few more viewers then haha
    2
  14678. Mongols > Germans?
    2
  14679. I've actually been slowed down a lot by focusing on these Monday videos. That said, I'm not willing to compromise on these videos because having a regular schedule is better than not having one in my opinion.
    2
  14680. The other day I finished the research and yesterday I finished the units. It's been a while, but I think the wait will be worth it. It's probably going to be longer than Market Garden (my longest video so far).
    2
  14681. I don't mind, but I think it's a bit redundant in this case.
    2
  14682. I haven't watched his Evola videos, but his Goldberg take was on par. I'll make it a priority to watch his Evola videos because it depends on what angle he's coming at. If he's just reporting what Evola said, fair enough. If he believes in everything that Evola said, then that might be an issue. It's difficult to see how Academic Agent (who has previously said he reads Austrian Economics) could also believe that Evola's version of Fascism is somehow compatible with the concept of a free market, unless he has abandoned the idea of the free market?
    2
  14683. I've never said that the modern governments bailout corporations are capitalism, since that's not a free market or capitalism. I've made is extremely clear in the past that the idea of corporations come from Syndicalism/Fascism, neither of which are capitalism or free market. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    2
  14684. Oh wow, yeah that sounds like a bad week... But I'm sure there will be better weeks ahead for you :)
    2
  14685. Google translate let me down on this occasion. Reading it as is, I would have probably would have said Loo Lee-ah, which wouldn't have been right either, but closer than Google translate at least
    2
  14686. Yes I've heard something similar. No offense taken 😂
    2
  14687. "So....😠 as the british understood swedes must to do business with Germany and grant rights of transit, so why the heck was Finland declared war by the british!? Doesn't make sense to me. Yeah, we went and attacked the soviets, but what the hell had happened before that!? It just seems, as correct, there's no right or wrong with geopolitics" Britain only declared war on Finland AFTER Finland went to war with the Soviet Union in the Continuation War. Sweden didn't go to war with the Soviet Union (or anyone). The Continuation War was not about 'transit rights' - Finland wanted to retake her lost territories (and, arguably, Karelia too). So Finland wasn't a 'neutral' power like Sweden, but a 'co-belligerent' Axis power.
    2
  14688. This technically isn't alternative history. This is a genuine question because the Germans had created a battleplan for the invasion of Sweden, and we can measure the relative strengths of both sides to make a decent assessment of the likelihood. Alternative history would be if we changed something in the past and then asked 'what would happen?' - e.g. 'If Sweden had been successfully invaded by the Germans and conquered, would she have ended up in the Eastern bloc after WW2?'
    2
  14689. There was a trade agreement between Britain and Sweden in 1939, allowing some Swedish ships to deliver much needed supplies through the British blockade per month. Because Sweden was neutral, Germany allowed this. However, as the war progressed, the Germans put pressure on the Swedes to grant them concessions. If the Swedes said no to German concessions, the Germans would threatened to stop the trade route. Sweden would therefore be pressured into giving in to German demands.
    2
  14690. I actually mentioned the Greater Suomi concept in my old Scandinavia video (link in the description)
    2
  14691. No rest for a worker :) Although I have been taking more breaks this year because even I had to admit that the work-pace of the previous two years (70 and 65+ hours a week) was a bit ridiculous and unsustainable. However, I like to work every morning and not take days off (except on special occasions) because time is precious and I don't want to waste it
    2
  14692. And yet they won, proving that the Western Allies are in league with the devil
    2
  14693. "Sir, I know you're not backing down on this one, but I still think calling it 'Death Day' might not be best for army morale. As a compromise, why don't we shorten the first word to the letter D so you still have it your way, and we just won't mention it to the guys. What do you say?"
    2
  14694. No worries! It's surprising how we use words or phrases like this for years and just assume we understand the true meaning, when in fact we don't
    2
  14695. I'm not sure what you -
    2
  14696. Thanks! And you're right, the debate isn't over. More documentaries will come. Currently working on one for Stalingrad
    2
  14697. Thank you. This was my first documentary and I actually want to redo this one day, and go more in-depth. Please check out my other Battlestorm videos if you haven't done so already. My latest ones on Battleaxe and Bruneval (Frost is in command of the Bruneval drop) are my best. Link to playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    2
  14698. That's not controversial at all. That's one of the reasons, and it's a good one
    2
  14699. I discussed these issues in a later video on Browning, giving more details. You may like to see it, so here's the link https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    2
  14700. No worries, I'm glad you liked it! Make sure you check out my other "Battlestorm" videos because I've done a few now, and I'm working on more, including Operation Crusader, and Stalingrad (which will be a bit longer than this lol)
    2
  14701. Interesting, not heard of this before! Thanks!
    2
  14702. Sorry to disappoint!
    2
  14703. You're correct. But I think plan could have worked as it was, if only Nijmegen bridge had been taken. You're right to point out that the air support (and thus, the plan) could have been better.
    2
  14704. You won't have long to wait... I've also decided to put your comment in it too. Hope you don't mind :)
    2
  14705. Thanks for watching! I'd highly recommend picking up some of the books listed in the description if you haven't read any already. They get to the heart of the debate :)
    2
  14706. Tell him to keep sucking in history! Haha
    2
  14707. Glad you liked it :)
    2
  14708. I don't tbh. Perhaps I should if you're interested :)
    2
  14709. Glad to have you on board, Sean :)
    2
  14710. Hi Herman, I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Despite what some people have claimed in this comment section, I do not think General Gavin was a bad general. People make mistakes, and this was a mistake. His subordinate may have made a mistake. His superior(s) may have made mistakes. And all that is fine. The purpose of the video was to lay out the operation exactly as it was and to determine what the main cause of failure was. If people don't agree with my opinion and want to blame someone or something else, fine. But at least now they have the information needed to make an informed decision. Up until the very end when I gave my opinion, everything else was factually correct according to the sources :)
    2
  14711. I don't feel like you can really get much value out of short documentaries. Some of my videos are shorter, but only because the subject matter allows it, not because I condense subjects down into 10 minutes.
    2
  14712. Yes, I agree, it was a combination of factors. However, if you had to chose just one reason as the main reason this operation failed (as I did in the video) which would you chose?
    2
  14713. Thank you Rob! Glad you enjoyed the video, I wanted to make it because I too was frustrated with a lot of the old documentaries that simply don't show what actually happened in enough detail. If you liked this I highly recommend you want my more recent Battlestorm documentaries (Bruneval and Battleaxe especially), as well as my other history videos. TIK is my channel name, but my name is Lewis. Call me either name, I respond to both :)
    2
  14714. He ran the Normandy Campaign?
    2
  14715. Well, I hope you'll check out my more recent Battlestorm documentaries, and my other history videos. This was the first history video I did, and I've done a lot more since this.
    2
  14716. Yeah, except it's actually the "IJsselmeer". Hundreds of people pointed out that the Zuiderzee was changed in the 1930s, which apparently the books I used hadn't realized either
    2
  14717. Then the person who de-prioritized the capture of the Nijmegen bridge must also bear responsibility for that.
    2
  14718. I'm sorry, zepter.
    2
  14719. Yeah, this was my first documentary too, yet a lot of people prefer it to my later ones (except maybe Bruneval or Battleaxe)
    2
  14720. Glad you enjoy these videos! Currently working on an epic Stalingrad video (been doing the research since April) and have now announced an Operation Crusader video too
    2
  14721. Thank you sir! I've done more videos since this so be sure to check them out :) I'm particularly proud of my recent Battlestorm Battleaxe, and Bruneval videos
    2
  14722. Morally at least, the US and the Brits should have gone to war with the Soviets over the freedom of the Polish state and the others (Baltic states, etc). If you're willing to declare war on Germany for Poland, why not declare war on the Soviet Union for Poland?
    2
  14723. I'm glad you enjoyed it and found it useful :) highly recommend the books in the description of the video if you haven't read them yet, especially Robin Neillands' book. Sadly, I've been to Belgium, but never to the Netherlands so I'm jealous :(
    2
  14724. +caelachyt didn't see this comment when I replied to the other in the other video. I'm glad you're enjoying it :) I'll hold my hand up and say I could have been more damning of 1st Airborne in the video. I think the reason I wasn't was because everyone's heard the mistakes they made. So for the benefit of being fair, in my opinion 1st Airborne's leadership (except Frost) was awful. Urquhart was the wrong man for the job. And honestly, I'd love to know what Dobie's first Battalion was doing. They spent half the day getting lost near the Ede-Arnhem road fighting about 90 Germans. There's no excuse for that! You bring up a good point about the hindsight and the SS Panzer Division not supposed to be there. I guess, if 9th and 10th SS Panzer were not in the area, it wouldn't have mattered if the 82nd had taken their time getting to Nijmegen bridge. But then again, you could argue the same about 1st Airborne at Arnhem. If Spindler's force hadn't been there, 1st Airborne would have been in Arnhem by Day 2 anyway. Perhaps the main reason for defeat was actually because Browning dismissed Urquhart (the intelligence officer, not General Urquhart) and therefore Browning is to blame. But my point still stands that if a unit of the 82nd had head off towards Nijmegen bridge straight away, they would have taken it before the SS had arrived. And yes, they could have dropped a good chunk of 1st Airborne south of the bridge. The only thing that might have hindered them was the bunker and bridge guards on Arnhem bridge itself. But I honestly I can't see why a Brigade couldn't have landed there on Day 1 if the Polish were going to land there later anyway.
    2
  14725. That's a good point about the Polish Brigade. Alternatively landing a battalion or two south of Arnhem on day 1 would also have been a good idea. About the push into Germany, you may be interested in this other video I made about that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f79KgQVL3MM
    2
  14726. Devon Ziegler nah, it's boring, nothing happened :D But I will do eventually. Part of the benefit of researching the Western Desert Campaign is getting to grips with Monty and later Eisenhower, Patton etc when they arrive on the scene at Tunis/Sicily/Italy. Then it'll make it easier for me to critique Monty's performance at Normandy in context of the performance of all the Allied generals in previous battles... so there's method in my madness ;)
    2
  14727. Thank you very much! It does make you wonder what would have happened if the 82nd had gotten to the Nijmegen bridge before the Germans did :)
    2
  14728. YOYO MAN well, I'm doing Operation Compass now, so the Afrika Korps could be the one after :) I did think about starting at the beginning of the war, but thought I may as well do the entire Western Desert Campaign first since it's one of the campaigns I know the least about... bought several books on it so far and more are on my Amazon wish list :P
    2
  14729. +YOYO MAN I really want to do Stalingrad. Berlin as well. The only fear I have of doing them right now is the scale. Market Garden was like 10 divisions in total. Stalingrad had a few more than that!
    2
  14730. I haven't studied in detail the battles that Patton took part in (yet, but I will) so I'm not really in a position to answer your question. But I will say this - Horrocks wasn't a bad commander, and he wasn't slow either. He got to Nijmegen bridge in the early morning of day 3, had only 10 miles to go to reach Arnhem which he had until the end of the day to do. But he suffered a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen. This is thanks to a skillful German defence, but also because the 82nd didn't take it while it was sat undefended on day one. I don't think Patton or anyone else could have changed the speed of XXX Corps by much. And the people who dismiss XXX Corps by saying they were "too slow" but then don't say why they were "too slow" need to take a long hard look at the events at Nijmegen.
    2
  14731. It's definitely something I've considered. It's something I've never actually read up about and I can see it being a nice short battle to cover. What makes it an interesting battle for you?
    2
  14732. *guys. Generals Browning and Brereton were in charge of the airborne operation
    2
  14733. They were, but they advanced very slow compared to XXX Corps (the irony being most people say XXX Corps was too slow). I mention O'Connor's 8th Corps on the right flank briefly towards the end of the video
    2
  14734. Just to be clear, don't blame "the Americans" or their divisions. We need to be more specific. Obviously, the entire United States America can't be blamed for the failure to capture a bridges. That fault lies in the commanders (Gavin, or Browning if you think he's to blame). I talk about this issue in this video https://youtu.be/WHCVKPIY6Pk I only roughly know what happened after Market Garden, but I believe the Germans eventually retreated across Arnhem bridge and held Arnhem until a couple months into 1945. The British concentrated on clearing the Scheldt estuary and the islands there for the use of the port at Antwerp. The Fifteenth Army was forced back to the Maas-Waal but held over the winter, resulting in the "Hunger Winter" in the Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_famine_of_1944. Surprisingly, the eastern side of the Market Garden bulge didn't change a whole lot over the winter, with only a few small chunks of territory taken there by the Allies. The airborne divisions continued to fight along Hell's Highway at least into October before being withdrawn. About the video you linked. It links to another video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oIlDTExMLo where the American paratrooper gives his own account of what happened when the tanks got across Nijmegen bridge. However what you need to remember is that this account is cannot be as relied on as first thought. For starters, these words were spoken many years after the battle, rather than at the time (Accounts at the time are more reliable for obvious reasons). Secondly, while they give the view of one American paratrooper who met the British tanks, the British tankers as well as their commanders (two of them, not just the one mentioned) state that the Americans were very happy that the British were over the bridge, even kissing the tanks. There's no mention at the time of a enraged American captain who demanded the tanks go forwards. And as I said in the documentary, according to the British accounts, the American paratroopers may have even left the tanks. One possibly spoke to General Horrocks using a radio in one of the British tanks. In fact, General Gavin's account at the time agrees with the British point of view, and it's only his later accounts, such as those in 1978 that go against what the British were saying. I'd highly recommend Neilland's book http://astore.amazon.com/t00ec-20/detail/B016AABMF0 as that goes into a lot of detail about the entire incident. He literally spends a third of a chapter disputing the claim that the British drank tea after they got over Nijmegen bridge, and the other portions explaining why Nijmegen bridge should and could have been taken on the first day and why the excuses at the time and later don't add up. And I have read Buckingham's book, but didn't have it to hand for this documentary (I lost a lot of my history books when I moved house a few years back). Whilst I wouldn't say not to read it, I don't recommend it unless you've read several other books on the subject. Even then, only get it if you want to see how not to write a history book. Whilst some may dispute the claim in this video that Gavin was to blame for the failure of the Operation, at least I provided a solid argument, backed by evidence and reasoning. I do remember reading Buckingham's book and wondering if he was going to support his arguments at any point rather than just making a statement and then moving on to the next. As I say, I don't have the book right now or I'd give an example, but I distinctly remember thinking that book was probably the worst I've read on Market Garden. And I've read a lot on Market Garden. Still, it's good to read books like that just so you know first hand whether people like myself are telling the truth or not. After all, I may have some sort of bias against certain sources that dispute my arguments. I've not got one, and I'd encourage you to come to your own conclusions about this battle. But some people like to spurt their own biased views based on a corrupted perception of what happened, rather than a factual evidenced-based view of what happened. After all, if you only read one book or watch one film on a subject, not only are you not going to fully grasp the situation, but the one book you read could be completely wrong or be super-biased - and you wouldn't know because you've only read that one book. So I encourage you to read more on Market Garden, however I'd recommend several books before Buckingham's book, simply because it's poorly done.
    2
  14735. Well, except in 1940, when they lost.
    2
  14736. It's interesting because neither Browning or Brereton are mentioned much after the battle begins, and Browning gets most of the blame while Brereton doesn't, even though they shared the same job. Brereton is mentioned only in passing, and I've read nothing on his involvement in the plan or its execution. It was decided that Brereton would stay in England to command from there while Browning would land at Nijmegen to command from there. What Brereton did while he was in England is anyone's guess - I'd love to look at the archives on this. And what Browning did at Nijmegen is also anyone's guess. Apart from mentioning one or two appearances and shifting the blame to Sosabowski, the narrative is silent. 1st Airborne was an inexperienced unit. With the exception of Frost's battalion (which had been used in previous raids - I'd recommend his book) and a couple of other units and men/officers, the whole unit was basically green. It certainly hadn't fought before as a full unit. Urquhart wasn't even a paratrooper - he was an infantry division commander who was given the task. The more experienced 6th Airborne Division wasn't used because they needed a break after Normandy.
    2
  14737. Well, to put things into context, more units are involved in the first month of the Stalingrad battle than all other units in all of my other docs so far. It's incredible, but the scale is overwhelming. I'll get it done, but I honestly don't know when I'll finish it because I'm not content just to make "that'll do" content. The facts need to be right - or as right as I can possibly get it - otherwise what's the point? I've got another video on the LRDG coming tomorrow, and am working on Operation Battleaxe right now, which I'm hoping to get done in the next few weeks. All I'll say for this Operation Market Garden video is that I'm confident enough to claim that the day-to-day events and unit positions etc are very accurate (or at least as accurate as the sources allowed me to be). I crossed referenced every event and made sure what I was saying was correct. The historiography (where I said what other historians think) is right, but my own final conclusion/interpretation right at the end of the video may be wrong. If anyone wants to disagree with my conclusion and thinks someone else is to blame, that's fine, but the rest of the video is spot on. Eventually I'll get to Italy and then do D-Day etc. Think it'll be a while before I get there though. I haven't read the Band of Brothers books, although I've watched both that and the Pacific. Very good series. At the minute I'm not in a postion to say whether they're accurate or anything as I simply don't know. All I will say is (if at all possible) try not to rely on one source of information for a specific event or events, because chances are that one source got things wrong and may lead you to form the wrong conclusions. I'm probably going to make an additional video for Battleaxe where I'll show you exactly what I mean when I say that you absolutely cannot rely on one source of information, because some of the stuff I've come across in the sources is rediculous. I've read two (or more) authors that completely contradict each other, and more will be so vague there's no way to actually know what happened for certain. This is why I make sure to do as much research as possible to make sure I get things as right as possible, but even then I sometimes have to bite the bullet and pick one side or another (or be vague, which I hate doing). Not a day goes by where I don't wish I had access to the primary sources, and for Battleaxe I've been super tempted to take a trip to London to get them.
    2
  14738. No, thank you! :) If you like this, check out my other two BattleStorm documentaries
    2
  14739. Santiago Restrepo And this is why the battle is so controversial. Most of the TV documentaries out there only mention the reasons for the failure in the Arnhem sector and maybe have some vague statements like "XXX Corps was too slow". But none of them go into detail or explain why. If you watch from 18:07 to 19:16, and then 29:55 to 32:20 I explain exactly what happens on day 1 in the Nijmegen sector. And then 46:43 to 50:55 I pretty much explain what happened on day 3 and why XXX Corps didn't arrive at Arnhem on time. Then at 01:01:00 to 1:06:05 I explain the events of day 4 and what XXX Corps were doing when their 4 tanks got across the bridge. At 01:35:37 onwards is the debates historians have on the battle and explains in more detail about the situation at the Nijmegen bridge during those crucial days. If you want even more detail on this, as TheVillaAston said "The Battle for the Rhine 1944" by Robin Neillands is pretty much the best book which puts forth the argument that Operation Market Garden was lost at Nijmegen. Poulussen's "Lost at Nijmegen" goes into a lot more detail about why the 82nd didn't capture the bridge, although it's a little less accessible than Neilland's book. The main things to note is that because Nijmegen Bridge wasn't taken on the first day, the Germans had the chance to dig in and fortify Nijmegen for two days. Plus because it wasn't taken on the first day, the Germans also had the chance to blow the bridge when XXX Corps did send 4 tanks across it. In the event, it didn't blow, but if it had who's fault would it have been? And finally, the four tanks (one knocked out) that did get across the bridge were alone. It's debated (again, read Neillands book for details) whether the American paras left the tanks to go hunting for more Germans. The British tankers dispute the claim that an American officer offered and then argued with them when they wouldn't go towards Arnhem. And the British infantry and the majority of XXX Corps were in Nijmegen fighting the 10th SS Panzer Division, not drinking tea as is often stated.
    2
  14740. It could be argued that the idea of Operation Market Garden at the time wasn't to race to Berlin. That idea came later to justify the excessive losses suffered by 1st Airborne. The actual goal was to race to the Zuiderzee and cut off the 15th Army. Why? Because the port of Antwerp needed liberating. Why? So Patton could get petrol for his tanks. Why? Patton wasn't stopped by orders. He was stopped because of a lack of fuel.
    2
  14741. No worries, I really enjoyed making it :)
    2
  14742. XXX Corps suffered a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen BEFORE they took the Nijmegen bridge. That is a fact. The reason was because the 82nd didn't capture the Nijmegen bridge on day 1, which they could have done. I'm not blaming "Americans" or "America". I'm saying someone somewhere - whether that be Gavin, Warren, Browning, Monty, Ike, the Germans, or whoever - messed up at Nijmegen. And I'm saying that the failure to capture the Nijmegen bridge on day 1 was the real reason for Market Garden's failure. And I'm saying that with confidence because the evidence is there.
    2
  14743. Thanks Rolan, glad you enjoyed it :) I'd encourage you to check out my other Battlestorm documentaries as well. Lots of people enjoyed me Operation Battleaxe video. Currently working on one for the battle of Stalingrad (taking a while as you can imagine given the size of the battle)
    2
  14744. Well, as I said in the video, the Polish drop may have actually saved 1st Airborne Division. So if they'd dropped into the north, they may have just reinforced a defeat. But if you mean they should have crossed the Rhine from the southern bank, they tried that several times and got hit hard - although some did make it to the British positions.
    2
  14745. Cheers! :D
    2
  14746. It's good to hear you enjoyed the documentary :) I agree that the British Army's performance during the war wasn't as good as it could have been. There's numerous reasons for this, but I think it's interesting that the plan for Market Garden is basically the opposite of what you'd expect from a British general in ww2, and yet that plan is also the one that's pulled apart for being too ambitious...?
    2
  14747. Well, the good news is I'm working on one for the battle of Stalingrad right now... Might take me a while though! I do have battlestorm videos on other battles on the channel though if you haven't seen them already
    2
  14748. Thanks Gixernutter I agree that the Polish aren't to blame for the failure at Arnhem, nor of the Operation, as they played their part. I do think 1st Airborne could have performed better on the ground, and I do think Urquhart should take the blame for that. I also think 1st Airborne's drop zones should have been different (one battalion at least dropped south of Arnhem on Day 1, where the polish were planned to drop) and the drop timings could have been better (two drops per day instead of one) - but the RAF should take the blame for that. I do think though that 1st Airborne shouldn't be blamed entirely for the failure of the whole Operation. I would absolutely love a copy of Spindler's war diary! Where did you get it from?
    2
  14749. Please check out the description for the sources I used. Most notably Poulussen's "Lost at Nigmegen" and Robert Neillands' "The Battle for the Rhine 1944." These books champion this argument, and of the three arguments, this is the one that makes the most sense to me. Montgomery's plan could have been better. However, it wasn't "rotten" as so often claimed. It could have worked had Nijmegen bridge been taken on day one, which it could and should have been.
    2
  14750. +Morgan Chalmers agreed. The comments on the other videos were great. It's good we can all have a civilized discussion about it. I tried to be as unbiased as possible when making this, and only allowed my opinion to come through at the very end once I'd given all the evidence and presented all sides of the argument.
    2
  14751. Yeah I have a video discussing the true purpose of Operation Market Garden according to Monty and Ike where I discuss the whole Antwerp situation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f79KgQVL3MM
    2
  14752. Yes! I'm working my way through the North African Campaign right now so Torch will come when it's time https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe And I won't say too much, but if you have any recommendations for books on the Bulge I'm all ears
    2
  14753. "Everyone tells a different story" - welcome to history! "Is it necessary to have to find someone to blame?" - not really blame for blame's sake, more discover what the main reason for failure was and figure out why that failure happened.
    2
  14754. +Divi Filius Augustus to say that is quite the compliment! Thanks very much, I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    2
  14755. That's a good point. Thanks for pointing that out :) I'll try not to make that mistake when I talk about the Heer in my Stalingrad documentary
    2
  14756. I don't understand what you mean?
    2
  14757. I've learnt many lessons after this video (this was my first documentary) and have begun to use nato-symbols for the units. If you watch my latest documentary on Battleaxe, you'll see a world of difference https://youtu.be/lqGo57Drs24
    2
  14758. Oh don't get me wrong, the Germans did exceptionally well, especially with the few resources they had. I'm just pointing out the events from the Allied perspective. As far as British tanks proceeding up the road without additional support - they wouldn't have gotten through. But what I find interesting is that the people who say this are usually quoting events from the film A Bridge Too Far, which itself is based on the book A Bridge Too Far, which actually contradicts itself. Not only that but historians have called into question the events as described in Ryan's book. Let me explain. So here's two paragraphs from Ryan's book that I need to quote in full. The first - "Lieutenant A.D. Demetras overheard Tucker arguing with a major from the Guards Armoured Division. 'I think a most incredible decision was being made right there on the spot,' he recalls. From inside a small bungalow being used as a command post, Demetras heard Tucker say angrily, 'Your boys are hurting up there at Arnhem. You'd better go. It's only 11 miles.' The major 'told the Colonel that British armour could not proceed until infantry came up'. Demetras recalls. 'They were fighting the war by the book,' Colonel Tucker said. 'They had "harboured" for the night. As usual, they stopped for tea.'" Ok, so this is suggesting that Tucker wanted the British tanks to go on to Arnhem on their own without infantry support even though they didn't have permission to do that. Fine. Now let's see the next paragraph in Ryan's book. "Although his men were at less than half strength and almost out of ammunition, Tucker thought of sending the 82nd troopers north towards Arnhem on their own. Yet, he knew that General Gavin would never have approved his action. The 82nd, strung out along its section of the corridor, could not afford the manpower. But Gavin's sympathies were with his men: the British should have driven ahead. As he was later to put it: "There was no better soldier than the Corps commander, General Browning. Still, he was a theorist. Had Ridgway been in command at that moment, we would have been ordered up the road in spite of all our difficulties, to save the men at Arnhem." Right, so there's several points to be made here. 1) The 504th was almost out of ammunition at this point. So they couldn't have supported the tanks even if they'd wanted to. 2) In the first paragraph Tucker is ok to argue with the British tanks for not driving north, but then in the second paragraph doesn't want to send his men either. Why not? If the tanks won't go, why won't the paras go either? 3) Tucker thought of sending the 82nd troopers north towards Arnhem on their own, but didn't because he knew General Gavin wouldn't have said yes to that. But it's ok for Tucker to criticise the British tanks for not driving north without permission from their commander? If Gavin would have said no, what makes you think Horrocks or anyone else wouldn't have said yes? In this very paragraph, Tucker admits that the US paratroopers at Nijmegen had the exact same option the British had - to march towards Arnhem - and he decided not to do it. Therefore, by Tucker's own reasoning, the US paras also drank tea at Nijmegen bridge. [Just to point out, I don't believe the "drinking tea" thing even happened - as I'll discuss below - nor do I actually suggest the US paras drank tea at Nijmegen. I'm mearly highlighting the point that Tucker can't criticise the British tankers without at the same time criticising himself and his own men.] 4) "we would have been ordered up the road in spite of all our difficulties." So had Ridgway been in command, he would have ordered "we" up the road. Who is "we"? Is Gavin implying that Ridgway would have ordered the 82nd up the road as well as XXX Corps? It certainly sounds like he is. So assuming that a better general like Ridgway or Patton was here, in Gavin's opinion, they would have ordered the 82nd up the road as well "in spite of all our difficulties, so save the men at Arnhem". Then why didn't General Gavin order the 82nd up the road at this critical point?? Why is it ok to criticize the British generals for not being like Ridgway, but not Gavin? And even if Gavin meant just XXX Corps, what "difficulties" was he speaking of? Could it be the fact that XXX Corps was still battling to take Nijmegen city because Gavin had let the Germans occupy it four days earlier? 5) We only have one person's perspective here. What about events from the British perspective? Neillands does well to cover this - he has a chapter in his book pretty much dedicated to the issue at the Nijmegen sector. I won't quote in full, but Captain Peter Carrington (the major that Tucker was supposed to have argued with - the fact he got the rank wrong says a lot) says "This story is simply lunacy and this alleged exchange did not take place". So the British officer states quite firmly that this event did not take place. All sources except Ryan's interview with Tucker say the US paras hugged and kissed the tank (even General Gavin is quoted as saying this too!) and it's only a couple of US sources that say the argument happened. Even then, the British officer said it didn't happen, so at best it's questionable to believe it even happened. But even if it did, it doesn't make any sense. Again, Neillands talks about this quite a bit so I'd absolutely recommend his book. But I'll end with two quotes from Neillands himself: - "This alleged incident between Peter Carrington and an American officer, widely reported and probably exaggerated, still leaves a bad taste. The first allegation is unfair: 'yellow-bellied cowards' do not cross a river bridge in tanks, knowing that it might blow up beneath them at any moment. Nor does a mere captain - even a captain of His Majesty's Foot Guards - take it on himself to rush off into enemy territory, especially when his current task is to aid the American forces on the north bank hold their bridgehead in the face of counter-attacks." "Let us be frank. The 82nd should have taken the Nijmegen bridge on D-Day, September 17. By failing to do so Gavin made a major contribution to the failure of the entire Arnhem operation and it will not do to pass the blame for that failure on to the British or to Captain Lord Carrington. Colonel Tucker bitterly complains about a delay of twelve hours [because the British don't drive to Arnhem immediately after taking Nijmegen bridge] but Gavin never provided the slightest explanation for the delay of thirty-six hours his failure to take the Nijmegen bridge imposed on the entire Market Garden operation."
    2
  14759. I agree to a point. They indirectly played a part. From what I've read, they unhinged the German defenses when they crossed the Waal, which lead to hundreds of German soldiers fleeing across and then dying on the rail bridge, weakening 10th SS's hold on Nijmegen significantly. Obviously the 10th SS continued to hold out until the next day, but I can imagine further delays if another 250 SS had held on in western Nijmegen. However you're right that the blame is Gavin's in the first place. If the Nijmegen bridge had been taken on day one, they wouldn't have had to send their paras across the river in boats like marines on day 4
    2
  14760. I'm sorry I wasn't born 50+ years ago. I've listed my sources in the video description. New evidence - as in, research and publications by historians more recent than Ryan's "A Bridge Too Far" which left a lot to be desired. I'd recommend "The Battle for the Rhine 1944" for the explanation for the new arguments, and "Lost at Nijmegen" for a detailed overview of the performance of the 82nd Airborne during Market Garden. I'd also recommend "It Never Snows in September" for a VERY detailed look at the battle from the German perspective. No axe to grind here, just stating the facts. If Warren's unit had set off towards Nijmegen bridge after landing rather than waiting several hours, they could have been on Nijmegen bridge well before the Germans arrived from the North. As it was, they left several hours late and the Germans beat them by minutes. Then the Germans had two days to dig in and fortify Nijmegen before XXX Corps arrived. This then caused a 36 hour delay as XXX Corps had to clear Nijmegen city house-by-house. By the time the British were over the Nijmegen bridge, Frost's men at Arnhem were finally overwhelmed and it was too late for the operation.
    2
  14761. Free markets, not capitalism
    2
  14762. Doctors are paid more than £50,000 and thus it is worth going to university over that. However, that said, I would not go to an NHS doctor if I had a choice. I'd much rather visit actual doctors.
    2
  14763. If that's the wage for an electrician in Australia, than your son is making an absolutely fantastic decision!
    2
  14764. That might be because I released this at the same time as the other video, so it may have recommended that one and not this one?
    2
  14765. Because I left that up to you to do the math for those professions. I can't possibly sit here going through EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL OCCUPATION you could get from EVERY SINGLE DEGREE out there. The point was to show you that it isn't just as straight forward as you think. But yes, doctors and (probably) lawyers are on more than university lecturers, so assuming you can land a job in those roles, and actually do a decent job at them, then yes, they are worth it. However, as several plumbers are telling me in the comments, plumbers get paid a lot more than officially recorded because they're doing a lot of overtime and also making a lot of cash-in-hand to screw the tax office over, which I absolutely encourage. Thus, it still might be worth it being a plumber.
    2
  14766. "But all of the work Austrians did on interest rates and loaning out money. Debt can be good if you are putting it towards an activity that has a greater ROI than the interest rate you took the money out on." I don't doubt that. However, personal debt is different to business loans/debt. And the problem for me right now as a businessman is that the massive currency printing that's been going on for decades has created so many distortions in the market, it's impossible to know what's a stable business or not. The stock market has been going up as the economy has been shut down. And Google/YouTube is a corporation in the stock market, and has been funded by the same investors and so on that have got "easy money" from the Central Banks. YouTube could be in a massive bubble of stupidity for all I know (and I suspect it is, similar to the dotcom bubble), so the last thing I want to do is take out loans for this business in case tomorrow the whole thing collapses and I'm left with debt I can't pay back. In a nutshell, I'm against debt in all forms right now due to the manipulations and debt-based fiat currency model of the globalist central banks. If it wasn't for that, I'd be in favour of business loans at least. I'd still be wary of personal debt though.
    2
  14767. It's coming next week. It takes time to do the scripts, record the audio, and edit them, as I explained in this video https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    2
  14768. As I said in the pinned comments of the past two videos, the next season starts next week. Please pay attention. As for the "flat earther" comments. At least I'm not a conspiracy theorist who believes that Hitler's nationalization of the industries was 'privatization', as you believe.
    2
  14769. Of course it did, that's why the "monarch" and the politicians have a lot to answer for.
    2
  14770. As I've said in previous pinned comments, the next season starts next week. And as I've explained in a previous video, I'm constantly working on the Stalingrad series behind the scenes, but it takes a hell of a lot of work. This is why there needs to be a gap between seasons https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    2
  14771. YouTube Censorship
    2
  14772. I think it's well known. Also, his opinion regarding that comment didn't really need an explanation - it spoke for itself. But maybe I could do a "Patton's Anti-Semitism" video in the future
    2
  14773. I'm curious, why would you not expect me to make videos like this??
    2
  14774. "Would you really have your country go back to some Dickensian 19th Century Dystopia" Well, for starters, Dickens was writing before "Laissez Faire Capitalism" (which it wasn't anyway, but that's a complicated topic) came along. Secondly, I'm not advocating a reversal, no. This is why I'm a progressive, not a regressive like everyone on the Left. "the FULL wieght of laissez - faire Capitalism, you know, 7yr old Chimney Sweeps, 10 and 12 yr ols "down the Pit" etc etc ..." At least children could earn a wage and have a chance of paying taxes. Nowadays they're taxed and can't earn the money to pay off those taxes. Buying sweets is 20% VAT straight off, but moreso because the person selling you the sweets has paid council (soviet) tax, income tax, National-Socialist Insurance, and his inflation tax, along with numerous other taxes like road tax and fuel tax getting the sweets to the shop in the first place. And the parents who gave the kid the money for the sweets have also been taxed massively before they even were able to give the kid the money because remember: if you tax the parent, you tax the child. And if you tax the employer, you tax the employee. What I want is for us to stop paying our theft-tax, stop getting into 'public' debt, and start freeing up the economy to let it actually work. If I hadn't been taxed last year, I could have employed a part-time worker. Instead, the wages for that part-time worker has been stolen from me and wasted on 'services' that I don't want nor need (like the National Socialist Hell Service) and has resulted in another person being unemployed. There's a reason millions of people are unemployed, and it's because of terrible government policies. If people read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt (or listened to the audio book here https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U ) it would save us a lot of trouble.
    2
  14775. Quoting someone else saying naughty words is not me saying those words. If you can't differentiate between a quote and a genuine swear, then my videos aren't for you.
    2
  14776. Yeah they're not really sending this out to many people. It's getting to the point where I can sort of tell within the first hour or two that YouTube is restricting a video's performance. They may unrestrict it at some point, but it's clear that this video hasn't performed well due to artificially not being recommended.
    2
  14777. I have a Bitchute channel, although I'm behind with the uploads to it https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    2
  14778. Yes, which is why I didn't just use one source, but several.
    2
  14779. Yeah, this is the flaw in any hierarchy - the top can bully you and steal your wealth, but you're not allowed to do the same to them because then the girly hierarchists claim that it's not "fair". What a joke.
    2
  14780. Monday
    2
  14781. It's actually not. It suppresses my videos on the topic.
    2
  14782. I pulled the photos off the internet, so the one about Dionysis is probably AI generated, though I didn't make it myself.
    2
  14783. Going off Wikipedia (yes, not the greatest source), it says Ludwig Feuerbach influenced Nietzsche. So, that would make him a Hegelian. Or is this a similar case to Karl Marx, where the guy claimed to opposite to Hegel, despite being directly influenced by Hegel? Edit: link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Feuerbach
    2
  14784. Let me ask you a question: if Christianity had roots in Judaism, why did the Christians crush and prosecute the Jews?
    2
  14785. It's only because I don't know the connections, plus this video was already a week behind
    2
  14786. Thank you! I've actually been recommended these before by someone in real life, so I think I'll check them out
    2
  14787. It's a religion. They believe in the Great Architect of the Universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Architect_of_the_Universe
    2
  14788. That's pretty much it. I'll be going into this in an upcoming video. And no worries at all :)
    2
  14789. Bingo!
    2
  14790. @Andy - yes you must! @Radu - you're correct, and this is why we absolutely must use as many sources as possible in order to have a hope at understanding what happened.
    2
  14791. I hope you liked it!
    2
  14792. I'll forgive you
    2
  14793. I'm actually interested in the period between 1850-present, although my focus is really on the time between 1905-1953. I have done a Purges video, and will do more inter-war period videos. But the reason I concentrate on WW2 is because (in my opinion) there's more at stake, and a lot more to discover.
    2
  14794. What honour does a liar have?
    2
  14795. Very tough question. Never actually considered it before to be honest.
    2
  14796. Glad to hear you liked it :)
    2
  14797. It's not the signal though. It's saying - be prepared to launch it. That's assuming you trust what Manstein is saying. And let's not forget, if Paulus was unwilling to defy Hitler's orders, why would he defy an order to breakout? Donnerschlag is the codename for Paulus's breakout attempt.
    2
  14798. Yeah, it's partly the camera and partly the excessively bright lights I use. Problem is I need them bright for the green screen, so there's not a great deal I can do currently :(
    2
  14799. As you will see in the video, Manstein never gave Paulus the order to breakout. That was one of the lies.
    2
  14800. That's a point I didn't bring up in the video, but Manstein also puts the dates that Paulus asks to break out later than they are so as to make him look worse. And yes, I can do. Not sure why I didn't in this case to be honest.
    2
  14801. Well, that's an unusual question, I'll admit that. I can't judge males to be honest so I'm certainly not the best person to ask. Taking a bit of a guess from what I've read, I've heard that Gavin of the 82nd Airborne Division was the youngest division commander for the US, had a few admirers, and he was a womaniser. Maybe he's a contender?
    2
  14802. I don't know much about it to be honest, and I've no plans to really look into it at the moment. Some people were saying it was Churchill's fault, and others were arguing that it wasn't his fault. I simply don't know enough to make the call.
    2
  14803. "You don't say how many tanks were left." because my sources don't tell me. This is why I need more sources, but nobody seems to have any to recommend. The problem with this topic is that it's completely neglected by the academics. I've ordered more books on the Soviet economy in the hope that they mention Lend Lease as well. Fingers crossed.
    2
  14804. In German: Unternehmen Zitadelle
    2
  14805. I did say I needed to do more research, and that the sources were perhaps biased. I also mentioned the economic aspects, although haven't got enough information yet to make a detailed analysis of it. But I wanted to answer the question proposed by my Patreon, which is why I gave a limited report, so yes I am aware and have no intention of just relying on the Soviet sources.
    2
  14806. No worries :)
    2
  14807. No you haven't struck a nerve, because I'm not a socialist (either Marxist-Socialist or National Socialist).
    2
  14808. Merry August-Christmas!
    2
  14809. It's just a preliminary really. I intend to do one much more detailed in the future (just struggling to get sources on it at the moment, which is causing delays)
    2
  14810. Haha you shouldn't be so concerned. Although a Marxist did comment saying "Neck yourself" last week on one of the National Socialist videos. I refrained from deleting his comment (since apparently 'freedom of speech' or something) so people can still go find it.
    2
  14811. 1) Wikipedia is a tertiary source written by unknown people with possible agendas, and therefore cannot be trusted. 2) those plans are vague, which is what I said in the video. Apart from Hitler's aim of removing the Jews and taking the Slavs as slaves to form a racist-socialist utopia, the actual details are not set in stone.
    2
  14812. The problem with that source is that it only lists what the Soviets said they received (which may not be accurate) and doesn't say when they received them. If they got the majority of that in 1944, then it didn't win the war, like I said in the video. The point is, we need to know what was sent and when it was sent.
    2
  14813. Except, as I said in the videos, Hitler was a socialist.
    2
  14814. I took it down. I've just released a video explaining why. Sorry for that.
    2
  14815. Austrich ;)
    2
  14816. CStriker421 Yeah, he changed his name to Octavian later, but originally was called Octavius
    2
  14817. That's my thoughts exactly. It's highly unlikely that the diary actually exists in my opinion
    2
  14818. I mean, technically it is!
    2
  14819. You're not wrong. We're not allowed to criticize the religion of Socialism, praise be
    2
  14820. Yes, definitely! It'll be much easier to show what happened in chronological order as the events happened, rather than bunching them all up in one video
    2
  14821. Which document is that? And which region do you live in?
    2
  14822. Except, it's not English translations. It's Russian translations of German that were then put into English. The original German diary is (supposedly) in Chuikov's personal possession and (suspiciously) hasn't been seen by anyone else.
    2
  14823. Possibly, but not it's not been published in its original language because Chuikov is the only source. The original hasn't been found.
    2
  14824. That is very true!
    2
  14825. Russia isn't the only one to manipulate history, but it's more abundantly clear they're doing it. Other States tend to approach it a bit more subtly and get away with it, while Russia just uses a sledgehammer
    2
  14826. "Can't wait for the next hyperinflation video" Hoping to get it out the week after next, although it may be delayed a little
    2
  14827. What about the Germans who escaped the British POW camp in India and managed to escape to Japan? See the book "Our Chances were Zero" and/or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolf_Magener
    2
  14828. Oh wow, thank you very much for choosing to support me!
    2
  14829. That's how we say it in proper English. None of this 'Your-ann-us" rubbish.
    2
  14830. "How can one tell how one would react to walking past dead bodies day and night?" I'm certain there were bodies there, but the point isn't necessarily about the bodies, but the statement that there's nobody to pick them up. They had people to pick them up. - "Also I had a problem with your statement about the smell in the air. I can personally walk on the other side of the street where a cat was ran over by a car and the smell will still be overwealming." Right but that would be the case everywhere in war. All it would take is a few bodies scattered about the city of Stalingrad for the entire city to start to stink. So for a soldier to complain about the smell, doesn't really make sense, since they would be smelling it on every battlefield they go to. - "While I'm mentioning this, I would also like to add about you view on morale. While a unit's morale may be high, I doubt there was any significant period of time in which any division in Stalingrad had no suicides, or any which fought there who didn't have to shut one or more of his men down for talking in a defeatist manner. As such, a soldier's diary may mention low morale even when official records (or even the diaries of other soldiers) do not." True. However, in conjunction with the fact that at least two or three statements of Hoffman's are definitely wrong, the fact we have contradicting evidence relating to this issue, and the others, would suggest that this was also made up. If two or three of the statements are flat-out wrong, proving that whoever wrote the diary wasn't in the 267th Infantry Regiment, why would you believe that the rest of the source was legitimate? Believing the rest of the source at this point would be faulty logic, I would argue.
    2
  14831. Cameron Thompson that's 5th most populated ;)
    2
  14832. gmsimpson05 wow I didn't realise Nigeria was so high on the list! That's interesting :)
    2
  14833. Leviathan268 it's 4th biggest!
    2
  14834. Bodglin o'Ite It is indeed :)
    2
  14835. I can see you're new around here. The Marxists despise me. And the German generals were lying (keep watching and you will see why). Also, Merry Christmas!
    2
  14836. All the music in my documentaries (except for the Market Garden series) is my own, so that track doesn't officially have a name.
    2
  14837. Great! Yes, we're only a few weeks away from Stalingrad. Just waiting for the map now. Going to start recording the script audio for Stalingrad video 1 this week
    2
  14838. Well, this is the All-in-One Courland video, so its a collection of the Courland separate videos all put into one. There's some minor corrections of course
    2
  14839. Merry Christmas!
    2
  14840. If you think this is insane, you should check out my Operation Crusader documentary... That battle was truly insane https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    2
  14841. Off the top of my head, they lacked tungsten, copper (I think), and iron ore (they had a load, but always needed more, so they traded with Sweden). But the lack of food and oil was more severe.
    2
  14842. Sadly, it won't be. We're close, but not quite that close
    2
  14843. Congrats :)
    1
  14844. gmsimpson05 you're correct!
    1
  14845. Thegamer8324 if you thought this was too easy, you'll get today's question too :)
    1
  14846. ***** the French flag wasn't in continuous use, so Denmark is correct. I should have been more specific with my question (something I'm learning fast doing this series lol)
    1
  14847. pelcowaHD see, and I bet you were thinking "Why am I learning about a flag? This will never come up in conversation ever again" and it did :D
    1
  14848. Max Quick Japans flag was only designed in the 1870's I think
    1
  14849. Morgan Chalmers it was one of them :)
    1
  14850. Good guess :)
    1
  14851. Fun fact: I haven't been to Nandos in about 4 years
    1
  14852. Sounds about right!
    1
  14853. Both!
    1
  14854. You were second, sorry!
    1
  14855. Yes, the only downside is the Australian postal service. Still worth the wait though in my opinion
    1
  14856. You almost spelled it right :)
    1
  14857. Fear of a dead Indian tribe... quite a specific fear there
    1
  14858. The reason was - the astronomer who found Uranus was being financially funded by King George of England. So he decided to name the newly discovered planet after King George... but the rest of the world despised the idea and so it was eventually changed to Uranus. This then kept with the tradition of naming the planets and their moons (except Earth and the Moon) after Roman and Greek gods
    1
  14859. For abusing your power as Quing, I'll get you done for a salt... but since you're a banana, you can a peel
    1
  14860. Doesn't everyone have this fear?
    1
  14861. I haven't studied it specifically, but I would imagine at least parts of it will be embellished and also wrong (either intentionally or by accident). Other evidence is always required. One source on its own is never reliable.
    1
  14862. At no point did I accuse Paulus of making stuff up. Never once did I say that in this video. Colonel Adem was German. How can all my sources be British if he was German? And if you look at my sources, you will find they are not all British. A lot are German and US too. I can't read German (which is why I'm learning it now). I can't read Russian (which is why I want to begin learning it as soon as I've gotten a hand of German). And also, if you don't like my content which is clear by this comment and the one on the other video, stop watching the videos. I see you've discovered my through my most controversial two videos (Perception and Numbers) and I can understand why you're on the defensive. But at the same time, you're wrong about this video.
    1
  14863. So you don't agree?
    1
  14864. Carefully using it. For example, I'm ignoring the long speeches it contains which were supposedly given by Paulus
    1
  14865. Great! Glad to hear you're thinking critically about your sources :) if you haven't seen my Critical Thinking video (aimed at Suvorov's thesis and Keitel's memoirs) I think you may like it, as I go a little more in-depth with the topic of checking and double checking sources, plus why you should be skeptical about everything. Link https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    1
  14866. If this was the journal/diary itself, then it would be more reliable. That said, it's still only from this guy's perspective and interpretation of events, which still may not be true.
    1
  14867. A first hand account written about the event many years later (e.g. a memoir) is less valuable than a first hand account written about events at the time of the event (e.g. diary).
    1
  14868. Thank you sir, be sure to spread the word :)
    1
  14869. No worries :)
    1
  14870. You obviously didn't watch my earlier videos criticising Halder. Shirer says in his book on a couple occasions "I just got off the phone to Halder and he said..."
    1
  14871. Shame
    1
  14872. Gary Thomas wow you were only 1 billion over... a very minor miscalculation considering :P
    1
  14873. Morgan Chalmers It would be surprising if there wasn't. 100 billion galaxies, each containing billions of stars...
    1
  14874. Morgan Chalmers the exact amount is unknown, but astronomers have a pretty good idea
    1
  14875. TheMegaSuperPickle correct! Lucky guess??
    1
  14876. Gokotti technically, you're not wrong!
    1
  14877. Tomislav that's true haha
    1
  14878. yay :)
    1
  14879. starcraft2own haha awww. Ok, I won't put any more messages there, but I also won't put links there either :) will you forgive me?
    1
  14880. CStriker421 you know it now :D
    1
  14881. starcraft2own haha those lucky owl breeders :P I think you're right though that asking questions on various types of topics is good, and I'll try to do that. ...but bear in mind that history is my forte :)
    1
  14882. martaxsasLT Nice! 
    1
  14883. Vid Ah, that's really interesting :) would other people not get offended for celebrating the October Revolution? I don't know much about the politics of Eastern Europe, but I'd assume that most people were unhappy under communism?
    1
  14884. Vid Very good! Did you know that or did you google? :P
    1
  14885. Morgan Chalmers Yes, I've been keeping an eye on HOI4
    1
  14886. Morgan Chalmers You were right the first time!
    1
  14887. Thegamer8324 Congrats!! It was November, the "ninth" month :)
    1
  14888. gmsimpson05 Wow, I didn't know the Orthodox Church still used the Julian Calender! That's interesting, thanks! :)
    1
  14889. healthyfire Good guess! But sadly not :)
    1
  14890. Yes, exactly.
    1
  14891. National Socialism and Fascism are not the same ideology. People who aren't Fascists, aren't Nazis or haven't studied them closely, think they are the same, but there's quite a big difference between the two concepts. It would be wrong to call Nationalsocialism a Fascism, even if Wikipedia thinks Hitler was a Fascist (lol) and doesn't want to admit what the economic policies of Fascism and Nationalsocialism are. Hitler was a socialist who hated Marxism. That's all. He still believed in government control of the means of production. He just didn't believe in Marxism (class-socialism). The original socialism that was born in the fires of the French Revolution has nothing to do with classes. Marx linked the two much later many years later. Everyone arguing that Hitler wasn't Socialist because he didn't help the workers is incorrect because Marxist-Socialism isn't Socialism. Hitler wasn't fighting a class-war (Marxism), he was fighting a racial-war (National Socialism). Saying that he was just paying lip service would be a distortion of history. That really is a dismissal of the historical reality. Hitler wanted to end the class struggle (which he thought was being instigated by the Jews in order to bring in a Communist revolution) by having a National Socialist government remove the Jews from society. He makes this very clear in Mein Kampf, and in his speeches, and in his private talks.
    1
  14892. Hitler thought that the words "national" and "social" both meant the same thing: the race. If you deny Hitler's socialism, you're denying his racism. If you don't understand why, you don't understand what Nationalsocialism actually is. The Marxist myth that Nationalsocialism was capitalism completely misses the mark. They nationalized the industries and called it "privatization" to hide it, they nationalized the youth, they nationalized the railways, they nationalized the trade unions, they created "worker's battalions" (one of which fought at Arnhem), and they sent shop floor militants and bureaucrats to run the businesses from within. They even attempted collectivisation. But yes, one day I'll understand... No, I used to believe the lie that Nationalsocialism was capitalism. I now know that that was wrong.
    1
  14893. After Disraeli, Lloyd George and Churchill, the Liberal Party became more socialist in mentality. That's why they promised social welfare schemes prior to WW1 and Homes Fit for Heroes during the war. So yes, the Liberals prior to WW1 were socialist in mentality - wanting more government control of the economy. Liberals before this era were more into 'classic liberalism', which is where others in the comments are calling me out for because I should have clarified between the he two types. Working class is not socialism. You're mixing Socialism and Marxism. Marxism is about class, Socialism is purely about public control of the economy.
    1
  14894. But Hitler wanted to end class conflict too, by uniting the race and kicking out the Jews (who he thought were causing the conflict). Mussolini did the same, but by uniting Italians under social-nationalism (Fascism). While Marx did influence later varieties of Socialism, Socialism is simply state-control of the economy. Hitler and Mussolini were totalitarian dictators, meaning they had everything under state control, including the economy. All within the state, nothing outside of the state. If they weren't socialists, then they cannot be totalitarian dictators.
    1
  14895. But Socialism predates Marx. Marxism isn't Socialism, but a variant of it, much like Fascism and National Socialism.
    1
  14896. Cheers James! Welcome :) you've come part-way through a debate, so I don't envy you. Regardless of whether you agree with me on this or not, please check out my other TIKhistory videos, and by Battlestorm videos. They're my best :)
    1
  14897. "If you people actually care about history, you shouldnt fucking hate TIK for challenging a historical viewpoint." - they don't care about history; that's why they're trying to hide from it. Their political agenda is all that matters to them. Thank you for disagreeing - I respect you for that :)
    1
  14898. In your opinion.
    1
  14899. So, what you're saying is that socialists can be racist too? And also, I wouldn't necessarily trust the BBC (a company run by rich-people who are biased, and funded by the government which is currently Conservative) to give you accurate reporting on the racism in the Labour Party.
    1
  14900. But is this really the case?
    1
  14901. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). It is a response to the "failings of capitalism". The idea is that the state (as a society, or social collective group) can do it better than the private individual. This is literally the definition. Also, to clarify, if it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. And again, National Socialism wasn't capitalism, it was socialism. The state had control of businesses and the economy as a whole.
    1
  14902. Yes! The problem though is that it's much easier to make a deliberately false statement, or make a deliberately dishonest accusation, or ask a deliberately high quantity of similar but slightly different questions, than it is to respond to all of them. And if I don't respond, they can claim it's because I can't refute them, and if I do respond, they can claim I haven't addressed the "main issues" or still claim I'm afraid to responded to the comments that "refuted" me. It's ulterior tactics - and I now see why many YouTube creators don't interact with their audience in the comments sections. The reality is, I got 1,500 comments within 3 hours of last week's video going up. There's no way I could physically respond to them all. So, by defacto, they win (by their own flawed logic).
    1
  14903. Oh yes, it wasn't just Marxists etc that disagreed. And, in fact, several Marxists agreed with me. But a portion of those that disagreed were quite reasonable about it - which is great! I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Blitz of the Reich's response video was very well balanced and great to listen to, for example. But the majority were Marxists, and weren't here for reasonable discourse. So yes it is funny - or even sad! The reason I linked to Peterson in the first place - stress on _link_, since I didn't use him as a source - was because he was talking about postmodernism, which is what they're doctrine. They're not using reasonable discourse, and they're not interested in the truth. Ideology trumps thruth. Whoever controls the present controls the past... It's very much Orwellian in that sense. That's why they're willing to go to Marxism.org and quote from there, because it isn't about knowledge or reason - they reject these notions. It's about dogma for them. It's about politics, and power. And you're absolutely right - it forms an echo-chamber for wackos.
    1
  14904. I didn't "pull" anything. That's what Hitler said! His interpretation of Marxism was this, therefore he has a branch of socialism.
    1
  14905. I'm more concerned that I was led to believe this lie for so long. Can't believe I didn't see it earlier. Their influence over modern political beliefs is huge.
    1
  14906. I never said they were.
    1
  14907. Didn't even bother monetizing it.
    1
  14908. You mean the one that contained a link. All links are automatically held for review so that we don't have a bunch of spam to random extremist websites.
    1
  14909. That video actually confirms it's not Marxism (which is not what I'm saying NS is - I'm saying it's socialism). "Your major mistake is that you base your entire argument on the defintion of the terms "socialism" "capitalism" and "comunism" on the definition of liberatarians (i.e. an extremistic political group), who have the agenda to disqualify any kind of social and left-wing policy." No, I base my definitions of what socialism and capitalism are on the actual definitions used both now and back in history. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Nobody's disputing that. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. But people dispute this. Why? Because they've been trying to dispute it since 1956 (the Hungarian Revolution began this process) and you can see it in the historiography. Let me give you some concrete evidence to support my definition of socialism - Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need”https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.”http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    1
  14910. I don't have time to respond in full, but thanks for your comment. I will say though, I know what Keynesian economics is (studied it in college along with other economic and political theories). And I will also say, I didn't "bash" anything. My videos were not an attack against socialism nor communism. If you think that, you've completely misunderstood the purpose of them (which many have).
    1
  14911. That's right, dismiss me and my original argument, the sources I used originally, Hitler himself, and the Nazis, and finally another video source from another academic saying the same thing.
    1
  14912. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    1
  14913. It really is a bad world view, and it boggles my mind. Yet people believe it somehow.
    1
  14914. I don't really want to get into a secular debate. The point I was making is that, there are differences between Islam and Christianity, but historically they're both part of the Abrahamic religions, which is where they have their roots. So to deny that they had no historical connection, or that one isn't a true member of the Abrahamic religions, is wrong. Not saying they're the same or one is better than the other, just showing that you can have two different types of the same thing, looking at it historically.
    1
  14915. And Nationalsocialism isn't corporatism, no matter how much Marxists claim it is.
    1
  14916. Thank you for that. Interesting!
    1
  14917. "Nazism - Neo-Classical power architecture, classical german gothic aesthetic, norse folk law, strong religious ties (catholicism and cultural german protestantism), strong family structures, farther-son bonds, both these latter points meant as a reflection of the state (the state as a family) - the state acts as the family does, but sees the family as a way of reinforcing nationalism, and support of the party." Yes, Nazism is the state. Because socialism is defined as the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. "Both authoritarian, both very different." No, both are economically socialist, and politically authoritarian. So the purpose of the video is to show that economically they are the same, which they are. "Criminals like to say they are not guilty of their crimes, in the same way Hitler told everyone he was a socialist, he wasn’t." Funny because there's this little book called "Mein Kampf" where he basically spends the whole book desperately trying to show how different his version of socialism is to Marxist-Socialism (in my opinion, that's why the book is a load of waffle, because it took him so long to articulate his point). And finally about two thirds of the way through, he finally says what the difference is - P406 “The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure.” Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. P406-407 “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” "literally Hitler calls this the 3rd Reich, in reference to the Roman empire" No, there were two previous German Reichs, and his is the third. Reich means "empire" and wealth in German. "Your channel is great, but this is wrong." Thank you. It does seem strange though that I'm so wrong when I point out the economic similarities between two ideologies.
    1
  14918. "First: socialism is based on social ownership of the means of production; i. e. there is no private property of the means of production." So, you're saying it is the social ownership of the means of production - which it is. Then you're saying that there's no private property under socialism. No, there absolutely is. There are numerous socialist countries that had private property. And, in the case of the National Socialists, the private property was owned by the Aryans - therefore was owned socially. "Hitler in fact protected the interests of german upper classes." No he didn't. "Second: the german bourgeoisie supported the nazis." That means nothing because this isn't Marxist socialism. "That's because nazism, as others fascist ideologies, were created as a counterpart against workers' movements." 1) there's a difference between Fascism and National Socialism. 2) no, they weren't against the 'workers', because the class system and class struggle no longer existed. The ladder existed, but the class struggle did not in their eyes because this was socialism. "Third: to say that national socialism is "socialism for one race" is like to say something like "the bankers are socialists but socialists only for the bankers". It makes no sense." It makes no sense to a Marxist.
    1
  14919. They dismiss the name as a ruse - which it really wasn't, but they say it is.
    1
  14920. "Did it employ socialist policies, yes, so did Bismarck, the ideology however is not socialist, it was designed to be its anti thesis to fight socialism." That's not true. It's anti-Marxist, but not anti-socialist. There's a difference between socialism and Marxism. And the Labour Party in Britain have socialist policies - and they are socialist. Saying they're not because Britain is still capitalist overall is an invalid argument. "national socialism is not socialism because it was devised as a nationalist alternative to goad the workers away from socialist movements to a fascist movement." Or, that's what the Marxists want you to believe because they don't want you to make the connection. There is Nationalism in National Socialism (obviously), but there is a big difference. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. And no, it wasn't Fascism either. Interestingly, the neo-Nazis who have watched this video don't have a problem with it because they know that they're socialist (this was my main mistake, thinking they didn't know they were socialist). The only people disagreeing are Marxists and people who don't understand what National Socialism actually is, and who think it's capitalism (which it absolutely is not).
    1
  14921. Everybody has biases. But not everyone has agendas, which is the word you were looking for. So, since I apparently have an agenda, can you explain what my agenda is here? I'd love to hear what agenda I supposedly have.
    1
  14922. That's why he's National-Socialist, not Marxist-Socialist.
    1
  14923. Correct. Both ideologies sought to end the 'class war' in different ways, and the outcome would be a one-race society for the National Socialists, and a one-class society (technically 'classless') for the Marxists.
    1
  14924. Thank you sharontony! I'm glad you liked the videos... Sadly I don't think they'll be the last I do on his subject.
    1
  14925. That doesn't undermine my argument at all. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. They're both different, but they're both socialisms. It's that simple.
    1
  14926. I have, I studied it in college. This video was off the cuff as a response to the comments in the previous video. See the pinned comment.
    1
  14927. I am being honest. People are asking me to "reconsider". And I have reconsidered. They're forgetting that I held their view just two weeks ago! But their interpretation of what socialism is doesn't make sense within the historical reality. The convergence of evidence says that Hitler's branch of socialism was socialism, and the more I read (in books that don't agree, I will point out) the more I realize why historians have failed to understand Hitler's motives and decision making. They've failed to grasp the socialist-element of his ideology, and are therefore perplexed when he makes 'unusual' decisions or says things that don't show him to be right-wing.
    1
  14928. Except Bismark swapped back and forth across parties all the time.
    1
  14929. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism.
    1
  14930. Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  14931. "But if You move definition of socialism from it`s target to a form of economy, then any state with private owned business is not socialistic." But it is how I defined it. It has a definition. I'm not moving the definition, socialism is heavy state control of the economy. "As I understand, NS didn`t realy changed economical model of Germany. It remained capitalistic." That's because you haven't been given all the information. It was not capitalism. Let me show you - 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The government of a totalitarian State would not be “authoritarian” if the courts still functioned independently, as they do under liberal capitalism.” “The division of power between the executive or legislative branch on the one hand and the judicial branch on the other was formerly a guarantee to the owner of private property that his property rights would be protected even against his own government. The totalitarian State, in abolishing this separation of power, abolishes the sanctity of private property, which thereupon ceases to be a basic principle of society fundamental to State morality.” “Constitutionally the businessman still enjoys guarantees of property rights. But what is the value of such constitutional guarantees without courts that dare to defy the omnipotent bureaucracy or to enforce laws that are “out of date”?” - Reimann. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann
    1
  14932. Socialism isn't necessarily Marxism. You're confusing the two terms. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is in contrast to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy).
    1
  14933. I know. And apparently, I'm the one pushing an agenda...
    1
  14934. Thanks Robert! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  14935. That's exactly it. I'm not fighting people who want to know the truth, or value evidence, they are happy to distort fact and history to defend their ideology. This is completely unacceptable in my opinion.
    1
  14936. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. Socialism is, by definition, the social ownership or control of the means of production, which is state control of the economy. This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private non-state control of the economy.
    1
  14937. "But the German people were never in control of the state. It was Hitler and his clique who had the power." The National-Socialist party was full of Germans. And was in every business and industry. Social mobility boomed during the Nazi era - that's why Hitler was replacing the old generals with a new generation of Nazi and SS generals, because he was promoting the common German. Your first sentence certainly doesn't hold up to the reality because the state was German. "It was a capitalist country with a "strong" state." That doesn't make any sense. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If the state is strong in the economy (which it was) then that is socialism. "The production was collectivized, but the winnings were still privatized as before the Nazis came to power." Winnings (or profit) is irrelevant to the discussion of whether the Nazi state was socialist or not. All that mattered was that the means of production were owned by the state, which is what you've just said. "The surplus value(profits) that was produced by the workers was still going to the owners of the company, like in every other capitalist country then and now." The "worker" is irrelevant to Nationalsocialism because Nationalsocialism is racial-socialism, not class-socialism (which is what Marxism is). "The state took his share like before(taxes), but had more influence(laws + important positions in the companies) and could often dictate the production." Exactly, and that's socialism. "But the main point and difference is, the winnings where going to the private owners." Again, irrelevant. "In a socialist country, the surplus value(profits) goes to the proletarian state" No it doesn't. In a socialist country, the state owns or controls the businesses. That is all. Profits don't matter. And also, you're describing Marxism, not socialism. Socialism pre-dates Marxism. "the proletariat should have the political power to dictate the production." Maybe in a class-socialist state, but not in a racial-socialist state. Again, we're talking about a different kind of socialism, and the laws of one type of socialism don't affect the laws of another. "The surplus value of the workers were going to the state, but the bureaucratic caste had the power and was dictating the production." And this was exactly the same in both the USSR and in National-Socialist Germany. "So there was no dictatorship of the proletariat." Of course there was. What happens when the workers rise up an seize the means of production? They form worker's councils. In Russian, these councils were called 'Soviets'. They become the government - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. So this was a dictatorship of the proletariat. "Btw your definition of marxism and socialism are the same." No they're not. Read the brackets - Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. In Marxism the workers are the social group in power. But socialism doesn't specify which social group is in power. It could be the worker-group (Marxist socialism), or the gender-group (e.g. feminist socialism), or the racial group (National-Socialism) etc.
    1
  14938. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. The ideologies are opposed politically, but that doesn't mean they're opposites to each other economically.
    1
  14939. It's not the people he loved, it's the nation as a whole. So long as the national spirit (the blood) survived and thrived, it didn't matter about individuals.
    1
  14940. Yeah, it's annoying. But it's to be expected :) cheers!
    1
  14941. Yeah, I've seen it.
    1
  14942. Because Communists were a different brand of Socialism. Fully explained this in my more recent video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  14943. Yes, yes we do https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  14944. https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  14945. I have reconsidered. And I'm currently reading through books that don't agree with this point of view. However, these historians are scratching their heads when Hitler makes certain decisions or says certain things that contradict the pure-Nationalism view of National Socialism. The classic argument is to say "he's just making this stuff up as he's going along" or " he's a madman". But when you consider the socialist element, it all makes sense. I'm not saying I'll change my mind. But as it stands, the evidence is converging on this conclusion. And the more I read, the more the dots are connecting.
    1
  14946. No, I was asking a genuine question. If he was German (and he is), then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different.
    1
  14947. Was Krupp German?
    1
  14948. Social ownership of the means of production.
    1
  14949. It's a spectrum, not a definitive thing. Also socialist theory and socialism in practice (historically) are not the same thing, so technically in that sense it could be argued that the original idea is somewhat meaningless.
    1
  14950. Yup
    1
  14951. That's more like Strasserism rather than National Socialism, which was rejected by Hitler.
    1
  14952. All you've done is said "lol u wrong" in these comments. You've presented no evidence. If you want to see my evidence I'll be glad to show you.
    1
  14953. Yep, pretty much. What I think is awesome is that I've managed unite the Nazis and the Marxists against the idea that they are actually pretty much the same. I wonder if they realise they have so much in common?
    1
  14954. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  14955. "Your account of socialism is so simplistic that it will mislead people - and this could be damaging for those who seek a better world through socialism." "Modern socialists - such as myself - do not necessarily agree that the USSR was socialist (or Cuba - or China)." I see your agenda sir. And yes, those states you listed were socialist. "State intervention does not equal socialism" Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. So yes, yes it does mean state. It is the exact opposite of capitalism. Heavy state is socialist. Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. And he brings it in. People have claimed he wasn't socialist because of privatization and his attack on trade unionism. These claims to not hold up to scruitiny. I will explain this ‘privatization’ by showing that the first thing Hitler does when he gets into power is get rid of private property (which, in turn, allows the state to take control of the economy) - ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    1
  14956. Thanks :)
    1
  14957. Hitler redefined what socialism was for him. He therefore created another branch of socialism. Thus, to say this isn't socialism is denying the fundamental core of the philosophy that Hitler had. It would be like saying Catholicism and Sunni Islam are not part of the Abrahamic religions because they say different things. No, they are part of the same family.
    1
  14958. Actually they drew their support from the left as well. It's a blend of Right-Nationalism and Left-Socialism.
    1
  14959. Great to hear Zavorot :)
    1
  14960. Yes, these are my views too. Glad you enjoyed the video! When Hitler devoloped his views is actually a debate. It was either in Vienna before WW1, or during or just after the war. There's lots of theories and arguments, but I don't really know enough to wade in on that debate yet. Cheers!
    1
  14961. It was either courage, or stupidity.... probably the latter ;)
    1
  14962. Why would you be nervous? The only people not liking this video are the far-left. And not all of them - several communists and socialists have expressed their support.
    1
  14963. No it doesn't. There is no law that says all socialist governments require the workers to be in charge of the MoP. Look at Lenin's NEP. Are you now saying that the USSR wasn't socialist? Hitler redefined what socialism was in his mind, thus creating another branch of socialism. This branch said the Aryans will seize the means of control. Privatisation in this context is irrelevant, since the people have been socialised. Socialism is an economic and social policy within social democracies. It's also a social and economic policy in non-democratic states. TLDR you're arbitrary definition of what socialism is in theory doesn't apply to the real world and is not what actually happened in the 20th Century.
    1
  14964. No it isn't. People are ignoring the fact that there is no singular definition of what socialism is. That's why National Socialism is a branch of it, much like Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. "Oh but they're not the REAL Christians" is not a valid argument. Arguably they may be the 'wrong' Christians, but they are still Christian. Their interpretation of what Christianity is differs from the Orthodox or Protestant interpretations, but that doesn't mean they're not Christian.
    1
  14965. And they could seize their businesses because the Nazis deleted the right to have private property (which is exactly what you'd find in a socialist regime).
    1
  14966. They're more liberal. Socialism is more heavy-intervention.
    1
  14967. I don't agree with the NS world view, I'm just explaining it.
    1
  14968. Unfortunately, that's the goal of the channel :(
    1
  14969. No, because Marxism isn't socialism.
    1
  14970. Thank you Ken, glad you liked it :)
    1
  14971. I never said that.
    1
  14972. I didn't delete your comment.
    1
  14973. I meant they have the same roots. But they're not the same. Hitler read Das Kapital and was influenced by it, but beyond that they are different.
    1
  14974. The Aryans are the ones collectively owning the means of production. That is socialism. Not Marxist Socialism, but National Socialism.
    1
  14975. "It means that there is no unique owner of the means of production." The German people owned the means of production. "Collective or social ownership means that the whole community owns the means of production" Yeah, the German people owned the means of production. "not Mr. Krupp of Baron von Thyssen" As Hitler said, if they don't conform to the will of the German people, their property and their persons will be siezed. "That you really cannot mix up, unless you want to define your own vocabulary, but then you will be unable to communicate with others ;-)" I don't know how much clearer I have to make this. You - and others - do not understand what National Socialism is. That is the problem.
    1
  14976. As I've just replied to Yak elsewhere - Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different.
    1
  14977. I see you are avoiding the question. I shall ask it again - how did capitalist free-market forces and supply and demand resulted in the gas chambers at Auschwitz? "Moreover you make the assumption that something that is not socialism has to be free market, and henceforth driven by supply and demand, which is also not the case." You are incorrect. Historically, heavy state intervention in the economy (which is centrally planned) is the one thing that all socialist governments have in common. The opposite is true to capitalist countries - which by definition place their faith in supply and demand and free-markets, and thus less state intervention in the economy. "This is not socialism and is not free market." So, it's not capitalism - we're in agreement with that. But if it's not capitalism and it isn't socialism, what is it? I'm saying that it's socialism - because that's what it is. It's not Marxist-socialism, but it is still socialism.
    1
  14978. "nationalism and socialism are mutually exclusive" So no workers are racist? The Soviets weren't racist? They just happened to target nationalities and move entire peoples (like the migrations after the war, including Prussia) for no reason whatsoever?
    1
  14979. Bree Vee "TIK My comment is still up, dude." - figured it out. YouTube marked it as "spam", so nobody could see it (including me). Just unspammed it.
    1
  14980. Video he linked to was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUFvG4RpwJI
    1
  14981. I see original author deleted his comment.
    1
  14982. Watched that video, and it doesn't debunk anything. All it does is confirm that it wasn't Marxist-Socialism... which it wasn't. When talking about the Strength Through Joy program at 14:00 in, the narrator even says "the program was intended to replace the demand for trade unions and prevent class consciousness from developing, that might have become a threat to the Nazi government. The program didn't separate between the average workers and their bosses in an attempt to get people behind the idea on a community based on ethnicity_" Yes, that's because Hitler was anti-Marxist. He wanted to promote an _ethnic version of socialism, not class socialism. This video actually confirms this. At around 15:50 he says it was a planned economy, but that the means of production remained in private hands "if you were German, that is". And the owners of the means of production had to obey what the Nazis said, which is exactly what a racist version of socialism is. At 16:25 "from that point on, the economy was in complete control of the government" - yep, sounds very free market capitalist to me... (no sarcasm at all). He says this was done for the war - except we know it was done from 1933 onwards, and had infact been implimented by 1935 at the latest. 18:00 onwards he talks about why there was anti-capitalism in the Nationalsocialist German Workers Party... and then fails to understand that it was anti-capitalist. If it was anti-capitalist, and got rid of trade unions (which are actually allowed under capitalism), and ended trade with the outside world in favour of autarky, then how can it also be pro-capitalist? The reason industry was nationalised and then privatized again was because the Nationalsocialist Party had "socialized the people", to quote Hitler. He didn't need to nationalize the industries, since they had removed the other races from business. The social race owned the means of production, not the class. He mentions the socialisation of the health industry at around 24:00, but fails to grasp its significance. I think this is because he doesn't fully understand that socialism is not necessarily based on class. Again, socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. The Nazis were socialists. He talks about the secret state police (Gestapo) at around 30:00. Again, failing to see that the state police are able to forcefully remove you from society if you do not conform, saying "being tortured, gassed, and worked to death". Ok then, who owned the torture chambers? Which private business owned the gas chambers? Who owned the police? Who owned the slave labour camps of the Reich, or allocated them to German industries? It was the socialist (public) state. He asks the question "was Hitler influenced by Marx?" The answer is yes - which I agree. I agree he detested Marxism. "There are some passages in Mein Kampf where Hitler talks about socialism and seems to be in support of it" - hmmmm... maybe that's because socialism is not Marxism. But no, he does down the "he tricked the workers with the word 'socialism'" route, which just doesn't add up. He then quotes from a book which states "Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany's economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest." "...the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place [directly contradicted by the next sentence]. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state." He then goes on to accuse anyone who thinks that Nationalsocialism is Left Wing is only doing so because they have an agenda, and because we refuse to think about the other side. Actually, I also believed National Socialism wasn't socialism, and that it was capitalism, and that it couldn't be socialism because it wasn't based on class... until about a couple weeks before this video. For most of my life I have thought that National Socialism was capitalism. Now I see that Nationalsocialism is anti-capitalism, anti-Marxist, and socialism. He then concludes - "They're anti-semitic, anti-Marxist, extremely nationalistic, and favoured expansion - all undeniably positions of the German Right." Really? Because the reason Hitler wanted to expand Eastwards was the same reason he was anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist. He thought that the capitalist-class-struggle was created by the Jews, so that they could bring about Marxism, allowing them to become equal to the Aryan, and thus impregnate and mix the blood of the Aryan, which would in-turn bring down the fall of civilization. Hitler therefore wants to end capitalism to stop the class struggle, bring about a socialist-German-Aryan state, destroy Marxism, and destroy the Jews. Yes, there are elements of nationalism in there, but there's also socialism in there too. That's why it's called (drum roll) Nationalsocialism.
    1
  14983. It's not capitalism if the state heavily regulates and orders you to produce things the way the state wants you to do it, and if you don't comply, they will take your "private" property off you. The German race isn't a class because this isn't Marxist-socialism (which is based on race). This is Nationalsocialism, which is based on race.
    1
  14984. Is that why the USA calls itself a Democracy when it is a Republic? "The Republic for which it stands." All governments do this. But that's irrelevant to the discussion, since Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. The Nazis were socialists.
    1
  14985. You are correct. My biggest mistake was assuming people knew what socialism (as a whole) was. The Marxists exploited that hole beautifully. I won't be making that mistake again with them.
    1
  14986. You realise this was a response video to the other video I made about this topic, right? This video is discussing the criticisms I got from the other video, not where I presented the evidence.
    1
  14987. There was evidence in the video, and the follow up one. It's just this video got targeted by postmodernist Marxists who misinterpretated what I said, and proceeded to make false claims about the nature of the National Socialist economy and society. I'm not redoing the video because 1) it doesn't need to be redone, 2) no matter what I post now, it will be targeted by the Marxists. When I uploaded the second video, it was downvoted 7 times in the first minute. They hadn't even watched it. I could have been saying "I'm sorry, I was wrong" but no, they're not interested in reasonable discourse. Instead, swearing and calling people names is their agenda. Well, I prefer reason and logic, and if they're not willing to listen or make effective counter arguments, there's zero reason to redo the video, since the points made were not discussed in the correct way.
    1
  14988. "No, you're wrong" isn't an argument.See the new pinned comment. I've caught several people out already: I never said "National Socialism is Marxist Socialism", which is what everyone is claiming I said and is what most people are taking offense at. So no, this "embarrassment" is staying up, because the assessment is correct. National Socialism isn't Marxist Socialism, but it is a form of socialism.
    1
  14989. No worries :)
    1
  14990. Then why did you click on the video?
    1
  14991. I'm not discussing Marxism.
    1
  14992. Convenient that you must go, but had time to write an answer to everything except the one thing that was important: the answer to my question - what is your definition of socialism? Very convenient. Ultimately, your definition of socialism is either incorrect, or it's the same definition that I'm using, which is why you're unwilling to state it (you're not the first socialist who's failed to answer me on this either). Either way, you're making the typical socialist counterargument to deny any and all failures of socialism to not be "real socialism" in the hope that your socialism will finally be the "good" one. Socialism has a definition. And that definition is the one that came out of the 1800's - state ownership and control of the means of production. You can try take exception to every example of socialism, but ultimately you will have to face the fact that socialism leads to instability, violence, slavery of the workers, immorality, directly leads to poverty, the killing fields of Cambodia, and is responsible for the Final Solution.
    1
  14993. "And the armies of the Roman republc were state armies." Really? So it wasn't a collection of private citizens with private armour who gathered together to protect city? Just like with the vast majority of Greek city-states (exceptions being Sparta, which again is an early example of socialism), citizens weren't funded by the state. State-ownership of the army only came after the Marius reforms. Prior to the Marius reforms, private citizens paid for their own equipment and their own food etc. Marius changed this by having the state own the army. To quote from Wikipedia - "Because the poor citizens could not afford to purchase their own weapons and armor, Marius arranged for the state to supply them with arms. He thus offered the disenfranchised masses permanent employment for pay as professional soldiers and the opportunity to gain spoils on campaign." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_reforms It's worth noting that it was this reform which led to the formation of the Roman Empire and the corruption and civil war within it. Loyalty passed to the generals, and Caesar/Augustus used this to then destroy the Republic. "Even feudal armies cannot be considered private, as dukes and aristocrats were the public power in the land." Landed property is private ownership (obviously). This is why dukes would be uncooperative and could rebel in the middle of battle, which is actually what happened on numerous occasions. They didn't want to sacrifice their own army, or themselves, which would be costly. The difference here is that they didn't just own the land, they owned the people on the land (slaves, or in this case serfs). "Private armies and police (like pinkertons or Pompey...) are the exception historically. No stable civilisation could survive with rich oligarchs having their own armies." What are you talking about? Most of the examples you've just stated didn't use public armies, and relied on private armies. Rich oligarchs owning their own armies was the basis of the foundation of the Roman Republic, which was far more stable and richer than the later Empire. The Empire collapsed under the weight of its own tax and state-owned economic policies. "And by the way, the concept of socialism appeared in the nineteenth century!!!!!!!!!" To use your own terminology - wrong. There was a book called the "Republic" written by Plato which outlines state-ownership or control of the means of production as the more "moral" outcome (which is incorrect, but besides the point). The Spartan submitted themselves to the state, which was the very basis of their organization (more fascist-socialist). The term "socialism" originated in or around the time of Owen's New Harmony, but the concept had been born before that. Utopianism is the predecessor for socialism. Socialism in its modern usage originated in the French Revolution, and is the state-ownership of the means of production. And now it's my turn. If socialism isn't the state ownership of the means of production, I'd like you to define it for me. Please tell me what "real" socialism is. I can't to see you state something like "collective" ownership, or "for the workers" (which is Marxist socialism btw) or similar. This is going to be interesting.
    1
  14994. "@TIK You didnt uderstand what i said Yes : Those wealthy families you mentioned would be private ownership of the means of production since they are not the state, and therefore capitalism --> Therefore Nazi Germany is capitalist, by your own definition." I don't follow. You mentioned a bunch of private individuals who had private industries in the Weimar era, who then lost all their property rights, were nationalised and effectively became little more than managers within the state-bureaucratic system. How does this prove that what I said it was capitalism? Did you not read my previous post? ""State armies only became a regular thing after the English Civil War." Wrong. The Roman empire did have a standing state army organised into a number of legions, auxiliary units, imperial and senatorial provinces and so on. Sources for this are easily found. And it lasted dor hundred of years until the very collapse of the Roman empire." I said REGULAR thing. I'm not saying there weren't any state armies, but they simply weren't the norm. And in fact this proves my point. The Roman republic relied on private armies, whereas the Roman Empire relied on state armies (plus more). Therefore, it could be argued that the Roman Empire was socialist, which undermines your original argument. "The privately operated system became ineffective, so in the interest of keeping himself and Rome safe, Augustus instituted a new public firefighting force called the Vigiles." "In AD 6, Augustus levied a 4% tax on the sale of slaves and used the proceeds to set up the new force." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigiles Ah, so this is a good example of socialism in the Roman Empire then. Again, thank you for providing extra evidence that undermines your own initial argument. And again, when I said the public police force was only created in 1829, I actually meant that there weren't any publicly owned state police forces in the years before and that a regular police force only became a thing after 1829, which is true. The Vigiles weren't around in 1828. "Royal assent to the Metropolitan Police Act 1829 was given and the Metropolitan Police Service was established on September 29, 1829 in London as the first modern and professional police force in the world." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Metropolitan_police_force From the same wikipedia article you linked. Again, this is an example of socialism, since public-state police forces didn't exist in Britain before the 1820's and for most of the world. Yes there are some exceptions, but that's the point I'm making. You don't have to have a public-state police force, which is socialism. You can have a privately owned police force, which would be capitalism. So, yes, my definition of socialism is correct. Socialism is the state ownership of the means of production.
    1
  14995. Those wealthy families you mentioned would be private ownership of the means of production since they are not the state, and therefore capitalism. Same with the Roman Empire if it was private individuals who created those schemes, or if it really was a government bureaucracy, then yes that would be socialism. Levying taxes for a government to then spend back on the economy is socialism. The Romans had private armies prior to the Empire, as many countries had for centuries before and after. State armies only became a regular thing after the English Civil War. Similarly, the public police force was only created in 1829. Prior to that, policing was a private affair. It's interesting that you don't even know the definition of socialism.
    1
  14996. "I can find countless other mentions. But you know better than Hitler and Goebbels" I didn't say National-Socialism was Bolshevism/Marxist-Socialism. The National-Socialists and Fascists (different again) hated Marxist-Socialists. There's no law saying that socialists can't hate other socialists. So your quotes don't actually undermine my argument in the slightest. "Just because there are some ideas or methods that resembles what socialist ideas and methods doesnt mean they are a branch of socialism!" The central core tenant of socialism is in its definition. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). The National-Socialist, Fascist, Marxist and democratic-socialist regimes all have the same thing in common - state ownership or control of the economy. That is the definition of socialism. Economically they have the same goal in mind. Politically they are different, and that's why the National-Socialists want to kill Jews and so on, whereas the Marxists want to kill "Kulaks" and the "bourgeoisie". The Nazis banned private property in the February of 1933, they nationalized the industries (they invented the term "privatization", but that was actually a slight of hand to mask the fact that they were in total control of the economy), removed private trade unions and replaced them with the state union (the German Labour Front), they reorganized the economy into 13 separate sectors in order for their bureaucracy to run it easier, they stopped trading with foreign powers outside of their sphere of influence, if you wanted resources or manpower they forced you to go through the bureaucracy, they attempted a land reform policy (admittingly it wasn't super successful, but they attempted it), and they implemented the Final Solution (which wasn't private enterprise, but was the state). All of this was socialism, not capitalism (the private ownership of the means of production). Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism.
    1
  14997. Could you explain what makes someone right-wing in your opinion? If NS is socialist, what would make it be on the right wing?
    1
  14998. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    1
  14999. By your definition: 'Socialism in one country'; therefore the Soviet Union wasn't socialist. Incorrect. And I understand what you're suggesting, but you've failed to grasp that National Socialism is a mixture of what you said, and socialism. There's no reason to think historically that socialism gets rid of capitalism. Again, look at Lenin and the NEP. Hitler was anti-capitalist in theory and practice, but you're ignoring the elements of his socialism and are thus not seeing it.
    1
  15000. Exactly, the Conservatives were the old Left Wing Party until the Liberals converted to Socialism in the 1870s and 1880s.
    1
  15001. The people who hate on me for having this view don't seem to realise that once you grasp a superior interpretation of history, it's not possible to downgrade back to an inferior one. So I'm glad you can't unsee it either, because it shows I'm not the only one. Also, a LOT more to come on this subject soon...
    1
  15002. 'My' definition of Socialism, is Socialism. Your definition is Marxist-Socialism. I've explained the difference in these two videos https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  15003. Thanks!
    1
  15004. Thanks Mark, glad to hear you're enjoying the channel :)
    1
  15005. YouTube probably did it automatically. I don't understand why, but weird things are happening behind the scenes with YouTube.
    1
  15006. If Hitler wasn't a socialist, then he didn't have total control of the means of production, which means his regime wasn't totalitarian. So either Hitler was a socialist, or he wasn't totalitarian. Pick your poison. You're right that he disbanded the free-market trade unions, but he replaced them with the state trade union. That's a sign of socialism. Yes he banned non-National-Socialist parties, that doesn't make him un-socialist. The Bolsheviks fough the other non-Bolshevik parties - does that make them non-Marxist? Hitler makes it clear in Mein Kampf that he was a socialist, and that there's only one thing that separates him from being a Marxist - “The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P406 “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P406-407 So yes, the only difference between Marxism and National Socialism is the RACE.
    1
  15007. This was an off the cuff response to the previous video. It's been over 10 years since I studied the 19th Century. However, this wasn't the central part of the debate. The points raised in the two videos stand, and I encourage you to read the pinned comment.
    1
  15008. Yes, that's what I've been saying! Gunter Reimann's The Vampire Economy paints a good picture of this.
    1
  15009. Sorry for late reply. "Martin is describing proper socialism, but not what most people in the UK would think of when people talk about socialism, they think about paying higher taxes for better schools and hospitals." But this is a form of socialism. According to a lot of criticism in the comments though, this isn't a form of socialism - which it absolutely is. Socialism (for me) is heavy state intervention or a centrally planned economy which 'seizes the means of production' (which doesn't necessarily mean a revolution) and solves (or at least attempts to solve) the class struggle. I may be missing something out here, but this definition would encompass every socialist movement within history (British Labour, Scandinavia, Venezuela, Soviet Union, National Socialism etc). Whereas, the distinction between what I'm saying and Martin seems to be the 'government ownership' aspect. "So when you say NS = Socialism, I ask: Did they have planned economy?" Yes. To quote Tooze, Wages of Destruction - "The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 And as Tooze points out on Page 112, the party had "radical activists of the SA", "shopfloor militants" and "Gauleiter commissioners" meddling in businesses. However, then - "Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - "Did they recognized classes as a problem?" Yes. But once they got rid of the Jews, in their minds, they resolved the classes. "Did they have 90%+ government ownership?" Well, this depends. Did the government actually 'own' the businesses? Well, they didn't 'nationalize' the businesses, because Hitler said there was no need to once they got rid of the Jews. However, now that the Jews were gone, the Aryan people were in charge - which meant there was no need to nationalize it since the Aryans had seized the means of production, and therefore, since the Aryans were the state, the state owned it by default. In Hitler's mind, in addition to the "shopfloor militants" and so on, this was state ownership. And this is what he said to Strasser in 1930. But even if this isn't classed as ownership, I would classify the Labour Movement in Britain as socialist - even if a significant portion of the businesses weren't owned by the state. And in my definition of socialism (heavy state intervention or a centrally planned economy which 'seizes the means of production' and solves the class struggle), this does classify as socialism.
    1
  15010. Great! So, out of curiosity, what is the element(s) of the "NS = socialism" argument that I've put forth that don't make sense to you? I'm asking so that maybe I can see where it is I've not explained right, and then try reframe it. "Of course, that time was primarily, both ideologically and socio-economically, concerned with nationalization - no private ownership, no private anything, only possessions, and strict control of the economy by the government - that was socialism." - see, I'd say that's communism. I think there's a difference between Marxist theory and Marxist practice.
    1
  15011. https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    1
  15012. Except, Lenin did exactly that.
    1
  15013. They can't grasp what I'm trying to say. I think it's deliberate though, since there are both socialists and communists who are agreeing with me.
    1
  15014. Thank you!
    1
  15015. Even though numerous people did agree with me, and more people upvoted then downvoted.
    1
  15016. You are correct. This video was a response to the first I put up. Yet, this was downvoted 7 times within the first minute of being published. I could have been saying "sorry guys, I'm wrong!" but they would have downvoted anyway. Ideology is at work here, not reasonable discourse (discussion).
    1
  15017. Thank you one two :) If I'm wrong, I'll admit it.
    1
  15018. lol you noticed that too?
    1
  15019. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15020. I haven't studied all the fascisms so I can't say for sure at the moment (considering I've only recently realised that NS was socialism). I know that Mussolini was a socialist before the fascism, but I haven't made a 100% verdict yet. I will do a video at some point though when I've looked into it more.
    1
  15021. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different.
    1
  15022. Also, the Liberals in Britain shifted from a capitalist ideology to socialism in the late 1870s, so I wasn't wrong there. This is the origin of the 'Liberals' we have today who exist on the Left of the political spectrum rather than the Right, and are not really liberal, since they're calling for totalitarian state control of the means of production.
    1
  15023. This was a quick response video to the previous one. It isn't 100%. But what is 100% is a more recent video of mine where I define what Socialism and Capitalism are using multiple sources with references on the screen. Hopefully you will find that one significantly more to your liking https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15024. I've already refuted his points in the comment section. He (unknowingly) makes it clear that it wasn't capitalism, and that it must have been socialism. He doesn't understand the difference between socialism and Marxist-Socialism.
    1
  15025. This isn't Marxist Socialism. This is a different socialism. In Hitler's mind, the class struggle would end once the Jews were removed from society. Considering the National Socialists were anti-capitalist, introduced state control and planned the economy centrally, you'd think they were socialists or something. If the Pope says Sunni Islam isn't Christian, yeah he's right. But to deny that Sunni Islam and Catholicism share the same roots - they are both part of the group collectively known as the Abrahamic religions, which is why they both worship one God, go to temple regularly, and pray (not all religions share these traits) - to deny this would be wrong. The same applies to Marxist Socialism and National Socialism. They're not the same, but they're part of the same tree and share the same roots
    1
  15026. *balanced, not balaned lol
    1
  15027. Well, you should be skeptical of all interpretations of the past, that's for certain, and I never want you to think my views are gospel. However, if you've been watching my other videos, you know I don't say things unless I have a reason to do so. Here is a good 'balaned' alternative-view response video to this and my previous video on this topic by another YouTuber which you'll probably want to watch. https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I
    1
  15028. I've read them. I have screenshots too. But nothing they have said contradicts the core of what I've said, nor what the historical reality was. I've also taken advise from several of my Patreons whom usually give good advice (some who agree and do not agree with me) that it's not worth continuing this discussion at this time. I agree with them, simply because this channel isn't about political theory, it's about history. And the historic idea and application of National Socialism has been said (whether everyone agrees with the assessment about the 'socialism' bit or not), and now it's time to move on.
    1
  15029. They're not here to debate; they're here to smear someone who they don't agree with because this is a threat to their ideology. They're picking holes but ignoring the historical reality. A good follow up video someone posted https://youtu.be/17DkMDvKqw0
    1
  15030. Also, I'm glad you don't agree with me. It shows you're thinking :)
    1
  15031. This video is old and somewhat out of date. Come back on Monday and I'll have a much more compelling argument for you to consider
    1
  15032. So, here is the way you should see the political spectrum - Left Marxism/communism/socialism/NationalSocialism - Fascism - minor socialists (Labour Party and liberals) - capitalists (conservatives etc) Right The Left are pro-state and pro-public ownership of the means of production (socialism). The Right are anti-state and pro-private ownership of the means of production (capitalism). So, when fighting against a Nationalsocialist, they best way to fight against them is to attack their socialism. Let me give you an example of an argument you could make - (I reject the idea that people should be put into groups. Are we not individuals? There are bad/lazy 'white' men who sponge off society, just as much as there are bad/lazy 'foreign' men. Why do the 'white' men get a free pass? If a person feels like they're being oppressed at work, it's not because they're part of a group, it's because they're bad/lazy at their job. Some people are naturally better at work than others and will rise up the ranks. If you're one of these people who are getting 'oppressed' it's not society's fault that you didn't work hard or act in the wrong way. It is not the government/society's role to make everything better for you (the nanny state), but for you to take responsibility for your life. If you're not in demand, you need to make yourself valuable, so that you become something others want. When you're in demand you will rise up the ladder. Others do not care for this and will stay at the bottom. And that's fine, but they then have no right to take the property of others just because others did the work and they didn't. That's not fair on those who don't actually work. And I don't want to share my money and my profits or my property with others. I worked for what I have, so it is mine. If the 'foreigners' came here, they did the same. Taking from one person and giving to another just encourages lazy/bad habits in people, and will/has resulted in poor economies throughout history whenever socialism has been implemented. Also, I believe in lower taxation, and less-state ownership. I don't trust the government and I don't want them dictating to me what I can or cannot do. We don't want to give them too much power, because that always leads to problems.) Or something like that. And, even if you don't agree entirely with the points raised in the bracketed paragraph, if you want to fight against Nazis, your best bet is to attack their anti-individualism, their anti-capitalism, their anti-semitism, and their pro-socialism all at the same time.
    1
  15033. "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." - Sun Tzu If you know what National Socialism is, you can fight it. If you don't know what it is, you're not going to be able to fight against it. "So, I'm not really clear how this relates to Holocaust denial." Exactly. You don't understand what National Socialism is. Therefore, you're going be attacking them only on their racism, and lose the other side of the battle. --- This post is long, but I've written it because I want you to understand this so that you can fight back against the neo-Nazis more vigorously. So, if you want to fihgt back against the Nazis, this post will give you all the ammunition you need to do so. So it should be well-worth it to you. And also, knowing what a Nazi is and what they stand for doesn't mean you're going to suddenly find yourself recruited to their cause. Misunderstanding what they are, and not fighting back against them effectively as a result, will actually help them more than hinder them. So I'm telling you what National Socialism is so that you're armed and able to fight back against them. If you grasp what I'm saying, this will help you immensely. So... you think (as I used to think) that this is the political spectrum - Left Marxism/communism/socialism - moderates (libs/conservatives etc) - Fascism/National Socialism Right Also, the Left (socialism) generally appeals to 'workers' and the Right generally appeals to 'businessmen' and 'aristocrats' (capitalism). So, you think National Socialism is actually racist-capitalism. But what exactly is socialism? Socialism is the social (public/state) ownership of the means of production. It is a rejection of the private ownership of the means of production (capitalism). It is a rejection of free markets. It is a rejection of supply and demand. It is a rejection of private property and business. And it believes that the world is split into social groups. You think that socialism is the workers (a social group) rising up and taking the ownership of the means of production is ALL socialism. No, this only describes Marxist-socialism, not all socialisms. The workers in Britain didn't rise up and take the means of production. Instead the Labour Party took certain industries and put them in state-ownership (public ownership - which is why it's called the Public Sector). There was still private ownership, but the Labour Party moved Britain down a more socialist path. And the point is, you can have socialist policies and socialist parties within capitalism. Socialism is the public/social/state ownership of the means of production. Capitalism rejects the idea of the state owning businesses. Capitalism wants free markets and the natural order of supply and demand to dictate how the economy is run. It believes in international trade, and stock exchanges, private property etc. National Socialism rejects capitalism in both theory and in practice. By 1934, Hitler had closed Germany's borders and brought trade with foreign countries to a trickle. He'd almost crashed the German economy by the end of 1934. Now, some will say "oh, this is only because he didn't know what he was doing". No, he wanted to do this from at least a decade before when he wrote Mein Kampf in 1924. A Nazi rejects capitalism because he thinks capitalism is a Jewish-plot. In the Nazi mind, the Jew is trying to create a class-struggle so as to bring about Marxism. When Marxism has taken over, this will allow the Jews to interbreed with all the Aryans and bring about the fall of civilization (yes, it's crazy, but that's what a Nazi thinks). So, what a Nazi wants to do is end capitalism to prevent Marxism from happening. In order to prevent Marxism (which is communism) from happening, they will introduce socialism into the country. BUT it is not Marxist socialism (since they reject that), and is therefore not based on class. It is a different type of socialism that they call "Nationalsozialismus" (notice that the words in German are together, not separate). A socialist sees the world in social groups. We're not individuals, we're 'white', 'Jewish', 'workers', 'bourgeoisie' etc. To see us as individuals is to accept capitalism and the Scientific Method (which they reject because science tells us that we are individuals, because that's a central theme to science). For a Marxist Socialist, the world is split into class-groups. For a National Socialist, the world is split into racial groups. A Marxist will remove the bad classes to end the class struggle. A Nazi will remove the bad racial classes to end the class struggle. Removing the Jews from society isn't just an example of racism, it is an example of socialism. A Nazi isn't looking to just remove bad elements of society because he doesn't like them. He's removing them to improve the welfare of the race that he's defending. So a British-Nazi want to remove foreigners so that he can improve the lives of the white-British people. It is racism, but it's also socialism. If it was capitalism, artificially removing the foreigners from society would be a rejection of free-market forces. Supply and demand also dictates that those foreigners were there for a reason. Maybe there was a certain skill-set that these foreigners had that the locals didn't have, so they came to Britain in order to fill that role. Maybe there was a worker-shortage, so supply and demand meant that they came here to fill the empty business positions. Plus, if they're earning a wage and spending money (consumerism) they're contributing to the economy, therefore let them in! National Socialists reject this. They say, no the 'foreigners' (social group) are coming here and stealing 'our' (social group) jobs. They're a burden to the state (why? If they have jobs, they're not a burden) and they're milking social welfare. The irony being they're both stealing jobs and welfare at the same time, plus are they attacking the social welfare that the state provides to the local populace? No, in fact the promise is that the people on welfare will get more, because it's socialism for the 'us' and not for 'them'. Now, you and others have said "yes, but this is all just rhetoric and they're just saying it to recruit workers". Actually, they genuinely believe all of this. And by thinking that they're just saying this to recruit workers to their cause, you're actually playing into their hands. Here is a source from 1936 where "the writer provides ten responses to the most common objections they encountered to Nazi anti-Semitic measures" http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/responses.htm Here is just one of the arguments, which sounds very much like socialism to me - "Argument 3: “The Jew has better prices than the German businessman.” — Counterargument: Any crook can sell junk. Jewish crooks have driven thousands of German businessmen to bankruptcy with the glittering trash in their department store palaces. When someone does get good products more cheaply from the Jews than from Germans, it is only because the united Jewish firms force down prices from the manufacturers, which means reducing workers’ wages. He who has bought good products cheaply from the Jew should never forget that the curse of a German worker and the tears of his hungry children come with them!" This is a rejection of capitalism. It is a rejection of free market forces. It is a promotion of social groups to create divisions in society.
    1
  15034. But Marxist-Socialism does the exact same thing on class-lines. Those with more are "not us". Once they get rid of these undesirables in the "revolution", they can bring in socialism for those that remain. And many socialists today do split society on race, gender etc. Socialism, by it's very nature, splits society into different social-groups. That's why identity politics is left-wing politics.
    1
  15035. Thank you!
    1
  15036. Yeah, I think that's what it boils down to.
    1
  15037. Cheers! I've actually just written a lengthy response Pinned comment for both videos explaining everything again. I doubt it will please the Marxists, but I've definitely reconsidered my stance as I say at the bottom of it.
    1
  15038. Sorry!
    1
  15039. Your comment was marked as spam, so was in a different folder. You would still see it (which you pointed out), but nobody else could. I had to go into a different area to see it. Just published it now for you.
    1
  15040. You replied to another guy, which is why I started writing my reply to you (but fine, it's not important, I could be mistaken on that). And well done for disproving everything I said by calling me "dishonest" without actually tackling the counter-arguments.
    1
  15041. In case Bree Vee deletes his comment again, this is the video he was refering to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUFvG4RpwJI And yes Rose, I've definitely sturred up the socialist-hive with these videos...
    1
  15042. Watched that video, and it doesn't debunk anything. All it does is confirm that it wasn't Marxist-Socialism... which it wasn't. When talking about the Strength Through Joy program at 14:00 in, the narrator even says "the program was intended to replace the demand for trade unions and prevent class consciousness from developing, that might have become a threat to the Nazi government. The program didn't separate between the average workers and their bosses in an attempt to get people behind the idea on a community based on ethnicity_" Yes, that's because Hitler was anti-Marxist. He wanted to promote an _ethnic version of socialism, not class socialism. This video actually confirms this. At around 15:50 he says it was a planned economy, but that the means of production remained in private hands "if you were German, that is". And the owners of the means of production had to obey what the Nazis said, which is exactly what a racist version of socialism is. At 16:25 "from that point on, the economy was in complete control of the government" - yep, sounds very free market capitalist to me... He says this was done for the war - except we know it was done from 1933 onwards, and had infact been implimented by 1935 at the latest. 18:00 onwards he talks about why there was anti-capitalism in the Nationalsocialist German Workers Party... and then fails to understand that it was anti-capitalist. If it was anti-capitalist, and got rid of trade unions (which are actually allowed under capitalism), and ended trade with the outside world in favour of autarky, then how can it also be pro-capitalist? The reason industry was nationalised and then privatized again was because the Nationalsocialist Party had "socialized the people", to quote Hitler. He didn't need to nationalize the industries, since they had removed the other races from business. The social race owned the means of production, not the class. He mentions the socialisation of the health industry at around 24:00, but fails to grasp its significance. I think this is because he doesn't fully understand that socialism is not necessarily based on class. Again, socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. The Nazis were socialists. He talks about the secret state police (Gestapo) at around 30:00. Again, failing to see that the state police are able to forcefully remove you from society if you do not conform, saying "being tortured, gassed, and worked to death". Ok then, who owned the torture chambers? Which private business owned the gas chambers? Who owned the police? Who owned the slave labour camps of the Reich, or allocated them to German industries? It was the socialist (public) state. He asks the question "was Hitler influenced by Marx?" The answer is yes - which I agree. I agree he detested Marxism. "There are some passages in Mein Kampf where Hitler talks about socialism and seems to be in support of it" - hmmmm... maybe that's because socialism is not Marxism. But no, he does down the "he tricked the workers with the word 'socialism'" route, which just doesn't add up. He then quotes from a book which states "Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany's economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest." "...the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place [directly contradicted by the next sentence]. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state." He then goes on to accuse anyone who thinks that Nationalsocialism is Left Wing is only doing so because they have an agenda, and because we refuse to think about the other side. Actually, I also believed National Socialism wasn't socialism, and that it was capitalism, and that it couldn't be socialism because it wasn't based on class... until about a couple weeks before this video. For most of my life I have thought that National Socialism was capitalism. Now I see that Nationalsocialism is anti-capitalism, anti-Marxist, and socialism. He then concludes - "They're anti-semitic, anti-Marxist, extremely nationalistic, and favoured expansion - all undeniably positions of the German Right." Really? Because the reason Hitler wanted to expand Eastwards was the same reason he was anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist. He thought that the capitalist-class-struggle was created by the Jews, so that they could bring about Marxism, allowing them to become equal to the Aryan, and thus impregnate and mix the blood of the Aryan, which would in-turn bring down the fall of civilization. Hitler therefore wants to end capitalism to stop the class struggle, bring about a socialist-German-Aryan state, destroy Marxism, and destroy the Jews. Yes, there are elements of nationalism in there, but there's also socialism in there too. That's why it's called (drum roll) Nationalsocialism.
    1
  15043. If I'd messed up, I would have apologised. I've done that before. What's happening here is that I'm responding to criticism, and making people aware that they're 'counterarguments' are not sufficient.
    1
  15044. Pretty much. Oh and also, "privatisation" (which wasn't actually privatisation, even though they think it was)
    1
  15045. I didn't say he was only following orders. I said the decision came from the very top, so blaming Harris alone is not right.
    1
  15046. I didn't say that at all. I said they're all wrong, but that the Germans and Soviets committed far more crimes than the Western Allies. And no, the scale is absolutely relevant. Two murders are worse than one.
    1
  15047. They did. That's why they started producing a lot more synthetic oil prior to the war, despite the fact it wasn't economical to do so https://youtu.be/URBlC-wjXiQ
    1
  15048. I have considered it, although wouldn't know where to start
    1
  15049. Loads. They deny that the Soviets were socialists.
    1
  15050. I answered someone else about this. The British government didn't react very well to the crisis, but that doesn't mean it was deliberate. Most of the authors also don't say it was deliberate, so I'm not convinced that it was deliberate. You can still blame the British government for poor handling, but saying it was deliberate is a stretch. And the British government has always been incompetent - which is the best form of government in most normal situations.
    1
  15051. https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    1
  15052. Be careful next time ;) hope the answer was what you expected
    1
  15053. But if I didn't use the world fanaticalness, you wouldn't have anything to complain about in the comments ;)
    1
  15054. Yes, although practically all Axis divisions were in that state during 1944
    1
  15055. Oh there's been much longer 'questions' than that, and some coming up are longer than Lord of the Rings
    1
  15056. If you're talking about the Walloon Legion, then I can confirm that it didn't fight to, or in, Stalingrad
    1
  15057. "on the other hand DeGrells Division fought to Stalingrad" It did?
    1
  15058. Battlestorm Stalingrad will continue on Monday :)
    1
  15059. If the pictures are not copyrighted (like they are with stupid Getty Images), then yes However, I can't use the video footage because YouTube's algorithm will allow others to falsely copyright strike
    1
  15060. Lol
    1
  15061. I mention one SS panzer divison in this video
    1
  15062. It is now ;)
    1
  15063. No there isn't.
    1
  15064. Cameron Thompson I'm afraid it isn't, but a very good guess. "And" is 5th on the list
    1
  15065. Ville metsänmiettijä no :P
    1
  15066. Tomislav Awesome! I can do that! Expect a random medical question in a few days :) (if it's too easy let me know so I can make it a lot harder!)
    1
  15067. Tomislav not even in the top 100 apparently. What's your "specialist subject"?? I can ask a few questions related to something you might know :)
    1
  15068. Morgan Chalmers I may change it slightly ;)
    1
  15069. Morgan Chalmers that's quite a good suggestion! I'll save that for a future QOTD :)
    1
  15070. Morgan Chalmers yes! I was kinda surprised though. I wouldn't have said that myself
    1
  15071. Bodglin o'Ite the The
    1
  15072. Thegamer8324 true. It may be a while before I can answer that one since google doesn't have the answer so I'll have to do some research/sit there and manually count the countries :/
    1
  15073. Thegamer8324 you're doing well then! The next question is always a surprise so no one has an advantage :) but I don't mind taking suggestions or whatever
    1
  15074. Thegamer8324 haha nice, have you got every one of them right so far?
    1
  15075. Thomas Curtis I'll strap it to the end of a Firefly's 17 pounder ;)
    1
  15076. Yes it does. I'll update tomorrow as soon as I've applied the paste and tested it out
    1
  15077. I built it myself, so no insurance. I'm hoping it'll either be the paste, or something simple. But for the CPU to shut itself down - that's not good. And Rex, thank you for the offer but I'm not accepting any money. I've enough money to cover the cost, I'm more annoyed that it could be a few days before I can record and post videos again :/
    1
  15078. How exactly?
    1
  15079. I'm in a place called central heating.
    1
  15080. "I wonder how you explain the price of nowadays freshly produced tanks or other military tech which are have a price even b4 the enterprises start the production and which are completely paid by the state. Sometimes even paid starting up from the development." The prices are made up - that's how I explain it. And now you know why the military is incredibly wasteful with resources. You've just proven my point exactly.
    1
  15081. "The cost of a lump of steel is the production cost, the state set the price mostly based the cost of wages. That is the price the state places on a tank, they are the consumer - that is the value to them, and we all know something is only worth what someone is prepared to pay." Yes, but they also set the cost of the steel, the labour cost, and the cost of the tank. So they're making up all the numbers and then calculating the cost based on made up numbers. "...and we all know something is only worth what someone is prepared to pay." Interesting. You're admitting that the (Austrian) Subjective Theory of Value is correct, and that the (Marxist/classical economics) Labour Theory of Value is wrong. "A command economy orders the number of units it needs. If it needs 100 units it produces 100 units." True. " There is no waste like a capitalist economy..." Because it cannot calculate that waste. "Saying there is no waste in a capitalist economy is just wrong." Absolutely there is waste in a capitalist economy. I never said their wasn't waste. But in a capitalist economy you can calculate waste because you have prices. A good recent example is the Steam Controller. It started off at $49.99, but nobody bought it. Thus it is a waste and Valve wants to get rid of them and shut down the service. So it's lowered the price to $5. The loss of profit hurts Valve's bottom line, indicating to Valve (and society) that the Steam Controller was a waste of resources that could have been better used elsewhere https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/27/valve-steam-controller-sale-discontinued/?guccounter=1 "As for no buyers there are buyers people do have money, if you had been to the soviet union you could see items in shops with marked prices." But the prices are meaningless because they're set arbitrarily and you cannot calculate the cost of the products. They have 'prices' but not 'true prices'. They're made up. "That was the value of the item and that is what people paid." People paid for them, but the artificial price wasn't the true value of the items. "There was no variation depending on what shop you went in it was standardised." Exactly. Proving my point. If they weren't manipulated prices, the prices would vary depending on location, since it would cost more to ship to a shop miles away than it would to ship to a shop nearby.
    1
  15082. A good video about this problem https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4
    1
  15083. "Let's say that in order to make a tank you need: 1 ton of steel(£1 per ton), 1 ton of tungsten(£1 per ton), 1 man-hour (1£ per hour) plus a factory has to make profit, but I'll skip that, because it's a whole different story. So a price of a tank would be 1+1+1 = £3." But how do you know that the steel is that price? How do you know the price of the tungsten? How do you know how that the price of a labour hour is that price? You cannot calculate the prices of the material. "Well, under planned economy, that's the real price. Take it or leave it." But it's not the real price, even under a planned economy. Value is determined by supply and demand, and the subjective wants and needs. You have supply but no way to calculate demand, and no way to calculate the subjective wants and needs of the consumer. Therefore, the price you've determined is artificial and is not the actual price. "1 ton of steel costs £1, 1 ton of tungsten costs £1 and 1 man-hour costs £1. Under planned economy tank costs £3." But how did you calculate the cost of steel, tungsten, man hours etc? You can't. "factory A uses 1 man-hour to produce a tank..." How much is a man-hour? Why is it that? "factory A uses 1 man-hour to produce a tank with a 76mm gun(price is £3) , while factory B uses 2 man-hours to produce a tank with a 76mm gun(price is £4). Factory B is not efficient." But again, how do you know the cost of labour hours if they're artificially made up? Your pay per hour is determined by the buying and selling of labour as a service on a free market, so without that buying and selling, you don't know the true value of labour per hour. Also, by your own numbers (assuming they are a true calculation, which they're not), it actually proves that Factory A is less efficient than Factory B. Think about it. Factory A used 1 hour to produce a tank at £3. Therefore, that's a ratio of 1:3. Factory B used 2:4, or a ratio of 1:2. Thus, Factory B was more efficient. "factory A uses 1 ton of steel to produce a tank with a 76mm gun(price is £3), while factory B uses 2 tons of steel to produce a tank with a 76mm gun(price is £4). Factory B is wasting resources." But again, you cannot calculate the cost of steel because it's made up. Therefore the cost of the tank is also made up. And again, by your own numbers, you have a 1:3 vs 1:2 ratio, so Factory A is wasting resources, not Factory B.
    1
  15084. "Could you clarify please..." The value of a good is determined by the exchange of the good. If the good is not valued highly, it will have to have a lower price. If it is greatly valued, it will have a higher price. But one exchange is not enough to determine the price of a good across an entire economy. It's only the buying and selling of goods across the entire economy which determines the actual price of something. A commissar can slap a price on something, but that's not its true value. The only way you can have prices (and thus be able to determine the value of something in society) is by the free trade of goods and services. Without prices, you cannot know the true value of something. How much is a ton of lumber? How much is a loaf of bread? Without the exchange of these goods in a market, you do not know the value of such things. They have value (obviously), but there's no way to calculate how much value they have unless you have a free exchange of said goods. Let's say a tank requires 1 ton of steel, 1 ton of copper, and 1 ton of plastic. In a capitalist economy, we'd know how much each of these materials is. Why? Because the exchange of goods and services across the economy will determine the price/value of the material accurately. The more that steel is in demand, the higher the price. The higher the price of steel, the more the steel-profits are. The higher the profits, the more money the capitalist has to pump into the business to make more steel, that will in turn meet the higher demand. And, of course, he determines that society demands more steel if his profits go up. If his profits are low, then society does not want steel. Thus, the factory that creates the tank knows how much each of the materials cost, and can calculate the cost of the tank. But how much is the tank worth? For the sake of argument, let's say each material cost £1 to make. Thus the cost of the tank was £3. Labour cost is also £1. And let's say the factory owner wants to make some profit, so decides that the finished tank is priced at £5. But is the tank actually worth that? Only if he can sell the tank. If no one buys the tank, then he must reduce his price. If he reduces his price to £4.50 and people start buying his tank, then his tank is probably worth £4.50 in value, not the £5 he originally wanted. It could also be worth more than £5 if there's a higher demand for tanks. He could also find that nobody's buying his tanks at all because they're not good tanks, thus he makes a loss and goes out of business. In that case, economic calculation was possible because we had accurate prices, which were determined by the buying and selling of goods and services across society. In a socialist economy, you do not have the free exchange of goods and services. Therefore you do not have accurate prices. Without accurate prices, everything becomes incalculable. Let's see this - Let's say a commissar decides that the tank is £5. How would he know if it truly is £5 or not? There are no buyers or sellers who can purchase the tank at its actual value. Without someone buying his tank at the £5, there's no way to know if its is £5 or not. The government decides to buy the tank at £5, but the commissar works for the government. He's artificially set the price, and the government has artificially bought it. That's not a free market. It would be like one person buying and selling to himself - the price is meaningless. Thus, because the price is meaningless, there is no possible way to determine the value of the tank. Without prices, you have no value and no economic calculation is possible either. See this linked video (6 mins long) for how the lack of prices (or even accurate prices) would be a massive problem for an economy https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4 "Soviets had to have somewhat reliable stats because of planned economy in that era (i'm not talking about 80's in USSR where most of their stats were bogus, since punishment were pretty much gone at that point) and i pointed out consequences for lying about important information." A planned economy can't provide accurate stats because of the economic calculation problem. You can punish people all you want, but they can't give you accurate economic information in a socialist economy. Thus, the stats are bogus in all eras of the Soviet Union. Yes, you can say something like - the Soviet Union built N number of tanks in year Y. And that's true. But there's no way to calculate GNP, GDP, or how many rubles the tanks cost, or if they were efficiently built, or if they were a waste of resources, etc. Economic calculation is impossible. "From what i see, you think everybody came up with whatever numbers during that era...please correct me on that if i'm wrong." There's no way to calculate the value or efficiency of a socialist economy, simply because it has no market. The people in every year of the Soviet Union made up numbers. Hence the phrase: 'They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work'.
    1
  15085. "Yes you said you don't trust entire picture, but also use those author statistic as your base and not the official one. Like it or not, you picking side and going from there. Soviet bad therefore i'm going with this guy." No, I'm saying both statistics are wrong. Doesn't matter if they're official or not when it comes to socialist economies. All socialist calculations are wrong because they have gotten rid of the thing that allows calculation - the market. And actually, Harrison uses the official Soviet statistics, so your argument makes no sense. "...how much USSR economy was based on actual money exchange? Especially during war? People used ration cards, for food and other items." Exactly. So you can't calculate the price or cost of anything because you didn't have a market economy. That's what I'm saying. "I think judging Soviet economy like Western one is a giant mistake." Who said I'm judging the Soviet 'economy' like a 'western one' (whatever that means). The mistake here is believing that you have economic statistics in the first place, which you can't in a socialist economy. "For example, you could not purchase a car or a house, you would have to sign up and wait in line for years to get one." Exactly. Prices were meaningless. So without prices, you don't have economic calculation. That's what I'm saying.
    1
  15086. "I want to discuss a real country (the Soviet Union) that actually existed, and had to function somehow." Right. "Soviet economy had a lot of issues, one of which was inadequate prices. But not all of them were inadequate, and those that were, were inadequate for reasons you never mentioned." They weren't inadequate... because you say they weren't? That not an argument, that's an opinion. "In USSR they were calculated differently. Your claim was that prices were made up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but "prices were made up", implies that there were no rules or logic, which simply wasn't the case. There were rules, formulas, laws, decrees... You can say that they used wrong ways to calculate prices, but you can't say that those prices were simply made up." Those rules, formulas, laws, decrees can make 'prices', but not 'true prices' that actually reflect the genuine value of a good or service. The only way to do that, is to have the free exchange of goods and services. The commissar can say that a Valve Controller is priced at $49.99, but the true value of it is much less than that and is determined by the consumer, not the seller https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/27/valve-steam-controller-sale-discontinued/?guccounter=1
    1
  15087. @Artiom "TIK you are a nice guy. I don;t want to argue about this. But there are 2 things i want to say 1) "Price" is a virtual generic shit created by consensus. " No it isn't. The price of a good is only determined by buying and selling. You can put a 'price' on something, but that is not its actual value. "2) Is there a really free market?" You're correct, there is no free market. "Are you sure the world strongest economies are competing fairly and not using war, diplomacy and corruption? Or sometimes tariffs?" The States of those countries are doing that. Common (State) control of the means of production is Socialism. "Do you realize that capitalists are not the people who root for fair competition ))) they own capital not charities."" They're not capitalists. Owning capital does not mean capitalism. A King is not a capitalist just because he has gold. He's only a capitalist if he privately owns his own means of production. Please see my Public vs Private video for the actual and historical definitions of capitalism and socialism. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15088. When a video of mine comes up, hit the three dots next to it, then click (forget the exact wording) "do not recommend this channel". That should solve it.
    1
  15089. Not quite, because some 'evidence' (actually interpretation) points in the opposite direction. So it's not an 'agreement' (concordance) as such, but that more evidence is leading us to one conclusion (a convergence) rather than another.
    1
  15090. Glad you found it, and I'm glad you're enjoying it
    1
  15091. Thegamer8324 Nice!
    1
  15092. Ville metsänmiettijä sadly, that's classed as a continent!
    1
  15093. nolan koski yes! Correct! Sorry for late reply btw
    1
  15094. Bodglin o'Ite that's a continent ;)
    1
  15095. Tomislav oh yes!
    1
  15096. Morgan Chalmers haha no they're classed as continents
    1
  15097. Devon Ziegler yes! Maybe this was a little too easy?
    1
  15098. Gary Thomas yes!
    1
  15099. Bodglin o'Ite hahahaha!
    1
  15100. starcraft2own Correct!!!
    1
  15101. Morgan Chalmers It's not really a riddle, but more of a if-you-know-what-longitude-and-latitude-are you've got it :)
    1
  15102. Bodglin o'Ite Yes, I told Gary that. But either way, the colour of the bear you'd see would be white
    1
  15103. Devon Ziegler you're correct that they have hollow fur. As I mentioned to a couple of the others, the light from the ice is what makes them appear white. However, the colour of the bear you would see at the North Pole would be white
    1
  15104. starcraft2own Polar bears are the best bear?
    1
  15105. Ville metsänmiettijä Sadly not haha
    1
  15106. Yes, it's because he's concentrating on the German sources and he's not using Soviet sources (which aren't translated into English at least). I think he speaks German but not Russian, which probably has a lot to do with it.
    1
  15107. It's not controversial for not awarding 5 stars, it's (potentially) controversial for taking a point off because the author didn't use the Soviet sources. A lot of people scream at me, telling me how much the Soviet sources are biased and whatnot. But obviously, if the Soviet sources are biased, so are the German sources, so are the British sources, and so on. But it's true, Eastern Front historians should be using the Soviet sources, and they won't be able to get 5 stars from me unless they do.
    1
  15108. Let me know if you like it!
    1
  15109. Thanks, and yes, this was the fairest method I could think of. Does mean we could move into minus-star territory, but I have a few plans if we ever do :D
    1
  15110. Haha well I'm glad to hear that! In general, I'd recommend you stay away from memoirs, unless you've read a few books on a particular subject first, and you're ready to question what the author's saying. It's just a lot safer that way.
    1
  15111. No worries! Which video/book was that where you saved €40?
    1
  15112. Haha thanks! And will do :)
    1
  15113. You're very welcome! :)
    1
  15114. The term you're looking for is Bewegungskrieg, which as Citino says, was the correct term and much older than Manstein. And no, it's a good book.
    1
  15115. Thank you!
    1
  15116. Look at the pinned comment. "A book starts off with 5 stars. I will then simply deduct full stars, half-stars, and quarter-stars (depending on severity of the faults) off the 5 stars. So, in theory, we could end up in negative-star territory. This is the most simple and fair method I can think of."
    1
  15117. Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  15118. I was going to look into it at some point. But it's severely under-researched. The German official history of 1942, only gives it two pages :(
    1
  15119. The German has already helped with my pronunciation. Can't read much yet, but I'm hopeful I will eventually. Russian will be a while away, but yes I can see both being essential
    1
  15120. If you look closely I have Age of Extremes on the top right of the bookshelves. I read bits of it in university, and have just purchased it again :)
    1
  15121. A perfect book gets 5 stars. And I'll be deducting stars, half-stars and quarter-stars for mistakes. Therefore, a book absolutely needs a full star deducted for not supplying a bibliography, a full star deducted for not supplying an index, and a full star deducted for not using all/both sides of sources. As I said to someone else, this method could lead us into negative-star territory. But so be it!
    1
  15122. Excellent and thank you! Let me know what you think about Citino's book, and Guderian's for that matter. He lied throughout it. MHV gave at least a couple examples in his recent video https://youtu.be/UTgf3UHMBjY
    1
  15123. Absolutely :)
    1
  15124. I don't know any to be honest. But I think you'll like the videos coming in the next few weeks (starting Monday) because I'll be talking about a lot of Commonwealth units (and their commanders) that took part in Operation Crusader :)
    1
  15125. True, or perhaps "turning phase" - which we could narrow down to 1941-1942
    1
  15126. That's a great suggestion! And I now understand why "sie" means "they" now, which is fantastic! Never made that connection. Although, I'm still not exactly why it also means "she", but "she" and "Sie" are quite similar so I'm guessing they have common roots too
    1
  15127. "It is pretty stupid just to argue that Soviet sources must be used, no matter what." They must be used because there's no telling "what significant information have Citrino missed by not using Soviet sources, and how it could have changed his conclusions?"
    1
  15128. No worries, I certainly will :)
    1
  15129. Excellent! Glad you liked it :) I'm working on Operation Crusader at the moment (the next in the North African Campaign series I'm doing), and hope to have it done in a few weeks time. Will probably be longer than Market Garden, so I hope you enjoy that too
    1
  15130. Yes, I pre-ordered it, and according to Amazon it should be arriving between the 11th of June and the 6th of August! To be fair though, every single one of his books has taken a millenia to arrive, which he blames entirely on the Australian postal system (I asked him a while back) and I don't think he's wrong.
    1
  15131. What? It's European Asia.
    1
  15132. Yeah, I have his books on Kindle :)
    1
  15133. If it was a purely German-affair, then yes, just using the German sources is fine. For example, when discussing domestic policy. But anything like this where there's other people (and thus other languages to consider) then using their sources is necessary. Just because the historian doesn't have access to those sources, or cannot read them, is not an excuse either - because other historians do have access to those sources and can read them (as well as the German) so they deserve a higher grade.
    1
  15134. Yes, probably! I've got it but not had time to read it
    1
  15135. I don't understand. Of course they're published. Historians are debating them all the time. Antony Breevor's Berlin talks about the atrocities committed by the Red Army, and that's been out for years. And I know some people will read this and respond to this comment saying Beevor is lying and whatnot. I get it. However, while Beevor may have exaggerated some of the events, the events also did happen and denying them is not good history, regardless of your political or national beliefs.
    1
  15136. Cheers Al! Glad you liked it, again :D
    1
  15137. I don't think a good definitive book on WW2 exists yet. When it does, I'll let you know. But a good starting point for the Eastern Front is Richard Overy's Russia's War. Apart from the title - which should be "The Soviet Union's War" since 'Soviet Russia' was only one element of the Soviet Union - the book is short, but quite solid and a good read.
    1
  15138. I have been getting better recently, since I have been learning German using Duolingo, and looking up German names. That said, I'm looking forward to learning Russian too, for the same reasons.
    1
  15139. The "mainstream consensus view" you're talking about is directly influenced by the German generals. But, what I've done in my videos is present a ton of evidence that directly contradicts that. That evidence comes from the books and sources used, and I've listed the sources in the pinned comments of the videos in question. None of these sources are fringe opinions, they come from academic books from established universities, or historians who have proved their reliability. And I compare them to the old or popular histories to see where they get things wrong. The problem is that these are not books the casual reader would read. If you read nothing but popular histories like Beevor and Hastings (out-of-date and pandering to a mass-audience and the whims of their publishers), or the old histories like Shirer (influenced directly by the German generals), or you get your history off forums on the internet (and/or wikipedia), then you're missing out most of the story. "You have elsewhere argued this order was rational due to fuel shortages. I don't regard German fuel shortages as that bad" That's not a counter-argument. That's a statement of your opinion. You need to back that up with evidence. I've shown that Germany and Axis Europe were suffering under a fuel crisis in the oil video, and listed my sources. Things were that bad in Axis occupied Europe that millions of litres of French milk went sour because they no longer had the fuel to power the trucks they used to use to drive the milk around the country for consumption. For a time, the German truck manufacturers stopped production of trucks because they didn't have the fuel to test the trucks they were producing. And the German generals considered demotorizing their army. All evidence and hard facts that are not disputed. How you interpret that is up to you, but I've shown plenty of evidence. Only saying "I don't regard it to be that bad" is not a counter-argument. You're dismissing the argument as wrong, without presenting evidence to back up your point. "Time after time -- this is historical fact -- Hitler would order units with no prospect of relief to stand fast whereafter they were besieged and annihilated." There was also plenty of times he did allow retreats. Look at the evacuation of Estonia in late 1944 for example. It depended on cirumstances. But the point I made was that Germany transitioned into a static war, probably as a result of the oil crisis. Citino says this transition happened for various reasons in his book that I've reviewed in this video. What I did (thanks to Toprani) was connect the dots the oil crisis. "You are arguing that the German generals, not Hitler, changed tactics. They really didn't." They did. Citino spells it out in this book. "They were however constrained by Hitler, supply, and compelled into winnable battles which they lost the most famous of which is Uranus and Bagration." And why would Hitler not allow retreats? I say oil. Why was supply bad? I say a lack of oil. Why did they lose those battles you mentioned? Because they didn't win the war in 1941-1942, and thus were forced to transition into a static war, giving the initiative to the Soviets.
    1
  15140. What "mainstream"? You mean the books written in the 1950's which were influenced primarily by the German generals trying to prove their innocence from war crimes and who never made mistakes it was always that "madman Hitler's fault"? These old books also don't use the Soviet sources, so they're just as bad. Now we're getting access to the Soviet sources (mainly thanks to Glantz) we're seeing that what the Germans thought happened, didn't happen. So there isn't an "alternative" view, there's new evidence and outdated views, which is why I'm saying not using the Soviet sources is not acceptable, thus I'll deduct a star.
    1
  15141. Yes, but as I said, few of the books use the Soviet sources. And this is because of the influence of the Cold War, plus that many historians still don't have access to the Soviet sources. That said, I've been through Glantz's books (who does use Soviet sources), and can tell you that Citino gets most of it right. Also, why is the view "I'm" describing an "alternate" view? What does that even mean? Citino uses plenty of German sources, and his book is presented from the German point of view. From that perspective, the German officers changed their style of warfare to suit the needs of the type of war waged on the Eastern Front.
    1
  15142. I don't understand why you've posted this on this video. I didn't argue anything about the German officer corps here. In fact, if you read Citino's book, you'll probably get your answer.
    1
  15143. Excellent! Glad you agree!
    1
  15144. I do plan to get Grossman's book at some point. He's just been lower on my list of priorities in regards to Stalingrad. I wanted to get the big events and unit positions correct first, and then dive into memoirs and similar.
    1
  15145. Great! Let me know what you think if you do
    1
  15146. You won't go wrong with this one :)
    1
  15147. It's a 5 book series, you forgot book 5 - the Companion (appendix). They accidentally sent me one book twice and told me to keep it. I've recently bought the condensed version to compare between that and the larger series. And the final book on the shelf looks like it's a Glantz books, but it's actually from a different author. I just put it there because it looks neater.
    1
  15148. Yes, I plan to do a couple of videos on the Blue Division (the Spanish Legion) at some point, as well as the Estonian division.
    1
  15149. Fantastic! Let me know what you think of it :)
    1
  15150. You should read this book.
    1
  15151. Fantastic! I hope you enjoy the rest of it :)
    1
  15152. Hi and thanks! That's a very good suggestion! I'm not sure when it'll be, but I'll plan it in. I do have some ideas now, although I'm still learning and trying to get to the magic answer about traits.
    1
  15153. :( I'm not sure I can help you with that, but I hope you can get a copy
    1
  15154. Thanks!
    1
  15155. Well, I mean, I was born during the Cold War. Politics influences people's perceptions, which is why I deliberately question the motives of every politician and every decision my state makes. Just because I'm from a certain country doesn't mean it's right, or that another country is wrong. Yes, people are biased and propaganda exists, but there will be truth in there somewhere, you just have to figure out what's right and wrong. People who don't want to use the Soviet sources are only saying that because they don't trust the Soviets. But we wouldn't be using the sources in a vacuum. We have German records to compare them too. And despite the propaganda, some may actually back up what the German generals were saying. The only way to know is to use the sources.
    1
  15156. Not read it, but thanks for the suggestion. Looks difficult to get though, based on a quick search on Amazon
    1
  15157. And I've not read the Storm of War, but it looks interesting. I'll add it to my shopping list.
    1
  15158. I think Overy's Russia's War is great and I'd recommend it to anyone starting out on the Eastern Front as probably the first book they should read. I also have Why the Allies Won, but not read it all. I do agree with the bits I have read so far though (I tend to dive into relevant chapters of certain books when doing research, which is what I've done with this one).
    1
  15159. No worries, thank you for watching :)
    1
  15160. Mercenaries don't exist? Private armies have never existed? Individuals have never earned their own income and balanced their own budget?
    1
  15161. The reason for the decline of the west is because of central banking, which Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto. I've been over this https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  15162. Yep, I've just been removing him and reporting him. I'll have to make a video warning people about the scammer.
    1
  15163.  @benni-lu1op  In what way is explaining the fundamental problem of poor logistics - the economic calculation problem - nonsensical?
    1
  15164. But they only did that because of Lend Lease and the fact that the world was shipping a ton of scarce resources that have alternative uses to them to overcome the problem. The point of the economic calculation problem is that it shows how inefficient an economy with distorted prices is compared to a proper market economy. It's like trying to count but having thrown out numbers because they're 'bad'. It's just insane.
    1
  15165. "However, the length of sleeper is a pure guess, as there is nothing I can find on the internet to say just how long the sleepers were on the railways of the Soviet Union." I think this is the issue. Do not rely on the internet for information. To quote Dunn p191-192: "When they [the Soviets] entered other European countries, the ties were shorter and spreading the rails a further 8.9cm reduced the stability of the track, as one rail was too close to the end of the tie. Holes between the rails from the previous spikes or screws weakened the tie. As a result the Russians had far more difficulty converting the tracks in 1944 and 1945 than the Germans had in 1941 and 1942."
    1
  15166. Right, but it wasn't as bad as the German deficit was. And again, Lend Lease shipped fuel and more to the Soviets to overcome the problem.
    1
  15167. Yes you were! Well done again :)
    1
  15168. What's the historical subject?
    1
  15169. So what did you think it was before now? "Lent"?
    1
  15170. Yeah, you need to do some research on this because the 'Gold Standard' (which was over 60% FIAT paper anyway) ended in 1913 for most of the world. A 'Gold Exchange Standard' was introduced after WW1, but this broke down, leading to the Bretton Woods Standard. Gold was confiscated by Roosevelt in 1934. So to say that Gold was still going before 1971 is just plain wrong.
    1
  15171. Yes!
    1
  15172. Allies didn't have market economics either, which is why, again, they had to divert a ton of resources that have alternative uses to the problem to overcome it. That's why living standards declined for American citizens, why they still overran their logistics, why there was corruption, and why they also suffered from the Economic Calculation Problem.
    1
  15173.  @dwarow2508  Actually I did explain in previous videos that the Soviet economy was close to collapse as a result of the food situation, and may have done in 1943 had the Germans taken and held the Caucasus in 1942. See https://youtu.be/46sqhBhHJ-M and https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w As for MHV, I don't necessarily agree nor disagree. It's hard to predict what would have happened, but I would say that the logistical, resource and especially food situation was desperate enough for the Soviets even with Lend Lease. It's hard to imagine how they would have coped without the food.
    1
  15174. FYI, I've just removed the fake TIK account(s) that replied to you. I don't promote cryptos and never will. Watch out for scams.
    1
  15175. Clickbait would be if I advertised talking about Soviet Logistics and Lend Lease, but when you clicked on the video it was me eating ice cream and telling you about my day. What this is is 'clickable', not 'clickbait'.
    1
  15176. See https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  15177. You even admit it yourself, that the State central bank (something Marx called for) is manipulating interest rates lower, when the market is demanding them be higher. That's not unregulated free market Capitalism because the market isn't in charge, the State is. And I've been over this - inflation is the expansion of the currency supply, and comes from one place only (the Central Bank). Rising prices is the symptom of inflation, not inflation itself. Again, the State is the cause of the problem. Under free market Capitalism, prices would come down, not go up. The fact that they're not proves we don't have Capitalism.
    1
  15178. Yes, because it's almost like there wasn't a free market during WW2 even in the west...
    1
  15179. Sources? I showed you mine (and several books agreed). I'd like to see you provide sources that said "over 75% of all trucks were Soviet made".
    1
  15180. No, the evidence is clear, it happened. However our interpretation of the evidence is subjective, meaning elements maybe be argued over (e.g. was the development and implementation of the Final Solution a centralised or decentralised event?)
    1
  15181. Thanks! I'm a subscriber of Tom and he's pretty good. It's from him that I heard of Rainer Zitelmann.
    1
  15182. Except for myself, winning isn't the end goal. It's getting to the truth about history. I don't mind if I "win" or lose a debate, I still win because we all learn what happened in history. That doesn't mean I won't passionately present a strong argument, but it does mean that I'll accept defeat when necessary.
    1
  15183. But if I didn't, I wouldn't have read your comment!
    1
  15184. I actually have a Patreon question asking the same thing, so I'm going to have to answer that at some point soon and elaborate further. But in a nutshell, I'm anti-State, anti-political, and pro-free market. This is why it's ironic that my critics will say I'm a "conservative" who's pushing my "political agenda". I'm anti-political, so how can I be pushing a political agenda? And conservatives are pro-State and pro-political, so again that's not my position. Anyway, for simplicity's sake, it's probably best to just say I'm an AnCap, even though I have my reservations and wouldn't describe myself as that. People seem to use the wrong definition of "capitalism", so describing myself as a capitalist would be wrong because it would give people the impression that I was pro-State and pro-political, which is why they think Anarcho-Capitalism is oxymoronic.
    1
  15185. And unsubscribe from every channel, and put down every history book and historian, since they're all just personal opinions, right? Again, don't listen to what I'm saying, just jump to stupid conclusions.
    1
  15186. Yeah, that's a valid criticism. Perhaps the language I used wasn't precise enough.
    1
  15187. Just watch coming Monday's video. You'll get a better quality version, so you won't be missing out.
    1
  15188. It was just the choice of words :) the two separate ones were in case people didn't want spoilers. Learnt a lesson there again - just do one big video!
    1
  15189. Absolutely. I actually want (in the future) to go back and redo the main Market Garden video. I think I can up the quality massively and make it even better.
    1
  15190. Don't be, you'll see a better quality version on Monday anyway
    1
  15191. Thank you for understanding Sirko. I will always admit when I make mistakes :) also I've actually done the video, and I do think it's better than the ones I took down https://youtu.be/fr92BwihIoU
    1
  15192. Thanks!
    1
  15193. I best not ask what words they were in case you posting them gives YouTube an excuse to take my channel down. But yes, lesson learnt the hard way
    1
  15194. Why? So they can take them down a day later?
    1
  15195. Thanks! And yes, I definitely made a mistake :)
    1
  15196. No they didn't, and that's the point. I wanted to take them down before anything like that happened (probably a slim chance of them doing it, but not a chance I'm willing to take). And I did cite my sources. I always list my sources in the pinned comments of my videos, except the really old ones because I put them in the video.
    1
  15197. I like the fact I missed out the "t". Blaming autocorrect for that
    1
  15198. Es is gut, danke! :D
    1
  15199. Well, you'll get a better version on Monday so I guess it's you and the others who are in luck :)
    1
  15200. Thanks! I'll definitely try harder next time!
    1
  15201. Yep, probably
    1
  15202. Thanks Rob! Yeah, the Oil video was one of my best. I intend to go back to that topic at some point and expand upon it because it ties into a lot of other things too, which I didn't mention in the video.
    1
  15203. I'm glad! Surprisingly, I am too now. I'm determined to make up for yesterday's mistakes
    1
  15204. Ok, I will certainly try :)
    1
  15205. Cheers Pete! Sadly, quite a few people think I was wrong
    1
  15206. Thanks! The overall content was right, just the delivery was bad. I will rectify that issue for Monday.
    1
  15207. Haha admitting a mistake does not make me a cat ;)
    1
  15208. Actually, several historians are of the conclusion that the earlier Barbarossa period was more important than Moscow. The time of Smolensk is currently under scrutiny. Personally, I'm not sure whether Moscow or Stalingrad was 'more important', but Fall Blau and Stalingrad ended up being the last hope for victory for the Germans.
    1
  15209. It's not necessarily more important, or 'better', but it's an absolutely fascinating event in scale and scope, and incredibly interesting. That's why it gets a lot of attention.
    1
  15210. No, it was fully my own decision, based off the good advice of several viewers :)
    1
  15211. I used a poor choice of words and so took yesterday's videos down.
    1
  15212. Brave and stupid! Still, it gives me the opportunity to make a better quality video overall :)
    1
  15213. Ok, but what if the music aids the presentation rather than drowning it out? My personal taste is to put music in the videos because I personally think it's better with music. And those above seem to agree. I just need to find a balance in the volume so that it's there in the background, but doesn't drown out the words.
    1
  15214. See, this is why I turned it down. Now people are complaining it's too low. I do prefer the music being in it though because, while it is for educational purposes, it's also entertainment. This is why video is superior to books imho - video can be both.
    1
  15215. Yes, yes there are. One of whom I refer to as "my local Nazi", since he watches and downvotes every video, and proclaims his love for the Führer. Many also deny the Holocaust, which is impossible to do as a National Socialist, and both them and I know that, but it's what they do to troll. There's definitely more Marxists though, and that's an equally haunting problem, since they are practically the same thing.
    1
  15216. Well I hope you enjoy it :) just wish I could have gone below division level, but the sources don't allow it
    1
  15217. Yes. Think Crusader will be longer overall though. Can't say for certain yet how long this series will be.
    1
  15218. The agenda is that the Marxists are insisting that they're not socialists. When pushed for evidence I have provided it, and it just gets dismissed or ignored. Not disproven or anything, dismissed. And they're using the incorrect definition of socialism. When pointing that out, they still insist on Marxism being the definition of socialism. Saying "no, you're wrong" is not a counterargument
    1
  15219. Ferdy? Oh yeah, he was a right old pain in the neck
    1
  15220. Haha you're not the only one. I did mention it earlier in the series, but I think people missed it 🙂
    1
  15221. Soviet tank 'corps' were the size of divisions.
    1
  15222. Or maybe that's the only reason Blitzkrieg succeeded or failed - air support? Not sure, but could be a big factor.
    1
  15223. There's a reason I kept Tuesdays free on my schedule ;)
    1
  15224. If you listen carefully, I actually separate the term "capitalism" from the free market, since they're not the same.
    1
  15225. The "workers" is plural, not singular. The workers collectively owning the means of production (if that's even what they mean, which they don't, they mean state ownership) is not independence nor responsibility. A person owning his own means of production is taking responsibility and showing independence. Those that advocate for a free market want that.
    1
  15226. It has been since about 2018.
    1
  15227. It's not just Mises saying this. I knew this way before I read Mises, as other historians are saying this too, and reading the early history of the socialist/communist movement will show you that this is the case.
    1
  15228. CStriker421 it's a fact... I've made today's question a lot easier for everyone, since this was far too hard :)
    1
  15229. starcraft2own !
    1
  15230. I don't get the impression that Glantz is anti-Soviet. He's not pro-Soviet either. I think he's just trying to document what happened from as neutral a perspective as possible, same as me. Could be wrong, but I don't see the anti-Soviet agenda in his writings
    1
  15231. Are you referring to Hitler blaming Halder, or me blaming Halder?
    1
  15232. Did you miss last week's episode?
    1
  15233. Thanks for your kind comment! My degree is just a standard BA degree, not a PhD or anything. But it's worthless in the sense that I didn't learn much during that time, and it got me into a ton of debt for zero gain (not worth it in my opinion). To think like a historian just requires you to understand history theory and to think things through rationally. In fact, my years at university killed my passion for history and it took me 3-4 years to get it back - and it was this channel that reinvigorated it. I was one of the first to do battle videos, was one of the first to list my bibliography in each video, and definitely the first to use a reference bar to back up my claims in each segment of the videos. The reason why is because I'm trying to raise the bar with what's possible with history in video form, hoping to inspire others to do something similar. Judging by the comments, it seems that a lot of people have picked up history books for the first time because of my videos, which is fantastic! Hopefully I've inspired you too. Cheers!
    1
  15234. Just seen your other comment saying the same thing 🤣
    1
  15235. "Consistency is pretending that the atrocities perpetrated by the Eastern Aliies was limited to sex crimes, so that you can pretend that they were not engaged in their atrocities before the Axis comitted atrocities against them." What are you referring to specifically?
    1
  15236. They hadn't surrendered yet
    1
  15237. Germany invaded the Netherlands without a declaration of war.
    1
  15238. OP clearly didn't watch the full video... 🙄
    1
  15239. Thanks for letting me know! Looking at the analytics, something seems to have changed after about 24 hours, and it's beginning to recover :/
    1
  15240. But is this really the case? Was it really 'total'? Totalitarian, perhaps, but not total. There were conscientious objectors, and there were many people within each country forced to fight against their will (conscription). Many were conscripted into the factories and mines in Britain, Germany and the Soviet Union. And children were also targeted, even though they weren't really involved in either the war, nor the building of munitions (yes, there Hitler Youth, but they were an exception). So really, could you really say this was total? If my government decides to declare war, does that mean I have to agree and then become a casualty because of their immorality?
    1
  15241. I wish more people were like you 👍
    1
  15242. Not quite. There aren't many books on this topic in English, and it would require quite a bit of money to purchase all of them just to answer this question. Worse, the Dutch sources aren't translated, so it would require quite a bit of effort. And, as shown, some sources do say that Kesselring was innocent (including Kesselring himself), so it's possible to come to the wrong conclusions. On top of that, what I said at the end will no-doubt annoy a lot of people, and the debate over that continues to divide the historical community to this day.
    1
  15243.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  Yes, but not necessarily. OP was early and hasn't yet watched the full video. But what I say towards the end may actually surprise OP...
    1
  15244. I suspect this one will get a few downvotes...
    1
  15245. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  15246.  @SamBrickell  Wouldn't surprise me at this point
    1
  15247.  @jamesbeeching4341  At 5pm GMT (nearly 4 hours ago). Normally by this point a Monday video of mine would usually have at least 10,000 views, and we're at 4,000 now :(
    1
  15248. Dashboard is showing 8 thousand views. Also saying that I got 4,000 from 'recommendations'... Yet still at 2,723 views, and the comments, likes and dislikes clearly don't reflect 4,000 or 8,000 views. What a joke.
    1
  15249.  @andreastiefenthaler3811  Thank you. It looks like some are getting notified, but others are not...
    1
  15250.  @MultiChris777  I wish that was true, but views have stayed at 2723 for over 40 minutes now, and over an hourly threshold :(
    1
  15251.  @alanpennie8013  Yeah, I think that was before the restrictions
    1
  15252. From the sources I have, that's not true. The SS don't appear to be involved in the air strikes
    1
  15253. It seems some have, but some haven't :( this video is more restricted than the Greek video was - which definitely was age restricted
    1
  15254. starcraft2own awww you can't buy love, so I'm glad she's happy
    1
  15255. Gary Thomas really? What a waste. But I guess she thinks it's better than giving some of that money to the poor :/
    1
  15256. robb.holloway it's actually not (as far as I'm aware)
    1
  15257. Morgan Chalmers lol
    1
  15258. Relevant! https://youtu.be/vB2zZWk9TfU
    1
  15259. I use Blender for the animations. But as I explained in this video, it's too complicated to explain how https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    1
  15260. Yes, I believe these two regiments were very weak at this time. To be honest, I'm not sure how they got to those balkas. But there was also one regiment of 112th Rifle Regiment at Mamaev Kurgan, itself very weak too.
    1
  15261. You weren't first, but thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying the videos! 👍
    1
  15262. Beer also works, apparently 👍 I'm good thanks, yourself?
    1
  15263.  @evil1143  You were pretty close!
    1
  15264.  @flavionessuno5085  Yep, that's why I'm reading Hoffmann's diary as we go through the series. You can also find it online, e.g. here https://mrcaseyhistory.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/william-hoffman-diary-of-a-german-soldier.pdf
    1
  15265. Müller "Enemy in the East" P50-52. He was actually referencing a meeting between Göring and the Polish leaders, and got his information from a Polish historian.
    1
  15266. "You don't even mention that there's absolutely no source to back the theories layed out in the book you're encouraging ppl to read." You clearly haven't read the book because Müller references a Polish historian who said this too. The rest of what you wrote is undermined by this fact.
    1
  15267. I didn't, I said Weimar Germany was 'Capitalist' which is also wrong, hence why I put ' ' around the word Capitalist in the subtitles.
    1
  15268.  Arbane's Sword of Agility  I like how you're a "Christian" and yet don't follow the teachings of Christ. For this reason, you need to watch my Public vs Private video which will explain to you where you've gone wrong. Here's the link https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15269.  Arbane's Sword of Agility  "I’m saying I’m not a Nat Soc" What are you then? An international socialist? A Marxist? A Fascist? Come on tell me, which version of the anti-Semitic religion of socialism are you?
    1
  15270. I've actually answered this here https://youtu.be/rK0SuYi4Hho
    1
  15271. Yes, I'm very much aware that Orwell was a socialist. It was partly because of Orwell that I was an Anarcho-Socialist up until age 31, and why my private Facebook page still says I am an Anarcho-Socialist (I don't go on Facebook so haven't updated it). Despite being a socialist, Orwell is still my favourite fiction author and I've read many of his books and have many of his other writings and letters etc. I still agree with Orwell on a lot of things, except the idea that socialism is the solution to the problem of socialism.
    1
  15272. This is actually a Patreon question which I'll be answering in more detail at some point in the future. I have talked about Stalin making a separate peace with the Germans in this old video of mine though https://youtu.be/WVtT-NIq1Zg
    1
  15273. I think it's joint FIRST! So I'll give it you
    1
  15274. CStriker421 haha no, it's not a trick question. Quadrillion it is!
    1
  15275. Is that all one number? :)
    1
  15276. Gokotti technically yes, but I was asking for the name :P
    1
  15277. You may also be my first 'First' comment on my videos lol :)
    1
  15278. starcraft2own bonus points!
    1
  15279. If that's what you believe :D
    1
  15280. Thomas Curtis omg that's almost a bajillion!
    1
  15281. Gary Thomas haha technically you're right :D
    1
  15282. Morgan Chalmers tis true!
    1
  15283. Thegamer8324 Correct! :)
    1
  15284. "B-BUT THE COMMIE HANDING OUT PHAMPHLETS ON THE SIDEWALK TOLD ME THAT THE SOVIET UNION WAS NEVER RACIST!" Hahahahaha! Looks like they haven't read "Lenin, Stalin & Hitler" by Gellately, or "Das Kapital volume 3" by Marx ;)
    1
  15285. Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movlid_Visaitov
    1
  15286. I could be wrong, but I normally click on the watch icon at the top right of a video thumbnail to save to watch later. I thought the three dots were for reporting and ignoring videos etc like you said. Is it normally different for you? Do some channel's videos allow you to click save to watch later, but mine don't?
    1
  15287. And thank you, Yaragi, I'm glad you're enjoying them!
    1
  15288. I would use footage, but I suspect YouTube or someone else will claim the video as their own and take it down (false claim copyright strike). That's why I use all my own music too
    1
  15289. I hope Chinese is easier than learning German like I am... With their sentence structure and random gender-word assignment, it's no wonder many Germans choose to speak English (not that the "official" spelling of English words doesn't deserve criticism too)
    1
  15290. You do a podcast? But yeah I'm the same with WW1, it's not a focus but I know a reasonable amount about it and I have considered doing videos about it in the past. The big problem with WW1 for me is that the Western Front(s) are static for the most part, and there's no real dramatic attacks (Blitzkrieg-like) which topple nations, so I don't find it quite as interesting as WW2
    1
  15291. It does look like an interesting movie, and it's currently out in cinemas here. I may wait until it comes out on dvd/online though
    1
  15292. A couple years back I did a poll asking what people wanted to see. Two of the many options were the Battle of Crete, and the Battle of Stalingrad. Most people voted for Stalingrad, so I began to read up on it. I still want to do the Battle of Crete one day, but I think it will be a while away
    1
  15293. Absolutely. And we've got a long way to go yet!
    1
  15294. Sorry for the wait! If I could make them quicker, I would!
    1
  15295. This is me sticking to tanks. Did you not watch the video? https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  15296. Yes, free market medicine is cheaper and better than Nationalized/Socialized medicine https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15297. Okay smartie, if I'm so wrong, could you please calculate how efficient the German logistical system was for me? I'll wait.
    1
  15298. "1. How can you ensure efficient price negotiation in cases like Healthcare where you have little or no power of argument? If you have to pay a fortune for a surgery to say save your child's life, what are the chances that you'll calculate the efficient use of this scarce resource (money) and if it's better to use it elsewhere (say in the nascent small business u won)?" Here you go https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ - "2. Most notable companies of our era are monopolies or at best duopolies. These monopolies can and does similarly distort the market. Such monopoly isn't a result of govt. manipulation, rather a natural result. What do you say about this?" It is a result of government manipulation. Every transaction in the economy requires FIAT currency, which is printed by the Central Bank. The 'price' of that currency is determined by printing and interest rate manipulation. Therefore, before we even talk about regulations, taxation, "laws", price controls, wage controls, bribery or corruption, you have to realize that EVERY transaction is manipulated by the State. The result of all this manipulation is 1) the impoverishment of the poor and middle income earners for the benefit of the elite, and 2) the creation of monopolies (the State is a monopoly on "law", after all) and corporations (corpse, body, organ - organs of the state). This is because a small number of publicly owned corporations is easier to manage than a lot of privately owned small businesses, and the State wants more control. In reality, it is Socialism that creates monopolies, and it is free market capitalism that renders monopolies impossible. We don't have free market capitalism, and that's why we have monopolies.
    1
  15299. National health services are not more cost effective per person https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15300. When I mentioned this in a previous video, I was called a 'conspiracy theorist' by the morons. Klaus and Prince Charles are in talks with each other over this, and you can see them in videos agreeing with each other. Yet apparently, I'm a 'conspiracy theorist' for pointing this out. There are too many unthinkers in this world. Too many Chinese operatives.
    1
  15301. Healthcare? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15302. Of course there's a market for Atlantic fortifications. If people need it, and it's not an inefficient waste of resources that have alternative uses, then they will be built
    1
  15303. I think you'll find this video interesting https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15304. Oh really? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15305. Okay, so could you calculate how efficient the Germans were being for me? Also, your solution to Route 1 or 2 doesn't work. I didn't say which track was more likely to get attacked again or anything like that. It's purely about the resources. You either missed the point or didn't understand it. I would suggest you rewatch that part again and try to understand the problem properly.
    1
  15306. Ahem https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15307. As I said in the video, if there's no profit, then that means that you're either being wasteful of resources, or there's no demand for the good or service you're providing, or both. Also, big pharma is protected and funded by the state. The law says you cannot sue a pharmaceutical company if they provide a bad service or product that kills you. And the Central Banks are funding all giant corporations through inflation and interest rate manipulation. So to complain that Capitalism (private control of the means of production) is bad, when in reality the ailments of big pharma is an example of Socialism going wrong (after all, corporations are collectively owned by their shareholders), is a bit silly. Watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15308. That's Communism in a nutshell!
    1
  15309. Oh, but if it was Statist propaganda where I said how great the National Socialist Health Service was, then you'd be all for it, right? So the only reason you're against this viewpoint is because you're emotionally invested in socialist ideology.
    1
  15310. "this is why the privatised British railroad system is among the best in the world." It's not private. The State dictates the wages, the prices, and the State is the only entity that's allowed to build train lines and stations (which is why there's overcrowding). - "And why the deregulated Texan power grid can handle every weather condition." Every transaction in the USA requires dollars. Central Banks have manipulated the dollar through artificially adjusting interest rates and printing more currency. So EVERY transaction in the economy is manipulated by the state. Therefore, Texas doesn't have "unregulated capitalism". Also, Texas has taxes, regulations, and a million other state interventions. Calling it "deregulated" is simply false.
    1
  15311. Is it? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15312. Found another 77th Brigader!
    1
  15313. If you fix the price, you get shortages. Hence why there are shortages in the UK right now - because of the price fixing. So yes, setting prices and rents does lower the immediate cost for the consumer, but you have to look at the unforseen consequences. This is why I recommend you read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt because it explains this, as does "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. Also, profits indicate demand. It really does appear that you haven't thought this through, and don't understand how a free market works, which is understandable because we don't have a free market... But you really would benefit from reading up on how free markets work.
    1
  15314. It's a government department/corporation. It's owned, controlled, and financed by the State, therefore it is the State.
    1
  15315. Exactly, which is why I say "Soviet". I only use "Russia" if it's in quotes.
    1
  15316. Yes, they faced problems. Great. That doesn't explain how EFFICIENT they were being. Pay attention.
    1
  15317. The health care system in the United States is not a market system https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15318. Okay, I guess you're right that anything that's theoretical is wrong. I guess we can throw out all of Marx's and Keynes' theories afterall!
    1
  15319. "Where did you learn that from? Even in economic theory, demand would just be higher if something is free at the point of consumption but even then that would be circumvented by a queue system where someones need for a surgery or operation would be prioritized based on the urgency which sounds like a more equitable system then whoever is willing to throw more dosh around (I'm specifically referring to health care only)." Exactly, shortages of supply (due to over-demand) leads to queues. The queues are the result of a shortage brought on by infinite demand. When something is "free", that means one of two things. 1) nobody wants it, or 2) there's an infinite supply (like air). If it was in demand and wasn't in infinite supply, then it would have a price, because buyers would bid for it with money/currency. Since there isn't an infinite supply of medical services, and the price is "free", the service is overused, leading to shortages. This is basic economics. Also, watch this video on US healthcare https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ The UK prison system is run by the state, and the so-called "private rail system" isn't private. The only entity in the UK that can build train stations and train lines is the State. There are other regulations too, including price and wage controls. This is why, again, there are shortages of trains and overcrowding in stations, because the State has distorted the price system and enacted regulations that prevent the private sector from reacting properly to the problem.
    1
  15320. Yeah I'm aware of the problem. It's the camera's auto focus. I'm going to either switch to manual, or (if that doesn't work out) get a different camera.
    1
  15321. Yeah, it's not like I've not mentioned this in other videos, or that this video had nothing to do with Soviet logistics, or the fact that Lend Lease helped the Soviets get to Berlin, again as I've mentioned in previous videos...
    1
  15322. Yes, I agree. I briefly mentioned this in the video
    1
  15323. Okay smartie, what's the solution to the economic calculation problem? As you said, military logistics is overly complicated compared to all other logistics. I wonder why that is...
    1
  15324. Yeah, when two Socialist systems go head to head, one will win. That doesn't mean either were as efficient as a free market system.
    1
  15325. That's true. But that doesn't mean that the people were right. There's a reason the system collapsed in the 1970s and 1980s, and it was because Socialism always collapses https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA
    1
  15326. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15327. If the people want it, it will happen... unless they don't want it, or unless government intervenes so thoroughly in the economy that it's impossible to know the real price or anything in the economy due to central state bank manipulation of interest rates and currency printing...
    1
  15328. You are correct, we don't have a free market or Capitalism.
    1
  15329. You believe in the ideological slogan that 'profit is bad'. But is this really the case? Have you even tried to understand why an ex-socialist like myself may no longer be persuaded by such an argument any more? Have you considered that there may be another perspective on this that you haven't even considered, or heard of before, and that you're not even seeing? If you understood my perspective, you would realize how silly your previous comment sounds. I would recommend you start here https://youtu.be/G6S5c6xhXTY And here https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA
    1
  15330. Stalingrad won't be next week. I'm going them consistently every 3-4 weeks now. See 13:44 of this video https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    1
  15331. Logistics is economics. Also https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  15332. Trucks. The USA had more resources to throw at the problem. That doesn't make them more efficient though.
    1
  15333. Because the State has imposed laws preventing workers from being paid fairly. Minimum wage, for example, forces everyone at the same bracket to be paid the same. If you've ever worked a job where everyone gets paid the same, you know how insane it is. People who don't work well are paid the same as those that do. This incentivises laziness and lower production, thus increasing costs, and consumer prices. And firms cannot use internal price mechanisms because this is a fundamental problem of socialism. This is why publicly traded corporations (collectively owned by their shareholders) are inherently inefficient and can be out competed on a free market. But because we don't have a free market, and because the State prefers a small number of easily controllable corporations to millions of small private firms, they do everything they can to prop them up.
    1
  15334. But then the price goes up, signalling a high demand/profit for manufacturers, who then make more, thus increasing supply.
    1
  15335. Right https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Also, the NHS has just outright failed to provide me a dental service I desperately need, and now I'm going to have to go private. Do I get the many thousands of pounds back I've been forced to pay to the NHS? Of course not, but I will have to pay again. Our heroes... So happy with the overly expensive, State mismanaged health hell 'service'.
    1
  15336. That's not how you calculate efficiency. If they delivered those supplies with 1,000 trucks, or 100 trucks, the 100 trucks would clearly be more efficient. It's not about the amount of supplies delivered the other end, but how efficiently those supplies were delivered
    1
  15337. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15338. You're confusing "mandated insurance" with "free market". They're not the same https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15339. "However, even your linked YouTube's vision sounds like hell for those who need medical help but can't afford it. I personally would rather pay more tax and have a fairer health system." Right, so you'd rather pay 6x the amount you would normally pay, for a more wasteful and less efficient system? - "A comparison of UK vs US life expectancy and infant mortality is the biggest argument for the NHS (yes the rest of Europe does even better)." Apples and oranges. That's not necessarily because of the health care system alone. For example, a lot more Americans are obese that Europeans. Also, there has been suggestion that the NHS is downplaying/fudging the numbers regarding infant mortality, so that's a controversial issue. - "This is not to say I disagree with your overall points in the video. I'm a cell biologist and the inside of a cell runs very much like a theoretical economy and does so constantly balancing flexibility and efficiency, but it does so without any empathy whatsoever, and I would rather not live in a society like that." Okay, but here's the deal. You want a nationalized service, I don't. Why do I have to settle for a bad service just because you want to? You can still have a nationalized service if you want it, and gladly pay taxes for it. I, though, want my taxes back so that I can put them to better use. Why am I not allowed to do that? And the reason why has nothing to do with health care or anything else. The reason why is because individuals are not free to make those choices, and the nationalized and socialized health care is just an excuse to take more power, more choice and more wealth away from citizens.
    1
  15340. Really? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15341. Someone else who's not done their homework but thinks they're right https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Once you've realized that US healthcare is expensive because of State regulation, perhaps you could open your eyes and start to read into basic economic principles. Again links to the audio books of Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt and Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA And I'm not a "child of Thatcher". She was a Conservative. I'm not a conservative because conservatives are Leftwing, as I explained at 12:08 onwards in this video https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY
    1
  15342.  @matthewbadley5063  "You apparently think "nationalized" = socialism, which is simply wrong." A nation is not a society? A society is not a nation? What's the difference between the nationalization of the industries, and the socialization of the industries? Answer = NOTHING. I've been over this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "The nazis destroyed labor unions and set up a system by which they could control the workforce to stop strikes and organized labor." Yes, this is called NATIONALIZATION. It's EXACTLY what Lenin did in the Soviet Union, as I explained my Hitler's Socialism video. Again, the link is here https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 - "This only helped the capitalists who owned the factories and mines." These so-called 'capitalists' were members of the Nazi Party, which was the State. The old capitalists were thrown out (e.g. Professor Junkers) and replaced by Nazi Party members who seized the means of production. - "The Night of the Long Knives was also mainly targeted at the remaining left wing elements of the nazi party (described sometimes as the nazbols) such as Gregor Strasser and Ernst Rohm." No it wasn't, and I've explained this in the Hitler's Socialism video, backed by sources. Hitler had seized power through 'peaceful revolution' and wanted to remain in power. Rohm wanted a 'violent revolution', and so it looked like he was about to start one (he wasn't, but Hitler believed he was). Thus, Hitler removed him and 1,000 others who were a threat to him, including capitalists and conservatives (e.g. Schleicher). It had nothing to do with the 'Left wing' of the Nazi Party - that is simply false, as the evidence is clear. Go watch my Hitler's Socialism video to see that. In addition, Lenin and Stalin killed Mensheviks. I guess they weren't REAL Socialists either then? - "I've watched the video. It's pretty bad." You haven't watched the video, otherwise you'd know not to regurgitate the old debunked arguments I addressed in the video. - "A common narrative of fascists..." Are we talking about Nazis or Fascists? Because they're not the same thing https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "A common narrative of fascists is a false appeal to left wing ideology (IE adopting credulous names like national socialist). While actually working against socialist aims. That you refuse to acknowledge this is troubling." A common narrative of Socialists is a false claim that National Socialism and Fascism weren't Left Wing ideologies, and that they only 'pretended' to be part of the Left to gain votes, when the evidence shows that it was the OPPOSITE. They were Left Wing ideologies, but Nazism pretended to be moderates (center) in order to appeal to the middle-classes. Mussolini didn't even bother because he seized power without being elected, so the Socialist narrative doesn't even work there because Mussolini had no incentive to pretend to be anything other than what he was - a National Syndicalist with a Philosophy of Actualism. Again https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - Please stop spouting the same LIES that I have already debunked in previous videos. You're distorting history.
    1
  15343.  @matthewbadley5063  Late reply but still worth replying too. The Nazis didn't work for capitalists, but against them, they nationalized/socialized the trade unions and crushed those that refused to nationalize, and the Night of the Long Knives had nothing to do with ideology (and they also killed capitalists during that event). I've been over all of this in-depth in my Hitler's Socialism video, using 107 sources, 350 direct references, lots of quotes and discussions and so on. Please watch it, or stop spreading nonsense about the Nazis not being National Socialists https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  15344. Rejecting basic economics sounds absurd and idealistic. The free market creates prices, which allows for economic calculation, and therefore will provide the technical possibility to calculate the needs of the front line. Without those prices you cannot make economic calculation.
    1
  15345. "But putting the blame at insurance companies doesn't solve the problem." No, watch the full video - OBAMACARE caused the problem.
    1
  15346. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15347. It's not "free", and it's certainly NOT at the point of need. Now, I'm not arguing to abolish it - I'm just arguing for a choice. If I had the choice of not paying for the National Socialist Health Service, then I wouldn't. I'd put the currency I'm paying for that into a proper healthcare provider (and before you say it would be dearer, it's not, I've checked the prices). Also this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15348. Spot the benefit scrounger!
    1
  15349. And if the quicker results end up costing more resources to complete? Being quicker by itself doesn't necessarily mean it's better or more efficient.
    1
  15350. It's socialists and Keynesians who don't understand basic economics, nor anything else. This is why their narrative is so easily torn apart. For example, the word "inflate" does not mean "rise". Yet all the central planners and central bankers say that "inflation" is a "rise in prices". No it is not. They don't even understand basic English... Except they do. They understand this perfectly. But they've changed the definition of words to hide what they're doing because what they're doing is politics, not economics.
    1
  15351. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Also, the NHS plainly sucks. It's only seen as a great thing by millions of benefit scroungers (who don't actually have to pay for it), and people who don't understand basic economics. It's a poor service, delivered sometimes but not always, and is incredibly expensive. For example, I wasted two entire days trying to get through to the NHS dentists line, and then they finally picked up the lady asked for my postcode but then put the phone down before I had a chance to say it all. I'm now having to go private and pay a second time for a service I haven't received from the NHS but have paid for. Do I get the many thousands I've paid in taxes back? Of course not.
    1
  15352. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15353. Oh really? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15354. And I'll just leave this here https://twitter.com/ToddHagopian/status/1080281399557537792?s=20
    1
  15355. I'll just leave this here https://www.reddit.com/r/Shitstatistssay/comments/nruiv3/something_something_control_of_interest_rates_and/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
    1
  15356. Surprisingly not 😂
    1
  15357. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15358. "You can always train more engineers to make up a shortage" Manpower is also in short supply. Is it better to train more engineers? Or sailors, soldiers, truck drivers, train drivers, radio operators...?
    1
  15359. They chased the cheapest supplier because government regulations, inflation and taxation force them to overly cut corners. Plus the suppliers are subject to government regulations, inflation and taxation too, resulting in them cutting corners.
    1
  15360. They ran out of oil in the October of 1941. I've been over this https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  15361. If you make something "free", then you make demand for it infinite. Since there isn't an infinite supply, then you get shortages. This is the inherent problem with the NHS in the UK. Healthcare itself doesn't have a near infinite demand - it only does if you distort the price system. Relevant video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15362. Your statist views are perfectly balanced and definitely not wrong. All within the State, right?
    1
  15363. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15364. Due to State regulations and propaganda, YouTube's policy regarding that issue prevents me from providing you with an appropriate response. There is a counter-argument, but I'm not allowed to give it. Ignorance is strength. Although what I can say is that they're not private due to regulations, laws, taxation, and currency manipulation. One half of every transaction is completed with currency, and the price of that currency is set by the State Central Banks' interest rate manipulation and currency printing. Therefore EVERY price in the economy is distorted. Nothing is truly free. And there is no private property. Try not paying your property tax and see how long you can hold onto 'your' property.
    1
  15365. "By the way the NHS doesn't have a literal shortage of beds" When something is made "free" (unlimited demand) then supply must become unlimited. When supply isn't unlimited, then you have a shortage. - "Yes the same way $6/h minimum wage in 1977 is way less than $7.25/h minimum wage in 2021... The artificial limit is on employment." https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ - "Come on, if your house is valued at the same price 12 years after you bought it, you should know you lost value." That's due to inflation, which is created by the State Central Bank. The first 60 pages of America's Great Depression by Murray Rothbard explains this process perfectly https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression - Also, this https://youtu.be/6oz9K6tpIvE
    1
  15366. @Napoleon Bonaparte  Rehearted! (I didn't realize that editing a comment would remove a heart, so that's interesting) Also yes, I added the date correction in the pinned comment 👍
    1
  15367. "You appear to have missed the point of health care in the UK." What? That it's expensive, inefficient, bloated, terrible, slow, and takes freedom and choice away from individuals? - "No drama... no longer subscribed." There was no drama. You stated something that was false, I corrected you with evidence, this hurt your feelings, and now you're going to walk away. Well, you have the choice to walk away, and I won't stop you. I just wish you and all the Statists out here would grant me the right to walk away from the NHS, inflation and theft-based tax system.
    1
  15368. You can keep the NHS. I just want my money back so I can go with a better service that's cheaper and doesn't do a terrible job. (And yes, I have checked the prices for private healthcare. Also this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ )
    1
  15369.  @PunishedRalph  "In this case, the German military was providing a service to Germany which was paying for them to operate. This being the case, the German military was not itself incurring a debt as a failing business was, it was the German state." Yes, except the people didn't want the war (and I'm not just saying that, there's plenty of evidence of this in the literature), and the State didn't operate via an undistorted price system (a free market). It didn't get its income like a normal business would. It got its income by seizing wealth from its people - taxation, inflation and through debt. As I showed in the video, and have gone into detail about in the Hitler's Socialism video, the Reichsbank was printing currency and exporting its inflation to the conquered territories so as to keep the Reich propped up. This is why the Greeks were starved during the war https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk The point is, the German Army was providing a service... but at the waste of massive amounts of resources. This is why the State was getting into heavier and heavier debt, and the economy was imploding. That's why Hitler HAD to go to war - if he hadn't invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland when he did, the Reichs' economy would have imploded. Gotz Aly explains this in his "Hitler's Beneficiaries" book. - "Likewise, it was the British state incurring the debt for the British Armed forces - so how can we tell based on their profits which was more efficient, given neither were making a loss or a profit?" Exactly. This is the economic calculation problem I explained in the video, and what Mises explains in his book "Socialism" - https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis - "Were the different governments confronting the threat of the Axis not providing a service people actually wanted because they weren't in profit? I certainly think people in many nations were in agreement that it was worth defeating the Axis. " If people wanted it, they would pay for it. They had to pay for it anyway since the State's income can only come from one source - its citizens. So if they wanted war, then you may as well allow the free market to work because it's more efficient for the reasons I explained in the video. - "It occurs to me that analysing these things through the lense of operating as a business is not that useful, and that you have pigeonholed yourself into this view with the whole austrian school thing." I pointed out why the Germans couldn't make economic calculations, which was the inherent problem with their logistics. I've offered the solution to this problem. If you have a different solution to the socialist economic calculation problem, please state it.
    1
  15370. There is no private healthcare (or anything else) in the UK. EVERYTHING is regulated by the State, or uses the State's currency which is manipulated by interest rate and currency printing, both of which distort prices. Therefore nothing is truly under private control in the UK. Secondly, the State steals resources from the supposedly non-State sectors of the economy via interest rate setting, currency printing and taxation. It then hands part of that stolen wealth to the NHS and other "services" (keeping the rest for itself). So technically yes, the NHS gets its funding from the private sector market, but only via force, not by voluntary exchange.
    1
  15371. Yes, and don't forget that Britain gave the USA all her money and then, after going bankrupt, got into a ton of debt towards the USA which wasn't paid off until 2006. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/britain-only-settled-debts.html
    1
  15372. You may find this video thought provoking https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15373. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15374. Are you sure? https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15375. The current system is a game of monopoly. The central distribution system of the army has monopoly control. What economists will tell you is that it's the least efficient system. Just because you don't understand why that is the case doesn't mean it's not true.
    1
  15376. Right https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15377. When the supply is "free", then people overuse it (demand). Thus, by not charging for its "services", the NHS has shortages and long waiting times. It's inherent to the system. A private system rations out it's services through the price system. This lowers demand (people who only have mild ailments would stay at home and not waste the doctor's time) and profits will increase supply. Also, a lovely video for you here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15378. The Red Army wouldn't have used free market logistics because it was Socialist. Not sure why you would even suggest that.
    1
  15379. Watch this https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  15380. Follow the science https://youtu.be/Xy3tP-BW5do
    1
  15381. Always ask the question: "But is this really the case?" If their narrative is so undeniable, they wouldn't need to censor opposition to it. The fact the State have an entire brigade of the British Army going onto social media to police people's thoughts, whilst also promoting blatant racism ("Offices of Diversity" "educating" state workers in Marxist "Critical Race Theory" to make all people who work for the State racist, even though Race is a pseudo-scientific religious belief) should be a big red flag to you
    1
  15382. Honestly, reading the comments of that video gives me a headache. Too many salty tears, even for me 😂
    1
  15383. I addressed everything you said in the video, including the stuff A J P Taylor wrote. Try actually watching the video, anti-Semite.
    1
  15384. What exactly does he say? And why exactly does what he says suck?
    1
  15385. Ville metsänmiettijä Neither I'm afraid!
    1
  15386. Gary Thomas but how many dimensions are there?
    1
  15387. starcraft2own ...in your own special way :P
    1
  15388. Cameron Thompson lol I'm going to steal that joke, cheers!
    1
  15389. Very good! Do you know what Uranus' first name was? If you do, hop over to this QOTW video and see what everyone else said https://youtu.be/54T11d9S2qs
    1
  15390. gmsimpson05 Venus was right!
    1
  15391. starcraft2own awww considering the size of the machine, that would have been a nice/sarcastic name for it. Sadly it's not lol
    1
  15392. Dowly Oh yes! :)
    1
  15393. Tomislav yes! No need for the sad face!
    1
  15394. CStriker421 it is an Enigma breaker, although it wasn't the first one!
    1
  15395. Thegamer8324 ok I'll check
    1
  15396. I didn't say "animal protein & fat intake". I said vegetarian. Hitler and Mussolini were eating carbs too, including lots of pasta and bread etc. Some believe that wheats and pasta are good for you, and substitute meat and even eggs for them. Well, they're not good for you. But I disagree with the idea that animal fats and proteins cause irritable bowl syndrome and cancers etc. Maybe for some, but certainly not for many on keto. If that was the case then humans would have died off years ago, considering we evolved to eat meat (hence our big brains, which came about because we ate meat).
    1
  15397. Yes, I forgot to mention it, but again that was late-war. And it was apparently a common treatment for Hitler's specific eye issue (Ohler mentions this)
    1
  15398. https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label
    1
  15399. FYI the clip comes from 08:00 of this video https://youtu.be/pfVdMWzKwjc
    1
  15400. Yeah, I forgot to mention that, but the cocaine eye drops was later on as well (1944, off the top of my head)
    1
  15401. I really don't like the idea of alt-history. Yes, we can say "if they did this, then the situation would have improved", but the butterfly effect means that you really can't see too far into the future after a changed event because everyone would have reacted differently. In theory, Hitler could have been captured. But who knows who would have captured him (had he decided that surrender was the best option, he may have fled west), and who knows how they would have treated him once he had been captured. Trial? A fate similar to Mussolini? Could he have fled to a different country and lived like a hermit? It's impossible to say.
    1
  15402. Please enlighten me
    1
  15403. You're now internet famous! Congrats! :D
    1
  15404. I've said this before but it's worth repeating - there's a difference between 'school' and 'education'.
    1
  15405. Yes, I spoke out both those points in the video. I do think we need another historian (probably also someone who's more medically educated) to dive into the sources a bit more.
    1
  15406. 1. Humans are not dogs. 2. There's more articles than this, but this pretty much sums it up https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/
    1
  15407. Please watch this video in it's entirety. It will explain the schedule and why you can't have a Battlestorm every week https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU Also, my Patreons and SubscribeStars fund the channel. They deserve to have their questions answered
    1
  15408. Both of those are war crimes, as are the deliberate starvation of millions of people, e.g. https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk
    1
  15409. They are coordinated, and their coordinating ideology is called Marxism. Klaus Schwab is a Marxist Socialist. By "stakeholder capitalism", what he means is Revolutionary Syndicalism (aka Fascism, which is just another name for Socialism).
    1
  15410. The science doesn't agree with you https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/1998-10/WUiS-GSRD-071098.php https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ Even Wikipedia gets this right (which is surprising) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
    1
  15411. No, not at all. I do want to do (and have done a few) non-WW2 topics though, especially the inter-war period and WW1. Why?
    1
  15412. Calling people names, or calling arguments names ("conspiracy theories") doesn't work. It may be the typical tactic of the Lamestream media (which are owned by giant monopoly corporations who are themselves getting money from the Socialist Central Banks) but that is a poor way to do history or science. You need to tackle the other person's points with facts and logic. So I would encourage you to put your emotions away and start using reason. Marxism (the ideology that Klaus Schwab believes in) is not a "conspiracy theory". All Socialists openly proclaim their intention to conquer the world (a "world revolution", or "great reset").
    1
  15413. Fascism is not the same as National Socialism, and I've explained that here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko?si=DTu7tjXRSi60ONoF
    1
  15414. Capitalism isn't how you described it. Please watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15415. Carr's views on history are out of date. In the description of my videos is a link to my History Theory video. That will bring you up to date.
    1
  15416. It's almost as if I said this in the video
    1
  15417. Anarcho (non-state) - syndicalism (state monopoly trade unions/corporations). It's a ridiculous ideology. If you haven't seen my "Public vs Private" video, you may want to because I explain how this ideology doesn't make any sense.
    1
  15418. Yes, there was a Second Book. I've even had National Socialists in the comment sections quoting from it. You can purchase it on Amazon, and while I don't normally like linking to Wikipedia, here's more information about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweites_Buch
    1
  15419. Property rights were abolished under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. Also, whether it's national or international is irrelevant, because nationalism (we the national group) and internationalism (we the class/gender group) are both group (public) ideologies, which is Leftism.
    1
  15420. I will, but probably when I cover Operation Torch
    1
  15421. Yes, and I covered that here https://youtu.be/k_xy7RCm5Ho
    1
  15422. Yay :D
    1
  15423. Good to hear! I'm using Fruity Loops
    1
  15424. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/inside-the-77th-brigade-britains-information-warfare-military
    1
  15425. As someone who's a (very minor) public figure, I'm beginning to wonder if something like that will happen too. If it does, don't believe a word I say.
    1
  15426. If you haven't seen this website before, you might find it interesting http://pricedingold.com/
    1
  15427. I'm using the historical definition of the word socialism. Watch this video all the way through to understand https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15428. Isolating yourself for work, hobbies and study is good practice 👍
    1
  15429. Try this political spectrum https://images.app.goo.gl/tfojGJmcMfoEtHZaA Or this https://images.app.goo.gl/RGENY4UrF6eN8JBr6 Monarchy is probably somewhere in the centre or centre right, going off this alternative political spectrum.
    1
  15430. I guess you need a history lesson https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (yes, the video is relevant to what you said, even if it doesn't seem like it at first)
    1
  15431. Yes https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  15432. "Very good video until the end. Your interpretation of left and right is a false axiom. Anarchism for example isn't right wing." Of course it is https://images.app.goo.gl/GXNz74W6MLWgLwNP9 - "You have attached left and right to more state and less state." Yes, because the old political spectrum ( https://images.app.goo.gl/nFnL8aMvmWLpwfYw5 ) makes zero sense. - "The right respects hierarchy cultural and religious institutions and the old Christian order whilst the left wishes to continue the revolution." Oh wow, I must be a Leftist Capitalist then. And it sounds like the Marxists are Right-wing (minus the Christian bit, since their religion is a bit different), since they demand social (hierarchical) control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15433. "In syndicalism ideology there is not a single central syndicate but several small with a direct democracy and no laws or bureaucracy." They are small direct-democratic states. "Far from something how can be called a state." A state is not some far off central authority. It can be as small as one factory. This is why the factory owner used to be called the 'governor' of his factory. If the workers rise up and take over the factory, they become the state of that factory. A state is just a politically organized community.
    1
  15434. A state is a 'politically organized community'. Syndicalism is trade unions (an organized community) in power (political). Syndicalism is the state.
    1
  15435. Thanks!
    1
  15436. I was meant to say "death camps" rather than "concentration camps".
    1
  15437. Hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  15438. The only way the rich can get rich is if you give them money. They get all the money, and you get all the goods and services. They can only get rich if they give back to society. Thus, while they do get rich, living standards rise along with them. When you prevent people from investing or creating businesses, living standards decrease or don't rise as quickly, which is what we've seen in recent years.
    1
  15439. You've misrepresented what my views on National Socialism are. Please see my recent video on Hitler's Vampire Economy. And I do plan to do more videos on National Socialist ideology in the future.
    1
  15440. Democracy itself is 'People' 'Power'. Except the 'People' are the 'Public' and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State Power (Socialism) Long video, but I think you'll enjoy it - https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15441. I've been over this in this video. Watch the full thing to understand https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15442.  @lukadinicc2229  I have read Marxist ideologies, including Luxemburg, and I understand the Night of the Long Knives. "if socialism/communism sounds just sounds nice then how do you explain that workers in USSR had more freedom over their workplace then in the west?" They didn't. A worker in the west is free to leave his employer. A Soviet citizen had no such luxury. "You call anarcho communism a oxymoron yet you think anarcho capitalism isn't." Anarcho Capitalism is anarcho (non-state) and capitalism (private control). That's not oxymoronic. The individual has total authority and total economic freedom. Anarcho-Socialism is anarcho (non-state) and socialism (group control). That's oxymoronic. The individual has no economic freedom, since they have submitted to the group, which in turn means they cannot have total individual authority. The less economic freedom you have, the less individual authority you have.
    1
  15443. You want freedom for the individual? So do I. I believe every individual should be able to do what they want so long as they don't harm others. Therefore we should give maximum freedom to the individual within a lawful society (no murder or violence, but you can go and do whatever else you want). This is why I'm a classic-liberal who believes in the free market. A market is two people - a buyer and a seller. A free market is a market where the buyer and seller are free to make their own decisions on what they buy and sell. A non-free market is when the state gets involved in their transactions and forces them to do something they don't want to do, e.g. regulations or taxes that force a seller to sell something different. A free market is maximum liberty and freedom to the individuals within it. A black market is an example of a free market. You cannot have a black market unless you have a state-controlled economy. This is why the US and UK have black markets for drugs - they are not free market economies. They are (mostly) state controlled. 'Private' is non-state and individual. It is the opposite of 'public' which means non-individual and state (publicum, Latin for state). This is why we call the state the public sector. A public is a state. A private is an individual. To have maximum freedom for the individual, we want more private control. To have maximum freedom and liberty to the individual, you need to give them as much individual (private) control as possible. If you give the state (public) more control, then the individual has less control. Socialism is collective/communal control of the economy. Collective is a group. And since a 'politically organized community' is a state, a group that's in political control is a state (public). Any organized group in political control (public, common, worker, race, nationality etc) is a state. This is why communism and socialism mean: state control of the economy. The fancy words (common-control, public-control, worker-control etc) are just there to hide the true meaning of what socialism and communism actually are. Many are fooled into thinking they stand for freedom or liberty, which they don't. This is why Orwell wrote the phrase "Freedom is Slavery" because people honestly think that the individual will get more freedom under socialism. Don't be fooled by the rhetoric - it is aiming for state control, not private control. An organized group in political control is the state, no matter the size. If a worker's trade union seizes a factory, they become to government of that factory. The previous owner of the factory was a 'governor' - literally they used to be called governors - and when the group takes over, they become the factory government. The conception of 'the state' as some far off entity is incorrect. A state can be as small as a house or as large as entire countries or continents (perhaps as large as the universe one day). It is not some far off 'blind power', it is simply a politically organized community. Anarcho-communism or anarcho-socialism or anarcho-syndicalism are all oxymorons. You cannot have non-state state-control. It is impossible. Anarcho-capitalism is possible (though stupid in my opinion) since it's non-state private control of the economy. Non-state non-state. Anarchy is maximum freedom of the individual, which is why it's on the Right of the political spectrum in my video. Or indeed these ones https://images.app.goo.gl/crFktXxASf8bGGDcA https://images.app.goo.gl/rPLyoMznDikMEU6W6 Nationalism is left wing, because all groups (public, state) being in control politically are states. If state control is on the Left, then nationalism is on the Left - which was it's original position during the French Revolution. Anarchism is the actual Far-Right as it is maximum freedom to the individual. The Nazis and Fascists are arguably Right of the Far Left Marxists, but they are still on the Left (some think centre, but I disagree). Capitalism (private individual control of the economy) is on the Right, as is democracy and freedom. So yes, one man's 'freedom' is another man's 'slavery'. It does appear that some people actually want to be slaves. They don't want individual freedom and see that as slavery. But it is not slavery. A slave is someone who is forced to obey someone else. A state or collective which forces you to obey them is not freedom. True freedom and liberty comes from making your own choices - classic liberalism.
    1
  15444. Wow, you have been watching for quite some time. I think many people assume that my channel has suddenly become controversial, when in reality it always has been (Market Garden) and will continue to be. Challenging people's perceptions and asking tough questions is what I'm doing here, so thank you for your advice. I have been considering moving away from the Left to Right spectrum, but each time I try to do so, I end up back at it. When you give individuals economic power, you give them political power and thus reduce the power (authority) of the state. Similarly when you reduce the economic power of the individual, you increase the political power of the state. This is why anarcho-socialism looks exactly like bog standard socialism - you cannot have anarchy where the colletive has power (hierarchy) over the individual. I may have to do a video explaining this because, as you point out, there's a lot of viewpoints and misconceptions... so we'll see. But thanks!
    1
  15445. If authority is on the right, then Marxism would be on the Right since the individual must obey the collective authority.
    1
  15446. If power to the individual is on the Right, and collectivism is on the Left, then yes it is https://images.app.goo.gl/w35tZ6GpWYsqNZ6t5 https://images.app.goo.gl/ZiRbDbe3WcF1A8wq8 https://images.app.goo.gl/Y2Wp5xRC8EbeyqCp9
    1
  15447. Also, Lenin and Stalin both killed socialists. I guess they're not socialist either then?
    1
  15448. Please read Farrell's "Mussolini" and stop claiming that total state (totalitarian) control of the means of production is not socialism
    1
  15449. Could be. But I see it more like this https://images.app.goo.gl/B3Lbf4yvSwMb7FMf6
    1
  15450. Of course corporations can create things... But that doesn't mean they should be able to forcefully enslave and steal wealth off other people, and then declare that "the law". It also doesn't mean they should forcefully divert the resources they've stolen from others to themselves, ruining the non-corporate elements in society. This is what Socialism does. I'd rather have technology be created a bit slower and more efficiently, than us all being enslaved, but get the next iPhone a few decades earlier than we would have done otherwise.
    1
  15451. Newspeak is claiming that the definition of Socialism doesn't exist. Stupidity is saying there's never been REAL Socialism, or claiming I've been defeated in my arguments, when in reality I haven't. If you don't know what Socialism is, you can't say I'm wrong.
    1
  15452. According to people who are on the Left, yes
    1
  15453. I've given the historical definition of Fascism here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  15454. "Did you read Homage to Catalonia after your Spanish Civil War video or before it." Before. Read it years ago. - "Being A Democratic Socialist is legitimate political position especially on the Libertarian end there is no error in a democracy people from other Democratic Party are not people in error." Being a Libertarian and a Socialist is an oxymoron. Are you for freedom of individual rights (liberal), or for freedom of the social-hierarchy (state/socialism)? https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (Public vs Private) - "That one statement say a lot about your series of revisionist political videos " Revisionism is what historians do https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 (my video on 'Revisionism') - "That have other channels covering the Second World War that Hitler was not a socialist." History lies in the heart of the debate. They're entitled to have their interpretations, just as I am. See my history theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - "Do you wonder why Beevor or Hastings class the Nazi’s as Facist or why the night of long Knifes happened in 1933 when Hitler was made Chancellor." I explained the Night of the Long Knives in my Hitler's Socialism video. See description for timestamp to "The “Hitler Killed Ernst Röhm” Fallacy 04:08:00" https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 - "Or who Hitler met Gobbel’s though and why that guy was side lined in the party then assinated. The George Orwell could of gained some political power by going into a left wing coalition with either communists or social democrats." I don't know what you're referring to here. Could you clarify? What has George Orwell got to do with gaining political power in Nazi Germany? Are you a bot? - "It because since Hitler became leader of Nazi he aligned himself with Conservative & Nationalists groups within Germany." Yes. Covered this in the Hitler's Socialism video. - "The soviet communists under Lenin & Stalin were awful human beings who killed Multi Millions. The Nazi killed Millions & planned to kill much much more." Yes. Socialism is evil and leads people to see economics as a zero-sum game. - "These are massive events of the last century to put both political party’s responsible under the heading’s of left wing socialism just because Hitler used the term to hoodwink support from some of the working class does a massive disservice to history & young people who use you as a historical source." He hoodwinked the working class as much as the Marxists did. Marxism doesn't help the working class, it hurts it. That's why they present themselves as helping the working class - to trick them into supporting a regime that will destroy them. - "But that does not change the fact Hitler was killer of Millions & planned to kill millions more, who came to power in a German Conservative & nationalist coalition." A nation is a society. Nationalism is Socialism. Also, once he was in power, he backstabbed the Conservatives, as I explained in the Hitler's Socialism video.
    1
  15455. "I going to just assume at this point your going to try to use an Orwell essay to prove Hitler was a Socialist." Nope. Not at all.
    1
  15456. "Read Homage to Catalonia & why I write F.F.S." I've read them. Orwell is my favourite fiction author. You're forgetting that I also used to be a socialist, but (luckily) realized the error of my ways, after discovering that Hitler was a Socialist.
    1
  15457. Who said I missed anything? Just because I quote Orwell doesn't mean that I agree with him, or that we haven't moved on since 1944. When I read a primary source, I don't just fully accept everything that's said.
    1
  15458. Left: Socialism is Capitalism!
    1
  15459. @Christopher Beer - "No, socialism calls for collective OWNERSHIP of the means of production." Ownership and control are two sides of the same coin. If you're in control of something, you're in de facto ownership of it. "In Nazi Germany, the means of production remained in private ownership, even if the State exercised more control" The industries were nationalized/socialized and were under Nazi-Party/State control. They were not in private ownership or control. I've been over this in the Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 The idea that they "privatized" the industries is Marxist propaganda. The Nazis nationalized/socialized the industries under a policy known as "Gleichschaltung" (Synchronization)
    1
  15460. @James the Other One - except, a collective/society is a State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15461. Socialism calls for the collective control of the means of production. Marxism calls for the collective control of the means of production on the international level. Fascism calls for the collective control of the means of production on the national level.
    1
  15462. "People forget that an important difference between socialism and fascism is that in theory in a pure socialist state everyone is 100% equal. Fascism believes in the superiority of one national or ethnic group. " What about the bourgeoisie? "P.S. George Orwell himself was a socialist.(but didnt like Stalin/Communism)" That's why he named Big Brother's evil Party - Ingsoc (English Socialism) In reality, Orwell was a Socialist at the beginning but was turning against Socialism at the end, having begun to realize its true nature.
    1
  15463. The definition of Fascism is: National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism. And this video will explain why https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Also, Orwell's title may be misleading... but that was the title he gave. My linked video does define Fascism and isn't misleading, but I wanted this video out first so that people could hear why some don't want to accept the true definition of Fascism.
    1
  15464. @Aidan B. I agree, YouTube is broken, and is a clear example of why hierarchies of society don't work. They should just allow the private individuals to comment as they wish instead of trying to socially control the private individuals
    1
  15465. But but but....
    1
  15466. You don't learn by being lectured to. That is the lie fed to you in the State school system. You teach yourself by working hard, studying and thinking critically.
    1
  15467. The main takeaway is that nobody knows what Fascism is because nobody is willing to admit what it is https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  15468. To be fair, Antifa are Fascist in all but name, yet they have no idea what Fascism actually is, and so don't understand why they're struggling to find the Fascists they want to fight. They should look themselves in the mirror https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  15469. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend this other video of mine where I give the technical definition of Fascism and explain why it's so https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  15470. @MrZauberelefant okay, thank you too
    1
  15471. @Aiden B. Are you still trolling? I and my other viewers have already defeated you numerous times now in several videos, and the best you can come back with is: "The lack of self awareness is astounding. Or perhaps it's just ego?" Well done. Very impressive. Still waiting for you to actually make an argument.
    1
  15472. ""Public" and "private" are distinct terms in economic theory" Yes, they are. That's why I did an entire video on it. I not only showed exactly what they are historically, I pulled up economic definitions, and I even pulled up dictionary definitions. There's a reason a 'private' in the army is an individual. - "According to you, er would be living in global socialism since the first stock Exchange was launched, which is laughable." Is a global community collectively controlling the means of production via central banks an individual, or a collective? - "You furnished a Definition of established terms to match your Agenda." How is it an 'agenda' to point out what words mean? Have you read the terms in the dictionary? Or are even the dictionaries wrong now? Are the historical records wrong? Are the economic theories all wrong too? Please watch the Public vs Private video. - "Tons of research Sometimes lead to wrong results." No, ZERO research leads to wrong results. - "Wonderful that you can dismiss any counterargument." Explaining something and supporting it with evidence (107 sources, listed at the beginning of the videos) is not me 'dismissing' it. YOU are dismissing what I'm saying. Literally, look at what you're saying - 'Tons of research Sometimes lead to wrong results.' I mean, how is that even an argument? 'You're wrong' is not an argument. - "You make the case that the theft of jewish property was nationalization, which can be considered. You make this out to be socialist." What's the difference between the nationalization of the means of production, and the socialization of the means of production? A nation is a society, is it not? - "So, the united states and their theft of Native lands would as Well as privately owned slaves would make the US socialist as well?" I don't know the circumstances of the Native lands. But slavery is not capitalism. There's a reason the British were the first nation to free the slaves - they were the first capitalists, and realized that capitalism only works if individuals have money. Slaves don't have money, and so freedom from slavery was embraced. Capitalism cannot work with slavery, because the individual is not free to participate in the market. - "And when was IG Farben anything but a private owned contractor to the state? If the ownership is the state, yes, that's socialism, See "Arisierung" . I accept that." Who was in charge of I G Farben? Oh, that's right, the Nazis. Every member of the board of directors for IG Farben was a member of the Nazi Party - the State - put there by the Nazis during their consolidation of power. IG Farben became a department of the State in all but name. Far from 'privatization', the Nazi policy was Synchronization (Gleichschaltung). I explained this in my video. - "But if the ownership is NOT the state, then it's suddenly socialism as well? Doubtful." Socialism is State control. It may not be the CENTRAL State - it could be a State within a State. A corporation is a state, because not only is it a hierarchy of society (a public) owned collectively by its shareholders and consists of thousands of people (and therefore is not an individual/private), but the word 'corporate' literally means 'group', and also comes from 'corpse' or 'body', meaning 'body of the people' (public). - "And calling Adam Smith not a capitalist would only leave Ayn Rand and Maggie Thatcher as true capitalists. I think you don't want to go down that road, do you?" If Adam Smith was calling for State control of the means of production, then he was not a Capitalist. State control of the means of production is Socialism.
    1
  15473. I G Farben was nationalized as I explained in the Hitler's Socialism video. Go into the description of that video and you'll find a timestamp to the section called "Privatization". Krupp and the others were too, although I didn't mention them in the video. Denying that the State didn't nationalize Jewish property is an insult to all the Jews who lost their lives in the Holocaust. What do you think the theft of private Jewish property by the social German collective is? Nothing says that Socialism abolishes money. Only Marxism wants the destruction of money because as Marx said: “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Karl Marx, On the Jewish Question. But other Socialisms don't necessarily want the destruction of money. So long as money is nationalized/socialized, then that's fine, which is why Karl Marx also called for Central Banking in the Communist Manifesto. Capitalism is about a volunteer economy. It's about the abolishment of corporations - so the abolishment of government. It's about the abolition of slavery (tax, coercion, forceful acquisition of wealth, inflation etc). It's about giving all power back to the private individual that the Socialist State has taken off them. If Thomas Hobbs argued for a strong state, then he is not a Capitalist, just like Andrew Yang is calling himself a Capitalist even though he's begging for Universal Basic Income (Universal Basic Inflation). "Enterprises" is not Capitalism. That's where the Socialist lie has seeped into the narrative. Private means individual. Private property means the property of individuals. It doesn't mean the collective control of property by hierarchies of society, which is actually Socialism, as I've explained in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I know plenty about these ideologies. I've studied them, and used to be a Socialist myself. It's you I feel sorry for. As an ex-Socialist, I know that you're where I used to be - unable to understand why anyone wouldn't vote for Socialism. That's because, like me, your State education system has only given you one side of the argument and not the other. As I explained in my Hitler's Socialism video, as soon as I realized that Hitler was a Socialist, I suddenly realised that I'd been lied to all the way through my State education system. I hope you can put down the pitchfork for one minute and listen to an ex-Socialist who's done the hard work for you and provided you with two videos that will lay it all out. Watch the Public vs Private video, then the Hitler's Socialism video. You will be thankful that you did.
    1
  15474. Really? The Labour Party who dominated the postwar period in Britain, who built the National Socialist Health Service, and Social Services, and Socialized the industries and the railways etc wasn't Socialism? You "don't see it that way"? Well, you obviously haven't heard the evidence which I've provided in a 5 hour video that has 107 sources, 350 references, and a ton of quotes that show you that Hitler did in fact nationalize the economy https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And as far as evidence for Socialists claiming that Capitalism is things that it isn't, just look at the comments of that video in question. A million times I've heard people claim that Capitalism is about starving the poor, or stealing money, or building giant monopoly corporations, or beating the downtrodden, or destroying the health of the people etc... Not one of these things is true. Even Karl Marx got this wrong, saying that Capitalism steals from the workers. As I showed in the Hitler's Socialism video, and the Public vs Private video, this is completely false.
    1
  15475. @MrZauberelefant - yes, I've been over this. Fascists and National Socialists believed they were advocating a Third Way between Capitalism and Marxism - that third way was Socialism.
    1
  15476. It could also be National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  15477. Yes, national socialism with a small "n" and a small "s". It wasn't the National Socialism of Hitler's Socialism though. As I've explained in my other video, Hitler's Socialism was Racial Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  15478. Just a quick video, since yesterday's video was restricted
    1
  15479. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    1
  15480. Not once does he mention State control (socialism). He also says the Nazis were fascists, and that all fascists were racists - two statement which are incorrect (one of Mussolini's mistresses - Margherita Sarfatti- was Jewish and 10,000 Jews were members of the Italian Fascist Party). This is why I prefer to rely on the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    1
  15481. I prefer to rely on the works of those who actually created the doctrine - Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini - rather than relying upon someone who wasn't a member of the Fascist Movement.
    1
  15482. That Fascism is Socialism, and that Conservatives are also calling for Socialism-lite
    1
  15483. Fascism is anti-English https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15484. If I had turned on monetization, this would have also been monetizing Orwells work. That's why I wrote that, confirming that I hadn't monetized the video.
    1
  15485. Apparently someone made a T-shirt saying something like "1984 has arrived", and the Blair estate decided to take him down
    1
  15486. You realize I was quoting from Orwell throughout this? Right? This wasn't me saying any of this, I was just quoting?
    1
  15487. @Михаил Воробьёв - Sounds like Georgi Dimitrov doesn't know what Fascism is and needs to study history.
    1
  15488. Trump is an idiot. But everything Left of him is Socialism https://images.app.goo.gl/7RMuDAVuKExMHhvz8
    1
  15489. You didn't watch the video. His entire argument was flawed, as I've explained.
    1
  15490. Debating history is what history is about. However, Mr Nigel Askey decided to attack and insult me, which is not what you should be doing in a debate. That's why I say in the video - I took so long to respond because I didn't feel Mr Nigel Askey deserved a response. Had he approached me in a civil manner, then that would have been different.
    1
  15491. I'm sorry you think I'm promoting Bolshevik propaganda, despite me calling it out so much that the Marxists hate me...
    1
  15492. Oh wow, thank you! What put you off before? The Nigel Askey article?
    1
  15493. He has published a few books on Barbarossa
    1
  15494. "I mean there is enough written out there to make a credible (to the lay person) takedown of tik without using sources he already dismissed earlier in the article." You must remember that, like this article, it has to stand up to scrutiny.
    1
  15495. Nigel Askey isn't a YouTuber, he's a professional historian who's got several published books
    1
  15496. Thank you! Have you got books published? WW2 ones?
    1
  15497. "Include NKVD losses but not Waffen SS?" Yeah, I really can't understand his excuse for not including the Waffen SS. It just doesn't make any sense
    1
  15498. "Recently finished a 3,500 word article on Savo Island that took two months to write." Come on, speed up! ;) - "Good narrative work, though there are no endnotes or footnotes, so it's hard to pin down source of quotes." Yeah, I really can't stand it when books are like that. Much prefer footnotes, especially ones that are on the same page
    1
  15499. YouTube has even been deleting my own comments recently. It's very annoying
    1
  15500. starcraft2own glad you found it funny. Today's question will be the weirdest so far :D
    1
  15501. Bodglin o'Ite alas, no
    1
  15502. Morgan Chalmers Yes, Britain has already signed it. USA are still debating it because they disagreed to one of the articles of the treaty
    1
  15503. Thegamer8324 almost right, there is 1 sea :)
    1
  15504. Chris Tran in the navy, yes you can sail the seven seas...
    1
  15505. Gary Thomas yar me matey, walk the plank
    1
  15506. gmsimpson05 haha smart arse :P
    1
  15507. Gary Thomas don't question the system!
    1
  15508. Hopper at least you can name all the seas!
    1
  15509. Gary Thomas that is correct :)
    1
  15510. Toni112007 North Sea, South China Sea, Caribbean Sea, Baltic Sea, Middle C... the list goes on!
    1
  15511. Did he really say that? Damn.
    1
  15512. Unfortunately the vocal minority are denying it and are trying to wiggle around the issues presented. It really baffles me how many people don't even know what the definition of capitalism is
    1
  15513. As you said, if the market is regulated it is no longer capitalism. And yes, I am admitting that I know the authors are using a false definition of capitalism. That's my point. They're trying to say that the state is capitalism. No, the state is socialism. Capitalism is non-State by definition.
    1
  15514. Capitalism is the free market. But the authors are using the socialist definition of capitalism, even though it's wrong, and even though some commentators have claimed Keynesians aren't socialists or anything. So it's not a straw man. The authors don't know what capitalism is but they're claiming a National Socialist economy is not a command economy at the same time they're saying it is.
    1
  15515. There has never been capitalism because the markets have never been free. And you can have capitalism, but only when the state can fund itself through voluntary contributions (like the rest of society) and doesn't force it's will upon others (like the rest of society isn't allowed to do). Capitalism can exist without the state. It is "non-State control of the economy" by definition.
    1
  15516. What education system? There's no education system in the UK that I can see.
    1
  15517. "Communism is Planned Economy/Limited ownership" "Fascism is Planned Economy/Widespread ownership" And National Socialism isn't Fascism, although it is similar. Still, I would argue it is more like Communism in your description of it, or maybe a go-between.
    1
  15518. "@TIK So "Mr. Distort history", if you would actually know what your talking about, you would know that social democracy is not socialism at all. It is capitalism with heavy regulation and protections for workers." So state regulation and state 'protections' is a free market now? If the state is in the market, or if business is funded by the market, it is no longer private control, and thus no longer capitalism.
    1
  15519. One where the people are free to make their own choices without other people forcing them to do things they don't want to do.
    1
  15520. Who said I was for a zero state?
    1
  15521. "Capitalism is slowly returning to where it began - feudalism." Please tell me where a free market is because I'd like to go there. "It is very easy when you declare yourself exceptional and your nation as a superior race." That's socialism in a nutshell.
    1
  15522. Thanks! It's good to hear you agree!
    1
  15523. The word "imperial" would suggest it was not capitalist. Imperialism (at least in the British sense) is when the state decides to intervene in trade disputes and open closed markets (colonizing them if necessary).
    1
  15524. I got topographical maps from internet sources and paid Terri (the graphic designer who does my thumbnails, link in the description) to turn them into what they are now. And no, they're not currently for sale.
    1
  15525. The moon-Nazis are so friendly. They kept raising their hands to give me high fives
    1
  15526. That's part of the answer, although not the full answer
    1
  15527. See pinned comment, also this other video from a few weeks back https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    1
  15528. That's quite an achievement! Although Jamie has been slacking recently. I think the hour difference between British Summer Time and normal GMT threw him off
    1
  15529. Yes, otherwise people will take the audio and use it to say I 'agree' with Hitler etc.
    1
  15530. +dsscott82 thanks!
    1
  15531. Happy New Year to you too Gripen! And I really hope you enjoy it as much as I did :) Just for future reference, I'll be leaving links in the video descriptions to Amazon. If you buy the books through the links I get a little bit of commission (and doesn't cost you any more). Didn't mention it in video because I don't want people thinking I'm doing this purely to sell stuff, and I certainly don't want you buying books unless you genuinely want them. My reasoning is if I can get a little bit of money towards more history books, it'll help bring the cost of making the documentary videos down slightly since they're not cheap
    1
  15532. Happy holidays to you too Gamer! Hope you didn't drink too much vodka ;) It is stressful... love having days off so I can work on videos like this though. I definitely appreciate everyone who watches and comments on my videos, especially you. I didn't want to make the standard "new year update video" so thought I'd do something new to show my gratitude and prove that I'm still here, despite real-life getting in the way a lot of the time
    1
  15533. +Gary Thomas I will, hopefully :) I like to visualize a battle from both sides, but it's difficulty relying on books from one language :(
    1
  15534. Yeah, it makes you look at the battle in a different way. Have you seen my documentary on Market Garden? I referred to this book quite a lot to get the position of the German units on the map
    1
  15535. +Tornike Khomeriki absolutely! I didn't like Last Stand Arnhem though if I'm honest
    1
  15536. Oh I see! I told you not to ask!!! And YouTube adrevenue? I think I got more pocket money as a kid lol. I don't have a patreon - but you and a few others have asked if I have one, so I think I'll set one up in the next couple days. I've already spent a small fortune on history books and need a lot lot lot more going forward. In fact, a new one has just arrived today - "With Paulus at Stalingrad" by Adam and Rühle :)
    1
  15537. I've no idea. Why do you think they did?
    1
  15538.  @samsonsoturian6013  Is it me, or has my original comment been deleted?
    1
  15539. I will get to it, don't worry. I really do want to continue with that campaign
    1
  15540. Yes https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU
    1
  15541. Not seen you in a while Jamie! Where you been??
    1
  15542. Congrats!
    1
  15543. If you notice, I usually say "fortunately for so and so", which is neutral because I'm only describing it from their point of view and saying for them it was fortunate. That doesn't mean I'm on their "side". Sometimes I also say "fortunately for the Soviets and unfortunately for the Germans". Overall I'm not on either "side" because both socialist regimes were evil, so I have zero incentive to be on either side.
    1
  15544. I'm not making comment about the current conflict. But both sides during WW2 were far from innocent and I've made that very clear since the beginning.
    1
  15545. All of this is proof that Keynesian economics doesn't work. They want people to spend in order to "get us out of the depression" and have created incentives to do that. Yet, despite these incentives, they're failing to get people to spend. Of course, savings are what grow an economy, not spending, but the Anointed don't know that because Keynesians don't understand basic economics.
    1
  15546. Socialism rejects the idea of the individual (I know National Socialism doesn't quite do that, and tomorrow's video will explain why) so the individual gets blamed when things go wrong with the system, rather than the system itself. Also, if you haven't watched my Public vs Private video (about the historical definitions of the words Capitalism and Socialism), now would be a good time to watch it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15547. Actually I gained patrons after this and the following "Hitler's Socialism" video, and I gained more subscribers. A lot of people now know that I'm sticking to the facts regardless of the anti-historical denialist social pressure, so they're happy to support me. That said, value is subjective, so if you personally don't want to support me, that's fine as well.
    1
  15548. Have you seen my public vs private video? If not, I would recommend that you do https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15549. Hahaha yeah, too late for that
    1
  15550. Of course. Technically the black market is inherently criminal due to the fact that it rightly dodges the regulator and the tax man.
    1
  15551. As I said, come back tomorrow for a video which will completely crush the notion of the Nazis being capitalist, and the comments in that video section.
    1
  15552. To get even better factual information on National Socialism, come back to my channel on Monday
    1
  15553. It makes no sense why the school system doesn't even teach you what money is, or what currency is, let alone how the market operates. Then you realise there's a difference between 'school' and 'education'
    1
  15554. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15555. Not sure if you've seen it, but my latest video explains what causes recessions, and this explanation is the total opposite of what the mainstream and academia tells us https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  15556. No, not as far as I'm aware. People say I look like the guy from Thoughty2, but I'm not related to him either
    1
  15557. You were indeed!
    1
  15558. So I've heard. I wonder what he'll think after Monday
    1
  15559. "Edit: Down vote ? This isn't Reddit" As far as I'm aware, the downvotes don't do anything
    1
  15560. Thanks Johnny! I don't normally take much notice of the criticism, but this was a patron question, so I was obliged to answer it :)
    1
  15561. I'll see you on Monday
    1
  15562. Agreed. The issue is the definitions, which nobody seems to agree on. That's why I made my Public vs Private video - to define the terms historically. But few took notice I have no problem with the idea of individuals trying to better themselves. Capitalism is all about that. However "collective bargaining" makes no sense. You get paid the market rate. Demanding more disrupts the market and leads to other problems. This is why increasing minimum wage results in job losses https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ Plus, we're all individuals. So collective bargaining doesn't make sense because individuals shouldn't get paid the same. You see the issue with equal pay when you work at minimum wage. One person works less than another, but gets paid the same as the better worker. The better worker resents the lazy worker and even slows down his own work out of spite. But if all workers got paid for the value they actually put in, then the better worker would have no issue with the lazy worker because they were getting fairly treated. And the lazy worker would have an incentive to pick up the pace. So unions don't make sense to me in the first place. And I've already explained in the Public vs Private video why I'm against corporations and states in the market so I won't go over that here. In my opinion the market (individuals) should be left to do it's job.
    1
  15563. Here you go https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15564. Exactly! They do overlap, and when asking "why" military events happened, you end up in the realm of politics and economics
    1
  15565. While it wasn't specifically made about their video, you'll want to come back for tomorrow's video ;)
    1
  15566. "He colors it with not understanding socialism and capitalism very well." In your opinion, but I disagree. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and then see why that opinion is wrong. At least I can define socialism - many socialists can't! "An educated person rolls their eyes and moves on." There's a difference between 'school' and 'education'. If you've been schooled in the 'public' schools to believe that socialism is great, then you've not been educated. "he is not specialized in politics or economics and refuses to acknowledge this." The opposite is true. I wasn't specialized in military history until I started this channel. As I said in this video, I was taught the Keynesian and Socialist world view during my college and degree years. I have more knowledge about politics and economics than I do about military history. "His viewers would do well to watch a bunch of channels on this topic to increase their scope and depth. Do not rely on one person to inform you. I imagine TIK would support such a position." Yes, I absolutely agree with this statement.
    1
  15567. I still think Crusader is my best finished video so far - although I think Stalingrad will top that once it's done
    1
  15568. I'll talk about this in an upcoming video
    1
  15569. Probably the best way you (or anyone else) could help is to suggest more things you'd like to see in these documentaries, that would be awesome. Your suggestion for making it funny is good :) what other things do you want from these videos? And I'm currently toying with concepts and elements not seen in other documentaries. So don't hold back on your ideas! Anything could make it into them
    1
  15570. I'll certainly give it a read. I need to re-read Beevor's Stalingrad again, and find more books on the battle in general, especially those with alternative views on it. I also need some more books on Hitler and Stalin, as their thoughts and orders are crucial to the outcome of the battle. Any suggestions are welcome
    1
  15571. +YOYO MAN I'll add it to my Amazon wish list. How detailed is it on the battle of Stalingrad??
    1
  15572. I look forward to your future comment :)
    1
  15573. I'm poor too. This hobby has cost me a small fortune. Don't even want to add it all up otherwise I'll be sad :(
    1
  15574. No, seriously, it's terrible. Completely off-putting. I'm surprised I've put up with it for so long. I hope you don't mind a documentary on Stalingrad then! It's not an obscure battle like a good number of mine have been so far. But I will continue with the lesser known ones, don't worry
    1
  15575. Just to clarify, I may have started the video series on it by then but it won't be finished by then, if that makes sense. I'm planning on doing what I did for my Operation Market Garden documentary and split it into segments, then join it all up at the end into one big video
    1
  15576. I'm afraid there's no way, unless I won the lottery I don't play and could quit my job and focus on this 100%. I'm not even sure this will be out this year! However, I'm interested in hearing about your dissertation. What's the premise of your dissertation? I haven't read/seen the series by Anton Joly yet. My plan was to go through Glantz's series to get the units down and then go through every other source I can find on the battle - which is when I was planning to get this series. Do you recommend it?That's an interesting site too. Shame there's not a complete list of oob for the entire campaign, but looks interesting
    1
  15577. You don't even need to wait for me to make a mistake. Just do what some people do any say I've said something I haven't said and attack me for that
    1
  15578. So kinda like "Hor-T" ?
    1
  15579. EXPOSED
    1
  15580. (I was joking)
    1
  15581. I'm not sure what you mean. What adjustment do you think it needs?
    1
  15582. "on a few occasions a tad bias" Everyone is biased because we're all human and have limited perspectives. The only way to overcome bias is to look at both sides of the argument and debate it. This is why I keep saying "history lies in the heart of the debate". "I actually stopped watching your videos when you did the Manstein's miracle episode" That was a one-off, and the main reason I did it like that was because I was burnt out having averaged 65 hours a week all year and needed some stress relief on my birthday week. "because literally the bias and sarcasm was thick enough to spread on toast" Sarcasm or not, the message conveyed in that video wasn't wrong.
    1
  15583. Yes, I bet it did too. Tanks didn't just take on tanks
    1
  15584. Because Bajor is next to Cardassia and we need to protect the worm-hole aliens
    1
  15585. Ah, but that's the one which got people complaining about in the first place :(
    1
  15586. True, but then surely that wouldn't have made the Soviets think they didn't issue any parachutes
    1
  15587. Yes you were!
    1
  15588. It's screwed to the wall. But this is why I've been favouring kindle books and other ebooks recently. Only problem is that ebooks are less accessible, and kindle books don't always display the page numbers. Plus, if internet goes down or if Google or Amazon go under, I'll be in trouble :(
    1
  15589. I haven't read much on the Battle of Britain (although I do intend to at some point). But I would be interested to hear if someone can confirm if Luftwaffe pilots did get captured or not during that period
    1
  15590. Glantz vs Isaev. Fight!
    1
  15591. I see puns, I like
    1
  15592. "Yes, but her husband says it should be like 'hoot' so we've now got two Germans who can't even agree on a name! Possibly we need a medium to ask the general himself how he said it." Well this is awkward. Whatever you do, don't ask them why it's "Das Mädchen" (the neutral girl) and not "Die Mädchen" (the feminine girl). Are girls not females in Germany!? ;)
    1
  15593. So "Hoe-t"?
    1
  15594. "This dude is really recommending me read books written by Murray Rothbard and yet he’s a pro-Russian communist LMAO." Yes, while at the same time, the Marxists say Nazis are capitalist, and since I'm capitalist, I must be racist and hate Jews... even though Murray Rothbard and Mises were both capitalists and Jewish... Literally makes no sense
    1
  15595. If both sides have the same number of tanks, but half the Soviet tanks are light tanks and 20% of the German tanks are light tanks, then the Germans have the advantage at this time. That was all I was saying. And if the Soviets couldn't beat the Germans when the Soviets had a 5 to 1 superiority in tank numbers, they would have no chance now
    1
  15596. I do realize that most of my subscribers aren't dumb, but there's still a significant number of people who are just waiting for me to slip up somehow so they can call me out on it. Not sure what they hope to gain from it, but everything I say is backed up by thr sources. Yes now and then mistakes are made, but they assume that I just make stuff up as I go along, and I'm not sure why they're like that
    1
  15597. It is a fair question, but some people are full of hate and don't know how to be polite
    1
  15598. Thank you! This is why I don't walk around going "I've got a degree in history, worship me" because accreditation and titles are meaningless. All that matters is the argument. And that's partly why I've not gone for a PhD or anything else
    1
  15599. Why can only academics do peer reviews? I mean, most of academic professors suck, don't know how to teach and think Hitler wasn't a real National Socialist. Most of them are also not my peers.
    1
  15600. True. But that doesn't mean his generals' contradictory and bad advice should be ignored. When you're in command of any enterprise, you're only as good as the information you're receiving from those below you. Hitler's generals were providing him with bad information and then making suggestions based on that. Hitler therefore wasn't fully to blame for his poor decisions and the generals were not fully devoid of any responsibility.
    1
  15601. Carlin is a historian as much as us YouTube historians are, although I can see why he wouldn't want to call himself one because there's a stigma about it in the academic community etc. I think he does a good job and he had a big audience. That said, I've only listened to a bit of his stuff as I'm not a fan of his presentation style (purely from a personal preference sort of thing)
    1
  15602. Capitalism is the private (individual) control of the means of production. That's a free market, where individuals can buy and sell as they please without a third party getting involved. If you think it's not, please provide non-socialist sources which provide a definition of capitalism. If the world economy isn't free, then it's only a matter of time until it collapses.
    1
  15603. They're not private https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15604. As I said in the video, I would argue that a centralized structure isn't necessary and can be dangerous. The option to be independent as I am now is critical, although if others want to set up a 'YouTube Historical Academic Institution' go ahead, but I'd be wary of it. As you said, Academic institutions had state support, and are subject to politics and regulations. This is highly restrictive and bad for history - since you need debate, and we must bow down to the strongest argument, even if the state or the regulators decide that they don't like it. So aiming for an 'institution' isn't necessary, and can be quite the opposite. If such an institution does get created, it should allow its members to say and do what they want, and not be funded by the state, to maximize the debate and prevent political censorship.
    1
  15605. It's a genuine SG Special from the USA (bought it in Texas). It does have a Fender strap on it though :)
    1
  15606. I'm doing good Vass, thanks, how are you? :)
    1
  15607. I need more space to put a new book case, which I unfortunately do not have at the moment :(
    1
  15608. Feel free to create a counterargument which stands up to scrutiny and doesn't contradict itself and actually persuades me that Hitler was neither a real National Socialist nor a totalitarian dictator and maybe I'll change my mind. Nobody has managed that so far.
    1
  15609. "Well actually since YouTube is a private company a laissez-faire system would be allowing the company to do what they wanted, which is creating their own terms of service to self-regulate user generated content that's uploaded to their platform (i.e. what they're doing now)." YouTube is a public non-state company, and is not private in the sense of capitalist-private. It's a corporation and has shareholders (the public), and - as I said in the video - is essentially a central-planned internet-state. The 'private' channels are forced to obey the rules set by the 'public' YouTube, even if those rules hurt them. And since there's massive manipulations with the algorithm and so on, this isn't a free market. "If the company was regulated, let's say by the state, to not self-censor and apply free speech protections then less content would be constrained, but that would be regulation of (and interference in) a private company." It is already regulated. For example, certain videos are restricted in certain countries depending on their content. The real issue is that YouTube isn't a democracy of creators or a free market system. The central-corporate-state has all the power, the creators have little power, and the consumers get screwed as a result. Luckily the internet as a whole is a free market. What will happen eventually is that people will migrate to other sites, which is already happening, and is why I've set up a Bitchute channel and will be decentralizing the channel more as a consequence of YouTube's policies. I don't necessarily want to do this because YouTube would be great if they left it alone to function as the market dictates, but since they insist on regulating us, YouTube has left creators like me with little choice but to find homes elsewhere.
    1
  15610. You must not take my word or anyone elses as gospel. You should accept it until a superior argument is given, then migrate to that. Ultimately, with each step along the path of superior arguments, you'll approach the truth about the past
    1
  15611. You can't grow coffee in Scotland, have wooly sheep at the equator, or get sponges in Hungary. Nature doesn't care about equality and doesn't distribute resources, terrain or the weather evenly. Thus each local area specialises in certain products and services, and then trades them to other areas in a mutually beneficial relationship. Borders destroy those trade relationships and thus impoverish everyone.
    1
  15612. They've been doing that a lot longer than 2020!
    1
  15613. First! (Is this a bot account?)
    1
  15614. You suspect correctly. YouTube has been screwing with the channel recently for two reasons. One, because I uploaded Stalingrad v1 30 minutes early, and the algorithm didn't like that... And two, because I've just passed 100k subs, at which point they manually review channels and decide what to do with them. Both of these may explain why I'm down 30% views this past month. The fact that Stalingrad v1 isn't performing anywhere near as well as Courland v1 did is an indicator that the algorithm isn't playing ball at the moment.
    1
  15615. Gary Thomas or the bizTzar tank :P
    1
  15616. Max Quick not seen that game before. Looks interesting!
    1
  15617. Gokotti Czar, Tsar or Tzar, it's all the same to me haha
    1
  15618. Morgan Chalmers so what was the first tank then?
    1
  15619. Morgan Chalmers yes the Kugelpanzer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugelpanzer Tbh, you can go back quite in history for the first ever tank. Leonardo da Vinci came up with the concept of a tank, as did H. G. Wells
    1
  15620. Rikki_PT as far as I'm aware, it wasn't used. But it was Russian!
    1
  15621. starcraft2own hmmm... and I have to list the images in case of copyright... we have a problem :(
    1
  15622. starcraft2own you cheat!!! Daisy would not be happy if she found out
    1
  15623. Rex1987 wow yeah, I'd not heard of those tanks. The last one is interesting that it was sold to the British who then apparently took influence on it for their Little Willie prototype
    1
  15624. CStriker421 woo!!! :D
    1
  15625. Ville metsänmiettijä True true and true :)
    1
  15626. Cameron Thompson Yes, Morgan's link explains it but it's basically a magnetic one that fluctuates daily
    1
  15627. Morgan Chalmers yep!
    1
  15628. starcraft2own haha coldhearted You're right. Here's the link Gary sent me and it's pretty interesting some of the stuff http://www.today.com/holidayguide/10-things-you-never-knew-about-north-pole-1C7657750
    1
  15629. Quadro2k Just go with your gut! There's no shame in being wrong :)
    1
  15630. Thegamer8324 That's a good one! I'll write that down. It won't be for a few days (since I've had to record a few in advance due to me working a lot) but I'll ask that :)
    1
  15631. gmsimpson05 correct! I'm guessing it's the same. If it fluctuates at the North, it must do at the South
    1
  15632. Tomislav yes :)
    1
  15633. Gary Thomas Good one, and I think I could probably guess it because I read it when I researched it for this and yesterday's one
    1
  15634. Rex1987 yes, two :)
    1
  15635. johnrblanks absolutely correct :)
    1
  15636. Paul's interpretation of Jesus dying on the cross was that the individual would be judged by God alone. You don't get judged by someone else's actions, only your own. This is a fundamentally opposing view of the idea that the individual doesn't exist, that we're all social creatures, that we bow down to the social group (the tribe, race, nation, State), or that 'once a bourgeoisie, always a bourgeoisie', or that we should be judged by our class, race, nationality, or more. I touched upon this in my Public vs Private video here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15637. If Hitler was a Christian, how come he hated Franco for being in with the "clerics"?
    1
  15638. I believe SubscribeStar allows you to make single donations (link in the description). If you do donate, thank you for your support! 👍
    1
  15639. It's not circular logic. You're forgetting about Hitler's views on the Shrinking Markets idea - that's the reason they were building up the military and going to war in the first place.
    1
  15640. 8th graders came up with the idea to put references in videos?
    1
  15641. See the bibliography in the back of the book
    1
  15642.  @arnekrug939  Fantastic! I didn't realize he'd started doing that, but that's great news! (Honestly haven't watch a video of his in a while... but should do)
    1
  15643. A nation is a society. Nationalism is Socialism. Socialism is State control of the means of production (in this case, military production). Take the Redpill, Neo https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15644. It is in Mein Kampf. It's also in his Second Book, and in his Table Talks, and his speeches. And yes, as I said in the video, many historians have ignored the Socialism in National Socialism for ideological reasons. AJP Taylor made mistakes.
    1
  15645. My Patreons support the channel, and those who pledge $5 or more a month get to ask questions, which is why I answer their questions
    1
  15646. Hitler nationalised all the businesses and industries in all but name as I've outlined here https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=eXTHVkSI9LB3DHZs
    1
  15647. "The first point I would make is that Keynes proposed increased government expenditure during a recession, ie when demand is low. The idea is to reduce the severity of the recession." I get that. However, the idea is flawed, as explained in the first 50 or so pages of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which you can find online for free, and I highly recommend that you read it. - "With low demand, it doesn't necessarily add to inflation." As I said in the video, inflation is the expansion of the currency supply, not rising prices. The government printing currency is inflation, even if prices don't go up due to collapsing demand. In fact, as I explained in my What Causes a Recession or Depression video, prices would normally go down in a recession. But if prices stay the same, then that's an indication that there has been inflation.
    1
  15648. "Your reference does not say that Keynes was championing inflation." But it does say he was championing inflation. You cannot increase government expenditures and lower taxes to stimulate demand (what Keynes wanted) without inflation. There's no other way. However, if you need another source, here's what Mises wrote in 1948 - "John Maynard Keynes, late economic adviser to the British Government, is the new prophet of inflationism. The “Keynesian Revolution” consisted in the fact that he openly espoused the doctrines of Silvio Gesell. As the foremost of the British Gesellians, Lord Keynes adopted also the peculiar messianic jargon of inflationist literature and introduced it into official documents. Credit expansion, says the Paper of the British Experts of April 8, 1943, performs the “miracle . . . of turning a stone into bread.” The author of this document was, of course, Keynes. Great Britain has indeed traveled a long way to this statement from Hume’s and Mill’s views on miracles." - Mises from https://mises.org/library/stones-bread-keynesian-miracle
    1
  15649. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/keynesianeconomics.asp "Based on his theory, Keynes advocated for increased government expenditures and lower taxes to stimulate demand and pull the global economy out of the depression. Subsequently, Keynesian economics was used to refer to the concept that optimal economic performance could be achieved—and economic slumps prevented—by influencing aggregate demand through activist stabilization and economic intervention policies by the government." There are many more, but this is the most simple and clear explanation of this. It doesn't specifically say the word "inflation", but it's clear in the rest of the context that that's what it means when it says "government expenditures" and "stabilization".
    1
  15650. Also related to this concept - see the section titled "National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw" of my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (timestamps in the description)
    1
  15651. As I explained in my Public vs Private video, the way Paul interpreted Jesus dying on the cross is literally the opposite of what Socialism stands for. I would go so far as to say Socialism is a religion in and of itself, and that Christians who are also Socialists have therefore fallen under the spell of a false god https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15652. Unless it does make sense, but you weren't listening, or you dismissed all or part of the explanation.
    1
  15653. Nah, Karl Marx predates him
    1
  15654. See my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y It's not a full answer, but it explains why the concept of Jesus dying on the cross was the exact opposite of one of the core tenants of Socialism
    1
  15655. Democracy isn't what you think it is https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  15656. Once prices go up due to inflation, they won't go back down. So you'll always have to pay higher prices for them in the future. Also, during an economic downturn, prices should come down for reasons I gave in this video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs the fact that prices stayed where they are (roughly speaking) shows that we've had massive amounts of inflation, even if we didn't know that they've increased the currency supply by a third or more.
    1
  15657. Nope. I'm not a conservative. See 12:08 of this video https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY
    1
  15658. I'm sorry I don't belong to the Far Left. Perhaps you would like this video instead https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ
    1
  15659. And, as you'll have seen, I did use a quote from Thomas Sowell in this video. But the problem with the monetarists is that they don't understand the importance of a stable currency supply. Effectively, while they get a lot of stuff right, they fall at the final hurdle. Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" will show you why.
    1
  15660. It's clear that you don't know what Austrian Economics is. I would recommend that you start with Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" and then proceed to Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" (you can find the latter online for free). In a nutshell, the Austrians use math, but it's not the priority. The priority is studying human action, not abstract numbers.
    1
  15661. No, I didn't mean "Friedmanism"
    1
  15662. The Reichsbank, and the people of Germany itself.
    1
  15663. True. Although the issue with increasing supply and demand of a currency (i.e." price stability") is that it leads to distortions within the economy, and then this results in the boom-bust cycle, which then compels the currency printers to increase the supply, leading to more problems, and eventually massive inflation.
    1
  15664. I've been over the Polish Alliance position before in a previous videos, which is why I didn't want to bring it up again https://youtu.be/1uzO0gLTEGc And I've done several videos which refute Suvorov's thesis - https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8
    1
  15665. Some of the books aren't "mainstream", and I've made it clear that the lamestream arguments aren't always right
    1
  15666. He's also the largest owner of private farmland in the USA...
    1
  15667. I don't think Rome had total control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  15668. History rhymes... Although the circumstances are a little different. They may be able to kick the can down the road longer if they can keep exporting their inflation to other countries on the periphery like Germany did. But ultimately the system is unsustainable
    1
  15669. You bring up some good points. But the answer to them can be found in the first 50 or so pages of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". You can find it online for free, and I'm going to recommend you read the whole thing because it will not only give you the answer far better than I can, but it will enlighten you even further
    1
  15670. "This seems to have been an invention of Ultra-Right-Wing Lunatics." Go away, Fascist.
    1
  15671. I think my big mistake was not moving to a different channel to do the history videos on. I should have kept this channel as a gaming channel, and done a different channel for history, only so I could occasionally release a gaming video if I had a bit of time.
    1
  15672. Thanks! And thank you for being one of them! :)
    1
  15673. "@TIK you obviously slept through 2015 - because in that year 499 years of state ownership of the Royal Mail came to an end with the selling of the final 30% stake held by the government." You're obviously aren't aware that it's in the FTSE 250 which is being directly funded by the Bank of England (the UK government's Central Bank). Royal Mail also heavily regulated by the State. So, if it's paid for by the State, and it's controlled (regulated) by the State, it is the State, even if the State says that it isn't. - "Royal Mail Group plc is now wholly owned by shareholders." Correct, it's publicly and collectively owned by its shareholders. Thus, it isn't a private individual. - "The clue is in the name - plc - public limited company" YES, THE CLUE IS IN THE NAME - "PUBLIC". It's therefore NOT private. It is public. And as I have explained in the Public vs Private video, the Public is the State. - "The word public means that shares are traded publicly and that anyone can own buy; unlike in private limited companies where the other shareholders decide who can and can't buy the shares. In a stated owned company, there is one shareholder, the government." I don't know how else to explain this to you other than to literally spell it out - the 'people' are the 'public', and the 'public' is the 'state'. In this case, the State is directly funding Royal Mail through the Bank of England's asset purchases program (Quantitative Easing, 'Stimulus' or whatever they want to call it). But even if it wasn't, Royal Mail is a 'state' in itself, because it is a public hierarchy. Again, I don't know how to explain this in a clearer way. If you can't grasp, or are refusing to grasp, what I'm saying here, then it's pointless continuing this discussion. - "Your video on public and private ownership got this wrong, public doesn't mean state and private doesn't mean an individual." Why? Because you said so? I follow the evidence, and both HISTORY and the ENGLISH DICTIONARY say you're wrong. - "You have a good grasp on history, but haven't a clue about basic economic facts." At least I understand basic English. - "As for YouTube's alleged censorship, case law shows that YouTube is a publicly accessible privately run forum and had the right to restrict freedom of speech" I'm the private creator. You are the private viewer. YouTube is the public platform (actually a 'publisher' now by its own policies, but in theory it should be a platform). The private individual (me) is not in control if my videos are being suppressed, if my comments are being deleted, and if my money is being cut by YouTube. That isn't a private individual in control, that is a collectively-owned public hierarchy in control. Yet somehow, you think YouTube is an individual. Yes, YouTube can restrict my and your freedom of speech, which is what I'm complaining about. Governments tend to restrict individual rights, which is why I'm complaining of this. By deciding to arbitrate, YouTube has become an internet government. I'm complaining against this internet government, and want a free internet. - "YouTube don't have to promote such films, nor do they have to allow you or anyone else to say what you can say in, for example, the street." If I stood in the street right now and said that a lockup caused a famine in Greece, I'd be kidnapped and locked in a cage, and my taxes would be increased. If I complain about this, you'll claim that the Government can do this because it's a 'private company' and thus can do what it likes... If YouTube wants to suppress my content, then I will complain about it. If YouTube doesn't want me to complain, then it can stop suppressing my content. Or it can delete the channel entirely. Either way, I think it's actions are terrible and is morally unjust.
    1
  15674. He was also a count, and so I was correct. Even Wikipedia confirms what my sources say https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyacinth_Graf_Strachwitz
    1
  15675. Sorry for slow reply, but the next season starts next week
    1
  15676. Robert Biggin ah, thanks! I'm glad you told me because I'm also working on "Project X" which definitely requires me to pronounce Graebner right ;)
    1
  15677. KingSNAFU I'll have more to show soon ;)
    1
  15678. Dowly glad you think so :)
    1
  15679. Glad you liked it! :)
    1
  15680. Hope it didn't disappoint!
    1
  15681. He'd have no chance
    1
  15682. While it's nice to speculate, I find the facts more interesting than fiction now. And I have enjoyed a good game of D&D or NationStates back in the day, and certainly like my computer games (and not just games like Close Combat, things like Skyrim too). But to make an alternative history story... I may as well put my effort into making another quality history video.
    1
  15683. 70%!? When was the last time you checked??
    1
  15684. Alright, name a post-WW1 turretless tank
    1
  15685. So long as it's a healthy addiction, it's fine by me ;)
    1
  15686. He's a good knight haha
    1
  15687. It's probably a combination of the way I'm sitting, tiredness and beard growth, since I think I've actually lost a bit of weight recently. I mean, I am slowly getting older! And yes, I used to play D&D :) I'll check out those channels you mentioned! Thanks! Shame you won't watch the video fully, but I understand :(
    1
  15688. You mean the city of Stalingrad?
    1
  15689. That wasn't socialism though. That was imperialism and colonialism - again, capitalism. The argument put forth by OP is that socialism is inherently bad. I pointed out a country (the UK) where the opposite is true. I could also do the same with several other countries like the Scandinavian countries, which also adopted socialist policies and didn't suffer any "pain" as a result.
    1
  15690. No, thank you for watching! 🖐️
    1
  15691. I only went on the Sunday unfortunately. Are you suggesting I should stop doing history? Everything I've ever said has been based on the books, many of them written by the people who were there. I don't contradict them, but there are contradictions, and in those cases I have to make decisions as to which account I think is right (and I often say I'm doing this in the videos themselves, I state the different perspectives, and allow you to come to your own conclusions). That said, I disagree that someone without military experience cannot study military history, just as I would also disagree with someone who said you need a degree to study history. Both statements are inherently wrong. This is called gatekeeping, and it makes no sense. Having military experience is great and qualifies you to talk about the topic, but someone without military experience can approach the topic from an unbiased perspective. I've not fought in the British Army, therefore I'm impartial (I will happily criticise it). That is a massive advantage for a historian.
    1
  15692. They had side turrets.
    1
  15693. Such as?
    1
  15694. Glad you liked it! I should be doing one of these a month, so good to hear :)
    1
  15695. I think with Britain, it was more a case of they simply couldn't let one European power dominate the continent because they would be next. This had been British strategy since the Napoleonic era and before then.
    1
  15696. Not after my Croatian Legion video, no. Caused total war in the comments section, even though the video had nothing to do with Balkan politics. I'm interested in Greece though, lovely country, and will cover the Battle of Crete one day.
    1
  15697. Great :) I'm planning on doing one of these per month, at least
    1
  15698. I haven't studied him specifically. This is actually why I'm progressing through the North African Campaign. The idea is I'll eventually get to Monty's era, and be able to judge him on what came before, to see just how "good" a general he actually was. Then, I'll cover Torch, Tunisia, Sicily and Italy, before moving into Normandy. So it's a long-game, but the idea is that by the time we get to Normandy, I'll be able to answer your question far more thoroughly and conclusively than anyone else has ever done. That's the plan, anyway, which is why I'm busy working on Operation Crusader now.
    1
  15699. I haven't looked into them much to be honest. But I did mention the Brandenburgers in my video about panzerfausts. Not sure if you've seen it so here's a link https://youtu.be/aDiSwl09bR4 Other than that, I've mentioned the Fallschirmjäger in Fort Eben Email, and will no doubt cover them again. But at the moment, my focus is really on the battles - specifically Crusader and Stalingrad. If I come across anything though, I'll do a video on them :)
    1
  15700. Well, yes that's true.
    1
  15701. Joel, I've not read it, no. Not saying I won't, but I haven't yet
    1
  15702. I disagree. The purpose of history is to debate it. If I'm not allowed to debate the blame game, then I may as well not bother.
    1
  15703. Ahhh ok. Well I never knew that. Maybe it's more like "sjhookov"?
    1
  15704. Wait, is this a communist political group I'm getting into here? Because I'd only be interested in documents to help with my videos.
    1
  15705. So you're saying the StuG was actually a tank destroyer?
    1
  15706. I list the sources I use in every video. Below are the sources I've read so far just for Stalingrad. As you can see, I've read plenty of "dry" books, and I can tell you Askey is incorrect in his assessment. Books Adam, W. Rühle, O. “With Paulus at Stalingrad.” Pen and Sword Books, 2015. Anderson, T. “The History of the Panzerwaffe. Volume 2: 1942-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2017. Beevor, A. “The Second World War.” Phoenix, 2012. Beevor, A. “Stalingrad.” Penguin Books, 1999. Bernardic, V. “World War II Croatian Legionaries: Croatian Troops under Axis Command 1941-45.” Osprey Publishing, 2016. Chuikov, V. “The Beginning of the Road.” Panther Edition, 1970. Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University of Kansas, 2007. Fritz, S. “Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East.” University Press of Kentucky. 2011. Forczyk, R. “Demyansk 1942-43, the Frozen Fortress.” Osprey Publishing Group, 2012. Gerasimova, S. “The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army’s Forgotten 15-Month Campaign against Army Group Center 1942-1943.” Helion & Company, Kindle, 2013. Glantz, D. “Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War, 1941-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. “The Companion to Colossus Reborn.” University Press of Kansas, 2005. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 2. Armageddon in Stalingrad: September-November 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book One: November 1942..” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 3. Endgame at Stalingrad Book Two: December 1942-February 1943.” University Press of Kansas, 2014. Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Guderian, H. “Panzer Leader.” Penguin Books, 2000. Halder, F. “The Halder War Diary 1939-1942.” Presidio Press, 1988. Hart, L. “A History of the Second World War. First Published 1970.” Kindle version 2015. Hastings, M. “All Hell Let Loose: The World at War 1939-1945.” HarperPress, 2011. Hayward, J. “Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitler’s Defeat in the East 1942-1943.” University Press of Kansas, 1998. Hill, A. “The Red Army and the Second World War. (Armies of the Second World War.” Cambridge University Press, 2017. Heiber, H. Glantz, D. “Hitler and his Generals. Military Conferences 1942-1945.” Enigma Books, 2004. House, J. “Toward Combined Arms Warfare: A Survey of 20th-Century Tactics, Doctrine, and Organization.” University Press of the Pacific, 2002. Jones, G. “Stalingrad to Kursk: Triumph of the Red Army.” Pen & Sword, 2011. Jones, M. “Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed.” Pen & Sword Military, 2016. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016. Manstein, E. “Lost Victories.” Zenith Press, 2004. Matthews, R. “Stalingrad: The Battle that Shattered Hitler’s Dream of World Domination.” Arcturus Publishing Limited, 2014. Mark, J. Obhodas, A. “Croatian Legion: The 369th Reinforced (Croatian) Infantry Regiment on the Eastern Front 1941-1943.” Leaping Horsemen Books, 2010. Mark, J. “Death of the Leaping Horsemen: The 24th Panzer Division in Stalingrad 12th August - 20th November 1942.” Stackpole Books, Kindle 2003. Mark, J. “Panzer Krieg: Volume 1: German Armoured Operations at Stalingrad.” Leaping Horsemen Books, 2017. Mawdsley, E. “Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945.” Second Edition, Kindle, University of Oxford. Mitcham, S. “Hitler’s Legions: German Army Order of Battle World War II.” Redwood Burn Limited, 1985. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume One: 1st-290th Infantry Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Two: 291st-999th Infantry Divisions, Named Infantry Divisions, and Special Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Mitcham, S. “German Order of Battle: Volume Three: Panzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Waffen SS Divisions in WWII.” Stackpole Books, 2007. Overy, R. “Russia’s War.” Penguin Group, 1999. Shakespeare, C.” Stalingrad: Struggle in the East.” 2014. Shirer, W. “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” Pan Books, 1964. Sokolov, B. “Marshal K.K. Rokossovsky: The Red Army’s Gentleman Commander.” Helion & Company, Kindle 2015. Stahel, D. “Operation Barbarossa: Germany’s Defeat in the East.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle, 2010. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015. Articles Hayward, J. “Too Little Too Late.” From Journal of Military History 64 (July 2000): 769-94. Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012. Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854. Toprani, A. “Germany’s Answer to Standard Oil: The Continental Oil Company and Nazi Grand Strategy, 1940-1942.” From the Journal of Strategic Studies 37 (December 2014): 949-973. Video Sources TheUSAHEC. "Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942" by Dr. Robert Citino. 23 July 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNDhswF1GKk
    1
  15707. I've read it. Read it when it was first published. He makes a poor argument.
    1
  15708. They won't be able too reply because I've since banned them for spamming the channel with the same rubbish. Also deleted their comments here just now because I've shown them to be wrong over and over and they're not listening.
    1
  15709. I'm not sure if I know enough about the Romans to do that!
    1
  15710. The Far Eastern Front is not something I know much about, including the battles you mentioned. I know of them, but not much details about them
    1
  15711. I actually haven't, it's still on my wishlist
    1
  15712. Not specifically, but I'll be around for a few hours if you have a question and I can answer it in the comments
    1
  15713. And so you should! Question everything, even what's said in my videos. I make mistakes too. And yeah, I'm not surprised another channel said that. I can remember TV documentaries saying that too. It's arguable if there was 'turning point' or not either. Citino avoids using the term in his books for example. So, while people do say things, there's usually more to it, and it's best to question things in case there are alternative ideas etc
    1
  15714. Follow this link https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory and sign up. You get to choose how much you want to support me. Every dollar will go a long way :)
    1
  15715. Surely the 75mm Pak gun was a good enough answer? Or the 88s?
    1
  15716. Great to hear that :)
    1
  15717. Oh really? If it was experimental, I'm guessing it didn't progress beyond that stage?
    1
  15718. Exactly, they're far too anecdotal.
    1
  15719. At the very least you'll need a camera (that can shoot HD 1080p at least), Audacity (free), a decent microphone (spend at least £50 on this as it's the most important aspect), a computer capable of video editing, video editing software (all the good ones aren't free I'm afraid), and the ability to crank out a video on a regular basis. If you're not good at note taking, that's the first thing you should practice. As I've said, specialize on a topic. If you like the Naval war, get 10 books on the subject and start note taking. Use Google Docs to note take because that will make it easier to drag your notes into another document in order to edit. But I wouldn't worry about making a script until you've got a good grasp on the topic first and have made plenty of notes. See this video for a basic overview of how I do my note taking and scripts: https://youtu.be/NZyhAdOXxnA
    1
  15720. Thanks Case, will do :)
    1
  15721. But are you looking at it in hindsight?
    1
  15722. Good question. But the honest answer is: I don't know, it's not something I've specifically looked into. Not saying it wasn't a factor, but I've not seen the need to read up upon it. If you're really interested, you may want to look into getting this book http://amzn.eu/fNpPYI8 it's only 350 pages too
    1
  15723. The first tanks were turretless, and the only main battle tank after WW1 that was turretless but still classed as a tank was the Swedish tank you mentioned. But otherwise, that is how people distinguish tanks from assault guns and tank destroyers.
    1
  15724. I'm only going off what the museum sign said. I've no way of verifying it to be honest, so you could be right :)
    1
  15725. Haha of course!
    1
  15726. Thanks for the two recommendations! I've added them to my wishlists :) But when did Churchill write his memoirs? See, I'm wondering if he's looking back in hindsight? But I can see the point. And same with the idea the Germans and Soviets were forced to collaborate. It's interesting they later became enemies though.
    1
  15727. I definitely need to read the Kotkin book soon. What is the conclusion you came to regarding the Treaty of Versailles? As I said, I studied it in college so, while I'm sure the historiography has moved on from 10+ years ago, I still remember a lot of it
    1
  15728. Alright, assuming all that is true, again he can't do it without the context of Stalingrad. Stalingrad was the catalyst.
    1
  15729. :)
    1
  15730. No, it's fine :) Some people try to argue that more 'effort' went into the west, so you may have heard that before. However, those people are trying to downplay the role of the Soviet Union for various reasons. The reality was +150 German divisions were in the East in 1941, and there was never a time when more divisions were in the west. The only time it came close was during the Battle of the Bulge in late 1944, but more were still in the East.
    1
  15731. Most of Germany's best troops were on the Eastern Front, so not sure what you're getting at here.
    1
  15732. Is that really a tank though? To quote wiki: "While turretless armoured fighting vehicles are usually classified as assault guns or tank destroyers, despite its unique gun laying process the Strv 103 is considered a tank because its designated combat role matched those of other tanks within contemporary Swedish doctrine. It is the only mass-produced tank since World War II to dispense with a turret." At this point, while it's role may be a tank, it's actually a tank destroyer filling the role of a tank. It's acting like a StuG towards the end of the war.
    1
  15733. Alright, name a post-WW1 turretless tank
    1
  15734. This type in particular? Or just the videos in general?
    1
  15735. Did they though? How do you know if it's barely been touched? I actually suspect it's the other way around. But I'm open to the idea that it's not - assuming there's evidence proving it one way or another
    1
  15736. Yes it was! I told my Patreons, but next time I go I'll make sure to announce it to the channel so I can meet more people :)
    1
  15737. I sorta answered this in the video. 'Not really' is kinda the answer. I mean, I may do it eventually, but not before Stalingrad at the very least
    1
  15738. Alrighty then
    1
  15739. Thanks man, will do! Been Greece twice, it's a great county to visit
    1
  15740. Thank you! That's the aim - I'm sick of videos and documentaries that don't go in-depth enough. That's why I'm making these :) Also, I did laugh out loud while reading your comment!
    1
  15741. In addition, 26:51 A Brief Summary of the critical events during Operation Market Garden
    1
  15742. Thank you!
    1
  15743. Thank you sir, I'm glad you found it useful! :)
    1
  15744. Hi, call me TIK, or Lewis :) in case you haven't seen it, I'll give you the link to my Market Garden Documentary which presents the operation in a lot of detail. But basically, what happens at Nijmegen Bridge on that first day really messed up the operation, and yet most histories of the battle do not mention it. Here's the link to my documentary https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc
    1
  15745. I hate you! Why couldn't you have provided that link before I made my maps!?!
    1
  15746. Thank you sir!
    1
  15747. Thanks!
    1
  15748. In regards to the operation's true purpose, you might want to watch this other video I made a while ago https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM And I couldn't agree more with your idea that Boy was "more concerned about keeping his position than about the situation his men would be dropping into". This is actually one of the big lessons to take away from history. Because a lot of people are like this in life.
    1
  15749. John, stop calling people "Yanks" and being belligerent. It's getting annoying.
    1
  15750. Ok, I'm going to have to ask you both to play nice. John, you have a habit of calling people names. Regardless of the quality of your arguments, the moment you start calling names, is the moment you lose in the eyes of everyone else ... which was also a mistake I made in my recent deleted videos. So, I encourage you to stick to arguments, and not resort to name calling.
    1
  15751. Right ok. Still doesn't change the fact that the 505th Regiment spent 5.5 hours questioning Dutch civilians on day one of the operation trying to find out if there were 1000 tanks in the Reichswald. Coincidently, after the confirmation that there weren't any, Gavin then sent Warren's 1st Battalion towards the bridge.
    1
  15752. Churchill was an idiot. So much for your theory of be being biased. Try again, and this time, don't call my a limey.
    1
  15753. Glad you liked it! More to come :)
    1
  15754. Browning was the corps commander, Brereton was the Army commander, and Montgomery was the Army Group commander. So if blame goes higher than Browning, you need to look at Brereton's actions. In reality, blame can be placed at all levels, although I don't think the initial conception of the plan was wrong (if you do, then Montgomery is at fault). For me it all comes down to what happened at Nijmegen (Gavin and/or Browning at fault), although I do think the Arnhem drop could have gone a lot better (partly Urquhart's, Browning's, and Brereton's fault).
    1
  15755. There was basically nothing in the Reichswald. Intelligence said the same. And it's not "the Brits" saying this. There's a book out there called "Lost at Nijmegen" written by a Dutch historian. I explained all this in my main Market Garden documentary https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc
    1
  15756. Gavin blamed Lindquist of the 508th for not following Gavin's pre drop orders to take the Nijmegen bridge straight away... even though no evidence exists that says he gave said orders, and Lindquist denies he ever received said orders.
    1
  15757. It was one of the largest tank battles of the war, and the worst tank battle in British history.
    1
  15758. Not like I did with them, no. I was using different software. But even if I wasn't, when you see next week's episode, you'll know exactly why it would have been impossible to put front lines in anyway
    1
  15759. Thanks Michael!
    1
  15760. That is a shame. Enjoy your time at work ;)
    1
  15761. This masculine, feminine, neutral thing is literally the top thing that's simply not clicking with me when it comes to learning German. In English, a table is just a table. It's not a masculine table or a feminine table. It's just a table. So I don't get it. The other is sentence structure. Structure sentence sense none makes. Like, it's absolutely insane the way some of it is structured. Basic sentences are ok, they sound oldie-English, and I can grasp them. But wow, the longer sentences... right now, I'm just accepting that I don't understand and I'm concentrating on learning individual words. Luckily I just need to read German, not speak it.
    1
  15762. You're absolutely right about the WTF moments. Next episode has these moments in spades. And it just keeps on getting worse :D I think every side has the same problem when overestimating the damage they've done. You hit a tank, but was it knocked out, or just damaged? No way to tell from a distance, especially if you're busy aiming at another tank. Plus, who's really keeping an accurate count? Human memory is absolutely terrible, so it's no wonder they overestimate.
    1
  15763. Mid ary, I'll tell you why I removed them. Three of those videos were Civilization 2 videos, which I had uploaded in the August of 2012, and was the earliest game I uploaded after Close Combat 2. Decided that I didn't want to continue the series so I unlisted them. I had several Close Combat 2 videos in a series called "The Imperator Challenge" where I went lower and lower with the requisition points on the Arnhem map for CC2. In the end, I got down to just 20 points and was able to call a draw after inflicting considerable damage on the AI. Can't remember why I unlisted those videos because I now actually like them, but I did. 4 videos were on Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem, which I despise to this day, hence why I removed them. And there's the odd competition video which I subsequently removed. I unlisted the recent artillery one, although you can still find it by going through the new artillery video. And there was the two 'Arnhem' book review videos, which were redone as one bigger video. These were removed for me being an idiot and I apologized for them.
    1
  15764. Excuse me Sevenfm, I have over 1,000 videos, and have removed exactly 21 - and 18 of them were gaming videos, and 15 of them were removed in 2012.
    1
  15765. They could replace their losses 1939-1943 (up to Kursk). Post Kursk they can't replace their losses, although they certainly tried.
    1
  15766. Cheers! The final script for Crusader was approximately 84,400 words. Obviously there was a lot of research, writing and rewriting, plus map and unit creation, and then editing... And I was working 40+ hours a week on the editing alone, let alone recording the narrative and making music and so on. Hardly ever get a day off, so yes a lot of work :) My current plan for Stalingrad is to do it in seasons of 6-8 videos each, otherwise it'll take forever and a day for me to even start! By doing it in seasons, I can then do all the research and scripts for each season separate, rather than waiting to finish all the research and scripts before starting. I'm also hoping to recruit an editor to help me out, although with the current Patreon crisis (the company is in trouble after the Sargon of Akhad issue) I've had to out that idea on hold.
    1
  15767. Well, I'm certainly glad to hear that :) I've tried to improve each one as we go along, so it's good to know this was an improvement over the others. Thanks!
    1
  15768. Thank you!
    1
  15769. It's alright, I forgive you
    1
  15770. Great to hear you're enjoying this series :)
    1
  15771. What about T-34s?
    1
  15772. And those AT rifles don't necessarily need to destroy the tanks. Mobility kills are just as important. Take out the tracks, or the wheels. Hit the engine department to cause it to stall or smoke. Damaging the turret so it can't turn or fire or whatever. Or sniping a commander etc. There are multiple ways of preventing tanks from operating, not just by causing a bit explosion.
    1
  15773. This is the problem! So many people are bothered by which tank was superior and which could take out which first, when in reality the war was a mass of infantry and artillery. Tanks play a vitally important role, but not in fighting tanks. Theirs is the spearhead of the infantry and artillery, and they need both of them to survive and prosper
    1
  15774. I'm sure I've already seen that one a while ago. Pretty good production overall. However, lacks details. I like my details - which is why I started making Battlestorm documentaries, because I wasn't happy with the lack of information in TV documentaries.
    1
  15775. Thanks!
    1
  15776. There are tank on tank engagements - this is the biggest tank battle after all. The point being that it wasn't just a tank battle, because tanks can't operate alone (as the Soviets found out to their cost).
    1
  15777. You didn't watch the video.
    1
  15778. Thanks Mick! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  15779. That's not a bad guess given the circumstances :) I would love to know how many grenades the Soviets produced throughout the war. I bet it's a lot more than mortars
    1
  15780. Yes, Alexey V. Isaev
    1
  15781. There's two aspects to this. One, your tanks need to be able to fight enemy tanks, because they may run into them and there's no guarantee there will be a friendly AT gun around to help. And two, the Matilda Mark II suffered from not having a sufficient gun, and couldn't fire HE rounds, making it poor against infantry (which was it's purpose, as an "infantry tank"). So you do need higher calibre guns. You also need range, because you don't want to be out-ranged by the enemy AT guns - e.g. 88mms in North Africa comes to mind. But here's a question for you - why are light tanks still in use? Surely, they would have been replaced by heavier and heavier tanks if they weren't capable of going toe-to-toe with a heavy tank?
    1
  15782. According to the sources, listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  15783. Trucks and Lend-Lease will absolutely be another video at some point. The only issue is I don't have sufficient information on it at the moment. I will slowly gather the material though, and when I make the video I will make it a good one
    1
  15784. I know you're trying to help, and I thank you for your feedback. I am working on improving my edits. But I think you have a misconception of what having a YouTube channel is like. I'm a one man band, and for good reason - a small channel with barely 35k subscribers is not a channel that can afford to pay the bills. This is why I'm reliant on my Patreons to help me, since the books alone cost a fortune. If I can't afford to go full time on this - there's zero chance of me hiring a producer or a camera operator. Editing is done by me, on a tight schedule, since I'm committed to one video a week, and I work a more than full-time job. And yes, I have been experimenting with better edits and things more recently (see my very latest video), but doing that drastically increases the time it takes to edit, which means I have less time for research and script writing, which means I'm not able to get the videos out each week, or work on big projects behind the scenes like Crusader and Stalingrad. My time is incredibly limited. The research for Crusader alone came to 91,300 words. Stalingrad is still over 370,000. And for me, the priority has been and always will be the in-depth information and accuracy of the videos. One day I will go full-time, and maybe one day after that I'll be able to afford a second camera for secondary shots, or better lighting (which is something I am working on now), or have the time to shoot more B-roll, or hire an editor or research assistant or camera man etc. But as it stands right now I simply cannot do it. I have to get these videos done and dusted, and move on. Again, this is why I'm highly reliant on Patreon support, because unless you're bringing in a million views per video per day, YouTube pays you in penny's. And the reason they do that is because the vast majority of viewers use adblock. Currently I get more money on Patreon than I get on YouTube (and I'm grateful to every single Patreon for this). And all of it goes on books or equipment. If I was to count up everything I've spent on YouTube over the years, not including the hours I've put into it, I'll have made a colossal loss. But I love doing it, and I have a passion for history, so here we are :)
    1
  15785. I'll see what I can do :)
    1
  15786. Thanks Filippo! It's one of the maps from Isaev's book. I've edited it to be green
    1
  15787. Good question. Why do you think it is?
    1
  15788. Several. I'm considering just wearing on shirt (similar to AVGN) to keep things standard.
    1
  15789. Bruce, I never said they had loads of T-34s. In fact, I showed the opposite. I said that people say they're war winning tanks, which they do.
    1
  15790. Bruce, we've given you the evidence that supports this side of the argument. Now don't feel bad, it's obvious that you hadn't heard this before. Just accept it and we can move on :)
    1
  15791. First sentence of this documentary - "The T-34 was one of the technical wonders of the second world war" https://youtu.be/lK4HV56Qj_E Second sentence - "it stunned the German army and prevented it from seizing Moscow." Third sentence - "the third Reich even tried to clone the T-34 but their attempts never challenged the supremacy of the Soviet colossus." In this one, it is described as "the only tank that could stand up the the German panzers" https://youtu.be/K6vFcPdnnhQ And they were the first videos I clicked on. There's probably more out there.
    1
  15792. I posted links in the pinned comment to places on the internet that do say that. I also know that people say that because a lot of people have commented on my videos saying that as part of the reason why the Germans lost the war on the German-Soviet Front. So yes, people do say it
    1
  15793. I pull the names off Patreon, so the names won't match those on YouTube (unless they decide to use the same username). I think many Patreons prefer to use their own names as usernames, possibly so they can appear in the credits 😊
    1
  15794. Thanks, I'm glad you thought so :)
    1
  15795. Wow, well done!
    1
  15796. It's funny because to me the Luftwaffe was defeated at Stalingrad :) I haven't done sufficient research yet, and the air war has never really been my focus, however I do think Stalingrad is a turning point in several ways and this might be one of them. Losing air superiority also severely affected the German army's ability to conduct operations. Without Stuka support, they would have struggled to even get to Stalingrad
    1
  15797. Right, except knowing all of that does not change the conclusion of the video, which I don't think you got to, because if you had you wouldn't be discussing tank vs tank numbers and gun sizes, which are not relevant. Also, I would like to point out that the Germans only committed 68.1% (973) of their Panzer III's (1,429) to the East, and 71.6% (439) of their Panzer IV (613). They could have taken more, but didn't. And if 6% were unarmed like you say, I wonder why that was, considering they had the tanks to arm them. [Stats from Table 2.6, Enduring the Whirlwind, Page 111]
    1
  15798. @Joe, I replied to your other comment, but I'll reply here as well - the tank numbers and tank strengths aren't relevant. That was the point of the video, which, as I said to Ahmed Salim, if you watch the full video, you'll see/understand why. I'm not hiding anything here.
    1
  15799. What do you mean? Bazookas can defeat tanks. As can AT guns.
    1
  15800. Good question. I haven't formulated an answer to it yet because it doesn't make sense on the surface.
    1
  15801. The one mistake was mispelling Isaev! Glad you liked the video though :)
    1
  15802. Why not just use 88mm guns?
    1
  15803. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  15804. Yes, that's it. Although trucks are still very important in order to rapidly move both infantry and their artillery and anti-tank guns. An infantry division without trucks is at a disadvantage vs one that has got trucks because of the increased maneuverability, which gives many benefits including the ability to outflank
    1
  15805. Not currently planned, although I will do at some point since I do need to follow up my Somaliland video.
    1
  15806. It's all about interpreting that data :)
    1
  15807. Thank you Comrade Cyka!
    1
  15808. Awesome! Good to hear :)
    1
  15809. You'll probably enjoy this video as well, which goes into detail why tanks alone cannot win battles https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74
    1
  15810. Cheers Kevin!
    1
  15811. That's not correct at all. The Germans hit part of the front where the French had few units, then broke through to the operational and strategic depths. The British were caught in a trap, and the French didn't have enough reserves to punch through to break them out. In this particular case, there was relatively little tactical fighting, which is why the Germans lost only a handful of guys (compared to what came later). So this had nothing to do with spreading the tanks out on the tactical level - it was a major strategic blunder. See this other video of mine where I explain the tactical level better with units and weapon ranges etc https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74
    1
  15812. Thanks! I'm trying to make the most detailed videos possible (especially my Battlestorm series), so it's good to hear you like the style of the ones I've made so far :)
    1
  15813. Completely agree with you. I'll be exploring the roll of tanks at Stalingrad when I eventually get my documentary out about it
    1
  15814. Happy to put things into perspective for you :)
    1
  15815. From my reading so far, Churchill was a great politician, but an absolutely terrible military leader. He was good at grand strategy (getting US into war, destroying French fleet, supplying Middle East, going to Greece and so on) but super-massively-awefully-impossibly-incredibly impatient.
    1
  15816. As you will see if you watch the full video, it wasn't the German tanks taking on the Soviet tanks
    1
  15817. True. But tank vs tank warfare was also quite rare. The main part of the conflict was the infantry war
    1
  15818. You shouldn't feel humiliated! It's all about our interpretation of what happened. You should feel inspired to go explore this new perspective of the war and re-read those passages you thought meant one thing, but actually meant something else.
    1
  15819. Glad you enjoyed it Sagara :)
    1
  15820. Different game, but in Close Combat I would hold my tanks back and only use them when necessary or when I had the advantage. Use their mobility. A good tactic is to draw enemy tanks into your hidden anti-tank guns (the Rommel tactic), which will give you a massive advantage once you've knocked out their tanks.
    1
  15821. If you watch my video on the Purges, you'll see that the tank men were removed and the cavalrymen remained. This had an impact on which doctrines were implemented in the late 30's, with a deprioritisation on the tanks. But apart from that, perhaps you're right that they weren't "new" doctrines, but they certainly had to revisit them once they realised how effective the German use of tanks was. To quote Overt, Russia's War, P33- "Officers were inclined to stick to the rule book. Any talk of 'deep operations', or massed tank attack, with its echoes of Tukhachevsky, was by association deemed to be counter-revolutionary."
    1
  15822. That's the plan :) I'm sick to death of bad TV documentaries. This was actually my motivation to do my first documentary (Market Garden) because I wanted to put them to shame and show them how a REAL documentary should be.
    1
  15823. Thank you sir!
    1
  15824. All is well, how's things with you and your channel? How's you Bolshevik Revolution video coming along?
    1
  15825. They're neither pro-Soviet nor pro-German. You're just used to pro-German sources, so when someone presents information which isn't pro-German, you think it's pro-Soviet. I couldn't care less, I just want to know exactly what's going on, not a half-truth pro-something "truth" that both the Germans and Soviets presented. But if you're going, goodbye.
    1
  15826. I haven't studied the Far East. However, the Manchurian Campaign is something I would consider doing research on at some point. First question I'd ask though - What was more important, the Manchurian Campaign, or the Atom Bomb in bringing the war to a close? :)
    1
  15827. Hadn't thought of it, I don't see why not considering the point of this video :)
    1
  15828. You're welcome, but if you have any other theories regarding this conflict, feel free to share them! I could even make videos to confirm or deny them
    1
  15829. It's great that you think so :)
    1
  15830. True - although I couldn't mention everything. As I said to someone else, from my reading of the Stalingrad Campaign, Stuka support was absolutely vital in getting the Germans to the city. Without those Stukas, the Germans would have had an even harder time
    1
  15831. Sources are in the pinned comment at the top of the comment section :)
    1
  15832. Good joke. So good, nobody's laughing.
    1
  15833. Glad you thought so :) It's a significant weapon! A "light artillery" in a way. I wish I knew which mortar was the most produced
    1
  15834. :)
    1
  15835. I'm sorry you thought that.
    1
  15836. Yes, I understand how YouTube works, but I can't produce this content any quicker. It takes me an entire week just to edit the Stalingrad videos. That's not scripting or shooting them, just the editing. It's a full two weeks worth of work, and then on top of that I've got to do research, scripting, recording, editing and publishing three other videos in a four week period. And I'm struggling to do that! It's simply impossible to make the same quality history videos any quicker. Yes, if I was doing gaming videos like I used to do, I could probably publish one or two a day, no problem. But since Monday last week, I've read three complete history books, and a few chapters in several more books, just to do the research for tomorrow's video. I'm just taking a quick break right now, but I'm scrambling to get the thing recorded and edited last minute, and may have to do an all-nighter to get it done in time. I haven't counted, but I must be approaching 70 hours of work this week. So to say "publish more videos" is simply impossible; not for this type of content. Yeah, I could easily do vlog videos or Minecraft videos, or even silly 5-minute "let me tell you my opinion on the Tiger tank" videos which just repeat the same old useless facts every other video on the subject has already regurgitated a million times, but that's not what the majority of my viewers want, and that's not what I want. The Stalingrad series is currently 23 hours long, with a script of 206,758 words so far. I'm going for quality, not quantity, and if that means the views suffer, then the views suffer, because I'm not compromising on the accuracy or the detail just to get some extra views.
    1
  15837. What do you mean? I've been publishing every Monday. I haven't missed any since I took that two week break in November.
    1
  15838. Which country is that?
    1
  15839. Being skeptical of blatant propaganda doesn't mean I support either side.
    1
  15840. I loved HOI3. Shame they took the order of battle out of HOI4. I can understand making it simpler (individual HQ units were a bit of a nightmare), but to basically get rid of it almost entirely wasn't ideal. I miss corps level control :(
    1
  15841. Will do! Next week's will be similar in length too :) I will be varying the length though, depending on topic
    1
  15842. No worries John, I wouldn't make them any other way :)
    1
  15843. It is a shame, but I'm struggling to get these Monday videos out as it is, plus do the research on Crusader and Stalingrad. There's no way I could commit to helping them
    1
  15844. Listen, if it was finished, I would. It's still in progress. Part of the reason I made this video is so I could make the units and sort out the Order of Battle for it plus fix mistakes, and make sure my pronounciation of the generals was right. It's all slowly working towards it. Might be a while off, but don't worry. It's coming. One step at a time :)
    1
  15845. It's a work in progress. A massive work in progress, which is why it's taking so long. Actually put it aside to finish Operation Crusader first, which is looking to be about 7 or 8 hours long.
    1
  15846. You're probably right. I hope someone can figure this out.
    1
  15847. Interesting! If you do dig up anything on the Hoch und Deitchmeister regiment, will you let me know? Would be awesome to know more
    1
  15848. Really? Wow, I pronounced something right for a change!
    1
  15849. You're welcome :)
    1
  15850. When you ask some questions!
    1
  15851. 6th Army deported 185,000 of Stalingrad's population to the Reich, camps or elsewhere as slave labour. There is also evidence that units (such as 24th Panzer Division) were burning down civilian houses, even though there were no enemy troops there - and this was on the way to the city. There was also much looting and other "petty" crimes. This channel is not about politics. When I get to the Soviet or western allied side, the same rules apply.
    1
  15852. Books!
    1
  15853. @ k3io - are we sure? It's not great and the words are over it, but if that's the best out there, I'll take it! @ imperator servat - hi and welcome, glad you like it :)
    1
  15854. Or at least 55 minutes of it!
    1
  15855. Thanks Josh :)
    1
  15856. Only on the ones where I actually have commanders and insignia pictures of course, but yes :D
    1
  15857. Google images of 88mm on trucks. It did happen. All I know is that the sources say they had "self-propelled 88mm guns".
    1
  15858. Boring probably. But misinformation? Please explain where the misinformation is.
    1
  15859. Simply naming the book is good enough! If it gives a detailed order of battle for the panzer divisions (especially if it's more than his other Order of Battle books) I'll get it. Would you recommend?
    1
  15860. Fantastic! :) well, as you can probably tell by this video, it really is going to be big. At least I won't have to do a full "order of battle" bit in it now though because I've released this. That should shorten it by around 50 minutes!
    1
  15861. Well, this isn't going to be like the previous two, since it's more of a reference. But, anyone waiting for Battlestorm Stalingrad will now have a reference to the size of the battle and enormity of the task I've committed myself to
    1
  15862. Brave, yes. They fought well, yes. But they also deported most of Stalingrad's population (at least around 185,000) to the Reich as forced labour, and burned civilian houses down on the way to the city. This was a war of annihilation, and 6th Army were a part of that. Notice how there were no SS troops in 6th Army too. The Wehrmacht was not as squeaky clean as it is often made out to be.
    1
  15863. Some didn't like it when I said the Sixth Army weren't innocent
    1
  15864. That's completely incorrect. Sure, there were some replacements, but the reason 6th Army's strength deteriorated as it did is because Army Group B was deprioritised compared to the other Army Groups, and was not accorded enough replacements on a whole. So the front line men that remained were mostly veterans. And in addition, there were plenty of rear-service units which weren't affected by the front-line attrition, but who also committed the same crimes.
    1
  15865. I couldn't give a damn about some incompetent government failing to do it's job properly. In fact, I constantly point out where it fails. Also, this is an order of battle video, so not sure why you got offended at this. Did you even watch the video? Probably not.
    1
  15866. I know the British committed many crimes across the ages, including in WW2, which I will come back to in future videos. As I've said many times, no nation is innocent.
    1
  15867. I wish I'd opened with that now!
    1
  15868. Glad you agree :)
    1
  15869. Thank you Bradley! I hope you also like the video that's about to publish in the next 15 minutes (at 5pm GMT)
    1
  15870. That's it, plus the fighting really got going on the 24th of July, so it makes sense to start there. Up until this point it had just been a race across the Ukraine/North Caucasus area. Good to hear you enjoyed the video! It's not something I've really done before, so it's good to hear you enjoyed it :)
    1
  15871. Not at all.
    1
  15872. Thanks!
    1
  15873. No worries. More to come :) I will be doing the Soviet Order of Battle for the pre-battle period too, in preparation for the full Stalingrad documentary
    1
  15874. I'm glad you think it's a real map, that I didn't get it from a book, and that I'm not using green-screen or anything... ;)
    1
  15875. I'm 'happy' in the sense that this is an enormous battle with lots of units, and yet only s handful survive, showing how hard fought and devastating it is.
    1
  15876. Glad you liked it! I am working on learning German, but it's not at a stage yet where I can use the sources properly. One day soon though... and then I'll start learning Russian
    1
  15877. They're not specifically mentioned in the books, so I don't have the units unfortunately. I know there's a lot of engineer battalions that end up at Stalingrad towards the end of the battle, plus 9th Flak Division and lots of rear service units, but I don't have specific Corps or Army assets for this time period
    1
  15878. Thanks! And yeah, I suck :)
    1
  15879. Hopefully I don't bore you to sleep :)
    1
  15880. I'm still far off finishing the main video. But at least most of the Axis units are done ;)
    1
  15881. Well, a first stand-alone order of battle video, at least
    1
  15882. I believe that is the correct phrase. Well, I hope you like it. Let me know if you can think of any way to improve this type of video because this is a first for me
    1
  15883. Not for the battle of the CITY of Stalingrad. Remember, this was a campaign, not a battle. They took part in holding the flanks (hundreds of kilometres away) and in Operations Uranus and Little Saturn etc. So yes, part of the Stalingrad Campaign, but not for the battle in the actual city. You have to draw a line somewhere along the front, otherwise we'd have to include all units fighting on the Eastern Front
    1
  15884. I recently did a review of it https://youtu.be/fr92BwihIoU
    1
  15885. Thank! It means "The Imperator Knight". It goes back to my old gaming days when I wanted a name that would sound dominant. "Imperator" is Latin and means 'he who is in absolute command'. And it's also where the English word "Emperor" comes from. Plus, the "knight" at the end implies it's the greatest knight/warrior. So, it's "The [he in absolute command] Emperor [warrior] Knight". But nobody could pronounce it, so I shortened it to TIK. Plus, this was back in 2012 when I first started. It no longer holds any relevance, and is more of a "what was I thinking" thing. And interestingly, I originally wanted to be The Imperator King, but someone already had that name somehow!?
    1
  15886. I never said that it's the individual's fault that the system they're in is bad. It's the system that's the problem, not the individual.
    1
  15887. Training and discipline doesn't equal motivation nor efficiency. It also doesn't allow you to calculate calculations without prices.
    1
  15888. In Europe, definitely the Axis. Not sure, but I would probably say that the Germans had it better than the other Axis members
    1
  15889. So you're saying that mercenaries and private armies don't exist? Or did you not look beyond your own ideology?
    1
  15890. I'm sick of reading comments by religious nut jobs claiming that a free market is evil or doesn't work. Two people working together isn't evil, nor impossible. Please unplug from the Matrix before you try and start an intellectual conversation. And yes, the Red Ball Express was a thing. And yes, the truckers in WW2 were brave... None of that is relevant because it doesn't get around the fundamental problem of a centrally planned socialist logistical-economy which is that: without prices you cannot make economic calculation. Nothing in your comment solves this problem, and the reason why is because it's an impossible problem to overcome, and is the reason Socialism always is inefficient with scarce resources that have alternative uses.
    1
  15891. Laissez-faire capitalism doesn't work because the state creates monopolies via their central banks, taxes and regulations. That's why we need a free market.
    1
  15892. A black market is a free market, that's why the State calls it "black" - because they hate that it's doing their job better than they are.
    1
  15893. The UK rail network isn't privatised https://youtu.be/tCHyNw5lEl0
    1
  15894. If the war is just and everyone wants to fight, then why would they want to get out the army?
    1
  15895. They should buy off the depots and sell to the troops directly.
    1
  15896. Bias exists in every source, and that's fine. This is why we need to use ALL the sources in order to overcome the sources. And no, I think most people these days are subjective, not objective.
    1
  15897. What's "ground news"?
    1
  15898. Apologies for late reply. Archival documentation is categorised as either primary sources, or secondary sources, depending on the type each individual document is. Therefore, Archival documentation is covered in this video.
    1
  15899. Yes it is 🤨
    1
  15900. It was not intended 😂
    1
  15901. Probably!
    1
  15902. Haha it does make it seem like that!
    1
  15903. Yes, I'm good Ragged, you? I still haven't read that novel yet, but I mean to. It was my granddad's favourite.
    1
  15904. You can't say "it's everyone's fault"! That's boring! Which is also my opinion of Pink Floyd... yes, let the hate begin. They're really not my cup of tea.
    1
  15905. I agree, but you must understand the context. The reason I'm doing these Q&A videos is because I'm working on Battlestorm: The Courland Pocket 1944-45, coming out this month. I can't do top-quality weekly videos AND Battlestorm documentaries. That's why last year I aimed to get the Crusader series out in March, but ended up starting it in October, because I was concentrating on quality weekly videos. This wasn't good overall because, while I was getting lots of views per video, my hardcore viewers were demanding Battlestorms. And I wanted more Battlestorms too. So I'm working on the Battlestorms behind the scenes, then doing Q&A and less quality videos in between. This satisfies my Patreons, and those wanting Battlestorms, but obviously means a dip in quality for the weeks inbetween Battlestorms. And this is why I need financial support via Patreon. I was going to hire an editor to help me make the videos, thus cutting down massively on the amount of time it takes to make a video so that I can get more quality videos out each week. Sadly, the Patreon crisis resulted in a loss of money between December and January, and it's too unstable now to hire someone. This current Q&A format video is the direct consequence of that problem.
    1
  15906. I have, but it's been having issues. Are they cleared yet? I've also heard of a couple of other alternatives, but I'm kinda waiting a bit to weigh up all the options
    1
  15907. What's the answer then?
    1
  15908. No worries :)
    1
  15909. Glad to hear Scrooge!
    1
  15910. Really?
    1
  15911. Good point, although the whole point of a chain of command is that you don't skip ranks, because you delegate directly to those below. Not saying that there's never a time where skipping ranks isn't relevant, but it makes sense why Lucas didn't pitch his plan to Clark and Alexander together.
    1
  15912. Joint first! Both of you were the same second!
    1
  15913. I may not like what you have to say, but it's not my place to stop you from saying it. Just because someone says something I don't like doesn't mean I have to pay attention to them. And just because we censor someone doesn't mean that those ideas and beliefs go away, they go underground, making it harder to deal with them. If someone calls for genocide on social media, that's an open invitation for us to challenge their beliefs and correct the person. At the very least, the backlash will put off their followers, and perhaps have them turn away from those beliefs. It opens up the opportunity to dismantle them. If we censor them, all that'll do is reinforce the idea that they must be correct, and that the authorities don't want the 'truth' to be told. Censorship actually converts people to their position - the opposite of the intended purpose.
    1
  15914. Yeah, see my "How BIG were Soviet Armies and divisions" video for the full explanation https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI
    1
  15915. Had to be today (start of the battle after all!) Part three is tomorrow :)
    1
  15916. +Thegamer8324 nobody suspects the Dutch Resistance (except the Allies it seems)
    1
  15917. I'm no expert on the French resistance by any means, but I did read that that was partly the reason the planners didn't use the Dutch underground for Arnhem. Give me some time and I'll find who said it and in which book (I've read that many!)
    1
  15918. Comes back to the faulty planning argument. I'm not so sure the intelligence was poor, more that it was ignored by Browning and others
    1
  15919. I'll make mention of that tomorrow ;) although I'll admit I don't go into any detail about the 15th Army
    1
  15920. Glad you like it, Der Balu :)
    1
  15921. +Amya Ysma glad you're liking them :)
    1
  15922. Gerrit Teunis excellent! Really happy to know you enjoy it :D
    1
  15923. +Gerrit Teunis the pegasusarchive is pretty good! I'd say that there's more to the debate than what they say there though :)
    1
  15924. akgeronimo501 They were attacked from the Reichswald flank once on the second day. The next time they were attacked was after XXX Corps had arrived. They had their artillery with them - I don't know why you keep saying they didn't. Gavin had studied previous paratrooper landings and had concluded that paras needed heavy weaponry. And the British at Arnhem bridge held on without tank support for 4 days, whilst the rest of the division held on for 9 days. So yes, it's possible they would have held the opposite side of Nijmegen bridge had they taken it. The 82nd landed near to the bridges near Grave. The distance to Nijmegen isn't important since they didn't move a unit towards it for several hours after their initial landings. If they'd set off immediately they would have had hours to dig in before the Germans showed up.
    1
  15925. +SuperVerst valid points. Wish I could give my opinion at this early stage :)
    1
  15926. Browning certainly has a lot to answer for. It's true, he is Gavin's superior and was there on the first day of battle. In fact, it's not clear what if anything Browning actually did after the beginning of the operation.
    1
  15927. Damn it! I've never heard it as anything other than the way I pronounce it :( I think I get Veghel and Schinjdel right though since others have corrected me in the past
    1
  15928. Fascism is "national syndicalism with a philosophy of actualism" https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko So they aren't purely nationalist. To out it simply, they just believe in socialism in one country. There's also no racism within Italian Fascist ideology. National Socialism on the other hand is racial socialism. It's Socialism for the race rather than the class https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Neither Fascists or National Socialists are Communist. Communism is another variation of socialism. A good way to think about it is to imagine a bunch of Socialists, but all the different groups call themselves different things and have slight variations in their ideologies. That's basically what's happening here. The Fascists, the National Socialists, and the Marxists, are want their version of socialism as their end goal.
    1
  15929. Yep, well done!
    1
  15930. Not everyone is racist, just the Leftists (Marxians, CRTs, and Nazis).
    1
  15931. Stalingrad is EVERY FOUR WEEKS.
    1
  15932. The Indians who fought were volunteers. None of them were forced to fight.
    1
  15933. "And having worked with, and co-authored several peer reviewed scientific papers on, using insect viruses to control pest populations (not to mention read a fair bit on past human epidemics), I fully endorse what the government has been doing to contain and control this pandemic." Yes, that's why you're a racist, Marxist anti-semite, and a Nationalist who wants to "control pest populations" just like Hitler did. You don't like people who have "bad blood", do you? - "Yes, but far right extremists are just as bad. Ask anyone who lives or has lived under a military dictatorship." Again, the right believes in liberty, not military dictatorship. A military dictatorship is a socialist dictatorship, since a military is a State, and the State control of the economy is Socialism. https://www.chirho.consulting/uploads/6/9/7/5/69753685/the-real-political-spectrum_orig.png - "The problem is that right wing extremists are using the convoys..." Oh yes, just look at these "Far Right extremists" do all this https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/suhf18/canadian_terrorism/ - "has NOTHING to do with vaccination at all (as seen by the weapons seizures at the US border, the US and Confederate flags being waved in the Canadian capitol, the banners saying "Spirit of 1776)." Exactly, it's about FREEDOM from racist-Fascist medical segregation. - "If you question what I am talking about with regards to right wing extremists organizing things, please read this CTV news article about the convoy organizers" Yeah, the same central-bank funded lamestream media that tells me I'm a conspiracy theorist for believing that the central banks that are hyperinflating the currency supply and then blaming it on the small shop owners, and is also telling me that the BLM riots were "just" and also "peaceful protests", and also how Kyle Rittenhouse was a "far right extremist", and how everyone who voted for Brexit is a Nazis, is now saying bad stuff about a handful of irrelevant politicians. Somehow I don't take their word for it. But you do. And the reason you do is because you're a little Mussolini. - "It is very much the attitude of a petulant bully, not someone who is concerned about the health and welfare of society as a whole." I see, the elite are forcing entire economies to shut down and are starving people to death, but that's fine - they're not the bullies or anything! But then when people start to protest against these racist-Socialists, you claim they're bullies. Wait, who's the "Far Right extremist" here? Oh that's right, it's you. - "Their whole argument is based on a selfish premise that doesn't take into account the public good." By "public" you mean the State. So yes, they're fighting against the State, because the State is totalitarian. I know you don't understand that, since no NATIONAL Socialist like yourself understands this, but it's a FACT https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Why don't you learn from history before it repeats itself again? - "Nor is it based on scientific evidence, but rather fallacy, lies and misinformation." Unfortunately I am not allowed to comment on this, since YouTube has already restricted my right of speech on the subject. Your remarks on this, however, scream of intellectual immaturity. - "It is a form of enabled narcissistic self interest that expresses no concern about the health and well being of others, nothing more." It's not about health, it's about freedom from tyranny, oppression, and collective stupidity. - "I would also add that this has nothing to do with racist, Marxist-Fascist governments overstepping bounds" Yes it is. - "But rather people getting what we in Canada call "cabin fever". Everyone has been under stress because of concerns over COVID and chaffing under restrictions (in part because the bulk of them have no knowledge of epidemiology) while lacking the means to "blow off steam", and some people are reaching the breaking point." No, people are finally starting to wake up and realize that they've been lied to, and that this was all a means to an ends. It was never about health, but about power. The Statists have seized power, and have convinced many to surrender themselves to the dictators. Luckily, some are fighting back, as am I in my own little ways. - "The fact that at least 75% of the population in our country has been vaccinated, and we have under 1/3 the infection rate that our "free" neighbours to the south have, suggests that we are on the right course to keep COVID-caused mortality down to a minimum." And the price of making the situation way worse with those backwards measures was slavery to the State. Well done. Hope it was worth it.
    1
  15934. Is fighting against totalitarianism considered "extremism" and "far right" now? I don't recall Adolf saying anything about "freedom to all"? And since I've proven Nazism and Anti-Semitism to be Far Left ideologies, it really takes the sting away when a Lefty calls someone a bad name. Besides, name calling doesn't get around the fact that our racist Marxist-Fascist governments have overstepped the mark and need to be shown that those who work rather than shirk are not going to take it any more. If the benefit scroungers aren't happy, tough
    1
  15935. As I said at least three times in the video RACISM WAS PART OF THE PROCESS. I didn't once excuse it. The point was that it wasn't the primary motivation for being in India - the economics were.
    1
  15936. Ah yes, because there was no racism in WW2, apparently? Also, just skip 1 minute ahead, and you'll be fine.
    1
  15937. Good going on 4th!
    1
  15938. Would it make things worse if I admitted that I haven't actually seen the film?
    1
  15939. I don't know about the French Republic. Britain formally abolished slavery in 1833, but I was referring to the fact that Britain was moving in that direction before 1833. Parliament formally started the abolition process in 1807 (the Slave Trade Act), and there were several acts between then and 1833 where they moved towards abolition. Between 1808 and 1860, the Royal Navy had successfully freed 150,000 Africans being shipped as slaves. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Abolition-Of-Slavery/
    1
  15940. I'd definitely get sued at that point
    1
  15941. Haha I'm just conscious that people are watching YouTube, and not everybody has time to read up on everything :)
    1
  15942. :( is there no accurate film of this battle!?
    1
  15943. How does the film compare to the REAL Pavlov's House presented in the video?
    1
  15944. Really?? I'm quite surprised!
    1
  15945. I do want to cover that war in the future, but it will definitely be after Stalingrad.
    1
  15946. If you do/have become a Patreon, thank you! Be sure to check out the Patreon update I posted yesterday (or watch the video that's coming out tomorrow as it's quite important).
    1
  15947. WHAT. Why do you distrust Glantz??? You realise that he and his co-author Jonathan House have done more to correct western perceptions of the Eastern Front than anyone else? He's not perfect, and I don't always agree, but to distrust him as much as we distrust Beevor is just not justified.
    1
  15948. Oh and yes, ultimately it's was great for 62nd Army that the small strip of land in the south held on, but I wouldn't call it 'decisive'
    1
  15949. Google! Except the one with the arrows and the green dotted line. That one's from Glantz's Stalingrad Trilogy
    1
  15950. Don't worry, I've been working on it today. However, I think the Eastern Front is equally as interesting, and there's nothing to say I can't do both.
    1
  15951. That is important! Thanks!
    1
  15952. I'm focusing on Stalingrad. That's all. These "biggest myths of the war" you're spouting - I've already tackled several. But like I've said in a previous video, I'm focusing on a limited number of battles in order to dive into the details and hammer out a good history of them. It's not because I don't want to or can't cover other myths, but I'm not one to make 5 minute history videos on a range of topics and miss a load of facts out. I'm one guy specialising on particular topics in great detail, and I can only do so much at a time.
    1
  15953. Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  15954. In what way?
    1
  15955. What about the Vatican? Ukraina is fine, doesn't require the "the".
    1
  15956. Because it sounds wrong to English speakers like me to not put the "The" before the name. Same with THE UK and THE USA and THE Vatican. I don't go "Hi, I'm from UK". No, I'm from THE UK. If The Caucasus was it's own separate country, it would also be called The Caucasus because the name simply demands it to not sound wrong. "Hi, I'm from Ukraine" is just awkward to both mind and ears. It should be "Hi, I'm from the Ukraine." Kinda like you wouldn't say "Hi, I'm from city." That's just wrong. "Hi I'm from the city" is correct. Same when referring to the Ukraine. The word demands it. Thinking about it, if it's ending was different, it would work. So "Hi, I'm from Ukrainia". Yep, that sounds acceptable. And if you change the front - "Hi I'm from Bukraine" sounds fine too. But the word "Ukraine", purely as a word, in the context of a country, to my ears, demands a THE before it. That's the reason why I say it. Perhaps someone with a degree in English can explain this better. It's purely the sound of it for me.
    1
  15957. Yes it's Monday! And no worries! Thanks for watching as always :)
    1
  15958. Thanks George!
    1
  15959. The green and grey ones come from Google images, so yes you should be able to find them. The one where I drew the green line and arrows comes from Glantz's Stalingrad. And I should be most sticking to Stalingrad in these videos.
    1
  15960. Too long! But it's worth it in the end
    1
  15961. Not sure about reliable numbers, but there are a couple of instances of Soviets fighting for the Germans, and you obviously have the Hiwis
    1
  15962. Haha I hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  15963. No worries, glad to hear you liked it :)
    1
  15964. M'aiq knows many things.
    1
  15965. Is it? But even so, there's no reason not to call it Naumov's House now.
    1
  15966. You're not the first to ask me for Ortona. I will cover it at some point before I do my main Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary as a bit of a comparison.
    1
  15967. You're welcome! Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  15968. I agree, although I've not got through it all yet
    1
  15969. Good to hear! Thanks for watching!
    1
  15970. Thanks :)
    1
  15971. Wait, what? "in the night attack, paratroopers, veterans of the landing on Crete took part." This is incorrect, Fallschirmjäger didn't take part in the Battle of Stalingrad. Maybe there was a few transfers from the Fallschirmjäger, but there wasn't a Fallschirmjäger unit in Stalingrad. The closest unit may have been the Luftwaffe Flak Division, but I don't think they were in this area.
    1
  15972. Thank you for the link! Google translate does a good job. Nice to know the Battalion commander was called Zhukov
    1
  15973. Thanks!
    1
  15974. Huh, well I didn't know that. Very interesting. Tell them all I said hi :) oh, and if you or they could provide me with the Chinese translations, I could update the subtitles of my videos to include them for the rest of the world
    1
  15975. Really? I was under the impression that YouTube can't be displayed in China?
    1
  15976. They based the map (which is called Pavlov's House) and mission off this house and Pavlov.
    1
  15977. And that could be the danger of being too broad and not focusing on specific areas of the war (e.g. battles)
    1
  15978. In some ways, the Axis-Soviet Front is the same. Neither side was the "good guy".
    1
  15979. That doesn't make it pointless.
    1
  15980. I try my best :) while my longer videos may put people off (because of their length) they're equally, if not more, in-depth than these smaller ones, so be sure to check some of them out when you get the time
    1
  15981. The good guys win
    1
  15982. No worries! Glad you enjoyed the video and found it useful
    1
  15983. I'll get to Siding Nsir when I reach 1943 in my Battlestorm North African Campaign videos. Russian Civil War may be a bit out of my scope for this channel at the minute, but possibly in the far future.
    1
  15984. Bit of both. It allows me to continue doing research on Stalingrad while I work on the next Battlestorm: Crusader.
    1
  15985. Only slightly!? I must improve!
    1
  15986. Nice to know you found it useful :)
    1
  15987. Thanks! :)
    1
  15988. ಠ_ಠ
    1
  15989. Hi 😊
    1
  15990. Haha time flies when you're having fun :) I was only at 10k in January, so most of the growth has actually been in the past 105 days or so
    1
  15991. Yes I am, don't worry. Yesterday I finished the battle-part of the script for Battlestorm Operation Crusader, and that part of the script alone is 50,400 words. To put this into context, that's more than twice as big as the script for Battlestorm Operation Market Garden, and I haven't even done the pre-battle script or the post battle script. So this is going to be a BIG episode - probably 6 hours long. And it's going to be on the scale of Battleaxe (down to regiment and battalion level). And I'll be doing a couple more videos before that comes out. It's just that a lot of people want Stalingrad so I'm also working on that.
    1
  15992. You're assuming the Germans could have overwhelm Chuikov's 62nd Army.
    1
  15993. Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  15994. Yeah, I'm going to make a video on it at some point
    1
  15995. Yeah, someone else asked about it. I'll look into it
    1
  15996. From what I've read (and I'll do a video on it if I have enough material) the Grain Elevator was able to shrug off 88mm rounds. I'll see if I can get info on the fighting inside
    1
  15997. I think I will
    1
  15998. No, thank you for watching! :)
    1
  15999. You'll get an answer in Tuesday's video (yes, doing two videos this week).
    1
  16000. The one by Ottaway?
    1
  16001. Thanks Alex! Will do :)
    1
  16002. 400,000 words of research for Stalingrad so far, and climbing :)
    1
  16003. Here's an article about it from a Russian historian who's been helping me with the Battlestorm Stalingrad series https://warspot.net/312-unknown-stalingrad-pavlov-s-house-anatomy-of-a-legend
    1
  16004. Sorry, I'll try to avoid both in future.
    1
  16005. I can display the full name when talking about an individual like Chuikov and showing his picture. But I can't do it for the units because there's simply not enough space
    1
  16006. "Their works contain more bullshit than a small 'fairy-tale' about Pavlov's house." Can you tell me which of Glantz's works contains all this "bullshit"? Glantz is at the cutting edge of research on this war, to the point that Citino has said we're living in the "Glantz era" of WW2 history. Telling people to not use Glantz's works is EXTREMELY bad advice.
    1
  16007. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  16008. Don't worry, it's just because I wanted to put a bit of colour in the otherwise grey thumbnail
    1
  16009. But is this really the vodka?
    1
  16010. I don't have any information on them, unfortunately.
    1
  16011. Exactly, that's why I'm doing it. I want it to be unlike anything seen before
    1
  16012. I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  16013. I will do at some point
    1
  16014. I like the fact that there are similarities in our videos (both saying the official Pavlov's House story was incorrect), but also differences in our interpretation of the reality. You say Lieutenant Afanasiev was the guy in charge, yet we have Captain Naumov also mentioned at the leader, with Dragan coming later. Is this a contradiction, or do these facts compliment each other?
    1
  16015. Didn't realise you'd made a video about this too! What a coincidence!
    1
  16016.  @rafal5863  Do you have any specific video recommendations? I can see via my own videos that evidence, logic and challenging their views does nothing. But how exactly does trolling get through to them?
    1
  16017. We don't have money. We use fiat currency, which has no value, and yet people believe it does. If the current system is capitalist, then I'm not a capitalist. What we need is freedom from the chains that keep us enslaved. What we need is a free market. https://youtu.be/G6S5c6xhXTY
    1
  16018. Also, I've already seen that video.
    1
  16019. I'm being very specific when I say that I'm not an AnCap. Keep up.
    1
  16020. Thank you for the recommendation!
    1
  16021. Taxes have always existed. Slavery, serfdom, feudal lords, regulations and other restrictions have always been. We've never had a free market, so stop chatting nonsense.
    1
  16022. What do you think I'd say about him?
    1
  16023. "you're attributing gnosticism to modern ideologies to justify a liberal-christian worldview that all these perversions of the enlightenment were due to heretics and that liberalism is the only true pure enlightenment ideology." Nope, that's not what I'm doing. Try listening with your ears, not with your heart.
    1
  16024. "Third positionists are the ones who popularized using that analogy in politics during the 2015-2016 period." No you didn't. The Red Pill came into existence via the PUA movement, and that has nothing to do with Third Positionism. - "Red pill refers to taking up the third position by rejecting the false dichotomy of modern politics" No it doesn't. You are confidently incorrect. It just means seeing the world for how it really is, which is definitely not how Third Positionists see the world. Anyone who believes in "Cosmic Truth" or other nonsense clearly aren't seeing the world for how it really is. - "a synthesis or third position is the true redpill while both of the others are blue pills of sorts." The synthesis is the blue pill.
    1
  16025. Are you trolling? Anodes and cathodes are to do with electrodes. I've not come across anything like this in the literature regarding the dialectic. Do you have actual dialectical sources explaining this?
    1
  16026. I think a distinction needs to be made between the elite of a movement and the grunts. Clearly, as you recognise, the grunts think one thing, while the high priests justify this in a different way. The Nazis were the same. What Hitler thought was not what the average brownshirt thought.
    1
  16027. "What you dont tell your viewers is that Marxism is a criticism of our current economic conditons, not a playbook on how to build a communist society." The current economic conditions are terrible. Capitalism doesn't work. However, the Communist's final solution isn't going to make things better. - "I cant see how its honest of you to blame past societal failures on marx, when any good marxist knows marxism does little to inform communists how to build a communist society, how then can marx be blamed for Cambodia, stalin, etc.?" You're splitting hairs. Marxism results in the attempts, and those attempts always fail. The reason why people keep trying to make Communism happen is because they're rejecting reality as a result of the dialectic cult. - "As a past socialist yourself you should know that anti-authoritarian Marxists exist" Yes, and that's the doublethink on show. The "anarchists" on the "Left" are only "anarchists" against the current system. Once capitalism is gone, they play to create "Federations" of trade unions and all sort of other nonsense. They're not actual anarchists, they're authoritarians. And the only way they can implement their regimes is through totalitarianism. All their roads lead to the same conclusion. That's why, when I realised this, I stopped being a socialist. - "Your political work is a total mess, and omits too much information to be taken seriously." You can keep crying but I'm not backing down just because you can't regulate your emotions.
    1
  16028. I understand your frustration with the capitalist system, and I agree that the politicians are all into kids. However, the current system is bad because our economy is not free. We have ridiculous amounts of taxation, regulation and inflation (caused by the state central banks, which Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto). What we need then is neither more Communism nor Capitalism, not do we need some middle position. What we need is a free market. The solution to selfishness and greed is not more selfishness and greed. The solution is a self-regulating economic system. There is only one system like that, and that system is the free market. Fascism only promises more of the same, just with different people on top. If you want inflation to continue, take over the central banks, it won't change a thing. You want inflation to stop? Okay, the free market has the solution to that - gold and silver as means of exchange. Collectivising the farms will result in cheaper prices, and food shortages. The cure for high prices is high prices. If you don't understand why then I recommend the book "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, which I think you should read as a top priority.
    1
  16029. Also, you cannot have totalitarianism without the total state control of the means of production (socialism)
    1
  16030. Socialism and Communism are the same thing - synonyms of each other. It was only Lenin and Stalin who separated the two terms. They had to explain why the Soviet Union wasn't the paradise promised. So they said, 'no no, this is socialism, the transition stage to communism'. Please see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16031. Yes you were. You beat me. I was late to the party today, sadly!
    1
  16032. I wouldn't say winners. The price of victory was very high.
    1
  16033. I'm studying Stalingrad now for my upcoming documentary on it. And while it was a turning point, it was not the first. Operation Barbarossa failed because the Soviets continued to fight and also prevented the Germans from reaching and taking Moscow and Leningrad. Several historians conclude that this was when the war was lost. Blau in 1942 was the last real strategic gamble for the Germans, and it also failed. But even if Blau had succeeded, the Soviets would have continued to fight. It wouldn't have won the war. At best it would have prolonged it.
    1
  16034. Incorrect. The Soviets won the war in 1941, before the USA even entered the war. Lend-Lease didn't really become a significant factor until 1943.
    1
  16035. You may be interested in the video I've got planned for next Monday
    1
  16036. I don't, but I will in the video coming on Monday
    1
  16037. Makes sense to me :)
    1
  16038. Yes, and it's a little more complicated than what you said. I'm actually working on a Great Purges video now and will hopefully be out soon.
    1
  16039. My Battlestorm documentaries are not. I'm incredibly proud to have made them, and the response has been overwhelmingly positive.
    1
  16040. Yes, because the statistics show that they're not telling the truth.
    1
  16041. It's not based on the Soviet archives at all. In fact, there's more German sources than Soviet, which is one of my chief complaints, and the reason I want to learn Russian after I've learnt German. No, instead, this is based on the German archives - rather than the German generals memoirs, which most accounts refer too (thinking they're reliable, which they're absolutely not).
    1
  16042. Just to point out, Lend Lease only really got going by the time we get to 1943. Before that and it didn't arrive in the sufficent qualtities need to make a significant difference on the battlefield.
    1
  16043. I've just finished making notes from Glantz's third book (out of the five in the "trilogy") and am currently at 242,000 words of research on Stalingrad. So yes, I have read it. I never said the Red Army was "more competent than the [Heer]", only that the German Army was not as superior to the Red Army as is often perceived. That in fact is the lie told by the German generals after the war, when the western world needed to believe that the Soviets were inferior. As you said yourself, every single "counterattack" failed to break the German line. Hold on a second, the Germans were defending? It's often stated that an army on the attack must have a much higher force ratio to overcome the defender and will (often) sustain higher casualties. Considering that these counteroffensives were hastily cobbled together and executed in order to try slow the Germans down in their advance to Stalingrad, it's no wonder they failed. However, once the Soviets had time to create a proper offensive plan and gather sufficient force, they executed a stunning offensive, surrounding the Sixth Army - despite numerous Romanian and German defensive actions and counterattacks. Not bad for an "interior" enemy. And you're right, several German Panzer divisions did face alarming shortages in and around Stalingrad. But not elsewhere. As I'll show in my next video, Germany had enough tanks and men to replace it's losses and actually grow its numbers up until mid 1943. That is including the losses sustained at Stalingrad. That is one of the myths or excuse told by the German generals as to why they lost the war. The reality is a lot different. And "my" argument was based wholeheartedly on what many modern historians have concluded. Main source listed in the description. My next video (hopefully coming this week) will hit hard with some statistics that will prove there's nothing lazy about the stated argument
    1
  16044. Thanks! Yeah, I'm not the type of person to shy away from this sort of thing. If something needs saying, I'll say it. That's probably why my Market Garden video did so well. Luckily though, some people are level-headed :)
    1
  16045. So, is your perpection of the Eastern Front the same as mine?
    1
  16046. Who's anti-German? I'm not. In fact, I'm trying learning the language at the moment. And the British and French were outfought in France, nobody's denying that, so not sure what your point is
    1
  16047. That is strange. I think the two worked well together.
    1
  16048. How many goods were shipped in 1941? That was the year the Soviets won the war.
    1
  16049. Yes, the Germans were on the defensive most of the time, and so had the advantage. As far as the Tigers vs Shermans and other tank duals are concerned, I'll leave this link here for you. It's a very good video, but I've linked to a very relevant point https://youtu.be/bNjp_4jY8pY?t=28m53s
    1
  16050. Nope, the Soviets won the war.
    1
  16051. No, the Germans were good at fighting... but the Soviets were good at fighting too. The point of the video was to say the Germans were fighting an enemy that wasn't "inferior" to them (at least not in every aspect). And I'll be honest, I don't think I've read anything by Bruce Gudmundsson
    1
  16052. I made a follow-up video to this video that talks through the statistics https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds A lot of people didn't like it and claimed it was wrong (which is fine, that's their opinion). However, their counter-arguments aren't very persuasive, with some saying "statistics don't matter"!? Also calling someone an idiot doesn't make their argument wrong, but they think that's a valid counter-argument. The point is this, the Germans outnumbered the Soviets until they got to Moscow. That doesn't mean they didn't kill more Soviets than they lost men (they did kill a lot more) but they had several strategic advantages at that point, including the fact that they outnumbered the Soviets, had total surprise, and caught the Soviets completely unprepared in the middle of a no-where-near finished mobilisation effort. Despite this, some historians say that this period in 1941 is when the Germans lost the war. If not, then 1942. There was no second-front in 1941 or 42. North Africa was a side-show, taking 1.5 panzer divisions away from the Eastern Front in 1941. The Axis and Soviets were fighting with everything they had in 1941 and 1942, and the war was decided then. It's up to you who you blame, but who was blaming Hitler? Was it the German generals? Guderian says that Hitler delayed the attack on Moscow and tries to make out that Hitler had surrounded himself with yes-men. The reality was that 1 million Soviet troops were on Guderian's southern flank, and Hitler and his generals couldn't advance on Moscow without defeating them first. Guderian says that everyone in the room was against him, which proved that Hitler was surrounded by yes-men. No, the reality is that Guderian was alone in his opinion. Yes, Hitler didn't allow Paulus to breakout of Stalingrad. But that's a very very very complicated set of circumstances which I don't I don't have time to go into here. I'll be discussing this in my upcoming Stalingrad documentary (currently at 370,000 words of research). However, the point is that sometimes Hitler was justified in his decision-making, and was backed up by at least some of the German generals. Hitler alone wasn't the reason the Germans lost the war though. And the main thing I want you to realise is that the German generals after the war don't want to lose face and so were trying to shift the blame from themselves. Conveniently, Hitler was dead and unable to defend himself against their accusations. It's an easy cop-out. They're equally, if not more-so, to blame for their defeat.
    1
  16053. Why is this argument wrong?
    1
  16054. Survivors write the history. That's why the German generals wrote their version of WW2 after appointing Franz Halder as an advisor to the US Historical Division, and after the Soviet Union closed their archives and censored their generals.
    1
  16055. History isn't written by the victors, it's written by the survivors.
    1
  16056. That's down to poor German logistics. Don't forget that the Soviets also had to fight in the same conditions as the Germans.
    1
  16057. I did show the sources, and followed this video up with another 44 minute one where I showed the data. https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds The counter-arguments are silly at best. Instead of attacking the argument, people are attacking the author, which isn't an effective argument.
    1
  16058. The Germans had numerical superiority on day 1 of the war, and had it until December 1941 (which is when they were first beaten back). Britain and USA gave Lend-Lease, but this didn't arrive in sufficient quantities until 1943. Many historians consider Barbarossa to be where the Germans lost the war, so Soviet numerical superiority and Lend-Lease does not explain why the Germans lost.
    1
  16059. :)
    1
  16060. I guess you haven't heard the rumour that says Big Mac's have so much sugar in them that McDonalds have to include gherkins in them otherwise they'd be classed as desserts?
    1
  16061. The good news is that I'm planning on doing a video on Lend Lease at some point.
    1
  16062. As I'll show in my next video, Germany was able to replace it's losses in manpower and tanks up until mid to late 1943. I don't think you're wrong in concluding that this was a war of numbers, but there's more to it than that
    1
  16063. Your numbers of well off. I've actually discussed the actual numbers in another video and the conclusion is the same as this video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16064. What are you talking about? Politics has nothing to do with this video.
    1
  16065. "and you'll see that the brilliant Russians only won when severely outnumbering their opponents or when cut off of supplies." The same could be said for the Germans, since they only won battles when the odds were heavily stacked in their favour. Not only did the Germans have total initial surprise, they caught the Soviets in the middle of a mobilisation and reorganization effort. In effect, they hit them at the perfect time. This also explains why they bagged as many prisoners as they did at the beginning. However, once the Soviets recovered, and got their industry going again (since they moved it all to the Urals during the fighting in 1941) they began to produce mass numbers of artillery and anti-tank guns, which prevented the Germans from achieving the one thing they were good at - breaking through the front and encircling. Once the Germans lost the ability to even break through the Soviet front lines (i.e. the period around Stalingrad and Kursk), they suddenly also started losing battles. After the Third Battle of Kharkov, the Germans barely won battles, which is why they also lost the war. And the Germans weren't outnumbered at Stalingrad, where Paulus' 80,000 initial city-assault force faced barely 54,000 Soviets in the city (in fact, Chuikov's forces never exceeded 54,000 at any point in the fighting, and definitely shrank as the battle progressed). Yet I don't recall the Germans winning that one. [Numbers come from Book two of Glantz's Stalingrad Trilogy.]
    1
  16066. Ah, sorry! You're not the only on to ask, and I think I've disappointed quite a few people
    1
  16067. Cheers! And yes, it's green screen haha
    1
  16068. And here it is https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16069. Don't worry, the research is already done. New video on it's way this week which will show that the Wehrmacht was only dominant in 1941 before Moscow, and why it failed after that.
    1
  16070. I have no problem standing against the crowd if I think the evidence says something different
    1
  16071. Or Belgium 1815... wait
    1
  16072. As this follow-up video proves, it wasn't outnumbered "immesnsely" https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw
    1
  16073. Who said they attacked headlong? The Germans? Of course they would say that! And the Germans also attacked along the major roads. That's what all armies did. Look at Barbarossa. Look at Brody and Dunno. The Germans travelled on the roads. And the Red Army didn't throw away "millions" of soldiers. They lost 2.5 or 3 to one, despite being outnumbered, being unprepared, and being caught off guard in the first year of war. If the Germans were so superior, why did they only kill 2.5 or 3 times as many men, despite having all the advantages on day 1?
    1
  16074. Which begs the question, if Germans reinforcements outpaced losses, what happened? Something doesn't add up.
    1
  16075. And here's that video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16076. 15+ million of that 30 million were civilians. And the Soviets were running out of manpower towards the end of the war. They didn't have "hordes". In fact, up until after Kursk, they only ever outnumbered the Germans (not including Axis Allies) at any one time by slightly over two to one. I have another video coming that will show you the actual numbers.
    1
  16077. So were the Soviet soldiers. In 1942, with the Ukraine in German hands, Soviet soldiers on their way to Stalingrad were already hungry before they even arrived in the city
    1
  16078. Except the High Command planned Operation Barbarossa, and it failed well before Moscow. The German generals then blamed Hitler for everything that went wrong. In their eyes, they were perfect and never made a mistake. When in reality, their decisions were equally as poor. Hitler's decision to stand fast at Moscow in 1941 has often been credited as saving Army Group Centre. His other "hold fast" orders weren't always good, but he did, in fact, allow them to withdraw *when it suited the strategic situation*.
    1
  16079. I've covered the Purges, and what most of the old histories of the Purges miss out on (because they didn't have full access to Soviet sources) was that what had a bigger impact was the massive mobilization effort going on in the Red Army at the time, which dwarfs what was happening in the Purges https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ The Germany Army was the "better" army in 1941 only. In 1942 onwards, it never achieved more of the "greatest tactical victories in history" that it achieved in 1941. As shown in this video https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds the Axis actually outnumbered the Soviets in 1941. Worse, they caught the Soviets in the middle of that mobilization effort. In short, they were totally unprepared for war. But for more details - their motorized divisions hadn't received trucks yet, and their tank divisions were too tank-heavy and had little infantry support. Plus they were using a mishmash of all different sorts of tanks and planes. In effect, they had no chance. But once the Soviets recovered 1942 onwards, the Germans were unable to achieve those great tactical victories it had in 1941. The point I was trying to make is that the Germans only win when they have a massive advantage. Once that advantage is lost, they suddenly aren't able to win. This is different to the traditional narrative which says the Germans won most tactical battles even though they were vastly outnumbered, but still lost strategically. The reality is that they did lose tactically as well.
    1
  16080. Yeah, I know. Not sure why I said 1942.
    1
  16081. They were fighting a two front war in 1941? 1942?
    1
  16082. So what you're saying is that the German generals didn't plan their invasion very well? And are you sure about the Panzer divisions stopping for the infantry? I think you'll find there was another reason, which I'll be covering in another video coming soon. Also, have you taken a look at Soviet logistics? Someone will probably pipe up saying about Lend Lease trucks, but prior to 1943 when Lend Lease actually started to make any significant difference, Soviet logistics were equally as poor as the Germans. In 1941 their trains were simultaneously supplying the front line and moving their industry to the Urals. A miracle that's mentioned but never studied.
    1
  16083. While Britain did well to survive 1940/41, Britain didn't do very well in general. Not only did they bankrupt themselves in 1941, which contributed to the collapse of their Empire after the war, but they also only fought against a handful of German divisions in North Africa. They did do well taking out the Italians, as shown in several videos in my Battlestorm series ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y ), and took out Syria, Iraq and a few other Axis countries and areas of influence, but that was about it. For one of the "great empires", its main contribution was in the air and at sea. Their land battles were generally insignificant compared to what was going on on the Eastern Front.
    1
  16084. German divisions were larger than their Soviet counterparts, so a straight counting of divisions doesn't mean anything. As I said in the video, the Germans had more men at the beginning of the war than the Soviets. There are also battles where the Germans outnumbered the Soviets, which is why they were able to break through Soviet lines and into the operation depths. Chuikov's army in Stalingrad was smaller than Paulus's army overall, but also smaller than what Paulus committed to the battle in the city. And yet, Chuikov fought the Germans there to a standstill.
    1
  16085. Funny, because the Germans outnumbered the Soviets at the beginning of the war, and did so until December 1941, when the Soviets finally outnumbered the Germans for the first time. At that point, the German offensive also came to a halt.
    1
  16086. I did a follow up video that looked at the numbers, and proved that there wasn't the manpower to send "hordes" of riflemen to their deaths https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16087. Just given examples and statistics to support my "theory" https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16088. It's a state, isn't it :)
    1
  16089. Not initially. Paulus's initial assaulting force of 80,000 went up against Chuikov's force of 50,000. In fact, Chuikov's force never exceeded 54,000 throughout the battle. It was only when the Soviets used their strategic reserves to mount an offensive that they outnumbered the Germans. But don't forget, the Germans also had strategic reserves (they pulled them to the front after the Soviet offensive, and that's the force that launched Winter Tempest) and that Army Group B had been starved of reinforcements. The Germans as a whole had replenished all their manpower losses between July and November 1942, but Army Group B had only received 11% of the replacements, even though it had taken over 30% of the losses.
    1
  16090. Correct!
    1
  16091. Sorry, I misread. On the offensive, you're usually going to take higher casualties than your opponent. That's not always the case, but usually is unless your opposition is either routed or handicaped in some way. And it's often said that you need a force ratio of 3 or 4 to 1 on the attack in order to succeed. Dug in enemy, ambushes, delays, over-extention, counterattacks and so on - these all cause high casualties. And that's probably a big reason for the higher casualties seen later in the war by the Soviets. However, there is another side to this. It's kinda hard to explain in text without writing many paragraphs so I'm going to keep it quite simple for the sake of word count. But basically, the German "Bewegungskrieg" (another more-accurate term for Blitzkrieg) was great once it had penetrated into the operational depths of the enemy's front. As it penetrated the front, it took casualties (the Germans took hundreds or thousands of casualties in fact on day 1 or Barbarossa). But once it broke through, the casualties generally reduced unless the enemy had reserve forces. Once in the operational depths, it just encountered light resistance from rear service units as it encircled the bulk of the enemy's forces. However, it suffered once it's logistics chain was spread too thin, and this is why the Germans had a stop-start stop-start campaign of offensives. They would strike through the Soviet lines, encircle a bunch of people, then stop, dig in, wait and rearm before their next attack. You see this constantly during the Blau and Stalingrad campaign (and I will cover this when my documentary finally comes out) and through the North African Campaign (which I'm part way through). This meant that the Germans were actually defending a lot of the time, even in 1941 and 1942. And the Soviets were counterattacking constantly right from the beginning of the war. They were striking back at the Germans over and over again. This, coupled with encirclements, is a big reason for the high amount of casualties sustained by the Soviets. The problem was, in their sheer desperation to stop the German offensives or do damage to the Germans, they could never strike through to the operational depths (e.g. the many Kotluban' offensives). Therefore, their attacks constantly met with high casualties until eventually they did make a breakthrough. It's often said that the Soviets changed their strategy in 1942 from a broad-front strategy to one where they concentrated their forces, and that's the reason they started winning. This is incorrect. The Soviets were fighting a broad-front strategy throughout the war. The difference was that once the Germans were brought to a crawl or even standstill - Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk - the Soviets had more time to launch or plan their own counterattacks and fight on their terms. The strategy never changed. Instead, a combination of factors - such as increased industrial output, patience from Stalin and the Stavka, a harbouring of reserves, a slowing and weakening of the German forces (usually due to their poor logistics) and an effective concealment of their intentions - the Soviets were able to gather enough strength at the vital parts of the front to breakthrough the German lines. Up until after Kursk, the Soviets didn't vastly outnumber the Germans at any one point, but they were able to concentrate at certain points of the front where the Germans (or Axis allies) were weakest and overwhelm them there. So, to answer your question, it's more of a case that the Germans were on the defensive most of the time. And this is probably why the Western Allies took a lot of casualties too. It's not a simple case of the Heer just being superior somehow. They were good at fighting - but that didn't mean that everyone else wasn't good at fighting too.
    1
  16092. They didn't outnumber the Germans in the battle for Stalingrad city.
    1
  16093. While the Germans overextended themselves (knowning their logistics would fail prior to the war) the Soviets didn't fall back on purpose. They fought tooth and nail for every inch of ground, which is why they lost as much as they did in 1941. But you're right that this was one of the biggest reasons that the Germans lost the war.
    1
  16094. "If you do not know the story, do not invent it ... you were not even born when it happened" Sorry, but I wasn't born when it happened, therefore I can't talk about it.
    1
  16095. I haven't, but have added it to my wish list and will get it soon. I do intend to follow this video up with another which goes into more detail and hits home with statistics
    1
  16096. Also, Rory Gallagher is awesome. Used to be my favourite guitarist back in uni
    1
  16097. Oil, or the lack of it for the Axis, was the main factor for this https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  16098. You're probably right. At the very least they have a German-centric view of WW2, and are quick to use the terms "revisionist" or "communist" when someone questions that deep-rooted bias. In reality, I'm trying to stand somewhere in the middle between the two sides. I have no reason to favour either side. But I do want to know what actually happened.
    1
  16099. Stat heavy version is here https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds just don't read the comment section. It's a mess. Or read it once you've seen the video fully and then laugh at the people going "you didn't mention this!" when I actually did but they couldn't be bothered watching the whole thing. And you should be suspicious of all history - revisionist or not. Never believe anything by one source or one person, always read multiple sources and come to your own conclusion. That is one of the big lessons of history.
    1
  16100. Which "stupid videos" of mine have you seen apart from this one which lead you to the conclusion that I should stop?
    1
  16101. Incorrect. The Soviets were outnumbered until December 1941. And I'm just as harsh on the Allied and Soviet powers as I am on the Third Reich. That said, Germany wasn't innocent of its crimes as some have argued.
    1
  16102. Raw statistics can be misleading, and in this case there are a lot of assumptions and misconceptions... or in some cases, complete lies being made. It's similar to the situation in WW1 - they introduced metal helmets to the men in the field, and were aghast that head wounds increased after the issue of these new helmets. The High Command assumed that the men thought these helmets made them invincible and so they were poking their heads above the trenches more, decided to recall them. But luckily they were persuaded that the statistics were being misread. Prior to the introduction of the helmets the men would die from head wounds. After they were introduced, they were listed as wounded - not killed. That's why more men were being wounded.Lindybeige talks about this here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IQE0uZUMys But the point I'm making is that statistics only say so much. You have to look beyong the statistics to realise what was actually going on.
    1
  16103. Yes, nobody's doubting the US contribution. However some historians have concluded that Germany lost the war with the failure of Operation Barbarossa. This was in 1941. That was before Pearl Harbor. The Germans were then beaten back outside Moscow, shortly after the USA was brought into the war.
    1
  16104. Some historians believe Germany lost the war before the United States even entered it. The majority of the German army fought and died on the Eastern Front
    1
  16105. And yet, look at the ratings for the video. A good portion of the viewers who rated the video disagree with what was said. And I don't think it's a case of they're all necessarily pro-German, but that they haven't done the research, or the research they have done (probably with old books and documentaries) has lead them to the wrong conclusions. So while I may be preaching to the choir for some, there's a lot who should be informed that there are alternative viewpoints out there.
    1
  16106. This was a light intro to the topic. I then made a 44 minute video that does go into the facts and examples https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw
    1
  16107. It's funny because in my last video I got called a neo-fascist
    1
  16108. Here you go. My latest 44 minute video which explains in far greater depth than this 10 minute video could possibly do https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  16109. You do realise I work in logistics, and no it doesn't. It paints a picture of German incompetence, and Soviet unpreparedness, which fits the narrative given in the video. The Soviets were outnumbered at the beginning of the conflict, and were caught completely off guard during the middle of a mobilization program while a massive reorganization program was under way as well. Their tank divisions were just tanks, because the infantry elements hadn't been issued with trucks yet. If the Germans had stuck one year earlier, or one year later, it would have been even worse for the Wehrmacht. The Soviets were reliant on light tanks at a time where the German Panzer IIIs and IVs had the technological edge and were dominating the battlefield, and then they were hit by the largest land and air invasion in history... but survived it. 1941 has been fashioned to say that the German army was amazing - and it was a good army. However it had many serious issues, was lead by poor and out of touch leadership, and was simply not up to the task logistically. The German generals were even warned that their logistics wouldn't get them to Moscow, so they assumed they would defeat the Red Army on the border before racing off to victory. That didn't happen, and neither did victory. Yes the Soviets lost a lot in 1941, but when they recovered, they reduced the ratio of loss, which, given the ratio in 1941, says they really were as capable fighters as the Germans.
    1
  16110. Really? There's loads of people arguing that they didn't. Had one guy claim the Eastern Front was just a side show.
    1
  16111. Except WW2. The German generals got to say what was true or not.
    1
  16112. The odd battalion-worth of British light tanks aside, Lend Lease was not substantial until 1943. The war was over by then. The Soviets had the Far East to defend and garrison, as well as Persia and the rest of the Soviet Union. They weren't fully committed to the Eastern Front either. However to say that the Germans were "engaged" on those fronts is incorrect. North Africa was just a handful of divisions. The Balkans wasn't a full-fledged conflict at this point, and neither was Norway. "Like with any history you have to try to remove the bias as much as possible and learn from the facts." I will copy and paste what I said to someone else - Soviet accounts and statistics are equally as bad as German accounts and statistics. That distrust you have of Soviet sources is the exact the same level of distrust you should have towards German sources. The fact that you don't have that level of distrust is proof in itself that bias has crept in. You should treat EVERY source, no matter the subject, with suspicion. No source is reliable, not even German sources. Guderian lies through his teeth about Barbarossa. Manstein lies through his teeth about Stalingrad. Raus gets his dates mixed up - a period of 3 days of combat near Stalingrad is made out to have actually taken place in 1 day in Raus's memoirs (13th to 15th of December 1942, but he says all that combat occurs on the 13th) - let alone numerous other holes in his and other accounts. In some of these scenarios, the Soviet accounts are actually more reliable than the German ones, although again they're not 100% trustworthy. This is why it's vitally important to look at every source with equal reservation. Now, this bias may not be your fault. As I've just said to someone else - Pick up an English-language history book on the Eastern Front of WW2 (there are some exceptions but these are more recent and few) and you will find that they are relying almost entirely on German sources. Go to Amazon and look up WW2, you'll get biography after biography on German generals, and German units, and German operations. Then try find the Soviet biographies, units or operations... There's barely any! There is a massive bias towards the Germans in the history books. Because that is what sells. If you're still not convinced, fine. But just, for 10 minutes, consider this. What's the point of studying history? Isn't it to get to the truth? If it is, then how do you get to the truth if all you have to work with is lies? The only way to do it is to gather all the lies and compare them to each other. Somewhere in that sea of lies is the truth.
    1
  16113. My focus is on Stalingrad at the moment, which does feature Manstein. Once Stalingrad is over though, I can move on to other things. And the Third Battle of Kharkov is definitely something I want to cover, so don't worry, it will happen eventually
    1
  16114. I'm glad you did :) a lot of people are saying I should have provided statistics to back up my points, despite the fact that the point of the video was to say that the new acedemic histories being written paint a completely different picture of the war and people should go read them. I even linked to Glantz' lecture, which does add weight to what I was saying. But lesson learnt - next time I do a video like this, I will provide statistics.
    1
  16115. Damn it!
    1
  16116. In my last video on the Croatian Legion I was being called "neo-fascist". Now I'm being called a "Russian zerg". I can't be both!
    1
  16117. As mentioned in Enduring the Whirlwind, the Germans also had a massive lack of leadership. On the 16th of March 1935, Hiter announced that Germany would expand the Reichswehr (renamed Wehrmacht on 1st of June) to 36 divisions in twelve army corps. "From the initial pool of 4,000 officers who had belonged to the Reichswehr, 450 were veterinary or medical personnel while 500 others were transferred to the Lueftwaffe in 1933. Aside from personnel required for staff and administrative appointments and all the various independent corps and army level units, the new target of 36 divisions alone would need 19,224 officers." ... "Following the Anschluss with Austria in 1938, a further 1,800 Austrian officers were also taken on strength. While these emergency measures mitigated the worst shortages, they could do little to alleviate the lack of trained General Staff officers or the concern amongst several senoir commanders that the rapid expansion had diluted the high standards of the officer corps." P53. So Soviet leadership had been purged, but German leadership was also non-existant.
    1
  16118. eBay. Although if you buy Close Combat Cross of Iron, you get what is essentially the same game, just with more units and maps and a better chance of it working on your computer.
    1
  16119. While I'm not going to disagree with your first point, I will say that the Soviets didn't have 5 times as many men on the field until after 1943. Prior to that (from any source I have) the most they had was 2 to 3 times as many, and at the beginning of Barbarossa, the Germans actually outnumbered the Soviets at the frontier.
    1
  16120. I don't care for sport, but if they're the best team why would they lose the championship? Surely, the best team is the one that wins as that's the point of having a winner and loser system
    1
  16121. Completely incorrect. It's well known that Soviet citizens in the decade before the war had taken up marksmanship classes as well as military training. To quote Enduring the Whirlwind Page 116 "Replacement personnel and fresh drafts could be drawn from the 15-30 million men and women who had received paramilitary training through the Osoaviakhim during the 1930s." As I've mentioned in other comments, the ratio of losses was around 1:2 or 1:3, and that's not counting Axis allies losses. The Soviets did equip their soldiers well - even at Stalingrad. I'll get to that point in my documentary, but except for times where they were cut off the suggestion that the Red Army threw its soldiers into battle unequipped is wrong. The "Not one step back!" policy was only used for a short period in 1942, and was later abandoned once it has done its job. It is true that the Red Army soldiers and civilians during the war didn't always get adequate food rations - but that's not because they didn't want too give them any, but actually because the Germans had taken the Ukraine, the breadbasket of the Soviet Union. And the Germans didn't show mercy. Millions of Soviet prisoners of war starved to death in German camps. And the Germans also had policies like the Commissar Order. The Germans and the Soviets were just as brutal as each other.
    1
  16122. Manstein's book is entitled "Lost Victories" for a reason. The perception is that it was the Germans themselves lost the war, rather than the Soviets who actually won it. It's actually quite a common theme.
    1
  16123. I do remember, and that is awesome. Upload it to YouTube!
    1
  16124. I do plan on going into detail about this concept during the Stalingrad video, especially when discussing Operation Uranus and the Soviet offensives in the Kotluban' area prior to Uranus, as that relates to how the Soviets came up with the strategies that started winning the war. Currently at 214,702 words on the research for Battlestorm Stalingrad (hense why I've not been publishing many videos recently)
    1
  16125. Ok I just want to point out a few things. The "Battle of Stalingrad" shouldn't be called a "battle" as it's more of a campaign in itself. It's actually a multiple series of battles that take place over a 5-6 month period. Within the "battle" are multiple offensives, counteroffensives, strokes, and counterstrokes, that take place in and around the city. The key point being around the city. I think that's why the Encyclopaedia you linked states 1.1 million losses, because it's counting everything around the city. Talking about the combat within the city itself - Chuikov's 62nd Army never really went above 50,000 men at any one time. And usually it was below that, AND parts of his army were on the eastern bank of the Volga or the islands in the river. The Germans outnumbered the Soviets for most of the battle, and yet were slowly ground down throughout. Operationa Uranus wasn't Zhukov's offensive. He helped out significantly, but it was actually a combination (there's a debate still raging as to who came up with the idea and plan) of Eremenko, Vasilievsky, Zhukov and others. Vasilevsky was in charge during the inital offensive. And while the Germans did occupy western Europe (and Norway like you said) they weren't sending vast numbers of replacements to the west until 1943 onwards. And even if they had lots of units in the west, they still have between 3-4 million men in the east. On the 1st of July 1943, the Soviets have 11,936,777 men. THIS is the highest number of men they have at any given time throughout the war. The Germans (not including Axis allies) at this time have 4,440,000 men in the east. At most then, they're outnumbered 3:1. Surely, the "superior" German army can win against an "inferior" foe that only outnumbers them 3 to 1??
    1
  16126. Chuikov's army was smaller that Paulus's during the battle of Stalingrad. Chuikov got more reinforcements fed into his army, but it never grew over 50,000 men. Paulus on the other hand had to keep feeding new units into the battle, rather than being drip-fed constantly, like Chuikov. Ultimately, Chuikov held on, but it wasn't because they outnumbered the Germans. Also, I've mentioned this elsewhere, but the two-front war thing didn't take effect until late 1942 at the earliest, or more until 1943. Until then, the war was almost exclusively on the Eastern Front. And lend-lease also didn't arrive in significant numbers until late 1942. Yet, the war was more or less lost for Germany by this point. Again, the German Army perished in the East, because the Soviets beat them.
    1
  16127. How close do you sit to the screen!?
    1
  16128. I replied this to someone else, but the numbers here speak differently. According to Enduring the Whirlwind - which is getting this particular information from Müller-Hillebrand, Das Heer 1933-1945 - total German losses in the East between June 1941 and June of 1943 were 3,965,000 (this figure also includes "sick"). They sent out 4,440,000 replacements in the same period, which meant the German army grew by 475,000 men. Plus they were augmented by Axis allies. Now the Soviet side - Glantz says "since 22 June 1941, when the Red Army fielded about 5.5 million soldiers , it had suffered just over six million casualties, with roughly 3.5 million killed, captured, or missing, and about 2.5 million wounded or fallen ill. Despite such an appalling toll, the NKO's mobilization measures had managed to increase the army's average monthly operating strength from three million soldiers in 1941 to about 4.2 million during the first quarter of 1942." Glantz says that when the Germans had 5.8 million men (Axis total 6.5 million) on the 1st of May 1942, the Soviets had just reached about 9 million "with about five million of these assigned to its field, or operating, army at the front and to the Stavka Reserve." That's not even double what the Germans have! It really doesn't sound like the Germans were facing hordes of Red Army soldiers.
    1
  16129. So the Germans only killed twice as many men as the Soviets? Doesn't sound like "endless Russian hordes" to me
    1
  16130. To clarify, German primary sources were used exclusively by western scholars to write their accounts of ww2. These scholars didn't have access to the Soviet archives, and didn't until after the fall of the Soviet Union. So that's why the literature is dominated by a German-centric-view.
    1
  16131. It was either Glantz or Citino (I forget which) who said that we've only had access to 40% of the primary source material for WW2 up until the last decade or two. Now suddenly we have access to another 40%. Entire battles and campaigns you've never heard of have been rediscovered. To give you an example, Kursk is not the biggest tank battle of all time - despite the fact that everyone says it is. As Glantz says in the video I linked, the biggest tank battle of all time was a forgotten battle in the Dubno-Brody area in 1941. So I think you misunderstood the purpose of this video. I presented to you one side of the historiographical debate, and said "discuss!" The views are not mine, but the views of the author I quoted. And you're wrong, 10,000 scholars don't agree with the idea that the German Army was underequipped or that they were vastly outnumbered on the Eastern Front. That's why it's called a historical debate - because it's not been decided yet. We're deep inside a transitionary period in the debate about the Eastern Front, and the old authors are being called out on their inaccuracies. Dismiss it all you want, but it's happening.
    1
  16132. Nearly? So half past 6 must be a good time to upload ;)
    1
  16133. Mr Spartan, you do realise that wikipedia is not a reliable source, right? For example, it says Kursk "led to the largest armoured clash in history, the Battle of Prokhorovka." - which is false. In that video I linked, Glantz states that the largest tank battle in history wasn't Kursk, but was a "forgotten battle" in 1941 in the Dubno-Brody area. And Stalingrad is lost before the German Army reached the city - at least, that's what several histories I've read recently argued
    1
  16134. Update - <!-td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}->216,715 words
    1
  16135. I'm not disagreeing with you, however the point of this series is to make quick-fire videos that present one argument (mainly so it gets people thinking or talking about history) so that I can concentrate on my big projects (my Battlestorm documentaries) where I do use multiple sources. My Stalingrad Documentary currently has 35 sources and a research word count of 214,702 (not including the 1.5 hours I'm about to do now). There's no way I can do that level of research for a 10 minute video like this.
    1
  16136. Source is in the description. Also, Germans didn't lie about everything, but they did get things wrong. And I personally don't think it's right to ONLY believe the Germans and not listen to what the Soviets were saying. The truth is in the middle.
    1
  16137. Wait, are you implying that they didn't?
    1
  16138. Nope, they are two different words and both were used. In fact, Wikipedia does actually use the word "Kampfgesetze" on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulturkampf
    1
  16139. I was explaining Samaan's narrative, not my own. As I said, I disagree with Samaan on that point.
    1
  16140. That was my conclusion. Darwin isn't to blame.
    1
  16141. It should be, it's in the description
    1
  16142. I actually do, but I know a lot of people play it so I want to get a raise out of them ;)
    1
  16143. Except for 3 to 4 German divisions in North Africa, the British, the USA, Canada etc were not fighting the Germans on land in 1942, that's why.
    1
  16144. alkafluence too easy? :P
    1
  16145. martaxsasLT :( I would have gotten it wrong lol
    1
  16146. Devon Ziegler I would have assumed either an American or Soviet plane, so I'd have been miles off
    1
  16147. Devon Ziegler looks like everyone knows more about aviation more than me :)
    1
  16148. Hopper I'm easing into it ;) I like to keep the questions varied, so I don't want to go all out into one subject if you get what I mean
    1
  16149. Devon Ziegler damn, even I don't know that!
    1
  16150. Tomislav that's a good one :P
    1
  16151. johnny onetothree damn that was quick! Congrats too! :)
    1
  16152. Do not just believe something that someone says. You've got to always ask the question: "but is this really the case?"
    1
  16153. Because memoirs are written years after the event, and thus aren't as reliable as the actual fact that the tanks were heading the opposite direction.
    1
  16154. History lies in the heart of the debate. It might be tainted if I relied on just one book. But by using multiple sources you get different and conflicting perspectives. That allows you to weigh up the different arguments. And I did use primary sources in this video. Monty and Eisenhower's memoirs are classed as primary sources. As far as the other stuff is concerned, the debate centers around the interpretation of the facts, not the individual facts themselves.
    1
  16155. "Colonel Lindquist was told by General Gavin to move to the Nijmegen bridge as soon as Lindquist thought practical after the jump." At best, that's debated. As Poulussen points out in the book "Lost at Nijmegen", there's no evidence of Gavin's supposed pre-drop orders with regard to going to the bridge. So while it's possible he did informally tell Lindquist to go for the bridge, he could also be saying that post-event to protect himself.
    1
  16156. Thanks for the recommendation! I'll add it to my shopping lists
    1
  16157. Ah... which flag should I use instead? And I'm using the wrong American flag, but in that case I kinda don't want to change it because it's a lot of work just for one star 😔
    1
  16158. Yes. Last week's video was demonitized, so I decided to experiment by not using his name here, and surprise surprise this one wasn't demonitized.
    1
  16159. Yep because I was overworked. Still am to some extent, but less so now that I've paused Stalingrad for a while.
    1
  16160. You're assuming I've not mentioned this numerous times on the channel.
    1
  16161. The real minimum wage is zero. But you wouldn't work for zero. There is a limit to how low a wage can go based on all the factors. Similarly, increasing the wage artificially higher than it should be, even by a little, has disastrous effects on the economy at large. For a full understanding of this, I'd recommend "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. Anyone advocating for a "minimum wage" or any other price or wage controls simply does not understand basic economics, because there are no real benefits to such policies and only downsides. But those downsides are hidden, which is why I recommend those books above because there's too much for me to explain here. And also, you have to agree to the wage you're being paid. If you're on minimum wage, you've done something wrong (unless it's your first job or you're a student or something). In reality, you shouldn't be in a minimum wage job for more than a short period of time. If you are "stuck" in such a job, then that's on you. Because you should be working in your own time to developing skills and throwing applications at every job that's better than the one you're currently in. If you're not doing those things, and if you're expecting miracles, your view of how the job market works is flawed. Yes, it takes time. Yes, it's tough. Yes, it requires work. But the benefits are real. It's your life and it's ending one moment at a time. You can either * DO. THE. WORK * and improve your life, or sit there and moan about it on your minimum wage job. Your choice.
    1
  16162. But it was. Prior to this people believed in the Labour Theory of Value. If you have a source that shows that the Subjective Theory of Value was developed earlier than this please present it.
    1
  16163. I agree, but they want real options not "crazy" and "more of the same", which are the only options they have right now.
    1
  16164. What, the religion you subscribe to?
    1
  16165. Wait until you realise that Liberals and Conservatives are the same...
    1
  16166. Baron, not Byron. Keynes was a Baron.
    1
  16167. From what I've seen, they say there's no point going back to classic liberalism because it'll just lead back to the others. That's why they say that individualism is the problem and statism is the cure. But I don't agree with that assessment because totalitarianism is worse than what we have now, so there's a flaw in their argument. The solution lies in private property rights.
    1
  16168. "lol private property laws were one of the factors to destroy peasentry in middle ages. off course libertarians will omit that.the enclosure act practically stole land from common peasent and gave it to landlords" That's not private property then. Stealing is the antithesis of private property. Stealing is the ultimate form of communism. And all that the Inclosure Acts prove is that the State views private property as something to seize. This is why the State is the ultimate enemy of the free market.
    1
  16169. The US has a free market? So the Federal Reserve doesn't exist, you use gold and silver to transact, there's no regulations, no taxes, and no laws? Didn't think so. The USA doesn't have a free market.
    1
  16170. Good old algorithm! I suspect it's because I took a break, so it'll play up for a bit
    1
  16171. Yup, probably. Goes against the current narrative, just like my Greek video
    1
  16172. Congratulations!
    1
  16173. I approve. Also this https://youtu.be/FlPalDkWsuA (they were great live)
    1
  16174. You might be right! If this YouTube thing ever does wither away, I might go work in logistics 😂
    1
  16175. Yet somehow, it was a success! /s
    1
  16176. Got something in the pipeline
    1
  16177. Tomislav Sadly not :)
    1
  16178. Thegamer8324 really!? Wish I got to do something like that in maths. My teachers were terrible. Had to get a private teacher to do one-to-one with me to make up for the awful teachers :(
    1
  16179. Morgan Chalmers well it was 50/50 between Venus and Mars but a few people got it wrong. I like to make some hard, but not all of them :)
    1
  16180. Morgan Chalmers correct!
    1
  16181. Yep, overworked, and frustrated with the UK government, and people in general. Despite copious amounts of evidence to the contrary, they're not listening, and instead continue to demand a looter's paradise (welfare state).
    1
  16182. Which letter is missing?
    1
  16183. Is this true? I really hope so, because I'd hate for history to continue to be distorted, and would like to see everyone adopt the truth at some point.
    1
  16184. I completely understand that. But the interesting thing is that the logistics impact the battle, even shape it. People say - "why didn't they do this or that?" - and the answer is sometimes "their logistics and organizational effort couldn't get all the guys to concentrate in that area". You may not notice it in the Stalingrad videos (until later) but if you watch my Fall Blau video, you will see that there's a gap between Army Groups A and B, and I believe (going off memory) there was just one Axis division in that area. In theory, the Soviets could have launched a major effort there and cut off Army Group A. In reality, there was no infrastructure there, and so a major effort was impossible.
    1
  16185. Yarr, cheers me maytee!
    1
  16186. Thank you Jamie! Sorry you weren't first this time
    1
  16187. The series is bi-weekly because it's currently impossible for me to do it weekly. This video was a corrections/change of pace video so that I could focus on editing the next episode, which (although it will be touch and go) I'm racing to get out for next week. Done a good 60 hours this week just on episode 2 and I'm only just half way through it
    1
  16188. Well, it's typical because I was having a discussion with someone about Beevor, and I was saying that "yeah, we all make errors, but I can't not use him just because of a few errors" and then this happens. Just for clarity though, I'm still going to use Beevor. I didn't know about the temperature thing, so I can't blame him for not knowing either (unless it was his translation error).
    1
  16189. Cheers Mitch!
    1
  16190. You mean the Officer Cadet Regiments? They're still fighting in support of the divisions. The only issue was that I don't know exactly which units they were in support of, and exactly where they were on the maps. However, we will be seeing some more of them soon
    1
  16191. Next week (assuming I can get it edited and rendered in time and there's no major technical issues). I did put it in the description of the 1st video that this is a bi-weekly series, but I don't think people read it
    1
  16192. Haha "the noise" is a good way of describing them. Thank you! :)
    1
  16193. I'm trying to reduce my hours whilst boosting productivity. The problem is that, when I do free up some time, I spend it doing more work!
    1
  16194. Well, the reason I didn't do that is because I have some of the temperatures going forwards, and I want to give accurate temperatures for when it turns cold... then we can see the contrast :)
    1
  16195. It's alright, I just realized my comment may have come off a bit snappy depending how you read it. It's not that, I actually feel bad that I can't do Battlestorms every week, otherwise I would. I'll agree that there's nothing on TV (haven't watched it since uni and no regrets) and I hope your day gets a little better now that work's over with :) cheers!
    1
  16196. Sorry but it takes me the two weeks to make them, and despite racing to get it done (I'm actually worried it may not be done on time) it's taking an absolute age
    1
  16197. I question books, however, once again, my knowledge on TEMPERATURE is limited, so even if I'd got it from a primary source, I still wouldn't have known. I do question things in books, and compare and contrast, so I don't always take things at face value. In this case I did because I don't know anything about TEMPERATURE.
    1
  16198. Yes I do, and I'll be doing that at the end for an all-in-one video like I did with Operation Crusader and Courland. The problem this time though is that there's going to be a lot more episodes, and I suspect this won't be over for months, if not years, so people will be waiting a long time for that corrected all-in-one video
    1
  16199. Of course! I should have thought of all that!
    1
  16200. Southern Russia is a desert. There's camels in the Stalingrad region. I'd give more spoilers about how the men reacted to the heat but I don't want to yet
    1
  16201. Warning: may contain a nut called TIK
    1
  16202. I assume you're being sarcastic, but in case you're not, what do you think I was doing here!? https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    1
  16203. And yet many did surrender.
    1
  16204. Yeah, not quite the quality of the Monday videos, but hopefully a nice discussion
    1
  16205. It does now, but it hadn't been discovered back then.
    1
  16206. Great to hear! And will keep them coming, don't worry :)
    1
  16207. "@TIK Read Mien Kampf. as I have read Hitler's insanity. The man actually believed he could conquer the entire world." I've read it. And no he didn't, he wanted to conquer "Russia" (the Soviet Union) in order to get enough soil and resources for the German people, and defeat the Jews/Marxists (which he saw as the same thing). He didn't want to conquer the world, only Russia. I will grant you that his National-Socialist world view was rubbish, but considering he'd almost reached his goals in 1941, I don't think we can simply dismiss him as "insane". Post-July plot 1944 you may have a point, but he was definitely making rational decisions in the Stalingrad era, with his generals' consent/advice.
    1
  16208. And yet he managed to steer Germany very well throughout the way, and got them a lot further than they did in the First World War. I'm not defending Hitler here (he was one of the most evil dictators in history) but I am defending the historical reality. When you look into the reality of the situation, you realise that the idea of Hitler being a bad military strategist is actually incorrect. It was his generals who were bad at strategy, especially Halder, who was the one pushing this view that was Hitler incompetent (see my Fall Blau video). But when you look into it, you realise that none of his decisions were made in a vacuum. Almost every single one of his decisions were made with his generals. After the war, they all blamed him for everything, including their own terrible mistakes.
    1
  16209. Langsam! It's wierd because, as soon as I put down Duolingo or something I forget everything, but when I pick it up again, it all comes flooding back. I can't spare more than 15-20 minutes a day on it though at the moment, so that's why I'm not picking it up quicker. Aber es ist spaß!
    1
  16210. Yup!
    1
  16211. A reduction of spending between the wars. Plus the British didn't take tank warfare seriously until the Germans overwhelmed them in 1940.
    1
  16212. "How do you know If Starikov is pro-soviet if you havent read him?" Because I did a quick fact-check online. The 'capitalist' internet provides people with many wonderful services that a socialist internet cannot provide. "In comunistic regimes propaganda was spread by state run media, in capitalistic regimes propaganda is spread by the big corporate media who also (indirectly) run the states." The media only has so much influence because of socialism ("social groups" getting offended) and because the officials are democratically elected. However they are a check on the excesses of the state. If the media wasn't there, the governments would become more corrupt like the Nationalsocialists and the Marxist-socialist governments became. "I hope you dont honestly believe that the western world is run by elected politicians." Not at the moment it's not. It's run by the bureaucracy. "that west can not be called democracy." It's not. We're living in "Republics". Actual democracy only exists in a handful of small countries. "Rule of financial elite is called oligarchy." No it is not. It's "a small group of people having control of a country or organization". It doesn't necessarily mean a financial elite. And besides, it's good that a financial elite runs the country. At least they know how to make money, rather than squander it like the socialists do. "Youtube is not "western media" Youtube is a video sharing platform." Publishers are not "western media" publishers are book publishers. "But many videos are still geting deleted, did you not notice?" Yes, because this is a private corporation who have an incentive to delete videos that cause harm to their website. I don't necessarily agree with all deletions, but I can absolutely see why they would resort to such measures when there is so many Russian propagandists, bots and trolls on the website trying to persuade people that Stalin isn't as bad as the "western media" makes him out to be.
    1
  16213. Nikolai Starikov is pro-Russian and pro-Soviet. His agenda is about as obvious as the moon in the night sky. That's not to say I won't read him, but that it's clear why he wants to paint Stalin as a good guy. The reality was that Stalin was a mass murdering dictator, and that has nothing to do with "western media" or "big media". It has to do with the primary and secondary source documents which clearly show that the Stalin regime did suppress and murder the "citizens" of the Soviet Union, and was one of the worst socialist regimes in history. The historians (notice that these are individuals, not social groups) covering this topic are not controlled by the mythical "global oligarchy" (whatever the hell that is). They are individuals and can make their own decisions. And, if anything, I would highly question Nikolai Starikov's pro-Russian and pro-Soviet stance, especially given the context of the time (Putin). The book covers I showed included one that is a primary source document written in 1939. Yes, there are book publishers on the covers, but that's how books are printed in the west. They're not sanctioned by the state and then printed, they're printed by private companies who own the means of production. They're free to print whatever they want. If anything, this actually gives them less of an incentive to form a "concensus" because there are multiple rivals and differing opinions, which is exactly what you get in the historiography about this topic. There is no agreement on this topic as I described in the video, and this is good because the debate is on. And these companies are not "western media". They're not owned by the BBC or Fox News. And there are independant publishers as well. I'm an independant video creator. YouTube is "western media" but I'm not dictated to by YouTube on what my opinions should be on a given topic. They're governed by the people who view my videos. If the people who viewed my videos disagree with my interpretation, then it's back to the drawing board to find more evidence or reassess. If I came out and said "Stalin was a great guy" without substantial evidence to back that up, I'd be eaten alive. Why? Because there's a ton of evidence that says he's not a great guy. If you're not willing to listen to alternative interpretations backed by evidence, and are willing to reject them as "lies", then you're also rejecting the core ideas of history - historical discourse and the scientific method. I will read Nikolai Starikov, but you should read Stephen Kotkin.
    1
  16214. It's not just for that though. If you watch my 'Battlestorm' series, you'll see exactly where that money is going. The people who are supporting me want quality in-depth history, not 5 minute videos telling them what they already know. That's what this channel is all about.
    1
  16215. But Japan only attacked the USA because of the oil embargo.
    1
  16216. Happy 2nd Monday!
    1
  16217. I never said it was a victory. I said IF it was a victory it wouldn't have changed anything
    1
  16218. I don't know what those comments were, but I'm glad to hear you're enjoying my videos. Hope you're learning a few things!
    1
  16219. German liason officers who could speak the language and coordinate efforts. I've got a video on the Croatian Legion that you might be interested in. Link - https://youtu.be/bVbqdD6CmOI
    1
  16220. No, not yet, but I am working on a video on Operation Keelhaul. Bought a £400 book which is by the same author who exposed the Katyn Massacre. The ones you mention are on my list of things to do, and I have a few books already on the Holodomor.
    1
  16221. I can't speak them, sorry. I'm learning German at the moment, and that's bad enough, so I can't commit to another language
    1
  16222. Emil Maurice was the chauffeur in question. He was also in Landsberg with Hitler and Hess, and initially took dictation when Hitler started writing Mein Kampf, but Hess then took over from Maurice. Another of Hitler's chauffeurs was Julius Schreck, who fought in the Bavarian Red Army in 1919. I mentioned him in this video https://youtu.be/UpuGRO72GbA
    1
  16223. Sure, I've just posted some on my twitter page for you https://twitter.com/TIKhistory
    1
  16224. +johnny onetothree yeah! Way to let the side down!
    1
  16225. +HoboTango glad you liked it, and no I haven't had time tbh. It is one I'd like to get though :)
    1
  16226. +Óscar Maldonado no thank you, I'm glad you've enjoyed it :)
    1
  16227. Well, it is talked about because I know about it. It might not be talked about on YouTube because YouTube suppresses topics like that, including my video on the starvation of the Greeks during WW2 https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk I would be happy to do a video on it, and have been meaning to do so, but I've got to be careful. I don't want my channel getting taken down. Plus, when I did a series of videos on another Allied war crime, Operation Keelhaul, very few people watched it https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM so the evidence suggests that it's not worth the effort to make such videos
    1
  16228. It's a new feature on YouTube and I thought I'd try it out. I may not do it again if a lot of people dislike it
    1
  16229. I've never tried this feature before. Didn't even know what it did. But if you insist on the dislike, fair enough
    1
  16230. You can only see green?
    1
  16231. Interestingly, History isn't a science or an art either... (at least, according to Richard Evans, and myself)... History is definitely not a cock up though! ;)
    1
  16232. I've never tried it before, but thought I would. Some like it, some don't :(
    1
  16233. Not tried it before, but thought I would
    1
  16234. Only just seen this comment. It was a while ago, but I think I meant this gun, which is 94mm (3.7 inch - not millimetres) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_3.7-inch_AA_gun?wprov=sfla1
    1
  16235. You're welcome, more to come :)
    1
  16236. Thank you sir!
    1
  16237. It is the same Hobart who later created the "funny" tanks. Unfortunately I don't have an exact date for Hobart's replacement by O'Connor. Surprisingly, I've just double checked in Playfair's British Official History of the Mediterranean and Middle East and there's zero mention of Hobart at all. The ship HMAS Hobart is mentioned, even though it only had a very small part to play in Somaliland (so small I didn't even mention it in my video on the Italian invasion of Somaliland) so I can only assume he must have been replaced before the war broke out with Italy at the very latest. The books on the LRDG don't mention him in great detail. And I don't have any detail about the route between Cairo and Siwa, sorry. Most of the maps in the books I've used have been awful. I've actually been relying on Google Maps a lot to try and find the locations of specific villages, because the books talk about places their own maps don't even show. I based the map in this video from Playfair's book (Map 19)
    1
  16238. Glad you liked it, Thumper! I'll be doing the next parts soon :) Is it just the LRDG or do you like other special forces units too?
    1
  16239. In book "The Sting of the Scorpion" it mentions that the "LRDG Association Nominal Roll" is the most complete record of members of the LRDG. However, not every veteran who served with the LRDG joined the Association, so while it is the most complete record, it isn't a full list of all the members that ever joined the LRDG. What was his name? Is it "McQuiggan"?
    1
  16240. Thank you for not spoiling the answer :) honestly, I'm glad I chose Fort Eben Emael as it's proving quite the challenge. It's also convinced me that it's time to attempt a large battle. I'm now torn between doing Operation Brevity, or a big/famous battle for the one afterwards. Not sure if I told you but I'm actually working on a "how I do my battlestorm videos" video at the minute which I'm hoping to finish for next week or the week after.
    1
  16241. Yes, me too. Sadly, the other YouTubers who have responded to my videos are the same, or worse. Yes, worse. That's partly why I wanted this to go out, so that my critics realize how poor their argumentation is. Hopefully they'll step up their game.
    1
  16242. I also did in this video!
    1
  16243. I did https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16244. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16245. Glad you enjoyed the video! I do wonder why you think "redistribution" (and I'm assuming you mean "to the poor") is part of socialism? I would argue that the opposite is the case - corporations redistribute wealth to themselves. And I've said this before: socialism is a war in the name of the poor, against the middle class, for the benefit of the rich and powerful. The lie is that it's for the poor - it's not.
    1
  16246. Glad you enjoyed it! I honestly think that last 10 minutes is hilarious in so many ways
    1
  16247. A nationalized trade union is a union that is nationalized into the state. This is what nationalization is. Lenin nationalized the trade unions in the Soviet Union. I mean, that's why it was called "the Soviet Union". The word "Soviet" means 'council' or 'union' in Russian. Socialization and nationalization are the same thing. I don't know how else to explain this to you. If you cannot grasp such basic concepts there's no hope.
    1
  16248. A thousand people in a hierarchy cannot be classed as 'private'. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16249. So would I, but you're not going to get it because nobody on the Left has a valid counter argument, just memes.
    1
  16250. Exactly!
    1
  16251. I know! It's so frustrating!!!
    1
  16252. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  16253. To stay as Capitalists, they should remain small and efficient. Big clumsy corporations which are funded by the State and only exist because of currency printing, cannot be classed as independent from the State. Gates is the largest farmland owner in the USA. I can't class him as anything other than a owner of a 'public' corporation.
    1
  16254. You're right that when a Socialist Party gets into power, they end up doing things to enrich themselves. However, this is irrelevant, because it's still social ownership of the means of production. And again, "Democracy" is Socialism. It's one and the same thing. It's State control, not "voting". Voting is just voting. Democracy isn't "voting", it's Socialism. I've been over this in the Public vs Private video and the Hitler's Democracy videos. Please watch them carefully. And again, Lenin and Hitler failed to implement Socialism. That doesn't mean they weren't socialists. The Third Reich and the Soviet Union may not have been "real Socialism", but that doesn't mean that the guys trying to set up Socialism in those countries weren't genuine Socialists. They're failed Socialists, but they're still Socialists.
    1
  16255. Of course it does. If you're pro-nation, you're pro-society. If you're pro-society, you're pro-nation. There's no difference between the nationalization of the means of production, and the socialization of the means of production.
    1
  16256. Also, watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16257. I understand that. But they're wrong, because socialism has nothing to do with class. A "proletariat" only exists in Marxist Socialism. In reality, we all work. Even if our job is investing capital, we're still working. I know a Marxist can't grasp that concept, but it's true. The "class" doesn't exist. We're all individuals, not groups.
    1
  16258. True, although he's not a moron. He just has his eyes closed. I was exactly the same when I was a Socialist. This is why I wanted to try and get him to open his eyes.
    1
  16259. Parliament bows to the Queen. It's her government, which is why the Prime Minister has to go see her on a weekly basis. The whole edifice is feudalism. From the Royal Navy, to the "Crown" legal system, to the fact that your local lords write their own rules into the deeds of "your" house (my friend couldn't work from home because some lord wrote in the deeds to "her" house that she wasn't allowed to work at the property).
    1
  16260. Ah, but according to their new video in response to this one, they provided a very solid argument...
    1
  16261.  @computercarnage113  Thank you, I have replied again. I do hope I can make a video response at some point
    1
  16262. Oh, and I've just responded to the guy saying the same thing
    1
  16263. Correct, and that third position was socialist. He wasn't communist or capitalist, he was socialist.
    1
  16264. I'm glad to see that you're listening, but also questioning things and not just taking what I say at face value. Brilliant!
    1
  16265. This is 99% of the problem
    1
  16266. https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  16267. Got news for you sunshine: it's time to learn your history https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  16268. You may want to watch the final ~10 minutes. I think it's gold, but up to you
    1
  16269. And the workers don't think they're superior to the bourgeoisie? Or the other way round? Socialism is a struggle between different social groups. Whether it's national groups, class groups, gender groups, or racial groups... it doesn't matter, it's all the same: collectivism.
    1
  16270. That would be a private slave. You and your family are not a public entity, and having a slave doesn't change that. See the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16271. While I haven't responded to that video directly, the evidence I provided in the Hitler's Socialism video renders their argument redundant
    1
  16272. Exactly! Sadly, most of my critics are like they are and don't take the time to fully understand what I'm saying. Then they wonder why their arguments don't work.
    1
  16273. About the corporations, watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I did address the private property rights - in fact, I did it twice. Once with a pen in hand, and the second time with text. It's also very easy to imagine what would happen if you got a bad service at a restaurant - would you make a deal with them to eat there again? You're also assuming there would be no courts or police. There would. There just wouldn't be a monopoly on the courts or police as there are now - there would be multiple police and court services, just like there would be multiple restaurants. And, with the exception of the corporation point, none of this is relevant to the video. If you want to learn about libertarianism, I highly recommend that you start with the basics - Hazlitt's" Economics in One Lesson".
    1
  16274. Thank you for not going there! And that's right, bashing them won't persuade them. The goal is to persuade, not "own" the opposition 😂
    1
  16275. Yes, if definitions don't matter then ice cream three jump blue dog mean.
    1
  16276. Again, I've been over this in the Hitler's Socialism video. 1. Socialism is state control. 2. socializing the trade unions is done for State control, not to benefit the workers, because Socialism doesn't benefit the workers (the lie is that they do). 3. Lenin did the exact same thing, so was he not socialist either? So no, they haven't "got" me at all.
    1
  16277. Correct! It's like trying to break through to a religious fanatic - it's impossible. (And that's not a go at your average believer - I mean the fanatical ones who take it to extreme levels)
    1
  16278. Again, if you watch my "Public vs Private" video you'll see that the definitions I use aren't just made up. Fascism and Nazism are different as I outlined in my "Fascism Defined" video, and Fascism's main going isn't anti-Communism as you claimed. Fascism's goal was to create a Socialist society that wasn't Communist - that's not the same thing as it was just anti-Communist. The vast majority of people are completely ignoring the socialist side of Fascism on purely ideological grounds because they don't want to give socialism a bad name.
    1
  16279. I actually am. Not over these two guys in particular, but the whole issue of working hard to show people the truth only to be dismissed as being 'insane'
    1
  16280. That's the lesson I've taken away from this. You can't convince everyone, but you can try and convince those who are seriously willing to consider your stance.
    1
  16281. That would be good, but you wouldn't need to outlaw corporations, just get rid of forceful confiscation (tax and inflation) and you will see exactly that. Corporations only exist because of the State (a corporation that has the power to steal from you, then redistribute that stolen wealth to their friends and other corporations).
    1
  16282. If you watched the original video (or even this one), then you'd know why several of your points are completely incorrect. This is why I know you haven't watched it - because if you had you wouldn't be spouting unhistorical propaganda. To give one example, Hitler nationalized the trade unions and crushed those that refused to nationalize, which is exactly like Lenin did. But again, you want to presume the lies spun by Marxists are true, and you want to ignore the evidence. I can't do that - I will stick to the facts, even if those facts make me unpopular.
    1
  16283. Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16284. Because there's MANY of them. In fact, I would say they are the majority. Plus, I used to be one of them. My hope is to get through to them, since I was just as blind to the truth as they are right now. Plus, it's not just for them - this video (hopefully) shows my supporters how NOT to make an argument, whilst at the same time how to respond vs a wave of insults.
    1
  16285. There's two sides of this, and I focused on one in the video. I did mention the second one, but didn't flesh out the concept. Think of a thousand people in a hierarchy (a giant pyramid). Would that be 'private' or 'public'? Is a thousand people 'private'? I would say not. So regardless where their funds come from, or who owns it, it's not possible to say that a hierarchy of a thousand people is 'private'. Personally though, regardless of where the funds come from, giant hierarchies of society cannot really be classed as 'public'. Even so-called 'private' corporations that aren't in the stock market, can't be classed as 'private' if they've got hundreds or thousands of employees. It's the hierarchy itself that's what makes it 'public'. I only focused on the "shared/collective ownership" bit to get the point across quicker. I explained this better in the Public vs Private video. Here's the link if you're interested https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16286. Right, but it's not crony capitalism, since big business is 'public', not 'private'. And this misses the point entirely since Hitler said he was going East to seize the land and resources first before implementing full Socialism. So even if you think the Third Reich was "crony capitalism", Hitler and the Nazis were definitely Socialists. And you're incorrect about the Soviet Union. They never actually achieved 100% social ownership. This is what allows the Marxists to claim that they're not real Socialists. Of course they were still Socialists, they just failed to implement it fully. Trying to implement Socialism and failing doesn't make you a Capitalist.
    1
  16287. I just wish I knew who I was shilling for?
    1
  16288. Perhaps, but I want to try to get through to them
    1
  16289. 1. The video wasn't made for them, even though they're the guys I'm responding too. It's for others to learn from their mistakes. 2. My goal here is to make my audience aware what my main opposition is like. 3. My hope is that I can persuade these people to listen, and maybe even agree. If I can get through to some of them, then perhaps I can get through to others.
    1
  16290. A nation is a society https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16291. This is why I did the Sowell quote at the end. I just wish I had a way of getting through to them
    1
  16292. Don't worry, Stalingrad again next week :)
    1
  16293. Of course, I'll just discard all the facts in favour of your beliefs.
    1
  16294. It is a shame, but this is my biggest problem. I cannot get my detractors to watch my videos and understand how wrong they are. They won't listen!
    1
  16295. It's a knee-jerk reaction based on emotions, rather than considering or trying to understand the other person's point of view. The belief they have in their minds is that everything their opponent says must be wrong because they're right! Therefore, rather than try to understand their opponent, we know they're wrong, thus let's spend our time refuting everything that's said, rather than actually listen. In some ways, it's a virtue signal - "I'm right, you're wrong, let me tell you why" - rather than an honest consideration of the argument.
    1
  16296. Socialism has a specific definition. All these other definitions that people pull out actually all mean the same thing when you stop and think about it, as I showed in this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16297. AGAIN, watch the Public vs Private video. How many times do I have to say it? It's not "bad accounting" to be correctly using words rather than mistakingly believing they're something else. Look, I've provided you the link, watch it https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16298. Because Hitler was consolidating power. Again, go to the Hitler's Socialism video and see the time stamps. I address the Ernst Röhm issue in there.
    1
  16299. I'll leave you to it, Taylor. But I do have one question before I go. Who's "we" exactly? You said "we're already established you as an unreliable narrator to [your version of history]". Who did you mean by "we"?
    1
  16300. But your point doesn't stand. I don't believe in any of the points you've just falsely accused me of. I'm just curious how you and DemocraticMarxist01 (who is also a Marxist, and therefore anti-Semitic) came to such an erroneous conclusion. Is it because you don't like it when someone points out that your religion is fundamentally anti-Semitic? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Why don't you watch the video?
    1
  16301.  @taylorpagotto9588  I would just like to ask you why you said "It's weird that he's so committed to calling socialists Nazi's when he's basically blaming Jews for the Holocaust." and "He has made it really clear he thinks Jewish people caused the Holocaust. It's really gross." (on ODS's video)? And I'd like you to point out why you said "TIK jumps on this anti-Semitic language by aping Hitler's rhetoric that modernity is inherently fascist." At no point have I said any of these things. I never blamed the Jews for the Holocaust, or caused it. I never "jumped on" Hitler's anti-Semitic language or his rhetoric. And I never said "modernity is inherently fascist". You remind me of DemocraticSocialist01, who also makes up lies and slander. Here's what Karl Marx said about the Jews https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  16302. No it isn't https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  16303. As I said, one nation under God (internationalism) is still a nation (nationalism).
    1
  16304. If you work for a corporation, you abide by their rules, and they enforce them upon you.
    1
  16305. Yes, and I don't know why. I think it's meant to be an insult
    1
  16306. Please, just watch my 5 hour video. It lays it all out for you, and uses Mein Kampf and his speeches, as well as other sources.
    1
  16307. I know it's not great, but as I said in the pinned comment, I think that last 10 minutes is some of the best content I've ever released. Maybe others don't see it that way, but I certainly do
    1
  16308. I guarantee that they don't
    1
  16309. Precisely! And that's one of the reasons I wanted to do this video - to show them why their arguments are falling flat in the face of the evidence they're refusing to even look at
    1
  16310. Hitler nationalized the industries and trade unions. Hitler abolished private property rights and expropriated property, redistributing it to the poor. How is my assessment "terribly flawed"? As I said in the video, Junkers was thrown out of his factory - please refute that. Expropriation of Jewish property to the German social group - please refute that. Otherwise it's Socialism.
    1
  16311. Perhaps. However, my goal here wasn't to kick them. My goal was to persuade them to listen. I have so many "critics" who don't watch my videos, but tell me how wrong I am. I wanted to send a message to them saying: start watching. And I wanted to show my supporters what a bad argument looks like, as well as how to respond in the face of insults. There's also a lot more, but don't for a minute think that my intention here was to crush smaller channels. If nothing else, I'd actually like them to respond saying they'll give the videos a go - that would make me very happy
    1
  16312. One nation under god is still a nation. Internationalism is no different to nationalism. To put it another way, a "class" (e.g. the workers) are classed as a society (hence socialism). So the workers could be seen as a "nation". Yes, they cross boarders, but that's the point. They're a nation without a nation (a bit like the Jews were prior to 1948). The point is that internationalism and nationalism are irrelevant, since both are societies, and thus socialist.
    1
  16313. Yes, I did do a video on Hitler's Democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I After that Marko, please watch the Public vs Private video if you haven't done so already 👍
    1
  16314. And one nation that conquers the world (internationally) is still a nation. Internationalism is nationalism.
    1
  16315. You should still listen. I think the final part of the video is revealing, even if they're unbearable
    1
  16316. Of course they haven't read Mein Kampf! 😂
    1
  16317. Sadly, there are so many commenters on my previous videos like them, that's why I felt like responding. This video really wasn't aimed at them specifically, but the 'stick to tanks' crowd, and my regular viewers who, I hope, have learned 1. what I'm dealing with on a daily basis, 2. how to respond in the face of harsh insults, and 3. something out of that last 10 minutes, which I think is the best part of the video (and one of the best video moments I've ever put out, in my opinion). So, I don't think this video was a waste of time.
    1
  16318. It's not a distorted world view. In the Public vs Private video, all I'm showing you is the definitions and the history. How that's supposedly a "distorted world view" I'm not sure. Could you explain why you believe the historical and dictionary definitions of words are distorted?
    1
  16319. Well, I'm certainly glad you're reconsidering! I would encourage you to watch the Public vs Private video first, since you're still unsure about the definitions. You may think it would be a waste of time, but there's more to it than just the definitions.
    1
  16320. Perhaps, but they've gained about 20 subs (mainly my fans who want to see how this turns out). I don't think that they'll get much out of this in the long term, unless they admit that they're wrong
    1
  16321. I didn't say that.
    1
  16322. But many believe (including me before I Red-Pilled myself accidentally) that Hitler privatized everything, and was a capitalist. I couldn't see the lie either, and certainly wouldn't have listened to the truth. My hope was to get through to them, and my other critics. I also wanted to show everyone how not to make an argument, and how to react under a wave of insults. Perhaps I can turn these boys into men in the process
    1
  16323. If no country has had private ownership, then how do you know it's not superior to socialism?
    1
  16324. Sorry for my ignorance on that verse, but could you explain what that means in context to what I'm trying to do here?
    1
  16325. "TIK, your videos on military history are excellent. Those on politics, not so much. Your libertarianism bias is showing through." Of all the people here, you're the person I know needs to watch this video in full. I cannot convey to you enough how much I want you to sit and listen to what I have to say in this video. I think, if you give it an honest go, you will understand why I'm saying that
    1
  16326. Thanks! I'll have a look when I get some time. Considering the points I brought up here, or in my previous videos on the topic, do you think their argument is persuasive?
    1
  16327. Sorry!
    1
  16328. Thanks Braden! Did all three of us release videos at the same time? Oops! I should have put it back by a day or something
    1
  16329. That's tempting ;)
    1
  16330. A few years ago I got a stye in my eyelid. Since then my eyelid has drooped. It looks worse (and goes red) when I'm tired or ill
    1
  16331. I didn't dismiss it. I said it wasn't that big at the beginning. It certainly picked up later on, although I didn't clarify that in the video.
    1
  16332. Haha well done again!
    1
  16333. Haha no need to be that excited - it's just a Q&A this time :)
    1
  16334. Well done Jamie! Not seen you first for a while
    1
  16335. Right but I didn't "ignore" it. I just genuinely didn't know that there was a mirror. And you didn't include a link to the "race IQ" thing - not that I care for that since "race" is an pseudo-scientific idea. Again https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/
    1
  16336. Exactly
    1
  16337. Yeah, I should have asked Terri to put Tommy Cooper in he middle
    1
  16338. Roses are red Oil slicks leave marks Here's a poem From happy-chappy Karl Marx - - Frantic, he holds her near, Darkly looks in her eye. “Pain so burns you, Dear, And at my breath you sigh. “Oh, you have drunk my soul. Mine is your glow, in truth. My jewel, shine your fill. Glow, blood of youth.” “Sweetest, so pale your face, So wondrous strange your words. See, rich in music’s grace The lofty gliding worlds.” “Gliding, dearest, gliding, Glowing, stars, glowing. Let us go heavenwards riding, Our souls together flowing.” His voice is muffled, low. Desparate, he looks about. Glances of crackling flame His hollow eyes shoot out. “You have drunk poison, Love. With me you must away. The sky is dark above, No more I see the day.” Shuddering, he pulls her close to him. Death in the breast doth hover. Pain stabs her, piercing deep within, And eyes are closed forever.
    1
  16339. Absolutely
    1
  16340. Really sure? I don't think you were
    1
  16341. You sure you were first?
    1
  16342. Morgan Chalmers how do you know these things!? I had to look it up!
    1
  16343. I'm really glad to hear that!
    1
  16344. Glad to hear you care :) and it is sorted
    1
  16345. Aber ist das wirklich so?
    1
  16346. Haha that's true! I'd never hear the last of it
    1
  16347. And they're mostly thanks to my Patreons!
    1
  16348. I think I got it before Market Garden, so it's probably 4 or more years old. However it seems I'm not the only one with this issue (not sure if it's exactly this fault, I'm tempted to take it apart and see though) https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/890851-corsair-grey-label-cx750m-burning-smell-fault-finding-and-repair/ Note that they identified on the second page that it was probably a batch from a particular factory, and this fault is probably (hopefully) not an issue any more.
    1
  16349. I haven't. Which books in particular?
    1
  16350. Thanks Rebel!
    1
  16351. Thanks for being understanding Firefox!
    1
  16352. No worries! Should be good - the start of Crusader and the First Battle of Bit el Gubi!
    1
  16353. No worries sir! Sorry for the delay!
    1
  16354. Ah! I assumed you being a football fan... Nevermind! :D
    1
  16355. If only I was a sports fan, I may have got the reference
    1
  16356. Not any more. My views were updated in this more recent video on history theory https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI?si=VZDzvenGDVWGVe4U
    1
  16357. There is a Kindle version. No audio book yet, but hopefully one day.
    1
  16358. "Well no true socialist defends private property the way Hitler did preserving the estates of hereditary aristocracy as well as capitalist overlords and rejecting any scheme for redistribution of wealth or confiscation." Hitler did start to do land reform, but decided to wait until after conquering the Soviet Union. By "capitalist overlords", I assume you mean the corporation owners? In which case, Hitler kicked them out (e.g. Professor Junkers) and replaced them with National Socialist Party members, who then "managed" the corporations on behalf of the State (which is syndicalism - a form of Socialism). And as Gotz Aly's book "Hitler's Beneficiaries" shows very conclusively, Hitler did institute a redistribution of wealth via a progressive tax system, and by confiscating the wealth off of the Judeo-bourgeoisie. - "Hitler called all such notions communism." No, he called communism a Jewish plot, which was why he was against it. He wanted to create a non-Jewish Socialism, and that's what he did.
    1
  16359. I have them, although I'm not convinced by the Hitler one
    1
  16360. You're assuming that Democracy is freedom. You've been misled. Watch this video https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  16361. Bingo! It's a dishonest tactic employed by those who are getting called out on their false world view and distortion of the facts.
    1
  16362. Yes, and s u i c i d e, not Seppoku. Can't say these terms in the video due to censorship.
    1
  16363. Haha it really was!
    1
  16364. But they were mobilizing to attack, and had German troops and equipment in their country. Arguably, that's the first aggression.
    1
  16365. Don't worry, I'm keeping busy :)
    1
  16366. Exactly! Gavin needed to capture Nijmegen Bridge before surprise was lost, and he didn't do that
    1
  16367. The movie, while a good film, is not very accurate and gives a wrong impression of why the battle was lost. John Frost was an advisor on the set and says in his book that there were several inaccuracies. "Major Fuller" is actually Major Urquhart (not the general). Browning did dismiss the intelligence report, that is true. And his treatment of Sosabowski was wrong. They did face old men and young boys... But they also faced a lot of veterans too. Most notable is the eyes and ears battalions that attacked the Groesbeek Heights on day 2. It wasn't 2nd ASK Panzer Division, it was 2nd SS Panzer Corps, which had 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions. These had been battered after Normandy. Flooding was not an issue, it was that the Dutch reclaimed parts of the sea or rivers for farmland, and this land doesn't make good landing grounds for paratroopers. The reason the landing zone was far away at Arnhem was because the RAF didn't want to suffer casualties from the heavy flak expected to be in Arnhem city itself. I disagree that the operation was doomed from the start. As shown in my Market Garden documentary, every bridge (except one, Nijmegen) was taken intact or not (Son) on day 1. On the morning of day 3, XXX Corps was just 10 miles from Arnhem. It then suffered a critical 36 hour delay at Nijmegen before the bridge was taken. The reason that XXX Corps did not get to Arnhem was because Nijmegen Bridge was not taken on day 1 when it could have been, which is exactly what Frost concluded.
    1
  16368. It isn't bad at all. Good to see you were one of the first though :) I'm not so sure I agree with you. I know the operation had a lot going on, but if 30 Corps had stalled for 36 hours at Son Bridge, the 82nd may have been in trouble too by the time it got there. Blocking the road to Arnhem is ultimately what stopped the Allies from winning. And holding onto the bridge at Nijmegen was the biggest roadblock that needed to be overcome. If that hadn't happened and 30 Corps had been at Arnhem on day 3, or even day 4, the outcome of the battle may have changed.
    1
  16369. I can't wait to see it either!
    1
  16370. Thanks Gripen! Long time no see :)
    1
  16371. It's funny because in most of the examples you gave, Churchill was involved somehow
    1
  16372. So do I! Feeling guilty not publishing anything in a while, however work is busy and I'm struggling to find time. Will let you into a secret though (shhhh, don't tell anyone) I've got another Battlestorm Documentary coming in the next week or two that isn't Stalingrad... :)
    1
  16373. Second
    1
  16374. I'll respond but, while I have done over 300,000 words of research for Stalingrad, it won't be done for Christmas (sadly). I'm determined to get it done asap though. And so you know, I'll be covering everything in detail from July 28th 1942 to February 2nd 1943 with context before and after the campaign, so effectively 7ish months of intense battle. Contrast that to the 9 days of Market Garden, which was a much smaller battle anyway, and hopefully you'll understand why it's taking so long! I'm planning on doing other videos between Stalingrad and now though. Next Battlestorm video will be out in a couple weeks, which is the reason the videos have slowed down recently :) Expect some minor Stalingrad-related videos after that one though. Cheers!
    1
  16375. This argument raises the question. Was it more an Allied defeat, or a German victory? If you support this argument, let us know. And, the final argument makes the case that the battle was lost, not at its inception, not at it’s planning, not even by the Germans (sort of), but by the decision not to capture the Nijmegen bridge on day one. This argument makes the case that the original Market Garden plan was thrown out as soon as General Gavin of the 82nd made the decision to deprioritise the capture of the Nijmegen bridge and focus his division on the Groesbeek Heights. Without the capture of Nijmegen bridge, there was no way XXX Corps could get to Arnhem in time. Proponents of this argument also make the case that XXX Corps wasn’t delayed before they reached Nijmegen, they were delayed 36 hours at Nijmegen. They also point out that it was Gavin who later claimed XXX Corps was 36 hours behind schedule before reaching Nijmegen bridge. So basically, because Nijmegen bridge wasn’t taken on day one, the Germans were able to block the road to Arnhem, and therefore the Operation was doomed. It wasn’t that XXX Corps was too slow as the first argument suggests, but that they suffered a far too crucial delay at Nijmegen. The whole point of the Operation was to lay an airborne carpet for the tanks to roll over. The bridges were the priority of the Operation. They were the main objective. Market Garden failed because one of those bridges was ignored for a few hours after the initial landings, allowing the Germans to secure it. Gavin certainly comes under flak by supporters of this argument, since he made the original decision to deprioritise Nijmegen bridge. But blame also goes to General Browning, commander of the whole airborne part of the plan, since his hand was in that decision too. When asked, who made the decision to prioritise the Groesbeek Heights rather than the bridge at Nijmegen, General Gavin’s response was: This decision was made by myself and approved by my Corps Commander. As a result, it’s fair to place the blame on General Gavin of the US 82nd Airborne, and his superior, British General Frederick Browning, for the failure of Operation Market Garden. So there is a basic overview of the three main arguments for the failure of Operation Market Garden. Which do you agree with? Let’s give you a second to pause the video so you can let us know your opinion in the comments. Ok. Having seen the battle unfold, it’s hard not to come to the conclusion that the Operation was lost at Nijmegen. Gavin and Browning failed to take a bridge, which was the one thing they had to do. The objective of the whole Operation was to take the bridges. And they didn’t do it. And whilst you could say it was the Germans who held the Nijmegen bridge for so long, it was only because Gavin didn’t send troops to take it until the early evening of the first day, by which point, it was too late. It’s almost as if it was an afterthought. There is this fact floating around that XXX Corps was 36 hours behind schedule by the time they reached Nijmegen bridge. But this is actually something Gavin said after the battle to bend the truth. XXX Corps was at Nijmegen at the beginning of day 3 of the Operation. So 42 hours after the beginning of the Operation (since it started in the afternoon) they couldn’t be 36 hours behind schedule, since they were 8 miles from their objective. They’d gone 50 miles and they’d got to Nijmegen with time to spare. Unfortunately not enough spare time to fight the 10th SS Panzer Division, but if Nijmegen bridge had been taken by the 82nd, it’s likely they could have reached Arnhem by the end of day 3. Because the 82nd hadn’t taken Nijmegen Bridge, it took XXX Corps and the bravery of the 82nd troopers paddling across the Waal another 36 hours to get across the bridge. Nijmegen cost XXX Corps a day and a half, and as a result, caused Frost’s troops to be overwhelmed, caused 1st Airborne more casualties, and caused the failure of the entire Operation. The British troops at Arnhem were not relieved, and if they had been on day three, or even on day four, it’s reasonable to assume that XXX Corps could have been across the Rhine. So why didn’t they take Nijmegen bridge on day one? The obvious problem was that most of the 82nd had been ordered to guard the Groesbeek Heights. Now, you could say that they needed the Heights as this was their Landing Zone. But the issue isn’t that they guarded the Landing Zones, the issue is they guarded the landing zone with as many troops as they did, and also flew in artillery to pound the “1000 tanks” in the Reichswald, rather than take extra troops that could go towards Nijmegen. And Warren, who in the end sent 1st Battalion towards the bridge, wasn’t told to take Nijmegen bridge until the evening of the first day. There is a debate, still ongoing, as to whether Warren was issued pre-drop orders to take Nijmegen Bridge or not. He insists that he wasn’t until around 7 or 8pm on day one. Prior to this, he’d been ordered to dig in at the Groesbeek Heights, which he’d done. The blame therefore rests on General Gavin for not sending anyone towards Nijmegen. Because Gavin feared an attack from the 1000 German tanks that were meant to be hiding in the Reichswald, he placed priority on taking the Groesbeek Heights, to protect against their attack. Except there weren’t 1000 tanks in the Reichswald. In fact, there is no evidence that anyone other than Gavin thought there were any tanks in the Reichswald. The German 406th Division that did move out on day 2 of the Operation could barely be called a brigade. The first time any German force worth defending against that was to come from the Reichswald moved out on Day 4, after XXX Corps had arrived, and then it wasn’t that big of a deal. At that point, the battle should have been over anyway. Of course, Gavin made the initial decision not to take Nijmegen Bridge. This was a poor idea and Browning, as Gavin’s superior, should have questioned Gavin’s decision to take the Groesbeek Heights. Browning should have ordered Gavin to make the Nijmegen Bridge the priority once more. He didn’t do that. Why? Because he wanted to be on the ground to command the Operation from the front. He wanted the glory of leading a successful Operation from the ground, and setting up his Headquarters on the Groesbeek Heights would allow him to direct the battle, in theory. In practice Browning did next to nothing practical when he was on the ground. So rather than telling Gavin to change his plans, he reinforced them, which ultimately proved to be a disastrous decision. Browning also made several other disastrous decisions, like dismissing the intelligence reports about enemy tanks, so if you come to the conclusion that it was Browning’s fault, you can certainly argue the case. But ultimately, the failure of this Operation was at Nijmegen, and when asking who was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden, you have to blame the person who changed the plan to suit their own wants. And the evidence here points to General Gavin. The thing is, Gavin knew his head was likely to roll. To quote Max Hastings in his book, Armageddon: “Gavin of the US 82nd urged that the US Army should review its policy of ruthlessly relieving formation commanders who failed in a single battle. He argued that it might be wiser to allow general officers to gain experience, and to enjoy at least a second chance.” Because he’d messed up. He was urging this because he was responsible for the failure of Operation Market Garden, basically he was begging to keep his job. I’m going to recite a lengthy but relevant quote from John Frost: “[By] far the worst mistake was the lack of priority given to the capture of Nijmegen Bridge. The whole essence of the plan was to lay an airborne carpet across the obstacles in southern Holland so that the Army could motor through, yet the capture of this, perhaps the biggest and most vital bridge in that its destruction would have sounded the death-knell of the troops committed at Arnhem, was not accorded priority. The capture of this bridge would have been a walk-over on D-day, yet the American 82nd Airborne Division could spare only one battalion as they must at all costs secure a feature called the Groesbeek Heights, where, incidentally, the H.Q. of Airborne Corps was to be sited. It was thought that the retention of this feature would prevent the debouchment of German armour from the Reichwald in Germany. This armour was there by courtesy of rumour only and its presence was not confirmed by the underground. In fact, as a feature it is by no means dominating and its retention or otherwise had absolutely no bearing on what happened at Nijmegen Bridge.” Thus, who was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden? Gavin. But I’m certain some of you will disagree, which is why I told you right at the beginning, that this was a controversial battle. The myths surrounding Market Garden battle have been burned into history. I hope we've made a dent in those myths today. Of course, history does not stand still. Tomorrow, new evidence or a new theory could come along and sweep away the conclusions we make today. But until then, I’d like to hear who or what you guys think is ultimately responsible for the failure of Operation Market Garden. Do you agree with the conclusions of this documentary? Hopefully you don’t because that’s what’s great about history. It’s not just about facts and figures, it’s about arguing. And we all like a good moan. This won't be the last documentary I make so make sure you subscribe to be notified of more. I hope this has been entertaining and enlightening. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16376. Episode 8 - Who was to Blame for the Failure of Operation Market Garden? If you’ve watched all episodes in this series so far, then you know what the plan was. You’ve seen what happened. You know the outcome. Now we have to ask the question that has sparked controversy ever since: Who was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden? Intro graphic. This was the biggest airborne operation of all time and the last major defeat of the British military. Historians have come up with a host of reasons for the failure of Market Garden and we’re going to delve into them today. If you’ve watched from the beginning of this series, you’ll have seen the battle as it happened. But just so we’re up to speed, let’s quickly recap. The plan was to take all the bridges between Eindhoven and Arnhem using paratroopers and create a corridor for British tanks and infantry to drive up and over, and off into the Netherlands. We saw how the initial landings went well, and we’ve seen how most of the bridges were taken without much trouble. Only a small portion of the British paras got to Arnhem bridge, but they held until the fourth day of the Operation. The Polish had dropped five days later and fought well to try support the British on the opposite side of the Rhine. Son bridge had blown, but was rebuilt by the 101st and by XXX Corps who made good their delay and raced to Nijmegen. Here they fought a tough battle for Nijmegen city and the bridge, which as a result of the determined and heroic effort from the soldiers of the American 82nd Airborne, saw the capture of that bridge. Sadly, despite the efforts of every Allied soldier up and down the corridor, the Germans had delayed them long enough to prevent them getting to the final bridge. Arnhem bridge. As General Browning had supposedly said before the battle, it was “a bridge too far”. Again, it’s debated whether he actually said that or not, but it serves it’s purpose. It may come as a shock then to hear that, immediately after the battle, Sosabowski (commander of the Polish paras) was relieved of command and blamed for the failure of Operation Market Garden. What? Why? This may seem a little strange, and it was. Because of bad weather, the Polish had landed five days after the beginning of the Operation, and despite a portion of their force jumping into the jaws of the enemy, they’d fought hard to support the British trapped at Oosterbeek. Why then, was Sosabowski relieved? How could he be blamed for the failure of Operation Market Garden? The truth is that at the time, a scapegoat was needed. And the Polish were an easy target. Some have even suggested that the Poles were only included in the battle just in case it did go wrong. After the war, historians started to look deeper into the reasons for the failure of the Operation, and nobody now thinks the Polish were to blame. So, let’s look at three of the main arguments for the failure of Operation Market Garden. The first argument is that it was “a rotten plan, poorly executed”, to quote Max Hastings. Now, there are a few variations to this somewhat popular and traditional argument, but the basic principle is this: the entire Operation was a failure from its conception. It was an over-ambitious plan, created in haste by a poor general, and the major mistakes that were made, were made mainly by the British units in the battle, and it was the British that ultimately should take the blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden. This argument makes clear that the ignored intelligence reports of enemy tanks, the landing zones miles away from the bridge, not being able to land the entirety of the Airborne divisions at once, faulty radios, and a host of bad decisions by commanders like Horrocks and Urquhart, essentially proves that the Operation was poorly executed. 1st Airborne failed to get most of it’s troops to Arnhem bridge on day 1. They were too eager to fight the Germans than get to their objective. They were dropped too far away from the bridge. Their radios didn’t work so they became disorganised. XXX Corps wasn’t hasty enough driving up Hell’s Highway, especially after getting across Nijmegen bridge. They delayed when they could have pressed on towards Arnhem, and may have gotten to Frost’s men in time. And as General Gavin of the 82nd said, XXX Corps were 36 hours delayed before reaching Nijmegen, and as a result they were never going to get to the British at Arnhem in time. For this argument, blame is then usually placed on one of the British generals. Montgomery, despised by many people for many different reasons, often receives criticism for coming up with this “rotten plan”. Urquhart gets a lot of criticism for accepting landing zones miles from Arnhem bridge, and for accompanying 3rd Battalion, slowing them down, and for getting trapped in a house with his second in command, and for not making it clear who would take command of 1st Airborne if he and Lathbury were lost. So yeah, Urquhart has his fair share of the blame. Equally, it’s fair to say that Browning is the one who should take the blame, since he made plenty of mistakes too - the most noteworthy of which is dismissing the intelligence reports of German tanks in the Arnhem area. But Browning also takes criticism for taking vital transport aircraft from the British, and therefore weakening 1st Airborne on that first vital day. And let’s not forget Horrocks, who’s slow advance up Hell’s Highway effectively doomed the Operation, if you support this argument. XXX Corps took every opportunity to stop and rest, drink tea, and generally didn’t perform well at all. The usual fact that this argument says is that once the British tanks were over Nijmegen bridge and the road ahead was clear, they stayed there and drank tea - despite an American paratrooper offering to go with them to Arnhem. So a few variations in who is to blame, but this argument is the one that’s been ingrained in the minds of majority of people when they think about Operation Market Garden. The massively popular film, “A Bridge Too Far” probably did more than anything else to cement the popularity of the argument. A lot of the books that focus solely on the Arnhem part of the battlefield tend to agree with this argument too, because as has been pointed out time and time again, the British made a lot of mistakes at Arnhem. So, do you agree with this argument? Let us know in the comments. The second argument is that - wait for it - the Germans were the reason why the Allies failed. Yes, surprisingly some people think it wasn’t as much an Allied defeat, as it was a German victory. Robert Kershaw, in his book “It Never Snows in September” is adamant that the Germans outfought the Allies during Market Garden, despite having to rely on eyes and ears battalions and other unfit or reserve units. And when you look at the evidence, the Germans did a remarkable job with the little resources they had. All they had was two depleted Panzer Divisions, not even at half strength, backed up by Krafft’s force, which is actually part of 16th Panzergrenadier Division. So you could make the claim that there were two and a half panzer divisions at Arnhem. They also had Panzer Brigade 107, which successfully harassed the American 101st Division, and the super successful 406th Division, that was more of a brigade than a division. But despite having this severe lack of men and equipment, the Germans were able to concentrate the rag-tag forces they had, throw them at the enemy, and win this battle. Training their units to fight, rather than march. Improvisation, and the creation of kampfgruppen - or battle groups - and the initiative of their leaders, were the decisive factors that ultimately allowed the Germans to prevail. Kampfgruppe Spindler at Arnhem was decisive in stopping the rest of 1st Airborne reaching Frost at the Bridge. 10th SS Panzer Division fought at Nijmegen in a similar situation to Frost at Arnhem. They delayed XXX Corps at Nijmegen for 36 hours. It was the Germans who cut the corridor in the final days of the battle, and it was the Germans that came to the conclusion that it wasn’t the British landing zones being so far from Arnhem that was an issue, it was “that a second airborne division was not dropped in the area west of Arnhem”.
    1
  16377. Episode 7 - Days 7-10 - Holding On Hold on. Hold on until the tanks relieve you. Hold on without reinforcement or resupply. Hold on until victory. Except there won’t be a victory. This battle is lost. It was lost days ago. You’re just holding on until someone decides to get you out. Such was the fate of the British Paras at Oosterbeek. Info graphic Last time we saw the Poles drop at Driel and cause the Germans to shift their focus south of Arnhem. The corridor was cut at Veghel and the British attacks in the North stalled. The Germans at Oosterbeek pounded the British paras whilst the Red Devils held on inside the Witches Cauldron. This time, we’re going to cover the last few days of Operation Market Garden, starting from the 23rd of September and ending on the 26th. You’ll be surprised to learn that the remaining airborne reinforcements flew in on the 23rd of September. Yes! 7 days after the beginning of the Operation, the Poles received the rest of their Brigade that hadn’t taken off two days previously. The 101st and the 82nd also received additional reinforcements, including an entire regiment, the 325th Glider Infantry, that landed at Nijmegen. With additional reinforcements, the Allies pushed Kampfgruppe Walther back towards Gemert in the evening of the 23rd. Defeated it may have been, but Kampfgruppe Walther had cut Hell’s Highway for 36 hours. Unfortunately, Walther was now in a poor position to attack the corridor once more, since British VIII Corps was now in Deurne. Over the next couple of days, it would withdraw to Boxmeer and would play no further part in the battle. On the 24th however, Kampfgruppe Huber, on the other side of Hell’s Highway, attacked towards Veghel. This Kampfgruppe was weaker than Walther, consisting of perhaps four Fallschirmjager battalions backed up by Jagdpanther tank destroyers. But the Germans had done their reconnaissance. They’d found gaps in the American lines. Striking into Eerde from Schijndel, the German Jagdpanthers annihilated British tanks supported by American paratroopers. Several Shermans were taken out, and trucks burst into flames on Hell’s Highway itself. Now, whilst the Germans hadn’t got to the road, they had prevented traffic from flowing north. Once again the corridor was cut. Worse, another force from Kampfgruppe Huber attacked towards Koevering the next day. Ambushing vehicles on the road, Fallschirmjager did enough damage to cut the road again. Fifty vehicles were destroyed and the road was blocked here until the 26th - day 10 of Operation Market Garden - and basically the end. On the 24th, Day 8 of the Operation, a meeting was held at Valburg between Horrocks, Browning, Thomas and Sosabowski to decide what to do. Sosabowski pointed out that sending reinforcements into Oosterbeek was pointless unless a major crossing could be made involving a lot more troops. This though, was not possible. A major crossing could not be mounted because XXX Corps was stretched too thin and had logistical troubles in the south. Instead, Horrocks decided that small crossings would have to continue for the time being. Interestingly, he told Sosabowski that if he didn’t like the idea, he would be relieved of his command. Yes, Horrocks was under pressure, but it may seem a little odd that Sosabowski was threatened with resignation. I’ll go into more detail as to why there was a distrust of the Polish commander in the next, and final episode of the series. But either way, on the night of the 24th, more assault boats arrived and 300 men, mostly Poles got into Oosterbeek - a lot were killed trying to make the crossing. With the corridor cut further south, XXX Corps struggled to press on towards Oosterbeek. On the evening of the 23rd, 130th Brigade finally reached the Poles at Driel, making this the first substantial connection XXX Corps had with the forces fighting on the Rhine. They still fought the Germans at Elst and Bemmel and would take Opheusden by the 26th. Even with a 300 man reinforcement, and the arrival (at last!) of Allied fighter bombers from the 23rd onwards, the situation in Oosterbeek during the last few days of the Operation remained bleak. Despite being assaulted by tanks, grenades, and a host of other weapons, including flamethrowers - specially requested by German commanders and ordered in by Model himself - somehow 1st Airborne continued to hold on. It was joked at the time that the British used German weapons - since their ammunition had run out - and the Germans used British weapons, since their own logistics were strained and they were getting resupplied by the Allies via the drop zones. And the Germans still didn’t have enough troops to deliver a decisive blow on the Cauldron. Worse, the troops that the Germans did have were suffering high casualties as they tried to storm each of the British strong points, since the defence of Oosterbeek was now a series of strong points rather than a continuous line. German commanders were angry that their troops were losing as many tanks as they were. The reason for the losses was because the German infantry weren’t trained and were few in number, and because there was a shortage of radios amongst the Germans. British AT tank guns and infantry managed to knock out numerous German vehicles, including Sturmgeschutz Self-Propelled guns and even some Panther tanks. Surprisingly, the German Konigstiger - or King Tiger tanks - weren’t that effective at Oosterbeek due to the narrow terrain which took off their tracks and prevented their turrets from turning. This was of little comfort to the British, who didn’t realise that the Germans were reorganising their lines. The Germans pulled in all their veterans from the various kampfgruppen that surrounded the British pocket, and put them on the Eastern side. It was hoped that this reorganisation would enable the Germans to pierce the British perimeter and bring about the end of British resistance. An attack was mounted in the afternoon of the 25th, and actually penetrated the British lines. Somehow the British managed to stop the Germans, who’s attack lost momentum quickly, due to fierce resistance and a huge amount of British artillery. The British called in artillery and (finally) airstrikes on the Germans to stall the attacks, whilst the Germans used Nebelwerfers - rocket artillery to pound the British into submission. A lot of British prisoners taken in these critical days were shell shocked by these strikes. Water and medical supplies were all but gone, and truces had to be called to evacuate the wounded to German hospitals in Arnhem. Thousands of British troops would end up as prisoners of war for this reason, perhaps as many as 6000 at the end of the battle. Having hung on for nine days, the Paras were finished. On the evening of the 25th, a plan to withdraw across the Rhine was put in place and the paratroopers crossed the Rhine in small boats throughout the night, under the cover of artillery fire. By the early morning of the 26th, the evacuation was over and the survivors of 1st Airborne met at Driel. Just 1,741 of 1st Airborne had made it to Allied lines. The rest of the 10,000 that had dropped into the Arnhem area were either killed, wounded and/or captured. In contrast, the Germans had lost around 3,000 men in the Arnhem sector. Another German attack went in on the 26th… and found no resistance. The Germans were surprised. All they found were dead bodies and weapons. The British had gone! Yes, the field hospitals were full, but it dawned on them that the British had withdrawn overnight. They had succeeded. They’d defeated the British. They’d won. And thus ended Operation Market Garden. It was day 10 now after the battle had begun and at best you could probably call it a draw, but really it was a defeat for the Allies. The British had failed to cross the Rhine, their ultimate objective, and although the Allied troops had fought heroically throughout the battle, they’d tried to go a Bridge Too Far. Total losses for both sides vary, depending on which source you use. It’s safe to assume that German losses were somewhere around six to nine thousand men, although the actual number may never be known. Allied losses may be as high as 17,000, with around half of them, over 8,000, being from 1st Airborne alone. But this series isn’t over yet. We have one more main episode to go. And it’s a biggy. The question we’re going to ask, and I’ll ask you guys now is, who was to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden? Comment below and let me know. We’ve seen what happened. We’ve watched the battle unfold. Now we get to decide who should take the blame for this defeat. We will find out next time. And there will also be additional supplementary episodes in the near future covering things I couldn’t cover in the main narrative so stay tuned. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16378. The Germans were taken completely by surprise by the Polish landing! They feared the worst - that the Poles would get across the Rhine, or perhaps even swing around their rear and capture the southern end of the Arnhem bridge! This would cut off 9th SS’s retreat as XXX Corps would crush them from the front. This was a fantasy because a thousand or so paratroopers weren’t capable of doing that. But nonetheless, the Germans reacted quickly, sending all available reserves to form a blocking line or “Sperrverband”, named after its commander, Harzer. Sperrverband Harzer consisted of 5 Battalions, perhaps as many as 2,400 men, and now blocked the route to Arnhem. This force engaged the 1000 or so Poles in the Driel area as the Poles formed an all round defense, waiting for XXX Corps to link up with them. The impact of the Polish drop is significant. Whilst they couldn’t get across the Rhine, because the Ferry was lost, they did draw off all German reserves in the area. According to Robert J. Kershaw in his book, ‘It Never Snows In September’, the Germans had been planning to destroy the British at Oosterbeek in a planned attack on the 22nd. But now had to take all their reserves to counter the Polish drop. If this is true, the Polish saved 1st Airborne from complete annihilation. The Polish drop would also give the Allies a last chance to cross the Rhine. XXX Corps sent reconnaissance units forwards into the area known as “The Island”. In this area, the main road was raised up above the surrounding fields, themselves split, not by hedges, but by ditches and streams. Basically, British tanks advancing this way would be exposed to anything the Germans could fire at them, with little chance of retaliation. So, even though XXX Corps resumed its attack towards Arnhem at 13:30, it soon got bogged down in the fighting. Five leading tanks were hit and set on fire by Panther and 88mm guns and the attack ground to a halt. With the tanks unable to proceed, it was decided that infantry should lead the attack. And the 43rd Infantry Division was picked for this role. Unfortunately, the 43rd Infantry Division was stuck at Nijmegen, and the traffic up the one road, now referred to by the Americans as [Hell’s Highway] was awful. So the attack was delayed. The Germans were also sending a steady stream of reinforcements into the Island area, meaning there was little chance of reaching either 1st Airborne or the Poles this day. The 22nd of September was a Friday, and it was now Day 6 of Operation Market Garden. Like the day before, there was still hope that XXX Corps could reach the paratroopers at Oosterbeek and create some sort of victory. That chance was lost today as Kampfgruppe Walther launched a counterattack, not in the north at the Island, but at Veghel against the 101st. They aimed to cut the corridor, as they had tried to do at Son a few days earlier. Again it was the Panther tanks of Panzer Brigade 107 that headed the attack. This time though, it was supported by Grenadiers, flak batteries, artillery, Fallschirmjaeger, a Tank Destroyer Battalion, and more. They would attack the right flank of the road - which was now nicknamed ‘Hell’s Highway’ by the Allies. On the left side of the road, another formation - Kampfgruppe Huber - also went in on the attack. This had infantry, supported by artillery, AntiTank guns and even four Jagdpanther tank destroyers. This force would attack at Schijndel but aimed at Veghel. Despite a shortage of artillery shells, this was a concerted attack and proved devastating for the 101st and the British too. Shortly after 09:00, the German attack went in. Artillery pounded the American positions and the tanks of Kampfgruppe Walther moved off ahead of the other infantry units. Veghel was reached at around 11:00 with Panther tanks and Panzer Grenadiers cutting Hell’s Highway to the north. They then turned south to Veghel where a battle erupted with the American 501st Regiment. On the other side of the road, Kampfgruppe Huber got into the outskirts of Schijndel, where they were able to fire at the Veghel canal bridge. The 506th Regiment, supported by British tanks, were able to push them back. Equally, the 501st, supported by British tanks and an unending artillery barrage, halted Kampfgruppe Walther. The Germans found themselves unable to continue the attack as night fell, but they had cut the corridor, and this meant that XXX Corps’ supplies and reinforcements wouldn’t get through to the North. And the British desperately needed infantry reinforcements in the north. Some elements, including tanks, of 43rd Division managed to reach the Polish Independent Brigade at Driel sometime in the evening. But the Island still caused problems and an attack could not be made successfully towards Arnhem. Worse, tank units at Nijmegen that could be used to advance north, were sent south to deal with the Veghel cut. Clearly, the British attack was losing steam. Lieutenant Colonel Charles MacKenzie - the staff officer who’d told Hicks he was in charge of 1st Airborne when Urquhart was missing - crossed the Rhine in a rowing boat and spoke to Polish commander Sosabowski. He impressed upon Sosabowski the desperate situation in the Oosterbeek Cauldron, and said that even a handful of reinforcements could make all the difference. That night, 60 men from Sosabowski’s Brigade got across the river and reinforced the Oosterbeek perimeter. But 60 Polish paratroopers weren’t enough to change the course of the battle. Harzer had decided that the British in the Oosterbeek pocket would be pounded into submission by mortars and Nebelwerfers, rather than all out attacks. There were a few reasons behind this change of tactics. One was that a good portion of the German reinforcements had moved south to block the Polish landing and the British tanks. Essentially, the British pocket at Oosterbeek was now merely a distraction from the main event further south. Another reason was that the Germans left at Oosterbeek were mostly untrained conscripts, backed by only a few veteran kampfgruppen. These troops would not be capable of mounting the assaults needed to root the British out of their strong points. Attacks were still carried out, but it wasn’t the all-out storming of positions that would overwhelm the Paras from all sides kind of attack the British were expecting. As a result, the British pocket remained virtually unchanged and the Paras continued to hold. So, the battle had shifted in the last couple of days. Frost’s men fought on until the very end. The Poles had landed, causing the Germans to move reinforcements south, perhaps saving 1st Airborne from annihilation. XXX Corps had problems linking up with the Poles, especially since Hell’s Highway had been cut near Veghel. And with the loss of the Heveadorp Ferry, it now seemed unlikely that the Allies could still achieve a victory. If you were Urquhart, and you had the choice of choosing the Polish landing zone, where would you drop them? Would you choose Driel? Would you land them south of Arnhem, or would you land them somewhere on the North side of the Rhine to support 1st Airborne? Let me know in the comments below. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16379. Episode 6 - Day 5 and 6 - Total Victory was now out of the question. But the tanks had to get to Oosterbeek where 1st Airborne were besieged in a pocket - what the Germans called the “Hexenkessel” - or witches cauldron. Over the next two days, the British race north from Nijmegen to get to the paratroopers and the Germans race south from Arnhem to stop them. If the British get to Oosterbeek, and if they can get reinforcements across the river, there was still a chance they could claw their way to victory. Intro graphic Last time, we saw Frost’s perimeter shrink to a few houses, while Frost himself is taken prisoner. 1st Airborne was forced back into Oosterbeek to form some sort of defence. 3rd Battalion of the 504th heroically crossed the Waal and took the north side of Nijmegen bridge as tanks of XXX Corps crossed the span. German resistance continued in Nijmegen though for several more hours, preventing the British from striking north. And the 101st held against a second surprise attack from Panzer Brigade 107. In this episode I’m going to cover two days, the 21st of September and the 22nd. Let’s start with the 21st, a Thursday, Day 5 of Operation Market Garden. At Arnhem bridge, the last gasps of 2nd Battalion could be heard as they held on in the hope of relief… but it was all in vein. Organised British resistance collapsed sometime in the morning of the 21st of September. Although it’s worth mentioning that some lone British paratroopers continued to fight on until the 23rd. Arnhem was now totally within German hands. The last radio message from the bridge, picked up by Germans and not by any Allied unit, read [Out of Ammunition. God Save the King.] Frost’s men were finally overwhelmed at Arnhem and the Germans had access to Arnhem bridge and the road south. With the loss of Arnhem Bridge, total victory for the Allies was now impossible, but they still had a chance to get to the British at Oosterbeek and get a bridge across the Rhine. At least, that is what Urquhart hoped. Around 3,600 paratroopers held the newly formed perimeter at Oosterbeek. The important point to note at this time is that the Heveadorp ferry area was still within British hands. Unfortunately, the ferry itself had been sunk the day before, just in case it fell into German hands, but the area was the best place near Oosterbeek to maybe form a bailey bridge since there were roads close to the river. Holding onto this area was therefore the last chance for victory. It fell to a handful of men from 1st Border to keep Heveadorp in British hands. At around 08:00, the Germans attacked from all sides of the Oosterbeek perimeter. They used assault guns and tanks to support their infantry assaults, but there was an unexpected stiffness to the British defences. Unlike in the previous days actions, the British had a lot of troops in a very small mostly wooded or urban area, and they were defending. This gave them an advantage they hadn’t had in the past. 9th SS, championed by units like Kampfgruppe Spindler, attacked from the east. German snipers did manage to infiltrate the British positions, since there weren’t enough British to form a solid defensive line. These snipers took their toll, but the British resisted strongly. They took out some of the German tanks, or forced them back with heavy AT fire. They even managed to capture a Sturmgeschütz assault gun from the Germans, but couldn’t figure out how to use it, so had to abandon it. However, 10th Battalion were decimated in the center during the day’s action with only a handful of men able to fall back. Despite this loss, the Germans maybe gained a couple hundred meters of ground the entire day. In the west, Von Tettau’s untrained troops also made little progress against the tight British defence, with British sniper fire now taking a heavy toll on the Germans. However the Heveadorp ferry area was captured by the Germans after a heavy fight, and with it, the last chance of Operation Market Garden succeeding. British supplies were once again dropping behind enemy lines. The Paras set up all manner of signals on the ground to try and sway the RAF to drop supplies to them, but they failed. The RAF were now suffering heavy losses, resupplying their enemy, who were then using those supplies to fight the Paras who the supplies were meant to be for. But the good news for 1st Airborne was that, today, contact was finally made with XXX Corp. And XXX Corps had artillery, which the belligerent paratroopers called on to stall the Germans. Steel rain blunted several German attacks, and the Germans thought their artillery was firing short, so they tried firing flares to stop their own artillery firing. Nope, it was British artillery, and this would be a big reason for why the British would continue to hold out at Oosterbeek over the next few days. Like at Nijmegen, artillery was useful in preventing attacks from forming, and when the British paras saw an attack forming, they’d simply call in artillery to disrupt the German attacks. More good news for 1st Airborne came in the afternoon. At 17:00 a new armada covered the skies. The Polish Independent Parachute Brigade descended from the heavens. Now, weather in England had delayed the Poles from setting off. They’d were originally meant to be dropped two days earlier, on Day 3 of the Operation, and they were supposed to drop near Arnhem. But the situation had changed dramatically since then, so Urquhart changed the plan at the last minute to drop the Poles north of Driel, which was south of the Rhine and south of the Oosterbeek Cauldron. Their task was to support 1st Airborne as best they could, and if possible, get men and supplies across the Rhine. It was also to guard the approaches to the river so XXX Corps could maybe attempt a crossing. However, things went wrong for the Poles right from the start. A portion of the Brigade didn’t take off from England. And whilst the Allies may have had air superiority over most of Europe, they did not over this battlefield. You see, in previous months, the RAF and US Air Force had dominated the skies, disrupting German movements and logistics, and bombed German ground units at the request of Allied units. But because the US Air Force feared mixing fighters with transport planes, there were little to no air support available for the Allied units during Operation Market Garden. As a result, the German Luftwaffe was able to hunt down a portion of the American planes taking the Poles to their destination. General Urquhart was of the opinion after the war that the lack of air support was a deciding factor in this battle. Once the Poles reached Driel and parachuted to their destination, they realised two things. One - only around a thousand men, perhaps less, of their entire Brigade had made it. And two - that the British at Oosterbeek had lost the area around the Heveadorp Ferry. This threw off the original plan to have the Poles support XXX Corps in crossing the Rhine. Their only hope now was to try and assist 1st Airborne as best they could, and maybe get troops across the river to them.
    1
  16380. Panzer Brigade 107 achieved complete surprise by attacking the exact same way they’d done the day before. You see, the Germans never attacked in the same place twice. It just wasn’t done. In theory, if you attacked the same place twice, the enemy will be prepared. That was why the Germans never did it, but that’s exactly why they did it this day, to throw the Americans off guard. And they did. It wasn’t long before they dominated the bailey bridge with fire once more. However, in the nick of time, 10 British tanks appeared and managed to destroy four more German tanks and turn the tide of the battle in their favour. Unable to take the bridge, Panzer Brigade 107 withdrew. It had once again been close to cutting the Allied corridor, but this wasn’t the only attack on the corridor this day. 406th Division which had attacked out of the Reichswald forest near Groesbeek two days ago was finally reinforced. Fallschirmjaeger, German paratroopers, perhaps a few hundred strong, joined the already weak 406th Division and now formed three Kampfgruppen. Kampfgruppe Becker with perhaps 800 men would strike Groesbeek on the Northern end of the battlefield and aim to take the Maas-Waal canal. Kampfgruppe Greschick with maybe 500 men, attacked Groesbeek’s center. And Kampfgruppe Hermann was positioned in the south and would hope to strike through Mook and cut off the bridges on the Maas-Waal canal. Starting in the morning, by 11:00 the battle raged for the Groesbeek Heights. Beek, Wyler, and Mook fell quickly, and Kampfgruppe Greschick’s unit managed to take some of the outskirts of Groesbeek itself. But an American counterattack in the afternoon, supported by British tanks forced the Germans back from Mook and Groesbeek, and the attack in the north was halted. This was the first serious attack on the Groesbeek Heights so far. It was four days after the Operation had begun, and well after XXX Corps had arrived, but at least the 82nd had four days to prepare themselves for the fight. It was only now, at the extreme north of the battlefield, that Urquhart came to the conclusion that he had to abandon the idea of relieving Frost at the Bridge. To use his own words… [...with the weak force now left, I could no more hope to reach Frost than reach Berlin.] Later in the same day he finally made contact with Frost over the radio. Urquhart told him he wasn’t certain [if it was a case of me coming for them or they coming for us.] And so with the British 1st Airborne Division abandoning all hope of getting the Frost’s beleaguered troops at Arnhem bridge, they instead had to look to their own defence. The previous days action had seen their attacking force in Arnhem decimated by the Germans. 1st Parachute Brigade no longer existed and the remnants of several Battalions fell back into Oosterbeek. The landing zones were overrun and supplies were dropping to the Germans rather than to themselves, and German tanks were pressing upon their lines. Urquhart decided the remaining units should fall back to positions immediately around Oosterbeek. He had to form a defense quickly before the remainder of the Division was wiped out. Throughout the day, Urquhart tried to salvage what was left of the original Market Garden plan. If he could no longer get to Arnhem Bridge, he would hold Oosterbeek and hopefully keep a crossing point open for XXX Corps. It was a desperate plan, but it might just work. The casualty list for 1st Airborne was staggering. It was no longer a division but a few stragglers and small groups falling back to Oosterbeek. But if they could hold on to Oosterbeek, and the Heveadorp Ferry, a bailey bridge could be set up across the Rhine and victory could still be clawed from the jaws of defeat. With that in mind, he told Corps HQ to change the Polish drop zone to Driel, near to the southern end of the ferry. If the Polish held the southern end of the river, and the rest of 1st Airborne held the northern end, there was a chance XXX Corps could still cross the Rhine. It was a desperate plan, but a plan it was. To the East, Kampfgruppe Spindler crossed the railway lines and reached the east of Oosterbeek. To the west, von Tettau’s Kampfgruppe pushed the British back from their drop zones and took Wolfheze. 4th Brigade of the British paras did manage to stall the attacks for a time, mauling part of Krafft’s attack, and even counter attacked, despite their orders saying to retreat. Hackett fought alongside his men, brandishing a German gun, trying desperately to get him men back towards Oosterbeek. During the confused fighting in the woods, there was no real front line as such, just groups of units moving around, ambushing and sniping at each other. Towards the evening, Hackett’s remnants fell back to Oosterbeek and recognisable lines were finally formed. Both sides took sizable losses in the day’s fighting, and this is perhaps the reason why von Tettau decided not to deliver a coup de grace and destroy the British pocket completely now as they retreated, which some historians think may have been possible. Either way, by the evening of the 20th, the British pocket was formed at Oosterbeek, and the fluid movement of the past few days ended. The siege had begun. This was 1st Airborne’s disposition at the end of the Day, 20th September 1944. 10th and 156 Battalions, who had fought their way back into Oosterbeek from the West during the day were now guarding the Eastern side of Oosterbeek that evening. This was because 1st, 3rd and 11th Battalions were so badly mauled, they were merely scraps of the units they once were. Lieutenant-Colonel Thompson took command of this force, which was nicknamed the Thompson Force. But Thompson was later wounded and from the 21st onwards (tomorrow), Major Lonsdale took command of this battlegroup, which for the sake of simplicity we will now refer to as the Lonsdale Force. 21st Independent Parachute Company, together with the 7th Battalion King’s Own Scottish Borderers, held the Northern end of Oosterbeek around Hotel Dreyeroord, a building soon nicknamed as the White House. 9th Airborne Field Company and 1st Border held the Western side of Oosterbeek. Inside this ring were Glider pilots who fought alongside the troops, the Royal Artillery, which was located towards the southern end of the pocket, and Divisional Headquarters which was located at the Hartenstein Hotel. Little more than three thousand six hundred men remained of 1st Airborne Division, and supplies of all kinds were running low. But Urquhart had successfully created a defence around Oosterbeek, even though it wasn’t a complete ring and was more groups of soldiers dug in at strong points. Frost’s position was now perilous. Movement was almost impossible and the few buildings they had left on the western side of the Arnhem bridge ramp were surrounded. Truces allowed the defenders to evacuate their wounded, which included their leader, Frost himself. They’d run out of everything, food, water and ammunition. In fact, the Germans were also low on ammunition, with many of them resorting to using captured British rifles and Sten guns, as their own logistics struggled to keep up. The shortcomings of German supply were alleviated by the Allied resupply drops which, as we mentioned, were falling into German hands. The Germans blasted the British houses at the Bridge at point blank range. They had Tiger tanks at hand, including the latest shipment of Konigstiger, or King Tiger tanks. The lightly armed paratroopers had no effective countermeasures against these heavy German tanks. Luckily, rubble prevented German vehicles from maneuvering with ease. But this only slowed the inevitable. There were only a few buildings left now, and many of them were on fire. So at 19:10, the British and Americans took the Nijmegen bridge. But it would take all night to clear Nijmegen so that they could continue their northern attack. As this day comes to an end, we see the end of two sieges. Arnhem bridge, and Nijmegen. Elements of 2 Para continued to hold, just, but they had no influence now over the bridge itself. For both sides it was now a race to engage each other in the area between Nijmegen and Arnhem. An area known as The Island. We’ll find out how that race goes tomorrow. If you could rate the video and let me know how I’m doing, that would be great! Otherwise, thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16381. Episode 5 - Day 4 - Two Last Stands The Mad Colonel. That’s what the Germans nicknamed John Frost who still clung on to a handful of buildings at Arnhem bridge. Frost’s men fought desperately with their ammunition running out and the houses collapsing and burning around them. Where was XXX Corps? Where were the tanks? They were 8 miles to the south fighting against the 10th SS Panzer Division, who were clinging on to the bridge at Nijmegen. Both Frost and 10th SS Panzer would fight two mirrored last stands as the outcome of Operation Market Garden hung in the balance. Who would fall first? Intro graphic. Yesterday was truly a dark and fateful day. The British forces trying to get to Frost’s men at Arnhem were almost wiped out having been caught in a crossfire. The rest of 1st Airborne were pushed off their landing zones as General Urquhart, now back in charge of the Division, tried to form a coherent defence. XXX Corps had reached Nijmegen making up for lost time, but were stopped as the 82nd had failed to take Nijmegen bridge. The Germans at Nijmegen were now under siege, but held on, despite Allied attempts to break through. The 101st had helped build a bailey bridge at Son in the morning but fought to hold it in the evening against Panther tanks of Panzer Brigade 107. It was now the 20th of September, a Wednesday. Day 4 of Operation Market Garden. The tanks should have reached Arnhem yesterday, but they hadn’t. XXX Corps was still 8 miles from Arnhem, and Nijmegen bridge was still in German hands. But if they could break through now, there was a chance of victory, even at this late stage. 10th SS Panzer Division held onto Nijmegen and the bridge with perhaps 500 men, backed by assault guns, 88mm guns, mortars and artillery. When the British set up for an attack, artillery rained down on them and stopped them in their tracks, just like the day before. Attempt after attempt was made to smash the German defenders, but Kampfgruppe Henke and Euling, under the command of Kampfgruppe Reinhold, fought them off. The stiffness of the German defence in Nijmegen throughout the day didn’t seem to be weakening. So the Allies decided that only desperate action would save the day. At 15:00 in the afternoon, Shermans blasted the opposite side of the Waal as Major Cook’s 3rd Battalion paddled in boats across the river. This was perhaps one of the most heroic and daring acts in World War 2, as American paratroopers stormed across a river in boats, assaulted a river bank like marines… which they weren’t trained for… to take the Nijmegen bridge from the other side. Unbelievably, under a hail of rifle, machine gun and mortar fire, half the boats made it to the North bank. As the boats turned back to pick up the next wave of troops, the American paratroopers overwhelmed the old men and young boys who’d been killing them moments before. This was a decisive tactical victory for the Allies which unhinged the German defence completely. The Germans had nothing left. There were so few units to form a defensive line that the Americans, supported by British sappers, were able to secure their beachhead and press on towards the northern end of Nijmegen bridge. Yes, you don’t hear that often, but the American paratroopers were accompanied by British sappers… the crossing was a joint effort. They managed to get to the Northern end of the Nijmegen Bridge, and as they did, four sherman tanks from the British Grenadier Guards attacked from the south. The tanks moved across the span of the bridge, killing the Germans in the girders. Just to point out another myth of this battle, the Germans in the girders were most likely engineers, not snipers as often described. They were perhaps trying to rig the bridge to blow, but nobody’s quite sure, but after the war, Harmel was convinced there weren’t snipers on the bridge. Either way, it was at this point that SS Colonel Harmel decided to blow the road bridge. His orders from Field Marshal Model were to keep the Road bridge intact, so Germany could launch counter.attacks in the future. This was an unrealistic eventuality since Germany had little offensive capability left, and Harmel understood that if he blew the bridge now, it would prevent the Allies from getting to Arnhem. As the British Sherman tanks crossed the bridge, he ordered the bridge be blown, but by some miracle, the explosives failed to go off. Lucky though the British were that the bridge was now in their hands, they were unable to advance. The four tanks they had on the other side of the Waal were alone. The few American paratroopers they had with them weren’t willing or able to advance with them. It’s often been said that an American paratrooper became angry at the British tankers for not advancing with them to Arnhem. This is fiction. Another myth of the battle made up after the event. In fact, the American paratroopers may have even left the tanks at the bridge to go fight Germans elsewhere. What is certain, is that the handful of American paratroopers who’d linked up with the tanks were too few in number to go on and in any event were in no position to take orders from the British. Their orders were to hold the other side of the bridge and it was down to the British to advance. Unfortunately without infantry support, the British tanks would be unable to advance. So where were the British infantry? XXX Corps has often been accused of being too slow after the capture of Nijmegen bridge. But the reality was that the British infantry and tanks were still fighting against the Germans who held on at Nijmegen. They couldn’t just leave a good portion of 10th SS Panzer Division there sitting in their rear, they had to fight on. Some of the German defenders, seeing the successful amphibious assault, decided to flee across the railway bridge, with around 250 dying on the bridge itself. The Germans lost control of the Nijmegen railway bridge but fighting continued in the city. Artillery fire rained down on the British, preventing them from overwhelming the last pockets of resistance. Holding on for a few more hours, the Germans finally realised their position was hopeless. Some once again tried to flee across the bridges, now in enemy hands. Others, such as the survivors of Kampfgruppe Euling, who’d held onto Hunner park, managed to slip under the Nijmegen road bridge and escape to the east. The British wouldn’t clear the last elements of resistance from Nijmegen until the early hours of the next day. It wasn’t until Nijmegen was secure that the British infantry and the rest of XXX Corps could have continued their advance to Arnhem. So why was it that at the time, and after the war, XXX Corps was accused of being so slow? Why were they accused of drinking tea on the Northern end of Nijmegen Bridge whilst their comrades at Arnhem were left to bleed? We’ll come back to that question in the last episode of this series, but I’d love to hear your opinions in the comments below. As the fighting came to ahead in Nijmegen, things further to the south weren’t easy either. As the morning mist cleared at Son, the Americans guarding the bailey bridge that had been built on the previous night could be forgiven for thinking they’d done their part. The day before, they’d stopped a German counter-attack which had nearly got to the bridge, and could be satisfied that they’d completely secured the line. They were wrong.
    1
  16382. But the difference between the Germans at Nijmegen and Frost at Arnhem was was 2nd Battalion was potentially about to get reinforced from the West. 1st, 3rd, 4th and 11th Battalions, supported by the South Staffords and elements of 2nd Battalion who hadn’t made it to the bridge now attempted to break through to Frost. Dobie’s 1st Battalion and half the South Staffords went forwards first, supported by 3rd Battalion who went in beside them. They cleared a few light defenses where the Germans had had their main line the day before. But then everything went wrong. The Germans of Kampfgruppe Spindler had pulled back slightly from the previous day’s positions - which did have the benefit of allowing Urquhart to escape his prison and make his way back to Divisional HQ - but it also meant the Germans now outflanked the British on all sides. And this wasn’t eyes and ears battalions, this was the 9th SS Panzer Division, armed with tanks, artillery and self-propelled guns. Some occupied the route ahead, others occupied the ridge to the north, and more were positioned across the river in the brickworks to the south. The lightly armed British paratroopers, backed up by little artillery, no air support or tanks and exhausted on their third day of fighting, were hopelessly caught in a crossfire. The 1st and 3rd Battalion were pinned down by German fire and by 06:30, after only two hours, the attack was over. Those that survived were either wounded or ran out of ammunition and were forced to surrender in the next hour or so. The 140 men of 3rd Battalion had been more or less wiped out. 1st Battalion and the first half of the South Staffords suffered much the same fate. The second half of the South Staffords now went in, but found themselves facing German tanks and self propelled guns near the museum. Pinned down and with no anti-tank guns, they had to rely on PIATs to try take out the tanks, but by 11:30 they’d also run out of PIAT anti-tank rounds. The Germans now counter-attacked and overwhelmed the South Staffords, who were forced to pull back through 11th Battalion’s positions. 11th Battalion, commanded by Lea, had been ordered by Urquhart to wait. He wasn’t happy that attacks were going in piecemeal. As the South Staffords fell back, 11th Battalion was ordered to take the high ground north of the railway line, hopefully so they could mount a fresh attack later. But this took time to prepare, and as they were setting up, the Germans attacked. Mortars rained down on them and tanks appeared. The 11th was in the open preparing to advance. Caught off guard by the Germans and in a hopeless situation, the Battalion basically evaporated. Lea was taken prisoner and maybe 150 men got away, the rest were either killed or taken prisoner. The last attempt to break through to Frost at the bridge had failed with huge losses to the British. 1st Brigade had been torn to pieces and now, in the early afternoon, the situation at Divisional HQ in Oosterbeek looked bleak. The Germans were attacking into Oosterbeek from the East and the landing zones could no longer be held. This was the day that the first of the RAF resupply drops fell into enemy hands. 1st Airborne did receive some reinforcements from a Polish Glider unit landing at Landing Zone “L”. Unfortunately, this went disastrously wrong for the Polish as they landed on top of 10 Para Battalion as they retreated south near Wolfheze. The Polish were quite-literally shot out of the sky and this didn’t help 10 Para’s retreat. Chaos and confusion reigned, and Krafft was able to push the British 10th and 156 Battalions (both now down to around 250 men each) and the surviving Poles beyond the railway line. Urquhart desperately tried to organise a defence as the light faded. He would later refer to the 19th as “a dark and fateful day”. At Arnhem, everything was going wrong. Remember that bailey bridge at Son? You know, the one built overnight? It had been incredibly important in the days events, allowing British tanks to roll on to Nijmegen. At 17:15 as the American paratroopers sat in their positions in and around Son watching British trucks drive across the bridge... the Son church tower exploded. Falling debris startled the Americans as more explosions erupted from the schoolhouse. General Taylor came out the schoolhouse to see enemy infantry and Panther tanks approaching from the south. Panzer Brigade 107 had arrived. General Student had brought Panzer Brigade 107 up from Helmond and it was now just yards from the newly built bailey bridge at Son. A British truck was hit as it crossed the bridge. It exploded and sent flames over the span and into the canal. The Americans reacted to the attack as best they could and even managed to destroy two Panthers. One was knocked out in sight of the bailey bridge as you can see here. Fighting continued as darkness fell, and only after the attack bogged down did Panzer Brigade 107 withdraw. Two tanks had been knocked out, but they had almost succeeded in severing the supply line to the rest of XXX Corps… and they weren’t defeated yet. If we compare the situation at the beginning of day 3 to the end of day 3, things had changed. XXX Corps wasn’t at Arnhem as expected, instead they were fighting a house-to-house battle for the city and bridge at Nijmegen. The 101st at Son had built a bailey bridge in the morning and only just managed to prevent it from falling into German hands in the evening. And the last attempt to get to Frost had failed. Now the British around Oosterbeek were in a desperate state as the Germans closed in on all sides. Frost still clung onto Arnhem bridge though. There was still a chance of victory... for both sides. Everything was now at stake. Who would fall first, the British at Arnhem or the Germans at Nijmegen? Tomorrow would be the last chance to get to Frost at Arnhem, and it would require a lot more fight and a daring feat of bravery from the soldiers of the 82nd Airborne. The 19th was truly a dark and fateful day. A turning point. But do you think victory could still have been achieved at this point? Or was it already too late? And guys, if you have any questions about this battle, comment below and I’ll get back to you as soon as I can. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16383. Episode 4 - Day 3 - “A Dark and Fateful Day” - Urquhart If everything goes to plan, you’ll be relieved in two days. If not two, then three days. Well, this was the day that British tanks were meant to be rolling over Arnhem bridge. And when we left yesterday, almost everything seemed to be going great for Operation Market Garden. Every bridge along the route except one was in Allied hands, and although the British tanks were still fifty miles to the south at Son, by the morning of Day 3 the bailey bridge was finished. The road ahead looked clear. The question is, would they make it? Intro graphic Yesterday we saw stalled attempts made by 1st Airborne to get to Frosts troops at the bridge, whilst Frost himself and 2nd Battalion continued to hold on. Ammunition and food supplies were running low, so relief was desperately needed now. The 82nd had destroyed the German attack from the Reichswald, for only a handful of losses, but only made token attempts to take the Nijmegen bridge. Nijmegen was now a German fortress. The 101st continued to fight on all fronts, especially near Best, whilst building a bailey bridge at Son, since XXX Corps had finally arrived. The 19th of September was a Tuesday. It’s Day 3 of Operation Market Garden. The good news was that XXX Corps and the 101st had finished constructing the bailey bridge at Son and were able to advance. Up to this point, XXX Corps had gone 18 miles from their initial starting positions. This may seem slow, and it was, but they were about to make up for it. The tanks reached Veghel by half 7 in the morning, and by half eight, they’d covered another 14 miles, reaching the 82nd at Grave. In two hours, they’d advanced further than they’d gone in the previous two days, around 24 miles. 42 hours after starting the Operation they were now at Nijmegen and only about 8 miles from the British at Arnhem. There was a good chance that they’d reach the British in time. They still had an entire day left to go the final 8 miles to Arnhem. 8 miles. Except that the 82nd Airborne still hadn’t taken Nijmegen bridge… the only bridge not taken intact or not on the first day, and hadn’t been in Allied hands at all. Nijmegen bridge was now guarded by a lot of SS infantry, supported by self-propelled guns, 88mm guns, and artillery, and they’d had plenty of time, unopposed by the 82nd, to fortify Nijmegen city. For the past two days, most of the 82nd Airborne had sat on the Groesbeek Heights. There had been no attacks on Groesbeek on the first day. On the second day, a paper German “division” had been repulsed without too much trouble. And the Germans didn’t mount any serious attacks on the Heights the entire third day either. The American units dug in at Groesbeek along with Gavin and Browning had no impact on what was now becoming a hard fought house-to-house brawl for the city of Nijmegen and the southern end of the Nijmegen bridge. As British tanks and infantry moved towards Hunner park, they came into the sights of the German 88mm guns. Several tanks brewed up and the fighting began, and would rage on for hours, with little ground gained this day. Nijmegen was still in German hands. The Germans had two Kampfgruppen in the city under the overall control of Kampfgruppe Reinhold which was located at Lent, just north of Nijmegen. One, Kampfgruppe Euling, held Hunner Park and the Nijmegen Road Bridge, and the other, Kampfgruppe Henke, guarded the Nijmegen Rail Bridge. Euling only had around 100 men at his disposal backed by four assault guns. But they were veteran SS soldiers, supported by a much larger contingent of artillery than normal. SS-Lieutenant-Colonel Zonnenstahl had four oversized batteries at his disposal. Coupled with a unique way of delivering that artillery… by putting boxes on a map and naming or numbering them so it was easier for forces on the ground to call for artillery support… Zonnenstahl was able to bring down copious amounts of fire to stall Allied assaults. Harmel attributed the successful defence of Nijmegen to this artillery support, which allowed, over the course of the battle, the small force of SS troops to maintain their positions against a much larger attacking force. Nijmegen wouldn’t fall into Allied hands this day. But it’s ok, Frost was holding the bridge at Arnhem. Just. There were now two German Kampfgruppen surrounding him and they attacked on all sides. Kampfgruppe Brinkmann continued to attack from the East and Kampfgruppe Knaust, a heavier battlegroup, now attacked from the North. At the beginning of the day, 2 Para’s perimeter still consisted of 10 out of the original 18 houses they’d occupied on Day 1. But now, the Germans were receiving a steady stream of reinforcements. 88mm guns were brought up to pound the buildings, and two Tiger tanks managed to get through the wreck of vehicles on the bridge and cross from the southern side of the Rhine. Artillery fire from across the river, including Nebelwerfers, hammered the British positions. The battle was now fully in the German’s favour as more assault guns and Mark III and Mark IV tanks rolled from the East. 2 Para was being blasted out from its positions, one strong point at a time. But the Germans didn’t have it all their own way. Rubble blocked the streets, making it difficult for tanks to move up, and a few vehicles and tanks were knocked out in the fighting. The Paras were down to scraps of ammunition, yet they continued to resist. They did get some artillery support from 1st Airborne, which did result in the Germans turning their guns on the church spires thinking artillery spotters were in them, but this wasn’t the case. According to Urquhart, [Frost and Gough discussed the likelihood of Gough and his Recce boys scalding across the Bridge at last light to try and force a link with XXX Corps.] You know it’s desperate when the forces in need of relief are actually considering aiding the relieving forces. The idea was dropped, but the resistance continued, despite the fact that Frost had to order his men to stop sniping the Germans to conserve the little ammunition they had left. The British could now found it difficult move between the buildings as German machine guns would open up in the spaces between them. German infantry had to assault the British houses and literally drag the Paras out of their positions. It seemed a hopeless situation for the British, but they fought on, hoping that reinforcements would come from either 1st Airborne, or from the south. It’s worth noting that as long as 2nd Battalion continued to hold out in Arnhem, the Germans would have a difficult time reinforcing the 10th SS Panzer Division at Nijmegen. The Germans were relying on the Pannerden Canal to get their troops across the Rhine, but this was slow. What this meant was that the Germans at Nijmegen would receive no reinforcements until 2nd Battalion were defeated, and 2nd Battalion wouldn’t receive reinforcements until the Germans at Nijmegen were defeated too. Effectively, there were two sieges going on at the same time, and whichever cracked first would decide the fate of the entire battle. If German resistance collapsed at Nijmegen, the British would get to Frost and be over the Rhine. If Frost is defeated, German reinforcements would stream into Nijmegen and 1st Airborne would be doomed. There was still a chance for both sides to claim victory.
    1
  16384. So half the South Staffords went to Arnhem in the morning, taking a similar route as 1st Battalion and managed to catch up to 1st Battalion later in the day. And when the second lift did arrive, Brigadier Hicks informed his (technically) superior in rank Brigadier Hackett, that his 11th Battalion was being taken from him and sent off to reinforce the Arnhem relief attempt. The result : 11th Battalion sat for at least two hours - but perhaps longer - outside the Hartenstein Hotel as the two Brigadiers argued over how 11th Battalion should best be deployed. Hackett who wasn’t exactly pleased that his inferior was in charge of the Division, thought that the situation was at Arnhem was “untidy” and had not been informed until now that his own troops were being taken from him. Ultimately, 11th Battalion commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel George Lea, and the second half of the South Staffords managed to reach the west end of Arnhem by the closing hours of day 2. So the situation at Arnhem wasn’t great, but the good news was that a good portion of British paras were in the same area and about to launch an attack that would hopefully relieve Frost at the Bridge. That attack though would go in tomorrow. Further to the south, the 101st were now battling against several German units. The previous day had seen only minor skirmishes, but now, Student was able to pull in new units and start counter-attacking. Student, as you may remember, was the leader of the German paratroopers, the Fallschirmjager, and quote “I knew more than anybody else that an airborne landing is at its weakest in the first few hours, and must be sorted out quickly and determinedly.” He therefore threw units at the 101st, even though most were of poor quality, simply because he wanted to hit the Americans early. At this point, his men were trainee Fallschirmjaeger and police units, but he knew that the 15th Army was arriving from across the Scheldt. Starting on the evening of the first day, but really got going on the 18th, Kampfgruppe Rink, the 59th Infantry Division, and the Fallschirmjaeger Battalion Ewald, all struck against the elite American paratroopers. Luckily for the Allies, the attacks went in piecemeal and were therefore beaten back, having little impact overall on this day. But, Student was able to start pulling in the 107th Panzer Brigade from Helmond. This was an entirely different kettle of fish. Armed with deadly Panther medium tanks and Panzergrenadier infantry, this force could overcome the lightly armed American paratroopers. However, it could only move by night for fear of Allied air attack, so Student would have to wait until tomorrow - Day 3 - to use them. In the middle at Nijmegen, the 82nd successfully held the Groesbeek Heights overnight against… no German attacks. But on the morning of the 18th the Germans sent in the 406th Division to take the Heights. Except the day before, this division was a division only on paper. It consisted of a HQ unit and a few training units. By the 18th, General Scherbening had cobbled together some inexperienced Luftwaffe, eyes and ears and artillery units and called it a “Division”. In reality it was was little more than four Battalions in strength, and may have been weaker than that. What is certain, is that they had few heavy weapons and many of the soldiers had no practical infantry training at all. Early on the 18th, this force attacked the elite American paratroopers dug in on the Groesbeek Heights, and somehow managed to take some of the drop zones, killing... wait for it... 11 Americans and wounding some more. But at 1 o’clock, the second wave of American paratroopers dropped from the skies and coupled with an attack by the paratroopers already on the ground, the German units were routed from the field, with the loss of a 1000 men killed or captured. This was the only serious attack on Groesbeek in the first few days of the Operation and it had ended in disaster for the Germans. A little to the North, a German engineer battalion of the 10th SS was now running a ferry across the Pannerden canal. Progress was slow, but units were steadily getting across and marching to Nijmegen. Kampfgruppe Henke occupied positions in and around Hunnerpark, and was now being reinforced by half tracks and more infantry who came across the Waal on dinghies, rather than face fire if they tried to cross the bridge. German forces found themselves winning, as Gavin had pulled back some of the paratroopers to help out at Groesbeek. There was now a lull in the fighting! The Germans gathered more forces and Kampfgruppe Reinhold took up Henke’s old positions as Kampfgruppe Henke now moved to secure the nearby railway bridge, which at this point, hadn’t seen any action at all. Reinhold dug trenches, almost completely unopposed by the 82nd, 88mm guns were positioned across the river and armoured vehicles moved into the city. Mines were laid, buildings that were in the way of their defensive plans were demolished. The center of Nijmegen was now fully in German hands and they had the entire day to fortify it. It’s worth noting at this point that as Day 2 comes to a close, the situation across most of the battlefield is stable and in Allied control. XXX Corps had reached the 101st and would soon have the bailey bridge up and running. The 82nd had successfully held the Groesbeek Heights against a German division that hadn’t existed the day before and barely existed even now. And at Arnhem, though the British hadn’t got many troops to the Bridge, Frosts men were dug in and potentially, could be reinforced by the large force of British paras who were only 800 yards from them. And yet there was one vital piece of the puzzle that needed to be grasped. Nijmegen, the only bridge on Day 2 that still hadn’t been secure at any point so far. But Nijmegen city was now a fortress, garrisoned by an ever growing number of elite German SS Panzergrenadiers. 82nd Airborne had failed to take this crucial objective and as Day 2 comes to a close and even after additional reinforcements to the 82nd, no effort was being made to correct this issue. The Germans at Nijmegen now blocked the road to Arnhem. Think about it: If the Allies don’t take Nijmegen Bridge soon, 1st Airborne would be isolated and potentially crushed. Without Nijmegen, there could be no Arnhem, and the whole Operation, would be doomed. If the 82nd had taken Nijmegen and the bridge there rather than concentrating on taking the Groesbeek Heights, how would things have played out? Would it have been better or worse than the situation we have now? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16385. Episode 3 - Day 2 - A Bridge Too Few At 09:00 hours on Monday the 18th September 1944, SS Captain Viktor Graebner, commander of the 9th SS Reconnaissance Battalion, drives his force across Arnhem Road Bridge from the south. Perhaps thinking he could surprise and shock the British paras into surrender, his half tracks and puma armoured cars rumbled into view of 2 Para’s positions. Graebner’s newly earned Knights Cross reminded him that such tactics had worked before, but sadly, wouldn’t work this time. Intro graphic Yesterday, we saw how the initial landings had gone smoothly, but then several things had gone wrong. Frost’s men had failed to take the Arnhem Rail bridge but had reached the Arnhem Road Bridge whilst the rest of the Division floundered around Oosterbeek. The 82nd had taken most of the bridges except the vital Nijmegen Bridge, and were busy pounding the Reichswald. The 101st had taken most of their objectives except for the bridges at Best and Son, both of which were destroyed. But they held the area around Son and could put a bailey bridge across the canal once XXX Corps had arrived. And XXX Corps had fought hard to break through the German crust, which had been thicker than imagined. They still hadn’t reached Eindhoven by days end and they were now behind schedule. But Day 2 was now upon them, and it started with a bang as Graebner’s reconnaissance battalion headed north across the Arnhem Road bridge. He’d left some Self-Propelled guns at Nijmegen to help defend there and raced north to Arnhem, thinking only a handful of British paras held the north end of the bridge. He believed a quick attack across the bridge could dislodge the British from their positions. Remember, no one knew how many British there were, and Graebner thought he was facing a force smaller than his. Not true. His battalion, consisting of half-tracks, armoured cars and trucks carrying infantry, drives across the bridge. Some of Graebner’s vehicles actually make it all the way across. Things look good, until one vehicle strikes a British anti-tank mine, and all hell breaks loose. Concentrated rifle and machine gun fire from both flanks riddled the open half tracks, killing crew and passengers alike. Mortar fire rained down on the Germans, and grenades were lobbed into the open hatches of the armoured cars. Chaos and confusion disrupted the attack, and Graebner was killed. More vehicles tried in vain to continue to advance, feeding the defeat, and it wasn’t until midday that the fighting finally came to an end. In two hours, 12 vehicles out of the 22 that had took part in the attack, burned on the bridge, and the largest concentration of armoured vehicles in 9th SS Panzer Division had been cut to pieces. What this represented was an important change in the battlefield. Day 1 had been about movement, capturing objectives quickly by surprise, but now the fronts were beginning to solidify. Fluid and daring maneuvers gave way to positional warfare. Foxholes were dug. Lines were forming. Positions were taken and fortified. Rapid attacks weren’t going to bring about victory. The moment had passed for decisive attacks, it was now going to be an attritional infantry slog. Frosts men at the bridge had fought off Graebner’s attack, but were not in the best situation. These are the buildings which they had fortified. Surrounded by Germans and now short of ammunition, they hoped either 1st Airborne or XXX Corps would reach them soon. They had to reach them soon. But by this point, XXX Corps hadn’t even reached the 101st American Airborne Division at Eindhoven, fifty miles to the South of Arnhem. They had a bridge to rebuild at Son, the bridge at Nijmegen to take, and time was ticking down. The Germans were now counter-attacking positions of the 101st, and by the end of the day, had retaken the bridges at Best and the Wilhelmina Canal. XXX Corps would reach the 101st at Eindhoven by 12:30 and would get to Son in the early evening, where they found the destroyed bridge. They began to construct the bailey bridge that would allow them to continue their advance to Arnhem. However, the bailey bridge wouldn’t be finished this day, with the result that XXX Corps was now behind schedule. Equally as concerning, 1st Airborne Division were still miles to the West of Arnhem and desperately trying to break through to 2nd Battalion at the Bridge. Before dawn, Fitch’s 3rd Battalion (accompanied by General Urquhart) moved from Oosterbeek and gained a mile and a half of ground without much opposition. However, as they reached the Western suburbs of Arnhem they were blocked by Kampfgruppe Spindler. It was at this point that General Urquhart, himself confused in the street fighting and trying to go back towards Oosterbeek, ended up trapped in a house in Western Arnhem. A self-propelled gun parked itself outside his position, leaving the whole of 1st Airborne Division without their leader. Sat with him was Lathbury, who was in charge of 1st Parachute Brigade (the units that were fighting towards the bridge). Without leadership to organise the attacks, the battalions fighting towards the bridge struggled to make headway. For the rest of the day, 3rd Battalion were pinned down in the street fighting on the outskirts of Arnhem, making little progress. By the days end, only around 140 men of 3rd Battalion were left. Further back, 1st Battalion had marched through the night and now were in Oosterbeek. Their commander, Dobie, was not in contact with 3rd Battalion and assumed they too had gone on ahead to the bridge. He therefore attempted to march straight to Arnhem. His troops had reached the railway embankment at around 05:30, but suffered casualties. Knowing that his unit would be useless if it didn’t get to its objective in one piece, he decided to avoid fighting and turned south. He linked up with stragglers from 3rd Battalion and by about 08:00 they had passed the railway line. But were then fired upon by Germans in nearby houses and armoured vehicles at Den Brink. There was now no other option but to fight their way forwards, 1st Battalion (with elements of 3rd Battalion) fought through sniper and machine gun fire to clear out the buildings between them and the rest of 3rd Battalion. But by late afternoon, the exhausted paras had only just caught up with the remnants of 3rd Battalion. Despite advanced elements being only around 800 yards from the bridge, they would go no further that day. Back at 1st Airborne Headquarters at the Hartenstein hotel, things were looking little better. Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Mackenzie now informed Brigadier Hicks that he was now in charge of 1st Airborne, since Urquhart had disappeared. Urquhart had issued orders that in the event that himself and Lathbury (who was sat in the same house Urquhart was) were lost, that Hicks would be next in line, and then if Hicks was lost, then Brigadier Hackett would be in command. So Hicks, hearing reports that 1st and 3rd Battalion were struggling to get to Frost at the bridge, decided to send the South Staffords and 11th Battalion of Hackett’s Brigade to help them - as soon as the second airlift arrived. Remember, not all of 1st Airborne had gone in on the first day - 11th Battalion hadn’t arrived yet, and half the South Staffords hadn’t arrived either. A good chunk of 1st Airborne had had to guard the landing zones for the reinforcements that were expected… now, but those reinforcements were delayed for 4 hours. It wasn’t until the afternoon that the second lift arrived.
    1
  16386. In all, around 750 men reached the Road Bridge at Arnhem. Almost all of 2nd Battalion, a 45 man unit from 3rd Battalion, Brigade Headquarters as well as a few more men from other smaller units had made it. They had with them only limited stocks of food and ammunition. They’d gone unnoticed by the twenty or so Germans manning the pillbox on the bridge, and a couple of attempts to knock it out failed, until a 6-pounder and a flamethrower were brought up. Missing the bunker, the flamethrower hit the ammunition and petrol storage hut behind it and a large explosion covered the bridge in flame that would burn throughout the night. Later, a convoy of German lorries carrying ammunition supplies attempted to cross the burning bridge. Yes, the flames exploded the ammunition they carried and this only added to the inferno. Another convoy (a V-2 rocket unit) was also ambushed on the Arnhem side, and several men taken prisoner, although the British didn’t realise they were V-2 rocket operators, which meant the V-2 rocket operators survived the battle. But overall, part of the British paratroop force had reached their objective and now just had to wait for relief by XXX Corps. So where were the tanks? XXX Corps had to go thirteen miles between their start point and the city of Eindhoven. Between Eindhoven and them was the German front-line. After an artillery barrage, the lead tanks had moved barely 30 minutes before ...quote... all hell broke lose. German infantry and guns hit them from the woods on either side of the road, brewing-up nine tanks in the immediate ambush. The British deployed infantry and Typhoons from the RAF to deal with the Germans, and the infantry went in to clear the enemy positions, finally allowing XXX Corps to continue. By this point, the Germans were reacting to the attack, sending in five battalions to try halt the advance. The whole day was spent fighting one new regiment after another that British intelligence officers were surprised even existed. And by the end of the day, XXX Corps had gone only eight miles from their starting point. There were another fifty-six miles to Arnhem, a bridge at Son to rebuild, and still many more Germans between them. At least all the bridges were taken on Day One, and those that weren’t could be rebuilt. Oh, except for one. Nijmegen bridge was still in enemy hands and the 82nd Airborne had yet to make an attack on it. Finally, at 8pm, Warren was able to send two rifle companies from 1st Battalion towards the bridge. A and B Companies attacked into Nijmegen, but B Company got lost along the way, so A Company went on alone. Yes, only one Company was attacking one of the main objectives in the 82nd’s sector, and it was many hours after the paras had landed. As they approached the bridge (which at this point was still guarded by only a handful of Germans), a German convoy of reinforcements from the North arrived. It was an entire infantry battalion from the 10th SS Panzer Division, supported by a company of engineers and Viktor Graebner’s Reconnaissance Battalion from 9th SS Panzer Division. The fighting began, but it was heavily in the German’s favour. B Company arrived later in the night but they too found the situation hopeless. The Americans did manage to capture and destroy the firing mechanism for the bridge, meaning the Germans weren’t able to blow the bridge (not that they were planning to anyway), but they were outgunned and outnumbered now. The Germans even managed to counter-attack and surround a unit in the post office, who would stay there surrounded for the next three days. The 82nd had failed to capture Nijmegen Bridge. The entire Operation depended on the capture of every bridge. Son had been destroyed, but since it was over a canal, a bailey bridge could be built in a matter of hours to replace it. But the bridge at Nijmegen spanned a much larger body of water and a bailey bridge couldn’t be built over that. Nijmegen bridge had to be taken on the first day. And it wasn’t. So things don’t bode too well for Operation Market Garden at this early stage, but there was still hope. If 1st Airborne could fight their way to Frost at the bridge, if XXX Corps could make good the delay and reach and repair Son bridge quickly, and if the 82nd could somehow capture Nijmegen Road bridge (which at this point was still a possibility) the battle could be won, and the war, over by Christmas. The question is, did the Allies make efficient use of the first vital hours of the operation? And who made the worst mistakes at this early stage? Let me know who you think it is in the comments below. We’ll continue the fight tomorrow. But before we leave, it’s worth mentioning SS Captain Viktor Graebner one more time. This guy went everywhere on the 17th. First he had the Knight’s Cross pinned onto his chest by Divisional commander Harzer earlier on the 17th (unlike what Wikipedia says, which is why we don’t rely on it) Graebner sent units to scout out positions along the Ede-Arnhem road, he fought elements of 1st Battalion, and then he drove across Arnhem bridge at 18:00 - an hour or two before Frost’s men reached it. At 19:00 he was at Elst, South of Arnhem. And finding no paratroopers there, he raced to Nijmegen and found no Americans at Nijmegen either. Yet within 24 hours of this picture being taken, Graebner was dead. We’ll find out why, tomorrow. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, by for now.
    1
  16387. Dobie’s 1st Battalion was to take the route that started along the Ede-Arnhem railway, but hearing reports of tanks ahead, Dobie chose to circle north of the route instead. This had the benefit of bypassing Krafft’s blocking line, but he soon became caught in fighting in the wooded areas north of Wolfheze. The German unit was a hastily formed Kampfgruppe, or battlegroup (which we’ll explain later), named after it’s commander ‘Weber’. Consisting of ninety or so Luftwaffe signallers, and despite being poorly armed and inexperienced, they attacked the paras as best they could. They didn’t do a lot of damage, but they did cause a delay. To the South, Lieutenant-Colonel John Frost’s 2nd Battalion had been given the dual task of taking the Arnhem Rail Bridge and the main objective… the Road bridge. Frost’s men got into combat almost immediately, destroying a small column of vehicles, probably a reconnaissance company from Krafft’s Battalion, but was quick to get going towards the bridges. Bypassing the important Heveadorp ferry (capable of transporting troops across the Rhine, but overlooked in the initial planning), they reached Oosterbeek by 6pm and overwhelmed the token German resistance there. Detaching Lieutenant Barry’s 9th Platoon supported by 8th Platoon with orders to take the Rail bridge, Barry lead a section of nine men onto the north end of the bridge itself. He thought he could take the entire bridge, but as he got to the centre of the bridge above the water, the bridge exploded. Luckily, none of the men with him were killed by the explosion, but the Rail bridge was destroyed. No matter, this wasn’t the main objective. The main objective was the Arnhem Road bridge. Now, it had taken three hours for 2 Para to get to this point. The German guards at the rail bridge had had plenty of time to prepare their explosives, so the chances of the Road bridge being there when they got to it.... They had to go on. Frost’s Battalion continued towards Arnhem. Shortly before the destruction of the Rail bridge however, Field Marshal Model, German Commander in Chief of Army Group B, fled his headquarters at the Hartenstein Hotel for fear of being captured. Interestingly, it’s claimed that Model wrongly came to the conclusion that the British landed in Holland purely to capture him! There’s no evidence of that. But it is true that he fled the hotel, and having assessed the situation, at 17:30 he (and the staff of IISS Corps) issue the first and perhaps most important order to the German units in the Arnhem-Nijmegen area. Immediate counter-attacks were to take place, with 9th SS Panzer Division to concentrate against the British at Arnhem, and the 10th SS Panzer Division to drive to Nijmegen, secure the bridge there and prevent any relief from getting to the British at Arnhem. At the same time, Student’s 1st Fallschirmjäger Army was to combat XXX Corps’ advance and the 101st Airborne at Eindhoven. This was a significant order. The Germans had decided to halt the relieving forces at Nijmegen. If they did that, the British at Arnhem would be trapped miles behind enemy lines... and doomed. At 18:00 Krafft suspected that he’d been outflanked - he had. Fearing the possibility of encirclement, he withdrew his force, which in turn allowed elements of 3rd Battalion to continue towards the bridge. Having delayed 3rd Para, Krafft’s force retreated to the Dreyenseweg and helped reinforce a new battle group that had been hastily set up there, Kampfgruppe Spindler. The Germans had practiced a new type of unit organisation, called Kampfgruppen. This was an ad hoc formation, which could be created or disbanded depending on circumstances. It’s basically a makeshift unit usually cobbled together from bits of other units and then given a leader and a task. Experienced and decorated in both the Iron Cross and the German Cross in Gold, SS Lieutenant-Colonel Spindler, commander of the 9th SS Panzer Division’s Artillery regiment, pulled in as many units under his command as possible, even units without guns. But he managed, by the evening of the 17th, to assemble a force of infantry, half tracks and self propelled guns, and possibly even some tank destroyers and Mark IV tanks. He decided, perhaps off his own initiative, to form a blocking line to prevent the British from getting into the center of Arnhem. Spindler is a very significant figure in this Operation, who we will see again and again as the battle progresses. Frost and 2nd Battalion was lucky enough to bypass Spindler’s line before it solidified. Following the bend in the Rhine and despite having to detach a company at Den Brink to deal with the German machine guns there, 2nd Battalion marched into Arnhem. As they moved through the streets, German vehicles screeched across the Arnhem Road bridge heading south. Commanded by SS Captain Viktor Graebner, the 9th SS Reconnaissance Battalion headed towards Nijmegen. Viktor Graebner was another significant figure at Arnhem and we’ll return to him again next time. The point is that only a handful of guards were guarding Arnhem Road Bridge. Frost reached the Road Bridge at 20:00, followed shortly by 1st Brigade headquarters. They had covered seven or eight miles in five hours. The bridge guards were in a pillbox on the bridge itself, so 2 Para dug into positions beneath the bridge and waited for 3rd Battalion and the Reconnaissance Squadron, which ominously hadn’t yet arrived. That’s because, facing Kampfgruppe Spindler’s determined defensive line, 3rd Battalion had decided to dig in near Oosterbeek and no further progress was made that evening. Only C Company, which had gone north of Krafft’s position managed to fight their way to the bridge after a violent clash in Arnhem itself, resulting in only forty-five men reaching Frost’s position. 1st Battalion’s commander, Dobie, received word via radio that 2nd Battalion had reached the bridge and needed reinforcements. He decided to abandon the idea of fighting to reach the North of Arnhem and to just get to the bridge. He turned South East and fought throughout the night, losing over a hundred men and only got halfway to their objective before they too were stopped by Kampfgruppe Spindler. Spindler had stopped two of the three Battalions from getting to the Arnhem Road Bridge on Day One, and this achievement is even more admirable when you consider that his force hadn’t existed that morning. By the late evening of the 17th, another kampfgruppen named “Harder” after its commander (who was, to slightly complicate things, was under the command of Spindler), moved into Western Arnhem and cut off Frost’s troops from the rest of 1st Airborne. There was now no way any more British paratroopers were getting to Arnhem that evening.
    1
  16388. The Landings - Day 1 The largest airborne operation in history begins on a Sunday. September 17th, 1944. The first Allied paratroopers and gliders descend in Holland in the early afternoon. Thousands of men land as many as sixty miles behind enemy lines. And despite the fact that the battle ahead would last nine days, it was in the first vital hours of the Operation that the outcome of the whole battle, and the lives of thousands of soldiers and civilians on both sides, would be decided. Intro graphic Last time we saw how the Allied battle plan wasn’t without its flaws, and how the Germans weren’t as ill prepared as the Allied Generals believed. And as the battle begins, the question we have to ask ourselves is … did the Allies make efficient use of the first vital hours of the operation? It’s the middle of the day, there’s plenty of light and despite a few accidents, no serious casualties are sustained on the drops. The element of surprise works in the Allies’ favour. Taking advantage of German confusion, most of the Allied objectives are taken quickly within a few hours. Most. The American 101st Airborne Division lands north of Eindhoven and secures most of its target bridges. But as the 2nd Battalion of the 506th Regiment (which included Easy Company from the Band of Brothers Series) approached the bridge at Son, an 88 and nearby German sentries managed to delay the paratroopers long enough to blow the bridge. The Americans were just 50 metres from the bridge when it blew up in their faces. Equally as concerning, the 502nd Regiment fought their way through to the bridge at Best, which the Germans also managed to blow before it fell into American hands. So the 101st failed to capture a bridge on the canal at the southern end of their sector. XXX Corps can’t cross a canal without a bridge, so when they eventually arrive, there’s going to be delays as they’re going to have to build a replacement bridge. And if that wasn’t bad enough, a glider from the 101st crashed near Student’s headquarters and plans for the entire Operation, Operation Market Garden, were in Student’s hands by around 3pm that same day. Day One. But the 101st weren’t the only ones having trouble. The 82nd landing near Nijmegen did secure the heights at Groesbeek, the Heumen bridge and the bridge at Grave. Browning had also flown in and now set up his headquarters on the Groesbeek Heights. I’m mentioning that because Gavin and Browning had both decided the Groesbeek heights were the priority for the Operation and had to be taken. And they were taken, because there were literally no Germans there. As a result, a good portion of 82nd Airborne were just sat on the Groesbeek Heights shelling the nearby woods (the Reichswald) because a sizeable German counter-attacking force was believed to be in there. Time was ticking down to take what was the REAL priority - the road bridge at Nijmegen. Now, the 1st Battalion, commanded by Lieutenant Shields Warren, had been ordered to take Nijmegen bridge that day. However, Warren was first ordered to secure some of the suburbs of Nijmegen and prepare them for defense, which took him most of the day. So early on, things weren’t looking so good at Nijmegen either. If the 82nd fail to take the Nijmegen Bridge, there’s no way XXX Corps can build a bridge over the Waal. Nijmegen Bridge has to be taken. But it isn’t. At Arnhem, the British land in fields surrounded by woods. This works in their favour as it prevented the Germans seeing exactly what the British were up to. But it also didn’t work in their favour, as they were 8 to 13 miles away from their main objective, Arnhem Bridge. But General Urquhart had prepared for this. Knowing that it would take hours to fight their way over several miles of enemy held territory, he decided to send 1st Airborne’s Reconnaissance Squadron, supplied with Jeeps, ahead. The idea was to send the jeeps ahead to the Arnhem road bridge in a coup-de-main (or surprise) attack, then wait for reinforcements from the rest of the division to arrive. Neither trained to use them, nor were they meant to be used for anything other than reconnaissance, this lightly armed and unarmoured force wouldn’t last long in a major firefight, but it might be able to slip behind enemy lines and might be able to get to the bridge quickly. However, Sepp Krafft’s SS Training and Replacement Battalion was one of the closest units to the British landing zones, and seeing the paratroopers land, he decided to quickly form a blocking line near Wolfheze and to scout out the British positions to gain vital information… because observation was obscured by the trees. Krafft wasn’t sure what the British were trying to achieve but his line would cause the British some problems in those first vital hours. It was the Northern end of this blocking line that the British Reconnaissance squadron drove into, barely minutes after the line had been formed. The small force of jeeps was stopped by heavy machine gun fire and even a flamethrower attack. They then tried to advance by foot, but were driven back. The first attack towards Arnhem had failed. Fitch’s 3rd Battalion marched along the Utrechtseweg, south of most of Krafft’s positions towards Arnhem. Unfortunately for Fitch, General Urquhart accompanied the Battalion, and slowed things down. Lieutenant Cleminson’s platoon took out a German car... this one… and it was only after the war that they found out it was General Friedrich Kussin, Arnhem’s commandant who had only just finished briefing Krafft on the situation. Despite this success, 3rd Battalion got embroiled in fighting Krafft’s Battalion, including an incident where General Urquhart himself was shot at by machine guns and mortar fire.
    1
  16389. Of course the British could rely on the Polish 1st Independent Parachute Brigade as reinforcements who would hopefully arrive on Day 3. Yes, it was no surprise that General Sosabowski, commander of the Polish Brigade, had had misgivings about this AND the previous proposed operation, operation comet (which was basically similar to this one, but with less troops). You see, the airborne units had been told to prepare for battle time and time again over the last few months, only to have plans cancelled last minute. This not only affected morale, but gave their commanders an eagerness to get into battle that may have clouded their judgement during the planning of the Market Operation. General Sosabowski was more accepting of the Market Garden plan because it was better than the previous one, although it clearly wasn’t perfect. His Polish Brigade would land south of Arnhem on Day 3, when the element of surprise was lost days before. It was bad enough for the brigades landing on Day 2. But the eagerness to get into battle felt by all the Officers and troops is perhaps why the Operation went ahead anyway. And is also why vital intelligence reports about the existence of German tanks in the area were ignored. Now tanks could overwhelm the lightly armed paratroopers and threaten the whole operation. Although a lot of the German units in the Arnhem area were of dubious combat quality, they did have two rather depleted SS Panzer Divisions in the area. The 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions to be exact. Both veteran units with elite soldiers and tanks. And yet, these intelligence reports were dismissed by Lieutenant General Frederick Browning - the man in charge of the whole airborne operation - because he didn’t want to cancel the mission with only two days remaining before it began. Browning also believed that the Germans were already defeated so these tanks were probably few in number and would be slow to react. So he didn’t warn Urquhart or any of the British paratroopers of the possibility of their being two SS Panzer Divisions in the area, which meant the paras didn’t take as many anti-tank weapons and ammunition as they could have. Oh, and Browning decided that his corps headquarters would be airlifted into the Nijmegen sector on day one using a staggering 38 aircraft and extra gliders on top of that, all of which were taken from the British allocation of transport aircraft - who were already starved of transport aircraft as priority had been given to the Americans. Oh, and the decision was taken not to support the air transports or the paratroopers on the ground with ground attack aircraft. This meant that the Germans would be able to move freely in day-light without fear of being attacked from the air - something they hadn’t been able to do in Normandy. The Germans could reinforce their troops as and when they liked, a fact that would prove disastrous as the battle progressed. Despite having two understrength SS Panzer divisions in the area, overall the Germans facing the Market Garden Operation were weak and were forced to fill the front with rag tag units. Including units like the ‘eyes and ears battalions’ who consisted of men who had disabilities that had prevented them from fighting, until now. By this point in the war, Germany was scraping the bottom of the manpower and material barrel, however, they were well led. Field Marshal Model, Commander in Chief of Army Group B, coincidently had his headquarters in the Hartenstein Hotel near to the British Landing zones. He was an experienced leader, having earned nicknames such as “Master of Defence”, “Lion of Defence”, the “Saviour of the Eastern Front”, and the “Fuhrer’s Fireman” (because he’s constantly putting out fires, or plugging holes in the front). In the defensive battle that followed, Model was the right man for the job. As was Kurt Student, Commander of the 1st Fallschirmjaeger Army. Fallshirmjaeger were German Paratroopers and in the days prior to the Allied airborne assault, Student had been ordered to ‘Collect all available units together and build a new front’. This he had done (and these units weren’t all elite paratroopers) but it’s important to note that Student was an experienced leader and had directed some of the first opposed paratrooper landings in history. You have to remember that paratrooper operations had only begun in 1940 so it remained a new concept even by 1944. Lessons were still needed to be learnt about how to properly use paratroopers in combat, but it was the Germans who had pioneered their early use. Student had been the Commander of the Fallshirmjaeger since the early days. He knew more than anyone else what to do in the event of a paratrooper landing and was in a perfect position to oppose the Allied landings in September 1944. In charge of ii ss panzer corps was Wilhelm bittrich. Harmel was in command of 10th ss panzer division and harzer was in command of the ninth. All of them experienced commanders who'd proven themselves in previous campaigns, including at Normandy in Operations like Epsom and good wood. Good commanders commanding ad hoc forces is what the British and Americans were facing. However, it’s worth noting that although the two SS Panzer Divisions together totalled maybe 7000 men at most (about 30% of what they should have been) the entire II SS Panzer Corps had spent a good 15 months performing anti-paratroop landing training. The Corp had been founded to stop the Normandy landings, including paratroop landings, and these training exercises were fresh in their minds. Essentially, the paratroopers were landing against an enemy who knew how to deal with them. So this is where we stand on the eve of battle. Three landing zones, one road, and an underestimated enemy. The plan has the potential to end the war by Christmas, but it isn’t flawless. I’ll leave you with a question - how rotten was this plan? And do you think it was doomed to fail from the start? Comment below and let me know. Next time, we’ll see what happens on Day One, so don’t forget to like and subscribe if you haven’t done already. Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.
    1
  16390. In charge of the Airborne part of the plan was Lieutenant General Sir Arthur Montague Boy Frederick Browning. This was the father of the British airborne forces, and was the one who said I think we might be going a bridge too far… well, he may have said that. Nobody really knows, but he had the task of making Operation Market a success, and that wasn’t going to be easy. Landing troops behind enemy lines sounds great, until you consider two things: Paratroopers rely on the element of surprise to disorientate and confuse the enemy so that they can secure their objective before the enemy knows what’s happening. So if surprise is lost or they fail to act quickly enough, they lose their biggest asset. They’re weak. They’re dropped behind enemy lines, are lightly armed and supplied by the air, so if they’re not relieved in a matter of days there’s a good chance they’ll be overwhelmed. Speed is therefore, imperative. The paratroopers have to take their objectives quickly, and the tanks have to relieve them quickly. It’s worth bearing this in mind as we consider that cracks began to appear in the plan right from the beginning. For starters, Operation Garden wasn’t going to be easy. Commanded by Sir Brian Horrocks, XXX Corps would have one road to drive up. One road. An entire corps, one road. That’s a logistical nightmare. But considering the enemy could easily counterattack from the sides and cut the road at any point, plus they had to drive 60 miles just to reach Arnhem… I hope you can see the problem here. Even if all things went smoothly, it would take at least two to three days for XXX Corps to get to the British at Arnhem. That’s assuming all the bridges would be taken intact. If the Germans managed to hold or destroy a bridge or two, it could take even longer. The issue of delay is compounded when you realise there weren’t enough transport planes to deliver all three and a bit airborne divisions at the same time. This would mean they would have to be dropped over a period of three days, because the RAF also refused to fly in more than one lift per day for fear of exhausting their pilots. Apart from the fact that this would weaken the strength of the initial landings and compromise the paratrooper’s element of surprise, it also meant that … potentially ... not all the bridges could be secured on the first day. If some of the bridges aren’t taken, and if XXX Corps is delayed, the Operation fails and the British at Arhem are doomed. General Gavin of the American 82nd Airborne Division who was dropping in at Nijmegen decided that he simply didn’t have enough troops on the first day to take all his objectives. He wanted to take the bridges from both ends at once, but without enough troops on the ground this wasn’t possible. He also feared an attack from the Reichswald… a forest that was within the borders of Germany, and he believed there were a lot of Germans in there ready to counter attack. In his mind, he would have to pull forces away to capture the heights at Groesbeek, in order to secure his position against the Reichswald rather than send troops to take the Nijmegen Bridge. This meant they wouldn’t be able to start their attack on the Nijmegen Bridge until later in the day, or until reinforcements arrived on the second day. The element of surprise would be lost, and it was likely that the Germans would have time to react, dig in and prepare their defenses at the Nijmegen Bridge. Not good. To make matters worse, the 101st Airborne had to take five bridges on the first day. 5. Lead by Maxwell D. Taylor, the 101st would drop as close to the bridges as they could to take them as quickly as possible. This would give them the best chance of taking the bridges, but with 5 to take chances are, they wouldn’t take them all. This, and the problems at Nijmegen and the lack of transports meant that, there was a big chance that there was going to be a delay in reaching Arnhem. At first glance however, the British at Arnhem seemed to have the least amount of trouble - they only had one bridge to take (well two, but one main one). Yet it wasn’t as simple as that. The RAF refused to drop the paratroopers near to the bridge because of that heavy Anti Air cover over Arnhem, and because the ground south of the bridge was believed to be too marshy for a landing (although good enough for the Polish airborne coming a few days later). Major General Roy Urquhart was commander of the British 1st Airborne Division. Urquhart had never commanded paratroopers before, and believed that once he was on the ground it was basically going to be the same as any other infantry battle. No. Paratroopers need to get to their objectives quickly and sit tight for relief. Essentially, once you take your objective, you’re not attacking, you’re defending. So perhaps Urquhart was the wrong man for the job? Either way, due to pressure from the RAF and the US Airforce, Urquhart was forced to land 8 miles to 13 miles away from the bridge. Yes, 8 to 13 miles away. Not only was there a real chance that the vital element of surprise be lost, but also the British paras landing on day one would need to hold the Landing Zones for subsequent waves of paratroopers, meaning that only a portion of the British paras landing on day one would actually strike towards Arnhem Bridge. And the British would also need to hold onto a huge area, which realistically they’d struggle to hold with the entire division. To be fair to Urquhart, he did request for his troops to be landed nearer to the bridge, such as south of Arnhem (which was again, good enough for the Polish Brigade coming later but not for anyone on Day 1). Unknown to Urquhart during the early planning stage, when briefed a few days before the battle, officers of 1st Parachute Battalion actually volunteered to land on the town of Arnhem itself rather than land miles away from the bridge, but in the end Air Vice-Marshal Hollinghurst refused Urquhart’s request and the landing zones remained many miles from Arnhem. The reason for this was the fear of anti-air batteries over Arnhem. The RAF and the US Airforce thought they’d take excessive losses if they landed near the city. Urquhart has taken the blame over the years for the fact that the landing zones were far from the bridge. In reality, that decision wasn’t his. It’s often been argued that Urquhart should have insisted on closer landing zones, but the fact remains that it didn’t happen. The British would land 8 to 13 miles away from the bridge.
    1
  16391. You may have heard about the battle of Arnhem, or you may have seen the film a Bridge Too Far. You may think you know what happened and what went wrong. Think again. In this series, we’re going to look at as much of the Market Garden Operation as we can, even the bits other documentaries leave out. We will dispel the myths that surround this Operation and find out who exactly was to blame for its failure. Intro graphic. In the coming videos, we’ll be covering the entire Operation, which was not only the biggest airborne assault of all time, but was also the last major defeat for the British military. It remains a controversial operation. Somehow an all-but defeated German army clawed their way to victory, stopping the Allies from crossing the Rhine and winning the war by Christmas. Today, we’re going to focus on the plan, since it’s a plan which has since been deemed “rotten” and badly executed. But was it really that bad a plan? The situation by late 1944 for the Germans was desperate. Nazi Germany had conquered most of Europe in the early days of World War II, but by 1944, was on the backfoot. The Wehrmacht (or German Army) was decisively beaten in the East by the Soviets at battles like Stalingrad and Kursk and annihilated during Operation Bagration. In the South, the Allies had defeated the Germans in the Desert and were slowly working their way up the Italian peninsular. And in the West, the Allies had landed in Normandy, had crushed the Germans in the Falaise pocket, liberated Paris and were now on their way towards Germany. It seemed to most Allied commanders that the German Army was thoroughly beaten. The Third Reich was about to fall. It was all just a question of time. Since Normandy, Supreme Allied Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force - Eisenhower - had been in charge. Knowing that the Germans were thinned out after Falaise, Eisenhower prefered a broad front strategy. That is, by marching his Armies forward on all fronts, so the Germans would have to spread out their weakened forces and would be overwhelmed by sheer weight of numbers. But supply and logistical issues soon became a problem. Armies require supplies and fuel if they are to keep on advancing, and Allied logistics couldn’t keep up with the demand of supplying all the Armies at the same time. The result? Allied Armies stopped dead in their tracks in late August and early September 1944. This gave British Field Marshal Montgomery the chance he’d been waiting for. Monty, experienced in the African Desert and commander of the Allied forces in the initial stages of the Normandy landings, believed that he had a plan that could knock out the Germans with a decisive blow if he was given logistical priority. In his mind, the British could bypass the German Siegfried Line, cross the Rhine river in September, then race into Germany’s industrial heartland, the Ruhr. He believed he could win the war by Christmas. Facing logistical problems and knowing that fighting through the Siegfried Line would be challenging, Eisenhower gave the green light, and Operation Market Garden was born. Monty’s plan was to drive XXX Corps (a British Tank and Mobile infantry force) over the bridges of the lower Rhine river and thrust deep into Germany. That was the Garden part of the plan. But of course Bridges would be no use if the Germans had a chance to destroy them, so the Bridges had to be secured for the tanks in advance. And there were several bridges in the area to capture intact if this operation was to have any chance of success. Therefore, three and a half Airborne Divisions (a total of 33,971 men) would land on Day 1 behind enemy lines to secure both the bridges and the road to Arnhem. The American 101st Airborne division would land at Eindhoven, the American 82nd would land at Nijmegen, and the British 1st Airborne Division, supported by the Polish 1st Independent Airborne Brigade, would land at Arnhem. This was the Market part of the plan. With a carpet of Airborne troops to secure the route, XXX Corps would simply cross the secured bridges and ride off to victory! But the bridges had to be secure - without them, the plan would fail - they were the priority of this Operation. So this was two operations in one. Operation Market, and Operation Garden. And together they make Operation Market Garden. Sounds simple… right? It is until you realise there was another element to the plan not often mentioned. Once the British tanks were over the Rhine at Arnhem, another Division - the 52nd Lowland Infantry Division would be flown in by air on the fifth day, after Deeland Airfield had been captured. Yes, this wasn’t an Operation aimed at capturing Arnhem bridge, it went on beyond that. The tanks were meant to get all the way to Zuiderzee, the shallow bay that juts into the Netherlands. Now, the reason you don’t hear about this part of the Operation much, is because (spoiler alert) it didn’t happen. But that was the true goal of Market Garden.
    1
  16392. Why was it flawed? It's easy to say something was flawed after it fails. But if you think about it, it almost worked, even as it was. And if Nijmegen Bridge had been taken on day 1, it probably would have worked, and we'd now be calling it a 'great plan'.
    1
  16393. No it wasn't. As shown in my main Market Garden video, all the bridges were taken, except the Nijmegen Bridge. And the only reason the tanks didn't get to Arnhem was because of the events at Nijmegen.
    1
  16394. I understand why Frost was angry too, however we have to remember that Frost probably wasn't there during the planning stage, nor did he know what the US 82nd Airborne was doing. He also probably didn't know about Gavin's pre-drop orders to Colonel Lindquist (or lack thereof). He very much aware about Browning's other errors though. Frost is probably right, or nearly right, however there's more evidence that says he maybe wasn't. This is why you can't just trust one source of information on a topic and have to dive into the details... which I aim to do.
    1
  16395. Or that Gavin should have taken the bridge, which was his objective.
    1
  16396. "facts on the ground should be the basis of history" The Nijmegen Bridge wasn't taken on day 1, leading to a 36 hour delay once 30 Corps reached it on day 3. They didn't get going again until day 5, and it was too late by then.
    1
  16397. That was Browning.
    1
  16398. And glad to have you along for the ride :)
    1
  16399. Yeah, he was referring to General Browning
    1
  16400. Hello Mr Darr, good to see you around again :)
    1
  16401. alkafluence a quick google, and it's 78%!?!? That's quite surprising!
    1
  16402. Gokotti we'd all be a little short of breath there :P
    1
  16403. Tomislav looks like this question was a little harder for everyone :)
    1
  16404. Gary Thomas haha there's not enough to go around
    1
  16405. Hopper haha not a bad guess though
    1
  16406. Morgan Chalmers yes! And India used to be part of Africa
    1
  16407. Morgan Chalmers did you know that there used to be forests at the North Pole? I'm not saying global warming isn't happening, and that man isn't having a negative impact, but perhaps the Earth can get a little hotter like it used to be
    1
  16408. Morgan Chalmers is CO2 really that low?
    1
  16409. Assuming that is true, then the source I used was wrong. However, my question is: why would the State lock away such information for that many years? And are we sure the State has given us all the information? Are you certain they haven't "memory hole'd" some of it?
    1
  16410. Where are we rising up to?
    1
  16411. I agree, but arguably they could have done more top supply the resistance, help the Warsaw Uprising by giving them more supplies and the Polish Parachute Brigade, and/or pressured the Soviet Union into helping them out. I'm not saying I fully agree with that counterargument, but people make it and it does have some validity (except maybe the pressuring of Stalin bit)
    1
  16412. Well done again Jamie!
    1
  16413. Hegel is deliberately contradictory. That's the whole point of the Dialectic. Thus, it's impossible to understand it by design, since when you have contradictions that means you've got something wrong. It is the opposite of valid integration; a deliberate anti-integration - an irrationalism. So "ideobabble" is a valid term here. As far as Materialism goes, inherent in the belief of the world being material, is the belief that there is a non-material world (Plato's world of forms, Christianity's Heaven, or Hegel's Spirit). Materialism is the belief that reality is fake, as it's a creation of some divine entity. In reality, we don't live in a material world. We live in an objective world. And the fact you didn't know these distinctions is proof that it is YOU that hasn't studied the history of philosophy.
    1
  16414. I've been arguing with the socialists and the Communists for years over the definitions, and they'll be the first to tell you that it's not state control of the means of production. Of course, you and I both know it is, but for some reason, many of them don't believe it. I've got countless videos now showing this debate that's going on, including my Public Vs Private video.
    1
  16415. Trickle down https://youtu.be/nZPDpk8NA-g?si=RVFxZORMZgML08w9
    1
  16416. You're saying that the Nazis didn't march?
    1
  16417. Wow, glad you liked it!
    1
  16418. I'm a not a "conservative" and thus not a "right-winger" who wants slavery. Your point 3 especially doesn't apply to me as I'm pro-freedom, arguing against "natural" rights, which is what the conservatives and socialists use to impose collectivism and tax slavery upon the workers. Remember, it's "natural" (argued Marx) that the capitalist system will lead to Salvation (Revolution).
    1
  16419. But I didn't rush it. This is how it would have been regardless. As I said, there's a lack of details at the end anyway due to the fact that the Germans weren't recording what was happening, as they couldn't during the collapse. And as explained in the video linked at the bottom, my descriptive style has changed since the first videos of this series, as I learnt that I didn't need to name each and every division during an attack. The details are still shown on the screen, but the viewer isn't bored by lists of information https://youtu.be/Iis4FmSRLXI?si=8iZfcK91HdJsG3em
    1
  16420. In what way did I lose it? I can only do what the sources say - if there's no evidence, I can't make it up 🤔
    1
  16421. I've outlined the current plan for future Battlestorms here https://youtu.be/Iis4FmSRLXI
    1
  16422. No because we have the evidence that Hitler wanted to annihilate the Soviet prisoners, and that it was his orders in 1942 to start feeding the prisoners purely so they could be used as slaves, that reduced the extermination rate. I covered this in the video on Soviet POWs in German hands.
    1
  16423. Once I've finished the script for Gazala, I intend to take a few days off :) Glad you enjoy the tank videos, and I don't mind if you disagree with me on the bank stuff haha
    1
  16424. I haven't watched his video, but by the description you and others have given, it really doesn't sound like it's worth my time to do so, let alone respond
    1
  16425. Does that mean you skipped some?? Why!?
    1
  16426. +Tomislav Iosif or Ioseb, depending
    1
  16427. YOYO MAN Sadly, I won't have time to read now as I'm off to Siberia. I did read "Young Stalin" book a while ago
    1
  16428. This was his first name in Russian :)
    1
  16429. Let's see how well you do next time ;)
    1
  16430. and his wife, Lady 'and Sickle' Stalin
    1
  16431. Iosif
    1
  16432. I'm afraid Sir Jamie, that you were fourth :)
    1
  16433. 2nd ;)
    1
  16434. Glad you enjoyed it Jake!
    1
  16435. He's been a Patreon for a while, and it's clearly a jokey name. I don't think they even watched the video that closely. I suspect the tag "Hunger Winter" and the fact I mentioned this in the description was what did it.
    1
  16436. You mean Fifth!
    1
  16437. Thank you Rob! Good to hear! I do think this and Battleaxe were my best-made Battlestorm documentaries. At least, this will be the style I'm using going forward.
    1
  16438. Don't worry, I'm working on more. Just that they take time. Operation Crusader will be the next one, and Stalingrad will be out at some point :)
    1
  16439. It's my pleasure, glad you're enjoying them :)
    1
  16440. Thanks for the feedback! I might make the title screens a little longer next time, although don't want to delay too long. Not sure if the next one will be Stalingrad, or if I'll break away to make something else or several, but it's definitely coming. Imagine a video like this, but on a titanic battle, and the video is around 24 hours long - that will be Stalingrad!
    1
  16441. It's funny because the other sources I used made out as though he made a bad decision, even though it ended up being the right one in the end!
    1
  16442. Hold on. The adverts don't happen to correspond with the timestamps in the pinned comment of the comment section by any chance? If so, that would make a lot of sense, since people will be clicking to those specific parts of the video shortly after clicking on the video. Hope that's not the case because I use timestamps to help people navigate the videos and I don't want people put off by the potential of lots of adverts :(
    1
  16443. What are you talking about? That's not how YouTube works. I have zero control of the ads placed on the video. And even if I did, I wouldn't place 16 ads on the video because I'd much prefer people to actually watch my content. Clearly you're either trolling or this video bugged out for you. Either way, calm down and think before you accuse people of doing something they didn't do.
    1
  16444. Makes sense :) also, I forgot to reply to your comment on your video. Maybe after Christmas (I'm really busy atm, hence the decrease in videos) we could do a video
    1
  16445. You'll be happy to know I'm working on Operation Crusader right now! Might be my longest Battlestorm video too once it's complete. Also, yeah it's impossible to get away from bias completely, but with Battlestorm I try let the facts speak for themselves (mostly).
    1
  16446. Glad you liked it 🙂
    1
  16447. Haha well I hope the video does live up to your early expectations! I'm certainly happy with the end result. I didn't expect it to be this long either. So much for a "short" raid video while working on Stalingrad :)
    1
  16448. Thank you Nick! Plenty of work, trust me. At the very least, I want to make sure what I'm presenting to you is as accurate as possible, which means a lot of research trying to figure out where each unit was at any time. Just wish all the sources would agree with each other! (actually I don't, that's where the fun is)
    1
  16449. Good to hear someone laughed! People keep commenting saying I should do TV documentaries, which is a nice compliment. However I can't make a Battlestorm video the way TV documentaries are made - I respect my audience too much to do that.
    1
  16450. More to come (eventually!). And yes, Frost is an interesting character to say the least :)
    1
  16451. That is really interesting Margaret! And yes, you're right about my North West accent :) @Nicolas, I hope you can help her out :)
    1
  16452. I'm sorry! 😂
    1
  16453. You might be right. Stupid Google Translate! Why do you fail so much!?
    1
  16454. Glad you liked it! Working on the next Battlestorm now: Operation Crusader. Taken a while because it might be a 7 to 8 hour video :)
    1
  16455. Oh yes. Constantly working behind the scenes
    1
  16456. Thanks, really good to hear :)
    1
  16457. Glad you liked it :)
    1
  16458. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  16459. Thank you! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  16460. The Battlestorm videos are what people are demanding I do more of at the moment because I haven't done one since this one. But most don't realise I've been working on one now (the next in the North African Campaign series) which will be about 7 hours long - the longest ever. Then there's Stalingrad which will be around 48 hours long (research is currently about 400,000 words). So yeah, the longer Battlestorm videos are where I'm putting the majority of my effort behind the scenes into. Enjoy!
    1
  16461. Fantastic! Hope you enjoy the other videos!
    1
  16462. Someone pointed out that it's technically "hen", but either way, yes :)
    1
  16463. Great! Glad you enjoyed the video :) I'm not sure why YouTube isn't promoting some of my Battlestorm videos. I'm also really happy with this one and the way it turned out. But YouTube only seems to like my Market Garden one. University, or degrees, aren't going to be useful unless you decide you want a history-related job at the end of it. Honestly, the lessons are - use all the sources, every source is biased, question everything (ask "is this really the case?"), and try to remain as neutral as possible. Beyond that, the only thing degrees do is show employers you were able to persevere with something for three years, which is their primary purpose. If you don't need the degree to get a job, it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to buy a ton of books on one subject you like and get reading. Read say x10 history books on the same battle, make notes (use Google Docs, free in pc and phone) and see what contradictions there are. Then try to figure out which story is right, and why. Interpret the evidence. Solve the puzzle. Then either write about it (blog) or create a video on it (doesn't have to be like mine, could be just a vlog or a podcast). Either way, when you really get into it, you'll have a great time. Trust me :)
    1
  16464. Glad you like :) awesome name btw
    1
  16465. Glad you enjoyed it! I do recommend Oldfield's book if you want more information on the raid, or Night Raid (even if I don't agree with some of it) since that has quite a bit of detail too
    1
  16466. Although, it was actually barbed wire. This then meant livestock couldn't eat the grass. So long-grass meant German facilities
    1
  16467. Yes, according to the sources I used at least
    1
  16468. Those damn Patreons of mine! How dare they! (I'm being sarcastic, I love my Patreons because they're allowing me to do this https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory )
    1
  16469. I didn't "ignore" those things Poland did, I mentioned them in the video. And Putin said Poland had "annexationist policies", clearly stating that Poland was an aggressive conqueror which is to blame for it's own destruction and the start of WW2. How is this a "misinterpretation"? Why is it that "critics" of my videos don't listen to what's actually being said? And people wonder why I have to explain things several times... it's because people don't seem to grasp things unless I repeat them in different ways. If Poland is the "key player" who compromised security in Europe, then the Soviet Union is moreso considering they allied with the Nazis for two years.
    1
  16470. "Why even try to link Putin to Hoggan?" Did you not watch the beginning of the video? The Patreon linked the two, and I agree with him, since their views are very similar.
    1
  16471. And thank you for the suggestion!
    1
  16472. I don't have a video right now about how I do it, but it's a good idea for a future video, so I'll add it to my 'to do' list :)
    1
  16473. "TIK all I will say that you should stop giving any announcements that you're not a fascist/nazi or whatever because dumbasses will still call you like that so there really is no point in doing that" It's actually not for them, it's for the YouTube censors. I don't have a lot of faith in them after they censored my video on the Holocaust in Greece
    1
  16474. I'm glad you liked the video! The anti-Semites use "Goy" ironically to refer to themselves and other white people, as a way to push the idea of the Jews hating everyone but themselves. The issue with the narrative regarding the Jews is that they're not a monolithic group. They don't have telekinesis, and they're not all "in on the plan". They, like everyone else, are individuals. But group-thinkers don't see it that way. They see everything in groups. So when one person does something in one group, that must mean everyone does the same thing in the group, even though that's not the case and there's plenty of evidence against that idea.
    1
  16475. And if they won't listen or won't be guided out of it?
    1
  16476. That's a good idea! I'll consider doing that. Do you have any suggestions of which points in particular?
    1
  16477. That's a very good point! And it's surprising how many Germans were married to Jews. Goebbels even had a Jewish mistress earlier on.
    1
  16478. "I would argue that NAZI propaganda posters appear a bit clumsy and "in your face"." I agree with you. It only really works for people who are already mostly ready to accept it. The subtle nature of other forms of propaganda are hard to see, especially since so many comments on YouTube, Reddit, and elsewhere are bots and paid activists. The 50 Cent Army isn't a "conspiracy theory", and neither is the British 77th Brigade. The only thing you can do is question everything, which is what I encourage with the question "but is this really the case?"
    1
  16479. It could very well be... I don't know if there's enough context to conclude whether it's the woman's house/shop or the Jewish person's house/shop
    1
  16480. Marx was responding to Bauer, but he was saying this stuff, not quoting Bauer or anything like that. Also Marx was not Jewish - his father had abandoned the faith and Marx never practiced Judaism. There's some evidence of him praising Satan (see Kengor, "The Devil and Karl Marx")
    1
  16481. "Namely, there is insufficient antisemitism on the Right, and rather than deal with it on the Left, the ADL is fabricating it." Where did you hear that from? Do you have a link? It would be a shame if they're not tackling Leftist anti-Semitism due to their own biases.
    1
  16482. He said that the bourgeoisie were the Js, and that's why he hated them and "capital"ism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  16483. I haven't, no. I have provided PDFs of my two "Hitler's Socialism" videos, and you can find them in the description of both. But otherwise, all my content is in video format at the moment.
    1
  16484. Perhaps, but it's not a coincidence that they decided to place the house just there so it implies that the smoke and flames are coming from his hands and the gold.
    1
  16485. The problem with quoting Goebbels is that the Left just think it's all propaganda, and that it doesn't matter what he said, because what he did was "privatized the industries" (even though they didn't).
    1
  16486. I'll get that guy from Friends to play the part of Stalin. What could possibly go wrong!?
    1
  16487. Haha, I've been there in their position before, and I'm sure you have too. Just so you know, my notes from Glantz's works on Stalingrad currently total 42,646 words and that's not including OOB's, tables or notes from other authors. And I'm miles away from finishing Glantz's second book, let alone his fifth. I'm going to reply to this comment in full in an upcoming video. Hopefully I'll give your students (and others) some perspective, advice and tips.
    1
  16488. https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory
    1
  16489. Madman - don't worry. I'm not "rushing" it. In fact, that's a good topic to talk about in another video so I'll do that :)
    1
  16490. Haha, I'll let you know when it is. And yes, one video is probably the best. I just don't want people getting bored and losing hope in the mean time.
    1
  16491. Also, it's actually relatively quick to make a LRDG video because it's done in 2D and are quite short. Can probably do one of them a week if I had a week off work. Sadly, I've decided that the other videos should be in 3D so they take months as a result
    1
  16492. I will continue it, and the LRDG. I've actually got the script for Battleaxe nearly complete. If I fancy a break from Stalingrad for some reason I'll work on the others
    1
  16493. Well, I was tempted to do the Ardennes, but a lot more people suggested Stalingrad. I will come back to that, and Crete at some point.
    1
  16494. It is my Stalingrad. But my back's against the Volga and I have nowhere else to go. It will be done... And the best part is, it's all down hill from here after Stalingrad. The only other Battle/Campaign that would be more difficult to cover than Stalingrad would be if I decided to do a video on the entirety of Operation Barbarossa. Every other battle or campaign will be easier! But I'm glad you have confidence in me comrade :) I'll try not to be biased, but you're right, there's no way I can be 100% non-biased. I'm relying on the sources I can get my hands on, which may be biased in themselves.
    1
  16495. Yes. I'll talk about this in an upcoming video (probably this week coming)
    1
  16496. As I said in the video: nobody's squeaky-clean in this war and the bombings were not good. However, the Germans and Soviets were simply way more brutal than anything committed by the Western Allies - the scale of destruction on the Eastern Front is unbelievable. And using the bombing campaign is also a bit rich, especially since it was Germany which started World War Two, and it was Germany that was the first to bomb enemy cities (they bombed a Polish city on the first day of the war).
    1
  16497. Well, to be fair, fighting an enemy that is "equal" in force would result in more casualties. You want to find their weak points and hit them there.
    1
  16498. @Adrian, Yeah, there's a lot of that going on. Glad you liked the video!
    1
  16499. I've just checked and I don't see any comment from you in the spam folder. Not sure why it wouldn't show up
    1
  16500. Yes, as I mentioned in the video, I saw that essay when it came up. I will be addressing Mr Askay at some point. However, my tactic has always been to slowly build up evidence over time in order to fight back against an argument, which is what I have done (better to overwhelm than it is to nudge). Several of my videos directly challenge his claims in that essay even though I do not specifically say that I'm refuting his argument in those videos. But I will do an all-in-one response to his essay some day soon, once I've done some more gathering of evidence. Probably would have done it already if I hadn't been hit by the Socialist wave of slander.
    1
  16501. A poll only confirms the beliefs of a selected number, not more than that. Everyone else not polled may disagree with the majority in the poll. It only confirms those beliefs there and then, and does not reflect that opinions change over time. And as you point out, the poll is reliant on not getting a "biased sample". Since all people are biased, that's going to be difficult. You've also got to question the motives of those conducting the poll because their bias may seep into the selection process, or even the wording of the questions etc. These are just some of the reasons off the top of my head, but essentially polls are not trustworthy at all. Also, calling out a straw man is itself a straw man.
    1
  16502. As a generalisation, they say all crimes were committed by the SS and the Nazis, and say that the German Army (Heer) was innocent.
    1
  16503.  @CA-jz9bm  I think he was referring to Chuikov's counter-attack in this video, not the Operation Uranus counter-offensive.
    1
  16504. Glad to see some good logical thinking 👍 You're not far off!
    1
  16505. It was along the Don flank at this moment. It would be sent into Stalingrad later.
    1
  16506. Yes, Terri did a fantastic job
    1
  16507. Huh... So, I just looked this up, and apparently this is actually a thing! Apparently, some people don't pronounce 'H' ("haitch") with the 'H' in the word, due to old-fashioned English speakers missing out the 'H' in most commonly spoken words (e.g. instead of "Hotel", they'd say "-otel"). I never knew this! I was taught to pronounce it with the H in school. It's also considered by some as "snobbish" to pronounce it "haitch"... So, considering that me and Terri are both English speakers, but from different ages and schools and backgrounds, I'm going to assume that we're pronouncing it this way because we're not benefit scroungers ;)
    1
  16508. You must be new here. I've actually been over this issue numerous times in numerous videos, including in previous Stalingrad videos. However, it's clear that in this case Popov's claims were exaggerated since the Germans didn't lose all their StuGs which they would have done had Popov's claim been correct. Both sides exaggerated the other side's losses, even factoring in the way the Germans counted their losses.
    1
  16509. Did you not see it in the last esisode? Episode 18? Or in the follow-up video about the map?
    1
  16510.  @alexalexin9491  Perhaps as a way of showing people he was secretly a Christian when he couldn't come out and outright say it due to State oppression? (I'm not saying this was the case, but there could be reasons for him doing something like this that have been lost to time)
    1
  16511. I don't currently, but I've been researching those topics for future videos 👍
    1
  16512. "Go back an read. Each of your claims has been debunked. If you think what you have shown would be satisfactory at any uni level, your delusional. Nothing to do with insults. They're woeful, not to any standard (as you've admitted). Nothing personal, just facts. Your emotional response is simply the next stage after denial." What you have written above - is an emotional response. That's why you're insulting me by saying I'm "delusional", even though in the next sentence saying it has "nothing to do with insults". Really? You don't think calling someone "delusional" is insulting? What I've written isn't an emotional response. You insulted-accused me of not doing something right, I asked you to explain yourself, and you couldn't. Then I explained why I do things the way I do them. Everything you said to counter this was successfully countered by me. You have not convinced me that the way I do things is "substandard" because your reasons for doing so don't stand up to scrutiny. I have my reasons for doing it the way I did - and I haven't even given you the second reason, only the first. It's not "denial" or "an emotional response" - it's simply fact. - "Citations MUST stand independent of any reference list. If you want to dance around that, fine." Well, if that's the case, the Harvard way of doing citations is also wrong, since it doesn't stand independent of any bibliography either. With the Harvard citations you don't even have to provide page numbers, which is simply ridiculous. How can you say that it "stands independent of any reference list" if they don't even provide page numbers? - "Its clear you don't understand referencing, citations and they're interlinkages. In text / video citations in your video have been done incorrectly. That was the point, you asked why, Ive explained it." And I've explained why I perfectly understand the way to do references and a bibliography works. But you didn't realize this when you jumped to the conclusion that there's "nothing right" with my references. I've (partly) explained why I do it the way I do, and you have ignored me, and instead continue to throw out baseless insults and accusations. It seems you'd rather continue to dig the hole you've made for yourself than admit that the way I do things - while it isn't the "official" way - is actually easier to understand than the alternative ways of doing it. Bottom line: I'm not willing to lower my standards by using what is clearly an inferior way of doing references just because they're "official". If you're going to come up with a reason why I should do it differently, then your reason a) must make sense, and b) be convincing (so, drop the insults, and start showing a bit of respect for other people).
    1
  16513. Hold on, you've not provided "criticism", you're provided insults and a weak argument. You've told me that "there's nothing right with [my references]", that they are "woeful, not to standard, missing major pieces, and not in anyway related to a bibliography" and have suggested that I've "[n]ever been to uni" and that I "should know" how to reference. This isn't "criticism", this is just simply an insult. Criticism would have been something like "Hey TIK, could I ask why you're referencing the way you are? Why don't you use the [insert reference method here] or provide the publication dates?" I would then have pointed out to you that I do in fact provide the dates in the bibliography. You failed to do that, and instead chose to insult me by saying I'm "substandard even for undergraduates" ... "eek". Then on top of that you provide a flawed argument that doesn't hold up to my counter argument, yet then expect me to "take the criticism" and just bow down to a flawed way of doing things. It appears you didn't understand that I refer to what you call "citations" as "references", and what you call "references" I call "bibliography" - which is the British way of doing things (it's actually different in the USA, Britain and Continental Europe, which you obviously didn't know). You've then called me out for "substandard references", believing that my "references" were my "bibliography", not my "citations". You've accused me of not providing the publication dates - which I have, they're in the bibliography. So to say that they're "missing major pieces" is simply incorrect, they are provided. When you say "Your references are... not in anyway related to a bibliography." - correct! The references (what you call "citations") aren't the bibliography! The bibliography is the source list and has the publisher and the publication dates. The references are the "citations" that don't need the publication date (for the reasons I gave above). Therefore, unless you've got an actual reason for why I should provide the publication dates in the "citations" (or "references") that stands up to scrutiny, then I see zero reason to actually provide them (since they're in the bibliography which is linked in the description).
    1
  16514. No, the "reference list" is the bibliography, which I've linked to in the description, and has the years. The "citations" - or the "references" as I call them in the video - are available in the video. As I explained above, the "citations" don't require the years of publication because it's pointless for the reasons given. The bibliography (what you incorrectly call the "references") does have the years and isn't "substandard" since all the information is provided. Since you seem incapable of finding the link, I will provide it for you here - The specific Battlestorm Stalingrad bibliography https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11_wRCV_bRBEryKB5l3uE-ZzMUPIGF6QyyrR5XpNXOGw/edit?usp=sharing Full list of all my sources https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing
    1
  16515.  @BenState  "dunno, but if one was to utilise many of the references as shown in the video (without bibliography), it would be impossible nearly to find the article. I don't know why you didn't reference correctly, its neater, easier to understand and follow and makes it much easier to follow up." 1. I have provided the bibliography, the link(s) are in the description. 2. there's a difference between a 'reference' and a 'source list'. Let's take the "official" Harvard way of doing things. In the Harvard style, the 'references' only need to show the author and the date of publication - not even the page number! E.g. "Glantz, D. 2009." Here is a page explaining this https://www.ukessays.com/essays/referencing/harvard-style-essay.php Only when using direct quotes should you add the page number... So the Harvard system makes it almost impossible at a glance to know where the information is. Whereas, I provide author, book, and page number in the reference regardless whether it's a direct quote or not. Then, if you so wish, you can find the date of publication and publisher by looking at my 'source list' (aka bibliography). This makes it way easier for the viewer to find the correct page in an instant. But you might object by saying that there's no reason to provide the book title in the reference. And I would disagree, the authors I'm using have multiple books or articles on the same subject, so it's more important that the titles are given than the (almost irrelevant) publication date. - "given than you didn't even know what the problem with your referencing was, im not sure you get what I mean. Either way, your 'own' system is not better." I disagree. The 'official' systems (and there's multiple) are absolutely awful. This is why I'm not using any 'official' system. And I didn't say that I didn't know what "the problem" was - I was asking you to explain exactly what you believed was the problem with the way I reference. You still haven't done that. Any objection you've provided doesn't stand up to scrutiny since I have demonstrated that it's easier to find the sources with my reference method than it is to find them using the Harvard style, and I could do the same with the other "official" styles too.
    1
  16516. What's wrong with them exactly?
    1
  16517. You are correct! Thank you for pointing that out, I will correct it
    1
  16518.  @frerderickbays2762  "ya u did but u never gave combat # just over all div # " I actually did both for the divisions where the numbers were available. The issue is that they're not always available, which they aren't on this date.
    1
  16519. 3 to 4 weeks. See https://youtu.be/kn455ydyZqY
    1
  16520. I'll be honest, I didn't get all the way through his series on Rome, but I enjoyed the videos I did listen too. It was years ago when I watched them. And I didn't even know he was doing one on the Russian Revolution!
    1
  16521. Links are in the description, but here's the playlist https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledi9jQeOzCUtBP2pxYdCYiXX
    1
  16522. As if I care about MPs and their laws! 😜
    1
  16523. Yes, someone else suggested this in the comments. I'll talk about this in a future video (maybe Addendum video)
    1
  16524.  @sodinc  Sadly, with the exception of a few instances (e.g. Pavlov's House), it's impossible to go down that far. Even battalion level is a stretch. But I will try
    1
  16525. I'm afraid you're going to be disappointed. While I won't be covering every action, my intention is to go into as much detail as possible whilst keeping things entertaining, similar to this episode and next episode. Lots of people want the details (as do I)
    1
  16526. Yes, in Britain you call them train stations and train lines.
    1
  16527. It's funny how many people get their information from Reddit... you know, because Reddit and Wikipedia are just godlike sources
    1
  16528. Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  16529. No, I'm not on vacation. I'm not publishing Stalingrad, but I'm doing other videos instead.
    1
  16530. Thank you, I'll check it out
    1
  16531. Nah, I messed up. Too much Stalingrad does that to you
    1
  16532. OP didn't listen very hard to what I originally said https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  16533. "Did Monty really blunder in his deployment of 82nd Airborne Division at the Bulge?" No, because Monty didn't deploy the 82nd at the Bulge.
    1
  16534. Can you tell I've been doing a lot of Stalingrad documentaries recently?
    1
  16535. The title doesn't imply that there weren't other blunders. You're reading into it too much.
    1
  16536. Thank you!
    1
  16537. Glad you liked it! What made you reluctant to watch this?
    1
  16538. "Did Monty really blunder in his deployment of 82nd Airborne Division at the Bulge?" No, because Monty didn't deploy the 82nd at the Bulge.
    1
  16539. You're really falling behind Jamie!
    1
  16540. I think it was a bit more than a minor mistake! :D Not the first time I've done this either - I've just can't get Stalingrad out of my brain
    1
  16541. Don't worry, I intend to do more political and economic stuff soon, but I had to get this one done first
    1
  16542. Did I say 1942? AAHHHHH! I've got Stalingrad on my brain
    1
  16543. Except Market Garden's objective wasn't the Ruhr https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM
    1
  16544. Thank you Steve!
    1
  16545. Radios!
    1
  16546. That's not a bad idea. Unfortunately the sources don't mention the logistical routes, and only talk in vague generalized ways, otherwise I would have provided it. However the supplies had to go south of Halfaya Ridge because of the Bardia, Sollum and Halfaya Pass garrisons.
    1
  16547. "Heart the comment so it’s a the top" I thought I pinned it? I'll repin it now
    1
  16548. "Also no timestamps in description" Ah... I completely forgot! I'll put them in shortly.
    1
  16549. Battlestorm The Courland Pocket will be out next Monday, and Battlestorm Stalingrad is after that at some point this year. Then I'll probably return to the North African Campaign.
    1
  16550. Cheers Bruce!
    1
  16551. Cheers Stephen!
    1
  16552. Not quite, it's Rommel's Second Offensive first
    1
  16553. I'm not saying it is necessary all the time. But there are a lot of instances where a text would substantially benefit with the injection of an interpretation by the historian. Stating facts is great and everything, but it's like riding to Gabr Saleh and then stopping and waiting for the enemy to react. You have to hammer home the opinion, and get the debate going. If it's the wrong conclusion, fine, but at least you stated your interpretation based on the evidence. That will spark a debate, and that debate is what makes history interesting. Is Churchill an alcoholic?
    1
  16554. Thanks! I will return to it in the future, after Courland and Stalingrad (which are the next two Battlestorms)
    1
  16555. Oh no, there's more coming next Monday and every Monday. I'm not stopping for Christmas! The 7th of January will just be the "Complete" Crusader video where I fix the minor issues and upload the full series in one video
    1
  16556. Don't forget that he's released a one book version too, which is just called "Stalingrad". Unless you want stupid amounts of detail (like me), the one book version is great.
    1
  16557. Overall, I'd agree with your assessment. Another mobile German division or two would have been disastrous for the British at this time.
    1
  16558. Arguably. It really depends on how easy you think the remnants of 7th Armoured Division would crumble. But the Panzer Divisions were already fatigued on Totensonntag, so another big battle would have exhausted them.
    1
  16559. HaZZarD thanks HaZZarD! You're not far off 1000 yourself :)
    1
  16560. Quadro2k I'm glad you're looking forward to it! I'm incredibly anxious about it for several reasons!
    1
  16561. Ladislav Matoušek Thanks man! Good to hear you're interested in Market Garden too. What makes it one of your favourites? I'm still working on the graphics so I'd say the quality of the maps etc should be a lot better by the time I roll it out... and it will be in colour too! :)
    1
  16562. Toni112007 slowly but surely :) I'll be catching up to you soon! And I hope it's as epic as you envision it :P I'm certainly working on it as hard as possible
    1
  16563. martaxsasLT me too :D already written 15355 words for my (unfinished) script!
    1
  16564. Rikki_PT that's what I want to hear!
    1
  16565. Rikki_PT not sure how I missed this comment! Thanks Rikki! Glad you're still around :)  I'm really trying to publish better content... and learn from my mistakes :)
    1
  16566. Smart Tactics cheers to you too! :D it is a special battle, and I'm nervous about making this as good as it possibly can be lol
    1
  16567. Mokou Fujiwara good job these HD cameras make people look more handsome than they actually are!
    1
  16568. Combat Camera haha not what you were expecting? :D thanks CC!
    1
  16569. Mokou Fujiwara damn! I'm impressed! I've saved the link and will get them for future use :) thanks for the recommendation! But yeah I don't want to do a documentary on the Eastern Front if it'll be out of date by the time I publish it :/
    1
  16570. Mokou Fujiwara I too prefer the Eastern Front for most of the battles. However, most of the sources and books that have been written about the Eastern Front are now outdated as recent historians like David Glantz are proving https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg Also Market Garden has always fascinated me. I blame CC2 for that though :P
    1
  16571. Devon Ziegler Thanks Devon! I hope you enjoy it when it does finally come out :)
    1
  16572. Christian S. Absolutely! I'm happy with 1000. It's nice knowing a good portion of you by name/username. And definitely hope we can have some more battles, it'll be a bit different from the Panther's League at least :)
    1
  16573. Christian S. cheers! I'm a loooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnggggggg way off 10,000 though :P
    1
  16574. Thegamer8324 thanks Gamer! I think you were one of the ones who asked for me to reveal my face, so hope you're happy with it :P I still think the Stalingrad LP was one of my best. As far as the documentaries are concerned, if I decide to do more after this, I'll definitely consider doing an early war documentary. I'm planning to go into a lot of detail with this one, so hopefully I can do the same in any more I make. Not sure if there's anything you can really do to help tbh, it's kinda a one man job! And you've definitely been around a while - couldn't get rid of you :D
    1
  16575. Morgan Chalmers I highly doubt TBF will be out this summer. By the sounds of it, maybe for xmas. Again, I'll be putting a video as soon as I hear. But I hope you have a nice holiday :) I'll hopefully be free later this week. The issue I'm having right now is with my job. Things are changing rapidly. By the looks of things, I might be in line for promotion...
    1
  16576. Morgan Chalmers Cheers! I like that you like my unique jumper :P I wasn't planning on selling copies... I mean, I didn't think anyone would actually want one And yes, I'm thinking it may take until then to actually finish it all. And I absolutely want to battle you again in GWTC ;)
    1
  16577. ***** hey SuperVerst! I guess you spoke too soon :P my main focus will be on explaining what happened (in more detail than documentaries tend to do) in order so everyone can see exactly what happened as it happened, in order to show why recent historians are rethinking the disaster. Explaining what happened as impartial as possible should by itself make people question what they've previously been told were "truths" about the Operation as most documentaries (and books!) focus on one or two areas, which means viewers/readers miss the bigger picture. The script is still unfinished so if I can spare the time to talk about Monty I will. I'm thinking I may have to do several "extra" episodes explaining things outside the main documentary because otherwise it would be way too long.
    1
  16578. Steinar Barsøe correctamungo!
    1
  16579. Tomislav the flag of Vatican City isn't that old! It's something like less than 100 years old
    1
  16580. Congratulations MrSuperchicken :)
    1
  16581. What's my secret?
    1
  16582. Yes, I plan to cover them at some point soon
    1
  16583. And that's the reaction I'm expecting people to have when they see it :D or see my Stalingrad documentary, which will be something like 48 hours long and current research is in the region of 400,000 words.
    1
  16584. Yes, I've decided to cut back (a little) on some of the Monday videos to allow me time to work on Operation Crusader, which was 92,000 words of research and is currently about 60,000 words in script (which isn't finished). I'm estimating now that the final product will be about 7 hours long, which will hopefully make up for a few shorter or not-quite-as-visually intense videos in the meantime.
    1
  16585. :D
    1
  16586. No no no, his books on this had a lot more than 3 errors. During the trial, they went to his sources and found that practically every source he used had been manipulated or changed or twisted to suit his agenda. Seriously, check the second link, she gives several examples and it's scary that this guy has so much credit as he has.
    1
  16587. Ckiane, please be incredibly careful when you read Irving. In fact, I would say stop right now and watch these two videos first before you continue. This one's the shorter of the two https://youtu.be/0ztdofPc8Rw But this one especially gives examples of how he lied https://youtu.be/t7zSR7BGbuQ
    1
  16588. Why? Can you not do that??
    1
  16589. Great! That book is very good too so you've not made a mistake there :)
    1
  16590. Thank you Anton :) I'm glad you're enjoying my videos
    1
  16591. You realise my Market Garden documentary was my first documentary, right? https://youtu.be/vTUC79o4Kmc
    1
  16592. If you anger some Wehraboos, you know it's a good day ;)
    1
  16593. I have that book, and I've just checked, and it is on the list. It's actually on the shelf behind me in the videos. However, it is an old book and massively out of date. As I've mentioned in several videos, it was practically written by Halder, who became the leading advisor for the US historical division, and did his best to manipulate the postwar view of the war. Some of Halder's manipulations survive as myths about the war to this day. So I wouldn't say that Shirer's book is very reliable no matter how well it is written
    1
  16594. Neither can I! Been working on the script solidly and it's well over 60k words right now
    1
  16595. Longer than anything I've produced so far, yes. A little while away yes, but current estimate says Crusader will be about 7 hours long.
    1
  16596. At the bottom along with Halder's Diaries - which is where Shirer got most of his information from.
    1
  16597. Great! Hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  16598. Hi
    1
  16599. I don't 'agree' with his decisions, more that I don't think he was 'insane' in his decision making. His objectives were X, and he was making decisions relating to X, but the German generals said he was doing Y, and therefore they said his decisions were bad and he was a madman https://youtu.be/nvjphjclEaQ
    1
  16600. I agree that Moscow didn't matter, but some think it did. The Caucasus and Ukraine mattered more.
    1
  16601. I see what you're trying to do, but if everyone else in Europe was using one gauge, and the Russians another, then the standard across the continent was the non-Russian gauge.
    1
  16602. Me too, and logistics is shaped by economics and politics
    1
  16603. They did use the Russian railways, but offloading one train and loading up another took an age. Creveld talks about this in the book, and it truly was a nightmare. Plus, they didn't have enough captured Russian locomotives to make it work.
    1
  16604. Wouldn't be a TIK video without a few mistakes ;)
    1
  16605. It actually wasn't. Hitler believed in the "Shrinking Markets" concept, which meant he saw no future in exports (and thus, no imports either). I will talk about this in a future video.
    1
  16606. Why should you export goods when you believe all you're doing is giving non-industrial nations the tools to industrialize and then compete with your own nation? (this is called "zero-sum" economics because you believe you're getting nothing in return for sending goods elsewhere) How do you import if you no longer export? If you can't import the food you need, what do you do? - You Lebensraum. Economics is the reason Hitler is going East in the first place, and why he doesn't trade for the oil for the trucks he needs to run his logistics, which means only 19 divisions are motorized and can go a limited distance before running out. Hitler's economic ideology dictated that Barbarossa would fail. War is an extention of economics. Understanding that production is what causes economic growth (not money), and that increased production increases living standards and creates more jobs (after a brief recession), means that economics isn't a zero-sum game. If Hitler had understood basic economics (rather than listening to Marxist theory) he wouldn't have even had a reason to start the war in the first place (or have a reason to get into power at all). [I'll admit I'm going deep here and not offering nicely easy-to-read/understand comment. This is because I have been reading up on all this recently and haven't yet moulded it into a solid and simplified script, so you're getting the raw product. However, don't worry because I will explain all this properly in a future video.]
    1
  16607. I mean... Not the next video (little one coming tomorrow)
    1
  16608. Hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  16609. I did mention that. It was probably the Fall Blau video (link in description).
    1
  16610. To be fair, all sides made mistakes.
    1
  16611. This is proof I don't delete your comments Oddball. Just thought I'd confirm that, since you said I love censorship for some reason ;)
    1
  16612. Thank you for your comment. I'm not sure why people don't want historians to study non-military matters, and the criticism I'm receiving makes little sense. I honestly think half of the unanswered questions about the war can be answered by economics or politics/ideology, or some combination of the two. To ignore it would be to ignore half the picture. If I'm wrong about something, that's fine, tell me where I'm going wrong and I can look into it. The problem with the thing that some are complaining about is that I have looked into their complaints... and they don't hold up.
    1
  16613. But I don't know Castilian so can't do that :(
    1
  16614. I'm not giving out my email at the monent (Nazis and Marxists like to DDOS, which they can via email apparently). But even if I was, I can't commit to a new project at the moment. I do want to get onto Bagration and D-Day, but it won't be until after Courland and Stalingrad are done at the very earliest.
    1
  16615. @George, I don't mention it in this video at all.
    1
  16616. Ok, if you insist ;)
    1
  16617. Thanks for the suggestion. The book I did read of his didn't really talk about logistics. Think it was his "Barbarossa" one. Can you tell me which one specifically talks about logistics?
    1
  16618. What do you mean by "again"? I've never brought this up before now since it wasn't relevant. But it is relevant because it doesn't make any economic sense. The only people pushing for railways being more relevant are people who haven't read a book like Thomas Sowell's "Economic Facts and Fallacies", which talks about why public transportation is inefficient compared to automobiles.
    1
  16619. It does today. Trucks/automobiles are far more flexible than trains. This is why train usage in the UK is roughly at the same level it was prior to 1914, despite a massive increase in population of the UK since then. It also shows quite clearly why companies should be privatized and not run by the government, and why Labour's current policy of "renationalizing" the railways is a complete waste of taxpayers money, since the vast majority of the people in the UK don't use trains and it makes zero sense to force taxpayers to pay for something they don't use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Great_Britain#/media/File:GBR_rail_passengers_by_year_1830-2015.png
    1
  16620. Yeah, total government control is bad. And Marxist ideology can only happen after they murder and steal off a portion of the population. Worse, since there's no incentive to work, the people are less productive, forcing the government to resort to enslavement of part of the population in order to boost production. This happens every time it's implemented as history clearly shows us.
    1
  16621. The reason you don't see them as a threat is because they're actually liberals who have been duped into thinking they're socialists.
    1
  16622. "the killing and enslavement is a feature where in socialism it is an incorrectable design flaw" Let's double check that, shall we? Definitions - Means of production : people, individuals. [A factory/building cannot operate without a human, so humans are the means of production. Therefore do you want to control your own life, or have someone else control it?] Capitalism : private control of the means of production. [private individual (you) control over your own life] Standard "Utopian" socialism : common-control of the means of production. [a group / other people / another authority controls your life - you're no longer free] Marxist Socialism : class-control of the means of production. [the "workers" unions are in control, anyone else should be enslaved and murdered] National Socialism : race-control of the means of production. [the "Aryan" race should be in control, everyone else should be enslaved and murdered] Fascism : nationality-control of the means of production. [e.g. the "Americans" (nationality, not race) should be in control, everyone else should be enslaved and murdered] Clearly, socialism is built on both killing and enslavement, no matter which form it is. Enslavement and killing are fundamental to the very core ideology itself, which is that some people should be excluded from society because they are part of a social group that another social group doesn't like.
    1
  16623. I have read Tooze. Did you miss the part where Hitler stopped trading with "international Jewish finance" (capitalism)?
    1
  16624. Interesting narrative. Doesn't make any sense and contradicts National Socialist ideology completely, but it was a nice read.
    1
  16625. "In order to need a savior, you have to feel there is something you need saving from, and that means you have to believe that somehow you are in really, really bad shape." Quoted from this article which explains it well https://onlysky.media/ncarter/so-long-self/
    1
  16626. At which point did I say it was just poor parenting?
    1
  16627. Capitalism is bad. What we need are free markets, not more Capitalism.
    1
  16628. Socialism is a bad thing. As an ex-socialist, I can assure you that socialism is one of the greatest evils that the world has ever seen, and at it's core is altruism.
    1
  16629. Why? What did she do to hurt you?
    1
  16630. The alternative isn't to assume you're perfect. It's to assume that you are a good person by default, but who has the self-confidence and self-respect to be even better than you already are. This is a much more healthier doctrine. Nobody is perfect, but we are human, and that's nothing to be ashamed about.
    1
  16631. A "fallen nature" = flawed 🤷🏻‍♂️ You believe yourself imperfect and in need of saving. Sounds to me that you do not value your-self. You have low self-esteem because your religion says that you're bad, but must work towards God to overcome this badness. Christianity starts at the assumption that you are bad, and then asks you to be good. Your "nature" is therefore flawed. Thinking yourself as flawed by default is to say that you think yourself as bad. This is self-hatred. Christianity then may say to overcome that bad "nature", but it starts at the premise of self-hatred. I mean, you can deny this all you like, but I think you're too busy defending Christianity from "attack" rather than thinking about this objectively. For a person who starts off Christian but loses the faith, they retain the belief that man is flawed by nature, but lose the ability to be saved by God. The state then becomes their God, which will save man from his sins.
    1
  16632. I mean, the fact that Catholics believe that humans are fundamentally flawed somehow speaks volumes. You cannot say that humans are flawed, but then expect nobody to feel guilt or shame for who they are. If you're fundamentally flawed to the core and have "Original Sin", then of course you're going to feel shame. Christianity may then teach people to improve and not be "victims", but the reality is that people of the faith do feel self-hatred. And it's an incorrect view anyway. Men are men. They are who they are. They make mistakes and aren't perfect, but they're not fundamentally flawed creatures.
    1
  16633. I'll copy what I said to someone else: "I went out with a Catholic woman recently who has stayed with the nuns in Rome. She was so poor that she couldn't afford to buy gifts for people at Christmas, and was forced to bake cookies for her friends and family instead. Yet, on one date she turns up and tells me that she had just given her last pound to the tramp in the street. She told me her friends would ring her drunk in the middle of the night and ask her to pick them up, and being an atlruistic "good girl" she would get out of bed and go pick them up. She admitted she was depressed, was constantly being taken advantage of, and was in therapy. I told her straight that it was her faith that was the cause of this, and she said "I know". Her 'self' was lacking because she had sacrificed it for everyone else. That's why she was also very tense and on edge all the time. I could tell she had anger issues. I've had family members who were in the same boat."
    1
  16634. Christianity does teach self-hatred. This guy's article explains it well https://onlysky.media/ncarter/so-long-self/
    1
  16635. Hold on, I knew I was right. Lenin's mother was Lutheran.
    1
  16636. It's a genuine error on my part. The rest of the video is factual, however.
    1
  16637. Why should I engage with a racist who believes in the anti-semite religion known as Marxism?
    1
  16638. Oh, I don't know racist, why don't you tell me?
    1
  16639. I'll tell you what then, Martin, let's read from Karl Marx himself, shall we? “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Karl Marx, New York Tribune (1850s?) from Muravchik “Heaven on Earth”. “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”. “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”. “The Weekly Mail maintains that although Levy really fools no one, he has changed "i" into "y", and it is true that among the 22,000 Levites whom Moses counted in the journey through the wilderness, there was not a single Levi who spelled his name with a "y". Just as Edouard Simon spares no effort to be regarded as belonging to the Romance people, so Levy is determined to be an Anglo-Saxon. Therefore, at least once a month he attacks the un-English policies of Mr. Disraeli, for Disraeli, "the Asiatic mystery", is, unlike the Telegraph, not an Anglo-Saxon by descent. But what does it profit Levy to attack Mr. D'Israeli and to change "i" into "y", when Mother Nature has inscribed his origins in the clearest possible way right in the middle of his face. The nose of the mysterious stranger of Slawkenbergius (see Tristram Shandy) who had got the finest nose from the promontory of noses was just a nine days' wonder in Strasbourg, whereas Levy's nose provides conversation throughout the year in the City of London.” - Karl Marx, Herr Vogt (1860). http://marxengels.public-archive.net/en/ME1916en.html “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, “Das Kapital volume 1,” p107.
    1
  16640. I used biographies of the individuals, and even had quotes from them and the authors 🤨
    1
  16641. "It's not helping others in a manner that destroys you." No, it is. By placing others above yourself, you lower your self-esteem, causing all sorts of mental problems.
    1
  16642. Helping others because you can isn't altruism.
    1
  16643. No, altruism is helping others to your detriment, since placing others needs before your own results in a lowering of your self-esteem.
    1
  16644. I am (unfortunately) still an altruist, having inherited it from my socialist days. I've been unable to purge this evil ideology from my psyche as of yet. I'm working on it though. But yes, it is a rejection of self worth, as you place the needs of others before yourself.
    1
  16645. As an ex-socialist, I came to the conclusion that altruism was bad before I read Ayn Rand. I've only recently started reading her (in the last few months). The reason I started reading her was because everyone was accusing me of having read her when I hadn't, therefore I thought I'd give it a go. I regret not reading her sooner as it would have saved me a lot of time. I'm not sure why you think I'm being dishonest with my "beliefs", but I'm curious to know what you think my genuine "beliefs" are.
    1
  16646. I never said you can't help others or exchange resources, just that nobody's entitled to those things.
    1
  16647. Just so you know, I read out and responded to your comment in my latest video https://youtu.be/Oe5NezWbQbs
    1
  16648. Altruism is the deflection of selfishness. Anyone claiming to be altruistic is doing it because THEY want to be seen as good in the eyes of others (or God). Altruism is done for selfish reasons.
    1
  16649. They're not going to Google. They're coming to me specifically. It's called "specialisation". Since most good honest people work for a living, they have limited time to do historical research. I am immersed in the literature, and so can show my findings and provide citations.
    1
  16650. I'm an ex-socialist. Try again.
    1
  16651. Communism, Fascism... Two sides of the same coin.
    1
  16652. What about all the evidence I presented? Are you just going to ignore it?
    1
  16653. I explained that anti-semitism and anti-capitalism are the same thing back in 2020 in this video here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  16654. I'm an ex-socialist, and I'm not mentally ill. Unless you've been one, it's difficult to explain it, but mental illness isn't what's going on - it only appears like that from a non-socialist perspective. Once you're in the wizard's circle, there's a 'logic' to it.
    1
  16655. "Of course you are not a capitalist, because you don't own land or factories or something like that." I do own land (a house), and I do have an editor/animator working with me. But I'm not a capitalist, I'm a free market guy. Capitalism is bad. What we need is less capitalism and more freedom for the economy to actually function.
    1
  16656. No, you place yourself first before others. I never said you shouldn't care about others. I don't understand your point about car insurance. And Ayn Rand's personal life is irrelevant to the discussion. We don't live in a truly free market society, so we have no choice sometimes but to deal with and use statist services. For example, I'm forced to use the NHS here in the UK. I'd rather use a free market service, but I'm forced to pay my taxes to the NHS, so I can't take my money and go elsewhere. This isn't a flaw in my reasoning or my person, it's the circumstances in which we live.
    1
  16657. It is altruism. You may not like this assessment, but it is altruism.
    1
  16658. Ayn Rand wasn't an Anarcho-Capitalist 🤣
    1
  16659. My family are dirt poor, and I am not. Nobody is a "victim" of the free market, you're only a victim of your own mentality. People are poor because you don't truly understand basic economics. This is why I always recommend the book "Economics in One Lesson"by Henry Hazlitt. Free markets may be bad for those who don't want to work. For everyone else, they're your ticket to freedom and prosperity.
    1
  16660. Lenin's mother was Lutheran.
    1
  16661. Lenin preferred his mother to his father, calling her a "saint". He was baptised Orthodox, but was brought up mainly by his mother. She may have "lapsed", but nonetheless she was a big influence in his life. So at worst you could say it was half and half.
    1
  16662. As an ex-socialist who is still trying to purge altruism from his mind, I can tell you that you're wrong with your assessment of altruism and of these socialists. They are altruistic to the bone - that's why they bang on about equality and how we all need to help each other in our society. I'm genuinely shocked that you think socialists are not altruists 🤦🏼‍♂️ All of the socialists in this video had parental issues. Either they lost one or more of their parents early, or they were absent in their lives, or they simply didn't get on, or there was abuse. Either way, there were parental issues, which coupled with the altruism, led to self-hatred and a fear of independence. It's not JUST the altruism, and it's not JUST the parental issues, it's the COMBINATION of the two concepts together that's the crucial point. The only one here that may not entirely fit the bill is Pol Pot, but he may do, since even in this case his parents were absent from his life. You denying the evidence isn't a flaw with my reasoning.
    1
  16663. Thank you for sharing your story, and for the book recommendation! I'll check it out
    1
  16664. So you deny the clear pattern in all their upbringings? What is your argument here? Stating I'm wrong isn't an argument.
    1
  16665. It's a combination of philosophy (religion/altruism) and laziness/parental issues, not necessarily one or the other.
    1
  16666. Are you denying the existence of the clearly identified pattern?
    1
  16667. Well, as an altruist myself, I can tell you exactly what it is. I mean, look it up online. A simple Google search will show you the problems with altruism.
    1
  16668. My source specifically says that in Karl Marx's time, the word 'Judentum' was synonymous with the word 'commerce'.
    1
  16669. That's interesting. Could you provide a source?
    1
  16670. Define history for me. The philosophy that socialism is based upon comes from Hegel, who based his philosophy on the irrationalism of Immanuel Kant, which ultimately derives from Plato and the Orphics. This philosophy denied reality, which is why I said that the socialists were denying reality, because that's what their ideology does.
    1
  16671. I have read a lot of Marx. You need to be a materialist to be an anti-materialist 👍🏻
    1
  16672. Lenin's mother was Lutheran 👍🏻
    1
  16673. It's funny how many people not only agreed with me, but told stories of their own lives which are similar to the socialists I discussed in the video. And then there are those who deny everything I've said to be true. It just makes me laugh 😂
    1
  16674. We don't have a free market. If capitalism is the free market, we're not living in capitalism.
    1
  16675. Capitalism and Socialism are both bad. What we need is less of both, and more free markets.
    1
  16676. Just so you know, I read out and responded to your comment in my latest video https://youtu.be/Oe5NezWbQbs
    1
  16677. "“Gleichschaltung” – and again, I'm not only native speaker but actually German – means exactly the core of fascism: corporativism, combining the power of the state with the power of the corporations." Exactly. It's the socialisation of the means of production, which is socialism.
    1
  16678. "Corporation" is a word meaning "corpse", as in "body" or "organ". Corporation means "organs of the state". Mussolini merged the businesses into corporations, which were organs of the state. That's why he nationalised two thirds of the entire Italian economy.
    1
  16679. And here is a video explaining the real reason Hitler killed Ernst Röhm in the Night of the Long Knives. It had nothing to do with socialism Vs capitalism https://youtu.be/Gh7v0DU9UWA
    1
  16680. Here is a video of mine going through all this, and more, with sources listed and references at the bottom of the screen https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    1
  16681. Gleichschaltung. Forced synchronization of the entire economy. All industries over 5 employees were nationalised in all but name, each becoming a betriebsgemeinschaft. The betriebsführer ran the businesses now, and the gefolgschaft fell under the state's power, which is why they couldn't change jobs without permission. Everything from the beekeeping society to the yacht clubs were nationalised. Private property was abolished under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. Property not in sync with state policy could be expropriated. That's why many films like Professor Junkers's aeroplane factory, and Fritz Thyssen's concern were expropriated. The Deutsches Arbeitsfront (DAF) was one of the largest trade unions in history. Over 25 million Germans were in the DAF. All private non-state trade unions were abolished or merged into the DAF, which had enormous powers within the factories. Price Kommissar Joseph Wagner tried to implement price controls. He failed, but the attempt was made. They did, however, implement wage controls, rent controls, pension controls, and a host of other controls and regulations. Boards for distribution were set up for all commodities, like coal, steel, paper etc. To buy a resource, you'd have to go to one of these boards first to get permission. Millions of questionnaires were sent out asking for details of input and output from all the businesses, and a real attempt to centrally distribute goods and services was made.
    1
  16682. Hitler wasn't a Fascist, he was a National Socialist, and there is a difference between the two distinct ideologies as I have explained in this other video using copious amounts of sources https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko If you don't get the basics right, I'm here to correct you with evidence and logic. You're welcome.
    1
  16683. Yes, which is why I concluded that the 1946 Depression didn't happen, even though Keynesians think it did.
    1
  16684. Yes, you've argued what I argued in the video - that the 1946 Depression didn't happen. I would watch the full video before commenting.
    1
  16685. "TIK has become much much angrier in his recent videos" Have I? Was I angry in this video? "his videos seem to be transitioning from measured history into the normal Conservative/Libertarian argument videos" Yes, Conservative (which is middle of the political spectrum) and Libertarian (which is Right-Wing). Yes, those are the same /s "Trying to place someone as multifaceted as Hitler onto a political spectrum is inherently flawed" You're admitting you don't know what National Socialism is. "and many of the comments on his original video point out the issues with it." Which is why I made a video called "Hitler's Socialism: DEFEATING THE DENIALIST COUNTER-ARGUMENTS". Emphasizing the "Defeating the Denialist Counter-Arguments" part because I addressed their 'counter-arguments' in the video. So, me destroying their arguments does not mean that their old comments and arguments are still valid.
    1
  16686. @Andrew Truax - yeah watched that video before. Nice to see another Marxist-Socialist call me an anti-Semite (TheFinnishBolshevik also did) for zero reason. I'm not planning on doing a video response because, as you said, he hasn't watched the video and doesn't actually address anything I said in the video except the definitions. And I said in the Hitler's Socialism video that if someone disagrees with my definitions, to check out the Public vs Private video which hammers the definitions home (going from ancient history all the way to the modern day). This guy didn't do that either, but then proceeded to say I know nothing about ancient or "feudal" history. What a joke.
    1
  16687. The State monopoly on war production isn't a free market. The State produces the products it itself consumes. That's Socialism. Thus, the 'price' of a tank isn't subject to the free market of buying and selling, so it's value cannot be determined through prices. Again, where there is no market, you cannot have prices. Without prices, you cannot have economic calculation. Your argument is that value isn't subjective. It is. A tank has value. But how much value? In a free market we'd be able to determine it because we'd be able to buy and sell tanks and come up with a price. In a State controlled economy like the United States had between 1929 and 1945, prices do not reflect the actual value of the goods and services. That's not because the subjective theory of value doesn't work, but because we cannot determine or calculate the true subjective value due to the fact that the prices were made up.
    1
  16688. You're correct, I don't see it. Could you explain why this undermines the market theory of value?
    1
  16689. If you pay him directly, yes. If you don't pay him directly, then there's no way to know. I'd also argue that the State police aren't there to protect you, but to protect the State.
    1
  16690. "If it was private companies buying military equipment and sending emplyees to war, it would be the same: no contribution to consumer good and living standards, no?" Yes, the same principle applies. Although in theory the private companies could only do it if it was either profitable or they had reserves of capital to spend/waste on the conflict. This would therefore limit any private war. The State on the other hand doesn't rely on profit at all, since all its revenue comes from stealing off its own citizens, or fraudulently printing more currency. Thus, the State can wage bigger and more destructive wars. "Because it seems to me the driver of this war recession was not the US state, but the Japanese and the Nazis." I agree. As a bit of an extra, I've heard of a theory that says the USA (or, at least, the central bankers of America and Great Britain) financed Hitler into power and encouraged him to go to war. I don't currently believe in this theory, but I've just ordered a book on it. I want to see if the argument has any merit, or if it's just a pro-Nazi argument. I thought you should know though, since apparently some argue that the USA was secretly behind the war (in fact, Rudolf Hess made a similar argument when he landed in the UK).
    1
  16691. "hank goodness we (USA) didn't have today's inflation levels back then! O.o" It's truly frightening what they're doing right now. The highest first-time unemployment claims in the US have just hit an all-time record high. This coming straight after the stock market crash, an oil crash, a near-total lockdown of the economy, and the promise of literal trillions of newly printed or digitized currency. And it's happening in every country :( "North and South Vietnam followed different economic paths" North and South Korea is another good example too. If you haven't seen this before, just look at a night map of Korea and see the difference in lighting. Speaks volumes https://images.app.goo.gl/WgcstqgrokumBnPW8
    1
  16692. The way to solve the debt crisis, is with more debt. If we all become debt slaves, our economy will boom! What could go wrong!?
    1
  16693. "why is Keynesian economics so prominent among economists? if your job is economics, how can't you understand the essence of it?" It's prominent among statists who work for the government, because it promotes government control and increased spending. It's a self-fulfilling loop.
    1
  16694. My pleasure! The Austrian School economists are the most in-tune with what happened, and don't present contradictory explanations of what happened (unlike some of the other narratives) so I'm more than happy to use them. It's all about finding the truth 🙂
    1
  16695. Except, there wasn't a recession at all. You didn't watch the video.
    1
  16696. A secret depression which didn't happen?
    1
  16697. Government = Socialism. So the original name still stands
    1
  16698. "Would a security guard be similar to a soldier? Standing outside a vault, producing nothing, no one attempts to rob it, and he still gets paid. But we wouldn't say security guards are a drain on the economy; they're insurance to protect wealth from being destroyed through theft." The security guard is providing a service. The person who owns the vault hires his service. Thus, he is economically productive, even though he doesn't produce anything. Now, the vault owner won't buy 100,000 security guards, with tanks etc, because that will be economically unproductive and inefficient. So he buys just enough to fulfill the role. "Extrapolate this to an army. If one thief comes, you need one guard. A team of thieves, a team of guards. 100,000 thieves with helmets, badges, grenades, & tanks, 100,000 guards, similarly equipped." Right. And in a free economy, people would happily pay for an army to protect them. The difference is that in a State economy (socialism) wealth is being extracted from everyone by force, and given to an army. So, instead of the military being the necessary size as dictated by the market, and providing an efficient service that people want economically, it's not doing that any more. The EFFICIENCY is lost, and thus, it operates at a loss - a cost to society.
    1
  16699. True!
    1
  16700. The lesson here is that you should try watching the video before commenting. My argument is that the 1946 Great Depression that the Keynesians argue happened, not only didn't happen, but that GDP actually grew.
    1
  16701. Well, considering the 1946 Depression didn't happen, then of course the 2020 Depression will be worse ;)
    1
  16702. Cops aren't there to help the consumer, they're there to enforce the survival of the State and their tax reaping minions. So yes, since they fail to provide a service to the consumer, they're technically unemployed. Same with firemen - my grandad was one, and he said firemen can't put fires out, they can only slow it down and try prevent them from spreading. Again though, if not paid for directly by the consumer, then they're technically unemployed. I've never once needed to ring for a fireman, since I'm careful. We're overpaying for their services, and substituting people to be uncareful. If I had the choice, I'd absolutely not pay taxes to them. Sadly we don't get a choice to not pay taxes, which is proof that they're not providing value to us, because tax wouldn't be mandatory if they provided value. 2.6% unemployment rate is not massive. You missed the sarcasm in my voice at that part. There was no 1946 Recession, unless you believe the fake Keynesian anti-economical numbers. As I showed, GDP lowered during the war, which fits the historical narrative. Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" explains why the Great Depression was caused by fiat-currency creation. The reaction by the State to the depression was to intervene in the economy. This reaction deepened and lengthened the depression. Saying 2+2=4 is not an ideological argument. It's simply correct. Pointing out that the mainstream narrative makes no sense, and the Keynesians have a flawed economic model that even states that there's recessions when there isn't one, is not an ideological argument. It's simply correct.
    1
  16703. Keep watching... :)
    1
  16704. No, it's more economic to disband the army
    1
  16705. Marxists don't think of economics. Their 'economics' is anti-economics, which is why their economies always implode
    1
  16706. Thanks!
    1
  16707. Actually, as I showed, the economy not only turned to normal in 1946, but also recovered from the Great Depression. That's why I say the Great Depression lasted from 1929 to 1945
    1
  16708. I don't have time to give a full answer here, but I would suggest that you read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard, and/or watch my previous video on What Causes Recessions. In a nutshell, the State creates the recession, and then "cures" it by deepening it... The way out of the loop is to let the market crash happen (as uncomfortable as that is) and return to a real economy.
    1
  16709. Yes, but many can't see it :/
    1
  16710. "The notion that a soldier or an unemployed person, because they do not produce anything tangible, don't contribute to the economy is beyond stupid, it's just ignorant." What good or service does an unemployed person produce? "An economic system is composed by those who produce goods (both tangible, like a loaf of bread, and intangible, like knowledge, security, laws, etc) and those who consume them (the factory worker, the baker, the teacher, the student, the soldier, the politician and, yes, the unemployed)." Incorrect. The factory worker is producing goods for someone else. The baker produces bread. The teacher provides the service of teaching (technically an investment in future production). The student studies, again an investment in future production. The soldier protects the economy. The unemployed (especially long-term unemployed) and politicians (especially long-term politicians) just consume resources from others without putting anything of value back into the pot. They, like leeches, drain the resources from those who actually work and produce for society. The soldier in a free economy (mercenary) who gets his wage directly from those voluntarily paying for his services, is an economic investment in the safety of society. The problem is that we don't have a free market. So our current soldiers are being paid from the wealth stolen off those who work. Therefore, it's impossible to assess the economic value they're providing - they're probably draining more resources than they would do under a free market. "They contribute by consuming the goods produced by the baker, the butcher, the fisherman, the farmer, etc..." So how does an unemployed person who consumes bread from the baker, make the baker better off? What's he giving back in return for the baker's bread? Money is a means of exchange. If there's nothing to exchange it with, then money is worthless. The baker is giving out bread in the hope that he will receive other goods and services in return. So he gives a guy bread, and the guy gives him an IOU (money) which says "I promise to pay you the same value of goods or services back to you in the future". But when the baker goes to collect the goods or service back from the economy, he doesn't get as much, because the guy who gave him the IOU hasn't contributed to the economy in the first place, but got his money for "free". "And you are not unemployed if you don't produce anything tangible," Yes you are. "if not all countries would have unemployment rates over 50% !" They do. That's why our economy hasn't done anything in the past 10 years, if not longer. And now you're beginning to see why Socialism doesn't work :) "if you receive some kind of unemployment pension I bet that you will spend it all on food, rent, basic goods, therefore contributing to the general economy." That's draining resources, not contributing. You're not contributing anything in return for those resources, therefore you're not contributing to the economy at all. "TIK, please stick to WW2 videos, that's what your're very good at!" This is a WW2 video.
    1
  16711. "Today I am a landlord and produce nothing." If you're maintaining your property, you're providing a service to your tenants, and thus are 'producing' a service. - "My workers are paid cash as well." And cash is manipulated by the Central (State) Banks. So even the "black market" (really, the free market) isn't truly free, since the means of exchange and the interest rate policies are being heavily distorted by the State, leading to massive amounts of malinvestment. In fact, the distortions are so prevalent within the system that the Stock Market goes up as the real economy implodes. The price of EVERYTHING isn't the real price. NOTHING is its proper fundamental value, which is why crude oil went negative earlier this year... That is definitely something to think about.
    1
  16712. Saving money will lead to growth. It's counter-intuitive, and Keynes called it the "paradox of thrift", but Rothbard explains this concept well in "America's Great Depression".
    1
  16713. If they would boost the GDP figures, then why would official GDP shrink? Doesn't make sense to me. There is no evidence for the 1946 Depression other than the official statistics, and as shown, the official statistics are incorrect.
    1
  16714. Yes, definitely didn't watch the video
    1
  16715. Yes, I unlisted them and was waiting to see the fallout from the COPPA crisis
    1
  16716. It's nice when that happens :)
    1
  16717. Britain 1825. The 1800s saw at least a doubling of living standards for the British people.
    1
  16718. "The banks have to bailed out because if they collapse we are all screwed." Not true. Banks have collapsed before, and life moved on very quickly. "Without banks there are no business-loans and no economic growth." Please see my What Causes Recessions and Depressions video if you haven't already, because business-loans are not necessarily what cause economic growth https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs "A bankrupt country is not a pretty thing." True!
    1
  16719. Correct!
    1
  16720. But what happens if the historians and economists agree? The historians and the Austrian School economists are in agreement here
    1
  16721. Except, the 1946 Depression didn't happen, as I showed in the video.
    1
  16722. I didn't ignore the 'growth'. Try watching the video fully before commenting
    1
  16723. I actually showed the Wikipedia data in the video. I also explained that there wasn't a Depression in 1945 either.
    1
  16724. My pleasure, glad you liked it :)
    1
  16725. You're asking a question to ask a question!? There's no need to do that, just ask the question! :)
    1
  16726. True. But the point is that removing "experienced" officers by itself is not the cause of the Red Army's bad performance later, since other states did the same. In fact, in states where there was no "purge", they suffered from poor officers too - Britain being a very good example of this.
    1
  16727. Ah, I see now. I would ask that you watch my video on "Soviet Tank Superiority" because it shows that it wasn't actually like that at all https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8
    1
  16728. @bakters - I'm not out to "thrive on controversy", although I won't shy away from a debate just because it is controversial. I may be mistaken but I don't think this particular video was controversial in any way? I just explained the historical debate.
    1
  16729. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  16730. Happy to hear that!
    1
  16731. YouTube won't let you annotate anymore. Only videos that have annotations can keep them. If you delete them, you can't get them back.
    1
  16732. Alex Jones can be right about what he's saying, but still be a lunatic.
    1
  16733. Well, I'm glad you like it :) more to come
    1
  16734. Thanks for watching :)
    1
  16735. Alex Jones is off his head. Yes, I know he's trying to get it right, and the Social-elites are taking away our freedoms and destroying our wealth, but there's better ways of fighting them than ranting into a microphone like a madman. All Alex is doing is making non-Leftists look insane. Entertaining perhaps, but it won't win over the opposition.
    1
  16736. I know about them though. Recommended Zamoyski's "Warsaw 1920" in another video.
    1
  16737. Glad you think so :) I like to try see things from different perspectives
    1
  16738. But the Purges paled in comparison to the expansion of the Red Army. When talking about the effectiveness of the Red Army, the typical excuse is to say the officers were Purged, which then meant the Soviet officers were not very good. But as shown in the video, the expansion of the Red Army dwarfed the Purges, and so that was perhaps more significant. On a human level, yes it's not nice. But we're not talking about that. The "Purges" in the west were to show that other nations also purged their officers and it didn't impact performance or morale. Sure they didn't get shot, but neither did all the Soviet generals. Many came back AFTER the war had begun. This then leads to the conclusion that it wasn't the purged officers that was the issue, but actually the commissars and the dual-leadership within the Red Army which limited it's effectiveness, plus the general expansion of the Red Army. I don't doubt Military History Visualise's video is accurate, but I'm showing that this is actually a historical debate, not just a "here's the answer" video.
    1
  16739. You realise that this video was designed as a nice follow-up to MHV's video which you posted? I love MHV's videos, however I think he only presented one-half of the debate in that video, which doesn't actually explore the topic. And no, not neo-Stalinist. Do me a favour, I have an extra video coming out tomorrow. Could you watch it? I think you'll understand more about where I'm coming from. You've been very critical of my videos, and I think you think I'm trying to be pro-Soviet. I can confirm that that's not the case.
    1
  16740. And why do you think that was?
    1
  16741. Thanks Vern! Good to hear you liked it :)
    1
  16742. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  16743. Thank you!
    1
  16744. Thank you for your comment! And have a medal for your achievement 🏅
    1
  16745. It's your New Year surprise Roald!
    1
  16746. I guess you've seen my LRDG videos then? I ran out of time, otherwise I would have included a detailed account of their actions within Crusader
    1
  16747. I would say no. They were only minor changes. The odd unit was the wrong number, or I had put the measurements over units etc. Nothing major.
    1
  16748. :)
    1
  16749. Gather the drinks and snacks. You're going to need them
    1
  16750. I believe in you
    1
  16751. What did you think of Pitt's trilogy?? Did you think he covered this battle well??
    1
  16752. You're welcome Axel. Enjoy :)
    1
  16753. I'm glad you found it and enjoyed it 🙂 be sure to check out some of my other videos too. This is the longest documentary I've completed, but my ongoing Battlestorm Stalingrad series is longer, and I think you'll enjoy that too https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag
    1
  16754. Sorry :(
    1
  16755. Hope you enjoy it! My ongoing series on Stalingrad is actually longer :)
    1
  16756. The next one (Courland) should be out in February :)
    1
  16757. It's over 9 thousand !?!
    1
  16758. I thought it was an appropriate companion for "Dead-Sunday"
    1
  16759. Thanks Edaordo! Glad you enjoyed it
    1
  16760. Thanks David!
    1
  16761. Well done! 🏅
    1
  16762. Yay! I'll give you that
    1
  16763. Very true! Not sure if you can keep up with everything at x2 speed but good luck :)
    1
  16764. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it 🙂
    1
  16765. Well, I hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  16766. Months. Just wait for Stalingrad (coming next)
    1
  16767. Yeah I made them myself. I uploaded the main Crusader theme as a separate video https://youtu.be/0OavdLkkNQE
    1
  16768. Because this is a documentary on one battle (Operation Crusader), not the entire North African Campaign. Ultra had little to no impact on this particular battle.
    1
  16769. Got a video on History Theory coming next week, and more videos after, but the next Battlestorm will be Courland, due in February
    1
  16770. Who needs sleep anyway?
    1
  16771. You can do it!
    1
  16772. Good to hear! This was probably my best Battlestorm series, although Stalingrad is probably about to surpass it
    1
  16773. Thank you sir! Took me an age just to get this video rendered and uploaded :D
    1
  16774. Awesome! Really glad to hear you liked it, and managed to get all the way through it 🙂 hope you enjoy Courland as much!
    1
  16775. Haha I'll forgive you
    1
  16776. Thanks! Once I've covered Courland and Stalingrad, I'll be coming back to do more on North Africa :)
    1
  16777. What word would you use to describe this battle then?
    1
  16778. Thanks for watching! The next Battlestorm series (Courland Pocket) will be starting soon. Hope you enjoy that one too 🙂
    1
  16779. I'm aware of the unit card issue, but I'm not convinced that placing the numbers and info on the outside would be better as it would clutter the maps even more. When I come up with a decent solution, I will implement it.
    1
  16780. Or the Italians
    1
  16781. You'll need snacks, drinks, and a full day off work :)
    1
  16782. You're welcome :)
    1
  16783. YouTube doesn't like promoting my videos for some reason, but glad you found it ☺️
    1
  16784. I do want to cover the Winter War at some point, and the Continuation War. Might be a while away though as priorities are Courland and then Stalingrad
    1
  16785. Thank you! Courland's coming along well, and should start coming out in February :)
    1
  16786. Yes, I'll allow it :)
    1
  16787. I would, however a hell of lot of people will complain if I pick one because I would be "stupid" to work with a different system than whatever system their particular country uses, which is why I now give both, and will do the same when it comes to all units of measurement (e.g. weights).
    1
  16788. I actually have another video discussing Malta https://youtu.be/8pS54t-a3Z4 But yes, Malta played the part in hurting Axis supplies
    1
  16789. If you're only 2 hours in, you've got some more interesting parts to come :) I won't spoil it for you though
    1
  16790. The entire family? Damn
    1
  16791. Yes, check out my New Years Resolution video where I discuss the plan for Stalingrad https://youtu.be/PYLdxM8td8M
    1
  16792. I know it's short. I'll make up for that when Stalingrad is released, although that's only going to be ~48 hours
    1
  16793. Hi, thanks for your comment and constructive criticism :) this was my first documentary, and a lot of mistakes were made. I've been trying to improve things since then, and my most recent documentary on Operation Battleaxe is a world apart in quality. Started using Nato symbols and names on the units themselves to make them distinct. Also 3D graphics (although still a birds-eye view). I'll leave the link in case you're interested in seeing Battleaxe https://youtu.be/lqGo57Drs24
    1
  16794. +Robert “IvorRama” Biggin lol. How's the hangover? :D
    1
  16795. ODDBALL SOK to clarify, I'm not blaming the "men of Gavin". I'm blaming Gavin himself, or possibly Warren or Browning. The 82nd troopers aren't to blame for the failures of their superiors. When I say "the 82nd didn't take the Nijmegen bridge" I'm not saying the soldiers are at fault. I'm saying the 82nd Division didn't take the Nijmegen bridge, and the reason they didn't take it is because their commanders didn't think it was a priority, or there was miscommunication or whatever. The commanders are to blame - not the soldiers, not America as a whole, not anything else. And yes they could have taken it and lost it before XXX Corps arrived. They also could have taken it and the operation could have succeeded. I think it's fair to say that it makes more sense to believe that if they'd taken the bridge the operation would have had a better chance of succeeding than if they hadn't taken it.
    1
  16796. +Gary Thomas you bring up a valid point there about the Nijmegen bridge :) and who would think that a recon unit wouldn't do any recon!?
    1
  16797. akgeronimo501 the 82nd landed in two places as it was (technically more). Interestingly, the 504th landed near Grave and took 4 bridges fairly easy.
    1
  16798. akgeronimo501 "Well, since one of us has actually got a degree in History and the other one doesn't and this is history I guess you can't talk about it. Pretty simple." Do you see how your line of reasoning here is kinda silly? I'm presenting you with my argument, and the best you can do is try and discredit me rather than come up with legitimate counter-arguments. And the thing is, if you expect the enemy not to react to the airborne landings and take your primary objective before you do, then that is your fault. You must always prepare for the worst. If you don't, you don't take your objective and the operation will fail. Gavin had enough troops to take the bridge on day 1. He sent those troops to take the bridge later in the day, so why not straight away? You have yet to provide a valid excuse for him not send his men towards their main objective.
    1
  16799. akgeronimo501 the 82nd had 5 bridges to take. They took all the ones in the south and left the one leading North. Why? Because the bulk of the 82nd landed several miles away at Groesbeek to take an inconsequential slope. They didn't have to pick that DZ. Gavin and Browning chose that area because they expected counter-attacks from the East - despite the fact there was no evidence to suggest there were units in the Reichswald (and indeed, there wasn't - the unit that attacked out of there on Day 2 didn't even exist the day before and barely existed on Day 2). Perhaps if the British had held out longer it may have worked. Indeed, if they'd gotten more units to the Arnhem road bridge, or if there'd been two drops a day instead of one, or if they'd dropped a battalion or two south of Arnhem, things could have worked out differently. Thanks for suggesting an alternative argument. My advice to you is to discuss the facts and present evidence to counter the arguments made by others... rather than attack them personally.
    1
  16800. +akgeronimo501 Frost managed it. Also, there was no counter attacks on the first day. The reality is that several hours were lost as they sat at Groesbeek before they even set off. When they did set off, they were minutes too late. And even if the distance was too far, why didn't Gavin land his troops closer to the Nijmegen bridge? He said he wanted to take the bridges from both sides at once like he did at the other bridges. Why then did he not do the same at the Nijmegen road bridge?
    1
  16801. akgeronimo501 in a 8 hour day, not including breaks, probably 24 miles
    1
  16802. akgeronimo501 I actually have had two copies of Ryan's book. The physical copy I lost many years ago so re bought it again on Kindle. Ryan's book is fantastic. They made a film based on it, then a game based on both, and that game (Close Combat A Bridge Too Far) is the reason I got into history and was the first video I made for this channel. It's still my favourite game of all time.
    1
  16803. akgeronimo501 the 11 men lost (as well as a lot of the other ones you mention) were from Kershaw's It Never Snows in September. Kershaw looked at the battle from the German side, since previous authors (like Ryan) didn't. I've listed all my sources in the video description. I apologise if I forget to reference them in the comments. At what point in the video did I say the Germans were the bad guys? War isn't as simple as good vs bad. The Germans were fighting for their country just like everyone else was. Sure, they had evil leaders, but so did most of the other nations. In fact, no nation is excused from atrocities in that, or any other war. From concentration camps (the British invented them during the Boar War), to gulags, to Native Indian reservations... all nations have done evil things. Nothing is simple in this world. And it's never black and white like you suggested.
    1
  16804. "The experienced 376th Parachute Field Artillery Battalion had - in slightly over an hour - ten of its twelve 75mm pack howitzers ready for action..." - Poulussen, Lost at Nijmegen. They did have artillery in day one. Not ALL their artillery, but a reasonable portion of it. They also had eight 57mm anti-tank guns of the 80th Airborne Anti-Aircraft Battalion on day one too. All the intelligence reports they had said there was nothing in the Reichswald. But yet Gavin believed there were 1000 tanks in the forest because he sent the 505 PIR to question civilians about the "1000 tanks in the Reichswald". This was at a point where Germany was on the backfoot, and there's obviously no way they could spare 1000 tanks to sit in a forest miles behind the front lines. I would recommend you read Poulussen's book or Robin Neillands book listed in the description.
    1
  16805. +Christian S. (DerBalu) it is for future documentaries, but sadly, too late for this one :( The issue I had was if I put the names of the units on the map, there would be too much text. But I was aware of this and I do need to address it, so if you have any suggestions, let me know!
    1
  16806. I misspoke. Sorry about that
    1
  16807. My research on Stalingrad seeped over to this. Saying 1942 1942 1942 over and over, then going to say 1941, but accidentally saying 1942 is understandable. If you watch my other videos, you can clearly see I know what year Barbarossa was.
    1
  16808. I know that. Sadly, I don't have the Heer numbers only the full Wehrmacht numbers, just like I have the full Red Army statistics - for men all over the Soviet Union including the Far East.
    1
  16809. I wasn't planning any more trips after TankFest yesterday. Why?
    1
  16810. You didn't watch the full video. Towards the end I called Stalin and his regime evil. I also know about the Holodomor and have committed to a video on it. But I wanted to show the Soviet point of view at the beginning, which is why so many people have called me a pro-Soviet or anti-German, except that's not the case for anyone who actually bothered to watch the full video.
    1
  16811. I have videos where people are accusing me of being pro-German, much like this one claims I'm pro-Soviet. The reality is I'm neither, so a video on the myth and reality of what the Germans did good is not the type of video I'm going to create. That's not history, that's politics and I'm not interested in that.
    1
  16812. You're very welcome Toni :)
    1
  16813. I'm jealous. I've not even seen one in real life :(
    1
  16814. For the 1940's starvation (the German Hunger Plan), yes. For the 1930's starvation (the Holodomor), no.
    1
  16815. Glad you liked it :)
    1
  16816. In Soviet Russia, road fork you!
    1
  16817. I see you didn't watch the full video. The Purges I've already done a video on https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ and what you stated about that event was completely false. Stalin didn't kill 30 million of his own people, the Soviets lost that many during the war, which was started by the Germans. You bring up 6 million, but then forget the countless other people the Germans starved to death from the Netherlands to the Ukraine or to Greece. Your assessment of the Moscow offensive is lacking logic as well as sources, and the Red Army didn't crumble at all - in fact, it was the Red Army that stopped the Germans. US Lend Lease was important, nobody's denying that, but wasn't the decisive factor.
    1
  16818. Great! Thanks for subscribing :) I upload videos every Monday, so be sure to pop back
    1
  16819. Not all of them, no. The officers were the ones ordering and even encouraging the retreats. So the order was aimed at them. Stalin forces the officers to stand their ground, and they in turn force their men to stand their ground. It's a managerial technique.
    1
  16820. It's been looked into by historians, but the general public are mostly not aware.
    1
  16821. Yep!
    1
  16822. That's why I said he and his regime was evil in the video
    1
  16823. This is why I waited until the end before saying Stalin and his regime was evil. It's good to catch people out who don't watch all the way through.
    1
  16824. Didn't watch to the end of the video, I see
    1
  16825. Unless you aren't German, in which case they have a certain ideology that wants to either enslave or get rid of you.
    1
  16826. I know, didn't see that one coming
    1
  16827. No, thank you for watching :)
    1
  16828. Yeah, I can't believe I didn't catch that when editing
    1
  16829. Thanks Leningrad! (sounds really strange saying that!)
    1
  16830. No worries :) you'll probably enjoy this Monday's video too, which is on Pavlov's House
    1
  16831. Ah, in that case he may actually like my video coming up on Tuesday (tomorrow). I'll say no more for now :) And I'm happy to answer your questions, but I will tackle one question at a time - simply because it's taken me this entire comment just to answer one of them! So, let me answer the question "What is the ratio of rifle carrying frontliners?" - or rather "is there any evidence that the Soviets didn't have enough rifles in combat?" plus "is there evidence they charged forwards without rifles?" At Stalingrad there was A LOT of divisions, regiments and brigades etc - so many that I'm not actually sure how many the Soviets actually put into the city. In fact, I'm actually compiling a list at the moment for my Stalingrad documentary. Anyway, the point is that, out of all these divisions, only two did not have enough rifles when they reached the city. These two were Rodimtsev's 13th Guards Rifle Division, and (later) Batiuk's 284th Rifle Division (which is the one Zaitsev was in). However, just because they arrived at Stalingrad without a full-complement of weapons doesn't mean they were committed without them. So, let's look at the facts - Batiuk's division had three infantry regiments. Only one of them has enough rifles when it arrives at Stalingrad. "In fact, for a time it had sufficient rifles to arm only one of its three regiments." Glantz, Armageddon in Stalingrad, P199. Note, it's not stated which regiment didn't have rifles. This information may be out there, but I don't have it. Anyway, on the 1043rd Regiment goes over the Volga on the night of 21-22 of September. The other two regiments (1045th and 1047th) crossed over on the 22-23 of September. Glantz says that they are then committed into combat "even though it was short of rifles" - whatever that means. But there's a couple of things to note. First, we're told it's lacking "rifles" - but what about the other weapons? Well, your guess is as good as mine. In fact, there's no mention of lacking other weapons, just specifically rifles. It's implied that they're lacking more weapons, but only rifles are mentioned in any of the sources (including Craig's Enemy at the Gates). So, this division may have been armed with every other weapon (e.g. sub-machine guns, machine guns, mortars), but just lacked rifles. We also have zero evidence to suggest that the men (lacking rifles) charged enemy positions without weapons, as shown in the film. Batiuk's division arrives on the 21st of September with ~10,000 men. By the 25th of September, it has 7,648 men (Glantz, Armageddon, P213). That's a loss of approximately 2,350 men in four days. For comparison, 95th Rifle Division goes into Stalingrad overnight on 18-19 of September. By the 25th, this has 5,455 men. That's a loss of 4,545 men in 8 days. Doing some quick and rough maths, that's a loss of 2,272.5 men in each 4 day period for the 95th Rifle Division, vs the 2,350 men lost for the 4 day period by the 284th Rifle Division. And there is zero mention of the 95th Rifle Division having a rifle shortage. So, we have two divisions, committed into the same battle, at roughly the same time, who are both suffering roughly the same amount of casualties per four day period, even though one of them has a weapons shortage. This does not prove anything by itself, but it's another piece of the puzzle - a convergence of evidence - which suggests the 284th Rifle Division did not commit the units that didn't have enough rifles into combat (or at least, didn't send them in suicidal rushes at enemy positions). And, according to Craig's Enemy at the Gates, Rodimtsev's division was short by 2,000 rifles. Again, this is probably one regiment's worth of men. But Craig notes that when Chuikov spoke to Rodimtsev, he set about fulfilling the order for rifles. The other sources (including Glantz) says they received rifles at some point after they'd arrived. So, my question would be - what would be the point of ordering new rifles if they're just going to send their men in mass-waves to be mowed down by enemy machine gun positions? In that scenario there would be no reason to order the rifles because they'd have no men to give them to. In addition, we also have Zaitsev's memoirs. Now, memoirs aren't super-trustworthy (in fact, I encourage everyone to avoid them). But even here there are two interesting things. First, that Zaitsev crossed at night - which goes against what we see in the film, but supports what Glantz says - and that even he was surprised that the Germans didn't fire at him while they crossed. Second, that he specifically says they had machine guns, and rifles. Considering he's in the 1047th Regiment which is going in on the second night, you'd think that they'd commit the regiment that had all its weapons on the first night, and then the other two regiments that didn't have rifles on the second night. So you'd think Zaitsev would be the regiment that has a lack of rifles. But there's no mention of a lack of rifles. Again, this proves nothing because Zaitsev's regiment may have been the one with all the rifles, and Zaitsev's work is probably propaganda, but even here we have no suggestion of a lack of weapons, or suicidal charges. The point is this - we know that two divisions out of the many that were committed into Stalingrad by the Soviets had a lack of rifles specifically. In fact it was just ~three regiments that lacked rifles (this is a maximum of about 6,000 men). We also know they received their rifles later. We also have evidence that suggests that the losses of divisions without rifles were about the same as those with rifles, implying that their men weren't being sent into combat without rifles. We have zero evidence of mass-suicidal charges, and we have no evidence that says they lacked other weapons (e.g. grenades, knives, sub-machine guns, machine guns, mortars, etc). We also have memoirs (bias or not) that do not mention this issue. Using the evidence above, I cannot see how the film produced drew the conclusion that the Soviets sprinted forwards in suicidal charges. There is zero evidence to suggest half the men had rifles and the other half didn't. There's zero evidence to suggest that one man who had a rifle didn't have ammunition, but that the other guy who didn't have the rifle did somehow have ammunition. Tactically it makes no sense to attack like this: surely it makes more sense in this fantasy scenario to have the riflemen shoot while the non-rifle guys run forwards to draw enemy fire. It also makes more sense for them to attack inside the buildings where knives or even unarmed men could grapple with the Germans at close quarters and overwhelm them with "superior numbers". In addition, we also know that the blocking units were not immediately behind the troops and didn't shoot anywhere near as many men as implied in the film. So, I'm going to conclude that, if anyone wants to argue that the Soviets charged forwards without enough rifles, they're going to have to provide more evidence than "derp not enough rifles, derp communism". Cheers!
    1
  16832. Oh, and yes, I know I misspoke and said 1942 at the beginning. Apart from that, I stand by everything else mentioned in the video.
    1
  16833. I never said anything of the sort.
    1
  16834. Fair enough, if that's your take on the Soviet government. However, as I said in the video, there's plenty of reason and evidence to hang Stalin and the like without exaggerating some of their policies. Order 227 is an example of Hollywood and historians exaggerating the events in order to paint the Soviet government as worse than it already was. It's simple fiction, and as I say, completely unnecessary as there are plenty of events that aren't exaggerated that can paint Stalin and the Soviet government as evil.
    1
  16835. Thank you sir! Really glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  16836. Very true
    1
  16837. One person, who apparently gave his limited and probably warped and/or altered perspective, to you, many years after the events in question, and you are now giving it to me. So, this 2nd hand account at best (assuming the source hadn't forgotten after all these years, or wasn't just telling you what you wanted to hear) vs the perspective of hundreds and thousands of others, who wrote down their experiences at the time as well as later, plus data and statistics, which have been collected by an army of historians (some of whom were also there), along with artifacts, maps and everything else, all of which have been analysed and scrutinized over and over, with debates still going on over it now, constantly evolving the picture to try and get to the truth, which then had been put down in many books, which I have read, and are listed in the pinned comment, all of which contradict what your grandad told you, since what he told you wasn't written in any book, and only exists in the film Enemy at the Gates, which is based on the book of the same name, which itself disagrees with the film. Yeah, I know what I'd rather trust.
    1
  16838. So, how did the Soviets win if they didn't have guns? The Germans must have fought exceptionally poor if they got beat by them.
    1
  16839. To say that Stalin and Marxist-Socialism is evil, like I did in the video you didn't fully watch? Yeah ok.
    1
  16840. I'm trying to be as balanced as possible :)
    1
  16841. While not quite the video you were asking for, I have a video entitled "Panzerfausts in 1942? Apparently so..." which may be of interest to you https://youtu.be/aDiSwl09bR4
    1
  16842. See, this is the danger. If you hadn't read more about WW2 you may still hold that same opinion, and all because you saw a film that got it horribly wrong. I understand that film makers have an artistic licence, but they took it way too far in this film.
    1
  16843. History is written by the survivors. That's why the German generals and Halder especially have effectively written the history of the Eastern Front. That's why we call it the Eastern Front and not the Axis-Soviet Front, because history has been written from the German perspective.
    1
  16844. I know, it's because I keep talking about Stalingrad and 1942, so it's become habit for me to say 1942. And then I didn't catch it in editing :(
    1
  16845. You're welcome :) hope you enjoy/enjoyed it
    1
  16846. I did say at the end that Stalin was evil, as was the Soviet regime. I guess you didn't bother to watch that far.
    1
  16847. Yes, I misspoke. See the description
    1
  16848. Cheers David!
    1
  16849. If you haven't watched my Fall Blau video, I'd recommend it because I answer your question https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY
    1
  16850. As I said in the description, I misspoke, that is all. It's clear from the rest of the evidence presented, the sources used and listed in the pinned comment, and the context given by my other videos that this was clearly just a presentation mistake.
    1
  16851. The original author edited/changed his comment from the original. I have removed my support.
    1
  16852. “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    1
  16853. "@TIK Sir, you are wasting your time with three butheads." Couldn't agree more. Especially when they write stuff that contradicts what they're saying and proves my point to be correct - "@TIK Look, a German could and did own property, even as a means of production lol. Krupp being an example. That does not mean your bsuiness couldn't be taken over at any time, or semi-taken over. It depended on your individual connections and loyalty to the party." "These companies were privately owned" The German did not own his property under the law because, as I quoted above, private property was abolished in 1933. The fact that you could have your business taken off you at any moment in time proves that it didn't belong to private individuals and it belonged to the 'community'. As you said, you had to remain loyal to the party, and the party was the state. And the companies were not privately owned. They were managed by individuals, but they were owned by the state. See my previous comments. "Nor can you earn profit in a Socialist society, at least as defined by Marx." And here's the problem. This wasn't Marxist-Socialism, this was National-Socialism. Profit is allowed under National-Socialism, although was severely constrained, as my previous quotes made it very clear. Also, as I showed in the previous quotes, the Soviet factory leaders were given ample monetary rewards for running their factories efficiently. At that point, what's the difference between profit or reward? Who cares where the money comes from. Money is money. And in both states the business leaders were earning money. "Nazis/Hitler did not have a coherent economic philosophy" Yes he did, it was state ownership or control of the means of production (socialism). It was also a 'soil' policy, since he thought that the German-race should have more soil, since Germany didn't have enough. This is why he wanted to go East. Therefore, as I've made clear many times now, his socialism actually resulted in WW2. Without Hitler's socialism you remove the motivation to invade Poland (going East) and thus you fail to explain why Hitler started WW2. WW2 is only possible with Hitler's racial-socialism. "historian William Shirer explains that in his book on the Third Reich" Yes and Shirer's book was written in the 60's and may as well have been written by Franz Halder, since he even says in parts that he's just got off the phone to Halder, and he said blah blah blah. Halder was trying to distance the Wehrmacht (and thus himself and his cronies) from National-Socialism so as to protect their skins in the Cold-War. Context is key. The National-Socialists were painted as capitalists, and their socialism was downplayed, because Germany wanted to be seen as a strong anti-Marxist pro-capitalist nation, and the USA wanted to see Germany as that too. The Marxists around the world (and in the Soviet Union) also wanted to deny this heretical form of socialism, and so, history was rewritten by the winners (actually, by the survivors). "For a socialist, the redistribution of the economy is the end. A totalitarian society that takes wealth at a whim may seem similar to a Communist one because Communist governments take all wealth, but that does not mean they are the same, unless you blur the definitions to be meaningless." No, that's irrelevant, and it iwho is blurring the definition (or not understanding the definition at all). Socialist parties may have that policy, but socialism actually has a definite definition. That definition is state ownership or control of the economy. I will follow this post up with many quotes showing the true definition and meaning of socialism. "Soviets made one good design and organized a massive central effort to produce it, leading to a quick massive mobilization of their economy" See, state ownership and control of the economy.
    1
  16854. “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  16855. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591
    1
  16856. I don't censor comments now (except abuse or spam). I've realized it's better for everyone to see how much ignorance remains in the world. Your comment being a great example.
    1
  16857. Thanks! Glad you liked it
    1
  16858. Others have complained about this, but the problem is it just doesn't sound right without "The" in front of it. It's like "UK". No, it's "The UK". Or "USA", no it's "The USA". Same with "USSR", again it's "The USSR." Maybe it's something to do with the "U" in it.
    1
  16859. Yes, see the description
    1
  16860. Yeah, I don't know how I messed that up!
    1
  16861. I didn't say it didn't include the soldiers - I said it was primarily aimed at the officers. Of course the soldiers are affected. Stop jumping to conclusions and putting words in my mouth. And my "assertions" are backed up by the listed sources. I didn't just make this up. Whereas, you're taking one Soviet source at face value and reading into it what you want. Relying on one source is bad history. You need a convergence of evidence to prove something (and context), and the book "Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed" by Jones (which explains all this in detail) shows that convergence very well. If you're still skeptical, read that book.
    1
  16862. But if the men are never at fault, then how can you say "individual men might be impossible to deal with"? That's a direct contradiction. No, someone who's never been in a leadership position will think that the men are never the problem, but that is why middle management exist in the first place - to deal with the problems caused by the men or workers. This applies in the military and in the civilian sector. Those at the bottom never see themselves as doing anything wrong, but they do things wrong all the time. Two individuals do not work as hard as each other, and this (not even including bad or poor behaviour) leads to conflict. Management and leaders have to deal with that conflict. And if they don't, they take responsibility for not dealing with it, which is why they get paid more - to take on that responsibility. And no, the order didn't order the men to advance at gunpoint - I explained that to be a myth in the video. The guns weren't at their backs, they were miles behind the lines preventing those individuals you spoke about from fleeing the battlefield. The men were allowed to retreat during a failed assault, or to fall back if necessary, as happened many times at Stalingrad. The men knew though that they had to keep fighting, even if they fell back, because they couldn't rout or flee.
    1
  16863. 1. Not a "communist apologist", whatever that means. 2. If you want clarification, all you have to do is ask for it nicely. The order targets the officers. Why? Because it's a middle-management technique. Anyone who has been a manager will know that sometimes it's not the men that are the problem. In this case, the soldiers were being encouraged and ordered to retreat by some officers who were looking to save their own skins, and they were getting away with it. Therefore the order was given basically said "no, the officers will be punished now for retreating". This forced the officers to stand their ground regardless of the situation, meaning they then turned to their soldiers and had to force them in line too. If they failed in this, they would be shot. So yes, it does impact the soldiers too, but they weren't the primary target. In fact, there's plenty of evidence that says the men were happy with the order because they were sick to death of retreats and defeats. The men wanted to fight for their nation but felt betrayed by their officers. This order gave the Red Army a backbone.
    1
  16864. No, thank you for watching :)
    1
  16865. I will be making more. I'm working on a massive (estimated 48 hour long) documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad. Check out my Battlestorm series for the type of documentary it will be.
    1
  16866. There's scouser sjw channels? And if there are, why the hell are you on that side of YouTube!? :D
    1
  16867. I'm not scouse, but even if I was, I'm not sure how being a scouser would make me a communist?
    1
  16868. "@TIK it doesn't matter, that's your opinion" All you've done is state opinions. We all have opinions, because history is a mixture of facts (the scientific method) and interpretations (in which, opinions are a part of that). "as time goes by the same D. Glantz will write something about "soviets were preparing to attack Hitler"." That's funny because Glantz has written two books completely destroying the Viktor Suvorov myth. "Stumbling Colossus" and "Colossus Reborn" absolutely crush the idea of the Soviets preparing to attack the Nazis, even though Hitler makes it very clear in 1924 (Mein Kampf) that he wants to destroy the Soviet Union, and is one of the main reasons he went to war in 1939 in the first place. I've covered this myth myself in several of my videos, sources are listed in the respective Pinned Comments - Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2 https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 Why You NEED to Think Critically | Suvorov and Keitel's "Preemptive Strike" 1941 Idea https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA How BIG were Soviet Armies and Divisions in 1942? And what impact did this have? https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI Stalin’s Purge of the Red Army and Its Effects on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2 https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  16869. "The first: if you want to cite something - cite sources. University of Kansas is nobody (as you are or I am) when talking about WW2 without contemporary sources." University of Kansas is the publisher. David Glantz is the author. As Robert Citino has stated, we're in the "Glantz era" of WW2 Eastern Front historiography. Why? Because Glantz (and his co-author House) has redefined what history books on the subject should be. They're massively detailed, packed full of sources, and pull no punches. The fact you're claiming that I'm not citing sources when I actually did, and I cited one of the leading experts in the field, is proof that you have little knowledge on the subject. Plus, the numbers in Glantz's book come from some German sources, but also Krivosheev's "Grif sekretnosti sniat: Poteri Vooruzhennykh sil SSSR v voinakh, boeykh deistviiakh i voennykh konfliktakh." Moscow: Voenizdat, 1993, pages 152-153. Plus Krivosheev's "Velikaia Otechestvennaia bez grifa sekretnosti: Kniga poter' - Noveishee spavochnoe izdanie." Moscow: Veche, 2009, pages 25 and 39-40. Plus numbers from other sources, including the Central Party Archives of the Institute of Marxism and Leninism. "But if you cite some researchers you must be aware that there are many of them with different claims and different sources." Yes, absolutely. My library of books confirms this https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/114GiK85MPs0v4GKm0izPj3DL2CrlJUdAantx5GQUKn8/edit?usp=sharing "So one of my sources is http://militera.lib.ru/research/meltyukhov/index.html where you can find sources upon which conclusions are made and verify those sources. And they aren't University of Kansas but contemporary soviet sources which can be easily verified." Yes, because random Russian internet sources are reliable. No chance of sources being altered or anything to suit an agenda. And Soviet sources are clearly 100% reliable. As you said yourself "You just repeat every myth made by soviet propaganda" and yet you're willingly trusting them? Besides as shown, Glantz lists his sources and a lot of them are Soviet, but unlike those who use sources from one side (e.g. just German, or just Soviet), he and his team compare them to German statistics and come to a more balanced conclusion. A good example is that another Russian commenter told me that my version of Mein Kampf was incorrect. Apparently the Russian version neglects to mention the part where Hitler says he has read Karl Marx and agreed with his views on class conflict (although disagreed on how to solve it). This is a distortion - a way of distancing the socialism of National Socialism from the socialism of Marxist Socialism. So yes, I'd be quite wary of Soviet/Russian sources if I were you.
    1
  16870. "You just repeat every myth made by soviet propaganda." So you're saying I should have listened to the National Socialist propaganda of the Germans rather than the Marxist-Socialist propaganda of the Soviet Union. "You say soviets were outnumbered before the war. The truth - they weren't." 22/06/1941 - 2,743,000 Soviets on the Eastern Front (from a military of 5,700,000) vs 3,957,910 Axis troops (3,118,910 of them German, and the German military was 7,309,000 men strong at this point). Source: Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. "You may use wiki to find that out." And who writes wikipedia? Yes, that's right, you can't trust wikipedia. "You say their army was unprepared. And that's not the case. Their army was completely prepared .... but not to defense they were prepared to strike Germany. And so on...." Nope, totally false. I've covered this in numerous videos all backed with sources listed in their Pinned Comments - Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2 https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 Why You NEED to Think Critically | Suvorov and Keitel's "Preemptive Strike" 1941 Idea https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA How BIG were Soviet Armies and Divisions in 1942? And what impact did this have? https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2 https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  16871. To be fair, historians are now of the opinion that the Soviets won the war before the USA even declared war.
    1
  16872. I have a Purges video. Will make you think about it slightly differently https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ
    1
  16873. If it comes from an American source, I use American language (e.g. lootenant). If it comes from a British source, I use British language (e.g. leftenant). And if it's German and I think I can get away with it, I'll use the German language (e.g. loytnant).
    1
  16874. As where the Nazis.
    1
  16875. Good question, and I don't actually know. Although, I would argue that if you survived a stint in a penal battalion, you're probably going to have enough experience in combat to not want to flee. So, while some may have served twice, I'd say it was unlikely. But that's just a hunch and I can't support it at the moment.
    1
  16876. Yeah, I misspoke :(
    1
  16877. I try and approach things from as balanced a point of view as possible, because what's the point of putting so much effort into making these videos if I'm just going to deliberately allow faults (bias, agendas etc) to ruin it? I also want to discover the truth for myself, so the last thing I want is to believe in the fictional narratives of the past, otherwise I (and we) won't be able to learn from the past.
    1
  16878. No, I'm saying the execution of their own men is no where near that shown in Enemy at the Gates.
    1
  16879. Except, the Nazis outnumbered the Soviets for the first 5 months of the war. For example, on the 22nd June 1941, the Soviets had 2,743,000 men, and the Axis had 3,957,910 men (3.1 million Germans). Source: Table N of Glantz, D. "When Titan's Clashed." University Press of Kansas, 2015.
    1
  16880. The only inaccuracy in the whole video was that I said 1942 instead of 1941 (I misspoke). Other than that, nothing is inaccurate. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  16881. 1) I absolutely encourage you to read widely on every subject I mention and don't just take my word from it. This is why I list my sources in the pinned comment so you can see where I got my information from and double check if you want, because I do make mistakes (like the war beginning in 1942, which I said in the video because I'm a derp). 2) Use my videos as a platform to debate and discuss and read further, not the absolute truth. 3) I'm not whitewashing the Soviets. I prefer the truth - see bottom link 3) Please don't call me a weirdo, it's not nice. A link to a video where I explain what got me into history and also why I'm doing this, which I think you may want to watch https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  16882. In what sense?
    1
  16883. I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video
    1
  16884. Sources are listed in the pinned comment. I've already done a video on the Purges. Pretending that the Soviets murdered millions of their own soldiers is simply fiction. The fact is, the numbers don't support that idea. You may not like that fact, but that is the reality. Therefore this video isn't stupid as you claim.
    1
  16885. I called Stalin and the Soviet regime evil in the video. Please watch until the end before making a judgement.
    1
  16886. Yes, Soviet propaganda, which is why I called Stalin and the Soviet regime evil in the video.
    1
  16887. Yes, it's called management. The officers were ordering and encouraging retreats. Stalin then says, stop that or we'll shoot you (and there are several cases of officers being shot in Stalingrad). The officers are forced to stand, and they force their troops to stand. Thing is many of the troops were wanting to stand and fight because they were sick of retreating. So this order was welcomed by many of the troops.
    1
  16888. You're very welcome, thanks for watching :)
    1
  16889. That was in the 1930's, a decade before the events in question. And the Ukrainians had it bad - first the Soviet regime starved them, then the Wehrmacht did with the Hunger Plan.
    1
  16890. Yes, I said 1942 was the beginning of the war - I'm sorry about that. I keep talking about Stalingrad, and therefore I keep repeating 1942, 1942, 1942 to the point that it's become a habit. I then also didn't catch it in editing. So please forgive me for this error. The war began on the 22nd of June 1941.
    1
  16891. Thanks! Glad you liked another one! :D
    1
  16892. Yes, they did murder many people in the Holodomor, and that's why I said that the Stalin regime was evil in the video that you've not watched all the way through. However, the evidence doesn't support the idea that they murdered millions of their own soldiers using blocking detachments as many people believe. Therefore stop believing the lie. As I said in the video, there's plenty of evidence to drown the Soviets, but saying they murdered millions of their own soldiers like shown in Enemy at the Gates is false.
    1
  16893. Because you didn't watch the full video, where I clearly stated that Stalin and his regime was evil.
    1
  16894. I'll just leave this link here https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  16895. I only said it once, and that's why I put it in the description. I keep talking about Stalingrad all the time, saying 1942 over and over. Then I slipped up here (the script said 1941 but I said 1942) and didn't catch it in editing.
    1
  16896. Soviet Holodomor happened in 1930s. Nazi Hunger Plan happened in the 1940s.
    1
  16897. It is in my book, which is why you can no longer see his comments.
    1
  16898. YouTube automatically removes comments (including my own, it seems) and holds others in a spam folder that channel creators must review. I'll take a look
    1
  16899. What, me calling Stalin and his regime evil? Or did you not watch until that part??
    1
  16900. You didn't watch the end of the video.
    1
  16901. If you watched further into the video, you'd see that I called Stalin and the Soviet regime evil.
    1
  16902. Sources are listed in the pinned comment if you want to double check
    1
  16903. From the moment I began this video, I criticise National Communists. So not sure why you think I sympathize with them.
    1
  16904. Yes, I simply mispoke and didn't catch it in editing.
    1
  16905. Actually, Chuikov said it was more Germans than Paris, not the whole of France :)
    1
  16906. Well, I think you'll like next week's video too - Pavlov's House
    1
  16907. Are you proposing I should use German statistics instead? Of course the statistics are inaccurate - we don't even know accurately how many men and tanks Rommel had in North Africa, nor which subunits (battalions etc) he had. If we can't get that right, we've got no chance when talking about hundreds of thousands or millions of people. However we have to work with something. If you can find better statistics, great, but the sources I used are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  16908. Not sure where he got it from, but it could be right. The Stalingrad Front may have executed 13,500 men. But the Stalingrad Front is a front (army group), not an army. Chuikov's 62nd Army is part of the Stalingrad Front, and is the army inside Stalingrad city. Chuikov's army didn't execute anywhere near that amount, but by saying "Stalingrad" Front, it makes it out as though Chuikov's at fault, simply because the reader wouldn't know the difference (since the distinction isn't made). Plus the fact that, at this point, Beevor has already made Chuikov out to be a brutal general and someone willing to sacrifice his men.
    1
  16909. 1) You didn't watch to the end of the video. 2) The officers were ordering unauthorized retreats. Therefore the point of the order was to tell them that they will be shot if they keep retreating. They therefore stopped retreating (mostly, some continued and were shot) and turned on their men to keep them in line too.
    1
  16910. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  16911. If I'd left that out the comments would be flooded with neo-Nazis, Wehraboos and people saying how clean the Wehrmacht was compared to the Red Army. That's why I made it clear that they're definitely not clean.
    1
  16912. I do, yes. Speaking about Stalingrad a lot, I'm in the habit of saying 1942. Sorry about that.
    1
  16913. True, but the British Army in WW1 and WW2 combined were tiny compared to the Red Army in WW2, so executions are going to be a lot more than just a few hundred. That said, yes it was bad that they executed 158,000 of their own men. But that's not the point I was making. The scene in Enemy at the Gates shows hundreds of men getting mowed down by their own side. The 158,000 figure shows that this cannot be the case.
    1
  16914. https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    1
  16915. You're welcome!
    1
  16916. Officers were ordering retreats. Stalin says stop that or we'll kill you. Officers stop all retreats (using brute force). Those that don't stop retreating (there as several at Stalingrad alone) are removed from command, and in some cases shot. Yes, some of the men got shot too, but the point was that the order was aimed at officers who were encouraging the retreats to happen.
    1
  16917. I've removed your other comments. Don't spam my channel with your poor and illogical ideology.
    1
  16918. National Socialism is basically the same as Marxism. They're both socialism and based off the teachings of Karl Marx.
    1
  16919. Just because Hollywood said it was true, doesn't make it true.
    1
  16920. Thanks! I just wish I could read Russian. I think this is the first video I've made where I really really really could have done with more Soviet sources.
    1
  16921. So, is it the economic idea you dislike? Or the totalitarian dictatorship part?
    1
  16922. Some Nazis claim it's faked. That doesn't prove it's faked.
    1
  16923. Huh, must be me then. I wonder why he'd call me a moron?
    1
  16924. Me?
    1
  16925. I would say the Soviet and Nazis regimes were equally bad... which is actually what I said at the end of the video.
    1
  16926. Then you are wrong. Having an interest in history and trying to understand the events in question does not make me sympathetic to a political or economic cause. My philosophy has been laid down before in this other video https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  16927. Good to hear! Which ones did you pick up??
    1
  16928. It's tempting
    1
  16929. Thanks Erik! I'm glad you like them :)
    1
  16930. Of course they rewrite history. Everyone does that. The German generals also lied through their teeth. The point is to see through the lies and do additional digging through the sources.
    1
  16931. Actually, Stalingrad wasn't really important for the Soviet High Command (they lost +90% of the city). They only held it so they could build up forces on the flanks to crush the two German Armies in the city. Retreating further back wasn't necessary by this point, and as shown in the video, was actually a suicidal tactic for the Soviets at this point in the war.
    1
  16932. Thank you, it's really good to know people appreciate the truth over fiction :)
    1
  16933. I think you're about right. I wouldn't say the retreating in 1942 was deliberate though. Some have argued that, but it really doesn't seem that way. It could be argued that Stalin waited for winter before the counter-attack, however the snows fell the same day as Uranus started, so it may also be a coincidence.
    1
  16934. Why is that?
    1
  16935. I'm from North West England. I've only spoke to one WW2 veteran, but he was in the navy which is not what I've studied yet. I would love to speak to move, from all different countries.
    1
  16936. The moron understands the purpose of the trickle down effect. That was the point. The officers were retreating, encouraging retreats and ordering retreats. Stalin focuses on them, forcing them to stand their ground. They then turn on their troops to get them to stand their ground too. Classic management technique. Sorry you failed to understand that. And your last point is made mute by my latest video about anti-tank warfare.
    1
  16937. Yes, and that's fine. However, I'd certainly not class them as a Western Allied power (considering that they were actually at war with Britain), and you can't class them as a Comintern power, so they're an Axis power - even if they weren't officially part of the Axis.
    1
  16938. I'm not denying that, but they still fought with German support, and helped the Axis out. Therefore, while not technically on the side of the Axis, they were fighting with them.
    1
  16939. But it did fight along side them, with German support.
    1
  16940. But the commanders were allowing, encouraging, and even ordering retreats. The purpose of the order was to stop the commanders from authorizing retreats, which forced them to actually stand and fight. However, it wasn't like it was shown in Enemy at the Gates. The blocking detachments were miles behind the lines in most occasions, and if they weren't they thrown into the thick of it when a crisis happened.
    1
  16941. I don't follow.
    1
  16942. Hey Bucket! It's actually good to hear you liked the background since few people complained about it
    1
  16943. So what's the truth then?
    1
  16944. Wow thank you Rebel :) glad you liked the video!
    1
  16945. And you didn't watch to the end of the video :) Love catching people out like this
    1
  16946. Yeah, denying that Stalin wasn't evil or killed millions of his own people is just ridiculous. It has nothing to do with politics either. I'm not changing history because it doesn't fit with your view of the world, and I'm not bowing down to bias or propaganda.
    1
  16947. Liberal cop out at the end?
    1
  16948. Thanks Snake, you I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  16949. Explain which parts are misinformation and I'll clarify which sources I got them from to show that nothing in this video is misinformation.
    1
  16950. Although that wasn't the penal battalions. I'd imagine it was the same in them though.
    1
  16951. Indeed, there's an account at Stalingrad where two men did exactly that and were executed.
    1
  16952. See the description
    1
  16953. No. The Holodomor happened a decade before the events in the video.
    1
  16954. Ah ok, I misread, sorry :)
    1
  16955. What did I say that was made up?
    1
  16956. Yes
    1
  16957. Soviet officers had been allowing and even ordering retreats to happen. The order stopped that and forced them to stand and fight. They therefore had to keep their soldiers in line. This resulted in executions of the soldiers, but also of the officers who continued to retreat. So the order was aimed at the officers because they were the ones who were meant to be managing the troops and also not ordering retreats. And the myth is that the Red Army could only fight with a gun pointed at it's back. That is not true in the slightest. The men welcomed the order, as did the nation. The morale factor was a big factor. Plus, they saw that the ends justified the means. It was better to lose 158,000 men shot dead than lose 40 million more dead and the rest enslaved if the Germans won.
    1
  16958. Me? Check out the pinned comment, you'll see all the sources I used.
    1
  16959. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  16960. What would you like to chat about?
    1
  16961. "The communists didnt care a whit about their troops and had no problems shooting them." In your opinion. Proved this wrong in the video. "Thats why he refused to organize guerrilla units before the war" Can you predict what will happen next year? Then how was Stalin meant to know that Hitler would strike in 1941? "One of his dirtiest tricks was in a city in Poland where hed told the partisans to begin a revolt at a prescribed hour which was to coincide with an external attack by the Red army. well partisans rose on cue but received zero external support." They rose up on their own, thinking that the Red Army was going to get to the city. Turns out the Red Army were at the end of their offensive capabilities (having been fighting for weeks) and thus stalled outside the city. "shame people have tried to rewrite history." Rewriting history is what historians do - https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 "S murdered about 6 to 8 million Ukrainians thru starvation prior to the war" You're talking about the Holodomor of the 1930's. You also have to remember that the Germans starved 3 million Soviet POWs during the war, burned down civilian houses, executed millions of people, starved the populace (the Hunger Plan), planned to starve millions more, and enslaved and then starved millions of people after shipping them to the slave labour camps of the Reich. In fact, "The Fate of Stalingrad’s Civilian Population" shows how 180,000 civilians from Stalingrad alone were murdered as a result of the German conquest and occupation of their city https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw " - a fact often over looked by revisionists." Revisionists (what I call Distorians) may overlook it, but historians do not.
    1
  16962. Sources are listed in the pinned comment. Pictures however were pulled from the internet. Still, the message is correct, even if the pictures are not. https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  16963. Thanks! Really happy you liked it :)
    1
  16964. Correct, I misspoke.
    1
  16965. What do you mean? How does making out as if the Soviets shot more of their own men (a lie) lead you to sympathize with them?
    1
  16966. Thanks! Glad to have you along for the ride :)
    1
  16967. I'm not shouting.
    1
  16968. Those that wanted to fight and win, and not keep retreating, and not become slaves of the Germans, yes.
    1
  16969. Yes, but the point is, if they slaughtered their men like shown in Enemy at the Gates, the death toll would have been far higher than that. It's still bad, but not as bad as often portrayed, or imagined. And no, Stalin's image is definitely soiled.
    1
  16970. Not being part of the Tripartite Pact isn't what defines a nation as being part of the Axis or not. Finland fought against the Soviets with German backing and were at war with the British (although never fought them). That means they're part of the Axis, even if not officially.
    1
  16971. Hey mate, yes it was good to meet you too and chat! I told you this video would spark a debate ;) Good luck to you and your clan!
    1
  16972. Yeah, I'm not sure how I didn't catch that one. Serves me right for rushing so I could go to TankFest
    1
  16973. The one rifle or bullets thing is a myth.
    1
  16974. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  16975. I've been reading Kotkin recently. But that doesn't mean the numbers stated in the Cold War in the West weren't wrong. The actual numbers were less than believed. This video is here to correct the fairy tale, not make another one up. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  16976. Yeah, I'm so used to talking about 1942 now, it's become second nature to say 1942 instead of 1941 :(
    1
  16977. Well, I'm certainly glad to hear that!
    1
  16978. Glad you liked it!
    1
  16979. It's presented from the Soviet point of view. My opinion is, that's the best way to understand something - to get into the heads of those that did the things. But then, bring it back at the end (which is what I did).
    1
  16980. So Stalin wasn't a totalitarian dictator?
    1
  16981. What?
    1
  16982. Presumably it's because you have some interest in WW2
    1
  16983. He certainly gets around that Beevor guy. Can't help but come across him almost everywhere you look.
    1
  16984. They're boring though, in my opinion.
    1
  16985. Oh yes. I saw that when he posted it, but I've not had time to respond. I will do though at some point when I can find the time. But in a nutshell - his arguments have many holes in them, and I don't feel bad for almost making him choke on his coffee either.
    1
  16986. You didn't watch to the end of the video. You also haven't seen my video on the Purges.
    1
  16987. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the rest of it :)
    1
  16988. Yes, I mispoke and missed it in editing (the script I wrote said 1941). Not worth taking the video down over, plus I've made a note about it in the description.
    1
  16989. I know I know
    1
  16990. I don't have statistics for individual year. I'm guessing there's a large swing in the numbers?
    1
  16991. I'm certainly trying to tell the truth :)
    1
  16992. So it is!
    1
  16993. I have. Although not sure when it will be if I'm honest. Stalingrad must come first now. I'm far too deep to take a step back
    1
  16994. His thesis is based on manipulated evidence https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    1
  16995. Yes, Holodomor was in the 1930s, and the Hunger Plan was in the 1940s.
    1
  16996. At which point? Chuikov didn't take part in the Kotloban offensives
    1
  16997. I was going to say, because I definitely said he was evil towards the end
    1
  16998. I can tell you didn't watch the video all the way through.
    1
  16999. Yes. Why?
    1
  17000. Me neither!
    1
  17001. That's perhaps true, but the point is, Soviet executions were not on the scale shown in Enemy at the Gates, nor as suggested in books like Beevor's Stalingrad.
    1
  17002. Stalin was evil. That doesn't mean the Red Army executed bazillions of their own men. The numbers are available.
    1
  17003. 22,000 Soviet tanks (most not deployed at the front). ~3900 German tanks on the front (with another 3,000 in other areas). Tanks alone do not win wars. I've said this, and shown this, to be the case numerous times. A tank is vulnerable when deployed alone. And because the Soviets deployed their tanks alone - because they weren't prepared for the surprise largest land invasion of all time - their tanks got chewed up by the German infantry. Soviets were close to the border because their doctrine sucked. That's the short answer. But this is too complicated to explain in a comment. Don't worry, I plan to do a video debunking Suvorov's completely distorian-thesis in the future and will show you why what you're hinting at is a load of rubbish. Educate yourself and read Glantz's Stumbling Colossus and Colossus Reborn, both of which explain why the Soviet Union was unprepared for war.
    1
  17004. You didn't watch to the end of the video.
    1
  17005. Glad to hear you enjoyed it!
    1
  17006. I hate football.
    1
  17007. "You've got to realize that the reason why your political content has taken such flak is not because of some marxist conspiracy, these people have a point." No they don't. They have a misguided definition of socialism. And when I've pointed this out to people, they don't like it. "You are making the argument, and this has been repeated to you many times, that socialism is when the government does stuff, and capitalism is when the government doesn't do stuff. That's not what socialism is." That is actually the historic definition prior to 1956. After 1956 (when the Hungarian Revolution came about) Marxists tried to distort the definition to distance themselves from it because they realised that government-ownership of the means of production wasn't working. You can actually see this in the historiography, and it is the beginning of the postmodernist (Marxist political) movement. "You're clearly really under-read on the topic." After all the criticism I went back and did a ton more reading/research, thinking that maybe I was wrong. Turns out I wasn't. My definition of socialism is the correct version. And my analysis of the Nazi economy, the Holocaust and WW2 is correct. Without racial-socialism you cannot have the Holocaust or WW2. "I know your schedule is busy, but slot in reading "the communist manifesto", or "the state and revolution", or "foundations of leninism" if you need supplemental material." That's Marxism, not socialism. Let me show you the difference - Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. "Socialism isn't fascism." National-Socialism and fascism are two different things. "[Socialism] demands a democracy, and constantly transitioning towards communism; all other roads lead to capitalist restoration as we've seen in the late USSR, late China, North Korea- these are no longer communist countries, or socialist countries." No, Marxism may demand that, but that's not socialism. Those states you listed are all socialist because the state owned the means of production. They were not capitalist economies because capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Those states were social-worker-states, and didn't allow private ownership in theory (except in some policies like the NEP, but on principle they were aiming to abolish capitalism). "You can keep on as you're doing with great history, but without bringing up your political level you'll never be able to interpret this history in an accurate way- leading to the flak you've been justifiably receiving." But it's not justifiable. That is the problem. I have socialists critizing my definition of socialism, but directly contradicting themselves. And this is what happens when you try to distort history, which is what the Marxists are trying to do. When you dig into their analysis and question what they're saying, their distorted version of history starts to fall apart. It's like the people claiming that the Nazis 'privatized' the economy. Well, hold on, if they privatized the economy (and that's capitalism) then non-privatization (or nationalization) would be socialism. Since nationalisation is state ownership of the economy, then it makes sense that socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is apart from the fact that the Nazis didn't privatize the economy, and that is, in fact, another distortion of history which the people spouting that they privatized the economy have got wrong (probably deliberately). I made mistakes in those two videos, and I will rectify them. However, the basic premise remains - Nationalsocialism was socialism because it was state ownership and control of the economy.
    1
  17008. "Socialism is worker control of the means of production." No it isn't. That's Marxism. Here's the definition of socialism - Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources." https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    1
  17009. Where's the shit politics? Just because my videos were targeted by a bunch of "Marxists" who don't know the proper definition of socialism (which is the social, public, state ownership or control of the means of production - businesses and economy) doesn't mean my politics is shit. Actually, that would mean that socialist politics is bad - which it is.
    1
  17010. And you didn't watch until the end before commenting.
    1
  17011. That's like saying all capitalists are selfish and greedy.
    1
  17012. Well, I mean, I technically wasn't the first to do a video on Enemy at the Gates (although, this isn't specifically about the film, even though it is featured heavily)
    1
  17013. Great! It's good to know you're along for the ride :)
    1
  17014. I can tell you didn't watch until the end of the video.
    1
  17015. There's propaganda on both sides, yet both sides don't see their own.
    1
  17016. The air war is something I wasn't interested in until I did the Bruneval Raid video. I now want to cover it, however I'm not sure I can do it before Stalingrad now. But yes I will at some point :)
    1
  17017. That one is the only factual mistake in the video. And it's more out of habit (saying 1942 over and over in a lot of my videos) and missing it in the editing than a wrong fact.
    1
  17018. It's not realistic at all. The blocking units weren't behind the troops. They were at the docks. You could mount attacks and fall back from those attacks, you just couldn't retreat from the city. They only shot a handful of men per month (think 10's, not hundreds). The rest were simply told off and sent back to their units. And the one-guy gets the rifle and the other the ammo bit in the film is completely made up. Basically the scene is complete fantasy.
    1
  17019. If it was set in space or something, yes. But as a historical movie, it's dreadful
    1
  17020. Thank you :)
    1
  17021. Of the film, or this video? I wouldn't recommend you watch my latest video on the civilians at Stalingrad then, but I'll leave the link anyway https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  17022. No, it meant that the middle managers were also shot. So they had to perform better and get the best out of their men.
    1
  17023. I'm glad you did too :)
    1
  17024. 22,000 - 10,500 of which were T-26s... Just watch these other videos of mine, they will explain all - "Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2" https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 "Why the Germans had the Tactical Advantage early in WW2" https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74 "The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2" https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  17025. I misspoke. It's a genuine mistake. The script that I wrote said 1941, but I said 1942 and didn't catch it in editing, as I said in the description.
    1
  17026. I'm not partial, I go where the evidence suggests. What frustrates me is that there's a lot of bias in the old (mainly Cold War) literature and the perceptions of this war (which was written primarily using pro-German sources until recently). So, the reason for the "pro-Soviet" videos is actually because I'm addressing the balance. But this isn't because I'm some sort of pro-Soviet communist or anything; it's because I'm looking to correct the common distortions of history, such as mass suicide charges of unarmed men against the Germans because "derp Russians". In fact, I would encourage you to watch tomorrow's video (I have one coming out today, but also one tomorrow). I think you'll see that I'm certainly not pro-Soviet. In the meantime, this video further explains my reasoning https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  17027. I called the Soviet regime evil at the end. Shame you didn't have the attention span to watch to that point.
    1
  17028. It is, but not as high as the losses portrayed in the film Enemy at the Gates, which is the main take away from this.
    1
  17029. You'll probably enjoy tomorrow's video too if you liked this one :) and yes, it's slowly going up
    1
  17030. Glad you liked it and thanks for subscribing :)
    1
  17031. I'm not. I called Stalin and the Soviet regime evil, but I left that but to the end of the video to catch out people who don't have the patience to watch it all the way through.
    1
  17032. Yes, I must be paid. That's why I made a video saying National Socialism is socialism and now am hated by the vast majority of Marxists. What you have to remember is that all sources are biased. All of them. German sources are biased and have agendas too. You cannot believe one side and ignore the other, you have to use all the sources, and be able to explain why some cannot be trusted.
    1
  17033. Yep, pretty much.
    1
  17034. I called Stalin and his regime "evil" in the video. I just left it towards the end because I'm sick of people who don't watch my videos all the way through and come to the wrong conclusions as a result.
    1
  17035. But they fought against the Soviets, were at war with Britain and the Commonwealth, and had German support. So yes, they're Axis.
    1
  17036. No, it's just coincidence. I've been working on my Stalingrad documentary since early last year. And I don't like football
    1
  17037. The video? Or Enemy at the Gates?
    1
  17038. Apparently so. I don't have much further detail on Ilya Ehrenburg's life, so I can't tell you more.
    1
  17039. Why?
    1
  17040. How am I mixing them up?
    1
  17041. Yes I misspoke, see description.
    1
  17042. I know, shocking isn't it
    1
  17043. Lewis and the North West of England
    1
  17044. Yes, calling the Soviet regime "evil" is apologetic. I'm guessing you didn't get to that point of the video.
    1
  17045. "Wikipedia" I've identified the problem.
    1
  17046. See the sources in the Pinned Comment. And yes, walking over minefields etc wasn't a common tactic. The statistics on the number of deaths does not allow vast numbers of deaths from Order 227 as claimed in German propaganda. I've done a video on the Purges and there was zero reason to go over that again in this video as that had nothing to do with Order 227.
    1
  17047. You didn't watch to the end of the video. See the sources in the Pinned comment.
    1
  17048. Yes, and that's what they did before the order. Problem is the officers were ordering retreats. Order 227 put a stop to that, forcing the officers to fight too.
    1
  17049. You mean, I tried to present it from their point of view, rather than from the German point of view, which is what most histories do.
    1
  17050. No, the Holodomor was in the 1930s, and the Hunger Plan was in the 1940s.
    1
  17051. Didn't watch to the end of the video, huh? Try again, old man, before you accuse this 'kid' of spouting propaganda. The Germans were National Socialists fighting against Soviet Socialists so of course they were bad, since they valued the social (race/class) group over the lives of individual human beings. The Germans aren't bad now, but they were back then.
    1
  17052. I simply misspoke and didn't catch it in editing. I put it in the description too.
    1
  17053. You realise that Orwell was a socialist, don't you? In fact, at one point he said he was leaning towards anarchism. The main thing being that he disliked totalitarian dictatorships, which is why he wrote 1984 (put people assume from the book that he was anti-socialist, and that is untrue). He's also my favourite fiction author, although I don't read fiction any more. The point being that your message is trying to convey one thing, but it actually doesn't make any sense.
    1
  17054. "Caricature" noun 1. a picture, description, or imitation of a person in which certain striking characteristics are exaggerated in order to create a comic or grotesque effect. "a crude caricature of the Prime Minister" synonyms: cartoon, distorted/exaggerated drawing, distortion... verb 1. make or give a caricature of. "he was famous enough to be caricatured by Private Eye" synonyms: parody, satirize, lampoon, mimic, ridicule, mock, make fun of, burlesque...
    1
  17055. You're welcome :)
    1
  17056. I sometimes also edit them in photoshop because Sheets can be annoying sometimes
    1
  17057. Google Sheet
    1
  17058. No worries, it's my pleasure!
    1
  17059. I will at some point. Might be a while away yet though. Stalingrad comes first! (after Crusader)
    1
  17060. Which laws are you referring to exactly?
    1
  17061. Good to hear! If you haven't seen my oil video, I'd recommend it (many say it's one of my best). I'll leave the link https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  17062. No they don't happen often. The reason is because I keep saying 1942, 1942, 1942 all the time, so it's become a habit now to say 1942. Then I simply didn't catch it in editing :( hopefully it doesn't detract from the rest of the video, or my channel
    1
  17063. Death and taxes
    1
  17064. Ah ok. Don't watch TV anymore (since uni) so forgot about that channel. But no, I'm British and have no affiliation with the Soviets, communists, or Russia. But by the same token, I've no affiliation with biased German sources either, and definitely don't trust Hollywood. Instead, I get my facts from the books, and the books used for this video are listed in the pinned comment. As stated in the video 158,000 Red Army soldiers were shot by their own men, so this isn't a nice regime by any standards. However, it wasn't as stupid as shown in the film Enemy at the Gates (the book by the same name that the film is based off also doesn't say the Soviets charged forward with one rifle OR ammunition, so it's a load of rubbish).
    1
  17065. What's RT? Rooster Teeth?
    1
  17066. The Soviets had 2,743,000 men at the front on 22nd June 1941, vs 3,118,910 German + 839,000 Axis allied troops (total 3,957,910 Axis). The first time the Soviets have more men than the Axis is in early December 1941. They send a lot to the front, but the Axis always have more men then them (which helps explain why they had the advantage). So yes, a surprise attack against an smaller army at any one moment in time, plus the fact that this army was also in the middle of a mobilization and reorganization effort and was thus completely unprepared for war. It's no wonder they got beat. But it's also interesting that once the Germans no longer have numerical superiority, they begin to get beat back. Source for the numbers - Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Table N Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Soviet German Front 1941-1945 Also, see the sources I listed in the pinned comment where I got all my information from for the video.
    1
  17067. Well, the numbers are always disputed, but the source I have says 158,000. I don't know about the generals.
    1
  17068. Maybe deaths, but not casualties. Depending on which source you use (in this case When Titan's Clashed) military deaths for the Soviets were 10,008,434 (just deaths). This means 158,000 is 1.57% of all military deaths the Soviets took, which is still a small ratio. It's certainly not 100% of deaths as implied in the film Enemy at the Gates. However, I also want to point out that total military losses for the Soviets alone were 28,199,127 (this is killed, captured, wounded and sick). So 158,000 is just 0.56% of the Soviet military losses for the entire war. And this is just Soviet military deaths and losses, not including all the other powers. And all this assumes that 158,000 is the correct figure, which may not be the case since it's disputed. It could be higher, but it also could be lower. At this moment in time, we don't know for certain, but that's the best guess we have now.
    1
  17069. Not entirely. I made it clear at the end that Stalin and his regime weren't innocent either
    1
  17070. Which is why I said Stalin was evil at the end.
    1
  17071. Understanding how the Red Army fought in WW2 does not mean you have to unfurl the red flag
    1
  17072. eh?
    1
  17073. That's exactly what I said at the end of the video.
    1
  17074. Can confirm, I'm critical of everything
    1
  17075. Is this also why wages and living standards are stagnating at the moment?
    1
  17076. Yes, you've got to kill off humanity in order to bring in the race of superhumans required to actually make socialism work. (Referring to both Marxist-Socialism and Nationalsocialism here)
    1
  17077. Context is the key.
    1
  17078. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  17079. Churchill.
    1
  17080. In the video I called Stalin and his regime evil. Did you not get to that part?
    1
  17081. Why is it? I didn't really enjoy the first one, so I didn't play the second
    1
  17082. Saying 1942 over and over all the time because I'm constantly talking about Stalingrad, I naturally said 1942 rather than 1941. A simple mistake and I have recorded it in the description.
    1
  17083. Wow, thanks Dan! I'm glad you liked this one! Didn't expect anyone to say it's one of my best :D
    1
  17084. I do not disagree with you. Perhaps I should have said: the USSR was a bad and a horrible place to live, and the regime was monsterous, but the propaganda has unnecessarily embellished certain points which have caused distortions in the history which need ironing out
    1
  17085. Except, I called Stalin and his regime evil in the video.
    1
  17086. Well, I'm certainly glad she survived. You may want to think about changing your YouTube name :)
    1
  17087. Absolutely, it was the Socialists who caused all the problems, and everyone else was caught in the bloodshed. Same applies in Germany with their National-Socialists. And yes, I'm firm in my conviction that the Nazis were what they said they were, as substantial evidence is available to prove they are socialists, even if Marxists and academics (who are often Marxists too) deny the reality of Hitler's socialism. But you can't blame everyone in Germany or Russia for what happened back then, just like you can't go to jail if someone else commits a murder.
    1
  17088. It's smaller than the numbers portrayed by Hollywood in their sham of a historical film "Enemy at the Gates", and that was the point of the statement.
    1
  17089. Or check out the end of the video where I made it clear how evil the Soviet regime is, proving your comment is redundant
    1
  17090. If only I could get official academic qualifications by publishing videos
    1
  17091. I don't understand your comment.
    1
  17092. Thanks for subscribing, Brian :)
    1
  17093. I mistakenly said 1942 instead of 1941, yes. It doesn't mean I did it on purpose or that the rest of the video was wrong.
    1
  17094. Yes, I hadn't realised they'd stopped executing their own soldiers since WW1. Considering that was only 20 years prior, and that the same officers of that war took part in the second, I'm kinda surprised it wasn't a thing in WW2. My bad. However, it was acceptable 20 years prior, and both the Germans and the Soviets did it during the war (and the Germans see themselves as more 'civilized' than the Soviets) so it's not like it's an uncommon practice.
    1
  17095. I know I misspoke in the video, but your dates are off. Invasion of Poland is 1st September 1939. Axis-Soviet War begins 22nd of June 1941 However, the start of WW2 is debatable. For the Chinese and Japanese, the war started in 1937, and really was a continuation of a conflict going on since the 1920's.
    1
  17096. What do you mean?
    1
  17097. You're very welcome; I'm glad you liked it :)
    1
  17098. You're welcome!
    1
  17099. The Ukrainians had it pretty rough in Stalin's era. I can see why they wanted their independence.
    1
  17100. I'm guessing you didn't watch to the end of the video.
    1
  17101. I wouldn't be a comrade in the first place. Truth be told. If you watched the full video, you'd understand
    1
  17102. Thanks Gaz! Will do!
    1
  17103. In terms of morale, Stalingrad was important once the city fight got underway. In terms of capturing the oil fields, Stalingrad wasn't really important.
    1
  17104. Glad to hear you liked it :)
    1
  17105. And this guy doesn't watch to the end of the video where he would see that his accusation is untrue.
    1
  17106. I don't appreciate being called a 'moron', especially when it is you who can't seem to read Beevor's book correctly. 158,000 is nothing compared to the self-inflicted losses made out in the film Enemy at the Gates, or the book Stalingrad by Beevor. That was the point of my statement. Beevor twists the statement about the losses to imply Chuikov murdered an entire division's worth of his own soldiers. It's there in black and white. Beevor is clearly pro-German and anti-Russian, which is why he's favouring German sources and accounts (most of which are racist, since this is Nazi times) over anything the Soviets say. This is a bad thing, especially when the reality was much different. No idea what you're talking about with the pictures.
    1
  17107. Are you saying all the sources I used in the pinned comment are incorrect too?
    1
  17108. Glad you liked it!
    1
  17109. As I said, I misspoke. It's obvious watching all my other videos that I know when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union. Context is key.
    1
  17110. That may be a factor. Most of my viewers are from the USA, and some of my more popular videos show how one of their generals made a mistake. Equally, by covering 1941-1942, I haven't got to the point where their men even land at Torch, so perhaps there's little incentive for them to subscribe.
    1
  17111. The Soviet and Chinese Communist regimes were evil, but the people weren't necessarily evil. Same applies with capitalism. There are many capitalist dictatorships that are evil, but that doesn't mean all people living in a capitalist country are evil. That logic doesn't make any sense.
    1
  17112. No, thank you! I'm really happy you liked it :)
    1
  17113. Also, it seems (from a quick internet search) that Zemskov's statistics are disputed to say the least. It's also not modern, since he published in the early 1990's (although that's still fairly new)
    1
  17114. One thing to bear in mind is that communism (an economic system) and totalitarian dictatorships (a political system) are distinct entities. You can have a democratic communist nation - it just hasn't happened yet. But Alexander, I would point out that the Soviet government at the end of the Soviet Union was different to the government under Stalin's rule. While you may want a communist economic system, it's probably not in your interest (or the people's interest) to settle for a Stalinist totalitarian dictatorship. And I know you disagree and think that Stalin's atrocities didn't happen, but there is a lot of evidence that says they did, and it's something to consider.
    1
  17115. Yeah, obviously it is a movie and there's room for artistic licence. But the problem is they have ingrained a false image in the minds of a lot of people. And most of the people who watched that film didn't go away and do research. Now it's one of those questions that comes up in my comment sections or on forums or on Reddit etc. This, in my opinion, is bad. And this is why I think the film is bad.
    1
  17116. It's not Nazi, but Finland did fight with Germany against the Soviets, and it was definitely under German influence.
    1
  17117. I think it's because I'm usually talking about 1942, and then when I go to talk about events in 1941, I say 1942 by habit.
    1
  17118. That was exactly my point. The officers were ordering and encouraging response. The order focused on them, forcing them to stand. They then forced the men to stand (although many of the men actually welcomed the order because they were sick of retreating). So this is a classic management technique.
    1
  17119. No, they burnt down houses and kicked the peasants out as part of their war of annihilation. They did not care. It has nothing to do with anything you said - the Nazi party has brainwashed a generation of people to fight a brutal war against what they deemed to be non-human 'parasites' (to use Hitler's own words). This was a racially motivated war for German living space and resources. They wanted to enslave the peoples of the East and ensure that the German people would dominate Europe for centuries to come. And the populace believed in that too, which is why they followed Hitler from 1933 into hell in 1945.
    1
  17120. Did they fight on the Eastern Front? Did they burn houses down and rob food from the peasants? Because I think you'll find that they did that. I think you'll find unit diaries from the time, like the 24th Panzer Division, saying they're burning down houses and forcing the peasants out. I think you'll find that many millions of Ukranians were starved to death by the Wehrmacht (not just the SS, but the Heer) as were the Dutch, as were the Greeks. 180,000 civilians at Stalingrad alone were carted off from their homes to the slave labour camps of the Reich. And it was the German soldiers who committed those crimes. And criminals are not going admit that they did that, are they? Just like Manstein didn't mention in his memoirs about the time he spent in prison for his war crimes. So no Tavish, it is you who needs to read books on the subject. Here's some recommendations - Fritz "Ostkrieg: Hitler’s War of Extermination in the East." Wette "The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality." Overy "Russia's War."
    1
  17121. Hate to break it to you Tavish, but in the 1940's the Germans were Nazi. So I was correct.
    1
  17122. I'm guessing you're a fan?
    1
  17123. A commie who called Stalin and his regime "Evil" in the video? Looks like you didn't watch the video all the way through.
    1
  17124. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  17125. I called Stalin evil. I'm not sure how that doesn't paint him as a "bad guy" like I apparently did (which I didn't).
    1
  17126. 1) I'm not a "neo-commie" 2) revising history is what historians do https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  17127. Unfortunately, these are the only statistics I have. My sources are listed in the pinned comment. If you can find and provide better statistics, I will reassess and do another video.
    1
  17128. Exactly, there was no need to exaggerate the events to paint the Soviets as bad.
    1
  17129. Which people have I forgotten?
    1
  17130. You realise that if the Germans had won, your entire family would have been even worse off. Hitler's policy was to kill in the region of around 40 million people through starvation, slave labour camps, and executions. Even if they had survived your family would have been slaves. Yes, the Soviet regime was bad, but the German regime was definitely not any better. And that's the point, your grandmother and her generation were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Neither side was any good, and we should feel sorry for all the innocent people caught by either regime.
    1
  17131. Where? I'm not communist. If I was, I wouldn't have called Stalin and his regime 'evil' in the video, and I wouldn't have made a video saying that National-Socialism WAS socialism, which it is.
    1
  17132. You're very welcome :)
    1
  17133. Good to hear! :)
    1
  17134. The Axis-Soviet War began in 1941.
    1
  17135. Yeah, I dumb
    1
  17136. The pinned comment has the sources, but this was before I started doing citations in the video itself. See my more recent Stalingrad video, where I put the citations in when talking about Order 227 (first third if linked video) https://youtu.be/n1DeU6NckLM
    1
  17137. Good to hear :)
    1
  17138. No.
    1
  17139. Why am I anti-German? I'm learning German right now, and I have zero dislike of the Germans. I also view both the Nazis and the Soviets as the same - socialists. So I'm as negative towards both as necessary. The difference is that unlike during the Cold War, I have zero reason to paint the National Socialists as being good, and the Soviet Marxist-Socialists as being bad... because that would be hypocritical. They're both equally as bad as each other, and there's plenty of evidence to bury both for the crimes they committed. That said, I also believe that the scientific method is essential to understanding the world around us, and the past. So I use evidence to develop my views. The evidence shows that not as many lives were lost as was previously believed. Therefore I'm siding with the evidence. That doesn't make me pro or anti anything, just factual. Relevant video: why I'm passionate about history, which explains my views on history very clearly https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  17140. The reason I said 1942 is because I keep talking about Stalingrad and Fall Blau, which took place in 1942. So it's become a habit to say "1942". I apologize for this.
    1
  17141. Good to hear! Always read with a critical eye and you won't go wrong :)
    1
  17142. Why?
    1
  17143. Yes, I misspoke. See the description
    1
  17144. If you don't want to know, don't watch a history channel like mine.
    1
  17145. You didn't watch to the end of the video
    1
  17146. Haha fair enough :)
    1
  17147. I mispoke, that is all. See the description.
    1
  17148. I'm planning on doing a video on Chuikov where I'll cover all those points. As I've said to a couple of people, the guy certainly has his flaws. You are correct with the stress, which manifested itself by the eczema on his hands (he had to bandage them), and he would burst out in rage and (apparently) hit people with his walking stick. To what extent the anger and the stick hitting were I'm not sure yet, but his troops loved him. The Soviet troops fighting in Stalingrad say that he was a different commander to many of the Soviet commanders, and if anyone else had led them, they wouldn't have won the battle. I tend to agree with that assessment over the idea that he was some sort of maniac who beat people. Why would his troops love him and want to fight for him if he was shooting them and beating them all day? It doesn't make sense.
    1
  17149. That's the point. The officers were allowing, authorizing and encouraging retreats. Stalin now says this is no longer to be tolerated, thus officers are now responsible and will be shot if they retreat without authorization. The officers, knowing their lives were now on the line, then ensure the lower ranks stand their ground. So yes, I fully understand that shit roles down hill, and I understand what the purpose of this order was. I've been a middle manager, and I know this 100% from experience.
    1
  17150. I never said they weren't barbaric.
    1
  17151. With the British you're taking about the same army with the same generals and much of the same equipment. The two wars were just 20 years apart. So, while the British didn't execute men in WW2, it wasn't unheard of in that era.
    1
  17152. They did in WW1.
    1
  17153. Lol. Thanks Ian
    1
  17154. Yeah, I misspoke. Talking about Stalingrad over and over, it's become a habit to say 1942 :(
    1
  17155. I see you haven't read Mein Kampf then. And why you think I'm losing subscribers, which I'm not, is beyond me? Even if I was, I'm not interested in subscribers. My goal here is to learn the truth, not let my "beliefs" get in the way of cold hard logic. Whereas you're letting your ideological faith cloud your judgement. Anyone reading your comments who hasn't realised by the time they get to this point will now know that you're a national-racist-socialist who's trying to deny the historical reality. Well unfortunately for you there's plenty of evidence to crush your version of events, starting with Hitler's socialism (which you're actually denying). Why are you denying Hitler's socialism?
    1
  17156. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  17157. Never heard of that guy before (don't watch TV), but yes they do look alike
    1
  17158. Not sure how much "cooling off" you'll do with this video, but at least you've finished work :) I'm hopeful it will spark a lovely debate here in the comment section... haha
    1
  17159. Well, the British certainly did in WW1, and that was the same army and country, and only 20 years previous. Surely the same idea about shooting your own electorate applies?
    1
  17160. You didn't watch to the end of the video.
    1
  17161. My apologies if you're being genuine. I get a lot of comments which request atrocities to prove a point - namely that I'd never talk about certain topics (implying that I'm siding with a certain faction, or being unfair to their particular faction). E.g. "why don't you talk about Allied atrocities!?" I assumed your comment was in a similar line.
    1
  17162. Be my guest :) be sure to list the sources I used somewhere too
    1
  17163. I called him evil at the end.
    1
  17164. Yeah, I talk so much about 1942, I've built up a habit of saying that year :(
    1
  17165. Also, I've covered the Purges in another video https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ
    1
  17166. Communism, socialism, fascism and Nationalsocialism are all ideologies that have led to millions of human lives lost, either in slave labour camps, or dead. Don't assume somebody's politics based on not watching even one full video - since I called Stalin and his regime evil towards the end of the video, which you clearly didn't get to.
    1
  17167. When you're talking about thousands or hundreds of thousands, all numbers become disputed. We don't even have accurate numbers that say how many men Rommel and his Afrika Korps had, and there have been countless books written about him. If we can't get Rommel right, we'll probably never get the numbers right on anything. However, even if the numbers turned out to be double what they are now, they're no where near what they were portrayed to be in Enemy at the Gates.
    1
  17168. I want to do a video on the Bulgarian army in WW2 at some point. May be a while away, but I do intend to do one.
    1
  17169. I know. Habit saying 1942 all the time and then not picking it up in editing
    1
  17170. Absolutely. I've explained my reasonings in this other video https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  17171. For starters, I don't have more subs than Military History Visualized. He has many times the number of subscribers than I do. Second, can you explain exactly why is it baloney, since you've not actually said why? Thirdly, sources are listed in the pinned comment. Fourth, what context did I not provide? State the context you wish me to provide and I will provide it to you. Fifth, enjoy your biased, socialist-agenda-ridden, very-little-information and worthless BBC documentaries.
    1
  17172. You have a right to make a comment, and disagree with me, however you can't call me a liar nor say I'm misleading, nor accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about, because that is completely incorrect. I don't even know what exactly you're disagreeing with, but if you're going to deny the Holodomor and try say that the Ukrainians had it better under German occupation (which it appears you're hinting at) be warned that I'm also armed with books on the subject and have plenty of documents to know that that line is complete rubbish and will not be tolerated in this comment section. I plan to do a video on said subjects because I'm sick to death of hearing denialist comments in this comment section. If that is the view you have, don't bother replying because you will only get your account banned from commenting on my channel. I do not accept fiction nor politically motivated agendas, only truth. And if you cry about freedom of speech, that's fine, but I'm not going to give you a platform from which to preach lies and distortions.
    1
  17173. If you don't know what I was talking about then how do you know I was lying and was misleading? Sources are listed in the pinned comment
    1
  17174. No worries sir, it's my pleasure :)
    1
  17175. Max Quick it was a hard question. Wales has the "Red Dragon"
    1
  17176. Bodglin o'Ite another one on birds?
    1
  17177. Morgan Chalmers and you got it right! :)
    1
  17178. Thank you, a few people have recommended this book, and it turns out I had already purchased it on Kindle! I just hadn't started it, but I will now
    1
  17179. "Rational Egoism will not work because we are irrational, emotional Primates, controlled by our subconsciousness up to ca 80% meaning our decision-making is tied to our lifelong experience... social, Culture, upbringing, friend, family and so on and so forth." We're not "irrational" creatures at all. You might be, but I'm certainly not. True, we're not emotionless, and there are subconscious activities going on (e.g. breathing or digestion are automatic processes). However, what separates us from every other animal is our conscious ability to use logic and reason. Our decision-making is tied to experience, and that experience is of objective reality. - "Rand does not like: Altruism or Collectivism... and the state that controls what companies can do or don't." I don't like them either. Charity is a selfish act, since you only give to charity for your own benefit. You want to feel good, or look good in the eyes of your community, or in the eyes of God. You're not giving to charity out of a genuine principle of anti-self, you're giving to charity purely for yourself. And you can only give to charity if you have something to give, which you could only obtain if you selfishly pursued the obtainment of the thing you're giving to charity. So altruism is nonsense and self-refuting. You want to FEEL like you're helping others, proving that you're doing it for selfish reasons. Collectivism is the same, but I won't get into that here. I came to this conclusion BEFORE I read Rand. Reading Rand helped me see even more flaws in the altruistic religion, but a lot of the flaws were obvious beforehand. - "the inhuman philosophy of Rand" No, yours is a inhuman philosophy. You're denying what makes us human - our conscious, rational power to use logic and reason. You have denied this quality, denying the fundamental nature of man. - "It's good that objectivism has helped you with the burnout... but as somebody working in the Fields of helping people that fight with Borderline, psychosis, or Antisocial personality disorder..." I can tell you don't have much success with curing these borderline, psychosis, or Antisocial personality disorders, since it is your ideology that's causing them. I know because this was where your ideology was driving me - I used to believe in the same ideology you now believe in. - "your fix for burnout may be only a Band-aid" It is not. History is impossible if it is Subjective. If it's all just irrational "opinions" of inhuman primates then there is no truth, and thus there is no point to history. This was what was causing the burnout. Only by overcoming the Subjectivism did the burnout go away. It's not a band-aid, it's the reestablishment of truth, of history, and of purpose. - "please do yourself a favor and check some professionals" The problem is an epistemological issue, not a therapy issue. - "(My Helpersyndrom is forcing me to write this)" I'm not being forced to write this. I'm writing this in the hope that I can get through to you and make you see the error of your ways. I cannot break you out of the wizard's circle, you must realise you're within it and take the first step. - "Because you said in your Video here you worked 12 Hours a Day..." Beforehand, when history was impossible, this was a grind. Now that history has been saved, working 12 hour days is truly liberating! I have meaning and purpose again!
    1
  17180. I'm not fully on board with Objectivism yet, I'm still looking into it, but I don't think you understand Objectivism if that's your idea of what it is. This sounds like a false caricature of the philosophy rather than a proper assessment made from actually reading their books.
    1
  17181. Someone must have recommended me that book because I already have it on Kindle! I will read it. But it's a shame that they don't have a theory of history - that's a major omission! I may have to create an Objectivist history theory myself because I absolutely cannot continue with the subjectivist model.
    1
  17182. I answer this in the video
    1
  17183. It does make sense, so long as my Patreons are happy with it
    1
  17184. I didn't realise that! Thank you for informing me, I'll give it a listen 👍
    1
  17185. Thank you! Several people said the same and I've started reading it :)
    1
  17186. I mean, it's true :)
    1
  17187. Because many of them are far too difficult to research in a week. I need more time on each of them
    1
  17188. Sorry to hear you didn't like Stalingrad. What's the reason for that?
    1
  17189. If the Objectivists are a cult, perhaps you could tell me the name of one of the Gods they worship? Bearing in mind that I've already looked into Objectivism to some extent, and I'm not really seeing any "cultish" elements so far. I've heard people who are dead-set against the Objectivists say there are cultish elements in the Objectivist movement, but I've heard these same people call me a "crypto-fascist" and a load of other nonsense. They said the same thing about the Austrian School, or the Red Pill (dating) community, none of which is true. The criticism seems to be coming from people who have done ZERO reading on the particular topic. Even if I read the Objectivist literature, or the Austrian School literature, or the Red Pill community literature, or anything else, that doesn't mean I'm not thinking critically as I'm doing so. I don't just believe everything I read, nor do I shy away from a subject just because other people have told me not to read into it. Every time I have read into a topic people have told me not to read into, I've been pleasantly surprised by the information that lied within, but also left wondering what the big deal was. Why are people so scared of reading into viewpoints that are not their own? And you're assuming I haven't listened to Christian thinkers, even though I have. I think you know full well that the Objectivists are highly critical of Christianity, and that's why you're calling it a cult: you don't want people to hear viewpoints that question Christianity, and this is because you're projecting. You yourself are having doubts about your faith, and are scared of losing your faith, and so you self-censor. As Eric Voegelin said: it's the self-censorship of the adherents. If you were strong in your faith, you would have nothing to fear from reading literature that was critical of it.
    1
  17190. And the Subjectivists are not?
    1
  17191. Have you not checked out my previous videos on the North African Campaign? Compass, Rommel's First Offensive, Battleaxe, Crusader, etc?
    1
  17192. It would be very boring though - "the line hasn't moved again!"
    1
  17193. I actually explain this in this video. Because I've been rushing to do weekly videos, I found myself unable to commit to projects that require too much research, otherwise I wouldn't be able to hit the weekly schedule. Thus, many of the Patreon questions (including yours) were left unanswered because of this. There's a lot, but I still intend to get to every question that has been asked. Once I've got the Gazala script done, the next check-in video will discuss the issue of the unanswered Q&A questions.
    1
  17194. I did that as part of Operation Compass. The beginning explains the Italian invasion of Egypt under Marshal Graziani
    1
  17195. I've not made it yet
    1
  17196. "Not long after that the order came that the 4th Romanian Army will be subordonated to the German 4th Panzer Army, just like at the start of Barbarossa, in June 1941, the Romanian 3rd Army was subordonated to the German 11th Army. Usually an Army was placed directly under the command of an Army Group, not under another Army." Sounds like you're looking at information relating to the Romanian 4th Army Corps, not the 4th Romanian Army.
    1
  17197. Possible!
    1
  17198. But this isn't the end of the war. The strategy you're talking about wasn't employed yet. As I showed in my fully-sourced and nearly complete 35 hour documentary series on Stalingrad, the encirclement at Stalingrad was far more nuanced than many of the old histories made it out to be. Hitler didn't make decisions on his own - Halder, Zeitzler, Göring, Paulus, von Weichs, Jeschonnek, and many more generals, made the decisions WITH Hitler. Yet, for some strange reason, only Hitler gets the blame. Isn't that strange? As I showed in my Courland Pocket series, Hitler was trying to pull as many troops out of the encirclement as possible, but simply wasn't able to do so. Yet he got blamed for not pulling the men out, even though he physically couldn't. Again, isn't that strange? Obviously, this isn't to say that Hitler didn't make mistakes, or that he was "right" (he wasn't). But a lot of the old narratives have been shown to be faulty thanks to the opening of the Soviet archives, plus a reexamination of the evidence by newer historians who aren't being pressured by the Cold War to make the German High Command look better than it actually was. And that's the crucial part - the High Command was EQUALLY to blame for the disasters, but is often overlooked due to the biases of the Cold War. 6th Army was also not a "manouver" army - it was mainly infantry. It only had one mobile corps, and one other panzer division transferred from 4th Panzer Army.
    1
  17199. Are you denying the starvation that took place within the pocket? Are you suggesting that the airlift succeeded, and that the Germans weren't skeletons when they surrendered? Are you denying that 90% of the men were infected with typhus when they were captured as described by several sources, including Colonel Adam? Even Soviet nurses that tried to treat them got infected.
    1
  17200. Yeah that was my fault
    1
  17201.  @1815MichelNey  "Maybe the children will be born with some problem, mothers fault, baby is paying for mothers sin." But the baby didn't sin, and the baby shouldn't be thrown into eternal fire just because of the mother's actions. Jesus died on the Cross for your sins so that you'd be judged in God's eyes alone for the actions you take. This means that God is judging your actions, not the actions of those before, contradicting the idea of Original Sin.
    1
  17202.  @akivaabraham7739 Yes, it was blocked. I found it in the "held for review" section and have now approved it and should be visible to all. Sick to death of YouTube censorship... Now, to your points, and I'll start with a simple lesson in logic. You cannot be both born and not born. If you were born, you're not not-born. Thus, a contradiction means that something is wrong, and therefore cannot be right. In truth, contradictions are unacceptable because something either is right or it is wrong, there is no in-between. And in case you try to argue that there is an in-between, then there can be no right and wrong, and thus no sin or virtue, since everything is in between... So, you would self-refute your own argument if you tried to argue that there is no right and wrong, or that contradictions don't indicate something being wrong. In the case of the Bible having inherent contradictions within it - yes. There are many contradictions in the Bible and Christian theology, from simple things like Paul contradicting the teachings of Jesus himself, to the fact that we can't have free will and Original Sin at the same time. Your response of just accepting the contradictions is an admission that you are wrong and have no answer. It is an admission that you have lost the debate. You say: "Forks in the road exist. The destinations of those forks are known. Which road one will choose does not exist. God cannot be ignorant of that which does not exist." But this cannot be right. If forks in the road exist, and the destinations are known, and we get to choose which road to go down, then God cannot be driving our actions or know the end result, which means he is not all-encompassing and all-knowing. And, if like the Molinists say, that God has imparted free will into us, then Original Sin still doesn't make any sense, since we are free not to sin, making Jesus and Christianity as a whole superfluous. You cannot get around these inherent contradictions, which means that something is wrong with this doctrine. In response to my point that good and evil are arbitrary, you responded: "It is simply favouritism. Its up to him, & you don't have to like it." That is an admission that I'm correct; there is no good and evil in the world, since God decided what was good and evil arbitrarily. And if he can decide arbitrarily, and we have free will, then we can also decide what we consider good and evil, making God himself also superfluous. We cannot have Original Sin, since sin is arbitrary by definition.
    1
  17203.  @akivaabraham7739 I do love how you decided to run away ("I will leave it there") rather than allow your beliefs to be challenged. I've been waiting for your response, hoping that you have one, but it looks like you weren't interested in trying to persuade me, but rather to convince yourself that you were right.
    1
  17204. "...God's subjective morality becomes all encompassing. The arbitrariness no longer applies... there is nothing besides God." Your argument relies on the idea that God is all encompassing, plus the consequential idea that our actions are determined by God (determinism). But there is a contradiction inherent within this doctrine. If God is all encompassing and determines our actions, then he controls us. We no longer have free will to do what we want; our consciousness is just along for the ride, as every action is pre-taken by God. He knows everything that will happen in advance, and you are not capable of making a choice. Well, when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, God punished their offspring with 'Original Sin'. We're all sinners because our ancestors disobeyed God. But is this really the case? If God is all encompassing, then it wasn't our ancestors that ate the forbidden fruit - it was God! God determined in advance that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit, thus it wasn't them that chose to eat the fruit, God had chosen for them. They didn't have free will because God is actually the one pulling the strings. God is punishing us because of the actions of our ancestors (which doesn't make sense anyway) even though neither they nor we have the free will to chose not to be sinful. This begs the question: how can God hold man responsible for evil if man doesn’t have the free will to avoid it, and God made him do it? The alternative is to say that Adam and Even, and subsequently ourselves, do actually have free will, and thus can be punished. But if that's the case, God is not all encompassing, and not deterministic, and also not omnipotent. God is, therefore, limited - which goes against the idea of God as this all-powerful being. Also, if Adam was free to sin, then we are free not to sin, which means we're not inherently evil. Adam only became evil AFTER he ate the fruit, proving that he wasn't born evil. Thus, we don't need Jesus Christ to save us from Original Sin, since we're not born with Original Sin. And even if we were, why is God punishing us all for the sin of one? Now, you may turn around and say that your God is not the Christian God. Fair enough. But the same concept applies to other faiths. If there is an all-encompassing God (or Gods), then everything is pre-determined by Him (or them), at which point we have no free will, and thus cannot be punished for our sins, which means none of us, or our actions, are evil. You cannot say that Hitler is evil if God hasn't given Hitler free will, because it would be God that made him do the things he did. And if God made him do those things, then there is no concept of good and evil - it's all arbitrary. As you said, the idea of a monotheistic God eliminates plurality - eliminates multiple-choice. If God stands for everything that's good, and he creates evil, then 'good' and 'evil' are both one and the same. And at this point, everything becomes irrelevant. There are no morals, no ethics, nothing! We're only left with God. Our actions and choices are completely meaningless, and we cannot be punished for them, since they're not ours to make. Our lives are totally outside of our control, so there's no point even having this discussion. And I would say that this is a bigger contradiction than anything you said about Ayn Rand :) Your point about my work on Gnosticism doesn't hold, since my mind is limited and inconsistent, and your mind is limited and inconsistent, then you shouldn't accept my arguments, since they are inherently incorrect. Your own conclusions are inherently incorrect too due to your limited and inconsistent mind, and so we're living in a swamp of irrationality. Nobody is right, everybody is wrong. At which point, we cannot determine whether history happened or not, and so my work is all pointless. I may as well give it all up... which is actually the reason why I'm looking into Objectivism, because the ultimate conclusion of Subjectivism is that history is impossible.
    1
  17205. For starters, I'm not currently an Objectivist. I'm looking into it, but I've not embraced it as of yet. So most of your arguments here are mute because you've assumed I'm an Objectivist when I'm not. Secondly, religious morality is arbitrary. God decides what is good or not completely at his whim, and all you've done is deferred the question of where we get our moral compass from to someone else. Why should God decide? Why not me, or you, or someone else? It's all equally as arbitrary. So why not let each individual create their own moral compass? Thirdly, if our senses are as faulty and untrustworthy as you and Kant claim, and if our minds are part of our sense organs (which they are - our brains are nerves attached to the rest of the body) then we cannot trust our minds either. Now, thanks to this argument, both our senses and our minds are faulty and untrustworthy. But, if our minds are bad, then how can faith be anything other than an illusion? The concept of God is a concept of the mind - belief requires a working brain. Without the mind, faith in God is impossible, rendering God impossible too.
    1
  17206. That's not a counterargument, that's confirmation. Disassembling certainty = an attack on the mind.
    1
  17207. Yeah, I messed up
    1
  17208. Hi
    1
  17209. Thanks for the recommendation. I've just read the blurb about it, and it sounds like a load of nonsense to me, especially since Freud was a dialectic, and Wilhelm was clearly a follower of Freud. But maybe it's worth having a laugh over... especially the bit about the family being the Fascist germ cell 😂 The Platonism is strong in this one!
    1
  17210. You were 7th I think
    1
  17211. I have the statistics, and I'll be talking about this in the final episode of the Stalingrad series (E51).
    1
  17212. There's no point burning books when the adherents to the Faith engage in self-censorship.
    1
  17213. Good evening to you too! (Although technically it's still the afternoon here)
    1
  17214. I use Blender for the front lines, and Premiere Pro for the rest. Units are made in Photoshop. I used Blender for some of my old documentary animations (most notably the North African Campaign videos and Fort Eben Emael) but it took too long to animated and render out each frame
    1
  17215. Thank you, however I did use Google Translate for Edelsheim, since there's no pronunciation of it on Forvo. And Broich is on Forvo and sounds the way I'm saying it? Also, "Buch" is pronounced "Book" (or "Buk") on Google Translate, and Duolingo (which is where I've been learning German).
    1
  17216. Premiere Pro for most of it and Blender for the front lines
    1
  17217. I'm not sure I fully understand your question. The fact that Amtrak isn't profitable (self-sufficient) shows that it's not a viable company and should have gone out of business a while ago. I'm not sure if you've read it, but there's a book called "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom. He talks about the setting up of the American rail roads, and tells the story of government-funded and/or operated businesses (which were never profitable) and the private businesses (which were). While I don't know much about Amtrak specifically, I have a feeling that there are many similarities, so I'd recommend you get yourself a copy of that book. In terms of whichever service you decide to use - use whichever you think is best. If jumping on a train or bus is better for you than using a car, then do that. Most people don't like 'public' transport, and cars are used by a lot more people for several good reasons. We should let the consumers decide where their money goes. Taking money off people and spending that on 'public' transport doesn't make sense, since they'd spend that money directly on the transport in the first place if they thought it was worth it. The fact that that money is being taken from them first, means that they wouldn't have spent it on public transport, which is why 'public' transport hardly (if ever) makes a profit.
    1
  17218. Yes, but the question then becomes - if Stalin forbade all evacuations, then why did they even evacuate key personnel? That's going against his orders. So, this is why I'm favouring the idea that he forbade the evacuation, but some evacuation was going on regardless
    1
  17219. Yes, see the pinned comment
    1
  17220. That Dresden figure of 250,000 was shown to be incorrect in Evan's "Telling Lies about Hitler" which I'd recommend to anyone interested.
    1
  17221. Covid or something else? Hope you get over it soon
    1
  17222. I wish! I needed simple figures and was inspired by images of papercraft figures like this https://goo.gl/images/qZULC9
    1
  17223. Thanks Matt, glad to hear you liked it :)
    1
  17224. Good to hear! Trust me, this was months of work... Probably too much for such a short video. But I learnt many lessons, which is the main thing
    1
  17225. Glad you liked it! Took me months to make so it's nice to hear when people are impressed by it :)
    1
  17226. I'm sorry to hear that
    1
  17227. Hej, I hereby award you the rank of "King First". Better luck next time, Jamie
    1
  17228. I think Jamie's going to be upset lol
    1
  17229. I'm glad you like it :)
    1
  17230. Glad you enjoyed it! I need to get back into making gaming videos, I've been a bit slack recently
    1
  17231. Nice find, SNAFU! I'm beginning to wonder if that sentence I quoted from Kershaw is either wrong or written badly. Did the Tigers cross from the south to the north, or the north to the south?
    1
  17232. +KingSNAFU I actually don't know. I can't even be sure if they're from 9th or 10th SS Panzer Division. All I know is "Direct fire was brought to bear by the 88mm guns of a pair of 'Tiger' tanks which managed to nose their way through the wreckage of Graebner's attack from the southern bank." P177, Kershaw, It Never Snows in September.
    1
  17233. Yes, I know it's really "bewegungskrieg", but most people know it as Blitzkrieg, plus it's easier to say.
    1
  17234. I don't disagree with you. You seem to be arguing the same points I made in conclusion to the video. I guess that means we're both not experts of armoured warfare.
    1
  17235. Some have already tried to claim I'm defending him because I love him or something... In fact, I was contemplating making a video clarifying my stance, and also explaining why it's important not to just paint someone we don't like as "insane" or whatever. Then I could link to it when someone makes a false accusation
    1
  17236. He definitely contradicts himself numerous times
    1
  17237. Why do you say it's important?
    1
  17238. In what way? If I did move the goalposts, I certainly didn't do it on purpose 😬
    1
  17239. I'm constantly called a "conspiracy theorist" for believing things like Hitler being a Socialist, or that the universities in the west are infected by communists, or that there are "offices of diversity" teaching racist ideologies in all the police, university, civil service, and many other services in the UK (and around the western world), or believing that the modern language has been changed to further the goals of the elite (e.g. the definition of "inflation" has changed https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA ) or that I believe the World Economic Forum when they say they're calling for a "Great Reset" (and even showed the video if their leader saying it, which also had Prince Charles later in the video too agreeing that action needed to be taken) and things like that... Apparently ignoring the evidence is what "experts" and "science" do now...
    1
  17240. You're right, it went all the way to the top... Although I would argue that the National Socialists were Left-wing.
    1
  17241. I do not
    1
  17242. I don't think sharing by itself does. I think people need to actually click on the video and watch it for it to help
    1
  17243.  @ZontarDow  Ah okay, fair enough
    1
  17244. I don't think the Ikea book-shelf builders read books, because if they did, they'd know that books are heavy
    1
  17245. What do you mean? Did I misunderstand this question? Or do you mean there have been questions that some people can't understand because they're complicated?
    1
  17246. He's my favourite fiction author
    1
  17247. Thank you, I am on Bitchute but it's upload process sucks and won't let me upload any more videos (they just get stuck in processing forever)
    1
  17248. You're obviously new here. To bring you up to speed: I hate the British government/establishment and have called Churchill an idiot before now. I'm not "pro-British" by any stretch, but neither am I "pro-German" or anything else.
    1
  17249. Yeah, he just repeats the same old Marxist argument that's been debunked in my videos. Again, someone who's not listening.
    1
  17250. Yeah, you see, this is what I'm not used to. When I was socialist, I wasn't like this. I just thought the non-Socialists were a bunch of selfish racists. I didn't think to lie or gaslight or be as intellectually dishonest. So I'm a bit shocked by how they're all behaving. I just didn't see how insane the Left were when I was in it.
    1
  17251. Seriously? What's the context here?
    1
  17252. Sometimes that's the best way to be
    1
  17253. I'd say that's about right 👍
    1
  17254. Haha well, the good news is that there will be another video on Monday
    1
  17255. Yes you are haha
    1
  17256. If you're willing to watch my stuff and still don't agree, that's fine. My issue is with those who don't even listen and then assume things, or make the same old arguments that are contracted by the evidence presented.
    1
  17257. Hey, thank you for your comment! Perhaps it is just a perspective. Others have also said that they have used my work to get through to people, so perhaps it hasn't been a "waste of time" as such. It's just hard to gauge from my perspective how effective or ineffective these videos have been at changing people's minds. If the audience is split into three groups as you say, I still think it's worth engaging the first two: the ones who agree, and the ones who are unsure but willing to engage. In fact, I wouldn't mind debating with that second group because they would be more likely to engage in the debate more honestly. The third group - the haters - are a waste of time. I realise that now. So yeah, I think I need to just ignore them now.
    1
  17258. Not right now because I've got enough on my plate! However, I do intend to cover them at some point
    1
  17259. You're right, and honestly I've known this was an issue for a while. I'll do my best. Thank you
    1
  17260. They are in a religion. I mean the concept of the blank slate comes from Christianity and Judaism. Greed and selfishness are seen as sins. Theirs is a new religion that borrowed from the old faiths. So yes, these people are fanatics, which is why it's impossible to get through to them. It doesn't surprise me that he went as far as changing the definitions. I'm not sure if I can do much more on the definitions debate regarding socialism and capitalism. I mean, it's pointless because they're not listening, and they're not thinking.
    1
  17261. "Some of your loudest critics are engaging with you solely to demoralize you." I 100% agree with you on this. This is a great way of putting it, and they have succeeded in demoralizing me. This is why I need to change my outlook, and also how I do things. I have to forget about them and start looking to help everyone else.
    1
  17262.  @aceknowledgable9403  I realise that the terms Left and Right (and "capitalism" plus "socialism") divide and conquer. I now only refer to myself as a "free market guy" for this reason. I also don't call myself a "Right-winger" anymore. Oh, and if you like those guys, I think you'd like Rollo Tomassi and Aaron Clarey, if you haven't watched them already.
    1
  17263. Thank you! What made you come to that conclusion too?
    1
  17264. I haven't because I can't find a copy.
    1
  17265. They don't stimulate the economy by lowering interest rates. They "stimulate" the economy (aka print more currency/add digits to a screen) and it's the stimulation that lowers interest rates. For a more in depth explanation, here's a free PDF of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression Alternatively, I sort of explain the process here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  17266. Thank you! Glad you're enjoying them :)
    1
  17267. It's not in Poland. But nobody knows it here in Britain at least.
    1
  17268. I wasn't but I will now
    1
  17269. Okay, continue to destroy your Self for the sake of others who never reciprocate, despite every altruist pretending that they do.
    1
  17270. Parents selfishly care for their children. It's done, not through altruism, but through self interest. I literally gave you several quotes of Hegel being nationalist. I don't know why you think he wasn't a nationalist. And yes, the world would be bad if it was run by Thatcherites. We need a free market, not Conservative tyranny.
    1
  17271. Yes, correct. Nationalism is a religion.
    1
  17272. EVERY FOUR WEEKS.
    1
  17273. "Plato is not really a mysticist, he is a champion of logic expressed by the Socratic method of the dialectic approach. He is also a materialist." The reason he's adopted the dialectic method is to transcend the material realm in order to get to the Gods. There's literally no other reason to believe in the dialectic unless you've already concluded Gods exist. The "struggle" dynamic of Heraclitus is along the same lines. Struggle both destroys and creates (Aufheben, as Hegel put it), and this process moves us closer to heaven.
    1
  17274. It also gets worse than that. Gentile is basically plagiarizing Hegel at times, it's that close.
    1
  17275. People doubt me, but I rarely say things without having concrete evidence to support what I said.
    1
  17276. You can see it (the stars are part of it). You can touch the elements that make it up. But it's not a solid entity. Society doesn't exist. You can't touch it, see it, taste it... And the State doesn't exist either.
    1
  17277.  @-jammy4123  Thank you. I don't like jumping to conclusions so it's nice to see someone else coming away with that impression too.
    1
  17278.  @soulknife20  "Republic is Aristotle's views on Plato." Is there a second Republic? The Republic (which I've read twice) was definitely written by Plato.
    1
  17279. I share the same sentiment. Although, to be fair, I'm fairly certain my videos are being shadow suppressed, with some (like the Greek video) outright suppressed.
    1
  17280. Gnosticism leads to totalitarianism. The whole religion is set up so that you destroy your Self and reject reality, allowing you to be enslaved by the priestly class.
    1
  17281. No, race is also a social construct. It's a spiritual concept that has no basis in reality.
    1
  17282. You can place your hand on your family members, so these individuals do exist. The problem is that we must distinguish between the individual and the spiritual concept of "the family". Some believe that "the family" is some sort of higher being that they must work towards, and that it unites people together in a spiritual way. Men will make sacrifices for their extended family, putting up with individual family members they don't even like, just because they believe in "the family". In reality, only the individual family members exist; the spiritual concept of the family does not. There are only relationships between individuals, nothing more.
    1
  17283. And those who are altruists are the most selfish people in the world, which is why they're deluding themselves. They feel shame and guilt for what they are, and so attempt to hide their sins through altruism rather than accept the reality.
    1
  17284. It's a miracle!
    1
  17285. The left bank is the Eastern bank. See 18:48 - the "[eastern]" in the square brackets is actually taken directly from Michael Jones's book
    1
  17286. I'll let Terri know you said that!
    1
  17287. In English, "militia" means non-professional soldiers (usually civilians). So, with the factory workers and similar being drafted into fighting units, this would be "militia" in the English sense rather than civilian police.
    1
  17288. Yes, that's what he wrote in his heavily edited and censored memoirs years after the event in question. But if you go to 18:54 you'll see that the request he submitted at the time doesn't mention "parts" of his HQ. He actually asked to move to the eastern bank of the Volga.
    1
  17289. I'm using this variation of the symbols http://niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html
    1
  17290. Is it not processed for you?? It seems okay on my end
    1
  17291. "I can see no reason why you're making such a big deal about what Chuikov actually did." I'm making a big deal out of it because it's an important event in the battle of Stalingrad that's gone almost unreported. I also knew there would be people who would challenge me on this, and they are. So if I just said "Chuikov lost his nerve" and then moved on, I'd have more people complaining than I already do. - "I don't blame Chuikov for asking to withdraw, or for trying to present himself in the best possible light." Neither do I. Several people are now dismissing what I said because they assume I was trying to disparage Chuikov. I've had to explain a few times now that that's not what I did.
    1
  17292. Absolutely, you can't be harsh on the guy. I think most people would have cracked under these circumstances.
    1
  17293. I think the logistics probably wouldn't have allowed it, unless other divisions were withdrawn first
    1
  17294. "Why this obsessing over his desire to withdraw?" Because it isn't mentioned in any source except for Jones's, and it's incredibly interesting. Plus, since I knew I'd get push-back (which I have), I knew I'd have to hammer this home, so I did. Despite this, I'm still getting push-back. - "Wasn't it a situation where withdrawal should be considered/attempted?" Yes.
    1
  17295. Chuikov's highly edited and censored memoirs talk about only sending sections of the HQ across the Volga. However, his actual request at the time (see 18:54 ) just asks for permission to withdraw.
    1
  17296. In history there are these things called "debates". I presented the evidence for one side of the debate, and then presented the evidence for the other. While the phrase "Chuikov lost his nerve" was repeated a few times, I didn't spend "half the episode" repeating the points. And since it is an incredibly important event which has sparked controversy in the comments, I'm not just going to gloss over it.
    1
  17297. I'm glad you liked it! I actually thought the editing on this video was a bit sloppy and rushed at times, so it's surprising to hear you think this is my finest video
    1
  17298. Sadly, the new limit on YouTube uploads is 12 hours, so we've already surpassed that. This series will have to remain in its individual parts.
    1
  17299. As I explained and showed, Chuikov's highly edited and censored memoirs say about only sending sections of the HQ across the Volga. However, his actual request at the time (see 18:54 ) just asks for permission to withdraw.
    1
  17300. Is this true? Such a shame as his book on the subject is fantastic. Far more accurate than some of the other dribble being produced by the Leftist historians.
    1
  17301. Ernst Röhm wanted an old school violent revolution, but Hitler wanted a modern "peaceful" revolution.
    1
  17302. Glad you enjoyed it
    1
  17303. Welcome aboard!
    1
  17304. Rex1987 Yup! This question was too easy. I'm going to have to start making tougher ones ;)
    1
  17305. Devon Ziegler Correct!
    1
  17306. starcraft2own and their body heat is melting all the ice! Quick! We must warn the scientists!
    1
  17307. Nikki PiP Antarctica is the answer! It is classed as a continent since there's land beneath the ice
    1
  17308. Thegamer8324 Yes!
    1
  17309. Robert Biggin nIce :)
    1
  17310. Morgan Chalmers You got it right, don't worry :)
    1
  17311. Morgan Chalmers Nope! ...just kidding :)
    1
  17312. Cameron Thompson cheapskates who don't want to pay for ice cubes, obvs ;)
    1
  17313. Hopper Nice! :)
    1
  17314. Gary Thomas too easy :)
    1
  17315. healthyfire Congrats! I'm thinking this was too easy ;)
    1
  17316. Ville metsänmiettijä Congrats!
    1
  17317. Comedy Games very good!
    1
  17318. Hoped someone would like that :)
    1
  17319. What's a "real historian"? Is this like "real jobs" or "real socialism"? How do you know if I am or am not a "real historian"? Are you a "real historian"? Then how do you know I'm not a certified "real historian"? Surely only "real historians" can know what "real historians" are, since it's clearly an elite club. No, all that matters is evidence and interpretation, and anyone can be a historian. Arguements are made by fact and interpretation. If an argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny, fair enough. But that doesn't prevent someone being a historian - just means they were wrong in that one argument. Now the evidence is there that these guys were National Socialists (swastikas on the tanks is a big clue) and that they kept blaming their allies for their own mistakes. Sounds reasonable to me. But clearly you disagree. Well, I would ask for your opinion, but since you're not a "real historian" either, your opinion doesn't matter.
    1
  17320. Well done! I'm kinda glad you didn't say "First!"
    1
  17321. Spartans, what is your profession?
    1
  17322. I will do, although Courland 1944 and Stalingrad 1942 have to be done first.
    1
  17323. Ok... but the balance of power in Europe would have been bad if Britain had allowed Germany to keep France occupied. British strategy had always hinged on not allowing one power to dominate the European mainland because that would give the enemy the best chance to invade the British Isles. And Keitel said in his memoirs that the only way they'd get peace with the British was if they gave up everything they'd gained already, which the Germans were unwilling to do. So it's alright requesting peace, but after being the aggressor, Germany wasn't in a position to give up what it had gained.
    1
  17324. I only enjoy it because I know it'll annoy people that they have to wait until next week. I like jokingly-annoying people.
    1
  17325. Welcome! I hope you'll check out my other Battlestorm (like this) and TIKhistory (detailed but not always battle) videos. I'm definitely putting a lot of work into these series.
    1
  17326. Why?
    1
  17327. It's the official Maori flag (type into Google and it should come up). As I explained in an earlier episode, it wasn't invented/created until the 1990's, but I've used it to distinguish the unit and because it looks cool.
    1
  17328. starcraft2own for goodness stape! :)  Is Daisy your mum's name or something?
    1
  17329. Hopper Yeah, I was the same. Just think of the Latin for stirrup and you're good to go :P
    1
  17330. Leviathan268 it is! Not sure exactly what it does though so you could be right
    1
  17331. Tomislav ah I see! I thought you'd get this question right haha
    1
  17332. shorter form of "ok" What does "Os stapei" mean? Is that the name of the bone?
    1
  17333. Tomislav k!?
    1
  17334. Morgan Chalmers tis true!
    1
  17335. Lyric Clifton I have some news for you. Your leg is not one bone :)
    1
  17336. CStriker421 it was!
    1
  17337. martaxsasLT speak for yourself!
    1
  17338. Great, and why do you think that?
    1
  17339. Not in English.
    1
  17340. It is for English speakers.
    1
  17341. Thanks, I've been meaning to read into his ideas and policies, since he had quite an impact on the agriculture of the Third Reich. In exchange I'd recommend the book "Hitler The Politics of Seduction" by Zitelmann. It has a fantastic take on Nazi ideology and talks about agriculture and whether Hitler wanted a giant farm in the East or not. Great book.
    1
  17342. I will cover the British conquest of Ethiopia at some point, but the Italians used it to take British Somaliland https://youtu.be/k_xy7RCm5Ho
    1
  17343. But the Baltics were annexed during the Battle of France, and the French didn't do anything to stop that.
    1
  17344. "It was the French who prevented SU from annexing Finland, Baltic States and Bessarabia (until fall of France, then the latter two were occupied)." How exactly did they prevent them from taking these countries?
    1
  17345. You realise that, since so many people complained, I'll be deliberately using it all the time now just to annoy you all 😂
    1
  17346. Enjoy away :)
    1
  17347. Irregardless irregardless irregardless!
    1
  17348. Just got the first ~30 minutes in. I wonder why
    1
  17349. I really would like to know why they disliked this
    1
  17350. ​ @zomp  "But can one even privatise healthcare cause there is little of profit to be made without reducing the quality immense ?" 1. Yes, there is profit to be made in private health care, and better quality will come because of it. Watch this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ 2. Once you've watched the above video, MAKE SURE YOU READ OR LISTEN TO THESE BOOKS - "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt (audio book version link: https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U ) "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell (audio book version link: https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA )
    1
  17351. Yes I think you may be correct. If you read the pinned comment, that seems to be the case
    1
  17352. I've heard about this topic, but I've only looked at it briefly so far. Others say Hitler was funded by central bankers too, and it's all interconnected. Not sure yet, but I've got a couple of books on the topic and I intend to read into it
    1
  17353. Yeah, I put links to the video in the description and put a card in the video to it. Glad you recognized it though! Their video is a great video
    1
  17354. Probably in 3 weeks. I'm doing them every 3-4 weeks now because people got confused with the 'season' idea.
    1
  17355. Yeah there's no excuse for anyone not to watch this in full 😂
    1
  17356. Great! I'm definitely considering doing more like this
    1
  17357. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17358. "Hitler was also a "Christian" you know?" I've also done numous videos now on Hitler's ideology, which includes videos such as "The real religion behind National Socialism" https://youtu.be/PMyzTnIessE It's clear that Hitler was not a Christian. Here is a playlist with more videos on the topic https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgxP4QadjKhk4bI6x2PbScO
    1
  17359. Who's calling for extreme violence? A Labour councillor has just been suspended for threatening to cut the throats of his political opponents https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-councillor-cut-throats-speech-walthamstow-protest-b2593240.html Here is the video of him saying it https://x.com/MahyarTousi/status/1821477234428850399 Note the so-called "anti-fascists" behind him who cheer and clap, and the Palestinian flags. At the same time, a Jewish group say police have let Islamist extremists go unchallenged for months. "What we are seeing now is in part the result of ten months of catastrophically poor policing. Notwithstanding our repeated calls to crack down on extremists on our streets over the past year, they were allowed to go unchallenged." https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1933264/police-row-explodes-jewish-group
    1
  17360. Labour, Tories, Libdems... they're all guilty, and so is Starmer.
    1
  17361. It's sad, but it looks like we're basically there.
    1
  17362. Yes, absolutely, because they're all the same
    1
  17363. I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and hte Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17364. It's surprising how many people think the State should take people's children away.
    1
  17365. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham. This is a problem that's been building up for at least 40 years (I would argue since the 1860s).
    1
  17366. As I just said to someone else - I'm not deleting comments, YouTube is. It's automatic. They even delete my comments. Try commenting without saying any of the following words https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ozg1Cnm6SdtM4M5rATkANAi07xAzYWaKL7HKxyvoHzk/htmlview?sle=true# I haven't got time to police the comments, nor respond to you fully. I've just checked if your comments are in the "review" folder, but they're not - they have been deleted. Please don't assume I'm deleting comments as I'm honestly not. I don't mind dissenting opinions (so long as you're being polite about it and not spamming).
    1
  17367. Also, they all share the same ideology. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17368. Labour, Tories, Libdems... they're all guilty. Starmer is also guilty for his poor handling of this situation.
    1
  17369. Thanks for the feedback
    1
  17370. You must make the distinction between the British government and the British people. It was the government who did the things you mentioned, and the British people (largely) disagree with the bad things that happened. Some may look back with rose tinted glasses, but hardly anyone wants thuggery, theft or horrible violence. You're only seeing that now in Britain because the government has pushed us too far.
    1
  17371. What? Calling for peace and understanding is a "low"?
    1
  17372. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17373. Yes, it's all of them - all the Parties and the rest. The whole regime is complicit.
    1
  17374. Just seen on Twitter. OMG
    1
  17375. You mean the guy behind him in the shorts?
    1
  17376. That's precisely what I did do. I called for peace and unity.
    1
  17377. Fascism and Socialism are two sides of the same coin. Keir Starmer is a Fabian Fascist.
    1
  17378. This has been building for 40 years. The entire Establishment are guilty, regardless of the party.
    1
  17379. Stalin was a Marxiet-Fascist. Socialism and Fascism are two sides of the same coin.
    1
  17380. Awesome, thank you!
    1
  17381. Because the State said so... I'm doubtful he's a practicing Christian, but until they finally reveal the details there's no real way to know.
    1
  17382. Super far right! ;)
    1
  17383. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17384. Oh, and if you say they're not nationalists - who nationalised the industries and created the NHS in the 1940s? Nationalism is Socialism, remember.
    1
  17385. They are nationalist (not patriotic) and syndicalist. They're not Actualist, but that's just another Hegelian offshoot, so while they're not full Fascist, I think "Marxist-Fascist" is an appropriate term.
    1
  17386. You must be racist
    1
  17387. Because they're all the same. There's no difference between the parties except the names and the symbols. They're all totalitarian, high tax parties that don't care about the peasants.
    1
  17388. I talked about them in my video on Himmler
    1
  17389. I may have one of his books on Kindle. Which one would you recommend?
    1
  17390. Incorrect. Hitler was socialist and I've got numerous videos detailing this, fully supported by sources. Here's the main one https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w
    1
  17391. It was hard to read them when I saw them, and just as hard to read them out loud for this video
    1
  17392. I can see two comments - your first and the test one. The problem with striking is that it would take a monumental effort to get people to do it. I certaintly couldn't organise such a thing. Plus, the government may interpret this as another "far right" attack, and the strike leaders could be jailed. But who knows, maybe it will happen.
    1
  17393. It started 40 years ago. All the politicians are to blame, regardless of their Party. And in reality, there are no parties - there's only the "Uniparty". They're all working together.
    1
  17394. I'm not a neo-con nor a boomer-con. I'm not left or right. I don't belong on the political specturm. But as an ex-socialist, the reason I abandoned socialism is well-documented on this channel. Anti-Capitalism is Anti-Semitism, and Anti-Semitism is Anti-Capitalism. If only more so-called Marxists and Socialists would read their own literature and ask themselves the question "who was the 'bourgeoisie' a couple hundred years ago", you'd realise how correct I am.
    1
  17395. A big risk. If I stop posting for a while, or the channel gets taken down, you'll know why.
    1
  17396. In the video I do blame the Tories, and Labour, and the Libdems, and everyone in the Establishment. That's why I said near the end that they're all the same, our votes are a sham.
    1
  17397. I abandoned it too in 2019, but came back last week. It's a LOT different than it was. Most of the bots are gone (although there are still some), and thus you can have a conversation without a bunch of fake accounts getting in the way.
    1
  17398. It's demoralized a lot of us, and angered me too. The rhetoric is ridiculous. If you're on X, follow me there as I'm back on there and fighting the narratives with words and quotes. Be careful not to repost "hateful" content as the police are now coming after people who even repost stuff they've deemed "offensive".
    1
  17399. I spoilt my ballot, so I didn't vote for this. There was nobody to vote for.
    1
  17400. I blamed the Uniparty - Labour, Commie-servatives, Libdems, the civil service, the criminal justification system, the police, the social workers... the entire State. It's the Establishment that's at fault for this, and this conflict has been building for at least 40 years, if not longer. Try watching the video.
    1
  17401. Because that's what politicians are. Never trust a lying scumbag.
    1
  17402. Absolutely, all the Parties are to blame. But I disagree. The "Welshman" was a second-generation immigrant. (He was also in one of the BBC's videos.) So the people who are upset with immigration are not falling for the "he's a Welshmen" argument.
    1
  17403. Good to see you here, and I don't mind if you agree or disagree, but I'd like to hear your opinion once you've watched this
    1
  17404. Don't worry, I have my doubts too. He's probably about as Christian as he is Welsh. But since the UK government has been so tight-lipped on the murderer, we can only really go off what they've told us so far.
    1
  17405. Labour-shites, Commie-Servatives, Fibtard Femrats, Red-Green divs - they're all the same. Our votes are a shame. And I said this in the video too.
    1
  17406. I'm calling for peace and unity with all communities within this country. How on earth did you think that's "fanning the flames of division"?? Did you even bother to watch the video?
    1
  17407. If you watch the video, you'll hear me explain my reasoning. I'm not repeating it to you in the comments.
    1
  17408. It started before the Tories. They're all on it - it's the whole Establishment, not one party. And yes, Starmer didn't start this all off, but his reaction has only enflamed the problem.
    1
  17409. I'm not.
    1
  17410. Nationalism is Socialism, Socialism is Nationalism. There's no such thing as "international" socialism, since the "nation" is merely the "class". And as I said in the video, this is Fabian Fascism or Marxist Fascism. Get your facts straight.
    1
  17411. What breaks? The gap between seasons was to get the scripts done, record the audio and start the editing process. I was still producing videos between the seasons. I had a couple days off the week after the last season, and one or two in between. Otherwise I've been working every day. I explained this here https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    1
  17412. I've always aimed for 30-40 minutes. And it was only the first season that was 40-50 minutes because I had to cram more info into it because it was the start of the series. But since then they've all been between 30-45 minutes. It also depends on the content. I wanted to end this season on the 12th of September 1942 to start the next season off on the 13th (the traditional start of the battle, when the Germans reached the city itself). With my current script for episode 18, it could be 50 minutes long (it may change).
    1
  17413. I think they were from 29th Panzerjäger Battalion, which was 29th Motorized Division's panzerjäger battalion.
    1
  17414. Yes, don't worry about it :)
    1
  17415. I would argue that, since it has a Central Bank and a huge bureaucratic State, modern Germany isn't "free market" either, but almost as Socialist as National Socialist Germany.
    1
  17416. Why do you think it's January? It's September 1942.
    1
  17417. Yeah, you're right. I messed that one up!
    1
  17418. I've not seen that? Is it as bad as Greatest Story Never Told?
    1
  17419. Thanks guys! I'm kicking myself for not realizing or spotting the error at any point in the editing or publishing process :(
    1
  17420. Others have pointed this out, and yes I made a mistake. They weren't Stukas, they were Ju 87s
    1
  17421. You will, although I am behind with the uploads on there https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  17422. I understand your point of view, but please understand mine. The way I do things is judge the actors when it becomes obvious that they're making mistakes or bad decisions, or if the sources say this. So Zhukov is pinning the blame on Stalin right now, which is why you're hearing me say Stalin is at fault. However, after the 1st Kotluban Offensive is over, or when we get to the point where it's time to assess it (or all of them - I'm not sure yet), I'll be explaining how Zhukov pinned the blame on Stalin, when in reality it wasn't really Stalin's fault. As you said, it was probably the right choice anyway given the circumstances. But I don't want to jump ahead of myself and assess the situation before it's all played out, if that makes sense.
    1
  17423. No I didn't. I was working flat out. As I explained in a previous video https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU
    1
  17424. I will make a video response to this in a couple weeks because I think it deserves one.
    1
  17425. It sounds like you had a great professor
    1
  17426. What happens if you don't wear glasses? Does it disappear?
    1
  17427. A great quite
    1
  17428. Sure, why not
    1
  17429. I can see me having to make a follow-up video
    1
  17430. What makes you suspect me, comrade Larkin?
    1
  17431. A 1/10 mix is quite a strong proportion. I thought it was more in the middle than that
    1
  17432. I understand your counter-arguments, but it doesn't get around the fact that Hitler did a LOT more than Roosevelt did in 1941, showing that TIME is not picking the most influential person of the year. Churchill was made Man of the Year in 1940, for what? Dunkirk?? Hitler had conquered France, but that, apparently, isn't as big an influence as Dunkirk... No, it's nonsense.
    1
  17433. Is that why Roosevelt was made Man of the Year in 1941? Hitler or Hirohito had less of an influence than Roosevelt?
    1
  17434. Yes, which is why Capitalism and Socialism are both bad. What we need is a free market.
    1
  17435. Yep. Samaan's book talks about that. It's interesting how everybody just sort of fell for it
    1
  17436. I will concede that it's not a well written source. Samaan likes to repeat himself, and I do wish he'd written it forwards in time rather than backwards in time. However, I've discovered things from it that I can confirm through further investigation, yet aren't mentioned in the mainstream. Most of the criticism in the quote you mentioned is a character assassination, not actual a refutation of the points raised. The only problem is the lack of bibliography. But he does provide citations through the book, so it is sourced.
    1
  17437. See this video for the overwhelming evidence of Hitler's Socialism https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=UXy1e5CatUgm7LVU And here's a 5 hour video of me going through all the various counter arguments, including the North Korea "come back" https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8?si=yaVe5HLuo36fnQIz
    1
  17438. North Korea is democratic, and I've explained this numerous times. Democracy is "people" power. And the People are the Public, and the Public is the State. So democracy is State power, which is what North Korea is.
    1
  17439. That's because I don't subscribe to that view. So it's not dishonesty, or "playing dumb", it's me saying: there's no way Churchill was the most influential person in 1940, clearly Hitler was. So rather than that, they're selecting people they like.
    1
  17440. You can only ignore the evidence for so long https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  17441. Her book about a village in the Third Reich is really good too
    1
  17442. It's not specifically about them, but it's really good timing
    1
  17443. Just wait until Monday
    1
  17444. Tell me what you think of tomorrow's video
    1
  17445. In preparation for tomorrow's video, which is definitely not a rant
    1
  17446. I'm struggling to convince people to watch it. Perhaps after tomorrow's video they may have an incentive to do so
    1
  17447. Thank you!
    1
  17448. Those words are synonyms. Unlike battalions, which are not regiments - but apparently the British army likes to call it's battalions 'regiments', as I've recently discovered. Had to redo the entire British artillery and tank unit cards to make, for example, "2nd Royal Tank Regiment" be the "2nd Royal Tank Battalion". I will also be adapting the script of all future videos to say the correct unit sizes (not the way the British Army called these units) so as not to confuse everyone.
    1
  17449. Yeah, I messed up :) glad I said it right though!
    1
  17450. Have a nice dinner :)
    1
  17451. My current estimation is that it'll be 7 hours long
    1
  17452. Yes, nearly finished the script
    1
  17453. I want to at some point. That said, it might be a while. The German official history gives them just two pages :(
    1
  17454. Will do!
    1
  17455. Actually, I changed it on purpose. The reason is because the Black Watch is the regiment, and placing that at the end could get confusing if (during the middle of the Crusader video) I mentioned say 1st Battalion of the Rifle Regiment. Doing that would put both the word 'battalion' and 'regiment' in the same sentence, which could easily get confusing, especially when I then start mentioning brigades and whatnot. So saying 1st the Rifles Battalion just cuts out the 'Regiment' bit, doesn't confuse anyone, and die hard British Army enthusiasts will understand what I've done (maybe not why, but can still follow along).
    1
  17456. Not bad!
    1
  17457. I have, but I simply don't have time at the moment to commit to any other projects like that. Not that they asked me anyway. And besides, I'm confident that when it eventually does come out, Stalingrad will topple anything they could make on the subject ;)
    1
  17458. Thanks Johnny!
    1
  17459. Isn't Crusader the only battle he won? And by the time he left, the British were pushed back in North Africa further than they'd ever been, and had lost Tobruk. He'd also lost the confidence of the other desert generals. So in a lot of ways, I can see why he's not more popular.
    1
  17460. Will do :)
    1
  17461. If you think this is bad, check out my videos on Brevity and Battleaxe - Strafer Gott is in them a lot too. Here's the link to North African playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    1
  17462. You've lost your edge!
    1
  17463. Serafim Mihai - Lend Lease certainly helped, but the question is - to what extent? And right now, I'm not convinced that anyone (including major historians) can answer that for certain. This is why I want to explore it. And yes, a lot of chest-pounding arguments are made from different sides of the political spectrum. I'm not going to get into that. Nobody with any brains will deny that the Soviets sacrificed the most, regardless of the Lend Lease question. We just need to know, was it "vital support", or did it "just help"?
    1
  17464. I'm sorry you're not interested in this. Some people are though, because they like to know everything prior to going into a Battlestorm video - like I'm doing with Stalingrad, but with Crusader in this case.
    1
  17465. Sorry :D
    1
  17466. Research is done, and I've been working on the map today. Not 'close', but certainly getting there
    1
  17467. Love that book
    1
  17468. Ba dum tss
    1
  17469. In addition to listener, Guderian didn't resign, he was sacked from his command position for retreating outside Moscow.
    1
  17470. Your argument makes no sense. Guderian was a good commander, but his point about the composition of units is wrong. It's written post-war to make Hitler seem like the guy at fault. This is what all the German generals were doing post-war in order to take the blame off themselves. The reality was, Guderian's memoirs are full of holes, as MHV also points out in his recent video https://youtu.be/UTgf3UHMBjY
    1
  17471. Any specific reason why?
    1
  17472. Probably. For a balanced mid-war German division, you'll want two tank battlaions, four infantry battalions, three artillery battalions, ome recon battalion, one anti-tank battalion, one engineer battalion, one signals battalion, one supply/logistics battalion, and probably one anti-aircraft battalion. If you want a more modern armoured division, you'll want three tank battlaions, six infantry battalions, six artillery battalions, four reconnaissance battalions, four anti-tank battalions, four engineer battalions, one signals battalion, four supply/logistics battalions (which you can't have), and two to four anti-aircraft battalions.
    1
  17473. During Crusader, the British infantry won the day after the tanks got chewedu up. How are the infantry "worthless" then? Also, your analysis does not factor in that one of the main reasons that the British leadership was poor was because they had an out of date combined arms doctrine. These leaders had their faults, but they did provide good leadership at times. The problem was that their tanks, artillery and infantry didn't cooperate because the tank doctrine said they didn't need too, since tanks were the main element of the battlefield. The organisation of their forces also reflected this belief. This is, in fact, one of the reasons that these poor leaders were poor. If, the British tank-havy divisions weren't a problem, then why didn't they keep using tank-heavy forces from El Alamein and beyond? And why are modern armies not using tank-heavy forces?
    1
  17474. Yes.
    1
  17475. Huh... Well, that's just stupid. You know, for my order of battle video for Operation Crusader, I've already had to change the names of the other non-tank units in order for them to make sense. So for example, 1st Battalion The Black Watch Regiment, became simply the 1st Black Watch Battalion. This is far simpler, and makes a lot more sense. Plus, anyone watching it who knew better could instantly tell what I'd done, so everyone could follow along. However, since at no point in any of the literature was it mentioned that these tank units were anything but regiments, I referred to them as regiments. If I'd known, I would have changed their names and called them battalions. In fact, that's exactly what I'm going to do in my main Crusader video - 4th RTR will be called "4th Royal Tank Battalion", whether people are happy with that or not. Despite my love for historical accuracy, I'm not willing to confuse viewers, simply because the British Army decided to use an abysmal naming system.
    1
  17476. For Operation Crusader, 7th Armoured Brigade consisted of - 7th Queen's Own Hussars Tank Regiment, 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, 6th Royal Tank Regiment, and the 4th Royal Horse Artillery Regiment, plus other battalions. So, the British brigades were made up of regiments. The other armoured brigade formations used regiments too.
    1
  17477. You thought I was American?
    1
  17478. Language is about communication. If you understood what was said, that's all that matters.
    1
  17479. Nice! Was I largely right in my assessment then?
    1
  17480. Ok, but what's the faulty confusion? The ratio is roughly the same now as it was then. If tanks were the be all and end all, we'd see more tanks now as a ratio to other elements. The USA is the world's leading spender on military power, but they have a similar ratio of tanks to infantry, as does the German Army, and the British Army now. That's further evidence that the ratio of tanks at the beginning of WW2 wasn't correct, and that the ratio towards the end was correct. If the ratio was dramatically different now (a lot more tanks) then we'd be able to argue that the ratio of tanks at the end was a factor. But that's not the case. I'm not saying there's a direct correlation, but it's absolutely arguable that you need a certain ratio of infantry to tanks in divisions, and that we can observe that that ratio hasn't changed much since 1945. I don't understand how this is a logical fallacy. If this wasn't the case, armies would use a different ratio (more tanks). Are you suggesting that it's purely coincidental??
    1
  17481. Ok, but if it's not true, why don't they use all-tank armies now? And why are the ratios between tanks and infantry quite similar?
    1
  17482. And why not? Please explain why combined arms doctrine is not or should not be used today. Because ultimately that's what this boils down to. If tanks were all that was required, we'd see 100% tank armies, and we don't see that. Plus you can find footage of the actions in Syria where unsupported tanks were taken out by infantry. Clearly combined arms is still the dominant doctrine. Also I've explained combine arms doctrine here and it's use in the armies of today and WW2 https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74
    1
  17483. No it isn't. The ratio of tanks to other elements is what matters. If tanks were the war-winning element, all armies would be 100% tanks (which the British doctrine in WW2 recommended, as you'll see if you watch my Crusader videos)
    1
  17484. Halder didn't like Rommel and so selected him to go to North Africa to get rid of him. However, he did go over the head of Halder, and Hitler even defended him on occasions - putting Halder in his place prior to Crusader. So, it's reasonable to assume that Hitler had Rommel's back, even if the priority was the East. It's interesting that you bring up the Panzer 2 because I was going to do a video (may still do it) where I'll show why the Panzer 2 was definitely a decent tank in both France and Africa (basically early war). But you're incorrect, the majority of the tanks Rommel had were Panzer 3 and 4 tanks. Yes, a portion were Panzer 2, but as I said, these were still useful vs the British. Also, just because the priority was the Eastern Front (since that was the main front of the war) doesn't mean North wasn't important at all. And it definitely was important. It leads to numerous issues for both the British and later the Americans. Plus it leads onto the Italian Campaign, which resulted in the topple of Mussolini. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by me telling untrue things. I let the sources dictate my view of things, and the sources are pointing me in a certain direction. I don't mind people disagreeing, so long as you're civil about it (most aren't when they disagree, and it ruins the discussion). But I will ask you to clarify what you mean by what "untrue things" I tell, and explain how I'm "just trying" and why "that won't cut it". You've read the sources I list in the pinned comments, right?
    1
  17485. Thank you!
    1
  17486. That's how the British used it. It appears the rest of the world did it better, because the way the British named their units is confusing as hell. "4th Royal Tank Regiment" is actually a battalion, because sense.
    1
  17487. How is that a strawman? Infantry formations are good because they bring anti-tank guns into battle, and can be used to root the enemy out of fixed positions, which tanks would struggle with if they don't have infantry support.
    1
  17488. Wow thanks, I'm glad you think so. I'm certainly trying my best :)
    1
  17489. Glad to hear! And no, thank you!
    1
  17490. I'm working on a 6 hour long Operation Crusader documentary, and a 48 hour documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad. There are plenty of 10 minute history videos out there, but this channel prefers to cover a subject in-depth and with quality, so no, I'm not submitting to the minute-history model.
    1
  17491. In a good way, I hope!
    1
  17492. Haha well I'm neither rich nor famous and I wouldn't have minded. A few people did say hi, which was a little surprising. Didn't think anyone would recognise me since I'm small fry :) And yes, I picked up Nigel Hamilton's "Monty" book. I asked how much it was, the lady said "£2". So I said "are all these books just £2? Because if so, I'll take the lot!" Sadly, I couldn't carry much more so I only got the one. Which ones did you get??
    1
  17493. Oh yes, that was me. You should have said hi!
    1
  17494. Yes, I think I covered most of this in the video?
    1
  17495. Glad you liked it!
    1
  17496. Apologies. I'll try better in the future.
    1
  17497. Depends on what part of WW2 you're looking into?
    1
  17498. Alright, but even then the panzer division with two panzer regiments wasn't balanced. Four battalions of panzers with three or four infantry battalions is not balanced compared to the ratios shown by more modern forces (where it's 1:3 in terms of tanks vs infantry).
    1
  17499. I have not, no. The only thing I've done remotely near that time period was my Fort Eben Emael Battlestorm video https://youtu.be/IFP4-dwTMQ0
    1
  17500. While the SS were arguably more brutal, the Heer (Army) was just as racist, and equally guilty of many war crimes. They deliberately took food off civilians, leading to starvation. They burned homes, and exported millioms of people to the labour camps in the Reich. Murder and pillage were the name of the game for both Army and SS. There really wasn't two armies at all. That is a myth started by the German generals who were trying to distance themselves from the crimes they committed during the war. Even Manstein is guilty of war crimes (sentenced to 18 years but only served 4) but you don't hear him mention any of them in his memoirs.
    1
  17501. You're too kind!
    1
  17502. Bustin makes me feel good https://youtu.be/0tdyU_gW6WE
    1
  17503. Or, are the infantry there to support the tanks?
    1
  17504. Yes, exactly!
    1
  17505. I've read his Barbarossa book, and I've watched his lectures online. However, they weren't related to this topic specifically.
    1
  17506. Thanks! Glad to hear you liked it
    1
  17507. Lol
    1
  17508. Fair point :) I haven't studied the Fall of France, so I'm certainly not up to scratch on French tank-doctrine
    1
  17509. That was a joke. The reality was that Italian tanks didn't need a reverse speed because their crews had surrendered. (jk - neither claim is true)
    1
  17510. Excellent! Thank's Peter!
    1
  17511. Thanks Paul, I've added that book to a shopping list and will pick it up!
    1
  17512. Sort of, if the bricks were arranged in a pyramid formation. Essentially, it's easier to manage 2 or 3 units below you than 500. So every commander up the chain of command has a few units to command below him. As a manager, I can tell you that this is essential. I can also tell you that this is why the Soviets were at a severe disadvantage in the early-war to 1942 period https://youtu.be/wDslsMgnphI (video: Soviet Army Size 1942)
    1
  17513. They mobilized earlier than the other powers, and got experience in the early war fighting against smaller powers who really had no chance. They then had better equipment, tanks (which were generally better than the vast majority of Allied tanks early on too), training, doctrines, and a lot more manpower (in 1941 vs the Soviets and the British) and so on, which explains their victories in the early war. Once the mid to late war period comes along, the other powers learn from their early mistakes and catch up to Germany in many ways, which then explains why their Blitzkrieg at Kursk 1943, and the fighting going on in late 1942 doesn't show them as capable as they once were anymore.
    1
  17514. Since he wrote his book in the 50's and this idea that Hitler weakened the Panzer divisions has been cited in plenty of books and documentaries since then. That, I would say, is the traditional narrative. And if everyone knows this, like you claim, then why is this view still being presented?
    1
  17515. Glad you liked it! And thanks, I post videos every Monday, so be sure to get stuck into the discussions :)
    1
  17516. Thanks! However, the point to note is that they assigned enough replacements to replace combat losses, so why were they still down? I actually discussed this in the video yesterday.
    1
  17517. You've never seen Jar Jar Binks before?
    1
  17518. Haha I don't blame you for not getting through the 800+ gaming videos! I'm planning on doing the odd gaming video now and then, but the focus will be the history from now on.
    1
  17519. You may be right with your speculation on Guderian, but then I would argue that this shows his ignorance about the overall German oil-crisis which dictated that it wasn't possible to build more tanks or mobile divisions. https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg (link to "<!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}-->Why Germany Lost - OIL" video, in case you haven't seen it)
    1
  17520. I haven't watched that. Thank you for the recommendation. I'll give it a watch
    1
  17521. Correct. And the British didn't fight them for the reasons I stated here https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    1
  17522. Ying, please pay attention. Hitler planned a war of aggression https://youtu.be/1N8nuPdV5Ow And the British tried to prevent that from happening, but failed https://youtu.be/EQKM5b1SoS0 Britain declared war because Germany invaded Poland, which Hitler knew was allied with Britain. Germany started the war.
    1
  17523. "To me it sounded like the bomber was above its target and aiming for it but still half the time the bombs would just bugger off 8 kilometres either way. Sorry about that haha." Oh no, that happened too! If there was cloud in the way, or flak, or enemy planes, the bomber crews would react to that and drop the bombs off target.
    1
  17524. No, it's common sense. Buses have bus stations. Trains have train stations. Rails don't have rail stations. The train is parked in the station, not the rails. And it's become more common for the term "train station" to be used than railway station, as shown here https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/293064/train-station-vs-railway-station
    1
  17525. I agree, his book on Crete isn't great. That's probably the exception to the rule. Normally his books are very easy to follow, especially the Stalingrad and Berlin books.
    1
  17526. Well, value is subjective. You might think that, but a lot of people don't think that. If they did they would have subscribed.
    1
  17527. "Question: how much of a factor was it that Churchill had decided by this point that the Nazis had been defeated and that therefore Stalin was certain to be the West's main post-war enemy." Great question, but honestly I'm not sure. I know Dresden made him question the idea of area bombing, so he knew that the war was coming to an end, but I haven't looked into his views on Stalin and the Iron Curtain yet. It's something I need to do reading on. - "Among the reasons for incinerating Dresden , according to two sources cited in the Wikipedia article, was: "to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do." " I've actually just replied to someone else about this, so I'll copy and paste my reply here: TLDR: it's probably not true, but it may have been a factor. So, for time purposes I cut out this discussion because it's somewhat complicated and I'm not convinced it was one of the main reasons for the attack on Dresden, if it was a reason at all. I would say that the politicians and Bomber Harris didn't discuss this reason, but some of the veterans did say that they went to Dresden to show the Soviets how powerful the west was. The problem is that these accounts were all written well after the war was over, during the Cold War, which may have influenced their opinions. And the only contemporary evidence we have for this view is this: “The intentions of the attack are to hit the enemy where he will feel it most, behind an already partially collapsed front, to prevent the use of the city in the way of further advance, and incidentally to show the Russians when they arrive what Bomber Command can do.” - Part of the briefing to the squadrons prior to the Dresden raid, quoted from Taylor, “Dresden,” p464. However, this statement is problematic because it actually contradicts other evidence we have, and also doesn't make logical sense. If they were going to show the Soviets how powerful they were, why didn't they keep bombing German cities in the East right up until the last day of the war? It just seems a little strange. So, it's more likely that the crews got told this because the Soviets had asked them to bomb Dresden and this might have been a way for the junior officers to flex. But I don't think it really played into the reason why Dresden was targeted specifically. For a full discussion on this, read Frederick Taylor's book on Dresden, pages 463-466.
    1
  17528. Does it? Google images lied to me!
    1
  17529. My money comes from my Patreons which I list on the screen in the video. I'm not "pro-Jewish", and I don't "hate" Irving. I don't trust Irving because of what he did https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8
    1
  17530. Irving also changed things in later editions of his books, so while his early versions might be somewhat acceptable, it's not worth the effort. You'd have to double-check every source to make sure what he was telling you was correct, at which point you're better off reading something else
    1
  17531. "We allied with Marxists and gave them half of Europe and called it a victory for democracy" Who is "we"? I did nothing of the sort. - "History (as taught) is literally a bunch of lies that makes no sense of any kind to even the least enquiring of minds" Yes, and that's the fault of the state ownership of the means of (academic) production. In a free market system, the state propaganda ministries (the school system and the university systems) wouldn't be able to indoctrinate their students. That, however, doesn't mean that ALL of history is lies. We can wade through the lies together and discover the truth. - "We can't even discuss many of the more obvious subjects as your channel would be censored - something I would hate to see as I like it a lot" I agree. My Operation Keelhaul videos were heavily censored, as was my video on what the Axis did to the Greeks. Apparently YouTube doesn't want you to know what happened in Greece during WW2, mainly because, if you did, you'd see a very similar story to what's happening to our world right now https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk - "The war had nothing to do with fighting for democracy" You brought up democracy, not me. Democracy = State power, though, so I would say that the war had everything to do with State power. - "We allied with a police state that had murdered tens of millions of its own people and invaded multiple countries before the war even started" The western countries were heading down that route at the time. For example, Hoover's heavily interventionist reaction to the Wall Street crash caused a massive depression that allowed Roosevelt to implement his socialist new deal. It was only the end of the war, with the death of Roosevelt, that unshackled the chains that had been placed on the economy and allowed the market to work once more. Surprisingly, I've even got a video on that https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw The point is that the whole world was sliding into totalitarianism during that time. The end of the war brought an end to that, but we're heading that way again. So complaining that "we" (the western States) allied with another police state is a mute point. The western States were ALL police states, since they had a monopoly of power over the law. - "Then we allowed it to take over half of Europe - gee what a victory for democracy" It was. Democracy = State power. The "Soviets" are workers' councils (that's literally what the word "soviet" means, "council"). The Soviet Union was a democratic state, which is why it ended up with a democratic dictatorship.
    1
  17532. Democracy is bad https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I "We" don't exist, there is only individuals. I haven't committed any war crimes, and I won't take responsibility for what other people have done, since it wasn't me who did those things. And history is not that at all. You have a terribly warped view on the past that's influenced heavily by the Marxist postmodernist world-view. This video will correct your assumptions about history https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  17533. See this video for an answer about Irving https://youtu.be/VsLW7VrOpA8 And see this video for an answer about why Britain didn't declare war on the Soviet Union https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    1
  17534. "Just remember my episode title idea for the next Stalingrad. 🙂" Haha I've written it down! Cheers!
    1
  17535. It's because I don't like letting people down
    1
  17536. Can I ask, why did you initially think it was going to be a let down?
    1
  17537. Yes sir!
    1
  17538. I agree that some people have no idea about how much work goes into this. My friend recently tried to make a channel, and realized very quickly how many hours it takes just to make a quick 5 min video. She couldn't believe it, and now has a lot more respect for what I do.
    1
  17539. As I said in the video, it's the most detailed of the books, but Buttar's account seems more readable and balanced. It's hard to tell though because there's very little on this battle in English.
    1
  17540. Thanks for the recommendation!
    1
  17541.  @RpattoYT  To be honest, I think the Ukraine issue is actually just a way to increase oil and gas prices at a time when the world is reeling from the effects of all the money printing. It's a false-flag event timed to boost energy prices, which will boost the stock market at a time when the stock market needs propping up. The threat of higher interest rates is pushing down the stock market, while an increase in oil and natural gas is a prop for the market.
    1
  17542.  @mvfc7637  I'm not a centrist. If you'd watch any of my videos that would have been blatantly clear. No centrist I know refers to the NHS as the National Socialist Hell Service. And yes, I'm not above being controversial, since every video I've ever made has been controversial. However, I'm only going to avoid those controversial topics which will instantly bring the ban-hammer down upon me. That should be understandable to you.
    1
  17543.  @RpattoYT  Unless it's something that will get my channel taken down, I'm happy to offer an opinion on contemporary events. Which particular part of our history are you asking me about?
    1
  17544.  @ОлафИванов  "But how can one seriously scratch about how bad the Soviet economy was, which created the world's first nuclear power plant, built beautiful cities, had a huge civilian and military fleet, a colossal fleet of all of them aircraft types? Planes carried people from village to village. I'm not talking about space." It did all that while its population was starving. Again, I've been over this https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w You can build a military as your peasants are starving. Stalin did that throughout his reign of terror. People starved to death every year in the Soviet Union between 1917 and 1949. If you do not include Gulag prisoners, then people starved ALMOST every year - there were only three years where people in the main population didn't starve. (Source: Hanson, “The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Economy,” Kindle P39.)
    1
  17545.  @simplicius11  "Your Moorhouse is not providing any source for his quotes. Zero credibility." I can tell you haven't read the book, since Moorhouse provides the sources in his book. His book is fully referenced and lists the bibliography at the back.
    1
  17546.  @KuroiReaper  "Think about what are you saying and citing." Yeah, it's funny how my sources are always in question, yet my critics never cite sources themselves, just provide opinions. - "During war soldiers would have been either way fighting and wartime conditions either way wouldnt paint bad picture as half of soviet union was razed and i dont think their priorities were making good picture or telling people how west is bad." US ships docking in ports on the other side of the Soviet Union, hundreds of miles away from the action, also had their crews forbidden from leaving the docks. As quoted before, Britain wasn't allowed to station aircraft to help with their convoys. Why? And the Soviets hated Britain. When the German and Soviet troops met at the border, the Soviet brigadier general toasted to both Hitler and Stalin as "men of the people", and invited the German reporters to come visit him "after the victory over capitalist Albion." (source: Moorhouse, “The Devils’ Alliance,” P10-11.) And as Stalin himself said: “...the Soviet Union is interested in preserving a strong Germany, and in the event of military conflict between Germany and the western democracies, the interests of the Soviet Union and Germany coincide completely. The Soviet Union shall never tolerate letting Germany fall into difficult straits.” (Stalin to Ribbentrop, from Moorhouse, “The Devils’ Alliance,” P38.) - "What are you talking about happened during cold war." No, it happened throughout the history of the Soviet Union https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  17547.  @cotnesiradze3520  "His original response made no sense, he's just too proud to admit it." I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong, but I'm not in this case. If I can find that original source which explains that it was the case that Stalin didn't want the West to see the dire state of the Soviet economy and people, then I'll quote it. I do have it somewhere.
    1
  17548.  @cotnesiradze3520  "Someone taking food that was left out in the open doesn't mean there were food shortages." Why was the food from all over Europe and not from the Soviet Union? Why was 2% of Soviet farmland that was privately owned producing 30% of Soviet food? Quote - “By the 1980s it was an open secret that the 2 percent of Soviet farmland that was privately owned was producing 30 percent of Russia’s agricultural output.” (Woods, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," Kindle p162.)
    1
  17549.  @cotnesiradze3520  "What does tipping have to do with food shortages?" You're just splitting hairs. I included that because it comes from the same account as the guy who said that when he offered the food to the Soviets, the men declined, but then the food went missing shortly afterwards.
    1
  17550.  @jacksteel1539  "I don't really see why this backs up your argument at all, what does this have to do with Stalin not wanting socialism to look bad and feeding the citizens more for appearances?" There's another book out here that says that specifically. I've read it, but can't recall it. But even without that, why is it that the Soviet Union was the only one of the "Allied powers" fighting the Axis powers that wouldn't allow troops on their soil? If they didn't trust the West, why did they trust their weapons and food deliveries? - "Obviously Soviet people would have realized they were being fed more for appearances, my grandma went to the Soviet union briefly and ate with a group of students and they told her they had used most of their sugar ration of that month for the meal and tea with her." Well, there you go. - "I think this is just a myth you're spouting tbh, the Soviet union was secretive and desolate especially during Stalin but is also subject to huge exaggeration by westerners." And Russian peoples that survived it. But of course, those people can be dismissed as traitors to the motherland, right? - "I think it's a bit weird to say it didn't work when 20 years earlier the Tsars lost the first world war because the economy crumbled and everyone hated them but after the 5 year plan and during the 2nd world war the economy didn't collapse despite in the last 20 years going through the great depression and a huge civil war." The Soviet economy remained crumbled throughout its existence. Here's a video you need to watch https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  17551.  @KuroiReaper  "I must say that this isnt true, it had nothing to do with that..." Here's a quote from Tolstoy, “Victims of Yalta,” p395. “The first and most important point to note is that the Soviet Government regarded all Soviet citizens who had passed even temporarily out of their control as traitors…” And several quotes from Tuyll's "Feeding the Bear" - “Interestingly enough, the severity of the labour shortage did not lead the Soviet Union to accept Allied troops... The Soviet government rejected proposals for the basing of foreign air units in the Caucasus, the stationing of a British squadron at Murmansk (to protect convoys), and the establishment of American bases in Siberia... American pilots were not welcome, and some aircraft orders were refused when the United States insisted on training the pilots in the Soviet Union... Stalin did allow American bombers into the Ukraine, but their operations were restricted and their presence was more accepted than appreciated.” (Tuyll, Feeding the Bear p81) There are more quotes besides this in these books, and there's more I can get from other books too. The British and US had spare troops and aircraft crews, but they weren't allowed on Soviet soil. And I've read an account from a historian (although I can't recall which one off the top of my head) saying that the Soviets had to prepare certain areas in advance to look better than they were so that when foreigners visited they wouldn't think the Soviet Union was as poor as it was. But there were food shortages even before the Second World War. When the Germans landed in Moscow to sign the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, one of the Germans tried to tip his Soviet driver, who furiously turned on him, asking if he was trying to get him put in prison. The food provided by the Soviets to the German delegation didn’t come from the Soviet Union, but from all over Europe - Sweden, Denmark, etc. Having some food left over from the flight, one German offered it to the Soviets at the airfield. His offer was declined, with one of them telling him that the Soviet people had enough to eat… even though the food later disappeared after being left out. (source for this paragraph: Moorhouse, “The Devils’ Alliance,” P18-19.)
    1
  17552. YouTube is stupid and deletes comments randomly (even my own). But yes, I've only ever heard that they would be reinstated via wounding, so this is new to me. However, Wikipedia (not the best source, obviously) does say that: "Different commanders had different attitudes when releasing the shtrafniks from the unit and returning them to their regular units. 65th Army commander General Pavel Batov only rehabilitated shrafniks who were killed or wounded in action and used the remaining shtrafniks until the end. General Alexander Gorbatov released all shtrafniks who had bravely fought in a battle, regardless of whether they were wounded or not." The source for this informations is (Pyl'cyn, Aleksandr, Penalty Strike: The Memoirs of a Red Army Penal Company Commander, 1943-45, Stackpole Books (2006), ISBN 978-0-8117-3599-5) This could explain the discrepancy.
    1
  17553. "Because that's not how penal battalions worked." How do you think they worked?
    1
  17554. No, it's "the Ukraine" because the word sounds plural in English. Therefore, just like we say "The Netherlands", and not "the Netherland" (which sounds awful - it's either "Netherland" or "the Netherlands") we must say "The Ukraine" in order to not sound like we're talking like babies. If the Ukrainians don't like this, they're free to change the name to "Ukrainia", which doesn't sound plural, and thus, doesn't require the "the". Otherwise, let English speakers speak English.
    1
  17555. I'd not heard of the book. But several people have recommended it, so I intend to pick it up before I do the next part to this.
    1
  17556. +Gripen85 Thanks Gripen! 1. @TIKhistory :) 2. I accidently forgot to put the end piece on my clippers and ran it up the middle of my head, so had to shave it all off lol. And no, I'm not super cheap, I just can't stand making casual conversation with a barber!
    1
  17557. akgeronimo501 No, they were dropped to support the division as a whole, including the 504th. So tell me, which sources say they didn't have artillery on day one?
    1
  17558. akgeronimo501 as I quoted in my reply to you in the other video, they did have artillery on day one. They also had anti-tank guns. How many men did they lose retaking the drop zone? How many men did the Germans lose?
    1
  17559. The rest of the Corps was strung out for miles down one road. But the majority of the spearhead were battling it out in Nijmegen. I'm not saying that Horrocks wasn't without his flaws. I'm sure if another commander (let's say, Patton) had been in Horrock's shoes they may have done a better job. However, Horrocks was on time up until Nijmegen. He then suffered a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen, caused primarily by the Nijmegen bridge being in German hands. And what part of it specifically does not make any sense? And just to point out, R.G. Poulussen is a Dutch historian (listed in the videos description), and he's saying the exact same thing I am in his book "Lost at Nijmegen: A Rethink of Operation Market Garden".
    1
  17560. +SuperVerst and I regrow it again in the last episode :P
    1
  17561. +Ayda Williams good to hear! I hope it's not too in depth at this point :)
    1
  17562. Nice! Was never into RO but it looks good! Nice video. Glad I could be of some assistance :)
    1
  17563. No, thank you for watching :) to be honest, I put these videos up and didn't really spread the word. I'm terrible at self-promotion. I only posted it to one forum, so really I'm relying on word of mouth and YouTube searches for "Operation Market Garden Documentary", which obviously isn't ideal lol
    1
  17564. Whatever you do, don't look up anything until at least next episode. Seriously, the wait will be worth it
    1
  17565. Well, they sort-of were (on certain days), but they couldn't identify the units. Sand, dust, both sides using each others equipment, and the position of the units was so close that a distinction just wasn't possible
    1
  17566. Oh trust me, it get worse!
    1
  17567. I can't commit to that right now, but I will do at some point in the future.
    1
  17568. Thanks Vali! I enjoy Mondays too, mainly because I get to chat to viewers like you, but also because I know I've managed to get the video finished in time haha
    1
  17569. Don't google it. I know it's tempting, but I genuinely think you're better off watching it happen
    1
  17570. :D
    1
  17571. Not often at the moment. I'm working an average of 77 hours on this per keep and struggling to keep up with everything, especially Patreon (which is really bad and should be a priority). So my Twitter has been neglected, sorry
    1
  17572. I don't smoke but that does sound like a good way to relax :)
    1
  17573. This is what happens when you rapidly expand your army after a series of defeats. You have no choice but to promote lower officers to higher posts before they have learned their trade. You see this in business all the time - people rising the ranks far too quickly (chasing the dollar), leading to corruption and failures in even the basic tasks.
    1
  17574. That video isn't displayable in the UK
    1
  17575. And next time someone rolls a 1 ;)
    1
  17576. Could be, but I just googled "skull" and used one of the pics
    1
  17577. I've been doing that already. Hence why I did the economics video
    1
  17578. "Anyway from you as producer I would expect no politica approach" Ok, imagine if I said this - "Anyway from you as the viewer I would expect you to watch regardless." That would be unreasonable wouldn't it? Why should any individual force another individual to do something? It's wrong. So, as an individual, I'm not bowing to 'public' pressure. Socialist tactics of using multiple accounts to downvote some of my videos and spread lies, slander and threats throughout the comment sections about or towards me isn't going to prevent me from telling the truth (backed by copious amounts of evidence). This is why the leftists are wasting their time commenting on and downvoting my videos - I don't care whether there is a consensus or not. History is about the sources, interpretation and debate. A consensus is irrelevant. "Remember that the video regarding if Nazis were socialists was a very controversial and I would say that should be a lesson to avoid taking political place as it's very complicated" Controversial maybe, but all my videos have been controversial. That's what my channel has always been about when it came to history. The very first history video I did was on Market Garden where I said the US general was to blame for what had traditionally been seen as a British failure. Controversy is debate. Debate is the heart of history and historiography. Censorship is the antithesis of history. Besides, as my arguments in the comment sections have proven, I now have pretty convincing evidence that, in my view, confirms that the National-Socialists were indeed socialist. For example, the first thing they did was abolish private property, and the best counterargument I've had against this is "no, you're wrong" and "neck yourself". "and also... You want to explain history not left/center/right etc.." I'm looking into WW2 - the main part of which is the war between the National-Socialists and the Marxist-Socialists. I cannot ignore that, since as the key to history is the context of the time. My research for Courland has forced me to look into the politics and economics of the situation because it's all related to why Hitler chose to bottle Army Group North in Courland in the first place - it's unavoidable! The politics, the economics and the military aspects are all interlocked. As I've discovered by trying to remain as quiet as possible on the political and economic matters, it simply isn't possible because of the Marxists and the National-Socialists in the comment sections of my videos who are making it political and economic. What I'm doing is a reaction to their lies, and a reaction to the distortions of history, which I'm discovering on a daily basis, such as National-Socialist not being socialism somehow. "@TIK that doesn't make them necessary leftist." The idea of freedom of speech is not a left-wing idea, since it's related to liberty and individualism. Censorship is a left-wing idea because it's an attack on individuals for the sake of the "social-group". I think that National Socialists and Marxist Socialists views are bad, but that individuals who 'believe' in those ideologies shouldn't have their freedom to speak taken away from them. It is a basic individual human right. Deplatforming or destroying the incomes of people who aren't socialist, just because a company (or even everyone else) disagrees with them, is a left-wing idea. This is a bad road to go along, and I do not support that in any way. "If they "attack" to people with more conservative ideas most probably are not in the same side (expect if they are more radical) but also not made them leftist." Patreon are a middle-man. They do not pay the creators - the creator's fans pay for the creators. They should not have a say in where other people's money goes. And yet Patreon has taken it upon itself to prevent people from supporting other people through their service. Why are they doing that? Well, as leftists they want to control the means of production. They feel it is there right to say where other people's money goes. Part of their leftist agenda is to destroy freedom of speech in favour of the idea of a "socialized man" (Das Kapital Volume III). It's the same as China's social credit system. If Patreon deems something to be "offensive" to their socialist weltanschauung ("world-view", to quote Hitler) then they will simply shut it down. This is why people are voting with their wallets, and I absolutely support them in their choice. Ultimately, I go where the evidence takes me - which means I end up in controversial topics, which will "offend" someone at some point. But that is what history is. History lies at the heart of debate. If I cannot question things and discuss topics, then there's no reason to talk, and there is no reason to do history. I would quit and go get another job, since there's no history left to discuss. Everything would be the official leftist narrative, or I'd have to say "sorry guys, I can't cover that topic because my research has uncovered truths that the grand-narrative-socialists have said I'm not allowed to share with you".
    1
  17579. Then why are they targeting non-Leftists?
    1
  17580. No worries. They're from several tables throughout Liedtke's "Enduring the Whirlwind". That's a great book btw, highly recommend it.
    1
  17581. Ah yes, the 11,447 was a mistake - long story short, I stupidly doubled the SPG count when calculating (I actually tweeted about this later when I realised the error). The correct numbers are - 6,864 for 01/07/1942 7,798 for 01/12/1942 7,505 for 01/07/1943
    1
  17582. Sure! I can't promise I'll remove the video, but if it's bad I may update the pinned comments.
    1
  17583. Courland is on the Eastern Front, and will be coming in February.
    1
  17584. It is, I agree, but it's so hard for me to stop ☹️
    1
  17585. I've made some corrections to some parts of the videos, but they're nothing major if I'm honest. I'm actually surprised that I got most of it right and didn't make any major mistakes. I still want to create the 'Complete' video though, just because it's all in one place then for everyone, and YouTube tends to like long videos for some reason, so it's worth doing. Plus it'll give me all this week to work on the Courland research and script.
    1
  17586. I will cover more battles in North Africa and Normandy. 22:50 into the linked video I start answering a question about me covering unknown battles, but after a couple minutes I talk about the future plans for the Battlestorm series and why I'm doing it in the order I'm doing it in https://youtu.be/OR_RhIWic1I
    1
  17587. I'm going to make them roughly 30 minutes long. I'm estimating the number of episodes, but it should be around 5 or 6. Maybe more, since the research isn't done yet.
    1
  17588. Hi Bob! I don't blame you at all, and of course I support the idea. Patreon is absolutely in the wrong. An alternative is desperately needed
    1
  17589. Hey Gamer! Not seen you in a while. What you been up to?? I'm good, just busy busy busy with videos and the channel :)
    1
  17590. Happy New Year to you too! I'm also glad you found my channel :)
    1
  17591. Christian is right. The off-the-cuff videos I've done haven't gone so well.
    1
  17592. I'm not blaming Karl Marx at all. I'm blaming the ideology of socialism, which was born in the fires of the French Revolution, many years before Marx put pen to paper. Socialism has nothing to do with Marxism.
    1
  17593. Halder Hate Hour History (HHHH)?
    1
  17594. Glad you liked it! I started reading Bloodlands, but have only read certain (relevant) parts. I do intend to read it all at some point.
    1
  17595. I'm assuming you're a Marxist-Socialist. Are you telling me you don't believe in the working class, or the bourgeoisie? Are you saying that all bourgeoisie are innocent and not guilty for the way things are? You'd be a poor Marxist if you thought the bourgeoisie were all fine, or even that some of them are fine. I mean, how you going to kill them all and seize their assets during the bloody revolution if you don't see everyone who you arbitrarily deem as bourgeois as being "the enemy" of the working class? That is exactly how socialism is. It divides society so that it can exploit those divisions, and is why it always leads to deaths and violence. Death and violence are built into it's core.
    1
  17596. When the British Army, government or individuals commit crimes and whatnot, yes absolutely.
    1
  17597. https://youtu.be/_yorr3va_Ug
    1
  17598. I want to at some point, but I think it won't be until after Battlestorm Stalingrad at the earliest, and I'd need an editor and more help besides. Barbarossa is insanely huge in scale, and a Battlestorm on that would take forever if I was to do it alone.
    1
  17599. And I do think they're similar to Marxist Socialists, communists and social democrats - they're socialists (centralised state planning) but with race at the centre of their ideology rather than class. It's two sides of the same coin.
    1
  17600. They may be "right-wing socialists", but they're not on the right-wing of the whole political spectrum. You start off on the left with communism and socialism (centralized power) then move to conservative and then liberal ideologies (getting more capitalist, decentralised and free as you go further right) and then suddenly it turns into authoritarian socialism again? Worse, anarchism doesn't even exist on this spectrum, when in-fact it should be on the right-wing as the most "free" you can get. This other video explains it in more detail https://youtu.be/FNJzqqh-jRw Plus nationalism started off on the left (during the French revolution) and then became right-wing somehow. This is silly because nationalism is all about the national-social group, and therefore is a socialism (which is actually what Hitler says). The word "patriotism" is what belongs on the right, but if nationalism is on the right, then patriotism also can't be placed on the spectrum.
    1
  17601. History sometimes repeats itself...
    1
  17602. Thank you Joseph! I'm currently doing bi-weekly Courland and bi-weekly Q&As, so I'll hopefully be answering your question soon :)
    1
  17603. Also NSDAP are not centrists - I never said that. They're on the Left with the other Socialists.
    1
  17604. How can capitalism - private (non-state) control of the means of production - be state authority? And how can individualism not be egalitarian? That's a contradiction in terms. Socialism is common control of the means of production. This means that the markets (the people, traders) are not free, and are dictated terms by the state. This requires a totalitarian regime to make this work in practice. And it requires censorship. Totalitarianism is everything totally subservient to the state, including the economy. By saying Hitler's regime is not Socialist, you're saying it's not totalitarian as well, since a free market means non-total control of the means of production. Hitler's regime was totalitarian, therefore your interpretation is incorrect. Marxism divides society into classes. Therefore it discriminates certain classes over others. It therefore cannot be egalitarian. This is why you get Gulags and Cambodian Killing Fields. National Socialism does the exact same thing but with races. Another question for you - which private business owned and ran the Holocaust? If it's capitalism, the state would have nothing to do with it, since capitalism is private ownership. I'll await your reply...
    1
  17605. Socialism came before Marx even put pen to paper. Marxist theory is irrelevant to this discussion.
    1
  17606. Evil is a historically useful term. As are the terms "crimes" and "murder". So please don't avoid the question and answer which of these two murderous regimes you support? And why do you think we shouldn't discuss their crimes and make out that they weren't evil? I'm not going to pander to Marxist views and place one lot of socialists on the Right-wing of the political spectrum - that would be a distortion of history. National Socialism is just on the Left with the rest of the socialist ideologies (as the evidence makes clear), so this isn't "horseshoe theory". Centralised economy and totalitarian/authority on the Left, free economy and democracy (eventually anarchy) on the Right.
    1
  17607. So which side do you support then? The Soviet Union or the Third Reich? I'm curious to hear why you think one regime isn't evil and why historians should whitewash it's crimes.
    1
  17608. Thanks Lighto! Glad to hear you enjoyed it
    1
  17609. Arbitrarily, and usually on religious grounds (which they initially wanted to avoid doing because Hitler was adamant they are a race not a religion)
    1
  17610. Thank you for watching :)
    1
  17611. I can't mention everything, plus the sources I have don't really talk about it.
    1
  17612. "Society is divided into classes [under capitalism]" I don't know what capitalist society you live in, but there's no classes here in the UK. Anyone who says there are classes in the UK is a socialist, because (again) they see the world in artificial social groups that don't exist. If you're capable, you'll rise to the top. If you're not willing to work hard, you'll sink to the bottom. If you're at the bottom, change your mentality and start working hard/smart, and you'll rise in no time. It's all on your shoulders. You can't blame anyone else if you don't put the effort in. "Bosses compete to make the most profits by exploiting workers" Yes, because giving people a job is "exploiting" them. Many people want jobs because they want a stable income. Wealth can only be made by production. If people don't work, nothing gets made and everyone stays poor. Only those that produce can become wealthy. This is why socialist states fail - the "workers" stop working because they receive no reward for their work. Money is worthless if you can't buy anything with it, which is why printing it is pointless. You need to produce - that's what creates wealth for everyone.
    1
  17613. No worries, hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  17614. If that is the case, then that's interesting. I didn't explore that particular point in-depth because I wasn't sure where I'd get the information from to confirm what they were thinking. However, the explanation you gave makes a lot of sense, if it's true
    1
  17615. To be fair, while I will be mentioning some of the atrocities as the fighting goes on, the focus will be on the fighting. But I wanted to explain the entire picture before we get into the fighting so I can't be acused of favouring one side or another (which is usually what happens).
    1
  17616. It's almost like government (or EU) "support" for (or suppression of) the economy doesn't work. Low tax and few regulations would free up the economy and let peope get to business. Instead they're fleeing, and I don't blame them.
    1
  17617. Glad you liked it Duke!
    1
  17618. Well, technically it was Leninist-Marxist Socialist then Stalinist-Marxist Socialist (I'm sure there's a better term), which probably manifested themselves different to "real Marxism".
    1
  17619. The territory of Poland still existed, as did it's people, even if it was occupied by foreign powers. And the rest of your statements don't point out mistakes, rather that you disagree with the points being made in the video. I won't be changing the video to accommodate your view point as my view points are valid even if you disagree with them.
    1
  17620. He doesn't debunk it at all. He confirms it's not Marxist Socialism, which it's not.
    1
  17621. I expect to see you when Stalingrad begins 😉
    1
  17622. "@TIK You didn't make this type of video when talking about the North African campaign and you didn't equate the British and French Empires to the Nazi Empire." You want to talk about the atrocities committed by the British in North Africa during WW2? Ok, go ahead, you first. "The British were in territories which belonged to them and to France through conquest" Yes, but that's not relevant to the North African Campaign. It would be relevant if we were talking about the Rise and Fall of the British Empire or something, but we're not when discussing the North African Campaign of WW2. On the Axis Soviet Front however, that's a different story because both sides were aggressors in this war. "Your distinction of Empires is implied when you used the 'coined term' Evil Empire, which in itself implies there are also then....Good Empires." No, it's an emphasis on the fact that these two empires were evil - since some people are defending one side or another. The British Empire was not "good", even for the British (it actually cost Britain more to maintain the empire than they got from the colonies). Just because I haven't had an opportunity to say that the British Empire was evil, doesn't mean I won't. You're assuming that I hold views I don't have, because you're seeing me as a "British" person. Stop being Fascist (nationalistic-socialist) and view me as an individual, not as a "British" person.
    1
  17623. I know RT is a propaganda site and cannot be trusted, that's why I was pointing out their distortions - but apparently you don't want me to point out their distortions? There are numerous Latvians in the comments thanking me for my balanced account - but then there's you, who doesn't seem to have listened to what I said. Then you're denying the fact that Hitler's regime was totalitarian (you can't have totalitarian regime without centralized-total control of the economy, socialism). But yes, it is me who's wrong.
    1
  17624. This series will be several hours long. This is just the set up. That doesn't make me a liar, it makes me thorough. Feel free to stop watching.
    1
  17625. Fascism isn't National Socialism. Fascism and National Socialism are not the same, even if wikipedia insists that they are. Standard socialism : common control of the means of production. Marxist socialism : class control of the means of production. National Socialism : race control of the means of production. Fascism : nationality control of the means of production.
    1
  17626. I see what you did there
    1
  17627. "Yet with the Nazis, was this the case? Were the means of production placed in the hands of the state (prior to say 1943)? No." Wow, please read Adam Tooze "Wages of Destruction" or Gunter Reimann's "Vampire Economy" (written in 1939) for a real assessment of what the National Socialist economy was because production absolutely was under control of the totalitarian state (you can't have "total" control without control of the economy). Here's some quotes - “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    1
  17628. No worries sir 😂
    1
  17629. If you just want a book on the fighting, then "Between Giants" by Buttar is probably the best, although it covers the 1941-45 campaigns in the region and the last 3rd is on Courland. "Blood in the Forest" is good if you want the political/social perspective. As far as I'm aware, no "one book to rule them all" exists specifically on Courland in English. Also, avoid the German books on Courland like the plague.
    1
  17630. I've never said the British empire wasn't evil. But just because the British government and certain private individuals were/are evil, doesn't mean all "Brits" are evil. That's a socialist mindset - thinking all people in a certain "social group" (nationality, race, gender, class) think or act the same or are guilty by association. We're all individuals - treat me as one. I may have been born in Britain, but I am not my nationality.
    1
  17631. Mine, I created it
    1
  17632. @Marcus, unfortunately that would be impossible. Not only am I committed to presenting a fair view on history (this series would be impossible to make without this video since it would ignite claims of "glorifying Nazis" or "glorifying the Soviet Union") but the fact is that many of the claims made by the military historians (e.g. Hitler's madness, or why Barbarossa failed, and Oil) are actually explained by the political theory and ideologies. By ignoring them, or not mixing them into the narrative, you'll get a distorted view of the events - at which point, I may as well not bother. And, in addition, I've committed to covering the Holocaust at some point. So while the military aspects will be the focus, I do need to cover non-military events too. Discussing ideology in teh North African Campaign can mostly be ignored because it doesn't impact the campaign. It does impact the Axis-Soviet Front though.
    1
  17633. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187
    1
  17634. "These states were economically and ideologically different." No they weren't - "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    1
  17635. Ok, another heart awarded because I didn't know that!
    1
  17636. "First of all, thanks for replying" No worries, thank you for answering my question :) I did ask it wrong - I should have said "why are the bourgeoisis bad?" rather than not bad, but nevermind. So, let's talk about some of your points - "But it is simply a statement of fact to point out that a class is able to make use of that privilege," "I'm sure you'll agree that there are actions and privileges that being a member of a given social class can get you, to elevate you over others." Sadly, I'm not in agreement with this point. Can you give me some hard current-day examples of how being in a certain social class can elevate you above others? "The "bourgeoisie" are able to, and do, enforce unfair working conditions." So let's imagine that the "bourgeoisie" give you a job, and you don't like it. Ok, so what do you do if you don't like your job? - you leave and get another. If you're a free person, in a free country, you can go elsewhere. You can trade your skills, time and abilities for another job. You can find one with better conditions, or create a job yourself (become an entrepreneur), since economics isn't a zero-sum game, and you can actually create wealth by producing things. Now let's put the government in complete control of the means of production and economy. Since factories don't produce anything by themselves, the "means of production" is actually just another phrase for the "people" or "workers". So now we have a situation where the government is in total-control of the people. You are no longer a free person and are not in charge your person. So what happens if you don't like your job? Can you get another? No, because every job provided in the economy is now owned by the state. It's a monopoly. All you're doing is moving from bad working conditions to other bad working conditions. And worse, if the government thinks that you're not worth hiring, what happens then? Can you explain how freedom is bad for people? "Men are disproportionately more likely to engage in street harassment than women." I'm not saying you're a sexist, or deliberately going out of your way to be sexist, and I actually think you don't realise that you were being sexist, but I am saying that this statement is sexist. In reality, you're not sexist for thinking one "sex" is better than another; you're sexist for thinking that people can be grouped into "sexes" in the first place. If you see people as defined by their "sex"-group, then that is in itself sexist. Unless we're getting into a romantic relationship, someone's sexuality is completely irrelevant to me. Why? Because I'm not a sexist. If you define people by their sexual characteristics, and state that all-people-of-a-certain-sex-are-x, then you are being sexist. Same applies with race; you're racist if you think people are defined by their "racial characteristics". Let's take an example. I am British. Does that mean I eat limes, play football and drink tea? No, I don't do any of those things. Why? Because I am an individual. I don't eat fruit very often, think sport is a waste of time, and prefer cold drinks. But that's not possible!?!!? How can I possibly be British and not like queuing?!?!? And I don't think it's right that people should judge me by my "nationality characteristics", because my nationality honestly doesn't define who I am at all. And I absolutely don't want people to find me guilty of association of a "social group". If another British guy commits a murder, does that mean I'm a murderer too? Does that mean I should go to prison for it as well? No, because that's a ridiculous notion. Individuals are judged by their own actions, not by the actions of others. Similarly, if another male harasses a woman, does that mean I should go to prison for it? No, because again that's a ridiculous notion. Similarly, if one Jew is bad, does that mean Hitler is justified in killing all the Jews? No, because again that's a super-ridiculous notion. And yet that is precisely the line of thinking you go down once you deprive others of their individuality and judge them solely on their association with a social group. "I do think that reducing everything to individualism is destructive and quite useless in terms of analysis of anything" I don't think you can find people guilty by association. I think people should be judged individually, and not be found guilty just because they belong to a social group. Not all people of a given skin colour are bad. Not all people who have a certain sexual-organ are bad. Not all people from a certain nation are bad. Not all people from a certain class are bad. I think separating everyone into social groups is truly destructive. It leads to an "us" vs "them" mentality. It leads to divisions. It leads to people thinking others of another group are "evil" or "non-human". It leads to social-schism. It leads to the loss of freedom for individuals, and it leads to a societal breakdown. This is why I refer to socialism as "social-schism". It honestly does promote a division of society, and this is built into its core philosophy. In my opinion, individuals should have the freedom to do what they want, without harming others. Everyone (regardless of race, gender, creed, nationality or class) should have the same rights. We should not be controlled by others, and be able to keep the money or products we earn by working, and spend our wealth were we see fit (not having it forcefully taken from us by others). We should not judge others by the colour of their skin, their sexuality, class or nationality. All that matters is their individual traits (are they nice, hard working etc?). And we should take responsibility for our own lives, think for ourselves, and not allow others to dictate how we act or think. This is true freedom. True liberty. And this is the philosophy of "classic liberalism".
    1
  17637. Ok, so why is it a fallacy, please explain to me? And why are the bourgeoisie not bad?
    1
  17638. What are the ideas you have that do not corroborate with the video? Anything specific? Maybe I can help clarify
    1
  17639. Hello Latvia!
    1
  17640. "Why can't you just suffice with shitting on dead US generals? There are so many to choose!" Because I'm not a Fascist. I don't believe in nationality-social groups. "This is a video about the tragedy of the Baltic states in the Second World War, bitching about Socialists putting everyone into groups was tangential and you could've done very well without it - any historical pretext was dropped the moment you used a contemporary image." But it was incredibly relevant because that's exactly what happened. Are you saying that the "workers" and "bourgeois" are not social groups? Are you saying the "Aryans" and "Jews" are not two different groups? This isn't me making things up here; this is me explaining the events that happened at the time. I'm sorry that your political ideology is preventing you from seeing the true meaning of the phrase "common control of the means of production". Here, let me translate - "totalitarian control of the people". [Since businesses can't produce without people, the phrase "means of production" means "people". "Common control" manifests itself as "someone else", whoever has the most power. Therefore the ideology of socialism is effectively "enslavement of people". That is why you have been tricked - becaues the words masked their true meaning.]
    1
  17641. Assuming I was wrong for a moment, is telling me to "stop trying because you're rubbish" good advice? I don't think so. Pointing out where I'm going wrong and offering suggestions would be better. However, those that have have struggled to win the arguments, since the fundamental problem with Marxists is that they think socialism is Marxism and Marxism is socialism. Unfortunately history clearly shows that Socialism came before Marxism and is separate to Marxism. Still, if I'm rubbish and should just stop, I guess we can all continue believing the lie about National Socialism being capitalism (lol).
    1
  17642. Yup, shrinking markets is a Marxist concept. That's why the Marxist-Denialists are downvoting this video and complaining/smearing. They don't want people to see the truth. Their ideology must come first.
    1
  17643. Not heard of that, but yes they seem related in concept. Again, anyone who understands basic economics would see through that straight away... It's a shame so many people don't understand it :(
    1
  17644. A significant portion of the commenters aren't my subscribers, but are people who have limited knowledge of WW2. Many are telling me it was Britain who started WW2... and so many didn't watch all the video because I quoted Hitler talking about the shrinking markets, yet these commenters are saying I was making up the concept. People always say how I should have more subscribers. I'm not so sure...
    1
  17645. True
    1
  17646. It's funny because some people are saying it's too complicated for them to understand... Can't win
    1
  17647. "By the way, Len Deighton in his book Blood, Sweat, and Tears goes into some detail about Hitler's shrinking market, and devotes almost an entire chapter..." You've sold me on it. Just purchased and look forward to reading it. Thanks!
    1
  17648. It's "limited monetization" right now, but I'm not going to question it.
    1
  17649. Please see the sources in the pinned comment.
    1
  17650. It's not MY logic, it's Hitler's logic. I don't agree with the shrinking markets theory, and yes, as you point out it doesn't make sense.
    1
  17651. Yeah, it's not like I used 107 sources or anything https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  17652. @Steven, please watch my Public vs Private video which will explain in great detail why Nationalism is a Left Wing ideology https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  17653. Just a point, Hitler wasn't a fascist https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  17654. Nazism and Fascism are not the same ideology.
    1
  17655. Correct
    1
  17656. Please tell me it was an economics class explaining why the shrinking markets idea is a load of rubbish!
    1
  17657. National Socialism and Fascism are two distinct ideologies.
    1
  17658. Sources are listed in the pinned comment
    1
  17659. A swing and a miss https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  17660. Start here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  17661. "The British Empire at its peak of power was the biggest colonizer, enslaver and mass murderers in the 20th century. Don't YOU forget it." I agree: the British GOVERNMENT was / is evil.
    1
  17662. A black market is a free market. If you have a black market, you know that the rest of the economy is a socialist non-free economy. Isn't there a black market for drugs? Copyrighted material? Prostitution? Books? Videos? Weapons? Cash in hand... We're not living in a capitalist age. This is socialism, and that's why it's slowly failing. Wake up.
    1
  17663. That's partly true, but doesn't explain the timing or the necessity of the events, nor why Hitler had to implement Autarky as soon as he got into power, not why he was heading East and not West or south.
    1
  17664. Ok, will discuss the discuss
    1
  17665. The war economy was gradually implemented throughout the 1930s, and most of the industries were 'privatized' (actually nationalized) by about 1935-36. Railways were nationalized in 1937. You can tell this happened because this was all a result of the Nazi "economic miracle" of getting people back to work.
    1
  17666. Glad you found it useful!
    1
  17667. Although it's not fully demonetized, only partially
    1
  17668. Of course it was!
    1
  17669. I'm not sure if there's much of a debate going on in here. Too many distortions being spouted that it hurts my brain to read them
    1
  17670. Oh don't worry, I will :)
    1
  17671. As I explained, that old narrative doesn't make sense without the shrinking markets narrative to tie it all together, which, if you had watched the full video, you would have seen the evidence for. Hitler actually spells it out in his Second Book, which I quoted heavily in the video. I explained the concept first, then gave the evidence for it at the end. But yes, I've got a "crazy" theory which is backed up by evidence.
    1
  17672. You didn't watch the video. This video is anti-socialist all the way through. If you watch the follow up videos on the shrinking markets and why ideologically denying the Holocaust is not possible, you'll see why.
    1
  17673. YouTube should be for the viewers, not corporations.
    1
  17674. Far Right? What does anarchism have to do with this? https://images.app.goo.gl/AuhRbeyrpJ8F3k4e8
    1
  17675. No it wasn't https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA
    1
  17676. Ok, I'll work on it :)
    1
  17677. But not enough oil or food. Even with the imports, Germany was in a deficit of oil so huge that a second Romania wouldn't have been able to cover it.
    1
  17678. Shrinking markets is only a socialist economic concept that applies to socialist economies. We're living in a Keynesian economic world, where all currencies are tied to the Dollar, and the economies are heavily regulated and centralised. This is why we've not seen growth since 2008, because socialism doesn't work. Yet, when it fails, people demand that the socialised central state do more! They have no idea that it is the free market that is progressive and the socialist tax economy which is regressive, and yet claim it is the opposite.
    1
  17679. You're probably not wrong.
    1
  17680. I'm not defending Trump, and I'm not a fan. However, I think people voted for Trump because they're sick of the establishment and thought that Trump wasn't part of the establishment (which he isn't). Also, like all politicians, he promised one thing when he was campaigning and didn't do it when elected. He promised to bring down the debt-based fiat-currency system during his campaign, and then didn't as soon as he got into office. This won over a lot of people who understand that inflation and currency-printing not only robs the poor of their wealth but also creates recessions (Business Cycle Theory) will eventually destroy the economy through hyperinflation. So there were reasons to vote for Trump, even if the guy was an idiot. It's like Boris in the UK. It's better to vote for Boris "go to work, don't go to work" Johnson than bring in Jeremy "let's try Stalinist Pol Pot communism again" Corbyn. Voting for the lessor of two evils isn't "insanity"... It is proof though that "democracy" (State Power) doesn't work https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  17681. Yeah, because the theory Herpa Derp is giving doesn't explain everything. Hitler did hate Marxism, and it compliments the shrinking markets idea, but it's not the reason HAD to conquer living space. The shrinking markets forced him to go East, which tied in with his hatred of Bolshevism.
    1
  17682. Thanks! And yes, new narratives keep us in the game.
    1
  17683. I have that book, and I'm planning to read it, but I've already studied the Hyperinflation of the 1920s and the Versailles Treaty etc. That said, they alone do not explain everything. You need the shrinking markets explanation to have it all make sense.
    1
  17684. A black market is a free market, because the state doesn't have a say in that market. If you have a black market, you know the rest of the economy is a state-controlled economy. Isn't there a black market for drugs? The centralised state "private" banks are printing currency, secretly robbing everyone of their wealth with inflation, and few are aware of it. We've not had a free market since the gold standard (gold and silver are money, not currency, because they have intrinsic value), and even then it wasn't free due to taxation and regulation. 2008 was proof that Keynesian economics is failing, and they've been dragging out the death of it for over ten years, if not more. Once the dollar hyperfinflates (which all fiat currencies have done in history) the state-controlled system will collapse, people will blame the capitalist system (which it's not) and use that as an excuse to bring in more socialism. Rinse and repeat. Don't be fooled. This is not capitalism. The markets aren't free.
    1
  17685. I don't know if it is, but I'm playing it safe. The swastika is technically banned, so I doubt this video will be available in all countries.
    1
  17686. They did have a war footing in the 1930s, it just wasn't run very well. Speer came along and reorganized it and made it run more efficiently. Right up until the end, they were still making consumer goods, but that was because Hitler was scared of a stab in the back.
    1
  17687. Glad you're enjoying them! :)
    1
  17688. A dangerous strategy :)
    1
  17689. Thanks! Which parts don't you agree on? I had to keep things short in this, but I do plan on returning to the topic in the future, so maybe I can elaborate or explain or provide more evidence for the parts in dispute?
    1
  17690. Who has?
    1
  17691. They didn't get rid of centralised (public) banks. They're National Socialists, they embraced the concept of centralised banking because they advocated Public Sector control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  17692. Of course he's mad at the world. He hated Versailles, which is why he went East to Russia where Versailles is... Oh wait.
    1
  17693. Good job the points don't matter! (I do prefer to call them National Socialists. But it's a bit cumbersome when saying it over and over.)
    1
  17694. Central Banking, as called for by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  17695. Thank you! It means a lot. Why are you a former historian?
    1
  17696. Try watching the full video before commenting. I quoted from Mein Kampf and Hitler's Second Book in the video.
    1
  17697. Yeah, I'm anti-Nazi and anti-inter-Nazi, not a neo-Nazi. Don't let the morons in the comments fool you into thinking that this is how my channel normally is. This video is being brigaded by the Far Left.
    1
  17698. Will do
    1
  17699. Yes, you're right. A bit of a longer video, but if you use the timestamps in the description and go to the section called "the Plunder of Europe" you'll hear a bit more on the overall Nazi plan for Europe. I don't specifically mention Poland here, but the policies I mention being applied to other countries (like the Ukraine) were also applied to Poland https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And another video on Greece which suffered a similar fate to Poland https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk I will be doing videos specifically on Poland in the future but I just haven't got round to her yet. Too many topics to cover!
    1
  17700. Thanks for the recommendation. I shall purchase it 👍
    1
  17701. Race doesn't exist.
    1
  17702. What about my 5 hour video on Hitler's ideology? https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  17703. Keto diet, actually, which was very effective. I lost over a stone in weight in January/Feb. I've been maintaining since then. Not sure why it's more obvious in this video than in my recent Q&As but a few people have pointed this out in this video.
    1
  17704. I've read both books, and more. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  17705. "Scipio Africanus I wonder if TIK is proud that his comment section is full of right wing nut jobs." And left wing nut jobs.
    1
  17706. If I offered you 1 ton of gold, would you say no to it? Intrinsic: "belonging naturally; essential." Gold is natural and rare (which helps give it its value), and silver is the same but also has many uses (e.g. electronics). Now, I'm not saying it's not also got subjective value - because ,of course, its value is subjective to each buyer and seller and its relation to other goods in the society (the market price). However, gold and silver do have natural value, just as an apple is valuable to someone who's hungry. For example, Venezuelans have resorted to using gold after their socialist government hyperinflated the currency supply https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/08/venezuela-puerto-ordaz-gold-mines-armed-gangs "“In November, one of the girls who is studying here told me: ‘A degree is not expensive, because its only 2.5g of gold [for a semester],’” said Arturo Peraza, rector of the city’s influential Universidad Católica Andrés Bello." And the hyperinflation in Germany in 1923 was partly caused by the state coming off the gold standard, and through printing currency. But those Germans who retained their gold could do well, and many shops and businesses resorted to barter or payments in gold. You see this throughout history whenever the currency supply is inflated - people return to the free market; they return to gold and silver.
    1
  17707. "@TIK I haven't claimed that marxist economics is superior I've just said that Keynesianism is better for the working class by creating a strong safety net and good working conditions." Hear me out. The poor and the 'working class' are better off without the safety net. Now, at first you might think - MONSTER! But in reality, that's not the case. I am poor, I am 'working class', and I know that a safety net is BAD for me, the poor and the 'working class'. BECAUSE it isn't the initial effect of the act of giving currency to the poor that's the issue. If that solved everything, then I'd be all for it... just as I used to be. BUT it's the knock-on effect of doing that which RUINS the economy AND hurts the poor and the 'working class' as well. It's not the INITIAL effect that's the problem - it's the KNOCK-ON effects which are the issue, and they make the INITIAL effect really really really bad for the poor and the 'working class'. The reason you don't see it is because you haven't looked into non-Keynesian/non-Marxist economics. Do yourself a favour and listen to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson, and listen to Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics. Once you see it, you'll understand. "@TIK of course we don't live in a 100% free market and anyone who claims that is an idiot. We live in a mixed economy with private companies and public services." We barely have a mixed economy. This economy is so socialized that it's hard to name something that isn't touched by the socialization. In fact, due to the currency manipulation, even the black market isn't a true black market (unless they purely operated through barter or gold/silver) since the socialization of the currency supply is absolute. "What are you on about gold and silver for? They're just as much real money as paper money is? Do you not understand what currency actually is?" Money is gold and silver, because gold and silver have intrinsic value. Paper fiat 'money' isn't money, it's currency, because it has no value. Now that we're no longer on the gold-standard, we no longer have money, only currency. The centralized socialized banks can print currency all day long, stealing the wealth off of you and me. This is why we no longer have a free market - because every person who uses currency (for the first time in human history, everyone in the world) is having their wealth robbed from them by the socialized central banks, and they don't even realise it. The point being that the currency supply itself is socialized, meaning that - if nothing else - every transaction we make today has been socialized and is controlled by the central banks and the Keynesian state. If you do not have a gold-standard - if you use fiat currency - you do not have a free market. "@TIK inflation isn't theft and was common place even in gold based societies like what happened to Spain when theh discovered the Americas or when mansa musa went to Egypt." The difference being that that inflation didn't benefit the 1% at the expense of everyone else. Everyone in society felt the effects of that inflation together. Our current inflation benefits the 1% and the centralized socialized state and banks by robbing the rest of society of their wealth without them even realizing it.
    1
  17708. He's just following socialist economic ideas.
    1
  17709. Yes, that's possibly part of it. But doesn't explain why he was expanding in the first place
    1
  17710. In no way am I a "communist shill" 🤦🏼‍♂️ Not sure how exactly you got that impression from this video, but I'm totally for the free market and have read into Objectivism and Austrian School Economics.
    1
  17711. Tell me about it. There's so many that are so wrong I could write a book about them
    1
  17712. Except, Nazism isn't Fascism, and the shrinking markets is a socialist idea on how capitalism works, but is a fundamental misunderstanding of how basic economics works. This is why I linked to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson in the description, in the hopes that socialists (Nazis, Fascists and Marxists etc) would find it useful.
    1
  17713. And as I said in the video, they actually nationalized the industries and called it privatisation.
    1
  17714. Don't forget that that quote came from his second book, which was written in the late 1920's (1928 off top of my head), and that Hitler hadn't expected to be involved in a major war until 1941, not 1939. Also, he thought that his main enemy wasn't the Soviet Union, but the USA, which is part of his excuse to gain Lebensraum before he's expected to be at war with them. So 30 years from 1928 puts it at 1958 - the point where time has supposedly run out. Therefore Hitler thought he had to act before this time, and there was little reason to wait because once he'd taken out the Soviet Union he was expecting to be at war with the USA. Also, as I explained, Hitler believed trade was bad. Therefore there was no reason to continue trading because all that would do is strengthen his enemies. Yes WE know that trade is mutually beneficial, but socialists believe economics is a zero sum game. One person's gain is another person's loss in their eyes. So trade is bad for them (supposedly, even though it's not). It also conveniently provides an excuse to implement just socialism on the national level, which Hitler wanted to do for many reasons (mainly for the 'race'). So, while you could argue that he could have taken his time a bit more, placed in context with all the other reasons, it makes perfect sense. And I'm not saying that the other reasons weren't important- they were. What I'm saying is that this is a central reason which ties all the others in. Without this, it doesn't make as much sense. But with it, it provides the impetus for more immediate action, especially to implement Autarky, which then leads to economic problems.
    1
  17715. He wanted to unite the German race and go east. He can't do that without going through Poland and Czechoslovakia.
    1
  17716. "Shrinking markets lead to end of capitalism...mmmhhh Thinking in communism " Shhhh... they might hear you!
    1
  17717. My own comments are also being deleted. And your comments aren't being deleted by me. Some are automatically ending up in the spam folder. Others, if they are being deleted, are being deleted by YouTube or other users (who are capable of reporting your comments).
    1
  17718. Thanks John!
    1
  17719. Agreed about the censorship. And yes, mistakes will be made - we're all human :)
    1
  17720. The Google Archipelago deleted my comment the other day which mentioned a certain amendment to a certain constitution which allows you to own certain things you can use to protect yourself. YouTube is censorship trigger-happy.
    1
  17721. Yes, not only have I read Mein Kampf, but I quoted from Hitler in the video. Private property didn't "thrive" at all under Hitler's regime, try reading the Vampire Economy, or Hitler's Beneficiaries, or Zitelmann's Hitler the Politics of Seduction for information regarding the National Socialist economy, because it was a totalitarian regime, and you cannot have totalitarianism without total control of the means of production (socialism). And without the abolishment of property (the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933) you cannot have socialism, and thus not have a totalitarian regime. If Hitler didn't abolish private property and bring it all under the state, then he's not a totalitarian dictator, which would be an incorrect assessment.
    1
  17722. I've just created a channel on there but haven't uploaded anything yet. I will be doing though
    1
  17723. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  17724. Thanks Rocco! I'll be following this one up in a couple of weeks, since people have asked a few questions about it
    1
  17725. Thanks! I've not read that, but I will now that you've made me aware of it. I'm actually reading Mises' Socialism right now, which is simply brilliant.
    1
  17726. But socialists believe that economics is a zero-sum game, because they reject the idea of trade (capitalism). Thus, since they can't trade for resources, the only way to gain access to resources is to take them by force.
    1
  17727. Ok
    1
  17728. Historians revise history. That's what they do https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  17729. They did, it just wasn't run very efficiently until Speer took over.
    1
  17730. You are correct.
    1
  17731. Learn your history https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  17732. No worries! That's what I'm aiming to do :)
    1
  17733. There are two versions of nationalism. One meaning "country" (what Hitler called "bourgeois nationalism"), and the other meaning race or ethnicity, as you pointed out.
    1
  17734. Agreed! It was either Hazlitt or that
    1
  17735. I also really enjoyed his book "Socialism" which crushes it completely.
    1
  17736. "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell is a good follow up, however I wanted people to understand the basic flaw in the socialist economic mindset, which was why I chose Hazlitt because he hammers it home.
    1
  17737. The link to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson is in the description. Listen to it, then come back and tell me how much Marx is right... And yes, I have read Marx.
    1
  17738. The reason the markets are shrinking now is because the central states and the central banks are introducing socialism - destroying the free market and limiting trade. The ten points that Marx brought up in his Manifesto are all being done right now (he actually called for central state banks), which is why the west is failing. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it...
    1
  17739. "Why did France and UK not declare war on the Russians when they invaded Poland?" I don't know the answer to that question, but on principle I agree that they should have. Perhaps they had read Mein Kampf and knew Hitler was going east, so didn't want to unite the Nazis and Soviets together? Plus, practically, they had enough to deal with with Hitler alone, nevermind fighting the Red Army too.
    1
  17740. If you haven't seen my "The Main Reason Why Germany Lost WW2" and "Fall Blau" videos, I think you should because they answer a lot of your questions. Links in the description.
    1
  17741. No, if you believe in the shrinking markets, you don't have an understanding of basic economics. That's why I linked to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson in the description.
    1
  17742. Glad to hear it! That's how I started... and then the pursuit of truth consumes you
    1
  17743. The only way the rich can get so much money is by giving people goods and services that they want in exchange for that money. Capitalism is not theft. Only socialism is theft because it relies on forceful "redistribution" of wealth through theft, tax and murder. That's why they're so keen on the "revolution" - it gives them the green light to murder and steal.
    1
  17744. How so? He predicted that the Keynesians would hyperinflate the currency supply and cause a recession, which they then blame on Capitalism? Or did he predict the virus?
    1
  17745. Because Hitler believed that their 'blood' got diluted (because they bred with their slaves and 'lesser' peoples) and that weakened their 'race' enough that it brought down their civilization. He spells this concept out in Mein Kampf - “If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile. History furnishes us with innumerable instances that prove this law. It shows, with a startling clarity, that whenever Aryans have mingled their blood with that of an inferior race the result has been the downfall of the people who were the standard-bearers of a higher culture.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P259.
    1
  17746. Yes, but there are others https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  17747. Tariffs are good for the economy! /s (disclaimer: I don't hate Trump. In fact, I think he was much better than the alternative. But free trade is super-important for so many reasons that I cannot agree with that particular policy.)
    1
  17748. And no, our one history lesson about WW2 in school was on the atomic bombs. That was it. I distinctly remember being very disappointed by the failure of the school system at the time, since I had expected so much more when we were told "next week will be a lesson on WW2". So I wasn't taught this in school.
    1
  17749. I'm glad you think the video is nonsense because all I did was explain Hitler's reasoning 😂
    1
  17750. You may enjoy the video that's coming on Monday because I talk more about the "madman Hitler" idea, and why it's important that we drop it.
    1
  17751. I'm not disputing any of what you said. However without the shrinking markets, none of that explains the timing of the war, nor why it had to happened when it did. History is not a zero-sum game. The shrinking markets adds to the narrative - it doesn't remove the other explanations (except the "Hitler was a madman" theory).
    1
  17752. It doesn't if you follow the letter of the Constitution. The problem is, the Federal government doesn't follow the Constitution, and neither do the White Supremacist group known as ANTIFA
    1
  17753. I've checked the spam folder and it's clear. Are you sure you posted it?
    1
  17754. Interesting, I look forward to seeing it
    1
  17755. I will.
    1
  17756. "Clickbait" is when a creator promises one thing, then delivers something else (e.g. if I promised you I'd talk about Hitler, then only talked about what I had for breakfast). "Clickable" is the idea that the title, thumbnail and topic of this video is interesting and people want to learn more. This video is clickable, it is not clickbait.
    1
  17757. The Treaty of Versailles doesn't explain why Hitler's going east. It's also not the reason they hyperinflated the currency supply. France did not accept currency as payment, only hard assets, so hyperinflation wasn't necessary to pay off reparations. The only way currencies hyperinflate is if you have central state banks who run the printing presses, which is a redistribution of wealth from everyone in society to them - the state. This was done because Socialists got elected and thought they could get away with it. And they did, because everyone blames France for the hyperinflation, even though the currency supply was inflating prior to the Versailles Treaty even being signed.
    1
  17758. You may want to watch this other video. Hitler nationalized the industries in all but name https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  17759. Haha yeah, I know. I just wish they would open their eyes
    1
  17760. If you read Mein Kampf AND Hitler's Second Book (which I quoted in the video), plus use all the sources I listed in the pinned comment, you'll see that it is the reason. It's not the only reason, as I made clear in the video. But it's the reason he had to go East when he did.
    1
  17761. I have read Gentile. However Nazism is not Fascism.
    1
  17762. He can do both - revenge Versailles, and shrinking markets. The two ideas compliment each other. But I think the Shrinking Markets makes more sense, since he was talking about that in the early 1920s, and it gives him a motivation to go East, which Versailles does not.
    1
  17763. Exactly. They also need a dose of Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson 👍
    1
  17764. And why did Versailles lead to Hitler declaring in Mein Kampf and his Second Book that his intention to go east for the living space, and say that he wasn't interested in a western or southern direction?
    1
  17765. So why was his attack on the Soviet Union because of Versailles?
    1
  17766. Yeah makes sense. Versailles is in the West, and Hitler was going East. Perfect sense.
    1
  17767. I understand your concern, but I don't bow to censorship, even if it hurts me. I will be backing up my videos on Bitchute soon though as others have suggested.
    1
  17768. So, the quotes I gave from Mein Kampf during the video are wrong?
    1
  17769. National Socialism is evil, as are all socialisms. I'm not "justifying" anything by properly explaining their "logic" as opposed to making stuff up about history, as the Marxist Socialist influenced historians do. And I never said Hitler wasn't wrong or evil (I actually call him evil in the video), I just said he wasn't insane. The problem was that he misunderstood how basic economics worked, as all socialists do. This leads them to the wrong conclusions. You would do well to not jump to conclusions yourself.
    1
  17770. HOI3's Order of Battle system was best
    1
  17771. I'm not centrist! Here's a more accurate political spectrum for you to consider https://images.app.goo.gl/pbzqGepNPmHfGi7A9
    1
  17772. It may not seem like it would, but this video explains it https://youtu.be/az9sQenDXGU
    1
  17773. But I'm not.
    1
  17774. You're welcome! Glad you're enjoying them
    1
  17775. The western Allies had guaranteed Poland's independence, and Germany was allied in all but name with the Soviet Union. So once Germany invaded Poland, Britain and France declared war. This meant Germany had a secure Eastern Front, and needed to knock the western Allies out first, before Hitler turned back east.
    1
  17776. And has your opinion changed after watching?
    1
  17777. I've used 80 sources for this one video, and was educated in college on this topic, and have a university degree. I have over 400 books on WW2. I can assure you that historians can't answer those questions satisfactorily.
    1
  17778. Hazlitt isn't classical economics, it's Austrian school economics, which is massively different. I could have linked to Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics (Chicago school), but I think Hazlitt's one-lesson hits home quicker, and will hopefully start people on the road of understanding how an economy actually works, rather than Keynesian economics... which is flawed through and through.
    1
  17779. Yup
    1
  17780. Sources I used are listed in the pinned comment. If you read Mein Kampf AND Hitler's Second Book (which I quoted in the video), plus use all the sources I listed in the pinned comment, you'll see that it is the reason. There are no assumptions being made here. Everything is confirmed by the sources.
    1
  17781. Agreed. However they're only on this video because it's become popular - they're not on my other videos because they're not my actual subscribers. The Nazis and inter-Nazis (Marxists) occasionally brigade my videos with multiple accounts to push their agenda. Best just to ignore them, and the Like/Dislike ratio, which has slowly gone from 95% likes into the 80s and will no doubt slowly move lower as they continue to smear the video with their beliefs.
    1
  17782. I'm not a "Hitler Apologist". I've rallied against National Socialism on multiple occasions. Talking about Hitler and explaining the stupidity of his ideology doesn't mean I'm defending him
    1
  17783. That's the Nazi propaganda narrative, yes. Unfortunately it doesn't stand up to scrutiny https://youtu.be/1N8nuPdV5Ow https://youtu.be/QevMycFrWRM
    1
  17784. Try watching the full video before commenting because I actually quoted from Hitler who spelt it all out.
    1
  17785. Shrinking markets is not a thing for capitalism. It doesn't exist. It is not a 'real problem' at all. If you think it is a thing, you don't understand basic economics. That's why I linked to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson.
    1
  17786. The superhuman and the unfair WW1 treaty are part of it, and compliment the shrinking markets idea. The other ones you mentioned are probably not true, although Hitler may have believed Stalin was going to attack (even if Stalin couldn't have attacked in 1941, as I've shown in previous videos).
    1
  17787. I also showed the swastika and the hammer and sickle, so I'm sure advertisers will love this video.
    1
  17788. Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed the video :)
    1
  17789. Yes, I agree
    1
  17790. My critics definitely need to listen to that
    1
  17791. And which is more compelling? The shrinking markets idea, or what you were previously taught? (Obviously WW1 and the Versailles Treaty plays its part, but I don't think it was the central reason)
    1
  17792. If you prefer, there's Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics. Basically anything that's not Marxist economics is actual economics. We're living in an era where Marxist-Socialist Keynesian economics is driving our economies into the ground, and more people need to realise how unfree the markets actually are right now.
    1
  17793. I'm not the communist here. I'm not ignorant enough to believe in Socialism. Also, would love for you to explain why the giant quote from Adolf Hitler I read out towards the end that confirms what I said is somehow wrong.
    1
  17794. Are you sure that was me? I don't think I ordered the wrong parts?
    1
  17795. Probably, but I've already ordered and kinda need it now :(
    1
  17796. Yeah, we're over 600 now. This is a rare thing. Usually get several by now
    1
  17797. Yep! Absolutely :)
    1
  17798. I'll be checking to make sure you marathon it ;)
    1
  17799. Thank you for the suggestions! I've been planning on doing something similar, for a while so I'll get on it :)
    1
  17800. Oh? What's holding you back?
    1
  17801. That's up to you to decide. I'm still trying to figure out the answer at the moment.
    1
  17802. And mine. Can't wait for it to be finished myself!
    1
  17803. Surprisingly, no it isn't
    1
  17804. Yeah... I may have been a little optimistic... I'm still aiming for it though
    1
  17805. I hope it comes out before you graduate then :D
    1
  17806. Thank you for your patience. I hope, when it does eventually come out, you won't be disappointed.
    1
  17807. I don't know, you may have to ask the question to be a part of the exclusive Stalingrad Marathon Club
    1
  17808. Haha no but when it is, I will come back here and make sure you marathon it ;)
    1
  17809. Well, see if you can bear my video coming out on Monday. I think that will show the scale of what I'm attempting here, so if you can get through that, you'll have a chance at Marathoning the whole thing :)
    1
  17810. I'd be very very interested in hearing/reading more. Have you published books before? And I'm guessing you can read English, German and Russian then?
    1
  17811. Wow, a book? Is it on the scale of Glantz's Trilogy?
    1
  17812. It's no worries, unless you have a channel there's no way you'd know. People assume that YouTubers do this full time or make a lot of money. That might be true for people with +500,000 subs, but not for the little guys. The amount I currently earn off YouTube and Patreon do not even cover the cost of the books I need to do this (although it is getting there, and I'm very greatful for my Patreons because they've more than doubled my book budget).
    1
  17813. Binge watching one individual video? Is that still the same thing?
    1
  17814. A few weeks!? I wish! Glad you're enjoying the videos though :)
    1
  17815. Thanks! I am in a (more than) full time job as well, but dedicate pretty much all my spare time to this
    1
  17816. If I have a week off work, I spend it doing this! Love every minute.
    1
  17817. Sounds like she knows best
    1
  17818. Good to hear! More to come :)
    1
  17819. This is what surprises me the most about the people that watch my videos. You guys are very very patient. It's amazing
    1
  17820. 91,300 words of research for Crusader and working my way through the script now. And no, no it isn't :)
    1
  17821. I will be talking about this question during the Stalingrad video, but I do intend to talk about what the decisive turning points were in the war in upcoming videos. You may get your wish in the next few weeks :)
    1
  17822. Not quite ;)
    1
  17823. Communism and Socialism are evil ideologies.
    1
  17824. National Socialism was racial socialism, Marxist Socialism was class socialism. All socialisms are evil ideologies that destroy economies, create a two tier society, and lead to the deaths of millions of people.
    1
  17825. Doh! Thanks, although it's too late to change it now :(
    1
  17826. I will cover it at some point, don't worry
    1
  17827. You're not part of society if you do not work and contribute to that society.
    1
  17828. So many people brought up these points that I just had to knock them down. They're still bringing them up in the comments of this video, even though I've addressed them. When the criticism is coming from a host of different people hitting the same points, it deserves addressing.
    1
  17829. "I researched on google and chatgpt" Well, that's where you went wrong. You need to do actual research using valid sources of information. - "didn’t you say that communism and socialism are the same thing if not then Trotsky Karl Marx Joseph Stalin Lenin Mao pol pot shouldn’t be on that list because these guys were communist dictators" Originally they did mean the exact same thing, which is why I just call them all socialists. However, the definitions changed over time. Communism and Marxist Socialism have the same end-goal, but vary in the way they get there. As I explained in the Lenin before the Revolution video, socialism became the state before the communist utopia, but then changed again as Lenin changed his mind after discovering that socialist economics weren't working. Technically, all the people I talked about were Communists who tried to implement Socialism, and failed to do so. But again, it's all semantics at the end of the day, since they all oppose private property and demand state control (even those who claim to be "anarcho-socialists"). - "I think of Scandinavian countries where Nazi Germans living similar to Scandinavian" Then you would be wrong. - "that’s like saying North Korea is a democracy because it says the democratic Republic of Korea" I've explained this a hundred times. North Korea is a democracy. Democracy means "people power". Well, the people are the public, and the public sector is the state. Therefore, democracy is "state power". The words are used to trick you into believing it's something that it isn't. But ultimately, all you're doing under democracy is giving away all your power to the Establishment via the "vote". - "they didn’t care about equality to much to be considered far left like the Soviet Union they thought they were a superior race compared to everybody else they hated Jews does this sound like people who care about equality" Socialists and Communists want to murder and steal from the "bourgeoisie". How is murdering and stealing from the bourgeoisie classed as "equality"? And yes, it is done on racial lines as evident by the fact that Karl Marx himself said that the Jews were the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie were the Jews, as I shoulwed in this video on Karl Marx's anti-semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Hitler was a NATIONAL Socialist, meaning that he wanted equality for the GERMAN people. Karl Marx was a CLASS Socialist, meaning he wanted equality for the PROLETARIAT. These are both as "equal" as the other.
    1
  17830. National Socialist Germany was National Socialist, not Communist. The National Socialists abolished private property under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. I've been over this so many times 🤦🏼‍♂️
    1
  17831. It's interesting how people don't listen, don't read, don't even watch my videos, but then proceed to tell me I'm wrong. Somehow it's my fault that other people are ignorant and would rather tell me how bad I am and how I shouldn't do videos on particular topics than do a modicum of research.
    1
  17832. Thank you for sharing your story. It's a sad fact that even people who technically own their houses don't really own them, which is why they pay rent to the state through property taxes. Your labour is also taxed, which means it's not yours either.
    1
  17833. Many had surprisingly valid points. After all, Christians should know what Christianity is, right? If half the Christians in the comments declare that I'm attacking Christianity, and that Christianity has nothing to do with altruism, then surely a response to clarify what I meant is warranted? I'd rather engage with my audience than not engage with them. If you wrongly perceive that as "pathetic" or "thin skin", then that's on you.
    1
  17834. They cannot be correct if the evidence contradicts them.
    1
  17835. "Your "Patterns" doesn't mean anything... it's not inherent to Socialists. It's just common to most rebels of any sort." So it does mean something then.
    1
  17836. "I have to" and "I've got to" are the same thing. Both are saying you must do the thing.
    1
  17837. Fear of independence manifests as laziness at school (among other things), resulting in low grades. Hitler didn't get a job and avoided work for years, including turning down two offers at apprenticeships. He had his head in the clouds and wanted to do art even though he was hardly practicing it, and art is usually not a viable career for the vast majority of art students. Does that make sense? There's other evidence we know about Hitler too both in his early life and later on, as the Kershaw quote hinted at. Oh good, if you know how brains work, then please, explain why some people can't see a clearly defined pattern supported by evidence, when others can? I don't know the history of anything, only tanks. That's why my degree was on tanks and not history. That's why I'm only good at tank topics and have no idea about anything else. Can't even tie my own shoe laces as I don't have a degree in them, nor do I know the history of shoes.
    1
  17838. You're dismissing those things even though I provided evidence in the video that showed those exact things? 🤨 Thank you for your opinions, but I'll decide what history I decide to look into, what logical conclusions I conclude from the evidence, and what content I produce from that. If others can see the pattern, and can appreciate that evidence has been presented in support of that pattern, then I don't see a problem with discussing it. The truth is that outright dismissal of a clearly identified pattern among all the leading socialists due to personal reasons doesn't seem to be the right thing to do. It's true that nobody understands how brains work. So I suppose we should never use them.
    1
  17839. "QUIT THE PSYCHOLOGY." When someone tells me to do something, I do the opposite. - "Do you want a 'pattern' that describe 99% socialists? Lack of understanding how big scale economy works. And no desire to change that." Correct. But the reason they are like this is because of the clearly defined pattern I've shown. I literally went through the upbringing of several socialists, and can list off others who went through the same pattern, yet you're dismissing this entirely for... what? Where's your actual argument?
    1
  17840. I agree, Atlas Shrugged is too long.
    1
  17841. Capitalism is bad. That's why I'm not a capitalist. I'm for a free market.
    1
  17842. The critics I was referring to at that moment had absolutely no argument. None. They just dismissed and denied the pattern without even a shred of an argument at all. If you say "well, I'm sure they had a reason", my question is, well why didn't they present any? All they did was say "no, there's no pattern here", even though there clearly was. I posit that I touched a nerve. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But it's not "an awful argument". It's simply a challenge for these particular critics to provide an argument, and possibly consider introspection. Of course, failing to understand the nuances, you're now accusing me of schizophrenia. Sure, why not 😂
    1
  17843. I think I'm just flabbergasted by the ignorance of some people. It makes zero sense.
    1
  17844. But your list is flawed. The Allies had jet engines too, and it was the British (Frank Whittle) who invented the concept first. The Allies had the M1 Garand. No point listing nerve agents since none were deployed. The British had penicillin. Nylon. Colour television. The list goes on and on. But it's certainly not as one sided as you've made it out to be.
    1
  17845. Just wait until my second video this week...
    1
  17846. The higher logic is the political ideology behind the reason why you're going to war. I cover that in other videos, but not all my fans are interested in politics or economics, and so they ask me questions on the equipment. I'm like you, I don't see why equipment is that special. A car gets me from A to B, it doesn't mean anything if it makes a loud noise. Similarly, a good tank is one that is sufficient or more capable of taking out another tank. I'm not interested in how it does that, just that it can. Unfortunately, most do not see it that way. Modern wars are started because of political rejection of basic economics. See my new series on the Weimar Hyperinflation and it will become clear why this is the case. Alternatively, see my videos on Hitler's ideology (specifically the "Hitler's Socialism" video) and I will explain to you why Hitler went to war.
    1
  17847. But I wouldn't say that much of that was a technological advantage. It's not like the Soviets didn't have skies, or other winter equipment, they just used it badly and the Finn's used it better.
    1
  17848. Glad you liked that one!
    1
  17849. I would say so, yes
    1
  17850. That couldn't send messages though, it was just a receiver. What I'm saying is that they weren't allowed to operating radios in terms of sending information, and also building their own. So Germans weren't used to taking apart radios and fixing them, or operating them, like the British were at the time.
    1
  17851. Oh wow, I didn't know that!
    1
  17852. As a concise summary, you're right
    1
  17853. I've heard that the Italian carbine was the 'best', but I could be wrong. I don't know enough about the Arasaka to be sure.
    1
  17854. Like a sticky bomb
    1
  17855. True! Still, I think the StuG is cooler
    1
  17856. My view exactly!
    1
  17857. I noticed that when editing but it was too late to go back. I would pick the StuG for Germany, or the Panzer 3 (since the StuG is technically not a tank).
    1
  17858. Well, I can confirm that "The Imperator Knight" wasn't chosen for political reasons in the slightest, it was purely chosen for gameplay, as a way of showing command, respect and for intimidation in games. Not that it did any of that, but I imagined it would be a mild form of psychological warfare vs my multiplayer opponents. I'd imagine you wouldn't take your opponent seriously if they were called "The Fluffy Bunny" or something. And yes, "TIKhistory" sounds more objective and professional. Perhaps I shouldn't have told people what the true meaning of the name was (although you'd quickly get it by looking at the earlier videos).
    1
  17859. They didn't have tanks, they had panzers! /s (StuG's my favourite German vehicle, although technically it's not a tank)
    1
  17860. "@TIK I'm not saying you know nothing. I'm saying that you've got one nugget of truth about economics and that you've built your worldview around that that small grain of truth. I'm saying that sure whilst what your saying about taxation being theft is right and yes free trade does increase GDP. My point is that just because that is the case doesn't make it the right thing to do and I don't think it makes it a good thing to do." How is it not right to increase the living standards of everyone in the economy? Honestly, I don't understand how you can sit there pretending to have the morale high ground whilst advocating that we all stop working, because that will somehow lead to better living standards. It makes zero sense.
    1
  17861. "@TIK mate we don't produce any goods anymore. Our economy is pretty much based on the financial sector in London. People are working more and more hours and seeing less and less benefits of technology." Exactly my point! "This is why trade unions want to go down to a 4 day week." And how exactly will that lead to more goods being consumed by the workers?
    1
  17862. "@TIK if you really want to help low earners then you need to look at the relationship between productivity and wages. America is one of the most deregulated countries on earth and 50% of its workers haven't had a pay rise in 20 years of almost continuous growth. Meanwhile the top 10% have increased their income year after year." The earnings of the top 10% are completely irrelevant to the low income workers. Again, you do not understand basic economics, and you're not grasp the nuances of what's happening in this example.
    1
  17863. "It is none the less a good way at looking at how society works and why often it doesn't work very well." I disagree. If you cannot understand the basics of economics, then you shouldn't be talking about it. The reality is that socialism (unintentionally) leads to the very problems it claims to solve.
    1
  17864. "The point is that the growth isn't distributed towards those who make the products and do the actual work and that's what fucks us off." That statement is fundamentally false, and is exactly why socialism doesn't work. If you cannot understand why this statement is false, there's no hope for you.
    1
  17865. "@TIK oh shit man an economics lecture from tik 😂 Mate you need to realise that it's a lot more nuanced than just "anyone who disagrees with me knows nothing about economics"." That's exactly what you're arguing.
    1
  17866. "Austrian rabbit hole" As opposed to the unworking Marxist-Socialist school?
    1
  17867. "All of this whilst the work that we do produces more and more." Good! That's what I want to hear! Living standards are rising then! Or at least, they should be. If you're producing more goods, then you should be consuming more goods. And yet, that's not what's happening. It's almost like there's some sort of weird thing that's preventing these finished goods being consumed by the worker.... hmmm... I wonder what that could be?
    1
  17868. Again, wages don't need to go up in order for the workers to see their wealth increase.
    1
  17869. Again, History of Socialism, you do not understand basic economics. The NHS is not an efficient way to spend the money stolen from the consumer. If the consumer was given his money back and told to make a choice on where he spent it, I guarantee he'd not spend it on an industry as poor as the NHS. If anything, you might find that individuals would found their own health services and run them far better than the state could with the NHS. And yes, taxes do decrease living standards. It's not a bold claim, and I will show you how in the economics video I'll make at some point.
    1
  17870. @Witness, you've completely misunderstood what inflation is, why it occurs, and what the relationship is to supply and demand and the consumer. Simply put, inflation isn't something you need to worry about if it remains low (e.g. 1 or 2%), and can actually be good for the consumers (indirectly). It's only a problem when it climbs high to the point that savings are destroyed quicker than they can be spent (hyperinflation). And yes, there's nothing to say that the private sector can't produce roads, schools, hospitals etc - in fact, the private sector used to produce exactly those things, and still does (although to a lesser extent because people have no choice but to pay for inefficient and poor 'free' state services). A capitalist cannot make money unless his customers have money. If they don't have money, they cannot buy anything from him. Therefore, a capitalist economy can only work if everyone has money. The capitalist knows this too. He pays people a wage to work for him, producing goods for people to buy. If he didn't pay them money, they wouldn't work for him, and they wouldn't be able to purchase goods - which means the economy wouldn't work, and his money would be worthless. And again, increasing wages (what you're suggesting) will only lead to inflation. Increased wages by itself does not lead to increased wealth because prices will go up to compensate. You state this yourself. However, this is because you don't actually know what increases wealth in a nation. I'd recommend you read "Economics in one lesson" by Hazlitt to get the full understanding of economics you need.
    1
  17871. I just want to increase low-income earners living standards, by investing money into new technology and innovation. You need capital in order to do that. Unfortunately our governments reduce that investment by stealing that money for themselves. Taxation decreases the living standards of the low income members of society, even if you only tax the super-rich. And, you asked dougie why socialists would think like a socialist - because they don't understand basic economics. They think increasing wages equals more wealth for everyone. That is completely incorrect. All that does is increase inflation, which we saw here in the UK in the 1970's. What boosts wealth is technology and innovation - and you need capital in order to invest in those things.
    1
  17872. I'm not a conservative. Conservatives want to keep things as they are - and that's the last thing that I want. Change is good.
    1
  17873. That's because the "right" aren't really "right". In the UK there isn't a single political party (not even minor ones that I can find) which are advocating lowering taxation and more capitalism. The Conservatives just want to keep things as they are. That is really really bad.
    1
  17874. I highly doubt they require history degrees though
    1
  17875. Hi, you ok?
    1
  17876. I answer this in the video. See the Shab249 section (timestamps in the description)
    1
  17877. All hail the Great Jamie!
    1
  17878. They could take out the German tanks, but only from less than 500 yards. The Germans could take out British tanks at much longer distances. Also, British tanks broke down a lot more than German tanks, which is why Auchinleck had to have a tank reserve of 50% prior to Operation Crusader in 1941. Undergunned, underarmoured, and mechanically unreliable. This is why the Sherman was a very welcome tank, as was tanks like the Churchill.
    1
  17879. National origin has nothing to do with it. If you think the Wehrmacht was the greatest army in the universe, then you're a Wehraboo.
    1
  17880. Why? I don't understand why people think I'm pro-Soviet.
    1
  17881. Haha I know what you mean. It's only because this was the best way to explain the concepts. Couldn't have done it if I was in the way
    1
  17882. Absolutely! If you're playing a WW2 game like Close Combat, consider taking some anti-tank guns instead of tanks and using different strategies. Takes a bit of getting used to, but it works, and can catch your opponent off guard.
    1
  17883. The graphics?
    1
  17884. Thanks! Great to hear you enjoyed it!
    1
  17885. But again, it's not about the tank types, it's about how you use the tank. So long as you have sufficient anti-tank guns and tactics, you don't actually need great tanks. Their early experienced in Poland and so on gave them the experience needed to realise this before the Allies. And mobilizing earlier allowed them to be ahead in terms of modern equipment. The Soviets had tons of tanks, but they were mostly obsolete. Same applies with the anti-tank guns etc.
    1
  17886. Yeah, I couldn't find better blueprints online, that's why 😂
    1
  17887. Glad you think so!
    1
  17888. Then people added extra things, like pencil and lava. Got a bit complicated
    1
  17889. No idea who that is either :(
    1
  17890. That's really good to hear :) hope I can maintain that title!
    1
  17891. The reason I've started doing more of the other stuff is because I need time to work on Battlestorm Crusader. Current script is 74,319 words. Almost finished the script and been working on it today
    1
  17892. Yes, this specifically came from Barnett, C. “The Desert Generals.” Kindle, 2nd Edition. "Though infantry divisions were equipped with anti-tank guns and field artillery, the infantry also believed the Hobartian doctrine that only tanks could fight tanks; and throughout the battle there were to be constant local pleas on the infantry’s part for armoured escort.” - Barnett Prior to this, Barnett says that, with only two options available to Cunningham at the time (either take the existing British 1916 to 1918 idea of how to create tank forces which had existed up to 1940, or listen to the likes of the 'crazy' General Hobart) Cunningham went with Hobart’s views, although not completely. Barnett says Hobart argued that tanks could win on the battlefield alone without the help of any other arm. Even Cunningham saw that this was crazy, and Cunningham decided to use a combined-arms approach. That said, he did keep the tanks and infantry elements apart in two corps, 30 Corps and 13th Corps. So Hobart is the reason the infantry and the tanks were separated in Operation Crusader. This doesn't mean he visisted North Africa - he could have spoken to Cunningham over the phone. And, when you consider the fact that Hobart had created 7th Armoured Division in the first place, and did so with 2 armoured brigades and one mixed support group, it's easy to see his influence. What is the order of battle for 11th Armoured Division? Is it also two armoured brigades and a mixed support group?
    1
  17893. Thanks for the quotes. Very interesting, since that's not what the histories of the North African Campaign are telling me in regards to Crusader. Cunningham and Auchinleck (who weren't tank guys) went to Hobart and he suggested splitting the infantry from the tanks. Cunningham apparently didn't like the idea, and so compromised, allowed a portion of infantry and artillery to go with the tanks. This is why the order of battle for Crusader was as it was, at least, according to my sources.
    1
  17894. Is that because English isn't your first language? Or because of the subject?
    1
  17895. Merseyside. Although the town didn't used to be in Merseyside
    1
  17896. I think you'll enjoy tomorrow's video if you like maps (although it's not of the Stalingrad city exactly). Will be out at 5pm GMT Monday
    1
  17897. Why is it click bait? Tank in thumbnail, title description is accurate, talking about tanks... Not click bait
    1
  17898. When they say they out ran their infantry, they mean they outran their infantry divisions. The Panzer Divisions had infantry in them, as did the motorized divisions that accompanied them. I'm not sure what you mean by your last question
    1
  17899. Hope you like it :)
    1
  17900. That doesn't change anything. In fact, I was wrong in the video - Germans started mobilizing in 1933. As I said in the pinned comment, their military spending went from 1% of national income to 10% between the years of 1933 and 1935, which apparently is the biggest peacetime increase in military spending in history.
    1
  17901. Well, I mean, that was an issue, but not the reason why the British were at a disadvantage on the tactical level.
    1
  17902. Thank you Isuf! It's truly unbelievable. Gained more than 10k subs in the past month
    1
  17903. I'm over 30 too don't forget :) hope you get better soon!
    1
  17904. A terrible day? What happened??
    1
  17905. Haha I hope the video didn't disappoint
    1
  17906. Not in the near future. Concentrating on Crusader, Courland and Stalingrad right now. Will look into it after them though
    1
  17907. Early war British tanks were terrible. Not all of them (Matildas were fine) but most of the Cruisers were bad.
    1
  17908. I'm a firm believer in specialising on a particular topic. In this case the European Theatre of WW2. I'm not saying I won't occasionally branch out, but this is where my effort will be.
    1
  17909. The British learnt and adopted combined arms in late 1942. The Soviets did also grasped it at roughly the same time or a bit earlier, but didn't grasp it in 1941.
    1
  17910. I can't cover everything in a single video. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  17911. Does he? Didn't know that. Does he come to a similar conclusion?
    1
  17912. Dubno had more tanks than Prokhorovka, thus was bigger.
    1
  17913. Cheers Yoyoman! I know what you mean, it's insane. Especially since I've gained more than 10k in less than a month. Casey Neistat said in his video the other day that getting to 1,000 is harder than 10,000. I'd very much agree with him on that one https://youtu.be/zY7_XJ1WUqk
    1
  17914. Good to hear! A bit different :)
    1
  17915. I think it's a lazy excuse. Distorting the past is not acceptable in my opinion. If they can't get the facts right, they should stick to fiction.
    1
  17916. You're not the first to ask for this sort of thing. I've been considering doing something similar, but it may be a while away
    1
  17917. I don't know about that. They definitely had them in North Africa. And you are correct about the Panzer 3, which is why the effective range was only 500 yards.
    1
  17918. Thank you TomTom! When you get to the end, you will have reached your destination
    1
  17919. :)
    1
  17920. Thank you for the book recommendation! I've added it to my shopping list :)
    1
  17921. You are correct. I'm a derp. Only said that because I used the term "Allies" in reference to the west.
    1
  17922. Glad you liked that one 😁
    1
  17923. Danke! Ich mag dich auch!
    1
  17924. Aka more guns
    1
  17925. Haha yeah, he's getting picked on
    1
  17926. A temporary halt due to peak season (I work in retail), and to concentrate on my documentaries
    1
  17927. I will. If I can do Stalingrad, I can do anything. The only other battle that would be bigger would be to cover the entire Barbarrossa campaign. Also, this may not be the Third Battle of Kharkov, but I will be covering Manstein's attempt to relieve Sixth Army
    1
  17928. The Soviet first 5 Year Plan happened before the 4 Year Plan, so it was the Nazis trying to one-up the Soviets
    1
  17929. Is gasoline still "free" there? I watched a video on a guy visiting Venezuela, and apparently the gasoline was "free" by government decree, but it was hard to get hold of
    1
  17930. Also, OP, I'm just providing you with the facts. It's not a political agenda - I'm anti-political. And I can't talk about economics if I can't provide an economic (capitalist) answer, and must provide a political (socialist) answer for fear of upsetting a few of my Blue-Pill viewers who refuse to accept the historical facts. I'm sorry, but I'm not in the business of lying because I'm not a politician. - "No system will work as intented in theory. All systems will be interrupted by human behaviour." Will you drop this political agenda of yours? Capitalism isn't a system. Capitalism is just an economy without hindrance. Economics is the free market (market = humans). Capitalism is economics, and economics is human behaviour, which is why Mises wrote his book on economics and called it "Human Action".
    1
  17931.  Wulf  Hahaha I've never said the word "bois" in my life
    1
  17932. The Socialist system worked in the Soviet Union? I have a video which should put things in perspective https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  17933. What was the lie, exactly? Could you explain the lie I supposedly put between two truths?
    1
  17934. Except the British Railways were never privatized, of course. Network Rail remained in control, and was the only entity allowed to build stations and lines, which has led to the overcrowding crisis (prior to the lock ups). Wage controls, price controls, regulations, taxes... It's no wonder Virgin Rail threw in the towel.
    1
  17935. They haven't read any of their literature (apart from the Communist Manifesto... maybe not even that), so they've no idea what their ideology is anyway. It would be like if someone claimed to be a Christian, but hadn't read the Bible, but was claiming that they're trying to "implement Eden". It just doesn't make sense, they're not adhering to their own faith, and they're just making it up as they're going along.
    1
  17936. "Evans has no such referenced material at page 439 (vid 9:53). The third Reich in power. You may have mentioned the plight of veterinary surgeons or pharmacists." I'm using the Kindle version, so the pages may be different to the physical. Nonetheless, Evans does say this in his book.
    1
  17937. "Nazi germany barely had a planned economy before the war," Ah yes, the Four Year Plan wasn't a thing. - "they even privatized some state companies," I know Wikipedia says this, but this isn't true. As explained many times now, the SA walked into the businesses and took them over from within. It wasn't just the "Vampire Economy" saying this either - I used other sources in this video, and in my Hitler's Socialism video (e.g. Tooze and Temin) to show this. I have other sources besides what I have shown. - "I feel like you started making this video with the idea that the planned economy was to blame for every supply problem, and then did your research to confirm this, disregarding any other potential causes." Oh no, I seriously considered the idea that there was a guy running around stealing all the coal. But then I realized that that doesn't explain why there were mountains of undelivered coal at the mines while cities were crying out for coal. Neither does the idea that there wasn't a planned economy. - "The idea that private railroads work better then a state railroad has been disproven so many times in so many countries now. If there is one sector that does better when state owned it's the railroads. Just look at the evolution of rail transport in the soviet union in 1920-1939 or 1941-50." Yes, because when I think about great train services, I think of the Soviet Union. I'm going to recommend that you read the book: "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Folsom.
    1
  17938. Good question, but I'm not sure off the top of my head. Anand Toprani may have talked about this, so I'd recommend you read his works which you can find online as PDFs
    1
  17939. Unfortunately I do. Experience has taught me that people on the internet do not understand sarcasm, especially if their primary language is not English.
    1
  17940. @Martin - did you not listen? The Reichsbahn was nationalized in 1933/1934. I have sources backing this up. But no, you keep spouting the denialist idea that the Nazis privatized the industries when they didn't. The word 'privatization' was invented in the early 1920s (a decade before the Nazi seizure of power).
    1
  17941.  @up_down6012  Probably best if you watch the first four episodes of this series, then do your own due diligence from there https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    1
  17942.  tokul76  You haven't done your homework.
    1
  17943. Wait. In paper bags??? Are you sure!?
    1
  17944. I'll elaborate on it. National Socialism was Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  17945. "So, umm, where do we get the money to expand services, repair the track, replace rolling stock and modernize?" Don't you know? Money is bad! Therefore, you don't!
    1
  17946. Yes, printing currency distorts prices. This is what the Austrians are screaming about. I'm glad you're realizing this.
    1
  17947. Absolutely agreed. All forms of socialism are inherently evil, and yet people have been led to believe that we should give socialism another go. It's an epic distortion of history that's doing this.
    1
  17948. I plan to look into that specifically. But I need to do a few other things first before we get to it. But I will because I can already see that that wasn't entirely the case :)
    1
  17949. A black market is a free market within a state-controlled economy. If you have a black market, you know you no longer have a free-market (capitalism) and actually have state-control (socialism). Doesn't the USA have a black market for drugs?
    1
  17950. The state is a politically organized community/group. The monarch is the top of a hierarchy. If the monarch (politically) wasn't in charge (organized) of a kingdom (community), they wouldn't be a monarch, nor the state. But again, this isn't socialism because the King can't have complete control over the economy. You need a far-reaching bureaucracy for that. Again, feudalism isn't socialism nor capitalism.
    1
  17951. It's neither, it's Feudalism (I'm sure someone who studies the era will corrrect me on the term Feudalism, but you get the point). The Monarch owned his land, but other land was owned by his lords in a vassal-kind of way. Plus you had serfs tied to teh land, and... it's just not the same. But the Monarch was the state, which is why Robin Hood stole from the state and gave the tax money back to the taxpayer. He didn't steal from "the rich".
    1
  17952. You need to watch the linked video fully https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  17953. Fascism is socialism on the national level. National Socialism is socialism for the race.
    1
  17954.  @day2148  You didn't explain anything. Please explain how an economy can be under state non-state control. And while there are no 'capitalist' countries, we do have capitalist elements within the countries. The parts of the economy not controlled by the state (the black market) is free, and therefore capitalist. That's not Utopian/Dystopian, that's just reality. Governments (including the EU, as you pointed out) are trying to control every aspect of the economy. They're trying to control people's lives, currency and businesses. This is why these governments are bad - they're hurting the economic freedom of the individual and thus hurting the entire economy. And as I said in the video, the EU doesn't need to nationalize the industries because they are 'socializeing' the people. They're socialist - much like Hitler and Stalin were socialist. "because they realize how much political capital the tech giants can wield over society. " If governments weren't corrupt, we wouldn't be seeing businesses gaining political capital at all - because it wouldn't be up for sale. The issue (which, overall is minor really) is that government needs to be held accountable through direct democracy, not that we should do away with the economy.
    1
  17955. State non-state is not an oxymoron? I'm afraid it is. When the economy is no longer in private control, it is no longer capitalism. If the government controls the economy, it is no longer free, and therefore not capitalism. You are correct that there has never been capitalism, and that fact only proves my point.
    1
  17956. So you're saying that neither Fascism and National Socialism were totalitarian regimes? You cannot have totalitarianism without total state control over everything, including the economy (socialism). Bearing in mind that Mussolini invented the term totalitarian to describe his own regime. And that if they weren't, the only totalitarian regimes in history have all been Marxist.
    1
  17957. Fascism is just socialism for the nationality rather than the race. National Socialism isn't Fascism - they are two distinct ideologies. You can be a racist Fascist, but that doesn't mean Fascism is racist.
    1
  17958. Yes, because we're not living in capitalist societies. A black market is a free market within a non-free state controlled (Socialist) economy. If you have a black market, you don't have a capitalist economy. Doesn't the United States have a black market for drugs?
    1
  17959. Yes, I'm only part way through it at the moment but I absolutely agree
    1
  17960. Thank you sir!
    1
  17961. You forget that Fascism is socialism. Socialism is the root of the two movements, not each other.
    1
  17962. And how do they attract that profit? By selling goods and services to the people. Profit is an indication that they are giving the people what they want. The 1% get the money, the 99% get their goods. If you don't want them to have money, stop buying cars, food, houses, clothes, phones, books, tablets, furniture... make everything yourself, and regress back into the woods. The rest of us will choose to be a part of this society and produce things that others want, trade with them, and provide wealth (goods) to our community.
    1
  17963. Glad you found it useful :)
    1
  17964. The only people saying I don't know about politics and economics are the Marxists. And there's a obviously obvious reason why they don't want Hitler to be associated with socialism...
    1
  17965. Marxism, Fascism and National Socialism are closely related by the fact that they are all socialisms. One based on class, one on nationalism, and one based on race. It would be more accurate to say that Fascism is more like Marxism (but not international, and based on nationality rather than class), and that National Socialism is also more like Marxism (it's international, since it's based on race, not class or nations).
    1
  17966. Exactly. Note that when he says "national", he thinks a nation should be created based on race, not nationality. He is not a nationalist.
    1
  17967. Thank you for the suggestion! I'll check him out
    1
  17968. The closest any state got to being Capitalist was Britain in the 1880s, before the Liberal Party became Socialist.
    1
  17969. If you have a black market, you don't have a free economy. A black market is a free economy within a socialist economy. Doesn't the USA have a black market for drugs?
    1
  17970. Fascism wasn't a reaction to the Left, it was an alternative to the Left. It was a different brand of socialism, and only because Mussolini got kicked out of the socialist party. Please read Farrell's book on Mussolini for a history of Fascism (I don't agree with all Farrell says, but his history is pretty good).
    1
  17971. @Ted, yes and he was actually more of an anarcho-syndicalist (socialist). This is why he introduced syndicalism when he got into power. He called his syndicalism "the corporate state". So Marxists will claim that corporations are capitalism... maybe now, but not back then.
    1
  17972. Neither are a plutocracy on their own. Both can be. As for the "Nazis are Fascist" argument, it doesn't make any sense. People have always believed that Caesar was born by cesarian, but he wasn't. Should we go back to saying he was just because people have been incorrect for so long? People on the Left don't know the ideologies of the "Right". They don't know what capitalism actually is (because Marx redefined it to something it isn't) and Stalin painted all his ideological enemies as 'Fascists', including Fascists, Nazis, the Finns, capitalists, the USA, the space monkeys... and what Stalin and Soviet/Marxists propaganda said is completely false. The historical reality is that Fascism and Nazism have nothing to do with each other ideologically. Now Hitler borrowed some of the concepts (e.g. Blackshirts to Brownshirts) in order to get into power, but beyond that these are two distinct ideologies. And because the Left doesn't want to associate themselves with these ideologies, they paint them as capitalist and as part of the Right. They paint Nazis and Fascists as evil and then say "don't speak to them" and "don't trust what they say". Ok, but this means the Left are unwilling to understand what these ideologies are, and don't listen to those who actually support said ideologies. They're therefore the last people who you should ask about who the Nazis and Fascists are, because they have no idea. They think Fascists are Nazis. That neither have any idea about economics (which is a deliberate ploy to prevent people from looking into the Nazi economy). They state that Fascism is the last stage of capitalism. The reality is quite different, and when you place them on the Left, and when you accept that they are an alternative version of socialism, everything starts falling into place. The distortions of the Cold War start to unravel, and you see the entire conflict, and the modern world, in a completely different light. You see that Nationalism and Fascism and National Socialism are not on the Right, and are on the Left. You see that Anarchism isn't on the Far-Left, but is on the Far-Right, and you realise just how much Marxists have distorted the political spectrum and have infiltrated the education systems of the west in order to push their narrative. I aim to correct the distortions of history so that I can learn from them. This has been one giant distortion which has destroyed our understanding of the modern world. I'm aiming to correct that distortion.
    1
  17973. I agree and there will be more to come. You'll probably enjoy the new video on Mussolini and Fascism coming out later today, for example.
    1
  17974. Do they?? I've not seen this happen before. Can you give examples??
    1
  17975. Then the same logic applies to Marxism and National Socialism. In practice, lots of people die under these two ideologies and they manifest themselves exactly the same so they must also be the same.
    1
  17976. Again, I cannot repeat this enough - National Socialism is not Fascism. If you want to dismiss the reality of the Third Reich, I can't stop you, but saying Fascism is the same as National Socialism is like saying Catholicism is the same as Islam. They're both socialisms/Abrahamic Religions, but they are not the same.
    1
  17977. Yes, National Socialism is not Fascism, even though many say it is. Ideologically they are not the same, although they do have some similarities because Hitler copied Mussolini in some ways. Fascism is nationalist-socialism. National Socialism is racial-socialism. You may want to check out my Mussolini/Fascism video too, link https://youtu.be/06vJY9nLMXU And I'll be returning to this subject soon.
    1
  17978. Critical edition?
    1
  17979. Take that definition and apply it to Marxist Socialism. Instead of race and nation, you have class. Otherwise it's the same.
    1
  17980. "However, Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly owned." No, it's controlled, not owned. Even Marx/Engels say this in Das Kapital - it's "controlled". So you don't need nationalization for it to be socialism, so long as the state is in control of those businesses. Read Reimann and ask yourself, are the Nazis in control? Read Wages of Destruction and ask yourself, are the Nazis in control? The answer is yes. Private enterprise was curtailed in the Third Reich, as even Reimann admits.
    1
  17981. "The German economy had markets." Were they free? Nope. So it's not capitalism. Were they controlled by the state? Yes. Therefore socialism. "I think the Nazi economy can best be described as a guided economy, as opposed to a planned economy (like in socialist states), or a free economy (like in capitalist states)." It absolutely was a centrally planned economy. Read the Vampire Economy and Wages of Destruction and you'll see just how centrally planned and state-controlled it really was.
    1
  17982. "Is there any recorded crisis in Nazi-Germany?" The food issue was terrible, as was the oil. This is why Hitler had to go to war (and predicted as much in Mein Kampf and his Second Book + speeches etc). Check out Wages of Destruction and Zitelmann's Hitler Politics of Seduction for economic and ideological discussions, because these two will give you all the info you need. "And fascism economic side was socialist right?" Fascism (Italian at least) was arguably centre-Left (Mussolini's economic policies were hindred by politics, since his dictatorship wasn't absolute). National Socialism was arguably middle-Left, although Hitler saw it as being in the Centre. Check out Zitelmann for discussion on this. I will do a video at some point going into more details too.
    1
  17983. According to Reimann, yes. Given the Autarky policy, it makes sense. This is also why Göring wasn't able to stockpile enough oil for the war - becaues he couldn't trade for it (if you stop exporting, you must also stop importing).
    1
  17984. A long, but very relevant video for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  17985. A book which does an overview of both Babeuf and Robert Owen, plus other socialists like Marx, Engels, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini is the book "Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism."
    1
  17986. ""Capitalism = Private control of the economy." TIK, for the love of god, that never existed in history." I know. I'm not saying it did. The closest an economy ever got to capitalism was Britain in the 1880s, but the Liberal Party got converted to socialism in the Lloyd George/Churchill era, and free-trade and capitalism were abandoned. This is also why the British Empire grew so rapidly, and then declined so badly too... And why the US grew in strength, then is declining in strength now (compared to China, which is slowly freeing its economy up).
    1
  17987. Thanks! Glad you agree! More to come on this topic
    1
  17988. Capitalism is the private control of the economy. A "private" means individual. It is the individual's control over his own economy. You as an individual can control your own money, property, life... Socialism is the opposite. It is the collective control of the economy. It is non-individual. It is the individual submitting to the group. It is the restriction on the personal freedom of the individual and their slavery to the state. Tariffs are made by the state. A state that has tariffs doesn't have a free market and therefore isn't capitalist. Same with any state that has a black market. The black market is the free market, because individuals (private) want what's on the black market. A black market is an indication that you have a socialist economy, and the black market is the free market within it. Now you may say that capitalism therefore has never existed. I'd agree. The closest we got was Britain in the 1880s. Then the Liberal Party got converted to socialism. This free market attempt is a good explanation of why the British economy grew so rapidly then, but declined after WW1 (war economy and the Liberals introduced more socialism after the war). It also explains why the British empire had to be abandoned after WW2 when the Labour Party got in. They couldn't afford an empire AND a welfare state.
    1
  17989. It literally means state non-state. If you have state-control, you no longer have capitalism.
    1
  17990. Yes it is.
    1
  17991. It's not just that though. He falsified and distorted the evidence he used, which makes him completely unreliable.
    1
  17992. Glad to hear! More to come on this subject :)
    1
  17993. The theory that Hitler wanted war first, therefore nationalized the economy is actually backwards. He had to nationalize the economy, thus had to go to war. I'll be explaining it all in detail in an upcoming video.
    1
  17994.  @SuperSpark1234  "as I point out in my post I am not interested in dictionary definitions" Then it is pointless talking to you since you can dismiss any word we use as 'not the correct definition'. When you change the meaning of words to suit your dogma and beliefs, we are no longer talking the same language and communication isn't possible. Therefore, until you accept that the words we use have a definite meaning, conversation with you is meaningless.
    1
  17995. A "politically organized community" that is in charge of territory. This is the Oxford English dictionary definition of the word "state", but also makes logical sense when you consider that a state can be any size. A house could be a state, with the head of the household being a 'king' of his private property. To coexist with other 'kings' to create a village, you would need a 'public' temple that would unite the gods of each household together. Then to create a town, you would create another 'public' temple to unite the two villages together, and so on. At the top would be the city's god (e.g. Athena) who would embody the spirit of the private citizens within it. That is how the ancients did it. A state is private when it doesn't belong to the highest hierarchy (in this case the temples, but also the government). And it is public when it does. A 'state' is a politically (polis, meaning city and citizens) organized community, and a government is one that governs that state. If you have group control (group being non-private, therefore public) you have government control.
    1
  17996. A primary source document from 1939 is Mises is it?
    1
  17997. It depends on your definition of "professionel educated historian" and "amateur enthusiast". I have a degree in history, and I create history-content for a living. Someone who creates history content is a historian, are they not? A patron of mine asked a similar question, and I plan to answer this in detail in a dedicated video a couple weeks, so be sure to check that out.
    1
  17998. Incorrect. There are many sources saying this. But even if they didn't, I'm saying it. I came to this conclusion independently by reading Mein Kampf, as I explained in the linked video.
    1
  17999. "I have a question: You have claimed that Nazi Germany was closer to a leftist totalitarianism than a far-right one." Place state-control (socialism) on the Left. Place freedom for the individual (anarchism, and capitalism) on the Right. You cannot have a far-right totalitarianism. https://images.app.goo.gl/qPkXG4tGCpithGEz8
    1
  18000. No worries, glad you liked it :) more to come
    1
  18001. I haven't actually read Ayn Rand, and despite people accusing me, I only recently got Hayek's Road to Serfdom, which I haven't fully read. Interesting that I came to similar conclusions separately from Hayek due to realising the true nature of the National Socialist economy... I may pick up Ayn Rand at some point if it's useful. Concentrating on Nazism and Fascism and Stalingrad at the moment though :)
    1
  18002. Except, those"social constructs" don't exist. I am not a race, a class, a gender (I'm a man, not a men), or nationality. I'm an individual. People who believe social groups exist and are willing them into existence are the problem. Socialists (depending on type) are causing class conflict, race conflict, gender conflict and nationality conflict where they don't need to exist. All human beings are individuals - we are not social groups. And that's now, before any "revolution" or such.
    1
  18003. @King Orange. Every Marxist is trying to hide the true meaning of the word socialism, and even redefine capitalism, so that they can pretend it's not state control of the economy.
    1
  18004. Pre-Marxist socialists didn't believe in classes. Sounds to me that you don't know what socialism is. Marxism is a socialism, but it's not socialism.
    1
  18005. The Nazis were not Fascists. I made this clear in the video.
    1
  18006. Hahaha thanks 😂
    1
  18007. Also, Hitler and the Nazis were publicly pro-church, but privately hated the church. Their support was purely propaganda. This is confirmed in Hitler's Table Talks. And as made clear by Zitelmann, the Marxist idea that Hitler just wanted farms is a complete fabrication that's not backed on fact. Hitler wanted more soil, true, but only so that they could sell industrial goods from central Germany to the new farmers. Why? Because he, like all socialists, believed in the idea of shrinking markets.
    1
  18008. Workers are irrelevant. This is not Marxism. All that matters is the German race. The Germans supported the Nazis. That's all that matters.
    1
  18009. ​ @AnttiTolamo  "@TIK I think that main problem is that you can't coherently explain Nazi ideology based on itself. Its not coherent." I can because I've read up on it and understand it. I'm not saying it's not coherent (it's based on flawed thinking, like all socialist ideologies), but it is logical and can be explained, as I will prove in a future video. "For example fear of commusnim and jewish capitalism same times does not make any sense. Other is based exploitable conspiracy using capitalism while other denies whole capitalism just because it thinks capitalism is exploitation." I'm not seeing how that doesn't make any sense. Hitler was neither a communist nor capitalist - he was a socialist. "There is inherent logical contradicton there what comes to economy and ideology when you oppose both same time." There's a difference between Socialism and Marxism/Communism. You think communism and socialism are the same thing, which is why you're not grasping it. They are not the same thing, just like Fascism and National Socialism are not the same thing. "Basically Nazis were anti-communist who wanted regulate economy and stop communism by moving their economy and society to that direction." Yes, but not all the way to communism. Hitler wanted to retain some individuality in his collective (racial) ideology. This is the incoherent bit, which even Hitler struggled with. But that doesn't mean that there wasn't a definite ideology, economic policy or that neither was explainable. "And this is what you will all a time face with Nazis. They wanted one things and did the opposite." Exactly what all socialists do. They want to free people by having the state enslave them economically. A free market is two people trading. A non-free market is the state in control of both those people. Freedom is Slavery.
    1
  18010. Or so the Marxists will have you believe... But that's simply not true.
    1
  18011. "One more sidenote, you haven't mentioned the case of Leopold II yet, who besides being the constitutional monarch of Belgium was also the private, individual owner of the Congo, as recognized by Belgian and international law at the time." Leopold was a King, therefore the state. He was therefore the 'public', not 'private' owner of the Congo, since the King is the state.
    1
  18012. "It wouldn't have been socialists, that would have prevented you from serving as an officer in WW2, would it?" It would have been classists, racists, and sexists judging people and stopping them from serving. So what we need to do is stop being sexist, racist and classist and judge people by their individuality. Socialists are judging people by their class like a racist judges people by their skin colour. It's immoral. "Socialism is a reaction to the unfairness of this system." Socialism is unfair. Work hard, give goods and services to the community and receive money in exchange? Have those who didn't work as hard as you steal your money off you for themselves. Nope, doesn't sound fair to me. ""working class" is a socialist term, yes, an affirmative term for people who would have previously been dubbed serfs, peasants, drudges or just scum," I think you'll find that the Classic Liberals were the ones who liberated the slaves and the serfs, not the socialists. And I think you'll find it is the socialists who are wanting serfdom back. Instead of economic freedom to the individual or free speech, socialists advocate subservience to the 'group' (state) and censorship. "The novelty is not in the introduction of "class" as a concept, but in honoring the working poor as contributing crucially to society." Honour the working poor by making them poorer through absolutely disgusting 'economic' practices that make them worse off. I despise calling socialist ideology 'economics' because it is truly aweful. Taxing businesses so that they hire fewer employees; forcing them to pay artificially higher wages and thus force people into unemployment and causing the employees that remain to work harder and the business to have less chance of surviving; taxing consumers on everything they buy (VAT) so they can buy less things; centrally restricting (which they call 'central planning') the building of houses to artificially cause a housing shortage so they can blame it on the 'greedy landlords'; force people to pay into government monopolies like a crumbling and inefficient and highly deadly National Health Service, which forces the private health services to put up their costs and/or go out of business, and then turn around and gloat about how 'great' the government is at 'running' the monopoly; debasing the currency from the gold standard and then using interest to secretly tax people without them realising it, and then lying about the real rate of interest, and also blaming business owners when they are fored by the interest rates to put prices up before they go out of business; price restictions; wage controls; media censorship; curtailing of freedom of speech; destruction of hte right of an individual to own property; force workers to manual labour; the murder and theft from those deemed 'wrong' in their eyes (bourgeois women and children, Jews, or 'kulaks'); all in the name of the 'workers'. And this is just those I can think of off the top of my head. 100% disgusting economics. Worse, they insist that anyone who disagrees with them "doesn't understand economics" when the reality is, unlike them, those arguing with them (like me) have looked at both sides (I actually used to believe in socialist economics - yes, I got suckered in too) and completely understand why their economics is absolute rubbish. Here, watch these - Economics in one lesson by: Henry Hazlitt https://youtu.be/8_u2a4uQFNI Basic Economics - Thomas Sowell https://youtu.be/dQiBD-crrvA They will explain EXACTLY why socialist 'economics' is not real economics and will actually show you why the poor (and our entire society) are made worse off by 'central planning'. "Your protest against judging people by class becomes farsical, if you turn around to attack those that fought to overcome the traditional caste system." Socialists are the ones causing the 'caste system' with their insistance on judging people by their race, class, sex and nationality. I'm advocating that they stop it. You're arguing against that because you want to continue to judge people by their 'class'.
    1
  18013. @Stefan B "That argument is such a cheapshot, come oooooon. OK, how would ANY f*ing government *in Leningrad have been able to prevent the starvation?" I answered in the last post, saying that the government could have given more freedom to the individual to decide what to do in the circumstances rather than prevent them from doing what needed to be done. But no, it isn't a cheapshot at all. Capitalism is the private control of the economy. A government is not a private individual. It is the 'public' sector, Latin 'publicum' meaning 'state and non-individual'. You cannot have a 'capitalist government' because that is literally an oxymoron. ""I use `groups' for convenience in speech" Yepp, and so do ALL people. Because we can't talk with each other otherwise. The problems arise, if those groups are characterized unfairly, with hateful intent." That's exactly what I'm saying. So stop saying the bourgeoisie are 'evil' and stop judging people by their skin colour or their sex. They are not collective groups - they are individuals. "Belonging to a class is not a question of birth, but of status." There is no such thing as class. It doesn't exist. "Which you can earn or lose, according to how much you conform to a classes rules of self identification." You can earn wealth by working and producing for your community, or you can lose wealth by not working for your community. You cannot earn or lose a 'class' because it doesn't exist. "A class identity IS an ideology." Yes. Socialists believe in the class identity. That's why socialism is classed as an evil ideology. "Questioning the rules of class identity is what thousands of people have been dubbed "socialist" for." They made 'class' up. They're fighting to divide society into different groups that don't exist, so that those of the 'wrong' group can be murdered and have their possessions stolen from them during the bloody revolution. 'Class identity' is the same as 'race identity'. It's positive and negative discrimination. Saying someone is inferior because of their 'race' is evil, and saying someone is inferior because of their 'class' is equally as evil. That's why judging people by their artificial and collective social groups is morally wrong. We should judge people by their individuality - their actions and beliefs - not by their skin colour or their supposed 'class'.
    1
  18014.  @stefanb6539  "Again, how would a capitalist government in Leningrad have saved people from starving in a besieged city?" For starters, there's no such thing as a "capitalist government". A government is non-private, therefore not capitalist. However a government that allowed a free-market wouldn't have prevented the individuals in the city exercising their own judgement of the situation, and let them leave the city prior to the siege (thus reducing the number of civilians needing feeding, and the overall number of people who died) and would have allowed them to exercise their own free enterprise spirit in order to alleviate the shortages within the city. Free market profits may have caused individuals running businesses to have hired more people to drive food trucks or set up dockyards, or sailed boats, or grown more crops in the area (since the local government actually confiscated foods and crops from the farms and thus made the situation worse). And people could have left after the siege was on, if the government hadn't been there to stop them. Obviously, siege conditions will result in deaths, but the deaths would have been much less had the government not restricted people's freedom. But again, the war wouldn't have even started if Hitler hadn't been a socialist. "Socialist do perceive workers as a class, and you blame them for it." Because there is no such thing as a 'class'. Someone who works, works. Someone who doesn't work, doesn't. That's it. The act of working does not make someone a 'class' just like someone who doesn't work is not a 'class' either. Class doesn't exist. You either work or you don't. "If viewing a given group of individuals with focus on their similarities is evil, then you are as guilty as the ones you condemn." I use 'groups' for convenience in speech and do not see them as living entities that give the individuals within the group characteristics. I judge individuals based on their individuality, not by the group they supposedly exist within. "If viewing a group of individuals with focus on their similarities is just a necessity of language and not evil in itself, then you ARE absolved, but your contempt loses its moral founding." No it does not. Unlike judging someone by their 'race', 'sex', 'class' or 'nationality' - none of which can be helped by birth, if they even existed in the first place - a belief or action is totally the individual's responsibility. If a 'British white man' commits a murder, that individual is at fault, not their entire 'nationality', 'race' or 'sex'. But he is still guilty of his actions and his belief. He thought murder was justified in that particular situation, and so he can be judged by his actions and beliefs. Similarly, if you choose to believe in an ideology which promotes murder and theft, such as a socialist ideology, then I think you should be judged by that belief. But again, unlike 'race' or 'sex' or 'class' or 'nationality' which is not the individual's choice, you as an individual can choose to change your beliefs and choose not to act. The choice is your individual choice to make and therefore the responsibility is on you, the individual. The moral founding is solid. Individuality makes more sense for human beings than does collectivism.
    1
  18015. "It does not make much sense to say that fascism and Nazism have nothing in common, because Italian Fascism had nothing to do with racism." I said they had socialism in common. I also said they're not the same ideology, which they're not. I didn't say they had nothing in common. "For someone who works so hard to convince people that there are different ways for socialism to manifest itself - different thinkers, branches, divisions, etc., you seem to view everything else in a fairly narrow and selective way, making your arguments seem rather simplistic. I think that is what might cause all the skepticism surrounding these types of videos." I am simplifying it for a wide audience of people who may not understand the differences in the ideologies. That doesn't mean that I don't understand. And actually this is a fairly simple issue: Marxists have redefined what capitalism and socialism are so that nobody knows what they are in order to hide the truth. I'm now simplistically explaining what they mean, and showing why the Marxist lies don't make any sense. This goes against the Marxist agenda, which is why they're complaining that I'm being too "simplistic". "(When you look into it, you would struggle to find any country which doesn't have at least some state capitalist practices) " Yes, I know. Because all modern states are partly socialist and partly capitalist. The Marxists say that our states are all capitalist, and they're not "real" socialism. They are not capitalist and are mostly socialist, which is why they're struggling to keep their head above water. "As a result, Nazi Germany and the Nazi ideology included elements that could be considered both socialist and capitalist." The Nazis hated capitalism, which they called 'international Jewish finance'. This is why they set out to control the entire economy with the state - socialism. That is not capitalism and it is an absolutely fundamental distortion of history to try and paint it as such, which is why I'm calling it out. For a Marxist, anything that's not 'Marxism' is therefore 'Fascism'. Unfortunately, that definition doesn't meet reality.
    1
  18016. I would cover WW1, no problem, but I think it'll be a while away before I do. I want to focus on WW2 for the time being because there's tons left to cover and it's really where my interest lies. Not saying WW1 isn't interesting, but WW2 just seems more dynamic since the lines actually move!
    1
  18017. Sort of. I'm aiming to get some more videos up this week at least
    1
  18018. Yeah, you do :) And no, I didn't know about that book! Thanks very much for pointing that out, I'll try find a copy from somewhere
    1
  18019. You're probably right :) detail and accuracy is what I'm going for and I just wouldn't feel comfortable publishing a documentary on a battle unless I've done a substantial amount of reading and research on it
    1
  18020. More HOI4 coming soon, how doe sthat sound? ;)
    1
  18021. Congratulations!
    1
  18022. :)
    1
  18023. Excellent! Just so you know, Barnett is a bit extreme with his biases (that you've probably seen if you're anywhere into the book). Some really don't like him and have even called me out for using him! I disagree with them because we shouldn't read all sources, but it's worth noting that some despise him. I highly recommend Barrie Pitt's "Crucible of War" series. The first half of book 2 is about Crusader and is probably the best on the topic.
    1
  18024. The Wire is the Libyan-Egyptian Frontier. The reason it was called that was because the Italians erected a barbed wire fence (quite deep) along the border.
    1
  18025. Given the whole left-wing agenda thing going on over there at the moment, probably. However, in theory they would just ban the user known as Adolf Hitler rather than me, since he is a genuine Patreon.
    1
  18026. You're welcome! :)
    1
  18027. Soviet Tank Corps are actually at division-size. Think I put a quick explanation of this in an earlier episode
    1
  18028. First! :)
    1
  18029. I watch Arch Warhammer now and then. He makes some good 40k stuff. Used to collect them, but now just enjoy the fluff.
    1
  18030. That's why I chose it, because of the irony ;)
    1
  18031. sonofeast11 never heard of that word before. Most honorificabilitudinitas
    1
  18032. But Stalin was a Communist. Stalinism is just Marxist-Communism by another name. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18033. I've said this in previous videos. Pay attention.
    1
  18034. The central banks (which Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto) are directly funding the corporations. As I've explained previously, corporations are collectively owned, and are thus Communist/Socialist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18035. Congrats Plencers! Sorry AJ!
    1
  18036.  @timbushell8640  Watch this and I will explain all https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  18037. "Again if you actually understand the definition of fascism you could not argue that either Germany or Russia were actually ‘socialist’ countries" Fascism has a distinct historical definition as I have explained https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  18038. North Korea is a democracy. Why? Because democracy is "people power". But as I have explained, the people are the public, and the public is the state. So democracy is "state power". National Socialism doesn't just have Socialism in the name. I was taught that it did, and fully expected to find that in my reading. But that's how I red-pilled myself, because it turns out that National Socialism actually implemented more Socialism than many many so-called Social Democratic parties have ever done. It's just that most people have been misinformed and led astray into believing that they didn't implement Socialist policies. YES THEY DID.
    1
  18039. Keep denying that evidence.
    1
  18040.  @davidthomas5990  Exactly, just like Lenin did with the Mensheviks, the Jews and the Whites and Greens.
    1
  18041. He didn't. Just like Lenin, he socialised and nationalized the unions into the State trade union (the DAF) and crushed those that refused to socialize.
    1
  18042. Haha what do you mean?
    1
  18043. All property should be private property. The railways are not private property, they're owned by the state. In the UK, 'Network Rail' owns the railway lines and the stations, and it rents the lines to the train companies for use. So the railways were never "privatised". It was a trick.
    1
  18044. Haha I'm a capitalist
    1
  18045. If you replace the word "Leftist" with the word "Capitalist", they think everything you said applies to the capitalists. In their minds, the capitalists are the lazy ones who are a protected class, with the workers forced to support them for nothing etc. The problem is that it's hard to think critically about propaganda when all you have to go on is propaganda. It's not in any way obvious to a Leftist that they've been tricked. I was a Leftist myself, and I can tell you that it's impossible to see the Matrix for what it is when you're in the Matrix.
    1
  18046. No it doesn't. Again, as I said in the video, you've been deceived. The countries that pollute the most right now are the Communist countries.
    1
  18047. Yes it is. Read the book "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism" by Murphy and you'll see why.
    1
  18048. It's funny because I've said over and over again in numerous videos now that corporations are socialist, not capitalist. So I'm genuinely surprised that you think I have come across as though I'm defending corporations. I can assure you that I'm not. I have said that stealing from corporations (via revolution) is bad. But only because stealing is bad in general, and it's not necessary. If we rid ourselves of the central banks, the corporations will collapse anyway, so stealing from them is pointless.
    1
  18049. Then why was I a Leftist? Why was I an anarchist-socialist? I wanted to work, and I still do. My conscientiousness is and always has been off the scale. I'm not willing to condemn the theory as outright wrong, but that the description you gave of it doesn't work with my own experience.
    1
  18050. Well, it's your lucky day because I've already done a video answering that exact question https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  18051. I agree that injustices exist, however I'm an ex-socialist, and I now see that socialism is actually not the solution to those injustices. To understand why I hold this view: I would request that you read the book "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. It doesn't give every reason why, but should give you the basics.
    1
  18052. Which bits did you disagree on?
    1
  18053. We live in a capitalist system, right? Right? ... Are you sure? ... Are you REALLY sure? ... All your professors, friends, family, media and politicians say that we do. However, a true education starts by asking a question: But is this really the case? What if I told you that even Karl Marx said that we don't live in a capitalist system? Yes he did. And I can prove it I ask you to watch two videos of mine. The first is this one https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The second is this one https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA Be curious.
    1
  18054. A race is a social group. Racism is socialism. And all Socialism is racism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Those racist "Right-wingers" you met, were Leftists https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  18055. It's tempting, but I actually enjoy reading the comments and interacting with people. I also don't want this to become an echo-chamber.
    1
  18056. I would, at some point, like to do a Vietnam series! Don't know anything about it, so I'll be approaching it from a neutral angle. Same with the American Civil War. Thanks for your comment!
    1
  18057. "The United States are the rolemodel of a capitalistic state." If the United States is a capitalist state, then I'm not a capitalist. Lockdowns are not a free market, nor are corporations (organs of the state), or taxation, or central bank inflation and manipulation of interest rates, wage controls, price controls, regulations, etc etc. You said that the world is not black and white. Okay then, that same principle applies to your view on capitalism. You have painted capitalism as bad, and democracy as good, even though neither is the case. The United States, for example, is meant to be a Republic, and yet it has shown itself to be more democratic (totalitarian) than the republic it was originally founded as. After all, democracy = "people power". But as I have shown, the people are the public, and the public is the State. So democracy is a deceptive term which actually means "State power". This is why North Korea, China, Fascist Italy, and Hitler's Third Reich were all democratic nations https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  18058. Well, regardless of Murphy's views on Obama, the book is still important and necessary for you to read. Capitalism does benefit us all - it pulled billions of people out of poverty for the first time in human history. Yet, Socialists want us to go back to the feudal age, claiming they're "progressing" us forwards. And no, what separates me from the others history channels is that I'm open about the politics and economics. The others have political views (one has admitted to me what his were). They're just not willing to tell you what they are.
    1
  18059. For you, I'd recommend the book "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism" by Murphy. That will show you why you're mistaken about the idea that capitalism doesn't self-regulate. Of course it does! It's Socialism that doesn't. And I've been over this before: Fascism & National Socialism are both Left-wing ideologies that have been placed on the "Far Right" by the Marxists to disparage capitalism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  18060. Those "entities" you're referring to are corporations. Corporations are not capitalist, they are syndicalist. You are conflating the two terms: corporatism with capitalism. We do not have capitalism. We have corporatism, which is socialist-syndicalism by another name. Yet, you blame the "free market" for this. This is NOT a free market. One half of every transaction is currency. The currency is owned by the State's central banks, who manipulate interest rates and print their way into oblivion. So half of EVERY transaction has been manipulated by the central planners. This isn't a free market in any sense of the word. I agree with you 100% that the financial sector is the enemy. But the financial sector is socialist at heart, not capitalist. The rich are getting richer because that's precisely what the enemies of private property want. Regulations, wage controls, price controls, inflation, taxation, laws... they are all designed to destroy private property and form monopoly corporations that are easily controlled by the central planners. This was both the Socialist and the Fascist way of doing things. Yet, many believe this is capitalism. This is why I say you have been deceived. I cannot comment on the virus situation, since censorship is real and I don't want my channel getting nuked from orbit. But I will say that, yes, you are arguing from the Leftist point of view. All you need to do is realize what capitalism is, and what it isn't, and if you do that, it will set you free. Watch this video of mine https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18061. You have a religious hatred of property, yet haven't realized the tremendous benefits that private property (not public property) can bring. For a moment, consider the idea that when you buy some bread from the baker, that you hand the baker some currency. You eat the bread, he keeps the currency. Is it a zero-sum game? Who has "won" the transaction? In reality, both parties won. In fact, the baker sold you his bread, and you sold him your currency, which he can then use elsewhere in the economy. The private property here is the bread, which was given to you (it is your bread) and you did with it what you wanted (ate it). This wasn't a zero-sum transaction. You both benefited from the transaction. Also, you're assuming that the current market is a market. It is not. It's totally fake. Do not be deluded into believing that the current market is a capitalist market. I know that people have told you before that it is, but they were just as mistaken as you are. This market is centrally planned by the Central Banks that Karl Marx called for in the Communist Manifesto. We have a Socialist system, which is why it's zero-sum. See this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And then maybe this video too https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  18062. The Left is egalitarian? Are you sure about that? Also, you're arguing that corporations (syndicates) are capitalism. I used to believe that too But the fact is that corporations are collectively owned by society (shareholders/stakeholders). Millions of people who collectively own the means or production is not capitalism. Watch this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18063. So, Socialism then?
    1
  18064. But I am an ex-socialist. Leftists do not know what the Right-wing argument is. They don't even know that corporatism isn't capitalism, despite conflating the two over and over. I know what the opposite opinion is, and that opinion is completely incorrect, as the historical evidence makes clear. The reason my world view changed by 180 degrees was because the evidence was overwhelming. I cannot go against that evidence.
    1
  18065. Military warfare is an extension of politics, which is in opposition to economics. Without the economics and politics, the military stuff is completely meaningless. And all of it is history. So if I'm not allowed to cover the economics and politics, then I have zero reason to cover the military stuff either, and certainly cannot explain it accurately, at which point I may as well go back to retail. So you're telling me to "stick to history", but don't seem to realize that those words actually mean "stop doing history". You're telling me to "delete the opinion", which means "delete every video you've ever made because opinion (interpretation) is a fundamental element of history theory and therefore is baked into the cake" https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc And while you're telling me that I'm good at the military stuff, that can't be true because you're saying that my historical approach to history must be fundamentally flawed if I'm coming to false conclusions based on the evidence. If the evidence is overwhelming, but you reject the evidence, then what am I left with? Nothing. There is no history without evidence. I cannot reject the evidence and the side with the lie. And I'm not saying that people should only read one book. But that book is the first in a long list of books that will show people how flawed the so-called "economics" that our miseducation system has spouted for generations. Mises wrote his book "Socialism" in 1922, which no Socialist or Keynesian can respond too. It absolutely kills the ideology and proves that the Socialist "economics" is nothing of the sort. But I won't recommend that book for someone who's on the brink of opening their eyes for the first time. I'll get them to read something a bit lighter first, such as "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt, then move them onto other books. But apparently that's the wrong thing to do. Apparently I should let people live in ignorance and just tell people what they want to hear. Well, unfortunately, I can't do that.
    1
  18066. "the fruit of knowledge was just the knowledge of evil" It was the knowledge of good and evil.
    1
  18067. The Tories have basically implemented everything that Corbyn said he wanted to do in his two manifestos (including his Race manifesto). As I've said previously, the Conservative Party used to be the old Left wing party in the mid-1800s, and they've never changed. That's why there's never been any tax cuts when they've been in power since Thatcher, and they've spent and printed like Labour. We have a one party state masquerading as a two party state, yet most people do not see it.
    1
  18068. Which questions do you think provide the best response?
    1
  18069. "And I can't understand why." Well, this video will explain why https://youtu.be/pwJf8O1S6eA
    1
  18070. Maybe, I don't watch that program so I wouldn't know.
    1
  18071. Someone who hasn't read Mises and Rothbard.
    1
  18072.  @marshall_zhukov  "Most are simply indoctrinated." Exactly. So they themselves think they're doing the right thing. So they're not evil. If you accidentally kill someone, that's not murder. If you deliberately kill somone, that's murder. Leftists aren't doing what they're doing to hurt people - but the ideology is. - "A lot of leftist dogma can be disproven by simple observation of life, history, etc..." Yes, but when you're indoctrinated you cannot see it, as I explained in the video. - "And I do not believe that our society will ever recover until the leaders and enforcers of woke, progressive, leftist ideology are brought to justice and punished." We can IF we can break through the indoctrination. That's the problem - we don't have an effective way of getting through to them. They won't listen.
    1
  18073. No, they themselves are not evil. They think they're doing what's right, and don't realize that they're working for the forces of evil. They've been deceived.
    1
  18074. Haha I'm sorry for constantly recommending books, but I'm glad you're reading them and educating yourself!
    1
  18075. Thank you, and I'm glad to hear I got through to you! What was the thing that helped you see the light? Also, I'm sure you have some gold and silver too, right?
    1
  18076. They have a different mindset and outlook from us, which causes them to see the world differently. If you thought you were a slave, would you put any effort in to your work knowing that it was all for nothing? The ideology has blinded them to the reality of their situation, and I know it might seem obvious to you, but when you're in the wizard's circle, it does make sense.
    1
  18077. "Organize a debate, prepare well and focus on a simple argument." I refuse to do live "debate" because they're not debates at all. An intellectual debate is one where both sides write out their arguments in full, and allow the other to respond. That's exactly what I did - the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video was a direct response to numerous Marxists and naysayers, including Finnish Bolshevik. But they won't engage with it. They won't watch it.
    1
  18078. Some are lazy, others paranoid, and many are as you describe. However, it's only because they've been mistaught by their family, friends and teachers. If they can be convinced to listen to reason, and if you can explain the unintended consequences of their policies, they have a good chance of grasping it and changing their world view (and themselves).
    1
  18079. I don't ignore it. I disagree with your assessment. Socialism and Capitalism are both evil, that's why we need a free market.
    1
  18080. You should comment more often! Thank you
    1
  18081.  @untruelie2640  "However, there is also a wider definition of socialism; a more descriptive one that is often used in the discipline of political theory." Okay, despite the fact that the historical definition is clear, I'll bite. What is this "wider" definition you speak of?
    1
  18082. I think this is the first time I've ever been accused on this channel of not understanding the Right. I normally get accused of not understanding the Left (in fact, others have said just that in response to this video). What parts of the Right do I not understand?
    1
  18083. Glad you liked it!
    1
  18084. For the Emperor!
    1
  18085. "The only thing I can say about Psychology after a career teaching it ,is that we do not truly understand how and why humans behave." No wonder, since "Psychology" is based on Freud and Jung, both of whom were Hermeticists. Hermeticism has seeped its way into academia in the forms of socialism, National Socialism, and Marxism. Jung's Holy Trinity of the Ego, Self and Shadow is nothing more than religious mumbo jumbo. There's zero evidence for such a split. But the reason this was done is for the same reason every other religion attacks the ego - because the destruction of the Self (which is the Ego) makes the individual impotent in the face of collectivism. In short, if you deny yourSelf and offer yourSelf as a Self-sacrificial lamb, you're more likely to put your money in the hat. You don't understand how humans behave because you've not been studying humans, but religion. Your emphasis on observation (which is the basis for Empricism) is likewise built upon the same religious foundations, as I explained in my video "But how do you know you're right?" - Objective Theory of History https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI Since I understand the religious foundation of empiricism, I'm no-longer trying to be "empirical". Rather, I'm being Objective in my view of history. The Objective Theory of History does not reject the Self (the Ego), nor does it pretend that if we take the Self out of history (if we all become personality-less creatures) we will get to "the Truth" (God). In actuality, the Objective Theory of History shows that it's not only impossible to do that, but actually counter to discovering the truth (actual truth, not God). Rather than reject the Self, we must embrace the Self in order to do good history, as the historian must trust his own mind in the logicial formation of conceptual concepts based upon a perception of the past through the sensory evidence. - "I would contend that we know so little about human behaviour such a model is not a realistic goal." You reject human behaviour, and then wonder why you don't understand it. Perhaps reading something by Ayn Rand, or Mises's "Human Action" would do you some good. But then again, you'll reject these books outright, since they're not approved literature and must be dismissed as "automatically wrong". - "Others modelled this in a different way and observed that we often do not have perfect information." The free market price for a good or service provides the consumer with all the information they need to make a decision. For further information, see this 6 minute video https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4?si=YOd-XP-8JTTe4LYi - "No one is saying you are not allowed to push back." You're saying that I'm not allowed to push back. Need I remind you that the whole point of this conversation is that I'm arguing that I am allowed to push back, and you're arguing that I'm not. Your very first comment said "No naiive economic or political "insight"..." which is another way of saying that my videos on the political and economic subjects should be dismissed. - "It is just that your pushback is not empirical and does not have broad theoretical foundations" It's objective, not empirical. And it is based on broad theoretical foundations. You've not watched my video ("But how do you know you're right?" - Objective Theory of History https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI ) you would see that. The issue here is that you've dismissed what I've said because you don't like it. You've let your "subjective" (religious) feelings get in the way of an objective consideration of the presented evidence. - "you are just trying to forcefully confirm one with selective interpretation of evidence" I use a full range of sources, from those I agree with, to those I don't. As I said, the fact that most socialists and communists haven't even read the Communist Manifesto, and that I am an ex-socialist myself and have read the literature, should be a clear indication to you that I know what I'm talking about. In reality, you're unable to bring yourself to watch my videos, have zero knowledge of the arguments presented, and are therefore unable to counter me with actual evidence. Since you have no counter, you're slanderously accusing me of selecting sources with zero basis for such a claim, and with evidence to the contrary. This is an incredibly dishonest and shameful display of poor behaviour from you - highly typical of an "academic" of course. - "I intended the comment about overview as a sincere compliment." There was no compliment. Your initial comment essentially said my "strength at integrating and synthesising historical information from diverse secondary sources" is flawed since it only applies to the military topics. Apparently, this exact same method doesn't work when applied to the religious concept of politics. In effect, this is a hateful insult, not a complement, and that's why I asked you to explain yourself. - "Incidently my journey was the opposite to yours. Started as a child of Maggie generation (dreadful woman) selfish and believing in markets. The more I read, the more I interacted with a wider world, the more I understood, the more I tended towards pro social societal structures." Margaret Thatcher is a statist Commieservative. She wanted increased police power, increased taxes (the Poll Tax), and screwed over the Producers in favour of the Looters. I can understand why you could falsely assume the Conservative Party are Right Wing, even though they've always been on the Left of the political specturm and were the original Left Wing Party here in the UK as I've explained in one of my videos on Oswald Mosley ( https://youtu.be/AGaPaOPNubo ). However, the Tory Party are Left-Wingers statists, and so was Maggie. I will remind you of the trash piling up in the streets of 1970s Britain due to the socialist policies of the Fascists (trade unionism and the government). Another YouTuber (that's right, not me) has done an overview of the Post-War concensus which resulted in the disastrous economic situation in the 1970s and 80s, which Maggie was responding to https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA?si=b-_7uTXKSBP8d_oV I don't like Thatcher or the Conservatives, and I don't agree with her or them. That said, the economic situation was disastrous, and when the market controls were somewhat lifted (not entirely), and the nationalised industries were semi-privatised just like the railroads (which, as I've explained in a video, were never made private https://youtu.be/tCHyNw5lEl0 ). Thatcher wasn't for a free market, but she did free it up sufficiently to allow the economy to actually function, and must be given credit for that, even if she was a dispicable person overall. The fact that you went the opposite direction - that you decided you preferred rolling blackouts, stagnent wages, low productivity and low employment (all things Socialism is good at producing) - only highlights how wrong your assessment is of me or of politics and economics as a whole. It is you, sir, who would benefit from watching my videos and questioning those long-standing beliefs you've developed, since it was the National Socialists who implemented a welfare state very similar to the Labour Party implemented after the war, and yet it is that system that you crave so much.
    1
  18086. When a religion is wrong about science, balance is not appropriate. Socialism is a religion. "Balance" (which, in this case, means give the cult a lot more praise) is neither appropriate nor possible, especially for someone who once fell for the lies. Socialism has led to millions of deaths and the impoverishment of every place it's been tried. As an "academic", if you cannot recognise this, or explain why this is the case without using the BS excuse of "that wasn't real socialism", then it just confirms that academia is a failure. Bias is inherent to the sources. If you watch my video on "But how do you know you're right", I explain how we get around this. However, when most socialists and communists haven't even read the Communist Manifesto, and don't know that Karl Marx called for central banking, or that the interest rate set by said Central Banks centrally distorts and regulates the price of every good and service in the entire economy, and that's why we have people ignorantly proclaiming that we live in a "free market" because their religious leaders (the professor's in western universities) have preached that the free market is the cause of all our problems - in such a scenario, I don't see why I'm not allowed to push back against their nonsense.
    1
  18087. There's a quote I gave in the video from a Major Shan Hackett. Well, prior to the point I quote in the video, he says this: "I was then commanding 'C' Squadron of the 8th Hussars, in Honeys, working with the 11th Hussars, the KDGs and the South African Armoured Car boys - all very good regiments." - Major Shan Hackett, commanding ‘C’ Squadron, 8th Hussars, quoted from Neillands, “Desert Rats,” p108. So I'm not saying Fletcher is wrong, and I'm not sayinf Chieftain is wrong either. Rather, I think the British subsequently referred to them as Honeys, which may or may not have occurred during the war. Regardless, it's easier for me to say "Honeys" than it is to keep saying "M3 Light Tanks".
    1
  18088. And that's precisely why I wanted to go through the entire North African Campaign, as well as Tunisia, Sicily etc, so that everyone gets the context. I think the fact that people jump to the Normandy Landings, and don't understand what came before, is what causes a lot of assumptions, which then leads to the arguments. With the full context, we can come to understand why things were the way they were.
    1
  18089. Who said I think any other media is good? Here in the UK, the BBC has a monopoly on all media outside of YouTube and a few select sources, and the BBC is pure government propaganda.
    1
  18090. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  18091. You're not the only one! Some have, some have not 🤷🏻‍♂️
    1
  18092. That's a good analogy, thank you!
    1
  18093. No, that was Terri. She did the maps and still does the thumbnails, plus other bits. I was hoping she would want to do the animations a while back, but she took one look at Blender and the map animations and said no. And to be fair, it's not easy because you've got to do the animations themselves but also be accurate with the unit positioning, which is why I've not just hired any old animator. This new person isn't an animator, but has a little bit of editing experience and is interested in learning. She's started the process and believes she can do this. I'm not going to say her name just in case it doesn't work out. However, I know her from my previous work in retail and she's a very hard worker. I'm confident she can pick up the animation process relatively quickly, although it may take time before she becomes fully proficient. The only question is whether she can interpret the script and get it right in the allotted time. The priority is to be accurate but also hit the deadline (currently every 4 weeks for a Battlestorm).
    1
  18094. Thank you for your support sir! I really appreciate it, especially right now with me getting help for this
    1
  18095. Sokami, please see my other responses to your "criticisms". National Socialism was a form of socialism.
    1
  18096. Sorry! :)
    1
  18097. "I am incredibly confused how you leap from "only 'racially pure' Germans can own things" to "socialist state"." Think of it in tiers. So imagine the top tier is a racial-socialism. The state is for the German-Aryan only. All 'bad' races will be removed, and the German-race will collectively own the means of production (socialism). There is no class in this society because in their mind class is based on international-Jewish-capitalism. If the race owns the means of production collectively, then it's ok for Germans to own private property and businesses, because they're working towards the collective German-race. "The people, bullshit idea of Aryan or not, never owned a goddamn thing in Nazi Germany because it was an authoritarian dictatorship," Exactly. They didn't really own private property or businesses. They could have them taken off them in an instant by the "People's State". This is because the collective (the race) comes first. They socially owned the means of production.
    1
  18098. The good news is that my video will lay it all out step by step and really explain it all in detail - that much I am confident in. The bad news is that this is a lot of editing and I've no idea if I'll get it done in time to hit the weekly target. But, fingers are crossed :)
    1
  18099. "You literally just admitted you believe Socialism = When States Do Things." If the state owns the business, this is called a "public" business (social ownership). That's the opposite of private business (and private ownership). So, it isn't when the "state does things" - and I never actually said those words btw - but when the state owns the economy (or parts of the economy in the case of the Labour Party). This is why conservative and capitalist elements want to reduce the size of the state, because they want more of the economy to be capitalist. And this is why socialists want an increase in the size of the state, because they want more of the economy to be socialist. Now, you might say "but Marx said that socialism is stateless", but this is where he went wrong. In order for you to prevent me from saying "this object is mine now" you need someone to step in and say "no, it belongs to society". That someone is the state. And this is because human beings are naturally inclined to own and possess things. This is not a "strawman" either. Claiming it is, doesn't make it so. This is what socialism is historically, and today.
    1
  18100. "If having some socialist policies or "socialism" in the name isn't enough to be a socialist state, even going so far as to have literal government-provided healthcare, what does that mean?" - gnet kuji The Labour Party in the capitalist UK is socialist. To deny that is bending the truth. Here are some of their current policies - "Labour will learn from these experiences and bring key utilities back into public ownership to deliver lower prices, more accountability and a more sustainable economy." and "Public ownership will benefit consumers, ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service." https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/creating-economy-works/#eighth They also want to renationalize the postal service. One of their policies is literally called "Towards a National Education Service" https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/education/#first "We will make the building of new homes, including council homes, a priority through our National Transformation Fund, as part of a joined-up industrial and skills strategy that ensures a vibrant construction sector with a skilled workforce and rights at work." https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/secure-homes-for-all/#first Social housing. But how can this be, gnet? How can this be? By your logic, a capitalist state can't have socialist parties or policies within it. "True Conservatism means a commitment to country and community; a belief not just in society but in the good that government can do; a respect for the local and national institutions that bind us together; an insight that change is inevitable and change can be good, but that change should be shaped, through strong leadership and clear principles, for the common good" - Conservative Party Manifesto, 2017, Page 11. They're into "keeping taxes as low as possible" (which means a reduction of the public sector), "increaseing trade", "reducing the cost of regulation" (less state intervention), "protecting private pensions" (but not public-state pensions), and talks about investing and backing small businesses etc. But how can this be, gnet? How can this be? By your logic, you can't have a capitalist party in a state where social(ist) welfare exists. ""Socialism is in every nation, as is capitalism." And thus, we are right back to the crux of the problem. Your definitions of both capitalism and socialism are so muddled and vague that you can apply both to literally everything everywhere at all times." - gnet kuji Again, it's not hard. Socialism is the social (public) ownership of the means of production. Change the word "public" for worker, and you get Marxist socialism. Change the word "public" to German-Aryan, and you get National Socialism. Also bear in mind that Hitler and the National Socialists destroyed trade in Germany by 1934 because they didn't like international capital (which is the opposite of what the Conservative Party want) and introduced their own National Education Service (the Hitler Youth), plus didn't nationalize all businesses (which even the Labour Party in the UK aren't calling for) and suddenly you see that National Socialism is actually socialism.
    1
  18101. "and Socialism built the pyramids" Was it a private firm or a public firm that built the pyramids? I honestly don't know. "So, literally, all states are socialism" No, but they can have socialist policies.
    1
  18102. I will copy and paste the relevant bits - "TIK, mate, if you literally cannot find a state your definition doesn't call Socialist..." Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. "show me literally any state in history which TIK's argument would not call Socialism. TIK said Britain. I pointed to the NHS. TIK said that's because Britain is Socialist. Which means TIK, with the whole of human history to choose from, has still yet to find even a single state which his definition would not call Socialist." I did that to show you that it's not a switch. It is a dial. You point to ANY capitalist or socialist state and I'll tell you where there is capitalism or socialism in it. That's because my definition of socialism is not restricted to one minor branch of socialism like yours is. - Now, to your latest post. "I see a lot of hand-wringing and excuses, but no states." There is socialism and capitalism is every state. That has been my point all along. So it doesn't matter what state I or you pick, there's going to be socialist and capitalist policies in them. That has been my point all along. And that's why your point has no meaning. I don't know why you cannot grasp this.
    1
  18103. gnet kuji - I've answered you. Read my above comment.
    1
  18104. As I have just replied to people elsewhere - Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different. - "Maybe he isnt good at analyzing political history of communism/socialism but we can all agree that he is good at general history during period of ww2, especially war history as it is shown from his other videos." You can't have the Holocaust or the mass-atrocities committed on the Eastern Front and across Europe during WW2 without National Socialism being socialism. This entire debate is vitally important to that understanding. "He will have to change his opinion at some point if he wants to be taken seriously ever again by an huge heap of his former audience." History does not bow down to groups of people. If one group of people cannot accept what history is, then there's no point watching a history channel. I'm not giving into social pressure if I'm right. "Ownership of enterprises by a capitalist state does not constitute 'social ownership', as the state is not controlled by working people." Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. "A state is either capitalist or socialist." Then what is Britain today? What is the USA today? What is every country in Europe today? They are a blend of socialism and capitalism. "A state can be capitalist and have social programs, but it remains a capitalist country because capitalists control these programs." At what point does it tip over into the socialist camp then? Is there a particular line? Perhaps if EVERY Jewish person was removed from Germany, that would constitue as "full-socialism" to you? "If National Socialism does not conform to the Marxist definition of socialism, it can not be called a branch of Marxist socialism." IT'S NOT MARXIST SOCIALISM. Seriously, we're NOT discussing Marxist socialism. "To Marxists, history is driven by class relations and natural processes. To National Socialists, history is driven by the ideological struggle between races. They are incompatible views of history and society." Really? Because they both have the social ownership of the means of production - which is socialism. It's not capitalism. In fact, Hitler was anti-capitalist. "Their idea of socialism was a society where all classes worked harmoniously for the common cause of the nation (a completely different definition of socialism than had been used by any marxist, anarchist, or utopian socialist before)." Yeah, because it's not Marxist Socialism. "There is not a single historical definition of socialism." Social ownership of the means of production. There are variations, but that is, broadly speaking, it. "You assume you understand socialism because this is what the media tells you socialism is." What? The media is not saying National Socialism is socialism. "You have read every source except those from the socialists themselves." I've not read every single source, but I've read Das Kapital and Mein Kampf. I've also read widely on the subject. "You have even read Hitler, despite his vehement opposition to communists." He doesn't like Marxists. GREAT. But that doesn't mean he's not socialist. "I think it's time you put aside your pre-conceived notions and read the original documents." I think it's time you put aside your pre-conceived notions and listen to what I'm actually saying. Me reading the original documents was what caused the penny to drop with me in the first place. Until recently, I also thought that National Socialism wasn't socialism. I now see the error of that line of thinking. I have put aside my pre-conceived notions are re-evaluated my perception of what National Socialism was, and have reassessed it for what it actually was. National Socialism is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production. That is what it is. "I personally cannot recall a single state in human history that fits the definition of 'socialism' based on their theoretical descriptions." This is the problem. Because if you're Marxist, you want to claim that no socialist state was "real socialism" so that you can then claim that Marxist socialism hasn't bee tried, and thus is still valid. This is the postmodernism element of the Marxist theory doing the rounds - redefine what socialism is, and deny that the other forms of socialism were socialism. The problem is, history does not bow down to ideology. My definition of socialism (the "state doing stuff" as some people have claimed, but is actually the social (state) ownership of the means of production) fits every single form of socialism, be it policy, an actually government, society, or revolution. "So, just to recap, I asserted that TIK's stance is "States = Socialism" and "Socialism built the Pyramids!" Socialism is the social (state) ownership of the means of production. Replace "state" with worker, or Aryan, or whatever, and you still have socialism. "TIK, mate, if you literally cannot find a state your definition doesn't call Socialist..." Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. "show me literally any state in history which TIK's argument would not call Socialism. TIK said Britain. I pointed to the NHS. TIK said that's because Britain is Socialist. Which means TIK, with the whole of human history to choose from, has still yet to find even a single state which his definition would not call Socialist." I did that to show you that it's not a switch. It is a dial. You point to ANY capitalist or socialist state and I'll tell you where there is capitalism or socialism in it. That's because my definition of socialism is not restricted to one minor branch of socialism like yours is.
    1
  18105. "Which is it, TIK?" It's capitalism with some socialism. I think I've made that very clear now. "Don't double-talk, just tell me which one it is." Again, this isn't a switch, so your question is invalid. "If Britain fails to be a socialist state using this criteria, then so does Nazi Germany." But it doesn't fail to be a socialist state. The NHS (social ownership) shows that it is socialism. "If Nazi Germany and Britain are both Socialist states, then either, as I have asserted, you really are defining all states as Socialist, and you're wrong to call it a strawman when people refer to your arguments as such, or there must be some state somewhere to which you can point to disprove that definition." Then disprove that these states didn't have social ownership. "So we're back to you not succeeding at what should be a trivial challenge if I'm wrong." You failing to grasp what I'm saying, and me tricking you by picking Britain, has absolutely proven my argument to be correct. "Show me an actual example of a historically existing state which qualifies as capitalist but cannot be reclassified as socialist using the working definition of socialism you have been arguing." Socialism is in every nation, as is capitalism. "...or, perhaps, and I know this might seem like an infinitesimally small possibility, but just maybe... your definition of what is or is not socialism/capitalism is nonsensical, contradictory, and arbitrary. Just a thought." Or... perhaps... you haven't quite grasped what I'm saying. Socialism is social ownership - that is the definition. Therefore, it exists in policies as much as in parties, states and governments. You can have a capitalist state, but with some socialist policies. That state would be classed as capitalist, even if it had some socialist policies. The same is true with socialist states with hints of capitalism, like National Socialist Germany. It is a dial, not a switch. Interestingly, my nonsensical, contradictory, and arbitrary definition of what is or is not socialism/capitalism is the historical definition. Again, socialism is social ownership. That is the definition. If the workers own the social ownership, that's Marxism. If the Aryan Germans own it, that's National Socialism in the Third Reich. If the Labour Party gets the government to nationalize the health-service (the NHS), then the Labour Party is socialist. My definition of socialism makes perfect sense. Your definition just means Marxist socialism - and that's absolutely, historically, incorrect.
    1
  18106. "Then you have failed to do what I explicitly asked you to do, which was to point to any capitalist state, ever, which could not be defined as a socialist state using your definition." No, because that's the point - my definition of socialism includes all socialist policies. So even if there was a government which was as capitalist as they come, but had just one socially-owned business (e.g. they nationalised the postal service), then that is a socialist policy. To deny that is to deny the definition of socialism as history - and you, and many other Marxists say it is - social ownership. "If that isn't your definition, then you should be able to point to a capitalist state where using your definition won't reclassify it as socialist." Socialism is not a switch. It's a dial. Therefore, Britain is a capitalist state. However, it has some socialist policies. Therefore, it is moderately socialist on the dial. Compare this to National Socialism which has turned the switch up further. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to grasp.
    1
  18107. "I have asked you to show me a capitalist state where I can't point to it and call it socialism using your working definition." Ok, let's play this game of yours. Let's start with Britain.
    1
  18108. "A reminder: Literally every argument TIK has rests on the assumption that anything a state does can be classified as "socialist" and therefore the Nazis were socialist." Talk about a strawman. As I said above - "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." Wikipedia In National Socialist thinking, Aryans (the social-bit) seized the means of production from the Jews, and now owned the economy (social ownership), then self-managed the means of production. By doing so, they had to rid the Jews from society - so, their removal of the Jews from society is evidence of their socialism. To use wikipedia again - "Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.[1][2][3] Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets." I can point to many governments which include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets. What I cannot do is then use this to explain how did capitalist free-market forces (competitive markets) and supply and demand (voluntary exchange) resulted in the gas chambers at Auschwitz, the concentration camps, and the death camps?. Why? Because it wasn't capitalism.
    1
  18109. "Sokami Mashibe - It should be abundantly clear by now to anyone reading this thread that the Thesis Statement in my original comment has been proven by TIK himself." But I'm not wrong, therefore I've proven that I will back down when I'm wrong. But I'm not wrong, so I'm standing my ground. Anyone reading the replies to people's arguments in this video will see that I've made very solid points that have withstood the counter-arguments. The reason you will not consider it is because you're pushing an agenda. And I submit as proof the fact that you upload videos entitled "Happy International Worker's Day!" and have a red flag in your thumbnail, and a Soviet flag over Berlin as your channel banner.
    1
  18110. "I looked at the page 198, there is no mention of capital or even Marx. May be give the quote itself? I previously searched for keywords and the only single place where i found hitler mentioning das kapital was where he was shitting on it as a jewish book, written to fool the people. Nothing about class struggle." You're reading the Russian version of Mein Kampf, aren't you? I shall quote from it (and put the quote in the context of the chapter) - "I began to study again and thus it was that I first came to understand perfectly what was the substance and purpse of the life-work of the Jew, Karl Marx. His Capital became intelligible to me now for the first time. And in the light of it I now exactly understood the fight of the Social-Democrats against national economics, a fight which was to prepare the ground for the hegemony of a real international and stock-exchange capital." Hitler, Mein Kampf, Jaico 2017, Page 198. Prior to this point, Hitler is talking about how he isn't a fan of capitalism. He says he reads Das Kapital (written by Karl Marx) and comes to the opinion that globilization was bad (to put it basically). So this is (partly) where he's saying he doesn't want international capitalism. "The struggle against international finance capital and loan-capital has become one of hte most important points in the programme on which the German nation has based its fight for economic freedom and independence." - Hitler, Mein Kampf, P197 He says that capitalism brought about the First World War. From this (later), the then goes on to say that Marxism is being used by the Jews to bring about social-equality based on class, which then will allow the Jews to inter-breed with the Aryans and bring about the downfall of civilization. He then says - “Just as he [the Jew] succeeded in obtaining civic rights by intrigues carried on under the protection of the bourgeois class, he now hoped that by joining in the struggle which the workers were waging for their own existence he would be able to obtain full control over them.” Page 290 “When that moment arrives, then the only objective the workers will have to fight for will be the future of the Jewish people. Without knowing it, the worker is placing himself at the service of the very power against which he believes he is fighting.” Page 290 “This Marxist doctrine is an individual mixture of human reason and human absurdity; but the combination is arranged in such a way that only the absurd part of it could ever be put into practice, but never the reasonable part of it. By categorically repudiating the personal worth of the individual and also the nation and its racial constituent, this doctrine destroys the fundamental basis of all civilization; for civilization essentially depends on these very factors. Such is the true essence of the Marxist Weltanschauung, so far as the word Weltanschauung can be applied at all to this phantom arising from a criminal brain. The destruction of the concept of personality and of race removes the chief obstacle which barred the way to domination of the social body by its inferior elements, which are the Jews.” Page 290-291 (Weltanschauug means 'world view') “The racial Weltanschauung is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure.” Page 406 (National Socialism and Marxist socialism are not the same because Marxism is based on class, whereas the racial element is the main element of National Socialism) “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” Page 406-407 “We, National Socialists, would reverse this formula and would adopt the following axiom: A strong national Reich which recognizes and protects to the largest possible measure the rights of its citizens both within and outside its frontiers can allow freedom to reign at home without trembling for the safety of the State. On the other hand, a strong national Government can intervene to a considerable degree in the liberties of the individual subject as well as in the liberties of the constituent states without thereby weakening the ideal of the Reich;” Page 510-511 (you can be capitalist, so long as you fall in line with the state) “The internationalization of our German economic system, that is to say, the transference of our productive forces to the control of Jewish international finance, can be completely carried out only in a State that has been politically Bolshevized. But the Marxist fighting forces, commanded by international and Jewish stock-exchange capital, cannot finally smash the national resistance in Germany without friendly help from outside.” Page 555 “The Jewish way of reasoning thus becomes quite clear. The Bolshevization of Germany, that is to say, the extermination of the patriotic and national German intellectuals, thus making it possible to force German Labour to bear the yoke of international Jewish finance - that is only the overture to the movement for expanding Jewish power on a wider scale and finally subjugating the world to its rule.” Page 556 Yeah, this wasn't capitalism.
    1
  18111. "Nice strawman to repeat a question over and over you probably already have an answer to." It's not a strawman. It's a genuine question that nobody seems to be able to answer. "The labour camps (as most of the death camps were first labour camps) filled with political opponents (Jews, socialists, social-democrats) benefitted these proto-multinationals greatly as they supplied them with cheap labour force, resulting in higher profits." If they were cheap labour, why kill them? "As the need for food and housing was rising," Sounds like a social problem. "with more (mostly soviet) prisoners pouring in," They recieved the most Soviet prisoners in 1941 during Barbarossa, and starved 3 million of them by 1942. This was before the main portion of the Holocast had even begun. The Wannsee Conference only happened in the January of 1942. "Auschwitz became a huge complex due to the demand of IG Farben for more labourers." Which they then decided to kill en masse... for profit... somehow? Remember all those businesses that execute their employees when they need to cut back on staff? "These camps were run by state officials," Hmmmmmm.... very interesting. It's like we're getting somewhere now. "but the profits benefitted the large private German companies and high ranking partymembers (many of them being owners of said companies)" German companies and German party members and German Aryans... you mean, only Germans could profit from this? Why was there no Jewish businessmen profiting from this? Is it because the Aryans had gained social ownership of the means of production? "this problem could be only resolved by eliminating the redundant Jewish work force in the production process." And they killed them during a massive labour and manpower shortage? They went against the grain of supply and demand, and killed millions of people who could have been better used to work to make more profit. "The racial discourse helped the nazi's to further dehumanize the jews to a merely economical problem (as was stated in the Wannsee conference)" One social-group of people are dehumanized. Another social group rises up and tackles them. What does that sound like to you? Capitalism or socialism? "This is (state)capitalism in it's purest form. To be as effecient possible for the highest possible reward." Incorrect, it is socialism. You can claim it isn't, but it is. "+TIK Have u seen FinnishBolshevik's response video?" Yes, and just like the arguments above, it was arguing that National Socialism was capitalism, which it wasn't. Have you seen Blitz of the Reich's video where he says National Socialism wasn't capitalism? Link https://youtu.be/go9lP1vZL8I
    1
  18112. They were 60% fulfilled in their requirement for a certain type of artillery shell, thus were lacking 40% of that particular shell. The issue wasn't the numbers but the fact that I mixed the two tables up. So instead of being down 40% in shells, I said they were 40% in artillery pieces - thinking the chart I was using was for the artillery pieces, but I'd used the shell-chart.
    1
  18113. Well, I have only removed two ever to be fair :)
    1
  18114. Interesting. Did they say why?
    1
  18115. That's true!
    1
  18116. Pretty much. I was sort-of rushing it to get to editing Crusader...
    1
  18117. As I have just replied to people elsewhere - Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses. National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different. - "Socialism refers to the power structure of the classes. In capitalism the power is owned by the capitalist, in socialism, the workers and peasants rule." and "Wealth redistribution and welfareism is NOT socialism. You expect to have welfare in socialism, but that's not the core." This is Marxist Socialism only. "Ban labor unions. purge Rhöm and his faction. Give military contracts to industry allies. Treat workers like shit." They replaced labour unions which were deamed to be anti-German and pro-Jewish, replaced them with the German Labour Front to promote German workers rights. They purged ~1,000 people from the 3,000,000 SA - and by the same token, Stalin Purged many socialists, does that mean he's not socialist either? They gave military contracts to industrial allies who were German, and this is fine. "When you cite sources so thoroughly refuted as Jordan Peterson, it's hard to take you seriously." I didn't cite him as a source - I linked to his video on Postmodernism because it's relevant to people who deny the Holocaust. Denying that National Socialism is socialism allows the denialists to claim that the Holocaust didn't happen, and this is why postmodernism is bad. Plus, I have read Tooze. Eco's Fascism is irrelevant because Fascism and National Socialism are not the same thing.
    1
  18118. "The Gulag was a prison system, nothing more nor less." So, the prisoners did no work in this prison system? They just sat around in their cells all day? They didn't build weapons for the war-effort, or work in mines or anything like that?
    1
  18119. "The Nazi State redistributes Property from Jewish Capitalist to German Aryan Capitalist.... therefore socialism. are you really unable to see what is completely screwed up with this "logic"?" That's what Hitler said. Simplicius, the Soviets also had a slave-gulag-economy.
    1
  18120. I have read Tooze. "Waffen-SS Auschwitz" - so the socialist state owned it? It was centrally planned as a means of seizing the means of production from the Jews and giving them to the Aryan Germans and therefore promoting social ownership?
    1
  18121. "A socialist state is a state that primarily defend the interests of the proletariat, the working class." Nope, that's Marxist socialism. When you look at social-democracy and National Socialism, they do not necessarily defend the interests of the proletariat. A better definition is - "A socialist state is a state that primarily defends the social ownership of the means of production." This definition includes Marxist-socialism, social-democracy, and National Socialism. "in this sense, neither Nazi Germany nor Stalinist Russia had a socialist state." Oh yes, because they weren't 'real socialism'. If you pretend that they're not 'real socialism' like a good postmodernist should, you can pretend that Marxist socialism works, even though the evidence shows that socialism has many flaws that are worse than capitalism. This goes against your ideology, so the best way for you to get around it is to pretend that these socialisms weren't 'real socialism'. Unfortunately, history does not bow down to political ideology. They were both socialisms.
    1
  18122. Sokami, as I've mentioned several times now in the comments section in reply to your comments, the National Socialist economy wasn't capitalist. Free-market forces and supply and demand cannot explain the gas chambers. They are only possible in a socialist economy within a racist society.
    1
  18123. :(
    1
  18124. Not read that one, but I read his Barbarossa one and it's good. When I get the time I will be reading more. He also has some lectures on YouTube that are worth watching if you haven't seen them already.
    1
  18125. "TIK is correct if he would state different definitions of socialism exist." I did say that. "TIK would be correct to state that apart from the marxist definition, their exist the view that social-democracy is socialist, or the view that several Americans have, that Europe is socialist because they have social welfare, public health services and public education services." I did say that. "TIK could also be argued to be correct if he would state that Hitler and the Nazi's considered themselves to be socialist (even if the Strasserism branch would disagree)." I did say that. "TIK however cannot be argued to be correct when he declares Hitler's definition of socialism to be the a correct definition of socialism." I have never once said that. Don't put words in my mouth. I've said that National Socialism was a form of socialism. That has been my argument all along. "TIK cannot be agued to be correct when he declares "nationalized economies, as opposed to free-market economies", to be the sole correct definition of socialism." You tell me what definition of socialism (not Marxist socialism) you'd prefer, and I'll use that to show you how National Socialism was a form of socialism. "TIK cannot be argued to be correct when he is placing the marxist definition on the same level as the American definition - nice theory, but wrong - and declaring the degree of state intervention and free market forces the only correct definition of the difference between socialism and capitalism." Point me to a socialist state which does not have heavy state intervention in the economy. "TIK most certainly cannot be considered correct when he states the Wikipedia definition of socialism and capitalism, than violates them while being totally blind for the fact he violates them!"" I did not violate them. "Don't make me laugh haha. Refusing to understanding of national socialism beaucse it goes. Against his political beliefs!!" And what are my political beliefs, kovy? Since I've been accused of being a fascist, nazi, a communist, a socialist, a 'libtard', an an anti-American, a pro-British, an anti-German, a pro-German, a conservative, and an anti-capitalist, I'd really like to hear your opinion.
    1
  18126. Have a heart
    1
  18127. And mightily bored they'll be.
    1
  18128. Ah ok :) so, the scoring system is like you'd get in school - +A, A, B, C etc But for a degree (in the UK) it goes 1st, 2nd, 3rd, fail. The way that's represented is 1, 2, 3, and fail. However, they then added in an extra number for some reason, so now it goes, 1, 2:1, 2:2, 3, and fail. The scores are based on the % points you get in your essays and exams. So to get a 1st, you needed to get 70% or more. For a 2:1, you had to get over 60%. For a 2:2 over 50%. And a 3rd, you needed 40%. The numbers might be off because it was like 10 years ago now since I was in university, but that's what I remember. I did get firsts in one of my essays (interestingly, the only essay related to WW2), but most of the subjects at university didn't interest me, so I didn't really try too hard. I was aiming for a 2:1, so I got one. I actually tried a lot harder at college because they were talking about Britain and Germany between the years 1850 and 1950 :) As far as I'm aware, a "Major" means you've taken a degree which they've fully committed to - which is what I did. But you can Minor in a secondary subject. So if I'd taken history for 75% of the time, but done English for 25% of the course, I would have Majored in History, and got a minor in English. I'm not sure if that's exactly it because I didn't do that, but I think that's right.
    1
  18129. Absolutely nothing. Qualifications and experience mean nothing unless you're applying for a job (and even then, they can mean nothing, as many have discovered to their horror). It does not show intelligence, it does not prove anything. The only things it could be argued is that a person with a degree or qualification should know more about a given topic and perhaps proves that they have a better than average understanding of the subject, and that they had the perseverance to sit through 3+ years of boring lectures whilst drowning themselves in debt. However, there's no law that says that someone without a degree couldn't be smarter, more able, and have more knowledge than someone with one. This is why I don't go around boasting about my qualifications, nor do I care if anyone else has a masters or a PhD etc. We are what we produce. If you produce history, you are a historian - whether you have a degree or not.
    1
  18130. I know what you mean :) but I actually released it, so I thought it was best to let the people who watched it know that I messed up and why
    1
  18131. Sort of. I've been mostly focusing on Operation Crusader because I want to get Battlestorm Crusader out soon. I did intend for the next few weeks to be purely on Crusader, but a couple of things have come along an disrupted that plan, so the next couple videos will not be on Crusader. I'll be returning to the Eastern Front/Stalingrad once Crusader is done.
    1
  18132. No worries! Glad you liked it!
    1
  18133. Yes, there are more important things. In-depthness and accuracy are more important :)
    1
  18134. I haven't quite got to that point yet in the Crusader script (which is when I figure out exactly what's happening and decide who's to blame). But it is something I will look into and I'll make a verdict on. I suspect, given the fact that the Ariete did well in the first few days of the operation at least, that there's more to it than what the Germans said.
    1
  18135. Both of those two battalions (2nd and 8th) are in 104th Schützen Regiment (and shown in the video). The other two I was referring to are 3rd Battalion of 255th Infantry Regiment and 3rd Battalion of 347th Infantry Regiment.
    1
  18136. And by last week, I mean, from last Monday to yesterday. So that doesn't include the 14.5 hour day I'm doing today. Tomorrow, I'm having a day off though :)
    1
  18137. Last week I worked 76 hours :D D:
    1
  18138. Glad you like it :)
    1
  18139. I actually am currently devoting all my time to it (averaging 71 hours a week since April when I quit my job). My Patreons are the ones allowing me to do this full-time, which is why I'm incredibly grateful for their support. Crusader script is almost done :)
    1
  18140. That's right. A lot of people base the German Army on its performance in 1941. That's fine, but there were other years of the war too :) don't know a huge amount about the Vietnam War, but again, lots of bias in the books. Who's Tommy Robinson? Never heard of him!
    1
  18141. I'm going to mention it in the main Crusader video, but only in passing. It's not really important in the grand scheme of things, other than as a distraction to the main events. Obviously, if they had actually killed or captured Rommel, or done something worth-while, that would have been different.
    1
  18142. Haha I see what you did there
    1
  18143. Good to hear! I hope you learn a few things from it :)
    1
  18144. Don't worry, it's a debate ;) that said, his conduct in the battle is questionable - even without considering the Dash to the Wire bit. And I don't think, even if he'd taken that supply dump, he could have raced off to Cairo without tackling the British forces and then take Tobruk. It may have given him the advantage and possibly won him the battle, but not the campaign.
    1
  18145. Haha I'm no expert on Italian. How do you pronounce them??
    1
  18146. Thank you! It means a lot to know the odd mistake doesn't detract from the main purpose of these videos - being informative :)
    1
  18147. I am planning on covering it at some point. It'll definitely be after Crusader though.
    1
  18148. Thanks Stan :) still, I work so hard on them, it's frustrating when things like this happen
    1
  18149. I have HOI3 and 4. The OOB system was "better" in HOI3, although the new streamlined OOB in HOI4 makes it easier to actually play the game. Saying that, there's not enough freedom in HOI3 or 4 to actually create a detailed OOB. You can't have kampfgruppen, for example.
    1
  18150. That's actually not Sümmerman. I couldn't find a suitable picture for him specifically and so decided to use a well-known picture of a soldier from the Afrika Division as his substitute.
    1
  18151. Hahahaha
    1
  18152. Yes, it's coming. I've hit a bit of a snag. I thought it would be a couple hours long... Well, nope! It's going to be about 6 hours long, and will be the longest Battlestorm video I've ever done by far! Didn't realize it was such a complicated and whirlwind of a battle. That's why it's taking so long to do, and why it's not out yet.
    1
  18153. Sorry, meant to say - just want to get Crusader out the way first
    1
  18154. Yeah, don't worry I'll be coming back to Stalingrad in a few weeks. Just want to get Stalingrad out the way first :)
    1
  18155. Ok!
    1
  18156. Congrats!
    1
  18157. Thegamer8324 let's put it this way, it's taken me months already and will take months to finish... although a preview will come soon
    1
  18158. Thegamer8324 something more ambitious than anything I've done so far
    1
  18159. Dowly haha I knew someone would ask this! You'll just have to wait and see
    1
  18160. ***** It's close ;)
    1
  18161. Gary Thomas And don't forget about Project A, and B, and C, and D, and E, and F, and G, and H, and I, and J, and K, and L, and M, and N, and O, and P, and Q, and R, and S, and T, and U, and V... And Z? Yeah, Y not ;)
    1
  18162. VOX TOGGLE GAMING more details to follow soon... but I've been working on something big
    1
  18163. February is the next one
    1
  18164. "9 minutes" *90
    1
  18165. Absolutely not. Wikipedia is written by unknown authors on a collective-level. It tends to favour collectivist ideologies as a result. Do not use it as more than a reference or an introduction to a topic.
    1
  18166. Really? Is this actually the case? Do you have evidence for this??
    1
  18167. Merry Christmas Jamie! Sorry you weren't first!
    1
  18168. I expect that this video will annoy some people.
    1
  18169. He's a South African general who took part in Operation Crusader, which is currently my longest battle documentary https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    1
  18170. Yes, that's exactly what I said in the video!
    1
  18171. "Laughable dude...laughble "In a market economy there is less incentive to build war machines" - TIK 2020 US total military spending 2020 $718 BILLION and something like 1.78 TRILLION in 2018, globally. War machines are one of the backbones of the capitalist economy." The consumer is demanding those war machines be built for the consumer? Or the state is demanding those war machine be built for the state? I think you will find that it is the state. The state is socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y thus, the USA doesn't have a capitalist economy. You know this because the black market exists. Well, the black market is a free market. A black market can only exist in a state-controlled socialist economy.
    1
  18172. Answering questions coming from the people who directly support my channel and make all this possible is never a waste of breath
    1
  18173. "Socialism is democracy. Tik once again entertaining the facistic views of his fascist subscribers." Socialism is democracy; that's why Fascism is democratic. "And the tendency of capitalism is the falling rate of profit, and thereby new markets are needed to uphold capitalism, thereupon capitalists start wars to carve markets among themselves." I will cover this in an upcoming video. But this is untrue because value isn't derived from Labour as the Marxists believe, but is subjective. Thus, in reality, the only economies that suffer from the falling rate of profit are Socialist economies. "f we want to end the world of war then capitalism must be abolished. No capitalism no more war." World War II was a war between socialist countries. Capitalism is private control of the economy. A private citizen (e.g. me) doesn't want war. Only states (socialism) want war https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18174. Jamie's back in the game!
    1
  18175. If it had been capitalist, it wouldn't have been the Union of SOVIET SOCIALIST Republics, it would still have been Russia. So I didn't confuse anything here. I know the USSR was multinational, but social-democratic/capitalist Russia would not have been.
    1
  18176. State Capitalism is an oxymoronic term https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18177. I want to, but I'm focusing on the European War for now. History theory says we should specialize on certain topics in order to become 'masters' of it. So doing the Far Eastern Front right now would be counter productive. One day I will do it, but only when I've covered what I want to cover in the European Theatre
    1
  18178. A very relevant video for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18179. Roads to nowhere are a waste, and since Socialism (governments) don't operate for profit, they can't calculate which route is the correct one to take https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4
    1
  18180. Well, I'm glad you're excited :)
    1
  18181. That's Lumsden
    1
  18182. Oh I haven't forgotten about it. After Stalingrad I'll assess the situation and decide what I'm doing after that. But definitely want to get Courland and Stalingrad done first.
    1
  18183. Not at the moment. Once Crusader is done, it's Courland then Stalingrad. After that, it's a possibility.
    1
  18184. Yes, that's one of the reasons
    1
  18185. Yes, someone else pointed this out. Interestingly, the source does say "Czech", so maybe they got it wrong.
    1
  18186. Glad to hear! But you ain't seen nothing yet ;)
    1
  18187. If I was to get into miniatures again, Bolt Action or Flames of War would the be way to go. The scale is quite small for Bold Action, isn't it?
    1
  18188. You're talking about Italo Balbo. I mentioned this in Operation Compass. After getting shot down, he was then replaced by good-old Marshall Graziani.
    1
  18189. Great! Hope you enjoy it!
    1
  18190. Glad to hear you enjoyed it, Luke :)
    1
  18191. I wonder how many people will get offended by this again. (Btw, you really need to update your material)
    1
  18192. It did take about 70 hours of editing. Script was already done, and so were the unit graphics, and 90% of the music. I'm absolutely knackered right now haha.
    1
  18193. Not sure about the training, but the Czech battalion was at Tobruk.
    1
  18194. After this, the plan is to cover the Courland Pocket, then Stalingrad.
    1
  18195. This will help http://www.niehorster.org/000_admin/009_symbols.html
    1
  18196. The narrator uses sources, which is where he gets his information from. Those sources are written (at least in part) by people who were there, or are officers in various armies. If generals were the only ones who could write the history of war, they would provide a very narrow outlook on the conflict. Historians don't need to have lived through the events in order to understand them. In fact, not having lived through the events actually gives them an advantage - they can look at what happened from a fresh perspective. And this is exactly the conclusion David Evans comes to in the book In Defence of History.
    1
  18197. Sadly, next week's will be about 25 minutes long (the plan doesn't require too much explanation). But future Crusader videos could be longer, so there's hope.
    1
  18198. Lol that's probably a better title
    1
  18199. You're correct that there's no battle like this. I honestly can't think of one which is so all-over-the-place like this. Most battles are quite linear; not so with Crusader.
    1
  18200. That's good timing
    1
  18201. Paddy. Firstly, I know that Ike was promoted - I mentioned this in my Purges video. Second, there's a difference between leading troops in combat and leading army groups, which is what Ike did. Thirdly, Gott commanded the 7th Support Group from 1940 until prior to Crusader late 1941, which was a mixed artillery and infantry force, so yes he was used to commanding artillery, as seen in Operation Compass, Brevity and Battleaxe - all of which I've done documentaries on. And the point is that Gott failed over and over and was promoted over and over, despite clearly not being capable of the positions he was already in. And your last point is meant to be an insult, but fails because nobody from the UK who's sane cares about the Empire. And FYI it collapsed because it was way too expensive to keep (or take in the first place - cheaper to just trade) and was completely unnecessary, especially in an era when two superpowers (one of which the UK was massively in debt to) wanted to bring it down. The whole world and the UK are better off without it.
    1
  18202. Lucky for you, this is the only music track that I've released as a separate video https://youtu.be/0OavdLkkNQE Note that I made this in January and it is the main 'Crusader' theme tune, which should tell you how long I've been working on these videos...
    1
  18203. I have - that's Lumsden, not Gatehouse. I don't actually know what Gatehouse looks like :(
    1
  18204. Haha I didn't think it necessary to say the armour penetration of the 88 since it wasn't a factor in 1941
    1
  18205. "There's not really a lot of content here on corps and Army level units." I covered the British OOB in more detail in a previous video (now out of date due to the "regiments" issue). Medium artillery units were listed at army level. I don't think (off tope of head) there were any heavy or super-heavy regiments listed during Crusader at all though. Link https://youtu.be/QCNDEoRDp6I But I will point out that the histories don't say where this artillery was deployed, so we won't see them in the field regardless of their presence unless a historian goes digging into the archives specifically for them and then say exactly where they were at all times.
    1
  18206. They did, but only in 1945. Better late than ever or something
    1
  18207. Ah ok, I think they became part of Eighth Army later (by the sounds of it, Gazala?) but at least up until the end of 1941, the only French units were the brigade I mentioned before, and the help given to the LRDG.
    1
  18208. I've covered them in the LRDG videos, and there was a brigade (I think) of Free French during Rommel's First Desert offensive, which I've covered, but the Free French didn't take part in Crusader.
    1
  18209. I haven't looked much further ahead than Crusader at the moment (I'm doing it all in order from Operation Compass to El Alamein and beyond), but the answer is probably quite a few. Montgomery seems to have been the first after O'Connor to really understand what he was doing and correct the faults with the British Army doctrines. Many find fault with his arrogance and so on, and that's understandable. But compared to what came before, he was a capable commander at the very least.
    1
  18210. Cowboys and hippies in WW2? Sure! Let's make that! :D but yes, it's a fantastic film. Oddball is just an amazing character
    1
  18211. Both are awesome! Favourite song? I like Art of War (the entire album's good too!)
    1
  18212. Put an end to war by conquering the world? ;)
    1
  18213. Can they shoot any subordinate? I'm fairly certain that's not the case in the British military (anymore at least).
    1
  18214. Great comment :) I'm also primarily into military and economic history. Politics does come into that (obviously), but for me when I study history the priority I think is economics, then military, then politics in that order. You can't have a military without economics, and you can't have politics without economics either. But yes, I agree with a lot of what you said. History is definitely about everyone. It shapes who we are and the world we live in.
    1
  18215. True! But my question is, why would anyone take learn from history when their perception of it is that it's boring? In my opinion we need to change that perception.
    1
  18216. The other failures of the Allies? Like Operation Market Garden, or the video I'm working on right now called Operation Crusader, where the British won but lost all their tanks? The Soviets didn't send men into battle with a single rifle - you've watched too many films. And I'm not anti-German. I'm learning German right now so I can read their sources! The Germans did really well militarily. I just want to approach this war in a balanced way. That means I will criticise them when necessary, and I won't be whitewashing their atrocities. And no, the Soviet military certainly wasn't perfect either, and committed many crimes too.
    1
  18217. I'll happily give you some book suggestions :) Glantz's Stalingrad 'Trilogy' (it's actually 5 books - but there's a 1 book condensed version which I've heard is very good), Citino's Death of the Wehrmacht, Liedtke's Enduring the Whirlwind, and Hayward's Stopped at Stalingrad, are fantastic for the 1942 Blau Campaign and Stalingrad. Anything by Glantz is good to be honest, which is why Citino has supposedly said we're living in the "Glantz era" of WW2 history.
    1
  18218. Wow, been a while! What is this - Return of the Jamie?
    1
  18219. That's quite specific! What did he do that made you interested??
    1
  18220. Good to hear :) more to come
    1
  18221. Retail. Although there's logistics, admin, stock and various other elements in there too. Quite a diverse role to be honest.
    1
  18222. Interesting stuff John :) I'm curious, what interests you specifically in Market Garden? I know you're quite strongly opinionated on the battle, but what exactly gives you those strong opinions, enough to post as much as your do?
    1
  18223. Great game! Liked the graphics of Rome 2, but just didn't feel the same as Rome 1
    1
  18224. I think your teacher was right. Money and/or resources is what makes the world go round. And I definitely agree with your teach-yourself mentality. Being spoon-fed history isn't healthy. Only by doing our own research can we really get closer to that elusive truth
    1
  18225. And your answer for next week's question? (it's at the end of the video)
    1
  18226. Because I know Stalingrad will take a while, so I wanted to get a "small" Battlestorm out this year. Sadly, I didn't realise just how colossal Crusader was, nor did I expect it to be as swirlingly complicated as it is. I'm still working on Stalingrad - in fact, the Monday videos on Stalingrad that I've been doing have helped me with my research. But I want to get a Battlestorm out this year and Crusader will be it. Also, love Greece, visisted two islands. Great country. Will do Crete one day too :)
    1
  18227. Yeah, and same with Cossacks too. Learning a lot today :)
    1
  18228. Haha no worries. Glantz is god!
    1
  18229. Ah, back then it was similar to that number but not quite (the list I've got building isn't finished). I announced the results in the pinned comment of the video after the one with the contest.
    1
  18230. Well, I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  18231. Oh I will be doing more in the meantime, don't worry :)
    1
  18232. When's your birthday?
    1
  18233. Will do! And unfortunately I've not read much on the Pacific Theatre, I'm afraid so I can't recommend anything there :(
    1
  18234. My favourite fiction author is George Orwell :) but then I don't read fiction anymore.
    1
  18235. You're very welcome :)
    1
  18236. Agreed!
    1
  18237. While I recommend it, it's probably not recommended for a newbie on the topic.
    1
  18238. Me too. Still gathering resources on it. Surprisingly little has been written on it.
    1
  18239. Yes!
    1
  18240. You should!
    1
  18241. Yes, seen it. That's partly why I've decided I'll do a video on it
    1
  18242. I'm guessing you haven't seen my non-Eastern Front videos? E.g. the North African Campaign videos, or Operation Bruneval or Market Garden?
    1
  18243. Strange. Here's the link again https://youtube.com/c/StalingradBattleData And the link to the first Suzdal video https://youtu.be/dqOuwrMSdjw
    1
  18244. Yeah, I didn't say there wasn't a weapons shortage. I said that the weapons shortage was resolved before the 13th Guards Rifle Division entered the city.
    1
  18245. So then the question becomes - why are they showing one get getting the rifle, and one guy getting the bullets? Also, what are the chances of the rifles being pre-loaded? Surely that's more unlikely
    1
  18246. That's not a typo! It was a pun. 13th Guards Rifle Division berthed their boats
    1
  18247. The 13th Guards (mostly) crossed at night, so the Luftwaffe couldn't do anything against that
    1
  18248. And you're assuming that they came pre-loaded. But the film doesn't explain that. And I was under the impression that they weren't pre-loaded.
    1
  18249. Which then begs the question - is that realistic? And the answer is, no. So either way, it's still silly
    1
  18250. But if you see dead people, and you're talking to me...... Does this mean I'm a ghost!?
    1
  18251. Yes you are! You're doing well
    1
  18252. Bodglin o'Ite This wasn't a question!
    1
  18253. I covered this in the video. It's not overproduction - it's overproduction of the wrong things, due to the central bank's manipulations.
    1
  18254. This video isn't specific about the current recession (nor any specific previous recession). I'll be doing videos on specific recessions (e.g. the Great Depression of 1929-1945), and might do a video on the current recession/depression we're now in, but this video is just talking about the cause of recessions/depressions.
    1
  18255. Economic history is still history
    1
  18256. Watch the last 15 minutes of this video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    1
  18257. Most of my income comes from my Patrons, not from Google advertisements.
    1
  18258. "Anyways, do not forget, this is somewhat of an opinion piece by TIK." Please read Murray Rothbard's "America's Greatest Depression" which will show you why this isn't opinion. "Which, if he was being intellectually correct, he'd admit." This is an intellectually dishonest counterargument. This presentation is supported by all previous recessions and depressions, and even current world events which Austrian economists saw coming a mile off "By my data, an inversion precedes a recession by nearly a year on average, with a median of 9.5 months. As can be seen below, there is a reasonable amount of variance with some recessions coming in about 6 months and others waiting nearly 20 months." - Christian Hubbs 25/09/2019 https://mises.org/wire/why-does-yield-curve-inversion-suggest-recession
    1
  18259. Central banking is not capitalism. Marx called for Central Banking in the Communist Manifesto. Capitalism is free markets. We don't have a free market right now (excluding the black market)
    1
  18260. "nd last but not least if you live in a normal country there is a thing that counteracts the inflation, which btw is 2,9% or if you look at the adjusted inflation 1% so you are wrong again, there is a phenomenon called yearly salary increase meaning my salary is worth the same today as tomorrow." Inflation isn't 2.9%. It's much higher than that. Official inflation will be that, or lower, but that's official inflation, which is hiding the true figure. They deliberately don't count all items. For example, house prices here in the UK have shot up to ridiculous levels. Health care in the United States is in a massive inflation bubble. And in both the UK and the USA, tuition fees have gone to the moon. In fact, the year after I started university (this was like 15 years ago), tuition fees doubled. Doubled. That's not 2% inflation. And all this is about to come crashing down. Oil prices were inflated to nearly 63 points a barrel. Now they're down to 22.39 in a matter of weeks. So, no. Inflation isn't at 2% or whatever. They're lying. And as I mentioned in the video, yearly salary increases don't always match the official inflation rate, let alone the actual inflation rate, so you're incorrect. "The main reason to have negative interest is to force capital to invest in the economy and not in governments." Absolutely untrue. In order to invest, you need savings. Without the ability to build up capital, you can't have enough savings to make proper decent investments. Any and all profits will be spent instantly on anything that they can get their hands on, so it won't be true investments it'll be risky investments - which further inflates the bubble. Negative rates also give rise to more QE, which forces savings and capital to go from everyone in society to the government. "Can you please make a video where you present your evidence for Adam smith’s invisible hand coupled with bretton woods system as you clearly are biased to it" I'm neither a supporter of Adam Smith nor the Bretton Woods System, so I'm not going to do that.
    1
  18261. "I love that you show images from the Great Depression where major factors where lac of regulation, thievery behavior on the stock market where investors would unite to inflate the value of stocks and then sell their shares, the bretton wood system that prevented new money to come in and avoid total panic by the banks and eventual collapse." Completely incorrect. Please read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which will correct pretty much everything you've just said here.
    1
  18262. "Also the current global health problem shows that despite the best efforts of a lot of people, the economy still is influenced by real world problems and it's not just numbers and book-keeping." The economy was tanking before the virus appeared. The virus was perhaps the pin, and has made the situation unfold more rapidly, but it wasn't what caused this recession. I, for example, knew that a recession was on its way and prepared accordingly. I have paid down my debts over the past couple years, and built up an emergency fund for this occasion. I've also pulled most of my money out of the banks in case we have a bank run or liquidity crisis (which we are right now, hence why they're printing like crazy). Yet most businesses didn't do that. Most businesses got into a ton of debt, and are now struggling to stay afloat. Well, I say let the bad businesses and banks fail. It's not capitalism (me) who's caused this recession, it's them. Well, let them fail.
    1
  18263. "I'm not saying currency creation can't cause economic downturns. Im saying that there is a large number of factors that can cause economic downturn." Yes, there's a large number of factors that make the recession worse, but only one thing that causes it: fractional reserve banking. "but well managed monetary policy (or fiscal policy especially) can cushion economic downturns." As I explained in the video, fiscal policy just deepens or prolongs the recession, it doesn't "cushion" anything. And you wouldn't need fiscal policy during a recession if there wasn't fiscal policy prior to the recession which created the circumstances for the recession to happen in the first place. "I just object to the black and white "state intervention always bad", "free market always good" approach because there is some major issues with it (i.e. I think everyone can agree that an ancap state would be a disaster)." Well, I disagree, but let's agree to disagree on these issues for now. I would encourage you to read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" if you haven't already. I think you can get a copy online for free. Should explain a lot for you
    1
  18264. It's not just North America - the entire world is doing the same thing! The UK and the EU is currently inflating their currencies into oblivion. It will take time to take affect, but it's practically guaranteed at this point. House prices, oil prices, stock prices, tuition prices, second hand markets (e.g. cars) were all in a bubble prior to the current crisis. Now they're all coming down. But those dollars and pounds and euros don't disappear. Currency doesn't get eaten by the money-fairy, it must go somewhere. And the inflation in the bubbles is now beginning to hit the consumer. Toilet roll shortages in the shops are the beginning of that process.
    1
  18265. Fractional reserve banking causes the business cycle. But since every State in the world has a Central Bank which runs the fractional reserve banking sector (and manipulates interest rates, which is the big issue), it's currently the State that causes the Recessions and Depressions. The way to stop this is to have a free market whereby gold is used instead of fiat tokens. Unfortunately, when this is pointed out, people jump to the conclusion that "we had recessions during the Golf Standard", not realizing that the Gold Standard wasn't gold - 60% of the means of exchange in circulation was fiat currency, and something like 25% was gold (the other being silver).
    1
  18266. You still had a fractional reserve banking system though.
    1
  18267. Haha yeah
    1
  18268. People think conservatives are right wing. History shows us that conservatives are the old Left wing. Therefore we shouldn't be surprised by such behaviour.
    1
  18269. "You don't get paid for the value you create, but for how much your employer estimates you to create." That's actually incorrect, you get paid based on the current market value of labour, which is subjective just like all other goods and services.
    1
  18270. It was my "Why did People vote for Hitler?" video https://youtu.be/Ydx72tT552k
    1
  18271. "What you describe is monetarism" No it isn't. It's supply and demand, which is basic economics. Air is free because it's in abundance. Similarly, if there's lots of something, then the value of it decreases. If you print a ton of currency or add digits to a screen, you'll devalue that currency, which is exactly what inflation is. Check out this video https://youtu.be/nnisOz2nGFc
    1
  18272. "Inflation is driven by wages, not by money" No, it's the amount of money/currency that there is.
    1
  18273. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  18274. I know people won't want to hear it, but perhaps if they understood the truth they could be inspired to make a change
    1
  18275. "Also, inflation is actually good. Without it money gets stuck so to speak with the 1%" Inflation is bad, as you'll see if you actually watch the video and try to understand it. Inflation is being used by the 1% as a tool to steal wealth from everyone in society to them, which is why they tell you it's good. It is good - for them. But it's not good for you or me. Here's another video about inflation https://youtu.be/nnisOz2nGFc "The threat of inflation forces companies to keep doing what they are doing and gives chances for other and newer businesses or people to do something." It makes it harder for people like you or me to save money to create a business in the first place because our wealth is being secretly stolen from us by the 1%. "The people who hate inflation are old bastards who bought homes dirt cheap after WW2 and refuse to fuck off and die." You mean people who remember what it was like before WW2 when inflation wasn't really a thing, or were taught by their parents that inflation was bad, since back before WW1 there wasn't inflation, and living standards were rising rapidly year on year (unlike today). "Inflation reduces peoples debt in comparison and most people and businesses are swimming in it." If this was the case, then there wouldn't be debt today. Most people are in debt because they cannot make ends meet due to the inflationary policies (as described in this video). "The reason why Thatcher's government recovered was because inflation reduced peoples debts to the point that they could actually spend money again." That's the complete opposite of what happened. Before Thatcher there was rampant inflation in the UK, driven by the unions who kept demanding more and more of it, ruining the economy. Thatcher therefore beat them down, and tried to get the economy back on track by tackling inflation https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA "If you want to fix the economy then you need to look at debt (no, not just public), household debt." The debt comes from the central banks and the government. That's exactly what I said in the video.
    1
  18276. I'm not attacking the unemployed. I'm attacking those who are creating the long term unemployed, and the fake long term unemployed (I know quite a few people playing on the system here in the UK) who are being provided with houses and money that is being robbed from those who actually work and redistributed to those who don't. But if I didn't have patrons, I'd be doing something else. I like contributing to society and being rewarded by society, and nothing will stop me from doing just that
    1
  18277. The true minimum wage is zero. If you don't produce anything of value to society, society won't reward you for your work. Decreeing higher wages than the market value hurts workers as you'll see here https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    1
  18278. Unions hurt workers. Here's a few videos that explain why https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    1
  18279. Glad you liked it! Sadly not a lot of other people did, as few people decided to watch it ☹️
    1
  18280. Nope. Supply and demand. You can't have inflation without increases in the currency supply, and central banks make the currency via the printing press
    1
  18281. Yes they did https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  18282. We're all going negative. Any currency you do have in the bank will be robbed from you, which is why I've got most of mine out of the system already
    1
  18283. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  18284. True, although the central banks set the reserve rate that influences how much the commercial banks are allowed to lend out. Also, I think you'll like tomorrow's video 👍
    1
  18285. It's a rarity, unfortunately
    1
  18286. In the UK, it's common knowledge that you don't go to the doctors when you're sick, but go to the emergency ward of the hospital because you get seen there quicker. That's just one of the consequences of "free" healthcare (it's actually very VERY expensive and a terrible service which we're forced to pay for)
    1
  18287. That's right, the Keynesians promoted the idea that saving was bad. That's why every government today has reacted to the global depression in the same way - by spending even more money and lowering interest rates as low as they can set them (prior to the banning of physical cash, then they will go lower).
    1
  18288. @Di Fox - I didn't invent anything. I look at both sides of the argument and go with the stronger argument. That's what smart people do.
    1
  18289. I love how Jean's comment is undermined by what we've seen recently, with EVERY Central Bank and Central State working closely together to flood the world with currency and directly intervene in the economy (the Lockups). Got to slow money velocity down to mask inflation, after all! But yes, they're doing this all by chance, because they're separate from one another... Give me a break.
    1
  18290. Actually, abolishing minimum wage will improve workers living standards https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ (I'd recommend Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson, and Sowell's Basic Economics, which will also explain why minimum wage and other price and wage controls are bad for the poor, and actually hurt them)
    1
  18291. "but if the capital goods can generate money from investors it won't need more loans in the first place. Therefore there won't be need for inflation." Exactly. Inflation is not required :)
    1
  18292. That's fine under a free market. If they're investing in something, then they're investing in something that they want, or think people will want. It's only bad when there's currency-creation involved, because that manipulates the markets and gives the wrong signals to investors. So people pump more and more money into oil stocks when they're already over-priced, because they see them going up. Then the crash happens and they lose a ton of money (like what's just happened in recent weeks with oil stocks)
    1
  18293. "I dont want to troll it's just a question ,did you study all these things as a student in a university because it's your major ?or you read all these things on random books at home then draw a conclusion on what you read?" With the exception of the videos titled "Why People voted for Hitler" and "Was Hitler a Strong or Weak Dictator? Intentionalist vs Functionalist/Structuralist Debate", nothing I've covered on this channel was studied at university by me. I have read a ton of books, articles, sources and more, and have drawn upon my real world experiences working in retail (rising to manager-level) and currently being self-employed and (technically) running my own business.
    1
  18294. The recession we're now in was created by inflation. Inflation of the stock market, the oil industry, the debt bubble, the housing bubble, the second hand markets (e.g. cars), the academic bubble (tuition fees) and more! There's been tons of inflation. They just don't count any of that when they do their inflation calculations, because they have price controls on food and other consumer goods, and so can keep them artificially low and claim there's no inflation. Well, there is inflation. You can't currently get toilet rolls because the price for a roll is set too low. If prices could rise up to meet demand and supply, then you wouldn't have shortages. The fact that governments are setting low prices is causing the shortages. Inflation is there, but it's in the form of suppressed inflation. Therefore to claim there's been no inflation and thus no consequences is incorrect. The current crisis is a result of the inflation and low interest rate polices of the central state banks around the world
    1
  18295. Next one's coming Monday
    1
  18296. True, but at least you're aware about what's happening, which will help you survive
    1
  18297. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  18298. "gold prices can be manipulated just like everything else in the economy" Spot gold can, yes. Physical gold though, can't. Listen to what Jeff Deist says in this video https://youtu.be/W-ByEct9CdA
    1
  18299. Yes
    1
  18300. There's a theory that says taxation goes to pay the interest on the loan for creating the money in the first place https://youtu.be/iFDe5kUUyT0 Recommend the whole series. Very good
    1
  18301. If an employer lowers wages, the best workers go work elsewhere, leaving the employer with a bad business that goes under. Only under Socialism do you have a situation where workers can be paid less than the market price, since inflation silently robs the workers of their money, giving that wealth to corporations who can then pay the workers less than the market price since they no longer need to sell goods to make a profit...
    1
  18302. And start reading Marxian/Keynesian anti-economics again? No thanks
    1
  18303. Wrong. Central Banks are "Central", meaning "Public". See: https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18304. Adding digits to a screen is still an inflation of the currency supply. The same principles still apply. If you have more currency to spend, you have more purchasing power, which will lead to shortages in the shops, at which point prices will increase to compensate. Now, in our era, government price controls are in place for food and toilet rolls (which is why there are shortages right now, since supermarkets aren't allowed to increase prices), but inflation has still occurred (it's just suppressed for food and toilet rolls, hence shortages). Health care, house prices, stock market prices, second hand car prices, luxury items, tuition fees, other services... There's plenty of inflation about. This "old theory" therefore is the correct theory.
    1
  18305. Also, could you point out which economic school is superior to the Austrian one?
    1
  18306. "The Austrian School has major flaws in it" Could you list them?
    1
  18307. Then why are we in the greatest depression we've ever been in and there's about to be another crash? Why is gold and silver rocketing upwards?
    1
  18308. Which is why the stock markets are at all time highs, commodity prices (except gold and silver, which are being suppressed by JP Morgan and more) are all going up, and why house prices are sky rocketing...
    1
  18309. I've been keeping a close eye on the economy since May last year. It was showing the signs of depression before Christmas. Yield curve inverted months ago. The Austrians saw this coming from a mile away - "By my data, an inversion precedes a recession by nearly a year on average, with a median of 9.5 months. As can be seen below, there is a reasonable amount of variance with some recessions coming in about 6 months and others waiting nearly 20 months." - Christian Hubbs, 25/09/2019 https://mises.org/wire/why-does-yield-curve-inversion-suggest-recession
    1
  18310. Not sure they'd have me, but I'd like to meet some of the guys there!
    1
  18311. They become impoverished. Whoever controls the printing press is stealing wealth from everyone else, and your politicians are allowing it to happen because they're getting a nice cut from the proceeds.
    1
  18312. "We need some kind of minimum wage to stop the wages to go to low. For example if there is no minimum wage the companies could make a deal to put down wages to nothing. Therefor starving concumers out" In that scenario, the companies would also starve themselves out, since there would be no consumers for their products. Also, if one company (or even a cartel of companies) decided to lower wages, then that just opens the door to their competitors. In my previous retail job, we had a problem of retaining employees because a competitor paid their staff higher wages. Most of the better employees would leave the corporation I worked for and go to them, leaving us (in general) with the less skilled and demotivated employees. It's no wonder the old corporation I worked for is now struggling compared it its competitor, which is currently booming.
    1
  18313. Because eventually you get hyperinflation. Here's a game you can play: get a chessboard and put one grain of wheat on the first square, two grains of wheat on the second, and four on the third, etc and double it for each square until you go to all 64 squares on the board. Then let me know when you're done. Well, that's what happens to the currency if they keep inflation going, even at a small rate.
    1
  18314. They're not private, they're Public, and thus they are the government https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18315. Inflation is the expansion of the currency supply - so that has been going on for years. The symptom of inflation is price increases. While food prices are only going up by about 2% per year, other prices have gone up massively. For example, house prices, stock prices, tuition fees, oil prices (prior to the recent crash), second hand car sales, health care prices, etc etc. There's loads of inflation. But they've successfully masked it by controlling certain areas of the economy. Now with the recent bursting of the bubble they're struggling to maintain those areas, so if they lose control prices will change massively in some areas.
    1
  18316. "Never mind the recessions of '45" Hahahahahahahahaha don't make me laugh
    1
  18317. @Slarty Barfast, I know. Got my hopes up too high it seems haha
    1
  18318. "I know a billionaire, nothing pisses him off more than paying his workers." I'm guessing he owns a corporation? If so, makes sense, since socialists don't like the workers having any power. (As I've explained, corporations are socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y ) "Buying an island and paying next to no tax on it" To be fair, I can't blame him for not watching to pay his taxes. If I could get away with not paying my taxes, I'd be able to hire another part-time employee, or hire Terri's services for more maps and editing
    1
  18319. There's two reasons why they're not earning a decent wage: 1) because the government has stolen money from the people and is paying them, which means they're getting a "fair" wage that's below market value, or 2) because they've not yet invented the cure. Like all capitalists who make investments, you put a ton of cost and effort up front, for a hopefully return on investment later (once you've done the thing that needs to be done)
    1
  18320. You are correct.
    1
  18321. Governments are public, not private https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18322. Lenin destroyed the Soviet economy prior to the NEP. Destroyed it. People fled into the woods to get away from his awful policies. And as I showed in Monday's video, the Soviet economy may, or may not, have fully recovered from that destruction https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w So there wasn't much of an economy by 1929, and even using the official statistics, the Soviet economy was just barely above it's 1913 level in 1940. And we know those stats were manipulated higher than they should have been. Therefore, it is an argument.
    1
  18323. "the Soviet Union had no economic crisis in 1929, while all capitalist countries had one." That's because they had practically no economy in 1929. Hard to have a crash if there's nothing to crash with.
    1
  18324. "The crisis of overproduction" Wrong, covered in the video. "the tendency of the rate of profit to fall are core reasons why recessions happen." Destroyed that argument in the Hitler's Socialism video. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 "Socialism eliminates the root of these contradictions, capitalism." Socialism causes the crisis as I explained in this video. Marx called for Central Banking for a reason. "There is a reason the soviet economy boomed while the capitalist world suffered from the great depression." My video on Monday titled "Did the Soviet Union EVER Recover from WW2?" will show you why that is totally not the case https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  18325. There's a reason Karl Marx called for Central Banking in the Communist Manifesto.
    1
  18326. "right we agree fiat is NOT a good store of value but that doesn't mean it isn't a great medium of exchange, which it absolutely is!" Right, so I'm not against a 100% backed fiat (or digital) currency, but I'd say that any other type of fiat currency is bad because it leads to recessions. "You're more correct than most everyone else on these points btw. I'm a perfectionist!" Haha well I'm glad you think I'm mostly-right! I used to be a perfectionist, but I realized it was a bit too much and stressful. Rather be 95% than 100% :)
    1
  18327. "TIK: fiat currency isn't inherently horrible." If you're using fiat currency, your wealth is being stolen from you by an invisible tax. Unless it's a 100% gold-reserve currency (an actual Gold-Standard), then it's horrible for the poor, and causes recessions and depressions. "And likewise purely digital currency also isn't inherently horrible, otherwise China wouldn't be using it fairly exclusively." The Chinese State is very happy with digital currency, yes. And they should be. It's a tool that can be used to steal resources from the economy and keep people in line.
    1
  18328. Yes, Corporations (the Fascist word for Marxist syndicates, or trade unions) are the enemies of the people. Correct. What we need is the end of Central Banking (called for by Karl Marx), since the Central Bank Syndicates and the Central State Syndicates are directly funding the Corporate Syndicates, propping them up. Socialist or Fascist monopolies like these don't work. This is why the market needs to be freed up, as explained in the video.
    1
  18329. "there is nothing even close to consensus on the causes of depressions/recessions." A consensus is irrelevant. History shows that the Austrian explanation is by far the most accurate of our current views. There were Austrians who predicted this current recession we're in miles ahead of it, allowing people like me to prepare for it. For example - "By my data, an inversion precedes a recession by nearly a year on average, with a median of 9.5 months. As can be seen below, there is a reasonable amount of variance with some recessions coming in about 6 months and others waiting nearly 20 months." - Christian Hubbs 25/09/2019 https://mises.org/wire/why-does-yield-curve-inversion-suggest-recession
    1
  18330. Monday is the next Battlestorm Stalingrad
    1
  18331. Yes you were!
    1
  18332. Just to point out that the Luftwaffe airlifted 30,000 soldiers out of the pocket, so technically a breakout would have to save more than 30,000 soldiers for it to be classed as worth it. Of course, I think a breakout at this time would have saved a lot more than that, even if a huge number would have been sacrificed.
    1
  18333. True! Although I do think it's still worth debating to see if one wrong answer might be less wrong that the other
    1
  18334. "@TIK Nope, the private managed Hospitals don't have more personnel, they're just more expensive." But they wouldn't be as expensive if they had more customers, which they can't have because the state is taxing customers who then don't have enough money to use the private hospitals, and therefore are forced to use the inefficient and badly run public hospitals.
    1
  18335. "In Spain our equivalent (Seguridad Social) is fairly good in quality, though it lacks personnel." It lacks personnel because the government is bad at managing it. If it was in the private sector, those personnel would be funded (assuming they were actually needed and it wasn't just inefficiency). "We also have private health companies, most are good and faster but lack certain coverages (I moved from one of these to the public one because of that)." Exactly. One of the reasons the the NHS was created was because the old private healthcare industry didn't yet cover all areas, so the NHS sped up this process. However, now that it does cover the entirety of the UK, there's no reason why it shouldn't be privatised. The government has done the one thing quicker that the private sector was unable to do. Fine. But now it's not as good or as fast as the private sector. It's time to de-nationalize. "The civil servants also have a system called "Muface" which can give either a public or a private insurance, depending on your choice." But who's paying for those civil servants? You are, through taxation. Are you getting 100% of your money's worth by paying them to loaf around in their jobs? If not, you could spend your money elsewhere, but you can't because you have no choice. The state steals your money and dictates to you where it goes. This is why socialism is bad. It is a fallacy to assume that a government can do better than the private sector in all circumstances - it simply cannot. It might serve a purpose at points (for example, the fire brigade is nationalized, and this makes sense), but for the vast majority of businesses, having a government official decide what to do is lunacy. They get paid whether their 'business' works or not. They therefore have no incentive to make it work, and thus it doesn't.
    1
  18336. "1. In modern war you can't have a powerful military without an industrial economy sustaining it, specially in the grand strategic level the USSR did. 2. Starving people doesn't build superpowers. It never has done so, and it never will. Economically and militarly, claiming so is just stupid." Yes, that is precisely my point. "@TIK Okay. Then by your logic propierty is currently banned in most EU countries." Private property is not banned in the EU. However it is heavily taxed. And I'm not talking about people who have houses, I mean everyone is taxed on their wages. Wages are private property. It's my money. Everyone is being taxed. Because of that, they have less purchasing power, meaning they can't acquire physical private property.
    1
  18337. "@TIK also the idea that nationalisation stifles productivity is easily disproven when you take examples. Easy ones include water and railways and now the NHS. All of which have caused a decline in customer satisfaction as well as in increased cost to the public." Hold on, hold on... You're saying that nationalisation doesn't stifle productivity, but then list the NHS water and railways, and say this has lead to a decline in customer satisfaction and increased cost to the public. Yes, it absolutely has! The NHS costs a huge amount of money to the taxpayer every year. I know because I (as a worker) pay at least 20% of my wages in tax (and it could be higher because I can't tell where the tax is coming from because they're all stealth taxes). We're paying for a service that was promised to be "free, universal, at the point of need" which was really "expensive, universal if you're not a worker, but if you are a worker you have to pay, and at the point of need but only if the ambulance will actually turn up". Plus, because workers wages are at least robbed by 20%, they have no choice but to use the delapidated NHS and cannot go get a better service elsewhere. This then drives up prices of the private sector, and discourages innovation in the health industry. I have friends in the NHS who complain about just how poor the whole rotten structure is. They're still using paper, when other private industries are using computers. The doctors and nurses are crying out saying that they can do it better, but the government are at fault. Again, politicians and bureaucrats cannot run a business. The NHS is failing precisely because of the government. Increased spending on the NHS will just delay the inevitable collapse. The public deserves a 20% pay rise and a choice to use more efficient services.
    1
  18338. "The Soviet Union had a lot of flaws but it also had a lot of benefits from a centralised system such as virtually no unemployment and practically no homelessness or extreme poverty." What is the benefit of a centralised system? That's not a benefit at all! I have outlined this above - state ownership of the means of production is inefficient and lowers living standards. Yes, they may have been in employment, but their standards of living were lower as a result of the inefficiency of the government.
    1
  18339. "Admittedly the Soviet system did drown in bureaucracy but living standards were actually very alright. I'm not going to say the Soviet union was a workers paradise because it obviously wasn't and it had serious flaws but generally on a day to day level things were alright up until the late 80s." Yes, but compared to living standards in the west, it was terrible. Plus, there was no freedom, there was no free speech, there weren't products on the shelves... you could be starved to death or sent to a slave labour camp, or just shot in the middle of the night for no reason. It was a nightmare!
    1
  18340. "@TIK if the Soviet union didn't have "effiecient" production then how come it went from a backwater to the world's 2nd superpower." By starving and enslaving many of its own people. And, while militarilly it was a superpower, the reality was that its economy was absolutely terrible, lagged behind most of the rest of the world and eventually caused its collapse.
    1
  18341. "@TIK Nope, they didn't ban private propierty." Huh 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners.
    1
  18342. "@TIK class isn't an identity like "gay", "British" or "black". Class is just the way in which you make your money." What are you chatting? You're now saying that "class" is not a social group? So according to you, class has nothing to do with socialism. Ok, so Marxism isn't socialism then. "If the way you make your money is exploitative I.e using other people to make money for you then you are "bourgeois". So this is your bankers, landlords, and business owners." Explain to me how hiring someone to work for them and paying them a wage is exploitative? If it was so exploitative, the workers wouldn't do it, and would lie in the gutter and go hungry. Pretty sure that a worker wants to find work, so that he can work and earn a wage, that's why he's called a 'worker'. A business owner hires a worker to work for him and pays him a wage for doing so. The worker then produces goods, increases the standard of living for everyone, and receives a wage dependant on his contribution and efficiency. That's not exploitation. Socialism is exploitation. I know, let's tax the business owners so that they won't be able to hire as many workers. So not only are profits down, wages lower, prices of goods higher, and there's increased unemployment, but there's no room for innovation or increased productivity, and as a result you have a stagnating economy. That is exploitation in my book. A tax on ANYONE in society is a tax on living standards for everyone. This is basic economics. "If the way you make your money isn't exploitative then your working class. For example a self employed gardener, a barista, an office worker." And a businessman who employs someone and pays them for their employment is also not exploiting the working class either. The workers don't have to work. They choose to because they want to earn a wage. That's not exploitation. "When socialists say we want to eliminate the bourgeoisie that doesn't mean we want to go on a murdering spree it means we want people to change the way they make money from an exploitative way to what we consider a "just" way." Yes it does mean you want to go on a murdering spree. You want to govern the lives of other people. You want to rob people of their money and dictate to people how much they consume. You want to lower living standards of the working class, and increase unemployment. You want to violently steal money from people. Explain to me how that is "just" compared to letting people have the freedom to choose what they do with their own lives. "Admittedly revolutionary rhetoric has in the past led to some anger towards people considered bourgeois and this led to mass killings e.g in China. But this is a fuck up of some socialists rather than what socialism is about." Yes, because this is what happens when you put bureaucrats, politicians, and socialists in charge of an economy. Socialists don't even understand basic economics, so what chance of they have understanding how detrimental their policies are to low-income families? When a private individual has money (even a little) he has a choice. He can spend his money where he chooses. If a business is evil, he can choose not to spend his money buying that business's goods. That business goes out of business. If the state steals the money off the private individual and gives it to 'society', the private individual no longer has a choice. If the state is evil, the individual cannot spend his money elsewhere. The state can be as corrupt as it likes, and the individual cannot do anything about that. Socialism demands less power to the private individual and All power to the Soviets!
    1
  18343. I'm sorry, I'll start talking twice as slow
    1
  18344. Congrats Koopa!
    1
  18345. I may have used more quotes from Ford for this particular episode, but that doesn't mean I didn't use the other sources!
    1
  18346. What? I used multiple sources. Sources are listed in the pinned comment
    1
  18347. Better than nothing!
    1
  18348. Well, I'm learning German first before Russian. It's coming along slowly, but I'm actually looking forward to learning Russian
    1
  18349. I can confirm I am from the UK haha
    1
  18350.  @Medhead101  I actually have a Bitchute (see link in description). Sadly, it refuses to let me upload any more videos at the moment, so I can't post there. Videos just get stuck endlessly in 'processing' :( otherwise I would post there more often
    1
  18351. I would like to, and was researching today about historical anti-Semitism. However I'm finding YouTube's policies are restricting my ability to cover those topics (e.g. my Greek video being suppressed, as have other videos). So, I'm sort of reluctant to do them due to YouTube's stance :(
    1
  18352. "Nice Tim" Wait, who's Tim?
    1
  18353. Yes, I used to have a couple of series on Panzer Corps when this was a gaming channel. The videos are hidden though, unfortunately, and haven't tried that mod. Also, I'm sticking to a 4 week schedule for Stalingrad because it's proven difficult enough to create them in 4 weeks, let alone less.
    1
  18354.  @Guilherme-ms3ub  Don't worry, this was just a one-off
    1
  18355. I know, it's shocking
    1
  18356. Is this true? Don't you have to be 'verified' for that?
    1
  18357.  @Nick-ce6lt  I wondered for a while if dislikes actually make a video more popular than likes. But I don't think it's necessarily the dislikes. It's probably the fact that people who dislike a video tend to also write lots of nasty comments, which YouTube then sees as engagement, and therefore promotes the video, which then gets dislikes and nasty comments, which then makes YouTube promote the video...
    1
  18358. Yep. I can understand why they targeted Mike Maloney's channel because he's a financial channel, but not sure why they targeted my channel, or MrBeast, because we're not financial channels so the scam most likely wouldn't work
    1
  18359. Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra!
    1
  18360. @michael.perry My sources tell me otherwise - Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Berkoff, K. "Harvest of Despair: Life and Death in Ukraine under Nazi Rule." Harvard University Press, 2004. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Hirschfeld, G. “The Policies of Genocide: Jews and Soviet Prisoners of War in Nazi Germany.” Routledge, Kindle 2015 (original 1986). Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1932). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNhF28fzN9I (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) https://youtu.be/7EnHeZXLzTc
    1
  18361. "I also think there was in a way a willingness to ally among fellow socialists, Mosley, and Hitler via Mussolini, and Mussolini and Hitler all had very different and perhaps conflicting versions of socialism, yet all wanted to face larger threats in their eyes." It's interesting because my (limited) research on Mosley has led me to the conclusion that he didn't fully understand Hitler or what National Socialism was. I'm not sure on his views of Mussolini.
    1
  18362. "It's not socialism, its fascism." Fascism is a version of socialism based on nationalism https://youtu.be/06vJY9nLMXU
    1
  18363. You're talking about the Suvorov "Preventative Strike" idea. I've got a playlist of videos explaining why that idea doesn't hold up in the face of the evidence https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp&si=mfNynh1vKGhYKDVR
    1
  18364. True, but I would suggest that the answer to our current refugee crisis isn't to send them to the kidney slave camps in China. By the same token, while the refugee crisis post-WW2 was bad, I don't think sending them to the Gulags was the right answer.
    1
  18365. An interesting take. Do you have a book that you could recommend that says this? (If you say "The Holy Reich" by Steigmann-Gall, I've already got that one.)
    1
  18366. The plan is three episodes right now, unless there's a major reason to do a fourth (e.g. a major backlash, or the archives are opened)
    1
  18367. You're correct that the ground was poor and the roads were raised in the area that became known as "the Island". The road going straight to Arnhem from Nijmegen was particularly bad, with the road going west first and then back round through Driel being the easier route overall. If memory serves me correctly, I read that the Dutch military had analysed the area before the war and concluded that the best way to Arnhem was the left route. Could be wrong with that so don't quote me. However, it's worth bearing in mind that by the time this area became a factor, XXX Corps were already 36 hours behind schedule. Frost's battalion had collapsed, and the Germans were over the Arnhem bridge and forming a blocking line to the south. Realistically at this point the operation was lost, and the only thing left to do was rescue the remnants of 1st Airborne Division.
    1
  18368. I share the view of several historians which I listed in the description of my documentary on Market Garden. Did you see my documentary? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTUC79o4Kmc
    1
  18369. 1. I agree, and Browning has his part to play in that, although so do others. Frost says in his memoirs that if he'd been told there was going to be armour, they could have swapped some of their mortar rounds for extra PIAT ammunition, but nobody told them. Browning is a very tempting target for blame for this and for the failure of the whole operation, especially since he had a part to play in the 82nd area with the whole - let's not go to the Nijmegen road bridge thing. 2. Agreed. Perhaps Gavin wasn't convinced. The fact that they took all the southern bridges (the closest to XXX Corps and relief), took artillery to pound the Reichswald (instead of say extra infantry units to take the last bridge) and then didn't send anyone towards the Nijmegen bridge until they were certain there wasn't going to be any counter attacks, speaks volumes in itself. Probably Browning had his part to play in that too. There is a definite "cover your arse" zone going on, which I fully understand. However, I do wish one or more of them had come out after the war at some point and said "ok, this is what really happened" and told the truth. The truth is there somewhere in the facts. But it's been left down to us to figure out what the reasoning was because these three Generals especially didn't want a stain their reputation.
    1
  18370. Mike Quinton It's a possibility :) after I've finished my next one on Fort Eben Emael, I'm going to try doing a big battle. Haven't chosen which one yet so anything's possible
    1
  18371. I agree to some extent. The loss of the drop zones at Arnhem was a major error. One thing the people say is that Monty should have concentrated on the port of Antwerp by taking the islands on the coast, whilst trapping the 15th Army. But if he'd gotten to the Zuiderzee, he would have done the same thing, but also be across the Rhine. So I see both sides of the argument.
    1
  18372. In what ways?
    1
  18373. I think you should water down the vodka a little :D but yes, it's definitely fun to debate history
    1
  18374. I'm on Bitchute, although not got everything up on there yet https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  18375. The best part is, Robin Hood didn't steal from the rich and give to the poor. He stole from the King, who was the State, and gave the stolen money back to the taxpayers. He fought the Sheriff of Nottingham - the Shire (place) reeve (taxman, although admittingly reeves had become more like tax-policemen by this point).
    1
  18376. "Already fighting" and "USA declared war on Germany" are not the same thing.
    1
  18377. "So the big reveal turns out to be more-or-less just "1. Already fighting USA" - just in different words." As I said in another reply to you. No. The big reveal is that Hitler believed that the USA declared war on him, not the other way around.
    1
  18378. https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  18379. In case you haven't seen it https://youtu.be/lj7bHzW0V6c
    1
  18380. "Already fighting" and "Hitler thinks the USA declared war on him" are not the same thing
    1
  18381. I have read it. It's one of my oldest books on WW2, my copy is from the 1960s. It's basically written by Halder. And Japan can demand all she wants, but the Tripartite Pact doesn't say one power has to declare war if another starts a war. So the pact would only be honoured if the USA attacked Japan or another Axis.
    1
  18382. Okay, let me clarify. At least for history in the UK, there are 'primary' and 'secondary' sources. Primary sources are things written by the people who were there (including memoirs, unfortunately). Books written by historians are classed as secondary sources (and this is where memoirs should be, in my opinion). A 'bibliography' is a list of sources, primary and secondary. In English, to call a history book a 'bibliography' wouldn't make any sense, and in fact your comment is the first time I've heard anyone suggest that a secondary source would be called a bibliography. Here's a couple links to websites (tertiary sources) which explain this. Note that they don't refer to a secondary source as a 'bibliography source' https://www.thoughtco.com/primary-and-secondary-sources-their-meaning-in-history-1221744 https://www.historyonthenet.com/primary-and-secondary-sources
    1
  18383. I've heard about the ideas floating around about Pearl Harbor... Not looked into it though, and I'm not an expert on the Pacific Theatre. Do you have any recommendations for books exploring the topic of Pearl Harbor being something that FDR knew about in advance?
    1
  18384. It's to prevent my enemies from taking the audio out of context and claim that I'm supporting Nazism etc
    1
  18385. Clickbait means you click on a video expecting one thing, but get something else. I provided the explanation as to why Hitler declared war on the USA, so it is not clickbait. It may be clickable, but not clickbait.
    1
  18386. YouTube. They censor my comments too.
    1
  18387. Not fully backed up, but I am on Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  18388. "Already fighting" and "the USA declared war on Hitler" are not the same thing.
    1
  18389. "just to make sure - how is the very first answer you dismissed, "Hitler declared war because he thought the US were fighting in the war already", different from your answer "he didnt declare, but just acknowledged the state of war between Germany and the US because the US were fighting in the war already"?" They were already fighting, and Hitler didn't declare war because the USA declared war on him, are two different concepts.
    1
  18390. You're literally a grammar Nazi!
    1
  18391. Exactly! Of course, Nazis don't see it like that...
    1
  18392. https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  18393. "So the big reveal turns out to be more-or-less just "1. Already fighting USA" - just in different words." As I said in another reply to you. No. The big reveal is that Hitler believed that the USA declared war on him, not the other way around.
    1
  18394. "Speeches in public are, by nature, propaganda." I agree, to an extent. The problem is that he also said this stuff in private. The "Roosevelt declares war" quote was said in private, for example.
    1
  18395. If I'm honest, I didn't realize there was a specific day for that. But I do now! And I intend to do videos specifically on the Holocaust in the future, even if YouTube suppresses them like they did my Greek video
    1
  18396. https://youtu.be/lj7bHzW0V6c
    1
  18397. If I wanted to know what Nazis think about the war, is a Nazi source not a good source?
    1
  18398. "Already fighting" is not the same as "USA declared war on Hitler".
    1
  18399. Incorrect. The pact did not require Germany to declare war if Japan attacked another country.
    1
  18400. I'm guessing you watch the Dollar Vigilante channel
    1
  18401. You can see who pays me in the video. Clearly you haven't watched it. Cognitive dissonance prevents you from even considering the opposing side. And no, before you jump on it, I have considered your side. Except, I believe in evidence, logic and reason. I reject illogical superstition and irrationality. Thus, National Socialist propaganda doesn't convince me that what you say is true. If you actually have an argument that stands up to scrutiny, please present it, otherwise admit defeat.
    1
  18402. Evans spent two years examining Irving's work during the trial and found all the distortions. Irving is no longer trusted, even by the National Socialist Racist Propaganda Ministry - the BBC. That should tell you something.
    1
  18403. A pattern of lies, half-truths and distortions... yet you're still wanting to know if anything he said was truthful? My question would be, why are you so desperate to trust Irving? Why are you so intent on using something that Irving wrote? Why not use historians who haven't been proven liars in court? There's plenty of actual historians out there - Citino, Glantz, Stahel, Zitelmann, Fritz, Evans, Rees, Kershaw (Robert & Ian), Zitelmann... I mean, the list goes on. Yet you're obsessing over one distorian. History theory even says to use multiple sources, yet Irving supporters dismiss all of the others. Yes, I disagree with the lamestream over the Hitler Socialism issue, but I still use their books, and enjoy their works. I just realize that they're wrong on one particular interpretation issue. Yet, when Irving has been proven to lie and falsify historical evidence in order to both make Hitler look amazing and say the Holocaust didn't happen, you're willing to stand by him, because...? It makes zero sense.
    1
  18404. "Do you know if he actively misused every single piece of information he acquired?" As Richard Evans said (and I quoted in the video) - “Irving has done all of these things from the very beginning of his career. Not one of his books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. It may seem an absurd semantic dispute to deny the appellation of 'historian' to someone who has written two dozen books or more about historical subjects. But if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian. Those in the know, indeed, are accustomed to avoid the term altogether when referring to him and use some circumlocution such as 'historical writer' instead. Irving is essentially an ideologue who uses history for his own political purposes; he is not primarily concerned with discovering and interpreting what happened in the past, he is concerned merely to give a selective and tendentious account of it in order to further his own ideological ends in the present. The true historian's primary concern, however, is with the past. That is why, in the end, Irving is not a historian.” - Evans, “Holocaust Denial On Trial: Expert Witness Report,” https://www.hdot.org/evans/#
    1
  18405. Irving's book comes in two parts. I have both parts. I also list the sources in the description. I also told you in the video which page that particular reference is, and I explained that Irving's statement hasn't changed since the 1977 edition. My advice would be to gather your facts before you attempt to lie.
    1
  18406. I'm not deleting comments. Your comments are getting automatically hidden by YouTube, and other users can report your comments and have them removed.
    1
  18407. Also thank you, though I use a VPN, I'm not that great at tech stuff. You don't happen to know if there's a good guide somewhere that covers the best methods to protect yourself online? The ones I've seen aren't so great
    1
  18408. What will clearing cookies every time do? Also, YouTube is owned by Google, who's owned by Alphabet. I don't think Facebook has anything to do with them (they're rivals, which is why you don't get video views for posting YT videos to Facebook).
    1
  18409. Question: Is it YouTube doing it, or the Nazis and Marxists? I've seen videos of them doxing people via Gmail, which is why my email is no longer public. But I'm curious if they can do it in other ways.
    1
  18410. His sources have already been checked, that's why I said read Evan's book first.
    1
  18411. I see, you expect everyone (literally everyone) to be able to read German, go to Germany, spend years in the German archives, find the documents (bearing in mind, as Evans explains, a lot of Irving's references were poor, making it difficult to find the relevant documents or parts of documents) and then judge them for yourself, whilst remembering to know the context for each one (meaning you'll have to do additional research on top)? It's impossible to ask this of the average person. Therefore, the historian's job is to do that for people. Unfortunately some distorians claim that every historian is like them. This is not true. The role of a historian is to give an accurate representation of the past, using the evidence provided. Yes, there's room for interpretation in there, but ultimately the evidence has to be used accurately. As Evans shows, Irving isn't even using the evidence correctly. That's not an interpretation issue, it's an evidence issue - and if you're going to falsify the evidence then you may as well be writing fiction.
    1
  18412. You're correct that individuals make up society, since no collective can exist without individuals. Now the question is, should the individuals in society be free to operate by themselves, or should they be enslaved by that society? And why is enslavement better than liberty?
    1
  18413. Socialism is Utopian.
    1
  18414. It's difficult to free the slaves when the slaves want to be slaves.
    1
  18415. Glad to hear that you had a decent discussion about history with your friends! A lot of my friends aren't really interested in history ☹️
    1
  18416. How are the facts the same in example 1? I literally listed numerous inconsistencies in Irving's account. Göring wasn't even there! For example 3, Irving couldn't even get the numbers right from the source he used. Revising history is what historians do. Distorians distort history and then claim they're "revising" it.
    1
  18417. These comments are insane... Was to be expected though!
    1
  18418. I disagree with Evans over the Hitler's Socialism vs Capitalism issue. And people make mistakes. But the disagreement is over interpretation only, not over his abuse of evidence (like it is with Irving).
    1
  18419. Thank you Johan :)
    1
  18420. You may want to pay attention to what I say in this other video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  18421. Yep! The comments are already a mess
    1
  18422. I think you need to pay closer attention. It was Irving who said there were 100,000 shops (having used a notoriously bad source). Evans said there were only 9,000 shops.
    1
  18423. True!
    1
  18424. They're the British Official Histories of the Mediterranean Campaign (Playfair is the author of the first four, forget the name of the other author).
    1
  18425. I disagree. The purpose of this channel is to educate, and that includes people who I don't agree with, like the Nazis and Marxists. If I just dismiss others I don't agree with, then I'd no longer be educating them, and this channel would lose it's fundamental purpose. This video doesn't fuel their racism, it holds up a mirror and says "your hero is distorting history". That, at the very least, will convince some to rethink. And there are several others in the comments who have said that they were tempted to read Irving, but won't now. In regards to the pinned comment explaining that Holocaust Denialism isn't banned in "every" country, like the deniers claim, this was done because I knew from experience that many of the comments would make that claim. It was a successful preemptive strike that prevented them from using that claim to gain some sort of legitimacy. Again, there will be Nazis reading the facts for the first time, and realising that they'd been sold a lie.
    1
  18426. Great! I hope you find it as interesting and useful as I did 👍
    1
  18427. Soviet Tank "Corps" were the size of divisions. They were called "corps", but were not corps.
    1
  18428. Technically second, but we'll say joint first! ;)
    1
  18429. The Nazis weren't Fascists, I agree. Technically the Soviet Union was Fascist (nationality socialism), not National Socialist (racial socialism).
    1
  18430. "I thought you believed fascism was the idea that the people could be compelled to socialism through war (it strengthens in-group bonds)." No, I never said that. Fascism is Marxism on the national level rather than the international level. "And that the racial aspect of national socialism was the byproduct of a more homogeneous German population relative to Italy." I mean, that might have been the case. However, all three ideologies - Marxism, Fascism, and National Socialism - have similar ideological roots which is why the Socialism element (state-control of the means of production) looks the same in each regime. Yes, one's classist, the other is racist, and the other nationalist, but they're all socialist. "Many British certainly believed they were of a superior race." Because those individuals are racists. But that doesn't necessarily mean they believe in Socialism or the Racial Theory of History. "The common definition of nationalism are broad enough to include patriotism." Patriotism doesn't require a state. You can be patriotic for 'your land', even if that land has no state (anarchy). You cannot be nationalist and anarchist because that's the total opposite.
    1
  18431. "I think that this is a kind of specifically anglo-saxon deficiency - not knowing what it means to defend your country, your native land, your family during an enemy's invasion. While we the Russians have it very deep in the subconscious." A lot of people on this island are socialists, nationalists and patriots who want to fight for their State. But there's also individuals who realize that the State isn't worth dying for. I would fight to protect my freedom, but I would never fight to protect the State. "What is more, Lewis provided no proofs as to whether the civilians were prohibited to evacuate. As you know he is very careful with his sources, why no sources now?" I provided references at the bottom of the screen. If you would like me to dig out more for that specific piece, I can do. However, considering that most of the Stalingrad population either died or were exported to the Reich as slave labour shows that they didn't flee. The question would then be, why didn't they flee?
    1
  18432. A long video, but you may be interested to watch it all, especially if you work for your government https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18433. Also, you should learn what the words "public" vs "private" mean. Luckily I've made a video about this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18434. Fascists don't believe in the Racial Theory of History, and there were Jews in the Fascist Party of Italy. See: Farrell, "Mussolini A New Life," Chapter Eleven - “Furthermore, the Fascists were not racist - necessarily. Mussolini believed, for example, that race was not a biological phenomenon but a spiritual one.” “A Jew could certainly be an Italian. Many of the most committed Fascists were Jews…” “Given Italy’s rich racial mix, Nazi style racism would have been quite impossible in Italy anyway. The Fascists did not advocate the extermination of Jews. The Nazis did.” (I have it on Kindle so no page numbers unfortunately) It was only after Mussolini saw Hitler in 1938 (16 years after Mussolini took power) that this began to change, but even then, the affects were rather limited compared to what was going on in Germany. For example, when Starace wanted to expel all Jews from the PNF (Italian Fascist Party), Mussolini stopped him. The first anti-semitic law in September ordered all foreign Jews which had come to Italy since 1919 had to get out within six months. This was followed up by another decree saying no member of the Jewish race could be a teacher or a student. They defined the Jewish ‘race’ on religion, not biology, so not only were ‘loyal’ Jews exempt from the law because of their patriotism, but as Farrell says, the Jews could 'convert' to Fascism if they wanted to avoid the persecution. Farrell - “These exemptions were a clear reflection of why the Fascists objected to the Jews. What counter was spirit, not race. Fascist anti-Semitism was, therefore, akin to the hatred of the infidel - of nonbelievers. But a Jew could embrace the Fascist faith, convert to Fascism, if he so chose.” Farrell - “But the discrimination introduced by Mussolini - though it did not involved violence at all - was indeed persecution. Mussolini had no intention of putting Jews in concentration camps or exterminating them but life for Jews in Italy became very harsh after the bulk of the laws against them came into force in December 1938.” So yes, I'm not saying that the Fascists were great or anything, but they were simply not the same as the National Socialists.
    1
  18435. Yes, I'll be finishing the North African Campaign after Stalingrad. May be a whole away though :)
    1
  18436. "stalin was nationalist since 1925 not in 1941" True
    1
  18437. Yeah, mine took a long time to arrive, but they get there eventually. Should be worth the wait :)
    1
  18438. Yes! It's nice to have both the broad strategic picture and hearing about how the people on the ground were coping. Not sure the sources will allow me to do that every episode, but I'll do my best to strike a balance. Cheers!
    1
  18439. It has! Where you been?
    1
  18440. At least you're honest!
    1
  18441. Thanks! :)
    1
  18442. Ok, thanks for the feedback. I'll try make it more clear in the future :)
    1
  18443. Because that's the question a lot of viewers ask, and it's a nice exercise to ask, since by answering that question it allows us to figure out why these events happened the way they did. And also, no this is not where most of my "intellectual resources" are focused.
    1
  18444. I want to cover the Battles of Greece and Crete in the future. However, I don't have many sources on the Italians. The English world doesn't seem to be interested, and I can't read Italian so I can't do my own research :(
    1
  18445. They had enough manpower to replace losses but they were covering a much larger distance in 1941 than 1942. They stretched their front far wider than their army could handle, so they simply needed more people to fill the gaps. That's where the Axis Allies came into it. The Axis Allies were not as well equipped as the German forces, so they were weak. They were also stretched super-thin across the front too, because the Germans wanted to concentrate on Stalingrad. So they were placed in a bad position by the Germans. The Germans then blamed their Allies (it's never their own fault, plus racism), when the reality is they set them up to fail.
    1
  18446. I'll be answering this in the future (for 6th Army at least) because it factors into the campaign and the encirclement.
    1
  18447. Overall replacements is 40% to Army Group South (A and B), and 38% to Army Group Centre for the whole June to mid-November 1942 period. Casualties were 50% to Army Group South (A and B) and 29% to Army Group Centre. I'd still say that Army Group Centre got too many reinforcements.
    1
  18448. Yes, I am a revisionist https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  18449. I answer this at the end of this coming Monday's video
    1
  18450. At this current time, I don't know the answer. I've been gathering sources on Rzhev in order to do the research needed to answer this question though, because it is an important one to understand the context of the Blau and Stalingrad Campaigns. Hopefully I'll be able to answer you (in a video) soon.
    1
  18451. In what way?
    1
  18452. The argument can, and probably should, be made that going into Stalingrad was a bad idea. However, I would also argue that the fighting that determined the outcome of the battle happened outside the city before the Germans even got to it. But you're right, they could have just stopped before they got to the city and saved themselves a lot of bother.
    1
  18453. Everything you say has immediately been compromised by your substandard behaviour. A typical postmodernist - accuse and don't provide any evidence for your claims, and attack the evidence your opponent has rather than dispute it. Worse, you insult your opponent and make a mockery of reasonable discourse, and you do so on nationalist grounds. I'm not going to tolerate said abuses in my comment sections. This isn't the Soviet Union any more, if you want to debate me, treat me like an equal and an individual human being, otherwise I will remove your post and block you from expressing your views.
    1
  18454. I can't put a hard date on it, but I spent 6 hours last week on the map - and that alone is still not finished >:( But when it is finished, it'll probably be the longest Battlestorm video to date.
    1
  18455. Eventually, but I'm working my way through the North African Campaign first. Operation Crusader is next.
    1
  18456. Can you provide evidence to back up your claim?
    1
  18457. I'd question why you think some of the German general staff can't possibly be incompetent. Why, in your opinion, must the explanation lie elsewhere? Do you think that the high command of the Soviets were also not incompetent? What about the British, or Americans? Why would the German high command be exempt from incompetence and criticism but others not?
    1
  18458. Hard to explain without showing you on a map, so I may make a follow-up video to answer this question in the future.
    1
  18459. Currently just the books, and some extra sources. But I really need to dive into the primary sources. I'm learning German now for this reason, and plan to learn Russian later.
    1
  18460. Glad to hear you agree, Kev :)
    1
  18461. Thanks for the criticism. Can you explain how I should improve the videos?
    1
  18462. Several German divisions were inside the city. These could have come out and been used to shorten the front for the other units (as I mentioned, the Axis allies were stretched thin along the Don). You're right that they may still have lost, but there would have been more flexibility for the Germans to guard, stop, or even properly counterattack any Soviet offensive.
    1
  18463. The original Blau plan said either make an effort to take the city or at leadt hit it with artillery from the south. You could be right with the Hitler's changing priorities bit.
    1
  18464. You're very welcome :)
    1
  18465. Yes, I don't have the details for the Caucasus, but there was only one railway between Rostov and Stalingrad supplying the two German armies there.
    1
  18466. I'll be mentioning it next time. However, the German losses for Army Group Centre are not as much as Army Group B, so it still doesn't explain it.
    1
  18467. What else are you waiting for? :)
    1
  18468. Who? Me?
    1
  18469. This is true. I wonder what the solution is to this problem though.
    1
  18470. I don't know about the Civil War, but in my opinion based on the research and videos I've done for the North African Campaign, I don't think Rommel's three divisions would have got further than Suez.
    1
  18471. If you don't like long and detailed videos, you're going to be really disappointed with my content. Probably best to turn around now.
    1
  18472. Would they though? If they'd taken Stalingrad, they would have raced off towards Astrakhan. So one of the pincers for Uranus would not have been there.
    1
  18473. I'm talking about BEFORE the encirclement
    1
  18474. You're right. However, I do want to explain myself, because normally I am quite concise. If I don't qualify what I say, people will complain that I said stuff I didn't say because they didn't listen and take in what I said. This is, in fact, a direct reaction to previous videos on German numbers where such reactions were made by viewers. You can see this if you watch "Your Perception of the Eastern Front is Wrong" and "The Numbers say it all" videos. I have discovered that it is in those videos where I am concise and make the point sharply where people become belligerent and complain. My recent "National Socialism was Socialism" videos are quite obvious with this. People complained in those videos, but then didn't complain in the video immediately after them which was further evidence in support of what I said in those videos. And the reason they didn't complain was because I was too short in my explanation in the NS videos, so they didn't grasp the concept I was trying to get across. In the video after it, I was much more subtle (to the point that at first glance the video has nothing to do with the NS videos). Yet it absolutely does - and the same people complaining (more screaming) that I was wrong in the NS video were actually praising me in the post-NS video, even though they shouldn't. Therefore, waffle has its place, and when I waffle, it means I've been burned before on this topic.
    1
  18475. The thing is, they didn't really destroy the Soviet armies during Blau (not all of them any way). A lot simply dissolved and fled, rather than be captured. This meant the Germans didn't actually take that many prisoners, another reason for the failure of Blau. And it was clear, even in July 1942, that they didn't have enough units to really do the job Blau demanded. So I'm not convinced that optimism was the decisive factor.
    1
  18476. Yes. I'll be talking about this more in this coming Monday's video.
    1
  18477. So what you're saying is that the Germans only did so well in 1941 because they outnumbered the Soviets? But as soon as the Germans lost their numerical superiority (in December 1941) they also stopped doing well?
    1
  18478. And the Soviets didn't have this exact samr issue?
    1
  18479. After getting hammered by Wehraboos on some of my videos, who claim I'm trying to bash the 'gloriously superior' German army, I've decided to take a more careful approach where I explain everything several times over so there can be no ambiguity that, no, the Germans did in fact get things wrong. It's cause and effect. Unfortunately, this then does dumb the content down a little.
    1
  18480. If I ever use a term like "many historians say" or "some people say" or "it can be argued" or "you can conclude", it means there's a historical debate going on among historians about this particular point. I'm acknowledging that debate exists, but making a decision on what side of the fence I agree with, since I don't have time in this video to go into the particulars. None of this is guesswork.
    1
  18481. I mean, it could be both. Boiling it down to one issue may not be accurate. It could be 30% Halder, 70% logistics, or the other way around.
    1
  18482. This is why I want to learn Russian after German. And yes, there needs to be more English-translated Russian books, and better ones because the ones we have currently have poor translations. However, at the same time, the archives aren't really completely open to western eyes. They were for a bit in the 90's especially, but not so much any more. Whole areas of the archive are no longer accessible - they have been resealed.
    1
  18483. Doesn't explain all of it, as you'll see on Monday
    1
  18484. As far as I'm aware, there was only one railway from Rostov to Stalingrad supplying 6th Army and 4th Panzer Army. I believe the railways and road systems in the Caucasus were not much better. As for Decisive Campaigns, I would love too. Sadly, time is very short at the moment, and every spare moment is going into these videos.
    1
  18485. Where was the success at Army Group Centre? Stalingrad was only a stalemate because Paulus didn't have enough reinforcements. Plus, they should have been sending men south to get to the oil fields, which was the priority.
    1
  18486. Thank you Mason, it's really good to hear :)
    1
  18487. ...as you will here in today's video (out in two hours)
    1
  18488. Congratulations, you've taken Moscow. Now your panzers have no fuel because you have no oil wells, and the Soviets are still in the game. Nothing changes.
    1
  18489. Yeah, I'd say supply lines. But then, why replace German divisions with Romanian and Italian forces?
    1
  18490. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18491. I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  18492. In 1942, Germany and Italy alone had a larger population than the unoccupied Soviet Union, nevermind the rest of the Axis. The Soviets couldn't afford to send endless waves against the Germans. And indeed, they didn't.
    1
  18493. That's true to an extent. But the fact that the main offensive was the south and that Oil was the main problem/objective for Germany, it doesn't make sense that they're replenishing Army Group Centre and prioritising it over Army Group South (A and B).
    1
  18494. It could have been ignored if they'd gone south of the city. Someone asked why they didn't encircle it, but that would have required crossing the Volga (which they would have struggled to do and wasn't required for Blau).
    1
  18495. So, split it up into many more graphs? The problem with that is you don't see the trend. Maybe I should have used line graphs for this one.
    1
  18496. Yes it could :)
    1
  18497. Not until mid-November, which is after the period we're talking about.
    1
  18498. I agree, thanks for bringing that up.
    1
  18499. That's fine, I don't expect you to :)
    1
  18500. Great comment! And I agree. Have you read any sources that specifically said the German General Staff didn't want to go south? I'd like to read them so I can give specific examples (other than Halder)
    1
  18501. But by the same token, the Soviets didn't have enough troops either. So the Germans could also find a weak spot to attack.
    1
  18502. I will get to both of them eventually. But at the moment I'm focusing on two battles/campaigns - Stalingrad/Blau, and Operation Crusader.
    1
  18503. Thanks! This was just the German figures because I don't have the numbers for the Axis allies at the moment.
    1
  18504. Thank you sir!
    1
  18505. Rommel had 3 German divisions. And they couldn't supply them properly. He had no chance getting to the Caucasus. Possibly Cairo, maybe Suez, but not beyond.
    1
  18506. Hey Agrippa! How's it going???
    1
  18507. I'm not German and (I don't remember the details of this video specifically) if I did say that, I was either expressing their opinion/view, or I did it subconsciously. I like to place myself in their heads for a bit to explain stuff. But not just the Germans - all sides. So yeah, basically don't read too much into it :)
    1
  18508. Thank you for sharing. If you enjoyed this one, I think you'll enjoy next Monday's video too
    1
  18509. The thing is, the replacements for Army Group Centre didn't match losses. So while Rzhev is certainly a factor (and I will come back to this), I'm not convinced it was the reason for priority of reinforcements being taken from the south.
    1
  18510. What about it?
    1
  18511. @hardanheavy I can tell by your comment history that you've seen the first two episodes of my Weimar series, yet you still push the idea that we have capitalism? Did you not understand what I said in those videos? Could you not grasp that Karl Marx's own definition of capitalism shows that we don't have it? I can lead a horse to water.
    1
  18512. It really is!
    1
  18513. Dirlewanger had a bunch of old wounds, so they were able to identify him from his deformed and broken bones.
    1
  18514. Actually, I think I can guess what you're going to say. If you're going to mention Eric Hunt's interpretation, I've got a video about him and Majdanek (plus others) here https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o
    1
  18515. In what way?
    1
  18516. I've done a video on that film https://youtu.be/9ITuCfOvoms?si=1r-HzedVbUQld3U7
    1
  18517. Great book and I used it in the video. It's terrifying what humans can do to other humans.
    1
  18518. Okay, but what if YouTube shadow bans a channel like the CEO of YouTube has recently said she's doing? https://youtu.be/Pi72kfigcL8?t=694
    1
  18519. We will get to that soon 👍
    1
  18520. Good morning!
    1
  18521. The only reason I don't wear that is because of the heat. It's a jumper, and it's hot enough when the lights are on and I'm recording videos :(
    1
  18522. You mean the Market Garden series? And Compass? I think they're the only ones where I actually wore that TIK jumper
    1
  18523. There's 24 hours in a day, and 60 minutes per hour. So 1045 hours is 10.45 am. 1300 hours, is 1pm (the 13th hour of the day). And 1830 hours is 6.30 pm.
    1
  18524. But could the limited railways in the area have supported more forces at the Volga? They were struggling to supply the 6th Army and 4th Panzer Army already because of the limited supply routes
    1
  18525. I know you're just trolling, but I hope nobody else complains
    1
  18526. I thought that was you!
    1
  18527. Now that this season if over, I may have a chance to update some of the units. Thanks
    1
  18528. Except comments are getting auto-deleted if they use the word, and videos mentioning the H during WW2 get suppressed too (like my Greek video), so it is YouTube censorship.
    1
  18529. Who said it was aviation fuel? It could have been some form of used oil that they needed to get rid of.
    1
  18530. Because the Russian sources tend to focus on the Soviet movements etc. When it comes to discussing what the Germans are doing, the Soviet sources tend to be sparse on details. Also, I'm not just using German or Russian sources, but English language sources too. Plus Anton Joly (French historian) has been helping me out, along with Egor Kobiakov (Russian historian). I've done my best to use ALL the sources I can get my hands on and balance it, yet somehow that's not good enough...
    1
  18531. I have been using Russian sources, so your criticism is invalid. The link to the bibliography is available in the description.
    1
  18532. All my videos are biased because they're made by me https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  18533. Honestly, I'm exhausted
    1
  18534. As I've explained numerous times, you have to use EVERY source, even the ones you don't like, or the ones that you believe are problematic. Beevor has a pro-German/anti-Soviet bias, and I'm aware of that, which is why I criticize him when his bias shows. I also tend to use him when talking about the Germans, not about the Soviets, to avoid any problems. And I use other pro-Soviet sources too, again in much the same way. Also, see this https://youtu.be/lj7bHzW0V6c
    1
  18535. Cary is correct. The Luftwaffe had already been shipping supplies to the Army since July.
    1
  18536. @SuperDryBeef People complain when I do book reviews, which is why I don't do them often, and avoid doing them on Mondays
    1
  18537. Exactly. And if they embraced free trade and a free market, and were therefore dependent on imports, the war would never have started.
    1
  18538. Glad someone spotted that!
    1
  18539.  @caryblack5985  Someone's been watching David Glantz! OP, if you haven't seen it, see this video https://youtu.be/7Clz27nghIg
    1
  18540. Premiere Pro being stupid. Something is glitching it and causing a mask I'm applying to appear during a fade. I'm going to have to stop fading myself in to get around it. Happens a few times in the video, and in last week's video too.
    1
  18541. Except they failed before they even got to the city as I said earlier in the series
    1
  18542. Except, the German Official History is the only one that talks about this at any length. I used snippets from the other history books and had to connect the dots for you. Some of the sources (e.g. some of the soldiers accounts) are not available in English, and were translated by a Patreon. The vast majority of the Stalingrad books don't come to this conclusion at all.
    1
  18543. I think your link got auto-deleted by YouTube. Or, at least, I can't see it at the moment
    1
  18544. Which writings of Corbyn were a rehash of the Protocols?
    1
  18545. I literally have like 3 videos on tanks, and only one on a specific tank (the Maus).
    1
  18546. Skin colour isn't a "race"
    1
  18547. Apparently not :/ most of them aren't listening
    1
  18548. How is this silly? The population statistics are what they are. Ignoring them is silly.
    1
  18549. They demonetized the video before it even went out this time
    1
  18550. I've not heard them say that I'm spreading Nazi propaganda. But I'd be interested to hear an example of which particular Nazi propaganda I'm spreading? My channel is set up to dispell both Nazi and Marxist propaganda so that we can get to the actual truth in history, and I've done several videos dispelling Nazi ideology (including the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video). Clearly, whoever's saying this hasn't actually watched my videos.
    1
  18551. Close your mouth and open your ears. I didn't say that the SPD was founded by Marx. Watch that section again. And are you denying that the SPD was a Marxist party?
    1
  18552. We have a constitutional monarchy here in the UK, yet we're being constantly told that we also have a democracy.
    1
  18553. Ahh! Sorry about that!
    1
  18554. Also, as shown in another video with copious amounts of evidence, the idea that Hitler was funded into power by the capitalists was debunked in 1985. That narrative relies on dubious memoirs and distorts history https://youtu.be/fNvfzJwyzX8?si=ikRPuiClLE-WbV_H
    1
  18555. Hitler wasn't a "Wehrmacht agent" for three reasons: 1. The Wehrmacht wasn't invented yet. 2. He was in the Bavarian Army, which was under Kurt Eisner's control, and later the Bavarian Soviet Republic. They weren't spying upon themselves. 3. It's unlikely that his fellow soldiers, most of whom were socialist or communist and wanted someone to represent them, would elect a "capitalist spy" to the socialist and communist governments.
    1
  18556. "Society" doesn't mean "society" in the way you mean it. Society = State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y We can have a 'society' without force, coercion and extortion. However, our 'society' doesn't want that, because all they want is power. The social-elites (socialists) of our hierarchy of society (State) earn their pay by extorting it (taxation) from those who work (a workers' State). They won't give that up because they're reaping the benefits of a slave system they created. So I'm against 'society' (States) in favour of the individual. The individual who can freely and peacefully cooperate with other individuals, without having to steal or extort their fellow individual. I would describe this as an 'alliance of individuals', rather than a 'society' (State). So, to answer your final point. No, I'm not talking about man in isolation with nobody to talk to or with no order. Rather, an alliance of (private) individuals that do not submit to one another, or some central hierarchy.
    1
  18557. "the same number is confirmed by David Glanz in Battle for Leningrad 1941-1945" Nuts! I have that book and didn't think to use it! I didn't realize it contained a narrative of this battle, but it does - it's literally the last part of the book before the conclusion. On page 450 of the edition I have, it says roughly 150,000 as Gusev's attacking force. Unless I've missed it, I can't see the quote about the rifle divisions being 4,000 to 6,500 strong on Pages 450-457, which are the relevant pages
    1
  18558. Ages ago, I put up a poll asking what people wanted to see next. One of the choices was Crete, which I expected people to pick, and even started getting books for it. But they didn't. They picked Stalingrad.
    1
  18559. Tomislav haha I wish!
    1
  18560. Morgan Chalmers Gilgamesh! Qu'ran is much much later
    1
  18561. Leviathan268 yes that's it!
    1
  18562. gmsimpson05 yeah I wanted to give a clue. I think if I remembered correctly the first thing ever written was a poem to a god or something similar
    1
  18563. Aloe DaMan huh... interesting! Never heard of Ptahhotep before. I may have to get rid of this video :/ thanks though for enlightening me! (I'm not American btw - I'm British)
    1
  18564. Dani Bautista Yeah probably... that's mainly why I changed the format in the later episodes :)
    1
  18565. CStriker421 yes! Good guess :)
    1
  18566. Bodglin o'Ite See, I thought it would have been the Iliad, but I was way off. Bible isn't that old in the grand scheme of things
    1
  18567. Not if they'd broken out in November.
    1
  18568. Second part coming this Monday (I upload once a week on Mondays)
    1
  18569. I'd say that's committing suicide is more cowardly. You have to face the consequences of your actions if you survive and surrender to the Red Army.
    1
  18570. Essentially yes!
    1
  18571. Exactly :)
    1
  18572. You don't need to wait, I'll be happy to hear them now!
    1
  18573. Thank you sir!
    1
  18574. Yeah, I should have used a different general siilhuette to throw people off :)
    1
  18575. Not at that stage. He does later ask Hitler to be allowed to use Army Group A in the Caucasus to attack towards Stalingrad to relieve Paulus. Thinking about the oil situation, Hitler said no. And at that time Army Group A was not retreating.
    1
  18576. Good to hear you disagree! (I like debates) Sadly, I can't debate too much until next week - or it'll spoil next week's video. But I will say this - Manstein gave the order for Paulus to prepare for a breakout... weeks AFTER he convinced Hitler that Paulus should stay where he was until he broke through to him. He also kept reassuring Paulus that he would break through to him, and never gave the order to breakout (which he claims he did). I do hope you watch part 2 next week :)
    1
  18577. Yes, but there's a strong argument that he's to blame at Stalingrad. You'll see why in part 2 (next Monday).
    1
  18578. Agreed. Although it was possible in the early days before supplies became a thing. This is why Hitler, Jeschonnek, Göring and Manstein are the primary targets for blame.
    1
  18579. I will do one at some point, and I'll be mentioning it in the main Battlestorm Stalingrad documentary
    1
  18580. Sorry! It'll make sense when you see next week's title ;)
    1
  18581. That's generally the way I view it too. But I'll go into more detail about this in a future video
    1
  18582. Haha I see :D
    1
  18583. For not breaking out of the Stalingrad pocket? They're to blame for encircling and ultimately defeating 6th Army and 4th Panzer Army in the pocket, but not for not making the decision to break out (which was probably possible either before or just after the encirclement closed).
    1
  18584. Why? What's wrong with that? :)
    1
  18585. Glad it was a surprise! Most people are saying they already knew, so it's good to hear that you didn't know :)
    1
  18586. Exactly. He's to blame for a few reasons :)
    1
  18587. When do you mean? After he's captured or before he's captured?
    1
  18588. Thanks!
    1
  18589. Well, I mean, that's technically not wrong since they were the ones who surrounded 6th Army in the first place.
    1
  18590. Let me guess, you first discovered me from the "Perception" or "Numbers" videos? Or possibly the "Suvorov" one?
    1
  18591. Oh, you definitely need to watch part 2
    1
  18592. Well, I hope not to disappoint, although this is a two-parter...
    1
  18593. Part 2 is already out https://youtu.be/uzAzpIdDNcI
    1
  18594. Thank you sir! Considering I only hit 10k in January, it's been a very successful 2 months :)
    1
  18595. You're very welcome :)
    1
  18596. RLM? Thank you for choosing me though, hope it was worth it :)
    1
  18597. NO it IS n't
    1
  18598. I should have used someone else's to throw you off!
    1
  18599. No it isn't.
    1
  18600. Yeah, I think anyone wandering into the comments section is going to realise this :)
    1
  18601. Sorry! I only upload like once a week :D
    1
  18602. https://youtu.be/5qkmO7tm8AU
    1
  18603. I wish I could say more! Will have to wait until next week :)
    1
  18604. Apparently not, a few people did somehow :)
    1
  18605. It's an idea, but it's hundreds of kilometers away from German lines (which were always shifting). If it was just a couple miles, then maybe, but it was something over 50kms.
    1
  18606. Maybe :)
    1
  18607. Who said that Manstein ordered the breakout?
    1
  18608. Haha that would have been an interesting twist!
    1
  18609. End of the Cold War and the opening of new archives (both Soviet as well as some German).
    1
  18610. Glad you like them! Increasing the speed is perfectly fine with me. I don't talk particularly fast 😊
    1
  18611. I don't agree with any of your points (although to be fair I haven't studied Fredericus is great detail so don't know about the first one). Bad logistics isn't necessarily Paulus's fault. They were fighting at the extreme length of the front, which was many hundreds of miles from Germany, and there only existed one railroad from Rostov to the Stalingrad area. His forces were also deprioritised in every aspect (along with the rest of Army Group B). They took more casualties and received the least amount of reinforcements out of the four Army Groups at the time. 6th Army was deprioritised when it came to supplies, including fuel. This was because getting to the oil-areas of the Caucasus was the priority, plus there was an severe oil crisis going on in general. I think you'll find that Fourth Panzer Army had the task of taking those hills, so if anything Hoth should take the blame for that. And the frontal assault on the city wasn't his original plan. Paulus was forced into it by what happened in the Kot'loban area.
    1
  18612. Someone else said it was pronounced "vikes". I'm not entirely sure and I'm waiting for confirmation. Also, I'm not sure if "vikes" means "vy-k-s" or "vis-ks" yet.
    1
  18613. Not quite. Manstein has a bigger part in this. He helped persuade Hitler that the 6th Army should stay where it was.
    1
  18614. I should have used a different outline haha
    1
  18615. Manstein wanted Paulus to break out? Then why didn't he issue the order to break out? He was his immediate superior and could have given him the order at any point. And what you've not mentioned is that Manstein helped persuade Hitler (along with Göring and Jeschonnek) that Paulus should stand his ground in the first place.
    1
  18616. It's not really relevant to the video.
    1
  18617. Yeah, I messed this one up a bit. Sorry about that
    1
  18618. Stange it didn't come up in subscriptions box. Have you clicked the little bell symbol next to subscribe under the video? That's the new notifications thing
    1
  18619. What's your excuse this time? ;)
    1
  18620. You may need too...
    1
  18621. It's filled with so many half-truths and distortions that it would take me quite a while to explain them all. He even denies that Jesus was Jewish. It's ridiculous.
    1
  18622. That's not what happened. I made a mistake, Glantz made a different mistake, and maybe Isaev made a mistake (not sure on that one). But it was Kobiakov that gave us the correct figures via the primary sources and this allowed me to provided the corrected figures.
    1
  18623. I did cover this. I think it was in this video https://youtu.be/rK0SuYi4Hho
    1
  18624. I have considered it, but yes, it would be lot of extra work and time, plus it may not even be possible. The casualty figures and the manpower isn't always available. As you saw in the final part of this video, there's a lot of guestimates going on due to the incompleteness of the sources
    1
  18625. It's possible. However, only the official history mentions Hitler, and the 6th Army's diary specifically says the Army Group. Plus, there are other entries, but no mention of Hitler.
    1
  18626. Yeah I accidentally put "kilometer" rather than "meter". I meant to put "meter". Sorry about that.
    1
  18627. Even if it was possible, they didn't have enough troops to do that
    1
  18628. It was for engineers, yes
    1
  18629. It's my lazy speech/accent. I tend to reduce the harshness of my 'd' and 't' sounds, which is also why I tend to say "Bridish" rather that British
    1
  18630. The recon battalion may have had half-tracks. Or it could be an indication of an attached unit we don't know about. Or maybe they were using captured Soviet equipment. But yes, the Soviets were definitely guessing at the numbers.
    1
  18631.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  I'm surprised you even know what they look like because I wouldn't be able to identify them!
    1
  18632. Well that's not good! When did you find that out?
    1
  18633. I have a couple of German history books (which I'm guessing would be - Ich habe zwei Deutsches Geschichtsbücher). One is "Stalingrad: Mythos und Wirklichkeit einer Schlacht" by Wette and Ueberschär, and "Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges" by Pöhlmann. I'm not yet at a stage where I can read them,, but I am picking up words and recognising them. They're an incentive to keep on trying. The main issue I have is that I can't dedicate much time to learning German. Per day I'm only spending 20 minutes learning German, which is all I can spare from my (currently) 75+ hour per week work week on this channel. Like learning guitar, if I could spend 75+ hours a week studying German, I'd probably pick it up pretty quickly, but I'm simply not able to break away from making videos and keeping the channel afloat. I did start to play Himmelsrand though, which actually helps, even if the language is a bit oldie-German. But again, I hardly get the time to play games these days, so it's once in a blue moon if I play it.
    1
  18634. You are the Zuerst
    1
  18635. I actually took a look at the second one you mentioned before I made this video. It does sound good. Hopefully someone who has read these books can comment and recommend them?
    1
  18636. Capitalism is the 'private control of the means of production'. 'Private' means 'individual'. Individuals owning their own shops and trading with other individuals did not create the Holocaust. So no, capitalism did not result in the Holocaust. See my Public vs Private video for an in-depth look at the definitions of socialism and capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18637. Link to Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18638. As I showed in the "Public vs Private" video, Capitalism is 'non-state' (that's what it means). You cannot have 'state-capitalism' because that's oxymoronic. If the state 'used' capitalism, it's not longer capitalism, since the 'private' is no longer in control of the means of production.
    1
  18639. If an economy is capitalist, then the private citizen is in control of their own means of production. Thus, it would be impossible for these citizens to enslave a portion of society into camps, since that would no longer be capitalism. It is the state that causes the Holocaust, and the state is socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18640. I'm not confusing the terms at all. Socialism is state control, as I showed historically in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  18641. The problem, as shown in the video, is that Suvorov has manipulated and twisted the sources to create his overall message. Therefore his overall message is flawed. I've shown how he's done this with Keitel's memoirs, and I'm working on another video which will tackle every single point Suvorov makes. His entire thesis is absolute garbage.
    1
  18642. Awesome :) well, just so you know for future reference, I'm aiming to publish videos at 5pm GMT every Monday. In fact, this has just reminded me to update the About section on my channel to say this!
    1
  18643. Wow that was quick of you! I'm just happy you didn't say "First" :D hope you enjoy the video
    1
  18644. I laughed. Yes, I think you're right.
    1
  18645. You're assuming that I haven't read Suvorov, or any other history book on WW2, like Glantz's Stumbling Colossus and Colossus Reborn which were written to debunk Suvorov - which they do with tons of compelling data. Such as the data on the state of Soviet artillery https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  18646. Bye
    1
  18647. I have a series of videos on Suvorov. This video was just the first of many, and I do present evidence that completely crushes the idea that Stalin was going to attack in 1941 https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp&si=RshZd10gPt_LvDBo
    1
  18648. But as I said, the evidence doesn't support this. As the Police Reserve Battalion 101 shows, they had the choice, and some chose not to participate in the killings. Most did participate, and those that at one time refused later joined in. They were Hitler's willing executioners. So again this idea that you have to obey orders "or else" doesn't hold up to scruitiny.
    1
  18649. For the same reason saying you killed lots of people because a deity told you too is also not a valid excuse under law - you're responsible for your own actions. And, in reality, it's been discovered that they didn't have to kill people but actually wanted to (see Police Reserve Battalion 101). So the excuse doesn't actually hold up to scrutiny.
    1
  18650. No worries, I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18651. Yup!
    1
  18652. I agree with that to some extent. I wonder if there's another version out there? Proves I need to pick up the pace of learning German though
    1
  18653. I'm not communist. And no, they do not prove anything.
    1
  18654. Wow, here's a video I made that says you're wrong https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8
    1
  18655. Sources are listed in the pinned comments of both videos. Sadly I don't have time to reply in depth to everyone. But essentially, the accusation that I haven't done my homework is incorrect, as you will find out in the other video which is actually a perfect answer to your accusation.
    1
  18656. And yes, you should question everything, I'm glad you were listening! However, I provide sources in my videos, and back up what I'm saying with hard evidence. The problem I have is that I simply don't have time to reply to everyone. If I give you a link to you or anyone else, that's to say "I've already answered this question"
    1
  18657. But Romanian oil was not enough. So huge was the deficit in oil, despite critical cutbacks to the civilian economy, that another entire Romania would not have been able to cover the shortfall. The Germans ran out of oil in the Autumn of 1941.
    1
  18658. Let me know what you think of the video at the end, Mr Bullet, let me know
    1
  18659. That would be a very logical conclusion ;)
    1
  18660. Yep, I agree with James, the Germans didn't know what the Stalin was thinking.
    1
  18661. I haven't read all of it yet. However, as I said in the video, there's plenty of evidence that says the Soviets were not in any fit state to attack in 1941.
    1
  18662. MHV is a great guy! I would suggest you finish this video though, since I'm not a fan of Suvorov's thesis. I say pretty much the same thing you wrote, but on more detail, and with a focus on Keitel
    1
  18663. Great counterargument (I'm being sarcastic, but since you've started the conversation by saying I'm "full of shit" it's clear that you need to have things spelt out to you). I've done a follow up video explaining the state of Soviet artillery on the eve of war which shows the Soviet Union was in no position to attack in 1941 as claimed by Suvorov https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Also done a video on the state of Soviet tank forces which shows the Soviet Union wasn't in a position to attack in 1941 as Suvorov claims https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 And done a video explaining why Germany had to attack in 1941 https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg And if you read Mein Kampf (written in 1924) it's clear Hitler's entire philosophy was geared to invading the Soviet Union from at least then, which means that even if the Soviets were planning on an attack, that would count as a preemptive strike for them. But yes, it is me who should "get more info".
    1
  18664. The focus was on what Keitel said, not on absolutely everything Suvorov was saying. I will follow up on this topic in future videos. But if you have those questions, go out there and do research. Find the answers. But in relation to your comment stating "there is allot of information about Stalin wanting to attack Europe after Europe was weakened by war" I would ask the question - But is this really the case? Please present this information, because I doubt it will stand up to scrutiny.
    1
  18665. It's a catch-22 situation ;) look, I've always encouraged people not to take what I say to be true - go out there and do your own research and form your own conclusions. The advice I give you in this video will stand you in good stead for that.
    1
  18666. And yet people seem to believe Suvorov :(
    1
  18667. Sorry if I'm misreading, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say (even with the sarcasm). Could you explain?
    1
  18668. Glad you liked it :) one day I'll learn Russian and include Russian subtitles. Unless someone decides to translate and subtitle the video in Russian now
    1
  18669. Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18670. Haha! Maybe it doesn't lead to Berlin... Maybe it leads to Venice.
    1
  18671. Yes, agreed. This is why we must have the attitude of "here's my argument, but I'm ready to change my mind when new evidence comes about". Being arogantly prideful of your creations will lead to problems in the long-term. And on your last point, this is why certain battles are very popular, and other battles are unheard of - it's all about the money.
    1
  18672. I don't know. You'd best go away and do your own research and figure out if what I'm saying is right or wrong :)
    1
  18673. True, which is why I followed this up with more videos, like this one https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 And this one https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c And this one https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw All of which show why the Soviet Union was not prepared to launch a preventative strike in 1941.
    1
  18674. Harold, if you cannot understand the idea that the red, green and blue lights on the device you're watching this on aren't producing yellow light and that your eyes/mind are being manipulated into thinking that there is yellow light, then it's no wonder you couldn't grasp the ideas presented in this video. There is such thing as yellow light, but your eyes only see red blue and green. A combination of red and green light makes your brain interpret that as yellow. So the point was that your eyes are being manipulated, just like you are by Suvorov's thesis. Ideas are presented in one way (yellow), but the reality is that when you dig a bit deeper, you discover this isn't really the case (red blue green). Essentially, Suvorov's ideas are only acceptable to those who have done insufficient research on the topic, which is why you're not able to argue against the presented facts but instead are trying to attack the author of the counterargument for presenting his arguement poorly (even though I didn't). That alone shows you're losing this argument.
    1
  18675. No it is not. See this TED-Ed video for an explanation of how the eyes see light https://youtu.be/l8_fZPHasdo
    1
  18676. Glad to hear that!
    1
  18677. He said the Soviets had more troops. They did not.
    1
  18678. I get what you're trying to say. But at the same time, as I showed, he was lying.
    1
  18679. I'm sorry! I only post one a week :D
    1
  18680. The letter "J" in German is pronounced as "Y" in English. I've learnt this at great cost thanks to my video on the Stalingrad Airlift Myth where I mispronounced Jeschonnek about 50 times.
    1
  18681. Who's pro-Russian? And why are you bringing politics into this? I think you need to watch this video of mine, which might make you realise what I'm doing here https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  18682. Good question ;)
    1
  18683. Why would it?
    1
  18684. Just because he was his chief of staff (or lackey, as Steve says) doesn't mean he didn't make decisions. What people don't realise about WW2 Generals is that they're entirely reliant on their chiefs of staff. Many of those staff officers are the ones making the decisions. But you don't hear their names too often in the history books. The same applies with Keitel.
    1
  18685. No, a simple Google search will show you that RGB is how our eyes see colour. Colours are wavelengths of light. The longer or shorter a wavelength directly indicates what colour light it is. That's why the colour violet is invisible because our RGB eyes cannot detect that wavelength.
    1
  18686. The difference is that my opinion is backed up by evidence, unlike Suvorov's.
    1
  18687. Yes, this is the problem. It's mock-history at best.
    1
  18688. You do when your empire is 1/7 of the world's landmass. Plus, those paras weren't really used as paras - they ended up getting slaughtered as infantry. And thos tanks were mostly light tanks (e.g. T-26s) which were poorly organized. Just watch these other videos of mine, they will explain all - "Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks in 1941? The Role of Tanks on the Eastern Front WW2" https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 "Why the Germans had the Tactical Advantage early in WW2" https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74 "The State of Soviet Artillery on the Eve of Operation Barbarossa WW2" https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  18689. Glad you like it! Which common revisionist claims would you like me to tackle?
    1
  18690. What you have stated here is an opinion not based on hard facts or evidence. Where is the evidence that says Stalin was going to attack?
    1
  18691. "Following orders" is also a convenient excuse when you actually want to murder people and commit crimes against humanity.
    1
  18692. "You want to debunk Keitel and Suvorov, but fail to explain how the Soviets actually captured over 20 countries." Ok, so I'm not sure why a post-ww2 issue has come up in a video talking about a pre-ww2 issue, because that's like saying I've found a cup that says "made in 59bc!" on the bottom. That's impossible because how would the guy who created the cup have known that in 59 years Jesus would be born/killed (I'm not familiar with the Jesus story, but you get the point). You can't tell what's going to happen in the future, and the Nazis couldn't predict that either. The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was before the war, and was a deal between the Nationalsocialists and the Marxist-Socialists of the Soviet Union which carved up Europe between the two powers. Therefore, any invasions by the Soviet Union in the 1939-1941 period were agreed upon by the Germans. After the war, you're really talking about the start of the Cold War, but that doesn't factor in to what happened in 1941 because that hadn't happened yet. "Not only are you embarrassing, but you should be ashamed." What should I be ashamed of exactly? I should be ashamed of not distorting history? The Soviet Union was a terrible empire with a socialist-government that resulted in millions of deaths. Stalin was pure evil. However, there is substantial evidence that says that he was not going to invade Germany in 1941. Look at my "State of Soviet Artillery video" which basically sums up the absolute dire situation the Soviets were in prior to Barbarossa, and shows that they were definitely not capable of launching an attack. Sources are listed in the pinned comment of that video https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  18693. Great!
    1
  18694. I'm glad it does Sajuek :)
    1
  18695. "The whole thesis of this video is misguided." - no, I proved numerious times that Keitel was lying. I didn't actually tackle the rest of Suvorov's thesis, just showed why it's flawed. But don't worry, I'm currently doing research and creating the script for another video which will tackle Suvorov once and for all, because his views are biased and misguided.
    1
  18696. Why? Is there a division you want to know about in particular?
    1
  18697. That would be a great, but difficult video to do. I'll consider it :)
    1
  18698. I'm sorry for using hard facts and evidence for form coherent logical arguments. I don't know why this upsets you, but clearly it does. By your statement then, if I'm not allowed to use logic, hard facts and evidence in my videos (because in your opinion there isn't any), what am I to use instead? Should I just make stuff up and state opinions based on my own mistaken beliefs? Become another Suvorov? No point looking into history at all, or doing research, thinking critically, or creating videos or discussions to try and find the truth or the reality. No, may as well just chest pound and say "my country is better than your country" and achieve nothing. Is that what you would prefer? Well sadly, I'm going to continue ask questions, do research, gather evidence, think critically and create videos, because I believe this is the correct way to approach history. And yes, soldiers are human beings, every nation committed crimes, history is written by the survivors, there is logic in this war, and the point of the video was to use the Keitel and Suvorov problem to show that critical thinking is an essential skill.
    1
  18699. He wasn't a genius, he was good at military strategy - something his generals never grasped. But even then, his social policy was dreadful.
    1
  18700. If I'm honest, I'm struggling to get these Monday videos out in time as it is. Research on Stalingrad+Crusader has slowed simply because I don't have enough free time. I have a more-than full-time job, and it currently feels like I'm doing two more-than full-time jobs at the minute. This is also why I'm struggling to reply to people's comments. The work-load for my channel is bad enough, so there's simply no way I can support Indy and their WW2 endeavours.
    1
  18701. But even if Hitler believed that the Soviets were going to attack, doesn't mean that the Soviets were going to attack. Plus the fact that Hitler states that he wants to go East in Mein Kampf written in 1924 predates any Soviet buildup. Hitler went to war in 1939 in the first place because he wanted to go East, so his intention was very clear.
    1
  18702. There is yellow light, but you can't see it. Your eyes can only see Red Blue and Green light (RBG). Yellow light triggers your red and green receptors in your eyes, which your brain interprets as yellow, but you don't actually see yellow light.
    1
  18703. What are you calling "crap"? I wasn't arguing for Suvorov. If you watch further into the video, you will see that.
    1
  18704. But how do we know Hitler had this foreboding? We only have Keitel's word for that. Plus, Hitler made it very clear that he wanted to invade the Soviet Union in Mein Kampf in 1924. This is why he went to war in the first place. So he was definitely going to invade the Soviet Union regardless whether the Soviets were planning on attacking the Germans or not.
    1
  18705. As I said to someone else, teachers make or break a subject. And with history, there are far too many bad teachers. Some are great! But I've had my fair share of terrible history teachers, so I know what it's like.
    1
  18706. You do realise there are servicemen in the comments section saying that I was right in what I said. "If one makes every individual responsible for all their actions, a military could not function, and our courts would be flooded with claimants." Why? Is your military committing criminal acts? If it is, it should stop. Intentionally targetting civilians is a crime. Collateral damage could be argued in the case of air and artillery strikes, so long as enemy combatants or military installations were the primary target.
    1
  18707. Wait, does that mean you believed in what Suvorov said?
    1
  18708. Thank you sir!
    1
  18709. Glad you agree
    1
  18710. Thanks for the sub :) Hitler was an evil guy, but he wasn't crazy, no matter how much the post-war surviving generals painted him as being that.
    1
  18711. I'll just leave this link here which explains the state of Soviet artillery and the massive logistical problems as well, which completely undermines the logistics argument https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c
    1
  18712. And I love your comment, thank you!
    1
  18713. So long as I enjoy creating them and you're enjoying watching them, the views don't matter :)
    1
  18714. History is written by the survivors. And the problem with Suvorov's work is that he's basing his entire evidence on twisted anecdotal evidence. The fact is that the Red Army in 1941 was hopelessly unprepared for war. It was caught in the middle of a mobilization effort, and a reorganization effort (which explains why units were moving and also the dismantling of lines etc). The fact was that the units had little to no ammunition (what, no stockpiling of ammunition for this great offensive Suvorov claims?), little to no fuel for their tanks and trucks, their tank divisions didn't have trucks to move their infantry or artillery (meaning the tanks were forced to fight alone, which lead to their destruction), a portion of the tanks didn't have bored guns, their air force was in a similar dire state, and their officers were shackled by a dual-command system (which I would argue is the main lasting result of the Purges), to name a few issues. Problems with Suvorov's thesis off the top of my head - he ignores the dire state of the Red Army, he ignores the building of multiple lines of reserve forces stretching back to Moscow (it was these forces that the Germans would run into during Barbarossa and Typhoon, although they weren't at full strength yet), he ignores the fact that Hitler had wanted to invade the Soviet Union since at least he wrote his Mein Kampf in the early 1920's, he ignores the German oil crisis, he ignores the build up of German forces on the Soviet border since mid to late 1940, he ignores numerous other issues (like the fact that Soviet troops were ordered not to counterattack across the border - why?). Basically Suvorov can only make his thesis work by not providing all the information to the reader, and can only make sense if you don't consider the dire state of the Red Army in 1941.
    1
  18715. The point of the video was to show that Suvorov is manipulating the evidence to suit his own agenda. He's done it with Keitel, and he does it with the other evidence too. Sure, people should read it - but then think critically about it. Ask: "But is this really the case?" then buy Stumbling Colossus and Colossus Reborn by David Glantz and realise "yep, what Suvorov is saying is complete garbage".
    1
  18716. Hey Gripen! How's things?? Let me know what you think of the videos :)
    1
  18717. Thanks for watching for 15 minutes
    1
  18718. True, there is a point where you have to accept what you're being told. But you have to be conscious that the information you're getting may not be entirely correct. This is why jumping to conclusions is a bad thing. And why you should remain open-minded to new concepts, evidence and ideas. The moment that someone presents substantial information that contradicts something you held to be correct, is the moment you should be willing to say "yes, I did believe that, but now I believe this".
    1
  18719. to amarillo?
    1
  18720. The flag of Wales shows a dragon. That doesn't mean they have dragons. All of what you've just said is your opinion. There's no hard evidence that supports this claim.
    1
  18721. A very nice compliment, thank you :)
    1
  18722. "You are dumb but pretend to be clever." - and you're not very nice. Manners make a man, so learn them. "Suvorov is not historian. He just red many many soviet comanders memuars and collected all the mosaic piece by piece." - so he is a historian then. A historian is someone who uses sources and publishes history books/videos/articles etc. "There are modern russian historians that prove Suvorovs statements." - they're not very good though are they? If the Soviets were going to attack in 1941, then that would be a preemptive strike in itself, since Hitler made it clear since at least 1924 that he was going to attack the Soviet Union to bring about Judeo-Boshevism. He also geared up his army for this task since 1933. "Just hours before german atack all army officers were ordered to destroy the envelopes without opening them or be executed. And there were those who opened the envelopes and find out the orders to attack." - source please. Orders or not, the Red Army was in no position to attack - The state of Soviet artillery and anti-tank forces at the eve of war https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Stalin’s Purge of the Red Army and Its Effects on the WW2 Eastern Front https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ The Soviets were also outnumbered in 1941, so it doesn't make sense that they would attack https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds Why the Germans had to attack in 1941 - proving it wasn't a 'preemptive strike' https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg And a video explaining why the Germans had the early tactical advantage over the Allies and explaining why Soviet tank doctrine wouldn't have gotten the Soviets very far if they had attacked https://youtu.be/OQblCC1rh74
    1
  18723. Yep, definitely sounds like the Soviets were the aggressors here /s
    1
  18724. I can't commit to that topic right now (I'm overwhelmed with work if I'm honest) but I'm interested to know what happened too. Wonder if someone else can elaborate?
    1
  18725. They only cut it up because people don't have the attention span to watch more than 30 seconds into a video, so it's an attempt to keep them engaged. I feel lucky that my viewers (on a whole) are able to watch all the way through my long videos (including those who watched all the way through my 9 hour Operation Crusader documentary)
    1
  18726. This video is part of a series where I've shown that Suvorov's thesis doesn't work. For example, the sorry state of Soviet artillery on the eve of war https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Also, David Glantz's "Stumbling Colossus" was written to show how badly Suvorov got it wrong. I'd recommend you read it.
    1
  18727. No it isn't. I recommend you read Stumbling Colossus by David Glantz, or When Titan's Clashed by Glantz (which has a brief summary at the beginning). Both show the state of Soviet forces prior to Barbarossa, and it's really not good. The Soviets didn't even have enough fuel and ammunition to get their tanks to the battlefield inside their own country, they certainly weren't in a position to attack.
    1
  18728. Glad you enjoyed the video!
    1
  18729. It takes two signatures to sign a non-aggression pact.
    1
  18730. The evidence is overwhelmingly against the idea of a preemptive strike. It has nothing to do with me making up my mind beforehand. What Suvorov is saying doesn't make any sense if you've read anything about the Axis-Soviet Front.
    1
  18731. Yes it is. I have the Kindle version, and it's there. Looks like you've not read it.
    1
  18732. I will get to those points in a future video. The point of this was to show that Suvorov wasn't doing his homework, and also was basing his points on opinions written after the events. His other points are also similarly poorly backed up and thus will be tackled thoroughly in future videos.
    1
  18733. True, although they burned through most of those tanks very quickly!
    1
  18734. The purpose of the video was to show that critical thinking was important, and that Suvorov was basing his argument on flawed evidence, because he wasn't thinking critically. I tackled one piece of evidence Suvorov used to show how he used it incorrectly. This video wasn't going to tackle the full thesis. However, Suvorov's thesis is based on flawed evidence. I'm in the process of making a much larger video which will tackle Suvorov completely. It may take a while, but trust me, the whole argument is seriously flawed from top to bottom, mainly because Suvorov is manipulating evidence to push his own agenda.
    1
  18735. As mentioned in the video, these territorial expansions were agreed during the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact. The Germans agreed that the Soviets could take these territories, in exchange for non-aggression and carving up Poland. Germany was the one that broke that non-aggression pact.
    1
  18736. "The Finnish campaign was proof of how disorganized their structure was" - which is perhaps why they set about restructuring their army. "Operation Barbarossa we see their weaknesses over again" - hmmm.... maybe they shouldn't have decided to restructure their army at the same time they had an aggressive state to their west
    1
  18737. I actually have a playlist on Suvorov addressing more of his things other than Keitel. This was just the first video on him, with the others being more up to date and (the more modern ones) fully referenced https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp&si=ZlGdfLwZPr_PxKwu
    1
  18738. We're entering the realm of alternate history here, but it's a good question. The Soviets definitely weren't in a position to attack in 1941, that's all I know for certain. Other commenters have said that the US would have sided with Germany if the Soviet Union had attacked Germany. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but could also be one possibility.
    1
  18739. Just because you should ask the question, doesn't mean you should ask it out loud. If you're in a business enviroment (like I am in real life), then you must realise that everyone else is playing "the game". And you should play it too. But in the back of your mind, be thinking critically, and stay sharp. That's how you win the game. By the way, I hate my job ;)
    1
  18740. Also, I don't mind people challenging me, it keeps me on my toes :)
    1
  18741. Thanks Traub! Don't worry, more to come :)
    1
  18742. Hey, look at the state of Soviet artillery on the eve of war https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c Also, look at the state of the Soviet tank force on the eve of war https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 Look at Mein Kampf, which says Hitler wanted to strike east from 1924. Look at the fact that Germany had to attack in 1941 https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg Look at the fact the Soviets were outnumbered on the first day of the war, and the first several months of the war (until December 1941) https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds And consider that Suvorov was willing to manipulate the evidence to support his agenda as shown in this video. So yes, the facts make it very clear that the "preemptive strike" idea is rubbish.
    1
  18743. But, I didn't tackle Suvorov's idea in this video. I just showed that at least ONE of his 'sources' for his thesis isn't reliable and does not support it. Plus, I know what Suvorov's other ideas and sources are and I intend to tackle them soon too.
    1
  18744. I didn't find it that hard to say! Can you say "My phobias include ailurophobia plus elurophobia and filinophobia"? :D
    1
  18745. I was learning German, but I don't have much spare time so I couldn't keep it going. Plus, the sentence structure and the completely random "gender" of every word just put me off
    1
  18746. The media isn't free and independent. Follow the money.
    1
  18747.  @cleancoder3838  Sorry for slow reply. No, I don't delete comments (except obvious spam). YouTube automatically deletes comments though, so it probably got memory holed.
    1
  18748. So, just to clarify this, it's "bay oh Bach ter" ? Because "be oh" is how I pronounced it, whereas "Beowulf" is "Bay oh wolf". And "Zeitung" is just me being lazy and not doing the Ts sound (far easier to say "Z" as an English speaker).
    1
  18749. Yes you were! Congrats!
    1
  18750. First! Congrats
    1
  18751. Nope, absolutely not. He abolished it under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933, specifically the permanent suspension of Articles 115 and 153 of the Weimar Constitution (which remained the constitution until 1945).
    1
  18752. Yes, I think saying that everyone on Wall Street conspired together is silly. It's like saying "all Germans" or "all Britons". No, groups don't exist. That said, these terms make it easier to communicate. If I had to say "some individuals who work on Wall Street, but not all" every single time, it would get tedious.
    1
  18753. I'm not sure why you said you're disagreeing with me, because I agree with you, Sutton's theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I merely said that I'm willing to reconsider if more evidence can be provided.
    1
  18754. I mean, it's possible, but I don't know why you'd want to do that. I prefer freedom to poverty, and such a system would both make the populace entirely dependent on the state, and impoverish them in the long run.
    1
  18755. "TIK, you have to be playing ignorant on that second half.." Nope. None of Sutton's books provide enough evidence to support his conclusions or those that others are coming to.
    1
  18756. The thing is, if we didn't use fiat currency or were forced to pay taxes, they wouldn't be an issue. Gold and silver need to come back, and people need to stop looking to the state to solve all the problems they create for themselves.
    1
  18757. I am stubborn, yes. I require evidence in which to base my beliefs upon.
    1
  18758. Except Versailles reparations were not punishing because the Germans never paid them https://youtu.be/dR-4RTSJ_yo
    1
  18759. A couple of articles for you to read on how monopolies are created. And no, they are created by the state, not the market, as explained. https://mises.org/library/five-ways-create-monopoly https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
    1
  18760. I would be happy to do this, but would need permission from the author and publisher.
    1
  18761. Standard Oil had competitors so it wasn't a monopoly. Also https://mises.org/wire/blame-government-not-markets-monopoly
    1
  18762. Monty deserves his criticism. However, in this operation, I'm not convinced it was his fault the operation failed. The plan could have worked, if Nijmegen Bridge had been taken on Day 1.
    1
  18763. No worries! Did you see the full series/the big MG video or just this one? And define what you mean by "bad planning and bad management". The Nijmegen bridge on day 1 was held by 19 Germans. After a delay of over 6 hours, Gavin finally sent a unit towards the bridge. The only bad planning and bad management here is by General Gavin himself, who decided to deprioritize the capture of the Nijmegen bridge on day 1 in favour of sitting on the Groesbeek Heights. And I'm not sure how you being Dutch would influence your opinion on this. I'd have thought you'd be less biased against either the Brits or the Americans, since you're not a Brit or an American. But maybe I'm wrong? The Dutch historian Poulussen says Gavin was at fault too, in his book "Lost at Nijmegen".
    1
  18764. That's not really a counter-argument. You need to say why Gavin was not to blame for not taking the Nijmegen Bridge. If the Nijmegen Bridge had been taken, then it's likely this "ridiculous plan" would have succeeded.
    1
  18765. They were at Nijmegen on the morning of day 3. They had the rest of the day to go the 10 miles to Arnhem (they'd already gone 50). But they then suffered a 36 hour delay trying to take the Nijmegen bridge, which could have been taken on day 1, but wasn't.
    1
  18766. Possibly, and I do think it would have helped massively. However, the Germans themselves concluded that it wasn't the British drop zones being too far from the bridges that was the main reason for failure at Arnhem. Instead, they believed it was that not enough troops were dropped on day 1. They concluded that had more men been dropped on day 1, the operation may have succeeded. Interestingly, the person responsible for deciding that two drops a day was too much for the transport aircraft pilots was General Brereton. Yet, nobody seems to be blaming him.
    1
  18767. And it all could have worked if Nijmegen bridge had been taken on day 1
    1
  18768. They held them for a few days, and they didn't need to use 17 pounder anti-tank guns since the 6 pounders actually had a new type of armour-piercing shot which was more effective than the 17 pounder shell at this time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armour-piercing_discarding_sabot
    1
  18769. But the enemy didn't have units at Nijmegen bridge for several hours. If 82nd Airborne had moved on the bridge straight away, they would have taken it.
    1
  18770. Of course
    1
  18771. That's a nice video, lovely music :) was your relative with 2 Para? Or was he part of another unit (like Gough's recon unit) that made it to the bridge?
    1
  18772. +David Pittman You raise a good point. Time to prepare a plan definitely played a factor. I sit on the fence at the minute with Monty. I see the arguments from both sides and just haven't read enough on him to make a judgement call. Browning did know about the Panzer Divisions though. He did ignore that information as he dismissed the intelligence officer (also called Urquhart) for coming to him with the evidence for their existence
    1
  18773. +David Pittman might have difficulty getting a copy of that, but I'll see what I can find. Thanks for the recommendation! :)
    1
  18774. I have, and the next one is decided. However... I think you'll be pleased to note I've just purchased a book on the St Nazaire raid, since I know nothing on it. Looks interesting. Can you recommend any more?
    1
  18775. Absolutely, it was most likely a combination of several different factors. But if you had to choose the worst mistake or the one reason. Which would you choose?
    1
  18776. +Michael McCabe oh yes, the British leadership especially showed little initiative. Thank for the feedback! At the moment, I'm researching the Western Desert Campaign, so we'll see what I come up with :)
    1
  18777. Apologies for late reply. In my opinion, the performance of 1st Airborne in the first couple days of the battle was awful. With the exception of Frost and the troops that made it to the bridge, it's hard to point to any unit and say that they did well in the Arnhem sector until the formation of the Oosterbeek pocket and the landing of the Polish Brigade. Urquhart's decision to accompany Lathbury and then the latter's decision to not to attempt an advance with 3rd Para Battalion on the first night was vital in the sense that it stopped reinforcements getting to Arnhem bridge. However, 10th SS Panzer Division had already crossed the Waal and was sat in Nijmegen. This fact would prevent XXX Corps from getting to Arnhem until after the Arnhem bridge was lost. Potentially, the addition of another Battalion at Arnhem bridge may have allowed Frost to hold the bridge even longer. If this is the case, the 36 hour delay at Nijmegen may not have been as a big an issue as XXX Corps probably could have gotten to Arnhem bridge if that bridge was still in British hands. It's a great argument, but I'm not convinced that Lathbury could have made it to the bridge that evening. Kraft's unit and Kampfgruppe Spindler were between Lathbury and the bridge. Spindler cut the route with a subordinate Kampfgruppe called "Harder" that evening after Frost's men had gotten through. It seems unlikely the other battalions could have squeezed past before Harder closed the gap. And whilst there was always a chance Lathbury could have fought their way through, the way the Para attack towards Arnhem on day 3 went (it was a complete disaster) it's doubtful they could have broken through. What is perhaps more decisive is the refusal for the RAF to land the Polish Brigade (or any other British unit) to the immediate south of Arnhem bridge. The Polish Brigade was meant to have been dropped there, but were dropped near Driel because the situation had changed by the time they arrived. So if a battalion or two had been dropped south of Arnhem bridge on day 1, there could have been two, three or even four battalions at Arnhem bridge, rather than one. In that case, the British may have been able to hold the bridge long enough for XXX Corps to arrive. And 10th SS Panzer may not have gotten to Nijmegen either, meaning there may not have been a 36 hour delay as Gavin's delayed attack towards Nijmegen bridge wouldn't have been stopped by 10th SS Panzer. In my opinion, looking at the battle after the troops had landed, Gavin made the biggest mistake. But looking at the plan prior to the troops landing, for me the biggest mistake was not landing at least one Battalion of British or Polish paras south of the Arnhem road bridge in conjunction with the units already landing to the West of Oosterbeek. Whether we blame Browning, Urquhart, the RAF or Montgomery for this, it's entirely up to you, but for me, this is a missed opportunity that would have been viable and may have changed the outcome of the battle.
    1
  18778. Thanks Simon. I don't see your comment as a waffle :) crossing the Rhine is something I definitely want to cover at some point as they supposedly learnt from the lessons of Market Garden. Currently working on a documentary on Fort Eben Emael in 1940 and will cover a large battle after that, so who knows. Interestingly, I actually bought a book on why O'Connor's performance in Europe didn't live up to expectations, especially since he was exceptional during Operation Compass. Haven't had time to fully read it. If you haven't seen my Operation Compass documentary, here's the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71kdhj27rk O'Connor is a great unknown... I agree with your assessment of Market Garden. There's definitely a lot of mistakes on the Allied part, most of them in the details of the plan and several mistakes by the Allied commanders that ultimately lead to the defeat. But for this video I decided to select one of them as the most important. If you had to select just one element or one commander for the failure of the operation, who or what would you pick?
    1
  18779. +Svenpaa Magnus Novus excellent! I look forward to hearing it :) be brutally honest!
    1
  18780. caelachyt I do the same, this is my favourite historical battle :) I was as accurate as I could be when placing units and describing events. You might disagree with the argument about Gavin, but put that to one side as you watch the rest, as I was relatively neutral throughout (I do point out that Nijmegen wasn't taken a few times, but ignore that if it helps) Here's a couple of things to note when you watch the first few episodes - the actual goal of the plan was to get to the coast, not Arnhem Bridge; Kraft's force at Arnhem isn't part of 9th or 10th SS, but is actually a unit of 16th Panzergrenadier Division (for some reason, I never knew that and just find it interesting); how the British at Arnhem really did a poor job of getting to the bridge (except Frost) which is best watched than described; how little manpower the Germans actually had throughout the operation; how XXX Corp's progress was actually on time until they got to Nijmegen; how there's a debate over what happened after XXX Corps got over Nijmegen bridge (we can discuss that later if you like, although you may have heard of it); how the counter-attacks by the Germans in the 101st area later on really hindered XXX Corps from getting to Arnhem; and how the Polish saved 1st Airborne. I absolutely agree with you that had the Allies had more units on the ground, this would have been a different story. Not sure if I mentioned this in another comment to you, but Kershaw says the Germans came to the conclusion that the British should have landed two divisions on day one instead of the one they did. I've yet to read about VIII Corps who were fighting on the right of XXX Corps. But General O'Connor was in charge of that force, and he did so well during Operation Compass that I'm surprised he wasn't able to give more support.
    1
  18781. +caelachyt absolutely, and I agree. But Kershaw also says the British weren't able to press home their attack because XXX Corps was spread out all over Nijmegen fighting the 10th SS Panzer Division who were still holding on there. By the time they were able to bring infantry forwards it was too late, as 9th SS were able to overwhelm Frost at Arnhem and block the road. Can I just ask, did you watch the rest of the episodes in my documentary, or did you just watch this episode? I only ask because I covered this point when the events happened.
    1
  18782. +caelachyt If you think Browning should take the blame, then honestly that argument is a reasonable one to make. In fact, I was debating including him with Gavin in my ending, but decided against it because Gavin made that first decision, and the argument that Gavin was at fault was the conclusion what Neillands and Poulussen came to. So I wanted to follow their footsteps in case anyone (including yourself) questioned it. I did actually consider having another video explaining why I chose to focus on Gavin instead of Gavin and Browning, but time issues prevented me getting around to doing it. Browning certainly messed a lot up: the fact remains he shouldn't have dropped in with his HQ, taking vital transport away from the rest of the airborne forces; he was useless when he was on the ground (literally not heard or read anything about the guy once he'd got onto the ground - except the decision to pull out of Arnhem); and approving Gavin's decision not to go for Nijmegen bridge was a vital flaw as well. If you haven't read Poulussen's book, he goes into a lot of detail about the 82nd's movements at Nijmegen, with a focus on the misunderstanding you mentioned. Probably the most detailed look at the 82nd at Nijmegen there is. Even if you don't agree with his conclusions, it's worth looking at. Not really light-introduction-to-the-topic read though. I agree that Allied intelligence was wrong/ignored, so you could argue that Gavin's decision to protect against the rumor of 1,000 tanks in the Reichswald is only equal to the fact that the two SS Panzer Divisions at Arnhem were ignored. Interestingly, the conclusion in Kershaw's book was (among other things) that it wasn't the distance from the objective that was the issue, but that they didn't land enough troops on day one. This comes back to the lack of transport aircraft and the fact the RAF refused to do two drops on day one... and comes round to the planning and even the over ambitiousness of the plan. I do wonder what would have happened if there had been enough transports to get the whole (or just more) of 1st Airborne in on day one even if they'd stuck to the same landing zones. And the point about this is, you can argue pretty much any point. You can blame Browning, I can blame Gavin, and someone else can blame the RAF, or poor planning, or whatever. And they're all valid points. The consensus is out on this issue because it's such a complicated issue, and really you just have to choose which point you think was the most important in preventing Market Garden from being successful. And if you're going to argue your point, that's fine, I just want to stress that I didn't choose Gavin because he was American and I'm some sort of arrogant "Brit". I chose him because he made the original decision. From the evidence I've seen, I do think that Market Garden was lost at Nijmegen. Here's one for you. Imagine 1st Airborne had landed at Nijmegen and the 82nd had landed at Arnhem and done the exact same thing. Would it change my opinion? No, because in my opinion the battle was lost at Nijmegen. Even if they 82nd at Arnhem took every objective and done a much better job than 1st Airborne had done, they would have been doomed anyway because the tanks wouldn't have gotten to Oosterbeek (not Arnhem) until day 5 or 6 at the earliest. They would have been starved of supplies, and even if they'd kept their landing zones - they'd be running out of men by that point, just as 1st Airborne were. In fact, with the exception of Frost (experienced paratrooper as he was), I'd say the commanders of 1st Airborne would have done a worse job than the 82nd did had they landed at Nijmegen. They probably wouldn't have taken as many bridges or at least not as quickly. British leadership (on a whole and with some notable exceptions) was pretty dire during both WW1 and WW2.
    1
  18783. +Serge Hamelberg Agreed. Yes, they absolutely underestimated their enemy. The Germans were on the back foot and they were running out of men, but the men they had were veterans of a long drawn out war. The Allies didn't have the experience of the Eastern Front. Realistically, they'd only fought a fraction of the might of the German army (except for the fall of France where they were all but annihilated) so they were not as experienced, and it showed. Now, that's not to say they didn't fight hard. They fought hard. The problem was that their training, experience, doctrines and leadership on a whole did not match that of the Germans, and it's clear to see in this operation.
    1
  18784. johnny onetothree no, earlier than that. The part of the Western Desert Campaign nobody knows about...1940. Literally, it's that bad I'm struggling to find books on the subject!
    1
  18785. +johnny onetothree I will do it at some point, but not the next one, sorry :(
    1
  18786. +Alexg6464 the Germans had so little south of Arnhem it's remarkable they won this battle. Even the two SS Panzer Divisions had problems with the quality of their units, especially around Oosterbeek after the Polish drop.
    1
  18787. Thanks David :) you're not "late", just a little behind schedule... a bit like XXX Corps... I have got two more Battlestorm documentaries out right now, and another on it's way. Here's some links in case you haven't seen them Operation Compass 1940-41 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b71kdhj27rk The Desert Fox | Rommel's FIRST Battle in North Africa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMv9YN11xkY The next documentary will be on Fort Eben Emael. Not sure when that'll be published yet (I'm about half way through making it), but I'll announce it when I know
    1
  18788. +David Pittman I'm glad you enjoyed it :) I mostly agree with you. I haven't read enough about Monty yet (I'm trying to remain neutral on him at the minute until I've read more) but I do think what you said about him being ambitious was probably true. Just to point out though that ignoring the Dutch proved in hindsight to be a bad move. In reality, they believed it to be infiltrated (we now know that's not the case, but it makes sense that they didn't trust the information). Also, it was Browning who ignored the evidence of the two SS Panzer Divisions, so really the blame would go to him for that. And some people do blame Browning. As I said to caelachyt I was debating blaming him AND Gavin, but in the end chose Gavin because he made the initial decision not to go for Nijmegen bridge
    1
  18789. +Ville “Villemaisteri” metsänmiettijä I'll have to double check, but I'm sure they did send scouts into the Reichswald. The problem was that by the time they'd done that it was too late and the Germans were dug in at Nijmegen.
    1
  18790. You can't fight Jerry if you're not properly hydrated
    1
  18791. johnny onetothree I'll go dig up some facts on the Franco-Prussian war for you :) I studied it in college but forgotten half the stuff I learnt about it
    1
  18792. ***** Sort of. They're basically known as a "co-belligerent". The British became convinced that Darfur was about to ally itself with Turkey in a bid for indepenence from British rule, so the British invaded. It's classed as being part of World War 1, although you could equally argue that it's not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Egyptian_Darfur_Expedition
    1
  18793. CStriker421 it's probably because it didn't last very long after the British invaded lol
    1
  18794. alkafluence they've had it pretty bad since... well forever, but especially since 2003
    1
  18795. KingSNAFU Did they really switch sides? I know they were allies with the Central Powers but they didn't join them?
    1
  18796. Thomas Curtis I'm afraid not!
    1
  18797. Tomislav why is everyone saying Bulgaria!? :P
    1
  18798. Pat Garret does that really sound like me!? I need to change my voice lol
    1
  18799. starcraft2own Any answer that involves the word Daisy is a win in my book :)
    1
  18800. "How the f**k is a made up concept like race the same thing as an observable quality like the producer?!" Race is a made up concept, much like class. The world is made up of individuals, not groups.
    1
  18801. It would be a distortion, since the British demands were that the Germans give up all their territory gains, which the Germans were unwilling to do.
    1
  18802. It's coming after Courland
    1
  18803. From what I've heard, that's pretty much it.
    1
  18804. @jeffrey, "is the germanic version of fascism" There were many National Socialist movements across the world at the time, and later which aren't based on German. "nazism is NOT about racial-identity struggle , its about nature , race is a natural component of it , but fighting other races like Marxism does on social classes that is not what nazism is about" Oh, I guess you haven't heard of the Holocaust then? Or the mass enslaving of other races (which Hitler says in Mein Kampf)? Or the starvation of other races? And yes, it is about race-identity struggle, and it is about removing the non-Aryans from control of the means of production, just like Marxism is about class-struggle. "nazism is not about equality of income of fighting the rich" Because that's not the definition of Socialism. Socialism is social-group in common control. You're thinking that Socialism is Marxism. NO, SOCIALISM IS NOT MARXISM. Marxism is a version of socialism, but it is not the definition of socialism. Being rich or equality of income is irrelevant to the definition of plain-old Socialism. This is where many people are going wrong. When I say they are Socialists, I'm not saying they are Marxists. Class has nothing to do with plain old Socialism. "they didn't control everything" Please read "Wages of Destruction" and "The Vampire Economy" because they did control everything. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to name something in the economy that the totalitarian state didn't control, and the term "totalitarian" should be the clue. "they had no free market I agree with that" Then they had control of everything. Wow, talk about a contradiction. How can they not control everything but not have a free market? If they don't have a free market, then they are socialist.
    1
  18805. Marxism is about class-identity struggle. National Socialism is about racial-identity struggle. Fascism is based on national-identity struggle. Feminist-socialism is based on gender-identity struggle. To say Nationalsocialism is Fascism is an incorrect statement. They are two distinct socialist ideologies. Capitalism is private control or ownership, rather than common control or ownership. Considering the National Socialist state was a totalitarian state (it controlled everything), it was not capitalism. They even abolished the concept of private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933.
    1
  18806. No, but common control of the means of production does make him a socialist.
    1
  18807. Except it's not in the slightest.
    1
  18808. Common control manifests itself as state control (public sector). Socialism therefore is, by it's very nature, state control of the economy (rather than leaving it in private non-state control, which would be "capitalism"). This is why the anarcho-syndicalists have to change the end of the Das Kapital quote I gave (technically I didn't give all of it) in order to justify their ideology, because their ideology demands non-state state-control, which cannot happen. It also explains why the term "state capitalism" is also an oxymoron. State capitalism is just socialism.
    1
  18809. But they are more or less aligned. True totalitarian regimes only came into existence in the 21st Century. The definition is a regime that controls everything (including the economy). You cannot have a totalitarian capitalist regime because capitalism is all about the free market. Totalitarianism can only exist where the economy is not free and everything is centralised (central planning). That is how socialism manifests jtself. Fascism and Nationalsocialism are both about the state being the national or racial community. The people are the state and the state are the people. Marxism is the workers taking control. The workers are the state and the state are the workers. This is how the different socialisms manifest themselves.
    1
  18810. I'm not trolling. I have plenty of evidence for what I'm saying. You're letting your ideology cloud you judgement, and until you decide to actually listen to what I'm saying, you're not going to understand. Yes it's not going to be nice when you grasp the implications (trust me, I also went through it), but you need to do it, otherwise you'll go through life believing historical distortions. This is why many National Socialists are criticising the "traditional narrative" because many people have the wrong idea of what National Socialist ideology actually is. People think it's just racism, or just nationalism, and others actually think it's capitalism. And because they're Nazis, nobody's listening to them (which is good on the one hand, but creates bias within the historiography because their ideology is being misinterpreted). Those denying the Holocaust are (mostly) doing it to troll the academic historians who have failed spectacularly to grasp the socialism in Nationalsocialism. I've actually been crushing Holocaust deniers in the comments by just talking about their ideology. Their entire argument folds in on itself like a pack of cards and they give in. Yes - I'm defeating deniers in literally two or three simple comments and getting them to submit! I would have made videos about it by now, but sadly I've had to do tons more research in order to gather substantial amounts of evidence in order to show Marxists what National Socialism actually was in practice. This is a huge topic and I'm deep into it, but if I have to tackle the Marxists first before tackling the National Socialists and Holocaust deniers, in order to prove that the Holocaust happened, I will.
    1
  18811. @trainbomb, That's because Marx Engels and Lenin are Marxist-Socialists, not National Socialists. (actually they did mention race, but it wasn't an inherent part of their ideology)
    1
  18812. Because the evidence is overwhelmingly clear that he was.
    1
  18813. No, they were both socialists.
    1
  18814. Social-group is common control of an economy. That's the definition of Socialism, as many many many sources indicate. Marxism is the social group known as the "workers" (class) in common control, and Nationalsocialism is the social group known as the Aryan (race) in common control. Fascism is the social group known as the nation (national) in common control. If you were a Jew in Fascist Italy, you were fine until the Germans came in. The first racial law only came in in 1938 after Hitler put pressure on Mussolini who came into power in 1922). There were still 8,000 Jews in Rome in 1943. This was because Fascism was based on national identity, not racial identity - if you were working towards the state, it didn't matter what race you were. This is why calling Fascists "racist" or saying National Socialism was Fascism is actually incorrect. You can have racist Fascists (anyone can be racist, regardless of political ideology) but racism isn't inherent in the Fascist ideology.
    1
  18815. Fascism is socialised man, the nation, in common control. Let me explain: Mussolini got into power in 1922. But the first racial law only came in in 1938, after Hitler influenced Mussolini. Mussolini didn't mind if you were an Italian Jew, so long as you were working for a greater Italian state. It was only in 1943 when the Germans came in that the Italian Jews were in trouble. Fascism was for the national-identity, rather than race-identity, or class-identity, gender-identity (feminist socialism) etc. So actually, Fascism, National-Socialism and Marxism are all socialisms - and therefore economic systems. But they manifest themselves differently because each has a different social-group they claim to support (workers, Italians or Aryans) and another social-group they hate (bourgeoisie, foreigners or Jews).
    1
  18816. Thank you. I just wish I had realised this much earlier.
    1
  18817. "This is in stark contrast to the Marxist doctrine of a theoretical classless society." Yes, but since I'm saying National Socialism is Socialism, Marxism is irrelevant. You think Socialism equals Marxism. That is an incorrect assessment, since Socialism came before Marxism. Socialism was born in the French Revolution along with Nationalism (they had roots beforehand). Socialism was a social-group in common control. Marxism came along and defined the class-group in common control, while National Socialism defined it as race-group in common control. When I say National Socialism is Socialism, I'm not saying National Socialism is Marxist-Socialism, which is what you're accusing me of doing. Remember, Socialism came before Marxism. I'm not saying National Socialism was Marxism; I'm saying it was Socialism. Here's a speech that Hitler gave in Munich 12th of April in 1922. I think you may enjoy it - " 'NATIONAL' AND 'SOCIAL' ARE TWO IDENTICAL CONCEPTIONS. It was only the Jew who succeeded, through falsifying the social idea and turning it into Marxism, not only in divorcing the social idea from the national, but in actually representing them as utterly contradictory. That aim he has in fact achieved. At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it ''National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it." Very interesting, don't you think? "And, incidentally, if you don't like to mix Nazism with Fascism for whatever reason" It's not for whatever reason; it's because they're not the same thing. This would be like saying Feminist-Socialism is Marxist-Socialism, which would be ridiculous.
    1
  18818. "But there is a critical difference: equality vs. social darwinism." Except, they both want equality for their social group. Equality for workers or equality for Aryans. Class-struggle vs racial-struggle. Socialism is the social-group in common control, regardless which social group it is. Therefore, they're both socialisms. Also, National Socialism is not Fascism - they're distinct. Fascism is another form of socialism, but for the national-group rather than race. "From your libertarian perspective" From your Marxist perspective you may think the distinction between National Socialism and Marxist Socialism is greater than it actually is. The reality is that the distinction is small. Also, my current perspective is not the perspective I've always had. Please don't assume people are static and don't evolve. "as they're both collectivists" Exactly. Socialised man in common control = socialism.
    1
  18819. Both National Socialist and Marxist Socialist regimes were terrible. Neither side deserves praise.
    1
  18820. Congrats!
    1
  18821. That's a very cynical way of viewing it. By that "logic", all information is opinion.
    1
  18822. Not TV shows, no. I don't have time, and TV is out of date. The only exceptions are Star Trek and House. YouTube I watch a lot though - check out my "Likes" playlist (which should be public) for the type of content I watch.
    1
  18823. I know. However, the evidence is clear cut once you have the actual undistorted definition of socialism. If I get demonetized, then hopefully I can rely on my Patrons for support. The truth shouldn't be artificially suppressed, which is what the Marxists are trying to do on the videos that address this huge distortion of history.
    1
  18824. I really don't have the time to take part in such things, although I would certainly pay a visit and maybe ask questions etc
    1
  18825. Feel free to utilize your private control to stop watching my private channel at any time. The social-group you identify with doesn't control you and force you to watch this (or does it?). By exercising your private right to stop watching, you thereby acknowledge the superiority of private control over common control, which provides individuals the freedom to make their own choices, and acknowledge it is best not have choice taken from individuals by others (common control). By continuing to watch, you also acknowledge that private individuals should have the choice to do as they please, unless you are being forced to watch by the social group you identify with. Only by being forced to watch by the social group is acknowledging that common control is superior.
    1
  18826. I didn't say it was the same thing? I'm not sure how you've misinterpreted what I said, but let me explain it again. Socialism is "socialized man" (a social group) in common control. Marxism is "the producers" (class) in common control. National Socialism is "the Aryans" (race) in common control. The only difference is the social group that's in control. These are distinct from "capitalism" which is about private control. There is no common control in capitalism.
    1
  18827. Thanks Yavuz
    1
  18828. I think you should read the evidence ONLY and ignore the opinions until you've come to your own conclusions. Or read the evidence, then get as many varying opinions as possible. That's the best way to avoid bias. Or ignore the news from mainstream media, since they're a dying medium and are willing to do anything in order to survive, including lie through their teeth.
    1
  18829. Bodglin o'Ite lol
    1
  18830. Devon Ziegler haha
    1
  18831. CStriker421 yeah, I would have said the Duma too!
    1
  18832. Thegamer8324 great answer!
    1
  18833. alkafluence loving these Putin answers!
    1
  18834. Leviathan268 I thought it was the Duma, which is why I mentioned that it wasn't!
    1
  18835. gmsimpson05 nope, I thought that too. The Duma's only part of it
    1
  18836. Inflation is robbing the poor. Read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression"
    1
  18837. By Karl Marx's own definition, we do not have Capitalism, since we don't use Capital. You have read Das Kapital, right?
    1
  18838. What do you mean I go too far? If you tax the parent, you tax the child. Similarly, if you tax the rich, you tax the poor.
    1
  18839. Did you know that I've done a video on Marx? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  18840. Just subscribed to him. I've heard of Snider because of George Gammon, but hadn't heard of Emil until now. I'll give them a watch because I enjoy the in-depth stuff (which tends to be lacking on a lot of YouTube videos)
    1
  18841. I disagree with the whole thing. George doesn't address the problem known as "the tragedy of the commons". In fact, his policies would just exacerbate it, much like what happens in all socialist creeds.
    1
  18842. Okay, I'll do a video on it, because you're not the only one who has asked. I do think I actually explained this in my video on the Soviet economy, because they had inflation and shortages too https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  18843. "the free market leads to power and wealth accumulating in the hands of the few in a matter of decades creating a new neofeudal aristocracy." You mean "Capitalism", not the free market. The STATE is the entity that steals from society and gives it to the few.
    1
  18844. I don't know because I've not read the Parallels. It was the original version of the book, but I was under the impression that a lot of the text is the same.
    1
  18845. It's great! Sadly, it's currently out of print, along with "The Cause of Hitler's Germany" by Peikoff, which is the shortened version. I really do hope they print more copies soon or make a Kindle version, because I'd recommend it to everyone.
    1
  18846. People don't know what libertarianism is, and the reason they don't is because they self-censor and refuse to read the literature. Again, I'm not a libertarian. And you didn't bring up any "counter points", so I have nothing to address. If you had wrongly identified me as a Marxist, I'd be making the same statement: you are wrong, I am not a Marxist. And stop projecting. You're the one acting like a child because you said something stupid and were called out for it. It's a shame you just believe what you hear on Reddit instead of doing your own research.
    1
  18847. I'm ignoring everything else said because everything else said is based on a false idea that I'm libertarian. It's not my fault that people make stuff up and jump to silly conclusions. In fact, I keep complaining that people do this! My question is: why did you just believe what someone else said? Why didn't you think critically and seek out the evidence for yourself? That's right, because you're willfully ignorant. I wasn't "just" calling you ignorant, I was correctly identifying the very foundation of your character. If you don't like the fact that other people call you ignorant, then adopt an objective epistemology.
    1
  18848. There wouldn't be a declining birth rate in a free market. The reason for the declining birth rate is the taxation, regulation, wage controls, price controls, and inflation that destroy productivity, drive up stock market and house prices, and punish men for having children in the "family court" system.
    1
  18849. It is Goebbels's Ministry of Enlightenment.
    1
  18850. I reject the idea that we are blank slates, and I'm disappointed you would accuse me of making such an argument when I clearly did not. Yes, we have a biology. Well done. However, you're wrong to assume that this one factor alone out of a multitude of factors "pre-determines" how we think as individuals. Worse, you then make a leap from the individual to the collective, as if some sort of spiritual collective consciousness exists. There's zero evidence in biology of a collective consciousness, and yet you state it as if it's fact. It's nonsense.
    1
  18851. Except you're not a dog, you're a human, and as such, you have a mind. That means you're not reliant entirely upon your biology, and therefore it is merely a minor factor on who you are as an individual. So it's not nonsensical, you just want to strawman.
    1
  18852. I didn't realise Keith Woods got deleted... That's annoying because I was using his channel to learn more about Third Positionism. Companies can't pay you so low because people simply wouldn't work for such low wages. Nobody works for free. So companies would have to pay the right amount for labour - determined by supply and demand.
    1
  18853. No, it's the State that does that. The free market is the mechanism which tries to fight against a concentration of wealth. The free market is not anarchy, but the most ordered system we have.
    1
  18854. "Essentially from what I can tell you believe that was Maximizes an Individuals liberty should be put above everything" No, that's only half of the equation. You don't understand my position at all if you equate me with a hedonist. - "Humans are entirely dominated by their world views which often are not wholly objective and almost never can be. Keep in mind what you assert to be the "objective truth" will go against somebody else's "objective truth" therefore using the objective truth as a reason why you are correct is pointless." I've answered this here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI
    1
  18855. @KorpralXI I countered you before in the other comment, but I'll copy and paste my answer again: "he’s applying his ideology (libertarianism) to this situation" I'm not a libertarian, and the idea that we think and are therefore not animals doesn't come from libertarian ideas. - "his entire ideology is based on humans being rational." No, it's based on truth being objective. Humans are not always rational, although they can be. - "We are not rational, we are raised and developed in Nations by our parents," If you were born in a submarine, that doesn't make you a fish. - "we are the result of our community" But that doesn't mean we ARE that community. - "and our parents." What about orphans? - "It’s why a Muslim and an Englishman are noticeably very different even if they were born inside of the same country." That's religious differences, which is based on brainpower. That's not racial. And all this point does is support what I was saying, since animals don't have religions. - "Because the Muslim has not integrated into being English" First off, he can be. He isn't if he's only just got off the boat, but he could be integrated into the culture. But again, the issue here is religion, culture and politics, not 'race' or a lack of brainpower. - "he has remained with his community of which he favours which is not fundamentally an English community." Yes, that's what religions do. But religion is no proof of the existence of races or that we are animals. - "These communities then affect the way we think,the things we believe and the traditions we inherit." Correct. We are brought up by our parents and are influenced by the social networks around us. However, that doesn't mean we can't change those ideas, or that the ideas were "pre-determined" before we were born, which is what the National Socialists and racists believe. - "TIK is simply wrong with his rabid individualism."
    1
  18856. I simply couldn't take on an employee in this state-managed economy, because as soon as I did I'd have to pay towards their pension, take out insurance for zero reason, and deal with HR management nonsense, plus other costs enforced upon me by the State. The State has increased the cost of employing someone so high than the so-called "Gig economy" is the only way forward.
    1
  18857. Sorry for slow reply. "As the one who grew up in the USSR, I remember that our communist teachers (which we laughed at) told us that capitalism inevitably expands and becomes global first, then it consolidates after running out of new external markets and causes the destruction of free market and there is no way preventing it. Thus, capitalism due to its ever expanding nature will inevitably turn into cancer and eat itself." Hitler believed in this too. It's called the "Tendancy of the Rate of Profit to Fall" fallacy in Marxist circles, and Hitler called it the "Shrinking Markets". I've addressed this in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video. See 46 minutes 32 seconds into that video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I like how you're from the USSR, and should know why what they taught you was incorrect, and yet you seem to have just believed their lies and their morality system. I'd seriously question that. I know a Macedonian who still thinks back to the glory days of her youth in Yugoslavian communism where they all sang songs to Tito as if he was a God. You've got to question the assumptions you've made.
    1
  18858. You might be an animal, and you might wallow in filth, but I'm not and I don't. I have a mind, and I use it.
    1
  18859. It's not a personal belief. I did back it up - I recommended two books in support. There's also more than just that, but since you haven't even read the basics, it's not worth listing any more.
    1
  18860. Not an ancap. Swing and a miss.
    1
  18861. Oh? Why?
    1
  18862. Also, yes. They'll be here in the comments again promoting him.
    1
  18863. First!
    1
  18864. I am slowly reading into it, yes. I should have done so years ago, but in some ways I'm glad I didn't because I was able to come to some of the same conclusions first (e.g. that altruism is bad). Obviously they were miles ahead of me and massively helped solidify my position on those issues, but I think it's good that I came to those conclusions independently.
    1
  18865. Capitalism is bad. What we need is a free market.
    1
  18866. And thank you! Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18867. Good to hear your opinions on this :) I don't want to say too much, I'll save it for that future video
    1
  18868. Thank's Ken!
    1
  18869. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  18870. Mostly wounded soldiers, but some units too (although not many)
    1
  18871. Ok, but when should he have broken out?
    1
  18872. Thank you! Good to hear you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18873. Glad you liked it
    1
  18874. Ok will do. Bye for now.
    1
  18875. I know, I noticed when I was editing, but was too late to go back :(
    1
  18876. Thanks :)
    1
  18877. What do you mean?
    1
  18878. Yes, but I encourage you to do your own reading on the topic. Never take what I say (or anyone else) as gospel. Multiple sources are what's needed.
    1
  18879. Thank you Oberst-Comrade 4nthr4x!
    1
  18880. Ah, I see :) I'll take a look. I certainly want to cover other pockets and compare them to Stalingrad, so I can compare the breakout attempts too
    1
  18881. Poor Göring! He get's so much hate. Can't imagine why :D
    1
  18882. I'm sorry you don't like long videos.
    1
  18883. Haha no need to be sorry :)
    1
  18884. Thanks! Glad to hear you enjoyed it :)
    1
  18885. I really do. They help get the point across. But if you have any suggestions on how to present this info better, I'm all ears :)
    1
  18886. Why would an early breakout be rational?
    1
  18887. Thank you very much for your great comment!
    1
  18888. Morgan Chalmers I'm afraid not
    1
  18889. It is chilling. I obviously disagree with them, but I totally understand why they've come to their conclusions. A lot of people are disillusioned with our current economy and wrongly blame "selfishness" and the "free market" for the problems, not realising we don't have a free market and that 98% of the populace are altruists.
    1
  18890. "You people support a perpetual debt-interest based banking system" Nope, swing and a miss. If you read the first 50 or so pages of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression", which you can get the PDF of for free in the link below, you'll see exactly why free market guys like myself are AGAINST the debt-based economic model. And Rothbard was Jewish, yet he's against it too. https://mises.org/library/book/americas-great-depression
    1
  18891. Okay, who is Joel Davis?
    1
  18892. As I explain later on in this video, people are abandoning the Left-Right political spectrum, and I mostly have too since it's not fit for purpose. I still use the term 'Left' to designate the Marxians and other Socialists, but otherwise I'm mostly done with it. For my previous stance on it, see the image in this tweet https://x.com/TIKhistory/status/1830534476339781639
    1
  18893. YOYO MAN and no, there were more StuG III's produced than Pz4's
    1
  18894. YOYO MAN hmmm... just realized that the figures I got were wrong and included chassis (which were then used for other vehicles)... son of a...
    1
  18895. ***** I did include the variants, although I didn't say that in the video. I guess I'll have to be very specific with my questions from now on :)
    1
  18896. nolan koski It wasn't :( I got it wrong, it was the StuG III - which used the PzIII chassis, and hence the confusion
    1
  18897. Steinar Barsøe ooo! No, tell me!
    1
  18898. Steinar Barsøe Yes, the Tiger 1 was devastatingly powerful. Surprisingly, my favourite is the StuG. Not because it was powerful, but because it was great on defense, it was cheap to produce, it was produced in high numbers, and Michael Wittmann started his career in the StuG
    1
  18899. Steinar Barsøe true true, but it was later upgraded and became a very capable tank. What's your favourite tank of the war?
    1
  18900. Steinar Barsøe yes! correct! :)
    1
  18901. Steinar Barsøe yes! Bonus question just for you Steinar - prior to the start of ww2, which German tank had more units produced, the Pz3 or the Pz4?
    1
  18902. crackwiser due to me misreading the info, it wasn't either. It was the StuG III :( The info I got included the chassis of the Mark 3's and 4's, which were used in other vehicles, like the StuG III. Mark III chassis production was higher than others, I guess you could say
    1
  18903. Hopper correct! Bonus question, when did production of the Pz3 stop?
    1
  18904. Tomislav no, it was the StuG III
    1
  18905. Ville metsänmiettijä I got it wrong, it was the StuG III. The stats I read included all Panzer III chassis - which obviously, the StuG's used. The StuG III was the most, followed by the Panzer IV I think
    1
  18906. martaxsasLT yes, and no. I got it wrong, the StuG was. The stats I looked at included all chassis produced, which included the 10k made for StuG III production :(
    1
  18907. Nikki PiP You were correct! The statistics I read included the chassis of the StuG III in with the Pz3 :( StuG's were the most
    1
  18908. Devon Ziegler I apologize, I was wrong :( it was the StuG III
    1
  18909. CStriker421 It's only easy today because I'll make it a lot harder tomorrow ;)
    1
  18910. I believe that it was known as "Gleiwitz" during its time in the Habsburg and later German empires. Then reverted back to Gliwice after 1945. So I was correct in calling it Gleiwitz, because that's what it was during this time. I don't think it's specifically Nazi propaganda, but just what it's called in German.
    1
  18911. Different lighting! You like? :)
    1
  18912. Resistance is futile! (But yes, Hitler's two books suck. Important reading, but really badly written.)
    1
  18913. Thank you!
    1
  18914. Well done Jamie! :D
    1
  18915. Logistics is mentioned in the first video :) and yes, I'll be trying to unpack it as much as possible. I need more sources on the logistics though, so if you have any suggestions, let me know
    1
  18916. At the moment, you can't send me physical books. However, if you have digital texts, I'll take them
    1
  18917. You may be waiting a while...
    1
  18918. I'm working on the script at the moment. Will be in a few weeks
    1
  18919. Also, a bit weird that they covered Barbarossa two years before it started (going off their timeline, since they're in 1939 at the moment) Edit: or at least their recent videos covered 1939, I'm not actually following their content
    1
  18920. Are we really going head to head? They're covering Barbarossa - I'm covering Stalingrad!
    1
  18921. I did, yes. Mainly because of COPPA. Didn't want to give the US government a chance to claim that those videos were aimed at kids (when they clearly weren't) and then sue me for $42,000 per video. But yes, much simpler times :)
    1
  18922. I'm doing this in series of 3 episodes each, so when the series begins there's 3 episodes with a gap of a week between each episode
    1
  18923. Yes, that is part of the reason
    1
  18924. Yes, and there's a couple of Patreon questions regarding WW1 coming up
    1
  18925. I've already admitted it in the comments, and will be admitting the error again in the next Stalingrad Addendum video.
    1
  18926. Hopefully one day ☺️
    1
  18927. Good point! I'll sort that
    1
  18928. Yeah, this is the big concern. I don't want to overdo it like I did previously.
    1
  18929. https://youtu.be/BaKYvDuiskk
    1
  18930. I'm back in the game Breaking hearts again You better watch out 'Cause I'm back in the game
    1
  18931. So because the US military doesn't do it, you reject direct evidence that shows that other militaries do it, and then conclude that "no military" does this? Perhaps your experience isn't the the only experience. Perhaps there are other perspectives. Perhaps evidence is more important than belief.
    1
  18932. You are incorrect. It's technically "optional" https://youtu.be/U8QMrtXGiWk This site lists a bunch of examples and the "hours" are all in brackets, indicating that it's optional. https://www.military.com/military-life/military-time-the-24-hour-clock.html
    1
  18933. I answered that question here https://youtu.be/rK0SuYi4Hho
    1
  18934. Wow! Thank you for your support!
    1
  18935. Everything is just static inside the city to be honest. I plan to do a brief summary of the fighting inside the city throughout this entire period, and as you'll see, hardly anything happened.
    1
  18936. Yes, there are enemy units at Sidi Rezegh... but that's at Sidi Rezegh. Pienaar starts off at Tieb el Esem, which is miles to the south. Look at the map in this video: there is nothing between Tieb el Esem and Axis forces in the Sidi Rezegh area. Nothing. Pienaar is reluctant to even go towards Sidi Rezegh even before he has a chance to fight the battle. He's not stopped because of enemy units; he stops his own unit way before he's in contact with Axis forces, even when Norrie is there. So to say he was stopped by an enemy force on the way towards Sidi Rezegh is simply untrue.
    1
  18937. Since the early days of the Mega Drive :) recently got Sonic Mania as well, despite Denuvo... really enjoy that game (even if my wireless keyboard sucks and makes it almost unplayable)
    1
  18938. Yes, a few people have pointed that out. Sorry!
    1
  18939. I don't actually know what Halder did the rest of the war, but his diary stops after he gets fired
    1
  18940. Yes I have an English copy. I got mine second hand off Amazon. Not sure if there's a pdf version out there though
    1
  18941. Founding a city/port is not as easy as Civ makes it out to be. You need workers to make it work, and a city big enough to make it function. There's a reason that a lot of major ports are also major cities and vice versa.
    1
  18942. 80%, not 8!
    1
  18943. Well, I'm glad you're excited!
    1
  18944. Glad to hear you're enjoying them, Jake :)
    1
  18945. That part is a while a way yet, sadly. It's quite late in the battle when it occurs :)
    1
  18946. No, the state ran the concentration and death camps. A private business (like McDonald's) didn't own the Holocaust, it was run by the "People's State" (to use Hitler's own words). That is the definition of socialism.
    1
  18947. According to Rees... which is why I pointed it out. Maybe the reason it was the biggest increase in history was because it wasn't capitalism, since it was the state doing that (socialism), rather than private businesses (capitalism).
    1
  18948. Unfortunately, as I explained in the British Forces episode, none of the sources actually state the number of men. The only one that does is Playfair's British Official History, which lists percentages of the losses. I've had to calculate from them the number of men, and these are the numbers you get.
    1
  18949. You may have done, but YouTube is weird with subscriptions. If you don't see a new video pop up, check back every Monday at 5pm GMT (watch out for British Summer Time)
    1
  18950. True. I mentioned a good portion of the 'hate' for Rommel at 20:55. I've not made a comment on Crüwell disliking Rommel because that hasn't happened yet (but will during the Crusader battle). Don't know much about Kesselring yet tbh. I have one book on him, but not had time to dive into the details yet. What do you think about him as a commander?
    1
  18951. Yes, a very good example! Thank you for giving that example! As for the Afrika Division - some sources say it started off as the "Division zbv Afrika". Some sources say it changed names on the 28th of November-ish 1941. Some sources say it changed later. Some source say it never changed. Some sources say it was always called the Afrika Division by the troops. Some say it was later called the 90th Afrika Division. Honestly, as much as I like to get things accurate, this is so much of a minor-issue that certainly I don't think it's worth arguing over. If the name had a massive impact on the campaign, fair enough, but it really doesn't. So, in my opinion, if people want to call it the Afrika Division, or the 90th Light Division, or the 90th Afrika Division, that's fine in my book. I see them as synonyms of the same name, if that makes sense. So I'm just calling it the 'cool' distinguishing name that's short, which is the Afrika Division.
    1
  18952. "Was Halder able to do more against Rommel both before and after he was dismissed?" I don't know what the future will bring in North Africa. I'm going through it in order and learning as I go so that I don't have future events cloud my judgement for what happened earlier. Obviously I know about El Alamein etc, but individual battle decisions and actions remain mostly vague right now, and that's deliberate. That said, I don't think Halder had any influence once he was dismissed. I think that was it for him. "Were there other German staff who also hated Rommel?" Certainly a lot of generals in the desert disliked Rommel. Check out 20:55 in the video. I've not looked too much at his involvement in France, although I know there was criticism of Rommel because he advanced 'too fast' and disorganized his units, much like he did in his first desert offensive. "Would you consider a video about the politics of the German staff?" For me to cover it in detail, that would literally be an entire career in itself. I would love to do that, but I couldn't possibly commit to such an ambitious topic right now. "and a video about the politics leading to Rommels suicide?" It's a while away, but when I get to it, I will cover it. The current plan is to do Crusader, Courland and Stalingrad. But I'm trying to go through the North African Campaign in order, then onto Torch, Tunisa, Sicily, Italy, Normandy and onwards. The reason I want to do everything in order is so that I can confidently say 'based on what came before, Monty/Patton/whoever is was a good/bad general' etc. I want to base my judgements of characters from the context of what happened before, not based on future events. But once I get to Normandy etc, I will cover Rommel's suicide. I hope that makes sense.
    1
  18953. In this instance, I'll agree with you on that :)
    1
  18954. :D great! Glad to hear that!
    1
  18955. :)
    1
  18956. "Rommel killed Auftragstaktik in his command" No, you will see plenty of that in Crusader. "and is to blame for his supply situation" I disagree. He didn't have any control over the Italian Navy - the ones failing to supply him.
    1
  18957. Glad you liked it, here's the playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL
    1
  18958. Because the 25pdr was used quite regularly as an anti-tank weapon in North Africa, as you will see in this series. The 3.5 AA gun wasn't used in the anti-tank role.
    1
  18959. Glad to hear! :) Sorry about the charts
    1
  18960. PAK 38 50mm. 100% my mistake :(
    1
  18961. Not really. But it could have been won in 1940 if Churchill hadn't intervened, as I explained in my Operation Compass video.
    1
  18962. Franz Halderp
    1
  18963. Vicious Unpolite Games - I must apologize, I've just double-checked my source, and it's not "Battleships" but "warships". Somehow I've converted this into "battleships", which is incorrect (although may have included battleships, but I trust your assessment that it was possibly only cruisers). I shall give you the quote - "[Rommel] had cabled Mussolini on December 2nd to the effect that the fighting efficiency of Panzergruppe Afrika depended upon a continuous stream of reinforcements, fuel, ammunition, and replacement armour and artillery, and the reply, that sea traffic between Italy and Libya was becoming increasingly dangerous, and that warships were the only vessels capable of getting through - and then with only limited cargoes of fuel and ammunition - had been dismissed by him as just another example of Italian obstructiveness." Page 146-147, Pitt, B. "The Crucible of War: Auchinleck's Command." Volume II, 2001. I can't pull this video down for that mistake, but I will correct it for the final 7-8 hour all-in-one Crusader video. I must thank you for helping me out with the pronunciation of Italian names - I'm just about getting a grip of German, but Italian names and phrases are beyond me! As for the Cannone da 90/53, my sources don't even mention it, which is why I haven't. Do you know which units had them during Crusader? The British also had a 94mm AA gun, but it wasn't used in the anti-tank role (which is why I didn't mention it either) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_3.7-inch_AA_gun
    1
  18964. Yes, I respect Gause for that too! He was apparently one of the 4,000 officers who were allowed to remain in the army after WW1. And you're correct about the trucks travelling that distance. That's why Tobruk was so desperately needed by Rommel, so that they had a port nearer to the front. Good to hear you're finding this interesting. Seriously can't wait until we're into the battle and the stuff that happens... but no spoilers ;)
    1
  18965. :)
    1
  18966. Thank you, I'll watch that when I get a chance
    1
  18967. Actually, currently I create the content (after research), then form the headlines from the content. I don't search for headlines. I go where the research takes me. These opinions are shared by several historians; sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  18968. Yes, he saw the video. Clearly you did not, BassLine.
    1
  18969. Absolutely! I'm not just doing the city fight, I'm covering most of the Stalingrad Campaign in detail from 24th of July 1942 to 2nd February 1943, including the situation on the flanks
    1
  18970. Was he really? I wonder if his name is in it? An it's not out yet, I'm currently at 242,552 words of research for Stalingrad, although had to take a few days off writing this to concentrate on the next video about the Eastern Front which should be up later today.
    1
  18971. As there were no SS at Stalingrad, that is impossible. Please explain.
    1
  18972. It's not just them, it's the Marxists and the Nazis too. Basically everyone who's an extreme economic socialist.
    1
  18973. Well, I don't reply to every message, but I do read them, and then I reply if I think I need too. However, if you want to catch me, the best time is the first 5 hours after I publish a video. I dedicate Monday evenings to replying to everyone :)
    1
  18974. They also don't take me anywhere near the amount of time to make compared to Battlestorm, so I'm happy to make them. Any suggestions?
    1
  18975. That's a great suggestion! I'll add it to the list :)
    1
  18976. Excellent thanks! Also added to a wishlist :)
    1
  18977. Thanks for the suggestion of "Seeds of Disaster", I've added it to a wish-list I've got on the Western Front of 1940. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to cover the Battle of France at some point and will get to use it. Probably after Stalingrad. What was the name of the book on the Italian Army?? I've got (and started but not finished) "the Death of the Leaping Horsemen: 24th Panzer Division at Stalingrad" and it's similar to the Croatian Legion book. Again, a very good book
    1
  18978. How do you do this!?
    1
  18979. Interestingly, I did a vote on a video asking if people would prefer the Bulge or Stalingrad. People chose Stalingrad so that's why I'm doing that now. I do intend to do the Bulge at some point after Stalingrad though
    1
  18980. Yes, I can't remember exactly, but I think I got that book after making this video. I do now have Pitt's series and it's the best series on the North African Campaign, although doesn't include a bibliography (major major issue).
    1
  18981. Huh... well, that's an interesting development! Thanks for letting me know!
    1
  18982. "Whilst reading N. S. Nash's book 'Strafer Gott Desert General.' Which recommends your video on Operation Compass." Nash's book recommends this video? Or do you mean that I recommend his book in my video?
    1
  18983. What do you mean? Of course the British were involved in the fall of France. I never said the defeat was a "shame surrender" since I don't hold such opinions. Stop trying to make an argument where there isn't one.
    1
  18984. Sorry, I do get it right in my more recent Battlestorms :)
    1
  18985. Is this true? Do you have a source?
    1
  18986. +SuperVerst true, which is why I made sure to mention it. Supply was a huge issue in the Western Desert Campaign and definitely decided the campaign. This is where those arguments come about saying Graziani should have used a smaller but more mobile force that could have given him the ability to go further and possibly defeat the British (since he would still have outnumbered them)
    1
  18987. +Michael McCabe thanks for the recommendation! I've added that book to my Amazon wish list ;) Felt like I didn't mention the supply enough, although I did include some of the supply dumps in the video that the Brits used to resupply as they moved from Mersa Matruh. And yes, when I was reading up on this battle I was like "O'Connor is doing exactly what the Germans did in the summer!"
    1
  18988. +Cameron Thompson oh yes! Next one will be on Rommel's introduction to North Africa :) Really looking forward to HOI4
    1
  18989. No worries! The next documentary video will be on Fort Eben Emael, but Brevity will be the one after (since I've just done Rommel's arrival). I'm thinking going forwards I'll keep alternating from the Western Desert Campaign and something else. Part of my reasoning for starting a series on the Western Desert Campaign was precisely for that reason - nobody talks about these battles. Everyone and their mother has written a book about El Alamein, but I struggled to find a dozen books written on Compass. And to put it bluntly, it's wrong. Just because something's popular doesn't make anything else less interesting. As I said at the end of my latest one, I actually can't wait to come back to the Western Desert Campaign. Honestly, I've never been that interested about the WDC. Again, this was partly why I wanted to do it. But now after two docs I'm really REALLY interested in it :)
    1
  18990. Thanks! And after your contribution to Panzer Corps Afrika Korps, I thought you knew everything on the Western Desert Campaign :D
    1
  18991. I wish I could translate for you
    1
  18992. +Gripen85 thanks for the feedback Gripen! I'm working on the next now, but Barbarossa is the ultimate goal (once I've gotten better at this). I'm hoping to improve the graphics a hell of a lot for next time :)
    1
  18993. Yes, I bought that one later and used it for the Rommel video :)
    1
  18994. Any battles you'd like to see in the future?
    1
  18995. Hello Chewy :) thanks for your comment! Now, I'm not taking requests as such, but I do like getting suggestions since I have an idea of the sorts of operations everyone wants me to cover. My aim is to work my way through every major battle and operation in WW2 (yes, I'm setting that bar very high lol), so I'll definitely visit Burma and campaigns like that at some point as I know nothing about them either. Might be a few years off though... The difficulty for me is the research. It takes time and costs a lot of money to buy the numerous books about a subject I need for the research, so I've kinda come to the conclusion I should concentrate on one theater of battle at a time - e.g. the Western Desert Campaign. I've just got several new books on the WDC for Christmas, so I'll definitely be on this for a while. That and the fact it took me about four months to make the Market Garden video and 2.5 months to make this one... The good news is I'm getting faster lol
    1
  18996. I'm glad you like them :)
    1
  18997. Happy New Year to you too Katarnstar :) you'll be happy to know I'm already working on the next one
    1
  18998. Thanks for the feedback :) more on the way (eventually)
    1
  18999. Thank! I'm glad you like it :) my next doc (on Fort Eben Emael) will be coming soon-ish. Will be similar to the Rommel one but also different again
    1
  19000. Yeah it's hard to say how much of the blame should go to Mussolini and how much should go to Graziani. I would say that strategically, Mussolini made the deadly mistake of declaring war in the first place. That dictated the overall outcome of the war for Italy. But could the 10th Army have performed better in 1940/41? I do think Graziani could have been better off using his armoured doctrine. I don't think he could have won the war or even decisively beaten the British, simply because the 132nd Ariete Division's performance (itself an Italian armoured division) later in the Desert War wasn't exactly stellar. But I do think he would have gotten to Mersa Matruh... where he'd probably have stumbled into O'Connor's counter-attack :( According to the sources I listed, the artillery units in the 10th Army were arguably the best units they had. They kept fighting until overwhelmed when everyone else was surrendering around them. The problem was the lack of anti-tank rounds and anti-tank guns in general, owing to the awful logistical situation and Italy's unpreparedness for war. Once the Matilda tanks entered the equation there was very little the Italians could do. I have the books to read up on the East African Front, so I may do that. Would be interesting to see how Savoia-Aosta ranks up to Graziani. The next one will be on Rommel's arrival to this theater though since I'm most of the way through animating it :)
    1
  19001. Just seen you said "mounted" instead of "mountain". They didn't use them in the Western Desert, but I do think they did use them in East Africa, and obviously on the Eastern Front
    1
  19002. The Germans certainly used Gebirgsjäger in the Caucasus. I can't say to what extent as I'm focusing more on the fighting around Stalingrad, but they did capture the highest point in the Caucasus
    1
  19003. +Michał Jurczuk and thank you for the feedback :) his eyes seem to stare into your soul...
    1
  19004. Max Quick I appreciate your honesty! I'd rather you say you didn't know than google it :)
    1
  19005. Gokotti imagine having that amount of gold. What would you buy first?
    1
  19006. ***** that was relatively close!
    1
  19007. Cameron Thompson thanks for sharing the video, I really appreciate it :)
    1
  19008. LordCucumber77 true, but considering the number they think it is, a few kilos would probably take more than a few minutes to mine ;)
    1
  19009. TheMegaSuperPickle probably more!
    1
  19010. Everyone who likes history thinks, acts and talks the same, do they?
    1
  19011. Good old YouTube 😂
    1
  19012. Well done Jamie!
    1
  19013. So you're saying that the Estonians who fought for the Red Army to liberate their country from Nazi occupation, weren't fighting to liberate their country from Nazi occupation? Also, let's say I was wrong in using that word... Ok, that doesn't mean I'm not neutral; it just means I've used the wrong word.
    1
  19014. Everyone should work in retail for 6 months, just to get a valuable perspective on humanity.
    1
  19015. A beer sounds good :) despite the criticism I have been doing a ton of research in my spare time on the subject and have nailed it down to the point where I'm winning the arguments. I will make another video on the topic at some point when I've collected more than enough evidence than required (to absolutely leave no doubt). Simply put, the argument that Hitler wasn't a socialist is basically the same as the argument that nothing was "real" socialism. Once I explain what socialism is and confirm that Hitler was socialist, I can get on with explaining the Nazi economy and the Holocaust.
    1
  19016. I'm not against socialism, I'm against anyone who denies and distorts history. I have the evidence and interpretation to crush the idea that National Socialism wasn't socialism. The superior argument is what I go for.
    1
  19017. You cannot exploit in a free trade transaction. If someone doesn't want to trade, they don't. If they do, then they agree to the terms of the trade. Thus the capitalist free-market does not have exploitation. That's not to say that people aren't working jobs they don't want to etc, but that they always have a choice to not work those jobs etc, because they are free to make that decision. If you don't like your job, there's a door you can walk out of. In socialism you don't have that luxury.
    1
  19018. Feeling oppressed by an evil group that doesn't exist is good now? Individuals oppress you. Groups don't.
    1
  19019. I assume this is a joke, right?
    1
  19020. Glad to hear it got you thinking 🙂
    1
  19021. There are no neutral sources at all. All sources are written by flawed human beings with limited perspectives. This is why you have to get all sides of the argument, and as many perspectives and sources as you can, in order to reduce the likelihood of being deceived.
    1
  19022. Give me an example of a "trait" we both have as "Brits".
    1
  19023. "@TIK Who says that everyone in a group has to be exactly completely identical in every aspect? That is a ridiculous strawman, that you are slaughtering right there." Of course they do, otherwise you don't have a group. That's the point - it doesn't make any sense. Marx - All workers are good, all bourgeois are bad. Hitler - All Aryans are good, all Jew are bad. Feminists - All women are good, all men are bad. How is any of the above true? It's not, because you cannot judge groups as being "all the same". Individuals in those groups are all painted as the same thing. But we know no two individuals are the same, so you cannot have a group. People aren't guilty by association, they're guilty only by their own actions. "If you see a police officer you expect a certain behavior from him, because you know what the word police officer implies. And the police officer knows it, too, so he will try to not disappoint your expectation." So ALL police officers are good and trustworthy? And none are bad? I can tell you a few stories... "If you see a waiter, you expect him to be polite. That is a stereotype, off course. How could I say he has to be polite, just because he is a waiter. Not all waiters are the same!!11!eleven! He could be an incredibly rude person, for all I know, I never met him before, I don't know him as an individual. But still, I will treat him like a stereotypical waiter, and he will behave like a stereotypical waiter, and we will both get along splendidly." So all waiters are good, and you've never had a bad waiter? And all waiters who are good always have good customers because they expect all customers to be good? If I have a bad experience with a waiter, should I then conclude all waiters are bad? A human becomes a waiter, not the other way around. A human who is a waiter is an individual, and I will judge them on their individual performance. I look past the group mentality.
    1
  19024. "Yeah, that individualism and class: "My role in second world war would not have been an officer, as I am not from that class" (TIK). So, you do share common benefits, privileges and on the other hand disadvantages and prejudices with a large group of people. Which does to a certain degree also imply common interests." Yes there are racists, classists, sexists and nationalists in the world. Just because I reject the idea of groups, doesn't mean others do. This is the problem. The way towards equality for all is for more people to reject the idea of social groups like class, race, gender or nationality. ""I don't see stereotypes" You certainly do, else you wouldn't even be able to talk or to orient yourself in the world. Our usage of words is build on generalizations. Pretending otherwise is just foolish." I honestly don't see stereotypes. I treat everyone as an individual because I'm not a sexist, racist, nationalist, classist or other. ""All British people are poms - it's just stupid" Yepp, there are incorrect stereotypes and invalid generalizations. The notion of all stereotypes being stupid is one of them." Yes, I'm glad we're in agreement that stereotypes are meaningless and invalid. "Off course, there is a lot, that all British people do have in common." No there isn't. We live in Britain (well, most of us do), and we have a common language (English). Apart from that, good luck finding something we have in common. ""I have no affiliation with any group" I don't believe you. You know of all the group identities that other people would attribute to you, and even more, you have the groups, that you want to be attributed to you. In your case historians for certain. Scientists. Intellectuals. Content producers on youtube." Others may attribute me to groups, but again, you've failed to see what I'm saying. All scientists are the exact same now are they? All intellectuals are the exact same? All content producers on YouTube are the exact same? No. Load of rubbish.
    1
  19025. Everyone is biased, but not all people have bad agendas. This video isn't about bias, it's about agendas.
    1
  19026.  @mat_j  I've read all of those books by Orwell. Great books. He's my favourite non-fiction author actually. But I honestly don't think you know what socialism or capitalism are, despite the claims you're making that I don't know what they are (even though I've explained them in-detail and you've, once again, ignored them). Sorry for advocating freedom for individuals. Not sure how it's contradictory, as you claim, nor how it requires governments to function (it literally doesn't, since it is by definition non-state). But I must be wrong, so long live socialist-slavery, comrades!
    1
  19027. Also, I totally get your arguments. Why? Because I used to believe in them. This is why your arguments aren't working, because I'm siding with the superior evidence and interpretation. You don't understand basic economics, which is why you're believing in socialism. Once you grasp basic economics you'll understand why socialism hurts the poor and exploits the workers.
    1
  19028. They're only in other people's hands if you work for other people. But there's nothing stopping you creating your own business or being self employed and having your own means of production. Plenty of people are doing that, including me right now. If you choose to work for other people who went out there and made their own businesses, then it's a bit much to complain that they're doing better than you. They took the time and effort to make what they did. You didn't. And no, I've no interest in live streaming.
    1
  19029. "embarrassing , complete lack of understanding of the theory...simply pathetic. Try again..." An individual is "private" (from Latin meaning individual and non-state). Capitalism is the idea that private-individuals shall be in control of their own production, their own economy. Individuals shall have all the power. A state is an organized community. You cannot have a state without a group of people. A person is not a state, only a group of people can make a state. A state is an organized group. It is therefore non-private (non-individual). It is "public". Public comes from the word publicum/publicus, meaning state (hense the phrase, "jus publicum" https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/jus%20publicum - "the right of ownership of real property that is held in trust by a government for the public"). This is why we call the state the "public sector", and why politics is the realm of "public affairs". So a group of organized people in charge of an area or place is what we call the state. And here 's the deal - a collective is a group of people. A commune is a group of people. A society is a group of people. A public is a group of people. A class is a group of people. A race is a group of people. A gender is a group of people. A nationality is a group of people. etc. Socialists believe that a group of people (varies) shall be in control of the economy. Socialism is the rejection of capitalism - private (non-group) control of the economy. Thus, by its very definition it is state-control of the economy. Now, there are varients of socialism, depending on the group that's supposedly in charge. A class-group like the "workers" in charge of the group-state, is Marxism. A racial-group like the German Aryans in charge of the group-state (the "national community" as Hitler calls it) is National Socialism. But ultimately it is still the same thing - state control of the economy. Socialists are currently using varying words and phrases to hide the true meaning of the word "socialism" from people. Why? Because if people realised that socialism is about state control rather than individual control, they'd see the true horrific nature of socialism and would not support it. It's got so bad that they invent terms like "state capitalism" - literally "state" and "capitalism" (non-state), thus "state non-state" - to hide the fact that state-capitalism is actually just socialism. Worse, socialism is the rejection of the individual. It therefore is all power to the group and the removal of the power of individuals. In capitalism the group serves the individual (who has the power). In socialism the individual becomes a slave to the group (which has all the power). Socialism is state-control of the economy, and is therefore slavery of the individual. Socialism is slavery by another name. This is why George Orwell wrote - "Freedom is Slavery".
    1
  19030. ""Give all power to the central authority" Seriously dude, wtf are you talking about?" Socialism is state-control of the economy. It is literally - give all economic power to the state. This is why you can't have totalitarianism without socialism. "Capitalism is a system which promotes hierarchical, undemocratic tyrannical control." In a business sense, yes. But capitalism is private-control of the economy. It has, by definition, nothing to do with the state. If theres an undemocratic state, that has nothing to do with capitalism, since capitalism is fundamentally a rejection of state-control of the economy. Socialism is state-control of the economy. It takes the power away from individuals in the economy. Worse, it dictates to them by the policies of hte central authority - the state. Therefore it is undemocratic by it's own theory. "@TIK You see that's the whole problem , you don't know or understand the basic of the theory, this is absolute nonsense." No, it is you who doesn't understand, otherwise you wouldn't be dismissing and ignoring my points. I know your arguments because I held your viewpoint at one point, and have researched into them. You don't understand mine at all. "Incentive theories have been refuted long time ago." Really. We all work for free do we? Wish I had known that when I was a manager at my old job, I could have paid the staff nothing.
    1
  19031. It's built into the core of the ideology! Take away individual human rights in order to give all power to the central authority, usually the state. The state owns everything and you own nothing. If you're lucky you may get given food by the state, and they may let you live in one of the state's flats, but you still have to work, and you're working for nothing, since you can't own anything. What's a human who has to work but owns nothing? A slave. And this is if it all goes well. At the very least this leads to poverty, since without incentives the workers don't work as hard. With centralised planning you get shortages of everything, like toilet paper. And because economics is viewed as a zero sum game, then the only way to increase wealth is to steal it from others, which means you have to kill them. This is why Gulags and Death Camps happened - it was the only way to reduce the number of mouths to feed in the crumbling economic system. But yes, I'm the one who's ignoring the historical reality, apparently.
    1
  19032. I'm not saying that capitalism isn't without it's flaws, but socialism has always led to slavery and death, since it's inherent in the ideology. You can't have a revolution without violence. Also, if you read any of the literature on India since 1947, you'd see it wasn't capitalist - they actually rejected free-market capitalism because they claimed it caused the previous British famines, so "unfair" capitalism was the reason they wanted independence in the first place. And I don't know why you bother watching my videos if I'm such a hack. You sound just like that Nazi who continues to watch my videos and calls me a "shill" in every one. Makes no sense to me.
    1
  19033. Yes, an individual is the product of his time and will be influenced by his world. But it doesn't guarantee that a boy will be a Nazi just because he was born in that era. Humans are individuals, not groups. And bias isn't what we're talking about. Bias is inherent. But agendas are not. I am biased because I can only read English sources (German is getting there slowly). But I don't have an agenda to defend a particular group, because I'm neutral in my individuality.
    1
  19034. Yes!
    1
  19035. Can you show me where they say that? There's articles of them saying they're Anarcho-Capitalists (e.g. https://mises.org/library/why-i-am-anarcho-capitalist ), and they praise Rothbard, who obviously founded the idea.
    1
  19036. "Many people on the economic left are anarcho-syndicalist’s. Your premise sounds very similar." You're clueless. - "Chomsky is their greatest spokesperson." Chomsky might be a Playdoh https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12094589/Jeffrey-Epstein-moved-270k-Noam-Chomsky-paid-Bard-College-leader-Leon-Botstein-150k.html - "I’m no economic expert" Yes, I can tell. - "but I feel as if you may need to read Rousseau’s ‘the social contract’ and perhaps even Adam Smith’s ‘the wealth of nation’s’." Ah yes, let's read stuff that's centuries out of date. That'll work! And I've read Adam Smith - it is out of date. - "These are the fundamentals of our modern economy especially philosophically." No, they're incorrect. At that point (the 1700s) they believed in the Labour Theory of Value, which has subsequently been shown to be nonsense. Value is subjective. - "Keynesianism advocates Investing in social infrastructure and having a large public sector as a means of creating jobs and wealth does provide benefits, was the dominant western economic system post war until deregulation and mixed economies became popular and recently Keynesian economics has returned to favour." As an ex-Keynesian, I can tell you that Keynesianism is not only wrong, but it's created to keep all lower and middle income people poor. - "I’m a social Democrat that lives in a housing complex run via an anarcho-syndicalist method." This explains a lot... - "I have no idea what an ancap is" I explained it in the video. Please watch it before commenting. - "It just sounds like extreme Laisser-faire economics extended to encompass social and ruling policy." Why don't you watch the video and do some reading on the topic before jumping to stupid conclusions?
    1
  19037. I don't know the Corbett Report. Why didn't you like me at first? And what changed your mind?
    1
  19038. Stay ignorant.
    1
  19039. Stay ignorant.
    1
  19040. Who said anything about voting for anarcho-capitalism?
    1
  19041. Also, my follow up video here explains the scaling issue regarding companies getting larger https://youtu.be/hr9TUcWcoYY
    1
  19042. See my Public vs Private video for clarification because you've jumped to conclusions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19043. If we didn't have a state, there wouldn't be public property. All the land would be owned privately including the roads. Thus, the bridge would be owned privately.
    1
  19044. Could you watch the video about Hitler's Socialism, listen to the overwhelming amount of evidence presented, and actually address the argument rather than present poor arguments from the Washington Post https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=dhN-H1CzuM2DKW5K
    1
  19045.  @tehehe5929  A state is just a public hierarchy. I've explained this here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19046. "Some stuff needs to be purchased by the collective, hence you need a taxation system." No it doesn't. That's simply false. - "How else will you fund the bridge?" How does McDonalds get built? How did the first railways get built? How does the private sector build houses, factories, warehouses, or cruise ships? Profit leads to capital accumulation, which allows the entrepreneur to build new projects, including big ones. All that's required for a bridge to be built is an entrepreneur with enough capital to buy the land on both sides of the water and then actually pay people to construct the bridge. - "The prisoners dillema will just cause no bridge to be build, no individual will carry this cost." They would if they are allowed to make profit.
    1
  19047. Is it not strange that the more taxation and inflation the State inflicts upon us the worse our lives become? We've got more taxes and regulations, more state interference in all our lives, yet people cannot afford housing, are struggling to stay afloat, and are demanding even more. Could it be that the cause of these issues is the very State that seems to be our salvation? Read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
    1
  19048. Why is "lust" bad? Why is having dreams, hopes, desires or ambitions bad?
    1
  19049. Wasn't he removed because of his race-IQ comments?
    1
  19050. But if I'm not an AnCap, and the video is about explaining what Anarcho-Capitalism is, then why must I defend it against criticism it that's not the purpose of the video? And if it's not the purpose of the video (as clearly outlined in the title), then why should that disappoint you? I explained what Anarcho-Capitalism is and I told you I wasn't one. There you go.
    1
  19051. I'm not an AnCap, so I don't know why you think I am.
    1
  19052. The roads in Croatia aren't privately owned. Even Wikipedia says this: "The state roads are maintained almost exclusively by Hrvatske ceste, while the county and local roads are managed by various county authorities. The road maintenance agencies are governed by various laws issued by the Parliament as well as bylaws issued by the Ministry of Transport." Hrvatske ceste is a state owned company. But paying for the use of the roads when you use them cuts down on traffic and saves on polution. I don't see much of an issue with that. In fact, I actually think that's necessary. However, I don't want the government setting the prices, which is what they do in Croatia and in the UK when it comes to toll roads.
    1
  19053. There's plenty of time. Pick books on things you want to learn and don't stop reading until you've devoured them! And I'm sure you're more knowledgeable on other subjects than me.
    1
  19054. We don't live in a civilization.
    1
  19055. You don't "pay" tax. Tax is a forceful confiscation of your wealth. If a robber puts a gun to your head and tells you to pay him, yes you physically hand him your wealth, but that doesn't mean you "paid" him. You were robbed, pure and simple. It also doesn't matter if some people are willing to pay taxes. That's good for them. The fact that it is compulsory to pay taxes is, by definition, force. So objectively, taxation is stealing. It's robbery. You can deny reality all you like, but that is reality.
    1
  19056. It's not propaganda. It's an explanation of what Anarcho-Capitalism is, and then my reasons for why I'm not an AnCap. The "agenda" is to answer a question from one of my supporters who keeps this channel afloat. I'm sorry if you're unable to consider perspectives in life outside of your ignorant bubble.
    1
  19057. A few Patreons have asked for a bookcase tour so it is on my list of things to do :)
    1
  19058. I've watched a few videos by him. Is he still an Objectivist?
    1
  19059. A State is a Public Hierarchy. Corporations are Public Hierarchies.
    1
  19060. For starters, Google is owned by Alphabet, which is a public corporation, and thus is funded by the State central banks via the debt-based economic model ("money printer go brrrr"). However, I would argue that it is a State in and of itself itself. For a full explanation of why I think corporations are States, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And no, corporations do not thrive in a free market. There are many books and videos explaining why.
    1
  19061. I'm an ex-socialist who was taught Keynesian economics at college, and I've done videos reading from Karl Marx etc. So yes, I've read a lot of stuff from lots of different perspectives, which is why I favour freedom over the faith-based totalitarian ideologies.
    1
  19062. We don't have true justice in our current system, despite a bunch of woke cultists in charge. You've not stated an argument against Anarcho-Capitalism, you've stated an argument against all Law systems.
    1
  19063. Yes, because there were no other private fire services throughout history, just that one corrupt example in Ancient Rome.
    1
  19064. Glad you enjoyed the video, and I hope you enjoy my other work too 👍
    1
  19065. Yep, as I said, this is the sticking point for me.
    1
  19066. I agree fully. That's why I refer to it as the miseducation system.
    1
  19067. Also I'm not an AnCap. If you'd bothered to watch the video you would have heard me say that.
    1
  19068. Problem is that you didn't watch the video. I'm not an AnCap.
    1
  19069. If we've never traveled to another planet, then it's simply because we shouldn't.
    1
  19070. We can confirm from history that the first police, hospitals and railways were created by private interests for profit. They later got nationalised or regulated, but they were invented by private interests. Roads, bridges and militaries can be private, but obviously these were first created before history was written (history is the study of the human record, so they predate the human record). Therefore, we don't know if they were created by public or private interests. What matters is that they can be built by either, and that the State is incredibly bad at all of these things as I explained in the video.
    1
  19071. Anyone who wants to dock at a particular dock would need to pay the fee for the lighthouse. There's no need for a dictatorial state and a levy upon the entire population just for this one problem that can be easily overcome by the free market. If no one has any capital at all, then you have nobody creating any goods and services, and thus you don't have enough of an economy spare to buy a bridge. Sucking out wealth from such an economy would result in even worse conditions. I answered the police and military questions in the video. There would be a market for security.
    1
  19072. No they didn't.
    1
  19073. Those that worship the State are in a cult. Those that question the cult aren't in the cult. Questions?
    1
  19074. When in Rome
    1
  19075. Yes. That is a tenet of Anarcho-Capitalism as well.
    1
  19076. I've talked about market failures in this video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  19077. That's exactly what I said in the video, which is why I'm not an AnCap. Try watching it before commenting.
    1
  19078. You've completely strawmanned the argument, didn't listen to anything I said, and have jumped to silly conclusions. I would ask that you listen to what I said before making comments like this.
    1
  19079. Correct! This is why Corporate-State power is bad.
    1
  19080. As I said in the video, monopolies are created by the State. Regulations create monopolies. The free market destroys them.
    1
  19081. Capitalism and socialism are bad. That's why we need a free market.
    1
  19082. Competition. If the consumer thinks that the bridge is unsafe or isn't well maintained, another entrepreneur could build a second bridge (or some other means of infrastructure) that is safer, and thus people would use that more. The bad entrepreneur would have lower profits, and thus go out of business, disincentivising other entrepreneurs from trying to scam the consumer.
    1
  19083. Remember lockdowns? They stripped us of all our rights (which are, in fact, just privileges granted to us by the slave masters). In the UK at least, we don't have freedom, we don't have property (taxes prove that), we're not allowed to defend ourselves, and we must comply with all commands. This is slavery, pure and simple.
    1
  19084. "all of these private providers buy the bandwith from the "government" company that runs the total grid system." Yes, which means they're only renting the lines. You don't have "private" providers, you have a veneer of the free market on a coffin of socialism.
    1
  19085. I pay for the internet, the electricity, and the waste disposal. I wish these things weren't government run, as the private sector is offering better quality services at cheaper prices. For example, I use the only free market internet provider in the UK as they're by far the best compared to the government corporation that owns the rest (BT, which pretends to be non-government but is). Biffa offers cheaper bin collection services than the local council, yet I have no choice but to pay taxes for an objectively bad service. Paying taxes ensures we live in a slave society.
    1
  19086. A market is a buyer and seller. A free market is free people. Market = people. Therefore, you cannot buy a slave because as soon as you do, you no longer have a free market. Any form of coercion = not a free market.
    1
  19087. If they don't have enough for their basic needs, then giving a large portion of that to politicians isn't going to help. The government only wastes resources, it doesn't magic up additional ones.
    1
  19088. And in a free market, everyone gets more money because it's not being chained down by the tax system.
    1
  19089. I'm glad you liked it! Are my other videos too complex?
    1
  19090. My goal is to make people think as that's the basis of intelligence, so I'm glad I get you thinking :)
    1
  19091. Yes.
    1
  19092. Yes, I agree.
    1
  19093. I've read some of Popper, although I'm more familiar with Mises and Rothbard. I'm also reading Ayn Rand at the moment. What do you think I'm not understanding?
    1
  19094. "The free market has to be regulated because people generally do not make rational choices to maximize their own wellbeing." Ah okay then https://youtu.be/cWc6DOYQPbU
    1
  19095. "Ancap guys have "the market" as their god." The "market" is a buyer and seller. That's it. It's the people in the real world, freely transacting without government interference. It's not a "God", it's you and me. Nobody claims that the market "cleanses humanity of evil" or all the other stuff you said. You're strawmanning the free market position, and this is because you haven't looked into it. So instead of calling people "silly", my suggestion is that you read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. It won't kill you, it won't waste your time, and it might open your eyes to new possibilities. You can listen to a portion of it here https://youtu.be/_YlpOQ4lgtY
    1
  19096. If you haven't got a suggestion for what else to call it, or how else to explain it to a wide audience who aren't as knowledgeable on this topic, perhaps the reason I chose to use the terms I did was for the lack of a better alternative? So does this really warrant the charge of being "extremely sloppy"? As I explained in the video, a lot of these concepts are new to me as well. It's only been five years since I was a socialist and I've been busy with the channel. I've not had time to dive down into the precise definition of taxation, and honestly it's not a priority nor that big a deal. So while I agree that being precise is a good thing, I'm not so sure this criticism is warranted.
    1
  19097. Okay... How would you describe the concept of non-coercive taxation to an audience of 320,000 people who are not all AnCaps or even free market people?
    1
  19098. The Modern Slavery Act of 2015 here in the UK confirms that tax payers are slaves.
    1
  19099. You've misunderstood my explanation on corporations. Please see this video where I go into detail about this https://youtu.be/hr9TUcWcoYY
    1
  19100. That's not anarchy. The definition of anarchy is "no state". If the state exists, then you don't have anarchy. Thus, in the scenario you described, you simply have a bad State deliberately allowing disorder as a means to incite a retaliation to justify further suppression, not "Anarcho-Tyranny".
    1
  19101. Anarcho-Tyranny? Is that just an honest way of describing Anarcho-Syndicalism and Anarcho-Communism?
    1
  19102.  @Aioradeleo27  "sometimes TIK thinks that society and individuals constantly act efficiently in their actions and decisions" You didn't watch the video. I said that men are not rational actors, which is a disagreement with the AnCap (Murray Rothbard) position. This is one of the reasons why I'm technically not an AnCap.
    1
  19103. I've got a shirt that says "Live Free or Die". Does that count?
    1
  19104. London is a cesspool and always has been.
    1
  19105. Nothing should happen. However, it cannot be classed as "private" any more.
    1
  19106. How do you protect yourself against The State with the power of a State? Because right now, we're under attack by our States, and they're actively stripping us of our freedom, liberty and private property.
    1
  19107. I was a socialist when I discovered that Hitler was a socialist. That's why I abandoned socialism. The definition of socialism hasn't changed, it's always been social ownership of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19108. You could say that about every system.
    1
  19109. I would suggest you watch this video of mine as it'll explain what's going on at a large level https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  19110. But without the Playdoh's, who's going to build the roads!
    1
  19111. India isn't an anarchist society, or even a free market. In fact, it's the total opposite. They advocate socialism, which is why their economy is struggling. https://youtu.be/9fHDWoQuUZo
    1
  19112. Well, I'm glad I've got you thinking. As far as the answers to your concerns, I think watching this video might clarify things https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ
    1
  19113. Keep worshipping Goddess Society!
    1
  19114. Karl Marx wasn't an economist. His "education" was on "philosophy" (religion). He studied Hegel, who was a theologian. This isn't "bias", this is fact. As an ex-socialist, I can tell you that Socialism is evil. It convinces people to act on greedy envy to steal resources off of other more productive members of society, and then murder any resistance. Then it implements a horrible economic system that always results in death and poverty, if not outright starvation, because it rejects economics in favour of emotions. Taxation isn't theft because the UK State says in the Theft Act that it's not theft if the State does it, since the State is not dishonest, and only something that is dishonest can be theft. And since the dishonest State has decided that it's not dishonest in it's definition of dishonesty, then it's not dishonest. 🙄 In reality though, the State is dishonest, and forcing me to pay tribute to Playdohs who R kids, is theft and immoral.
    1
  19115. It's both slavery and theft. Technically it's also robbery, extortion, expropriation, violence and R***.
    1
  19116. "History showed that central government is better in that role than manoral Lord or corporation." You do know that the 'central government' is the manoral Lord and corporations? I actually made this clear in the video.
    1
  19117. I wouldn't say it was essential, but it will be extremely useful for me (trying to plot everything out for my documentary). Realistically it's just lots of appendixes. I don't know if you noticed, but if you compare the first book to the last, you'll find a difference in the number of tables and details. There seems to be more of them in the first book. Well, this Companion is basically that but for the final volume (the two books). If you want to know the mobility ratings, or the casualty lists, or composition of a load of units referred do in the text, as well as some of the original operational orders, then yes. If not, then skip it :) I also haven't got the condensed version. Not sure if it's worth getting, having got the rest.
    1
  19118. I think I've got that book (or books) on my wish list. Will check. I think I have one of the Stalingrad Atlas books. Also Gary Grigsby's game is definitely on my wish list - although I can't spare time to play many games at the moment. All effort is going on Stalingrad (and now Battleaxe)
    1
  19119. At this moment in time, I'm not sure how I'm going to cram a million different things into one video and still make it entertaining. But I'm taking it as my personal challenge to come up with a solution to this problem
    1
  19120. What and stand there like a lamppost?
    1
  19121. Yeah that's the conclusion I had :)
    1
  19122. Thanks! Looks like Jason D. Mark made that mistake, unless Panse was speaking English and got it wrong
    1
  19123. I honestly don't know when Panse said this. It does sound like it was after the war, probably in interview, but there's no date for it as far as I can tell.
    1
  19124. Oh don't worry, I am. You may like my video coming Monday ;)
    1
  19125. Sorry, I mean "I've not heard of Adrian von Fölkersam before". What, in your opinion, made him different or better than Skorzeny? And I stand corrected. The Soviets had some bazookas (apparently, 3,000) in 1942. According to the Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck book, the Germans captured some US-supplied Soviet bazookas before November 1942 (when they captured bazookas from US troops in Tunisa), the first demonstration of captured bazookas was in March of 1943, and Panzerschrecks were first introduced to the troops in October of 1943. So, yes potentially the Brandenburgers could have been armed with them.
    1
  19126. I'm glad you agree! That's probably what it was, but it is a good example of the sorts of things historians come across in the literature
    1
  19127. I'll not comment until you've seen the rest of the video then :)
    1
  19128. According to the source I used, it wasn't. But there's always the possibility that it was
    1
  19129. John, that's the point, yet here we have a German soldier saying they had Panzerfausten in 1942.
    1
  19130. Hello to you too
    1
  19131. alkafluence awww too hard for ya? :P
    1
  19132. Tomislav don't forget the penny change!
    1
  19133. Thegamer8324 yeah, I hammered them... sadly, Moscow isn't quite so easy
    1
  19134. I don't reject it at all.
    1
  19135. Was it ridiculous when I said the exact same thing three years ago? https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  19136. I'm referring to the interpretation of evidence, i.e. anything that's not a hard science. We know that 2+2=4 but it's down to our interpretation to decide whether criminals should receive the death penalty or not.
    1
  19137. Copyright laws
    1
  19138. "5 people watcha fight from 5 angles. The police question them and get 5 different versions of what happened. Is that subjective truth? No it's all biased opinions based solely on their prospective angle of view and other biases." Yes, and that's exactly what subjective truth is - biased opinions based on their interpretation of the events from the perspective they saw them. There are two sorts of things in life - evidence (the facts) and interpretation. We know what the evidence says, and I'm not arguing against that. It's the interpretation of the evidence that's the issue here. You can't "stick to the facts" because the facts don't answer every question. - "It's not subjective whether the guy threw a left or a right even if every thinks they saw him throw a left. truth is, he threw a right. Thats not subjective, thats a fact" Correct. I'm not arguing against the facts. I'm arguing that there's no objective truth in relation to the interpretation of the facts. In your example, the guy definitely threw a right. But was that the right move? What would have happened if he had thrown a left, or a slightly different variant of a right? Or had feinted before doing something else? These are things that facts cannot tell us. The objective truth is that the fight happened. Why it went the way it did, who was the better boxer, and when the turning point of the fight was, are all subjective in nature because people will argue from their different perspectives. They will have debates over the "truth", but in the end some things can't be measured like we can measure things in certain hard sciences. - "Whether you agree with the one guy doing what he or the other guy is also subjective, because that is largely a moralistic choice, which is just another version of an opinion." Precisely. There's no objective truth when it comes to these sorts of things. That's what I'm saying. For these questions, the truth is subjective. - "As far as the start of WWII being subjective is because world war hasn't been properly defined, not because that point can't be found. Once you've defined what a world war is, what requirements need to be met for war to elevate to a world war, then it stops being subjective." Okay, but the definition of WW2 itself is itself a subjective opinion, which is why a proper start date will always be arbitrary.
    1
  19139. Subjective opinions are fact based as well, but the facts don't tell us everything. "When was the turning point of WW2?" is a question the facts can't answer. It's down to interpretation, which is subjective. History is not a science or an art, it's both. It's a craft https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Emotion-based opinions are irrelevant because we must base our interpretations on the evidence. And in my interpretation, this is a right-wing concept, even if the Left are ironically championing it. If history is subjective, then it is down to the individual, not the state, to decide on the truth.
    1
  19140. Thank you! Glad you liked it!
    1
  19141. Just watch my history theory video please. It'll explain this thoroughly enough that you won't be able to misinterpret what I am saying. https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  19142. Ok, it's probably good to double check. Those numbers came from Glantz, D. “When Titan’s Clashed.” University Press of Kansas, 2015. Table N Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Soviet German Front 1941-1945 I believe Glantz was getting his numbers from Russian and German historians/sources, which he lists under the table.
    1
  19143. Why is it flogging a dead horse?
    1
  19144. This is part one of many. This was just the intro, discussing the strategic situation. Next episode will be the explanation of the position that the people of the Baltic States found themselves in. Then the fighting begins in episode 3.
    1
  19145. Isn't it? It's pinned on my screen. Has it unpinned itself again??
    1
  19146. It won't be battalion-level I'm afraid (the sources don't allow it). But I'm aiming for division level at the very least
    1
  19147. This series will be several hours long, and this is just the set up to the events. This isn't the History Channel; I'm going really in-depth here and delivering the full story within context. If you're not happy with that, feel free to stop watching.
    1
  19148. Source? Both Glantz and Hitler, and my reading of this entire campaign has led me to conclude that this figure is about right.
    1
  19149. Purchase me own maps, or the topographical ones? Currently Patrons who pledge £10 or more get access to my finished maps and can download them. But the Courland map isn't finished yet, so I'll be uploading it after the series ends. (I'm actually planning on uploading the completed Crusader map to Patreon this week.) The topographical maps I base the maps off are here - http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/eastern_europe/
    1
  19150. Enjoy!
    1
  19151. This is part 1 of a 11 part series. This was the introduction to the events.
    1
  19152. This is PART 1 of a giant series on the battle in the same style as my 9hr Operation Crusader documentary https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho therefore I will be showing all that in detail in future episodes. This was just an outline of the strategy-situation in 1944-45.
    1
  19153. Glad to see you're excited haha
    1
  19154. Before you go, I just want to point out that it wasn't the greatest tank battle. That honour goes to the Battle of Dubno-Brody in 1941. Kursk may have had a lot of tanks, but it pales in comparison to Barbarossa.
    1
  19155. Yeah, it was from Denmark, and I said it wrong somehow in the video
    1
  19156. Yes, because it might answer the question: why did they fight in Courland at all?
    1
  19157. Feel free to pause the video at any point.
    1
  19158. I only put that in there to annoy you, Thumper 😆
    1
  19159. "Tankies" apparently. I'd rather call them "Marxees" or something
    1
  19160. This is part 1 of a series on the Courland Pocket. Therefore, I had to set up how both sides were fairing before getting into the battle. If we just jump straight in (as I have done in the past) you'll have no context and will come to the wrong conclusions.
    1
  19161. Thank you, I'll correct for the "Complete" video at the end of the series
    1
  19162. Yeah, we'll be seeing your town a few times during this series
    1
  19163. It's the introduction to the situation in 1944. Next time we'll look at the Baltic States. Then the fighting begins in episode 3.
    1
  19164. Actually I mentioned and talked about the US expansion in my old Purges video
    1
  19165. This Monday coming
    1
  19166. Well, I'm glad you're excited!
    1
  19167. Good idea! Definitely something to cover after Crusader is done
    1
  19168. Wow, awesome! You realise I'm going to fix all the errors (so far, only minor) and upload an all-in-one 7 hour long video for you to marathon, right?
    1
  19169. I assume he'd go through Spain, or through the Atlantic, but I didn't see the need to animate that :)
    1
  19170. Glad to hear :) well, I hope you enjoy this video because there's a lot more Crusader coming this way
    1
  19171. Glad you liked it Neves! And thanks for supporting me :)
    1
  19172. I agree! It's incredibly rare for a video of mine over 2,500 views to get zero dislikes. Lots of people must have been waiting for more Battlestorms.
    1
  19173. Yes, and have been since mid-April this year. Averaging 74 hours a week on this.
    1
  19174. Three reasons: 1, the script wasn't designed to be split up, so this one is short (next week's will probably be 40 minutes-ish). 2, because this is Battlestorm, it required very heavy editing. 3, I had to redo the artillery video, so I actually ran out of time. (You may not notice, but there are parts of the maps that remain unfinished inside this video.)
    1
  19175. Exactly! And, as you'll see in future episodes, this really should have been a loss for the British. The only reason it wasn't was because of Rommel...
    1
  19176. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it! I use Photoshop for the images and Premiere Pro for the animations/editing.
    1
  19177. No worries! I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  19178. Glad you liked it!
    1
  19179. Hope it was worth the wait :)
    1
  19180. Love you too Olof
    1
  19181. What blinkers? I agree (mostly) with you. As I said in the video, Churchill was a bad military leader (although was a good politician overall).
    1
  19182. Just you wait. When this battle really gets going - it really gets going. And Rommel's actions are... interesting
    1
  19183. Yes?
    1
  19184. Well, it was 4th Indian Division and 7th Armoured together during the beginning stages of Operation Compass, but yes I guess that's right.
    1
  19185. Yes, although it'll be a few videos before we actually get into the battle bit. Got to get the setup right
    1
  19186. The true test of any aspiring commenter is to beat the Great Jamie. It doesn't happen very often, but occasionally when the planets align and the blue moon rises...
    1
  19187. If you know nothing about this operation, you're going to be surprised by, and in awe of, everything that happens within it. This battle is very unique and I think you'll understand fully when we get into the thick of it :)
    1
  19188. The British didn't have the resources to mount their own D-Day. The Germans had a giant multi-army-group army that only the Soviets could bare the brunt of at this stage. The British had one corps, which then became a two-corps army by November 1941. But yes, Churchill was trying to keep Britain and her colonies in the war - which makes sense.
    1
  19189. You're correct, and I don't know. Maybe he was talking about the general area/zone?
    1
  19190. I've heard of this theory before, but I haven't read any literature on it. Do you have any suggestions for books etc that explain the theory fully so I may take a look at their arguments?
    1
  19191. I can't mention absolutely everything in a 19 minute video.
    1
  19192. I'm sorry you feel that way.
    1
  19193. If it was easier to supply them with the rifle bullets at a distance, it would make sense why the Germans weren't so keen on giving their troops SMGs while they're in Russia, but would be more interested as they fell back into the Reich.
    1
  19194. I also wonder if logistics plays a part in this too. Is it easier to supply an army with 5-clip rifle bullets? Or is it easier to supply them with 30-round magazines?
    1
  19195. It might have been my Soviet "War-Winning" Tanks video where I mention the mortar numbers in there https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8
    1
  19196. @Nukclear great! You may find it useful to compare them to what I said in the Stalingrad videos (references are on the screen). See if I got anything wrong :)
    1
  19197. A Patron of mine has asked this question. I will be responding at some point.
    1
  19198. Good question
    1
  19199. I have head of Vlasov, although I don't know too much about his story. Do you have any recommendations for books about him?
    1
  19200. He's actually had friends helping him narrate his recent videos, and they've done a good job too
    1
  19201. Thank you, and thank you for being here from the beginning! I don't see many of the old names around any more, so it's nice when the odd one pops up
    1
  19202. Exactly, they're missing be wood for the trees, even though they're denying the trees as well
    1
  19203. Viewers are the customers. Advertisers are trying to attract customers, hence the adverts. YouTube wants revenue, which is why there's adverts and YouTube Premium. But the advertisers are not YouTube's "customers". And you're correct, their censorship (both advertisers and YouTube) are censoring content on the Holocaust. Thus, the website is inadvertently suppressing knowledge of the Holocaust, which plays into the hands of the Marxists and the National Socialists. Plus they consistently censor "conservative" content (my content isn't conservative, but they ignorantly think it is because they're all lefties). So I stand by my point: this website is run by Socialists.
    1
  19204. You have no evidence for this assertion. He doesn't sound like he's under duress here https://archive.org/details/EricHFriedrichBergPart1Of4
    1
  19205. The smart Nazis should know that "race" doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label
    1
  19206. I don't disagree, but that doesn't excuse the "not the worst" ones
    1
  19207. Not sure if you've seen my Western Desert Campaign documentaries, but I'm a big fan of General O'Connor for his performance during Operation Compass. The issue is that he didn't do quite so well in Operation's Goodwood and Epsom in the fighting near Caen. There's even a book written (which I have) talking about why his performance in 1944/45 wasn't as good as in 1940/41. Sadly, I haven't read enough yet on the battle of Caen to come to any conclusions but it's one of those questions I hope to have answered one day. I didn't ask, did you record the interview? Or did you write it down?
    1
  19208. Thanks to my awesome Patreons, I've just bought the "Death of the Leaping Horseman: The 24th Panzer Division in Stalingrad" by Jason D. Mark, which I believe is the same author? And yes, Glantz' book's not out until the end of this month (in the uk at least) although I'm not sure I'll need to get it since I have the other books now
    1
  19209. Exactly. Interpretation is one thing - especially when evidence just doesn't exist. But taking people's opinions or accounts as the gospel truth and then insisting that it's the truth is another.
    1
  19210. CStriker421 yeah, it's 2!
    1
  19211. Thegamer8324 you'd be correct!
    1
  19212. Oh you mean the Soviets outnumbered the Germans in 1944, at the end of the war, when all the decisive battles had already taken place and Germany was already losing? Wow, great analysis. What about 1941? I think you'll find that Germany outnumbered the Soviets up until December 1941. And in 1942, Germany and Italy alone had a larger population than the Soviet Union, so the Soviets didn't have massive numerical superiority in the years that counted.
    1
  19213. And yet they lost? And, while the Germans consider Kursk to be 12 days, the Soviets consider it to be a giant strategic campaign that went on far longer than that.
    1
  19214. No no, you misunderstand. The other figure for the Soviets is the total size of the Soviet army in all areas including the Far Eastern Front. So the Wehrmacht is 7.3 million but has 3+ million on the Eastern Front, and the Soviet Red Army has 4.9 million men, with 2.7 million against the Axis (including Finland). So the numbers showing how many are on the German-Russian Front (the ones in the video) are the correct figures.
    1
  19215. Incorrect. Total Wehrmacht numbers for 1941 is 7.3 million. These numbers are just those deployed in the East.
    1
  19216. This is good then? If so, I have longer documentaries out there
    1
  19217. Please explain.
    1
  19218. I will, despite the fact that many reviews slate that book. Because unlike you, I don't just dismiss things that go against my understanding of history.
    1
  19219. I am actually planning on doing a video on the purges at some point. I just don't have enough sources to do so at the moment. All I'll say is that I'm also skeptical of the impact they had, and probably not for the traditional reasons given. But I'll save my thoughts on it until I do the video.
    1
  19220. https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19221. "It wasn't the tactics (blitzkrieg) that cost the Germans the war. It was the strategy that Hitler employed on the eastern front. His assumption that Moscow would be taken by the end of 1941 and thus failing to supply his armies with proper winter gear."* It wasn't Hitler, it was his generals. They planned this campaign. And they planned it as it was because their logisticians told them they could only get about 500 miles into the Soviet Union before they'd have to stop and wait for their supplies to catch up. And that's exactly what happened. That's why they had such a stop-start stop-start campaign. That's also why hen the Soviets continued to fight, the Germans had a problem - they couldn't send their winter clothing to the front because the men needed food, ammunition, fuel and medical supplies as priority. This is why, as I said in the video, Germany lost the war in 1941. When the Soviets didn't collapse Barbarossa failed, and so did the Germans. "And (Operation Blau) splitting army group south into 2 different army groups with 2 different objectives, oil fields/Stalingrad." Yes, this was Hitler's fault. But Blau failed before it got to this point because the Soviet armies withdrew/collapsed/routed (however you want to interpret it). "You also didn't address my other point. We both know the "common narrative" is NOT that the Germans were better on the defensive. But yeah, you may wanna just ignore I pointed that out." Not "better" on the defensive, but good on the defensive, thus inflicting more casualties on the attacker than they took. Normandy prior to Falaise, Market Garden, Stalingrad (both before they were encircled [so Kotloban for example], and after they were encircled, as well as outside the pocket when the Soviet counterattacks failed to break their lines over and over), Hurgen Forest, Monte Cassino, outside Moscow in 1941, Rzhev, Vistula-Oder, Oder-Neisse... I could go on.
    1
  19222. Except I didn't flunk out, I have a degree in history. As mentioned in the video, the "Blitzkrieg" was deeply flawed, which is why there were so many stop-starts to the damn thing. Blau was a disaster, and Barbarossa was also a failed Blitzkrieg, even though it struck against an enemy that was taken by surprise and was unprepared for war.
    1
  19223. I have a video coming out in half an hour. Please watch it because you'll then understand that I don't have a anti-German bias
    1
  19224. The German statistics aren't reliable either. I will copy and paste what I replied to someone else - Soviet accounts and statistics are equally as bad as German accounts and statistics. That distrust you have of Soviet sources is the exact the same level of distrust you should have towards German sources. The fact that you don't have that level of distrust is proof in itself that bias has crept in. You should treat EVERY source, no matter the subject, with suspicion. No source is reliable, not even German sources. Guderian lies through his teeth about Barbarossa. Manstein lies through his teeth about Stalingrad. Raus gets his dates mixed up - a period of 3 days of combat near Stalingrad is made out to have actually taken place in 1 day in Raus's memoirs (13th to 15th of December 1942, but he says all that combat occurs on the 13th) - let alone numerous other holes in his and other accounts. In some of these scenarios, the Soviet accounts are actually more reliable than the German ones, although again they're not 100% trustworthy. This is why it's vitally important to look at every source with equal reservation. Now, this bias may not be your fault. As I've just said to someone else - Pick up an English-language history book on the Eastern Front of WW2 (there are some exceptions but these are more recent and few) and you will find that they are relying almost entirely on German sources. Go to Amazon and look up WW2, you'll get biography after biography on German generals, and German units, and German operations. Then try find the Soviet biographies, units or operations... There's barely any! There is a massive bias towards the Germans in the history books. Because that is what sells. If you're still not convinced, fine. But just, for 10 minutes, consider this. What's the point of studying history? Isn't it to get to the truth? If it is, then how do you get to the truth if all you have to work with is lies? The only way to do it is to gather all the lies and compare them to each other. Somewhere in that sea of lies is the truth.
    1
  19225. I said where I got my numbers from - Liedtke and Glantz. Although I also missed out Kavalerchik. Liedtke, G. "Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943." Helion & Company, 2016. Glantz, D. and House, J. "When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler." The University Press of Kansas, 2015. Kavalerchik, B. "The Price of Victory: The Red Army's Casualties in the Great Patriotic War." Pen & Sword Military, Kindle Edition, 2017. Glantz is getting his numbers from Ziemke and Krivosheev. Kavalerchik disputes Krivosheev (see below). Even Wikipedia (untrustworthy) lists Soviet losses for Barbarossa as 4,973,820 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa This also clearly doesn't include the "6 mil captured Russians" you said the Germans took, and is barely half the "10+ million losses they suffered in the first 6 months". Now, the numbers are disputed (it's a massive debate in itself). However I have looked at this debate. Kavalerchik discusses the various numbers and viewpoints in great detail, pointing out that Krivosheev may have been wrong, and biased in favour of the Soviets. However, Kavalerchik and his team runs the numbers again, and comes out at 4,791,300 total "irrecoverable" Soviet casualties for 1941. Irrecoverable basically meant total casualties - KIA, MIA and wounded. Total Soviet casualties for the whole war - 14,534,600, plus 119,400 USSR Allied casuatlies (grand total of 14,654,000). German casualties on the Eastern Front for 1941 were 312,600, plus Axis allied losses of 81,500, for a total of 384,100 total Axis losses in 1941. Grand total of German losses for the war on the Eastern Front were 4,941,600, with 1,038,700 Axis Allied, for a total of 5,980,300. If, as you say, the Soviets lost 10 million casualties in the first 6 months, they only lost 4 million for the remainder of the war. This would further prove my point that once the Soviets had recovered, they were able to go toe-to-toe with the Germans, and beat them. If this wasn't the case, and the numbers I have are correct, what it says is that the Soviets lost 4,791,300 in 1941, vs 384,100 Axis troops - a ratio of 12.2 to 1 (15.32 to 1 if just counting Germans). But by the time we come to the end of the war, the losses were 14,654,000 vs 5,980,300, which is a ratio of 2.45 to 1 (2.96 to 1 if just counting Germans). How do you go from a ratio of 12.2 to 1 in 1941, to a ratio of 2.45 to 1 for the period 1941-1945? The reason is simply because the Germans caught the Soviets completely by surprise, during the middle of a mobilization program, and outnumbered them. Once the Soviets recovered and equalled or outnumbered the Germans from December 1941 onwards, the Germans suddenly were unable to fight as well as they had before. The ratio - while still in favour of the Germans - slowly whittled its way down to 2.45 to 1 by 1945, meaning that the only reason the ratio is so high is because of what the Germans achieved in 1941. From 1942 onwards, Soviet losses each year steadily decreased while the German losses steadily increased, which leads to the conclusion that once the Germans no longer outnumbered the Soviets, they were unable to beat them (on a strategic level, obviously they did win some battles where they were outnumbered, but this was far from the norm).
    1
  19226. No, as shown in the video, there were 3,957,910 Axis troops (3,118,910 German plus 839,000 Axis Allies) vs 2,743,000 Soviet troops on the 22/06/1941. Yes, the Soviets sent in reinforcements, but that doesn't mean on day 2 the Germans suddenly faced 5.7 million Soviets. On the 11/09/1941 The Soviets had 3,463,000 men, vs 4,215,147 Axis troops (3,382,000 German and 833,147 Allied). And between the 22nd of June and the 30th of September, Soviet losses amounted to 2,817,303. So effectively, they had taken losses equivalent to their border army, and now had 3,463,000 troops at the front, vs 4,215,147 Axis. So yes, during this initial period of the war, the Germans and Axis outnumber the Soviets. And as I again showed in the video, the Axis are only outnumbered for the first time in December 1941, which is coincidentally the first time they're thrown back. "By December the Russians had put another 12-13 million men under arms" - no they hadn't. For the whole of 1941, the Soviets lost 4,791,300 men. On the 1st of December 1941, they had 4,197,000 men at the front. Add them together, gives you 8,988,300 (admittingly, we're a month out from 1st of December to January, but you get the point, it wasn't 12-13 million men). From December 1941 onwards, the Germans are outnumbered by the Soviets. But at points, it's not by much. Obviously that gives the Soviets some room for maneuver and so on, however the thing to consider is that the Germans are never again able to achieve the victories they did in 1941 when they themselves outnumber the Soviets. Numbers come from Glantz or Liedtke.
    1
  19227. How was it pointless?
    1
  19228. While I understand why you're saying not to trust the Soviet sources, I'd also like to point out that the German sources shouldn't be trusted either. The only way to get close to the truth is to look at all the sources together. This is the first thing they teach you when studying history. And this is why Glantz and others are comparing the German sources and the Soviet sources. By doing so, you get a better perspective of the events.
    1
  19229. Sorry, meant to say the Germans don't outnumber the Soviets at the beginning of the war.
    1
  19230. That's the point. The Germans weren't facing 10-1 strategically, but were facing that on the operational and maybe tactical level. The question then becomes, why didn't the German troops in other parts of the front (who supposedly were so "superior" to their enemy) overwhelm the Soviets ahead of them when they were 1:1?
    1
  19231. My response to his article https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19232. Yes, I've seen that. Feel sorry for getting him to 'almost' spit out his coffee.
    1
  19233. Greece vs Persia. Wu vs Chu. These states won vs larger enemies. Also, what you're failing to realise is that the Germans outnumbered the Soviets in 1941, when they failed. Only in December 1941 did the Soviets outnumber the Germans, but the Germans had failed before that. David Stahel points out that their Barbarossa plan was a failure, even before the beginning of the campaign. In 1942, the European Axis had a larger population than the unconquered Soviet territories. So technically, the Axis bloc were the larger power vs the Soviets in 1942. Lend-lease hadn't become a significant contributer to the war at that point either. And the reason the Germans lost the war in 1941-2? This video explains all https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  19234. This is, perhaps one of the big reasons for the failure of the German campaign. The only problem is, Soviet logistics were poor as well - until late 1942.
    1
  19235. At what part of the video did I say the German army was terrible compared to the Red Army? Please point to that part. Just because they weren't superior, doesn't mean they were inferior.
    1
  19236. https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19237. You mean there's more to this than just numbers, and "overwhelming Soviet reserves" does not explain why the Germans were outfought? No way!
    1
  19238. My response https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19239. At this moment I don't have the numbers for the Western Allies, but when I do get them I'll do another video. Agreed on the casualty figures. From the books I've read, I'm getting the impression that the Germans were understating their own losses, and the Soviets overstating German losses. The truth is probably somewhere inbetween
    1
  19240. So it does! It's actually from Enduring the Whirlwind
    1
  19241. The argument put forth in the video is that one of the reasons they did so well at the beginning is because they outnumbered the Red Army.
    1
  19242. How about "Kursk was the biggest battle of WW2"? https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw
    1
  19243. Yet, the Germans got half way to Moscow in three weeks. Why would it take them several months more to actually reach the city?
    1
  19244. And if you factor them all in, it makes even more sense.
    1
  19245. Which ones did I prove correct?
    1
  19246. What about the Soviet supply trucks? If you think the Wehrmacht's logistics were poor (and they were) you should read up on the Soviet logistics of 1941. And how do you think the loss of 4,791,300 men in 1941 affected the Soviets? This compared to 312,600 German losses.
    1
  19247. You mean the Western Allies? You mean the guys who didn't really get involved until late 1942 and 1943 when the war was already lost? No, the Soviets won the war.
    1
  19248. I never once said that the Soviets were superior. Only that the Germans weren't superior. After their initial blow in 1941, the Soviets began to recover in 1942, and by 1943 they were winning (on a tactical level too). This is why, despite a massive loss ratio in the first year, the Soviets were able to catch up to that in the later years. Really, after Autumn 1941, the Germans were on the back-foot. Losses overall were 2.5 or 3 to one. This when the Soviets didn't outnumber the Germans more than 2 or 3 to one for most of the war. Notice though that the Germans were doing fine until the Autumn of 1941... That's when the Soviets started to win, and it was the first time they themselves were outnumbered or equal in number to the Germans. This despite having less than a 2 to 1 manpower ratio at Moscow.
    1
  19249. Yes. And the same applies to the Germans attacking the Soviets...
    1
  19250. I keep saying it over and over, but people keep ignoring it. Lend-Lease didn't really become a thing until 1943, after the war had already been lost for Germany.
    1
  19251. Das ist nicht wahr.
    1
  19252. The point was, if Manstein was outnumbered because the Soviets were concentrating in his area, why didn't the other German armies march forwards? They weren't that outnumbered, and being superior as they ware, why couldn't they advance? It's because they weren't capable of taking on the Soviets on equal footing.
    1
  19253. But they were taken by surprise. That in itself is a force multiplier. For example, according to David Glantz, at the battle of Brody in the first days of the war, the Soviets sent 5,000 tanks against the Germans in the Dubno-Brody area. 2,000 broke down before they made it to the battlefield. And many that did didn't have enough fuel or ammunition to actually fight the Germans. This wasn't because the Soviets were incompetent - it was because they didn't expect to be attacked and didn't have the fuel and ammunition stocks required to put 5,000 tanks, or even 3,000 into battle. Explain how this shows German superiority? It wasn't a fair fight (which is fine, if the argument isn't that the Germans were superior). When it does become a fair fight, German superiority is nowhere to be found.
    1
  19254. You didn't watch the full video did you? Or you missed the part where I looked at other statistics. Although the 30 million also includes civilian deaths. And you also missed the point I was making. The Germans did exceptionally well in 1941 against an enemy they outnumbered and who wasn't prepared for war. By 1943 the Soviets had recovered (reflected in the statistics as well as the narrative) and began to fight back. They didn't have a year like 1941 for the Germans (obviously the Germans were never taken by surprise on the grand strategic scale - operationally and tactically yes, but they knew they were fighting a war against the Soviets - and their units were equipped, as shown) but the Soviets did well from 1943 to 1945, retaking all ground lost and reaching Berlin. Take 1941 out of the equation and the ratio is actually very good for the Soviets.
    1
  19255. Sorry, I misquoted. It was meant to be 31st of January 1942. It's good to keep an open mind and try to remain as neutral as possible. And the best way to do that is to realise that many of the early authors were willing to accept what the Germans were saying, and ignore the Soviet sources (or didn't have access to them). But think about it, if the Soviets lied about the numbers, the Germans did too. So why trust the Germans and not the Soviets? Realistically you shouldn't trust either of them. Beevor's Berlin is a good book. And Beevor is good, but sadly outdated. For example, his Stalingrad book is a nice introduction to the battle, but he gets a lot wrong and simply cannot compare to the five-book four-part trilogy (yep) that Glantz has written on the battle. I'm currently working my way through it for my Stalingrad documentary, and nothing else compares to it in the level of detail. Sadly, it doesn't make for casual reading (a lot of , "this unit which was part of this corps was here at this time and was moving towards this place at this location...")
    1
  19256. Why?
    1
  19257. Didn't watch the video, did you.
    1
  19258. I'm surprised that's still up to be honest. I've more that tackled its arguments in numerous videos.
    1
  19259. No they didn't. But they did have most of their army in the east, and most of their losses were in the east.
    1
  19260. "To be fair you should show total men under arms available to each country (shown by theatre) then show how many of the soldiers were frontline troops vs logistic and other rear echelon troops." I can only work with the statistics I have available. If you can point me to these statistics, I'll happily take a look. "The biggest problem I see, is that this vid views the eastern front in isolation... had Germany not been fighting on multiple fronts and simply been fighting a war against Russia, its numerically small but technically and tactically superior armed forces would have defeated the Russians despite their superior numbers... taking that into context the Germans were superior soldiers man for man." Please tell me where these 'multiple' fronts were? They were North Africa, and the Eastern Front. In fact, in 1941 - as shown in my North African Campaign Battlestorm Documentaries - for the most part there were only two German divisions fighting in that theatre. This expanded by 1942, but the most important theatre was always the Eastern Front. And many historians believe that the Germans lost the war in 1941, during Operation Barbarossa, and before the battle of Moscow. This was the only game in town. "The simple fact of the matter is that Germany came close to winning an unwinnable war." That's simply not true. Had the war been confined to central and western Europe, yes. But the reality was that the Germans didn't beat the British or the Soviets. And that was before the USA entered the war. "One final point, the Germans had already been fighting for 2 years.... in terms of attrition the Germans were losing more veteran troops the longer the war progressed and did not have the population to replace troops with men of optimal fighting age or fitness... for these soldiers retreating (near routing) and sustaining a 3:1 ratio is remarkable especially as the Russians now had both a technical and numerical advantage; simply compare this ratio to the losses of the allies in retreat." So what you're saying is that they shouldn't have attacked in the first place? It's not like the Germans didn't know what they were getting into when they invaded the Soviet Union. They knew what the condition of their army was and thought they could tackle the Soviets in a surprise attack. The Soviets proved them wrong. And on the retreat they didn't sustain a 3 to 1 ratio. That was the overall ratio for the whole war. After 1941/1942, once the Soviets actually had recovered from the intial surpise attack from an enemy that outnumbered them, the ratio drops dramatically.
    1
  19261. +Nounismisation thank you for your reply, and criticism. I like constructive criticism :) I can see why you might think I've not lost my moral compass. But I think you need to consider something one thing - this wasn't a general history of the Eastern Front, nor was the Purges video a general history of the Purges. The point of these videos was to dive into the historiography and challenge the presumptions people have on these topics. It was to look at the big picture, not the small picture. And unfortunately by doing so, people do become statistics. As Stalin famously said "one death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic" That doesn't mean the people don't matter. Retirement with a nice pension is better than beatings, shootings, and being sent to the Gulags, with your family sharing in with that punishment. It's terrible. Truly horrific. However, that wasn't the point of these particular videos. Perhaps I need to actually do a full documentary of the Purges and go into the awfulness of it all. And maybe one day I should do a full documentary of the entire Eastern front of WW2 and do the same there. Take a proper look at the human aspect. Definitely something to consider. For my upcoming Stalingrad documentary, I do intend to put the human aspect in there. This is why I'm saying it'll be a long one. It was a big battle anyway, but I want to cover all aspects. I'll do my best to make sure to have my moral compass out throughout it all. Cheers
    1
  19262. I can tell you didn't watch the whole video. And I do have a degree in history. Not a masters because I haven't needed one, although recently I was considering going back to get one. Do you have a degree in history? How do you know I'm "making mistakes a first year university student would never make"? The only mistake here is not stating at the beginning that I don't think the German army is bad. I just don't think it's as good as people make it out to be. And a lot of people in this comment section are upset because they think I'm criticising the performance of the Wehrmacht. Nope. I'm just not convinced they were fighting inferiors. I didn't forget to calculate the technical superiority of the Germans. That was the point of the video, to show that, if the Germans really were superior, they didn't show it after 1942 when they were no longer fighting an enemy that wasn't prepared for war. "Blitzkrieg" had major advantages, but several big flaws. One being logistics, which soon became strained in the vastness of Russia. As shown in the video, it wasn't "so successful" either. In 1942, the Blitzkrieg during Blau was a complete disaster. In 1943, the Blitzkrieg didn't even break through the Soviet lines at Kursk. I didn't forget the fact that half of the Soviet Army was in the Far East or Internally. I mention that in the video. Your opinion of the authors of this material is also wrong. As Robert Citino has said recently, we're living in the "Glantz era" of WW2 history. That's how important he is to the current historiography on the Eastern Front.
    1
  19263. If you had gone further, you'd probably find that your ideas merge with those in the video. As you saw, the German army was better in the first days of the war. But as you said, that quickly changed.
    1
  19264. Have you seen this comment section? I even have people who have published books vehemently saying the German Army was superior always.
    1
  19265. Lend-Lease did not become a significant factor until 1943.
    1
  19266. Apologies
    1
  19267. It's alright if you don't agree with me. I don't expect you too. So long as you can make some good counter-arguments ;) not sure if you've seen my Battlestorm documentaries, but they'll probably right up your street
    1
  19268. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  19269. That's great! Be sure to explain to them why they shouldn't just trust what I'm saying and that they should get into the habit of questioning everything they hear or see. Not saying that what I presented here was wrong (at least not deliberately) but I may be biased or have used sources that are
    1
  19270. Why does it? I'm not following you. When where the Germans ever at equal footing? That never happened. And also, it doesn't mean no tanks or planes, it means less tanks or planes. This video and the follow up video show that Germany was actually able to replace the losses in tanks, planes, and manpower. This flies in the face of the traditional narrative that states the Germans weren't able to produce enough. They were producing enough, but they didn't have the fuel to put those tanks etc in the field. And the Germans only "kicked arse" when they had the fuel, when they outnumbered their opponent, and when they caught their opponent by surprise. Once they no longer had the element of surprise, once they no longer had the fuel, and when they no longer outnumbered their opponent, they began to lose. And I just want to point out, that at no point in this video, or in the follow-up "numbers" one, did I ever say the Soviets were "better" than the Germans, or that the Germans were "bad" fighters. I was merely pointing out that the traditional narrative doesn't make sense. And I didn't actually offer an explanation for this. The reason I didn't offer an explanation is because I only wanted to show that it doesn't make sense, and to follow these videos up with ones like the oil video and the Soviet tanks video, which begin to offer that explanation.
    1
  19271. Why does it? I'm not following you. When where the Germans ever at equal footing? That never happened. And also, it doesn't mean no tanks or planes, it means less tanks or planes. This video and the follow up video show that Germany was actually able to replace the losses in tanks, planes, and manpower. This flies in the face of the traditional narrative that states the Germans weren't able to produce enough. They were producing enough, but they didn't have the fuel to put those tanks etc in the field. And the Germans only "kicked arse" when they had the fuel, when they outnumbered their opponent, and when they caught their opponent by surprise. Once they no longer had the element of surprise, once they no longer had the fuel, and when they no longer outnumbered their opponent, they began to lose. And I just want to point out, that at no point in this video, or in the follow-up "numbers" one, did I ever say the Soviets were "better" than the Germans, or that the Germans were "bad" fighters. I was merely pointing out that the traditional narrative doesn't make sense. And I didn't actually offer an explanation for this. The reason I didn't offer an explanation is because I only wanted to show that it doesn't make sense, and to follow these videos up with ones like the oil video and the Soviet tanks video, which begin to offer that explanation.
    1
  19272. The lesson here is don't rely on one source. Both sides had reasons to fudge the numbers, and both sides did. Only by comparing them do we get a little nearer the truth.
    1
  19273. Why not? There should be no reason for you not to post on that video. Also, explain how my Purges video was a "deceit remake of history"? I gave the arguments of numerous historians from both sides. And everyone else seems to like that video. Quite clearly you and a few others are trying to pick a fight, which is why you've scurried back to this video hoping to get a rise out of people. Sadly, while this video may have attracted a lot of negative criticism, my other videos have not. The reason is because all my videos are well researched and backed up by multiple sources. Whereas the people criticising me (like you) can only make wild accusations that have no evidence to prove their points and aren't worth even debating.
    1
  19274. Speculation of course, but quite possibly true.
    1
  19275. I will say, it's impressive just how quick you commented this time
    1
  19276. Yep. It's sad
    1
  19277. Hi Nikki :) and yes, I should! Need to do more unit-videos
    1
  19278. You didn't watch the whole video
    1
  19279. My response https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19280. Yes, and do you not think that I may have just mispoken this? The original script said 1942, and I just said 1941 by mistake.
    1
  19281. "This, in a presentation predicated on the power of facts and stats?" If you have a problem with the stats I used, fine. However there are a few books where the figure of 900,000 by January 1942 is listed.
    1
  19282. You're right to point them out. And I will admit, I actually created the "light, special, SPG" category, to keep things simple. There is actually another table from Enduring the Whirlwind that breaks it down per tank, but I didn't go into that because it would have added more time to the video and I'm not sure that this would have added to the point I was trying to make. But I'll be happy to go through them in another video if you're curious
    1
  19283. What do you mean? Stalingrad was a 7 month battle. Not all of the casualties were taken in one day. The bulk of Axis casualties came after 6th Army was surrounded, where ~270,000 were trapped. Some were flown out, a lot died/starved, and approximately 91,000 surrendered in February 1943, although more had surrendered before that.
    1
  19284. What? Where Chuikov's force that never exceeded 54,000 and was usually a lot less than that was attacked by 80,000 of Paulus's troops?
    1
  19285. Thanks for your opinion. But I disagree with you.
    1
  19286. Surprise attack, overwhelming Axis numbers, fully prepared, enemy using mainly obsolete equipment, lack of fuel and ammunition, superior tactics (Berwrungenskrieg - the historically accurate term for Blitzkrieg). Again, I mention this in the video, but you probably didn't watch that far into it. Also, not Allied propaganda for two reasons - one, while I am English, I'm also willing to admit Britain didn't do well at land-warfare in WW2 (as a whole, with some notable exceptions obviously) - and two, because this video was debunking what the western world used to think about the Eastern Front. So, in reality, I'm actually attacking Allied propaganda.
    1
  19287. Where are these multiple fronts in 1941 and 1942? Which are the "multiple empires/superpowers" it fights against? You mean Britain and the Soviet Union? That's not "multiple" by any stretch of the imagination, especially considering it didn't fight on its own against them. The "second front" in 1941 and 1942 was Rommel in the North African campaign fighting with a couple divisions against the British. That is not a "multiple front" war. The Axis lose the war in 1941 and 1942 fighting solely against the Soviets when the Axis are at the peak of their power and the Soviets were caught off guard and unprepared. By 1943, the Soviets had more than recovered and soon reduced the loss ratio inflicted on them in the first year of the war, as shown in the video. And Lend-Lease hadn't started to make significant gains until 1943.
    1
  19288. Irrelevant. Judge the content, not the opinions of others. Many of the people arguing against what I said quite clearly didn't even get to the second table and so certainly missed the end when I explained that if you praise your enemy's abilities, it makes your own accomplishments even better. And Rebecca Black's Friday song has a worse ratio.
    1
  19289. But the Germans weren't outnumbered in the first 6 months, which is part of the reason they did so well (the other being strategic surprise, and facing an unmobilitized Soviet army, unlike the Germans who were mobilised and prepared). And when they were outnumbered across the whole front, they were only outnumbered by a small amount. That must mean that the Germans weren't facing 'hordes' of Soviet troops, nor mass-wave tactics, as described by the German generals in their postwar (Cold War) accounts.
    1
  19290. That's at most. It's probably more like 2.5 times.
    1
  19291. Except that "qualitatively superior army" was also outnumbered in 1941... and yet was winning. That was the point of this video, to say that the German generals didn't complain that they were facing Soviet "hordes" when they were winning.
    1
  19292. Have you seen this comment section?
    1
  19293. When do I lie?
    1
  19294. Bet you can't wait until I finish my Stalingrad documentary. I'll be saying the name of that operation at least a hundred times, guaranteed
    1
  19295. I've not heard of the map issue before - very interesting. And I can't remember who said it (it might actually be in the Jonathan House video I linked) but one historian said that Raus was actually one of the few German generals who gave the Soviets the respect they deserved. I haven't read up about him but I will get around to it at some point.
    1
  19296. Perhaps this explains some of it. However, you then have to think - "why didn't they log where these tanks were?" It's because the record keeping of the Wehrmacht was poor, which is something you don't hear often. Usually you hear how great the Germans were at keeping records. Clearly, this wasn't the case.
    1
  19297. If the Germans did lose 917,985 men in the East in 1941 as Glantz suggests, that's almost as many pixels there are on a 720p (HD Ready) TV screen (921,600 pixels)
    1
  19298. My response https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19299. You want me to discuss every aspect of the war in a 44 minute YouTube video? Somehow, don't think that's possible. However, I've talked about supplies and logistics before. I will copy what I said below - Logistics played a big part in the German defeat in 1941. The first three weeks of Barbarossa saw the Germans get roughly half-way to Moscow. It then took them a few more months to cover the rest of the distance. The reason being, just like on their way to Stalingrad in 1942, is that they had to stop-start stop-start their Bewegungskrieg due to (mainly) their poor logistics. While "Blitzkrieg" had its advantages, it was also poor on the logistical side, which the Germans never mastered. This was made worse by the poor roads in Russia, different guage railways, and the vast distances. Weather also played its part later. However, by the same token, the Soviets were also suffering from serious logistical issues in 1941. At the battle of Dubno-Brody (I talk about it here https://youtu.be/nA2286viUyw) 2,000 Soviet tanks break down on the way to the battlefield due to lack of fuel, mechanical failures, lack of spare parts etc, and those that did make it sometimes ran out of ammunition. So to say that the Germans were suffering from poor logistics isn't that good of an excuse since the Soviets were too. To say that "General Winter" only affected the Germans is a poor excuse too, since that affected the Soviets too. And its not like the Germans didn't know about the poor Russian roads, or the different guage railways, or the vast distances. This was why they planned for a short knock-out war. Unfortunately, the Germans deemed the Soviets as inferiors in every respect and, in their poor planning, didn't consider what would happen if the Soviets weren't knocked out quickly and decided to continue the fight. The fact was that, despite the initial advantages I outlined towards the end of the video (surprise attack, unprepared enemy etc), the Germans squandered these advantages in their arrogance. This arrogance is what's leading to certain portions of the viewers of this video believing that the Germans were superior. However, you and I both know people in real life who think they're superior to everyone else but who actually have several deep flaws that impact the things they do. People like that often can't see the error of their ways, and it's the same here. The German generals believed the Soviets were inferior, even though they were beaten numerous times on the battlefield. Even when they won (1941) they paid heavily for their success, one way or another. The fact remains that the "greatest army in WW2" lost to the Soviets. And as shown in the video, the reason wasn't because they were drowning in Soviet rifles and tanks.
    1
  19300. You're right, it isn't working correctly. I enjoy pointing out the flaws in the traditional narrative and arguments. Gets the conversation going, and if people are talking about history, I'm happy
    1
  19301. So you also didn't watch the full video and are going to assume many things about it that are untrue like half the commenters here?
    1
  19302. Think you'll enjoy my video coming Monday, especially about the Soviet build up, the amassing troops on the border, and the unpreparedness bits
    1
  19303. I deliberately leave something important to the end to punish people who do not watch my videos in their entirety. I can then call them out, or in this case, Douglas has. Same applies with my Order 227 video, where I was generally favourable to the Soviets until the end of the video where I said "Stalin and the regime was still evil though because...". The amount of people who were calling me out for being pro-Soviet, and then I'd say, "you didn't watch to the end of the video". Same applies here.
    1
  19304. Thank you sir!
    1
  19305. I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
    1
  19306. How!?!?!?
    1
  19307. They weren't bad soldiers. They just weren't inherently "superior" to the Soviet soldiers.
    1
  19308. You're also neglecting the concept that the Germans could also gain local superiority in numbers, despite being outnumbered across the whole front.
    1
  19309. Since you've started another thread, I'll copy my answer to your previous questions here so everyone can see you're incorrect. "I went to university and they never taught us that. what a waste of time that would be." Alright. Why do you think you cannot trust Wikipedia as a source? I didn't just use this one source though. I used several. And what exactly is wrong with Kavalerchik as a source? His numbers seem quite convincing, and he agrees with other German authors, as he discussed in the book. "the 30 million +5 million seems ok to me. probably even lower since it's a soviet statistic." And where did Wikipedia get this information from? Krivosheev. And Krivosheev's numbers are inflated for Germans and deflated for Soviets because he has a political agenda to push. Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't say this, because Wikipedia is written by random people on the internet. Overmans (German) estimations are generally near the ball, which is why Kavalerchik's numbers are similar to his.
    1
  19310. Considering the Germans were prepared, started the war with a surprise attack, got an early lead, and hit an enemy that simply wasn't ready and was outnumbered initially, it's not that bad.
    1
  19311. My response https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19312. What about deserters? Should they be classed as "captured" to you?
    1
  19313. Oh, so he's making up numbers for the other things, but he's reliable on those two points? Right ok. Also, where did your comment go in reply to James Davis? I made a good reply to your comment, but it seems you deleted it.
    1
  19314. @RouGeZH - Krivosheev is completely unreliable. To quote the Price of Victory: "... the casualties calculated by Krivosheev's team do not particularly inspire trust. How they managed to so precisely calculate front losses, even down to a single man, is a real puzzle. In the situation that had developed, the front and army commanders and staffs did not always know the location of their formations, let alone their losses in men, weapons and war material."
    1
  19315. And this is why I provided alternative numbers in the video, in case this set of numbers was wrong. However, since these numbers do in fact correspond to the German numbers, I'm inclined to think they're quite near. Also, what you need to remember is that the Germans at the time were also lying, so you can't always trust them either.
    1
  19316. "I went to university and they never taught us that. what a waste of time that would be." Alright. Why do you think you cannot trust Wikipedia as a source? I didn't just use this one source though. I used several. And what exactly is wrong with Kavalerchik as a source? His numbers seem quite convincing, and he agrees with other German authors, as he discussed in the book. "the 30 million +5 million seems ok to me. probably even lower since it's a soviet statistic." And where did Wikipedia get this information from? Krivosheev. And Krivosheev's numbers are inflated for Germans and deflated for Soviets because he has a political agenda to push. Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't say this, because Wikipedia is written by random people on the internet. Overmans (German) estimations are generally near the ball, which is why Kavalerchik's numbers are similar to his.
    1
  19317. Yes, but the Germans outnumbered the Soviets on the first day of the war and continued to do so until December, which explains why they did so well. The Soviets also suffered crippling fuel and food shortages (the Ukraine was occupied by the Germans!). And no, this is not me trying to create notoriety. I don't subscribe exclusively to the German general's view of the war. The evidence (placed in context, which is the important part) does not support it.
    1
  19318. Haha I know it's more like "He-re" but I always seem to get it wrong in the moment
    1
  19319. I do make videos about how the British run from the Germans. Check out my Battlestorm Documentaries on the North African Campaign. The one on Rommel's First Offensive in North Africa proves that I'm not just "bashing the Germans", and that I am critical of the British too. I'm not the worst on YouTube - in fact, if you'd bothered to watch most of this video, you would have seen at the end that I praise the Germans for doing so well. The reason most are critical of this video is because they only watched 2 minutes and proceeded to "bash" me for not having mentioned x y and z even though I actually did.
    1
  19320. Sure, let me go spend thousands of pounds and get myself into debt to get a useless PHD that won't do anything for me in real life to prove to some random stranger on the internet that I have in fact done my research. I already have a degree in History, sources are listed in the description.
    1
  19321. Explain what I got wrong.
    1
  19322. My response to the article https://youtu.be/-zwq1w9BV2g
    1
  19323. That link just takes me to the video. Post the comment again. Also, you do realise there's over 1,200 comments here, and I haven't been able to respond to them all. This is actually the first time I've had so many comments come onto a video in such a short space of time and, considering I'm prioritizing my Stalingrad Documentary and the upcoming Purge video, I'm not getting the time to actually search the comments for comments I missed.
    1
  19324. RouGeZH, I've tried searching for this "amazing" comment from you that showed all my errors and showed how wrong I was. Could you make a comment (copy it if needed) without responding to someone else's comment? That'll make it easier for me to see it and I'll respond to that.
    1
  19325. Great comment, thank you :) yeah, I didn't realise there was so much bias towards the Wehrmacht, and assumed the facts would overcome fiction. Clearly there's a lot more work to be done her to convince some people that actually the reality was different that what they (and the old narrative) imagine it to be. It's funny because most of the comments are saying I didn't consider something that I actually mentioned in the video, which proves they didn't watch it all and just got on their high horse after the first few minutes. But the good news is that a lot of the stuff I didn't mention I'm planning to talk about in future videos (i.e. the Purges, logistics, and many such things). And yes, some are calling me neo-communist. But as shown in my Croatian Legion video, I was being called a neo-fascist. Unfortunately for them, I can't be both. The realisty is I'm actually trying to find the middle ground between the two sides, which means I'm potentially going to make a lot of enemies.
    1
  19326. I do have WW2 documentaries on this channel. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  19327. I did state the tank numbers. Did you watch the whole video?
    1
  19328. I don't actually have a copy of the first Close Combat game although I have played it. I'm not sure I could make a good Let's Play out of it as the graphics and sounds haven't aged well, but I may do a video on it one day.
    1
  19329. I can, and I will... But it would take too long in one comment. You can start here though (and I'd recommend you watch the first four parts) https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    1
  19330. He's also a Marxist https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19331. "Plenty of jewish russians were Marxists (as well as Marx himself). What is your point?" Watch the full video.
    1
  19332. Was he not a Marxist? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19333. Corbyn is a Marxist https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19334. I'm taking ALL collectivist ideologies into consideration, including National Socialist collectivism, which I've addressed in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19335. We don't have "collective identities". Only Socialists who believe in social groups have so-called "collective identities". For the rest of us, the collective doesn't exist. I'm not a race, or a gender, or a class, or a nationality, or any other ridiculous "group" identity you might judge me as being - I am nothing other than an individual. My skin colour doesn't mean I'm part of a "racial group" (race doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ ). Class doesn't exist, full stop. Nationality doesn't exist either, full stop. And while gender does exist, the vast majority of males don't act or think like I do, so it's arbitrary to consider me the same as them just because of my reproductive organs. Bottom line: we're all individuals. Once you realize that, you can grow beyond the blue-pill collectivism you've been indoctrinated to believe, and take the red pill.
    1
  19336. A 'senate' is a 'council' or 'chamber' in English too.
    1
  19337. First!
    1
  19338. "For your information not all nurses use TIK TOK especially my mother whos a nurse working at a COVID unit whos also trying to raise me and my sister at the same time! So that money they “stole” from you is very important to us as much as it is important to you!" Okay, why do you feel entitled to be able to steal my money. thief? - "Since we also gotta reward the hard work of our medical officials, not just buisness owners." Considering that I think the National Socialist Health Service has done a spectacularly poor job over my entire life time, I strongly disagree. If this was a free market health service, then the medical personnel would get the wages they actually deserve, than the artificially higher ones they're getting now. - "Its not all about you man, we all go through crap at many momments at our lives and I’m sorry that you are in a financial situation but theres no reason for you to bash on the people who are working all day and night trying to save lives!" No, it is about me. The "finanical situation" I'm in, is the same one I've been in the whole of my life - I must work so that others can steal money from me to redistribute that money to the State, who then provide a terrible service, and then bring up children who then demand that this immoral system continues to operate. I'm also working all day and night, as are thousands of others, and many have had their work stolen from them by the State just to prop up the terrible service known as the NHS. It's that bad, they even steal wealth of children through the power of VAT, inflation, and debt. I have to forgo my life just to prop up yours. But if I complain about it, you and the other Socialists call me "selfish". No, you are the selfish ones for feeling entitled to help yourself to the money in other hard-working people's pockets.
    1
  19339. "I didn't realize doing a little dance to help lighten the mood in the worst public crisis in 80 years was such a bad thing" I'm afraid, due to YouTube's censorship policies, I am being restricted in responding to this point. But I will defer you to a video that may help you reconsider your stance https://youtu.be/Xy3tP-BW5do - "I don't know your tax situation, but I imagine its been complicated more by brexit than covid. You want to have a conversation about the establishment enriching themselves? Sure, valid point." It is a valid point, especially since my taxes were just as high before Brexit. The real culprit here are the thieves putting a gun to my head and telling me to pay up. - "Saying that the government is "enslaving" people in their homes and "taking their rights" in some kind of allusion to tyranny is blatant fearmongering." Really? I'm being forced to stay inside, not allowed to visit my family, or even leave my area, while I see ONLY small businesses forced to close while giant corporations and the State can remain open, while they take so many of our rights away that it even made one MP close to tears https://youtu.be/NMygjm7LF08 Alternative source because YouTube has been taking such videos down https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1259789/coronavirus-house-of-commons-steve-baker-mp-speech-emergency-legislation-vote-covid19 - "The virus is real, it's extremely contagious and very deadly." I'm afraid I cannot comment on this due to YouTube's aforementioned censorship policies. - "Most sane societies enacted stricter (obviously temporary) measures than Britain and America and have come out of things with far less dead." Like Sweden? Again https://youtu.be/Xy3tP-BW5do
    1
  19340. They've stolen that much money off me this year that I could have employed an extra part time worker. Instead, that money has gone to fund our beloved dancing nurses on TIKTOK and cut backs to government services as the establishment print currency into oblivion to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else tomorrow. Oh and taxes are going up, and negative rates are coming... But yes. Dumb strawman and conspiracy theories! Harrumph I say!
    1
  19341. As I said, the popular vote has nothing to do with democracy. Democracy is simply Demos Kratos (People Rule - in other words, State Power)
    1
  19342. Please understand that 'anarchy' isn't when "everyone runs away from each other". Those who subscribe to 'anarchy' or similar think that the end of Society (the State) will not be the end of cooperation. It will merely be the end of oppression. For example, see this https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ
    1
  19343. " NSDAP and PNF were not "workers parties" by any concrete mean, since workers had no rights of bargaining power during the regime and it was impossible to strike." Please watch my video on Hitler's Socialism, because they did bargain through the DAF (the State trade union). And like I said in that video, strikes aren't allowed under Socialism because otherwise it would show that the State isn't looking out for workers' best interest, which Socialism is meant to be doing. That's why Lenin also banned strikes https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19344. This is where I disagree with Mises. I think he was wrong about democracy. It's never a regime change - only a reorientation of the one Party regime which is pretending to be a multi-Party regime.
    1
  19345. Uh... pinned comment?
    1
  19346. I'm not a conservative, so why am I being compared to Ben Shapiro?
    1
  19347. "Just do tanks." Stick to tanks? https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8 "calling Corbyn an antisemite unironically is quite curious and rather laughable." He's a Marxist, is he not? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg "It's not serious and it was always just slander, quite often coming from those who pander to Israel, like you, TIK." Oh look, a National Socialist defending a Marxist Socialist - because there's ZERO difference between the two ideologies https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19348.  machivellsucs2 Go  That wasn't my argument. See the linked video (my Public vs Private video). Calling something 'private' when it's the top of the public hierarchy is simply ridiculous. It's the central bank because it's part of the central hierarchy - the 'public sector', or 'state'. Calling it "a private Central Bank" is the same as calling one guy a group - it's a contradiction in terms.
    1
  19349. "It was the (individual) lords' privately owned property." If there's hundreds or thousands of serfs/slaves on your property (themselves not able to own property), and you technically don't own it since you're in a hierarchy (so those above you own it), then it's no longer private, but public https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "The peasants were in a lease agreement." No, they were in a slavery agreement. They were never allowed to own any land, even if they worked for it. And their taxes were so high that they basically lived in extreme poverty where they were never allowed to save capital. That's neither capitalism nor a 'private' ownership system. "It's not ancap to rent out the property that you as an individual own? Duly noted." Under Capitalism you can either sell or rent out your property, but you cannot enslave your tenants on the property. Your tenants are always allowed to leave. And they don't have to work/slave away on your property to grow their own crops. Feudalism is a completely different setup. "lol owning serfs is ancap as long as they're owned by individuals. There is a market demand after all..." No, because if you own slaves, then those slaves are no longer 'private' individuals. You no longer have Capitalism. again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The market requires FREE 'private' people who own CAPITAL (money, not currency) who can buy and sell things on a FREE market. Once you have slavery, you no longer have FREE 'private' people, nor CAPITAL. Thus, you do not have Capitalism.
    1
  19350. It's not private property if it's not yours. The serfs didn't own their land, the lords did. And the penny-less serfs had to work for the lords as slaves, without capital. The remains of this system can still be seen today in UK law. If you buy a house, you pay tax to the State, and even to the lease-holder as well if it's leasehold, because you don't actually own 'your' property - the establishment does. Well, this isn't Capitalism because the property is not owned by the private sector (the individual), but by the 'public' sector (the State). The reason an ancap won't like this system is because it's neither Capitalism nor Anarchy - the two things at the core of what they desire.
    1
  19351. The answer is [CENSORED]
    1
  19352. I gave the sources in the video description and references on the screen at the bottom. Several different sources from several different authors using the word "senate".
    1
  19353. Watch the linked video. Socialism is State control. Direct democracy is State control.
    1
  19354. Again, you have no idea what Fascism is. The industries were controlled by the corporations - the 'organs' of the State. The State an the 9 corporations in Fascist Italy, and the 13 in National Socialist Germany. Learn your history https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19355. Are you sure Marxism isn't fundamentally Anti-Semitic? https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19356. He's a Marxist, so of course he is https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19357. It's ruled by the Party, and the Party is the dictatorship of the people
    1
  19358. Of course I don't have any views on a guy who's absolutely not going to potentially assassinate me with nuclear poison if I say the wrong thing... Of course not
    1
  19359. I need to do it because otherwise people will take the audio and use it out of context to say I'm pro-Hitler or a racist or whatever
    1
  19360. One character in the Matrix who has taken the red pill (and come out of the Matrix) says that he knows the artificial world of the blue pill is fake, but he would like to go back into it just so he can have a slice of cheese cake and whatnot... But once you've taken the bitter tasting red pill, there's no going back. But yes, I understand the mentality. Ignorance is strength after all, and the old way of thinking allowed us to live in a happier ignorance
    1
  19361. I've been copying and pasting a simple Google search result to numerous people who are asking the same thing. Just look it up. And realize that all Marxists are Anti-Semites which is why Labour is overrun by them https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19362. I would post political and economic videos more often, but people complain when I do, so I only do them sparingly
    1
  19363. Neither do I. We should all do our own thing, and not let other people dictate what we can and cannot do.
    1
  19364. "Dear sir, we are in 2023. The era of the Soviet dictatorship has ended. We don't need Keitel or Hitler or You to tell us how many weapons the Russians had in 1941." David Glantz - the best historian ever on the Axis-Soviet Front - has written a book called "Stumbling Colossus" where he shows conclusively that the Red Army was NOT prepared for war in 1941. They didn't have any trucks, or pilots for the planes they did have. They didn't have the logistics in place to fuel the tanks, and most of their tanks were T-26's, which were pathetic. In terms of manpower, the Germans alone outnumbered them on Day 1 of the campaign, not including the Axis Allies. The Germans had fewer (but better) tanks. However, they were also in a much better position than the Soviets. Hitler also made it clear in Mein Kampf in 1923 that he intended to attack the Soviet Union, and the reason he invaded Poland was because he was going East. It would have been foolish for Stalin not to REACT to the German mobilization by mobilizing the Red Army. So yes, you're completely incorrect, and so is Suvorov. The German military had been actively planning war with the Soviet Union since 1919, as Müller shows conclusively in his book "Enemy in the East". - "Everything I wrote to you are facts, not opinions." Yes, one-sided facts. You've completely ignored the body of evidence that shows that the Soviets reacted to German aggression, so of course you've come to a false conclusion.
    1
  19365. "He literally wrote against gnosticism (John 1,14: "The word became FLESH"); his opponents in the First Letter of John were literally the gnostics." As others pointed out in my previous video, if Christ was flesh, that makes Christ mortal, and thus a gnostic. If you say Christ was God himself, then he isn't gnostic, since only men can receive divine revelation. So this evidence of yours actually confirms that John was arguing for gnosticism.
    1
  19366. "Saint John also never meintions Eve sleeping with the serpent. I don't consider the Interrogatio Iohannis, written after the 7th century, a credible source for the historical John." Right, you don't see that, but others do. And I saw your original comment, I'm just not getting into this argument. I'm doing this now purely to troll you and the others who took way too much offense over this. I'm surprised so many Christians have never heard of the Apocryphon of John, or the beliefs of other Christian denominations.
    1
  19367. Why? A month in a concentration camp is a long time. Being beaten and tortured, and then starved and sleep deprived as you're forced to work long hours, I could certainly see many people cracking under such pressure.
    1
  19368. I explain it here in more detail https://youtu.be/y011Pdrb3Sk
    1
  19369.  @zacharygustafson8714  "I tend to get crap whenever I put out my definition of fascism, which is: a totalitarian ultranationalist ideology that combines concepts and practices from the far-left and far-right." Well you will do because that's not the definition. The definition of Fascism is National Syndicalism with a philosophy of Actualism (specifically, Actual Idealism). I've explained the definition here, and made the distinction between Fascism and National Socialism, since they are two separate ideologies https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko In a more recent video, I explained the similarities and differences between Hitler's, Mussolini's, and Mosley's ideologies https://youtu.be/bvm8I1mnucM But here's a question for you: what's the difference between nationalism and "ultranationalism"? I mean, if you're a nationalist, how can you be "more"-nationalist? It literally doesn't make any sense. And if ultranationalism just means when a country asserts domination over another (as some say it is), then Marxism (or any other form of "internationalism") is nothing more than ultranationalist in nature.
    1
  19370. That's not true, we have the records that clearly show us what they actually thought. So are options are to either make stuff up, or go with the evidence. I've chosen to go with the evidence. But feel free to ignore the evidence and live in a clown world.
    1
  19371. @Ratselmeister I'm defending British crimes? Is that why I spent over £450 to make a three video series on Operation Keelhaul, the Allied crime at the end of WW2 that has been actively suppressed? https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM Is that why I also called Churchill an idiot? https://youtu.be/z2c7d5RfkAA Is that why I did my video on the Dresden firestorm? https://youtu.be/PrrBRQDD_Jo Is that why I've said numerous times that I'm not "British", as I don't subscribe to any national religion. Oh that's right, you're projecting your insecurities onto me. You're the nationalist here, scrounger. Except, the here are no groups, only individuals. I see no race, no gender, no class, no nation, nor anything else, only individuals. That's why I judge others individually for the actions they commit. I neither "attack" nor "defend" anything, as this isn't my aim. My goal is to explain what happened and why, not to pretend that history can be distorted to suit one of the many statist regimes that exist. I also enjoy calling out people when they're wrong in their viewpoints, which is why I'm replying to you. Stay bitter.
    1
  19372. Overwhelming evidence shows that Hitler was a socialist and that they attempted to implement socialism https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w You can only ignore the evidence for so long.
    1
  19373. +Gwai Lo Damn. I'm interested to know where that village is. Lens is near Mons right? Whilst I do go into a lot of detail once the battle gets going, unfortunately I didn't go into regimental detail for XXX Corps when I made my documentary (obviously too late to go back now) simply because it would complicate things more so than the battle already is. But I wish I'd documented the positions of some the regiments for you so you could have seen where the unit was during Market Garden at least. Did he take part in the African Campaign??
    1
  19374. Thanks! No plan is flawless, but you're right that it had a lot of problems. I'm liking the fact that a lot of people have said the same thing, that the plan could have succeeded even with the problems :)
    1
  19375. +Rikki_PT There's an argument that says the Germans were the reason Market Garden failed. It may be worth watching this documentary with the question "was it more the Allies defeat, or a German victory?" in the back of your mind :) And I've kinda planned this wrong, haven't I? I should have brought it out before people go back to school. Damn. Looks like the war won't be over before xmas ;) :D
    1
  19376. +HoboTango I don't do facebook, sorry. Add me on steam though, I'm "TIK" surprisingly! The next battle/campaign I'm looking to do is the Western Desert Campaign, which will then lead nicely to the Tunisian, Sicily and Italian campaigns (thinking long-term). If you have anything on the 1940/41 desert war or could recommend me books, that'll be great. Atm I'm kinda short on sources for the early years. Between all this, I may venture out and do the Greek/Crete campaigns, and if I get enough experience, I can do the Polish campaign or the French 1940 campaign, as well as Normandy Landings etc. Obviously this is all long term, but I think starting small and working my way up is probably the best way to go about this. Did your wife's grandfather come from Hungary or was he shipped there from somewhere else?
    1
  19377. +HoboTango hey Tango! How's things? I want to do the Eastern Front. If I could do it now, I would. And I will attempt it in the future. There's two issues at the moment, however: 1. It's complicated. Market Garden was maybe three Allied Airborne divisions and a few more Armoured divisions. Plus the German ones. And look how complicated this was. I also only covered 9 days. Can you imagine the complexity of doing 9 days at Stalingrad or 9 days at Kursk, or the start of Operation Barbarossa!? It's too much for me at the minute, especially since I'm only just starting out. 2. The sources. We have the German sources pretty nailed down. But the Soviet archives have only just started to be released, and the stuff that's being released is changing the way we think about the Eastern Front. (see David Glantz in his video on the myths of the Eastern Front for a taste of what I mean https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg ... I always link this video, and it's a good one). So basically, we have one biased side of the story, and to do a documentary at this moment in time with only half the evidence just doesn't seem right to me. Therefore my plan is to get some experience under my belt doing Market Garden and maybe a few more other battles before I consider doing the Eastern Front. And as I'm working on these other battles and get some of the German units physically designed, that's less work I'll need to do by the time I come around to doing the Eastern Front. But don't worry, I will do the Eastern Front. That is the end goal. And when I start working on it, hopefully a few more modern books on the Eastern Front will have come out and I can use them to make something a lot more interesting :) Also, add me on Twitter (just started on it a day ago) and you can get a glimpse of some of the next doc I'm working on :)
    1
  19378. +Mister BananaBoy thanks Mister! It'll get better and more in-depth when the battle starts, don't you worry ;)
    1
  19379. +Douglas Carter sorry for late reply. I've had to redo the final episode (number 8) due to a couple mistakes I made, so I've talked a little slower to see if that helps :) But my reasoning is that documentaries on tv take massive breaks between sentences and when you get through an hour of a documentary, you realise that most of what they said could have been condensed down into at least a tenth of that time. But as I realised a while back, a tv audience is a lot different to a YouTube audience, so I'm doing what I think's best for the impatient internet viewer :)
    1
  19380. :D thanks, that's really good to hear!
    1
  19381. Thank you tigerhunter :) I'm not here to bash anyone. The idea is to present the events in as much detail as possible, whilst still being entertaining. I did give my opinion at the end of this series (and perhaps that was a mistake) but the narrative up to that part is right and backed by the sources listed in the description. If you'd like to help me get more views, share my videos. I'm very greatful for the support :)
    1
  19382. +Rex1987 wow, it's good to hear that! I was super worried nobody would like this :) I did a stupid amount of research for this, and as I said to some of the others, we go into a lot more detail in the coming episodes, so I hope you like the whole lot! Most of the time I took was doing the research and reading (and rereading) all the different books on Market Garden. Hindsight is a big issue, and you're right that we're judging them from a privileged position. However, the issue I tried to show in this episode is that they didn't even stick to the original plan, even before the mission had begun... Not only did the Allies have control of the skies, but the Luftwaffe actually came out to harass the Allies! :O the RAF/USAF really dropped the ball on this one
    1
  19383. +Thegamer8324 Those that have seen it like it. Those that haven't don't know what to think :) overall I'd call that a success too
    1
  19384. +Alexg6464 it'll start to get a bit more complicated next time when the battle starts... just like HoI3 ;) Thanks for the feedback! A few people have said my voice suits this, although it surprises me every time someone says it. And the reason I included myself was for that reason, plus I could do less animations (which also made it easier/quicker to produce), but maybe next time I'll make myself smaller so people can see more of what's going on behind me :)
    1
  19385. +Michael McCabe you bring up some good points which will come up later. The Germans were decentralized, and this is what helped them stop the Allies in Operation Market Garden. And two lifts could have been decisive, which is what the Germans said after the battle
    1
  19386. +alkafluence whilst I don't want to say too much (and reveal the conclusions I come to in the last episode) I will say that a majority of the documentaries I've watched fall short of depicting the battle correctly. In the Battlefield video you listed above for example, the battle only really begins 58 minutes into the 1hr 43 minute video. There's no way you can you accurately describe this battle in any detail in less than 40 minutes. Which is perhaps why at 110:00 in the Battlefield video, 1st Airborne units are depicted as being on the wrong side of the Rhine :/ Also, the conclusions they come to in these documentaries are all exactly the same. They're rehashing exactly the same things that Cornelius Ryan said in the 70's in his book A Bridge Too Far - which the film of the same name is based on. And they don't even get the basic details right. There are alternative views on this battle, which I'll explain in detail in the last episode, after I show you what actually happened.
    1
  19387. +Thegamer8324 It'll get a LOT more detailed as the episodes go on ;) absolutely, the plan called for the RAF/USAF to cooperate with the ground forces. But they basically didn't :/
    1
  19388. +Cameron Thompson thanks Cameron! I'm expecting criticism at some point haha. But it's all good so far :)
    1
  19389. +Morgan Chalmers Operation Mercury began on 20 May, my birthday :) And don't forget that the parachute drops in Norway and Denmark weren't opposed. The first opposed parachute landings were in the Netherlands I believe
    1
  19390. johnny onetothree oh yes ;) not made them yet, but I will haha
    1
  19391. +johnny onetothree and no, the next episode is on the 17th September, which was the start of the battle. I wanted to post this episode early so you guys weren't waiting so long, and to do some final tweaks :) after that, they come out almost every day for a week!
    1
  19392. +johnny onetothree Good points! To throw some fuel into the fire - the Germans didn't think that dropping paratroopers that far from their objective was a bad thing. The issue for the Germans was that they dropped so FEW paratroopers there on Day 1 You think they should have carpet bombed the Reichswald prior to the drop?? I guess that would have cleared any Germans there :)
    1
  19393. +Thomas Curtis oh it gets more complex as we go on :D that's assuming you haven't seen the others yet... and there will be more documentaries in the future :)
    1
  19394. +Dusan Stojkovic and the problems get worse as you'll see next time :/ it's a good movie, although not so historically accurate
    1
  19395. I'm glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  19396. alkafluence awesome, thank you for the suggestions! I'll add them to my Amazon wish list :D
    1
  19397. alkafluence literally all of it. Working on Operation E atm and the period just before it. And then also Operation Crusader. Surprisingly, there doesn't seem a lot written on this part of the campaign. Everyone and their mum has written books on El Alamein, at the detriment of the rest of the campaign it seems :/
    1
  19398. braccada well actually, I think you might be able to point me in the right direction at least after your advice in some of the PC videos. Check out some of the pics I've been putting up and follow me if you can. Otherwise, I basically need some recommendations for in depth books on the Western Desert Campaign if you know of any :)
    1
  19399. +Martin Juda Close Combat 2 A Bridge Too Far :) yours?
    1
  19400. ***** absolutely. I wouldn't expect more than a "first impressions" response this early on. Wait until the end and let me have it ;) One thing I will say is I've worked damn hard on this, and I'm still conscious that it's not perfect. But I know I couldn't have done better in the time frame. However, lessons have been learnt already and I'm going to apply them for next time (yes, there will be a next time haha!)
    1
  19401. +Svenpaa Magnus Novus awesome! I'm always hopeful of your approval :)
    1
  19402. +HoboTango free work is always appreciated haha :D right now, if you have any suggestions I'm all ears!
    1
  19403. +LordCucumber77 I'll take a look, and it was my pleasure! I've enjoyed making this - and we go into a lot more detail as the episodes go on :)
    1
  19404. akgeronimo501 What do you mean? I did use him. If you watch my documentary, you'll note that I remain neutral throughout, until the very end. I placed the units in the exact places there were during the battle - at the times they were there during the battle. And as I say, I could have easily come to a different conclusion. But I'm not going to while the evidence suggests that the battle was decided at Nijmegen.
    1
  19405. akgeronimo501 are you sure he was? Looks like we need to see the primary sources ;)
    1
  19406. akgeronimo501 Do not read one book and say it's gospel. Ryan's book is but one argument in a sea of books on the subject. His may be the most popular book, but that doesn't mean it's 100% correct. Can you remember your 12th birthday? What cake did you have? What presents did you get? Memory's fade. Opinions change. Mistakes are made. Lies are formed. Sources that are close to the date are better than those 29 years after. This gives people time to come up with excuses or get their friends to say the same story. Primary sources are those that were written close to or at the time. They are the most trusted, but can't be fully trusted. The purpose of a historian is to interpret the past - given the sources. When you read anything (literally, anything - even this!) you've got to question it. What gender is the writer? What nationality? What agenda might he have? Has he got a motivation to lie? Is he trying to achieve a desired result? Is he a socialist? Is he a fascist? Is he from the upper or lower classes? etc Even Ryan isn't except from this. He's an Irish then American immigrant. I haven't read up on the guy, but he could have anti-British sentiments due to his background. I'm hopeful that's not the case, but you've got to think like that when you read these sources. Poullussen (that author you seem to hate) is Dutch. So technically he's probably the most trusted source listed, unless he has a secret anti-USA bias. You're American, so you're going to be biased towards the US. I'm British, so I'm biased towards Britain (FYI, I'm probably the most non-patriotic Brit you'll ever meet, because this country leaves a lot to be desired). My point is, you've got to read many books on a subject before you come to conclusions. I fear that you've made your conclusions based on one.
    1
  19407. akgeronimo501 As I said in the documentary, Kershaw (who didn't argue that the battle was lost at Nijmegen, but who actually argues the Germans should take full credit for Market Garden) says that the Germans concluded five days after the battle that - "The enemy's chief mistake was not to have landed the entire 1st British Airborne Division at once rather than over the period of three days." To continue the quote from Kershaw, "Nothing was said about the wrong place, apart from the distance dissipating some of the effect of surprise, but it did admit that 'the second chief mistake [was] that a second airborne division was not dropped in the area west of Arnhem', in other words, in the same place to reinforce the first." That was the Germans. In 1945. By your own logic, Ryan was a little out of date (29 years) when he concluded that the distance from the bridge was the main factor in the failure of the British at Arnhem. I guess we could include Ryan in the "new buddies" list you're making.
    1
  19408. akgeronimo501 ok, since you like Max Hastings so much, let's quote Max Hastings in Armageddon (as I did in the videos) - "Gavin of the US 82nd urged that the US Army should review its policy of ruthlessly relieving formation commanders who failed in a single battle." Why would he urge this? Especially just after Market Garden. Is it because he didn't capture the Nijmegen bridge? I mean, why didn't Taylor of the 101st urge this? Oh, that's because he captured all of his objectives. So Taylor had no incentive to argue that formation commanders shouldn't be relieved when they messed up. But Gavin obviously did, because he had made a mistake during Market Garden.
    1
  19409. akgeronimo501 so you're saying it was Colonel Lindquist of the 508 PIR's fault for not following his orders then?
    1
  19410. akgeronimo501 19 = Dutch intelligence reports. If they knew their objectives, why didn't they go take them then? You were a paratrooper, so if you're given an objective, why wouldn't you go take it?
    1
  19411. akgeronimo501 No, the priority was the bridges. That's the whole point of the operation. And even if the DZs were the priority, why then did they release troops in the evening to take Nijmegen bridge if the DZs were the primary objectives? Surely they should have kept the whole division sat on the heights in case the 1000 German tanks appeared from the Reichswald?  And Nijmegen bridge was only defended by 19 bridge guards at the start of the day. A handful. No tanks. Not SS or elite troops. Bridge guards. The timeline is where you're misunderstanding. Gavin didn't order anyone towards Nijmegen bridge in his pre-drop orders. It was only AFTER a good portion of the first day was already gone that he gave the order to move the 1st Battalion of the 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment towards the bridge. Basically when he realised his mistake. It was only after several hours had passed after the initial landings that 1st Battalion moved towards the bridge. Just before they got there - literally seconds before because they heard them arrive - the SS pulled up in trucks and stopped them. The SS weren't in Nijmegen until this point. They arrived from the North. My point (as argued by the historians listed) is that if Gavin had given orders to Warren of the 508th BEFORE the battle, or earlier after the initial drops, the outcome of the whole of Market Garden would have been different because they would have arrived at the bridge with only 19 Germans defending it.
    1
  19412. I can assure you, nobody's blaming the paratroopers themselves. And why wouldn't it have a chance? Every bridge but one was taken on the first day. The one that wasn't taken was the only one where troops weren't sent to take it until many hours after landing.
    1
  19413. +FLUFFINATOR FLUFFINATOR thanks very much!
    1
  19414. +martaxsasLT Ah so you disagree with the historians who've decided this was a "rotten" plan! I agree with you though, I don't think it was as bad as some have made out be... Have you read a lot on this battle??
    1
  19415. Smart Tactics I'm now following you on Twitter :D I'll follow a few people and see what happens
    1
  19416. Smart Tactics see that's pretty good. I really should get into it. So is there any tips you can give me to get me started with Twitter?? I've finally got into Reddit after trying to navigate that website for a while too haha. Although to be fair, Reddit's site is a bit poorly organised Hope you're having fun in the Luxor btw and I'm not taking too much of your time up! We went past that a few times
    1
  19417. Smart Tactics I honestly don't know how to use Twitter otherwise I would. Every time I go look at it I just don't seem to grasp the concept... must be getting old at 28 yrs :P I'll go about creating a Twitter account and see what happens!
    1
  19418. +Smart Tactics oh wow, thanks for the share! Where you staying in Vegas? We went Excalibur about 10 years ago :)
    1
  19419. Hitler couldn't just remain at war with Britain but not do anything to her. He had to show that he meant business.
    1
  19420. Okay okay I give in 😂
    1
  19421. Yes, but if Britain offered a peace deal that said "you keep everything you've taken, we just want peace", and Hitler didn't accept this, it would probably be unpopular at home, and be suspicious to Stalin
    1
  19422. I was watching some other history videos the other day which had over 1 million views each, yet fewer comments than this video currently has. It's becoming increasingly obvious that YouTube doesn't really promote my videos as much as others, even though the engagement rate is higher. The question, of course, is why?
    1
  19423. Some videos for you https://youtu.be/geyvR1mCoOc https://youtu.be/gP0WxmqDg5s https://youtu.be/PQGMjDQ-TJ8 https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag I talk about and explain the food crisis in parts of all these videos, giving evidence of it's existence in each
    1
  19424. If Germany received a peace offer from Britain that basically said "you can keep everything you've taken, let's just peace out", then it would seem very strange for Hitler to refuse this and go for more demands. Such a move could have been unpopular at home, and made Stalin suspicious.
    1
  19425. Yes, this video shows why "sticking to tanks" is a bad idea. I was reading about the Hess Flight (a non-tank subject) when I stumbled upon the idea that Hitler wanted to convince Stalin that he wouldn't start a war on two fronts, and that made me wonder if it could apply to Dunkirk.
    1
  19426. Used to play Hearts of Iron a lot, and I started the channel with videos of me playing Close Combat. I decided to hide the videos though because I didn't want to risk being sued by the US government over COPPA... At the moment though I don't really have much chance. Have played some Total War recently in the evenings to relax
    1
  19427. It released at 5pm as usual. Clocks haven't changed where you are, have they?
    1
  19428. "Has that correspondence between Hitler and Stalin been confirmed with any primary source?" Apparently it's a copy of the original, but the original primary source hasn't been found. So, it could be accurate, but it does cast doubt on it. However, we do know from other sources that Hitler wrote to Stalin shortly after the Hess flight, we just don't know if these were his exact words.
    1
  19429. "TIK, all you're doing is re-telling documented tactical movements for the most part and repeating bits you've read from books that cover those battles." Not in this video I'm not. As far as I'm aware, this is a totally new theory. Also, yeah I'm re-telling documented tactical movements from books and primary sources... Sorry for backing up my work? - "Furthermore, it's quite obvious you've got some reading to do in terms of politics and economics if you ever intend on becoming anything more than a storyteller." I was educated in Socialist dogma and economics, and converted to free market capitalism and freedom (liberty to the individual) after realising that Hitler was a Socialist ( https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 ). So, I'd say I've got a fairly wide range of knowledge about politics and economics. That's why I favour economics and despise politics - since they are polar opposite ideas. If you have a political system, you do not have an economy. Also, nothing wrong with just being a storyteller. That's what history is, after all - stories about history.
    1
  19430. "Why throw away seventeen hundred quality aircraft and twenty eight hundred airmen , many experienced veterans from the Spanish war , before an planned impending land invasion , opening up a permanent 2nd , 3rd , 4th fronts , just to gain an advantage of surprise over Russia ?" Because the bigger prize is the Soviet Union. And Hitler must show willing with Britain, he can't just pretend to be at war with them. "The surprise factor is negated through the initial losses against Britain , and naturally , the ensuing losses that would be tallied up for years to come , on the many new war fronts that inevitably would open up , as the war progressed ." Yes, but you're forgetting that the Germans (and Hitler) genuinely believed that the Soviet Union would collapse in a few weeks. Their experience from the First World War told them that Russia was the weaker enemy, and if France and Britain fell so quickly in 1940, then the weaker Soviet Union must fall quicker in 1941.
    1
  19431. "So Hitler wanted to continue a sort of phony war with Britain, so he could perform a surprise attack on the USSR. This is the argument that makes absolutely least sense." Actually, this is the part that is more or less confirmed (from the sources talking about Stalin, with Stalin himself believing this to be the case). The issue is, whether it can be applied to Dunkirk or not.
    1
  19432. We know that Hitler sent Stalin a message after the Hess flight. This text is supposed to be a copy of the original. However, since the original was lost, there's no way to 100% verify if these were Hitler's exact words.
    1
  19433. In the first video I explained that the original halt came on the 23rd by Kleist and was followed by Rundstedt and then Hitler etc. As I said in that video, the original halt is done for tactical reasons, but it doesn't explain why Hitler held back the tanks for three days. A strategic reason may (or may not) explain this. But that's going off the sources I have. I'd be interested in taking a look at Freisler's works on this. Do you have a name of a book, or the author's full name?
    1
  19434. That would make sense
    1
  19435. Once again, the bribery of German Generals has nothing to do with this topic. And no, he didn't "destroy the SA to please them". Hitler destroyed the SA because Röhm was seen as a threat to Hitler's power. I've been over this in my Hitler's Socialism video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19436. Yeah, it's not in there, and it seems to have disappeared completely, so YouTube mustn't like all the links. Try doing one link?
    1
  19437. Yeah, I saw it, but then it disappeared. I even replied! I'll check the 'review' folder...
    1
  19438. Inflation is the expansion of the currency supply, not the rise in prices. When a plane goes up into the sky, it doesn't inflate. If something expands (like a balloon) it inflates. Inflation leads to higher prices - and there has been higher prices. Look at the stock market, the bond market, the housing market, the commodity market, the real estate market, the second hand goods market (e.g. cars, guitars, pianos, even books...) and more. Yes, it hasn't hit every day prices here in the UK... because the UK government regulates all the prices, and has LOCKED THE ECONOMY DOWN forcing those people who kept their jobs to save cash at record amounts - "Households have accumulated £125bn ($175bn) in savings during the pandemic and Haldane said this "nest-egg" could reach £250bn by June at the current rate." - Andy Haldane, Chief Economist of the Bank of England. Yahoo reports - "It is unclear how much will be spent after the crisis passes but Haldane predicted a surge in spending once restrictions ease." https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bank-of-england-andy-haldane-uk-economy-coiled-spring-covid-19-coronavirus-083250588.html Well, this is EXACTLY what happened in Germany. In 1914 Germany came off the gold standard, allowing them to inflate during WW1. Because they were scared, people didn't spend their currency during the war. That's why the inflation started immediately after the war (before reparations) then spiraled out of control by 1923. For an explanation of this, see the book "When Money Dies" by Fergusson.
    1
  19439. "business will decrease production in order to increase prices back up again. Decreased production means less demand for for workers." Only for the businesses that were in the 'bubble'. Don't forget that the reason there was a crash and depression in the first place is because inflation and interest rate manipulation had misallocated resources to the 'wrong' businesses (creating 'bubbles'). These 'bubble' businesses weren't needed (weren't profitable), and so the bubble 'pops' and the businesses are forced to cut back. But some businesses were suppressed during the 'boom' years because resources were misallocated away from them. So during the 'bust', resources (like land and labour) that went to the 'bad' businesses during the boom, would then be freed up go to the 'good' businesses, who'd then be able to expand and take on more workers and so on. "We are in agreement that the best monetary policy in the long term is just not to have one, and tie your currency to precious metals; but if you are going to have one, the best policy in times of crisis is to increase the amount of cash in people's hands, it's simple logic." No, this would just exacerbate the problem. Giving people and businesses freshly printed currency (inflation) further misallocates those resources and perpetuates the depression. THAT's the mistake that Keynesians make - they don't realize that their 'solution' to the problem is the problem. And yes, I don't think Brüning should have been setting the interest rate anyway, but if the rate was too low to begin with, then increasing it would help.
    1
  19440. Not really, because anarchism is without ruler or authority. Multiple rulers or authorities is still rulers and authorities, so it can't be classified as anarchism.
    1
  19441. That's not true. Capital doesn't mean "head" nor "individual". It means "money", which Marx also said was the Jewish God https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19442. Playing devil's advocate, if God had said it was okay to murder, that would have made it moral and right? I'm not someone who chains himself to one person, nor follows them without question. I respect Mises, Rothbard and Rand, and I listen to their points, but I also disagree at times. You can be blinded by the light, so it's best to shield your eyes.
    1
  19443. You've made a bunch of assumptions. Please watch this video https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19444. Weber may have defined what a state is, but he wasn't the first. This is an ancient concept. And there are problems with defining it as "coercion" or force, etc. The more important element is that it's an organised Public hierarchy of society.
    1
  19445. In what way are AnCaps socialist?
    1
  19446. Neither does the Pope.
    1
  19447. Amazon has 1.5 million people working for it right now. The Vatican State has less than 900. Why is the Vatican a state, but Amazon is not?
    1
  19448. They're not anarchists. Did you not read the title?
    1
  19449. This video was built upon the work I've done previously, like the Public vs Private video (full of references) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y As you can see, the definitions I'm using are concrete.
    1
  19450. I'm not an AnCap, but they can provide answers to your questions, and I think they would answer something like this: 1) You've asked several questions in one here, so this requires multiple answers. Rather than have centralised laws, you would have local laws that are set by the property owners. Murder is not legel because of the "NAP" (Non-Aggression Principle). The explanation for the NAP can be found here https://libertarianism.fandom.com/wiki/Non-aggression_principle As shown in the series of videos on the "market for security" published by the Mises institute, yes there would be independent law firms who can be hired to create and uphold laws. It would take too long to explain, so I'd recommend giving them a watch in order to understand it, but it does make sense and may lead to a much better law system than the corrupt BS have right now. Here are the links: https://youtu.be/V0_Jd_MzGCw?si=jkiX-s_C_iZhj4VJ https://youtu.be/4rq3RcUyMrM?si=-rw09qZ-sBaJbDRl https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ?si=lj7ltzSwyObUk8tl 2) Again, you've asked a couple questions in one here, driving at diverging issues. I'm not sure what the AnCap response to this would be to the "immorality" question, but my response is simply to state that I don't owe anyone else anything. I didn't take out a loan, and I have no mortgage on your life or anyone elses. I may choose to save someone's life in a certain situation, and may not do so in another (if Mr H of WW2 was in trouble, I probably wouldn't choose to save him). In that sense, I am responsible for my own life, and you of yours. I may want (motivation) to save you due to instinct or due to it making me feel good, but there is no "cosmic duty" compelling me to do so. (Again, the AnCap response may be different.) Right to property is the same as right to my body. Remember that whole "my body, my choice" thing? Well, my property is an extension of my body. I possess a body, just like I possess property. If you steal my property, you're violating my freedom, and thus you become an enemy I am motivated to defend myself against. 3) I think the AnCap response would be that children are the property of the parents until they fly the nest. As such, the parents get to decide what their children consume. If the parents think it's okay for their children to consume drugs, that's on them. But someone else abusing their property (in this case, their children) would obviously be a violation of their freedom. So it's "immoral" because you're doing harm to other people. 4) Most of this was answered in 1... but I will answer the question "Should 99% of people adhere to a system that only 1% actually supports, in the ground of it being "morally right"?" If everyone votes to murder the J's, does that make it right? Clearly not. Democracy is a scam because it's merely the "majority" murdering and stealing off the minority. And this isn't just about democracy, but government in general. All governments punish a certain portion of the population who do not agree with the governors. AnCaps promise that everyone can become their own government, on their own land, with their own rules. Your property - your choice (with the NAP in mind). Right now we have a system where the 1% are benefiting off the rest of us. We need to smash this system, not reinforce it. AnCaps promise to smash it. Socialists and Conservatives are all about reinforcing it. So I do find it interesting that you've brought up a point that undermines your own argument. 5) Yes. The current world is not a meritocracy, because the current world isn't a free market. In a free market, it would be merit-based society, rather than the corrupt one we have now. 6) The Labour Theory of Value was debunking a few years after Marx published his Das Kapital. Yet here you are stating nonsense like "personal input has absolutely nothing to do with their accumulated wealth, and possibly at the expense of others". This is complete socialist nonsense. The biggest lesson you have to learn is that YOU CAN CREATE YOUR OWN WEALTH. If you could not, then self-employed workers and businessmen wouldn't be a thing. Thus, wealth can be accumulated without the expense of others, and is based on personal input. Now, the CURRENT system isn't set up that way. Because most people believe in Altruism, and Altruism says that we have to help those in need, people are actively incentivised to be the most needy. Thus, it's a race to the bottom, as those who sit on their hands and moan about life being so hard get "free stuff" stolen off the backs of those who actually do work. But in an AnCap society, those people would have to get a job, and the incentives would be set up to actually reward personal input. And there is a symbiotic relationship between employer and employee. This is a whole discussion in and of itself, but essentially, the Marxist Weltanschauung (world-view) that we are antagonistic forces fighting against each other is nonsense. Bees pollinate the plants, who provide nectar to the bees in return. Your point about the natural disaster is silly. Yes, a meteor could hit the earth right now and wipe out all life. That's not a factor we can control. In your example, because business owners are incensivised to look after themselves and take responsibility, the other owners will have things like "savings" and "business insurance" to rebuild in the event that their business gets wiped out. I know savings is not possible in our current heavy-tax and inflation-riddled Keynesian society, but in a free market it would be a viable strategy. "Extortion" is justified in this scenario because what matters is the CUSTOMER. This is the part you've forgotten. If the customer is willing to pay the price, then he's not being "extorted". If he's unhappy that Bob is charging a lot for the product he's providing, Bill is more that able of creating a rival business that undercuts the competition. In the "real world" (aka this Keynesian hell-hole) everything is messed up. Doubling down on the nonsense doesn't mean things will get better. What we need is a complete change, and that's what the free market is - the much needed change. Finally, I will say that even a basic read of "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt would have answered most of your questions. It's clear that you've done ZERO reading on economics, and so I would recommend you read that rather than ask more questions that have already been answered.
    1
  19451. This is an old video from a different channel, but it explains free market health care vs State health care very well in a short space of time https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ The issue with he NHS is that it's a bloated bureaucracy, and like Mises explains, without free market prices you cannot have economic calculation. There is so much waste in the NHS that it's surprising they do any health-related work at all. What the NHS can do, a truly private free market health care service can do better, for cheaper, and wouldn't bring down the entire economy with it like the NHS is doing. It's too complicated to explain here why this is the case, but the linked video should help you understand. What is needed isn't some privatisation in the NHS, but truly private and independent hospitals that compete with each other to be the best at the most cheapest prices. The consumer should come first, not the business. If you're being paid by the government, you're part of the government. Most likely, your business would not exist the way it does if the government wasn't paying you, therefore you're part of it. For example, let's say that your business is selling books, but because nobody is buying books, you're going under. Rather than accept this, you go to the government and ask for money in the interest of "education". Thus, instead of your business failing, freeing up resources to be put to better uses, the bad and unwanted business is being propped up by the government. The book shop owner has effectively become a member of the government, since he's on their payroll. Same with the unemployed collecting welfare cheques - they're being employed by the state to sit on their backsides all day rather than be a productive member of society. I hope that goes some way to answering your questions. I'd really recommend Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson if you haven't read it already.
    1
  19452. The reason parents can't afford private education in the current system is because the current system is making them poor. People would instantly be 50% better off without taxes alone, let alone all the regulations and central planning. We're getting poorer because the state is robbing us blind.
    1
  19453. "I was born and raised under a communist regime. For decades now, I'm living in a "free" democratic and capitalist society. And do you know what's the big difference between those two systems? Absolutely nothing. They both suck!" This is where you're going wrong. We don't live in a 'free' or 'capitalist' society. This society we live in only has the veneer of Capitalism, otherwise it's socialism all the way down. Even ignoring the taxes, the wage controls, the price controls, currency printing, rent controls, the regulations, the fines and many other manipulations... one half of every transaction is currency. Well, the currency you use is State central bank currency, the price of which is set by them - that's the interest rate. By artificially setting interest rates, they're manipulating and controlling EVERY transaction in the economy. The State controls and distorts EVERY transaction in the the currency! It's hardly a 'free' market - nor capitalism. - "And that's because the only thing what matters are PEOPLE who make the society. I mean, who gives a crap how a system is called when majority of population are living like freaking zombies. Everyone are just pursuing their own petty interests (power and profit), instead of focusing to help each other, to help the nature and to pursue knowledge and wisdom." Except, if we lived in a free market, you'd find that profit would be good. The only way to make profit in a free market is to give people what they want. By providing goods and services to others, they give you money in return. BUT because we don't live in a free market, instead we have inflation (a secret steal tax) and direct taxation - both of which steal wealth from those who produce efficiently, and redistribute it to those who don't. This causes massive distortions and inequality in the economy. If you want to know why the elite are getting richer, it is through inflation and taxation (force). - "Communism, socialism, fascism, capitalism, monarchy, democracy... all those are just empty words." Maybe to you, but not to me. They have definitions, but it sounds like you don't know what capitalism actually is, which is why I'm encouraging you to watch my Public vs Private video. - "Or, you may argue, some of them work as intended, but does that matter when, more or less, people aren't really happy, aren't really free and live a crappy life?" Of course they're not happy! I'm not happy with the current system either. Socialism doesn't work, and it gives the elite everything at the expense of the poor, who are forced to either slave away all their life, or exist on handouts. The way out of this is the free market. It's literally in the words - a market is a buyer and seller (THE PEOPLE). A free market is a free people. We don't have a free market, so we don't have free people. We have unhappy slaves. - "Why everyone are so latched on those empty words? Could people live in absolute monarchy or within absolute communist regime and still be happy?" I mean, maybe some people like being hungry slaves of the elite. I personally do not. So rather than slaving away for a monarch, or a 'first' comrade, or some other overlord, I'd rather work for myself, and for others I care about. And again, the words are not 'empty', they have meaning. - "And that's exactly why I wrote you should be able to see trees for the forest, thus to see what is going on in practice, not in theory." I'm telling you what's happening in practice. As I said in the Public vs Private video: the people are the public, and the public is the State. - "And that's why I think you're wrong about Hitler. He wasn't a socialist, and under a different perspective he was a socialist in the same time. But does that really matter, when he was responsible for millions of deaths?" It matters when it was his Socialism that murdered those people. His Socialism led to the war, and also to the Holocaust. If you take away his Socialism, you can't explain why these events happened. - The rest of your post is just you failing to understand what's going on here. First, you're using the Marxist definition of Capitalism, not the actual definition. You have no knowledge of Capitalism - itself being the way the economy would function if it wasn't for State manipulation and distortion. Calling Capitalism an "ideology" is like calling the natural world an "ideology" - it's ridiculous. I would encourage you to read the book "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and watch my Public vs Private video, so that you actually understand where I'm coming from. And if you're not interested in the words - fine. But don't complain when I argue with evidence that they actually have a meaning.
    1
  19454. "I didn't even want to rely on any source whatsoever, because the source is irrelevant." No, the source is absolutely relevant. - "That article explains, in simple words, why Hitler wasn't a socialist and explains differences between socialist idea and his own agenda." And my Hitler's Socialism video explains why that old Marxist narrative is a load of rubbish. - "Although the Nazis did pursue a level of government intervention in the economy that would shock doctrinaire free marketeers..." Ah, you see, even Marxists can't hide the facts now. - "...their “socialism” was at best a secondary element in their appeal." Again, this argument has been addressed. It was a primary element in their appeal, but in order to get a wide variety of votes, they had to downplay their Socialism in favour of appealing to the the nationalist and conservative voters. If they hadn't done this, they wouldn't have done well in the late elections of the Weimar Republic. I've explained this here https://youtu.be/ZFI8lfnh_VU - "Indeed, most supporters of Nazism embraced the party precisely because they saw it as an enemy of and an alternative to the political left." No, they saw it as an enemy of the Marxists. Marxism may be on the Left, but it's not the only thing on the Left. Hitler's left-wing Socialism that prioritized the national-social group over the international-social group was appealing to many of the German voters. - "After he took the throne, he went straight forward for autocracy, trying to accommodate any kind of socioeconomic system which will suit his needs for subjugation of entire world." Exactly, just like Lenin did. That's precisely what Socialism is all about. - "On the other hand, I'm really worried you went too deep into a rabbit hole of political ideologies. And that serves no one but only unaware, blinded fanatics who just can't see the forest for the trees." I'm glad I could be of service to you. - "So, please, stop and give it a try." Give what a try? Telling the truth? Laying it all out so that even the most religious ideologues can understand it, only to be ignored by them and instead presented with poor arguments that not only contradict themselves but also fly in the face of the evidence? Your arguments are fundamentally flawed, and I'm not persuaded by flawed arguments. - "It's not that hard." Oh no, apparently it's really hard for people to actually sit there and pay attention to a 5 hour video which lays all out for you. In fact, the only counterargument I've had is "that's not 'real' socialism", which again, is a ridiculous argument considering I've outlined the historic definitions of Socialism and Capitalism in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Socialism, communism, fascism and everything else are nothing but futile definitions and useless LABELS, used by people to judge others or to justify their own narrative." No, they actually have definitions. Socialism/Communism (originally they meant the same thing) are defined in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and Fascism is defined here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "And that's why I wrote, "where the humanity disappeared"... or in other words... Why no one really cares about the freaking people!?" You don't think I care about the people? Socialism is Elitism! You're pandering to the elites! But you don't realize it because you're so caught up in the religion of Socialism I can't get through to you. I accidentally took the Redpill, and just like Neo, I can't unsee the Matrix. You're still plugged into it. Wake up, smell the roses, and properly pay attention to what I'm saying. Once you understand that SOCIALISM IS FOR THE ELITE, NOT THE POOR, and why that is the case, you will realize that you have been lied to - just as I had been when I was in school, college and university. I can lead a man to water but I cannot make him think... It's down to you to open your eyes
    1
  19455. Thank you for providing one source, from the lamestream news media, owned and controlled by the Marxist State central banks (Marx called for Central Banking in the Communist Manifesto), that's behind a paywall, but no doubt contradicts the 107 sources I used, the 350 direct references, and the numerous notes and quotes and discussions I had in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video which, although subtitled "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments" because it directly addresses all the counter-arguments usually spouted by people who refuse to accept the evidence, is clearly wrong because... you know... the SJW editors at the Washington Post say so https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19456. Yeah, I'm not surprised you export Fosters - it's garbage. I'm an ale drinker anyway so 🍺 Your analogy of a car crashing in slow motion is very apt. It really does feel like that
    1
  19457. Hahaha don't you mean 'tanks'?
    1
  19458. I do not have it, but even if I did, it's going to be a struggle translating it over into English
    1
  19459. I have read Pritt Buttar. I used his work quite extensively in the Courland series. I also made this video https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU
    1
  19460. Sadly not. There's very little written on the other powers, let alone on the Italians or other Axis. I've not really touched upon the Japanese, and probably won't for a while yet
    1
  19461. Yes, I tried to say it like Yegor throughout the video
    1
  19462. It wasn't just Ukranians - there were Russians and Cossaks too according to the info Egor Kobiakov provided
    1
  19463. But the report does say when a unit had not been used in combat. The other ones say "performed well", and "defensive positions" implies that they were at the front line. Also, the report was for early-mid September, so if the units hadn't been in combat yet, it's likely they would have been after this time. There's no point giving weapons to someone if you're not intending on using them in combat.
    1
  19464.  @bezahltersystemtroll5055  I was surprised to learn that there's actually a wikipedia page about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrimp_on_the_barbie And this other site does a good job explaining it https://theculturetrip.com/pacific/australia/articles/why-australians-disown-the-phrase-put-another-shrimp-on-the-barbie/
    1
  19465. I knew that saying 'shrimps on the barbie' would annoy Australians because they say 'prawns', that's why I said it. However, prawns and shrimp are actually two different things. If Australians call shrimp 'prawns', then what do they call prawns, 'shrimp'?
    1
  19466.  @SmotritelMayaka29  Yeah you've missed the point. Romanians were on the Don, and south of the city, and took part in Manstein's counterattack. Nobody's questioning that - we know this. The actual question that's being asked was whether the Romanians were in the city itself in the September to November period, specifically fighting at the Grain Elevator like two Soviet veterans claimed.
    1
  19467.  @Caresfree637  I do not, no.
    1
  19468. But that's not the short answer. The short answer is YES
    1
  19469. "This is like seeing the inner workings of how a historian operates. Excellent." Yes! I would like to do this sort of video again in the future - take you from the initial problem, then through the workings out of the problem, to the solution or probable solution. I think this format may be valuable to many people
    1
  19470. Romanians fell back into the city at the end of the battle (post-November 1942). But before that there's no evidence to say they set foot inside Stalingrad. The question is: were they at the Grain Elevator in September 1942 as two Soviet veterans claimed?
    1
  19471. I would say that the inflation we've had previously has gone into asset bubbles (like stocks and housing), and the bubbles have to be constantly inflated by the Central Banks. In my opinion, if they're allowed to pop, the inflation we've seen previously will be allowed to flood the market, which is when those prices really take off.
    1
  19472. Prices have not remained "stable". Look at house prices here in the UK. Does this look stable to you? https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/94/96/3f9496b969733044727eb3902f8af267.png How about this? https://paulclaireaux.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/UK-House-prices_July-17_960_4web.jpg
    1
  19473. I think this series will come out every so often, rather than a set date per month. The reason why is because this will actually be difficult to make. This first video took a couple weeks worth of scripting and editing to put together (not including all the months of reading prior to that), so it's not something I can do consistently with the Stalingrad stuff.
    1
  19474. You'll get it on Monday
    1
  19475. Terri made that ice cream truck for me, so I'll let her know you approve :)
    1
  19476. Apparently, a lot of people say you can still hand them in and get a new one, so it's not worthless... I think they've missed the point.
    1
  19477. What about gold and silver and copper? It's not an all-or-nothing scenario.
    1
  19478. True. I was trying to explain inflation to people who might not understand it, but it's actually difficult to do.
    1
  19479. But gold is a commodity, so it's okay to mine more, as the excess is a store of a commodity. Excessive gold mining will lower profits and will reduce the mining operations (in a free market), keeping the inflation in check. Currency isn't a store of a commodity, so excess printing only waters down the currency. And deflation is a good thing https://mises.org/library/deflating-deflation-myth
    1
  19480. The police are the tax enforcers. They don't protect private property or the individuals, all they protect is the State, and steal our property to fund their monopoly on power. They are the reason people are in poverty.
    1
  19481. Except, this is my element. Just because I started with the military history stuff on the channel doesn't mean I was taught the military history stuff in college or university. In college, I was actually taught the European political and economic situation between 1850 and 1950, concentrating on both Germany and Britain, but touching upon other countries too. I was taught the Keynesian perspective, which is why I ended up becoming a moderate socialist. Then I did my own homework while trying to discover the origins of the Holocaust, and realized that National Socialism was actually socialism (it wasn't a "trick" as I had been told). That's when I started looking into Chicago and Austrian economics, and I've never looked back.
    1
  19482. The purpose of communication is to communicate, not to assert dominance and superiority over others. I understand economics, but a large portion of the audience doesn't, so I'm tailoring my speech to the audience rather than talking over them to make myself sound more intelligent than I actually am (like Keynes, Marx, and numerous economics college professors).
    1
  19483. "no they were not. They believed that workers in different countries would never be willing to start slaughtering workers in another country and were shocked when that happened. An it's not just Russia. In Britain, pretty much the only people who dared to speak against the war were Marxists." You're referring to the socialists, not the Marxists. In 1917 there was a split between Socialism and Communism. This is well documented and will be explaining this in the next Weimar Hyperinflation episode. Part of the reason for the split in the Socialist ranks was because of a pro-war vs anti-war factions, but also because the Communists were totalitarians, whereas the Socialists were (supposedly) pro-democracy. Thus the party split in two. Bolsheviks vs Mensheviks and Anarchists etc, SPD vs KPD in Germany, Italian Socialists vs Mussolini's Fascists. - "How can you be so clueless of these facts considering how much you know about war history in general? Is it some cognitive dissonance playing a role or what is going on?" It's not me who's clueless here. You have bought into the same lie that the Marxists and Socialists have spouted for decades that I realized was completely false. Open your eyes and ears, and start listening. You have been deceived.
    1
  19484. "It's hilarious that you use that word, when it was the communists who were the most anti-war group prior to WWI. One reason why Lenin got in power in Russia was that he promised that he'd end the war (which he did)." Lenin ended the war with Germany but then started a war against the Russian people, and a war of world conquest (world revolution). A "revolution" is a war. The communists were absolutely pro-war.
    1
  19485. There's a difference between two individuals cooperating together, and one individual forcing another to comply with his orders.
    1
  19486. I never said that individuals can't work together to fight for freedom. The USA proved that during the American Revolution. The problem here is that States end up going to war, so the individual needs to be sovereign and say "no" when the State decides to take you into an aggressive war.
    1
  19487. Right, you can't start or sustain a horrific war if the individuals are sovereign and the collective doesn't control you. Right.
    1
  19488. "And they've manipulated gold lower and your buying. If a country is manipulating the price of gasoline into artificially low prices, that's not the time to invest in gasoline. That's just being a realist." Artificially lower prices result in depleting stocks and, eventually, shortages. We had shortages of gold and silver last year, yet the paper price for both went down as premiums went up. This year we have the silver squeeze movement that's taken 37.3% of the Comex's current registered reserves, and 11.1% of their overall silver since January 2021. https://www.reddit.com/r/Wallstreetsilver/comments/rgk9bl/the_open_interest_on_the_upcoming_january_futures/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 Eventually, lower prices will result in shortages, at which point the unofficial black free market price of the goods will go much higher than the official price. - "I have zero faith in crypto and I own none of it. But I can recognize the old gold speculators do have faith in it, which is why gold is longer the haven it used to be. The times have changed, gold has to compete now and it has lost value as a result." You keep saying that gold has lost value, but it hasn't. It's only lost value to you because you got in far too late and bought at the peak. If you had bought when they smashed the price down artificially lower than it should have been (like I did) then you'd be saying that gold has gone up (and it has). Besides, gold isn't "competing" with crypto. Just like housing, crypto is just absorbing the inflation, preventing it from seeping into the real economy. When the housing and crypto and stock and bond markets implode (or explode, depending), which they will, then you'll see real assets like gold go a lot higher. Again, gold is a long-term hedge against inflation, not a speculative "investment".
    1
  19489. But there are a bunch of sources that agree with me, including Karl Marx, Murray Rothbard and modern investors and economists? So now what?
    1
  19490. I can confirm that it is not a sponsored video, and I'm not working with anyone else on this.
    1
  19491. There were no taxes in Germany, Venezuela, Russia, Zimbabwe, Austria, Turkey, Hungary...?
    1
  19492. Calling it "ridiculous" doesn't mean anything. You have to actually explain why having to pay tribute to your lords doesn't make you a serf.
    1
  19493. Well he won't find that person in the ranks of the so-called "experts".
    1
  19494. Yes it is https://mises.org/library/inflation-and-deflation
    1
  19495. Awesome! Glad to hear it
    1
  19496. But in your scenario, Bill Gates doesn't just keep the currency under his mattress. He invests it in the stock market, causing stock prices to rise to astronomical levels in the biggest bubble in human history. Since stocks are prices, you have price inflation. Unfortunately, the State doesn't count that towards its "CPI" (Consumer Price Index), nor house price rises etc, so the "inflation" number is lower than it actually is. And even if Bill Gates just keeps the currency in his bank, the bank will loan out that cash to others, or be allowed to increase the number of currency units in circulation for other investors. So prices will rise regardless.
    1
  19497. Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for watching!
    1
  19498. The Reichsmark hyperinflated too. One of the reasons Hitler had to go to war was because he had been inflating the currency during the 1930s and then trying to use price and wage controls to keep the currency from imploding.
    1
  19499. @HallBr3gg I see, so I'm the conspiracy theorist for believing that the central banks are all cooperating together (which they absolutely are because the IMF directs them, which is why they're all inflating together), and for thinking that the media is all owned by the same corporations (you're a simple Google search away from finding out that they are), but the socialists who believe that there's a giant racist-capitalist conspiracy to keep the poor poorer are not conspiracy theorists?
    1
  19500. I see, so it's okay for Socialists to change the meaning of Socialism to mean anything they want it to mean, and it's okay for the Central Bankers to change the definitions and then pump out tons of propaganda via the media that they fund to covertly convince people to accept their redefined definitions, but when I point this manipulation out, I'm the Orwellian one?
    1
  19501. The State steals private property, it doesn't protect it in any shape or form.
    1
  19502. JP Morgan got fined again recently for manipulating the precious metals market. They've been fined a total of over $42 billion so far, yet continue to rig it. Yet this is supposedly a "free market"...
    1
  19503. That doesn't change anything. Money is commodities, and commodities are required to create capital (according to Marx). It doesn't have to be gold specifically, it just needs to be a commodity, which fiat currency is not.
    1
  19504. I agree with your first sentence, and your last. However, the bit in the middle is a little odd. You say that in order for capitalism to exist there must not be any monopolies (I agree), however you then proceed to say that there has to be a monopoly (the State) in order to have capitalism. Which is it?
    1
  19505. I see what you did there 😂
    1
  19506. Again, I've been over this. Corporations are public. They are bodies of people (public), not individuals (private). A corporation which consists of hundreds, if not thousands, of people is not an individual. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19507. Thank you for your support, sir! It really helps make all this possible
    1
  19508. And yet, despite all that, there was a housing shortage in Germany.
    1
  19509. Except, savings are what generate growth, not mindless spending.https://mises.org/library/saving-bad-economy
    1
  19510. I hope they find it useful!
    1
  19511. Some have argued that there's not enough gold by itself. However there is enough gold and silver and copper.
    1
  19512. Marx was incorrect. Money/currency doesn't store up labour value (since the Labour Theory of Value is wrong). If he was correct, then hyperinflation could never happen. Instead, we have the Subjective Theory of Value, which says that the value of everything depends on individual assessments.
    1
  19513. I haven't actually heard of Bill Still or Money Masters, but I'm curious. Is there a particular video of his that you would recommend as an intro to his stuff?
    1
  19514. Wow, thanks for the feedback! I put a lot of work into this, so hopefully the rest of the series will be the same
    1
  19515. Regarding the changed definition of inflation, see this video https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA
    1
  19516. Glad you enjoyed the video! Regarding your final question, if they had kept their economy free, they probably would have thought twice before attacking France, or starting the war in the first place. The German people would have realized the true cost of the war, and there would have been a massive incentive for it to end. An early peace would have resulted, or an early revolution, or similar. And this would have occurred before the economic situation became desperate. In terms of food production, they would have been better off with a free market, which would have adapted to the high prices better. However, it wouldn't have been a truly free market if there were enforceable taxes. So the same problems would have occurred (inflation, wage increases to the factories Vs the farms, urbanisation etc). In a truly free market without taxation, then there's no way Germany could have been an aggressor in a war.
    1
  19517. You may be right in the short run, but inflation always creates false signals that result in bubbles, which always pop. I've done a video explaining this process here which I think you will find interesting https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  19518. Yeah, it's probably going to get confusing as the series goes on because of the milliard thing. I'm in two minds about referring to them as billions or just sticking with milliards
    1
  19519. "Turkey's inflation blew up because Erdogan in the stroke of genius decided to defy accepted sensible practices of monetary policy and forced the central bank to keep the interest rate too low. " No, Turkish inflation started way before he did that. The media are telling you this because they want to distract you from the main cause. - "The monetary base increased by, like , a third. Prices do not." UK house prices have shot up 8% this year, and increased massively last year too. The current trend is clearly indicating that this will continue https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/housing-index So yes, they did increase the amount of currency in existence by a third, and so, when some time has passed, prices will no-doubt go up by a third. - "Whether I am worse off in the end depends on the relative speed of growth of wages and prices. The mere fact that they both increasing means nothing." In the 1950s, one working man could afford to have an entire family. Today, two people working full time struggle to do the same. This is reflected in the official UK statistics https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2021/10/uk-real-wages-will-still-be-lower-in-2026-than-they-were-in-2008 - "Inflation bites into savings in currency, but if inflation is stable, interest rates account for it..." Inflation is currently 6%, and interest rates are 0%. How is this "stable", exactly? - "And one can always save in gold or something similar. People know that prices increase (and they even know approximately how fast they increase). So if they want, they can just buy gold, it is not WW1 Germany." Gold prices are suffering under copious amounts of manipulation - https://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/jpmorgan-fined-126-billion-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/jpmorgan-pay-60-mln-settle-precious-metals-spoofing-lawsuit-2021-11-19/ https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jpmorgan-to-pay-%24920-mln-fine-for-manipulating-precious-metals-treasury-market-2020-09-29 JP Morgan alone has been fined somewhere in the region of $42 billion for artificially suppressing the price of precious metals in order to keep you in the dollar/currency. So while you can buy gold, gold is not performing well because of the likes of JP Morgan, and so people are less-likely to choose gold as a viable option (until it's too late). - "I am swearing, because I cannot be but amused by the fact that you are arguing with people from the 50s. When Rothbard and others wrote their works, many economist did believe that you can manipulate the economy however you want with inflation of money supply. By now it is the long resolved question, and everybody accepts that the best you can do with monetary policy is stabilization." I'm not arguing with people from the 1950s. I'm arguing with the Keynesians who continue to spout their nonsense today. Rothbard's words show that the Keynesian Weltanschauung is incorrect, and the results of their disastrous economic policies are plain to see for anyone willing to open their eyes. The problem is that defenders of the faith are unwilling to open their eyes, and that's why you're swearing.
    1
  19520. "It is possible to massively increase a monetary base and to not experience a proportionally larger shock to prices. That is exactly what happened a year ago." UK house prices would disagree with you on that one. - "I just don't fucking get it, what narrative are you trying to construct? That the government robs people blind with inflationary tax? That is just not true, because any country with more or less sensible leadership follows stable and predictable monetary policy." The more they print, the more your wages and your savings go down in actual terms, even though they go up in nominal terms. You have more digits in your bank balance, but everything else in the economy has gone up in price, and so you're worse off that before. Also, the more they keep printing, the more likely they'll have a hyperinflation, or a massive recession/depression as I explained here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs So they are not pursuing a stable monetary policy at all, although it is predictable enough that I know where it's heading... which is why gold and silver is a nice hedge against them. Also, you're swearing because you're hearing something that's challenging your previously held beliefs. My advice is for you to read the first part (at least, preferably all of it) of Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" which is available as a free PDF here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression - "See recent example of Turkey." Turkey's inflation has come about because of the USA. Same with Iran's inflation, Venezuela's inflation, Zimbabwe's inflation, Lebanon's inflation, Argentina's inflation, Brazil's inflation... In fact, all the world is inflating together because of the United States and the Federal Reserve. You can either be aware of this fact, or you can ignore it. - "So sensible governments stopped messing with inflation since 80s." Sure...
    1
  19521. I don't need to advocate a return to feudalism, since we already have that. As I said, we have to pay tribute to our lords and ladies. Does that sound feudalism to you? It does to me. So I'm actually criticising the feudalism we have, not advocating a return to it.
    1
  19522. "I can't get rid of the feeling that it's still just your interpretation of certain sources you think credible." I've used plenty of sources I don't agree with. I held one up in this video - Taylor's book is good for the history, but isn't great when it comes to the economics side of things. I've also read Keynes and Marx, and there are sources that say that the inflation was caused by exchange rates (it wasn't, and I will prove it later). I'm not cherry picking sources, but I am deciding that certain points raised in those sources are correct or incorrect depending on the interpretation (whether they make logical sense, or if the evidence doesn't contradict them, etc). This is the exact same process I use in EVERY video of mine. Why? Because that's the basis of history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc I would encourage you to watch that video on History Theory if you haven't already because it also answers your "I'm pretty sure there are countless books that could be used to make the exact opposite of your argument, but I don't have the time and resources to independently go check and verify" point. No, you don't have time to verify, which is why you need historians to do the work for you. I can provide you a strong argument for one narrative, meaning that you (as a casual reader of history) only need to find a source that provides the opposing argument, at which point you can decide who seems to be telling the truth or not (again, depending on your interpretation). Put another way, how do you know that ANY historian isn't telling the truth? Have you got time to verify their entire bibliography? Again, this all falls back on history theory, which is why I encourage you to watch the video I linked. - "your attitude towards historical economic systems and governments paint you as an anti-establishment person, thus cautions me to take your arguments with a grain of salt." Absolutely. But please remember that I was a moderate socialist and was pro-State intervention in the economy UNTIL I had my epiphany and realized the true nature of Socialism. That's why I had already read Marx and Engels, as well as bits of Keynes and other mainstream sources. I used to believe that the BBC was a Right-Wing mouthpiece (oh how wrong I was!) So now I take the opposite stance, mainly because my previous supporters accused me of reading Mises and Rothbard, which I hadn't when I independently came to the conclusion that Hitler was a Socialist. Because of their accusations, I decided to pick them up, and boy do I not regret it. It became obvious straight away why the Socialists didn't want me to read Mises and Rothbard, and the reason why was because Mises and Rothbard completely destroy the Socialist and Keynesian narrative in a straight knockout. The point is that I changed from a pro-State person to an anti-State person as a result of me reading the sources and seeing the evidence. I go where the evidence takes me, so feel free to be skeptical, but you should know that I've also sat on both sides of the fence and can absolutely see your point of view because I used to believe in that point of view too. - "Also, your arguments align with my world view that almost all bad things happen because of greed and/or stupidity, but maaan, your reasoning suggests that it only got worse and most likely it will only get even worse... That's a depressing thought." There's a quote I heard recently and I think it's apt - "Would you rather be happy, or would you rather be right?" - Rian Stone - "Anyways, keep up the good work, Monday is only bearable because I know at least I'll have a Tik video at the end of the day!" Awesome! I'm glad you're still watching even if you disagree. That's shows maturity on your part :)
    1
  19523. That's an epic list!
    1
  19524. I'm not sure yet, sorry. Soon though
    1
  19525. But they won't give me the 10 pounds of gold they promised, will they? Current price of 10 gold Sovereigns is £3,328
    1
  19526. "I just don't have the magic bank numbers at the moment" You've got to look after yourself first before you can help others. I hope you're doing okay
    1
  19527. Thanks for your feedback! I was trying something new with the camera changing. I'm now thinking I'll keep it for when I'm showing stuff to the camera etc, but otherwise will stick to the one.
    1
  19528. That's a brilliant way of explaining it. Thank you!
    1
  19529. Define history.
    1
  19530. There is a quote from Kant himself saying he had to save faith. It's from the Critique: "I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge, in order to make room for faith." - Kant I don't necessarily agree with Mises, Rothbard or Rand. I've made it clear that I have disagreements with all three. But yes, you continue to make false accusations against me, if it makes you feel good about your ignorance.
    1
  19531. Yes, Capitalism is bad, which is why we need a free market. The Capitalist British government is terrible, which is why we need to defund it by ending taxation, not give it even more power via socialist policies.
    1
  19532. I don't know exactly what my philosophy is. In the past few months I've dipped my toe into Objectivism and I'm finding myself largely in agreement, so I'm probably in that area.
    1
  19533. Is that State control, or private invitative? https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19534. You say this now, after I've just released a 5 hour video proving Hitler's Socialism and defeating the counter arguments https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19535. I'm an ex-Socialist. I know plenty about Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  19536. Keir Starmer is no different than Hitler. The Playdohs who work for the British government have a lot to answer for.
    1
  19537. Hyperinflated comes from one place and one place only - the State Central Bank
    1
  19538. Really? What's your take on it?
    1
  19539. The worst of the inflation was during the Ruhr crisis, but the inflation was already picking up before this. The Ruhr Crisis just gave the state the excuse to wipe out their domestic debts.
    1
  19540. Central Banks are not private, they're public https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19541. Or a 'Republic' like America (which is NOT a democracy: read the Constitution).
    1
  19542. Hitler's evil and his ideology is Socialism and also evil. Not sure why you think I am a "Hitler apologist", but you're wrong.
    1
  19543. Great! And so am I :)
    1
  19544. Well, I hope you fulfill that resolution :) here, I'll help. This "History" playlist has (I think) all the content you'll want to see https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledhMtb3bsJkJmtECxS_mm_QM
    1
  19545. Me too, and happy new year to you :)
    1
  19546. It's something I do want to cover. Not sure when I will, but I will
    1
  19547. "I wouldn't buy all the food in the supermarket and let everyone starve like an evil capitalist would." No the capitalist wouldn't buy all the food and let people starve. That's not what capitalists do. They're the ones owning the factories that produce the food that goes on the shelves. They want people to buy the food, so it's pointless them producing or buying it all back in the first place. "No, I'm an SJW, so I'd buy all the food and give it to the poor as a lottery win would be my greatest virtue signalling opportunity." Great. They wouldn't need to work tomorrow as you could just keep buying them food. Then they stop working so no food gets produced. Productivity stops, and everyone goes hungry. Congratulations, you've successfully socialized the economy! Well done. Note that money inflation is tied to decreased production (GPD) in this socialist country - https://youtu.be/S1gUR8wM5vA
    1
  19548. "Low taxation countries usually have low living standards, not high; opposed as to what TIK claims. This can be statistically verified e.g. Western Europe having higher living standards than USA." https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/real-gdp-capita/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/per-capita-gdp.asp These were just the first few links I found. I'm sure there's a lot more. "Tax cuts usually lead to less welfare, less social benefits," Because there's less need for welfare as more people have jobs. Tax cuts lead to job growth. Increase taxes lead to job cuts. "expansive healthcare" How does tax cuts lead to expensive healthcare exacty? You're still paying for the health care, but you're being forced to do it via tax rather than wages. At the very least, it costs the same, but in reality it's a lot more. For example, I've been to the doctors twice for a checkup in the last 12 years, even though I've been forced to pay national insurance (a tax) that entire time. Please tell me how that's not expensive to me? "Too much bread is created and the people can't buy them anymore. This stalls further production boosts and leads to firing of workers." I covered this in the video. This is how more jobs are created, and how the economy expands. This is a fundamental process to a working economy. "This is why the 2008 banking crisis was possible." The 2008 banking crisis was caused by government regulations on the banking sector, as Thomas Sowell points out in his book "Housing Boom and Bust" but this video also explains it - https://youtu.be/5GoAGuTIbVY "Overproduction should really be covered by decreasing the working week, with keeping the same wage, instead of firing half the workforce." No, because then you're not growing the economy. People's living standards don't increase - you're just lowering the amount that people work. If you want to go part time, go part time. A sizeable chunk of the workforce want more pay and more hours, not less. "Production boosts haven't really gone to lowering of prices as described on your model (inflation is the norm, not deflation)." Inflation is caused by the government printing money and has nothing to do with production. And to explain why production boosts haven't lowered prices - it's because the government is encouraging many people to be on long-term government subsidized unemployment social welfare. These people are no longer working, and have no incentive to work. The government is also hiding many people from the unemployment register, such as by increasing the school age to 18. This has then prevented any growth in the economy, as those who are still working are subsidizing the increased number of those who are not. So you aren't seeing the benefits of the production boosting process because the government has made this impossible by extending the length of time people are not working. "7) Governments by themselves are not holy though. A lot of bureaucracy exists really only to distribute the shortages. You have right on one bread, you have right on two breads. Only if this and this is fulfilled, you can have a third bread. A lot of government bureaucracy should be reduced. Certain regulations should be lessened, while other regulation should be increased." No, all government regulation is terrible. What hurts the consumer is bad for the economy. Governments are bad for the consumer. If a bad capitalist makes poisoned bread, then people will stop buying his bread and he will go out of business. It's in his best interests to make quality products at affordable prices. You don't need a government to regulate this. It's a pointless cost to the taxpayer, and ultimately hurts/shrinks the economy. "8) Giving every worker the same wage (instead of along individual productivity) has unified workers in bargaining for collective wage increases. They're not as divided as when they received individual differentiating wages." Again, collective wages are pointless. Production is what matters most. And it also doesn't work the way you've imagined it to be. You see this on minimum wage - it leads to workers not working efficiently, it leads to less production, it leads to bickering and bitching between the workforce... it's just bad all around. The Owenites at New Harmony found this out the hard way back in the 1800's, as did Attlee's government in the 1940's. "Total wage increases led to increasing demand, inviting production investments." No, it leads to inflation, as Milton Friedman highlights quite effectively here https://youtu.be/6LfUyML5QVY "High wages also means it is more likely the capitalist will invest in production boosts, because the relative cost of production boosts has lowered compared to the total wage costs." Except he can't invest in production because he now has increased costs. So he will fire his workforce, much like happened in this video - “The $15 Minimum Wage Is Turning Hard Workers Into Black Market Lawbreakers” https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    1
  19549. Glad to hear it Jim. This was a necessary video because I'm going to be talking about WW2 economics like Lend Lease and the Nazi, Soviet, US and British economies in the future so I had to get some basics out the way first.
    1
  19550. Academic Agent’s “The Origins of Money” will explain all https://youtu.be/fWDn1-dyXDg And no, we don't need bureaucrats at all. Bureaucrats don't make money, or teach/train anyone.
    1
  19551. No it isn't, it's 1 pound. 10 divided by 10 is 1.
    1
  19552. Happy New Year to you too!
    1
  19553. I didn't say the USSR did nothing wrong by killing their own soldiers. I said that they didn't kill as many as claimed, and that the order was a middle-management strategy to stop the officers from fleeing. The USSR was wrong to do what it did, but I don't see the need to make up stuff in order to paint them as somehow worse than they already were.
    1
  19554. You're incorrect; the principle about production still applies, it just means you have to change the numbers. So let's do that - let's say the capitalist earns $50 and the workers earn $10, but the production is 5 each (the bread is $2, which would equal $50 profit). Then you increase the amount of money for the workers by 1 bazzilion dollars. Do their living standards go up? No, because in order to increase everyone's living standards, production would have to increase. Increasing the money supply by itself won't equal more food.
    1
  19555. He has 100 in savings for starters. But I took cost out of the equation to make it simpler. If we add cost back in, the same production principle is still the way living standards rise for all, but the numbers would change. It would make things unnecessarily complicated for zero gain as an example, which is why I cut it out of the scenario.
    1
  19556. Yes, and your standard of living would be even higher if the government wasn't consuming resources that could have gone into the production of consumer goods. Your living standards are only high due to previous years where government consumption was low. Now it is high, it's slowing growth of the economy and squeezing living standards.
    1
  19557. Thanks Julius! Happy New Year!
    1
  19558. Milton Friedman explains monopolies and how to deal with them https://youtu.be/tdLBzfFGFQU
    1
  19559. Yes, that's probably a better way of putting it
    1
  19560. "TIK, we get it, you're a liberal, you made that clear with your "Nazis were socialist" videos, I thought you'd be done embarrassing yourself but no, you haven't learned." 28th of February 1933, the Nazis abolished private property.
    1
  19561. I was going to say!
    1
  19562. Let's take a look at this amazing USSR socialist paradise you describe https://youtu.be/t8LtQhIQ2AE Very appetising. Such a happy and healthy place. Those empty shelves and long queues make me feel so full. Yum. Give me more socialism! In the comments, a person from Russia states that the country didn't know about toilet paper until 1978-1985. He describes it as hell. Another commenter says that this was Moscow, and that this shop was "stacked". In smaller towns you wouldn't even have half of the variety. Good job you had that "amazing" health care system though. Maybe it was just a bad day. Oh wait, this other store was the same https://youtu.be/ZKVhrzhAI8I At least there's wine... And lines https://youtu.be/WH4KOOb80pQ very productive workers. Let's check out a gas station https://youtu.be/qRvpu1NUUCY Queues are very efficient socialism. But don't worry comrade, your grocery store is large and spacious https://youtu.be/CYmURKVd2so Here's a news report in the 1970s https://youtu.be/bC-AZPslWKU This is also a video which you and many socialists desperately need to watch https://youtu.be/7OQeSYgOars
    1
  19563. Now I see why there's so much starvation in Venezeula. Clearly the socialists just thought that they didn't need to work. Oops.
    1
  19564. @Николай Гончаров "@TIK "Just stop working and die!" not slaves at all!" But the same principle applies to both capitalism and socialism. Are you suggesting that socialism will end all jobs? That's insanity - we'd all starve to death since there would be no production. No, it's in our best interests to work and provide for ourselves. I don't want to live in a world where I have nothing to do. I want to work! And I don't want to be forced to work in government-owned places that don't interest me (socialism); I want to choose where I work. If I don't like my job, I can walk out and get another. That's the power of capitalism - I can choose where I spend my time and my money, and therefore I am not a slave. I have the freedom to work as much or as little as I want depending on how much I want to earn. @Alexander Grable "Fine freedom, where the proletarian has no other choice than that of either accepting the conditions which the bourgeoisie offers him, or of starving, of freezing to death, of sleeping naked among the beasts of the forests!" Again, the same applies to socialism. People have to work. There's no getting around that. Engels is essentially saying that the workers shouldn't be workers. Production will halt, which will result in starvation. Good job Engels. I can't believe that I am defending the necessesity of humans to work and create things to a bunch of socialists, who clearly don't understand the very basics of economics. 'Oh no, I'm enslaved because I have to get out of bed every day'. What a fundamentally ridiculous argument. If you don't want to work, you are not a worker.
    1
  19565. "As soon as you have some people allowed to print ex nihilo as much money as they want other people are just their slaves what ever the capital they got." Where are the slaves? If you don't want to work, just stop working. Nobody's forcing you to work.
    1
  19566. "@TIK as I said they were writing about their world and you try to apply rules written in 1867 to our world which has nothing in commun." So you're now admitting that socialism has no place in the world we are in now? Ok, I agree, because as we have found out numerous times by now it doesn't work in the real world in which we live.
    1
  19567. "Just because there is an economic plan does not mean there is Socialism." If there is a centralized economic plan, then it is socialism. 'Centralized' meaning the social-collective-public state-government, and 'plan' as in the government does the planning. That is exactly what socialism is. This is the core of the philosophy. "...had economic plans under right wing governments." If they were government economic plans, they had a centralized public-state plan. This was "socialized man" (the public, or state) "common controlled" plan. It is not private property planning the nation's plan, it was the public plan, the collective controlled socialized man's plan. That is socialism and not capitalism, and therefore (assuming capitalism is right-wing, and assuming that these plans were made and executed by the states you mentioned) those plans were not right-wing. The very definition of socialism is collective-control. That is society as a whole, which is the 'public sector' or the 'public sphere' or the government/state. "Furthermore you mistake fascist corporatism for GOSPLAN which is bizarre." GOSPLAN is a government centralised plan. The Italian Fascist-Socialists operated in similar ways to the Nationalist-Socialists, which was a top-down, state-controlled economy. Again, the corporations were commonly-controlled by the state. This is why Fascism is socialism, and why Mussolini, Hitler, and Oswald Mosely were all socialists.
    1
  19568. "you missunderstand Marx engels" Socialized man having common control. These are Engel's exact words. It's a shame that Marxists don't actually read Das Kapital properly, but it's nice to see you try and wriggle your collective-way out of this whilst failing miserably.
    1
  19569. "Ownership by members of the 'volk' is not the same as Socialism." Marx/Engels say in volume 3 of Das Kapital that socialism is - "socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature" Socialism is the "socialized man" having "common control". Socialized man could mean worker - which is why you're refering to it as - which would be Marxist Socialism. However, it could also mean woman - gender socialism. Or it could mean nationality - e.g. Italian Nationals, which would be Fascism (which is socialism). Or it is the socialized race - the racial-socialism (National Socialism). This is why the Left are all about identity politics. It's related to "socialized man", otherwise meaning "social groups". Race, nationality, gender, class... it's all the same thing - an artificial social construct for a group of people who supposedly all think and act the same way. The reality of course is that human beings don't all think and act the same way, but the point is that the Left do think in terms of racial groups, because they are racist. A "volk" is the same as socialism - it is a social group. And yes, Nationalism is anti-individual, which is why it crystalized (along with socialism) as a by-product of the French Revolution. Patriotism, which is different to nationalism, is more individual in nature, while nationalism is a "national identity" based on shared social characteristics like race. Nationalism is anti-individual and therefore a Leftist ideology, just like socialism.
    1
  19570. "as shown by Germa Bel http://www.ub.edu/graap/EHR.pdf the 're-privatisation' often selling shares to the dominant private interest group in the firm." And as also stated by her - "In addition, delivery of some public services previously produced by the public sector was transferred to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the Nazi Party." From "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany" PDF. Yes, the Nazis sold their state industries back to the state, and called it 'privatization'. And as Temin makes clear - "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591
    1
  19571. You don't need to seize anything. If you want to improve the world, this is how you start https://youtu.be/rKAAzZFLPEs
    1
  19572. "Zero cost is a common assumption in many cases. That is fine if you do not try to model the input market or the labor market, but still I am afraid your story has many other inconsistencies." You're assuming things and making wild claims that have no basis in reality. I took cost out of it just to simplify the process, but adding it back in doesn't change the principle; only the complexity. The principle about production still applies, it just means you have to change the numbers. So let's do that - let's say the capitalist earns $50 and the workers earn $10, but the production is 5 each (the bread is $2, which would equal $50 profit). Then you increase the amount of money for the workers by 1 bazzilion dollars. Do their living standards go up? No, because in order to increase everyone's living standards, production would have to increase. Increasing the money supply by itself won't equal more food.
    1
  19573. He has 100 in savings for starters. But I took cost out of the equation to make it simpler. If we add cost back in, the same production principle is still the way living standards rise for all, but the numbers would change. It would make things unnecessarily complicated for zero gain as an example, which is why I cut it out of the scenario.
    1
  19574. "However............it's a big world out there TIK and we have become accustomed to high quality work from you so we may become slightly disappointed if you don't maintain your high standards in all fields. Which is rather difficult." I dumbed this down so that the socialists could understand it. Apparently many of them still didn't... This is concerning because I'm going to be using this as a springboard to jump into the Holocaust (socialism) and other Nazi+Marxist atrocities, the Nazi socialist ideology and socialist economy, and the Soviet Union's economy (socialism), and Lend Lease supplies.
    1
  19575. The capitalist consumes, but politicians and bureaucrats who know nothing about investment. They will spend other people's money unwisely wasting it on things that people don't need.
    1
  19576. But all you've done is increase the money supply. They cannot buy anything since there's no more products in the economy. Same applies to 7 billion people on planet Earth. Increase their money by 50%, and all you do is increase the money supply. They don't receive any more goods. Living standards do not increase in this scenario. The only way to increase living standards for everyone is to increase production. That was the point of the video, but somehow you missed that.
    1
  19577. "who want a employee that sells a lot of things but manage to get rid of customers in the long run because of bad deals? no one. but he works hard, then. so in your world this type of behavior should be rewarded? no?" No, not at all. That would drive away customers, which would decrease production in the long run. Therefore this would be a bad employee. "a lot of cases called lazyness are actually rooted in bad management as the explanation are oftenly that the employees get a lot of trouble when they try to be effective." My experience as a worker who rose up the ranks in my previous job screams to me that the opposite is the case. Sure, you do have bad management, but you also have terrible laziness too. Not all workers are lazy, and I'd say most are not. But those few that are will actively try to do the least amount of work possible, to the detriment of the entire team, and their own jobs. There's only so many times you can tell someone to do the most basic elements of their job after they purposely/lazily neglect to do it over and over again. At some point the warnings aren't enough, and people get sacked. We had to sack someone because they smoked an e-cig in the building three times, despite being told on at least three seperate occasions, plus had signed the company documents stating they shouldn't smoke inside, and the fact that it is against the law here to smoke indoors. Is that bad management? Not in the slightest. If anything, we should have sacked him sooner. Yes, bad management do exist and I've been under them. The thing is, if you don't like it, the option is to get another job. Nobody's keeping you in that position. There's a door you can walk out of. And if you think you can do better, either rise up the ranks or set up your own business. “How to Start a Business for under $500” https://youtu.be/rKAAzZFLPEs
    1
  19578. Yes because electricity isn't produced or anything. Lobbyism is a government problem caused by government, not capitalism. Religion is irrelevant to economics, unless you're talking about tax havens, which is immoral. Interest was covered in the video, and is bad for everyone except the government who prints the new money. Illness is also not unique to this system.
    1
  19579. It seems people still don't understand, or can't apply this principle to the real world, because they assume it's somehow different if you have 7 billion workers instead of 10. And it's worse than that - people are disagreeing on ideological grounds, although it's super obvious that they are.
    1
  19580. Minimum wage increases are bad for workers https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ Also, if everyone's wages are low, then everyone's wages are average. Money isn't the problem, as I explained in the video. If you half the wage, the amount of products on the market doesn't decrease, and therefore all you've done is cause deflation. Might take some time to take effect, but you've not actually decreased living standards, just wages and prices. The men and women issue by Thomas Sowell https://youtu.be/QlwZCuJcbKA Milton Friedman on this issue too https://youtu.be/hsIpQ7YguGE
    1
  19581. Nice one Jamie!
    1
  19582. Except, if the capitalist pays his workers less, then he has to charge less for his products because otherwise he won't sell any and will go out of business. Minimum wage increases result in unemployment https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ and https://youtu.be/9aCpaON5NyE explain why
    1
  19583. "I don't think I've seen this much controversy in the comment section of a TIK video before, and it is on the subject of economics of all things..." Check out the comments section of my National Socialism was Socialism videos. I was told to "neck yourself" by the socialists who want to deny that the Nazi economy was nationalized (they called it 'privatization' but this is simply untrue). Also, I never said government wasn't necessary. I only said it takes away from production and potential growth of living standards.
    1
  19584. @Alienated TV. First things first, let's clarify some definitions because you've confused two socialisms together. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is not interested in classes. He's interested in races. His "social group" isn't the "working class" is the "German Aryan". Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world (yup). He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. He wants to abolish class (a Marxist or capitalist concept) and unite the German race as his community. Therefore getting rid of independent private unions and replacing them with state trade union is all that matters to qualify as socialism. Similarly, the managers of industry were enslaved by the state, as socialist writer Günter Reimann explains in "The Vampire Economy" written in 1939. The state dominated the economy, which is the very definition of socialism (at least, the pre-1956 definition of socialism).
    1
  19585. @Alienated TV. Thank you, I have already read that study, and it misses the mark big time. Please note that the Nazis abolished private property on the 28th of February 1933 as part of the Reichstag Fire Decree. The 'privatization' that took place was a slight of hand. The reality was that by 1935, the Nazis had infiltrated the industries and had nationalized them from the inside in all but name. Wage controls, price controls, limits on trade, government quotas, state-trade union... it was social ownership of the means of production all the way. I will quote the best part of that study though - "In addition, delivery of some public services previously produced by the public sector was transferred to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the Nazi Party." P23 Yeah, no, the Nazi Party by that point (mid-1930's) was the state. It wasn't the private sector at all.
    1
  19586. "Building Regulations" did, but not "Planning Permission". Planning Permission is a different thing altogether.
    1
  19587. Haha glad to hear it! It seems that people either loved it or hated it :)
    1
  19588. Thank you sir!
    1
  19589. I have read lots of different views, and used to hold them myself. Unfortunately I place my faith in the scientific method above all else, which is why facts and evidence - not beliefs and emotions - are what drive me to the conclusion that to help everyone you have to raise living standards through trade, investments and technological advances, not lower them by robbing Peter to pay Paul.
    1
  19590. If you want healthcare, go ahead and pay for it. I've been taxed (sorry I've "paid" "national insurance") consistently for 12 years and been to the doctors 2-3 times. Tell me again how this is "free" or "fair"? And if I need to drive on roads, guess what, I can pay for that too. Or at least I could if the government hadn't already taken it from me. My taxes are going on the trains. Why? I don't use trains. In fact, train users are decreasing year on year. Complete waste of money. Research can be done by private people too. You're reading the words of someone who researches and then makes videos for a living, and I do it through viewer donations, not through force. The government doesn't need to invest in the economy at all. That's the point. Look at how much governments around the world screw up! Check out the video links in the description for examples of government stupidity.
    1
  19591. "Yeah? Check out housing, roads, utilities, clinics, grocers etc. in places without bureaucratic codes and regulations." https://pin.it/eqyw2v2bgybb6y "Good government. We should try it." Feel free, just don't do it anywhere near me.
    1
  19592. That, plus some people don't like me covering non-history topics (even though I've not done this randomly... There's method in my madness)
    1
  19593. Thank you sir! Very good and valid points. I will link to your video in the description too
    1
  19594. And yet, if you read the comments, a lot don't think socialism brings about misery. They refuse to accept the numerous examples where socialism killed production and lowered living standards.
    1
  19595. Check out my Nationalsocialism was Socialism videos if you think this comment section is bad https://youtu.be/dlXqFgqOviw
    1
  19596. @Hereward The Wake - won't someone think of the children - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg_UuhHDcGI @hijskraan - the socialists claimed the same thing here, but it doesn't make sense under scruitiny. As shown above, living standards were growing. Also, why would you move to the cities if it was so much worse to live there? There must be a reason why? Otherwise, just stay on the farms! And why would factory owners purposely build factories that collapse? That would be extremely expensive for them, so their incentive is for the factories to stand. We still have factories standing in Britain that were made in that era, although they're mostly abandoned or museums now.
    1
  19597. I don't? Who does own them then?
    1
  19598. Can confirm, analytics are proving that to be 100% the case.
    1
  19599. He has 100 in savings for starters. But I took cost out of the equation to make it simpler. If we add cost back in, the same production principle is still the way living standards rise for all, but the numbers would change. It would make things unnecessarily complicated for zero gain as an example, which is why I cut it out of the scenario.
    1
  19600. Hahaha they're already here
    1
  19601. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it. Labour laws, regulations, high taxes, wage controls (e.g. 'minimum wage'), price controls, government intervention in the economy, state run or state funded businesses - are all socialisms, as they fall under the definition that the state owns or controls the means of production. State armies, state police and judicial services don't necessarily count as socialism since they're not a means of production. However, a National Health Service, or nationalised fire service, a state postal service, or a state education system are all forms of socialism, since these are parts of the economy funded by taxation. I'm not saying whether they should or should not be funded by the state, but that if they are, they're socialisms. If you doubt this, then ask yourself how exactly they are capitalism - private ownership of the means of production?
    1
  19602. The Many Definitions of Socialism “When a population collectively owns and controls the means of production, and distributes the end result proportionally. In practice however, control is usually delegated to the state...” by NowThisWorld https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBYmeLBWjeI “Socialism can be defined as "a system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control." In other words, it's a state-controlled economy in which the state controls the means of production: factories, offices, resources, and firms. There are also forms of socialism in which the means of production are controlled and owned by workers.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/whats-difference-between-socialism-democratic-socialism-new-york-democratic-primary-a8425416.html Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need”https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.”http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.“This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.“This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.“The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement”https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354”
    1
  19603. @DorianD Swooty - No, "State Capitalism" is an oxymoron and made up term by the Left that doesn't exist. Socialism is the social (community, public) state ownership of the means of production. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. If you have the state owning or controling the businesses, then you have socialism. "When the government controls all the business, that is state-capitalism. You plank." - DorianD Swooty
    1
  19604. @Standardowy Login - I want to cover the great recession, and more. The thing is, I needed to get some pretty basic elements out the way in this video, otherwise people will disagree instantly without understanding the basics. At the very least, I can point them to previous videos like this one where I explain the concepts. Same with my upcoming "history" video, talking about history theory.
    1
  19605. I shouldn't have to make any more purely economics videos now. This was necessary though for what's to come. Happy New Year to you too!
    1
  19606. I highly doubt that https://youtu.be/ACXTTfE4GxM Also https://youtu.be/Jt6HU24Brh4 Socialism and a higher minimum wage is actually worse for workers who are the least skilled https://youtu.be/Ct1Moeaa-W8
    1
  19607. Well, your friend doesn't have to work that job. If he doesn't like it, he could get another job. Nobody's forcing him to work there. And again, there must be a reason why construction workers decide to work in a dangerous job. They don't have to work in construction. And yes, people need to produce things. If people didn't work nothing would get produced and we'd all starve, no matter how much money was printed. This was exactly my point in the video. Socialism doesn't eliminate the need to work. All it does is place people into industries they don't need to work in, to produce things they don't need, in order to earn money they cannot spend, which decreases their living standards dramatically https://youtu.be/S1gUR8wM5vA Note in that video - money goes up, and production goes down.
    1
  19608. Also, safety regulations? An employer doesn't want to waste time hiring and training a new employee - they want to retain employees and keep them happy. The safety of the employee is paramount. But if the employee doesn't feel safe at work, they can leave.
    1
  19609. The only thing holding them back is their own mentality and incentives. It has nothing to do with the time period, or the money situation. There are numerous unskilled jobs out there and people don't want them because they know the government can give them free money at the expense of the taxpayer. People would come to us because the Job Centre had forced them to apply for jobs, and once we hired them they wouldn't turn up the day after. They'd fulfilled their obligation to the Job Centre and could just carry on claiming money. Pointless. Capitalism was what abolished slavery. It turns out that giving people the right to have private property prevents them from becoming slaves. Private property is the only thing that stops a government from taking control, which is why abolishing private property is the first thing socialist states do. Private property is the antithesis of public state property. If you want slavery, abolish private property and you can have all the slavery you want (Gulags and concentration camps). And again, capitalism doesn't force anyone to work. You have the choice not to turn up to your job. If you don't want to work, just stop working. Simple. Nobody's forcing you to work.
    1
  19610. "This is only a valid argument if the government were somehow totally unaccountable to the people. If they fuck up enough, they get booted out of office. Hence the incetive to not fuck up." "You focus on the government it self, and the fact that it was "a government", completely ignore the fact that it was not accountable to the people who's money it was spending, AND the fact that it was the capitalists who put that government in power in the first place. Nothing wrong with that. No siree. Nope." The government isn't accountable for people's money. This happens all the time in even Western "democracies" (they're actually republics). So this is exactly my point - government ownership of the means of production is wrong, immoral and leads to economic instability and decay. "You literally can't increase your IQ, it's genetic." Oh I'm sorry if you can't increase your own intelligence, but everyone else can https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/intelligence
    1
  19611. Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. SOURCES (Some are general economics texts) -Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015.Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016.Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962)Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009.Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press,  1979. (originally published 1946)Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017.Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001.Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003.Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  19612. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591
    1
  19613. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses - namely the Jews. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners.
    1
  19614. "The entire point of the argument is that people CAN'T be consumers/buyers if they don't have any money to spend and, therefore, aren't part of the market and have their needs ignored." Yes, which is why the recently unemployed have an incentive to find a new job under this system. They will barter their time and skill for money, get hired, and then will be able to trade their earned money for goods and services. This is called an economy.
    1
  19615. "The problem is that, under a pure market mechanism, there is no incentive to use it in order to meet the needs of large swathes of the population" Your entire argument is built on this faulty premise. In fact, you fail to understand that a 'market' is a buyer and seller. It is the population itself. They are the very people who are getting their needs met by the market - themselves. So of course there is incentive - it's called the consumer. A consumer only buys what they want or need, and doesn't not buy what they don't want or need. The consumer makes the choice, which means that the large swathe of the population are making the choice, since everyone is a consumer. What you're proposing is a system whereby the government (a monopoly) takes control of the economy (socialism) and forcefully takes money off people so they can create things that the consumer doesn't want. If the consumer wants to buy food for their children, tough luck because the socialist government has taken your money and spent it on an inefficient and failing project like a giant peanut farm in Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanganyika_groundnut_scheme A government monopoly is exactly what leads to things like Gulags and gas chambers, because these were created by governments. Consumers do not want gas chambers, which is why none are built in capitalist countries. "No TIK, unemployment is NOT necessary. Yes, it is bad to have people artificially stuck in a non-gainful form of employment, but it is ALSO bad to have workers wanting to work but being unable to." But they would be able to do so if you let the market decide where to spend its wealth. The only artificial form of employment is when the government intervenes and forces workers to work jobs that nobody needs them to work - such as stood beside roads, drinking tea and pretending to "maintain" the roads. That's not efficient. An independent private firm would want the work done as quickly and efficiently as possible to lower costs. Government is not interested in that because government can always just increase taxes on the poor later. Having those excess workers not working would save the consumer money, who would then spend the excess elsewhere, leading to job creation, which would then solve the unemployment problem. Placing a barrier between that - like paying people not to work so that they have no incentive to work - is a terrible strategy for improving living standards as there is a wide section of the economy which is not being productive, whilst draining the rest of the productive workers in the economy. "The problem is that it's not at all self-evident that the increase in buying power resulting from the fall in the price of stuff A will outweigh the fall in buying power that results from the unemployment generated by the automation/streamlining/layoffs of industry A" Then you need to study some basic economics. Here's a book you should read - Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson". "What's worse is that some people simply don't have the IQ to acquire these new skills, regardless of the amount of money you throw at them." Then don't throw other people's money at them. Make them want to increase their IQ, skills, and opportunities. Give them an incentive to actually work hard. Give them a purpose in life. That's what a productive economy does. "And that's just a fraction of the reason why there is a massive need for government intervention. There's environment, consumer protection, safety standards etc." Yes, because it's in my best interest as a business owner to pollute the water I drink, annoy all my customers so I have none and go out of business, and to kill my own workers (you know, because it's not a cost or anything to hire and train them).
    1
  19616. But they are disputing it. Have you not read the comments? And I explained why unemployment was necessary in the video. Preventing unemployment from happening is preventing the economy from growing, because those unemployed can then get jobs in the new businesses set up by the fact that the consumer has spare money due to falling prices from the increased production.
    1
  19617. "By way of contrast it's very difficult to find the mention of how many people died during the great depression in the U.S at that time" "Capitalism was heading towards a crisis in the 1920's and 30's which prompted Roosevelt to make The New Deal." A Great Depression caused by the US government (socialism) itself https://youtu.be/dgyQsIGLt_w Thomas Sowell also concluded the same. "@TIK Hitler's racism wasn't his socialism. Some of the Jews were owners of production but they weren't the only ones." What are you on about? Socialism is state ownership of the means of production. The socialist "enemy" of Marxism was the bourgeoisie. The socialist "enemy" of racial-socialism was the Jew. The bourgeoisie don't necessarily own the means of production, so that has nothing to do with it. They're just an evil bogeyman. "Most modern economists couldn't even predict 2008, so I think Marx can hardly be expected to predict something with so many variables as the date of the fall of a whole world system." Funny because I distinctly remember knowing in advance of the 2008 recession that there was going to be a recession, because many economists were warning about it at the time. In fact I advised some family members not to set up their business in 2008, and they ignored me and did it anyway (it didn't last very long). "What Marx was talking about is happening now, started by Thatcher and Reagan" Yes because world poverty hasn't been descreasing over the past few decades and living standards haven't risen at all (see third graph in this link https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty ). You do realise that the UK was in crisis in the 1970s? Academic Agent has done a great video on this here https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA "I meant to say the 'Wehrmacht' and said Wiemar mistakenly which is a fairly easy to figure out, so why the incredulous act?" It wasn't easy to figure out because you said that Weimar was a country, and the Wehrmacht isn't a country. "You act as if Marx was scapegoating the bosses and that they have nothing to do with a country's economic woes." I never said Marx was scapegoating the bosses? And they don't have anything to do with a country's economic woes. How can businessmen who provide jobs be bad for an economy? It doesn't make any sense Since it's clear that you're not interested in listening to what I have to say, maybe you should listen to these other videos - Why Government Money Can't Fix Poverty https://youtu.be/f0JorXgqxiU Why is the Government Driving Folks off Their Land? https://youtu.be/yw3RiMdS7sE This LA Musician Built $1,200 Tiny Houses for the Homeless. Then the City Seized Them. https://youtu.be/n6h7fL22WCE The $15 Minimum Wage Is Turning Hard Workers Into Black Market Lawbreakers https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ Sandy Springs, Georgia: The City that Outsourced Everything https://youtu.be/f8qFvo2qJOU Elon Musk Can't Sell His Teslas in Texas https://youtu.be/noqdlCmn4h0
    1
  19618. Also I don't have a PHD in military history, so not sure where you got that idea from. I have a degree in history, but we didn't study military history at all. In fact, we studied many topics related to economics. My interest in military history is an individual choice interest, much like my interest in music, animation, economics, and computer games. Anyone can learn anything; there are no artificial limits.
    1
  19619. They're not unrelated at all. The reason I'm doing this video is so I can then cover Lend Lease, the Holocaust and more, which I've promised. The reason Hitler lost the war was through economics, and the reason Hitler went to war was through economics. Tank production is economics. To say that military and economics are not related is just not possible. However even if they were unrelated, that doesn't mean I don't know about economics. I make my own music for my videos. Military history and music are unrelated, but that doesn't mean I can't do both.
    1
  19620. "If this along with Hitler was a socialist oh dear." 28th of February 1933 the Nazis abolished private property. The subsequent 'privatizations' was a slight of hand, and masked the reality that the Nazis nationalized the industries and had total control and ownership of the industries, the railroads, the workers battalions, the education systems, the youth, the military, the political system, the judicial system, and the wage controls and price controls. They destroyed private trade unions and replaced them with the state. They did this, not in the name of a class group, but in the name of a racial group, meaning that they weren't Marxist-Socialists, but racial-socailists. But yes, the Nazis were capitalists somehow. "@TIK so at 19 minutes in supply and demand, can you explain to me then the situation involving nurses , demand is high, 50,000 short at the last count yet wages are low." If demand his high, then their wages would be high. The reality is that demand isn't high. For example, I've paid "national insurance" (tax) for around 12 years. In that time I've been to the doctors about 2 or 3 times. Have I got my money's worth? No. Is the NHS in demand by me? No. It's a bulging oversized colossal waste of money. Now that's not so say there shouldn't be hospitals, but the way the government has made it isn't the way it should be done - The reality is that the NHS is "free", meaning people overuse and abuse the system. The underpaid nurses are now dealing with x10 more patients that they would normally deal with simply because the people get a cold and end up at hospital. Except of course it's not actually "free" to me because I work. It's only "free" to those who don't work; who don't contribute to society. Every worker is effectively subsidizing everyone who doesn't work - as I described in the video. Worse, because it's run by the government, most of my money has been wasted on government officials, administrators, bureaucrats and politicians. It hasn't gone to the nurses directly without passing through the money filter that is the government. If I paid the nurses directly, they'd get 100% of the money, but I'm not allowed to do that as the government has forcefully taken the money I would or could have allocated to pay for the nurses directly. Plus, I haven't needed to go to the doctors so often, so my demand for nurses or healthcare is low. Therefore the amount of nurses needed is also low. This is why the NHS is failing - it's a bureaucracy, not a health care system. There is zero need for it to be the size that it is. But the government has made it way too big, and "free" to the point that people abuse it when they don't need to. This is why wages for nurses are low - they're not actually in much demand. You could shrink the size of the NHS and pay the staff that remain more. This is basic supply and demand. "At best a system for the benefit of a few and the detriment of the many" Yes, that's what socialism does. Socialism benefits the government and anyone who doesn't work. Those that do work are massively worse off as a result of the restriction and constraint on living standards. This is seen historically in countries like Cambodia, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, North Korea, Tanzania, Venezuela etc. Here's a video on Socialist Venezuela https://youtu.be/S1gUR8wM5vA Note the inflation rate rising and the productivity rate falling, further supporting the conclusions made in my video.
    1
  19621. "Nearly 29% of folks see this as the croc of shit that is is." For starters, a third of my viewers are pro-Soviet, or pro-Nazi, simply because of the type of content I'm producing. And a portion do not want me to produce non-WW2 (or even non-Eastern Front) content. So that explains the vast majority of the dislikes. And besides, a consensus does not mean anything. The world is not flat even if the majority of people think it is. "Spare us, and yourself stick to history dude." This is history. History is anything that has been recorded. Economics and military history go hand in hand. For example, Lend Lease.
    1
  19622. People will no doubt complain about this. They complained when I didn't convert stones into kgs, so they'll definitely complain about this
    1
  19623. You can't have people or battles without economics.
    1
  19624. Enjoy https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19625. Welcome to the Halder Hate Hour, hosted by TIK...
    1
  19626. Yes, please see this follow up video https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19627. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  19628. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It's probably a mistranslation (but not my error!)
    1
  19629. It is indeed :)
    1
  19630. It became important, but it wasn't important at the beginning of Fall Blau. The Germans could have taken the Volga further south/east and stopped the river traffic from there
    1
  19631. Glad to hear you caught up! Not particularly proud of the Spain video (well, the WW2 part was fine, although a lot of complaints about my take on the Spanish Civil War). Have fun at work!
    1
  19632. Same!
    1
  19633. See this video https://youtu.be/pzoL24dqWaU about halfway through it, you'll see that I use Blender 3D software to animate the maps. It's free online and on Steam. Here in this video though, I was using just Premiere Pro.
    1
  19634. Yes https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19635. Yeah, I've decided that the history comes first. I'm clearly not promoting Nazism or any other totalitarian ideology, and the use of the Swastika is purely for historical-accuracy purposes. If the YouTube bots/employees have a problem with that, they can demonetize the videos to their hearts' content. I'd rather take the minor financial loss and continue to produce top-quality videos, than sacrifice historical accuracy to pander to a corporation that doesn't have viewers or creators best interests at heart
    1
  19636. Relevant https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19637. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It's probably a mistranslation (but not my error!)
    1
  19638. See my latest video, I explain why I said "Chuikov" wrong, plus people are helping me out https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19639. But what about your mind?
    1
  19640. I'm really happy with the maps too. First time I've got people to help me with the videos, and for the map, it was money well spent!
    1
  19641. Yeah, I wouldn't recommend waiting this time round. As you'll see at the end of the video, we're already at battalion level in detail (like in Crusader) and we've got 7 months of battle to go (unlike Crusader's 60 days). We've got a long way to go!
    1
  19642. See the pinned comment - and the responses to it. We're trying to figure it out
    1
  19643. Well, I'm glad you liked it and decided to comment saying so. I'm working hard to get the next one out for next Monday so I hope you enjoy that one too. Cheers!
    1
  19644. As far as I'm aware, there wasn't any Waffen-SS units at Stalingrad (Manstein's counterattack contained some, but 6th Army and 4th Panzer Army didn't have any). There were Soviet-peoples fighting with the Germans though - e.g. Hiwis and some that took part in the actual fighting - so it could be possible. Don't think they were SS though
    1
  19645. I talk about this here https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19646. Yes, see the pinned comment :)
    1
  19647. Yes they did. 103rd Panzer Battalion had 8 Panzer IV longs in June 1942, and this decreased to 4 by the 21st of July 1942, according to Jason D. Mark's "Panzer Krieg" v1 Appendix 1 - himself using sources "T314, 716, p.102" and "T312, 1685, p.95". Similar numbers for 129th and 160th Panzer Battalions too. He also provides photos of the units at the time and they clearly have long barrels.
    1
  19648. See the follow up video :) https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19649. Yes, yes it is :)
    1
  19650. I've just watched part of the first one. Not bad graphics, and not a bad effort for an overview, but not a very accurate documentary. The front lines for the battles on the Don bend are basically fiction. As bit one example, at 17:32, they even say in August 14th Panzer Corps was commanded by Hube, not Wietersheim. Hube would not take command of the corps until September. Second one looks a lot better - it mentions elements of 24th Panzer Division fighting in the city, and also goes down to battalion level. Very good effort. Thank you for the links!
    1
  19651. Not sure on the number of episodes, so I'm going to say "a lot". It will be much longer than Battlestorm Crusader was, that's for certain
    1
  19652. I talk about this here https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19653. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It was probably a mistranslation from the German (not my error though!)
    1
  19654. I probably should. I've heard the OOB has been updated. Not sure if that's true though
    1
  19655. The film was, but the book was an actual history book
    1
  19656. Not citing myself as such, but linking to those videos for viewers who want more information about those particular topics because I cover them in more detail there than I can here. And why not cite Enemy at the Gates?
    1
  19657. Speaking of October/November, you just reminded me of the fact that the October Revolution actually happened in November. Did a video about it years ago (in 2014, a video that still only has 231 views lol) https://youtu.be/4ajIw5DQPjU
    1
  19658. Yes I discussed this high temperature in another video https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  19659. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath
    1
  19660. Have you seen my Battlestorm Operation Biting (Brunival Raid) video? The battlefield looks almost the same today on Google maps, and the roads have been renamed "John Frost Road" etc. Quite hard to find the exact places though because the farm names have either changed or have evolved to mean different places. Think I got it right though in the video, but still not sure
    1
  19661. And this is the point I brought up in my "Why Hitler HAD to go to War" video. His own ideology and policies caused the food and oil crisis which then forced him to go to war which he then lost.
    1
  19662. I haven't had time to pick up the new CC, but I do intend to at some point. I've watched a couple of videos about it and it looks like they've done a good job of it!
    1
  19663. It's about time!
    1
  19664. You're welcome! And I hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  19665. There's 3 episodes Season 1 :)
    1
  19666. Yes, see the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It was probably a mistranslation from the German
    1
  19667. I'm not sure how you can say that. In this video I'm proving my other videos correct, yet you're praising it. Very strange.
    1
  19668. Have you seen my Public vs Private video? You really should.
    1
  19669. You helped make this! I should be telling you "great job!" :)
    1
  19670. Wow, you're a TIK veteran! Have you played Close Combat the Bloody First? I haven't played it yet
    1
  19671. I double checked in case I got it wrong. But it comes from Beevor, Stalingrad P87. Definitely says 53 degrees in the sun. Beevor is quoting from Helmuth Groscurth who was XI Army Corps' chief of staff. Could still be a wrong recorded temperature though, or Beevor may have got the numbers wrong (e.g. 35 degrees or something). But the mistake isn't mine at least
    1
  19672. Hey Paj! Not sure about an entire playthrough, but I do plan on picking it up at some point and maybe doing a review or "First Impressions" video. Sadly I'm not going to get the time to do that until after Stalingrad Season 1 at the earliest because I'm working 70+ hours a week on this project and struggling to get it edited and released on time as it is, despite the fact it's a bi-weekly series. How's the CC community taking the release of the Bloody First? Have you played it?
    1
  19673. It does affect it, so if you can't watch it straight away, putting it on silent would probably help. Thanks!
    1
  19674. See the pinned comment and the discussion underneath. It was probably a mistranslation (not my error though!)
    1
  19675. Thank you! :)
    1
  19676. It's going to get more books added to it too as this series goes on. Alexey Isaev's "Stalingrad: City on Fire" book comes out in November, which I've already pre-ordered. (Hoping he's got a better editor this time, his Dubno book was poorly translated from the Russian)
    1
  19677. Yes, I started research for it in 2017!?!
    1
  19678. Thanks Mike!
    1
  19679. I have no idea when this series will end, or how long it will be, so waiting for this to end isn't recommended
    1
  19680. Excellent! Thank you for the recommendation
    1
  19681. I don't know, they're all on different topics and they don't really go together
    1
  19682. You're welcome! Thank you for watching!
    1
  19683. Glad you like them! I'm really pleased with the map too, and it was definitely money well spent to get Terri (the graphic designer) to make it. She's making the Stalingrad city map right now too, so hopefully that'll be good as well :)
    1
  19684. I thought that, but the sources definitely left it out too, so I kept it as it is
    1
  19685. Soviet Tank Corps were division-level units not corps-level units, but were called "corps"
    1
  19686. Soviet Tank Corps where division-level units, not corps-level units, but they were called "corps" just to be awkward. The Tank Corps were the same tier as Soviet Rifle Divisions, and are the correct size and have the correct "XX" at the top of the unit to indicate that
    1
  19687. Yes, I have tried to do that more. However it takes forever to edit that slide, which is why I didn't always do it, because I run out of time :)
    1
  19688. I was tempted to put in the general's ranks while making these videos. However, I couldn't confirm all of them, so decided not to do it. But if you look them up, you'll find that many of the generals have ranks that don't correspond to their units. There's Major Generals leading corps tier units, and Lieutenant Generals leading divisions (and I think, even brigades). The command structure on the Soviet side was a complete mess at this point.
    1
  19689. @slovene ball - Season 2 should end mid-way though August (although I've got to finish the script yet), and the Axis entered the city of Stalingrad in late August, so yes I think we'll be entering the city during Season 3.
    1
  19690. The worst part is that many of the pound sterling notes have been converted into plastic, so it's going to be harder to start the fire in the first place. That's part of the reason I converted some of my plastic into metal. Those who do not learn from history...
    1
  19691. Haha you might enjoy tomorrow's video :)
    1
  19692. Soviet tank corps were division-tier units. Yes, it's a little confusing, but the way I've displayed them is correct.
    1
  19693. It was originally meant to have been a trilogy... but when they started writing book 3, they realized they'd underestimated the scale of the battle, so it ended up being a 2 part book 3, and then the appendix for book 3 parts 1 and 2... so yes, a 5 book trilogy ;)
    1
  19694. As explained in the video, Hitler was anti-bourgeois. And as I also said in the video, if you're not sure on the historical definitions of Socialism and Capitalism check out my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19695. The people in charge of Corporations (giant monopoly hierarchies of society) are not classed as "Capitalists". Yet, DemocraticSocialisr01 thinks that giant monopoly hierarchies of society are individuals (private), and thus Capitalist. It's a ridiculous argument. Syndicates/Corporations are a Socialist concept, which is why you have "anarcho-Syndicalism".
    1
  19696. Exactly! So they're not Right-wing or Marxists. They're simply Socialists, and called themselves Fascists.
    1
  19697. Also, covered this in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19698. Corporations are Socialist. Corporate means corpse, body, as in 'body of the people' or 'Public' or 'Society'. Corporations are hierarchies of society consisting of thousands of people who are collectively owned by their shareholders. They are not individuals (Private) and therefore are not Capitalist (private individual control of the means of production).
    1
  19699. Taelor, you sound a lot like me back in the day. You're a classic liberal at heart who's fallen for the empty promises of the Left. I'd highly recommend you check out Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson and the books of Thomas Sowell. No math required to read them either, they're much like this video - an explanation using straight forward language
    1
  19700. Capitalism exists, but the State is not capitalist. Thus, there can be no Capitalist nations or countries. Capitalism exists in their economies, but the States of those countries are NOT Capitalist, since Capitalism is inherently non-State and non-Corporation
    1
  19701. As I said in the video, if you don't believe the actual definitions, watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19702. Right https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19703. I explained this in the Public Vs Private video. Anarcho (non-Society, Private) Syndicalism (Society, Public) is an oxymoron https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19704. "You were not quoting from anyone, you giving your stupid interpretation....which ended up being antisemitic." No, I was framing it the way that the National Socialists see it. They believed that the factories were owned by Jews. That does not mean that I hold that view. Again, you have failed to distinguish that explaining what Hitler's ideology is all about doesn't mean that I believe in it. It's no wonder you're coming to such blatantly ridiculous conclusions if you don't have the communication skills to understand this. - "Incorrect, Mises said the fascists had saved European civilization from Bolshevism. Read the quote in full." I have. The full quote is literally him saying that the Fascists believed they were saving Europe. And the book is literally him in praise of 'Liberalism' which is opposed to Fascism, and Fascism is opposed to Liberalism, which you would know if you understood basic political theory. Again, you're failing to distinguish this because you lack basic communication skills. - "Mises was a member of the fascist fatherland front and said fascism had saved civilization...those are the facts." This has got to be in the Top 10 most ridiculous sentences I've ever read. For starters, I've already explained why he didn't say Fascism saved civilization. But, if you don't believe me, perhaps you'll believe others explaining this - "It should also be made clear that the passage quoted from Mises occurs in the context of an ATTACK on fascism. Mises criticized and rejected fascism for its illiberal and interventionist economic program, its foreign policy based on force, which "cannot fail to give rise to an endless series of wars," and, most fundamentally, its "complete faith in the decisive power of violence" instead of rational argument to gain ultimate victory." - https://mises.org/library/mises-fascism-democracy-and-other-questions And here's another quote from Mises himself - "My activity from 1918 to 1934 can be divided into four parts: Prevention of Bolshevist Takeover. Halting the Inflation. Avoidance of Banking Crisis. Struggle Against Takeover by Germany." - Mises's Notes and Recollections https://mises.org/library/meaning-mises-papers He was an economic advisor trying to persuade the guy in charge - Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss - that Facsist/socialist policies were ridiculous. It was in 1934 that Mises was forced to flee as Dollfuss was assassinated by the German Nazis. And, by his own words, he was trying to stop both the Marxists AND the National Socialists of Germany. But also The Fatherland Front in Austria was opposed to capitalism and liberalism. Mises was a capitalist and a liberal, and was Jewish. Mises was arguing with Dollfuss against his policies. - "Using your logic, comparing Marxists to fascists is accusing Werner Scholem(a Jewish communist who was murdered in the holocaust) of "agreeing with Hitler"...which is totally bunk." No, that's exactly what you're arguing when you say that Mises was a Fascist. And again, Scholem was ethnically Jewish, not religiously Jewish. So, by being a Marxist, he was religiously anti-Semitic, just as Karl Marx was. - "Unlike Mises, his views were totally opposed to fascism....he never claimed they saved europe from civilization." Marxism is just fascism by a different name. Fascism is socialism on the national level, whereas Marxism is supposedly international. The fact that an international regime is still a nation doesn't seem to have been realized yet by many socialists. - "The Nazis also glorified the murder of Rosa Luxembourg and Eisner...guess you must be spitting on them as well." You're the one spitting on them, not me. You are the one denying the Holocaust and being anti-Semitic by denying that the Holocaust didn't happen, whilst calling for another 'Revolution/Holocaust'. - "Also, Marx's family founded the synagogue(in Trier) that was later burned by down by the Nazis....so don't start that BS with me.." Irrelevant. Marx didn't found the synagogue and was anti-Semitic. - "your historical revisionism is far more offensive to the victims of the holocausts than pointing out the fact that Mises praised fascism in the 20s." 1) Revising history is what historians do. It's literally their job, as history theory dictates https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc 2) I'm the one arguing that the Holocaust happened. You're the one denying it happened, and calling for the next one. 3) Again, Mises did NOT praise Fascism. He was attacking Fascism. - "Corporations are not socialist at all, they are capitalist entities. Just look at Amazon." Are you saying that Amazon is a private individual? Are you saying that all Corporations are private individuals?
    1
  19705. "Mises was not an atheist, just like Rothbard + Marx." Mises and Rothbard believed in Judaism. Marx did not. But this sentence of yours is contradicted by Aiden B who has just said that Marx was an atheist, which you yourself said earlier. - "And again, I have never claimed that capitalism was Jewish.....you did. You literally claimed that the Nazis rose up against the Jewish factory owners...an outrageous and antisemitic lie." I never claimed that. Me explaining that the Nazis believed themselves to be rising up against Jewish factory owners, doesn't mean that I think that. If I explained that Julius Caesar had slaves, that doesn't mean that I'm pro-slavery. If I quote from Stalin, that doesn't mean I agree with Stalin. You seem to have difficulty in distinguishing between these two stances: 1) when someone believes in what someone else thinks, or 2) when someone is quoting what someone else thinks. These are not the same thing, and this is leading you to believe that when I say "the Nazis believed this" that I must agree with the Nazis. That's not true at all. - "As for pro fascist Mises. Mises did not say "fascism had failed"..he said it "had saved European civilization" something that you cannot deny. He was speaking for himself, not fascists." No he wasn't. I've just explained this. Again, you are failing to distinguish what someone else is saying. Let me break it down for you - 1) Fascists believe that they saved European civilization. 2) Mises is telling you what the Fascists believe. So that's not Mises believing that Fascism saved European civilization. Instead, he's telling you what the Fascists themselves believe. You have failed to distinguish this from the (highly selective) quote, which is very worrying, because it's a clear that you're not understanding basic reason or logic. - "As for Mises being a victim of the holocaust, all Jews were victims of the holocaust...including many jews who had previously supported fascism(such as Ettore Ovazza)....Mises was not denounced because of his views, but because of heritage." None of that excuses your previous point. You said that Mises was a Fascist, and thus a supporter of Fascism. In reality, he was a victim of the Holocaust. Your denial of his actual beliefs (Liberalism and Capitalism) and your assertion that he believes in the opposite (Fascist Socialism) makes it seem that Mises was anti-Semitic against Jewish (including himself), and that he was praising his own persecution and that of the other Jews. This is anti-Semitism in the extreme. - "AS for your last comment about Hugenburg...ridiculous. He was a media tycoon FFS which is why your dimwitted sophistry is laughable. Do you think Murdoch is a socialist as well?" This is a dismissal of the argument, not a refutation. Corporations are Socialist. I've been over this and explained this in full in my Public vs Private video, which you should see https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19706. "LOL, both Mises and Marx were atheists who disliked religion. Marx, however, came from a long line of Rabbis...including the chief rabbi of Trier whilst it appears Mises's family had very little to do with the Jewish community in europe." No Mises practiced Judaism. But even if he didn't, he was ethnically Jewish. So your argument that I'm an anti-Semite is contradicted by the fact that I support Mises, and Rothbard, both of whom were Jewish. Also, since anti-Semites (like yourself, and your hero Karl Marx) believe that Capitalism was Jewish (which the Nazis also said by the way), then why would I be a Capitalist? If I was anti-Semitic, and believed that Capitalism was Jewish, then why would I support Capitalism. Your argument makes zero sense. - "It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aimed at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has for the moment saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history."- Mises, Liberalism(1927) This is a fantastic example of selective quoting. In context, Mises is actually saying that Fascism has failed. But, by taking out these two lines from the text, you make it sound like he's defending it. And in reality, the first line actually says that Fascism believes that it's saved European civilization - but that's Mises saying that Fascism believes that of itself, not Mises saying he agrees with that view. The second sentence is the same: Mises is saying that Fascism thinks it's won for itself a victory. Again, that's not Mises agreeing with Fascism. He's just pointing out what Fascists think. Also, what you fail to realize is that Mises was a victim of the Holocaust. When the National Socialists invaded Austria, they burned Mises's library, and he had to flee to the USA. But here, you dare to call a Jewish victim of the Holocaust a Fascist. You truly are a deluded anti-Semite. - "Also, the DVNP was headed by the arch capitalist Alfred Von Hugenburg who was also an antisemite and a future cabinet minister." He was Chairman of the Krupp Steel Corporation. A Corporation is not an individual (private), and thus not capitalism (Private control of the means of production). A Corporation is a group ('corporate' literally means 'group': 'corpse', 'body', 'body of the people', or 'Public'). And collective 'Public' group control of the means of production is Socialism. That's why Marxists call for a Corporate State (they just call it a Syndicate State instead).
    1
  19707. "The funny thing is that his hero, Von Mises, was a supporter of Fascism..." Mises was also Jewish and practiced Judaism. So, apparently I'm an anti-semite, who's hero is also Jewish? And where exactly does Mises support Fascism? In his book "Socialism", he has an entire section where he destroys the Socialisms that are Fascism and National Socialism. In fact, you hate Mises because he was Jewish, and as your hero (Karl Marx) says: “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”. So Marx says that the Jews are anti-Socialist and that's why they must be destroyed: "The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”. - "Your video implied that the German Jews were all factory owners, which is a load of antisemitic BS." This is a lie. You've literally made this up. - "You also repeat this claim in this very comment "Socialism calls for the removal of the bourgeoisie/Jews from society."- equating Jews with bourgeoisie." Karl Marx literally says this himself. I've given you the quotes. You believe this because YOU believe in Socialism. I don't believe that all Capitalists are Jewish, or that their products are "inwardly circumcised Jews" (Marx, “Das Kapital V1,” P107.) - And your quote from Engels doesn't say much. Engels himself praised Marx's 'Herr Vogt', saying it was better than the Eighteenth Brumaire https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/ni/vol10/no08/marx.htm Well, Marx's 'Herr Vogt' also includes a passage where he says the editor of the Telegraph has a Jewish nose - “The Weekly Mail maintains that although Levy really fools no one, he has changed "i" into "y", and it is true that among the 22,000 Levites whom Moses counted in the journey through the wilderness, there was not a single Levi who spelled his name with a "y". Just as Edouard Simon spares no effort to be regarded as belonging to the Romance people, so Levy is determined to be an Anglo-Saxon. Therefore, at least once a month he attacks the un-English policies of Mr. Disraeli, for Disraeli, "the Asiatic mystery", is, unlike the Telegraph, not an Anglo-Saxon by descent. But what does it profit Levy to attack Mr. D'Israeli and to change "i" into "y", when Mother Nature has inscribed his origins in the clearest possible way right in the middle of his face. The nose of the mysterious stranger of Slawkenbergius (see Tristram Shandy) who had got the finest nose from the promontory of noses was just a nine days' wonder in Strasbourg, whereas Levy's nose provides conversation throughout the year in the City of London.” - Karl Marx, Herr Vogt (1860). http://marxengels.public-archive.net/en/ME1916en.html So Engels is praising Marx's anti-Semitism, as shown above. But Engels is also doing more than that. He's saying that Karl Marx was Jewish. He's not correct. Karl Marx never practiced Judaism. He was 'ethnically' Jewish, but he wasn't Jewish in faith. Thus, this is irrelevant, since Karl Marx was religiously anti-Semitic. - "You also completely ignored the fact, in your video, that only rightwing parties adopted anti jewish provisions in the 19th + 20th centuries- see the DVNP in Germany." No they didn't. Here's my political compass https://images.app.goo.gl/oiW7t66hhsjipS8P6 Fascism/National Socialism, and the DVNP (which was nationalist, and thus collectivist) were all Left-wing parties.
    1
  19708. "Funnily enough, I have watched the video. Which is... how I know you used him. Seriously, what even is this argument?" Not true. All the anti-Semite Socialists in the comments and on Reddit were laughing at the 'fact' I've quoted from Sargon, but this was untrue. You've read them, and haven't watched the video. - "You did use Sargon. You literally just admitted this entire fallacious response was worth nothing..." I didn't "use" Sargon and I didn't "quote" Sargon. I referenced the three Socialists in his video. That's not the same thing. - "First off, even assuming that each socialist in the video disagreed on literally everything, that's still anecdotal evidence. Three people will never represent an entire ideology, and it would be silly to assume they do." See, this is what I'm talking about. I never said that. You're putting words into my mouth. To quote the typical postmodernist rhetoric, "you're building a strawman". - "Now, if you were to bring a person representative of hitler's views in there, you'd find the socialists would disagree with them far more, and have less of those common ideological foundations and agreements." Really? People calling for State control of the economy would have nothing in common with other people calling for State control of the economy? I see.
    1
  19709. Except, by Karl Marx's own definition of capitalism, we don't have capitalism and we haven't since the First World War. See the first ~10 minutes of this video for a full explanation and also quotes from Karl Marx himself (and others) on this issue https://youtu.be/YygQ0Wq0wDA
    1
  19710. Why would you take Hitler at his word in regards to private property when he abolished private property in 1933? If you watch the video, you will learn. If you don't watch the video, you will remain in ignorance.
    1
  19711. "You cannot define Hitlerism as 'nationalist' in any real sense, when he was attacking large sections of the German public." I explained this in the video. He didn't see the Jews as part of the German 'race'. I explained this in the video. For Hitler, 'nationalism' was 'race'. "He was a Racialist and Imperialist above all." Went over this in the video. "And an Austrian of course NOT a German." Technically, it's part of the 'Nordic' race, which is actually what Hitler believed he was fighting for. "And above all an ideological Elitist" So is Marxism and all forms of Socialism. It benefits the elite at the expense of the poor. "All three of these predominant ideas (with capitals) are antithetical to most conceptions of socialism." Socialism benefits the elite at the expense of the poor. "But more important is that Fascism is government/power by FORCE." Socialism says you must bow to the collective socialism, and if you don't you will be murdered or enslaved. "You can set up a quasi-capitalist economic system, but if it's done and maintained by a gun (or fear of a gun) it is NOT the thing it is pretending to be." I agree. But the State is the one with the guns. "elitist racialist imperialist pragmatist fascist." Sounds like Marxism to me. "t would be a shame if you were fooled by the cleverness of the 'National Socialist' slogan, that fooled and betrayed so many Germans and Workers." I'm an individual. I wouldn't be fooled because I'm not part of a 'race' or a 'class', since such artificial social groups don't exist.
    1
  19712. North Korea is democratic. A democracy is 'rule by the people'. Except, of course, the 'people' are the 'public' and the 'public' is the State. I explained this later in the video (showing you haven't watched it), and in even more detail this other video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And I explained how Hitler was pro-democracy in this video too https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  19713. Read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, and "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. Those three books will explain to you exactly why your entire comment is fundamentally flawed.
    1
  19714. Thanks for watching! I'm glad to hear you agree
    1
  19715. Several people seem to have done so, but I think many of my critics have not... yet
    1
  19716. "But to label people who don't agree with you as denialists is beneath you." People who deny that Hitler nationalized the industries, tried to collectivize agriculture, and centrally planned the economy, are denying history. Therefore I am correct in my assessment. And unless they can somehow prove that Hitler had no control of the economy of the Third Reich, I'm right to call them denialists.
    1
  19717. I have provided a PDF in the description
    1
  19718. Soros isn't a Capitalist, unless he operates nothing larger than a small family business. If he's in charge of a Corporate entity, then he's a Socialist. See my Public vs Private video for further explanation of what I mean https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19719. A monopoly can only be formed through the law - which is Socialism.
    1
  19720. @Rantanplan - and there you go. But there are several other people in the comments who have realised that my arguments are solid. Unfortunately they're stuck on the Labour Theory of Value part and haven't got past that yet, but I'm interested to see what they do when they get to inconvenient facts that go against their narrative. Will they dismiss my sources and evidence as usual, or will they actually use them this time
    1
  19721. @Dimbledorf - No it means I don't bow down to bad arguments. Bit like this video really. I defeated all the bad arguments that my critics came up with, and the best counter argument I get is 'stick to tanks'. Well, no.
    1
  19722. Stick to Tanks you say https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19723. "but if there's a privatization of the State owned companies as they say" There isn't - this was a false claim, as I show in the video. And all the other points they raised are tackled in this video. So yes, we can talk about socialism.
    1
  19724. "I don't think you understand what the phrase "capital supported Hitler" means..." It means the corporations (socialist syndicates) supported Hitler.
    1
  19725. By the way, Slater, Karl Marx called for TAXATION in the Communist Manifesto. So yes, capital supporting the State is Socialism. "2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax." - Karl Marx, 'Communist Manifesto', p26.
    1
  19726. Paying taxes = capitalism now? Slater Slater, you're such a troll.
    1
  19727. "TIK, bravely spoken." Who dares, wins... apparently :)
    1
  19728. Capitalism isn't an ideology. It's just what would naturally happen if there was no restrictions or state control in the economy. That's why the boom in the 1800s happened and billions were lifted out of poverty - because the shackles of ideology (socialism) came off the economy.
    1
  19729. Yes. Yes he is. What do you expect from an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19730. Socialism isn't worker control of the economy - that is Marxism. Socialism predates Marxism. Communism and Socialism are the same thing - a community is a society. Again, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19731. 107 sources, 350 direct references... But "refuted" by mike mcmike with accusations backed by nothing. Well done
    1
  19732. "You do however stumble by not adding caveats to your final statement remarking that Hitler was a socialist. It is simply to broad a term to define something, and (as I'm sure you understand) can/will be interpreted as very offensive. Being compared to a mass-murderer will do that, we already have to deal with Stalin and Mao." The reason I am an ex-Socialist is because I realized WHY Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler, and more, are all socialists. The doctrine of Socialism requires the use of FORCE to compel others to submit to the collective and work for the collective. This results in slavery, impoverishment, and death, which is why every socialist regime eventually collapses in on itself. The issue isn't the people - it's the ideology itself. It's fundamentally a justification of totalitarianism, and is good at convincing people that it is not about that at all. Now, that statement isn't designed to be 'offensive'. It's designed to make you understand. This is not an attack against socialists - it's an attack against socialism itself. You're correct that 14 year olds coming across my videos may get upset, but they'd get upset regardless of how I present this. The assumption has always been that Socialism is great and moral. It turns out that it is not. (I don't have time right now to address all your points, but I wanted to respond to this one in particular)
    1
  19733. The Nazis aren't Communists (Marxists) but they are Socialists because they called for State control of the means of production. They only painted themselves as Third Way because they didn't want to be associated with the Communists. So I think it's inaccurate to not call them Socialists, just because they were a different faction of socialism.
    1
  19734. Thinking critically is liberating! A lot of people don't seem to be able to do it :) Also, it should automatically back up to BitChute, but I don't think it has yet, and it appears that some videos don't automatically backup for some reason https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  19735. @trainbomb - I do have a history degree. But as I've said numerous times, history degrees are worthless. And yeah, seen that video. His argument is poor, he hasn't watched this video fully, and he hasn't seen my Public vs Private video for an explanation of the definitions. He also claims I'm anti-semitic whilst trying to defend the anti-Semitism of Karl Marx... What a joke of a 'rebuttal'.
    1
  19736. I'd really recommend Aly's Hitler's Beneficiary's, and Reimann's Vampire Economy. Great books. The best is Zitelmann's book, but it's almost impossible to get a hold of in English now... so unless you can read German, the other two are a good starting point
    1
  19737. This is my view https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  19738. I didn't mistate it, I just showed its very obvious flaws. If someone digs a hole and finds a box with a diamond in it (or some old gold coins, or anything), then the diamond would be valueless under the Labour Theory of Value. The theory doesn't apply to an item found on the floor, or a second hand book, or anything rare or valuable that doesn't take much time to make. It cannot explain fads (e.g. everyone wants yoyos all of a sudden, so the price of yoyos goes up in value, which the Labour Theory of Value can't explain). You even said it yourself: what makes diamonds valuable is their rarity, not the Labour that goes into making them (in fact, diamonds are not rare, but the market is cornered, limiting supply, which makes them expensive, proving that the Labour Theory of Value wrong again).
    1
  19739. I have seen it, and this video (while not directed at it specifically) does counter their arguments. And to clarify, I did not major in economics (or, in fact, military history either). I was taught a blatantly Marxist and Keynesian economic view of history during my college and degree years. And I embraced it. But I now reject that view as false due to my own private studies into Chicago and Austrian Schools of economics. There is no competition! The Austrian School is far superior to Keynesian anti-economics, and this isn't theoretical either - it makes sense when you look at the history of recessions are see how much worse recessions became from the Great Depression onwards. The reason why is because the world embraced the very economic theory that's causing them.
    1
  19740. My biggest regret with this video was not just copying in my Public vs Private video. In that video I showed the definitions as they were historically, but also explained WHY they are what they are. And as I showed at the beginning of this video, there are Socialists who agree on the definitions I use. Many simply deny it for political reasons, but their arguments quickly fall apart when challenged. My recommendation here is for you to watch my Public vs Private video. As I say, it will show you exactly why the definitions are what they are https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19741. I'm using the correct definition https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19742. Is nobody listening to you either?
    1
  19743. This video should clear things up for you https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19744. North Korea is a Democracy, since the people are the Public and the Public is the State. Democracy is State Power.
    1
  19745. Hi
    1
  19746. You guys need to watch this video. It will 100% clarify the definitions for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19747. Profit doesn't prove that the workers are or are not getting paid fairly. If McDonald's didn't make a profit, the McDonald's staff would be out of a job.
    1
  19748. No, it is. McDonald's staff don't contribute enough value to society. Thus it is an entry level job.
    1
  19749. I've covered the Ernst Röhm debate in the video (Night of the Long Knives). I also showed how Hitler didn't hate socialists, he hated Marxists (which is not the same thing, as I also explained)
    1
  19750. Yes, I did use Evans. When you watch the video fully, you will see that I address Evan's argument, and will then understand why I am standing by the argument presented.
    1
  19751. That explains why the critics refuse to consider the argument made in the video. Perhaps they fear that, if they even thought about it, they'll be carted off to Room 101.
    1
  19752. YouTube appears to be automatically deleting my responses to you... So I'm going to try mask the language a bit.
    1
  19753. "Poor Krupp, Thyssen, Messerschmitt, IG Farben, etc" None of them are capitalists. Corporations are hierarchies of society - states within states. If you'd watched the video, or my Public vs Private video, you'd know this. Nothing you said about is accurate about my argument. You don't even know what my actual argument is. How can you presume I'm wrong if you come up with a caricature of 'my argument' which isn't even an actual representation of my argument? The answer is because you have come up with a conclusion about me before you've even given me a chance, yet you're claiming I believe in things I don't. I don't think capitalism is a paradise, and I've never said that.
    1
  19754. Yes, it is serious that I used 107 sources and you're dismissing the piece and the sources rather than actually counter the argument which currently none of the Denialists can.
    1
  19755. Fascism is syndicalism (corporatism). Also, Hitler probably wouldn't have backed the Communists because (as explained in this video) he thought Communism was funded by the Capitalist Jews. However he did regret supporting Franco.
    1
  19756. "A lot of viewers were so severly fucked by the 2008 crash that they went socialists." Which is silly because the crash was caused by the Socialist Central Sanking State - which Karl Marx called for! They need to look up the Austrian Business Cycle
    1
  19757. And again, there is no "surplus" labour. Value is subjective, not based on labour, so you cannot have a "surplus" of value.
    1
  19758. I don't agree with Socialists, but that doesn't mean that I want to steal the means of production off them. If a thief steals my money, I don't steal it back, because that would be stooping down to the level of a thief.
    1
  19759. Correct. Corporations are collectively owned by their shareholders. They are not individuals, thus they are not Private, and therefore not Capitalist.
    1
  19760. The State is NOT Capitalism. Corporations are a Socialist concept, coming from the Revolutionary Syndicate movement. Learn your history.
    1
  19761. Also, as I said, if you disagree with the definitions, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19762. Marxists like Wolff use the same definition of Socialism as I do. The difference is that they mask the meaning from their audience so as to keep their totalitarian dreams alive. Also, Wolff's economics are absolutely awful.
    1
  19763. Marxism and Communism are basically the same thing. Hitler wasn't a Communist/Marxist, he was a Socialist.
    1
  19764. For the full explanation of the historical definitions, see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y I'm not willing to change the historical definitions just because people want to change them to hide the truth. At the end of the day, even if the definition has changed, the definitions I'm using were the ones used in the era in question, so the fact remains that socialism is public sector control of the means of production.
    1
  19765. I talked about Lebensraum in the video.
    1
  19766. Hitler deliberately ordered Army Group North to besiege the city and starve it. If I didn't say "denying" food to the inhabitants, then I apologize. I have "checked my facts" as I've done a video on the siege of Leningrad (sources for that video are in the pinned comment) https://youtu.be/nnyJ-qlzZGk
    1
  19767. Not sure when I'll finish Stalingrad, but aiming to get the next Stalingrad out for next Monday's video (23rd).
    1
  19768. You have no idea what Capitalism is, and you're jumping to conclusions. You state that "Capitalism without a state is a shark without water" but this is false. Capitalism is fundamentally anti-State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And as I've said, a "worker's democracy" is totalitarian Socialism (like North Korea, or China). A worker's paradise is Capitalism, since only Capitalism can meet the needs of the worker-consumers.
    1
  19769. You're looking at it.
    1
  19770. Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  19771. Relevant video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  19772. I've had Marxists claim just that. One said to me that socialism is when a worker owns his means of production. So he said I was a socialist because I own my own camera and equipment... No, one individual (a private) in control of his means of production is capitalism. But Socialists have distorted their own ideology that much they don't even know what it is they're arguing for https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19773. Sure https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19774. Yeah, try watching the actual video before commenting. I show how Tooze and Evans provide evidence of Socialism, yet conclude it's not Socialism. I also explained the Social Darwinism which you mentioned, and how they nationalized the economy. Value is subjective, and individuals can believe what they want. I'm not forcing anyone to watch or listen (you and many others being proof of that). Therefore there's no socialization of thought in this video. Finally, Fascism is also socialism, and I'm against socialism. Therefore I'm not Fascist and showing that Marxists are still spouting a false narrative of history because their ideology demands it, isn't Fascism. As I said in the video, even if I was wrong on that point, it doesn't matter because Hitler's still a socialist.
    1
  19775. Yes, r/BadHistory on Reddit is appropriately named. I've read through some of their comments and it's just a joke.
    1
  19776. Yes, I used to believe this too. Then I woke up.
    1
  19777. If most opponents of Socialist deserve to be in camps, how different are you to Hitler or Stalin? Also, there's a reason people are in opposition to Socialism - they know it only benefits the elites, not the poor https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  19778. The Nazis and Fascists are left wing. The Right stands for individual freedom, which Nazis and Fascists don't. https://images.app.goo.gl/VVvuNWDGoGmtrmQVA
    1
  19779. Stick to history, you say? https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19780. "Its hilarious isn't it? He calls us antisemites when he constantly claims that Jews=bourgeoise..which is not only extremely wrong but also extremely anti-Semitic." Historically, because of old-fashioned anti-semitism, the Jews were forced by Christians into towns (boroughs) because they weren't allowed to own land in Christian Europe. They resorted to practicing usury (charging interest on loans), which was banned by the Pope, so only they could do that. This is why they became known as the "bourgeoisie" (townsfolk who were the "money-changers", to quote Karl Marx). I've explained this and given sources regarding this here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg So me pointing out that old-fashioned anti-semitism like I'm doing, isn't anti-semitic. Denying the old fashioned anti-semitism that caused the Jews to become the bourgeoisie, and then calling for the Revolution against the bourgeiosie, is anti-semitic. Thus, it is you who is being anti-semitic, Marxist. - "I thought Slater asked for a Marx quotation, not a quotation from the youtuber "Nicolas Caous"." To quote Karl Marx from the Communist Manifesto: "We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State..." "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution." "If, in the end, the oppressed proletariat is thus driven into a revolution, then we will defend the cause of the proletariat just as well by our deeds as now by our words." "But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons – the modern working class – the proletarians." So, the modern working class has the weapons that will bring death to the bourgeoisie, and it's a battle, to forcefully overthrow the existing trembling bourgeois class, wresting from them their private property, by "deeds", not just by words. And considering that every revolution up until Hitler's revolution in 1933 had been violent, it's pretty clear what Karl Marx was on about when he called on the workers of the world to unite and rise up against the bourgeoisie in a violent revolution.
    1
  19781. "Three days, and still no answer...why? Because TIK was lying." No, it's because I've got better things to do than reply to dishonest anti-Semite Marxists. I'm only responding now because I'm collecting screenshots for my videos and noticed that my original response had been dismissed again, although it is nice to see Coad admit that Marx was an anti-Semite. You deny that historical fact, don't you DemonraticMarxist?
    1
  19782. Glad you liked it! Took me a long time and a lot of effort to get this done, but to hear people are finding it useful and informative makes it all worth it
    1
  19783. "I'm already anarchist." You believe every individual should be free from collective tyranny?
    1
  19784. "Hitler, denationalised previously state owned industries, concentrating more of the wealth and power of Nazi Germany into the hands of capitalists." Try watch the video in full before commenting. Marxist propaganda says he privatized the industries. In reality, he nationalized them. And it wasn't "capitalists" who gained power and wealth, it was the Socialists in Germany.
    1
  19785. "Nice deleting comment." I've not deleted any comments and I've been accepting all those in the spam folder. If your comment was deleted, it may have been reported by someone else. "I wanted to discover your channel but I have to say that I find myself disappointed with what I m seeing right now" If you don't like this particular video, you could just ignore it
    1
  19786. Hundreds or thousands of people are not an individual. An individual might be in charge, but that's not the point. The hierarchy itself is the public. See this video for clarification https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19787. I've explained this in-depth in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19788. Incorrect, that's the unhistorical Marxist definition of Capitalism. The actual definition in explained in depth in my Public vs Private video, which I did say to watch if you disagreed with the definitions because it would set you straight https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19789. You sound like these guys https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    1
  19790. "but at it's core socialism at it's foundation is: Anti-capitalism." Exactly, it's anti-individual. Thus it is state, as I explained https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "It's not public ownership, state ownership, or even worker ownership (it's ultimately not), it's about anti-capitalism." Capitalism is free market control. Being anti-free market means that you're pro-central economy, which requires public control and state control. So no, your argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
    1
  19791. "Any counter argument will be deleted by _ _ _" I haven't deleted a single comment, and I have no intention of doing so. I want there to be counter arguments to my argument, but so far there simply isn't any.
    1
  19792. “...the word fascio means literally bundle and had been used for a long time as an alternative to [trade] union.” - Farrel, "Mussolini: A New Life," Chapter 5.
    1
  19793. You'd have to be pretty dumb to vote for a donkey or an elephant
    1
  19794. So, you didn't watch and listen, you have failed to hear the evidence, and the only counter you have is that I supposedly don't know the difference between two words. Well, as I said in the video, I'm unconvinced by your argument. And since you've failed to convince me, this means my argument still stands. Yes, your argument does still stand too. But neither of us are now necessarily right nor wrong because we're unable to convince either of us that we're right. I guess we'll have to see if other people agree with you, or with me. Hopefully they'll actually watch the video and hear what I have to say.
    1
  19795. Yeah, they're not Socialist https://mises.org/power-market/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys
    1
  19796. Timestamps in the description. If you do skip ahead, you MUST watch section 5 before you watch section 6 onwards
    1
  19797. Nations are Societies. Ultra-nationalism is ultra-Socialism.
    1
  19798. Please learn the words that you speak https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19799. "Imagine spending this much time creating and editing a FIVE HOUR video who's entire basis is factually wrong." It's not factually wrong. "I really don't understand the motivation behind pushing lies out to the general public." Neither do I. That's why I'm trying to correct them by making people aware that National Socialism was real National Socialism.
    1
  19800. "This is just a lie. lol" The SA shopfloor militants marched into the factories and took them over from within. Professor Junkers was removed from his factory and replaced with someone loyal to the State. He was the first, but not the last. I explained this in this video. Watch it.
    1
  19801. Please watch my Public vs Private video. The State is Society - the 'elite' are the top of the hierarchy of society https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19802. Hope you enjoy it though :)
    1
  19803. Try watching the video before commenting. Your entire argument is fails spectacularly in the face of this video
    1
  19804. 1) Yes. It crushes the Marxist arguments, as you'll find out if you watch fully. 2) I answer this in the video.
    1
  19805. The script is published as a PDF in the description.
    1
  19806. Thank you, although I would still encourage you to watch it fully
    1
  19807. Yes, that's the lie. Once you realize that this is just the excuse, you can see the world for how it really is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19808. All states are Socialist. Their economies might not be, but the State's themselves are https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19809. This video will explain all https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19810. Awesome! I'll take a look
    1
  19811. Myth of the Robber Barons is a great book! Not read the other one though. Any good??
    1
  19812. "Anecdotal evidence is not evidence." It is when it confirms other evidence already presented. "She even claims that Hitler believed in equal rights for women." This is true. The National Socialist Women's League was a thing you know.
    1
  19813. I never said Socialism was when the government does stuff. Please pay attention. This video will explain exactly what I meant https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 Please follow that one up with this one, which outlines the historical definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19814. @wannabchomsky - there was a black market in Nazi Germany because the 'official' economy was Socialist.
    1
  19815. Cooperatives are States. Again, Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19816. "You think that you presented arguments in your video, but to virtually each argument there are underlying ideas and concepts that you misrepresent." Palette, as I've already told you several times, if you don't watch the video, you'll never know what my argument is. Currently nobody has been able to argue against it. Those few Marxists who did get through the video and now panicking, as their comments make clear.
    1
  19817. Alright palette - I've already beaten down your awful counter argument. So I'll take down Barry's now. "Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies." This is a myth. Even Richard Evans who thinks Hitler wasn't a socialist makes quite clear in The Coming of the Third Reich that the "wealthy industrialists" didn't support Hitler until he was practically in power. Most of Hitler's support came from the working class. "Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements," Yes, but only to get in power. Once he'd seized the reigns, he got rid of the conservative and capitalist elements (e.g. von Papen) after the Night of the Long Knives. You would have realized this if you had watched the video. "Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month." Yes, and as part of that Act, he also abolished private property. Trade Unions weren't outlawed - they had to be consolidated (nationalized) into the state trade union - the DAF. Again, I explained this in the video which you didn't watch. "and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps." Because they were his enemies. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Communist or a Marxist like these parties were. You would have realized that this argument wouldn't work, if you'd watched the video. "Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives." As I said, Hitler also arrested von Papen and killed his associates, all of which were capitalists. By the same logic that says killing a socialist makes Hitler not a socialist, then Hitler isn't a capitalist either. Also, Strasser was male, so by your logic, if Hitler kills a male he cannot be male. Again if you'd watched the video, you would have known that this argument had already been shot down by me. "Why do you assume that I haven't watched it?" Because you wouldn't have copied and posted a quote from an online source which doesn't actually stand up to any of the arguments presented in the video, and who's own arguments were completely destroyed by me in the video. Hence the title of the video "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments".
    1
  19818. Everything you said is countered in this video. Try watching the video first before commenting.
    1
  19819. "Capitalism is not "private control of the means of production" and in fact capitalism is not possible without government. Capitalists cannot be anarchists." 1) It is private (individual) control of the means of production, and I have numerous sources confirming that, as shown in the video, plus common sense. 2) Individuals can do things economically without the government, so yes they are possible without government - in fact it is the government that cannot exist without private control of the means of production, as history shows us. Every state that bans capitalism (individual ownership of private property) ends up collapsing. 3) Anarchism is anti-State. Capitalism is also anti-State. Therefore there is no contradiction. But as I showed in the video, Socialists cannot be anarchists, since Socialism is State control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19820. Private control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19821. It's 5 hours because I wanted to nail the coffin shut once and for all
    1
  19822. But it wasn't a REAL alliance or anything ;)
    1
  19823. "Communism is state control of the economy. Capitalism is private control of the economy. Socialism is a mix of the two." Socialism and Communism were/are synonyms. "Socialism doesn't mean the same thing in all contexts." This is an admission that you don't know what Socialism is. Please watch the Public vs Private video. "The European Union is also a socialist economy. That doesn't mean they can defacto drag you off to prison." Of course they can kidnap you and throw you in a cage. They're the only ones allowed to do that!
    1
  19824. "democratic socialism is not marxism" That's why Lenin joined the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party of Russia, which later split into two factions, one of which became the Bolshevik Party.
    1
  19825. I'm not sure you understood my point properly, or maybe I didn't explain it properly, because I agree with your point about the way we make exchange.
    1
  19826. Thank you! Glad you found this informative
    1
  19827. "The Nazis favored privatization and opposed socialist economics in every way they could... The Nazis despised nationalization..." JUST WATCH THE VIDEO. If you did, you'd know why your Cambridge quote doesn't make any sense and is contradicted by what actually happened. I've even provided timestamps in the description for you. "they are mad at the Nazis for being warmongering genocidal hate filled cretins." They did that for two reasons - 1) because they wanted to create socialism and needed the resources of the East to do that, as I explained in the video. And 2) because if they didn't go to war, their proto-Keynesian/limited-socialist economy would have imploded by 1940, so they needed to plunder other nations to fund their social and economic spending programs, as I explained in the video. "and the extermination of anyone deemed by the Nazis as not sufficiently German." Yes, just like Marxists exterminate anyone who isn't a worker... or even those that are. Socialism relies upon murder and theft of others. That's its core economic theory.
    1
  19828. Have you bothered watching the video? No. Do you have a counter argument? No. Are you a sore loser? Yes. Until you and your comrades bother to watch the video and realize how wrong you all are, I'll continue to rub your noses in the fact that you're currently losing this debate. Don't like it? Watch the video.
    1
  19829. Socialism requires force. If you want to stop being in the collective, sorry you're out of luck. If you want to stop handing over your wealth to someone else who provides you with nothing of value in return, sorry you're out of luck. If you're bourgeois or Jewish or Kulak or similar, socialism will steal from you, kill or enslave you. And the murderers and thieves that promote this ideology of enslavement then lie and say it isn't 'real' socialism. Who would have guessed that murderers and thieves would lie?
    1
  19830. Stealing everything off of people, giving little back in return, then claiming you're doing it to help the victim, is evil. Therefore Socialism is evil.
    1
  19831. Yes, that's a video that doesn't address anything said in this video, and many have posted the link to it already.
    1
  19832. You haven't watched the video. Everything you said was wrong and disproven in the video.
    1
  19833. They are decided by society, not by employers.
    1
  19834. Take your time :) and timestamps are in the description
    1
  19835. "TiK, this is the most important video of the recent decade on this subject." I don't know about that, but I do see this as one of my most important videos, which is why I provided a PDF version in the description. I feel like this message needs to get out there.
    1
  19836. The trade union was able to bargain. And yes, Hitler consolidated power - sorry that you would rather take a simpleminded view of the reality of what was happening at the time. And if you have an actual refutation of Mises and Hayek then please state it (backed by sources). If not, you cannot just dismiss them as you have just done. Mises and Hayek both present arguments that show Socialist economics to be deeply flawed. Is that perhaps the reason you don't like them?
    1
  19837. For years, historians have been championing the view that Hitler DIDN'T control his economy (socialism). They have unwittingly undermined their own argument for the Holocaust. Yet, when I point out this error, and show my workings out, proving that the Holocaust happened and that Hitler did indeed control his economy, and when I call out the historians who have spouted the Marxist narrative for years without one of them having decided to check it, apparently that makes me "biased". Of course I'm biased! You are too! EVERYONE IS BIASED. Learn basic history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  19838. This video shows that the National Socialists nationalized the industries and economy, nationalized the trade unions, and created a massive welfare program for the benefit of the poor. Please reserve your snarky comments until the end.
    1
  19839. Also, I mentioned the Night of the Long Knives in this video. See the timestamps in the description
    1
  19840. Covered all this in the video. Try watching it fully before attempting to counter. Also, 107 sources vs you claiming I'm making stuff up. Again, try listening and thinking first before reacting
    1
  19841. This is 5 hours, not 4. And my points here destroy the denialist counter arguments presented in that video.
    1
  19842. Socialism is theft. You must steal off others or be stolen from. I'd rather work to please others than live in a hostile environment like Socialism.
    1
  19843. Wait until he realises that Conservativism (traditional statism) used to be the old Left, and that the Right (actual capitalism and classical liberalism) isn't represented in modern political systems 😂
    1
  19844. This was actually a response video as I explained at the beginning and in another video ( https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 ). When I say "some people" etc, I'm either referring to the people who disagree with this premise.
    1
  19845. That's correct.
    1
  19846. They have lost! Most of the counter arguments they're providing have been answered in the video they haven't watched. Eventually they'll get the hint :)
    1
  19847. There are timestamps in the description :) and if this was a battle video, I would do it. However, I think splitting this up would give my critics a chance to dismiss other points I had made in other parts. So, with this video being the sensitive and controversial topic that it is, I think it's best to keep it all in one video
    1
  19848. Society = the State. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19849. @preatot - I'm not deleting comments, and there's nothing currently in the spam folder. If comments are disappearing, other people might be reporting them, but it's not me. I welcome counter-arguments, so I have no reason to delete them.
    1
  19850. @Lovecraft - I knew they wouldn't watch it, although I hoped that it would force some of them to do so, which would cause them to realise that I've actually got valid points
    1
  19851. Incorrect. Marxists everywhere, including in the comments of this video, claim that National Socialism was Fascism, and that Fascism is the final stage of Capitalism. I have several history books confirming that this is the Marxist view. Modern economies are either private or public, yes https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The definitions of Socialism and Capitalism that I'm using are the historical definitions as the linked video explains. Postmodernist-Socialists have redefined the definitions, but I'm reconfirming them because the actual definitions work perfectly, even if we have some who still insist that Socialism isn't when Society is in control.
    1
  19852. Hahaha our lord and saviour Manstein
    1
  19853. Take your time :)
    1
  19854. National Socialism is not Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  19855. Nations are Societies. Populist Ultranationalism is the same as Populist Ultrasocialism.
    1
  19856. Why? Their argument is debunked by this video
    1
  19857. That's a great attitude to have! Regardless whether you agree with me or not, I hope at the very least that you find this video useful or entertaining :) let me know!
    1
  19858. I've come to the conclusion that Socialism is a religion, and once you're under it's spell, it's hard to break out of it
    1
  19859. Capitalism is non-State. Socialists think Capitalism is when there's Corporations or Fascism, but Socialists are mistaken, as I've explained in the Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19860. "Sorry, all states. That means the United States of America has socialism?" The country may not be socialist, but the State is. They 'rationally regulate their interchange with nature, bringing it under their common control', to use Karl Marx's term. "But it is still more capitalism than socialism." The State (non-Public) economy is always Socialist. The non-State economy is always Capitalist. Therefore, the government of the United States is Socialist, but parts of the economy (e.g. the black market) may not be.
    1
  19861. "However I find your "all countries are socialists" to undermine an otherwise excellent argument." All STATES are socialist, not all countries.
    1
  19862. Also, I'm not a conservative, so don't lump me in with them. My recommendation is that you watch my Public vs Private video first, which I think will clarify everything you're concerned about https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y If you pay attention to that video, I think you'll get a lot out of it, even if you still end up disagreeing. There's a lot of stuff in there that is applicable to everyone, regardless of perspective.
    1
  19863. There are historians saying this too. Did you watch the video?
    1
  19864. Thousands of people working together in a hierarchy is not an individual 'private' person. Thousands of people are public https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19865. @Cloud Seeker - and are those 8 employees a single 'private' person/individual or a 'public' group? They're clearly a group of people organized into a hierarchy (a society). Now, it is a society designed to seek profit (as all non-socialist societies are), but it's still a 'public' entity. My Public vs Private video might clarify this for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19866. Corporations are giant hierarchies consisting of thousands of people who collectively control their means of production (e.g. shareholders). Thousands of people are not an individual (private). Thus they are not capitalist, since capitalism requires the private (individual) control of the means of production. Corporations consist of thousands of people in a hierarchy. These people are 'public' (from Latin publicum, meaning 'of the people'). The public is social, and the hierarchy of society is a state. Corporations are States (perhaps within a State, but they're still States). Society (States) controlling the means of production is Socialism. Please see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19867. It's important that you learn the words in question https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19868. Glad you liked it! I've said it before but it's worth repeating: there's a difference between 'school' and 'education' 👍
    1
  19869. Thank you! Glad you're enjoying the videos :)
    1
  19870. Exactly, it's public control, rather than private control. The "workers" are a public.
    1
  19871. @Joshua Worman - I'll be honest I don't always get a chance, but I actually set aside a couple days to reply to the counter arguments for this video... and I'm somewhat disappointed how there basically isn't any valid ones :/ if you're interested in learning more about bias and history theory, here's a video you may enjoy https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  19872. @Steinar Vilnes - every source is biased. Unless you have omnipotence or know everything, you're biased. Being biased is not a problem in itself, so long as you seek out both sides of the argument. Well, here's ReasonTV with one very compelling point of view which you'd do well to listen to.
    1
  19873. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  19874. @palette - Nothing you've argued in your posts contradicts the argument presented in the video. If you'd bothered to watch the video, you'd understand why. So instead of taking the time to write a ridiculously long and pointless "argument", spend that time listening to what I say in the video.
    1
  19875. Also, you may be interested in reading Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" as well as books by Thomas Sowell. No math involved. They're great reads
    1
  19876. "I disagree with my countries right wing party," Not sure what country you're in, but conservatives used to be the old Left wing. They're not on the Right; the mainstream political spectrum has shifted Left. In many countries (e.g. the UK), they don't actually have Right wing parties.
    1
  19877. Once the empirical fact of the definition of Socialism is confirmed as State control, your other "facts" also fail to hold up. As but one example, you say that Hitler privatized businesses. I also believed this to be the case... until I did my homework. Turns out that this is totally false, and it's Marxist propaganda. The Marxists claimed that Hitler privatized businesses in order to say he was a Capitalist, and thus bad. In reality Hitler nationalized businesses in a process they called "Synchronization". And if you do decide to watch this video, you will see that I provide plenty of evidence that supports what I'm saying. In fact, in this video I address every point you brought up in your last comment. You just need to suspend your disbelief and give this video a chance. In 5 hours you'll either accept that Hitler was a Socialist, or, assuming you still don't agree, you'll learn a lot of things you didn't know beforehand, because this video is jammed packed full of facts about the Third Reich and National Socialist ideology.
    1
  19878. Incorrect. The definition of Socialism is "Public control of the means of production". As I showed clearly in my Public vs Private video, a Public is the State. It may not be the Central State, and could be a State within a State, but it is a State nonetheless. A 'workers collective' that centrally manages its resources is a State, because it's a politically organized community. The definition of a State is a politically organized community. From the Oxford English dictionary: "state noun, a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government." This is empirically a fact. If you want more information about why these definitions are correct, backed by historical context, please watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19879. As explained in the video, Socialism hasn't changed. Modern Socialisms and old Socialisms are all the same - Public Sector (collective hierarchical) control of the means of production.
    1
  19880. As I showed in the video, a broad concensus is irrelevant when it comes to history. What matters is the evidence. The evidence supports what I'm saying, as I showed in the video. The difference between what I'm saying here, and what Irving did, is that I'm not distorting the evidence to support my conclusions. This is not an evidence issue, it's an interpretation issue. And the reason we have a bad concensus is because people don't know the meanings of Socialism (public) and Capitalism (private). Once you understand the definitions, it's impossible to say that Hitler was a Capitalist.
    1
  19881. Covered in the video you didn't watch. Hitler nationalised the unions into the state trade union, the DAF (German Labour Front).
    1
  19882. They came off the gold standard in 1914, which is why they were able to hyperinflate in 1914-1923. They weren't on the gold standard in the 1930s. Hitler started inflating as soon as he got in power, which is why he implemented price and wage controls to try and hide it.
    1
  19883. Yep, seen it. Don't agree with it.
    1
  19884. He nationalized the industries and the trade unions, created a welfare state, and tried to conquer the East to provide the 'paradise' of Socialism.
    1
  19885. I fully agree with OP, Aiden and wannabchomsky are a disgrace. I don't mind people disagreeing with me or anyone else, but there's no need to resort to abuse, harassment, lies and slander. History is about debate, and you can't have a debate with these two. Their comments are just a soup of meaningless words, senseless slogans and pointless insults. They're only here to laugh at other commenters as a way to overcome their personal inadequacies as human beings. And my agenda is to tell accurate history, rather than just make it up like the Marxist-Socialists do. YouTube may not currently be a place for academic rigor, but it could be. The comments are usually very decent in most of my videos. Thanks largely to these two thoughtless hypocrites, this comment section is a rare exception. There are no "probabilities" when it comes to history. Either an argument is right or wrong. Just because I didn't publish this in a censorship (peer review) journal doesn't mean it's more likely to be wrong. Academia is run by the State - student loans come from the State, it's regulated by the State, and the university rewards you with a State-sanctioned degree. Thus, since academics receive their money from the taxpayer, it makes sense why they'd ignore the Austrian School of Economics and just continue to brainwash people (myself included) with the pro-Socialist pro-State narrative. Academia and the Lamestream didn't predict this current recession. The Austrians did. The Lamestream can't see what's coming next. The Austrians can. Why? Because they actually understand basic economics. And it's not hard to grasp either. All you have to do is let go of the notion that "academics" from State universities are somehow smarter than everyone else. Once you realise that they hold deeply flawed beliefs and are actually in an economic bubble that will soon pop (just like all State created economic bubbles) then you can begin to take non-Statists seriously. Incidentally, I didn't invent the definitions. I went back to the original historical sources and the dictionaries and used those definitions. It's the Statists who have redefined things - because they're postmodernists. For example, they've redefined "inflation" https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA When I point out the original and historical definitions, which even the dictionaries confirm, apparently this means I'm "inventing" definitions. When Marxists do it, it's alright though. What a joke.
    1
  19886. Yes, in fact it was listening to Tom Woods that I discovered Zitlemman's book and Reimann's The Vampire Economy. I'd be interested to hear Wood's take on this
    1
  19887. "Where did all the Capital come from when all of Germany became war debt slaves from the treaty?" Germany didn't pay her Versailles payments, and actually got more money from abroad than she ever gave as reparations. This was documented at the time, and you can read about it in several books. I'll be covering this in the future. "Fascism." Fascism is a different ideology, and it's not what you think it is https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  19888. I explained Pinochet and Franco in this video (the one you're on now), and I addressed Pinochet again in the previously linked video https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 And in that other video I addressed the "redefinition" counter-argument thoroughly. I also stated clearly in this video that you need to watch the Public vs Private video which makes it extremely clear that I'm not making "broad categorizations". The definitions I'm using are not only historic, but are also correct https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Continue to ignore me all you like, but all you're doing is confirming that you're not listening to what I'm actually saying.
    1
  19889. "Glad you snapped out of the university trance like I did." I'm assuming you didn't skip to the end of the video, but I do mention this in the video :)
    1
  19890. So, is he saying that Socialism is unpopular? Lol
    1
  19891. I think he's saying I should Stick to Tanks https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19892. As soon as a nation exists, the market is no longer free https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19893. Corporations are not private. Again Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19894. Apologies for the late reply. Profit isn't "surplus" labour because (as explained in the video) "labour" isn't the value of something. For example, Monopoly-money only has value when you play the game Monopoly, but the money doesn't have value outside of it. This is because value is subjective, not based on labour.
    1
  19895. There is no "surplus" of labour.
    1
  19896. Exploitation is only possible if you religiously believe in the debunked Labour Theory of Value
    1
  19897. Yes! https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19898. Did someone say "American health care" https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  19899. Oh yes, of course! Haha
    1
  19900. Let me make it clear. An individual doesn't need another individual to tell him what to do, or have another individual steal his wealth "for his own good". Therefore, individuals can exist without a State.
    1
  19901. Yes, because private law enforcement isn't a thing, the State police aren't completely useless and expensive, and the State police service is more than 150 years old... Oh, wait.
    1
  19902. Don't feed the trolls
    1
  19903. "You are public enemy #1 over there." Which is interesting because I'm not a Wehraboo, and have plenty of videos destroying Weharbooism.
    1
  19904. Corporations are syndicates, which are States, and thus Socialist. Again, I've been over this in the Public vs Private video, which is why I said to watch that if you disagree with me on the definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19905. If you haven't read it, I'm going to recommend that you read Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics". He talks a lot about the "racism" issue, as well as other things. I think you may enjoy it. Alternatively (or preferably in addition) "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. These two books will set you straight and answer everything you've mentioned.
    1
  19906. Fascism was a different ideology. I explained that here, and I also explained it in more depth in another video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  19907. This is history https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  19908. State health care isn't 'free'. You just don't pay for it directly. But you are paying for it, and you're paying for it a lot more than you think. Two videos to get you to understand why https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  19909. Do you understand that this was not the argument presented in the video? I used 107 sources, 350 direct references and quotes, and copious amounts of scrutiny of the Lamestream narrative, and showed that the National Socialists nationalized the industries and the trade unions, and created a welfare state.
    1
  19910. A nation is a society, and society is socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19911. But the ECB, run by a convicted criminal, and working in lockstep with the Fed and the IMF, isn't evil?
    1
  19912. "every corporation, public or private, is controlled by laws, wage controls etc. By your logic that would make all corporations state controlled. If that's the case, there really is no distinction between private and public, all companies are state controlled. Do you realize the fallacy here? " Corporations aren't private. They're not individuals, they're groups. THIS is the lie that you've bought in to. Watch the Public vs Private video.
    1
  19913. I didn't say Google and Amazon are necessarily part of the central state. What I'm saying is that they are public bodies in themselves, and thus are states within themselves. There can be multiple states/societies within one society, just like there can be multiple villages within a town. Shareholders publicly own the company. It is, therefore, publicly owned. I would also argue that these corporations (corpse, organ, "organs of the state") are owned and controlled by the central state, since the central bank is directly or indirectly funding them, granting special privileges, and is controlling them through regulations, wage controls, prices controls, "laws" etc. I would highly recommend that you watch my Public vs Private video. I think it will clarify a lot of this for you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And I'm tired of being respectful when a lot of my critics haven't taken the time to either watch my videos, or understand my points. My biggest regret was not putting the Public vs Private video in this video because that would have shot down most of the remaining criticism, but I stupidly believed people would be reasonable and actually go look that up. I was wrong. In addition, if you read back your comments you'll find that you're making an emotional response to empirical data. That's why you're telling me to be more respectful, and calling me arrogant. All this is irrelevant. In fact, your entire argument is irrelevant. Let's say that you're right - let's say that socialism is great and glorious (which it isn't, but let's say it is). Fine. But Hitler's still a Socialist. Let's say that Socialism actually works, and doesn't deliberately hurt the poor and middle class for the benefit of the rich and powerful that it claims to be fighting... Fine. But Hitler's still a Socialist. Let's say that Amazon and Google are bad and evil and Capitalism is bad, even though it's the most successful economic model in human history and has pulled billions out of poverty for the first time ever... Fine. Hitler's still a Socialist. Again, you're arguing from an emotional standpoint. And I get why. When I was a Socialist, I probably would have argued the same, because I never understood why anyone would be a capitalist - I believed that all Capitalists were either secret racists or Nazis, and that capitalism was wrong and bad for the poor. I now see that I had been lied to, and that I was completely incorrect. It turns out that the reason the Left can't find Nazis to punch is because they're not looking hard enough in the mirror. I would encourage you to put your emotions to one side, and look at this more objectively. What does the evidence say? What is the definition of Socialism? (See the Public vs Private video for that) What do capitalists say about capitalism? How do they see the world? I would seriously encourage you to do your homework on these things because you're going to be shocked by the answers.
    1
  19914. Oh and Google and Amazon are public companies, not private companies.
    1
  19915. I have responded to all those points before. I'm sick of explaining the same points over and over. For example, replacing a governing party is not the same as removing the government itself. So democracy is authoritarian. That's why Hitler was pro-democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I Definitions do change because of ignorance, but that doesn't change the fundamental core of the idea of Socialism. It's still 'public' ownership, even if you change that to 'worker' or 'race' or 'gender'... all those are just 'groups:, and therefore 'publics'. And all them meant the same thing - the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y But honestly, I simply don't have time to waste answering every single message, especially when I've addressed a lot of these criticisms in other comments or other videos. Perhaps, rather than asking me the questions, you search for answers yourself. In addition to the two videos I linked too, I'd recommend three books: "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell and "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. They will get you thinking.
    1
  19916. I actually mentioned that argument in this video. See timestamps to Section 2 Part 2 in the description. I also have mentioned this in my Public vs Private video, and my more recent Hitler's Democracy video, because it's a very common denialist counter argument, hence the title of this video being what it is
    1
  19917. Once again, listen to what I'm saying https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19918. 1936 is well after the Nazis were in power, and years after those economists started writing their theories on economics. Many historians to this day call the National Socialist economy "proto-Keynesian". They beat Keynes to the punch. I forget their names off the top of my head, but I listed them in that video I linked too.
    1
  19919. "Socialism is by design for workers only LOL" Incorrect. That's only true of Marxist-Socialism. But Socialism itself pre-dates Marxism and has nothing to do with "class" or "workers". I explained this in the video you haven't watched. "The State should be beholden to the workers, the Fascists (and Communists too) reversed that as the workers are beholden to the state." The State is for the bureaucrats and politicians, and never for people who actually work. "China is State Capitalism" State (public) Capitalism (private) is an oxymoronic phrase. You cannot have Group-Individual (Public-Private). China has a Corporate (Group) State system. It doesn't have capitalism. The people are not free in China and the State exists, thus it isn't capitalism. "Now that Countries have become Corporations, the CEOs are the Masters" Correct. And I wish Socialists would stop calling for more Corporate Power (Socialism).
    1
  19920. Socialism for Workers ONLY is like Socialism for Aryans ONLY.
    1
  19921. This video shows why that one is incorrect
    1
  19922. "By the way, the Marxist definition of State is not the same as the Cambride definition of state." I know, I've quoted Marx's definition of socialism numerous times now, including in the video itself. The problem is, Marx's definition of Socialism is the same definition I'm using. The problem is that none of you know what Karl Marx actually defined Socialism as because none of you have read Marx.
    1
  19923. "It can also mean any number of people." If "private" means "any number of people" then there's no such thing as private property, since all property would be in the hands of the public. Thus, we have Socialism, which is the workers (public) in control of the means of production. Also, if "private" means "any number of people" then all the corporations are owned by the people, and thus are democratic socialist in nature. You really like painting yourself into a corner.
    1
  19924. "Then how do you explain the amount of poverty in capitalist countries..." 1) They're not capitalist. 2) The State is the one causing it. Some videos to watch and consider - https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI
    1
  19925. 1) covered Junkers in the video. 2) Covered North Korea in the video. 3) Democracy is 'People Power'. People = Public, and Public means State. Democracy is State Power. This is why the founding fathers of America created a Republic, not a Democracy, because they knew that democracy (State Power) was bad. North Korea is a democracy, because the State is in power. Democracy and Socialism are two sides of the same coin - they both mean totalitarianism.
    1
  19926. "You're a fucking idiot." "you insufferable little prick." If you do not respect and cannot cooperate in a civil conversation with a fellow human being, then this conversation is over.
    1
  19927. Your entire argument is false and undermined by the video you didn't watch. For example, they didn't ban the trade unions - they nationalized them into the DAF. If you can't be bothered watching the video, you can't complain when I dismiss your poor counterarguments as having already been defeated (hence the title of the video).
    1
  19928. "You ask for evidence/ proof: I show you it. You flee." What evidence did you show? All I see from any of your posts is false accusations, insults and bad manners. You've called us "flat earthers", "idiot troll(s)", "obvious troll(s)", you've told me to "get tested". And that's just in this comment thread. In other comment threads you've called me: "dumb" "crazy" "dellusional" "an idiot" "a loser" "a pathetic liar" "a nutter who doesn't know what he's talking about" "a clown" and "a fucking clown" and a "balding clown" "a libertarian joke who has said sub embarrassingly stupid things he only should be made fun of" "an extremist" "a libertarian extremist pushing a narrative" someone who needs "actual medical help" you've said I "don't live in reality little Tiki" You've also called me and other commenters a "kid", suggesting that you're actually an adult. Perhaps you should look yourself in the mirror and start acting like one.
    1
  19929. The burden of proof has been met. But you're ignoring the proof by refusing to watch the video
    1
  19930. @Use Bitchute - Nazi ideology is based on false premises, which they then built a logical argument from those falsehoods. This makes the whole thing logically insane. Tomorrow's video will show that as well.
    1
  19931. Yes, as Yulus said, socialists claim socialism is for the people, therefore it is democratic. Democracy has nothing to do with voting. Democracy is 'people power'. So by the Socialist logic, if the people collectively control their means of production, they're technically a democracy. Obviously that's rubbish because a collective is a state, and a state takes power off the people, which is why socialism is for the elites not the people, but hopefully you get my point
    1
  19932. @Aidan B. Politics literally means 'affairs of the polis'. Polis means city. Politics is the affairs of the city/state. A city is a society. Politics is the affairs of the society/city. (Socialism) I wish you'd just start listening to what I'm saying, and actually watch the videos you're supposedly criticizing. Again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  19933. Here's the Wikipedia entry for Rainer Zitelmann providing ISBN numbers for his books https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainer_Zitelmann Apparently the German version is called "Hitler: Selbstverständnis eines Revolutionärs". The book is hard to get hold of in English, so (unfortunately) you may have to get the German version and translate. I have been tempted to ask Zitelmann if he could do another run of his books.
    1
  19934. It is terrifying when you realise the extent of the State and the lack of control you have as a result of it encroaching upon every facet of your life. Really glad you enjoyed those videos, they're the ones I consider to be the most important on the channel
    1
  19935. I'm not a conservative, so I'm certainly not giving a conservative's appraisal of capitalism since conservatives don't like capitalism. As I have explained, back in the mid-1800s, the conservatives were the old Left-wing. It was the old-Liberal right wing that shifted radically to the Left after embracing socialism. The conservative elements are on the Left, which is why they embrace racism, just like the Marxists and the National Socialists. And I HAVE discussed Umberto Echo's Ur-Fascism as part of my video defining Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Because of his ideological agenda, Umberto got the whole thing wrong, as I explained in the video. It is absolutely not "the best academic source" on the topic. I would go so far as to say it's a complete distortion of history. The facts, as presented in my linked video, speak for themselves. The issue here is that you are assuming I'm wrong without having actually listed to me. Your eyes and ears may have been open as some of my videos on this topic played, but you weren't ready to absorb the reality of what was being said. I'm going to ask that you take what I'm saying more seriously, and that you to watch these videos properly in this order - Getting OWNED over Hitler's Socialism https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024 Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Hitler's Socialism | Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 FASCISM DEFINED | The Difference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko Suspend your disbelief and listen to the hard evidence.
    1
  19936. My audience is not "mostly conservative" - it's a mixture of all audiences, which is why the "stick to tanks" crowd exist. I've constantly made counter-arguments in the comments, and most of my videos are crafted to answer the most pressing concerns (especially those that are not Patreon questions). You're correct that I don't "discuss" topics with other people in my videos, but that's because a debate is not the same thing as a "discussion". A live-stream between two opposing sides, for example, is a "discussion" (or, more usually, an argument or confrontation) where the people with the quickest rebuttals and more impressive slogans win. This is where the "whataboutthis" crowd come to play, along with the "itsaysthisonwikipedia" crowd, who are normally the same people. A debate requires someone crafting an argument backed by evidence and solid interpretation and presenting that in the form of text, audio, or video, for others to then consider the stance and offer up another crafted argument with their evidence and interpretation. This has only occurred a handful of times (e.g. with Nigel Askey), but it does occur. My 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video, for example, was a rebuttal to people like FinnishBolshevik, many commenters, and the writers of posts on Reddit and elsewhere. Since history lies in the heart of the debate, rather than in the pointlessness of a heated exchange, I won't engage the arguments of political ideologues who's sole purpose is to win emotional leverage by accusing me of being [insert bad names here]. The few times I have done this (e.g. the "Getting OWNED over Hitler's Socialism" video) my viewers have complained that I'm doing little more than waste my time. Bottom line: this is an intellectual debate, which requires in-depth discussion and deliberation over the evidence in order to find the truth. If both parties are not honestly trying to get to the truth, or if one side wants to score social points over the other, it's no longer a debate, but a pointless confrontation.
    1
  19937. So do I TopBunk https://youtu.be/54T11d9S2qs
    1
  19938. Cheers Traub!
    1
  19939. You're correct, although people have downvoted it still.
    1
  19940. More civilians died at Stalingrad than people who were executed for cowardice in the Red Army throughout the war (if the figure of 158,000 is correct)
    1
  19941. Yes, it was a typo.
    1
  19942. I plan to at some point. Maybe not Tokyo because I'm sticking to the European Theatre.
    1
  19943. They were mostly fighting outside the city to the west. Also (off top of my head) I don't think Chuikov had arrived at that point yet.
    1
  19944. My comment - I pulled it from the official German history. Here's the quote from it - “When the city is entered the entire male population [was to be] liquidated because Stalingrad with its population of one million, all of it Communist, was particularly dangerous.” - Hitler, Situation conference on the 2nd of September 1942. “Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015.P1078-1079. One footnote says "KTB OKW ii/I. 669 (2 Sept. 1942)" was the source. The other footnote says that Halder reported the word was actually "annihilated" in another document. However, the order was weakened when given down to the Army Group, and turned into "evacuated", which is perhaps why they didn't "liquidate/annihilate" the civilians but decided to deport them.
    1
  19945. I meant that someone asked it in response to the pinned comment, and I answered it in the response to that in the pinned comment. I'll copy and paste. One second.
    1
  19946. See my answer to the same question in the pinned comment.
    1
  19947. I mistyped. It was 1941, not 1942.
    1
  19948. Glad to hear that :)
    1
  19949. But if you don't register, you could be shot.
    1
  19950. "However it does raise the issue on how beholden you are to your Patreons in what areas are okay for topics for your channel." I'm not sure that's entirely true. I took advice off several of them (some who agreed with me, and some who didn't), and their advice was that it was wise to back down for now. Plus, I was leaning in that direction too. I've decided to employ the same stance I did when I was hit by the Wehraboos.
    1
  19951. Oh, don't worry ;)
    1
  19952. I promised my Patreons I would avoid that topic for a while. I have put up new pinned comments in them though.
    1
  19953. Thanks Gregory!
    1
  19954. I may split it into parts and sending them out individually, but I will be putting it all together and releasing it as one as well. However, I can't release any until the whole thing is done.
    1
  19955. Thanks Sevenfm!
    1
  19956. Yeah, I don't know the significance of the crocodile either to be honest.
    1
  19957. It's interesting because I have quite a lot of books on Stalingrad now, yet very few mentioned the total number of civilian losses.
    1
  19958. Yes, they're the best!
    1
  19959. Glad you liked it :)
    1
  19960. I've committed to covering the Holodomor one day, and have started gathering books. But I can't comment at the moment, except to say I think it happened (since some even deny that). Priority is still the battle videos, and I've also committed to covering the Holocaust, which I have started reading about (in fact, I'm just taking a break from reading about it now). Here's a video explaining why I've committed to covering these topics https://youtu.be/cmwogdxsUbA
    1
  19961. I've got Terri helping me out with the editing, but she can't do the animations. And I'm not sure any animator could, since I often have to figure out where the front lines and units are by referring to the books, and sometimes I spot mistakes in the narrative and have to change it. Not sure your run of the mill animator would be able or willing to do that. So if I was to get an animator, they'd have to be passionate about history too, which is going to be a hard find
    1
  19962. I think you're right, but I still have this crazy idea that I should try to get through to them... I don't know why but I can't seem to shake this belief.
    1
  19963. Yeah, but this is the problem. We live in a post-evidence age, where emotions triumph over logic and reason. This is what's getting me down... It's a bigger issue than just history, but when it comes to this channel, in some ways it feels like I'm wasting my time presenting so much evidence if people are just going to dismiss it anyway. I know a sizeable number of viewers will listen, but a significant amount will also not listen, and that portion is quite large. I don't think ignoring the problem will make it go away. What I really could do with is a solution to the problem. But I haven't found one 🤔
    1
  19964. That particular video was targeted by 4chan. They weren't my regular viewers
    1
  19965. Nowhere in his comment did it say that, no. But the Soviet narrative is that, and it's quite clear that he's been taught the Soviet narrative.
    1
  19966. Congratulations!
    1
  19967. You should comment more often!
    1
  19968. I can put a card in the video, but can't add stuff to it or change the uploaded video, I have to take it down and re-upload to do that
    1
  19969. Unfortunately YouTube removed the ability to add annotations a couple years back. Only old videos still have them (I think, although they may have removed them, not sure)
    1
  19970. The guy 'divines' out of the aether that I'm an Anti-Semite. He thinks I must be, because to him, all Capitalists are Nazis.
    1
  19971. May I ask you who said that quote?
    1
  19972. :)
    1
  19973. "TIK How do you find the time??? Quite prolific 👍⚫️👍" My Patreons are allowing me to do this full-time, and the last time I had a full-day off was Wednesday the 8th of August. Before that was the 4th of August, and before that was the 4th of July. Averaging roughly 73 hours per week (including breaks, but I don't actually have enough of them). Today's going to be a 13.5 hour day. "I think simplifying language is like turning down the resolution on a camera - you lose fine detail." But sometimes you don't need high-definition. If I shouted "I have Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia!" would anyone know what that is? Surely saying what it actually was in plain language would be better? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJRJmNIV9Xk (and no, I don't have Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, I just made a video a long time ago explaining what the word was) "I can absolutely see how you're passioned about history rather than using history as tool ; you share your passionate hobby with us. And I love the feel of that!" I have a passion for learning and I'm dedicated to figuring stuff out. Want to know the truth, because what's the point otherwise? And I guess I may as well share that stuff with you lot too - would be rude not too ;) if you haven't seen it, here's a link to my Why I'm Passionate about History video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  19974. @Mako - I've replied to people, but I can't tell if I've replied specifically to you or not. If I haven't, send me a private message on Patreon and I'll respond (probably on Tuesday now as Monday's Crusader video isn't finished yet...)
    1
  19975. Mako - I will do shortly!
    1
  19976. At Benjo, oh yes I understand that. The history of those times is intresting, and I'm not against the spirit of his works. To explain myself: I'm a firm believer in using simple language to communicate to others. I don't enjoy books (even WW2 ones) if the sentences are longer than pages, and I have to get an Oxford dictionary out for every other word. I'm sure there's a name for that mentality, but George Orwell said it best in one of his books (forget which one now) where he's talking about being concise and to the point in writing is good. Shakespeare Dickens and Tolkien are my most hated literature enemies... Oh and Ben Johnson (contemporary of Shakespeare).
    1
  19977. You're welcome, glad you liked it :)
    1
  19978. "Could you adjust your visuals so they don't overlap with Subtitles?" I'll do it, but I'm not sure what it is that you're asking? Can you describe it to me? Or explain it in a different way? The subtitles should be correct, but they're not displaying correctly somehow?
    1
  19979. Haha that's a good strategy :)
    1
  19980. Time for some quick maths ;) you're taking the mean between the individual percentages. So, if it was 10% and 20%, then it would be 15%. But this is incorrect because this will lead to the incorrect percentage. What we need to do is take the total number of artillery pieces required and the total number they had and then work out the percentage from them. So 3244+1752+1483=6479 then 2053+1316+962=4331. And 4331 is 66.84% of 6479. I hope that makes sense :)
    1
  19981. If individuals are free, they're free to own property. If all land is owned by individuals (rather than the State) then degeneracy can only occur on the property owned by the degenerates. The fact that degeneracy is as prevalent as it is proves we don't have enough freedom for the individual to own property. The destruction of the free market leads to degeneracy, not the other way round.
    1
  19982. "You'll need to point to more than one Nazi to make your case." This case has been made before. I've given you a source above, and there are more too. Watch my Aryan religion video and you'll see plenty more Nazis https://youtu.be/fGUq3V8kl30
    1
  19983. So, you're an individual, not a collective. Sharing the same interests with other people is not collectivism. Collectivism is the idea that you (the individual) must destroy your Self (destroy your individuality) and be subservient to the collective at all times. Upon destroying yourself, the collective gains a spiritual consciousness (it becomes God), and gets to dictate what you can and cannot do. You cannot be both an individual and a collective. And hanging out with other people doesn't mean you, yourself, become a group. You're an individual with other individuals. You've not wiped out your own individuality to become the group, therefore you're not a group. A bunch of individuals are just a bunch of individuals, they don't morph into one body, and thus are separate. So groups do not exist, only individuals.
    1
  19984. Are you a group, or an individual? Pick one. You can't be both.
    1
  19985. I voted against Brexit, but even I have to admit that the propaganda wasn't from Nigel Farage as the lamestream media were all anti-Brexit. Had I had the chance again, I'd definitely have voted for Brexit.
    1
  19986. I've noticed that the least competent people tend to get promoted in the corporate world - it's easier to promote the lazy out of the way than it is to fire them. So long as they can walk the walk and talk the talk, then they can be moved to middle-management to be yes men. In my view, it's probably the same in the civil service and the government in general.
    1
  19987.  @WillyEckaslike  Why on earth would you recommend Suvorov? I've got an entire playlist of videos showing why his thesis was wrong https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledidXn1okJdOAlDWGuuSJxnp
    1
  19988. That's odd because in my experience people where I live have generally been favourable of Poland. The only criticism comes in the form of immigration and the "they're taking our jobs" argument, but not a hatred of Poland itself. The few Poles I've seen in the local area have all got jobs and work hard so I don't see the problem, especially when businesses are crying out for workers right now and a lot of so-called "working class" 'Brits' supposedly "can't find a job" https://www.theguardian.com/food/2022/dec/04/staff-shortages-see-uk-restaurants-struggle-to-cope-with-christmas-season
    1
  19989. I was tempted to do a video on the 'Ye' situation because I think a lot of commenters were just reacting to the controversy rather than trying to understand why Kenye had come to those conclusions. It's similar to the Whoopi Goldberg situation which I did a video on (link in case you've not seen it https://youtu.be/wBsW0XYd2Gc ) I agree that just "Googling it" isn't proper research. You can't dip your toe in the water then claim you understand how oceans work.
    1
  19990. Cheers Chris :)
    1
  19991. Surprisingly, a lot of people don't seem to know there's a difference between socialism and communism. I'm actually quite shocked by this, but then I have to remember that I studied this stuff back in college, whereas not everybody did. If I could turn back time I would have defined the concepts better... although to be fair, most of hate is from people who saw the title and didn't bother watching the video at all.
    1
  19992. Really? You like to think about Nazis in the shower?
    1
  19993. Cheers Francisco!
    1
  19994. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    1
  19995. Three socialists define socialism at 1h 35m into this debate here https://youtu.be/z6gB3gA9UZg The first socialist is Xexizy (who admits there’s all different definitions of socialism) defines socialism as 1. the abolition of production for exchange, 2. worker ownership of the means of production (democratically and collectively), 3. worker control of the state’s apparatus (media, police force). Worker’s state essentially. He lists the Paris Commune, Catalonia, German and Hungarian communes (1918-1919) as socialism. He says that the Soviet Union wasn’t socialist, but says it was a socialist-revolution. The second socialist is Badmouse who doesn’t actually define it, but doesn’t disagree with the others, and later on in his closing statement (3h 47m) does say workers control of the means of production. He says Venezuela wasn’t socialist. At around 3hs in, he does define capitalism as the private ownership of the means of production. The third socialist is Finnish Bolshevik defines socialism as (and he says the classic Marxist definition is) the collective ownership of the means of production. He lists the Soviet Union, China, Eastern European Countries, Cuba as all socialist countries (contradicting Xexizy). ‘Democratic socialism’ as defined by Bernie Sanders was “anti-individualism” - implying a ‘collective’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQs_lmpQh6Q “When a population collectively owns and controls the means of production, and distributes the end result proportionally. In practice however, control is usually delegated to the state...” by NowThisWorld https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBYmeLBWjeI
    1
  19996. “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members. “This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all. “This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses. “The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement”https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
    1
  19997. "I think your definition of "socialism" is one-dimensional and overly simplified, which does not accurately reflects the complex meaning that this term represents in 20th century politically and economically." But this is the definition. Let's see what many different sources say - “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need”https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.”http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” And what is the community? ... the state.
    1
  19998. Yes, of course the New Deal, the NHS, nationalised pensions industries and businesses, price fixing, government economic regulation, social housing and social welfare is all state ownership or control of the economy (socialism). None of that is private ownership or control of the means of production, so it isn't capitalism. And no, "state capitalism" is an oxymoron. Capitalism is about non-state control of the economy. If the state controls the economy, then that is socialism. It would be like saying "anarcho-socialism". Socialism is and requires the state, so zero-government socialism cannot exist.
    1
  19999. No it didn't. It actually confirms it's socialism. Socialism is the social ownership or control of the means of production. It has nothing to do with the workers (that's Marxism). All that matters is that the state owns or controls the economy, which it does in Nazi Germany. Plus, Hitler didn't privatize the industries - that's a distortion of history.
    1
  20000. Why is this "Red scare"? This isn't anti-socialist or anti-Marxist.
    1
  20001. Glad you think so David :)
    1
  20002. Yes it was. Follow up video with 107 sources, 350 direct references and timestamps for your convenience, showing you exactly why it was https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20003. By law it was abolished on the 28th of February 1933 in the Reichstag Fire Decree.
    1
  20004. That's a good point, I would also like to know who the first socialist official was! It could be 1905 Russia though
    1
  20005. Regardless of whether it's a hate symbol or not - not being able to show it in a historical documentary type video is the annoying part.
    1
  20006. Ah, but he didn't let them be at all. As Tooze points out in "Wages of Destruction", by 1935 (if not earlier), the bureaucracy dominated every aspect of business, and dictated their actions. It wasn't "ownership" but "control" of the means of production. And as we know from Marx, Das Kapital volume 3 - "socialized man" (the class, or race, or gender or whatever) in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Highly recommend you read "The Vampire Economy", which you can get online for free in a pdf. The author was a Marxist-Socialist in hiding in Germany in 1939, and he's description of what was happening is very revealing about just how the private companies were completely subdued by the state. In fact, private companies didn't even exist, since private property had been abolished in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933.
    1
  20007. Why? I've heard of him. What's he about?
    1
  20008. Yes, I can't keep up!
    1
  20009. There's also a difference between fascism and National Socalism. I was also tempted to draw a circle.
    1
  20010. Thanks Julius! And yes, it's a warzone in here haha
    1
  20011. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism.
    1
  20012. So what you're saying is that you didn't actually watch the video and didn't listen to what I said, nor did you contemplate the meaning of the message I provided, and then proceeded to attack the wrong parts of the argument. Ah yes, that's exactly what I've been saying all along. Rewatch both videos, spend 10 minutes actually thinking about it and what I said (pretend Hitler was a socialist and relook at the situation with the Holocaust etc) and then ask yourself, would this have been possible if the National Socialists weren't socialists? Because my view is, no it wouldn't have been possible, which is why Holocaust deniers are able to deny the existence of one of the most documented events in human history - people aren't grasping the implications of half of what National Socialism is.
    1
  20013. The funny part is, the video was aimed at both Nazis and Marxists. The Nazis were fine with it because they already knew they were socialists, so it was a failure in that regard.
    1
  20014. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. So yes, Hitler was against Marxism, but the only difference between his socialism and Marxist socialism are the victims. Rather than kill members of the bourgeoisie, Hitler killed those not deemed racially good enough. So yes, a parallel can absolutely be drawn.
    1
  20015. The question is, why are they fighting? Are they not a United front? (No because they can't even agree what socialism is.) Don't they realise that socialism is the social ownership of the means of production, which means, when the state intervened and dictates how your "private" money is spent, that's socialism. A welfare state is socialism. And you, living in Sweden with a 44% tax rate (according it wiki), are living in a mostly-socialist country. Denying that is denying the reality.
    1
  20016. You mean Halder's explanation. Halder heavily influenced Shirer's book. And https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20017. Glad you liked it Luke
    1
  20018. 1) National Socialism isn't Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko 2) see my updated video, using 107 sources, 350 direct in-video references and numerous quotes and more showing that National Socialism was Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20019. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. They're not 'compatible' or 'the same', but they are both socialist.
    1
  20020. I self-censored it because I know that YouTube would refuse to monetize the video if I used a swastika. So, I censored it, and denied them monetisation at the same time. If they don't like it, they can update their terrible community and advertiser guidelines and prevent the censorship of history channels, which they are censoring.
    1
  20021. No, socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. It has nothing to do with "democratic ownership". It is simply the government (which could be democratic, but could also not be) owning or controlling the economy. It also has nothing to do with the workers. It only involves the workers if it's Marxism. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). And according to you, neither the Soviet Union nor the National Socialist governments owned or controlled the economy. That view is absolutely incorrect. Both governments were heavily involved in the economy, which is why both had Four and Five Year Plans.
    1
  20022. Exactly, and we have cooperatives here in the UK. The point is, your definition of socialism does not include social policies or parties, mine does. Whether the Soviet Union was socialism by the Marxist standard or not, they practiced social (public - state) ownership of the means of production, so they are socialist. Britain, Austria, Germany may all be capitalist overall, but they have some socialist policies and parties. To say the Labour Party in the UK isn't socialist is ridiculous. Same applies to the National Socialist party.
    1
  20023. As opposed to your definition where there are zero socialists.
    1
  20024. "History is wrong" "Soviet socialism was indeed not socialism" Unfortunately, history bows to reality, and doesn't bow to ideology. It was socialism, and history is not wrong. History is what happened. You can't rewrite the past to suit your political beliefs, it doesn't work that way. "According to Your definition USA and GB are socialist countries, too." Britain has a National Health Service, and had (from the 40's to the 80's) a significant amount of social (public) ownership. Then there was a backlash against it, and now Britain is slowly privatizing everything. The Post Office in Britain is now a private company. But in the US the Postal Service is actually in social (public) ownership, as are many services. So, while I would not necessarily class these states as socialist now, I would say they have some socialist policies. Denying that a party (like the Labour Party) which wants to socialize the economy or society is socialist is simply denying the truth. "Just try it." Ok - "Labour will learn from these experiences and bring key utilities back into public ownership to deliver lower prices, more accountability and a more sustainable economy." and "Public ownership will benefit consumers, ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service." https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/creating-economy-works/#eighth They also want to renationalize the postal service. One of their policies is literally called "Towards a National Education Service" https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/education/#first "We will make the building of new homes, including council homes, a priority through our National Transformation Fund, as part of a joined-up industrial and skills strategy that ensures a vibrant construction sector with a skilled workforce and rights at work." https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/secure-homes-for-all/#first Social housing. Oops! Looks like the Labour Party in the UK is socialist, just like the National Socialist German Workers Party and the Bolshevik Party in the Soviet Union were socialist too.
    1
  20025. By your definition, Soviet socialism wasn't socialism either. Unfortunately, history says it is. My definition fits better.
    1
  20026. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism.
    1
  20027. Except that private property was abolished and those businesses were run by the state.
    1
  20028. I'll check them out, although I didn't realise they were novels, and I'm not into fiction. Just seen she has a non-fiction book entitled "Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal" which I'll get instead. But thank you!
    1
  20029. True, there is propaganda being pushed by the Left about what these things are. And yes, individualism vs collectivism are probably good terms which I will use in future videos to address the distortions people are making in response to the points raised in this one, but the only reason the terms have become "fuzzy" with the definitions is because the Marxist-Postmodernists are trying to twist the words to suit their agenda. However these other terms do actually have historic and distinct definitions, and they are - Markets : people, individuals. [A market is two people who trade. So do you want to have "Free Markets"/free people, or "planned economy"/non-free people?] Means of production : people, individuals. [A factory/building cannot operate without a human, so humans are the means of production. Therefore do you want to control your own life, or have someone else control it?] Capitalism : private control of the means of production. [private individual (you) control over your own life] --- Notice how the Left will change the terms of those above to hide the meaning of following - Standard "Utopian" socialism : common-control of the means of production. [a group / other people / another authority controls your life - you're no longer free] Marxist Socialism : class-control of the means of production. [the "workers" unions are in control, anyone else should be murdered] National Socialism : race-control of the means of production. [the "Aryan" race should be in control, everyone else should be murdered] Fascism : nationality-control of the means of production. [e.g. the "Americans" (nationality, not race) should be in control, everyone should be murdered] --- Some random Leftist terms that don't make sense - State Capitalism : a contradiction in terms, since you cannot have non-free free individuals. Either the individual is free, or is controlled by the state. Capitalism is freedom from the state, so you cannot have state-controlled free-people. Anarcho-syndicalism : a contradiction in terms, since if you have workers unions (or federalism etc) you cannot also have anarchy at the same time. This is actually based on a deliberate postmodernist revision and misquotation of Das Kapital Volume 3 (and yes, I checked the original German). --- I haven't read Ayn Rand, but I probably should. Do you recommend Atlas Shrugged, or is there a better book by her?
    1
  20030. Modern day liberalism may be collective, but old-school liberalism isn't.
    1
  20031. He didn't like Marxism. There's nothing to say he didn't embrace the ideals of it. Plus, you have to remember that he was trying his hardest to separate himself from the Marxists so that he actually has some distinction from it. Take the hatred of communism away from what Hitler's saying, and the old difference is his hatred of the Jews, which is actually tied into his socialism.
    1
  20032. Haha I'm not sure why they assumed that either. Although you don't need to be hard left to be anti-wehraboo
    1
  20033. So that my critics can't sound bite it, take it out of context, and say I'm promoting Nazi material
    1
  20034. "There is a socialist dimension to National Socialism, but that does not make it socialism - any more than the post war settlement in the UK (including acceptance of a mixed economy) amounted to socialism." The Labour Party was (and is) socialist. It describes itself as "socialist". It implemented state ownership of the means of production, e.g. the National Health Service, National Pensions, National Insurance, Council (social) Housing, state benefits etc... These are all signs of state ownership and control of the economy, which is the very definition of socialism - Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). "I think the conclusions you draw here are not well argued or well informed. Your knowledge of socialism as an ideology and as practice could be better." You are correct that they weren't well argued, but this was because this video was aimed at National Socialists, which was my biggest mistake. I assumed they didn't realise that they were socialists, but it turns out they do know that they're socialists. They're actually agreeing with me! It shouldn't have been to them that this video was aimed at, but towards the Marxists and others who, it seems, don't actually know what socialism is. Now I'm having to defend myself against Marxists who continue to believe there can only be one form of socialism - Marxism. This is not true. They also assume socialism is what "Marx said" it was. This is also untrue, since the idea of socialism came before Marx and also existed after him. But regardless of all that, to assume that I'm not well-informed is incorrect. Simply asking for more information, which I have provided you in response to your comment in the other video, would have been better than simply assuming I don't know what I'm talking about.
    1
  20035. I know, it's stupid, but that's good old YouTube's policies for you.
    1
  20036. My biggest mistake was aiming this at the neo-Nazis. I assumed they didn't know what they were. Unfortunately, they know exactly what they were. It was the Marxists that I should have made this video for. Luckily, when I have stood my ground in the comments, I've won the debates. So, despite the hate, I know my position is correct.
    1
  20037. "The means of production was owned privately in Germany" - you're thinking of communism. Socialism is a mixture of capitalism and communism.
    1
  20038. "socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature;" - Das Kapital volume 3 P593 Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism.
    1
  20039. Hahaha you've read it too then?
    1
  20040. "But the idea underlying Fascism is irreconcilably different from that which underlies Socialism. Socialism aims, ultimately, at a world-state of free and equal human beings. It takes the equality of human rights for granted. Nazism assumes just the opposite." Untrue. Marxist Socialism aims at the destruction of the Jews/Bourgeoisie, as Marx made clear - “We discern in Judaism… a universal antisocial element of the present time.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Marx,On the Jewish Question. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx is saying here that the people who trade goods for money (in other words, capitalists) are Jewish, and are on the side of “tyranny”. Yes, the reason he hates capitalists is because he thinks they’re Jewish, and the reason he hates Jews is because he thinks they are capitalists. And he says this again in his last book, Das Kapital: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Marx, Das Kapital, P107. Karl Marx has said that the products of the Capitalist are "inwardly circumcised Jews". In other words, the offsprings of the Capitalists are "inwardly circumcised Jews", because they Capitalists are Jewish. But why did Marx believe that? Well, Marx believed that Capitalists were the bourgeoisie (boroughs, townfolk) who practiced Usury (lending of loans and charging interest). Since Usury was banned by the Pope in the Dark Ages, and since Jews were not allowed to own land in Christian Europe, they were forced to live in towns and became "money changers". So, for Karl Marx, the bourgeoisie were the Jews. This was why the offspring of the bourgeoisie were "inwardly circumcised Jews". And what did Karl Marx call for? Oh yes, that's right - REAL Socialism: “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Marx, On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx was calling for the removal of the Jews/Capitalists from Society. This will allow him to usher in Socialism. ALL SOCIALISM IS ANTI-SEMITISM. That is why, when I realized that Hitler was a Socialist, I realized the true nature of Socialism and what it was really calling for. See my more updated video on Hitler's Socialism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20041. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20042. Except, state control is socialism. Socialism is - "_socialised man_, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their _common control_, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature;" - Marx, Das Kapital volume 3. Hitler didn't cooperate with industrialists, his party owned and controlled them from within. As Adam Tooze and Gunter Reiman make clear (just to name a few), private property was abolished, and the bureaucracy was in every business, dictating every move. Wage controls, price controls, state unions, state holidays, state quotas... the state was in absolute control of the economy.
    1
  20043. Yes. History has been distorted, and it's affecting our current perception of the world. This is why it's important to me that I cover this (and the Holocaust etc). Socialists are hiding the truth about Socialism, and many believers don't know what they're supporting. Hitler's socialism may be different to Marxism, but it's all the same. If you don't like Hitler's socialism, then why would Marx's socialism be any different.
    1
  20044. I know exactly what it is. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. Laissez-faire - or leave alone - is no government intervention, which is what most conservative capitalist governments favour.
    1
  20045. Yes, and he was a socialist too before the fascist party :)
    1
  20046. You're not suggesting that YouTube is white nationalist and socialist are you? ;)
    1
  20047. "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20048. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas c Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “The government of a totalitarian State would not be “authoritarian” if the courts still functioned independently, as they do under liberal capitalism.” “The division of power between the executive or legislative branch on the one hand and the judicial branch on the other was formerly a guarantee to the owner of private property that his property rights would be protected even against his own government. The totalitarian State, in abolishing this separation of power, abolishes the sanctity of private property, which thereupon ceases to be a basic principle of society fundamental to State morality.” “Constitutionally the businessman still enjoys guarantees of property rights. But what is the value of such constitutional guarantees without courts that dare to defy the omnipotent bureaucracy or to enforce laws that are “out of date”?” - Reimann. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). National interests are - “made mainly by the Nazi party, or, rather, by its leaders, that is, by the State bureaucracy. It is a principle that only Party members shall occupy key positions in the government and in all organizations where the State influences the distribution of jobs. They must be engaged whenever there is a choice between the Party member and non-Party member.”  - Reimann. “The influence of the Party cannot be seen in laws, but in practice, and personalities are the important factor. A large number of the ministers [at present all ministers] are Party members.” - Ministerialdirektor Sommer, spokesman for Rudolph Hess, in the Deutsche Juristenzeitung of May 21, 1936. “The capitalist under fascism has to be not merely a law-abiding citizen, he must be servile to the representatives of the State. He must not insist on “rights” and must not behave as if his private property rights were still sacred. He should be grateful to the Fuehrer that he still has private property.” “This state of affairs must lead to the final collapse of business morale, and sound the death knell of the self-respect and self-reliance which marked the independent businessman under liberal capitalism.” - Reimann “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112]
    1
  20049. To address your points - Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. "Hitler imprisoned and killed socialists, democrats, communists, union leaders and other dissenters (along with some church leaders and conservatives)." This is an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations. However, the ‘socialists’ he killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. “he established the German Labour Front (DAF) which replaced all other independent trade unions” At first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. “gave more power to employers and made them solely responsible for decisions affecting the workers and their welfare” Since class has been abolished, working class doesn’t exist in a racial state. All that matters is the race. And it wasn’t the employers in control, it was the state. As you will see in my follow up message, employers were completely dominated by the state. “What redistribution of wealth was that? The Nazis did not redistribute wealth.” You are severely mistaken. I’ll show you in the follow up message just how high taxes were increased for businesses and employers in order to redistribute wealth. “[Hitler] believed the individual should work for the community but this effectively meant the elites and the state.” Which is a sign of socialism, since socialism is the state. “Hitler was inconsistent on this anyway since the nazis did occasionally rant against capitalism but were effectively in favour of it.” Again, you will see in the follow up message just how non-capitalist the Nazi state was. “The points about socialism were put in at the insistence of Drexler and Feder and Hitler was increasingly against them as time went on (Shirer p.41, 126-27, 143)” Shirer’s book may as well have been written by Franz Halder, and is massively out of date. And actually, Hitler was not against socialism no matter how much Shirer of Halder say he was. “The Nazis engaged in mass privitisation of government property and industry in the early 1930s and even into the war. The term "privitisation" was coined by a writer (Maxine Sweezy) in the 1941 documenting  the "reprivitisation" of government assets under the Nazis. The term was also first used in german publications in the 1930s. This is something Stalin and communists did not do.” And it is time to read my nex comment where I will explain this ‘privatization’.
    1
  20050. "if the state isnt controlled by workers its not Marxist-socialism." Fixed that for you.
    1
  20051. Is that the go-to answer when somebody says something people disagree with? Socialism is the social (public state) ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. I know what I'm talking about, and have been studying this stuff since college. These videos were made vs the Nazis, and that was my mistake, because they know what they are. I should have made them towards everyone else, since it is everyone else who don't actually know what Nationalsocialism is and think it's capitalism. That is a lie.
    1
  20052. I suspect it's to do with Cold War politics. Also there's political reasons for all sides to deny that the Nazis were on the Left.
    1
  20053. Hahaha they're using multiple accounts to downvote (seen them post the same comment a few times from different accounts) so I don't doubt this will get a lot of hate. But it doesn't matter to me :)
    1
  20054. I know. Fact: most people don't get past the title. And they wonder why I don't agree with their arguments (because I've already addressed their points in the video or the pinned comment).
    1
  20055. Oh boy. You're going to love this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20056. This is history. The primary source for this video was Mein Kampf, which was written in 1924(ish), as well as other history books.
    1
  20057. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20058. "TIK OK if you insist. Was there no role for private Capitalists in the holocaust?"And who were these private capitalists? Were they Jews? No, they were Germans. German-capitalists... not non-Aryan capitalists. This is a big deal - To quote from Wikipedia - "There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms." In National Socialist thinking, Aryans (the social-bit) seized the means of production from the Jews, and now owned the economy (social ownership), then self-managed the means of production. By doing so, they had to rid the Jews from society - so, their removal of the Jews from society is evidence of their socialism. So long as the Germans socially owned the means of production, they could be capitalists all they wanted to be. And that's the point. Having German capitalists involved in the Holocaust doesn't mean anything, because they're helping the socialist government to gain social ownership over the means of production. And, when you say that capitalists were involved in the Holocaust - yes, but they didn't own it. They didn't plan it. That was done by the socialist state. Because supply and demand and a free market economy doesn't result in the gas chambers.
    1
  20059. But similar is not indistinguishable - they're not the same. And having companies involved doesn't answer my question. How does supply and demand and a free market economy result in the gas chambers?
    1
  20060. Because, as explained in my more recent video, he thought Marxism was a Jewish conspiracy https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20061. Exactly. Thanks for posting
    1
  20062. Haha yes it does
    1
  20063. Surprisingly, I'm not moderating. Any comment with a link is automatically held for review (and I'll get to them eventually, since 99% will be links to the daily stormer). Otherwise, I'm not moderating at all. And yes, I'm glad you're happy with this type of content. I can't tackle WW2 if we fundamentally misunderstand the political, economic and social situations going on at the time. I know it's hard for some people to grasp, but National Socialism is socialism. I got that from the primary source!
    1
  20064. Haha yup
    1
  20065. Also, in your other comment, you explicitely state that "There certainly was private property, not only on a small level , but in larger scale and that was the driving force of the german economy , unlike the soviet union where all the means of production (exept small parts of the agrarian sector) was owned by the state , which planned the production in a centralized manner." So you're contradicting yourself. If it isn't state ownership of the economy, then why do you define the Soviet Union as being socialist for having the state own the economy? This is what happens when people try to distort history. They run themselves into loopholes they can't get themselves out of. "Congratulations then american comrades, USA is a socialist state!" The USA is a capitalist nation. However some elements of it are socialist, since the government does own parts of the economy. This is not so hard to get your head around. The state owning the Fire Department or the Police Service is a form of socialism. This is especially true since 200 years ago, both of these things were in the hands of private companies or individuals. The first state police service was created in Britain in 1929.
    1
  20066. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need”https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.”http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it. And yes, the Nazis banned private property.
    1
  20067. Here's another one you can lose braincells to https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20068. Ah, that explains why I'm so tired... either that or reading Mein Kampf hurt my brain
    1
  20069. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. You can't have the Holocaust without socialism, which is why many Denialists are able to deny it happened since most people think Nationalsocialism is capitalism (which it absolutely is not).
    1
  20070. Bye
    1
  20071. So, our list again - Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation What we can see is that private property was abolished, autarky, collectivization, price fixing, and extremely high taxation all happened under National-Socialism. In addition, ‘privatization’ happened in name only. And as Zitelmann explains in “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction”, Hitler threatened the ‘private’ owners constantly with nationalization in order to get them to do as he pleased. Therefore, while you could argue that they ‘owned’ their businesses, they were controlled by Hitler. And therefore, they didn’t actually own their means of production, since this was actually owned by the state, which is exactly what Hitler was arguing in Mein Kampf (1924). And, even if you didn’t accept the nationalization bit on account of ‘privatization’, what you have to remember is that just because Germany wasn’t fully socialist, doesn’t mean that Hitler and the National-Socialist German Worker’s Party weren’t socialist. They were only in power 12 years. In 12 years the Soviet Union hadn’t even collectivized the peasants, and capitalism was still around. Germany may not have been fully socialist, but they were far more socialist in the Nazi era than they were before and after the Nazis (except in East Germany after WW2, obviously). Now, we need to remember that National-Socialism is different to Marxism. National-Socialism is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). It is based on race, not class. This is important because it changes how the Nazis operated compared to the Marxist-Socialists - Other counter arguments to the idea of National-Socialism being socialism include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations. The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that socialism definitely is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). It is not “two workers, one hammer” as you described it. And National-Socialism was socialism: private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources -Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press,  1979. (originally published 1946) Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnunghttp://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htmhttps://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitutionhttp://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20072. Now let’s turn our attention to collectivization - “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187
    1
  20073. … 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591
    1
  20074. So, now that I have confirmed that socialism is indeed the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), we can look at this list again - The Soviet Union (Marxism) National-Socialist Germany Fascist Italy Khmer Rouge (Cambodia in the 1970’s) The Labour Party of the UK (representing ‘democratic socialism’) Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation So far (apart from National-Socialist Germany and Fascist Italy which we’ll get to below) every single one of these historic socialisms are defined under my definition of socialism - state ownership of all or parts of the economy. Historically then, my definition works, whereas yours denies the historic reality. Now let’s turn our attention to National-Socialism. In order to prove that National-Socialism was socialism, we need to see if the Nazis implemented any of the policies below, since these run counter to capitalism: Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation First, let’s take a look at the abolishment of private property, Autarky, price fixing, high taxation and nationalization/’privatization’. We’ll start with the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933 -
    1
  20075. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it. Now, the benefit of my definition is simple - it works. There’s no “am I socialist or a capitalist if I own the means of production?” rubbish, it actually makes sense. Does the state own a business? Yes. Then it is socialism. Is the business owned by the private individual? Yes, then it is capitalism. Is the state propping up the banks after the 2008 recession instead of letting them fall to market forces? Yes, then that is a socialist policy (since it leads to state ownership of those banks in the form of shares and investments). Is the state nationalizing the industries? Yes, then that is a socialist state (even if it hasn’t finished doing so). Is the state using high taxation to prop up on dying sector of the economy and therefore lowering productivity and hurting all consumers equally? Yes, then it is socialism. A worker who saves his pennies and purchases a hammer in order to craft something to sell, is a capitalist. Yes, vast amounts of wealth may be needed to create a factory, but the worker can create a business from his own workbench. And this is the benefit of capitalism to a worker - you are not being exploited. If you do not like your job, get another, or create your own business. There is nothing stopping you except yourself and high taxation (and high taxes are an indication of socialism, as I will explain below) from the state. Capitalism is against the idea of the state being in the economy. Capitalists want private property and private ownership of their businesses. They want less government regulation and no price fixing. This is all explained by Hazlitt in his book “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” which I would highly recommend to you, but yes capitalists do not want high taxation, price fixing, tariffs or regulations. Some will advocate that for themselves, but as Hazlitt points out, regulation for one industry hurts every consumer high higher taxation and higher prices, and hurts every other business through higher taxation and higher prices, and hurts the entire economy through higher taxation and higher prices. Plus, productivity falls, hurting everyone as well. So yes, capitalists (on a whole) are against state involvement in the economy. Socialists on the other hand advocate that capitalists are bad and that the state can do it better. Why? Because the state is the public. Let me explain: a government is a body that governs. Simply. So when the workers rise up and seize the means of production, what happens? They govern their factory. This means, they’re a government (of their factory). If all these ‘governments’ or ‘councils’ or ‘soviets’ form together, you get a Union of Socialist Soviet Republics - the USSR, or the Soviet Union. This is what happened historically (generally speaking because in reality Lenin betrayed the workers, but that’s not relevant here). When you say collective ownership, what is a collective? A group of people. A group of people is a social group. A social group cooperates together, and policies that affect the whole group are ‘public’ policies. A ‘public’ is the state. If you get rid of one government, you replace them with another. And if you have no government (anarchy), it won’t be long before another group of humans bands together and forms one (either by violence or persuasion). Therefore, “stateless socialism” as you defined it, not only doesn’t work but is another direct contradiction like “state capitalism”. If you have a stateless society, there is nothing stopping one group seizing power over others. There’s also nothing stopping one human from purchasing or seizing the means of production. So you cannot have “stateless socialism” even if we didn’t define it as the state ownership of the means of production. But if you do define it as that (which I and a lot of people do), you can’t have a stateless-state, much like you can’t have a state-non-state (state capitalism). Again, they’re oxymorons.
    1
  20076. Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members. This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.” This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses. The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement” https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354”
    1
  20077. Ok I’m going to stop here a second and look at this list again. The Soviet Union (Marxism) National-Socialist Germany Fascist Italy Khmer Rouge (Cambodia in the 1970’s) The Labour Party of the UK (representing ‘democratic socialism’) Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation You have denied that all of the above is socialism. Even the abolishment of private property doesn’t make sense because if you abolish property you can no longer own it (collectively or not). But I will assume that, by “direct ownership and management of the means of production by the workers” you mean that property is collectively owned - which then would be an abolishment of private property. However, if you meant that the workers just own the means of production, then private property still exists, at which point none of the above is socialism. Ok, so you’ve denied every socialist policy, party and state in history. And you’ve contradicted yourself numerous times. Your definitions are flawed and don’t match the historical (or even logical) reality. They’re also contradicted by vast quantities of literature on the subject. And why is that? Well, let’s give the historical context: from 1956 onwards, Marxists realized that socialism (up to this point, defined as “the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy” had failed spectacularly in every state it had been in so far. Why 1956? The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 against their own Marxist-Leninist government for starters, but also the previous horrors of Soviet and National-Socialism were coming to light. So, what the French Marxists did was start to redefine socialism. They couldn’t do so on practical and scientific grounds because all the evidence said socialism was a failure. So they rejected science and evidence. These were the “postmodernists” - a movement that still goes on to this day. The postmodernist goal was to distance themselves from the reality of socialism and advocate it on ‘belief’ only. They referred to this ‘belief’ as ideology, but the reality was it was belief. This is why postmodernists won’t even engage in debate with people, because to engage in debate is to give the advantage to the “enemy”. Obviously the “enemy” has the advantage of evidence, so they would lose if they engaged them in a proper debate. That is why I’ve accused people in the comments section here of being postmodernists - because they’re doing absolutely everything they can to suppress the idea that Nationalsocialism was socialism - refusing to engage in debate, telling me to “neck yourself”, slander, accusing me of being a Nazi (even though the purpose here is to prove the Holocaust happened), and reporting the video (but then crying that they have “free speech” - using liberal western policies against the west). But unfortunately, the definitions that the new age of socialists use to define socialism (as you have done), don’t hold up to scrutiny. This is quite typical of anyone trying to distort history - as soon as you start poking at their points, their logic falls apart. So, not only do you and other postmodernist-socialists have an agenda to reject every socialism in history (not just national-socialism), your arguments doing so don’t actually hold up. Even your definition doesn’t hold up to scrutiny:
    1
  20078. “So if the means of production were to be made public (read: government owned), the only way this could still be called socialist, is if it were a direct democracy.” Ahhh, so when the workers rise up and replace the government, they either have to form a democracy, or total anarchy, in order to make socialism work. Got you. I guess this means that democratic socialism is socialism - which a lot of people are claiming it isn’t. “This is precisely why the libertarian socialists at the First International were so opposed to the establishment of a Republic structure to the USSR, with Bakunin dreading the introduction of the "Red Bureaucracy."” Are you referring to the real First International in 1863? Or the second-but-actually-the-first International where Lenin had in the weeks before planted his agents as delegates, so that Iskra didn’t have the greatest number of grassroots members but did have the majority of delegates? Is this where he demanded a small party of professional revolutionaries rather than a mass-worker-party, bullied out Bund and the economists, which is then where he formed the “Bolshevik” (Majority) Party, and ended democracy within the Marxist movement? Just checking because either way, it sounds like the First International was definitely advocating democratic socialism. Lenin on the other hand was advocating a socialist-dictatorship. Of course, neither of these is any different from one another because socialism is an economic policy. Authoritarianism and democracy are political in nature, whilst socialism is the workers owning the means of production, and thus separate from the idea of democracy and dictatorships. “You see, as workers no longer had DIRECT control over their workplace, it was no longer socialism. Lenin claimed nothing less, calling the USSR state capitalist with this exact reasoning.” Right, so you’re definitely saying that the Soviet Union wasn’t socialist. Ok, I’ll note that for later. “State capitalism is, logically, just when the state owns and runs monopoly enterprises "in the stead" of the workers, in the same capacity that the owners of capital do in a private economy.” But if the state owns the means of production, then it is no longer in the hands of private owners, and thus is no longer capitalism. As soon as the state owns the means of production, the workplace, decisions about the distribution of revenue, and the mechanisms for production, are no-longer owned and managed by someone (typically an investor) with large accumulations of capital, not the laborers. Therefore, the term “state capitalism” is an oxymoron and makes zero sense. And surely, if the owners of the means of production wanted to reap the benefits of price setting and consumer perception, they wouldn’t want the government to take the profits they would make from their investments? And I guess this is why, historically, capitalists have been advocating small government and less-government ownership in the economy, because they know that this reduces the amount of profit they make. And also, what’s the difference between “state capitalism” and “nationalization”? Surely these are the same thing? If they are, why are socialists advocating nationalization, or saying that nationalization is proof of socialism. By your definition, nationalization is capitalism. “Marxism is also not a "kind of socialism." Marxism isn't even an economic theory.” So we’re now scrapping everything you’ve just said? “if the people were allowed to manage themselves and their economy a la socialism, the state (a term of art referring to a power structure not able to be held accountable to the people) would no longer be needed.” But if the people/workers managed themselves and their economy, this would be capitalism too, by your definition? And also, if a group of workers work in a factory, what’s to stop one of the workers saving his money and buying ownership of the factory from the others? If there’s no state, there’s nothing to stop him or the other workers from making that trade. Plus, if a worker then gets access to a hammer and some nails, he can become a private builder. Thus, even under socialism, there is private ownership, unless the worker doesn’t own his tools. But if there’s no state, what’s to prevent him from saying ‘ok, this hammer is mine now’? Nothing. So as soon as you have stateless-socialism, it devolves into capitalism. “As for your statement that Nazi Germany used socialism to commit the holocaust, you can now see that this is a completely false claim.” But I don’t see it. You defined capitalism as the workplace, decisions about the distribution of revenue, and the mechanisms for production, are all owned and managed by someone (typically an investor) with large accumulations of capital, not the laborers. Ok, so which person or business owned the Holocaust? That’s right, they didn’t. The Holocaust wasn’t owned by one business or one person, and therefore wasn’t capitalism (by your own definition).
    1
  20079. “Sure, I'll define them for you.” First off, I’d like to thank you for defining socialism and capitalism. That was very helpful, and you are the first to actually do it in these comments sections. I can now see why so many people are upset that I’ve defined socialism by what it was defined historically, rather than what they believe it is post-1956. “I'll give you the knowledge needed to work out where all of your confusion lies.” No… You’re talking to someone who’s done his homework. I think you’ll see where your confusion lies. Ok, here’s a bunch of states and policies that I (and many others) would define as socialism/Marxism - The Soviet Union (Marxism) National-Socialist Germany Fascist Italy Khmer Rouge (Cambodia in the 1970’s) The Labour Party of the UK (representing ‘democratic socialism’) Nationalisation Abolishment of private property Autarky Collectivisation Price fixing Extremely high taxation In the course of my replies, I will show how my definition of socialism encompasses all of the above, and how your definition doesn’t cover any of the above. “Capitalism is when the workplace, decisions about the distribution of revenue, and the mechanisms for production, are all owned and managed by someone (typically an investor) with large accumulations of capital, not the laborers.” Ok, I’m a worker who owns the workplace, makes decisions about the distribution of revenue, and the mechanisms for production, and I own and manage them myself. Therefore, by your definition, I’m a capitalist. “Socialism, by contrast, is the direct ownership and management of the means of production by the workers.” So again, I’m a worker who owns the workplace, makes decisions about the distribution of revenue, and the mechanisms for production, and I own and manage them myself. Therefore, by your definition, I’m a socialist. Wait a second... How can I be a socialist and a capitalist at the same time? That doesn’t make any sense. As a low-income worker, who is self-employed, and owns the means of production, am I a capitalist or a socialist? Your definitions are contradictory. “Capitalism, by this measure, is an inherently authoritarian ideology, not centered upon government authority, but instead upon the authority of the owner class over the laborers.” Ahhh, so because I don’t have large accumulations of capital, I can’t be a capitalist. Therefore, I own a privately owned socialist business. And for context: I work 77 hours a week on average and get paid slightly above minimum wage because that’s what I earn off YouTube and Patreons. I’m thinking of dropping my wage to hire a part-time editor who will be on more per-hour than me and I’m going to be on less than minimum wage. This will hopefully increase production, which will then allow me to hire a full-time editor, and further increase production to hire more people and so on… But hold on, does that mean that as soon as I hire a worker I’m no longer a socialist? Even though I’ll still be working 77 hours a week as a worker, I’d no longer be a worker? And if I do hire a worker and create a job, I’m also suddenly an ‘owner’ class, despite also being a worker? And, even though my employee will earn more than I do, I’d be exploiting them as an authoritarian? And also, without large investment capital, by your own definition, I can’t be a capitalist either? Your definitions are confusing. Am I a capitalist or a socialist? Because according to your own definition, I’m not a capitalist. “Socialism, by contrast, is the direct ownership and management of the means of production by the workers.” Ahhh, so according to your own definition, I’m currently a socialist. But once I hire someone to help production, I suddenly jump from no longer being a worker to being an evil capitalist, even though they’ll be making more money than me and I’ll have practically no capital left. This also means that anyone who has a start-up business as an individual is a socialist, since they own and manage the means of production. In fact, it goes beyond this - if two workers collectively own a hammer: socialism. If two students put their money together and purchase a box of pens to do their homework: socialism. Yeah, this makes total sense. I guess I am a socialist then. Unless socialism requires two workers as a minimum. At which point, I’m an evil capitalist until I find another worker to share the means of production with. What happens when two people decide to collectively start up a business, does that mean that they’re socialists too? By your definition they’re both evil capitalist-socialists. “It is almost always connected with the Labor Theory of Value, which centers all product value as deriving from labor, not consumer demand or price setting.” I’ll tell this to my Patreons - hey guys, I’ve been working 77 hours a week but you’ve only been paying me for 40 hours, so I basically need you to double the amount of money you’re pledging to me. This won’t double my productivity because as soon as I hire someone to help me out I’m no longer a socialist, which means you have to pay me what you think my work is worth not what I think it’s worth, which will reduce the amount you’re pledging and thus I’d have to fire the person I hired, which then means I become a socialist again… So yeah, pay me more and receive less in return for your money, thanks. “You see, if the workers do not have direct control over how their labor is valued, managed, and how revenue deriving from it is distributed, the economic model is not socialism.” Got you, so I’m definitely a socialist right now, as are all start-up businesses, independent contractors and individuals who own private property. Thanks for clarifying that.
    1
  20080. Glad you think so :)
    1
  20081. I don't rely on Peterson. I only watched his postmodernist videos, because I was studying that at the time (still am). I wanted to link to his video on it, but somehow copied the suggestions bar, that is all.
    1
  20082. All sources are biased. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use them.
    1
  20083. Oh look, it's Mr Defeated again. Still coming back to distort history with your national socialist friends?
    1
  20084. I'm glad you're finding them entertaining. I've had a wonderful time over the past couple of months getting hundreds of insults flung at me, despite the fact that when actually engaged in debate, they lose every time. But what does it matter to them? They've succeeded in their mission of smearing the message of the video, which (while the video is not perfect) is absolutely correct.
    1
  20085. Socialism is not communism. You can have private property in a socialist government, and there are many examples of this being the case. Britain, Scandinavia, Western Europe etc.
    1
  20086. This is my fight, and I'm not out of my depth.
    1
  20087. "There were over 3,000,000 SA members in the early 1930’s. Taking out their socialist leader (Ernst Rohm) and up to 1,000 others, does not equate quashing the socialist movement." - as I wrote in the pinned comment.
    1
  20088. That assessment of the industrialists is incorrect. Digging further into the details, you see that the industrialists were completely enslaved by the state. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20089. Again, it's not about class. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is in contrast to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is all about state control. One of the first thing he does when he gets in power is wipe out private property. … 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... Hitler has no interest in the working class, or the business class, because this isn't Marxist-Socialism. He sees things on racial lines. Everyone in Germany has to be German. None-Germans need to be removed. The Holocaust is actually an example of his racist-socialism.
    1
  20090. Except, I've already shown in this comment section that his video misses the point. When you see it from my point of view, his video actually confirms that Nationalsocialism isn't capitalism, and fails to say it wasn't race-socialism. He only confirms it wasn't Marxism - class-socialism.
    1
  20091. Historians rewrite history to improve it, correcting the mistakes that others made previously. That's why I followed this up two years later with a 5 hour video (107 sources, 350 references) where I defeated the counter arguments and exposed National Socialism's fundamental ideological flaw https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20092. Thank you. I'm assuming that's a speech? Do you have a full source?
    1
  20093. Here's a video with 107 sources, 350 references, and 5 hours of explanation and information which confirms that Hitler was a Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20094. Thank you Chris!
    1
  20095. Cheers Truth! Yes, I'm not too bothered about the likes or dislikes - it proves nor disproves nothing. A solid counter-argument does, but I've not seen any of them. And yes, the right are trying to discredit by using multiple accounts, which I've witnessed behind the scenes. So sad.
    1
  20096. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. So yes it is.
    1
  20097. Oh and see 12:08 onwards of this video to understand why Conservatives were the old Left wing (and still are - they're not right wing) https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY
    1
  20098. Watch this more recent video very carefully https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20099. Absolutely not. National Socialism has both left and right elements in it. This isn't pandering to anyone, and I don't "believe" anything. I go where the evidence takes me. See the pinned comment.
    1
  20100. Ignorant comment https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20101. True, except Hitler had anti-Marxist ideas, not anti-socialist. The claims that he 'privatized' the industry don't hold up to scrutiny, and the 'anti-trade unionism' actually shows that he was anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist, but pro-socialist, since he replaced them with the state-led (and therefore socialist) German Labour Front. He echoed Lenin's anti-trade union stance too.
    1
  20102. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era. Please explain why this is not socialism.
    1
  20103. I've done a ton more research since this. These videos will remain up.
    1
  20104. Hey Akuma, yeah I recognize your avatar from a while back :) the main issue is not whether the National Socialists and the Soviet Socialists are similar or different - this is a separate debate which is currently raging in academic historical circles. The main issue is whether National Socialism is socialism or not. Having seen it, I cannot unsee it. My only regret is not seeing it earlier :(
    1
  20105. Yes. I've linked to that video a few times in the comments, it's a good video in my opinion. Backs up what Tooze said too in his book Wages of Destruction.
    1
  20106. National Socialism isn't Fascism. They're similar but not the same. And no, I'm committed to the Holocaust. Therefore I must nail down what Nationalsocialism is. I've done a ton more research since this point, and I'm now confident in what it is. While I did make mistakes in this video, the overall message is true. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism.
    1
  20107. I don't know if you've seen it, but you should enjoy this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20108. You're getting communism and socialism mixed up. And there's nothing that says socialism or communism does not involve slavery. Indeed, the gulags would say that your assessment is wrong.
    1
  20109. Nazism is racial-socialism. It believes that the racial-state should dominate society (and the means of production). It's socialism, but for the race not the class. That is all. And on the Fascism page, Wikipedia says Hitler was a Fascist. As I have explained, this is wrong. Clearly it has been written by socialists who have a poor-twisted view of the ideologies in question. And no, I'm not a Nazi, Fascist, socialist or communist. I don't believe in artificial social groups, and won't look down upon others just because of their "class" "race" or "gender" etc. I am an individual. Don't judge me by the standards of anyone else.
    1
  20110. National Socialism and Fascism are not the same. They are similar, and often get lumped in the same camp, as you have done, but this is only because you don't understand the fundamental difference between the two. Both are socialisms, as the core idea of both of these ideologies is that "socialized man, the producers," should be in "common control" of the means of production (Das Kapital volume 3). For Fascists, that socialised man should be the nation. For Nazis, that socialized man should be the race. This is why the Italians only introduced the first racial law in 1938 (16 years after taking power), and only did so because Hitler influenced Mussolini. For Mussolini, being an Italian Jew was fine, so long as you were working towards the Italian nation. For Hitler, this was unthinkable. In his mind, the race was more important. That's why he wanted to unite the Germans, and remove the Jews from society.
    1
  20111. But NS is not capitalism, therefore it cannot be on the right.
    1
  20112. Thanks for the constructive criticism! :)
    1
  20113. History is being rewritten constantly by historians in order to correct the mistakes of the past, and this is in line with history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc The previously linked video shows how the National Socialists nationalized the industries, nationalized the trade unions, implemented price controls, wage controls, rent controls, welfare schemes, central planning, and many more Socialist policies. Please watch it - it took me 18 months to create and will answer your questions (hence the title of the video)
    1
  20114. No it did not. This more recent 5 hour video using over 100 sources, 350 references, quotes and more, will explain why they didn't have a free market nor Capitalism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20115. Yep. That would be interesting.
    1
  20116. Wrong. They were socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20117. 1. Nationalizing the industries is completely irrelevant, since the industries were still under state control. All quotes come from Tooze's Wages of Destruction - Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. P111-112 "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - P113 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” P174 P179-180 Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. P182 “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” P186-187 - 2. "A state having state owned police and army is nothing special *dumbass*." Interesting that you call me a dumbass, even though it is a special thing. State police were only created in the 1820's with the 'Metropolitan Police Act 1829', and the first centrally organized police force was created in 1667 by King Louis XIV to police Paris. Prior to this (and even after this), armed individuals were the 'police', with many employed by corporations or other individuals - a very private force if you ask me. A state police force is an incredibly modern thing in human history. Same applies with state militaries. Professional standing state armies only really became a thing in the gunpowder era. Oliver Cromwell created the first standing army in Britain in 1645, prior to that, there wasn't a state army. Lords had their own armies, and these would then either fight with the Monarchy, or against it (or not at all). And, while there are examples of state armies across history, they were few and far between. For most of human history, armies were private affairs, with individuals owning them. 3. "And state directed unions actually hurt the workers" Workers are irrelevant. All that matters for National-Socialism is the race. Again, National-Socialism (race) is not Marxist-Socialism (class), but it is still socialism (social, public, state group ownership or control of the means of production). 4. "Your assertion that every business had nazi guards to enforce production is laughable to say the least. If that were true they wouldnt have had enough troops to fight the war, there is nothing but a handful of anecdotal evidence which points to this." Actually, this is why the Germans ran out of troops in 1941. Hitler had promised that the soldiers would return to the factories after Barbarossa, and they did, reducing the number of soldiers at the front. 5. I just want to reiterate that Nationalsocialism (race) is socialism, but is not Marxism (class).
    1
  20118. The state owns or controls the entire economy under merchantilism does it? Fairly certain it didn't.
    1
  20119. I disagree with your definitions, and here's why https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Also https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20120. Haha read the source material and tell me! (Actually, in this case, the source material sucks, but if you can be bothered to read through it, I'd be interested to hear what you think)
    1
  20121. I would suggest you look it up.
    1
  20122. And in my latest one (Courland episode 2)
    1
  20123. Nope, not many. I'm holding back those that are linking to other sites though.
    1
  20124. The video I linked to will give you the facts you need to reassess your own flawed argument.
    1
  20125. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20126. Effectively, Three Arrows dismissed the socialism in National Socialism on the grounds that the Nazis "tricked the workers". But then he proceeded to believe the Nazis when they invented the word 'Privatization'. He talks about Trade Unions as showing that this was anti-socialism. No, it was anti-capitalism and anti-Marxism. Removing the privately owned trade unions and replacing them with the state-run German Labour Front is actually a sign of socialism. Therefore, National Socialism was Socialism.
    1
  20127. Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20128. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann
    1
  20129. Yes, except Three Arrow's video only confirms it wasn't Marxism, not socialism. In fact, as I've said to others in the comments, his video actually confirms it is socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. Therefore, there’s three things you need to realize. 1. socialism does not necessarily mean Marxist (class) Socialism. It could mean National (race) Socialism. 2. When I say National Socialism is socialism, I mean it’s socialism, not Marxism. 3. socialism is shown by the level of state control, which is opposite to capitalism, since capitalism is about less state control - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. I will explain this ‘privatization’ that Three Arrows said happened. ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... To be continued...
    1
  20130. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what National Socialism was. Not sure how this is quantified as ridiculous - unless you're using postmodernism as your entire argument, but if that's the case, then "no, you're wrong too".
    1
  20131. Some won't listen to the evidence. I'm working on a massive video right now, full of evidence and arguments from both sides, which will destroy the counterarguments. But, just like my more recent Public vs Private video, some people will not listen to evidence.
    1
  20132. Will do, Green! Thanks!
    1
  20133. Oh.... wow.... I think I may have to watch this then do a review on it. If it is what you say, then it's got to be called out
    1
  20134. Yes, yes they did.
    1
  20135. Well, I thank you for being civil! Some guy's just reported the video... This goes back to Bernstein, one of the persons who buried Engels. He was a Marxist who realised that Marxism didn't work (he observed that living standards during capitalism were actually rising, not falling, as Marx predicted) and so started down the democratic socialist line. This caused a schism within Marxism, which ultimately is where the SPD and Labour Party comes from. To keep things short, Labour is socialist, but they're not Marxists. You describing yourself as democratic socialist, but wanting to take over all the means of production, is actually full-on Marxism (economically), but without the violent revolution (which is what Marx and Lenin wanted). And yes, it seems a lot of people don't understand what socialism actually is. Some think it's "statelessness", which is actually the complete opposite of what it is. This is why the definition that it is the ownership or control of the means of production (business or economy) makes more sense, and fits with history quite nicely.
    1
  20136. As Marx/Engels said in Das Kapital volume 3, "socialized man" in "common control" of the means of production is socialism. Therefore, if the socialized-race is in common control of means of production, which is what Hitler himself said, then that is socialism. And the NHS would also be classed as socialism too for the same reason - it's in common control (state).
    1
  20137. Ah, I see :)
    1
  20138. What for? I'm not promoting National Socialism.
    1
  20139. I suggest you don't try looking at the definition history gives us because in that definition you will find the socialism in social-democracies, the socialism in Marxist-Socialisms (all varients), and the socialism in National Socialism.
    1
  20140. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era. You can still have capitalism in socialism. You're thinking of communism. That's different.
    1
  20141. If they have a problem with the logo, they should reconsider their policy of censoring history, which is above all others their most unforgivable policy.
    1
  20142. There's a reason it's 5 hours long - it crushes any doubt
    1
  20143. Watch my more recent video (107 sources, 350 references, plus note and quotes etc) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20144. National Socialists are not Fascists (they're two separate ideologies) and see this more updated and recent video with substantially more evidence https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20145. See my Hitler's Socialism video which gives a lot more information, and is backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references and more quotes, note and so on. It renders your argument obsolete https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20146. I put on a voice to prevent my enemies taking the audio out of context and claim that I support Hitler or Nazism.
    1
  20147. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era. And yes, state health care is absolutely socialism. For example, Britain was (and might still be) a socialist country from the mid-1940s onwards, and the Labour Party (until New Labour) was socialist in nature. It's not communism though, which is, I suspect what you're mistaking it for.
    1
  20148. I never said they were the same. Similar, but not the same. What I did say is that some historians are arguing they are super-similar, which is correct because that's a current historical debate.
    1
  20149. I think it's because one is racist, while the other is perceived not to be (but could equally be seen as such, so double standards).
    1
  20150. "TIK The labour party isnt socialist idiot" And I'm the idiot? "The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party." https://labourlist.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Rule-Book-2013.pdf Page 3
    1
  20151. The Marxists want every worker in every country to unite, not the socialists. Marxism is but one branch of socialism. The Labour Party in the UK doesn't want to unite the world and they're socialist. And the Nazis want every Aryan in every country to unite, which is why they're socialist.
    1
  20152. They're like a swarm of bees, annoying at best.
    1
  20153. He wasn't a communist, he was socialist (which came before Marx). However the point I'm making there is that the Nazis (who are watching this) are more like their enemies than they realise. In fact, Hitler said this himself in Mein Kampf. And he said the only difference between his ideology and their ideology is the race (rather than the class). “The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure.” - Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. P406 “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” - Hitler, A. "Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. P406-407
    1
  20154. Exactly!
    1
  20155. You're assuming socialism and communism is the same thing. They're not. You're also assuming that there's one "socialism". You said it yourself, Mussolini was socialist.
    1
  20156. I cannot cover the military history if we do not understand the reasons. For example, Hitler distrusted the Prussian officers of his officer corps. Most people do not understand why he distrusts them. The reason is because he's a socialist. He trusts those who aren't from the upper class. This is just one example of where everything is tied into the fact that Hitler was a socialist, as was National Socialism. I'm honestly shocked I didn't see this before.
    1
  20157. Not all are, however a lot are. I've seen that at least one guy has copy/pasted the same comment from multiple accounts, which means they're disproptionally downvoting this video and spamming "no, you're wrong" comments. It's sad, and doesn't change anything.
    1
  20158. Nah, they're counterarguments aren't very good. If the best they can do is mix up socialism and communism (thinking they're the same thing), or come up with the classic "no, you're wrong" postmodernist argument, then they're going to have a bad time.
    1
  20159. Are you talking about FinnishBolshevik? He's got no idea what Stalinism is, but wants it so bad.
    1
  20160. It's glorious ;)
    1
  20161. Yes :)
    1
  20162. Hitler hated Marxism, but he was a socialist.
    1
  20163. That's because I've studied Marxism in college. Yes, I should have listed more sources, but it wasn't necessary because this isn't about Marxist-Leninism or other forms of socialism or communism, this is about National Socialism.
    1
  20164. Didnt see the other comment. Socialism is not communism. You can have private property in a socialist society. You're mistaking communism for socialism.
    1
  20165. Yes, agreed. Their counterarguments are also flawed because they assume I've always held this view. No, I only realised my mistake the other week. Prior to this, I would have agreed with them. Now I realize where I've gone wrong. And I know their side of the argument because it's what I thought too. But I now see that that side is seriously flawed.
    1
  20166. I didn't want to say 'look at the name' because I knew people would use that against me. But you're certainly right to point that out. And I did mention that they renamed the party to include the name for a reason.
    1
  20167. Of course, they're terrible.
    1
  20168. Ernst Röhm and crew were but 1,000 of the +3,000,000 strong socialist SA. They continued until the end of the war.
    1
  20169. No, communism is the seizing of the means of production. Communism is not socialism. Socialism is part capitalism and part heavy state intervention in the economy and society, which is exactly what happened in the Nazi era.
    1
  20170. No, I related the two to point out to Nationalsocialists that they aren't that much different to the Marxists. There is a lot in common, not just their names. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is in opposition to capitalism - Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Therefore, there is little difference between the two socialisms. All that matters is which "social group" is in charge, and which "social groups" are the enemy. Bearing in mind that "social groups" like gender, class, or race don't actually exist and are fictional constructs in order to incite "belief" in the adherents of socialism. All humans are individuals - we are not bees in a braindead beehive. And individuals have the ability to reject socialism on the grounds that it is a "belief" against scientific thought, fact and reason. "National socialism was neither right nor left" It was and is absolutely on the Left. "his national community encourages individual initiative as a form of social darvinism, but uses this ability for the good of the national community and not the individualistic interest of anyone inside the national socialist community" You're contradicting yourself. Hitler speaks about individuals in Mein Kampf and says they are subordinate to the national community, which takes ownership. He is therefore saying, just as you have said yourself, that the interests of the community (or state) come before its citizens. This is further shown by his destruction of private property (below). "the Fuhrer never ended private property, this is painfully inaccurate he just made property and individual innovation a tool for the national community" I think you'll find that he did - ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20171. No, thank you! Glad you enjoyed it Carter o>
    1
  20172. That was by mistake. All swastikas should have been covered up in the video. However, it may help that I didn't attempt to monetize the video (because I assumed it wouldn't go down well) which is perhaps why the video hasn't been taken down by the YouTube bots.
    1
  20173. Ok, but Mussolini was a socialist (Fascism is socialism, but not National Socialism) and therefore on one end of the spectrum or another. Capitalism is on the opposite end to socialism, since it's a question of how much government control (lots of control=socialism, limited control=capitalism). From what I can see, Distributism can only exist with government intervention, since it doesn't occur naturally and could only exist if the government restricted the natural progression of the economy. It's also regressive, since it requires people to own land and work on their land only (e.g. farmers and small tradesmen), and has the 'belief' in returning to the family unit as the dominant "social group" (which is what the ancient Romans and Greeks used). That is definitely leaning towards socialism, since it requires state control and envisions a utopian society. This may not be classed as 'socialism', but it's definitely in the middle between all-out socialism and capitalism. I don't think it requires a triangle to express this.
    1
  20174. You're correct that they're using the old incorrect political spectrum which, as I pointed out in the video, doesn't make any sense. I'm curious to know what political spectrum you use. For me, National-Socialists and Marxists are on the same side of the political spectrum. They're a rejection of liberalism and capitalism. Therefore, if you place liberalism and capitalism on the left, then Nazis and Marxists are on the right, or vice versa.
    1
  20175. Only if you don't fully grasp history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  20176. Remember when Hitler and the Nazis intervened in the society and economy and handed the means of production as well as all executive powers over to the collective and pure Aryan state?
    1
  20177. They banned private property and nationalised the economy (and then called it 'privatization', even though it wasn't). Economically they were incredibly similar to the Marxists in the Soviet Union. And as I've said, they are racist-socialists. But ultimately the "socialism" is the economic idea. So when I say they're socialists, I'm not saying they're Marxists (who are "international" even though that ended up being untrue too). The Nazis and Marxists have the same views economically - ending the class struggle by bring in their version of socialism. Socialism is the social-public-state ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Both states may differ politically, and on who their "enemies" were, but they have the same economic principles.
    1
  20178. State intervention in both society and the economy. And maybe not, but that's what socialism is. Laissez-faire - is leave alone, or no government intervention, is the opposite and usually conservative-type policy.
    1
  20179. I used to believe that National Socialism was capitalism, until about two weeks ago. Then I realized I was wrong and changed my mind. I am capable of changing my mind. However, in this case, the evidence supports what I'm saying, which is why I'm not backing down.
    1
  20180. Unfortunately, after all the criticism I received telling me to stay out of politics, it would be unwise for me to discuss politics at this time. Instead, I will adopt a... different approach.
    1
  20181. Yes, I saw that. It's a nice debate.
    1
  20182. Yes, they're not interested in the evidence, they're already made up their minds. Not sure if you've seen it, but I followed this up with a 5 hour video where I dismantled their counter arguments and provided a lot more evidence https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20183. YouTube is a corporation/syndicate. All interNational Socialist syndicates are Marxist. Thus, YouTube is Marxist and therefore doesn't see the Hammer and sickle as evil, even though it clearly is.
    1
  20184. But there's now no class struggle, so the workers don't need unions, since they're (in Hitler's mind, and the minds of the National Socialists) all part of the Aryan race. And since the state is run by the Aryans (and workers could rise through the ranks, pretty fast to be fair) this would constitute classless society.
    1
  20185. Socialism is not communism. Private enterprise can exist and class collaboration (rather than class struggle) does exist in socialism. It may not exist in communism, but it does in socialism.
    1
  20186. Yes they are.
    1
  20187. Yes, there's different types of socialists.
    1
  20188. Hahaha that's a great analogy - I'll take it!
    1
  20189. And Marx didn't create the socialist system. He theorised it, along with communism, but created nothing.
    1
  20190. Socialism (in a nutshell) is large state intervention in the economy and society. It's a halfway house between capitalism and communism. I know what it is; I studied all this in college. That's why the bibliography on this particular issue is light because I don't have access any more to the works I used back then. But I'm not wrong in my assessment just because I didn't use Marx or Lenin.
    1
  20191. "I am pissed of by people like you smearing socialists by adding Nazisin that equation" Why is this 'smearing' socialists? I'm not against socialism. You think I am, but I'm not. You honestly think that Marxism is the only form of socialism. And this is the problem. If you didn't think that, you wouldn't have any issue with Nationalsocialism being a form of socialism. Just because Hitler is a socialist, doesn't mean that all socialists are Hitler. Just because Hitler is a human, doesn't mean all humans are bad. Socialism isn't undermined just because Hitler was a socialist.
    1
  20192. You can fight National Socialism and Monarchism as a socialist. Being a socialist does not automatically make you a Nationalsocialist. Your argument doesn't make any sense because you think that socialism is all about class. That is the fundamental mistake you're making. All Three Arrow's video does is confirm that it wasn't Marxist-Socialism... which it wasn't. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. If a businessman was German, then he is allowed to have property and businesses. If he was foreign, or Jewish, he wouldn't be allowed to have property or businesses because National Socialism is the social (German) ownership of the means of production. Germans can have businesses and private property. HOWEVER, the Race comes first. So, if the Race/state decides that you're not working for the race/state, you and your property and businesses can be seized, for the greater-German (socialist) race. If you are non-German, your property and businesses are to be seized and you are to be 'removed' from society. The only issue is how the state will remove you. The Final Solution to that problem was execution. For a Marxist, socialism is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production. This is different. When talking about the Strength Through Joy program at 14:00 in, the narrator even says "the program was intended to replace the demand for trade unions and prevent class consciousness from developing, that might have become a threat to the Nazi government. The program didn't separate between the average workers and their bosses in an attempt to get people behind the idea on a community based on ethnicity_" Yes, that's because Hitler was anti-Marxist. He wanted to promote an _ethnic version of socialism, not class socialism. This video actually confirms this. At around 15:50 he says it was a planned economy, but that the means of production remained in private hands "if you were German, that is". And the owners of the means of production had to obey what the Nazis said, which is exactly what a racist version of socialism is. At 16:25 "from that point on, the economy was in complete control of the government" - yep, sounds very free market capitalist to me... He says this was done for the war - except we know it was done from 1933 onwards, and had infact been implimented by 1935 at the latest. 18:00 onwards he talks about why there was anti-capitalism in the Nationalsocialist German Workers Party... and then fails to understand that it was anti-capitalist. If it was anti-capitalist, and got rid of trade unions (which are actually allowed under capitalism), and ended trade with the outside world in favour of autarky, then how can it also be pro-capitalist? The reason industry was nationalised and then privatized again was because the Nationalsocialist Party had "socialized the people", to quote Hitler. He didn't need to nationalize the industries, since they had removed the other races from business. The social race owned the means of production, not the class. He mentions the socialisation of the health industry at around 24:00, but fails to grasp its significance. I think this is because he doesn't fully understand that socialism is not necessarily based on class. Again, socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. The Nazis were socialists. He talks about the secret state police (Gestapo) at around 30:00. Again, failing to see that the state police are able to forcefully remove you from society if you do not conform, saying "being tortured, gassed, and worked to death". Ok then, who owned the torture chambers? Which private business owned the gas chambers? Who owned the police? Who owned the slave labour camps of the Reich, or allocated them to German industries? It was the socialist (public) state. He asks the question "was Hitler influenced by Marx?" The answer is yes - which I agree. I agree he detested Marxism. "There are some passages in Mein Kampf where Hitler talks about socialism and seems to be in support of it" - hmmmm... maybe that's because socialism is not Marxism. But no, he does down the "he tricked the workers with the word 'socialism'" route, which just doesn't add up. He then quotes from a book which states "Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany's economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest." "...the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place [directly contradicted by the next sentence]. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state." He then goes on to accuse anyone who thinks that Nationalsocialism is Left Wing is only doing so because they have an agenda, and because we refuse to think about the other side. Actually, I also believed National Socialism wasn't socialism, and that it was capitalism, and that it couldn't be socialism because it wasn't based on class... until about a couple weeks before this video. For most of my life I have thought that National Socialism was capitalism. Now I see that Nationalsocialism is anti-capitalism, anti-Marxist, and socialism. He then concludes - "They're anti-semitic, anti-Marxist, extremely nationalistic, and favoured expansion - all undeniably positions of the German Right." Really? Because the reason Hitler wanted to expand Eastwards was the same reason he was anti-capitalist and anti-Marxist. He thought that the capitalist-class-struggle was created by the Jews, so that they could bring about Marxism, allowing them to become equal to the Aryan, and thus impregnate and mix the blood of the Aryan, which would in-turn bring down the fall of civilization. Hitler therefore wants to end capitalism to stop the class struggle, bring about a socialist-German-Aryan state, destroy Marxism, and destroy the Jews. Yes, there are elements of nationalism in there, but there's also socialism in there too. That's why it's called (drum roll) Nationalsocialism.
    1
  20193. Ok cheers. Look forward to reading it :)
    1
  20194. What I said was not misleading. However, I can't study WW2 without touching upon the politics. You cannot understand Nazi atrocities in the East if you don't understand what National Socialism actually was.
    1
  20195. Really? What's so different about racial-socialism compared to class-socialism? They both promote strong state, lower individual freedoms, higher taxation, state control of the economy, lower living standards, poverty and the death toll was in the millions for both. Except that they have different names, the only difference between Fascism, National-Socialism, Democratic-Socialism and Marxist-Socialism is the name of the group of victims of their state-heavy regimes.
    1
  20196. It contradicts Marxist socialism - which I'm not saying it is. It's National Socialism - racist socialism. The German economy in 1933-1945 was a state-controlled planned economy. It was Autarkic, and the capitalist economy had largely been crushed by 1934 thanks to the abandonment of trade and the establishment of government intervention.
    1
  20197. Ich lerne Deutsch. However, there are several versions of Mein Kampf available online, and I have the printed version. I double checked what I was reading with one of the ones online . In fact, I highlighted in the printed version the quotes I wanted to use, and I took the quotes off the one online because it was quicker to copy/paste than to type out. So while there might be flaws, I think it's reasonable to assume the version going around is fairly accurate. Once I've learnt German and re-read it, I'll let you know.
    1
  20198. "In marxism socialism means that there is no private property in your country" - that's communism. Socialism is a mix of capitalism and state intervention in the economy and society.
    1
  20199. I disagree. Democracy is people with the power to vote on policies. Direct democracy - if you will. Voting for someone else to make policies without your imput is not democracy and is similar to the Roman Republic. It's a democratic process, but the state is not democratic. By using similar logic, you could make the case that because the Soviets were councils that operated democratically, the Soviet government was democratic. We know that's not the case.
    1
  20200. Maybe. But that's because there is no definitive definition of what anything political is. There are generalisations, but not 'laws'. Socialism though, does not require the seizing of the meana of production - that's communism.
    1
  20201. And yes, I enjoy debates :)
    1
  20202. Not true about the nationalisation bit. Britain in the 40s and 50s was socialist, but didn't nationalise ALL businesses, only certain industries. Plus, 'seizing the means of production' (which is what you're suggesting at by saying the nationalisation bit) is a communist, not necessarily socialist, idea. Socialism is basically a halfway house between capitalism and communism.
    1
  20203. Exactly. YouTube doesn't like swastikas and can demonetize and take videos down with them in it, which forces history creators like me to change our content. They're also targeting history channels and taking down videos (even battle videos) for little to no reason as far as I can see. This is therefore a deliberate distortion of history. Yes, it's an evil symbol, but so is the hammer and sickle as you point out. Therefore I'm making a point.
    1
  20204. "Granted it is sometimes very hard to separate one's personal opinions from facts" Except I'm the one who's provided the facts. What you said is not a counterargument. I've given you a bunch of evidence that clearly shows that this was socialism, and you've responded with "this is just fucking ridiculous". That's not a counterargument. And the reason you've responded with that is because you've lost the argument. And also, how would I lose your respect by making a solid counterargument? You told me I "goofed", I said I didn't, you then provided me with a link as an argument, I've challenged that argument and shown that it doesn't hold up, and now you're upset that I made a solid counterargument. That doesn't make any sense. If you know that National Socialism isn't socialism, then it should be very easy for you to be able to prove it. The fact that you're now struggling to do so should be an indication to you. The way this works is simple. I state something like "Hitler is blonde" and give evidence. Then, if this isn't the case, people have the opportunity to state their evidence against it. If the evidence supports the idea that Hitler wasn't blonde, great, my argument has been disproven and we can solidly confirm that Hitler wasn't blonde. However, if I provide a compelling argument that says "Hitler is blonde" and you fail to disprove that, then there isn't enough evidence to back up the counterargument and we can conclude that Hitler is blonde. Now, if you disagree with that, fine, but more research needs to be done if we are to prove that Hitler wasn't blonde. This is called the Scientific Method. From day 1 of me doing history on this channel, that is what I've done. First video came out and I went against the grain, saying Gavin of the 82nd Airborne was to blame for Market Garden. There are counterarguments, but they don't hold up. Therefore, I've stuck to my guns. Eventually, someone will make a decent counterargument, and as I said, I will change my mind when one is made. But for now, Gavin of the 82nd Airborne (and probably Browning too) are to blame. The same applies with other videos of mine, including this one. I will stick to my guns until an effective counterargument is made. But when one is made, it should hold up to scrutiny. Currently, the counterarguments made DO NOT hold up to scrutiny, which suggests they're based on poor research or a faulty premise.
    1
  20205. And I have admitted my mistakes in the past. But there is no mistake to admit. You cannot have the Holocaust without the socialism.
    1
  20206. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20207. Ok, I'll just counter the idea that this was capitalism. Hitler is both anti-Marxist, and anti-capitalist because he thinks the Jews are causing a class crisis within capitalism to bring in Marxism, so that they can destroy the world. He therefore wants to bring in racial-socialism in order to stop this. I will explain this ‘privatization’. 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    1
  20208. I'm braced :)
    1
  20209. Thanks Mateusz! I suspect it won't be long. It won't matter if it is or isn't reported because getting this video taken down doesn't change anything.
    1
  20210. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20211. Try this https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20212. That's true. It depends on how you see the political spectrum. I see it historically.
    1
  20213. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era.
    1
  20214. Not all. Some have agreed with me. They realise that there's not one unifying socialism, but branches of socialism. The Nazis being left does not mean all left are Nazis.
    1
  20215. Workers owning the means of production is not socialism, that's communism. Socialism is a blend of capitalism and large state intervention. Sometimes this means nationalisation (like in Britain) but sometimes it doesn't.
    1
  20216. Yup. I expected as much.
    1
  20217. Hey look,your argument is defeated https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20218. That's it, there's a blend of both left and right. And it's in the name. I can understand why they haven't grasped this (because I didn't either until recently), but once you grasp it, it all makes sense.
    1
  20219. "Socially, they outlawed homosexuality, banned divorce in many instances, banned abortion, introduced conscription and compulsory military service, introduced widespread censorship and state control of all broadcasting, media and arts, These are not the policies of Socialists, but of Corporate state fascists." Look at that list again and tell me which of those policies is state control of the economy? Because common-control of the means of production (state control of the economy) is socialism. Socialism is a rejection of private-control of the means of production (individual control of the economy). Socialism is collectivism, or social groups. Class group, racial group, gender group, national-group... Now was National Socialism about all about racial-groups or was it all about individuals having lots of freedom?
    1
  20220. "Socialism has an element of Internationalism. The NSDAP had none." Marxist socialism is international. NSDAP and Fascism aren't international because they're not Marxist. Socialism was born out the of the fires of the French Revolution, many years before Marx put pen to paper. When I say it's socialism, I mean the original socialism, not Marxism.
    1
  20221. It is correct. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. Compare this to conservativism, where they want less state intervention (among other policies).
    1
  20222. I can show it but the video would get demonetized and potentially won't be shown in Germany (because of their laws and sensitivities). I decided not to even attempt to monetize this anyway because I knew advertiser's wouldn't want their brands associated with National Socialism (even though they wouldn't be associated with them, since they're not sponsoring me, and are only paying YouTube for hosting the video). Clearly I'm not a fan of National Socialism. That said, I don't think that the Swastika should be banned in videos etc. But if it is outlawed, then flags displaying the Hammer and Sickle should also be banned, since they're just as evil.
    1
  20223. Actually, this moron did address all of that in the follow up video that took 18 months to make, has 107 sources, 350 direct references, timestamps in the description, and is 5 hours long. This moron would ask you to watch it, or at the very least stop spouting the Marxist narrative https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20224. Thank you Show Me :) Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what National Socialism was.
    1
  20225. Thanks Andresev! I'm actually surprised I didn't realize NS was socialism before. I only realised the other week when reading Mein Kampf. Can't believe I didn't connect the dots before... Embarrassing really for someone who's into WW2 history as much as I am
    1
  20226. I didn't quote Peterson. Nor did I list him as a source. My sources are listed in the pinned comment. I was linking to his video on Postmodernism because we have a bunch of Marxists on the internet saying things that aren't true, and using goon squad tactics and multiple accounts to downvote videos that they see as a threat, to mention no names.
    1
  20227. National Socialism is not Fascism.
    1
  20228. Congratulations Jamie!!! First time in a while you got first!
    1
  20229. Staring at you. Just you.
    1
  20230. They've closed their ears. What's interesting is that some of the Marxists and National Socialists agree with me, and yet others disagree. At the very least, this is a debate. And yet, that's not what's happening because a lot are not willing to even consider the other side's point of view. I used to think that the Nazis only called themselves socialist to trick the working class, and that it was actually capitalism and so on... but now that I've actually done a lot of research on the topic, I've realised that this was a massive distortion of history.
    1
  20231. You're very welcome. I'm glad you found a this useful :)
    1
  20232. Actually, the Nationalsocialists that have commented are well aware that they're socialists. This was, in fact, my main error with this video. I assumed they didn't realize what they were and built the video to target them. But they're fully aware that they are socialists, so they're actually agreeing with me. Also, they don't despise socialism. They despise Marxism. And yes, there is a difference.
    1
  20233. And here is a follow up video backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous notes quotes and more confirming that Hitler nationalized the industries, and the trade unions, and went East to forge a socialist empire https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20234. Cheers WoOchuck! Glad you liked it
    1
  20235. Thanks! This one is better https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20236. Revising history is good and is, in fact, part of the critical thinking process. You can't think critically and also not question the sources. https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 And as you said, there's no precise definition of what socialism is. The Marxists who downvoted this video also made that mistake, but still continue to give me a warped definition that doesn't fit all socialisms. At the gery least, my definition reflects the historical reality of what socialism is, and can be applied to socialism in all it's forms. A large centrally planned economy and society brought about by state intervention in the economy and society. It's like a dial - you turn the dial up, and you get some socialist policies. Keep turning, you get more. If you're conservative, you start to turn the dial back down.
    1
  20237. Thanks Leonard. Yes, it does seem like the Marxist definition of socialism is different than the historical practical implementation of socialism throughout history.
    1
  20238. Glad you agree Jim Land :)
    1
  20239. Cheers ej! :)
    1
  20240. "So, the German soldiers who survived the battle of Stalingrad routinely praised the way their captors treated them in the POW camps." I don't know what books you're reading but you should get some better ones. "Bernie Sanders is a self defined socialist. Does that make him a Nazi?" You can be socialist and not be racist. "Again, you are in a completely untenable position." See the pinned comment.
    1
  20241. "My Struggle" is just waffle, and a terrible read. I'd only recommend it if you're really really really interested in the subject, and my advice is for you to skip the first 100 pages or so, which is mostly about his early life and not relevant to anything.
    1
  20242. Maybe https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20243. Definitions may help you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20244. End of the video. Watch it.
    1
  20245. Marx is irrelevant to this discussion. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is in contrast to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy).
    1
  20246. Communism and Marxism are the same thing. And prior to the early days of the Soviet Union, the words "Communism" and "Socialism" meant the same thing.
    1
  20247. Socialism is state intervention in the capitalist economy. You can still have private business. Communism is where you don't have private business.
    1
  20248. I think it's also the right too, not just the left. I can see at least one guy who copied and pasted the same comment on two different accounts, so they're using their typical multiaccounts spam technique again. And yes, they're using the "modern" technique of "no, you're wrong" as their counterargument. It's silly.
    1
  20249. Did I? Where at the beginning?
    1
  20250. Thanks! If you haven't seen it, you may like my more recent Public vs Private video, which starts in Ancient Greece and goes all the way to the modern day explaining exactly what Socialism is historically and why National Socialism is a version of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20251. This is an old video, and I've addressed the counter arguments, including your own in the more recent video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20252. It didn't deny the class struggle, it aimed to resolve it by removing (in their eyes) the race that was causing it - the Jews. And Marxiat-socialism doesn't see all humans as equal. The bourgeoisie and the upper classes were to be murdered in a violent revolution in order to bring about "equality" for their social group (the working class), which it ultimately failed to do, plus they murdered millions of workers attempting to bring in this "equality" (e.g. Kulaks). The Nationalsocialists wanted to bring equality to their social group, which they defined as the racial-group, by removing or enslaving non-races. So yes, both class struggle and equality are there within Nationalsocialism, and therefore I'm not missing the point at all.
    1
  20253. "Bro.. I'm sorry but you can't just make these willy nilly claims based on purely historical sources." - erm... yes I can. This is a history channel. And I'm discussing National Socialism, which was definied by Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, which was based partly on Marxist theory. This is a historical subject, and this can absolutely be quantified by history. Socialism is state intervention in society and the economy. That's what happened in Germany during the National Socialist era.
    1
  20254. I didn't want to point that out because I knew that people would use that against me. And they still have, even though I didn't use it haha
    1
  20255. "The thing is you seem to think Socialism is race-based rather than Class-based." No I don't, read my above comment again. If it is class-based, then it's Marxism. If it's race-base, then it's National Socialism. Marxism isn't the only form of socialism. "The difference between Capitalism and Socialism relates to what Class is in control, not the race." No, socialism is the social (public) ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism. What you are describing is Marxist socialism. "I'm sure you are well aware that Hitler was funded by many millionaires and aristocrats" Were they Jewish millionaires? No, they were German millionaires because to the National Socialists the race came first. You could own your own property and factories etc if you were German. But if you didn't work towards the race, or if the race/state/Hitler and the Party thought you weren't playing ball, or if the state needed your property, you could have everything taken off you and have yourself thrown into a camp. By 1934, National Socialist Germany had shut her borders to world trade. They sent militants from the Party into businesses, industries, shops etc and brought in the Party policy, and dictated policy what resources the businesses would get and how they would treat their German staff etc. They shut down Trady Unions (which were seen as Judeo-Marxist institutions) and replaced them with the German Labour Front. The removed the Jews and other races from society, placed them in ghettos, concentration camps and death camps, in order to find a Final Solution to the race 'problem'. This was a racial-socialist government, not a class-socialist government. So you bringing up class as a way of saying this wasn't socialism is actually irrelevant. Apart from ending the class-struggle by favouring the race, this has nothing to do with the working class owning the means of production, because this is racial-socialism.
    1
  20256. You can't have the Holocaust without the socialism in National Socialism. It's a misconception to think this was capitalism, and Marxists have a ideological agenda to deny that this is the case. Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production. If it is the social (worker) ownership of the means of production, then it's Marxism. If it is the social (German/Aryan) ownership of the means of production, then it is National Socialism.
    1
  20257. I subscribe to the idea that if you waffle on and on about Biblo eating berries in the woods, and the reader is falling asleep, you're not doing it right. Also, using terribly pretentious language with sentences that go on for years, and paragraphs that don't end, you're also doing it wrong. I'm not reading to think "oh, I wonder if this guy's smart and knows what antidisestablishmentarianism is", I'm there for the story or the information. If you're unable to write a book that keeps the reader gripped, you've failed (since that's a very important element). And while Shakespeare doesn't waffle on and on like the other two, he's severely overrated. In the non-fiction world, the same basic principles apply. Plain and easy language, flow, no waffle, straight to the point, lots of information, conveys the story, keeps the reader interested - brilliant. Couldn't ask for more.
    1
  20258. They're not great at all. Have you actually read them? Terrible writing.
    1
  20259. "I love you and all TIK... but political science really doesn't seem to be one of your strengths due to this overly simplistic notion you have of capitalism and socialism." Actually politics and economics is absolutely my strength, more than military history. However, this video was targetted at Nazis, not Marxists, who I assumed actually knew the definition of socialism. Turns out, they either don't, or they're deliberately trying to change the definition because socialism doesn't work. "And yes I have read and seen your rebuttals to much of the criticism towards this video, but I'm sorry they just don't hold up." Neither does your rebuttal to my definitions. "I would love to add to that, but there isn't really anything I could say now that hasn't already been said." And I've already disputed what has been said, backed by solid evidence and definitions. "Yes, there are different kinds of socialism including some that are pretty horrible. But Nazism has far too many contradictions to be considered part of the same category" There's no difference. "and YES as much as you like to say otherwise the economic structure of Nazi Germany was capitalism." Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. How can it be capitalism if private property has been abolished and the state is in control of the means of production? Oh yes, it can't.
    1
  20260. "Just because the state had power in the private industry of Germany doesn't make them socialist, for one because 'state control' isn't even what socialism is to begin with." I think you'll find that it is. Google’s definition of socialism - “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production” “an economic, political, and social system that is based on the belief that all people are equal and should share equally in a country's money:” https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism “1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” “2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property” “b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state” “: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism “Socialism is a set of left-wing political principles whose general aim is to create a system in which everyone has an equal opportunity to benefit from a country's wealth. Under socialism, the country's main industries are usually owned by the state.” “1. an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels” “2. any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system” “3. (in Leninist theory) a transitional stage after the proletarian revolution in the development of a society from capitalism to communism: characterized by the distribution of income according to work rather than need” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/socialism “1 A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” “The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy” https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism “An economic system in which goods and services are provided through a central system of cooperative and/or government ownership rather than through competition and a free market system.” http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/socialism.html “Socialism started out being defined as “government ownership of the means of production,” which is why the government of the Soviet Union confiscated all businesses, factories, and farms, murdering millions of dissenters and resistors in the process. It is also why socialist political parties in Europe, once in power, nationalized as many of the major industries (steel, automobiles, coal mines, electricity, telephone services) as they could. The Labour Party in post-World War II Great Britain would be an example of this.” - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. “The great majority of those I have asked, all of them qualified to speak with authority, not only give a definition, but their definitions come remarkably close together.” - “Socialism is the public ownership and operation of all the means of production.” - “Socialism ... is the collective ownership, through the state, of all the means of production and distribution.” “Socialism… is a proposed reorganization of industrial society which would substitute for the private ownership of land and the instruments of production public ownership, and for the private direction and management of industry, direction and management through public officials.” - “...the common ownership and operation of substantially all productive instruments.” - “Socialism is the collective ownership and democratic management of the social means of production for the common good.” - “Socialism… is that contemplated system of society which proposes the abolition of private property in the great material instruments of production, and the substitution therefor of collective property; and advocates the collective management of production, together with the distribution of social income by society, and private property in the larger proportion of this social income.” - [And this just goes on and on like this, with numerous people from 1911 saying the exact same thing.] From “The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354” The Labour Party 2017 manifesto’s motto is “For the Many: Not the Few”. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf On Page 4 states - “Labour will invest in the cutting-edge jobs and industries of the future that can improve everybody’s lives. Which is why this manifesto outlines a fully costed programme to upgrade our economy.” “Labour will change the law so that banks can’t close a branch where there is a clear local need, putting their customers first.” - which will increase costs and lower competition, P16. “Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate” - decreasing the chance of small businesses and start-ups, creating an economy, P18. “Widening ownership of our economy” - is the headline on Page 19, stating “Many basic goods and services have been taken out of democratic control through privatisation.” “Bring private rail companies back into public ownership…” “Reverse the privatisation of Royal Mail at the earliest opportunity.” “Public ownership will benefit consumers [by increasing costs and prices, lowering productivity, and increasing taxes for the consumer?], ensuring that their interests are put first and that there is democratic accountability for the service.” That sounds exactly like state control and ownership of the economy. So, what we have here is a clear definition of socialism. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). This is opposite to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Socialism involves the abolishment of private property, state ownership or control of the means of production, and leads to policies like Autarky, nationalisation, and collectivisation. But the principle element is state control of the means of production, which is where the term “public sector” comes into it.
    1
  20261. Very strange... Not the first time my comments have unpinned themselves. I've repinned the pinned comment now.
    1
  20262. See the pinned comment.
    1
  20263. I've no idea what YouTube is thinking, but you're absolutely right in your assessment. The frustrating part is, they don't explain their actions. They link to the "community guidelines" as if they're some sort of Holy tableture, but the reality is they're super vague and don't explain why a particular video got demonetized etc.
    1
  20264. It was doing ok for a while, but now the dislikes are beginning to creep up. Seems like I've done a good job if this is the case ;)
    1
  20265. Thanks Levi, glad to hear it :) I wish YouTube had a Reddit-type comment system or something. The current comment system suck. Upvotes affect things, downvotes do nothing.
    1
  20266. I can't possibly keep up with all the comments. However, I am replying quite a lot to the ones that don't agree, so perhaps you're only seeing what you want to see.
    1
  20267. See, this is what annoys me. People claim I'm wrong, then demand evidence. I provide that evidence, then they double down, even though I've shown it to be the case and can provide plenty of sources and evidence that absolutely proves the case. Yet the response is always the same "I've got an image of socialism in my head based on the distortions that other people have given me, built on a false belief that socialism somehow helps the poor, and when evidence completely contradicts this, I'm going to double down and dismiss everything". Yesterday a socialist actually listened to what I was saying, and took it in. At the end he realised what I was saying and had an epiphany. If people would only listen and take in what I'm saying, they'd realise that they've been completely deceived - as I had been too.
    1
  20268. You've basically just admitted you didn't know the definition of socialism. Don't kid yourself. Socialism is, and always will be, state control of the economy. Marxism was state control of the economy for the workers, and Nationalsocialism was state control of the economy for the race. The thing that links the two is state control of the economy, which I've shown to be the case.
    1
  20269.  @daca8395  If it isn't state-control of the economy, then what does it matter if they privatized the economy or not? I've said this a thousand times now - socialism is collectivized/public/common/state control of the means of production (the economy). It's in opposition to private-control, which is capitalism. It has its roots as far back as ancient Greece and Rome, and was 'born' in the French Revolution, 50 years before Marx put pen to paper. If you tell me that it's to do with the working class - you're wrong. Marxism is to do with the working class, but Marxism is just a varient of the original socialism, not actually what socialism is.
    1
  20270. @Danilo Popović Yes, they did abolish private property in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. To quote Temin's “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” - "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 The 'privatization' that took place is, in fact, a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses - especially the Jews, but not just the Jews. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. Reimann's "Vampire Economy", written in 1939 by a Marxist in hiding (so a primary source document), quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” And - “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 And Hitler abolished the classes too, which he saw as the work of the Jews. He thought the Jews were bringing in capitalism in order to ignite class-warfare, which would bring about Marxism. This is why he implemented his version of socialism - in order to stop the Jews.
    1
  20271. It's state control of the economy, so yes National Socialism it was socialism. If it wasn't, you can't even explain the Hitler Youth, since private controlled youth groups were abolished in favour of the state-controlled group. Same with the German Labour Front (abolishment of private trade unions for the state), the nationalization of the railways (state control), the workers battalions, the wage controls, the price controls, the expropriation of the industries, the bureaucrats and shop floor militants and Nazi-Party officials who took over the industries, the Autarky policy and hte 4 Year Plan, let alone the Holocaust.
    1
  20272. "I'd say that it is a system that can apply any policy from the whole spectrum at the same time with one goal - domination of Aryan people and extermination and enslavement of others and for this goal he would use anything either from the left, either from the right" But you can't exterminate people like they did in the Holocaust without the state. No business could do this. The state owned the means of production, and therefore was a socialist state. A strong state in the economy cannot happen under capitalism - it is the opposite to what capitalism is. "And even if he introduced any of the Socialistic policies he would do it not due to his allegiance to socialism, but due to its fitting to the current needs of the Reich. Socialist would never accept Oligarchy, which was in place in the Reich, its completely opposite conceptions, they cannot co-exist, and if they supposedly do, they don't, by definition of Socialism" As my previous message shows, there state bureaucracy was in charge (much like in the Soviet Union), not the industrialists and businessmen. So this isn't the economy you think it is. You don't understand the economy or the politics or the ideology of the Third Reich. You've only dipped your toe on the surface of the water and come to the wrong conclusions.
    1
  20273. By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The influence of the Party cannot be seen in laws, but in practice, and personalities are the important factor. A large number of the ministers [at present all ministers] are Party members.” - Ministerialdirektor Sommer, spokesman for Rudolph Hess, in the Deutsche Juristenzeitung of May 21, 1936. “The capitalist under fascism has to be not merely a law-abiding citizen, he must be servile to the representatives of the State. He must not insist on “rights” and must not behave as if his private property rights were still sacred. He should be grateful to the Fuehrer that he still has private property.” “This state of affairs must lead to the final collapse of business morale, and sound the death knell of the self-respect and self-reliance which marked the independent businessman under liberal capitalism.” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20274. This is in contrast to capitalism, which is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). Hitler is all about state control. One of the first thing he does when he gets in power is wipe out private property. … 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ...
    1
  20275. Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism.
    1
  20276. That video doesn't debunk it at all, unless you think Marxism is the only form of socialism.
    1
  20277. “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of theTwenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  20278. "The Nazis viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized.” Temin, P576 “Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.” Temin, P576-577 “Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated [had their property seized] by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to “examine” the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.” - Reimann, Chapter II (no page number, as on Kindle) Reimann, in 1939, quotes from a German businessman’s letter to an American businessman - “The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.” “Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.” “How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials.” “You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years.” “We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep…” “The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions … The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare. (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz).” - Reimann, quoting from Jahrbuch des Oeffentlichen Rechtes der Gegenward, ed. by Otto Koellreuther (1935), p. 267. “There exists no law which binds the State. The State can do what it regards as necessary, because it has the authority.” “The next stage of National-Socialist economic policy consists of replacing capitalist laws by policy.” - Fritz Nonnenbruch, the financial editor of the Voelkischer Beobachter (quoted by Reimann). “The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges, grants, in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage.” - Reimann “Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the “national interest” or the “welfare of the community.”” “Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is “in the interest of the national community.”” - Reimann Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591
    1
  20279. "There certainly was private property, not only on a small level , but in larger scale and that was the driving force of the german economy , unlike the soviet union where all the means of production (exept small parts of the agrarian sector) was owned by the state , which planned the production in a centralized manner." Stating things that are incorrect doesn't make it true. The Nazis banned private property. Here is the Reichstag Fire Decree - ... 28 February 1933 - Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence: § 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of (opinion) expression, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications. Warrants for House searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” ... Articles of the Weimar Constitution affected - Article 115. The dwelling of every German is his sanctuary and is inviolable. Exceptions may be imposed only by authority of law. Article 153. Property shall be guaranteed by the constitution. Its nature and limits shall be prescribed by law. Expropriation [noun, the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit.] shall take place only for the general good and only on the basis of law. It shall be accompanied by payment of just compensation unless otherwise provided by national law. In case of dispute over the amount of compensation recourse to the ordinary courts shall be permitted, unless otherwise provided by national law. Expropriation by the Reich over against the states, municipalities, and associations serving the public welfare may take place only upon the payment of compensation. Property imposes obligations. Its use by its owner shall at the same time serve the public good. ... By law, individuals couldn't own property. Therefore, they cannot own businesses. The 'privatization' that took place, in fact, is a slight of hand. And there are many instances where the government exercised their power by seizing a person's personal property or businesses. The Nazis nationalized industries that didn't do as they insisted, then 're-privatized' them. But in reality those businesses could only function as part of the state, and were under control by the state, and weren't really owned by their owners.
    1
  20280. Here's my more recent video, backed by 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and more, showing why Hitler was a Socialist. It also perfectly explains his reasoning in the quote you provided https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20281. Because he hates postmodernism.
    1
  20282. Did they do a video on this? I don't agree with them at all, but I'd be interested to see their comment section and compare it to this one
    1
  20283. The "benefit of workers" bit is Marxist, not socialist. Socialism came before Marxism, and was simply state-control of the economy. Doesn't matter which group is in control, it's still socialism. So the counterargument that it doesn't benefit the workers is irrelevant (although arguably Hitler's regime did benefit the workers, providing full employment and high wages, which is why the people where in support of the regime).
    1
  20284. - They banned private trade unions, and replaced them with the state trade union, the DAF. - Performance related pay is missing the elephant in the room that the state dictated worker's pay. - Workers banned from changing jobs is state control of the economy, so socialism. - Hitler took money off the state monopolies that he had created by nationalizing the industries and taxing them heavily... a process he called "privatization". - Hitler did murder socialists, and Germans. I guess he wasn't German either. I'm no expert on counter-arguments, but your counter-argument looks suspiciously like it's been influenced heavily by the Stalinist-Marxist lie.
    1
  20285. “However, no one can possibly ignore the substantial changes that took place in Germany’s economy during this period: active government control over all branches of the economy; massive deficit spending on public works; regulation of foreign trade, prices, wages, and investment. It is quite clear that there was no free market economy in Germany throughout those years, even in comparison with other advanced industrial countries, none of which had operated under conditions of “pure competition” since the beginning of the century. The scope and depth of state intervention in Nazi Germany had no peacetime precedent or parallel in any capitalist country...” Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Page 3
    1
  20286. Not technically. See the first video for my updated video on Hitler's Socialism (107 sources, 350 direct references) and the second for the in-depth technical definition of Fascism and why it's different from Nazism https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  20287. Done right? The economy of the Third Reich was imploding https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20288. Zzzzzz....
    1
  20289. It's Racial Socialism rather than Class Socialism (Marxism). Instead of the Class Theory of History, Hitler believes in the Racial Theory of History. However, they're both still Socialism because they both desire Socialized Public Sector (state) control of the economy (means of production). And, in case more Marxists disagree with the historic definition of the term "Socialism" I have explained why it is State Control of the economy in my other more recent video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20290. After all the Marxist criticism, of course this is being revised, and expanded upon. However, the theory is sound - the issue is the evidence presented in the video (which wasn't overwhelming) and the non-sensical counter-arguments being used. Please see the pinned comment where I explain why National Socialism wasn't capitalism, and that Marxist theory isn't relevant to this dicussion (except to say that Hitler was influenced by it). You should also be aware of the New Left theory of Postmodernism, which rejects reason and evidence for "belief" (even though they don't use it). The evidence I am now presenting is being rejected, not on logical grounds, but on political grounds.
    1
  20291. And here I was about to upload a response video. Oh well
    1
  20292. He was actually a socialist. But he had a philosophy which also appealed to the right too.
    1
  20293. I highly suspect he won't venture into politics (since that's what I asked him), but you never know.
    1
  20294. Haha glad to hear, and thanks for the laugh :) I hope you've enjoyed the books
    1
  20295. No? What made you think that?
    1
  20296. Yeah, I think it was Berlin by Beevor, then I read Stalingrad, and then something like The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.
    1
  20297. Thank you for your support! I wish I could meet more fans in real life, but it's not really viable :)
    1
  20298. Considering the book on Operation Keelhaul was £460, I'd say the bookcase alone is a few grand.
    1
  20299. If only that was true :)
    1
  20300. "Rather than a secret society secretly ruling us all, it's a bunch of socialists repurposing old theology all over again or a bunch of people finding this religion all over again like we now how these Neo-Pagans etc." That's actually how I see it. I did say that it wasn't a monolithic religion, but rather separate denominations or sects (or however you want to describe it). Perhaps I didn't make this clear enough because I've had a few people complain that I think that it's a monolithic religion even though I specifically stated it wasn't. In that video I did say: "It has evolved over time, and it’s not a united religion. Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims don’t see eye to eye, even though they’re all technically worshipping the same God. Well, the same thing applies with this other religion too. Even though they are of the same faith, there is a vicious hatred between the different denominations, but they are still one and the same." So there isn't one big secret society, it's a bunch of small esoteric cults that share the same core theology/ideology, but are different from one another.
    1
  20301. No, it's like saying a man died after being pushed off a bridge, when in reality he jumped off it himself.
    1
  20302. It's called English. When referring to a country or government, you use the feminine pronoun "she". It applies to all countries. For example, "Britain rules the waves because she has the largest navy." Please don't jump to stupid conclusions based on false assumptions. If you're not sure on something, ask a question first.
    1
  20303. Yes, I thought that when I first read the title
    1
  20304. You're correct. I've always mispronounced that word and I need to consciously overcome years of habit
    1
  20305. Was he?
    1
  20306. Take your time with regards to the judgement of this. However, I will point out that you're incorrect when it comes to the "name calling". As I quoted in an earlier episode of this series, the author Sewell openly brags about himself being a Marxist (specifically a Leninist). David Hoggan and others (like Irving) call themselves "Revisionists" but this is a play on words (explained here https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 ). In reality, they are Denialists because they not only deny the H of WW2, but also change and distort the evidence to push false narratives. That's a form of denying history, and so the term "Denialist" applies. Neo-Nazis are neo-Nazis. I'm not sure why you think this is "questionable". And the Bloomsybury Group were proto-hippies. Just look at who they were, what they got up to, what they stood for. It was all for "peace maaaannnn". Keynes himself not only was a conscientious objector (not because he had a decent reason, he was just opposed to war because he thought it was intellectually beneath him), but he also based his economics off the works of the National Socialist economists, as Sennholz shows in his book "Age of Inflation". So if you don't like the term "proto-hippy", I'm happy to call him a "proto-Nazis" instead if you wish.
    1
  20307. "no one says that the treaty of versaillies led to hyper inflation..." They do. They say that in order to pay the reparations, the German government turned to the printing press. See these slides for example: https://image3.slideserve.com/6080271/the-treaty-of-versailles3-l.jpg https://image.slidesharecdn.com/3-150729145755-lva1-app6891/95/wemar-germany-impact-of-hyperinflation-4-638.jpg?cb=1453141488 https://image.slidesharecdn.com/megroup1-160418131035/95/comparison-between-hyperinflation-in-germany-and-zimbabwe-7-638.jpg?cb=1460985070 And older books say this, and I was taught this in college. - "everybody recognizes that that was because of the great depression" The Great Depression was in 1929? Unless you're referring to the depression in 1921?
    1
  20308. As I explained at the end of episode 1 of this series, the Reichsbank had increased it's goldmark holdings to 2.626 billion as a result of WW1 (from 1.356 billion). So the Reichsbank itself could have paid off the first payment without even touching the printing press if they wanted to do so. Also, the inflation started well before WW1, and the high inflation ramped up before the first payment was made. Thus, the hyperinflation wasn't caused by the reparations payments.
    1
  20309. As I just said in response to your other comment, the Federal Reserve is not the only thing in the United States.
    1
  20310. I love the gaslighting, Royeaux. Your argument boils down to "believe your TV box or we'll call you stupid names". Don't worry, there's no propaganda in your media, and they're definitely not owned by the same corporation https://youtu.be/_fHfgU8oMSo
    1
  20311. This is it. You have the Soviets, US, British and the Germans themselves (along with other countries) all agreeing that this event happened. Of all the things in the war that are disputed, practically the whole world is united on this event. And yet we have people who think it didn't happen. And then they pretend their not racists.
    1
  20312. Probably not if I can reply to you. But I wouldn't advise leaving any in the future.
    1
  20313. It won't be targeted at them. It will be the usual in-depth documentaries I normally make targeted at anyone interested in the subject, and will encourage further reading. The more we all know, the less chance we'll have people siding with the distorians
    1
  20314. "So what?" Yeah, I think you missed a big point there. The crimes of the Nazis and Soviets in this time frame are far more intense than in any other period in history. If you're saying they weren't evil, then you must think that evil does not exist. And that's nice, but it does exist, and they are evil.
    1
  20315. Possibly. But we have the advantage.
    1
  20316. Actually, I've decided to let them stand here. Their obvious racism does more harm to them, and nobody's taking them seriously.
    1
  20317. Yes, flooding is a tactic. Marxists do the same. They use multiple accounts to downvote videos, as they've done on my channel and i have proof of that too.
    1
  20318. They're untrustworthy because the people who deny the Holocaust reject the scientific method and distort the evidence. Since socialism was proven with fact and evidence to be bad and doesn't work, the French Marxists invented Postmodernism - which is a rejection of science and evidence in favour of belief that socialism does work (they call belief 'ideology' but it's basically belief). All that matters is that their world view [see definition of socialism below] of dividing the world into "social groups" and rejecting the 'individual' human being as a concept so that 'society' or 'the state' can rule over their chosen "social group" after removing the undesireable "social group" is promoted and preached. So they reject evidence and are happy to distort evidence and make stuff up. Therefore, this isn't a dismissal of rational, scientific, evidence-based arguments - it's a dismissal of their 'belief'. If they came forwards with actual (non-distorted) evidence that proved that the mountain of evidence that is in existence that proves the Holocaust happened is completely false, then at best this would be classed as a debate, since they would need a brilliant argument to prove a ton of evidence is false, and there would be a substantial counter-argument (which is why it would be classed as a debate). But they're not doing that. They're fabricating evidence, twisting, mis-quoting, distorting, rejecting, denouncing authors and kicking and screaming like little children in order to promote their beliefs and undermine the foundation of science and the professional historical scholarship. That's not an argument - it's completely fictional, it's completely false, and therefore we are legitimately able to dismiss those beliefs entirely. [Definition of socialism: Socialism is the social (public, state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy). If it is the social (worker's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it's Marxism (which is what you think 'socialism' is). If it is the social (German/Aryan people's state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy), then it is National Socialism. This is the opposite to capitalism: Capitalism is the private (individual, non-state) ownership or control of the means of production (business/economy).]
    1
  20319. Yeah, there's a lot of things being said about it, but many are not true. In the meantime, I'd recommend these videos for you The Origins of Mass Killing: the bloodlands hypothesis https://youtu.be/fXrqGlgufCA What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg
    1
  20320. Why?
    1
  20321. The best bit is, most of the deniers quote each other, so when you go back to their sources you find nothing, or even forgeries of documents in the case of one distorian I can think of. Then good old David Irving comes along and pretends to use the original sources. Except he's manipulated and distorted the sources to fit his agenda. So even then, they have no evidence for what they're doing.
    1
  20322. I like the idea of a Fabian strategy.
    1
  20323. Really?? He argues that the Soviets didn't invade Poland!?! Oh wow, that's insane! I'm genuinely shocked by that. And yes, I'll be covering the famine and explain that too
    1
  20324. Furr is known to have an agenda. What type of agenda does he have? Could he be selectively using texts to manipulate the reader's perception of the events? Why is there so much evidence saying that Stalin did create this and that the Kulaks weren't really an enemy at all, and yet we have one guy, with a known agenda, telling us something different?
    1
  20325. I also suspect a great deal of these denialists and racists are people who don't fit into normal society, so they've formed their own group on the fringes. It's sad, but their hatred is fueled by the fact that they're unable to make proper friends or relationships.
    1
  20326. Haha thanks!
    1
  20327. You mean, that's what he wants you to believe. The reality is that he's been proven to be lying in court http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/judgment-00-00.html
    1
  20328. Haha I know the feeling, thanks
    1
  20329. Good question!
    1
  20330. Exactly. That's why I'm getting a lot of backlash from Nazis and inter-Nazis (my brand new term for Marxists, InterNational Socialists) who don't like me discussing anything about the horrors of socialism, even when it directly relates to the fighting itself.
    1
  20331. I actually stopped after I announced this. Too much effort and I don't have the time to police the comments. The only ones that I do delete are actual spam comments. That said, my policy now is to call out Marxists and Nazis for being what they are - the same thing, socialists.
    1
  20332. I'm not downplaying anything. What word would you use to describe them?
    1
  20333. Yes, I'll agree with that.
    1
  20334. 'We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not?' Orwell, G. "Nineteen Eighty-Four." Penguin Books, 2000. P260
    1
  20335. Is this on Reddit? Let me guess, shitwehraboossay?
    1
  20336. Actually I made a response before the question was even asked https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  20337. I'm glad to hear you agree! Thanks!
    1
  20338. Cheers Ricky!
    1
  20339. I have since updated this policy and no longer censor (unless people spam or swear excessively or such)
    1
  20340. They sure did
    1
  20341. This channel is supported by Patreons, and a small amount of money off YouTube adverts. That's about as independent as you can get.
    1
  20342. That was just the dregs. I'd already deleted most of the comments prior to making this video. I also only showed a small portion of the dregs too, and only those that were short. Many were several paragraphs long going into detail why the events didn't happen and that it's a conspiracy. On top of that, up until this moment, I didn't have a single video on this channel about these events, except my revisionist historian one, but that's fairly recent and didn't get a great deal of traction. Most of the comments came on other videos that had nothing to do with this topic, which is why it's sad.
    1
  20343. I will make a video on it, and it was definitely manmade. See the video: The Origins of Mass Killing: the bloodlands hypothesis https://youtu.be/fXrqGlgufCA It doesn't just discuss the Holodomor, but it's good. Also, this other lecture shows that, while other areas of the Soviet Union were impacted, it wasn't as much as the Ukraine: "What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results" https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg
    1
  20344. Thank you, I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  20345. It's opened a can of worms, but it had to be done :)
    1
  20346. Except I'm not far-right, and it wasn't far-right propaganda. In fact, I had valid views, and have successfully defended myself numerous times in the comment section. The best part is, the video immediately AFTER those two videos was further evidence that supported my points, yet the very people who complained in the NS videos actually praised it... which says they don't understand what NS is. I will leave the link to that video, and if you watch it and don't understand why it supports what I said in the previous videos, you yourself do not understand what Nationalsocialism actually is https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  20347. I'm not too worried about the backlash because I'm doing this for myself and for those who want to learn. I follow the evidence and will state my findings regardless. Therefore I couldn't care less how much a video gets downvoted.
    1
  20348. Cheers Tim, thanks for the book recommendation. I'll pick it up :)
    1
  20349. Yep!
    1
  20350. They were evil. Irish famine and India etc (not sure about Spanish regime). However, this was a mild evil compared to the National Socialist and Soviet Socialist regimes.
    1
  20351. Yes! Please!
    1
  20352. I can certainly feel the pressure
    1
  20353. They're not receiving any attention beyond this video. I feel like I was going to end up coving this topic anyway because it's hard to avoid it when discussing the Eastern Front. The point is, I'll be doing what I always do - make videos presenting the facts, show the counter arguments, then make a conclusion. It will be just like any other history video I've ever made. Not going to call anyone out etc, this video was just to highlight the problem.
    1
  20354. Oh yes, and there's a mountain of evidence that says it happens. They conveniently skip all that, or twist this evidence to further their own agenda.
    1
  20355. I don't think there's a single country in the world where every citizen loves their country. Except maybe the Vatican
    1
  20356. Glad to have you along :) I remember the Polish cavalry thing too. There's lots of nice little myths like that - like Caesar being born of cesarean
    1
  20357. I am 100% confident of my position. And I'm 100% not happy with spam or hate speech, neither of which should be tolerated. The point is, the Holocaust happened. You can disagree with the details, but to deny the event because you don't like a particular race is not acceptable history.
    1
  20358. I've actually taken a pay cut to do this full-time, and it's not profitable right now, which is why I'm reliant on the support of my Patreons. I'm definitely not doing this for the money (although I do need it to be profitable otherwise I'd have to stop eventually). So no, you're absolutely wrong.
    1
  20359. The famine did affect other parts of the Soviet Union, however it was concentrated in the Ukraine and similar provinces as shown in this video: "What Do We Know About the Holodomor: New Research Results" https://youtu.be/3k5ScxnpQrg When I cover it, I will mention that it wasn't just the Ukraine. However, to deny that it impacted the Ukraine more other regions is wrong.
    1
  20360. Here's a video you need to watch, bearing in mind that this is ten times more theory than I ever learned at university https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  20361. Thanks! Good to know I have the support of another super-geek :D
    1
  20362. That is irony. I will allow because it's funny. Also, never realised that his first name was Paul. TIL
    1
  20363. The problem is, free speech. We uphold it, but they abuse it. Discourse cannot happen because were arguing against people who value fiction more than fact. They're not listening, and they're spreading lies. So the question becomes - how do we protect free speech without degrading the quality of our own free speech?
    1
  20364. In that case, thanks for the comment, Mike! Glad you're enjoying my videos :) Yeah, they usually hit a couple days or weeks after a video goes up (not all videos, just ones relevant to them). So most viewers are gone and then I'm left to deal with them.
    1
  20365. But nobody's laughing at them.
    1
  20366. The issue is not of free speech, it's of self-moderation. If you shout and scream obscenities at your boss, you'll get fired. You can't then cry "free speech" and say the boss is at fault because your behaviour was unacceptable. Same when PewDiePie said the N word. He got into big trouble over that. But he couldn't argue "free speech". I think the same thing applies here. If they want to lie, distort, and twist facts, then spam this stuff all over the place, then they shouldn't cry foul when they get banned. It's not reasonable discourse or an opinion, it's outright and offensive lies. They can spout that stuff on their own videos, but I don't think they have a place in here.
    1
  20367. It's a nobel idea, but it's hard for one guy to debunk hundreds of comments flooding-in as the Nazis and Marxists Brigade your channel. I was spending all my time responding to comments and less time creating videos. It's simply not possible. This is why the internet is both a blessing and a curse - on the one hand it allows massive amounts of information to be shared, but on the other it also allows lots of dissinformation and distortions to be shared. I know probably most people will see through it, but I suspect a lot wont, which is why censorship seems like an easier option. That said, not long after this video I stopped censoring people. There have been a few bannings since, but that's only because they were spamming or swearing excessively.
    1
  20368. And mine too. Ignorance is their strength.
    1
  20369. I've ceased deleting or holding back comments (although YouTube automatically keeps some held for some reason) because, while it is a threat, I realized it's better to have people out in the open with their views rather than give them ammunition against the idea of free speech.
    1
  20370. 1. It's irrelevant if Irving deliberately misinterprets the information to push his agenda, which he does and has been proven. There's even been books published proving this fact! 2. How many teachers do you know where they say "hey class, here's some evidence that supports an established event" and then a tenth of the class start constantly calling out "YOU'RE NOT USING THE CORRECT SOURCES - BUT WE ARE, DAVID IRVING IS GOD, NOTHING YOU SAY MAKES SENSE BECAUSE WE'RE REFUSING TO LISTEN" and then proceed to interrupt the flow of discussion within the rest of the class? I mean, why even turn up to class at that point when you're not going to listen, and you're only there to disrupt it? This portion of the class are not willing to read anything that doesn't fit their racist bias and are there purely to discredit the teacher's legitimacy (by calling him a liar, without taking into account anything he's actually said or done). Teachers absolutely remove the bad apples from the class, and I don't see what's wrong with that here. Not that I have removed people; I only removed about 8 or so after this video went up, and they were mainly people spamming the comments with links to the Daily Stormer. Been too busy to care much about the idiots spamming David Irving comments. Think my regular viewers are too smart to fall for their tricks anyway.
    1
  20371. Explain.
    1
  20372. Deleted that guy. He was being racist elsewhere. He also claimed to be a subscriber, and that he was leaving (trying to discredit me). Reality was, he's never once commented on any of my videos unit this one, so it's obvious he wasn't ever a subscriber. Again, dirty tactics.
    1
  20373. Yeah :(
    1
  20374. Thanks philiphied!
    1
  20375. Actually, as Evans points out, Irving manipulated the evidence, misquoted from the sources, and changed the meaning of what was said to paint a false narrative in favour of Hitler. Regardless of whether he works with the original sources or not, if he's not capable of being honest and work within the realms of acceptable historical practice (which uses the scientific method, as well as common sense), he's not to be trusted.
    1
  20376. Exactly. Sadly, ignorance is strength
    1
  20377. I intend to research both sides of the argument, not just one or another.
    1
  20378. I've just checked and your previous comment isn't in the "reviewed" comments, so it was most-likely auto-deleted by YouTube. While I have sympathy for anyone who is ill and near the end of their life, this doesn't mean Irving was right in his views. "Freedom of speech" is a violation of private property rights, and therefore is not something I agree with. You can say what you like on your own property, but not on mine. That said, I'm (largely) not policing these comments - YouTube is. I'll only delete you if you're not behaving yourself. If you're spamming, swearing, being disrespectful towards others, or denying history, you're out. Don't like these rules? Tough. And this isn't to say that conversations cannot occur. They occur all the time. I welcome all VALID objective perspectives. But I'm no-longer tolerating ideological (religious) fanaticism, which is a fundamentally invalid way of conducting history as I outlined here https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI?si=PGT73KbvHiWZxDYr
    1
  20379. Yes, but most distorians are minor, or are genuine mistakes or misinterpretations. But this isn't a mistake, it's deliberate, and it's hateful.
    1
  20380. Cheers Wiron! You're right about the comments. My latest video is proof to that. Got a response coming in the hour though :)
    1
  20381. Yeah they were in reply to someone else. I've not deleted any comments, so he must have deleted his own. People tend to do that when they lose arguments :)
    1
  20382. Oh, so the Reichstag Fire Decree is nonsense is it?
    1
  20383. 28th of February 1933, private property rights are abolished. Tell me again how this isn't socialism?
    1
  20384. More like just far left. Nazis and Fascists are socialists, but I hadn't discovered that yet when I made this video. One of the biggest distortions in history is the idea that they were capitalists and not socialists, and I was fooled too. More videos to come on the topic.
    1
  20385. Yes, it's taking forever because it's a stupidly long battle. Will be about 7 hours long when it's done.
    1
  20386. Belief is irrelevant. All that matters is evidence and interpretation https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  20387. Which is why we should educate everyone so that they can see through the biased political agenda.
    1
  20388. Actually yes, there is a bait and switch going on. And this is just one example of the shady tactics the deniers are using. You're right, it doesn't make sense when someone points out that the logic is flawed. Same applies with denying the Holocaust using a manipulation of evidence.
    1
  20389. The book "Stumbling Colossus" by David Glantz. Or knowing that the Soviets were outnumbered by the Germans alone on day 1 of the war. Or knowing that the entire German Army was far bigger than the entire Red Army. Or knowing that the Soviets were in the middle of a mobilization and reorganization effort and thus couldn't have attacked. Or knowing that Soviet tanks had little fuel or ammunition because they weren't expecting to fight. Or knowing that Soviet motorized rifle divisions weren't motorized (so how would they have attacked?). Or knowing that they were building two defence layers inside the Soviet Union. Or knowing that Suvorov distorted the facts in order to make his thesis.
    1
  20390. I also believe in free speech, good or bad. However, I also don't like lies and distortions of history. Discussing the details if fine, saying the past didn't happen is a distortion of history.
    1
  20391. You can question the details of the Holocaust - you just can't deny it or claim that large parts of it are made up. This is the same in every topic on history. I don't see many people denying that WW2 happened, yet the logic is just the same.
    1
  20392. History teaches us not to instantly believe everything we hear. The first question you need to ask is "But is this really the case?" Now, most of us do not have time to go double check every fact, but what I'd suggest for you is not to take a hard stance on a subject unless you've thoroughly looked into it from both sides. So if you come across a video saying "the earth is flat" go - ok, I'll accept that for now, but if I find more information that disputes this view, I'll change my mind. Then, if you have time to do some double-checking, look up a video that refutes that claim. And look at the arguments on both sides. Look at the authors. Look at their "agendas" (assuming they have any). The point is, don't dig yourself into a position and become a unmoveable rock. This is not good because if someone comes along and says "the earth isn't flat" your first instinct is to dispute their facts. Rocks can crack and break. Instead, be like water. If water hits an obstacle, it goes around it. If water wants to crash, it still can do. But if you believe in the flat earth, and someone tells you "during an eclipse the Earth makes a round shadow on the moon", then you should say "good point", let me think about this. If this new fact disputes the old fact, and makes more sense (ideally you'll want several facts like this) then all you need to do is come out and say "you know what, I used to think the earth is flat, but now I think the earth is round." I promise you, people will have more respect for you if you do that, than if you stubbornly believe in something.
    1
  20393. Considering a lot of the killing was in Polish territory, I'm not surprised to hear they have this law.
    1
  20394. There's a difference between barbarism and civilization. That difference is the laws of society. And you're not questioning cosmetics, you're questioning the very idea that World War 2 even occurred. The war could not have happened without Hitler's socialism. Hitler's socialism also made the Holocaust a reality. You are denying the fundamental element that makes both of these events occur. To deny one, is to deny the other. That cannot be. WW2 happened, and so did the Holocaust.
    1
  20395. lol "patriotard"
    1
  20396. They're not revisionists, they're distorians. Calling them "revisionist historians" gives them a honest title, and we don't want to even grant them that.
    1
  20397. I'm not sure if it is currently taught or not, but they didn't teach it in my school. Or, maybe I missed that lesson.
    1
  20398. Nope. I want to make documentaries on the events themselves (and, where appropriate, show why denialist arguments make no sense). Basically like I've done in all my videos. But I'm not interested in becoming a channel like what you described.
    1
  20399. I'm not sure if I'll do a review of his book as part of a video, but I do think I'll be showing where he went wrong in some of the videos when discussing the events themselves.
    1
  20400. Haha thanks!
    1
  20401. Thanks for the comment :) I'm glad you think I'm doing the right thing here. I won't let them stop me from making videos, you can count on that
    1
  20402. When have I ever said that the British didn't commit war crimes? I didn't. In their long history they certainly have committed horrible crimes. But here's the deal - they didn't commit many in the time period I study (WW2). And those that they did commit pale in comparison to the Axis powers.
    1
  20403. The numbers fluctuate, as they do with any topic in history (e.g. how many men were in Rommel's Afrika Korps). Historians currently think the number of Jews alone is over 6 million. Recent estimates put the number at 6.2 million, with many more millions in the wider Nazi atrocities. But, while the numbers may be debatable, the event in question did happen, and saying there was no deaths at all is nothing other than a twisted fantasy.
    1
  20404. Wow, I feel privileged :) thank you
    1
  20405. When the state has a policy of seizing food from people, how can you claim that this wasn't deliberate?
    1
  20406. Says the guy linking to a Marxist-Leninist blog. Hmmm... I wonder why it's mostly Marxists who are denying the Holodomor happened, as well as many other Soviet atrocities, or the fact that extreme socialisms like Marxist-Socialism and Nationalsocialism are evil? Maybe it has something to do with ideology and postmodernism?
    1
  20407. The Holodomor happened because of Marxist-Socialism, Stalin was to blame, and this is a valid argument.
    1
  20408. If you do not deny Stalin's crimes then you're not as far left as you think you are.
    1
  20409. It's not "empirical evidence" because empiricism is observation-only (sensual). There is no perception in empiricism, just senses. We need to add perception into the equation, which makes it non-empirical. It's not a "mathematics axiom" - there are only three actual axioms. The three are: existence exists, we exist possessing a consciousness, and A is A (the law of identity). From these, we can gain logic (e.g. A is only A, it cannot be something else). And logic shows that 2+2 does in fact equal 4, since there's no other conclusion you can come to when you put two objects and two more objects together.
    1
  20410.  @menajev  "You never heard about hallucinations?" Yes. Hallucinations are a fault of the mind (the conceptual level) not the sensual or perceptual levels. Your mind has departed from reality, which is why you "think" you saw something, when in reality you did not.
    1
  20411. You've literally just explained empiricism, not objective history. You can only get to the truth via logical concepts based on the evidence. Without historians integrating the evidence together logically, you'll never get to the truth about what happened.
    1
  20412. Historians study the records. What is contained in those records? Records of the past. Thus, historians are studying the past via the records. And as explained in the video, by using all the sources we can, it's possible to get an accurate, logical, and objective history from these sources. You can try and say otherwise, but you're clutching at straws. History is contained within the sources.
    1
  20413. Paul contradicts Jesus, and Christianity is based on Paul, not Jesus. There are literally thousands of contradictions in the Bible - just look them up. It's fiction, not history. The only thing it tells us is what a particular Jewish sect believed, nothing more. If God appeared, I'm sure he could prove himself. At which point, I would ask him why he believes in such an evil ideology as altruism, and why he allowed his followers to corrupt their minds on such poison. His hateful and evil ideology has made man suffer in his name, for zero reason at all. Men could live a good life, but instead they choose to remain poor and ignorant in their self-righteousness.
    1
  20414. If God created reality, then what created God? You don't get around the infinity problem with another infinity. If God always existed, then why couldn't readily have always existed? The most logical answer is that reality has always been. The universe came from reality at some point in time, but reality itself must be infinite.
    1
  20415. Circular logic. Your "evidence" is your "trust" and "good reason", which is based on the "evidence" ot "trust" !and "good reason". Tell your God to appear before me on live broadcasting feed for the rest of the world to see, for I would like to quiz him on a few things.
    1
  20416. As Voegelin said, trust is a spiritual act. Faith exists on the spiritual and emotional level, rather than on evidence. As you said "good reason", not evidence.
    1
  20417. There is an answer, and off the top of my head, I think it's: dreams and hallucinations are your mind turning inwards. It's only a temporary "failure" (if you want to see it like that), but if so, it's technically a failure on the conceptual level, not the perceptual level.
    1
  20418. Regardless, the eyes and brain habe zero incentive to not sense reality. It wouldn't make sense on an evolutionary level to evolve eyes and brains that couldn't sense lions and snakes.
    1
  20419. I explained this in the video with the pencil in the water. Illusions do exist in reality, which tells us something about the nature of reality. The rubber hand illusion is not a subjective experience, it's an objective experience. Your senses are valid, even if they're wrong. You do feel like the rubber hand is yours during the illusion, just like you do see the pencil appear bent or broken in the water.
    1
  20420. I'm not against Anarcho-Capitalism, and I understand why people are AnCaps, but as I said in that video, I'm not an AnCap. My views are constantly evolving, and since discovering that Hitler was a Socialist, I've not committed to an "ideology". In fact, I've deliberately avoided doing so because I was tricked before into believing in the evil ideology of socialism, so I'm now being careful not to fall for something else. But now I understand that socialism is evil, that state intervention destroys the economy, I have looked into free market economics, and I'm in favour of a free market. However, unlike what some have implied, it's not due to ideological reasons. There's no "ideology" behind the understanding of how actual economics works.
    1
  20421. Which ideology is that exactly? He's accusing me of being an AnCap and a Libertarian, neither of which I am. And if he wanted to engage in a discussion over this issue, he should have approached it in a different, more respectful manner. He has the freedom to make stuff up, and people have the freedom to believe him, but I also have the freedom to ignore such nonsense.
    1
  20422. No. My viewers have made clear that his video is more of a "hit piece" than an attempt to get to the truth. It's also full of fallacious arguments. I also understand that it's not aimed at me, but purely a defensive move trick his own subs to dismiss and not watch my videos, so they don't have to see and hear what I actually said.
    1
  20423. History does study reality. The sources record reality, not fiction.
    1
  20424. "But wait!! If Hitler believed taking over the Soviet Union was so easy, why would he need to trick Stalin in the first place." Someone else just said this, and it doesn't hold up. Think about it. If Hitler thought that all he'd have to do is kick the door down and the whole thing would come crashing down, then why bother with divisions, tanks or artillery, or even rifles? All he'd need is a good pair of boots! Hitler may believe that the Soviet Union would be easy to take down, but only if the Germans actually try and win. If they don't get a surprise attack, and if they don't actually try their hardest to win, then they'd probably lose.
    1
  20425. Yes, I've changed the titles to say Hypothesis rather than Theory
    1
  20426. "What was the position in early June 1940. Any information after that date is irrelevant, and I'm afraid your theory relies heavily on subsequent information." Currently, this might be true. But that doesn't mean that the evidence for it doesn't exist. 1st, I need to confirm that this theory works in 1941 (see pinned comment) 2nd, I need to gather more evidence for this theory for the 1940 period and prior to that And 3rd, I need to then combat the counter-arguments But that doesn't mean the information after June 1940 is irrelevant, because if the two-front-war idea was correct in 1941, then it could be correct in 1939 (e.g. Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) and in 1940 too. If it is, then we could be onto something.
    1
  20427. Consider this: If Hitler thought that SU would just collapse anyway, why bother having rifles, tanks or artillery?
    1
  20428. @klo schuessel - Like this video shows, just because you have a counter-argument, doesn't mean it stands up to scrutiny. You may think it does, but just because you don't see my point of view doesn't mean that my thinking is "swiss cheese".
    1
  20429. If I didn't already have a pinned comment for this video, I would pin yours, because this is a major problem for most of the criticism I get. At least 90% of the counter-arguments for my videos were answered in the videos people comment on criticizing, or in the videos I say "I've covered this in a previous video, here's the link".
    1
  20430. I guess so, although I would argue that it does work, and also isn't as complicated as the idea that letting the British Army get away would result in peace somehow...?
    1
  20431. There must be a reason for the disagreement. So what's your reasoning?
    1
  20432. Yes (I think all my videos are?)
    1
  20433. I assume you are refering to Crusader? Courland isn't in North Africa - it's Latvia
    1
  20434. I wanted to hire a part-time editor in the new year to help out. Sadly, the Patreon crisis hit in December, and that put a stop to my plans. If I can get more support, I will hire an editor
    1
  20435. Just replied to someone else - The danger with Patreon is that they may decide to delete my Patreon page randomly if they decide that my channel is promoting things that don't fit their agenda (e.g. NS is S, or anything that criticises the left - for all we know criticism of the Soviet Union or socialism may be something they take "offense" over) even if you haven't violated their terms of service. Many supporters stopped supporting through Patreon because they didn't want to give money to this company (5% cut goes to Patreon). I saw a significant drop in support - when it all kicked off in December, that was the first month that I saw a decline in pledges with people explaining it was Patreon and not me. The pledges have levelled off now and seems stable for the moment, but I wanted to give people an alternative to Patreon because people were clearly unhappy with them. From what I've heard, other YouTubers suffered much more than me. This is a link to the video which was the start of the issue (and it ballooned from here) https://youtu.be/4ThPdCicEsg Other high-profile YouTubers have also deleted their Patreon Accounts or are jumping ship to SubscribeStar, e.g. https://youtu.be/voO6noMRdS0, and https://youtu.be/h8_OrrvaVVw and https://youtu.be/WrZDcEix7uk and https://youtu.be/gZdXolMeWBY
    1
  20436. There are limited sources in English (and I have no plans on learning Finnish) but I absolutely want to do a Finnish-front documentary series. I'd also like to cover the Winter War too, because I want to see exactly what happened myself. One day after Stalingrad...
    1
  20437. Glad to hear! Too late to do a partnership, although I haven't heard of that guy before. Thanks for pointing him out
    1
  20438. Technically, it won't. I'm just giving people an option to change because of the whole Patreon-being-political issue. The danger with Patreon is that they may decide to delete my Patreon page randomly if they decide that my channel is promoting things that don't fit their agenda (e.g. NS is S, or anything that criticises the left - for all we know criticism of the Soviet Union or socialism may be something they take "offense" over) even if you haven't violated their terms of service. Many supporters stopped supporting through Patreon because they didn't want to give money to this company (5% cut goes to Patreon). I saw a significant drop in support - when it all kicked off in December, that was the first month that I saw a decline in pledges with people explaining it was Patreon and not me. The pledges have levelled off now and seems stable for the moment, but I wanted to give people an alternative to Patreon because people were clearly unhappy with them. From what I've heard, other YouTubers suffered much more than me. This is a link to the video which was the start of the issue (and it ballooned from here) https://youtu.be/4ThPdCicEsg Other high-profile YouTubers have also deleted their Patreon Accounts or are jumping ship to SubscribeStar, e.g. https://youtu.be/voO6noMRdS0, and https://youtu.be/h8_OrrvaVVw and https://youtu.be/WrZDcEix7uk and https://youtu.be/gZdXolMeWBY
    1
  20439. That's true, but I know someone will complain
    1
  20440. Things like "War", "Battles" or "Hitler" automatically get flagged. When I've reviewed my recent videos, many of them have not been accepted and have been restricted to "Limited or no adds"
    1
  20441. I may mention it in the videos because I know some fought on after the war, but it won't be a focus for the Courland Series. I do want to do some post-ww2 stuff at some point in the future, so it may be a possibility
    1
  20442. I need a library!
    1
  20443. 3rd :)
    1
  20444. It had numerous issues and was definitely not as good as a Sherman, but it was a much better tank than most Allied tanks that came before it.
    1
  20445. Yes, the don't appear until about half of the way through, but they're in there
    1
  20446. After Operation Theseus, yes
    1
  20447. i actually mention that quote in the video :)
    1
  20448. Yes, some of the Royal family were pro-Nazi. Not sure about the rest of your claims, but even if they're true, that doesn't change anything regarding Finland.
    1
  20449. You mean redpilled. A 'race' is the idea that all people of a certain skin colour belong to a social group (Left). Individuals (private) are not plural, and therefore do not belong to social groups. Thus, the concept that someone's skin colour doesn't define who they are is a classic 'British' Liberal idea belonging firmly to the Right.
    1
  20450. Operation Compass in WW2 is the greatest British victory in history. The British in WW1 sucked compared to that
    1
  20451. "Germany started with a peacetime economy and didn't really start to ramp up production until 1941" Then how did they start mobilizing in 1933? By 1935, 10% of their economy was geared to war. That sounds like a war economy to me.
    1
  20452. Fascism and National Socialism aren't Marxist Socialism, but all three are varients on the Socialist concept (since socialism pre-dates Marxism, and is just state control of the economy).
    1
  20453. They had the winter clothing. They just couldn't ship it to the troops because their logistics were rubbish. Germany may have planned for a long war initially. But once they saw how effective the "Blitzkrieg" was in France, they thought they could do that to the Soviet Union. So while they planned for a long war prior to the war, Barbarossa was designed to be a quick victory. The hope was the Soviet Union would collapse. It didn't.
    1
  20454. "Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, and you mean that Nazi Germany IN GENERAL was preparing for a long war (or wars) during the 1930s. I could definitely agree to that. They had after all the fresh memory of World War 1 as a stark reminder that wars can drag on for lengthy periods of time." Yes, that's what I meant
    1
  20455. "Practically all German sources of the planning of Barbarossa indisputably state that they envisioned the campaign to be a short war." But this was after Poland and France. Before they saw the miracle of the 'blitzkrieg' they planned for a long war.
    1
  20456. Also this https://youtu.be/WV9J6sxCs5k
    1
  20457. I'm on Bitchute, but it sucks and won't let me upload any move videos. Keeps coming up with an error. I have considered other platforms but I'm reluctant to divide my audience.
    1
  20458. That's what our modern Socialists want - a two-tier society where the elite live in their castles "centrally planning" the destruction of us peasants.
    1
  20459. I'm sticking with Patreon and SubscribeStar
    1
  20460. "And besides, those private firms that take over, are always owned by a close friend, relative, or business associate of one or more of the local councillors! Come on TIK, you can't be that naive after reading so much Soviet history." I'm not calling for private firms to be operated by the Council. I'm talking about private firms directly interacting with their customers without any government involvement at all. When I go to the local shop for milk, there's no commissar involved. I can go directly to a waste collection service without having to pay a bunch of corrupt government despots at the same time. - "You have a bone of contention with local authorities, don't abuse the workers who actually do nothing but work, whilst at work." You don't get a pass just because you work for the Monopoly Corporation. Your wages come from the theft of my wages. You are a thief, just like all your colleagues. You're working, but your job only exists thanks to criminal activities. - "Buy me a Go Pro, I'll prove it. You would applaud me if you saw the footage. I load over ten tons each day, walk a half marathon, weigh 12 .5 stone and am almost 55." Yes, if only you could do this privately without having to work for the State. The people would then pay you exactly what you're getting paid now, and probably save 80% of their council tax bills. Why? Because we wouldn't be paying for all the other "services" that the local Soviets are supposed to provide but actually don't. We wouldn't be paying those pen-pushers you hate so much. We wouldn't be paying for local corruption or local incompetence. There would be no "planning permission" or wasted regulations. We could have the same services but for much cheaper, and there would be far more efficiency. The issue isn't the job you're doing but the way it's being organized. Central planning doesn't work. - "We get home within our work hours... We waste no time and have plenty of it left each day to study whatever history we like and write about it." But you did waste time. I've seen the local bin men. They're incredibly slow at their jobs, they don't operate efficiently, and the worst part is that they're collecting far more waste than they would do if the system was privatized. If citizens paid the private companies to pick up their waste, the private operator would charge for the weight of the waste. The "public" (you're using the term incorrectly, since you are the public - the State) would therefore reduce the amount of waste they're putting in their bins, either by choosing products or companies than use less packaging, recycling more, or by coming up with creative ways to use the packaging that they do have. Since they have no incentive to do this under the "free" council service, there's a ton more waste being thrown out, making your job harder. But again, the unintended consequences are lost on you because you believe that forcing people by gun point to hand over their wages to you, taking your cut, and then providing a terrible service is how "society" should be "run". I strongly disagree.
    1
  20461. "We are the grunts of society, keeping you safe from rats taking over." I'm not against bin men, I'm against bin men employed by the tax system. I have all the respect in the world for bin men who work for private companies. I have zero respect for government "employees". - "We don't get any of it, we don't even attend the staff parties because we get shunned by the paper-pushers." Your wages come from the theft of my wages. Children are going hungry in the UK as their parents are still forced to pay for "roads" and whatever other "services" the local Soviet are supposedly meant to provide. And note, this was BEFORE the virus. It's gotten worse since then https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/children-are-so-hungry-in-one-british-town-they-are-eating-from-bins/ - "And yes, council's are full of corruption, but do not include us in that." Taxation is, by definition, corruption. You are ALL guilty of corruption. - "No private firm can match us." Yes, because you have the entire state apparatus behind you and only the militant state are "legally" allowed to own weapons. Therefore you have a massive firepower advantage over the slaves you extort taxes from. If us private citizens were armed, you would have a serious problem. Also, considering that you've stolen the wealth from the populace, making them poor, they cannot now afford to go private. That's why I don't have access to healthcare in this country. Can't use the "free" National Socialist Hell Service which I'm forced to pay for, and can't afford to go private because I've already paid for the "free" NHSS. That's the only reason why no private firm can touch you - because they can't compete with your Corporate Monopoly. - "We just toil in all weathers and get constant abuse for it" Because you're an overpaid criminal who's doing a lousy job. - "Have some respect, the councillors hate us more than you do." Respect is earned, not taxed. - "Been tried by numerous councils and always fails." Well, maybe that's the problem. Local Councils (Soviets) are incredibly inefficient and the people who work for them have no idea about basic economics. - "We have to be heavily vetted, can't send undesirables round good folks houses on a weekly basis." The bin men don't come into people's homes or even go onto their property. They stay on the street and just collect the bins that residents have to leave out in the street. - "And, as council workers, we are trained to do far more than simply empty bins." Really? Other than steal wealth from hard working people and then sending in your goons to forcibly threaten and beat people who don't pay up for your protection racket, what are you trained for? - "We have had training by army and police to look for All kinds of abuse, crime and even terrorist activity, although we do not talk about it." No, you're trained by the army and police to BE the abuse. You are the criminals. Your pay comes from the theft of my pay. My viewers give me money for my product. You steal that money and keep it for yourselves. You are the terrorists. - "And we are Not socialists. We are far more well informed than most folk imagine." The State is Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y You work for the State, you are a Socialist. You reject private enterprise and favour the Corporate State fascist monopoly, and the reason why is because you are a Socialist.
    1
  20462. Only the state can create bin men? The bin men employed here in the UK are extremely expensive. Would rather have my Council Tax back and pay a local firm to do the job better for cheaper (since they won't have to employ as many bureaucrats), but unfortunately we must accept socialism in our so-called "capitalist" society.
    1
  20463. I just mistyped when editing the video. If you look at the subtitles, I spell it correctly.
    1
  20464. I'm not sure if you've seen it, but I have now released a video on Zitelmann's book https://youtu.be/7dFgOBiwSGM
    1
  20465. That was just me mistyping
    1
  20466. After ww2?? There's a period of time after ww2!?
    1
  20467. Also, while they did, the outcome of the Far East wouldn't have affected the home countries of the European powers, if that makes sense. At least that's the way I perceive it.
    1
  20468. Damn it! I'm trying to catch you out
    1
  20469. Ah, thank you for naming him :)
    1
  20470. Nikodem, you might also want to know which Central Power was the first to fall in WW1? It wasn't mentioned in the Great War Channel and isn't what you think - https://youtu.be/SimSLZlwSfE
    1
  20471. ftffighter, once again, I have a nice wishlist for that battle on Amazon and the later crushed Hungarian Revolution. I don't believe they sided with the Russians like the Romanians did though.
    1
  20472. I will have a video coming soon explaining this in more detail, but Mosley and his Fascists ALLIED with the National Socialists in Britain, which explains the name-change. Mosley himself was not a National Socialist, which is why I didn't call his ideology National Socialist.
    1
  20473. "i fell like you didn’t go into the necessary details defining fascism, democracy and the distinction of the two." That's because I've done that before in previous videos. I defined fascism here in great detail https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko (FASCISM DEFINED | The Difference between Fascism and National Socialism) And I've got a video on "Hitler's Democracy" where I go into more depth about the idea of Democracy https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I - "The sources you give for the idea that fascism is „democratic“ are literally the founder of fascism and hitler. A little biased don’t you think?" We could also use Marxist sources or other Gnostic sources that all say the same thing, that their totalitarian "Kingdom of Heaven" on Earth is somehow the ultimate form of democracy, or how the state will "wither away". - "Now what democracy actually is, is the idea that the political Souveignity is held by the masses. (Roughly meaning power held by the people) while I myself also feel like the current voting system is pretty far away from people holding the power, (it’s bad here in Germany but the USA is way way way worse even)" Yes, and the "masses"/"people" are the Public, and the Public Sector is the State. Democracy is all power to the State. Here is my Public vs Private video explaining how the "people" are the Public Sector State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "that it is by faaaaar more democratic than fascism" They're all the same. The people vote away their freedoms to the State "representatives" who then lord over them and steal their wealth via the power of taxation and inflation. - "Where literally ONE guy holds the power. Not quite souvereignity of the masses, eh?" One man doesn't hold the power in Fascism or National Socialism. It is the Party that holds the power, and the Party is the People. - "but please try researching more thoughly because even though you say you are not a fascist or anything in the beginning, your source bias on some of your points can reinforce some of this ideas in your viewers." You mean, you haven't done any research by watching my back-catalogue of videos and realising that I've done plenty of research on this topic (some of them have hundreds of sources). This is NOT the first video touching upon this subject, and none of your points hold up to scrutiny. You hold preconceived notions of what "democracy" is that do not fit reality. The people don't have power in a democracy, the state has power. The people only think they have power, but they don't. The "democracy" is a State. It is governmental power, nothing else. EDIT: Also no, you can tell I'm not a fascist by my anti-Statism. Fascism is pro-State, and I'm anti-State. You, meanwhile, appear to be pro-State. You want all power to the "people", all power to the State. So who's the fascist here?
    1
  20474. The word is "but" not "boat". I would suggest turning on captions for my videos because I have uploaded the script to them. That should help you out.
    1
  20475. It's not "completely wrong and false", it's just not bog-standard nationalism. A nation doesn't have to be a race. But for Hitler and the National Socialists fools like the commenter Friedrich Baeker (who's currently spamming the comments section with dribble and is going to get banned if he keeps it up) the nation is the race. So to distinguish between the two types of nationalism, it's best to describe it as Racialism or Volkisch nationalism.
    1
  20476. I've not been hacked. Those 9 extra videos that aren't mine are there on purpose - I put them there. I'm assuming you watched the one by "Rageaholic"?
    1
  20477. Social Darwinism and Darwin's theory of evolution are two separate things. Social Darwinism is the correct term, and it's mystical in itself, but it might be misleading to some.
    1
  20478. They'd be very long movies! But if they were historically accurate, I'd live in the movie theatre
    1
  20479. At that one battle, yes. That's nothing compared to the prisoners taken in the kesselschlachts in 1941.
    1
  20480. That's fine with me! :D
    1
  20481. Yes, as Steve says, a Soviet Army at this time is basically the size of a German corps (approximately). There's reasons for this that I'll go into in a future video, but this is actually why I showed the Soviet Fronts as the same size as German Armies in the video, rather than the size of Army Groups. So when 6th Army has 6 corps, the Soviets face it with 5-7 'armies' (corps), which is a rough parity in numbers, with Soviets having slightly more at times. The difference is that the Soviets were better at replacing their losses in the Stalingrad Campaign, and the Germans basically didn't - see last week's video.
    1
  20482. It is indeed :)
    1
  20483. Absolutely, they are humans, with strengths and flaws just like everyone else. They made good decisions, and they made mistakes - but it all makes sense in the context with the information they had. The great lesson to take away from this is to realise that good decisions can only be made with unbiased, accurate and substantial information. And you have to interpret that information with an unbiased mind too (and it could take time to properly do that). Without such luxuries as time and information, it's no wonder people make mistakes or come to the wrong conclusions.
    1
  20484. Neither!
    1
  20485. I haven't figured this out exactly, however there was actually some oil in Estonia, and Hitler wanted to secure the Baltic for strategic purposes (protecting sea routes from Sweden for their iron and other materials, and the navy). That said, the main issue is having Army Group Centre take priority over Army Group South.
    1
  20486. I haven't specifically studied the Voronezh operation, but probably not, given that Salmuth continued to hold on there for several more months without help. And your second question is the great "what-if?" question. It wouldn't have been easy with the supply situation, but I guess if that was prioritised in the south too, then maybe. Personally, I think it would have meant the Germans taking the Grozny oilfield and Stalingrad. But would they have lost in the centre? Would they have lost later with another Operation Uranus type attack? Not sure, but I think the Germans would have been in a much better position overall.
    1
  20487. Vấn đề?
    1
  20488. Cheers Phil! Glad you liked it
    1
  20489. It's not even the introduction. It's the introduction to the introduction!
    1
  20490. Great! And will do :)
    1
  20491. Why would it lead to a collapse though? The Germans wouldn't have been able to go beyond that with their current transport and logistical issues, and they wouldn't have had the oil to continue the war - which the Soviets would still have retained. Like in 1812, I can't invision a scenario where the Germans taking Moscow on its own would lead to Soviet surrender.
    1
  20492. Not in great detail but I will be touching upon it, yes. Hopefully I'll have made a video or two about it first before the main Stalingrad video comes out, so the videos are there if people want more information.
    1
  20493. Yes, and this is partly why it takes me so long to do, because I'm verifying everything I'm putting into the videos, and double checking each source against the others when there's contradictions, plus questioning everything.
    1
  20494. Will do!
    1
  20495. Karl Marx defined capital as "commodity money" that circulates in the economy (this is from Das Kapital vol 1). Therefore no, this doesn't make them capitalists, since nobody today is using capital. Nobody uses commodity money (gold or silver) as their means of exchange, and thus we cannot have capital. Trucks, warehouses etc, are NOT capital.
    1
  20496. Collectivism and socialism are the same thing though. Ultimately it's the idea that man and society are to be improved by the guiding spirit of the elite, themselves being on a higher plane of existence (Cosmism).
    1
  20497. "Sorry if you made that clear later in the video, but I stopped watching after you have used this definition more than once in the first ten minutes." Yes, because just like all my other critics, you think you already know the truth. But you don't, you have been tricked. I can lead a horse to water but I cannot make him think.
    1
  20498. "For the Nth time: There is no universally acknowledged definition of socialism - as this term is used for just too many different concepts throughout history." As I keep saying, ALL those definitions mean the same thing. They're just masks designed to trick you into thinking that socialism isn't totalitarianism.
    1
  20499. "Socialism is totalitarianism. Define totalitarianism." The State in total control of the economy and society.
    1
  20500. You didn't read me right if you think I support a Commie-servative like Truss.
    1
  20501. "Owning Dishonest Shills" Oh no, not him again. Dude bro https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    1
  20502. Exactly. I also wonder how my other history videos can be considered good if I'm "insane" and coming to wrong conclusions? There's no logic in their counter-arguments.
    1
  20503. What makes Liz Truss "right wing"? She's a Commie-servative just like the rest of the Keynesians.
    1
  20504. So do I
    1
  20505. Great minds think alike!
    1
  20506. That's why they also oppose free speech, because they don't like others explaining why they're wrong.
    1
  20507. You'll be surprised how many people are making similar comments. Dive deep into the comments of these videos below and you'll see numerous examples - https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20508. HOI4!
    1
  20509. Did you survive?
    1
  20510. Of course! Should have known that one
    1
  20511. alkafluence ahhh good one :)
    1
  20512. starcraft2own hahahahaha :D
    1
  20513. johnny onetothree so do I haha. It sank because they left their gun ports open... well, at least that was part of the reason it sank
    1
  20514. Hopper I'm afraid not :)
    1
  20515. martaxsasLT nice! I really struggle to get into CK2. I love the concept and really like being a lord and roleplaying etc, but I just suck at the game :/
    1
  20516. alkafluence I'll watch them and hopefully I'll improve. I'm not very good at CK2, despite liking the concept and role playing...
    1
  20517. Thegamer8324 hmmm... maybe I should do a CK2 LP since everyone seems to have played it
    1
  20518. Thegamer8324 that's awesome! Don't rely too heavily on games though. History books are far more reliable sources of info
    1
  20519. CStriker421 lol who said computer games don't teach you anything!?
    1
  20520. crackwiser you know, I'm glad you heard about the Varangian Guard from some other source other than CK2, unlike those CK2 nerds martaxsasLT and CStriker421 and Thegamer8324 ...
    1
  20521. This video was copyright ID claimed by the band "Whipping Boy" (whoever that is, never heard of them). I've disputed it, but just know that the as revenue is going to them because the "melody" in this video is theirs, apparently. YouTube isn't broken though...
    1
  20522. You shouldn't have done, this video was copyright ID claimed by the band "Whipping Boy" because the "melody" (aka the standard 12 bar blues progression) apparently belongs to a punk rock band
    1
  20523. Operation Crusader is one series within the wider BATTLESTORM series. Crusader playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL BATTLESTORM Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  20524. Thanks Nom! Glad you're enjoying them :)
    1
  20525. Currently, I do not, no. Sorry
    1
  20526. THANK YOU!!!!
    1
  20527. "Concerning the "Young Fascist" batallion, you are correct about its presence. More precisely it was a support unit of the RECAM since November 17th (Source: "La meccanizzazione dell'Esercito Italiano dalle origini fino al 1943" by Lucio Ceva and Andrea Curami, 1989. Volume I, Page 407.)" Awesome, thank you! I'm not sure where RECAM was during this battle, and assumed it was further north, or had retreated behind the Ariete front lines. I do know the Young Fascist Battalion was in defensive positions on the hill (can't remember which one exactly off the top of my head) later in the battle and defended against a British attack.
    1
  20528. Yeah but those other videos don't go into this level of detail, plus the books aren't accurate nor in order - which is why I've had a hard time piecing all this together. It would be much better to just wait for next Monday ;)
    1
  20529. Certain vehicles gain a reputation that's unjustified. Much like the Tiger tank. Sure, it's got an 88mm gun, but it broke down all the time, it's armour wasn't actually that thick, and it was available in very very very few numbers. So Allied tankers assumed that it was impossible to take out (which it wasn't). I think it's the same with the 8 wheeler. The British only saw it from a distance, and assumed that, because it was so big and had lots of wheels, that it was somehow better than it actually was.
    1
  20530. Sorry!
    1
  20531. Hey Rich, actually it's on hold while I do this. Still gathering books and whatnot, but the plan is to finish this, do Courland, then Stalingrad. So, will be going back to the Eastern Front once Crusader is done :)
    1
  20532. NOT TODAY
    1
  20533. Actually, Auchinleck wanted a 50% reserve in tanks, not 25%, because he knew they'd lose that many to breakdowns. I covered this in a previous Crusader video :)
    1
  20534. Thanks! I will correct for the end (all-in-one) upload. The number of British tanks was 136
    1
  20535. Monday 5pm GMT :)
    1
  20536. There are a couple in this battle, although not quite like this.
    1
  20537. Here's a video you may like too https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20538. The Vampire Economy is written by Gunter Reimann in 1939 about the economy of the Third Reich. It shows just how socialist the economy really was. The only way you could think it wasn't socialist after reading that, would be not to have the correct definition of socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y The Vampire Economy doesn't mention the Shrinking Markets theory. For that, you need Hitler's Second Book and/or Zitelmann's "Hitler: The Politics of Seduction". Being published by the Mises Institute is not a sin if the book in question is a primary source document.
    1
  20539. This is a military video. Without the Shrinking Markets idea Hitler doesn't go to war.
    1
  20540. Hitler did nationalize the industries and I have recently shown that https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20541. Only if you believe in the labour theory of value, which is out of date. If you accept reality and go with the subjective theory of value, then there's no exploitation. And the only way to get rich is to give things to your society.
    1
  20542. Trust me, there's a lot of people out there who deny this, even prominent academic historians... Glad you enjoyed the video
    1
  20543. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y and then https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20544. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  20545. It's been a thing for a while. First used it in my Operation Market Garden video - my first history video.
    1
  20546. A national socialist is a nazi. Well, an inter-national socialist (Marxist) is an inter-nazi
    1
  20547. A black market is a free market. If you have a black market, you know the economy is not free. Isn't there a black market for drugs?
    1
  20548. Fascism is socialism (state control of economy) on the national level rather than international like the Marxist version of socialism. If conservativism turns into Fascism, that's only because it's Socialist to begin with. This is why I'm not a conservative.
    1
  20549. It would help if you had the definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20550. Thank you Ryan! The backlash I've received so far has been immense, but their counter-arguments have left me unconvinced, which is why I recently made my "Hitler's Socialism | Defeating the Denialist Counter Arguments" video. Ultimately this isn't a popularity contest. All that matters is the uncomfortable truth.
    1
  20551. I'd say so.
    1
  20552. Socialists are trying to confuse the actual definitions, which is why it's important to give them the historically accurate definitions backed by evidence, which I've provided here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20553. "Socialism is NOT defined as state control, it's worker control." No, that's Marxism. Socialism came before Marxism and had nothing to do with class. Socialism is the socialization of the means of production, which as I explained, is the state. You can deny this all you want, but it is the historical truth. Also, "state capitalism" literally means "state non-state". It's an oxymoron. A free market is a market that the state is not involved in. E.g. a black market is a free market. If you have a black market, you know the wider economy is socialist. Don't we have a black market for drugs?
    1
  20554. Socialism and communism meant the same thing until the Russian Revolution failed and Lenin needed an excuse as to why it failed https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20555. Yes. I was fooled by the socialist rhetoric. Having realised my mistake, I'm now trying to show people the light, and it's hard to get them to open their eyes
    1
  20556. Adam Smith was a classical economist. The Labour Theory of Value is wrong, as were both Marx and Smith in this instance (this is a big reason why Marxism doesn't work). We now use the Subjective Theory of Value, which actually explains prices properly. For example, second hand books (like Zitelmann's Hitler the Politics of Seduction) go for thousands of pounds because there's a limited amount and a high demand for them, even though the original labour that went into the book wasn't that high, and I purchased my copy for £28 last year. As the supply decreases and the demand goes high, the purchaser will decide if it's in their own interests to buy the product, and prices help them make that decision. The Labour Theory of Value can't explain this.
    1
  20557. Hi! Welcome, and glad to hear you're enjoying the videos!
    1
  20558. I'm glad I'm not the only one who can see it too. Thank you!
    1
  20559. Exactly. But they claim they "refuted" my argument, or that I haven't "addressed" their points, thus they "win". It's hard to address something that has no substance.
    1
  20560. I actually answered everything you disagreed with in last week's "Public Vs Private" video, so I'll link to that and encourage you to watch that and understand why anarcho-socialism is oxymoronic, why Socialism is state control, and why you cannot have totalitarianism without Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20561. Yes! And then they cry when I don't accept their poor arguments. They also don't like that I've historically nailed down the definition of socialism and capitalism which they have failed to counter too https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20562. Glad to have you on board ☺️
    1
  20563. Yes. They would realize that they are in fact the fascists.
    1
  20564. This is part of the issue. I'm trying to explain complex concepts to people in a simple way, but it's hard to know if I'm doing that or not.
    1
  20565. This is military history. Without the Shrinking Markets idea Hitler doesn't go to war. Without Socialism you don't get the Shrinking Markets. Plus, this has a massive impact on how the war is fought, and explains why Hitler slowly but surely gets more and more control as the war goes on - because he believes in centralised socialized control of everything. To ignore this would undermine all the military videos - it cannot be ignored
    1
  20566. Check out my Public vs Private video. That will explain why Lenin is wrong.
    1
  20567. I know... History repeats...
    1
  20568. You may prefer tomorrow's video. It's a bit more serious
    1
  20569. Capitalism = private (individual) non-state control of the means of production. So go ahead. Explain how the Holocaust was non-state control of the means of production.
    1
  20570. If YouTube bans this video, they'd be supporting Holocaust denialism. I highly doubt they'd do it, but if they do, I'll be ready...
    1
  20571. See Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" in the description. That'll explain what a free market is, and help explain away most of the disagreements you have with my points.
    1
  20572. Please see my "Public vs Private" video which explains why corporations (or "the tiny few") are not capitalist entities https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20573. Though it may not seem like it at first, I think you may be interested in my Public vs Private video which will explain that your idea of classic liberalism isn't quite right. You're almost there, but there's an important point you haven't quite grasped https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20574. There were rival companies / departments of the State, but they were all working for the State, and they were run by members of the Nazi Party
    1
  20575. Incorrect. I've been over this. The "Privatisation" claim is a Marxist myth. In reality, the National Socialists of the Third Reich nationalized their economy https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20576. Socialists are denying that Hitler's socialism was real socialism. I'm making them aware that they're wrong - dead wrong https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20577. This other video of mine, using 107 sources, 350 direct references, numerous quotes and notes etc shows how wrong you are https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20578. A market is not free where there exists taxation, inflation/currency printing, and State regulations. If the unofficial black market exists, then the rest of the economy is State controlled.
    1
  20579. Patreon pays me. I crowdfund my channel so you can see exactly who is paying me. Turns out, an entire race of people (as you are implying) is not funding me, which makes logical sense because races don't exist as entities
    1
  20580. You may be interested in my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Norway (much like Britain) has a lot of problems. The way to improve it's economy is to free the workers and let them get to work, not go further into monopoly and totalitarianism.
    1
  20581. All your hammers belong to the state
    1
  20582. I fully expect a backlash.
    1
  20583. I'm glad to hear you survived that ordeal! The problem is that socialists tend to be people who don't care for facts and figures; they care more about emotions and feelings. Capitalism is better overall, no questions asked, but to explain why is not the right way to go about it. You have to make them feel why capitalism is better, and that's hard to do. I still haven't really figured out a way to do that. So instead, I'm hitting them where it hurts - their own ideology - in the hope that they'll stop and think that maybe there are some benefits to capitalism... and then they do their own research. Wishful thinking, but that's the best I've come up with so far.
    1
  20584. "hitler stated that national socialism was not Marxist. and he was correct. your video basically says it uses the word socialism therefore it is the same. you sir are useless." I didn't say Hitler was a Marxist. Hitler's not a Marxist. Hitler is a socialist. Socialism came before Marxism. So unless Marx had a time machine, Marxism isn't the original nor only version of socialism.
    1
  20585. I'm against big business for the same reason I'm against big government https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20586. Prior to Lenin, the terms "Socialism" and "Communism" were synonyms and meant the same thing. And even after Lenin, the difference was that Communism is the Utopia "we" (the Soviets) are aiming for, and the reason we're not in utopia right now is because we're in the transitionary stage called Socialism. We'll definitely get to Communism though, pinky promise. So yes, they are still synonyms in my book. But even if they've changed slightly now, they meant the same back in the WW1-WW2 era outside of the Soviet Union.
    1
  20587. Of course he had firm convictions. They just didn't teach you what they were, because they didn't know or want you to know that Hitler was a socialist.
    1
  20588. Venezuela is currently socialist https://youtu.be/yZBq08unM1Y
    1
  20589. Yes exactly, and ironically "Antifa" themselves are closer to the Black Shirts than they realise. For all intents and purposes we'd be right in calling them Fascists.
    1
  20590. Yes, I was tempted to do a response video (which I may still do), but I wanted to get this video out, and tomorrow's too.
    1
  20591. Really? https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20592. If someone wants to review my videos, that's fine with me. But "peer reviews" are nothing more than "censorship". Without a free, honest and open debate, you cannot assess the value of an argument. Censorship leads to ignorance. "Peer reviews censorship" is therefore anti-history. Also, I would recommend you watch my more recent video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20593. Democracy isn't voting. Democracy is 'People' 'Power'. Well, Hitler wanted a 'People's State' - which is the same thing. Voting is called voting. And this is why the Founding Fathers of the USA called their government a Republic, not a democracy, because they knew that democracy was bad https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20594. State control of the currency supply causes recessions and depressions that are then blamed on the "Laissez-faire Capitalism" which you then assume is at fault for the destruction of the economy and the loss of life under "Capitalism". Unfortunately Capitalism isn't to blame, Socialism is https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  20595. Well, I hope you do watch the linked video because, even though it may not seem like it at first, I think it may help you understand where I'm coming from.
    1
  20596. But Socialism does have a historical definition. So the excuse that it means different things to different people is just an admission that most people don't know the true definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20597. Yes, it was abolished. And none of them are "Private" companies. Please see my "Public vs Private" video, which will explain the history of the terms. I think you'll begin to see why I'm not backing down on this issue https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20598. Private Property was abolished under the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. He didn't support private trade unions because he was a socialist, so he merged them into the state trade union, the DAF. Lenin did the same thing with the trade unions.
    1
  20599. Please watch my "Public vs Private" video because it will explain and historically define the terms we're using and show you why National Socialism, Corporatism and Communism have a lot in common https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20600. I'm also glad you found this channel. Enjoy! :)
    1
  20601. It's hard to tell if I'm getting through to them or not. I suspect not. But that's not the biggest concern. The thing that baffles me is how much doublethink there is in order to justify the fact that Hitler wasn't a socialist. I've shown in multiple videos the contradictions in that claim, and yet the standard response is "no, you're wrong" followed by a bunch of insults. For example, Mussolini invented the term totalitarian to describe his own regime. Mussolini was a totalitarian because he had total social control of the means of production. You can't have totalitarianism without total control of the economy (socialism). So if Hitler and Mussolini weren't socialists, they can't be totalitarians either. Yet, when I pointed this out, people started saying Hitler and Mussolini weren't totalitarian dictators ( "it wasn't REAL totalitarianism" ) and some even resorted to saying that I have the false definition of totalitarianism... even though Mussolini said what it was and I have the quote where he describes it as being all within the state and nothing outside the state. It's truly frightening how people won't open their eyes.
    1
  20602. In an inflationary environment, assets go up in nominal terms only. For example, British house prices are at a historic high right now in terms of fiat currency (pound sterling). However, in terms of other assets, like gold, housing is not. As the linked chart shows, British houses are the same price as they were in the 1970s when measured in gold http://pricedingold.com/uk-house-prices/ It's not house prices that are going up. House prices have stayed the same. A house is a house. Instead, wages are going down. Wages are going down thanks to the hidden stealth tax known as "inflation" which is defined as "the expansion of the currency supply". https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA This video series will help you understand what's happening right now with regards to inflation and it's effects on the average person https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU Also, this video of mine will explain the economic consequences of inflation on the overall economy https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  20603. It's a shame that people don't know what socialism actually is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20604. "TIK, you don't see a simple thing. All states are genocidal. All states are created by bandits. Every society is an experiment. Humans are very bad. There is no economy, there's only monopoly, extortion, rape, murder, slavery. Ideologies were invented to make it look a little better, but try not to pay tax!" Except, I do see it. I agree.
    1
  20605. Here's a video you should watch all the way through. It will educate you if you decide to open your ears https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20606. You will probably enjoy my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20607. I talked about that in this video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  20608. In reality, capitalism is private control of the means of production. This means it's non-state, since Private comes from the Latin and means "small famil, individual, and non-state". Central Banks are public sector entities, as are corporations, which is why both are embraced by socialists like Karl Marx and Hitler. For a more in-depth explanation of the etymology of the words, the history, and the explanation of the definitions, please see my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20609. The BBC is publicly funded (therefore not subjected to the free market, and also socialized/nationalized), and has racial quota's for how many people of a certain skin colour it needs to recruit. It judges people by the colour of their skin - which in my book is racism. It is scary how many people find this acceptable.
    1
  20610. Thanks!
    1
  20611. I don't defend the terror bombings. I condemn them. The Allies shouldn't have stooped down to the German level. The only thing I point out is the hypocrisy of the Germans complaining about something they did first. If you punch someone in the face, and they punch you back harder, then you cry about them punching you, saying it's their fault... No, it's your fault for punching them first. If you don't want to get punched, don't start the fight.
    1
  20612. That's nonsense. Manstein didn't know there was a whole army ahead of him, and he wouldn't have gotten through. Also, Soviet offensives on the flanks were throwing the Germans back, which is why Hitler stopped the attack.
    1
  20613. You can't trust them to give you an accurate account of certain sensitive subjects, no. E.g. Operation Keelhaul, or the Hess flight.
    1
  20614. That doesn't automatically make them fascist, and the Soviet Union used terror tactics against them (and everyone else too).
    1
  20615. Except, if you had kept watching, you would have heard me say that it's impossible to tell whether either was a better general.
    1
  20616. Before this channel was a history channel, I had videos on here of me playing HOI4 multiplayer
    1
  20617. Manstein continuously said in his memoirs that Hitler forbade retreats, and if the Führer had only just let the Germans retreat in every battle, then they would have won. So obviously, according to Manstein, the best way to win the war in the East is to retreat all the way to Berlin...
    1
  20618. Here's a video you might enjoy https://youtu.be/_VKI6K5zX6o And another https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM
    1
  20619. Except, some sources show that the UPA had Jews in their ranks. Also, from what I can tell, the Jews only left the UPA when the Red Army turned up, suggesting that it wasn't due to innate anti-semitism. Thus, the UPA may have reacted to the Jews leaving by blaming and targeting them, rather than because they were collaborators with the Nazis, which doesn't appear to be true because they were targeted by the Germans in their anti-partisan efforts. (Edit: disclaimer, I'm not saying you're incorrect, only that some of the sources have come to this conclusion)
    1
  20620. Italy, Croatia, Oswald Mosley, arguably Franco's Spain, probably Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania (not 100% sure about them)
    1
  20621. As far as I'm aware, there's no way to get the dislikes back. I can see them behind the scenes, and there's only a few. But I guess people have less incentive to click dislike now since it doesn't show publicly.
    1
  20622. Really!? I know they're dense with unit positions and things like that, but I didn't struggle with the words?
    1
  20623. No, only the top brass were killed. The rest of the organisation carried on, which is another reason why the "Hitler killed all the Socialists" narrative doesn't hold up.
    1
  20624. Democracy = People Power. But the People are the Public. And the Public is the State. So Democracy = State Power. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y This is confirmed if you think about it logically. If 99% of people voted to kill the Jews, then the People and the State would enforce that rule against the Jews. The People and the State are one and the same. I'm going to pause before we move on to your other false assertions, because if you cannot grasp this element there's little point moving forward in the discussion.
    1
  20625. Synchronization!
    1
  20626. I'm not a conservative.
    1
  20627. "wealth is created because of the LTV. You need to read Locke again just because Marx took it up too doesn't make it wrong." Locke's economics are out of date. The LTV was surpassed by the Subjective Theory of Value which came along in the 1860s. "I don't need or want to debat the LTV: Locke was right Mises was wrong, you've made too videos, we might not change each others mind but it isn't fatal to libertarianism; you can be wrong about some things but still be better than the alternatives." As an ex-Socialist, I used to believe in the LTV. I fully understand what it is, and now understand how flawed it is. It can't even explain why second hand books cost the amount they do. No labour went into the creation of the second hand books, and yet you still charge money for them? IMPOSSIBEL!?!??"!2
    1
  20628. How exactly was it a distortion of facts and history?
    1
  20629. Devon Ziegler ah I see, thanks for the info :) I'm sure someone will leave a nice response at some point lol
    1
  20630. gmsimpson05 well Justinian is pretty well known in Roman/Byzantine history - which in turn is pretty popular. But you're right that history is mainly "his-tory" in that women weren't talked about more. But Theodora's story is covered quite well I think, even though she caused a scandal by marrying Justinian
    1
  20631. gmsimpson05 Nika riots! That's right :)
    1
  20632. YOYO MAN I didn't know people lived there. Can you recommend some good hotels? :D
    1
  20633. +YOYO MAN hahaha! Have a bonus FIP for that
    1
  20634. Well done! Let's see if you get next one ;)
    1
  20635. Rex1987 It shall be done, Comrade Commissar!
    1
  20636. +Rex1987 close (ish) but not quite
    1
  20637. Technically no, but since you're a new subscriber I'll let you have the 3 FIPs :) and I hope you stick around
    1
  20638. +Martin Juda surprisingly no. I'm sure someone can explain why
    1
  20639. +Sneaky Scaper it's in Siberia, yes
    1
  20640. Hope Daisy isn't too cold :(
    1
  20641. Is that a random guess at spelling Oymyakon or another place?
    1
  20642. I can relate to that. My "studio apartment" in Manchester could have been described as an ice cube. No central heating. Glad I don't live there anymore
    1
  20643. "Somewhere" would be a good name for a town
    1
  20644. Martin Juda yeah! Absolutely :)
    1
  20645. Martin Juda bonus point for being cheeky :P
    1
  20646. +Martin Juda congrats :D hope you're keeping tabs
    1
  20647. +pelcowaHD have a bonus FIP and a link to a BB King and Gary Moore video to cure those blues of yours https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUaevnP1LLg
    1
  20648. Now you'll never forget it!
    1
  20649. Devon Ziegler yes! How'd you know that!?
    1
  20650. Bodglin o'Ite nice!
    1
  20651. Also, I'd love - absolutely love - for you to give me ONE "lie" that I've actually told. I may have made mistakes, but I've never once lied. Just like the other critics who are falsely accusing me of saying things I haven't said, you are lying with your false accusations.
    1
  20652. Slavery is not freedom. How you can claim that owning slaves is "freedom", I genuinely don't understand. Get your head out of the clouds and realise what you're saying is complete nonsense.
    1
  20653. Gluttony is bad, greed is not. Wanting things is good behaviour and should be rewarded, not punished. The mother chastising the child is incorrect if using the word "greed" to refer to food, which would be gluttony not greed. Gluttony is bad, since excess of food will lead to health problems. Excess of wealth is never a bad thing.
    1
  20654. I'm a not a "conservative" and thus not a "right-winger" who wants slavery. Your point 3 especially doesn't apply to me as I'm pro-freedom, arguing against "natural" rights, which is what the conservatives and socialists use to impose collectivism and tax slavery upon the workers. Remember, it's "natural" (argued Marx) that the capitalist system will lead to Salvation (Revolution).
    1
  20655. And never once have I ever claimed that "I'm the most important person". It's disappointing that this is the ridiculous conclusion you would come to just to defend dishonest ideologues who's "ideas" have murdered millions.
    1
  20656. When have I ever "not engaged with ideas other than my own"? I've never once argued that. Ideobabble merely calls out "ideas" (or rather, their authors) that are incoherent gibberish presented in the most confusing manner. Language is meant to communicate, not obfuscate. If you have to mask your ideas behind a wall of language deliberately designed to make it impossible for the reader to understand what you're saying, you should be called out for it. "Mortality" is not required. Self-preservation and understanding that actions have consequences is all that's needed. Standing at a cliff and deciding not to jump off of it is not a moral issue.
    1
  20657. You cannot comprehend my explanations because you've not listened to them. I don't agree with Hegel, I reject him. I'm not sure why you're assuming I'm on the same wavelength as him, and it would take me far too long to address all the nonsense assumptions you've made about me in your comments, so I'm not even going to bother. You're so far off the mark, I don't even know where to begin, but I would suggest you watch my recent video titled "But how do you know you're right". That might help explain where I'm coming from.
    1
  20658. I fail to see how a lion killing a gazelle is "good" or "bad". Stating that it is a moral thing isn't a convincing argument by itself, neither is saying "some people" would see it that way, as (for example) lots more people (e.g. every Christian - only man ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil) would disagree with that statement.
    1
  20659. It's a practical issue - a principle of self-preservation. I don't want the same processes that caused millions to starve or die to inflict the world again, because I don't want to starve and die. "Mortality" has nothing to do with it. You have motivations, a self-preservation instinct, and there are consequences to your actions. What is "right and wrong" is simply determined by these principles. There's no need for some pie in the sky idealism.
    1
  20660. There was a "tank" video last week. Nobody watched it because YouTube suppressed it. The video about Hegel has performed better than the "tank" video. Therefore, the market demands the non-tank videos. And I find these videos just as interesting, if not moreso, than the military stuff, so I'm going to continue making them.
    1
  20661. If they're all equally "free" to enslave, then there is no freedom to begin with. Freedom comes from the ability to say "no" to someone else. If you submit (if you give up your freedom), you're no longer free. So to say that men COULD create slavery is missing the point that the potential slave has the freedom to fight back. Only those that have been convinced by false philosophies to submit to their new owners will not fight back under such circumstances. Give me liberty or give me death. And democracy isn't freedom, it's state tyranny. I've explained this before numerous times so I won't go over it.
    1
  20662. Yes, morality is a controlling tactic. The absence of "mortality" leads the individual to think for themselves, consider self-preservation, and make their own decisions in life. Standing at the edge of a cliff and deciding not to jump off it is not a moral issue. Jumping off a cliff is not "wrong" due to morals, but due to the need for self-preservation.
    1
  20663. If your words make sense and are delivered in a respectful and honest way, then you have nothing to fear. But calling something "nihilistic" when it clearly is the opposite, is just nonsense. Yes, this word is anti-democratic, because democracy is when the majority votes to oppress the minority. Democracy is just dictatorship masquerading as not being a dictatorship.
    1
  20664. Yeah just ignore what I actually said and jump to incorrect conclusions, thanks.
    1
  20665. How exactly is it an ouroboros term? And this is history. I looked at the past, saw what the entire history of philosophy was about, and created a word to describe it.
    1
  20666.  @crackiechan4432  Do you know what happened to it?
    1
  20667. I am on Bitchute now https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  20668.  @warrenlehmkuhleii8472  It's now published, so enjoy! (Or... don't enjoy because it's not a 'happy' video) https://www.bitchute.com/video/lOFwkyiiQI9C/
    1
  20669. Bingo
    1
  20670. Read the source I left in the description. There were Rs in the Baltics by the Germans. The reason you haven't heard about them is probably because they were suppressed, and political agendas are being pushed.
    1
  20671.  @yohannbiimu  I've read a book on Nanjing, but not sure if it was that particular one. It was a history book on the shelf in my university library. It could have been Chang's book... but either way, the book was top quality, but obviously the events were not...
    1
  20672. Hello Nukclear!
    1
  20673. How is any of my video titles misleading? I say exactly what's in the video 🤔 is it misleading because you don't like it? That's wouldn't be misleading though
    1
  20674. "Categories 3, 4, and 5 shouldn’t be seen as r* or war crimes or at least not factored into the stats." The Germans stole their food, forcing them to perform such acts to get the food back from the very people who stole it in the first place. Also, women were dragged into number 5's by their hair... Are you saying that they weren't R'd? - "Saying the women were forced to do what they did is like saying the men were forced to become soldiers and are all therefore victims of war crimes. Yet we wouldn’t say that." I absolutely would. Conscription is a crime against humanity. Being forced to kill others by anyone else, is a crime against humanity.
    1
  20675. Gary Thomas thanks! I was telling others in work about it today, and they couldn't believe it got resolved so quick. Apparently, not the first time it's happened in our store either!
    1
  20676. Thegamer8324 I'm working on a history documentary atm (currently writing the script) and if I decide to go through with it, and if I also decide that it'll be easier from a production point of view to be in the video (rather than animate the whole thing), you may get to see me then. Otherwise, unless I do a music video (very tempted) or something, chances are you won't see me.
    1
  20677. starcraft2own sadly not :) it's Dottie (or maybe spelled Dotty) Have you not done any good deeds???
    1
  20678. From what I've heard, Einstein said as part of his theory on relativity that Time was the fourth dimension.
    1
  20679. Wow, thanks! Glad you think so!
    1
  20680. I am planning on doing a few more shorter videos soon. From a practical point of view, I may have to do so. However, people complain if they're short, so I can't win either way
    1
  20681. I think the point is that it would be easier to kill baby Hitler than wait until he's an adult and has already had a chance to influence history.
    1
  20682. Hi!
    1
  20683. Thanks! Glad you liked it!
    1
  20684. The orders of the 82nd Airborne were to take the Nijmegen bridge on day 1. They failed to do this. They did take all the other bridges, but not this one, which was the most critical. It makes no sense to not send just one battalion to the bridge earlier. Feel free to blame Gavin or Browning or whoever, but the battle was lost at Nijmegen. And why would Frost be able to hold at Arnhem for four days, but Warren not be able to hold for two? That doesn't make sense. And yes, parachute divisions are equipped to deal with panzers - they have anti-tank guns and bazookas.
    1
  20685. I mean, I have no direct evidence for that.
    1
  20686. And then I'd have a bunch of people saying "but you didn't mention this, or didn't mention that, or I didn't listen properly at that one point so now I'm going to claim you didn't consider something". I've learnt this lesson the hard way, which is why I make a conscious effort to explain everything in detail so there are no loopholes in the message.
    1
  20687. It's tempting, but why write books when I can make videos?? You can see things much clearer in videos imho
    1
  20688. Is that the one that's in Italian? I've just googled him and only Italian versions come up. Is there an English version?
    1
  20689. You mean the Zuiderzee? ;) yes, I know. It's an old map - actually the first I ever made for any history video. I pulled it back from the grave because I needed something asap. Either way, it doesn't change the overall concept of the plan.
    1
  20690. Market Garden has always been my favourite battle - and still is. It's the one battle I can say I know the most about. Stalingrad is my second favourite, although I'm still not 100% on it yet (although to be fair, it is a much bigger battle).
    1
  20691. It's outdated. Plus, if you read that, you'd have to read three books as minimum in order to get the full story - 'A Bridge Too Far' 'It Never Snows in September' and 'Battle for the Rhine'.
    1
  20692. As I said in the video, there isn't one. Get Beevor's "Arnhem" and Neillands' "Battle for the Rhine". These are the two minimum essential books on the topic. Once you've read Beevor's book, move onto Neillands. Do not read Beevor's book alone because it's biased.
    1
  20693. Me too!
    1
  20694. I wish I could tell you but I haven't read it. I would use it as an introduction and be prepared to change your opinion on the subject if you find other information on it.
    1
  20695. I have played it, but I don't remember. Are you playing as the 82nd or the 101st in that game?
    1
  20696. Yes, one of the best on the subject, but he's messed up at the Nijmegen bit. So if you get it, make sure you pick up Neillands' book too.
    1
  20697. Why would he be sending his lawyers for that? He needs to defend his 'argument' about the Nijmegen debacle.
    1
  20698. STEP 5: Explain to YouTube user 'slapped by a hat' that the book is still recommended as one of the best books on the battle, but tell him you also need to read Robin Neillands' book too (and/or Lost at Nijmegen) because of the Nijmegen issue that Beevor fails hard at.
    1
  20699. Birkly, I've replied to your messages. The formal orders don't change anything. I'm not sure what you're getting at. You've provided evidence, but no argument.
    1
  20700. No, it is relevant. And yes, he does need to provide the evidence. We have a direct quote from Gavin that says the exact opposite. We have other historians that say the exact opposite of what Beevor says, and they manage to back up their points. What we have here is a statement that doesn't make sense, and zero evidence to back it up. Therefore, yes absolutely yes, we need Beevor to show his hand, otherwise the only conclusion we can come to is that he's dead wrong.
    1
  20701. The point is, the plan as it was could have worked, if Gavin had taken the bridge. But yes, the plan could have been better.
    1
  20702. A surrounded enemy is easier to take out, yes? Once over the Rhine, the tanks were to head to the IJsselmeer, which is away from Germany. Doing so would practically cut off the Germans on the coast. Montgomery says this was the objective in his memoirs. https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM other books I have also mention the IJsselmeer as the objective. It also doesn't make sense to mount the entire invasion of Germany along one single road (although, that one road is sufficient for a corps, as Rommel's adventure during Operation Crusader shows).
    1
  20703. Thats sounds bad. Which county are you from?
    1
  20704. Ok, and what exactly do the orders say that proves that Gavin didn't make the initial decision and that Browning didn't agree with him?
    1
  20705. These orders don't change anything. I don't know what you're trying to prove.
    1
  20706. See my reply to your other comment.
    1
  20707. Again, it depends on the book and the video. Generally I skip to the relevant parts of the book, unless the whole book is relevant, at which point I'll read it all the way through. No point reading parts of a book that aren't relevant to the subject you're reading on. For example, I'm working on Operation Crusader right now, and since many of the books are on the whole of the North African Campaign, it's kinda pointless to read beyond that. So I work up to where Crusader ends and I'll pick up the next bits when I move onto the next battle. Another example, if I'm reading a general history of WW2 while I'm looking into Stalingrad, I don't need to read up on what happened in 1940. I know this from other reading/research, so I can just skip to the relevant chapters. When I was in uni, I did the same. Although my practice back then was to read the introduction and conclusion chapters of the books too in case I missed something. I don't tend to do that any more since it's usually irrelevant.
    1
  20708. Depends on the book and the style and whether I'm taking notes or not. I don't read for fun, I only read to make videos (learning as I do this), because reading is otherwise way too boring. I'm basically converting these subjects into video format because I can understand the battles better and I much prefer to learn it that way.
    1
  20709. He wasn't because at that point Warren's battalion had been withdrawn. So with nothing much to do, he drove back north.
    1
  20710. No, the 10th SS Panzer weren't already there. They arrived in Nijmegen in the evening.
    1
  20711. Really? What were the missing two states?? And I hope you enjoy it, and then read Neillands too :)
    1
  20712. You're very welcome :)
    1
  20713. Yes, however it probably won't be for a while. Stalingrad first.
    1
  20714. Nope, unless you believe Gavin's story about the pre-drop orders. Welcome to the heart of the debate, enjoy your stay :) Also I think you need to read Neillands or Poulussen's books, they'll explain it better than I could, and go into more detail. Poulussen's probably more relevant on the Lindquist debate.
    1
  20715. Or Lindquist was ordered to dig in at Groesbeek.
    1
  20716. Thanks for the heads-up, I'll give it a watch
    1
  20717. Haha
    1
  20718. We don't know if "only Gavin knew" about the tanks.
    1
  20719. If they contain links YouTube forces me to approve them. I've just approved a bunch.
    1
  20720. You mean, compared to the deleted ones? More in-depth, and I address several things I didn't in previous ones.
    1
  20721. New week.
    1
  20722. Because the rest of the account is fine. If you didn't read this and Neillands' book (2 books), you'd have to read three books to get the same information. For your second paragraph, exactly. They spared a battalion in the evening, so why not earlier in the afternoon? And yes, it was the plan, so why did it not happen? That's my point. I don't understand your questions about generals. And they're using all the information available, including the AARs (that's how we know the 505th were searching for 1000 tanks in the Reichswald), but the answers aren't always in the AARs.
    1
  20723. I wanted to make up for my mistakes :)
    1
  20724. No, they sent a battalion to the bridge several hours after they landed rather than straight away. The Germans only got to the bridge shortly before the paras did. If the paras had set of earlier, they would have taken the bridge no problem. But they failed and caused a 36 hour delay in the offensive.
    1
  20725. I liked your comment so more people can see. And I agree.
    1
  20726. You can argue that if you like. But if that is the case, why is Beevor not telling the Nijmegen story correctly? What evidence or incentive does he have to say the exact opposite of what the current evidence says?
    1
  20727. It's good, apart from the Nijmegen bit. However, currently there isn't a book that covers this battle correctly. They all seems to mess something up. Beevor does well and covers most of the issues, but unfortunately it still requires you to read Neillands' book at the very least.
    1
  20728. It is a Gibson SG Special I picked up in Texas. And, if you don't watch it for the guitars, why are you asking about it?
    1
  20729. That would make a lot of sense ;)
    1
  20730. This is history. I don't know what you think history is, but this is history.
    1
  20731. I'm not salty. Churchill is an idiot and Monty messed up. However, I agree with Dutch historian Poulussen, that Gavin was the one who screwed up Market Garden. Suffering a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen was what killed this operation, and that only happened because Gavin failed to take the bridge. Beevor doesn't acknowledge this, and shifts the blame to Browning, but then leaves a lot of holes in his argument, as I explain in the video.
    1
  20732. Yes, exactly! But it seems Browning and Gavin were in agreement (unlike what Breevor's book says).
    1
  20733. Mario, that's fair. You can still blame Monty and Browning, just so long as you accept Gavin's role :) And Frank, the ratio is entirely up to you and your interpretation. I also put more emphasis on Gavin's role, but that's my opinion. I can't argue with someone if they still place the blame higher.
    1
  20734. Haha sadly not :)
    1
  20735. Really? What makes you say that??
    1
  20736. Fantastic :)
    1
  20737. I don't know what you're getting at. If Gavin made the initial decision, and Browning agreed, the orders you provided don't discredit that. And either way, if Gavin's orders were to take and hold the bridges at Nijmegen, the fact is he failed to do it. He failed to follow clear orders. Therefore, based on your source alone, I could argue that Browning was not to blame. So again, I'm not sure what you're trying to get at. The fact remains that Gavin did not order his division to take the Nijmegen bridge for several crucial hours after landing. And, referring to your other comment, how do you explain the delay in heading towards the bridge?
    1
  20738. Well, this is a review, but it goes into a ton of detail as to why Beevor messed up in this book. Because of that, most of this video is actually about the situation at Nijmegen, and how Beevor has made a claim about the battle that goes against the current evidence but hasn't backed up his claim. Not sure if the other two reviews mentioned that, but I certainly did.
    1
  20739. I don't, I say they're slightly behind schedule, but then catch up on the morning of day three. 30 Corps are not late when they get to Nijmegen.
    1
  20740. No no, they suffered delays, but once they crossed Son Bridge they caught up any time lost. So by the time they got to Nijmegen they were actually on schedule.
    1
  20741. I always recommended the book. But, as I said in this video, his book cannot be read alone. You have to read Neillands at the very least too. But if you chose not to read Beevor, no matter what book you choose on this subject, there will be flaws, so you're going to have to read more than one book on this subject. Breevor's comes close to a "one book to rule them all" on the operation, but fails massively at the 'blame game' (as I like to call it). If you choose not to read Beevor, then I'd have to recommend three books - 'A Bridge Too Far', 'It Never Snows in September', and 'Battle for the Rhine'.
    1
  20742. Yeah, I knew a few people would have known it. But it's still a myth that continues to be spread, and we should be the ones trying to prevent it from doing so.
    1
  20743. Good question. I don't know the answer, but I hope someone else does
    1
  20744. I encourage you to do your own reading sir. Don't take my word for it. (Although, sources are listed in pinned comment.)
    1
  20745. That's really good to hear. I may get things wrong now and then, and I may not present these videos perfectly (e.g. the smugness or the poor German names pronunciations) but I definitely do my homework. I learnt that early on when a lot of people weren't happy with my Market Garden conclusion. (Also as I said in my Oil video - there's no such thing as a "revisionist historian". Historian by definition is someone who questions everything they read, see or hear. And I even encourage you to question everything I say - which it sounds like you are doing. Bravo!)
    1
  20746. By going on to talk about Göring, and calling him irresponsible (he doesn't do the same with Jeschonnek) the reader comes away thinking it was Göring's fault. Therefore he implied it was Göring. And he's done the same with his new book on Arnhem. He says how the 82nd Airborne failed to take Nijmegen bridge, and then goes on about how Browning was at fault, leading the reader to conclude it was Browning's fault. Which is fine, but he never even acknowledges General Gavin' role in the matter. In fact, he defends his actions, even though what he says in the defence of him can so easily be disputed. Same has been done here. By focusing on Göring after saying Jeschonnek introduced the idea to Hitler, the reader gets the impression that it was entirely Göring's fault.
    1
  20747. Quite a few people did try to persuade him. I'm deliberately being vague though because this is a subject I'll be returning to in upcoming videos ;)
    1
  20748. I really need to get into the habit of looking up the names before making videos. It sounds more like "Yes-shone-nick" to me
    1
  20749. Jamie, so good you could join us. Better late than never, ay?
    1
  20750. Jamie won't be happy
    1
  20751. Thank you! More to follow :)
    1
  20752. Agreed - I've actually read it all and have taken extensive notes. I know all about Manstein and Paulus. In fact, I'm planning on making videos on them in the next few weeks :)
    1
  20753. Will do!
    1
  20754. With Paulus at Stalingrad was a memoir written by Colonel Adem, who took part in the Battle of Stalingrad. It's not a reflection of the west, it's a reflection of the German general's view of the war. It's also garbage, and I've already done a brief review of it here https://youtu.be/51_6olyYPDo
    1
  20755. I get what Wikipedia is trying to do, and I respect that, but at the same time it really isn't an acceptable source. Ultimately it's just other people's opinions, backed by barely any sources. People treat it as gospel, and it certainly is not
    1
  20756. Yes he is still alive. How is it a slur?
    1
  20757. I am very much aware. Unfortunately, not being a full-time YouTuber, I cannot possibly commit to that project at this time.
    1
  20758. Did you even watch the video?
    1
  20759. Yes, and his books are awesome
    1
  20760. Endgame and the German Official History of the war.
    1
  20761. Mistakes get repeaten over and over again. And it makes me wonder - if we can't agree on a war that happened less than a century ago, what chance have we got on wars that happened hundreds, if not thousands of years ago?
    1
  20762. No worries! I may get the odd thing wrong now and then, but that is why I think sources are a must. Never take my (or anyone's) word for it!
    1
  20763. There's always the possibility of inaccuracies, no matter which book you look at. In Robert Citino's eyes, we may be living in the "Glantz Era" of WW2 history, but that doesn't mean that Glantz is infallable. Multiple sources are needed, and in this case Glantz and the German official history both say the same thing. Plus Glantz adds to it by confirming Göring wasn't with Hitler until the 22nd of November, two days after Hitler had made his mind up thanks to Jeschonnek. And I agree with you on the official histories. The British official history of the Mediterranean War, while good in a lot of respects, does drop the ball in a few areas.
    1
  20764. Glad you liked it, Ikrananka!
    1
  20765. Added to my shopping list. Thank you SuperCaratacus :) any other book recommendations for the Battle of Britain?
    1
  20766. Oh ok... so did Britain ever come close to running out of pilots and thus lose the battle?
    1
  20767. I haven't read enough on the Battle of Britain to know, but I've heard the Luftwaffe came close to victory. Is there any truth in this?
    1
  20768. So by your logic, if an employee murders someone, the employer/company is prosecuted while the person who did the deed gets off free? Damn, that's a massive loophole... No, the person who screwed up still screwed up and should take the blame. You can blame Göring if you like, but it's untrue that he was solely to blame and Jeschonnek should take some responsibility too, as should Hitler himself.
    1
  20769. No offense taken. But you do realise that I've been saying the exact same thing about Market Garden from the beginning? Nothing has changed. And that's not to say new evidence won't come along that changes my mind on the subject, but from the first video being published until now, my opinion hasn't changed, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. And while I am trying to learn German, restricting everyone from discussing Eastern Front history because they can't speak German and Russian doesn't make much sense to me. Certainly, it's a massive benefit for anyone who can read German or Russian, but gatekeeping history like that is not doing anyone any favours. All that will do is limit those who can discuss history to the "elite". Sorry, but I don't want that. My goal here is to get people discussing history. I want them to read history. I want to break the idea that history is boring (which a lot of people think) or that it's only for tweed-wearing dust-collectors. And for this reason, restricting people from discussing a topic because they don't speak several languages and are therefore not worthy of discussing it with the likes of "us", is a terrible idea.
    1
  20770. The issue with Shirer is that he was basing his book on what Halder and the German officer's version of events - which as shown here, wasn't always accurate. It's biased in so many ways. But it does have its place in history and has influenced many people's perceptions of the war. I don't know what the kids today learn about WW2, but I hope it's something written in the past 10 years at least.
    1
  20771. That's great to hear! Thanks for watching :)
    1
  20772. Hahaha
    1
  20773. Their options were - 1) don't go to war (but this isn't realistic since that was Hitler's whole plan). 2) peace with Britain (possible, but not likely). 3) Middle East (but they struggled to supply Rommel as it was, so not realistic). 4) knock out, or at least cripple, the Soviet Union in 1941 (they failed at this).
    1
  20774. I didn't actually mean the etymology of the word, I was making the point that history is what people have written down - as in, I was using it to make people aware that you're reading someone else's opinion. As at least one person has pointed out, he didn't realise that about history (the subject) until I said it in this video.
    1
  20775. Glad you're enjoying the videos! I don't want to pry, but is there a specific reason why do you struggle at reading? I never used to read when I was a kid, and so struggled to read out loud when asked too in class at high school, and even in college (which I used to get made fun of by the other students)
    1
  20776. Did you see last week's video? Check out the pinned comment in that video
    1
  20777. Do you think that it's logical to come to that conclusion without having read his books? Perhaps yhe reason he's quoted so often is because his work is above and beyond what came before him. Glantz blows the old authors of the Eastern Front out of the water - and I should know, I've read most of them! 'When Titan's Clashed' is a good starting point, but his series on Stalingrad is amazing too (either the 5 book series, or the newer 1 book condensed version, which is easier to get a hold of) As I've said in other videos - "if you're not reading Glantz, you're doing it wrong." And while that might sound ridiculous from your current point of view, I'm being serious. We're living in the Glantz-era of WW2 Eastern Front historiography. To ignore the Glantz is to ignore the best we've ever had (up to now). And that doesn't mean I think he's perfect (his maps suck, and I've spotted a few minor errors in his Stalingrad series whilst working on my own Battlestorm series) but he's the best we have
    1
  20778. I like to think that most people will agree with me :)
    1
  20779. Lux aren't important ;) the statistics help with the tactics, but getting the millimeters accurate is not so important. This is why at TankFest I was like "that doesn't really matter" when people were talking about armour thickness etc. Might have an effect on the individual tank if it's hit, but not on the squadron or regiments or the division. And unlike in WoT or the like, you have AT guns, infantry, (actual) artillery and so on to factor in, at which point I would argue that combined arms tactics are more important than the quality of the individual parts.
    1
  20780. Nothing, it's the video from 3 weeks ago. Link https://youtu.be/E071A1dzqvs
    1
  20781. Yes, that is the origin of the word, but that's not the point I was making. Plus, you're assuming that language stands still - which it does not. Colour and color being both correct, as an example.
    1
  20782. Danke! German is quite hard (although can only spare 20 mins a day on it at the moment). Not looking forward to Russian though
    1
  20783. Honestly, I've never even come across this word before until I read it for this video
    1
  20784. Thank yoy. You'll probably enjoy the video that's coming out today, because I'm talking about tank warfare, but putting a different spin on it, and explaining why talking about exact millimetres of armour is a bit pointless. Tactics mean more than the individual tanks.
    1
  20785. Focus is on Crusader at the moment, but the Monday videos (when I'm doing Stalingrad-related ones) are actually giving me the chance to work on Stalingrad a bit too. But I absolutely want to get Crusader out so I can focus back on Stalingrad and Courland (which I'm committed to as well, but won't be as bad as Crusader, which turned out to be way bigger than expected)
    1
  20786. It's the type of content. Some people aren't interested in history, they want news of today. Others who are interested in history only want shallow 5 minute videos. Others just want to hear what already know because they're hostile to learning (and those people like this usually are the ones who pretend they know everything). And others only watch 2 minutes of video because their attention spans have been crippled by the internet. So while long form in-depth content has it's place. Shorter video content will usually perform better just because of the market.
    1
  20787. The comment wasn't about the etymology of the word, but the usage that historians have for the word. It's necessary to recognise that every word you hear, see, listen to was created by someone else. Their thoughts, their perspectives, their biases, and their agendas are all part of our history because we're social animals and we require constant input - like this. You're reading my words, my opinion, my biases, my perspective... which is why it's good practice to know who the author is, otherwise they could manipulate you into changing the meaning of the history we're all creating together.
    1
  20788. If I won the lottery I don't play, I would hire people to help me. But this could become a reality if I can get more support on Patreon.
    1
  20789. Also, I've never defended the Wehrmacht or the SS. I've made it clear that they're not illogical, that they did what they did on purpose and there was a method and reason behind their decisions. That's what made them so evil, because their actions resulted in the deaths of millions, and they knew exactly what they were doing. Calling them 'mad' or blaming everything on Hitler gives them an excuse - gives them a way out. Well, I'm not giving them an excuse.
    1
  20790. As I've said many times now, I'm doing a Holocaust documentary because I'm sick to death of hearing from deniers how it didn't happen. During that, I am to show the manipulations that David Irving made in his books.
    1
  20791. That's actually what I'm doing! The sentence structure makes me go cross-eyed
    1
  20792. To be honest, I wasn't sure what it was until after the video when I googled the term.
    1
  20793. Haha did I really say that?
    1
  20794. https://youtu.be/51_6olyYPDo
    1
  20795. "donations from several private institutions and persons amounted to 2,071,000 marks from february 27 to 4 of march of 1933," I addressed this in the video you didn't bother to watch. That's after Hitler got into power, which he did in January 1933. Have you got any evidence of industrialists donating PRIOR to Hitler getting into power? And, of course, I know you don't, because what pathetic evidence there was is shown in the video. - "It is said that there were donations during 1932, but no details are known about them, content or amount." Right. You have no evidence. History is only what we can prove via the evidence, not stuff we make up in our own minds. Without evidence, your claims are unsupported and therefore false.
    1
  20796. Thank you for doing that!
    1
  20797. I've always been a pessimist simply because I'd rather not get my hopes up and then be disappointed. However, in this case, I hope you're correct and I am somewhat optimistic we're getting through the worst of it.
    1
  20798. No, the businessmen were mostly voting for the (classic) liberals or the conservatives, not Hitler or Fascism. But when the voter base turned away from the traditional parties and Hitler gained the most seats in the Reichstag, at that point they tried to control him, and then failed. They didn't want him in, but they had to deal with him when he was in power.
    1
  20799. I dealt with Sutton here https://youtu.be/SnbFpR1m0zA Secondly, yes the National Socialist movement was grassroots funded, and the party was massively in debt when it got into power.
    1
  20800. I'm glad to hear it! Would you mind telling me what it was that convinced you of my argument? I'm under the impression most people (apart from my viewers) are refusing to watch, or listen, or seriously consider what I'm saying, so any clue towards what helped you realise the original distortion would be very useful.
    1
  20801. Yep, that's precisely it. But even then, there was only Reemtsma's deal. Yet, somehow, that's evidence towards "Nazi capitalism", apparently.
    1
  20802. The businesses were nationalised and socialised. Owners of big companies lost their businesses, such as Professor Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory. Fritz Thyssen ended up in a concentration camp. Only the unions that refused to nationalise into the Deutsches Arbeitsfront were crushed. I've provided plenty of evidence of all this in previous videos on this topic. See this playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgxP4QadjKhk4bI6x2PbScO
    1
  20803. I've done plenty of videos on Hitler's Socialism. I was the one who did the 5 hour video on the topic, which the opposition then slammed without watching it. I then remade it and condensed it down to 43 mins https://youtu.be/mLHG4IfYE1w?si=AR1yqUh-xmrCIUEm
    1
  20804. The burden of proof is on you. You're claiming Hitler was funded by capitalists prior to the seizure of power, and the best evidence you can come up with in support of this claim is nothing. Show me your receipts. Where is the actual evidence of large sums of money going to the National Socialist Party from the industrialists and big business leaders prior to 1933? As explained in the video, you haven't got anything substantial, and thus the Marxist argument is nonsense. And as as you can see, I didn't ban you, but I have given you a warning. If you can't behave yourself, I will ban you. Respect is earned, not taxed. Your behaviour is what decides whether you get to talk to others or not. This is not to say that I would ban you for opposing views - there's plenty of people with opposing views in my comments. It's not because you oppose me, but purely because you're behaviour is poor. I'm therefore giving you a chance to correct that behaviour.
    1
  20805. Calls me a "dingbat". Calls my viewers "stupid". Falsely accuses me of "cherry picking". Falsely accuses me of pumping out "propaganda". Falsely accuses me of "obfuscation". Falsely accuses me of being a "reactionary demagoguery". Wonders why I will shortly ban him from commenting in any comment section on my channel 🤔
    1
  20806. Turner even stated they did, and the old history books especially are full of this narrative. Even Evans is not entirely exempt from this criticism as he still has to mention how Fritz Thyssen gave money to Göring, and he still pushes the idea that National Socialism wasn't Socialism.
    1
  20807. Watch the video, then give me the evidence for your claim that there were "donations from industry". As explained in the video, there were only four capitalists of any note that may or may not have given money to the Nazis, and even then the evidence for that is sketchy at best. Watch the video.
    1
  20808. This is an old video. Battleaxe is already out! In fact, I'm working on the battle after Battleaxe right now - Operation Crusader. And I've never been into football. Not my cup of tea.
    1
  20809. Battleaxe will be out on the 6th of June 2017 (took me five weeks to make as of this video)
    1
  20810. True!
    1
  20811. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0CyOAO8y0
    1
  20812. Yeah, I realized when I was editing this that I also need the line to be split into two because sometimes the Axis lines might be broken while the Soviet lines don't, or there could be a gap in no-man's land etc. So really, I think the current 'solution' is correct, although I could also put both lines in the same object in Blender, which might make things easier...
    1
  20813. Pitt and Playfair are by far the most detailed authors on the North African Campaign. I don't just use them - I use all the sources I can get my hands on (including German). But for the battles prior to Gazala, they're by far the most detailed. Unless a source has come out recently, they are the most detailed. Now, when it comes to El Alamein (which I haven't covered yet) sure there probably are better sources. Great. However, despite their flaws, I stand by the fact that these sources are the best there currently is for the pre-Gazala battles.
    1
  20814. That makes sense, but I still don't want to do it. I think it cheapens the experience in the present. I'd just rather not
    1
  20815. Yeah, they're all mine (except the Market Garden ones). I'm actually surprised people have taken an interest in them because I didn't think anyone would notice them too much in the background. It's funny because if it wasn't for the broken copyright system, I wouldn't have made them!
    1
  20816. 1984 is my favourite fiction book, and I have a fun story to tell about it. In school they forced me to read Animal Farm, and I hated it. But a year or two later I read 1984 and absolutely loved it. Read it a couple of times in quick succession (I'm not a big reader of fiction, so this was a rare event). And I realized afterwards that it was the same author who wrote Animal Farm. I wondered, how could the same author who wrote a superb book like 1984 mess up his previous book, Animal Farm? So I went back to read Animal Farm. I realized that Animal Farm was actually good. The only reason I hated it was because my teachers had forced me to read it, and I absolutely hated them, and hated being ordered to do something. It was a wake-up call that made me realize that school is designed to make you dumb, and also that you have to want to do something in order to do it. If you do something that you hate, it'll be an absolute struggle and you'll hate every second of it.
    1
  20817. Is it capitalist or is it a corporation? Pick one
    1
  20818. Yeah I will get back to it at some point 👍🏻
    1
  20819. Good idea about the tablet idea! Hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense! I'd have to get a different teleprompter stand though... I'll look into it
    1
  20820. Any ideas, let me know
    1
  20821. Because socialism relies on belief rather than an understanding of how economics actually works. It's also inherently anti-Semitic as Karl Marx himself made clear https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg I say this as an ex-socialist myself who accidentally realized I'd believed a lie for the whole of my life and instantly turned against it.
    1
  20822. Yes, until you realize that "bourgeoisie" just means "Jews" by Karl Marx's own words, as I've explained previously.
    1
  20823. Haha stop the bullying! (I need to ask you: did you enjoy last week's video?)
    1
  20824. I agree. However the counter argument will be that there are differences between people of different "races" that aren't just skin colour, and then we go down a rabbit hole. The problem is that the 1% difference in DNA renders the counter-argument mute. Sure, a few small differences may be at play, but the differences are so minor it's not worth talking about. Fundamentally we're all human.
    1
  20825. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    1
  20826. @simplicius - I'll just leave these links here (On the 1929 Depression) https://youtu.be/moFxynPP2yw (On the 1920 Depression) https://youtu.be/czcUmnsprQI
    1
  20827. The Founding Fathers of America called their government a Republic, not a democracy, because they knew democracy was bad. Democracy is 'people' 'power'. But the people is the public, and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State Power (Socialism) https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20828. History is economics. Just because you disagree and don't like the fact I've pointed out another flaw in the Socialist narrative doesn't mean I'm wrong.
    1
  20829. "Everyone recovered from the world economic crisis of the early 30s." Yes, but only after the war. Read "Depression, War, and Cold War" by Higgs to understand why the US economy only recovered in 1945/46.
    1
  20830. @Romen Wilkins - please see this video on Austrian Business Cycle Theory https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    1
  20831. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    1
  20832. Both Nazism and Fascism painted themselves as a "third way" (socialist) between Marxism and Capitalism.
    1
  20833. Except, central banks are not capitalist https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20834. Why exactly do you think my views on recessions and unemployment are "simple"? Also https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  20835. "Keep in mind that the US government did nothing for three years and the downturn continued." Please watch this video https://youtu.be/moFxynPP2yw It explains away most of the points you raised, especially your point that the US government did nothing. You may also enjoy this video about the Great Depression of 1920 https://youtu.be/czcUmnsprQI
    1
  20836. "@TIK You missed the point about worker control?" That's Marxist-Socialism, not Socialism. "Maybe I did and you can explain what method German workers under the NAZIs exercised control over production, hours/wages and had a voice in the Reichstag?" That's not even how Marxist-Socialism works. Under Marxist-Socialism, the workers are in 'socialized control'. This means that the 'public' are collectively in control. Public coming from the Latin, meaning 'state'. The workers are not in control in Marxist Socialist states, they collectively submit to the central state, which then orders them about. Even if this Marxist Socialist state was magically democratic, the central state still orders them about, it just does it by vote first.
    1
  20837. "National Socialism wasn't REAL National Socialism!" Lol.
    1
  20838. But capitalism isn't failing, and there are only minor differences between communists and socialists (in fact, prior to Lenin taking power in Russia, the two words were synonyms of each other). Please see my video coming out tomorrow titled "Public Vs Private", but I just happen to address everything you said in your comment.
    1
  20839. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    1
  20840. Collective control of the means of production on the national or international level... Yes, total non-sense. Watch this video from start to finish, then you will understand fully https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20841. "The Fed being private owned is an anomaly." It's a central bank. Thus it is 'public'. Public coming from the Latin meaning 'state'. It doesn't matter if the legislative or executive don't have control over it or not, it's the central state of the banking sector. It is therefore not a 'private sector' bank. (It's private in the sense that we can't just walk into it, but it's part of the public sector hierarchy)
    1
  20842. "@TIK The KMT wasn't capitalist? Virtually everything was privately owned with the exception of some military armories and bases." Right, so it wasn't capitalist then. "Socialized healthcare is economic freedom not individual freedom" So it's economically unfree. If I can't choose a different service, then I'm not free to choose, both economically or individually. "and while taxes do cross over into both categories all ideologies with the exception of anarchists believe having to pay taxes is a necessary limitation of individual freedom" Tax is force (slavery). Trade is cooperation (freedom). I should not be forced to pay for something I don't want nor need, especially when I am perfectly capable of trading for the things I want and need... if my money hadn't been forcefully taken from me in the first place by a collective with guns. "Turns out that political ideologies are more complex than just "More freedom" or "less freedom"." True, however capitalism is economic and political freedom. Socialism is economic and political slavery. National Socialism is not capitalism - the Third Reich was neither economically nor politically free.
    1
  20843. "A good example of authoritarian capitalism is the KMT under Chiang Kai Shek." That wasn't capitalism. "A good example of free socialism is the united front in the spanish civil war or a more moderate example would be modern Scandinavian states." The people there were/are "free"? Could have fooled me. "You keep talking about stuff only on an economic spectrum without factoring individual freedoms." I just love being forced to pay into the National Socialist Health Service of the UK. I wish I had a choice, but I'm not economically free because this is socialism, just like Scandinavia. Of course, my individual freedom is not impacted by my economic slavery in any way. "And when I point this out you act like there is some grand conspiracy behind the political compass." It's not a conspiracy. It's redundant. A line something like the second one listed here will do https://i.imgur.com/rLlDlcQ.png
    1
  20844. "A totalitarian regime, who did not have complete state control." Then it was authoritarian, not totalitarian. 'Totalitarian' as a term was created and defined by Mussolini - all within the state, nothing outside the state.
    1
  20845. And you cannot have totalitarianism with total socialized 'state' control of the means of production (Socialism).
    1
  20846. Or, you could just cut the circle off at the point where free market capitalism magically warps into socialism on the Right, straighten it out, and say that the Right is capitalist and anti-state and the Left is Socialist and pro-state, which is exactly the point.
    1
  20847. Agreed
    1
  20848. I used to be a socialist. I do understand it very well. And you said it yourself - "solidarity among people and nations" - is the Fascist idea.
    1
  20849. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc
    1
  20850. "I understand it just fine." Then whey are you calling a central bank a non-central bank? "The Federal Reserve even says in the first sentence "The Federal Reserve, like many other central banks, is an independent government agency"" You've missed the point. It's a central bank - a public entity. It's therefore not 'private'. "You on the other hand fail to do enough research." Actually I've done a ton of research on this very issue, going right back to Ancient Greece and Rome, then forward in time. I'm working on a video right now that cover this in detail, because there's a lot of people who don't understand the very words "Public" and "Private" in the economic and political sense.
    1
  20851. And you've failed to understand the difference between the public sector and the private sector.
    1
  20852. You might like this https://i.imgur.com/rLlDlcQ.png
    1
  20853. So does that mean you travel back in time to watch the videos? (Physics wasn't my strong point)
    1
  20854. "Tik is blaming the Hungarians (and Hitler) for thinking that capitalism does not work." No I didn't, I'm not blaming them. I'm saying they didn't understand it, just like most people don't. That's not the same thing. "Bit In the inter war period nobody of us would have thought that capitalism works because In this time the "evidence" of broken capitalism was massively overwhelming." Exactly. But capitalism wasn't broken, it was socialism that was broken. They didn't know that, but they were wrong to think that. "Yes, with 100 years hindsight everybody would have known everything better." Well... no... because it's STILL not known by the majority of people. That's why there are people in this comment section arguing with me over this, and why the central banks and central states continue to believe that spending grows the economy (which it doesn't), thus leading to more recessions. "And Tik blames the Hungarians for having the knowledge of their time." Again, not blaming them.
    1
  20855. I'm not preaching that the Fascists and National Socialists are Far Right, I'm saying that they're on the Far Left, which they are. All Socialists and those who believe in central 'public' or 'social' control of the political economy are on the Left.
    1
  20856. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    1
  20857. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs_(ethnonym)
    1
  20858. https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  20859. "Sounds like an independent entity inside the government to me." Exactly.
    1
  20860. It's a central bank. Thus it is 'public'. Public coming from the Latin meaning 'state'. It doesn't matter if the legislative or executive don't have control over it or not, it's the central state of the banking sector.
    1
  20861. The Federal Reserve is a central public sector bank. It is not "independent" of the government.
    1
  20862. Please see this video which explains that recessions are caused by governments https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc The Great Recession was caused by government spending during the "Roaring Twenties" (which is why it's called that) and prolonged by government spending and restrictions, which caused it to last until 1945/46 (see Higgs "Depression, War, and Cold War")
    1
  20863. I will do one day. However, Stalingrad comes first
    1
  20864. Correction, it was Nijmegen not Reimargan. And the question is then, why hadn't the paratroopers captured the bridge at Nijmegen on the first day like they were supposed to?
    1
  20865. Yes, probably the same guy! I've moved on from gaming (although will be dripping in and out of it again soon). If you liked my Market Garden video, you'll probably enjoy my other Battlestorm videos too (later ones are the best) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y Currently working on the next one's, Operation Crusader (coming soon), and an epic one of the Battle of Stalingrad which I've been working on for over a year now and I'm nowhere near done.
    1
  20866. And I hope you do enjoy it!
    1
  20867. Happy birthday!
    1
  20868. When Titan's Clashed is more of an overview of the entire Eastern Front from 1941 to 1945, so therefore it can't cover everything. As an overview of the whole conflict, it's great! And I think it does mention most of those battles you listed, at least briefly. But if you're looking for specifics on Barbarossa, you may want to check out his "Operation Barbarossa" book, or his "Barbarossa Derailed" (on Smolensk). Alternatively, David Stahel's "Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East" is probably the book you'd want to pick up for that specific period. Stahel seems to be focusing on the 1941 campaigns. He also has a couple of videos on YouTube, including this one on Barbarossa https://youtu.be/KxsdfcgfSS8
    1
  20869. For Stalingrad reading, I definitely recommend Glantz, Jason D Mark (link in description),, Falk, Anton Joly (link in description), and Isaev. I've mentioned in previous videos, and will be mentioning in future ones, some more authors and specific books that are deserving of praise because without their books this simply wouldn't be possible
    1
  20870. There's two reasons why I don't do that. 1) because that would take a hell of a lot more work to constantly swap the units out. And 2) because many of those units are actually combat-units, not just HQ's. For example, I may know where the regiments are in a division, but not the rest of the support battalions or the artillery regiments. Therefore, the division counter represents the support battalions and artillery regiments within it, not just the HQ.
    1
  20871. Nuts! Thanks for pointing that out
    1
  20872. Okay... None of what you said really undermines the numbers presented or the conclusions, it only reinforces them. As you said, the Germans were tricked into thinking that the Soviets were on their last legs. Okay great, but they still messed up with the reinforcement issue.
    1
  20873. Yes, and also I randomly found it online and thought it was funny
    1
  20874. I'm sorry, you were 3 seconds later than Jamie!
    1
  20875. Hitler would have done Barbarossa if the west had fallen. But yes, had Hitler got bogged down in France, it would have been really bad for him.
    1
  20876. You'll not last five minutes!
    1
  20877. Noooo! I always make a spelling mistake like that :(
    1
  20878. +Gokotti It could well be :D
    1
  20879. If I had a chance to go, I would :)
    1
  20880. Nobody's routing for the Nazis here. But it is interesting from a military perspective to study, speculate and ask "what ifs" had things been done differently. Or what would have happened if just one or two commanders had made different decisions, on both sides of the wire
    1
  20881. @Tornike - in that case, we do pronounce the "e" at the end of Jänecke?
    1
  20882. And this is the same Hube who broke out of a pocket in 1944 with a similar size army to the one trapped at Stalingrad
    1
  20883. Is it not "noob" with a "h"?
    1
  20884. I think that's good enough tbh! I got a few right :)
    1
  20885. Good question! I'll look into it
    1
  20886. I'm certainly working on it. But I did leave a short hint in the video for a reason... a short hint...
    1
  20887. I'LL БE ЯIGHT БACK
    1
  20888. Thank you sir, there may be another day soon where I won't be able to pronounce German words (I'm actually trying to learn German on the side - 32 days into it now) so your help will probably needed :)
    1
  20889. Yes, I'll be covering both those operations, and will end the series in February 1942. Anton Joly has done videos on Paulus in captivity, so I don't need to do them.
    1
  20890. He was a huge National Socialist. That's why he ended up being convicted for crimes after the war. Of course, he doesn't let on in his memoirs, but why would he.
    1
  20891. In other words "it wasn't real socialism"... but it was though. Hitler said the exact same thing about Marxism
    1
  20892. Yeah, the place is called "Bobrovskii", but I thought I could improve it slightly 😂
    1
  20893. You're arguing with the benefit of hindsight. Yes, knowing the outcome of the battle, that the airlift would fail, that glorious Manstein would fail to do what he said he could do, then yes it does make sense for Paulus to tell his army to breakout immediately. But that only makes sense with the benefit of hindsight. At the time, Paulus and the other generals weren't to know all that, and so the best option was to hedgehog in Stalingrad.
    1
  20894. At university or at school?
    1
  20895. Good spot :)
    1
  20896. Yeah, guitar was my first obsession. Did you know that except for in the Market Garden video, I put my own music in the Battlestorm series? It's not great music, but having a interest in guitar has definitely helped this channel :)
    1
  20897. Why? What are your priorities?
    1
  20898. Happy birthday! How old?
    1
  20899. Awesome! Here's the app https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=io.moreless.tide
    1
  20900. You'll have to let me know how you get on with it. I definitely suggest trying out the traditional Eisenhower Matrix first. It forces you to prioritize. The only reason I use my "newer version" is because I know that certain tasks are better performed in the morning (when I'm more alert) and other tasks can be left to the end of the day as they require less brain power.
    1
  20901. Yeah, I hope he doesn't pull my videos down for copyright. I'll make sure to only use the one map just in case ;) And I do need to update my passport...
    1
  20902. I don't think the spelling matters
    1
  20903. Morgan Chalmers Sure have a point! But the points don't matter, so you can half a few more too :)
    1
  20904. Gary Thomas Yes! Which would suggest that parliaments are wise... ಠ_ಠ
    1
  20905. Devon Ziegler haha no, sadly not :)
    1
  20906. starcraft2own Owl have to give you some encouragement
    1
  20907. When I've finished my current Panzer Corps LP. I'm not doing what I did last time and update the game only for it to ruin my save files for the LP
    1
  20908. +alkafluence absolutely! But Italy definitely didn't see itself that way and wasn't prepared for war with most of the world
    1
  20909. Also, I've not looked into Greece that much. But that's probably why the Italians went into Greece too, to try and get as much as possible before the war ended... even though it didn't
    1
  20910. Also, wannabchomsky - you can't have "totalitarian capitalism" lol. Oh no, they're oppressing me by making me free!
    1
  20911. I didn't say he was a Marxist. I said he was a Socialist. Socialism pre-dates Marxism. And as I said, I'm not interested in a consensus. If the majority think the moon is made of cheese, the moon is not made of cheese.
    1
  20912. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20913. 1. The video is 5 hours, not 4. 2. My "obsession" is due to the fact that if you can't define something then you don't know what it is. (this is science btw) 3. I can put people like Jeremy Corbyn (leftist Anti-Semite here in the UK, now ex-leader of the Labour Party, which itself is Anti-Semitic, and he was sacked for refusing to deal with the Anti-Semitism within his own party). I can put all Marxists in this camp, including Marx himself, since he was an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  20914. Strange... YouTube has just deleted two of my comments in reply to you... Let me try again, but I'll hide some of the language to beat the bots Mr H nationalized the industries, as I showed and gave evidence for in the video you didn't watch. The Marxist narrative that H "Privatisation" the industries is false, and I used 107 sources, 350 references and loads of quotes and more to prove that the Marxists-Socialist narrative was wrong. And Mr H wanted competition because, as I explained in the video, his ideology had a fundamental flaw in it.
    1
  20915. Hahaha
    1
  20916. "Thanks for talking with me! " It's alright, thanks for talking with me :) "To say capitalism is just private owners control of tools is akin to saying the simple farmer who owns his own shovel is a capitalist bc he owns a shovel." Yes, that is actually capitalism. "That's silly. Its to say capitalism has always existed...thats even sillier." Capitalism hasn't always existed. For most of human history, people have been slaves or serfs of the public sector - e.g. the kings, states and other entities that strangled their economic freedom. The shovels were owned by their masters, not by them. Once the slaves were set free, they worked (estimated) 50-80% more harder and more efficiently, which had stunning effects on the economy, which we've seen in the past 200 years. "You said you were a socialist once. After learning about what capital actually is, how "bourgeoise economics" or "political economy" as it was called in the 1800s, forms capital and how it managed to replaced serfdom with wage work, i dont get why you'd backslide into a simple one-dimesional definition that covers no pertinate aspects of it." Because Marx and the socialists lied about the definitions and promised the world. When you realize that their definitions are completely false, and that their language is deliberately designed to be over complicated to distort the truth and hide the meaning of the words and phrases they're using, you'll understand that you've been played - just like I was. "Private ownership has existed well before capitalism." Technically not. I actually explained this in part in the Public vs Private video (which I recommend, link above) but not properly. "Private" used to mean "family", or "whatever the lords owned" (which included slaves). Once it turned into "individual", and once the individual was freed, then it became capitalism. Prior to that, it was a kind-of feudalism. That's why your claim - "Your one dimension view of capitalism is useless in explaining the rise and fall of fuedalism and capitalism since both have private property." - doesn't work as a counter to what I'm saying. "I like you bc you try to push beyond conventional thinking in military analysis...you dont repeat what the dictionary says on that content." Of course I do! I use dictionary defined words all the time! You'll discover that the words 'socialism' and 'capitalism' are the only words in the dictionary that socialists claim have no meaning, or if they do we'll never 'understand' what they are, because only 'they' really know the 'true' meaning of the words... It's just a way to keep people ignorant and to hide the true meanings from us peasants. You haven't been told the capitalist side of the argument, just like wasn't told. Back in the day, I couldn't understand why anyone would be a capitalist. It was only when I realized that Hitler was a socialist that I decided to look into the capitalist world-view, and read "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt and heard some lectures online by Thomas Sowell and people at the Mises institute, that I realized that I'd been completely lied to by the socialist-propaganda and that capitalist economics is superior. "Social analysis, building up deep interpretations requires deeper thinking than stringing together what the dictionary states." Words have meanings. Socialists are trying to disconnect the meanings from the words to hide the true meanings. Orwell warned about this ("Newspeak" or "New speak" or "News speak", depending). This is known as "postmodernism" (created in the aftermath of the Hungarian Revolution, as I explained in my History Theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc ). If you destroy the meanings of words, you have no way to communicate. Socialism and capitalism have meanings, and had meanings prior to the 1956 revolution in Hungary. Then the Socialists attempted to hide their meanings so they could keep the 'faith' in their ideology - an economic theory that fails every time but appeals to those who seek absolute power. "Again, I appreciate you replying to me! I know you are busy and I look forward to your content!" I don't get much time, but I'm trying :) thanks for reading/watching and I hope I'll see more of your comments in the future!
    1
  20917. "Why don't you use capital accumulation in your explanation of capitalism though...thats a big mis-step." Because that's not the historical nor current definition of capitalism. Marx claimed that capitalism was 'when there is rich people'. But that's not what capitalism is. Capitalism is the private control of the means of production.
    1
  20918. "19:29 "marx is an ancap" yeah you don't use capital, which capitalist strive to accumulate, in your defintion of capitalism at all...so its not a complete or even useful definition of capital inho and it leads you astray. Your definition of capitalism would include a peasant who own thier own tools or average joe who digs a ditch for him self with his own shovel. This is absurd. Further more conflate capitalism with markets...but the latter have existed for millennia with out capitalist relations." Is there a language barrier or did you just not listen to what I said? Also, Public vs Private video will set you straight https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "This is a misguided critique of the socialist opposition to the division of labor... Thats an absolute gross misunderstanding of the labor theory of value." It's not misguided, it completely crushes the Labour Theory of Value. Labour is valuable, but that's because labour is subjective. Two workers are not equal. You see this at minimum wage where one worker is lazy and the better worker is resentful for providing more valuable for society but is having to subsidize the lazy worker. The Labour Theory of Value is debunked value system that doesn't work.
    1
  20919. I wouldn't say I'm neutral in this debate. However I've been on both sides, so I'm favouring the better argument... Not neutral but I think understandable :)
    1
  20920. Looks like I need to read Ayn Rand at some point. Thanks for your comment
    1
  20921. "extreme-Right" Are you using this confused mess of a political spectrum? https://images.app.goo.gl/EKZuUy8i4HXsApm76 Or this one? https://images.app.goo.gl/SStX1yAq13fHJ57WA I'm using the latter one. And the reason why is because it makes more logical sense to do so.
    1
  20922. Yes, unfortunately by not admitting that Fascism and National Socialism are Socialism, Roger Griffin is negating history and is giving the Denialists all the ammunition they need to deny the Holocaust (as I explained in this video)
    1
  20923. No comments were deleted by me.
    1
  20924. @akiru bamiru - glad to have you back! I responded to your other comment asking what made you revise your views, but I now see you've commented again here :) I'm certainly no fascist etc, and my criticism of Socialism is largely the result of the backlash from the Marxists and National Socialists. I wasn't a Capitalist when I first discovered that Hitler was a Socialist - I was a Socialist! I abandoned Socialism instantly, but didn't become a Capitalist at that point. It was only after I was attacked by the Left (who were claiming I read Mises and Rothbard -which I hadn't) that I started looking into the economics of the Right, which is when I discovered that I'd been taught wrong. Nobody ever explained the Austrian Business Cycle Theory. Nobody ever explained the alternative argument. All I was taught was that Socialism was great, and if only government would spend more money, we'd get ourselves out of all recessions, and we'd live in paradise. Well, discovering that Hitler was a Socialist was a wake-up call for me. As I hope it will be for others too. It's good to hear that you're open minded too. I don't want you to agree with everything I say. I want you to think for yourself, and it appears that you're doing that. Keep it up! Oh and ignore wannabchomsky. He's a troll who spends half the day raging in the comments of this video - a video he still hasn't watched or understood. If he keeps this up his name will be added to the dictionary as a synonym of "close-mindedness".
    1
  20925. So you didn't watch most of the video, and you didn't see all the nationalization of the industries or the centralized planning or attempts at collectivization? Okay then.
    1
  20926. "Stick to tactical and operational issues, you are not very well versed in political science." You may enjoy yesterday's video, titled 'Stick to Tanks' https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  20927. There's nothing to say. You've not said anything relevant.
    1
  20928. Value is subjective. So "well reasoned" is not how I would describe a bad argument with a bunch of swear words in it.
    1
  20929. There's no time stamp, you must watch from the beginning of the Public vs Private video to grasp this concept
    1
  20930. Just watch the Public vs Private video and you'll see what I mean https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20931. Thank you! I hope you got out and aren't still living in Socialism!
    1
  20932. "I'm sorry all the hate is getting to you." Thanks. It's more frustrating than anything else. Not bothered about the insults, it's the ignorance I don't like. "Thank you for the content. It's channels like this that have inspired me to get my BA in history." That's good news! Of course, I would encourage you to question whatever you hear and think outside the box. Just because a professor (or me, or anyone else) says something, doesn't mean it's true. Do your own homework and come to your own conclusions
    1
  20933. No, by my logic, if Denialists make a bad argument that takes 5 hours to debunk, then I make a 5 hour video debunking it.
    1
  20934. That's what I used to think too... Then I realized that I had been brainwashed by the Socialists. Read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell, then Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" and you'll realise exactly why "pure Capitalism" has 1) never happened before, and 2) is not "a bad thing".
    1
  20935. "TIK I’m sorry but your argument is in the small minority of recent political/economic change of thought on the Nazis." If the majority believed that the moon is made of cheese, would the moon be made of cheese? A consensus is irrelevant, especially when my argument beats theirs. "Just because u have a channel preaching your values and people agreeing with u doesn’t mean your right." All that matters is the argument. If there's no counter argument to what I'm saying, then I'm winning the debate. "Also saying your winning an argument doesn’t mean your winning argument..." There's NO counter argument. Where's the counter argument? There isn't one. I am (currently) winning this debate, because my opponents arguments are no where to be seen. Their arguments have been defeated in this video, and none of them have offered anything to counter what I've said. Now, I'm NOT saying that I will win this debate in the long run (maybe there will be a counter argument which triumphs over mine). But right now, there is no opposition. The people downvoting this video and spouting the old defeated counter arguments in the comments have nothing to back up their actions. The old arguments are defeated, and I am waiting for a new argument to be brought back to counter mine. Currently there isn't one. Therefore I am winning this debate right now - and I am making you aware of that fact in the hope that you or your comrades will actually come up with something to counter me with.
    1
  20936. "TIK I’m not saying your mental ill. I’m saying u sound like u are. That u have gone down this rabbit hole of thought and have come back as sounding like someone who believes the earth is flat. Your so out there man." Well, I'm not mentally ill, and in this case, you and your comrades are the flat-Earthers who believes that Hitler wasn't a (National) Socialist. I've shown you why he was a Socialist using substantial amounts of evidence and interpretation. If you or your comrades actually bothered to watch the video, you would see that your counter arguments are no longer valid. Currently, I'm winning this debate.
    1
  20937. "TIK u sound like a person who has lost their mind." I actually defeat the counter argument that says "TIK's mentally ill" in the video 04:43:42 . You should try watching the video before commenting.
    1
  20938. Because Socialism is designed to enrich the rich.
    1
  20939. I don't know why you're spamming audio of Wages of Destruction. I used that text heavily in the video.
    1
  20940. "TIK says "Hitler wanted to socialize the people". (What the HELL DOES THAT MEAN???) When Marx talks about SOCIALIZED MAN, it means MAN FREE OF THE FETTERS OF CAPITALISM. Man becomes socialized as a result of a PROCESS not as a result of the doings of a man (Hitler) What TIK says makes NO SENSE" If you watch the video, I explain this. I even quote from Marx himself who uses the same term.
    1
  20941. Yes, and I have video proof of that here https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    1
  20942. Fantastic!
    1
  20943. Try watching the video before commenting. Your argument falls flat in the face of the weight of evidence presented here.
    1
  20944. Kameradan is right, you need to watch the video. Your current argument is countered by this video
    1
  20945. Yes, but don't forget that the universities are definitely not filled with 'progressives' or anything 😂
    1
  20946. Enjoy! Be sure to check out my Battlestorm videos too, which are some of by best 🙂
    1
  20947. And yes, I do dislike socialism, even in regards to shareholder companies.
    1
  20948. I'd like to pay for the services I use. Sadly the government steals my wealth through taxation and inflation, and spends that on things I don't want nor need. I don't need a police department who defends the State but pretends to protect me - I can protect myself with guns, but even if I couldn't, I could pay a private police service if the State didn't have a monopoly. Same with the roads, hospitals, and fire departments... The State monopoly makes said services expensive, inefficient and poor. I'd rather open up the market to competition and choose the best service, rather than be forced to pay for a bad service. And that's before the State keeps 50% of what I give it for itself rather than to the services I'm supposedly paying for. And Socialism doesn't work. You need a private sector to support the public-state sector. When the private sector is crushed, everything falls apart, as Lenin discovered to his horror and had to backtrack with the NEP
    1
  20949. I'll spoil it a little: this video disproves all 4 of your points 👍
    1
  20950. That doesn't answer the question. In addition to getting rid of the Left wing parties, Hitler also got rid of the Right Wing parties. Britannica seems to forget this. Also, there's practically no evidence. In this video I used 107 sources, 350 direct references, plus more notes and interpretation... Yet you just dismiss it without watching?
    1
  20951. I have, but I'm not sure on what topic. Plus these videos are consuming all my time
    1
  20952. @Vejas - he's trolling. The PDF for this video (see description) isn't even 175 pages long (just over 100)
    1
  20953. Actually the historians I've read say they're 'state capitalists' (a concept I've demolished in the video). None that I've read say they were social democrats or anything similar. And as I showed in this video, the Third Reich wasn't capitalist at all. The historians are showing all this evidence of it's socialism, but then concluding that it's capitalism. So the myth of National Socialism being capitalism lives.
    1
  20954. Many historians do believe that Hitler's ideology was secretly Capitalist... somehow. I'm actually in the minority here.
    1
  20955. And that's the Labour Theory of Value, which I debunked in the video, and have debunked before.
    1
  20956. "TIK says socialism is STATE CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY. TIK, can you please answer the simple question: WHOSE STATE are you talking about? A workers state is VERY DIFFERENT from a state that represents the interests of capitalists. So your definition of socialism does not say much." Try watching and listening to the video because I make it very clear what socialism is in the video and address your question too.
    1
  20957. Ahh the health care debate again. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  20958. You think Freedom is Slavery? Or insanity!? Your teachers must be proud to have a willing slave like you
    1
  20959. "@TIK I think since many are pointing to TimeGhost's YT vid on why Nazi's weren't socialist, you could make a rebuttal to that and keep it under half-hour if possible." This video debunks theirs, so there's no need to repeat myself. And besides, my critics won't watch my videos anyway, as numpty-chomsky above is making clear. "wannabchomsky - Or people who have lives won't watch it. What an embarrassing comment. of course TIK liked it." You don't have a life, that's why you're trolling in this comment section rather than actually taking the time to watch the video and realize that nothing you're saying is relevant.
    1
  20960. You are spot on with your assessment. The critics in the comments have proven that
    1
  20961. It's actually very racist https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM
    1
  20962. Yes, the Marxist Critical Race Theorists are slowly coming to the same conclusions that Hitler did, since National Socialism is the logical conclusion of a race-based view of society. This is why the Marxists are struggling to find Nazis - because they haven't looked in the mirror hard enough.
    1
  20963. I've replied to this comment thread in my latest video https://youtu.be/hr9TUcWcoYY
    1
  20964. I'm just annoyed with myself that I didn't get it sooner... damn Leftist professors of mine!
    1
  20965. Yeah I'm really inventing the definitions and, even though I used 107 sources and 350 references, I'm definitely not backing it up at all. I mean, that Public vs Private video I made which goes over the definitions in great detail, by going back to pre-history and forward to the present, and is also backed by multiple sources, can just be dismissed because the evidence doesn't matter. All that matters is your feelings and your feeling say that Hitler was a Capitalist, so therefore it must be true. I mean, even if he really did nationalize the industries in a process called Synchronization, it doesn't matter, the Marxist narrative says it was Privatisation, so better just go with that. And hey, we all know that monopolies are bad, which is why the cure to monopolies is to make one giant monopoly which everyone is a part of (except the bourgeoisie, or maybe some other group you don't like, because they'll be dead). And this monopoly definitely is a workers' collective - it's definitely not a State, even if it is a organized political community with one rule of law, which is the historical and also Oxford English dictionary definition of a State. But luckily, George Orwell taught us that dictionaries and history can be changed to suit our feelings once we've had the Revolution, so better just dismiss the inconsistencies in our own arguments now and just go with what feels right. Yay ignorance! https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20966. Define "Capitalists"? Do you mean rich people in charge of Corporations? Because they're not Capitalists
    1
  20967. I linked to his live stream where three socialists failed to define socialism, or even defend their ideology. Quite typical of socialists really, which is why I used it as an example
    1
  20968. Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20969. Yes, exactly. Synchronization rather than Privatisation
    1
  20970. 1. You need to watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 2. Even with my definition, not every country in history is Socialism, and I never said that.
    1
  20971. If you're defending the Marxist narrative, then of course I'll call you a Marxist. You can call yourself whatever you want, but if you choose to defend Marxist-Anti-Semitism, I'll call you out for that.
    1
  20972. There is no ad hominem and snark in my reply to you, only facts.
    1
  20973. You are spouting the Marxist narrative. The National Socialists nationalized the industries and the trade unions, and created a welfare state, as shown in the video.
    1
  20974. That's not the only reason. History lies in the heart of the debate https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  20975. @summertime rainman - that's not what I said at all. And by "entrepreneurs" you mean "social elites" (socialists) in charge of hierarchies (societies), such as the NSDAP, which ruled over the enterprises in the Reich, just like the Bolshevik Party ruled over enterprises in the Soviet Union.
    1
  20976. Please watch the video before forming conclusions. Socialism came before Marx, and has nothing to do with class. Marx introduced class into Socialism (hence Marxist Socialism). Well, Hitler believed race was more important than class. They're both Socialists - just one believes in class and one believes in race. Socialism has nothing to do with either.
    1
  20977. Thousands of people in a hierarchy is not an individual. Therefore, Google/Alphabet isn't a private individual, it's a Public https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20978. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts
    1
  20979. I explained that Nazis believed themselves to be in the third position in the video. They believed they were the Socialists between the Marxists (who they thought were Jews) and the Capitalists (who they also thought were Jews). Just because the Nazis believed that doesn't make it true. So please watch the video before commenting.
    1
  20980. What are you? 12? Who uses words like "cringe" and "sucker" these days? And you spell IQ as "iq". Playtime is over Mikey, your mommy's calling you 😂
    1
  20981. If you're not going to watch the video before commenting, then at least understand why I will just reply with : WATCH THE FULL VIDEO
    1
  20982. "I expect you to run/ most of Tiks sad followers do when I expose their balding clown" Rather be a man than a Chinese troll.
    1
  20983. In depth and sourced 👍
    1
  20984. @Aiden Barton - I'm agreeing with someone who knows what National Socialism is on that point alone. Let's not forget that you (and your Marxist buddies) are calling for the removal of the Jews from society. You have so much in common with the Nazis, which is why you're so racist.
    1
  20985. I agree, except that it was dominated by a soulless bureaucracy. If you read Reimann's "The Vampire Economy" you'll get a true picture of what it was like.
    1
  20986. Stick to Tanks everyone! https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  20987. "Once again you feature on “bad history” and rightfully so." r/BadHistory is appropriately named
    1
  20988. "A democracy has certain characteristics as we define it miserably -free and fair elections -multiparty competition -no undue burden on voting -a free media " Well, we don't have them here in the West, so I guess no country is democratic then.
    1
  20989. "Ask those in grenfell tower fires why we have regulation." Ah yes, because there were absolutely no building regulations prior to 2017... /s Also, I like how everyone who owns a flat now has to suffer because of government-imposed regulations resulting from this one-off incident. Nothing like making the poor poorer via socialist regulations! - "And there you go again :) rather than accepting any common definition, this time it’s Marx you will use to push your narrative: why not a common definition? Oh right that doesn’t work with your narrative today" I've given you the common definition, which you've rejected. I've given you the Communist definition (which is the same), and you've rejected that too. Why don't offer me what you believe to be the 'true' definition and we can go from there?
    1
  20990. "Wait, so when I work a job that enriches capitalists, I'm actually a slave to the state?" The only way the "capitalist" gets money is if they produce products and services that other people want. So a capitalist system doesn't enrich the capitalists, it enriches everyone. You get the products and services that you want, and the guys who produced those product and distributed them to you get your money. It's a win-win. This is why capitalism is the ultimate social good. Socialism on the other hand doesn't work like that. The only way to get rich in a socialist system is to steal wealth off of other people. This is done either via taxation or inflation or revolution or expropriation. The current system we have works this way, which is why the poor are getting poorer. Ironically though, even though the poor are getting poorer via a socialist system, they've been tricked into believing that socialism is the cure and that capitalism is to blame. Once you realize that socialism is the problem, and that the failure of socialism is being blamed on capitalism, you can see the world for how it really works.
    1
  20991. "Your night of the long knives excuse makes you look like an idiot" No, it makes the people who use that as an excuse look like idiots
    1
  20992. Socialism doesn't promote equality. It promotes the destruction of the bourgeoisie. It promotes the destruction of the Jews. It promotes the destruction of [insert other social group here]. And I have covered all your points in the video. Please watch the video first before commenting. And the fact you went from Nazism to Marxism doesn't surprise me at all, considering there's little practical difference.
    1
  20993. @trainbomb - His argument is poor, he hasn't watched this video fully, and he hasn't seen my Public vs Private video for an explanation of the definitions. He also claims I'm anti-Semitic whilst trying to defend the anti-Semitism of Karl Marx... What a joke of a 'rebuttal'.
    1
  20994. Lenin did the same thing to the trade unions in the Soviet Union. I guess Lenin was capitalist too by your standards.
    1
  20995. This should please you then, because this is very comprehensive (although I think I'll be adding more to this in the future). Been working on this for over a year
    1
  20996. "I suggest to pack it into a series." No because when I've done this in the past for certain issues, people claim that I'm making stuff up - even though I'm building upon previous work. In this case, it had to be in the same video. "TIK, this is all good content I am sure, but 5 hour long youtube video? No one got time for that." You'll be surprised. Plus, nothing says you have to watch it all in one go, and nothing says you can't increase the speed of the video using the settings. That will reduce the time somewhat
    1
  20997. So much wrong in this statement. However, by Liberals they mean the Right-Liberals (Capitalists). In which case, why would Fascism be on the Right, if the Fascists disagreed with Capitalism? And while the Fascists didn't like Marxists, they did embrace the idea of Socialism - totalitarianism.
    1
  20998. Again, watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  20999. Yes, I wish please would watch the video before trying to argue. The title of the video explains why the old 'counter-arguments' don't work, yet people don't seem to understand this. The answers to almost all your points are in the video, and your comparison with the USA is silly since Roosevelt was trying to implement Socialism in the USA, which is why the USA didn't get out of the Great Depression until after Roosevelt had died https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw
    1
  21000. Glad you got through it and found it useful! Not sure you'll convince your family members, but at least you're informed 🙂 cheers!
    1
  21001. The videos are all fully sourced. You're asking for an answer or explanation from me, yet when I provide you one, you complain.
    1
  21002. Actually, Karl Marx was about racial socialism too https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  21003. That's exactly what they're doing. It is fair.
    1
  21004. If they don't make anything, then no value will be made in either the Labour or Subjective Theories of Value, so that's not a valid counter argument.
    1
  21005. I'm very surprised nobody got there before (some have, but not to this depth). I can't give you a download, but there is a PDF version in the description
    1
  21006. I know... But don't forget, I'M the one who's mentally ill ;)
    1
  21007. And as I have shown in the linked video, the people and the state ARE one and the same. Link again https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21008. Democracy is People Power. Except the People are the Public and the Public is the State. Democracy is State Power. This is why the Founding Fathers knew that democracy was bad, and called their government a Republic. North Korea is a Democracy, since the People's State is in control. In fact, I explained this in the video you haven't watched.
    1
  21009. Society is the State. The People are the Public and the Public is the State. A State is a "politically organized community". https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21010. The Left are calling for the Social control of the means of production, hence Socialism. But the "Social" is the State. This is why you cannot have totalitarianism without Socialism, because it wouldn't be total if the means of production weren't controlled by Society.
    1
  21011. "thanks for your reply I will definitely go through the whole episode but it need some time." Great! Let me know what you think of it when you're done :) "But I pointed out about the Progressive ideas of socialism capitalism like equality, fight against racism, supporting womens right movement, fight against superstitious believes, spreading scientific values, universal healthcare which fascists, fuedals, monarchists, imperialists are against, and liberal,capitalists socialists are ignorant."" Fixed that for you. To clarify, healthcare would be more available, and be massively cheaper and efficient under capitalism, but you'd pay for it directly rather than have it "universally" (aka "free").
    1
  21012. Fascists are socialists too. But the National Socialists are not Fascist, as I explained in the video you didn't watch.
    1
  21013. I'm not just accepting Hitler's own definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21014. "If corporatist and mixed economic policies makes a nation socialist, then that would make virtually any major power in the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s socialist. It baffles the mind how you can make high quality anti-wehraboo videos, and then dabble into this anti-intellectual crap." Please watch the Public vs Private video and it will show you why your insulting remark is wrong.
    1
  21015. This isn't a popularity contest. It could get 100% likes for all I care. If people don't like the fact that the moon isn't made of cheese, that's their problem, not mine. All that matters is the evidence, not 'belief'.
    1
  21016. How would one video discredit the other videos? That's not how it works. Plus, as some have said, this is possibly my best video
    1
  21017. Of course military history is coming. Not sure why you would think I wouldn't do more of that. No need to be worried about me, I've been working on this video for about a year, and I'm so glad it's finally out :)
    1
  21018. You didn't say anything there that hasn't already been addressed. Quoting other historians' opinions is irrelevant. Try watching the video, there's plenty of evidence of Hitler's Socialism within it, backed by 107 sources.
    1
  21019. Okay, that doesn't explain anything. Saying "Nazism and Fascism are on the Right because they are" is not an argument. They're on the Left because the Left believes in collectivist tyranny https://images.app.goo.gl/DyxbhbtWaC2XkKax7
    1
  21020. Crony Capitalism is Socialism. The State Central Banks are in control of every transaction via artificial interest rates and currency creation. This system is designed to silently rob you of your wealth and redistribute it to the State. Therefore we don't have a free market nor Capitalism - since you don't even own your own home; you pay property taxes because you're renting it off the State. As for the rest, learn basic economics https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21021. Note the date of that video. Then note the date of this video. Note that others have shown me that video in the past before this video even came out. Note that that video gives the same old arguments which have been refuted in this video (hence the title of the video - "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments").
    1
  21022. Already done https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  21023. What's happening January 20th?
    1
  21024. Timestamps are in the description.
    1
  21025. The dictionary definition supports what I'm saying. The dictionary also supports the historical evidence. Want proof? I actually took pictures of the dictionary definitions for my Public vs Private video where I outlined the historic definitions of Socialism and Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21026. *Marxist division
    1
  21027. I respect them and their views, since I used to believe them too. That said, I agree, they shouldn't be mocking me. The argument is what matters, not the author.
    1
  21028. There's no rush
    1
  21029. "and that's why the self-same class of people has put so much effort into destroying trades unions in the past 40 years. " Trade unions are BAD for the working people, and for the economy as a whole. As a worker myself, even I can fathom that one out. These videos might help you understand https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ and https://youtu.be/RPndzQVeVMY as well as this article https://mises.org/library/union-myth "In your view any human endeavour where there is any sort of cooperation at all is 'socialism'." FORCED cooperation is socialism. I don't want to join a racial or class collective, but if socialists have their way, I'll either be enslaved or executed. That's why I'm not FREE to not pay my taxes because I've been forced into the collective. "then shifting to an inflationary policy where most of the new money creation is done by capitalist owned private banks who create new money every time they write a new loan due to the nature of the fractional reserve banking system." The Central State Bank is the one creating the inflation. That's why Marx called for Central Banking in his Communist Manifesto, and why Lenin and his comrades cheered as they hyperinflated the currency supply after seizing power. Socialists want to steal off the workers, whilst claiming they're helping them. "Look at the state of the UK, everyone's in debt," Yes, the central state bank has lowered interest rates and printed currency. That's why capitalists are against States in control off the 'money' supply. They want an actual gold standard (not the 'gold standard' of the 1800s, but an actual one). "When is this ever going to work?" It won't. It leads to the boom bust cycle as Mises and Rothbard etc have pointed out time and time again. State inflation causes the recessions that they then blame on capitalism. "But after decades of central planning, the Soviet economy was only $66 billion in debt and the Soviet citizen was $0 dollars in debt." Quote - “Even when they had appliances and TVs most country people in 1980 still lived without paved roads, indoor plumbing, central heat, or telephones.” (Eaton, K. “Daily Life in the Soviet Union.” Greenwood Press 2004, P124.) And quote - “After 70 years of socialism, 57 percent of all Russian hospitals did not have running hot water, and 36 percent of hospitals located in rural areas of Russia did not have water or sewage at all.” (Maltsev, Y. “What Soviet Medicine Teaches Us.” https://mises.org/library/what-soviet-medicine-teaches-us) "The capitalists (because that's just what they are) used and still use and finance the ideas of Friedman and Mises et al when they want to smash Keynesianism when doing so benefits them and destroys the power of collective bargaining but they don't subscribe to that nonsense." Keynes called for the inflation you're complaining about. Mises (and to a lesser-extent Friedman) wanted to end the inflation that you're complaining about. So, I'm in agreement with Mises because I want to end the inflation that causes the boom-bust cycle that you're complaining about. "Sound money is an anathema to the casino capitalist class as it would limit the amount of Monopoly money they get to play with. It's that fact that will stop your monetarist paradise from ever occurring, not 'socialism'." Yes, absolutely. Sound money is what Mises and Rothbard etc call for. Keynes and the socialists want fiat currency so they can hyperinflate the currency and steal wealth from the lower and middle classes and redistribute it to themselves - the elite. I'm seriously not sure how you can defend Keynesianism when it's calling for the exact thing that you're complaining about. Mises and Rothbard etc are calling out the bad economic policies that socialists and Keynesians are calling for - the very things you're complaining about - and you're defending them!?
    1
  21030. "it's robber baron capitalism writ large" Great book (also short) that I highly recommend https://www.amazon.co.uk/Myth-Robber-Barons-Business-America-ebook/dp/B004X2IJ72/
    1
  21031. "no, it's pure Capitalism, derivatives are financial instruments created solely for profit," Capitalism is Private (individual) control of the means of production. It makes profit, but profit isn't it's definition. "The particular central bank in question is privately owned, it has (secret) shareholders." Ah, so a public hierarchy that's collectively owned by it's (secret) shareholders is an individual is it? I guess you think a hierarchy with thousands of people in it is also an individual. Individual = private. Private (individual) control of the means of production is capitalism. Collective (thousands of people) control is socialism. Please watch my Public vs Private video for a further explanation of why the definitions you're using make zero sense https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21032. "TIK: Capitalism is NOT in crisis! $542.4 trillion outstanding derivatives: Am I a joke to you?" The reason for that is the fiat currency inflation caused by the Central Banks, which is a fraudulent Public-State engineered socialist policy designed to undermine people's confidence in capitalism. Inflation robs people of their wealth, and redistributes it to the rich and powerful, and does so in the name of the poor and Capitalism. It isn't capitalism, it's socialism and is something Capitalists are against. Please read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" for a good explanation of this issue.
    1
  21033. The Fascists embraced syndicalism, which they renamed as corporatism.
    1
  21034. Socialism came before Marxism. Babeuf, for example, was a socialist. Marx's Communist Manifesto goes out of it's way to say that the Socialists that came before him weren't 'real' socialists like him, but that doesn't mean they weren't socialists. Part of the problem I'm having is that people think Socialism is Marxism only, so they're upset that I'm saying Hitler was a Marxist. But I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying he was a Socialist, not a Marxist, and Socialism is not necessarily Marxism.
    1
  21035. "Socialism was not a nationalist ideal. It is a globalist one." As I explained in the video you didn't watch - if Lenin takes over the world, then he has a one-nation state. A nation can be the size of a city or encompass the world. Nationalism/internationalism are two sides of the same coin. "Nationalism and socialism are separate ideals, and work at odds with each other." They are one and the same thing.
    1
  21036. You are correct. Even Hitler realized that there was no difference between nationalism and socialism, hence the name of his party.
    1
  21037. Great book on the Myth of the Robber Barons https://www.amazon.co.uk/Myth-Robber-Barons-Business-America-ebook/dp/B004X2IJ72
    1
  21038. "I think it would go a long way to acknowledge the fact that many very wealthy people dont indeed deserve all of the wealth they have because they used the state in order to get it." I do acknowledge that. That's precisely what I said in the previous comment. - "Thats the problem with all current capitalist societies." Incorrect - that's the problem with all current socialist societies. We don't have a free market because the State has control of the economy. You can't have a "lockdown" unless the State is in total control of the economy. Therefore, we do not have Capitalism... unless you think that Capitalism = Money (the Marxists definition). If that is the case, then my Public vs Private video is the place you need to go. It will set you straight https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Some form of a state in our current age no matter how small one thinks it should be is necessary for a society to function at very least to maintain laws and provide military defence" You're assuming here. There's no factual basis for this statement. - "but the problem is the state ends up being able to be bought which it has been so the more wealthy companies and individuals end up going around the market basically by using state power to help them gain wealth." I would say that the problem is that the State has the power to enforce the confiscation of wealth. The elite steal off individuals, and some of those individuals decide that the best thing to do is bribe the State officials to grant them certain privileges. The issue isn't the money, it's the omnipotent power of the State. - "The reason the rich are far more obscenely wealthy than the rest of the population is [because of inflation and taxation.]" Fixed that for you. - "What people get wrong though is when they try to counter this "socialism/government handouts for the rich" with more socialism or when they see one talking about how the rich are too rich (which they are due not to the market but abuse of state power) they assume its communist rhetoric." I agree. - "Another problem is if there was some kind of movement that was to establish 100% capitalism what is to be done about wealth that was earned by state power abuse rather than through the market?" You cannot change the past. But what you can do is aim for a better future. By freeing up the market and destroying the fundamentally coercive nature of the State, you set up the conditions for future prosperity. Those in monopoly control right now would find themselves having to compete against the rest of society without the State being able to forcefully redistribute wealth to them. They wouldn't be able to compete, and would lose their monopoly status very quickly. - "On a totally unrelated note have you ever heard of the ideology of Social Credit? I live in one of two places in the world where they actually came to power albeit they never tried to implement their full economic policy and from what I gather their idea was that the problem was not "socialism vs capitalism" they took the stance that collective ownership of the means of production wouldnt work but the flaw that lead ultimately to the depression from their viewpoint was the traditional money supply/medium of exchange/banking system was flawed and not based in reality." Yes I have heard of the ideology of Socialism ('Social Credit' is just another form of wealth redistribution). I agree with them that the current socialist system is flawed and not based in reality. I don't agree that more socialism is the way to go though. If you haven't already, read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". You can find a free copy online. - "Im not saying their exact solution was correct but I think there is indeed a problem with the current "banking system" considering that it has had to be propped up by the state on numerous occasions." We are in agreement. The issue though is the State, not the monetary system. I'm not sure if you've seen my semi-recent video on German logistics but you should give that a go when you get a chance, it will explain a lot to you. - "The exact medium of exchange is still up for debate in my opinion because the current state backed fiat and the previous semi state backed gold standard are very flawed." You're correct :) the issue was that the 'gold standard' was 60% fiat currency, and this allowed States to ravage the market. But this was FAR more stable than the currency debt-based economic model we currently have. Again, you should read Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression" if you haven't already.
    1
  21039. You're welcome, I hope you like it and find it useful
    1
  21040. Please see the Public vs Private video, link in the description
    1
  21041. "I remember thinking that you were a crazy Holocaust denier when I saw your first video on it" Really? I'm not sure how you got that impression, but damn :( maybe I should remove the original videos...? "The more I’ve read researched I’ve realized you were right from the start." I'm really glad to hear that you did your own research! That's fantastic! "No matter if it’s true or not it flys in the face of everything people are taught in the world today. People will and probably should always have a negative reaction to this idea the first they hear of it. That only makes discussion and research more important. The truth about the Nazis has been covered up the next question is why." Precisely. People are reacting, not thinking. The way you overcame the original reaction and started looking into things should be a lesson for everyone
    1
  21042. Nations are Societies. National rebirth is also Social rebirth.
    1
  21043. "As a Socialist, he did a shitty job." Agreed. "He did not advance womens' rights," Try watching the video before commenting. "international brotherhood," He did, for the international 'Nordic' 'Aryan' 'blood' brotherhood (stupid, but yes he did). "abolition of private property." Yes he did. Reichstag Fire Decree. Again, try watching the video before commenting. "He did not institute workers' counsels." Councils (soviets) are departments of the state - corporations. "He got into a war with the Soviet Union." Which was Marxist Socialist, not Socialist. "He legitimized his rule with the support of the nobility and bourgeoise." He hated the 'vons' and the bourgeoisie. Again, watch the video. "He also abolished trade unions" By socializing them into the state-trade union, the DAF. State control of the means of production is socialism, so he socialized the unions. Again, watch the video. "the Communist Party, the Socialists, and the Social Democrats," Which one of those parties is the REAL socialist party? And why were all these socialist parties fighting against each other? "He formed a coalition with the Conservatives and Christians to rule." He took out von Papen and killed his associates during the Night of the Long Knives. Again, watch the video. "He did not teach nor institute Marxist theory and ideology." Because he wasn't a Marxist, he was a Socialist. "The inherrent Racism in Nazism is against Socialist principles of universal brotherhood of the proletariat." Marx was racist, as I showed in the video, as were Lenin and Stalin etc. Also, proles are a class. Hitler is a racial socialist, not a class socialist. Again, watch the video. "Lastly, Hitler used crony Capitalism and contracting out to private corporations for both civil and military labor, rather than nationalizing all industry and banning private enterprise." Corporations were state entities as I showed in the video. Thousands of people in a hierarchy which is collectively owned by their shareholders cannot be classed as 'private', which is why corporations are not capitalist. Again, watch the video. "He was also allied and a deep admirer of Mussolini, who was anti Socialism" Mussolini was a socialist. Showed that in the Mussolini video I made months ago. Read Farrell's "Mussolini: A New Life" for more info. "he helped install Franco, who was anti Socialism." Which was why Hitler then said he'd made a mistake. (See Zitelmann P436-438) "Any other fucktarded ideas you wanna run by us? None? Good! So shut your fucking face and fuck off with your fucking bullshit." Blah blah blah. Try actually watching the video before knee jerking a reaction in the comments of a video backed by over 100 sources.
    1
  21044. There's a PDF you can download in the description
    1
  21045. @ReklamK - if you do not know my argument, you cannot counter it. Currently, nobody is able to counter my points. Therefore, Hitler was a Socialist.
    1
  21046. I talked about corporations all the way through the video. Try watching it first before judging
    1
  21047. "You can literally prove anything when you disregard the integrity of its definitions. The reason this counter argument bothers you is because it strikes at the core of your entire thesis, and runs it into the ground. There has to be some serious cognitive dissoans behind your reasoning. 1. Nazis are bad 2. Capitalism is good 3. Capitalism is rightwing 4. Therefore nazism, which is bad, can't be rightwing 5. Ergo, Nazism leftwing: Nazism=Socialism. Im gonna be a bit blunt here and guess that the reason you're not a fan of unversities is because they didn't buy your home-cooked definitions. Whenever you argue about abstract concepts." Incorrect assumption. I was a Socialist who knew what Socialism was. As I was reading Hitler's texts, I realised that Hitler wasn't the capitalist I'd been taught he was. He was a Socialist. THAT was when I made my first video. Then, after getting the hate from the very people I was a part of, I decided to look into the opposite argument. That's when I became a capitalist. I became a capitalist AFTER realizing Hitler was a Socialist, not before. Hitler's RACISM is his SOCIALISM. A RACE is a SOCIETY, and SOCIETY is SOCIALISM. And that's why this argument is so dangerous to Socialists - because if every Socialist realized the true nature of Socialism, they wouldn't be Socialists.
    1
  21048. Actually they're not "random" Socialists. One of them made a "rebuttal" video of my original videos, which is why I made sure to tackle his arguments in this video and point out that even his fellow Social-elitists don't agree with him. Worse, more have come out the woodwork to claim that I don't know the "true" definition of Socialism, which is literally the most ridiculous counter-argument coming from people who can't define it themselves, and when they attempt to do so, get it wrong, as I explained in both this video and my previous "Public vs Private" video which actually shows the historical reasons why they called Socialism and Capitalism, again backed by numerous sources https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21049. Most scientists don't believe that humans have any impact on the climate (the media lies and say they do using manipulated percentages, but they're not organisations designed to inform, they're organisations designed to entertain and pump out government/corporate propaganda). But regardless of whether climate change is real or not, or if we humans have any or no impact on the climate, the fact is that the Socialist Left are using the "Green" "crisis" to implement the "Red" Revolution. Well, their own statistics disprove their own 'solution' to the climate problem. https://youtu.be/lLaKxeR3XtA https://youtu.be/IfGySQ8qHZU https://youtu.be/Uefn7ikVnVc So if there is a climate crisis, the Left's answer is a terrible answer anyway.
    1
  21050. Thank you Vro!
    1
  21051. That makes you a Capitalist like me, because I believe the same thing. You've realized that taxes aren't going to where they need to be, because the State is truly an inefficient way of distributing the resources of society and is channelling money into the wrong hands. You've realized that Socialism cannot compete with a truly free market. The only issue is that you may still think that paying taxes is the only way to get better roads and education. It is not https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21052. Thank you!
    1
  21053. Yeah I'm beginning to wonder if Engels and Marx got anything right. As your quotes highlight, they had contradictory views and a poor grasp of the concepts they were talking about
    1
  21054. "Cringe" That's what I'm doing when I see Redditors trying to use the same old defeated counter-arguments to counter this video.
    1
  21055. Thank you! I'm sure I got some bits wrong, or need to clarify others, but I'm happy to do that in future. Glad you enjoyed it and found it useful!
    1
  21056. @Conor - try watching the video, or this one where I use the English dictionary to show you the basic definitions of the words we use https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21057. Was imperialism Socialism or Capitalism? I'm pretty sure it was blamed on Capitalism, even though private individuals and small businesses weren't responsible for it, and in reality it was giant monopoly corporations (hierarchies of society/socialism) that expanded empires, or the States themselves (Britain's Army, the Wehrmacht/Lebensraum etc)
    1
  21058. Here's the definition of Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  21059. Reddit 2018: we've won! Reddit 2020: we've not realized we've lost!
    1
  21060. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21061. But you don't. You can stop working at any time and go live in the woods. However if you want to be a part of society, you need to contribute to it.
    1
  21062. Fascism is a different ideology, as I explained in the video you didn't watch - Quote from Farrell - “...the Fascists were not racist - necessarily. Mussolini believed, for example, that race was not a biological phenomenon but a spiritual one… A Jew could certainly be an Italian. Many of the most committed Fascists were Jews… Given Italy’s rich racial mix, Nazi style racism would have been quite impossible in Italy anyway. The Fascists did not advocate the extermination of Jews. The Nazis did.” (from Farrell, “Mussolini,” Chapter 11.)
    1
  21063. Reading up on what Socialists think, doesn't make me a Nazi.
    1
  21064. Why don't you just watch the video first before commenting? The answer is in the video. Also, historians revise history. That's their job. They do this to correct the mistakes that previous historians made, and this is fully in line with history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc Finally, hating Marxism is not the same as hating Socialism. Marxism and Socialism are two separate things. And the words in the thumbnail is a quote. Hitler did say "I am a Socialist."
    1
  21065. "TIK is an ancap" Nope. "He's an extreme libertarian. His reaction to corona virus would probably be Government imposed Isolation bad even if it kills millions of people." You can't stop a virus in an interconnected world, unless you shut down the economy. Plus, the virus isn't as bad as the media are making out to be. It was the same with swine flu and other flues - they're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Not saying the virus isn't bad, or doesn't kill people, but totalitarianism isn't the solution to the problem.
    1
  21066. Yes, Karl Marx never had a proper job, sponged money off all his friends, had a maid, and yet complained that Capitalism was bad. Ridiculous no matter which way you look at it
    1
  21067. Thank you sir! I'm doing my best to bring you only the best :)
    1
  21068. @Ididthis Onpulpous - The video is titled "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments". I have DEFEATED the ARGUMENTS that are presented by people who deny that Hitler was a Socialist. Therefore, you are the one presenting a "bed of bullshit", because I've proven that to be the case in the video. If you do not watch the video, then you are admitting defeat.
    1
  21069. Have you got an actual counter to this argument? No. Therefore you're focusing on me and trying to undermine my legitimacy. And you're trying to say I'm bad at history? Either come up with a counter argument or admit that your views are wrong.
    1
  21070. Listen "dude", you're not providing evidence, you're just quoting opinions. And the little evidence you have provided actually supports what I said, not what you said. But you don't understand why it supports me, and the reason why is because you didn't bother to watch the video. You have no idea what my argument is, and so you're just spouting the same old rubbish in the hope that something sticks. If you don't understand my argument, you cannot hope to defeat it by quoting other people's opinions.
    1
  21071. As I've just replied to your other comment spam: You didn't say anything there that hasn't already been addressed. Quoting other historians' opinions is irrelevant. Try watching the video, there's plenty of evidence of Hitler's Socialism within it, backed by 107 sources.
    1
  21072. The Fascists (who aren't National Socialists by the way) wanted to distinguish themselves from the Marxist-Socialists, since they were looking for Socialism on the national level rather than Socialism on the international level.
    1
  21073. Fascism is also not National Socialism, which I explained in the video, and also in more detail here in this one https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  21074. "What are all these socialists complaining about we've clearly already achieved socialism." Exactly. You can't complain about corporations if you yourself are calling for corporations, which is what Socialists are doing.
    1
  21075. "Private companies are owned and controlled by the shareholders." Which is why they're not 'private' companies, they're 'public. And they even tell you that they're 'publically traded companies', not 'private'.
    1
  21076. And here's a video about American health care you should watch https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  21077. Democracy and voting are two separate things. Democracy doesn't require voting. Again, if you put your emotions to one side, and bothered to listen and learn, you would start to see that what I'm saying is not "insane".
    1
  21078. Exactly!
    1
  21079. In fact, it doesn't really say why they weren't Socialists.
    1
  21080. Yep seen it, don't agree with it
    1
  21081. Conservatives are the old Left. People don't seem to realise this https://images.app.goo.gl/XGBcGWXBADmjvexV9
    1
  21082. "however my gripe is you telling the world not to read David Irving" I never said not to read Irving. I showed examples of Irving manipulating and falsifying the evidence, and let people come to their own conclusions. If you watch that video again though, you'll see that I didn't say "don't read Irving". It's just that, any reasonable person would come to that conclusion after hearing what Irving did to distort history. "You should read up on Richard Evans and learn about his trip to West Germany during the cold war. Amongst other things. Evans has an agenda. We could DEBATE this but youtube wont allow it." I don't doubt that Evans has an agenda. As I said in point 3 and in this video, there's no way anyone would could list all the Socialism of National Socialism, but come the conclusion that Hitler was a Capitalist simply because Hitler didn't like Marxists (which Evans thinks is Socialism). That said, I think he's correct about Irving. My gripe with Evans is his interpretation of the evidence. Evans' criticism of Irving is that Irving is distorting the evidence and is basically writing fiction. There's a difference between disagreeing on interpretation, and outright manipulating the evidence to support your view. And yes, I agree that YouTube is not upholding the Right-wing liberal principle of Free Speech. However, as someone who is defending Irving, you are clearly not someone who is an advocate of Right-wing liberalism. You, therefore, cannot complain about not having Free Speech, since your sympathies are with those who don't believe in Free Speech.
    1
  21083. 1. I'm glad to hear you understand what Socialism is too. 2. I'm not deleting messages, YouTube is (and they've deleted some of my own) 3. I actually disagreed with Evans in this video over his conclusions regarding Hitler not being a Socialist, despite listing all the Socialism Hitler implemented.
    1
  21084. You are correct! Sadly, the majority don't see it, and won't see it
    1
  21085. "@TIK lol what?" Time for you to learn https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21086. Hitler only put Marxists and Social Democrats in the camps, not all Socialists. I explained this in the video.
    1
  21087. If you watch the video in full, you'll see that I've answered your questions
    1
  21088. STIK TO TANKS https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  21089. " You couldn't make a consise argument in ~1 hour?" No. There's too much evidence to do that. "Quantity over quality it seems again TIK." There's over 350 direct references and tons of quotes. Quality over quantity.
    1
  21090. Been working on this for months. Let me know what you think AA
    1
  21091. Eventually they'll realise that the title of the video means that all their counter arguments are invalid. Until then, they'll kick and scream, but as you say, it's not going to work for them. They're even providing quotes that reinforce my argument. It's hilarious. Proves that they haven't watched the video. Cheers!
    1
  21092. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  21093. You said that it's comical when you hear this argument, and then proceeded to say that I argued that the Conservatives have never had a dictatorship. That's not my argument at all. And you're only arguing that because you falsely assume that I'm a Conservative. Sorry to burst your bubble but I'm not a Conservative, and the Conservatives definitely have bad dictatorships, since I've explained that the Conservatives used to be the old Left Wing (prior to the ~1870s). They still are the old Left Wing. The Right basically no longer exists in politics, which is why it's pointless voting any more.
    1
  21094. Please watch the video before commenting. Marxism is public (state) ownership of the means of production for the workers. Socialism is just public (state) ownership of the means of production. I explained this in the video you haven't watched. Secondly, the Left are not about equality, or "anti-hierarchy". The Left divide society into classes, races, sexes etc in order to break down cooperation between human beings. With the breakdown of society (the Revolution) they can transform society by "seizing the means of production". Well, Public ownership or control of the means of production is Socialism, and the Public is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21095. I value your comment, thank you
    1
  21096. Thanks John! Glad you like it
    1
  21097. @Random thoughts "TIK as far it is my knowledge that happened mostly to Jewish businesses and only in some sectors. For example no one nationalized small business." If you watch the video, you will learn. "And I know you have more expertise, but probably you just define socialism differently. Hitlers war economy has some similarities with the new economic policy of the Soviet Union in the sense of allowing small businesses, but I think it was nothing like the economy of the Stalin area" As I explained in the video, National Socialism and Marxist Socialism are versions of Socialism. But National Socialism is not the same as Marxist Socialism. The two are similar, but do not look exactly the same. Marxists will claim that I don't understand, or that it wasn't "real" socialism, but the reality is that I do understand, and I have defined my terms (backed by MULTIPLE sources from all different political perspectives). The biggest issue I'm currently having is that people are assuming I'm wrong without having actually watched or truly listened to what I'm saying in this video. Wannabchomsky is a prime example of someone who proudly announces that he has watched the video - and yet somehow doesn't know the argument I'm making, and argues against me by calling me names. Then he wonders why I'm not convinced by his insults. Well, the same applies to most of the commentors who "disagree". They refuse to watch the video and then make the same old arguments that the video actually proves false. Then when I tell them to watch the video, they call me names. Don't be like Wannabchomsky and actually watch the video. Even if you disagree that Hitler was a Socialist, there's plenty of information in the video that will teach you other aspects of National Socialism, and the history of the Third Reich, and more.
    1
  21098. Try watching the full video in full before commenting. I picked apart Bel's "Against the Mainstream" in the video.
    1
  21099. I know. Most of the responses directly contradict themselves and undermine their own arguments. This is why I remain unconvinced
    1
  21100. https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  21101. Oh yes, and people are still doing that even now, like these two guys here https://youtu.be/8rWnuuEN024
    1
  21102. That's not what socialism is. Please see this video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21103. If you think value is subjective and are not a Marxist, use the timestamps in the description to skip to section 5. That's where it gets interesting because I explain Nazi ideology in depth, then go on to explain the Nazi economy.
    1
  21104. "Capital accumulates into smaller and smaller hands as has been observed and showcased time and time again." Funny because Berntein Lenin and more realised that this wasn't the case. The only reason it 'accumulates' in fewer hands is because of the inflationary policy of the Central Banks - the State banks. Socialism creates the 'crisis of Capitalism', and then blames it on Capitalism.
    1
  21105. Well, I can confirm that I'm not going "alt-right".
    1
  21106. Based off your other comments, it doesn't sound like you're giving this a fair hearing at all. I would advise that you watch the full thing before commenting.
    1
  21107. Try watching the videos before commenting.
    1
  21108. Intelligent people listen first before speaking. You haven't watched the video. If you had, you wouldn't have refuted an argument I didn't make.
    1
  21109. @J Stevinik - I've just replied to your other post - The guy defends Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism, and then concludes that Marx and Marxism isn't Anti-Semitic - even though Karl Marx said: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” (Marx, "Das Kapital V1" P107). He also claims I have no idea about history - great argument. He also hasn't watched this video in its entirely, because he wouldn't be using a couple of points to try and say that National Socialism privatized the industries - a notion I destroyed in this video with ample evidence (timestamp in the description) - nor would be come to the blatantly false conclusion that Socialism has nothing to do with the State. I specifically said that if anyone disagrees with the definitions, to watch the Public vs Private video and address the concepts outlined therein. He hasn't done that, because he can't https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Overall, it's a joke of a response. It hasn't convinced me that any of my points are incorrect - it's just another Fascist slander attack designed to distance National Socialism from Marxism. It fails in that regard.
    1
  21110. There are two definitions of the terms nationalism and nation. The old definition of a nation had nothing to do with ethnicity (more like language and culture), while the newer one did (this was Hitler's definition of nationalism). Hitler himself makes the distinction in Mein Kampf, and this is why he has to make the arguement that the Jews living in Germany were not really German as a result of their race, even though traditionally they would have been viewed as "German Jews". Hitler argues that it was a mistake to see them as German, and then proceeds to argue that they need to be removed from.tbs German "body" as if they were some sort of infection.
    1
  21111. The NHS isn't the problem. It's the system that funds it that's the problem. The workers are being forced to pay tribute to their lords and ladies, and are punished if they don't. We call this system of slavery - 'socialism'.
    1
  21112. "Can someone pls tldw" There's timestamps in the description, so you could just listen to the conclusion. "Nvm he started siting misus as a reliable source, I’m out." Just because you can't understand Mises doesn't mean he's not reliable.
    1
  21113. NOT ONE STEP BACK!
    1
  21114. Yep, Marxist YouTube has now deleted two of my responses to you, so apparently quoting Karl Marx to show how RACIST and ANTI-SEMITIC Karl Marx was against the Jews is no longer allowed. This anti-Semitic "platform" is a complete joke.
    1
  21115. Great explanation https://youtu.be/fWDn1-dyXDg
    1
  21116. Stick to tanks https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  21117. I can confirm that I'm not deleting comments etc. It's Google doing it. I'll clear the spam folder now, but if it's not in there and it doesn't appear, then YouTube may have deleted it (or someone else may have reported it)
    1
  21118. Right, so you think Socialism is always Capitalism. Got you.
    1
  21119. By your logic, if Capitalists are the ones who own the means of production, then Socialism can never own the means of production because as soon as it does, it will become Capitalist.
    1
  21120. No it isn't Capitalism. A State is the opposite of Capitalism. You have been indoctrinated by the incorrect Marxist narrative, as I was.
    1
  21121. Fantastic! I'm glad you're enjoying it!
    1
  21122. Maybe but you can't have a 'private' (actually public) monopoly without state control. If there's a monopoly, all you'd need to do is have one guy start competing and the monopoly is broken. The only way to prevent that is by ensuring by law that no one is allowed to set up shop and compete with the original monopoly
    1
  21123. "Private monopolies do not work efficiently or deliver." They're not 'private', they're public. Thousands of people working for a hierarchy (a society) is not an individual (a private). Monopolies only exist due to government intervention in the economy. "UK train companies are an example. One of the first acts of PM Johnson was nationalising failed private rail companies." The reason they failed is because the UK government is the only entity in the UK which can build railway lines and railway stations. This causes overcrowding on the stations and trains that are available. Nationalizing the railways is a stupid solution. Why am I as a tax payer being forced to subsidize an out-dated form of transport I don't use, which the government has made even more inefficient due to its regulations and laws? Makes no sense to me. "Commonly created wealth should be used for common services." Should. But it never is. The state steals your wealth and consumes resources on your behalf, whilst claiming to be helping 'society'. Of course, by 'society' they mean the 'hierarchy of society' which is the 'state'. "Currently we have the reverse with commonly created wealth appropriated by private individuals and concerns." The only entity in the UK that is legally allowed to steal is the UK government. As the theft act makes clear, "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly." Except it then says that it's not dishonest if the government steals - "Dishonestly (1) A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest— (a) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;" http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/crossheading/definition-of-theft "The richest people in tbe UK are inproductive economic parasites - landowners." By landowners, you mean the elites. And the elites are the government. "Privately created wealth should stay private. Currently the state appropriates privatly wealth in the form of income and sales taxes." Agreed! It shouldn't be stolen from people and redistributed to those who don't create wealth - the government. "Easy to put right." Yes, by abolishing compulsory taxation. That would collapse the state monopoly in a heart beat, freeing up the economy to actually function.
    1
  21124. Umm references are at the bottom of the screen at the relevant parts and sources (107) are in the description. It was Hitler who said it.
    1
  21125. And, Jeff, Left Wing academia also says Fascism is the end-stage of Capitalism. This goes back to what Stalin said at the time. If you type in "fascism is capitalism" into Google, you'll find plenty of people saying that. Adam Tooze basically concludes that in the Wages of Destruction, which is why I made sure to tackle him in this video (and the other one).
    1
  21126. You know that he nationalized the unions into the State trade union - the DAF, as I explained in the video? He was against the bourgeoisie, believing them to be the Jews, again as I mentioned in the video. He hated Marx and Marxist-Socialism, believing it was a Jewish conspiracy and a false Socialism. That's why Hitler said he was a "real" Socialist unlike Marx's "fake" Socialism. Again, explained this in the video. He also used the Reichstag fire to abolish private property, as I also explained in the video. There's a reason I called the video "Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments". That's because this video does.
    1
  21127. @J Stevinik - Yes, and it's not "in-depth" at all. The guy defends Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism, and then concludes that Marx and Marxism isn't Anti-Semitic - even though Karl Marx said: “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” (Marx, "Das Kapital V1" P107). He also claims I have no idea about history - great argument. He also hasn't watched this video in its entirely, because he wouldn't be using a couple of points to try and say that National Socialism privatized the industries - a notion I destroyed in this video with ample evidence (timestamp in the description) - nor would be come to the blatantly false conclusion that Socialism has nothing to do with the State. I specifically said that if anyone disagrees with the definitions, to watch the Public vs Private video and address the concepts outlined therein. He hasn't done that, because he can't https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Overall, it's a joke of a response. It hasn't convinced me that any of my points are incorrect - it's just another Fascist slander attack designed to distance National Socialism from Marxism. It fails in that regard.
    1
  21128. @Muhfucka Jones - that's because, as I explained in the video, Hitler believed Socialism was in the middle of the political spectrum between Communism (Left) and Capitalism (Right)
    1
  21129. Thanks Collin! I also prefer long videos where I can dive into topics in depth. A lot don't like it though, so it's probably better to do this a once in a while rather than all the time (not that I can do videos of this length all the time anyway)
    1
  21130. Oh, and a video you may enjoy on the Soviet economy https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  21131. I've explained this here: https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  21132. @Mark Maier - You're arguing with trolls. Don't let them waste your time
    1
  21133. Fascism is Socialism by a different name. Fascism is also Democratic, since Democracy is People Power, and the People are the Public and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State Power, which is exactly what Fascism is.
    1
  21134. "State isn't needed for socialism, any collective is needed." 1) The racial collective is a collective. 2) as shown, a collective is a State.
    1
  21135. Except they did. Try watching the video. And again, I explained the profit argument in the video. There's a reason why I named the video "Defeating the Denialist Counter Arguments" because I've heard all the Leftist arguments before and decided to go through each one and destroy them. Watch the video.
    1
  21136. Except they did have Public control of the means of production, as I showed you in the video.
    1
  21137. Glad you're enjoying them! If I'm getting you to think, then I'm doing my job right ☺️ cheers!
    1
  21138. I've explained that to you before Slater, the state takes your property rights away, it doesn't protect your property rights. Taxation is a theft of private property. So is inflation. An individual can protect his own property from the excesses of the State... Can't really tell you how on a public platform though.
    1
  21139. It does show the 'slides', but I guess you could pair it up
    1
  21140. There's a link to a PDF of this video's script in the description 👍
    1
  21141. It's 5 hours, not 4. Why can't Socialists read?
    1
  21142. McDonald's isn't an individual, and therefore cannot be in private control. The corporations do not control me, yet I'm part of the private sector. Millions of self-employed people are not controlled by the corporations. The local council is also called "the corpy" here in the UK, because the idea of corporations is just the fascist word for syndicates, and worker's councils (Soviets). The State is one giant monopoly corporation. Yet despite all this, the corporations are in control and are all private. Ha. So the State Corporation can never be a public then? You're honestly saying that 'worker' Socialism cannot ever be, since a 'class' is a 'public', and publics cannot be publics, otherwise the State Corporation would be classed as a public, which you have rejected. In other words, according to you, workers' corporations (Soviets, councils, syndicates whatever you want to call them) can never be public?
    1
  21143. "You wasted almost 5 hours (plus probably days making the video) trying to convince people who are very staunch in their opinions." I would argue not. By defeating their arguments, the other people watching this video will be convinced by my arguments (hopefully) even if the Marxists are not
    1
  21144. Thank you for the link!
    1
  21145. Thanks nekeke!
    1
  21146. They're denialists because they deny that Hitler was a Socialist. And people have watched the full thing, just like they've watched my other (longer) battle documentaries. It's only this long because of the amount of evidence and the fact I had to tackle a lot of bad arguments for why Hitler was a Capitalist.
    1
  21147. "You made an astonishing effort which as always will be underrated." That's the story of this channel in a nutshell haha :) "But most of the socialist fanatics will probably never watch this video." So far, this statement is turning out to be true, sadly :(
    1
  21148. Oh, it can when you realize that the "Capitalist class" isn't Capitalist. People in charge of giant monopoly hierarchies of society are classed as being the rulers of those societies, and those societies are not 'Private' individuals, they are 'Public' Group States.
    1
  21149. Perhaps, but since I'm not a racist, or a (inter)nationalist, there's no reason to assume Socialism/Statism is good. Unshackled by the religious belief that it is, this enables me to look at the economics and politics correctly and see that, no, all forms of Socialism/Statism result in poverty. This is why minimum wage ends with people unemployed https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ and why social health care becomes unaffordable, or even bad https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ and why the public/State education system doesn't work https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI or why the State police are all racists and sexists and believe that judging people by the colour of their skin is "diversity" and not racism https://youtu.be/gsDeE29hfOc This isn't preaching, this is fact, as Thomas Sowell makes clear here https://youtu.be/qsKA9jCC7Jw
    1
  21150. I'm not seeing this "quick overview" you're talking about. Where is it?
    1
  21151. Mocking me doesn't refute what I've said.
    1
  21152. Democracy is People Power. Except the People are the Public and the Public is the State. So Democracy is State Power. North Korea is a Democracy, because the State is in power. This is why the Founding Fathers knew that democracy was bad and called their government a Republic. Also, I explained all this in the video.
    1
  21153. Try watching the video, especially the part about "National Socialism's Fundamental Ideological Flaw", a link to which you will find in the description
    1
  21154. 1. I actually addressed this argument in the video. 2. I also addressed it in this shorter video here https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  21155. But by your own argument, Socialism has nothing to do with workers, since there is no class. As I said in the video, Socialism came before Marxism and has nothing to do with Class. Marx introduced the class-worker element to Socialism. And no, the workers didn't own the means of production in Germany... the Germans and the German-State did. Thus, it was Socialist.
    1
  21156. Washington Post is owned by the elite establishment - the State. Follow the money.
    1
  21157. Only just seen this, so sorry for late reply. "But socialism requires 1) The workers control the means of production, and 2) Democracy." 1) That's Marxism, as I explained in the video, which you should really watch before commenting. Socialism pre-dates Marxism and doesn't require worker control. It only required state control. 2) Democracy = people-power. By "people", it means "public", the hierarchy of the people/society. Democracy therefore is state-control. Please see my Public vs Private video for more information https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y "Nazi Germany had neither, hence wasn't socialist." Again, watch the video. I used 107 sources (both primary and secondary), tons of references and quotes from various authors that show you exactly why it was for the Germans (socialism). And again, it wasn't for the workers because it wasn't Marxism (not that Marxism is for the workers, but it generally is associated with that in theory, even though in practice it does the exact opposite). "It'd be a bit like someone who didn't believe in god and didn't think Jesus was anything special to claim they were a Christian because they did all the other stuff. It's not enough." No, it would be like a Protestant claiming Catholics aren't Christians because they don't believe in the same things Protestants do. National Socialism and Marxist Socialism are both Socialist, just like Protestants and Catholics are both Christians. They're not the same brand, but they are both variants of the original idea. "I'm disagreeing with your opinions in this video." You haven't actually watched the video, so you're not even making an argument. Everything you've said has been covered in the video. So if you had actually watched it, you wouldn't be coming out with the same stuff I've already refuted.
    1
  21158. I covered this in the video. Please watch it.
    1
  21159. And people have watched it all, and really enjoyed it
    1
  21160. Lenin got rid of the Mensheviks, so I guess Lenin wasn't a real Marxist? The reason Hitler got rid of the opposition was because he believed his own version of Socialism was the REAL version of Socialism, plus he needed to get rid of the competition in order to seize power. He also got rid of all the other parties, including the Right Wing ones, yet we don't hear people say anything about that with regards to his ideology
    1
  21161. See the timestamps in the description. This video doesn't just show that Hitler was a socialist, but it shows the workings of the Nazi economy, and how the whole of Europe was subjected to their rule, and how it was all imploding, which is why they had to go to war. As for the users, yes you're correct that a lot of them are morons from Reddit, e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/wiki/hall_of_infamy (scroll down to the bottom Apparently the fact you agree with me on the definition of Socialism and National Socialism being Socialism also makes you a "conspiracy theorist" :)
    1
  21162. Charles - if you're an 'anarchist' and believe in no society (since society is the State) then you can't be Socialist. If you're a Socialist who doesn't believe in a CENTRAL State, then you're not an Anarchist, since Anarchy is no-State at all. A commune is a State. Also, been over this before https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21163. It depends. Do you think a nation is a society? If so, then nationalism is no different than socialism. Personally, I think that when these socialists claim they're on the 'Right', I just imagine them being on the right-wing of the Left side of the political spectrum.
    1
  21164. Yep. But the Marxists make excuses for Marx's Anti-Semitism and ignore the evidence staring them in the face. Very concerning because they don't understand what REAL Socialism is...
    1
  21165. Haha well to be fair they're suggesting that because it is on the same subject, not necessarily because they're pushing that narrative
    1
  21166. Looks like "social democrats" don't realize what "social democracy" really means https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21167. The value of the product is subjective. So rather than there being a fixed price for something (because of the amount of value a labourer has supposedly put into the product) you can charge higher or lower than the labour costs. Profit therefore isn't subjective. And profit isn't made because the capitalists "stole from the workers".
    1
  21168. @Aiden B - you really need to watch this video at some point because they did care a lot about the German workers, and their families etc. There were plenty of social reforms, a trade union looking after them (the DAF), a welfare organisation, a massive tax burden on the rich especially, and more.
    1
  21169. Capitalism is non-state. So State Capitalism doesn't exist. It's not that it's not 'real' capitalism; it doesn't actually exist. It's impossible to have 'State Non-State'.
    1
  21170. I already mentioned the first one in this video, but yes I guess I could at some point make a more detailed video on this subject because that would solidify my argument even more
    1
  21171. I did go all out, yet I feel like I released this too early (as I explained in the PDF)
    1
  21172. Except, I'm using the historic definition of Socialism, as I explained in this video, and in my Public vs Private video which goes more in-depth on the definitions https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21173. "I've learned so much more since I left university than I learned back then." Same! There's a difference between 'school' and 'education', and we've been schooled, not educated
    1
  21174. This isn't a response to semi-personal attacks - this is proving what the majority of historians refuse to accept. And this has been in the words since 2018, so it hasn't delayed the next videos of Stalingrad at all. "Let's just agree that Hitler's National Socialism and Stalin's Marxist Socialism were basically a different version of the same thing. Control of national and social power under a totalitarian dictatorship." That was basically my argument. Yet, many are saying 'no' to this, and citing historians that say this wasn't true as well. This was the original problem.
    1
  21175. That is the effect Postmodernism has had on our world. Orwell warned us about this. Words become meaningless. A psy-op. For example, the reduction of state spending dosn't become a relief to the taxpayer, it's called "austerity", since tax remains high and spending gets cut, redistributing stolen money to the financial social-elites. Everyone who disagrees with the Left isn't called 'moderate' or 'liberal', but "Fascist" (even though they've no idea what the word actually means). The words Socialist and Capitalist used to mean different things, but Socialists have somehow convinced the world that stealing money from other people and redistributing that money to Social-elites, who them pocket most of that money and give you practically nothing in return, is somehow good. Yet, those who want to keep their private property and individual human rights are called "selfish". Democracy is People Power, or a People's State. Well, Hitler said his regime was a People's State (he actually called for a People's State in Mein Kampf). And he was correct, since the people are the Public and the Public is the State. Democracy is State Power. That's why the Founding Fathers knew that democracy was bad and called their government a Republic. Thus, politics causes the change of word meanings in order to distort the truth and push agendas.
    1
  21176. No, sorry. But there is a PDF version in the description
    1
  21177. Marxism and all socialist variants (except National Socialism, technically) reject the individual. That's what the Socialist "New Man" is all about - creating a new human being that could actually work exclusively for the collective rather than for natural "self interest". Also, if "the workers" are pushing for "workers' rights" out of "self interest", then how can "the workers" and the socialists claim that the capitalists are "greedy" and "selfish", when they are themselves acting greedy and selfish? If capitalism is all about greed and selfishness, then so is socialism for the same reasons. It's in the workers' selfish and greedy interests. But, of course, there will be excuses because the religion of socialism cannot be wrong.
    1
  21178. They hate him because he removed the Jews from society, which is what Karl Marx called for too https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg All Socialism is Anti-Semitism, and Anti-Semitism is Socialism.
    1
  21179. Not true. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. Socialism is the public ownership of the means of production. Only is Socialism is there any exploitation https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21180. True, but I also think it's worse than that https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  21181. Great! Glad you enjoyed it! I have a feeling though it won't be the end of the discussion, because my critics are refusing to go down quietly ;)
    1
  21182. Yep
    1
  21183. Socialism came before Marxism. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Marxist. Socialism is state control of the means of production. Hitler's economy had that (or, at least, attempted to have that, as I explained in the video). So it is socialism. And I'm not a conservative. Conservatives are in the middle-left of the political spectrum. I'm a capitalist, and many of my viewers are too. Yes, I don't think Hitler was in the middle either. That's how he painted himself, but I reject that, as I explained in the video. He was definitely on the Left of the political spectrum because he wanted centralised control over the economy (state control, or totalitarianism).
    1
  21184. "You are using a bizarre, arbitrary definition of "private" to mean "around a dozen people"." No, it's only bizarre to you because you because you didn't know this fact beforehand. You were deceived into thinking that giant public entities were private, so when I point out to you that they are not private, but public, and that the definition of private isn't what you thought it was, you're now assuming that I've somehow tricked you, or that I'm simply wrong. No, I'm not wrong. You have been deceived by the Socialist ideology. I am now showing you the truth. You now have a choice - take the blue pill and stay in the lie of the Matrix, or take the red pill and see the world for how it truly is. Your choice, Neo.
    1
  21185. "I don't understand how you can think a company like MCDonalds isn't part of the private sector." Because it's neither an individual, or a small group, and is collectively owned by its shareholders. It's a public corporation. YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO BY THE SOCIALISTS, just like I was. WAKE UP. YOU HAVE BEEN DECEIVED.
    1
  21186. "For example, mammal can mean dog, but it doesn't mean dog." Just like Socialism can mean Marxism, but it doesn't mean Marxism.
    1
  21187. "I never denied that private CAN mean individual, but it doesn't mean individual." Right, but it does mean individual. That's why a private in the army is an individual soldier. It also means small group too, as I have explained. So once AGAIN - and please pay attention here - "private" means individual AND/OR small group. So yes, private CAN mean individual, but it can also mean small group. Therefore, we are now in agreement.
    1
  21188. "I have already said private CAN mean individual, but is not synonymous." FINALLY, you admit that you're wrong. Now we can move on. - "In economics, under a capitalist mode of production, it also means non-state in the context of "the private sector", to which companies like Amazon and McDonalds belong." Except, as I have explained NUMEROUS times now in this thread, McDonalds is a PUBLIC corporation. McDonald's went public in 1965 https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/investors/stock-information.html As I explained in the Public vs Private video, when a company gets big, it goes from being classed as "private" to being classed as "public". This is why Amazon and McDonalds are no longer private and are public, and why they're also owned by millions of their shareholders, information of which I have also provided before. Here are those sources once again https://ycharts.com/companies/AMZN/shares_outstanding https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/052816/top-4-amazon-shareholders-amzn.asp https://audioeditorfree.com/how-many-shares-does-amazon-have/ Because corporations are not private, but public, and because they come from Socialist Syndicalism, they are Socialist, not Capitalist. Just like the Socialist State, they are monopolies. And the word "corporation" is just a different word for "syndicalism", since the idea for the word "corporation" came from syndicalism. What part of this do you not understand?
    1
  21189. "Sure, run away while claiming victory. That's an internet first." I'm not running away. You're refusing to READ what I'm saying. - "Again, the OXFORD DEFINITION of private sector:" Hold on, we've not even got you to confirm what the word "private" means, so before we move onto the "private sector", can we just get you to confirm that you agree with the historical and dictionary definition of the word "private"? Once again from the Oxford Dictionary: "private. adjective, 1. belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only. 2. (of a person) having no official or public role or position. 3. (of a service or industry) provided or owned by an individual or an independent, commercial company rather than the state. 4. (of education or medical treatment) conducted outside the state system and charging fees to those who make use of it. 5. relating to or denoting a transaction between individuals and not involving commercial organizations. Noun, the lowest rank in the army. ORIGIN: late Middle English (originally denoting a person not acting in an official capacity): from Latin privatus ‘withdrawn from public life’, a use of the past participle of privare ‘bereave, deprive’ from privus ‘single, individual’." (Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. P1413.) Do you, or do you not, accept the FACT that the word "private" means "individual", "non-public" and "non-state" as the evidence shows?
    1
  21190. "Where does the Oxford dictionary say it is synonymous with individual (and small group)?" That's it, I'm done here. Several times above I've given you all the evidence that there is to answer this question. You're refusing to read it. I've also provided you with a link to the Public vs Private video which shows additional historical evidence which will explain and also support what I'm saying. You're refusing to watch it. So, you've confirmed that there's no point continuing this debate, because you're not being honest with it. You're not trying to get to the historical truth, you're just trying to protect your fragile ego, and that's why you're asking a dozen or more pointless questions over and over as a way to try and catch me out. Well, I'm not playing your stupid game any longer. If you were intellectually honest you would go and seek out those answers in my videos, or online, or in the books. But intellectual honesty is not why you're here, is it. And here's the deal, Slater Slater. You've spent weeks or months in this comment section screaming at anyone who agrees with me, and boasting about how wrong I am, and how wrong my "fans" are. Now, in this comment thread, I've shown you how wrong you were all that time. In reality, I've done my homework, I've put the effort in, I've presented the evidence, and you've got nothing. You can't be bothered to watch the videos and try to understand them, and I can't be bothered to listen to you any longer. You've been debated, and you've been defeated. The definition of Socialism remains as it was historically: the public (State) ownership of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21191. "I just love man how you both argue about who has real sources, No your sources are bad and lie, my sources hold the actual universal truth" That's not what's happening here. Slater Slater has provided one source - Investopedia. I've provide several in this discussion alone, and well over 100 in the video, with plenty dealing with the definitions of Socialism and Capitalism, including Karl Marx's own words on the matter. This isn't a debate over sources, it's a debate over logic vs emotion. Rational vs faith. In short, the communication issue involves one side assuming they're right, while the other side is factually correct. - "my opinion is that fact does not exist, fact is point of view, fact is bunch of people calling something a fact, most facts are right and wrong at the same time, because we just forget that they are just well done opinions and points of views and thus definitions as whole are just pointless concepts which give us answers to ease our complex human minds, but I must admit that I was victim of this also, also love how you decided to have this long debate about diffrent points of views in which you both have good points of views" The postmodernism is strong with this one... I'm not getting into a debate over this because it's pointless. The craft of history requires both evidence and interpretation forged into a compelling argument. Through an open and honest free market debate, the truth can emerge over time as poor arguments fall, and stronger arguments rise to the top. The process can take a while (technically it never ends), but that's the point of it. Rather than become nihilistic about it, accept it and enjoy the journey https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc - "I also love how you TIK call yourself without any ideology, but you call your enemies leftist (group collective, not individuals) and you clearly hate leftism by your own words which is ideological position for one of your examples, which is by definition oxymoron situation, so I guess we have fact which was changed, thats how facts change, people change their minds" Being anti-ideology, is not an ideology. And if you're defending Socialism, you're on the Left by the Left's own definition of the political spectrum. - "what do you expect TIK? that people that you see as leftist and people who see themselves as leftist must become rightwing in order to not be your enemies and people with emotions rather than truth? I personally dont care about leftism, rightism, but you clearly see world in groups, not individuals with your own personal truth" I have no expectations. I'm defending history from people who don't respect the evidence and have zero ability to form a solid or coherent interpretation of the events, yet have the tenacity to slander and mock me and declare I'm wrong, despite the fact that they're incapable of actually standing up against me in debate, as Slater Slater has demonstrated here. - "I love how Lewis clearly builds his life on books with facts/points of views of individuals while the other has his mindset build on his personal thinking, both have their merits" Yes, I use evidence and logic to form my opinions. Notice again - the craft of history is the evidence and interpretation of that evidence formed into a logical, rational argument. My opponent on the other hand has contradictory logic and flimsy evidence, which is why he's relying on asking the same questions over and over again even though I've given him the answers backed by evidence. His emotions and faith is what's keeping him from admitting that he's wrong. Maybe, perhaps maybe, he's realize this at some point and just start to consider the possibility that his opponent (me) had the same belief set that he had at one point, but then realized that that belief set was completely incorrect. There's no shame in being wrong. There is shame in stubbornly holding onto an untenable position when your opponent has both logic and evidence on his side. Slater Slater has lost this debate, but he cannot admit it.
    1
  21192. The fact remains that you're refusing to accept anything I say, or any evidence I provide. You're refusing to read it. You're refusing to think about it. You're repeating the same questions over and over despite the fact that I've already answered them. The reason why is because, instead of trying to get to the truth, you're trying to "win" against me. Stop. If you want to get to the truth, stop trying to "win", and start caring about the truth. Truth requires evidence, which you have failed to provide, whilst demanding so much from me. You wouldn't be asking all these questions if you had actually done your homework and figured out what my argument actually was before jumping to ridiculous conclusions about me. But again, you're not interested in the truth. You thought I was an easy opponent, and now you're struggling to actually come back with anything against the evidence I've presented.
    1
  21193. "There is no functional difference between a village and a town, only one of scale. There is a large functional difference between a person and a village though, which you are claiming are the same." Oh okay, when I said 'small group', you thought I meant village? What's your native language again? You're quite clearly not a native English speaker.
    1
  21194. "That profit can exist on a socialist society has NOTHING tondo with the fact that no one opens a business to bit make money. Stop this Gish-gallop. At the moment I consider it beneath you." Socialist society is a business. It makes a profit or collapses. Therefore, by your own definition of private ownership being capitalism, socialist society is also capitalist.
    1
  21195. "Where doe the Oxford dictionary state a crowd stops at 12? This is a sully semantic game, and you know it." It doesn't. It doesn't say how big a "group" is. I guess this means that we have to use our own brains to determine the difference between something that is small, and something that is large.
    1
  21196. ""The word private comes from the Latin 'Privus'' So?" Because, the Oxford dictionary then says that it means private. I've given you the source plenty of times now. I've given you the Cambridge dictionary definition too. This is also the historical definition, as explained in the Public vs Private video.
    1
  21197. "No, private does not mean small group or individual. No dictionary definition supports this claim." I've just given you a quote from the Oxford dictionary proving that you're wrong. For the THIRD time now: the word private comes from the Latin 'Privus' to mean 'single' or 'individual'. (Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. p1413.) That was the historical definition, and the dictionary definition rolled into one.
    1
  21198. "What is the functional difference in a PLC with 12 shareholders and a PLC with 36 shareholders?" What's the functional difference between a village and a town?
    1
  21199. "Right, so you are equating "public" with "a crowd". And saying 11 people is an "individual"." No, I'm saying that 11 people is a small group. It would be classed as "private" because (ONCE AGAIN) private means "individual" AND/OR "small group". - "Let's pretend that isn't silly." Let's pretend you can read.
    1
  21200. "Not at all. The group of people who own Amazon shares is tiny compared to the group of people who don't own Amazon shares" That doesn't matter. The fact is that it's a lot more than a small group. 10 million people isn't a small group, and therefore cannot be classed as private.
    1
  21201. "You're trying to define public as meaning a crowd (Viz "pöbel" in German)There is more than economic definition of public, too. Which is how you can have a PLC in the private sector. It's a semantic game that you play poorly." A crowd is a public. Oxford says so: "Oxford: adjective, 1. of or concerning the people as a whole. 2. open to or shared by all the people of an area or country. 3. of or involved in the affairs of the community, especially in government or entertainment. 3. of or provided by the state rather than an independent, commercial company. Noun, 1. ordinary people in general; the community." (Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. P1435.) Cambridge says so too: "Cambridge: adjective, 1. relating to or involving people in general, rather than being limited to a particular group of people. 2. (government) provided by the government from taxes to be available to everyone. Noun, 1. all ordinary people. To go public - a company that goes public makes shares available on a stock market for the first time." (Cambridge Dictionary https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/public) Notice the "To go public [is to] make shares available on a stock market for the first time" bit.
    1
  21202. "The intention of the corner shop is to make a profit. It is run FOR profit. It may not always end the year IN profit. Stop being silly" Again, it's irrelevant. Profit exists in a Socialist society. You just can't measure it due to the lack of a means of exchange.
    1
  21203. ""You've bought into the Marxist lie" You're being emotional again." Stating facts is not emotion.
    1
  21204. "And the obvious fact is, n one starts a business intending to make a loss" I see, so since the Roman Empire made a profit, that makes it capitalist, does it? What about the King of England back in the medieval times? Is medieval England a capitalist power too now, just because it taxed the poor for profit?
    1
  21205. "Note that the investopedia definition (the economic source) does mention profit." And it can make up any definition that it likes, especially when it's owners are pushing their agenda. I thought you didn't like corporations and big business? Yet here you are trusting corporations and big businesses rather than your own logic.
    1
  21206. "I'm reading your messages, buy I'm simply not buying them." And that's you're asking the same questions over and over. You ask a question, I provide the answer, then you reject it, and repeat the same question. I then provide you with the same answer, and you reject it again. I knew this would happen, which is why I normally don't even bother wasting my time replying to you (and others like you) in the comments. You've already decided that you're right, and no amount of evidence or correct answers will ever persuade you that you're incorrect, even when the reality is overwhelming. - "Evidence that "private" in an economic sense means "individual", please." Again, the word private comes from the Latin 'Privus' to mean 'single' or 'individual'. (Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010. p1413.) That was the historical definition, and the dictionary definition rolled into one. - "The dictionary definition of "the private sector" contradicts you." You asked for the definition of "private", but are saying that the definition of "private sector" is different. Well, yes because it's a separate dictionary definition. However, the definition of "private enterprise" is "noun, business or industry that is managed by independent companies or private individuals rather than being controlled by the state." (Source is same as above.)
    1
  21207. "I didn't claim that it was only "the insiders" who own the company. You're getting emotional and being dishonest there." There's no emotions, only facts. You said that there were a small group of people owning the company. I've proven to you that that was completely false, and there are millions of people who own that company. - "Even if Amazon do have "millions" of investors, as you claim, that is still a relatively small group compared to the number of people who DON'T own shares." Completely irrelevant. Just because you choose not to join the collective, doesn't mean that the collective is not a collective or doesn't exist. - "What is the upper limit for the TIKtionary definition of "small group", out of interest? And is it as arbitrary as I suspect?" Well, how big is a small group? It's a universal question and doesn't just apply to me, it applies to you too. It's one of those "when does a town become a city" type questions. It's not actually got a fixed number because it depends on circumstances. However, a group of more than a dozen or so people is probably no longer classed as a small group. Certainly by the time you get to 50 people, that's no longer a small group or private. So in the economic sense in which we're debating, giant corporations that contain hundreds, if not thousands, of people, and millions of shareholders, cannot be classed as a small group.
    1
  21208. "And you have provided no evidence to the contrary that doesn't involve tortuous manglings of accepted definitions." The evidence against you has been so overwhelming that you're now backed into a corner and have no way out. So the only tactic left for you is to pretend that all the evidence I've presented doesn't exist. You've lost this debate.
    1
  21209. "The fact is no dictionary definition of "private" says it is synonymous with individual. Even the definition you provided disproves you on that You've gone from silliness to dishonestly here." The dictionary definitions support me 100%, and don't support you at all. You cannot read. So it's no wonder that you're having difficulty here. Perhaps, instead of reading words, it would be better for you to go to the Public vs Private video and watch that, because I provide visuals to back up what I'm saying. Perhaps you will understand the pictures better.
    1
  21210. "Anyway, back to the modern definition of "private sector" - how on earth is e.gm Amazon not part of it? It clearly is ny government owned, so are you claiming it's a charity?" Are you drunk? I have explained this above. I'm having to repeat myself for you again just because you cannot read. The "insiders" (the ones you claim are the ones who own the company) only own 10.2% of Amazon's shares. Institutions own 58.7% of the company, and the "General Public" (the millions of other normal people) own 31% of Amazon. https://audioeditorfree.com/how-many-shares-does-amazon-have/ Amazon is not private. It is a public in itself. And that's without even talking about whether it's controlled by the Central Public or not, which it clearly is, since a business needs a government licence to even operate CCTV cameras here in the UK. Amazon is also directly funded by the Central Banks via "Quantitative Easing" and "easy money". So yes, it is owned/controlled by the Central Public.
    1
  21211. "No, a club with 10 million members which is open only to those members would be classes as private, by everyone (apart from you, apparently)." There are TWO definitions of private. One is economical, which is what we're discussing. And the second is whether something is secret/separate or not. You have mixed the two definitions together and then wonder why I'm not making sense. No, you've made a mistake here. 10 million people is not "private" in any sense of the word. 10 million people is quite clearly a public.
    1
  21212. "You claimed "private" means "individual". But as I have shown, it absolutely doesn't (for example, you can have a private member's club that is only open to the 5 million people who belong to that club) ." Again, I've just explained that to you. Are you not reading my messages? My response to you previously said: A club with 10 million members would be classed as a public. It might be "private" in the sense that people can't have access to it. But that's not the economical sense of the word "private", which is what we're referring to.
    1
  21213. "You're not making any sense." I am making sense. The issue here is that you're refusing to see my point of view. I fully understand your point of view, because I used to believe in it. You don't have a clue what my point of view is because you've not taking the time to understand. Your eyes are open and your mouth is flapping, but your ears are closed.
    1
  21214. "But you can, and do have a heirarchy in a family. Or even between two people." I've just explained this to you. You're not reading what I'm saying. As I've just said: a small family is not classed as a public because the hierarchy must be bigger than one or so points up or down. If you see my diagrams in the Public vs Private video, you'll see what I mean here. In other words, two people is not a hierarchy, even if one is above the other. That's why hierarchies are represented using pyramid shapes, which a simple Google search for the word "hierarchy" will show. And again, I've explained this in the Public vs Private video.
    1
  21215. ""There are 507.15 million shares" Irrelevant. How many shareholders are there? The "collective" of shareholders are a relatively small group, I think you'll find." Well, according to your favourite source, Investopedia, there are some big shareholders with lots of shares. These are classed as "insiders" who are in senior management positions. However, there is also a section titled "Institutional Shareholders". In there, there are three "groups", which are other corporations. And it says that there are more than 3,000 institutional investors. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/052816/top-4-amazon-shareholders-amzn.asp Investopedia doesn't talk about the millions of individual investors and day-traders who have shares in Amazon. But, there is another source here which does https://audioeditorfree.com/how-many-shares-does-amazon-have/ The "insiders" (the ones you claim are the ones who own the company) only own 10.2% of Amazon's shares. Institutions own 58.7% of the company, and the "General Public" (the millions of other normal people) own 31% of Amazon. So yes, this isn't a privately owned company by any stretch of the imagination.
    1
  21216. "None of this supports your assertion that "private means individual". It simply doesn't, any more than six means one. This is just silly." You refusing to accept the facts doesn't make this "silly". You are being silly by digging your heels in when I've presented overwhelming evidence against you. The fact that you're still asking questions that I've answered here, in the video, elsewhere in the comments, or in the Public vs Private video, is proof that you haven't done your homework and haven't thought any of this through.
    1
  21217. ""An "individual" and a "small family" are BOTH described as "private"" So is a club with 10 million members that is not open to non club members." Incorrect. A club with 10 million members would be classed as a public. It might be "private" in the sense that people can't have access to it. But that's not the economical sense of the word "private", which is what we're referring to.
    1
  21218. "So it's not the heirarchical element of Amazon that makes it "public"?" Technically not. But sort of. A public is a bunch of people. Groups of people (societies) organize themselves into hierarchies. This is actually the definition of a State, from Oxford. - "state noun, a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government." So I'm using the idea of hierarchies as a way to try and get you to understand what I'm trying to say. You can't have a hierarchy of one (a hierarchy of a private individual). A hierarchy requires multiple people, and multiple people is a public. But obviously, if there was a lack of a hierarchy with a bunch of people, that wouldn't necessarily make them private. A nation in anarchy is still a nation. But as I said, it's just a way for me to convey what I'm saying, and for you to visualize what I'm saying. "Even a small family is heirarchical." Maybe - although I would argue not. But even if it was, a small family is not classed as a public because the hierarchy must be bigger than one or so points up or down. If you see my diagrams in the Public vs Private video, you'll see what I mean here.
    1
  21219. Get your facts right. The current policies that World Central Banks and the Central States are using to combat the Depression that they have caused are the very MMT and Keynesian policies that you studied. QE and other "stimulus" packages, and work creation schemes, are all Socialist policies. Saying that you studied economics, but then failing to recognise that healthcare isn't "free" when the State provides it is insanity. If it's "free", who pays the nurses and doctors? Nothing is free but the cheese on the trap, and Statist belief in Keynesianism is trapping us all in mountains of debt that can never be paid off. For you to then say that this is the fault of Capitalism is a complete joke. Learn what the words actually mean https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Socialism is the cause of this current crisis, which is why those who believe in the free market are betting against the debt.
    1
  21220. "Socialism is government ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services." Glad you agree. "Hitler was not a socialist. He did not even nationalize major companies like Krupp." Try watching the video before commenting. This argument is defeated in the video. "Hitler despised socialists." Hitler despised Marxists and Social Democrats, not Socialists. Again, explained in the video you didn't watch. "Hitler persecuted socialists and rounded them up in every country he invaded." While not covered in the video, Social Democrats continued to work for the ministries of the Reich, so this isn't actually fully true. However, yes Hitler did attack Marxists. "The people around Hitler, the better journalists and historians of the time, as well as the better historians since, all place on the extreme Right of the political spectrum, far from the socialists of the far Left." The people around Hitler actually put him in the middle of the political spectrum (the Nazi "Third Way") as explained in the video. And as I also showed in the video, the historians were/are wrong to place him on the Right. He was a totalitarian. Thus he was on the Left. Please watch the video before commenting.
    1
  21221. So Ian Kershaw admits he was a Socialist, but still concludes he's a Capitalist. This shows what I'm saying to be true.
    1
  21222. Thank you for letting me know, and the link!
    1
  21223. The definition you gave is the same as the one given in Das Kapital volume 1 (pages 104-107). I'm not using Marx's definition though, I'm using the historical definition https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21224. I disagree with the assumption that some constraints need to be imposed on Capitalism, but I do agree with your points on Socialism.
    1
  21225. I disagree. A fact is a fact. We may not know the answer to something, and thus make false statements that are the truest statements we can make, but that doesn't mean they're true.
    1
  21226. Oh wow 😂 is there a video of that interview?
    1
  21227. And 1. Corporations are not Capitalist, they're Syndicates. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y 2. Secondly, as they explained in the video, the issue is that the State has failed at law enforcement. If law enforcement was private, then law enforcement would be more efficient https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ
    1
  21228. See 03:26:09 of this video https://youtu.be/z6gB3gA9UZg Also, this entire discussion is amazing. You should watch it.
    1
  21229. Probably not, but the Rothbard one "What has the government done to our money?" definitely is. The Hazlitt one just explains why, everything that a government does, is merely taken from the Private sector. So when they say they've "created 8 jobs" building a bridge, in reality they've stolen at least 8 jobs (if not more) from the Private sector, to create a bridge the Private sector clearly didn't need (otherwise they would have built it themselves) and prevented the creation of unknown jobs and businesses and projects in the Private sector. If you understand that concept, then you probably don't need to read Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt.
    1
  21230. Hahaha
    1
  21231. I guess you didn't read Corbyn's Race Manifesto in the last election? You obviously haven't heard about all the anti-Semitism inherent in the Labour Party. And it appears that, despite being a Labour Party supporter (thus, making you a Marxist Socialist) you haven't read Marx, or understood what he was calling for, which was anti-Semitism.
    1
  21232. And there's a basic difference between the nominal value of your wages and your actual earnings. In reality, your purchasing power has been slowly stolen from you for decades by the invisible theft known as inflaction, which is why you really really really need to read Rothbard's America's Great Depression, or What has the Government Done to Our Money. Not sure I have a chart for Euro's, but the US Dollar is a good example of how the purchasing power of each dollar is on the brink of worthlessness https://images.app.goo.gl/TKvzJvTx7vVMuUTy8 Same with the British pound https://images.app.goo.gl/ptSu1kGJXEHQeMz4A
    1
  21233. Incorrect. This is how my critics misrepresent my political and economic views https://images.app.goo.gl/jSdwaBBvJhq271W57 And this is more how I see things https://images.app.goo.gl/sQrhL41XehBuYXzR8 Or this, if the Republicans were shifted to the Left too https://images.app.goo.gl/u8ydkcNEweJTyLKU7
    1
  21234. Yeah I really need to do that at some point
    1
  21235. You have the wrong idea of what anarchy is. Anarchy is not people rioting (that's chaos). Anarchy is the lack of a central authority, but law still exists. Rather than have a monopoly on law enforcement, there would be multiple law enforcement businesses. See https://youtu.be/7rfkoOQ4IpE
    1
  21236. I'll let her know!
    1
  21237. "Logically speaking (according to Austrian economic analysts), this should be debasing the currency and resulting in massive inflation." House prices, stock prices, second hand car and book sales, tuition fees, the price of gold and silver, council taxes, energy bills, fuel bills, the price of a can of coke... Oh yeah, there's no inflation! Herp derp! In reality though, the effects of inflation (the expansion of the currency supply) is a rise in prices. But prices don't necessarily rise instantly, if the inflation is being directed into certain assets and then other commodities are being artificially regulated to be cheaper than they should be (like toilet roll and food products here in the UK). Money velocity has collapsed due to the lockup, so people aren't spending their money the same as they were before. I saw one report say that the rich are only spending 45% as much as they were before the lockup. When the lockup is lifted, and people go out to spend all that extra cash which has been created from thin air, supply and demand will result in a rapid rise in prices within a short space of time. It happened the exact same way in Germany. In WW1 people saved and didn't spend because they were scared of the future. Then, at the end of the war, they did spend, which is when the inflation started.
    1
  21238. Shirer was fine for his day (the 60's) but basically he wrote down Halder's view of the war. There's several passages in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich where he says something like "I've just got off the phone to Halder and he said..."
    1
  21239. I mean, it should have been obvious from the Hitler's Socialism video and others where I quoted from both Mises and Rothbard and others
    1
  21240. It's outdated. Good for it's time though, and still has some relevant points, but there are more up to date economic books now
    1
  21241. Remember, I used to be a Socialist. So I see both sides of the argument, and have realised that the Austrian Economic argument is far superior to the Socialist one. Just like with all my history, I look at both sides of the argument and favour the one that makes the most sense. And people like you do call me out on it all the time. They call me names, say I'm talking nonsense, and create arguments that are either already addressed or are easily addressed (much like the ones you've made here). Since these arguments are unconvincing, I remain firm on the side that doesn't believe that the Judeo-Capitalists are stealing money off the workers. And it's clear that you haven't read the Doctrine of Fascism properly, since Mussolini and Gentile and the other philosophers of Fascism called for Revolutionary National Syndicalism with Actionalism, which involved taking down the current system and replacing it with the Syndicate/Corporate totalitarian State.
    1
  21242. The issue isn't the light or the cat, but the observer. The light would still be either on or off
    1
  21243. I do plan on doing that, but Gazala's taking up a lot of time, as is this history theory video. I have to prioritise!
    1
  21244. Peikoff and Rand have provided the solution to the sophists and rationalists, thank you.
    1
  21245. But they only broke up after the Cold War (with a brief split in WW2). So they went ~70 years as multi-national states, which goes against the narrative that they were mononational states.
    1
  21246. I didn't dismiss Nationalism, and said it was a factor. I just don't think it's the main nor only factor for the collapse, and that other internal and external pressures were
    1
  21247. I'd phrase it more like this: the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed because of other reasons (mainly external pressure), but it split into smaller multi-ethnic and multi-national states, who were (arguably) kept propped up by nationalism.
    1
  21248. Socialism is the centralised Public State control of the means of production https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Socialism has nothing to do with Class, or a "Classless society". Only Marxist-Socialism calls for the murder and theft of the bourgeoisie in order to make a so-called classless society. But Socialism predates Marxism and has nothing to do with Class. Also, if Socialism is a society that doesn't produce "commodity production", then Socialism is literally calling for the end of the economy. You can't feed people if you don't make any food, since food is a commodity. But the reason Karl Marx called for the end of commodities was because he thought commodities were "inwardly circumcised Jews" - “The capitalist knows that all commodities, however scurvy they may look, or however badly they may smell, are in faith and in truth money, inwardly circumcised Jews, and what is more, a wonderful means whereby out of money to make more money.” - Karl Marx, Das Kapital, P107. Also, why did Karl Marx call for Central Banking in the Communist Manifesto if he was against currency? It's because he wasn't against fiat currency, he was against money (gold and silver). And as he made clear: “What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money… Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist.” - Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question." Yes, Karl Marx says selling things - huckstering - is a Jewish cult, and that money is the Jewish god. “Christ drove the Jewish money-changers out of the temple, and that the money-changers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again to be Jews is perhaps no more than a historic coincidence.” - Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question." Karl Marx is saying here that the people who trade goods for money (in other words, capitalists) are Jewish, and are on the side of “tyranny”. Yes, the reason he hates capitalists is because he thinks they’re Jewish, and the reason he hates Jews is because he thinks they are capitalists. In Karl Marx's mind, the bourgeoisie were the Jews. That's why he wanted to get rid of the bourgeoisie and the Jews. “As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism - huckstering and its conditions - the Jew becomes impossible, because his consciousness no longer has an object… The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.” - Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question." So Marxism is ANTI-SEMITISM.
    1
  21249. You're only disagreeing because I refuse to accept your arguments that Socialism works. To quote you from a while ago - "More libertarian bullshit from TIK. Always blaming socialism for the failings of what was very much a capitalist economy."
    1
  21250. That's not the reason I gave. Please finish watching the video before commenting.
    1
  21251. Except, I can understand others feelings, therefore I'm not a "socio path". The reason, as an ex-socialist, that I now object to Socialism, is because of several reasons. The first is that I understand basic economics https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U The second is that Socialism is ANTI-SEMITISM https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg And that Hitler was a Socialist https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I therefore realize that STATE unemployment insurance, STATE old age pensions, STATE hell care, STATE un-affordable housing, and STATE sponsored theft (taxation, inflation, regulation) results in the poor being poorer and the rich being richer. Therefore, as someone who cares about others, I want people to realize that the answer to state-mismanagement of the economy and the impoverishment of their lives is not "more state". Sadly people don't listen. They already believe they know the answers. But as an ex-socialist, I can promise you, socialism isn't what you think it is.
    1
  21252. I didn't say nationalism wasn't a factor. I said it wasn't the only, not primary, reason for the collapse. Watch the full video.
    1
  21253. Public/Collective/State control of the means of production is Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21254. I do sometimes agree with the mainstream narrative... sometimes... I think.... Thank you for supporting! 🏅👍
    1
  21255. I'm glad to see some support for the non-battle videos! I enjoy making both and I think it's nice to have a bit of variety on the channel
    1
  21256. Considering that gym owners were having to defy lockdown orders and break into their own gym, I'd say that the market wasn't free. Socialism is causing the USA to collapse https://youtu.be/xSCe-hKxtkc
    1
  21257. Yes! Just because I started with WW2, doesn't mean I have to stick to it (stick to tanks!). Anything between 1850 and 1950 is fine, since that's the period I'm most interested in
    1
  21258. The consumer market collapsed because the State took control. They forcefully recruited people into a war that they started, then forcefully took over the economy. The solution to State control is not more State control.
    1
  21259. Yes, I know what Socialism is. Do you? https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21260. I didn't say that central planning caused the end of the Austrian Empire. Please actually watch the video before commenting.
    1
  21261. Is it a popular empire among history fanatics? I didn't even realize that it was. I know Rome and Byzantium (yes, East Rome) are popular, but I never suspected Austria-Hungary to be. I wonder why?
    1
  21262. While I had heard of them before I looked into this video, I need to look into them more. But it's interesting that they predate both the Nazis of Germany, and the Fascists of Italy. And according to Wikipedia (not the greatest source, I know) they were originally anti-Semitic, but then later became Zionists?
    1
  21263. How exactly is this a variation of the Dolchstoss theory? External and internal pressures led to the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Are you denying that? Or are you saying that it was purely external factors and that there was no internal pressure?
    1
  21264. Actually the evidence is clear that a Socialist "economy" doesn't work... at all, whether there's a time or plenty or not. In fact, Socialism led directly to the destruction of the Greek economy https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk
    1
  21265. If you haven't seen it, this video may be of interest to you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21266. You realize that the "Anglo" nations are not Capitalist, and that hardly anyone (especially in the UK) calls for Capitalism, because we were all brainwashed by school and university Statists to believe that the State is the answer to everything. So, on the contrary, I've broken out of the "anglo-washed" agenda and am now arguing against slavery (Socialism).
    1
  21267. Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia weren't multi-national states? Then why did they collapse into national states at the end of the Cold War?
    1
  21268. Actually, that reinforces what I said: that external powers wanted the Austro-Hungarian Empire to collapse in 1918, and didn't in 1848
    1
  21269. "They did collapse further." Yes, but not until WW2, or the end of the Cold War
    1
  21270. I didn't say Socialism was the reason for the collapse.
    1
  21271. So you basically agree with the 'federalist' idea that Emperor Karl was calling for?
    1
  21272. Except I didn't say it was Socialism that caused the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire
    1
  21273. Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia didn't collapse for ~70 years after the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed.
    1
  21274. I'm aiming to have the next one out in two weeks
    1
  21275. What do you mean?
    1
  21276. The biggest tank battle in world history. Would you not want to know where and when the biggest tank battle in world history took place? The fact that for 50 years, Germany and the Soviet Union were telling us that Kursk was the biggest battle, proves that they were both lying.
    1
  21277. So do I, but apparently it's known either as Dubno, or Dubno-Brody, or Brody :(
    1
  21278. Glad you thought so :)
    1
  21279. We do need more books, and that's why I was quite damning of the one book we do have, since it wasn't good enough. If it had gone into the numbers, I'd probably be more inclided to say "this is probably true, but hopefully more books will come out that will confirm it". Now we're forced to rely on what Glantz and a couple of others have said, which isn't ideal. And I agree, the Soviets and Germans (and even western authors today) aren't giving fully accurate and unbiased information about the Eastern Front.
    1
  21280. While I agree with what you're suggesting, it seems very unlikely that Prohorovka was bigger. From Glantz's numbers, there were 2,000 fighting at Dubno-Brody. Compare that to the maximum of 1,156 tanks at Prokhorovka, and it's hard to argue with that.
    1
  21281. It's in the Ukraine
    1
  21282. 1. I now think it's more of a translation issue, plus the fact that Isaev simply doesn't actually give the numbers (or if he did the editor and translators need shooting). I'm considering making a follow up video on this topic just to set the record straight. Might be a while a way because I have other things that need working on which take priority, but I probably will. I will say I was probably wrong to call Isaev biased, however I'm not the only one who's had trouble with this book. A few people have messaged me saying they've also struggled with it too, pointing out its many errors. And while it is probably a translation issue, it does appear to the reader as bias. This is why I've interpreted it this way. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But hopefully you can see where I was coming from in the video. 2. Fair point about the bias thing, but you don't need to call me an idiot or swear. I promote discussion and am happy to accept criticism, but only if it's constructive or presented in the right way. I understand that you've probably got annoyed at me for thinking this was bias, but if you present me a clear argument that says otherwise (which you've done) then I'll listen. Your first sentence was completely unnecessary. 3. The Russians do have reason to spin history. As does everyone else. Nobody - not you, me or anyone - are truly unbiased. Some are less bias that others, and I'm certainly aiming to be as unbias as anyone, but that doesn't mean I'm not biased at all. People are publishing works that are biased. They are. Germans are. Russians are. Glantz is biased too. Nobody is exempt from that. Our purpose as historians (or as history buffs) is to collect all the biases and find the middle ground. That might be an impossible job, but we should try anyway!
    1
  21283. I know, I am sorry. The main issue is that this is one of the very very few books on the subject in English, and the translation is terrible, so working out the details is incredibly difficult. I can confirm though that, after going through and manually adding up all the various tanks from all the various units in this book, that Isaev's numbers match Glantz's. So Isaev and Glantz are right - roughly 5,000 Soviet tanks vs 800 German.
    1
  21284. Maxim, it's funny because I have a video coming this Monday about "rewriting history" and how it's people misunderstand the meaning of history. You should watch it.
    1
  21285. Perhaps it would have been better for you to tell me which names I mispronounced and tell me how to pronounce them rather than call me a mong. And I actually looked up the names prior to the video. Sadly, except for videos where robots are reading back the names wrong, I couldn't find the correct pronounciation. Nor could I take a trip to Russia or Ukraine to find out. So in the end I had no choice but to guess.
    1
  21286. Thanks for your criticism! Always welcome. However, the video title stays. Will make a follow up video at some point explaining why, but I will say one thing - Isaev does actually provide numbers, and they do correspond with Glantz. The problem being you have to sit there with a calculator and add them up, which is something I didn't do prior to making this video. Probably need to send Isaev's translator and the editor off to the Gulag
    1
  21287. Thank you!
    1
  21288. Write what!?
    1
  21289. No, if you count the whole of Kursk, then I'll count the whole of Barbarossa, which by the same logic was a bigger tank battle than the whole of Kursk. It's Prokhorovak vs Dubno, and Dubno comes out on top.
    1
  21290. What? I didn't say Kursk was the biggest tank battle?
    1
  21291. I'd give him another shot, but this is the only book in English of his that I can see. And it does have a few holes in it. Perhaps it was the translator. Perhaps it was the publisher. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting it. Either way, his explanation of the battle could have been better, and he could have provided the numbers on the days and talked about them at the beginning etc like I said in the video.
    1
  21292. Thank you for that! Didn't know about it, but will get it :)
    1
  21293. DAMN YOU
    1
  21294. It's weird. He gives numbers for the small clashes and interesting facts about the tank types and some of the actions, but then seems to miss the forest for the trees when he looks at the battle as a whole. While I look forward to more Russian texts on the battle, someone else was saying that the law changed in Russia a couple of years back, and there appears to be censorship again. To what extent this is true, I don't know, but it would explain the faults with Isaev's book. Interestingly, there's only two parts of the book where he talks about the numbers of the whole battle. One in the introduction, and once in the inner sleeve of the outer cover of the book. That's it. Both of these differ from the tables he gives when talking about the Soviet forces. He has tables for tank numbers, but doesn't add them up, doesn't say how many reached the battlefield, and leaves plenty of questions unanswered, like how many engaged on a particular day. This just leaves holes for the reader to misinterpret.
    1
  21295. Dubno was a tank battle though. The infantry were involved too, but there was still a massive whirlwind of a tank battle.
    1
  21296. All the tanks in 1941 were lighter than those in 1943, on both sides. But that doesn't mean they're not tanks. The size of the tank is not the issue. The number of the tanks is what matters.
    1
  21297. I've since manually counted Isaev's tank numbers and it came to roughly 5,000 tanks. I say roughly because it took half a day and I didn't have time to recheck, so I can't be 100% sure, plus some figures aren't clear due to Soviet records. Therefore Glantz was right. You're wrong in your assessment, this dwarfed Prokhorovka. And I think the reason it wasn't mentioned is simple - the Soviets didn't want to admit they messed up, and the Germans didn't know about it because the majority of the guys who fought this battle perished at Stalingrad.
    1
  21298. It's not out yet! It'll be out Monday! I publish on Mondays :)
    1
  21299. You will probably find my Monday video quite interesting. I talk about Kursk about halfway through the video. Mostly about the tank numbers, but I do think Prokhorovka wasn't a great day for the Soviets.
    1
  21300. The jury is still out, but I have since done the math and there are approximately 5,000 Soviet tanks at Dubno. I had to sit there with a calculator to add them all up (thanks Isaev!). This does then make it bigger than Prokhorovka. However, there's a lot more work that needs to be done on this battle.
    1
  21301. I've been working on it. But the occasional one slips through still, usually when I talk fast.
    1
  21302. Neither do Panzer 1's or 2's
    1
  21303. It does, especially when you realise that even with all the breakdowns there were still more tanks in this battle than at Prokhorovka. A lot of those tanks that break down acted like pillboxes and had to be taken out later. Also, I've since crunched the numbers, and Glantz is right. Isaev just left the reader to add all the tanks up, which is a big flaw in the book if you ask me.
    1
  21304. A quick Google search will inform you that the PQ-17 convoy was in 1942. The Battle of Moscow was in 1941.
    1
  21305. No, you're the one making claims without backing up what you're saying. Please state a source that says Shermans took part in the Battle of Moscow 1941.
    1
  21306. The bigger question is how could there be Shermans defending Moscow in 1941 if Shermans didn't see combat until 1942?
    1
  21307. Or old management getting complacent
    1
  21308. Just to confirm, after this video I went and manually counted the numbers in Isaev's book. They came to roughly 5,000 tanks. So Glantz was right and this battle was probably the biggest of WW2.
    1
  21309. 22,000 tanks. Also, the same question can also be asked of the German generals. For example, why didn't Manstein mention the war crimes he committed in his memoirs?
    1
  21310. I agree. And to do that we need to be open minded and be prepared to change our views when the evidence demands it. Thanks for your comment
    1
  21311. A correction - Isaev's numbers correspond with Glantz's. The issue being that Isaev's leaves it up to the reader to do the math. I sat there with a calculator and added it all up, and they do in fact match. Meaning the title remains.
    1
  21312. Not quite. I thought that the author was biased because of his nationality (you can never be too careful with that). But now I'm certain it was the guy who translated the book who's at fault. He did a terrible job of it. Although I did have to sit there with a calculator just to find out that the number of tanks at Dubno was as high as claimed, it turns out that the numbers are correct and I'm sorry for this video, which casts doubt on the Soviet-view of the war. That was absolutely not my intention.
    1
  21313. I do plan to do Crusader at some point, but sadly my time is limited. Trying to prioritize Stalingrad, and then produce quicker videos like this to keep the channel alive in the meantime. Not saying it'll be an age before Crusader comes out, but I don't know when it will be. Also, I've added Khalkhin Gol to the list to cover
    1
  21314. Yes, and I've picked it up! Not had time to read it yet though
    1
  21315. According to the information I have (which I mention in the video) there were 306 German tanks at Prokhorovka vs 850 Soviet tanks, for a maximum total of 1,156 tanks. I stress maximum because other sources say it was lower than that.
    1
  21316. Would be nice. Although I'm super happy with my 1300 subs right now :)
    1
  21317. New CC COI LP coming soon (possibly next week) ;)
    1
  21318. Well done! YouTube haven't said exactly how long you have to watch a video before it counts as a view, but I'd suspect it would be less than 20% of the video, otherwise video creators would be inclined to make their videos super short
    1
  21319. link?
    1
  21320. It contains that song (as well as other bits) but isn't classed as a music video
    1
  21321. You'd think that lol. I don't actually know what the highest viewed cat video is
    1
  21322. Close! That's in the top 20 videos I believe
    1
  21323. Not really sources, but topographical maps from the 1950s. I couldn't find topographical maps from the 1940s, so there's probably more roads than there actually was. https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/eastern_europe/
    1
  21324. Interesting! You don't happen to have a source which mentions this so I can have a look?
    1
  21325. What are you doing up at 4:48am anyway?
    1
  21326. Yes
    1
  21327. Lenin and Stalin implement socialism. Socialism kills the economy. Millions die. "bUt iT wAsN't InTeNtIoNaL!?!?" Yes it was. They were socialists. They wanted to implement socialism. And socialism killed millions of people. Claiming that wasn't intentional is just ridiculous. The Ukraine was the breadbasket of the Soviet Union. Yes, other areas suffered, but the focus was on the Ukraine because that was the breadbasket of the Soviet Union. So it's not hard to grasp why people focus on the Ukraine when that was the focus of the campaign of economic suicide.
    1
  21328. That's what I said in the Addendum video a couple weeks back https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  21329. Dangerous game, but I like it
    1
  21330. Yes! One of the reasons I started doing the Battlestorms originally was because I felt that the old TV documentaries were too wishy washy, and weren't presenting the history. History lies in the heart of the debate - so without the debate, you don't have history. The old TV documentaries not only didn't give the details, but they played it safe and just presented a 'safe' narrative so as not to alienate anyone. Well, that leaves most viewers with a feeling that they're not getting the full story, or that the producers didn't really look into the topic. It also left me frustrated and wanting to know more. Hopefully these videos are presented in a way that shows I am looking at as many sides of the argument as possible, and am not scared of diving into the details
    1
  21331. This is the second time you've commented "nothing new here" on my videos. I'm surprised you keep coming back to my videos if you dislike my accent, or think I'm regurgitating things you already know.
    1
  21332. Thank you! A lot of the information is out there, but not in one place. I've kinda pulled it all together and formed it into a narrative. And I couldn't do this without you and the other Patreons. So thank you :)
    1
  21333. I really want to say what happens, but I won't spoil it for you!
    1
  21334. Well done Jamie!
    1
  21335. "P.S: To say that there is no grand ‘Jewish’ agenda is correct. However, this cannot be applied to Zionism. There is an increasing problem Zionism and globalism." Your agenda is quite clear for people to see. You're both racist and anti-globalist (aka, nationalist). This explains quite clearly why you favour David Irving. "Therefore retrospectively one cannot truly fault all aspects of Irving’s work." If he's willing to distort facts on one subject, why wouldn't he do the same on other subjects? The reality is, he would. Perhaps nobody has felt the need to go through and check his references in those other books, but I suspect that if they did, they'd find deliberate distortions. "Irving had written several works prior to his inquest into the Holocaust, these are works which in their time were highly praised by both historians and critics worldwide." Yes, although there were suspicions even then. When it was revealed that he had been deliberately distorting evidence, it cast a large shadow of doubt over his entire catalogue of books. This is why, he should not be trusted. Because he was willing to deliberately distort evidence to favour Hitler, you can no longer be sure that what parts of his writing is fact and fiction. Therefore, the best thing to do, is not use his books. "That is why he is relevant to your video." No, if I can't tell what is fact or fiction, it is not relevant to this video, since I'm strongly in favour of accuracy based upon the principles of the scientific method which Irving has rejected. "Your obstinate resistance towards an author who provides a series of good primary sources is troubling." Primary sources are incredibly dangerous for anyone who hasn't mastered the secondary sources. I actually reject the idea that Primary sources are inherently 'superior'. It is my firm belief that you must master the secondary sources first before you dive into the primary sources. Memoirs are absolutely NOT to be trusted. Diaries offer a limited perspective on the events. Documents can be biased and have agendas, and so on. Historians spend their lives interpreting and reinterpreting the evidence and filtering out the distortions of history. For someone like Irving to claim to only use primary sources and to reject the secondary ones is, in itself, a testiment to his mistaken belief that primary sources as somehow superior to anything else. That is wrong. And with this very statement I'm going against the established way of thinking about sources - and any history teacher or tutor reading this is probably foaming at the mouth. However, the origins of the terms go back to Rankean history, and are far out of date. A primary source is no more trustworthy than a well stated argument by a peer-reviewed historian using multiple sources of evidence to create a convergence of evidence. This is where people (like Irving) are fundamentally mistaken about the value of primary sources. Secondary sources (books written by actualy historians, and not distorians) are actually far more valuable and trustworthy (again, not distorians) than they may first appear. It's no wonder that Irving comes to some outlandish conclusions. He is living in a postmodernist nightmare of contradictions. By distorting the evidence, he rejects the idea of evidence. Without evidence (and a rejection of the scientific principles), we're just left with belief (or ideology, which is just another form of belief). And if he forms his history on belief alone, he cannot prove that his version of events is correct because the only argument he has is his belief. He can't say anyone else's beliefs or ideas are wrong because there's no way to prove that someone is wrong by belief alone. "But you do have a problem with shying away from the taboo side of history." Hey look! A belief not backed up by any evidence, and contradicted by the available evidence! "Any teacher and especially a historian should be encouraging people to explore." Exploring a lion's den is probably not the best thing to encourage people to do without a gun. I aim to provide that gun. "People should investigate the Irving conspiracy, the Holocaust and these macabre topics." Absolutely. But only once they're armed to the teeth with evidence and knowledge of the arguments the racist-socialist-postmodernists are making. "Please don’t be fearful of propaganda." Propaganda should be studied, not believed in. "Just like Irving’s work, there are plenty of aspects within the holocaust that are largely based on unfound claims." Just like this statement, which is also based on unfound claims. Rejecting the Holocaust is rejecting the whole of WW2. Are you saying WW2 didn't happen? Because WW2 and the Holocaust were both central ideas of Hitlers from at least the time of Mein Kampf. Stating that the Holocaust didn't happen is also stating that Hitler wasn't racist, and didn't believe in a greater Germany. It quite literally makes zero sense to do that. Hitler makes it very clear that, in order to have a true racial-socialist society (the "People's State" as he called it), he must get rid of the non-Aryan races. But how would they possibly get rid of those other races? Well, the Final Solution to that problem was execution. So, are you denying that Hitler was a racist-socialist? Are you denying that he wanted a better Germany? Are you denying that he started WW2 to fight both capitalism and Marxism? Because it definitely sounds like you are. "Just let the people make their own judgement." Yeah, I will. Once I've provided them with tons of evidence and counterarguments to the arguments made by people who reject the fundamental realities of reason and the world in which we live.
    1
  21336. Yes, keep watching the video ;)
    1
  21337. Thanks Koopa!
    1
  21338. Fantastic! That's good to hear!
    1
  21339. You are probably right!
    1
  21340. You should check out my LRDG series. Got 4 videos on them so far
    1
  21341. Really glad to hear that! It takes me an entire week to make these videos for a reason :)
    1
  21342. Check the link ;) https://youtu.be/0OavdLkkNQE
    1
  21343. You will enjoy this video https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs I would also encourage you to read Rothbard's America's Great Depression (PDF in the description)
    1
  21344. Really? Where was the naval blockade and bombing of Germany cities in 1938?
    1
  21345. Good question!
    1
  21346. Friedman is great in a lot of ways, so you should continue to listen to and read him. Same with Thomas Sowell. But as you'll see when you read Rothbard's America's Great Depression, the Austrians have the superior economic model. And it aligns with the history better. Hope you enjoy the book!
    1
  21347. Because the stock market is not the economy. They measure "GDP" and say that it's growing or whatever. But nobody has ever asked me how many products I've made. They don't ask the small businesses or the self employed how much they produce, even though they are the main part of the economy. Without small businesses and the self employed, your economy will collapse, as it does every time Socialism is attempted. Yet they have just implemented measures that deliberately hurt small businesses and the self employed (lockups and taxation and inflation) to funnel cash into the public sector corporations, making the stock market go higher. The real economy has just been battered and bruised. The fake government and corporate economy has grown. They don't even count unemployment properly - it's massively understated! So yes, they can claim our economy is strong, and they can claim that socialism is paradise, but the reality is significantly different.
    1
  21348. Right, inflation hasn't hit consumer prices, but it has caused huge distortions within the economy, which is why the stock market boomed through what was supposedly the worst health crisis in human history (I doubt that narrative, but many people seem to believe it). Meanwhile the actual economy (small businesses and the self employed) were decimated during this economic crisis, yet "GDP" and the stock market, and the housing market all went "up". Don't you think this is strange? I would encourage you to read Rothbard's "America's Great Depression". I think you'll find it entertaining.
    1
  21349. The reason why is because some idiot has (for a second time) reported and deleted the pinned comment
    1
  21350. By artificially lowering prices, the government enabled the price gougers to operate. Similarly, by banning drugs, the government enabled criminals to operate in the shadows. This isn't hard to grasp. Your false statement about prices going up not causing a drop in demand is false due to the fact you do not understand basic economics. Demand is determined by the willingness for the purchaser to pay for the goods. If the price goes up, and there was now less purchasers willing to buy, then we would say demand has gone down for that product. Similarly, you don't understand the function of profit, and have a religious view of it (you falsely equate it to the sin "greed"). Profit is an indication that you have successfully contributed more goods and services to the economy than you have taken away from it. Losses indicate that you're not contributing to the economy. Again, this is basic economics.
    1
  21351. "The etymology doesn’t matter." No, it actually does matter because it tells the story of how the central planners have changed the definition to hide the crime they're committing. - "Inflation was not even a very old term. But that’s irrelevant." Then why bring it up? - "Nobody cares about keeping the money supply the same over time if the money supply grows proportionally with products traded in the economy." It actually does matter, and you should care, since it is this process that causes recessions and depressions, and steals wealth from everyone who holds the currency (including children) https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs - "In fact, inflation used to mean printing money at variance with the commodity (e.g. gold) backing the money, or abandoning the commodity standard. Because thus led to price increases, it colloquially became to mean overall price increases. The abandonment of commodity money and replacing it with a slow steady planned increase in the money supply means that the old meaning is not important." The price of other goods and services was (and still is) tied to gold. Just because fiat currency is no longer the gold price doesn't mean that the definition of inflation has changed. To inflate, does not mean to rise. These are two separate meanings. The central banks are inflating the currency supply, thus that is an inflation. Prices may or may not be rising, but that's irrelevant because prices do not inflate. - "What people care about is price changes, as they should." Right, but the reason why prices are rising is because of the inflation, caused by whoever owns the printing press (the Central Banks). By inflating the currency supply, there are more notes chasing the same (or fewer) number of goods and services, thus causing the 'price' (the number of currency units required to purchase something) to rise. By printing more currency, they're increasing the supply, thus lowering the value of each individual note. Yes, they're manipulating interest rates and injecting that currency into certain areas (e.g. house prices) and then aren't counting that in their official CPI numbers in order hide the inflation, but that doesn't get around the central issue that inflation caused a wealth transfer from everyone else who holds the currency to those who own the printing press, and distorts the economy, which leads to recessions and depressions. - "But nobody minds nearly as much so long as there is no high or uncontrollable inflation like in Weimar Germany or the 1970s." Oh I absolutely do care. I'm not falling for the silent tax, and I don't like the fact that my savings accounts have a 0% interest rate. I also don't like the fact that house prices are going to the moon, nor do I like the fact that my wages and savings are being depreciated. If you want to cheer for the system that keeps the poor poorer and the rich richer, go ahead, but I'm getting out of this central planner paradise. - "Nobody it trying to fool anyone into thinking they aren’t increasing the money supply." Yes they are. The Central Planners absolutely are. That's why they changed the definition of inflation to mean rising prices, which is a massive manipulation of the meaning of the words. And you have been fooled, and are now supporting their manipulations. - "If you only issue money proportional with production, which the scheme aimed at (assume for a moment that this is “money” and that overall production is actually proportionally linked to consumer products), then there can be no serious sustained price inflation from this." Right, but that's not what happens. Not only are there price increases (it doesn't happen across the board at first, but comes in waves, starting in the capital goods industries), but there will be recessions and depressions, and the loss of purchasing power as a result of that. Then, the manipulations will hide the price rises of consumer goods until the last moment. By the time you start seeing significant price rises in the shops, it's too late to stop it.
    1
  21352. Price stability is actually not something we want, and you forgot the other side of the issue, which my other video on what causes recessions explains in more detail https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  21353. People are willing to spend more and get into debt to consume more because the central bank has lowered interest rates (the cost of money) to zero or below. See this for a full explanation https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  21354. "Increased prices are passed on by industry to the consumer by interest on the national debt and its multiplication of debt that forces industry to outsource to cheaper labour markets while attempting to survive their own failure." And debt is the expansion of the currency supply. Debt is created out of thin air by the banks, controlled by the central bank. Dollars, pounds, yen, Euros... they're all debt instruments. - "There is no "excess" supply of money in circulation, where is it?" House prices, second hand cars and other goods prices, tuition fees, oil prices, lumber prices, copper prices... the list goes on.
    1
  21355. There's a difference between nominal prices and actual value. The stock market can crash up and be a bazillion dollars, but by that point a bazillion dollars might only be able to buy you an egg.
    1
  21356. "OK not a fan of the Austrian Economics. Inflation, for example, means price increases. Yes in the past it was applied to money but that was the past. Words change." Okay, then the MEFO bills didn't cause "new-inflation", but they were an expansion of the currency supply, and they did cause distortions throughout the economy as well. - "Thing is, MEFO's can exist in any gold or hard money economy." But if MEFOs exist, then it's no longer a gold or hard money economy. MEFOs are paper substitutes for gold/money. So as soon as MEFO bills exist, you no longer have a gold economy. - "Suppose instead the gov't decided to just tax any business with 'money in the safe'. The effect would be mostly the same." Except, the businessmen would want to save more cash, so once the government has taken the currency from the safe, the businessmen will cut spending even more. This is the principle of the "seen and unseen" that Henry Hazlitt talks about in Economics in One Lesson. I know you said that you don't like the Austrian School, but I would suggest that you look into it, since theirs is very similar to the Chicago School (except their business cycle theory is vastly superior). - "Why didn't the Nazis just do that instead?" Probably because the businessmen would have just hid their cash and pretended it didn't exist? Although taxes on businesses and businessmen did increase significantly during the Nazi period, as Götz Aly shows in "Hitler's Beneficiaries". So perhaps they did both methods. I quoted Reimann saying that these "loans" (or, in this case, MEFO bonds) were just a tax, since nobody believed that the government would pay interest on them.
    1
  21357. I never said that my savings were in fiat.
    1
  21358. Neither can I :) we're nearly there
    1
  21359. "But my question is, were does history stop and supposition begin?" Having an alternative opinion or interpretation of the facts is history. Because history isn't just about facts, it's about the interpretation of those facts. I've explained this in-depth in my History Theory video https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc "With respect, I disagree." Great! I don't agree with your interpretation, and you don't agree with mine. That's fine - that's the start of a historical debate. You can't have a historical debate with just facts, you need an interpretation in order to do that. "If you look at the tactical situation, I see it as trying to protect his north flank. It's not an isolated position." This may be true, but I'm not so sure. If we go back to the start of the northern bridgehead, it started off with one unit capturing a small bridgehead on its own initiative. Apparently, Paulus and/or Hitler then got involved and said that the bridgehead must be held. Then it was decided to use a southern bridgehead to thrust towards the Don, which they did, and then they got overstretched, while two divisions were tied down in the northern bridgehead. So, in my interpretation, I'd say that the original capture of the bridgehead led to its retention. It was not gained to be used later. It was gained, and then held, and perhaps expanded - which isn't the same thing. "If you consider the 14th Corps is over extended and left exposed at the time. I'd suggest they were trying to interdict the railway from the north." That's a valid opinion. There's no direct evidence for this (as far as I'm aware). But this is a reasonable assumption based on what you can see... which is an interpretation of the evidence, not a "fact". In theory, if you think my interpretation was an "alternative 'what-if' scenario" and not sticking to the "facts", then I could equally claim this about your interpretation for the same reasons. So, I hope you can see that we have the "facts", but our interpretation of the facts differs, and this leads to 'debate', which will ultimately allow the best interpretation to win out overall.
    1
  21360. Correct, Paulus doesn't have hindsight. However, I would ask: why bother making a bridgehead across a river if you don't intend to use it? Paulus was heading to Stalingrad, not North. So why have a bridgehead to the north? It doesn't take hindsight to realise that this was a bridgehead to nowhere and served no purpose. This is an analysis of the situation, it is a fact, and it is not a hypothesis. This isn't a "what if", it's pointing out what happened and explaining why it was a mistake.
    1
  21361. @timobrienwells - I think you need to understand basic history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc And why the term 'revisionist' doesn't make sense in the context you're using it in https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  21362. In your opinion, who I should be reading? I've not seen any instances or Glantz "invent[ing] history". Can you point out any in the Stalingrad series?
    1
  21363. I'll just let you know that I've updated some of the unit cards thanks to your links. Couple of notes though - Oberst Mayer wasn't in charge of the 276 I.R during the Stalingrad period. And I've removed Schwerin from the 76th ID, but haven't been able to replace it because the pictures of Richard Schwerin are either copyrighted/watermarked or not very good. Same with some of the other unit commanders.
    1
  21364. Well, I actually put that info in the description ;) my videos are always uploaded at 5pm GMT on Mondays (watch out for British Summer Time)
    1
  21365. I was not aware, no. Why is it a political issue? To whom? How is evenly distributing criticism to all German generals rather than placing the blame on just one scapegoat, a "pro-Russian" stance? We're not even talking about Russia here, we're talking about the Soviet Union, which in faith and ideology wasn't Russian.
    1
  21366. And as I said, we're all individuals. Sometimes we band together to form groups, but those groups are made up of individuals.
    1
  21367. Oh trust me sir, I've read those posts on Reddit. I even centred the Hitler's Socialism video on refuting their points. You should watch it https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Schacht was more towards Laissez-faire, but was having to take orders from Hitler, who was Socialist. The result was a semi-Keynesian economic policy. In fact there are numerous authors saying that it was Keynesian economics. This is why Richard Overy spends part of his book "The Nazi Economic Recovery" trying to say it wasn't Keynesianism (pages 1, 16-19, 31 and more) but actually a proto-Keynesianism. "The secret behind the Nazi economic revival was not merely proto-Keynesian spending policies but the whole ‘package’ of controls, all of them inter-depended, all of them necessary to achieve what the Nazis wanted from the economy." Overy, p38. So the only reason it wasn't Keynesian is because it went beyond Keynesianism (it was Socialism). A lot of other authors, like Mises for example, straight up call it Keynesianism though, which I'm not against. They did implement some Keynesian policies, and Keynes himself actually predicted that the Nazi economy would recover quite strongly thanks to the policies implemented. Unfortunately Keynes was wrong yet again (Overy p40-41). Overy asks - "Was this strategy Keynesian? Superficially, perhaps. But it is important to remember the differences." (p50) Yes, that's why it's correct to call it proto-Keynesianism, since it was slightly before Keynes really became popular.
    1
  21368.  @jeffreymcfadden9403  That's interesting. Where is the rumour coming from? Why do you doubt it?
    1
  21369. Tomislav Almost, but not quite ;)
    1
  21370. gmsimpson05 yeah, good guess though :)
    1
  21371. starcraft2own lol you really like the name Daisy don't you??
    1
  21372. Dowly It wasn't Norway. That landing was initially unopposed
    1
  21373. CStriker421 they didn't, this was the first OPPOSED landing in history, not the first paradrop or operation
    1
  21374. martaxsasLT glad you liked it! Might do some more tough ones :)
    1
  21375. Hopper yeah that was before, but it wasn't opposed initially :)
    1
  21376. Rex1987 Nope that came slightly after this!
    1
  21377. You've edited your original comment, but don't worry, I've got screenshots. It's not "humour" to imply that the Jews are running academia - that's an anti-Semitic trope. When I said that the Nazis believed that the Jews were running the businesses, Marxists accused me of being an anti-Semite because they were trying to insinuate that I was in agreement with the Nazis. So if stating what Nazis say makes me a Nazi in the eyes of the Left, you "joking" about the Jews running all of academia is clearly actual anti-Semitism, which goes fully in line with your ideology https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg Looks like the mask has slipped.
    1
  21378. Minimum wage, price controls, high taxes, central bank currency printing... it's all designed to enrich the corporations and the state. Socialists are the ones unwittingly making the corporate-state bigger and more powerful.
    1
  21379. It was my grandad's copy, and he got it third hand! But nah, it's not a great book. Too out of date to replace it
    1
  21380.  @ancapgrandscribe9546  I have read several of theirs, I just hadn't heard of that one. Any others you recommend?
    1
  21381. If you watch my 5 hour video on the topic, or if you watch my older videos, or see the hit pieces written about me on Reddit, or the response videos made by Marxists against me, you'll see plenty of evidence of the Marxists saying this. And you may not believe me, but I have zero reason to lie. I was a British socialist similar to George Orwell (who's still.my favourite fiction author). Just like Orwell, I knew going too far Left was a problem, but I thought things like state pensions, the NHS, and more reforms and taxes on the rich was the way to go. Of course, I woke up from the propaganda and now see those things as a scheme to enrich the elite and keep the poor poor. But at the time I was deceived.
    1
  21382. "Tik... How do you not understand this topic after all the studying you've apparently done? You have Marxist Socialism on the left. And you have Racial/ National Socialism on the right. They are similar in goal but they go about collectivising in opposite ways." What part of "I've responded to this exact point in the video" do you not understand? - "Making them completely different." No, it doesn't. They're both varients of socialism. Again, I'VE EXPLAINED THIS IN THE VIDEO. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEOS BEFORE COMMENTING.
    1
  21383. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  21384.  @Aditya-pq8mi  Awesome! It was technically blues, with a bit of rock. If you like that kinda thing, you'll probably like this https://youtu.be/L6njH8xIzvg (Garbage Man by Muddy Waters) And Rory's cover https://youtu.be/HaHjog_nvxw
    1
  21385. Nick, you failed to explain why dismissing sources is acceptable. Please explain to me why historians should throw out primary sources purely because they hurt your fee fees.
    1
  21386. All those private companies you mentioned had been nationalised under the policy of Gleichschaltung. Professor Junkers of the aeroplane factory (the one that made the Stuka dive bomber) was thrown out of his factory by the Nazis. Fritz Thyssen was thrown out too, as were many others. Those that remained were only nominally in charge, but in reality were under the thumb of the Party and were forced to join it if they hadn't done so already. Uniformed National Socialists officers were in the factories running the show. The trade unions were nationalised... I explained all this in the first minutes of the video. If you can't be bothered to watch it, then I can't be bothered to continue this conversation any more.
    1
  21387. So it contradicts what he said after the war in the quote you provided. It shows he was lying during interrogation to save his own skin.
    1
  21388. I'm really not well-read enough on the Pacific Theatre to talk much about it. One day I will take a look, but I know next to nothing right now. You probably know more than me
    1
  21389. Well done Ryan!
    1
  21390. Cheers Lock!
    1
  21391. Haha yes :) got any more? (when I started to reply to your answer, I got distracted... then you posted your joke and I didn't see it)
    1
  21392. Not going to lie. I had to look her up :(
    1
  21393. Friday :D
    1
  21394. Glad you liked it! Be sure to check out the next in the series - Operation Crusader - if you dare (it's over 9 hours long) haha https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    1
  21395. Hey Nanor, I do have a Patreon where you can help support me, and with all the books needed for the research I need as much support as possible https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory Not sure I have a big enough of a following to make a crowd funding campaign to direct a documentary, but I did try with some of these videos to make things more dramatic (Brevity and Fort Eben Emael especially, with tanks being in the Fort Eben Emael video) and while it did work out somewhat, it took too long to make each one as I had to animate them myself. Something to aim for though.
    1
  21396. But they never did it?
    1
  21397. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  21398. Well, the good news is that I'm working on the next one now - Operation Crusader.
    1
  21399. Yes, that's what the troops nicknamed it
    1
  21400. Wait until you get to Operation Crusader 😂
    1
  21401. Awesome! I'm glad you liked it! I'm working on the next one now - Operation Crusader. So I hope you stick around for that one :)
    1
  21402. Thanks! I'm really happy with this and Bruneval. And I've been working on the next installment of the North African Campaign today in fact. Crusader will be soon!
    1
  21403. Glad you like it, and welcome to the channel! Be sure to check out my latest series on the battle after this, Operation Crusader https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledjvQKDHORAPuJdug2sY4lrL
    1
  21404. I'm glad you got the reference ;)
    1
  21405. Thanks! Hope you stay :) and don't worry more to come. In fact, I have another video out tomorrow
    1
  21406. It's hard to say, but I do think that O'Connor was the best early-war general that the British had. Or at least, the best in the North African Campaign. His performance during Compass was spot on. Apparently, his later performance in Western Europe wasn't as good, but I don't know enough about that to say why that's the case. Either way, I'm certain he would have done better than Neame, Beresford-Pierse, and the like. And Churchill is responsible for the rush of this battle, and he definitely should have taken the blame for Greece and Crete. His impatience and insistance often leads to military disaster. And he has a habit of blaming others. Godwin-Austen conducts a fighting withdrawal against overwhelming odds in British Somaliland (which I covered in another video) and Churchill harbours resentment against him for retreating. In fact, I'd say that apart from approving the plan in the first place, Wavell shouldn't be blamed at all. But this is the danger of being "responsible" for things outside of your control. Someone below or above you makes a mistake, you get fired.
    1
  21407. Yeah, a lot of documentaries don't go into enough detail in my opinion. I like to know where every unit is at any given moment of time. My other documentaries are similar
    1
  21408. It was my pleasure. Thanks for watching :)
    1
  21409. I'll try my best :)
    1
  21410. Thanks! Glad you liked it!
    1
  21411. Oh good! They take time to make, but more will be on their way eventually :)
    1
  21412. Oh yeah, forgot about that! Thanks everyone :)
    1
  21413. Alright Mario, if you say so
    1
  21414. You weren't first, Jamie. Stop distorting history
    1
  21415. Yes, however my plan is to cover the WDC and the Middle East before progressing into Tunisia, Italy and then eventually Western Europe. All this while simultaneously covering battles on the Eastern Front (Stalingrad). There's several reasons for this, but the main one being that I want to get a good grasp of the units (e.g. Eigth Army) and commanders (e.g. Montgomery, Patton etc) before I tackle the most famous battle of WW2. And also I would like it to be awesome. With each of these other battles I'm doing, I'm making mistakes and learning from them. By the time I get to D-Day, I'll have ironed out most of the mistakes and the quality of the piece will be significantly better than it would be if I just attempted to do it now. Hope that makes sense
    1
  21416. Yeah, this is the first time I've done Chapters and that's one of the lessons I've learnt. Some of the chapters were a little long too. And I know there was an editing mistake towards the end where the presentation box was bigger than I set it and it covers the map. I think I went back to fix another mistake and the editing software decided to mess up. Sadly, I only noticed after the video was uploaded and I'd already announced it was coming out, so too late to go back and fix. I'll be careful in the future. The 25-pounders would have been effective, however the British had three problems. First, the Support Group (with the 25-pounders) was an independant unit from the tank regiments, making the coordination of the guns and tanks difficult. Second, while Rommel had updated his doctrine on the use of artillery and anti-tank guns to combat tanks while conserving his armour, the British hadn't come to this conclusion. This meant they still tried to engage the Germans with their armour throughout the battle, leading to heavy armour casualties. In fact, the whole premise of the Battleaxe battle was to get to grips with the German armour and overwhelm it. So Rommel had skillfully countered British intentions by not committing his armour to a tank battle - until the British were weakened at least. Third, British tanks were armed with the 2-pounder AT gun. The issue is that the 2-pounders could not fire High Explosive rounds. As mentioned in the video, this meant that they had to score a direct hit on enemy AT guns (an impossibility at long range) meaning that they had no effective way of countering the PAK guns, or the 88's (who were even futher back). The Germans on the other hand, could use HE rounds in their Panzer III's and IV's, meaning that the British equivalent of the 88mms (sort of) had to pull back before they could really do any significant damage to the panzers. While I haven't mentioned it (or looked into it in any detail) there was a naval war going on in the Mediterranean. The Battle of Taranto is an early example of the battles being fought for supermacy. I don't know to what extent the Royal Navy was capable of blocking Italian or African ports, but as mentioned in the video, around 80% of axis supplies were reaching Libya.
    1
  21417. Every Monday
    1
  21418. I still hold the view that it's a bad decision to split Army Groups A and B from one another. In fact I said that in either the last episode of Stalingrad, or the episode before. I'm not siding with Hitler's views. I don't believe that Roosevelt declared war on Hitler, only that Hitler believed that. And I've never said Hitler was a great leader, or didn't make mistakes, or didn't do bad things. The only thing I've done is not rely upon the German Generals' opinion that he was a 'Madman Hitler', and instead of making stuff up, I go to the source himself - Hitler - and see what he says about certain things. As I said, why would I go to the Allies to find out why the Germans did something? That doesn't make any sense. The German Generals pretended that everything was Hitler's fault. That's simply not true. Those war criminals also made mistakes, and used Hitler to cover them up. Well, reality isn't as simple as they made it out to be. So I (and I'm definitely not the only one to do this) am now showing that a lot of the mistakes (not all) can be blamed on them, not just Hitler (sometimes both). Why this is problematic for you, I'm not sure. The role of the historian is to figure out the truth, even if that truth sometimes goes against our own beliefs. My "defence" of Hitler in this instance (it really isn't) is merely over the war strategy, not his ideology or his domestic actions. And I'm not even defending him! I'm merely showing that it was his henchmen who made the decision, or persuaded him that it was right, or so on. Hitler still takes full responsibility for the disaster that was WW2 and the Holocaust.
    1
  21419. The stupid thing is that deplatforming and censorship doesn't stop the opinions, it just drives them underground and invalidates the censors
    1
  21420. Remember that I see the Nazis as Socialists on the Left. Thus, if I have shifted Rightward, I've moved away from National or Socialist ideologies. As I said in the video, the more I read about their ideology, the more I'm convinced it's flawed. The only concern I have is censorship. And I obviously don't exclusively quote from National Socialist historians (or those who are sympathetic). It's only when I need to show you the Nazi perspective that I quote from them, or if I want to criticize them, which is certainly not every video. Usually when I look at their perspective, there's nothing useful to take from it. Don't forget that they dismiss the mainstream (including me) just as the majority of the mainstream dismisses them, so they're behind the curve when it comes to the historical debates as well as haven't got all the updated facts as those who follow the mainstream do. This is partly why their books are flawed. If anything, my use of Nazi secondary sources is a confirmation of my quest for objectivity within the boundaries of history theory. I'm not sure I (or anyone) can be fully objective. Our opinions and interpretations leak into our work. True objectivity though comes from the subjective process of using multiple sources from different perspectives. Thus, you shouldn't just rely upon my work, and you should be seeing what others have to say about the same subject.
    1
  21421. I was like you once... you can see my transition from your position to the one I hold today if you watch my non-battle videos in order. I even tell you why my outlook completely changed. Tomorrow's video may not be an easy one to stomach for you, but just like you did with the Marxists, you should listen to the information, even if you disagree...
    1
  21422. That's a decent idea! Thanks for that 👍
    1
  21423. Stalin is an idiot and the Soviet Union was evil. Now, please explain the pro-Soviet bias I supposedly have. The only reason I'm focusing on the Germans is because nothing has been written in English about these battles from the Soviet perspective. That's why I can't do much criticism of them. Otherwise I would.
    1
  21424. I'm getting there with German names, but that's only because I'm learning the language (definitely not perfect with German). And if a non-English or non-German name is not on Forvo, I've basically got no chance ☹️
    1
  21425. Which is why they abolished the state's guarantee on property rights in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. (Article 153 of the constitution was suspended.)
    1
  21426. And yet he did allow several retreat? It really does appear to me that they attempted a phased withdrawal, but got cut off (as you'll see next episode)
    1
  21427. The book "Hitler's Swedes" by Larsson. I have it on Kindle so there's no page numbers, but if you go to the 18th of August he explains it. It comes from one original primary source, which is an Estonian-Swede account.
    1
  21428. The purpose of this channel is to be in-depth and super-accurate. I'm not sure why you would bother watching at all if you're not interested in the narrative of the events and the historical debates surrounding them, which is ultimately what I'm describing. Skipping parts will leave you with a limited understanding of the events. If you don't like my voice, again, don't watch. Also, I don't watch my videos again after I've edited and publish them, so I'm not speaking to myself at all, I'm speaking to everyone else. Not sure how you interpreted my enthusiasm for the subject at hand for me somehow loving my own voice, but you have. I suspect the real problem here is your impatience and inability to focus on one thing for any length of time.
    1
  21429. Why would you skip part 2? A lot of people are praising me for my honesty and the way I presented an unbiased account in part 2. It also places everything into context.
    1
  21430. Thegamer8324 correct! It's hard to count and it doesn't help that several countries are suffering from civil war, and other organisations cross official borders and are trying to form their own states (like ISIS)
    1
  21431. Jason Gould Correct! :)
    1
  21432. SilvaComet I guess that's correct :P
    1
  21433. starcraft2own and now you know the answer so you can live happily ever after!
    1
  21434. thomas barton a little too many there lol
    1
  21435. Samuel Leško You're correct that it's complicated, and your answer is perhaps as equal as those in the video. I think Kosovo was counted in the original figures but I forget exactly now. The reason for the "195 or 196" in the video is because of Taiwan. The Cook Islands etc are counted in the second set of figures in the video - the "246 or 247" - as colonies and free states and what not. But yes, it's complicated, and really it all depends on your definition of what a "country" or "state" actually is. Do you count IS as a state? What about the Donetsk People's Republic? The DPR came after this video was published. However IS declared themselves a state before this video so someone could argue the point they're a state too (despite the war crimes and human rights abuses they're committing) even though I don't think they're recognized as a state by the UN. Again, it's complicated :(
    1
  21436. Jack Granahan close! Unless a new country has been founded since I made this video ;)
    1
  21437. Tomislav that's a pretty solid guess!
    1
  21438. CStriker421 yeah it can get quite complicated, but 195 is great :)
    1
  21439. ***** not heard of the Principality of Sealand before. That's a good one :)
    1
  21440. And the bonus FIP?
    1
  21441. Considered by some to be, but no
    1
  21442. Alexander the Great?
    1
  21443. johnny onetothree yeah, I'm feeling generous :)
    1
  21444. John Constantine
    1
  21445. Not read enough on him, but he certainly wasn't the last. He was the last to try and reconquer (restore) the Roman Empire's lands in the West, which is why they call him the "Last Roman".
    1
  21446. I'm going to make a film about the history of Russia and call it "Tzar Wars"
    1
  21447. You've still got a chance for the bonus FIP ;)
    1
  21448. He has a wife you know
    1
  21449. I respect your honesty. Have a bonus FIP on me :)
    1
  21450. He saw the overthrow of Romulus Augustus and became first King of Italy, so was never a Roman Emperor
    1
  21451. 3 FIPs to you, good sir
    1
  21452. You're not wrong
    1
  21453. I have promised to do a video of me playing the guitar at some point; I just haven't had the time yet
    1
  21454. I actually had a great idea for one, but then I fell ill so decided against it
    1
  21455. Thanks, I wouldn't mind if it hadn't come with headaches. Not been able to focus :(
    1
  21456. I'm hesitant to recommend it as a first read if you've never read anything before on the Battle of France, simply because it has very... interesting... views. Of the sources I had, I would recommend Jackson's The Fall of France, which gave a much more balanced account overall.
    1
  21457. And what happens if France had had to fight Germany on her own? Surely she should have been prepared to fight without the aid of others, and then would have been in a better position with allies. Instead, by this argument, it sounds like France was more reliant on her allies than her own army.
    1
  21458. Yes 🙂
    1
  21459. The reason they made the wall was so they could send their troops into Belgium and have the battle there rather than have it on French soil. But yes, the gap in the middle was the error.
    1
  21460. These were from IKEA. Hopefully they still sell them because they're pretty good
    1
  21461. And yes, I know that the meme "Socialism is when the government does stuff" is a joke - I mentioned it in this video, and explained the irony of it. Have you actually watched the video?
    1
  21462. I used to be a Socialist. As I said in the Hitler's Socialism video, when I realized Hitler was a Socialist, I immediately grasped the true nature of Socialism. Prior to this moment, I thought Socialism was good and Capitalism was bad. I thought that it was obvious that you had to have central planning and organisation of the economy. But in an instant I realized I'd been deceived. A typical Socialist wants what I want - a better world, a better economy, and a better life for the poor and downtrodden. I still want these things. The problem is that those who believe in Socialism have been deceived into thinking that Socialism will solve these problems. What they don't realise is that it is the cause of these problems. Socialism destroys the economy. Socialism impoverishes people. It makes the world a terrible place to live in. But to a Socialist, or anyone unaware, they think it's Capitalism doing those things. And the reason they think that is because they've bought into Marx's reinvented terms of what Socialism and Capitalism are. Marx wasn't even describing Capitalism when he referred to it. What he was describing was Merchantalism, which was actually a precursor to Socialism. I agree with Marx that Merchantalism doesn't work, although I don't necessarily agree with his reasons as to why it doesn't work. The point is, it wasn't me who reinvented the definitions of Socialism and Capitalism - it was the Socialists like Karl Marx. What I've done is gone back to square one (to pre-history, then to the present) and shown exactly what the terms means and why they mean that. As I've shown in the video, when a society decides to organise itself politically, it becomes a State (defined both historically and by the dictionary). There's no way around this. A Socialist is calling for the 'collective' or 'social' control of the means of production - which is translated into everyday speech as State control of the economy. Now, if a Socialist doesn't realise that this is what he's advocating, and defines it some other way, or believes that he's not calling for State control - he's mistaken. And that's the point. Socialists mistakenly believe that they're NOT calling for State control of the means of production (totalitarianism). Or, if they are, they think it won't be bad (it'll be 'democratic' or something). But history makes it very clear that they ARE calling for State control, and that it will end up in totalitarianism, as it has done so many times. A Socialist may disagree, or dismiss, or say 'this time will be different'. You may say you don't agree with my definitions, and claim that I've reinventing them. But you're not deceiving me - you're only deceiving yourself. This lesson of history is not being learned, and so we're doomed to repeat it again and again.
    1
  21463. A hierarchy cannot be an individual. An individual may or may not be in charge of the hierarchy, but the hierarchy itself makes it Public. And a Public in charge of the means of production is Socialist, not Capitalist. Only individuals (non-hierarchical) in charge of the means of production can be Capitalist. This is an important distinction, because when you say a State is Capitalist, you're saying that the dark is light. If the criticism is a monopolistic hierarchy - like a totalitarian dictatorship, or a Corporation - then the criticism is of Socialism. If the criticism is of the individual who is in charge of the totalitarian dictatorship, or the Corporation, then that is still a criticism of Socialism, because the individual only has power due to the fact he is in charge of a politically organized community (the definition of a State). Yes, he may be rich and have money, but the criticism is that he has power over everyone else due to the Socialism. To then turn around and say he's a Capitalist makes zero sense because Capitalism is an individual on his own, without the hierarchy. The hierarchy is what makes it Socialist, not the individual. If the individual is what makes it Capitalist, then every collective would be Capitalist because every collective consists of individuals.
    1
  21464. A truth cannot be false. A truth-false would be an oxymoronic statement. An individual cannot be a group. Therefore a group-individual cannot exist. Well, a State cannot be Capitalist, since they are opposites. State Capitalism is therefore an oxymoronic statement. I disagree with the term because it's simply untrue. If something is a State (a group), it isn't Capitalist (an individual). If something is Capitalist (an individual), it isn't a State (a group).
    1
  21465. In the future, but not right now. Stalingrad is next
    1
  21466. Agreed. Thanks for your comment
    1
  21467. @Vass, interestingly, I'm just reading through "Telling Lies about Hitler" today. Is it the same book?
    1
  21468. This video was to define the terms, not explain why one is better than the other. Socialism is totalitarian State control, and Capitalism is individual freedom. You can debate the pros and cons of each all you like, but I know which I would prefer. As to your points regarding unregulated Capitalism being bad, I would encourage you to watch these videos: What causes recessions and depressions https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs 1946: The Greatest Depression before 2020 https://youtu.be/JzEK5yd2kLw Send us Wheat or Coffins https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk Did the Soviet Union ever recover from WW2? https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w And Hitler's Socialism (which has many examples of over regulation killing the economy) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 Videos made by others which you may find interesting: Minimum Wage hurts workers https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ State health care is more expensive than free health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ The free market provides better and more efficient schools that people are queuing up to go to (not that I think schools are good in general, but many do) https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U Why the British Public will never vote Socialism again https://youtu.be/C4qepKR3akA No ice cream for you comrade https://youtu.be/DagaYGIe9j8 Why Communist Economies fail https://youtu.be/7OQeSYgOars What Socialized medicine really looks like https://youtu.be/crh7rrYAsfA College and Housing Bubbles https://youtu.be/HO_BMxny34U Perhaps, with the addition of the knowledge contained in these videos, you will understand why I maintain my stance on the subject of Socialism, and why I believe that the free market not only works but is simply not understood by those who criticize it.
    1
  21469. Oh and a video explaining why and how we can have a market for security https://youtu.be/hY5OYdGevAQ
    1
  21470. Here's a video about Milton Friedman you might find interesting https://youtu.be/Q0bFP5WhYcQ
    1
  21471. Collective ownership of the means of production is not private ownership.
    1
  21472. Thank you! :)
    1
  21473. Public companies aren't controlled by the state, they're competing public states, and the government state can control a few corporations easier than lots of little ones. See what the US FTC and COPPA is doing to YouTube right now. The state is now able to quickly shut down hundreds of small independent private YouTube creators by controlling one corporation. This is what Hitler and Mussolini realised, which is why they wanted corporatism rather than direct ownership of businesses. The police in the UK suck, and Thomas Sowell described Britain as a "burglar's paradise". So a private police force (or even just allowing individuals to protect themselves using firearms) would be way better than what we have now. Private armies are fine too, since they'll be small, less expensive and less capable of seizing power. Social Democrats etc are all the same. They want to come up with excuses to tax people more and reduce your freedom. "Oh no, the NHS is failing again despite the fact it's not had a budget cut in the past 20+ years even though we claim it has, we need to increase taxes to sort it, and we'll do so by claiming they're doing it for the poor or the children. If you say no to this new tax, you're racist because reasons." If taxation was voluntary, you could still have a state army and so on. The issue is that the state would have to convince you to actually hand over your wealth rather than take it by force as they do now. In that case, they'd have to up their game, and not fail on their promises. There's no chance of them fighting an offensive war, and similar bad policies would lose them support. I honestly don't see any problem with voluntary tax.
    1
  21474. Of course it's biased, everyone is biased, that's what makes people human https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  21475. @Tom Ogburn, try watching the video. I addressed most of your points in the video itself, especially the "state capitalism" rubbish.
    1
  21476. Educate yourself https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  21477. As I said in the video, 'Private' means 'individual' or 'small' group. 'Public' means large group. So a large group of shareholders is not 'private' control. It's not capitalism. This is why the Marxist syndicalists and the Fascist syndicalists were all about trade unions (Soviets) or corporations (Fascist trade unions = corporations), because the 'public' collective would collectively own them. All collectives are made up of individuals. Therefore, by your own logic, all collectives are 'private'. This is why what you're saying about shareholders collectively owning the means of production being private doesn't make sense. They are collectively owning the means of production, rather than owning it individually (privately).
    1
  21478. When the people (the collective) own the means of production, that's socialism. So when the collective (the shareholders) own the means of production (have shares in a company) that's socialism. You can't call many people (the public) controlling the means of production 'capitalist' because that's not the definition. Therefore, companies with shareholders are not capitalist companies.
    1
  21479. Yeah I'm beginning to wonder if Engels and Marx got anything right. As your quotes highlight, they had contradictory views and a poor grasp of the concepts they were talking about
    1
  21480. "That statement of yours just sounds like something Trump might say or a provocation of some sort." Trump wasn't for the Free Market. He was a conservative, which is the old Left-Wing. I've explained this in another video. See from 12:08 of this video https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY - "The pure free market idea, like pure socialism, sounds nice but the human costs of such idealism are dreadful." How would you know? We've never had a free market. Name one country that has zero taxation, doesn't inflate its currency supply, doesn't have a government monopoly on law or policing or military... Oh wait, you can't. The human "cost" of a free people who are at liberty to do what they want so long as they do not harm others, is that the totalitarians without our society won't be able to steal wealth from them or dictate to them what they can or cannot think.
    1
  21481. So, according to you, this is capital-less profit-leas Capitalism? I disagree. What you're doing is looking at the box, not what's inside the box. Follow the money. Central State Syndicate Banks are printing currency into existence to prop up what they call "stakeholder Capitalism", which is a different way of saying "revolutionary syndicalism". There can be no profit, since profit has been deemed evil (Marx said "Money is the jealous God of..."). And our 'faith' in capital will be destroyed once again during the hyperinflation period we are now in. Even the mainstream media is calling it the "great reset" and a "new world order", or "the new normal". But either way, if you think giant monopoly hierarchies of society that are collectively owned by their stakeholders, is "private control of the means of production" and thus Capitalism, then by all means believe that. I however don't trust the so-called "experts" telling us that it's Capitalism (and individualism). I look at what it actually is, and see the "critical theory" that's behind it.
    1
  21482. Glad you liked the video! On your point about the NHS vs US companies, you might want to see this video https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  21483. It is authority, because "collective ownership" is fundamentally authoritarian. Should a worker decide to go it alone, that would be private ownership, which wouldn't be allowed in a so-called "anarchist" society (state).
    1
  21484. Not against stock markets by themselves, I'm against manipulated (non-free) stock markets https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs And yes, I'm against antitrust laws. They're not necessary, and actually hurt consumers rather than help them https://mises.org/library/antitrust-policy-both-harmful-and-useless
    1
  21485. They're not. Stepping into an NHS hospital is like stepping back into the 1950s. I've had friends who work there and they said they're still using pencils and paper for admin rather than computers, for a collosal time and manpower waste. Bureaucratic administrators are well paid to do little, sapping a significant chunk of taxpayer money.
    1
  21486. I'm not American, but from what I've seen, both Democrats and Republicans are Socialist parties, but with different flavours of it. It's the same here in the UK, with the communist Labour Party, the socialist Liberal Democratic Party, and mild socialist Conservative Party. And they wonder why voter turnout is low.
    1
  21487. In regards to Hitler being in private control of the public hierarchy, think about it this way. All collectives have individuals in them. Therefore, someone might claim all collectives are 'private' and therefore capitalist. This is incorrect because thousands of people aren't an individual or small family-like group. As shown in the video, once you get thousands of people, a hierarchy of society (a State) is formed. It doesn't matter who's in charge of this hierarchy, or how the leadership appoints the leaders, or how it's funded or managed etc. The point is that the hierarchy itself is 'public'. So while an individual might be in charge, and he may have a bodyguard preventing anyone accessing his palace or whatever, the hierarchy itself makes it 'public'. You're correct that individuals control parts of corporations and states etc. However they're still 'public' employees, even if they have a great deal of independence within the corporation. Perhaps it would be better to say 'hierarchy' vs 'non-hierarchy'?
    1
  21488. Wow thank you for your great comment!! You said that you used to teach Economics and Government, or you still do??
    1
  21489. Are corporations individuals? No. Then corporations are not private. If corporations are not private, and private control of means of production is capitalism, then corporations are not capitalism. The State (and corporations) are giant hierarchies - societies consisting of thousands of people. And when a society controls the means of production (like this) then that is Socialism.
    1
  21490. Glad you liked it! Cheers!
    1
  21491. There is a free market. But it doesn't bow to any country. If it does, it is not free. And if you think a free market economy is not capitalism, then it is not what capitalism was historically.
    1
  21492. As explained in the video, every State is socialist. Capitalism is the part of the economy not touched by the State. Considering the currency we use is all State controlled, and the fact that heavy taxes and regulations are imposed on us all by the EU (and other states, e.g. the 20% VAT rate which is a disastrous policy that impoverishes the people) it's hard to argue that it isn't socialist. It certainly isn't a free market by any stretch of the imagination.
    1
  21493. On the surface, government regulation seems good! But that's the point - you cannot judge a book by it's cover. Only by looking deeper can we see that government regulations actually hurt both the workers and the economy as a whole https://youtu.be/G6S5c6xhXTY
    1
  21494. Glad you liked it! 👍
    1
  21495. Because revenue is not the same as profit. A company can make revenue but be unprofitable if the cost of running the company is more than the revenue. YouTube is unprofitable.
    1
  21496. "I am a little bit confused about why large companies are not capitalist." Are they individuals (private) or hierarchies of society (public)? If they are individuals, then they're capitalist. If they're hierarchies of society, they are a society and thus a State. This doesn't mean they are the "Central" State (e.g. the US government), but it means that they are a "State within a State" (which was how IG Farben was described as being during WW2). "have shareholders but seem to have a small number of people or one individual who profits the most." They're collectively controlled by their shareholders and redistribute wealth to the top - the Social-Elite (Socialists). "It is interesting these very large wealthy companies, or, the one person in control, who are very rich, seem to support and often actively work towards the idea of a global government, a Totalitarian global government it seems, ie a Communist style government. Why?" It is interesting, isn't it. Once you realize that they're not capitalist entities, but socialist entities, then it all makes sense. "A well known public figure in the UK, I heard say that we don't have Capitalism, we have, Corporatism." Correct. And it would be a mistake to think Corporatism is Capitalism.
    1
  21497. Change the words to suit your own agenda then, postmodernist
    1
  21498. Private health is better and cheaper than public health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Private schools are better and cheaper than public schools https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI (also, 'education' and 'schools' are not the same thing https://youtu.be/_MzH7qktZkw ) And the effects of things like the artificial state 'minimum wage' regulation https://youtu.be/Ct1Moeaa-W8 and https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ )
    1
  21499. "capitalism means the rule of finance capital" No it isn't. "whether that capital is held by a public or private actor does not matter." Yes it does. If it's ruled by the public sector, it's not capitalism. "do you really plan to argue that the state cannot own capital" The state does own capital. But that's not capitalism. "and as part of its organization of production regulate capital markets?" If it controls the economy, then that's socialism, since the means of production will have been socialized.
    1
  21500. This video will explain it better https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  21501. You're very welcome :)
    1
  21502. Thank you! I've not read Rand. Which book is that quote from??
    1
  21503. Yes, just look at the hospitals in the USA https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  21504. ""National socialist NHS" is gratuitously offensive." The Labour Government (which was socialist) created the National Health Service in 1948. So it is National and it is Socialist. It also judges people by the colour of their skin, which is racial discrimination https://www.leadershipacademy.nhs.uk/resources/inclusion-equality-and-diversity/#:~:text=Developing%20a%20diverse%20workforce%20within,t%20be%20able%20to%20function. Therefore, the National Socialist Health Service is an accurate description of the National Socialist Health Service. If you're offended by the truth, good. - "If you have any ideas of how a small family or individual owned capitalist group or cooperating groups would go about constructing a CAT scanner, generate electricity to operate it and train doctors (from within the same small family as the engineers and electricity generators) to interpret the results, let me know." Yes, because the NHS existed before private health care, or electricity, or doctors... - "You play with semantics about what socialism and capitalism means to shift all the blame for crony capitalism and totalitarianism as socialist, when that word means something very different to what you say it does in the context of the very successful social democratic models of government in Scandinavia." I'm sorry for using the historical and dictionary definitions of the words, and I will start using the historically inaccurate and false definition of the words that you believe in... Oh wait, no I won't. And if you don't like it, you can downvote the video and cry about it in the comment section.
    1
  21505. Glad you enjoyed this one :)
    1
  21506. References are at the bottom of the screen, and sources were listed in the first seconds of the video. None of this is made up
    1
  21507. Your definition of capitalism is incorrect. You're using the false Marxist definition of capitalism. I'm using the actual and historic definition. But yes, I'm the one who's "redefined" the term. I'm a private individual. My property isn't mine because the State is constantly stealing my property from me. Well, if someone wants to steal my property, they'll have a hard time... I don't need a State to "enforce" anything on my behalf. In fact, if the State went away, I'd not only have more property and income (since my money wouldn't be stolen from me every month) and I'd have the freedom to purchase arms and defend myself. As Thomas Sowell explains, Britain is a "burglar's paradise" because the people are not allowed guns or to defend their property. I don't need the State to "enforce" private property, since it isn't doing that. Instead, I will enforce my own private property which is my natural right as a human being. Also, profit is still made in a socialist society. It's just that what pathetically little profit is made in a socialist society is then stolen by the State from the people, and then withheld from the people in the name of the people. In Capitalism, profit can only be made if people provide other people with goods and services that other people want. It's 'terrible' that people are getting paid for giving people goods and services that they want. And it's 'great' how the State is allowed to seize the wealth from the people, keep most of it, and then provide a few terrible services which they claim are "free". I point this out to people, and I'm the one who's "got it wrong", apparently... And then I get lectured all the old arguments which I used to believe in too about how the State is great, and how we all need expensive nationalized (but not real Nazi) socialist State health care, and how people will starve if we don't allow the State to steal 40% of wealth from the poor workers and redistribute that to the State in the name of the workers. All I want is a better life for the poor - the very consumers I'm trying to service - and that makes me an evil capitalist. Well, I disagree https://youtu.be/L6Lw-QAHzk4
    1
  21508. I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  21509. Yes, in this age of emotions people prioritize feels before reals. I'm of the opinion that it should be the other way round!
    1
  21510. Robin Hood stole from the State (the King, and the sheriff/shire-reeve/taxman) and gave the money back to the taxpayer. But no, monarchs didn't have total control of the means of production, nor did they have a free market. They had something else. I would say that it was similar to Socialism though in the sense that it was authoritarian and starved the poor.
    1
  21511. The only way to get rich is to provide goods and services to others in exchange for money. I give you bread, you give me money. So, capitalism (the free market) is mutually beneficial. The rich are rich because they have all the money, and the poor are rich because they have all the goods and services that the rich (and the poor) provide. (Don't forget, many entrepreneurs and capitalists are poor.) For this reason, Capitalism is the ultimate form of social good, because it provides people with what they want without wasting resources. The State also provides "services". The difference is that the State does it so inefficiently that it would soon be out of business if it played by the same rules as everyone else. But it doesn't play by the same rules. Rather than going out of business because it provided a service nobody wanted or needed, it steals money in the form on inflation and taxation to keep itself afloat. Then, to add insult to injury, it then claims that it's providing you a good service that you really need (e.g. roads). Yes, the State has produced roads, or railways, or laws. However, the free market can do it better. The problem is that the free market isn't allowed to do it better because the State has a monopoly on all those things, and it needs a monopoly in order to justify its extra-lawful ability to steal your wealth and redistribute it to itself. Let's take British railways as an example. The British railways have been nationalized (officially or unofficially) since prior to the First World War. Yes, there was the "privatization" era of post 1995 up until recently, but this was the same as "privatization" in Nazi Germany - in the sense that it wasn't real privatization. Network Rail was the only entity in the UK that was allowed to build railways and railway lines. It also set rail fares and workers wages, pensions, and so forth. If you want to know why there was overcrowding in the UK railway stations and trains, the answer is Network Rail, which is a government corporation. Yes, there were "private" companies operating on the government's lines, but this was a veneer of capitalism on a coffin of socialism. Back in the 1880s, railways were profitable, and didn't need to be bailed out through taxpayer's money. Now they do, because the government is the one running the show. For a great example of the same situation with the American railways, see Folsum's "The Myth of the Robber Barons" which talks about how the US government created unprofitable railway lines at the same time that an American entrepreneur built a profitable line without government assistance. The same applies with the roads. The M6 in Britain is a great example of how insane government policy is. If you're lucky, you might only be stuck in traffic jams on the M6 for a short time. It's overcrowded to say the least. My friend in real life was complaining about this recently. I said to her: "well, why don't you take the M6 toll road?" She replied: "Because I'd have to pay". EXACTLY. You can pay to go on the M6 toll road and skip the traffic. But people won't because it costs money (they'd rather sit in traffic for hours on end than get to where they're going for a price of £5). The price (cost) rationally regulates the economy - supply and demand. When something is free at the point of need, it gets overused. Thousands of Sunday drivers or people who could drive at other times of the day, pile onto the M6 at the same time (usually "rush hour"), making a terrible situation even worse. Why? Because they have no incentive not to do so. If they had to pay for the roads at the point of need (rather than indirectly via taxation), they would think hard about whether they really need to use this road at this time. They may decide that the journey isn't worth it, or that they could travel at a different time (e.g. the evening when nobody's on the road and thus the toll is cheaper). This would reduce the amount of vehicles on the road, and thus reduce the likelihood of traffic or traffic jams. So yes, the government does make roads. But does so poorly, inefficiently, wastes a ton of resources in the process, and these roads are decaying constantly and are also jammed full of traffic. The free market can do a much better job at this, but often isn't allowed to do so thanks to the government's own monopoly status. (Don't forget, you're not allowed to build anything in the UK without "planning permission" from the central State.) I highly recommend the books "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. I think you'll find them enlightening.
    1
  21512. Also, I don't have time right not to address your comment in full, but I will say that Mises is great, and the only reason people don't like him is because the collective has told them not to and they haven't actually read him. If you read Mises' "Socialism", you will see how reasonable and down to earth he actually is. The collective heavily attacks something that directly and successfully challenges the collective. In that regard, me and Mises are in the same boat.
    1
  21513. Are public traded corporations not collectively owned by their shareholders? A lot of PhD economists and our beloved central banks define that when prices goes up, they inflate. When a plane goes up in the sky, it inflates. When a elevator goes up in its shaft, it inflates... Oh wait, no it doesn't. So when prices go up, that's NOT what inflation is. Inflation is the expansion of something - the expansion of the currency supply. Price rises are only a symptom of inflation. So they will tell you there's no 'inflation' because prices aren't going up during a time when they've locked down the economy, while they print currency like there's no tomorrow https://youtu.be/K0VKzNtZupA Most economists have been taught by Marxists. This is why we're moving into negative interest rate territory and massive inflation - they don't like money (capital, Capitalism) and want to destroy it, and replace it with state control. This is why they'll happily stand there and lie to you about the definition of inflation, or say gold is a "relic of the past", and tell you why banning cash is a good thing https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/benefits-cashless-society-mobile-payments/
    1
  21514. "But none exists without some level of State involvement, which reflects the dominant world view in that country. Then there is no perfect Capitalism (nor Socialism for that matter), because it being perceived as such depends on national context." Exactly. No pure capitalist economy has ever existed. And yet, capitalism is the blame for all the problems in the world...? "But then all economic systems are inherently flawed because they are models. Interpretations of reality, rather than reality itself. So, arguing for one or the other is an ongoing process." History is also inherently flawed because it is a model. It's interpretation of reality (the past), rather than reality (the past) itself. Yet I don't see anyone complaining that I shouldn't make historical arguments.
    1
  21515. @Mark Ant "ny country that dels in the free market is capitalist, all so-called communist countires were only run by state capitalism wrongly called communism." I dealt with everything you said in the video. 'State Capitalism' is an oxymoronic term used to hide the term socialism/communism. If it's controlled by the state, it is the state.
    1
  21516. Ok, private armies don't have to operate like that. If you hire a worker, you can provide them with a uniform.
    1
  21517. Private sector militaries don't operate like that.
    1
  21518. "The public sector can generate profit" Profit is an indication that you're providing value to society, which is why society rewards you with wealth. States do not provide value to society. If they did, they wouldn't need to force society to give money to them (taxation). The fact that taxation is not voluntary is proof that the public sector does not provide value to society. If it does not provide value, it cannot generate a profit. You also have the socialist economic calculation problem which prevents them from realizing how wasteful they're being with resources that could be used better elsewhere (thus any 'profits' a state makes is less-ideal than a private individual), but I won't get into that. "Unregulated capitalism doesn't maximise general profit." Regulation = a reduction of wealth and value creation. All regulations hurt the economy and shrink living standards. The consumer should decide what they buy, not some tyrant in a bureaucracy. "If there are no regulations, the most profitable activity is not labour but theft." The only way to earn wealth is to give to your community, not take from it. If everyone is stealing from one another, you do not have wealth, you have anarchy. That is why socialist economies collapse, because taxation is theft, and 100% taxation is slavery. Capitalism is about cooperation. Capitalists realize that the only way to make money is to give to society. Society then rewards you for your giving. Theft is not giving, it is taking. "Profit maximisation is not always desirable." Profit is an indication that you're providing society with value that it wants. If you have high profits, your services are in demand, and thus you should use your profit to reinvest in your business. If your profits are low, then society has told you that what you're producing is not in demand. Maximizing profits is maximizing the value you give to society. It is always desirable, unless you want consumers to have less goods and services. "For example, in an entirely private health system, the poorest wouldn't be cured." This is stupid. Wake up please https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ https://youtu.be/F-QftFQfJrE "To conclude, the public sector can absolutely be beneficial to the private sector." If taxes are not voluntary, the public sector (a non-economy) is a leech on the private sector (the actual economy), which, if it gets too big and sucks too much blood from the private sector, and collapses the actual economy.
    1
  21519. Who said that?
    1
  21520. "This is a more accurate representation of the political spectrum and you can put a lot more aspects in a political compas but classifying in a single spectrum is impossible. To me four spectrums (didn't use that one) is the most accurate you need to get." If a King collects taxes, then you're not economically free. You therefore cannot have a right-authoritarian on the compass. Similarly, if the collective is in control of your economy, you're not politically free. Thus you cannot have a left-libertarian on the compass. It turns out that the top right and bottom left squares are impossibilities and thus redundant. You're then left with a line. A line like this - https://www.metabunk.org/metamirror_cache/www.therightplanet.com_wp_content_uploads_2011_09_true_political_spectrum.png I also showed a similar political spectrum in the video itself. "Didn't know 17th century Europe was socialist. Slavery can exist in both sides of the spectrum..." You cannot have slavery under capitalism because private citizens are in control of their own economy. You can't have slavery if every private citizen is free, which they are under capitalism. So, in the past, where there has been slaver - that's not capitalism. "in anarcho-capitalism there's no regulation so you can go wild and just have slaves or maybe you prefer the term pay-them-so-little-they-are-like-slaves." If you have slavery, you don't have capitalism. Also, if you pay them and they are free to leave, they're not slaves. I covered this in the video. In addition, a lack of regulation does not instantly mean that there is no law. Private Sector law still exists. Only Public Sector law does not. ""To their view if government does things it's left-wing." Tell me was Otto von Bismarck a socialist or a conservative, his government did things and it was and is considered Right-wing, also didn't know anarcho-communism was Right-wing." Interestingly, you're quoting yourself and disagreeing with yourself here. Bismark implemented socialist policies, such as pensions. Anarcho-Communism isn't Right-Wing. I never said it is, and I addressed Anarcho-Communism in the video. "I was complimenting your military history knowledge and videos but only miliatary history. I know econòmics is part of history I just don't think you are the best or the most honest at explaining it." I favour the strongest and most logical arguments. Arguments that are flawed get taken down, and hard. That's what I've always done and always will do. The idea that Fascism or National Socialism was capitalism is just ridiculous, as this video makes blatantly clear.
    1
  21521. "Oh please their political compass is incorrect" No, it is correct. "their socio-econòmic ideology allows for slavery to happen." They're anti-socialist, so they're against slavery. "To their view if government does things it's left-wing." Because it is. Watch the video. "I love you military history videos but your econòmic videos are kinda biased" This is history. Economics and history are the same thing.
    1
  21522. What do you mean? Do you think the reality is different from these definitions? I would strongly disagree.
    1
  21523. "@TIK fails to understand that hitler believed the individual would make the race. that life was an eternal struggle and it was by the individual struggle that the race improved." No, TIK understands that. TIK is pointing out that this logic doesn't make any sense and is contradictory. If the individual makes the collective race, then the race doesn't exist, since it is a shell of a body, made up by individuals. Also, if the individual did make the collective, then it makes sense to give all power and freedom to the individual. Instead, Hitler wanted to control everybody in society, politically and economically (totalitarianism). This is the opposite of what he should have been aiming for if he placed the individual before the race. But he doesn't do that, he places the racial collective before the individual. "he could not resolve it because it is unresolvable." Exactly my point.
    1
  21524. Racism is the idea that someone's ethnicity (group) is more important than their individuality. National Socialism is built upon the Racial Theory of History. But if we are individuals, then we are not part of our race. If we are part of a race, then we are not individuals. This is the fundamental contradiction in National Socialism that I mention at the end of the video. Hitler died having never solved this issue.
    1
  21525. Yes, if only US health care wasn't regulated by the State, you might have had a point https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ Prices are a form of rationing. If you lower the price, you either have shortages or a massive dip in quality. This is why the NHS in the UK is a massive waste of money and is constantly crying out for more money because it doesn't have enough basic equipment to meet the artificially higher demand due to it being "free". It's not free, it's extremely expensive. It's only free at the point of need, meaning people overuse it, resulting in a terribly poor service, long waiting times, and patients sleeping on floors because the expensive service doesn't have enough beds.
    1
  21526. Not quite. Socialism is when the Public Sector dominates society. A large gathering of people isn't necessarily socialist by itself.
    1
  21527. Racism exists, but races do not. You literally said that races exist, meaning that there must be a difference between people of different races, which is what we call "racism".
    1
  21528. It's funny because even science says that race doesn't exist https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/ Believing in human "subspecies" is actually what Hitler thought https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM Yet somehow, you and the Left think that you should judge someone by the colour of their skin, and that somehow that is not racist. IT IS RACISM. Believing that the human race is split into sub-races IS RACISM.
    1
  21529. Wow, thank you Joshua! Welcome, and I'm glad you finally found the channel, despite YouTube's best efforts to stop you 😂
    1
  21530. Yes, Anton Joly pointed that out too. Not sure why misspelled it, but I did 😂
    1
  21531. The map was finished today. It will be soon... :)
    1
  21532. You could let me know!
    1
  21533. I only got it recently and haven't had time to dive into it, so I can't say yet, sorry :)
    1
  21534. "You could also do a video on the Thatch Weave, which allowed less nimble American lanes to face the Japanese Zeroes on an even footing." The Thatch Weave!? I need to study my air war a bit more... :)
    1
  21535. Glad to hear you enjoyed it :)
    1
  21536. Thanks :)
    1
  21537. This is definitely something I'm aware of and have been struggling with for a while tbh. It's difficult because if I start on the action it doesn't provide context, but on the other hand if I do an introduction or give too much exposition, people will stop watching. It's finding that delicate balance of starting as late as possible, but not too late. I've just made a new video on the Long Range Desert Group which will be up on Wednesday. And whilst I didn't do an introduction, I tried to give more context to things by starting earlier than the main action. Hopefully that'll be the best of both worlds :)
    1
  21538. UnderBoss648 It's actually on my list! Someone else requested it a while ago. I don't know when it will be exactly, but now with this "Lite" series I should be able to cover that in the next couple months
    1
  21539. More on the way :) any you would like to see in particular?
    1
  21540. The influence of socialism is still strong in East Africa I see. Punish the individuals responsible, not the entire social group they supposedly belong to. My government may claim to represent me, but trust me, they don't.
    1
  21541. @ Jamie - Yes, it sounds really interesting. The battle of Kohima sounds interesting too. Do you have any book recommendations?
    1
  21542. @McCabe - yeah, I think that's what I'm going to do. A Lite video every couple weeks. And then a main video every few months. As good ol' Stalin supposedly said, "quantity has a quality all its own". I'm not against any battle in any point in history. The Boer War is definitely something I'd be interested in doing, same with the Zulu Wars, and WW1... Franco Prussian War... etc. The only limitation is the books I have access too - which is why I'm concentrating on the Mediterranean and Middle East in WW2 because I have books on them. I'm actually spending a fortune on books right now (I don't even want to consider counting how much I've spent so far). Turns out I don't have enough money coming in per month to afford this hobby on my own and I've actually been contemplating setting up a Patreon to help lessen the cost. This is why I'm sticking to WW2 for the time being as I know you guys love it so I can return to this conflict over and over. I know that the books I buy for WW2 will therefore be used multiple times, so I'm ok with spending the money on them.
    1
  21543. @Thumper - I actually agree. It's a problem I've been trying to combat for a while and I'm still torn on where to start the narrative. Too much exposition and people get bored and don't watch. Not enough and it doesn't provide enough context. I've tried again to get it right in the next LITE video (on Wednesday) so hopefully that'll be better. And I didn't see your comment as too "critical" - I asked for feedback and I want it. So thanks for letting me know :)
    1
  21544. Will do!
    1
  21545. Thanks for subscribing! It is bizarre how people just swallowed what he had to say after the war. Nobody seemed to question what he was saying
    1
  21546. And why did they invade the Soviet Union? Because of oil...
    1
  21547. And the rest of the video?
    1
  21548. Great to hear!
    1
  21549. Lebensraum is not just 'living space', it meant seizing the resources that Germany needed, rather than trading with (and therefore relying upon) the other world powers for resources. Hitler's whole philosophy was to conquer the Slavic lands in the East, enslave the people, and take their resources for the Greater German Reich. That was his entire goal and the reason he started the war in the first place. So long-term peace with the USSR was not an option. The oil deficit meant they were going to run out of oil in late 1941, so this placed a time limit on the invasion of the Soviet Union. So Hitler had to attack in 1941, or not at all.
    1
  21550. Good question. I'll admit, I don't know - haven't yet fully-studied the situation in mid-1943.
    1
  21551. Welcome! Glad to have you on board :)
    1
  21552. And if he'd taken the oilfields of the Caucasus he may have been able to.
    1
  21553. Great counter. I honestly need to do more research on Dunkirk, but yes for now I will admit I might be wrong in that aspect.
    1
  21554. I may be doing videos on the Middle East during WW2 in the future, which does have parallels with the modern day events
    1
  21555. These are great questions, and honestly I've not done enough study on Dunkirk or the British political situation to answer them. Logically it makes sense though that destroying the British army would add further pressure on Westminster to surrender. But saying that, they didn't surrender after Belgium, France, Norway, Greece, Crete, Rommel, Singapore... have I missed any?
    1
  21556. In a nutshell, I guess so. The Germans were playing the short game (aiming for quick operational victories). The Allies were playing the long game (economic and strategic). Ultimately Germany had to win before the Allied forces could bring their long-term advantages to play.
    1
  21557. I tried to find them tbh, but couldn't get production rates. I don't think daily stats are necessary, but weekly or monthly ones would be great.
    1
  21558. They had an embargo on the Japanese prior to the war. This starved the Japanese of oil, which it was hoped would cause the Japanese to back down and begin trading. This wasn't what the Axis were about though - they believed that they shouldn't rely on other powers for resources - and so waged wars of aggression to take the resources for themselves.
    1
  21559. But they did.
    1
  21560. Is that true? If so then it reinforces the point.
    1
  21561. The Soviets weren't running. They were fighting. Sure, there were some routs etc, but they were still fighting, and fighting hard.
    1
  21562. Glad you enjoyed the video!
    1
  21563. Soon changed your mind :)
    1
  21564. It's not really the expense, it's the quantity. Back in 1941, Germany couldn't produce enough synthetic oil to meet the needs of Continental Europe.
    1
  21565. Glad you liked it 😊
    1
  21566. No oil, no need to build ball bearings.
    1
  21567. Really? Go on then, explain how they weren't defeated. I'm curious now to hear what you have to say.
    1
  21568. Yes, but the reason they were reliant on horses was because they didn't have the oil to run trucks or tanks. And even with most of their units being foot infantry, and reliant on horses, they still considered demechanising some of their motorized and panzer forces. This is a big problem when you're trying to wage a lightning war. The Germans had a choice. Either trade with other nations (globalization) or conquer resources (Lebensraum). Hitler chose the latter. Once the British blockade came under affect, the Germans had a finite amount of time to find a new source of oil before their lightning war ran out of steam. The Soviet Union was the only nation with a viable oil source, so they went East. And this is why they hoped to knock out the Soviets quickly so they didn't need to fight for too long. 'Blitzkrieg' was meant to have brought victory by September - before they ran out of oil in October. I'm not sure why you think this is a paranoid discussion? And why is finding out logic in something a bad thing? Hitler's reasons for going to war are well known, and are shaped by the food and oil crisis brought on by his intention not to have Germany trade with other nations in the growing global economy. This is why he favoured the policy of Autarky prior to the war.
    1
  21569. It would have resolved the oil crisis at the time. However, Germany would have lacked oil internally, and that meant she would be reliant on other powers to trade resources. Hitler didn't want to rely on other powers for resources, so was willing to wage wars of aggression to take the resources Germany lacked. That was his whole philosophy, and probably the main reason he went to war in the first place. I suspect Hitler would have invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 anyway. Or perhaps delayed by a year. But if he had done so, I think the Soviets would have been better prepared by that point. So yeah, 1941 it had to be, really. But obviously, having more oil in 1941 would have helped the Germans massively.
    1
  21570. In a sense. That was because of Halder though. I'll explain in a future video.
    1
  21571. You're more than welcome sir!
    1
  21572. It's interesting to read other histories of the war and keep this in mind. A lot of decisions made now make a lot of sense.
    1
  21573. And just to clarify my point, you can claim (as historians have) that Germany lost by October 1941. Even if you think Stalingrad was the turning point, US troops had not even set foot on the European continent at that point. And that's not to diminish the role of the USA in WW2, or her contribution, but the reality is that the Soviets (with help from the western Allies) did the vast majority of the fighting. And the Germans were prevented from securing the oil they needed to continue the fight against the Soviets and the western Allies.
    1
  21574. But the USA didn't enter the war until it was already lost for Germany. And Germany was forced to fight it, and lost it, because of a lack of oil.
    1
  21575. Ok, so what's your counter argument?
    1
  21576. It wasn't enough. And the reason Hitler went to war in the first place was because he wanted land and resources for Germany. He didn't want to be reliant on the other great powers for resources. That was kinda his entire philosophy. So, in that world view, prolonged trade with your ideological enemy is not an option.
    1
  21577. Except, the bigger tanks consumed more fuel
    1
  21578. Because of Halder. I will do a follow up video on Halder and explain it all for you.
    1
  21579. You're very welcome :)
    1
  21580. It depends how you look at it. At the very least, it placed a time limit for the beginning of the invasion of the Soviet Union, which (it could be argued) then cost Germany the war.
    1
  21581. You're very welcome, thanks you watching :)
    1
  21582. Actually that's not the case. My latest video (Blau) shows very clearly why this idea that Hitler was "mad" is not the case.
    1
  21583. Thanks! Really good to hear you found this useful :)
    1
  21584. "Why invade Soviet union if you could get resources to fight Britain anyway?" As I showed in the video. Germany was running a huge deficit of oil, even with Soviet oil. So huge, if there had been another entire Romania, it still wouldn't have been enough. They were going to run out by Autumn 1941, even if they did nothing. Leningrad may have something to do with Estonian oil. But yes, the main goal was in the south, so why not concentrate there? Good question. What you have to remember though is that while Hitler wanted to go south, Halder did not. Halder was the one who reorientated the German armies to aim towards Moscow. And I'm not sure on Dunkirk. I was merely showing that Hitler may have desired peace, that is all.
    1
  21585. He was hoping Britain would be pressured into surrendering.
    1
  21586. Glad you liked it :) currently working on a similar video to this, but one that looks at things much bigger than this.
    1
  21587. Yeah, probably. As I said, this is the one thing I'm not so sure on. You're probably right.
    1
  21588. Germany was only at war with Britain in 1940-41, and the British weren't in a position to liberate the continent. The Germans had three divisions in North Africa, and that was it. So attacking the Soviet Union isn't "all countries" and isn't stretching forces too much (inside the Soviet Union yes, but even if they were at peace with everyone but the Soviets, they still would have been stretched in Soviet territory).
    1
  21589. They weren't. I'll paste my reply to someone else - As shown in the video, the Germans lose by 1941 (or 1942 at the latest). In 1941, when the Germans and Axis invade the Soviet Union they outnumbered the Red Army. There were 3,957,910 Axis troops (3,118,910 German plus 839,000 Axis Allies) vs 2,743,000 Soviet troops on the 22/06/1941. Yes, the Soviets sent in reinforcements, but that doesn't mean on day 2 the Germans suddenly faced a billion Soviets. On the 11/09/1941 the Soviets had 3,463,000 men, vs 4,215,147 Axis troops (3,382,000 German and 833,147 Allied). And between the 22nd of June and the 30th of September, Soviet losses amounted to 2,817,303. So effectively, they had taken losses equivalent to their border army, and now had 3,463,000 troops at the front, vs 4,215,147 Axis. So yes, during this initial period of the war, the Germans and Axis outnumber the Soviets. The Axis are only outnumbered for the first time in December 1941, which is coincidentally the first time they're thrown back. German casualties on the Eastern Front for 1941 were 312,600, plus Axis allied losses of 81,500, for a total of 384,100 total Axis losses in 1941. For the whole of 1941, the Soviets lost 4,791,300 men. On the 1st of December 1941, they had 4,197,000 men at the front. Add them together, gives you 8,988,300 (admittingly, we're a month out from 1st of December to January, but you get the point). During this vital time on the Eastern Front - June to October/November - the Germans outnumber the Red Army. Yet they are not able to achieve strategic victory. In fact, their offensive grinds to a halt through lack of oil (as the main factor, though there are other factors). We can therefore conclude they are not outnumbered. And outproduced? The Soviets are busy transporting their industries to the Urals. Production does not catch up until late 1942. I'm planning on doing a video on this, but it's hard to see how between June 22nd 1941 and October 1941 how the Soviets out-produced and outnumbered the Germans, when in reality their army was smaller at any one given moment in time than the Germans. Yes, they eventually outnumbered the Germans, but by that point the war is arguably lost. Only Hitler's last gamble to take the Caucasus is what could save him, and while the Soviets do outnumber the Germans at this point (5,313,000 Red Army vs 3,578,000 Axis troops on the 07/06/1942) along the whole front, the Germans concentrate their forces in the south, achieving local superiority. In fact, at Stalingrad, Paulus's 80,000 men who took part in the initial assault on the city, outnumber Chuikov's army, which never exceeds 54,000 men. It's not until after the campaign becomes static that the Soviets are truly able to gather the resources needed to outnumber and thus defeat the Germans (Operation Uranus, Little Saturn etc). But as I said, it's arguable that the war was already lost by October 1941 (if not earlier) when the Axis enjoyed superiority in numbers.
    1
  21590. Exactly. I'll be following that comment up with a full-video about it, since some are still disagreeing with what I said
    1
  21591. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  21592. Yeah, sorry Steve I was distracted and misread the chat (using the studio app). I was aiming at Jack.
    1
  21593. Sorry, not Steve, meant Jack. Misread.
    1
  21594. If there isn't enough, just know I aim to publish a new video every Monday (one's about to publish now too!)
    1
  21595. Thank you very much sir, I shall message you shortly :)
    1
  21596. Great! Which language?
    1
  21597. If you'd watched a bit further, you would have seen that they weren't producing anywhere where near enough synthetic oil
    1
  21598. Thanks!
    1
  21599. We're led to believe that if they postponed Barbarossa until 1942 or 1943, the Wehrmacht wouldn't have had the fuel to launch it. But if they'd not invaded Poland until 1941 or beyond, not sure. Synthetic fuel never seemed to get to the required levels, although they certainly could have stockpiled more oil. It's a good what-if, but I don't know the answer to it I'm afraid.
    1
  21600. Arguably Germany lost before the US declared war.
    1
  21601. Sure https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA https://youtu.be/dprGvO5GG9c https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8 All of these are relevant videos explaining why Suvorov's preemptive strike idea was bogus. The last one (which is about Soviet artillery) is a good summary. For further reading, please see "Stumbling Colossus" by David Glantz, which effectively hammers the nail into the idea that Stalin was going to attack Germany in 1941.
    1
  21602. Thank's Bud! Good to hear you enjoyed it
    1
  21603. None of the above! Technically it should be somewhere between Liverpudlian or Mancunian, but it's not really.
    1
  21604. What? An oil crisis!? ;)
    1
  21605. Staff? It's only me here, working (70 hours a week) at minimum wage (both YouTube and Patreon money, and that's assuming I was working 40 hours a week, much less than minimum wage if calculated hourly). Zero chance of hiring someone right now. You may want to ask French historian Anton Joly about that video https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIk1QDvITjPOCsIRGGpSasA
    1
  21606. But why did they go to war with the Soviets? Oil.
    1
  21607. Excellent! Good luck with your English!
    1
  21608. The British had control of the Middle East and the Suez canal, and Oman. I'm not sure what you're getting at here? Are you suggesting that Rommel should have been sent further east? The problem with that is that they were struggling to supply him with the forces they had. Giving him more troops would have made the situation worse. And don't forget, Middle East oil was not as big as it is today. It wouldn't have helped too much.
    1
  21609. Thanks! Japan has a similar story, but sadly I didn't have the specifics, the sources, or the background knowledge to talk about Japan.
    1
  21610. I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  21611. Thanks! Good to hear :)
    1
  21612. Will do!
    1
  21613. Thank you sir! I said it in the video but it's worth repeating - when you read WW2, it's good to have the oil crisis in the back of your mind. It really does explain many of the decisions being made.
    1
  21614. Never realised Lend-Lease was seen as a second independence from Britain (in 1941). Very very interesting. Sounds like a good love-hate relationship to me :) it proves that everyone is out for themselves, and every nation is also out for themselves. May do a video on it in the future. Thanks!
    1
  21615. "When you live in the country shor.t of strategic resources the first thing you must do isn't take Moscow." The reason Hitler goes to war in the first place is to secure the strategic resources Germany doesn't have. Nazis come to power 1933, and by 1935 they've come out of (what Hitler calls) "international Jewish finance" (world trade). Hitler rejects the idea of globalization and trade because he thinks Germany would be reliant on the other powers, which would then make her vunerable again like in WW1. So, he sets about a policy of Autarky (no-trade, self-sufficiency) and aims East to seize the land and resources Germany lacks (oil, food, metals etc). So, the reason Germany is short of resources is because of the stifling of trade from ~1934 onwards. And obviously this is a deliberate policy because Hitler doesn't want to trade, he wants to steal the resources Germany needs. Therefore, he was intent on going East right from the beginning (1924 at the latest). It was central to his entire world view (his "Weltanschauung") and the reason he went to war in the first place. "Hitler should have been attacking to procurar oil." The oil Germany needed (since they can't trade for it) is in the Caucasus. This is why Germany went East. Romania didn't have enough, and they couldn't supply Rommel as it was, so going to the Middle East was out of the question. This is why Hitler is all about the southern front as I explained in my Fall Blau video https://youtu.be/hzr6dD8fvVY "It never mattered that the German Army wasn't a hundred percent mechanized. Germany didn't have the gas any how." Yes, and as I explained in the video, Germany's oil crisis was so severe that they had to de-motorize the Wehrmacht during the war. This is why they lost the war - because they didn't have the means to fight it. You can't have a Blitzkrieg if your tanks and Stukas don't have enough oil to run them. And this is why by 1942 the Germans weren't able to wage a full second 'Barbarossa'-type campaign in the East - they didn't have the oil to do so.
    1
  21616. "The Germans couldn't produce enough steel either." True, but unlike oil (where they had to conquer to get enough of it) they could trade for steel from Sweden. That's actually one of the reasons Hitler insisted on going towards Leningrad - to prevent the trade routes to Sweden from being cut.
    1
  21617. That is one I haven't yet figured out fully.
    1
  21618. Imagine invading the Soviet Union in HOI4, but with a two-three month deadline for victory, before your tanks become immobile. The best way to emulate this is to not import any oil before 1939.
    1
  21619. I don't disagree, Germany didn't use all their opportunities, which is partly what I'm trying to do here - show where they went wrong. They did try to get Turkey to side with them, and Spain. I don't know the details, but both wanted to remain neutral.
    1
  21620. The Soviets were trading oil with Germany, but weren't trading enough. Plus Hitler wanted German economic independence from other states (Lebensraum), so trading with a hated enemy wasn't really an option. And you're perhaps right about signing peace with Britain. Keitel said in his memoirs that they would have had to give up on all their conquests to date in order to get Britain to peace out, and that was unacceptable to them.
    1
  21621. It looks good, although I highly doubt I'll ever find time to play it. So is GG's War in the East. So much to play, so little time :(
    1
  21622. Near Liverpool, yes. I don't have a scouse accent though ;)
    1
  21623. Glad you enjoyed the video! And my accent! Not from Northumbria though
    1
  21624. True! Bit of a bad strategy if you ask me
    1
  21625. I don't disagree, but if you watch the video, I show you why Germany ended up fighting the Soviets in the first place, and why the USA was the powerhouse that it was, and so on.
    1
  21626. Oh wow. What unit(s) was he in?
    1
  21627. What's your verdict? :)
    1
  21628. "yet you don't have a million subscribers" I have 55,000 subscribers. I'm getting overwhelmed with comments. Replying to each and every single comment is impossible unless I stop publishing videos and dedicate my entire time to replying to comments. That's why I can't possibly reply to them all. As to your question, I doubt the Germans would have had enough oil to use the French Fleet in battle. They didn't have enough for the Italian fleet, which is why most of it sat in harbour for the majority of the war.
    1
  21629. No worries - thank you for watching Dr :)
    1
  21630. Yes, I have a video explaining this entitled "Why we need a New Term for "Revisionist Historians"" https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  21631. George, your comments are automatically flagged as held for review - not sure why, but YouTube doesn't seem to like your comments. And in response to your comment, all I'll say is that I welcome criticism and opposition. In fact, that's part of the whole process of history, since it's a debate. What I won't accept is a response (like Peter's) where he hasn't even watched the video but is trying to argue against something I never stated. Same goes with your argument. I never said that Hitler was never not going to invade the USSR. What I said was that this invasion was dictated by the oil crisis, forcing the Germans to attack in 1941. The timing of the attack is dictated by the oil crisis. The emphasis is on the southern front, which Halder ignored in the planning stages of Barbarossa. It also explains why they went south to the Caucasus in 1942. I also never said that Germany wasn't fighting a war of aggression. In fact, I argue that it was in tomorrow's video. However, Germany fought a war of aggression precisely because they didn't have the fuel (or other resources) naturally in Germany to protect themselves. I'm not sure how you misinterpreted what I was saying there, but you somehow did. Hitler was racist and evil. But he wasn't insane (at least, not in the early war period - towards the end as death approached he may have been). What you'll find is that this isn't one or another. Hitler's ideology goes hand-in-hand with the economic situation. He wanted to go east, AND he was aware of the oil crisis plaguing German's sphere of influence in Europe. This isn't a case of trying to rationalize Hitler's racism. You're trying to make out that I'm somehow justifying or downplaying the racism. That's absolutely not the case. The racism and the economic goals were merged. That's summed up with the phrase "Living Space". He wants room, he wants resources, he wants to dominate and enslave the Eastern peoples. But in this video, the argument is put forth that the timing of that invasion was dictated by the oil crisis and it explains why Germany only had a handful of motorized and armoured divisions compared to the Allied powers and the Soviets.
    1
  21632. In this case it's a chicken and egg scenario. What came first, ideology or economy? Living space was part of Hitler's agenda - but why? Because of the resources. Germany didn't have sufficient resources to protect herself. As shown in the video, there was a food crisis (which was somewhat manageable). However, the most severe resource that the Germans lacked was oil. This was why they had to go east when they did. If their ideology couldn't coexist, why did Franco's Spain coexist? Also, you're forgetting Communism. The Soviet system couldn't coexist either, which is why lots of nations tried to crush it during the Russian Civil War, and in subsequent conflicts. This war was about ideology, as much it was about resources. The oil crisis was the big motivating factor for many of the decisions made. It explains many of the aspects of the war. Please watch the video and find out. If you still disagree, fine, but you'll at least understand the perspective first. Right now, you're arguing against me over something I've not actually said, just because you've read the title and then not listened to the reasons *why*. You've just assumed several points that I'm not even saying. If you watch the video at least, and you still disagree, fine I'm happy to discuss it with you. But until you watch the video, then you're not actually grasping the points brought up within it.
    1
  21633. The "Main" factor, does not mean the "only" factor (I said this about a minute into the video). However, it is a critical reason. And no, I disagree with the idea that if they had all the oil in the world they would have lost. I actually think they would have won against the Soviets at least. And that's assuming that they would have attacked the Soviet Union, since they would no longer have their main incentive to attack them. They still may not have won the entire war, but it would have been a totally different ball game if the Germans had had enough oil.
    1
  21634. Because if you do, you'll see WW2 from a completely different perspective. It shows that many of the "mad" decisions made by Hitler weren't actually as "mad" as the post-war generals claimed they were. And explains why the Germans lost in 1941, or if not, certainly by late-1942. It also explains why Britain's determination to continue the war started the time-limit for Germany to invade the Soviet Union.
    1
  21635. I can tell you didn't actually watch the video.
    1
  21636. Glad you like it :)
    1
  21637. Relevant video on revisionist history https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  21638. Gamechanger!
    1
  21639. Watch the video. Seriously, you need to watch the video before you jump to conclusions like that.
    1
  21640. Good to have you along for the ride :)
    1
  21641. That was Halder's fault. I'll explain in a follow up video.
    1
  21642. Thanks, I hope you'll stick around :)
    1
  21643. The Axis European oil shortfall was 9,558,000 tons. 900,000 tons of oil simply doesn't cut it. This is why he needed to invade when he did, otherwise his army would have run out of fuel and wouldn't have been able to invade.
    1
  21644. Yes, there are a few reasons for going north as you say. But there's also oil in Estonia, which I didn't know about prior to making this video.
    1
  21645. I'm not sure they knew at that stage the extent of the oil crisis for the Germans. They blockaded them for the sake of blockading them (thus, limiting the amount of resources Germany would have access to), much like they did in WW1. At what point they realise Germany's oil crisis, it's hard to say. They certainly figured it out by the end of the war when the western air forces bombed the synthetic oil factories (I think, in 1944).
    1
  21646. They were important. Provided oil, and the most troops of any of Germany's allies on the Eastern Front.
    1
  21647. No, their synthetic oil was a bigger portion, but even with both Romania and synthetic oil, they were running a massive deficit, and ran out of oil in the Autumn of 1941.
    1
  21648. WHICH IS THE REASON HE WENT TO WAR IN THE FIRST PLACE - TO INVADE THE SOVIET UNION.
    1
  21649. They weren't able to siege it. They never got close to encircling it because the Soviets stopped them beforehand.
    1
  21650. They never sieged Moscow.
    1
  21651. Glad to liked it :)
    1
  21652. Glad you found it useful :)
    1
  21653. Ideology and economics are intertwined. The oil crisis did dictate the timing of the attack though.
    1
  21654. I would advise that, if you truly think that oil only became a factor later in the war, that you do research into it and try figure out if oil wasn't a factor in the early-to-mid war. The reason is because no argument can stand without evidence. I have made my case, backed with evidence. So in order for you to counter that, you also need to provide evidence. This then becomes a historical debate, which would be awesome. Hope that makes sense
    1
  21655. Good to hear you liked it :)
    1
  21656. But in 1942, Germany and Italy alone had a larger population than the unconquered Soviet territories. They really couldn't afford to lose millions of soldiers or people.
    1
  21657. Thank you! I plan to revisit this subject one day, and expand upon it
    1
  21658. Thanks for watching and I'm glad you liked it :)
    1
  21659. Well, thanks for subscribing. I'm trying to remain neutral with my videos. This video of mine explains what got me into history and what I'm about https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  21660. Incorrect. I'm super-critical of the British. I'm not even a fan of Churchill.
    1
  21661. Thank you sir! Glad to have you along for the ride :)
    1
  21662. I don't have the figures, but according to what Toprani says, no.
    1
  21663. Well, thank you for leaving this one :) glad you enjoyed the video
    1
  21664. "Blitzkrieg" also isn't a real doctrine. Bewegungskrieg is though, and that means war of movement. So I think you'll find I was correct in what I was saying.
    1
  21665. I'm glad to see some people are thinking :)
    1
  21666. If you watch the full video, you'll see why. I discuss the logistical situation, but oil was in critically short supply.
    1
  21667. Hitler's own philosophy was that he wanted Germany to not be reliant on other powers for resources. This is the point of starting the war in the first place. It was for living space - for land and resources in the East. Lasting peace with their long-term ideological enemy was not on the German's agenda. Plus, they conquered France in six weeks - surely they could tackle the Soviet Union... right? And the occupied territories weren't consuming much oil. There was a food crisis going on, yet millions of litres of milk was left to rot in French farms because they didn't have the fuel to power the trucks to drive it to the shops. The fact was, there simply wasn't enough oil to go around.
    1
  21668. Thank you! What I like best is that this shows how important the Stalingrad Campaign was. It'll give better context for when the Stalingrad documentary does eventually come out.
    1
  21669. Would you rather we assume they couldn't ever win? They did pretty well, considering
    1
  21670. If there were two Romanias, there still wouldn't have been enough oil to cover the deficit. And long-term trading with the Soviet Union was not an option. Hitler's whole world philosophy was to conquer the East for the good of Germany. His policy wasn't trade, it was seizing resources. That's why he started the war in the first place.
    1
  21671. Yes, there's definitely a time limit, and Hitler realised that. And, while US troops were not fighting in 1941-1942, their equipment had been shipped to Britain and the Soviet Union, so the USA was obviously involved. However, I would still argue that if Germany had had access to plentiful oil supplies in the 1939-1941 period, things may have swung in their favour on the Axis-Soviet Front.
    1
  21672. USA only gets involved in 1942 (considering they only entered the war in Dec 1941). Arguably, the war was lost for Germany in 1941. If not, they were on the back foot by the conclusion of the Fall Blau campaign - again, before the USA even landed troops in Europe or Africa.
    1
  21673. Italy was reliant on German support, and thus didn't have enough to run her fleet, which is why it did little except convoy run between Europe and Africa.
    1
  21674. I'm not "bashing the Germans", I'm addressing the biases inherent in the narrative because of the over-reliance on the German sources due to the political landsscape of the Cold War. Now we have more information coming out on the Soviet side, we can see a more balance picture.
    1
  21675. I have several videos questioning Suvorov's thesis, including one specifically on his take on Keitel (the origin of his theory) https://youtu.be/TyANHGWbUHA But others like the Red Army Air Force video, which shows just how unprepared the Soviets were https://youtu.be/kh7KmtwLUbw Considering how unprepared they were, it's unlikely they were planning on striking first
    1
  21676. Anyone who deliberately distorts history is not a friend of me.
    1
  21677. Copyright issues with both footage and music. I do create my own music, but I reserve them for my Battlestorm Documentaries.
    1
  21678. Great! More to come. Working on a bigger video than this which ties everything together. Might be a while though yet before it comes out.
    1
  21679. I actually encourage you to do your own research. Find evidence that says something different, and I'll explore that. However that said, Toprani points out that Middle Eastern oil production at this time was not enough, and there was no way the Germans would have got it back to Germany in order to refine it. Also, you forget that they struggled to supply Rommel's three divisions, so would have had a hard time supplying a larger army in North Africa.
    1
  21680. Glad to hear you liked it :)
    1
  21681. There were multiple reasons to attack the USSR. But Germany had to attack when it did because if it didn't it would run out of oil and not be able to attack.
    1
  21682. That's the point. They did run out of oil. That's why, despite having more tanks in 1942 than in 1941, the Germans weren't able to attack across the whole Eastern Front again like they did during Barbarossa.
    1
  21683. I get what you're saying about logistics and I agree, but you've missed the point. Germany was going to run out of oil in October of 1941, even if they didn't attack the Soviet Union. They didn't have enough oil production to stockpile - they were running a deficit. Watch the video and you will see that.
    1
  21684. Did you watch the video? Only because I showed that they ran out of oil in 1941, and you didn't mention that.
    1
  21685. Even with Soviet imports and Romanian oil, it wasn't enough and they were running a massive deficit. Toprani describes that France was sent back to the pre-motor-vehicle era as a result of the oil crisis.
    1
  21686. Please watch this more up to date video. The middle portion of the video accurately describes the oil situation and provides a graph that illustrates that, even if there had been a second Romania supplying the European Axis, they still wouldn't have had enough oil to supply their minimum requirements. Also, you will find a link in the description of the linked video to my full bibliography https://youtu.be/YAfo5mse-ag
    1
  21687. Even with Soviet oil, they were running a massive deficit. As shown in the video, another entire Romania would not have covered the shortage, and that's with Romanian and Soviet oil
    1
  21688. It makes a change doesn't it :) a lot of people don't know the importance of actually doing research and forming arguments based on that. I'm trying to show people how it's done. Thanks for your comment
    1
  21689. If you watched the video, you'd find that Germany was running a massive deficit of oil in 1940/41. So huge in fact that a whole other Romania would not have been enough to cover it.
    1
  21690. Thanks! I'll see what I can do :)
    1
  21691. You didn't watch the video then. Considering Germany lost before the USA even got involved, I'd say your point is irrelevant.
    1
  21692. It was certainly important. But the point is that it wouldn't have crippled the Soviet war effort, nor won the war. The Soviets would have just taken it back later. Hitler's strategy of aiming for the Caucasus was a sound one, and may have lead to Soviet collapse.
    1
  21693. Good to hear! :)
    1
  21694. You're welcome :)
    1
  21695. I'm planning on looking into it in the future, but let's put it this way, I'm not convinced any of the major historians of the war know the answer to your question. They may say they do, but they're never forthcoming with the information they gathered to support their claims. From what I can see, it remains a major unresearched subject. That said, I'm gathering what little on the subject has been written, and I'll let you know when I have an answer.
    1
  21696. They were still getting oil, but not enough to launch major attacks like Barbarossa. Plus, infantry Divisions (which are the majority of German divisions) don't need much oil to operate. Trains brought supplies forwards, and the war became less mobile for the Germans.
    1
  21697. Sources are listed in the pinned comment.
    1
  21698. Not without oil.
    1
  21699. There's a difference between not having enough fuel, and having none.
    1
  21700. Except, even with Romania and Germany's synthetic oil plants, they were still in a massive oil deficit, so your points are irrelevant. I also didn't see the point in talking about the political aims since that's irrelevant to this video, which isn't about why they went to war.
    1
  21701. Why?
    1
  21702. Thank you! Yes, I'm trying to remain as neutral in this as possible and just present the reality of the situation. Obviously, I am biased though, simply because I'm reliant on English sources. There's no getting around that for the minute, although I am now learning German and want to learn Russian too.
    1
  21703. Thank you very much! I've just published them
    1
  21704. Italy already had Libya before the war, and quickly lost most of it during the first year of the war. In fact, I've done a video on this (Operation Compass) https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk And yes, the Middle East did have some (limited) oil production. However, logistics was a major problem for Rommel's Afrika Army because the Royal Navy and RAF were sinking Italian ships, and Rommel only had 3 German divisions (plus some Italian). This was why attacking into the Middle East wouldn't have been a viable strategy. Plus, even if they had, the Middle East wasn't producing anywhere near enough oil at that time to satisfy German demands. Only the Caucasus could relieve the pressure.
    1
  21705. Hitler's philosophy was to conquer the lands of the East (living space) in order to take the resources and the slaves needed for his Reich. This was because he didn't like the idea of Germany having to rely on other powers for her resources (hence his policy for: Autarky). This is actually why he started the war in the first place. So long-term trade or peace with the Soviet Union was not an option.
    1
  21706. That was Hess. I was actually going to mention him in this video, and ask if the Oil situation was part of the reason he wanted to seek peace, but didn't have enough information on him in general and didn't have hte time to do research on him.
    1
  21707. I agree, but the point I was trying to put forward here is that taking the Caucasus would give Germany a chance of winning the war. It may not have been a great chance, but it was a chance at least.
    1
  21708. He did. This is what living space (Lebensraum) and Autarky was all about. He wanted to conquer land, but mainly for the resources that Germany needed. They were stockpiling oil, and were building up their synthetic oil industry. Problem was, I don't think they predicted occupying Western Europe as well. Hitler only wanted a war in the East, not in the west. Imagine Poland in 1939, no declaration of war from the west at all, and then Barbarossa in 1940, but with enough oil to last until November 1941.
    1
  21709. Adrian, Romania wasn't producing enough oil to cover the German/European deficit. It would have required another two entire Romania's in order to cover the deficit.
    1
  21710. Glad you liked it 😊
    1
  21711. He wasn't able to invade the British Isles. That's why he tried to put political pressure on London for peace (he didn't need to conquer Britain, just get peace).
    1
  21712. By politics, it doesn't mean modern politics; it's historical subjects on political topics, e.g. Fascism or National Socialism. The "stick to tanks" crowd think I should do nothing but the pure military videos. However, without understanding the political ideologies, it's impossible to understand why decisions were made on or off the battlefield. Thus, your comment makes no sense. I'm not aiming to be another Jordan Peterson; I only want to talk about historical topics without being muzzled by people who can't fathom that there's more to history than glorified tractors.
    1
  21713. You can absolutely comment - this wasn't just for Patreons because I needed to know what everyone things, Patreon or not. And this new flexible approach should allow me to take a few much-needed days off.
    1
  21714. You were! Congratulations!
    1
  21715. Sadly I don't have enough transports to make that viable
    1
  21716. People have complained when I make shorter videos, demanding that I do 30 to 40 minutes. That's why I don't often do 10 to 15 minute videos, but I'll have to start doing more going forwards.
    1
  21717. I have made a Stalingrad playlist, it's here https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledi9jQeOzCUtBP2pxYdCYiXX
    1
  21718. Yep!
    1
  21719. I think if people are paying to ask questions I shouldn't short-change them.
    1
  21720. Or, it's because Stalingrad is sapping 90% of my time, so I don't have time to do the research or edit other videos, causing the quality of those videos to drop. When I took the break from Stalingrad in the first months of this year, the channel boomed like never before as I was able to dedicate more time to making different military and political videos than Stalingrad. So overall, it is Stalingrad that's hurting this channel's performance, and that's why my new videos aren't doing well. The break I took from Stalingrad absolutely confirms this.
    1
  21721. Yes I have, and Terri has actually made me a couple which I may publish in the next couple weeks 👍
    1
  21722. If you click on the bell again, there should be a drop-down menu with 3 options. You have to select 'All' to be notified of all videos. I know, I know. It's stupid
    1
  21723. Hey Vass! Barbarossa is an interesting campaign. I should do more videos on it in the future, although a full Battlestorm series on it might be beyond my capabilities at the moment. Apart from Glantz, Stahel's books are a good read on it too.
    1
  21724. Whoever scores the most points
    1
  21725. Me too! We'll get there soon
    1
  21726. Like this? https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  21727. That's the cupboard of mystery. On it I have a postcard of Berlin during the Cold War, which I've never been to and don't talk about the topic. I have two postcards of Venice which I've never been to. And I have a poster of Kitchener from WW1, which I also don't talk about. But the best part is, one of the doors won't open because my bookshelves are covering it. The Muc-Off sticker and the other one are the icing on the cake
    1
  21728. Haha they've just begun (2 downvotes now)
    1
  21729. History theory says: use all available sources. There's nothing wrong with using old out of date sources, or "biased" ones (all sources are biased). And yes, I'm aware of Beevor's biases. However, in this particular instance, his points complement the other sources, and I have no reason to suspect he was incorrect.
    1
  21730. Thank you! I was using Google translate for that name, and it pronounces it "Reenok" (although, now you say it, I can hear the "Rin-nock" in Google's attempt at the word)
    1
  21731. All that matters is what the customer will pay for the product. For that reason, the cost of labour is irrelevant to the final price.
    1
  21732. Two sides of the same coin
    1
  21733. Welcome! Hope you enjoy the videos, especially the controversial ones :)
    1
  21734. Basic economics is not propaganda https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21735. "there is no such thing as market economy in the purest sense of the word" This is a market economy. I (the seller) produce a product, you (the buyer) watch it. Are you denying that this is a market? You're correct that there's never been a free market OFFICIAL economy, because we've always had taxes and other manipulations. The closest we got to a free market was Britain in the 1800s, which is why living standards boomed during that period (poverty still existed, but not near as much as in the 1700s). But you're wrong that markets don't exist, or couldn't. It's not ideology either. It's nature. If we didn't have government ideology manipulating and enforcing terrible policies, a natural free market would emerge. There's no ideology in that - if you took off your shoes, your feet would touch the floor. Well, if we take off the shackles of government totalitarianism and force, we (the market) would be free.
    1
  21736. That's basically the conclusion I come too
    1
  21737. Glad you liked it!
    1
  21738. Racial Socialism and Class Socialism are similar, but not the same. I explained this in a recent video https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  21739. Fascists and Socialists are the same thing.
    1
  21740. "sanctions and blokades by west." You mean 'autarky' which was self-imposed, since the Soviet Union was socialist and believed that trade (i.e. the free market) was evil.
    1
  21741. You're working from home then :)
    1
  21742. The answer: indoctrination financed from abroad
    1
  21743. "the greatest story never told" I started watching it. It's full of inaccuracies and actually hurts my brain. It's pure Nazi propaganda, and not even entertaining.
    1
  21744. Hoover seized control of the economy after the crash, and then Roosevelt went even further. You might have a point about the war (might, although I disagree), but not in the 1929-1940 period. For more information about Hoover seizing control of the economy, see Rothbard's America's Great Depression. And watch my video on what causes recessions coming tomorrow, which will address your other points.
    1
  21745. Everybody is biased. Being biased is part of the human condition https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  21746. "I guess TIK isnt too familiar with the USA's federal reserve, which is infinitely better than letting politicians be in control of the money supply.... The fed stabilizes the money supply and the people put up with them as long as the money is stable... Prices for food might be slowly rising but prices for luxury TVs and computers are dropping so the consumer is content." Come back on Wednesday. I have a video going up entitled "What Causes Recessions and Depressions", which will basically answer your points. For clarity, I'm very familiar with the idea of Central Banking, that's why I'm against it, regardless whether bankers or politicians are the ones in charge of it.
    1
  21747. I did read it when I was in uni. Apparently that book was also subject to a bit of controversy. Not sure if it's accurate.
    1
  21748. A Democracy is "People Power". But the People are the Public and the Public is the State. Democracy is State Power. A "Society" is also a Public, which is a State. I've covered this in the linked video. The Soviet Union was a Socialist nation, since a nation is a society/social, which was controlled by the workers' democratic State.
    1
  21749. "The Soviet Union did not have a Socialist economy, how can he not know this." Because it did have a Socialist economy. It only didn't have a Socialist economy if you don't know what Socialism is https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21750. I'm very much aware of the fact that the elite want full-Socialism and the destruction of the poor and middle classes.
    1
  21751. "meanwhile 50% of manufactured goods in the U.S. are made by prisoners...jesus if i want preached at i would become religious, this channel has now become a one man grievance outlet, where did socialism touch you TIK?" Right, but the US government has those prisoners, doesn't it? And the US government is socialist, since all governments are socialist. So that actually reinforces the point that socialism is bad. My Public vs Private video will explain what socialism is to you https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21752. If nobody wants it, the price must come down. https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21753. There was no fault
    1
  21754. "A Russian guy i talked to at a museum told me he supposed the pre revolution standard of living returned in the mid 70s." That's actually what the official statistics show, as I showed in the video!
    1
  21755. Quality of life continued to go up until the system died in 2008, and then 2020. This is what the Austrians have been speaking about for years now - the economy isn't free, and as a result it is being destroyed by artificially low interest rates and currency creation on an epic scale.
    1
  21756. "Long time discredited monetarist theories painfully banded to explain complex economic development. Stick to military history." There wasn't a single monetarist theory in this video. Also https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  21757. You may want to watch this video https://youtu.be/zkPGfTEZ_r4
    1
  21758. Try watching more than a minute of the video
    1
  21759. Because the 'economy' (as it was) disintegrated. It then needed to be rebuilt from scratch, with a poor populous that had been stifled economically for decades and had no experience with entrepreneurship. Worse, the new state wasn't exactly laissez-faire.
    1
  21760. Enjoy https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21761. Please watch my Public vs Private video https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21762. Glad you liked it!
    1
  21763. Sweden and Norway is not Socialist any more https://youtu.be/0lxD-gikpMs
    1
  21764. "Actually they used money in the UDSSR or in the GDR so they could have calculated how much money something cost. Seems just they didn't do it, didn't draw the right conclusions and/or didn't want to make the hard decissions." There was money, but it wasn't a free market, and so the prices didn't reflect the true value of the goods. Thus, they could calculate how much something cost in terms of labour hours, but not it's actual value. Therefore they couldn't make actual economic calculations.
    1
  21765. Definition of socialism and why it is central planning https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Stick to Tanks https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8 And because I'm into Austrian School economics, I could see the current crisis from a mile away. It's given me time to build up an emergency fund, which I'm going to use to get through the crisis, unlike a lot of debt-drowned corporations and people. Covid-19 was unexpected, but I am prepared financially because I understood basic economics https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  21766. Absolutely. There are differences though, since Fascism and National Socialism allowed multiple corporations rather than just one giant one (USSR Inc)
    1
  21767. Guido von List also looked into the Kabbala, as did others in the Thule Society.
    1
  21768. For a more in depth explanation, see my video on the objective theory of history https://youtu.be/chgZcPzfbeI
    1
  21769. Yeah, I kinda misspoke there
    1
  21770. Why not both?
    1
  21771. Yeah there's a few stories like this just in the LRDG, let alone the SAS and other units - although this one seems to be one of the more desperate but mostly-fortunate ones.
    1
  21772. The books don't go into the specifics. But it does seem likely he lost a lot of blood... and possibly therefore enough fluid to succumb first. I've used the odd poll before, but yes it's a great feature :) I can start using them more often
    1
  21773. I can do, I just didn't think they're be that popular
    1
  21774. Which one's that? I don't think it's worth replying to him. He's probably just wanting attention and views.
    1
  21775. Only number 1 is racism. I wouldn't say that 2 or 3 are racism (although racism may be linked to them). You're correct though that the BS Marxist narrative doesn't distinguish between the three and lumps them all together. The Playdoh's in the media and the Government might propagate the myth that 2 and 3 are racism, but who cares about what the Establishment think?
    1
  21776. National Socialism isn't just racist fascism though. In fact, Fascism and National Socialism are two distinct ideologies, as I've outlined in this video https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  21777. Free trade and colonialism are two separate things. Free trade was/is fine by itself. But the Establishment decided that any nation that put up borders had to have "open borders", which then led to war and colonialisation. So no, colonialism isn't free trade, but the free-trade-plus-"gunboat diplomacy" policy was the driving factor that led Westminster to colonise.
    1
  21778. No, what made you jump to that conclusion
    1
  21779. I'm sorry for your loss too. It's horrible
    1
  21780. Devon Ziegler I'll believe you got it right haha
    1
  21781. Gary Thomas Yes! It's called the Burj Khalifa :)
    1
  21782. martaxsasLT it is in Dubai so you're half there :)
    1
  21783. Cameron Thompson yes, but not quite! "Burj Khalifa"
    1
  21784. Gary Thomas haha why stand still and conserve your energy when you can climb the side of a building!! YEAHHH!!!
    1
  21785. Gary Thomas Was it in Mission Impossible!? Didn't know that haha
    1
  21786. Omar Ramirez not quite :)
    1
  21787. Morgan Chalmers Lucky google guess? :P
    1
  21788. Devon Ziegler haha are you a Mercan? wait...
    1
  21789. Morgan Chalmers lol well I think it's good to get things wrong and learn :)
    1
  21790. crackwiser are they what you use the most??
    1
  21791. Cameron Thompson spoiler alert! :P
    1
  21792. Thegamer8324 great!
    1
  21793. starcraft2own time is TIKing down for you then!
    1
  21794. Peter Trimble hey pete!
    1
  21795. Congratulations!
    1
  21796. Yes, I'm not my 'race'. My ethnicity is completely irrelevant to me as a human being, and I judge people for who they are rather than for what their skin colour 'says' I should think about them.
    1
  21797. If you had watched the full video, you would have heard me talk about the racism in the west. Please watch my videos in full before commenting
    1
  21798. Ja ich lerne Deutsch, aber I keep messing it up because I'm so used to the English pronunciations. Maybe one day I'll get it right :)
    1
  21799. The only hope is to wake as many people up to reality and prepare for the future as best we can.
    1
  21800. Because I'm an individual, not a race. Are you an individual or a group?
    1
  21801. What feedback did you have?
    1
  21802. Not sure why that would be relevant to this video. I did mention western racism towards the end.
    1
  21803. I'm an individual, therefore I'm not a race. If I was a race, then I'm no longer an individual. Races (socially) don't exist.
    1
  21804. Seriously? I haven't watched Babylon 5. Star Trek is more my kind of thing
    1
  21805. Yeah you're losing it Jamie!
    1
  21806. I don't know myself so not saying you're wrong, but others in the comments are claiming that Sweden and others conquered parts of Estonia in the past.
    1
  21807. There are biological differences between individuals. And if there are no two people that are the same, then there are no 'racial' differences - only individual differences. Not all white guys from the UK like football (I don't). Not all white men are intelligent, or 'superior'. Not all men are good with cars (I'm not). Not all women are hopeless at DIY (my female friend is amazing at DIY). Why? Because 'groups' don't exist. Only individuals exist. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21808. I tried. I really did ☹️
    1
  21809. They took the other islands this episode, not Saaremaa itself. The Germans didn't really contest the other islands, but they do with Saaremaa.
    1
  21810. You were technically 3rd Jamie!
    1
  21811. You should absolutely read "America's Great Depression" by Murray Rothbard. I think you'll find it enlightening, because you're so close! The free PDF can be found here https://mises.org/library/americas-great-depression
    1
  21812. Yes. Welcome to reality. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  21813. Haha thanks
    1
  21814. Italian Fascism is the same as you described, just "national community" rather than class or race. If you haven't seen my video on me defining Fascism, I'd recommend it https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  21815. Also, the fact he was a Marxist, and claimed that it was capitalism, even though the evidence was overwhelmingly pointing in the direction of socialism, to me, suggests that he was being genuine in his observations, even if his conclusion was wrong.
    1
  21816. Wow, joint first it seems!
    1
  21817. "You must be confusing private enterprise with free enterprise. Private enterprise means that businesses are privately owned, not that they are completely free from state intervention." If it's not free, it's not private. Private means the individual owns his business, meaning he can do with it as he pleases. As soon as the totalitarian state "intervenes" in the business (in other words, takes it over), then it's no longer his business, even if he nominally has ownership of it. - "There are many examples of totalitarian regimes with private enterprise, China being the most notorious one." China is Communist with a policy of Gleichschaltung. It grants its people nominal ownership over its firms, which is enough to encourage them to actually work (rather than starve), but they don't actually have much power, which is why the State is constantly mandating that they shut parts of their economy down.
    1
  21818. "I personally believe Anarcho Capitalism (your implied view) is the most dystopian vision of the future possible." Your personal beliefs are irrelevant. But I'm not sure how you even came to this conclusion. Imagine a world where you could buy and sell things without having to pay sales and business taxes (so everything would be 50% cheaper here in the UK), or drive a car without paying car tax, or own a TV without paying your TV tax, or call up one of the multiple police services that exist rather than the racist monopoly police service that oppresses us right now... Gee, what a horrible nightmare that would be! Alternatively, look at China. You want that? Really? That's your utopian vision of the future? As Orwell said, a boot stamping on the human face forever is not my vision of a wonderful paradise.
    1
  21819. I've been over the historical definition of socialism right here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y That video is backed by sources. You could just watch it at any time... but you won't, because you know The Truth™
    1
  21820. Damn! I thought I'd catch you out. You foiled me :P Good point, and I don't know the answer. The books I read don't say why either
    1
  21821. Hey Hobo, wow I didn't realise you were doing videos! That's awesome :) thanks for putting me as squad leader. Would like to watch it, which video is it? Also, just checked out one of your other videos and I can help you improve your commentary audio if you'd like some help with that?
    1
  21822. See, I believe Kursk had more tanks, and yet Glantz claims Brody was bigger. I need to do more research on this issue
    1
  21823. Makes a change!
    1
  21824. You have the right to vote! The Patreons have their own vote.
    1
  21825. I'm neither pro-German, pro-Russian nor pro-Soviet. I don't care about tribal politics. And I'm also fully aware of the nationalist propaganda coming from the German generals and the Russian government. So I'm not favouring either side, and I'm actually happy to cover the Soviet victory and German defeat. And feel free to make a Battlestorm Singapore from the Russian perspective. I don't care, Britain sucks now and it sucked back then.
    1
  21826. You're wrong, I did read your comment. Thank you.
    1
  21827. You're the Fascist, not me.
    1
  21828. Thegamer8324 yes, correct! They also sold a mcpizza not long ago, but I missed it and will forever wonder what it was like
    1
  21829. starcraft2own from this day forth, 1940 shall be forever known as the "Year of the Daisy" * thunderous applause *
    1
  21830. Nikki PiP close! Only 11 years off :)
    1
  21831. "Fighting against nazi occupation is now radicalising on purpose and destroying economy, are you serious?" That is precisely what the source I used said, and I agree with the source.
    1
  21832. I guess you think minimum wage helps the unemployed, right? https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    1
  21833. If you think this is ridiculous, you should watch my 9 hour Operation Crusader video. Now that's truly ridiculous!
    1
  21834. Thank you for rating the video 5 starts! ☺️👍 I've seen that survey come up with other channels and wondered if they did that sort of thing for my videos too. You've confirmed that they do, so thank you
    1
  21835. @ Duhduhduh Buhbuhbuh "All great but TIk seriously, "socialist policies are designed to destroy economy". Is that a quote from objective historian?" Yes, this is actually very objective. If I'd said 'socialist policies are to help the economy', you'd know I was lying and pushing a socialist agenda. A statement of fact is being objective, especially when the evidence is clear, like the fact that minimum wage causes unemployment https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ - "Or "Tito did not care about civilians". Those both statements sound pretty amateurish to me." Oh okay. Maybe a quote from a historian will help you change your mind - “Tito began with a small popular base, and his basic strategy was to remove the party underground from the cities to the poorly supervised rural areas, seek support in the villages and among the roving groups of refugee Serbs, and create enough disorder to stimulate German reprisal actions, which would further radicalize the civilians and create more recruits for the Partisans.” - Milazzo, “The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance,” Kindle Chapter 2. - "Real reason why Tito had more succes is that Communist movment was movment of all people of yugoslavia,unlike chetniks or ustashe that were nationalist movments. Brotherhood and unity was main creed of Tito partisans" Except, of course, all the people who fought against him and his international movement, which included all the nationalist movements.
    1
  21836. "It is not my mother tongue" Right, that explains some of the issues. - "didn't you say at 2:07 "unconditionnal surrender was signed by Yugoslav High command on 17th of Arpil 1941"? If yes, this is false" Okay, but here's a direct quote from a history book - "Less than two weeks after the war had begun, on 17 April 1941, the rout was complete and the Yugoslav High Command was compelled to sign an unconditional surrender." - Milazzo, “The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance,” Kindle Chapter 1. And another quote from another book - "On April 17, two representatives of the Yugoslav General Staff and of the absent Royal Government capitulated to the Germans in Belgrade." - Roberts, "Tito, Mihailović, and the Allies," P17.
    1
  21837. Is English your native language? I'm asking because every point you brought up is a complete twist of what I actually said in the video.
    1
  21838. I just said the full name - Libertarian-land - so that everyone would know what it meant
    1
  21839. Who said I was a "Brit"? I'm an individual, not a tribe
    1
  21840. 5pm GMT as always. But British summer time differs by an hour
    1
  21841. Okay, but why are they not to be called Communists? And they can't be called 'Partisans' either because they weren't the only partisans and that name would be confusing and misleading.
    1
  21842. Countries that locked up their economies had a higher death rate per 100,000 than those who didn't. So, in other words, those that implemented Socialism needlessly killed a lot of their own people. Just look at Sweden vs the UK https://youtu.be/HADXjj75f5Q
    1
  21843. It does, doesn't it
    1
  21844. "First supply "from Moscow" is not an factor before Red Army actually arrives on Yugoslav... It was logistically impossible before that." Not true, they got parachuted supplies by the Soviets.
    1
  21845. "As someone who considers themselves fairly enmeshed in the socialist cause, I can assure you, we do not want to destroy the economy." Exactly, you have no intention of destroying the economy, but that's precisely what Socialism does. "The vast majority of socialists believe in social democracy under capitalism and disagree on what comes next, hence the 1 bagillion ideologies." Haha yeah
    1
  21846. Did you watch the same video? I said they committed crimes against civilians. Yet you missed that?
    1
  21847.  @Chud_Bud_Supreme  I wouldn't mind talking about politics or economics - in fact, I want to (in the context of history). But it's difficult because people aren't listening to what I'm saying, are jumping to wild and ridiculous conclusions, and then are asking questions that have been answered a million times before (e.g. "but who's going to build the roads?") It's just frustrating and off-putting. But a lot of people last week said that I should ignore the people who aren't listening and go ahead with it anyway. So we'll see.
    1
  21848. Glad you think so Marty!
    1
  21849. No worries, thank you for watching :)
    1
  21850. Very little unfortunately. I've always concentrated on the European Front, although did start reading one book on China vs Japan (but that was a while ago, and have forgotten much about it). This is why I'm not committing to any videos on it. I think it's good to specialize.
    1
  21851. Thanks for pointing that out! I'm a derp!
    1
  21852. To be honest, I don't think Wiki does this battle justice, so you're going to have to wait ;)
    1
  21853. You're probably right! And I have no idea. Although I think the real events weren't very dramatic... but if you need someone to embellish facts to make a film, you can always call Hollywood!
    1
  21854. Yes! And it gets better (but I won't spoil it)
    1
  21855. Yes Ton, you could even say it was down to the wire.
    1
  21856. Glad to hear you're enjoying this :) the next video has just come out ;)
    1
  21857. I guarantee you won't be able to predict what happens (unless you've already read up on the battle)
    1
  21858. 82nd
    1
  21859. Haha I fully expect those sorts of comments
    1
  21860. It's my pleasure!
    1
  21861. Cheers Peters! Glad to have you onboard :) you've come at a good time, since I've been working on the script for this video all year, and only finished it a few weeks back. It was ~75,500 words.
    1
  21862. That's what happens when you nationalize or socialize a company - priority goes away from the customer to the employees (who then are incentivized to be lazy because they get bailed out when they do)
    1
  21863. Thank you, but I'm going to decline. I've said this before but I don't think I'd be any good at live streams, and I much prefer to back up my points with references
    1
  21864. Some of the points confirm they were Socialists (e.g price controls), and the other points are flat out wrong or distortions of the historical reality (e.g. the "privatisation" idea, which I've shown to be false in my 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video).
    1
  21865. Thanks for the heads up. I've read his Barbarossa book, but not the others yet. I'm doing my best, but I can't read everything! :)
    1
  21866. I like constructive criticism :) There's two reasons for this. The first is that I wanted to offer the German perspective first so that I could tackle the idea that the 'Blitzkrieg' wasn't working. If I'd gone down a more balanced route I would have been accused of being pro-Soviet or anti-German (again). So by doing that, I've shown that the Germans got things wrong, and that this wasn't a flawless campaign from their perspective. When I do the Soviet or more balanced view (which I've started, if you check out the video that follows this - the Soviet army sizes video) I can refer back to this video as say that the German campaign was flawed regardless. The second is because there's a lack of Soviet sources detailing their point of view. I'm trying to find everything I can now to try bridge the gap, but Cold War politics still has the Eastern Front in its vice. I do have Glantz to fall back on, but would like other accounts too. I am learning German at the moment, but I'm now beginning to think I should learn the Russian instead, such is the need to get more sources. So the Soviet and balanced perspective is coming, but see this as a series rather than an all-inclusive one-off video.
    1
  21867. Good to hear! :)
    1
  21868. It's not hindsight when some people were saying the same thing at the time.
    1
  21869. Glad you liked it! I think this is one of my better videos too. A lot of people also enjoy my "The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL" video as well, so I'll leave the link https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg And yes, the better option seems to be not to take the city - or at least not by direct attack. Cutting the Volga south of Stalingrad and then shelling the city makes more sense.
    1
  21870. Well, they would have needed the Caucasus, and the Baltic region in 100% control. Certainly a line along the Volga was definitely a possibility, since they'd almost reached that point anyway. That said, garrisoning such a vast territory would have been an administrative nightmare... which is probably the reason they weren't too friendly with the population and were busy starving them and exporting them off to labour camps.
    1
  21871. As shown in my oil video, yes she did fail because of oil. It wasn't the only factor, but it was the most important https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  21872. Good old lying Gurderian! I'll leave a link to MHV's recent video on him https://youtu.be/UTgf3UHMBjY
    1
  21873. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  21874. Thank you! I hope you'll say the same for the epic +24 hr video on the Battle of Stalingrad I'm making, since this was just part of the warm-up :)
    1
  21875. Thanks Ken!
    1
  21876. No worries, it was my pleasure :)
    1
  21877. If there's something you want explaining, I can explain, or if it's a complicated issue I can show you which books you can read to get that information from.
    1
  21878. So am I! Thanks for watching
    1
  21879. Yes, but defeating individual pieces is not the aim of the game, like in Chess. You must win strategically in Go in order to capture the most territory. You can win in go without even fighting - which is strangely enough similar to the philosophy of Sun Tzu.
    1
  21880. This is the correct translation https://youtu.be/ZrHmcpRAZNs
    1
  21881. I think I talked about this in my recent Q&A video so I'll give you the link https://youtu.be/usBKGE4w5NI (check out the timestamps) But basically, I think it would have hurt the Soviets more than helped the Germans, since the Soviet economy was on the brink anyway. Not sure how much supply it would have given the Germans though in the short term. Long term it would have been very advantageous.
    1
  21882. Thank you! More to come :)
    1
  21883. No, that part was specifically about the first few weeks of Blau.
    1
  21884. A variety of sources, but in this particular case, you should check out the book "Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East" by David Stahel.
    1
  21885. Germany ran out of oil in ~October 1941. See sources in pinned comments and my Oil video for more information about Germany's oil crisis. Link: https://youtu.be/kVo5I0xNRhg
    1
  21886. Yes, why?
    1
  21887. Good to hear! :)
    1
  21888. That's good to know! More to come :)
    1
  21889. A lot of time! But the end result is worth it :)
    1
  21890. Thanks! Glad you like the videos
    1
  21891. That's actually the reason I use that one so much, because *it is creepy*. You hear a lot how he was able to stare people down and convince them with his charisma, so I think that picture is appropriate for the period. However, if I cover 1944-1945, I'll probably choose one where he's looking haggard.
    1
  21892. Fall Blau failed in the summer.
    1
  21893. If you think this is long, wait until you see the +24 video on Stalingrad I'm making. And trust me, I try and make my videos only as long as they need to be.
    1
  21894. Yes! That will be coming at some point soon :)
    1
  21895. That wasn't the objective, as tactical success didn't lead to a strategic victory.
    1
  21896. Worst option.
    1
  21897. Wow, thank you! I no longer watch TV, so I'd rather these videos just get more popular on here :)
    1
  21898. Thanks for subscribing :)
    1
  21899. I hope it didn't disappoint!
    1
  21900. Fantastic! Glad to see you're keeping an open mind :)
    1
  21901. I agree, and yes it's a very good video. I'll leave the link for anyone who wants to see it https://youtu.be/VP_QaNU5Uys
    1
  21902. How exactly were they strategic geniuses?
    1
  21903. Well, I can assure you, I'm not :)
    1
  21904. Ok, you've taken Moscow. Then what? The Soviets don't surrender, and now you've got no oil, and your armies are even further into enemy territory, meaning your logistics are even more stretched, so there's no chance in getting to the Caucasus. The end result is the same.
    1
  21905. I wanted to give things from the German perspective before moving into the Soviet. My new video (out today) is the start of that process.
    1
  21906. Well, I'm glad you think so :)
    1
  21907. I'm was ok at Chess, but I never could get the hang of Go. Watch the odd Nick Sibicky video now and then https://www.youtube.com/user/nicksibicky
    1
  21908. You're very welcome :)
    1
  21909. Oh no, don't worry about it, I didn't see your comment that way! I only didn't reply because I've been overwhelmed with comments again! Glad you liked the video. You're right for questioning my dislike of Halder, although for me, I'm just having fun showing how the old Halder-is-perfect-view of the war is wrong. I actually will make a video exclusively on him eventually, and while I will put him in his place for manipulating the post-war view of WW2 in his favour, I will agree with some of what he said.
    1
  21910. Ok, but why? As David Stahel points out in the book I mentioned, Hitler wanted to go south for the resources, whereas Halder wanted to go Moscow. What evidence do you have that contradicts this?
    1
  21911. It makes sense, but assuming they can supply Rommel properly to actually get there, they wouldn't have found it easy to ship the oil back to Germany for processing, just like the British were struggling to do with Middle Eastern oil. Plus, it would have been difficult to defend the Middle East against Allied and Comintern counterattacks.
    1
  21912. Glad to have you on board :)
    1
  21913. It was my pleasure! I'm just glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  21914. Great :) I'll be returning to the Eastern Front after Crusader is over. The next bunch of videos (hopefully starting in February) will be on the Courland Pocket, and Stalingrad itself will be covered once that's done.
    1
  21915. You're very welcome :)
    1
  21916. A big question, and it's down to interpretation. I think if they'd gone Astrakhan first, then south, they would have done better than they did in reality, because the Soviets barely hung onto Stalingrad as they did.
    1
  21917. Disaster from their point of view, not from our point of view. It's good to look at history from the lens of those at the time.
    1
  21918. What's my bias? Apart from the fact I can't read German (learning it now) and Russian (planning to learn it after German), what exactly am I doing that's so biased? https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  21919. I am the presenter, and I have a 2:1 degree in history. Not that that matters because accreditation isn't relevant - all that matters is that you understand history theory and apply it. A number on a sheet of paper that some university gives you isn't an indication of intelligence nor that you understand the topic. It only indicates that you managed to sit through years of boring lectures by people who cannot teach and who have an agenda to teach you a twisted narrative of history, and then hand in some homework. At least, that was my experience at university. I've done more work on this channel than I ever did at university or college combined, and I'm certainly more proud of it. Two relevant videos https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  21920. I get people telling me I speak too slowly, which is why I try not to pause very often :(
    1
  21921. Hope you did!
    1
  21922. You have a lot of responsibility being a leader.
    1
  21923. Yes, pretty much
    1
  21924. I know that, which is why I delete the auto-generated subtitles and put my own in. I guess I could run the script through Google translate into different languages, although that would take a long time to do for each video.
    1
  21925. I'm sorry! I don't speak Polish :(
    1
  21926. You're very welcome :)
    1
  21927. All the way until February 1943
    1
  21928. Okay, but the Front HQ is just a HQ, it's not another army. The 62nd Army was isolated on the other side of the Volga. Yes, supplies could come in, so it wasn't encircled, but I still think it is correct to say it was isolated since it has no physical connection with the other armies. To say it was "cut off" or "encircled" would be wrong, but I think "isolated" (meaning: separated) makes sense
    1
  21929. Isolated from the other armies, not from supplies
    1
  21930. Unfortunately people complain when I put music in it, and people complain when I don't, so I've just decided to save time by leaving it out
    1
  21931. Glad someone noticed that :)
    1
  21932. That's Wüster! I've got his memoirs on the battle and have been using it in the series 👍
    1
  21933. There have been issues at YouTube over the past 48 hours or more. So you may be affected https://downdetector.com/status/youtube/
    1
  21934. Yeah I messed up. It should have been the 9th from roughly the 10 minute mark (when I say the 9th). Not sure how I managed that!
    1
  21935. Thegamer8324 nice! How long you been playing the sax?
    1
  21936. Thegamer8324 correct! Do you play any instruments?
    1
  21937. Morgan Chalmers lol it's not that high!
    1
  21938. starcraft2own A to G with a few sharps in between :)
    1
  21939. Gary Thomas Correct!
    1
  21940. Pat TheHombre what do you mean? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK_0jXPuIr0
    1
  21941. what do you mean? :D
    1
  21942. Tomislav that's an Odd number to pick ;)
    1
  21943. Devon Ziegler well, there comes a point where you don't need lessons any more. If you can play it pretty well, and maybe make some of your own songs up, you definitely don't need lessons. I'm not sure if you're at that point, but if you've had lessons then maybe you're close?
    1
  21944. Devon Ziegler Awww, why did you stop?
    1
  21945. Morgan Chalmers No, DRC begins with C. Congo. That's like saying Germany begins with F, the Federal Republic of Germany, or that China begins with P, the People's Republic of China. I'll be doing more countries QOTD. I'll be doing lots of different QOTD's as you'll see at 7pm tonight
    1
  21946. Morgan Chalmers They are indeed 2 different countries :)
    1
  21947. gmsimpson05 lol well at least you got the number right :)
    1
  21948. johnny onetothree Rules are meant to be broken! haha 
    1
  21949. Robert Biggin Great! You got it right! But 2 of the named places were wrong. Dagestan and Diego Garcia aren't independent countries
    1
  21950. Dowly So close, yet so far!
    1
  21951. Gary Thomas Yeah, sure you did haha
    1
  21952. Daryl Sarbaugh that is one of them
    1
  21953. Toni112007 yes, you're correct!
    1
  21954. Rex1987 goal!
    1
  21955. Yvette Morris I'm glad you do! I'm not a fan (not sure if you can tell lol)
    1
  21956. Gary Thomas I think they spell it "fuutbAwls"
    1
  21957. Nikki PiP Absolutely yes!
    1
  21958. Cameron Thompson I'm glad you agree :D
    1
  21959. Tomislav wow I didn't expect you to say that lol
    1
  21960. Tomislav Just Googled it, not heard of it before! Are you good at it? A professional?
    1
  21961. Tomislav Is that a sport!?!
    1
  21962. Bodglin o'Ite That's correct. MATE
    1
  21963. whatthehell1338 Absolutely yes :)
    1
  21964. Morgan Chalmers Because I pulled images off wiki and attributed them so I don't get into copyright trouble
    1
  21965. Morgan Chalmers I'll do a flag one at some point. Tomorrow's one is about the world. Not sure about HOI. Will try get something out this week coming
    1
  21966. Morgan Chalmers Oh yes :)
    1
  21967. Devon Ziegler yep!
    1
  21968. Hopper Yes!
    1
  21969. Dowly That's a good idea. Operation Market Garden would be my first choice since I was going to do my dissertation on it before the tutors decided that no one was allowed to do dissertations I was playing it the other day. I would have had a video out by now but my recording software failed to record it. I'm not that fond of it though if I'm honest Is there a difference between Achtung Panzer Operation Star and Graviteam Tactics Operation Star? I have APOS not GTOS
    1
  21970. Exactly
    1
  21971. I've read Spengler's "Prussianism and Socialism". It's more communist that the books I recommended.
    1
  21972. "Richard Wolff" Don't you mean Mr "Socialism Can't Create PS5s"? https://youtube.com/shorts/YqH0hVY1SBk?si=-GR7PcgYeQzy3MvH
    1
  21973. I've dealt with the Rate of Profit to Fall Fallacy in the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video, because Hitler believed the same thing, which he referred to as "shrinking markets". It comes from the old classical economics that Marx believed in, but which the world moved past after the 'Marginal Revolution'. If you're still clung to the old economic model, you're two centuries behind the times.
    1
  21974. As I've been saying this for years now, Stalingrad is every 4 weeks. I CANNOT make the videos quicker than that. That's why we have these filler videos in between. It's either that or the channel dies and Stalingrad doesn't get completed.
    1
  21975.  @Jason-gq8fo  I'm not right-wing. Try again.
    1
  21976. "If the government had let the rail industry collapse instead of bailing them out as you suggest then prey tell how we would have won the Battle of Britain" If the Big Four weren't subsidised by the government in the first place, they wouldn't have grown too big and too inefficient to be unprofitable in the first place. Thus, government has created the problem that it then pretends to solve. And Labour only returned the railways to profit through subsidies, paid for by the taxpayer. They didn't make them truly profitable in the sense that the passengers paid for the trains out of their need for the use of trains. And as I showed in the video, the railways were never "privatised", so the rest of what you're saying is nonsense.
    1
  21977. "But it is the free market that promotes obesity,fentonyl,gambling and disposable vapes as acceptable lifestyle choices.." Who are you to decide what other people should or shouldn't do with their own lives? If the people want those things, then the people should be free to have those things. And even though we have a glorious government right now, they haven't prevented people doing any of those things, so why do you think the State is any better?
    1
  21978. "Ok then explain the bailing out the banks? clearly banking industry was dying in 2008!" Yes, and I've personally explained this here https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs
    1
  21979. If the original rail companies were going bankrupt, LET THEM. There's no reason to nationalise a dying industry. It's a misallocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses. All you're doing is lowering living standards by nationalising failing industries.
    1
  21980. Glad to hear it!
    1
  21981. Or they're ignorant of what actually happened, which is what I've discovered. So many will argue that Hitler privatized the German railways, which is complete nonsense. That's why I did a video on the Reichsbahn (the "coal" video) to show that Hitler nationalized the railways in 1933-34, and then rubber-stamped this nationalization in 1937. Yet, for some reason, socialists genuinely think that Hitler privatized the German railways. It boggles the mind!
    1
  21982. Read the pinned comment and watch this video https://youtu.be/rOySICBQ_1s?si=x0Cw6R-tNEXaYChQ Again, while Stalingrad is on, there's only so much I can do.
    1
  21983. Why?
    1
  21984. Not seen it, but glad you thought this was good 👍
    1
  21985. I'll be answering some of these as the series progresses, but I will say that I'm not sure (even now in August) that the German High Command was super-focused on Stalingrad (yet). I think they just wanted to take the city at this point because they believed they could, but weren't fanatical about it yet
    1
  21986. This is the latest episode. Another episode comes out tomorrow
    1
  21987. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  21988. At the moment, I have no idea. All I can say is: a LOT
    1
  21989. That's what I mean. I've talked about this issue before https://youtu.be/9p_5viY7V4s
    1
  21990. It's probably not taken in the shade, which is why it's high
    1
  21991. It's still telling me there's an error :/
    1
  21992. Actually there's just one German division between the two. I'll talk about this in a future episode, but if you see the maps in my Fall Blau video, you'll see that I made that area blurry, because it was basically open terrain with few units on either side
    1
  21993. Also, if the sources say an MP40 could get 180 rounds in that time, why wouldn't a Thompson be able to do that?
    1
  21994. Unless it had a 100 round drum magazine
    1
  21995. I talked about the second BAR in the video. And I don't think this is moot because we can factor in training and so on by thinking logically.
    1
  21996. FIRST! :)
    1
  21997. "Just as an FYI reminder, the British had full access to a weapon of a high rate of fire in the vickers K G.O. It was effectively a super bren gun. Extremely popular with british special forces groups and the commando brigades (SAS, LRDG, Commando raiders and Normandy group)." True, except not at a squad level. It was only available at the platoon level and higher, and was more of a support weapon. It was also classed as a Medium Machine Gun at this time (a Heavy in WW1).
    1
  21998. True. Although the Germans may have had more ammo than that because each man in the gruppe carried ammo for the LMG. Again, this was just to see the theoretical maximum firepower potential of the squads, gruppes and sections
    1
  21999. It's every other week (bi-weekly) when the Season is on (seasons are 3 videos each). So the final video for this current season is next week. It's bi-weekly because it's currently impossible for me to animate a Stalingrad video in a week. In fact, it's almost impossible to do it bi-weekly, and I'm working almost flat out to get it done.
    1
  22000. True. Although, it does appear that the Germans (and possibly the British) may have the advantage in terms of ammunition, because they all carried extra ammunition for the Bren and MG34/42, so maybe they could keep firing their LMGs longer
    1
  22001. Thanks, but I'd rather not use Wikipedia if it can be helped because anyone can write anything on it
    1
  22002. Welcome! Hope you enjoy your stay :)
    1
  22003. It is a meme video, but I did still deliver information about the 3rd Battle of Kharkov, I just did it sarcastically and in a way that would show that it wasn't as much of a "miracle" after all.
    1
  22004. Don't let this interrupt the other video! Also, if you enjoyed the Vampire Economy you will probably enjoy the Mussolini video (if you haven't watched it already)
    1
  22005. Thank you!
    1
  22006.  @uhavedied12334557  Of course I have a license! What are you the license police!?
    1
  22007. Thank you! People are complaining that this video wasn't serious... so I guess you're not allowed to have fun with history unless you have a permit to do so :(
    1
  22008.  @misterijaaaa  "Boy some heavy pro communist BS and that is why i really don't like harsh critic video's like this." Are you suggesting that I wouldn't do this for Chuikov? Or Zhukov? Or Stalin? Because I absolutely will. I despise both National Socialism and Marxist Socialism. Me knocking down Manstein a peg doesn't mean I'm defending the Red Army for the sake of it. The Red Army generals/politicians/economists did a lot wrong - but I don't think we don't need to twist the truth like Manstein did to knock them down. "For communist authors and generals for example land lease was in basic non existent and German always had more losses then them almost from day1." Yes, and they would be totally wrong.
    1
  22009. Because that's much the same to be honest. I'll be doing a bit of that with Chuikov during the Battle of Stalingrad
    1
  22010. Thank you sir!
    1
  22011. Thanks for the feedback. Rest assured, this was just a one off.
    1
  22012. Thank you!
    1
  22013. No, clearly it's a silent v
    1
  22014. Back to normal, I see :D
    1
  22015. No worries! More reviews like this to come :)
    1
  22016. I don't think I'm amazing, but thanks anyway :)
    1
  22017. Thanks sir, will do :)
    1
  22018. No, and I don't see the point. Just because he's a general or admiral doesn't mean he's correct. You cannot calculate human action, otherwise he would know which football team is going to win every match.
    1
  22019. You'll never have perfect knowledge. We're still trying to figure out what happened at Stalingrad 80 years after the battle. So unless you are an all knowing god, you cannot predict human action.
    1
  22020. That doesn't disprove what I said. A wargame can be useful, but not when it comes to making predictions or calculations.
    1
  22021. I wish I had attended a class like that. My history education at college was good, but was mostly lacking when I got to university, and this lesson wasn't really one of them. It was implied, but not stated, which is somewhat sad to consider when I think about it :(
    1
  22022. Also, are you saying Winston Smith is a bad guy?
    1
  22023. The problem is that the term Revisionist implies you cannot revise history. And people use it as an accusation when someone says something (with evidence) that they don't agree with. "You're just rewriting history!" And it gets more complicated because some good historians go by the term revisionist because that's what they're doing - revising the past. Therefore the term is being used by both sides!? So, to clarify this all up, I'm proposing that Revisionist be the term used for actual historians (implying that revising history is good) and Distorian be the term used for people who aren't doing it right.
    1
  22024. If you'd clicked on the video, and saw it was just me walking down the street talking about how I like icecream, then that would have been clickbait. But this is not clickbait because I'm talking about Revisionist Historians. It's just a enticing title-thumbnail combination - which is the point of a title and thumbnail.
    1
  22025. Really? Did they say why?
    1
  22026. Well, once I get back to Stalingrad (concentrating mostly on Operation Crusader at the moment, and Rommel) there will be some more on Mr Manstein :)
    1
  22027. I know, but it's a subject I know quite well, so :)
    1
  22028. Damo, this is not about freedom of speech. You CAN discuss the Holocaust. You CAN discuss and revise the details. You just can't legally DENY it happened in certain countries - which, if you do, is a hateful and racist act against the Jews. It is a hate crime - and that's why I'm justified in calling out people who claim what you claim to be racist, because it is. You can try and distance yourself from the racist aspect of what you're saying, but it undercuts everything you say. Why? Let me explain - The Holocaust of WW2 is a part of the wider mass murder committed by the Nazis. The Holocaust refers to the Jewish portion of that mass murder. 5-6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis in WW2 in the Holocaust, which itself was part of the wider Nazi mass murder of millions more people other than Jews (some sources claim the total figure, including Jews, could be as high as 20 million). This higher number includes all the people starved to death across Europe, from the Netherlands, to Greece, to the Ukraine, and elsewhere. It includes the Commissar order. It includes the persecution of millions of Soviet citizens who lost their homes and were forced into slave labour, where they died through shootings and beating. It includes the euthanasia program, which started in the early 1930's. And this does not include the military deaths inflicted on the battlefields. You're claiming you're not racist, or not a neo-Nazi/fascist. Then why deny/question just the Holocaust, and not the rest of the mass murders committed by the Nazis? The difference between the events you listed and the Holocaust is quite obvious. The Holocaust was the systematic killing of a racial group outside of war, similar to the Armenian Holocaust (which, I will add, Turkey is also denying that event happened - if only there was a law that forced them to remember what they did) or the Stalinist purges. The Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki bombings were conducted during wartime against enemy states (like the Blitz). And we can talk about the moralistic nature of those individual events all you like, just as we can discuss the moralistic nature of the Holocaust - all of these were immoral. But, nobody's denying that Hiroshima happened. Nobody's questioning whether the Blitz happened. But they are questioning the Holocaust, and they are deliberately trying to downplay the numbers, in order to show that Nazism and fascism is a viable alternative to democracy. In addition, the main difference between these events is that the Holocaust was an international event, affecting event country in Europe (and beyond) and, as I said, was the systematic industrial elimination of an internal racial group. That sets it apart from the WW2 bombings, for example. Yes, the Stalinist purges and the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens happened, but nobody's trying to deny that happened, or downplay the numbers. Again, this is a difference between this event and the Holocaust. They are questioning whether the Holocaust happened. They are trying to downplay the numbers. And they're doing it for racial reasons. That's the difference. You talk about Communism killing 10 times the number of people. Alright. Your point is what though? Most people hate communists as much as they hate Nazis. And those are different topics. Let's stick to this one - the Nazi mass murders of WW2, and the part of that mass murder called the Holocaust. You ARE allowed to discuss it - just not deny it happened. But if you do discuss it, let's not misquote people or distort facts and figures, or base arguments on flawed logic (as you're doing right now). And if you do question it, question it somewhere else, because this channel is about discussing facts, using arguments backed up by actual evidence - not fiction. You have presented an argument based on the lie that you cannot discuss the Holocaust. And if you continue to do this, and continue to spout complete and utter hateful lies in the comment section, I will be forced to take action. "One final observation you don't have to believe we went to the moon, you don't have to believe the earth is round and spinning, you don't have to believe in religion or God, but you must believe in the Holocaust narrative or you will be ostracized or even jailed!" Right... but people do believe that those events didn't happen. But if you did think the world is flat, nobody is harmed. If you think the moon landing didn't happen, nobody's harmed. If you don't believe in God, nobody's harmed. If you don't believe in the Holocaust, you're harming people who either survived it, knew people who survived it, and are doing so for racist reasons. That's the difference. Denying the Holocaust or questioning that it happened at all or deliberately downplaying the numbers is a hate crime, harmful to other people.
    1
  22029. Which is why we have records of what people wrote, said, thought and did.
    1
  22030. I'm not being known as a Revorian! :D
    1
  22031. Wait, you're accusing me of being a distorian?
    1
  22032. "Revisionists want to fit a social perspective" "Revisionist historians do rewrite history to put a political or emotional spin" So, what social, emotional or political perspective am I putting on history? And, what makes you think the historians immediately after the events also didn't put their own spin on things? Why are they more pious than us now? Surely, they are no better than us? "but the histories were pretty good, the more revised history is, the less clear..." Things aren't always as simple as people make them out to be. Historians of the past went with the simple answers - 'we can't explain this yet, therefore we conclude that Hitler was a madman'. Later, their omissions or mistakes were cleared up. So, in reality, history is getting more clearer as time goes on. There are people who say, the further from the events you go, the more creases are ironed out of the narrative. It's better as time goes on, so long as you don't deliberately distort history or lie.
    1
  22033. What does that even mean? Why would you abandon the sources? Nobody's suggesting that you don't use sources.
    1
  22034. While I have studied some of Russian Revolution and obviously the Soviet state leading up to and including WW2, I don't really know much about the different communist factions :(
    1
  22035. Ok, what exactly are you having doubts about? I've been attacked in many of my videos by people calling me a "revisionist" because they disagreed with my videos. And I'm not pushing an agenda here. I laid out very honestly what I'm aiming for here in this other video "Why I'm Passionate about HISTORY and What Got Me Into it" https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  22036. Plus the fact that all the stars have moved since the original horoscopes were made, so they're out of date and therefore meaningless.
    1
  22037. Glad you enjoyed the video Óscar :)
    1
  22038. Negationist is a good term. But I prefer Distorian, because it's simpler and has more impact. You're right that 'revisionist historian' is now associated with Holocaust deniers (Denialists), but it really shouldn't be. This is a slight of hand which confuses people into thinking that, because deniers are bad, so much revising history, since that's what the deniers are called. Taking that term away from them is a step in the right direction.
    1
  22039. A crusade against Distorians? Count me in :)
    1
  22040. Keeping things real ;)
    1
  22041. The way you described it is the good-reivisionism. But there's the other side of the coin, which is the bad-revisionism. This is why I'm proposing that the term be split. Good-revisionism and bad-distorianism.
    1
  22042. Yes, people do read one book and then think they know everything. That's why I keep saying "use all the sources!" I don't know much about Indian history, but it's interesting to hear that that's what people think.
    1
  22043. Exactly!
    1
  22044. That's why, perhaps, he should be labelled a distorian?
    1
  22045. That's true. Although, sometimes if you're going after one rabbit, you can't chase another. So sometimes you've just got to accept what's been said, and hope someone else comes along and looks into the other issue.
    1
  22046. That's what I'm saying - the term 'revisionist' means two polar opposites. Revising history is good, unless you do it poorly. If you do it right - you're a revisionist. If you do it bad, you're a distorian. But people use the term revisionist to mean distorian - and this is where it gets confusing. In this video, I'm proposing that we split up the terms to avoid any more confusion. I hope that makes sense?
    1
  22047. Seven, Orwell had first hand experience with the Soviets during the Spanish Civil War. This was in the era before the "Cold War" had begun. tdr, feel free to disagree, but Orwell was a product of his times. He was a British person during the colonial empire, so of course he's going to support his country and have those views. I don't agree with those views, but I don't hate him for it. That's like, if society today made a law saying that petrol cars are illegal because hyperthetically their emissions cause people to die, and then we judged anyone who ever drove them in history to be immoral. That wouldn't be right, because you can't retroactively impose a law - just like you can't retroactively impose the morals of today on the characters of the past. McCabe, I'd not even heard of Sutton until today. Now everyone's suddenly telling me about him. What's the deal with the guy?
    1
  22048. But there are two types of revisionist historians. Good ones and bad ones. This is why I feel the need to change it. The problem is Revisionist implies in a negative way that you're not allowed to revise history. Well yes, yes you are. So to call a bad historian a revisionist makes no sense. It's better to say "you're not a true historian, you're a distorian", and shun their bad practices completely. Giving them the term "revisionist historian" implies they're still historians, which they're not. For the good side of revisionism, perhaps the term is defunct? Maybe we don't need to call historians "revisionist historians". But I'd still argue that we shouldn't call the bad historians revisionists, and make people aware that revising history is actually a good thing.
    1
  22049. Having dipped my toe into WW2 Balkan politics in my Croatian Legion video (I didn't actually bring up the politics, but the viewers certainly did), I'm a little reluctant to go back to it. That said, I think I've read a lot of the politics and the 'propaganda' being written there, and I can absolutely see why someone like yourself would get disheartened by the revision of history. As I said in the video, there's a distinction between the good revision of history (questioning things or presenting evidence to seek the truth) and the bad revision of history (that distort history to fit some sort of agenda or bias). You've seen the dark-side of historical revisionism (what I'm now calling 'distorianism') and how it's bad. But when you say "Noone's interested in truth, which history should provide." - that's exactly what a good revisionist historian is trying to do. The best way to look into history is gather all the sources, from all sides, and evaluate it. Question those assumptions. Ask "but is this really the case?" And try not to let your own biases get in the way. So, in your case, look at the old view and question it, then look at the new view, and question it again. Put them both together and see what you get. By questioning things, you'll find yourself moving closer to the truth. I don't really know much about the history of your country or your former country. But there will be truths on both sides. History is not as black or white as people think it is. Now, one side may (in the end) be slightly more truthful than the other, or slightly more right than the other. But the other side will not be inherently wrong either. And one last thing, historians provide history books - but it is you that has to do the reading. You're the one who interprets the history that the historians provide. And if you're only reading historians that say "Hitler is blonde" because that makes you feel good - because that's your comfort zone - then you're probably not going to find the truth.
    1
  22050. Good point. To clarify, I didn't use Emmet Scott as a "serious source" which is why I said "whooo spooky". So I've hearted your comment so more people can see your comment :)
    1
  22051. Given the content of the video, what do you think?
    1
  22052. Cheers! Thanks for sharing! And yes, I know exactly how you feel about people not understanding the term - which is partly why I made the vide :) just so you know, next week will be doing a book review of Beevor's new Arnhem book (which is going to be interesting to say the least). But should get back to Crusader the week after, unless something else pops up. But I'm currently working my way through 91,300 words of research for Crusader and writing the script, so it's going to take a bit longer than I thought!
    1
  22053. I think you need to rewatch the video. Revisionist historians are good. Distorians are bad.
    1
  22054. Yes, but the problem is, that interpretation of the term 'revisionist' is wrong. That's the point of the video.
    1
  22055. Communist.
    1
  22056. I get what you're saying, but I'm disagreeing with the term because it implies that revising history is bad. I've been called out for being a revisionist, and told that it's wrong to revise history. Well, no it's not, that's the role of a historian. The term 'revisionist' has been used by those people who distort history to give themselves some legitimacy. So I'm making the distinction that revisionists should be the regular historians (or just historian), and those that distort history should be called distorians, because this makes more sense.
    1
  22057. Agreed!
    1
  22058. I guess there's some truth to that. I personally think economics and geography dictate political policy, which then leads to war.
    1
  22059. Thanks, glad you agree! And yes, question everything!
    1
  22060. Of course, otherwise it's a distortion of history.
    1
  22061. When revising history, you're only revising the details, or our perception of the established events. It's more like modifications to a car rather than selling the car because the car doesn't exist.
    1
  22062. No, the rumours, lies and mistakes in the early histories are corrected after further investigation or the release/finding of new archival evidence. As I showed two seconds into the video, the early histories are not automatically right just because they were written the day after the events happened. People are biased, have agendas, and get things wrong. It is the job of a historian to revise these past mistakes - question things, research and correct them.
    1
  22063. If you didn't listen then you have no idea what I said. Which explains why your message makes zero sense. Assuming that there can me more distortion as time goes on is completely false. I would argue that it is the early histories that are distorted, and it is the subsequent ones that show where the early histories went wrong.
    1
  22064. But the term "disruptive" has negative connotations. It implies you're disrupting history - kind of like you're deliberately trying to dismantle it like an anarchist or something! Revising history is good though - that's what a historian should be doing - so I think the term revisionist fits better here.
    1
  22065. I'd say that was the work of a distorian. It's distorting history to fit Guderian's own agenda. But then, this is why I keep saying people should avoid memoirs (use secondary sources first, to understand the topic, then use the primary sources) because they're untrustworthy.
    1
  22066. The research was 91,300 words, that's what! I'm grinding my way through it
    1
  22067. That's called distorting history. Any historian worth his salt does in-fact seek the truth.
    1
  22068. What?
    1
  22069. Awesome! Thanks for subscribing Jack, I hope you enjoy my other videos :)
    1
  22070. That's a good way of putting it. Thanks!
    1
  22071. I see what you did there
    1
  22072. Haha there's no rush :) just know, I'm focusing mostly on Operation Crusader at the minute (North African Campaign), but will be returning to the German-Soviet Front after that.
    1
  22073. Thank you for the Tottle link - or Twoddle, as I like to call him. I've been looking for a copy so that I could destroy it. You know that the same people who helped him create and publish it, later came out and said it was all lies because they didn't have full access to the archives? It's no wonder he never published anything since and has disappeared from the public scene.
    1
  22074. This is why I made the video, to distinguish the difference. If people are using propaganda or brainwashing, they're distorians
    1
  22075. Except, what you said isn't what I meant. Saying the British abandoned Poland isn't a distorted path. Rewriting history so that Stalin is a good guy (for example) is.
    1
  22076. If it's presented without facts or sources, it's being presented by someone who's not a real historian, therefore they're a distorian.
    1
  22077. You need to start revising history then 😉 actually, I've been employed since I was 17 (either part of full time) and also have a history degree. But I've never had a job related to my degree. This channel is the only thing that's come close, so you're not the only one.
    1
  22078. But history isn't a science. There is scientific method in it, but it goes beyond that. For example, you can't measure what was the main cause of WW2. To decide what was the main factor, you have to dip into the "art" of history, and create your own interpretation. Sure, you use evidence to form your argument, but I guarantee you'll never be able to "prove" your interpretation to be absolutely undisputably correct because there will always be another viewpoint or interpretation that questions yours.
    1
  22079. Yes, exactly!
    1
  22080. Thanks! Will do!
    1
  22081. Thank you Keith :) yeah, this is why I feel a new term (distorian) should be used to describe those distorting history, so as to distinguish them from the good-revisionists. Glad you agree :)
    1
  22082. What do you mean?
    1
  22083. EUROVISIONIST HISTORIAN! I actually liked the Hungarian ‘song’ the most. Didn’t understand a single word, but it was still awesome. Here’s my bibliography - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w00c8KbQIME
    1
  22084. I'd not hear of that before. I wonder what would have happened if Marx had been pro-democracy? Either way, thanks for letting us know :)
    1
  22085. Thanks for your feedback. Got to experiment with these things :)
    1
  22086. Only just seen this comment, but I agree entirely :)
    1
  22087. Maybe I already knew this. Maybe I wanted to manipulate the facts to distort history. Maybe I have a video from the past that shows I did know - https://youtu.be/4ajIw5DQPjU But maybe - just maybe - I just ran out of examples, ran out of time editing and thought "eh, that'll do". Nah, it couldn't possibly be that. Yeah, it was the latter. But shhhh!
    1
  22088. Agreed!
    1
  22089. As someone who knows nothing about the topic - why? Why are they so bad?
    1
  22090. In Suvorov's case, he's definitely a distorian, as I showed in my Keitel/Suvorov video. Completely manipulating his narrative and incorrectly interpreting the evidence to fit his agenda.
    1
  22091. And that's only if you believe Manstein. The reality was, Paulus never received the order to break-out, whether Manstein claimed he gave it or not.
    1
  22092. Technically, we could just use the terms "historian" and "Distorian" to distinguish between the two. And that's fine. But I wanted people to know that revising history is good (which it is). So, use the term "historian" on it's own all you like - that's what I intend to do. But remember that revising history is what a normal historian is doing (in the correct way). If they're doing it wrong, they're a distorian.
    1
  22093. Either way, the term "revisionist" when used in a negative way implies that revising history (questioning things in the scientific way, like you said) is wrong. As an example, I've posted a comment with loads of comments from people from previous videos calling me a revisionist in the negative way because they disliked the fact I questioned the traditional arguments or facts, even though I backed up my points with ample evidence and presented it in logical argument. So the term 'revisionist' is being used incorrectly. Therefore the term Revisionist should be seen as good, and Distorian (which actually makes more sense) should be seen as bad. That way, nobody is getting confused.
    1
  22094. Yes, sometimes a good revisionist is wrong. But the point is, it's a confusing term - it means two polar things. That's why I'm suggesting it should be split. Revisionist good, distorian bad.
    1
  22095. But there's two types of revisionism. One is good, one is bad (which you describe). The problem is, people get confused by the two types since they share that same name. Therefore, since revising history is good, I'm proposing that Revisionist be used for the good normal historians, and Distorian be used for the bad ones.
    1
  22096. DM'ing can be exhausting for similar reasons, you're creating so much, and even though you're passionate at first and still interested in it, you get worn down over time.
    1
  22097. Sounds about right! It's probably because I took that break in August for bereavement, and then have missed a couple weeks since then. The algorithm wants consistency and punishes you if you're not.
    1
  22098. I understand that it's dense. I've been wondering if I've been putting too much information into them, and have scaled back slightly in recent episodes. If you compare the last three or four to the first three or four, you'll see a difference. The information is still there, just not spelled out to the same extent.
    1
  22099. I couldn't do that. I hate publishing anything without having read at least three books on the given topic, and even then I think that's too little. The Battle of the Bulge video I'm working on only has 8 books, and I feel guilty using so few! Might be able to sneak in another couple before I have to record it.
    1
  22100. I'm not going anywhere, I'm just going to cover other topics for a while before returning to Stalingrad.
    1
  22101. I am crazy! If you don't mind me asking, what was your master thesis?
    1
  22102. Not heard of that documentary before, but I do think that this series will be longer than 40 hours before it's finished. Could be wrong though
    1
  22103. I'm glad to hear it helped, and I'm sorry it's paused for the moment. But I won't abandon it, and you'll still be getting other videos in the meantime. We will be back in Stalingrad at some point, and I hope your situation improves by the time we do
    1
  22104. Once a business gets to a certain point, it becomes totally inefficient. The only way to grow larger is to have an unfair advantage over the competition, and that unfair advantage is government support. The Establishment love syndicates (corporations) because it's easier to control a few giant bureaucracies than it is to control millions of small businesses. Thus, they use the expropriation of private property (taxation, inflation, outright theft) to redistribute wealth to themselves, but also to their corporations. The workers and small businesses are crushed under the power of the State, while the big inefficient businesses are propped up. This is why socialism always fails, because the more you crush the productive private economy, you're left with the unproductive public portion, which is why millions starve to death. So you're right that businesses grow too big in our current system, but the reason why they grow big and gain monopolies is because of the State. This is why socialists are incorrect: they're advocating for the very thing that will make the situation worse.
    1
  22105.  @JulianH-co7qg  Once a business grows beyond the natural 'private' free market size, it goes 'public'. Public business are States, and are created by governments. "Capital interests" are actually government interests, not the market. I've been over this here https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22106.  @JulianH-co7qg  A market is two people: a buyer and a seller. These individuals can exist and trade without a State.
    1
  22107. Yes, because we're all enslaved to the State.
    1
  22108. However, there were only 6 in the original Sonic the Hedgehog and similar games. This got extended to 7 from Sonic 2 onwards https://sonic.fandom.com/wiki/Chaos_Emerald#Number_of_Emeralds
    1
  22109. He didn't call for the emancipation of the Jews. He said that their emancipation was when society was emancipated from them. Thus, what I said was correct. And all the other evidence indicates that this is the correct way to interpret it
    1
  22110. My pleasure!
    1
  22111. Thank you! I'll be honest, I don't know a lot about the history of the Pharisees
    1
  22112. If Marx didn't think the Capitalists were Jews, then his comment about the "inwardly circumcised" ones makes absolutely no sense. It only makes sense if Marx viewed the Capitalists as Jews. This suggests that there's continuity between what Marx wrote early in his life, and what he wrote later. And if you can't see how evil Socialism is by this point, I'm really not sure how to get through to you religious fanatics. If you won't open your eyes, I can't help you https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U
    1
  22113. Yes!
    1
  22114. https://youtu.be/FgyYkLqEyh8
    1
  22115. Yeah, a really good video. Basically confirms what I've been saying here. So many Jews did not realize the nature of their new religion. Thank you for linking the video.
    1
  22116. Thank you. I've not heard of this channel before. His video is interesting.
    1
  22117. 1. The point of this video is to show Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism, and show why ALL Socialism is Anti-Semitism 2. Liking the NHS and wanting to contribute to it, is one thing. But advocating stealing wealth off other people to fund it, is bad. Socialism justifies stealing off the "Judeo-bourgeois Capitalists" (aka taxpayers) to fund the Elite's projects. 3. The Philistines were also a Semitic group from Israel area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines
    1
  22118. Yeah, I was wondering if this video was getting suppressed because the views were so incredibly low, and hardly any non-subscribers have had this recommended, which is exactly what happened with the Greek video.
    1
  22119. And race isn't a thing, but some morons think it is, which is why "racism" is a thing, even though "race" is not.
    1
  22120. Austrian School economists are against the "international bankers and plutocrats" and ALL Socialists are in support of them. Get with the program
    1
  22121. Thank you for the recommendation!
    1
  22122. "Of course human races don't exist, but racism does." Yes. Race doesn't exist. That's what I said.
    1
  22123. "Well fair, but he was of jewish descent. That's an important information, since it really makes a difference in the way his words are meant." NOT if he rejects the faith and NEVER practices Judaism. He rallies AGAINST it. So judging Marx as being Jewish because his grandfather was, is ridiculous. As gillysuit2 said, you're an individual, and what your parents and grandparents do is irrelevant to what you do.
    1
  22124. @Maximus Brutus - I'm being unobjective? Why? Because you say so? Wow okay, let's check the facts. 1. Marx NEVER practiced Judaism. 2. His GRANDFATHER had been a rabbi, but his father renounced the faith. 3. Race doesn't exist. It's a pseudo-scientific belief that is untrue. See link in previous comment. Based on these facts, it's blatantly clear that Karl Marx was NOT Jewish. Therefore, I'm being objective, and it your ignorance that has blinded you to the truth.
    1
  22125. Because his anti-capitalism is his anti-Semitism, and explains why there's such a widespread hatred of "Capitalism"
    1
  22126. Same as usual then ;)
    1
  22127. Nazis and Marxists are both racist and anti-Semites, whether they realise it or not!
    1
  22128. What Karl Marx said, and what Karl Marx meant, are two different things. The guy believed in Hegelian Emotionalism (I refuse to call it "logic" because it isn't). He would make contradictory statements so as to hide his true message. That's why he was calling for individuals to bow to the collective (a collective is a State) which will centrally plan everything, and then says Socialism is anti-State. It's borderline insanity in my opinion. And yes, Socialism is the State https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22129. There are a bunch of crying Marxists in the comments, but you have to look a bit deeper because they're not getting many upvotes. And normally my commenters are quite decent overall. I obviously get the meme comments, and the haters, but this channel tends to have a decent number of people who actually write decent historical stuff. Unfortunately this video hasn't performed well at all in its first few hours. Most of my regular viewers haven't watched it, and are probably unlikely to do so. Not sure if it's being suppressed by the algorithm, or just people aren't interested. It was posted on a Thursday, so it's not the regular day I post. But either way, I think many of my regular viewers haven't shown up. A bunch of Nazis have, and it's surprising to me to hear that Nazis genuinely didn't know about Marx's racism. I thought this was common knowledge, but clearly not. Some are now saying they like Marx because of his racism, which should explain why Leftists can't find the Nazis in real life. The smart Nazis aren't skinheads, they're in the Lamestream political parties pretending to be non-Nazi-racists
    1
  22130. I shall try again, but mask my language a bit - OP didn't read the source properly. Marx says the emancipation of the J is when society emancipates (i.e. rids itself) of the J. So Marx wasn't saying he was freeing them, he was saying society (socialism) was to get rid of them
    1
  22131. Yes, YouTube is deleting my comments - it's just deleted two more elsewhere
    1
  22132. If I can show that something is true based on the evidence, then it's not propaganda.
    1
  22133. So you're denying that Marx was anti-Semitic or a racist? Because if everything I said was wrong, then you're denying that calling someone a "Jewish n*****" is wrong.
    1
  22134. I'm curious what you think of this video https://youtu.be/6C0c9HmWeJY
    1
  22135. Okay... What about it?
    1
  22136. He did criticize Christianity. See the book "The Devil and Karl Marx" for details. He used to sit in Churches and laugh out loud as the priests were trying to speak. Karl Marx was a liar, a cheat, never worked a day in his life, sponged off his friends, cheated on his wife with the nurse and had a baby with her, was an Anti-Semite, and based his religion (socialism) on Anti-Semitism. You can choose to accept the facts, or you can stick to your religious beliefs, but don't expect me to be convinced by arguments made in ignorance.
    1
  22137. I talked about this in the video
    1
  22138. I wouldn't call the Socialists atheist - I'd call them anti-religious, meaning they're looking to destroy other religions other than their own.
    1
  22139. I've read that the term "self hating Jew" is controversial, although I don't really understand why. But the concept does fit Marx quite well
    1
  22140. Let's see... white skinned racists, dressed in black, burning down ethic communities, screaming that they're 'saving' black people from "Fascists", without knowing what Fascism is, and demanding everyone bend the knee to a "woke" religion which teaches Critical Race Theory, which says that if you're "woke" then your "racial soul" is "black"? Hmmmm... https://youtu.be/rSHL-rSMIro
    1
  22141.  @FFFFFFF-FFFFFFFUUUUCCCC  Grand-son of a rabbi. But as I explained in the video, his father turned against the faith, which is why Marx hated the faith too
    1
  22142. Please watch the full video
    1
  22143. Yes, I've been thinking of doing something like that for a while 😂
    1
  22144. "You might not like football, lager and limes, but the stereotype exists for a reason. There's a grain of truth behind every stereotype. Can you judge an individual by a group stereotype? Absolutely not. Can you judge a group at large by their stereotypes? To an extent, yeah." Well, no you can't, and you've just admitted that. If I supposedly belong to the group of "whites" or the "British nationality", then I don't fit the bill. Thus, the 'group' doesn't exist. If the rest of my supposed "fellow countrymen" committed a crime or belong to a stereotype, I don't see why I should be judged by their standards or actions. If another "white guy" commits a crime, I don't go to jail for it because I didn't commit the crime. Punish the individual, not the group. If I pointed at a large group of British men and said "all of them have shaved heads" then the chances are that would be false. The stereotype of a 'group' doesn't fit all of them, proving that not only does the stereotype not exist, but that the 'group' doesn't exist either. There are idiots in every 'group', just like there are smart people in every 'group'. We shouldn't be judging a huge swathe of the population just because a few are bad apples. And the reason why is because we're all individuals. Once you accept that, you'll get over the idea of 'race' or 'gender' or 'class' and start seeing the world for the way it really is.
    1
  22145. Yes, there are differences between individuals. But those differences are between individuals, not "races". And difference on a group level is just little more than cosmetic. Science says that we're all human. Just because I'm white skinned doesn't mean I'm part of a "white" race. Or that, because I come from the UK, I must like football, lager and limes. To think like that is simply ridiculous.
    1
  22146. Contradictions do exist. That's when you know there's a problem to overcome.
    1
  22147. Science has the answer https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/people-and-culture/2018/04/theres-no-scientific-basis-race-its-made-label
    1
  22148. That's true. Hitler (the racist) hated Marx because he believed Marx was "racially" Jewish.
    1
  22149. Thank you Someone! It's been one very intense year 😂
    1
  22150. It's a long way to the top
    1
  22151. You weren't ;)
    1
  22152. I've heard that story too. But again, that's only one tank. Where's the rest of the battalion?
    1
  22153. That could be correct. I haven't looked into it specifically, but even if they were having tea a PIAT team could deploy relatively quickly, so it does seem odd how Wittmann's Tiger wasn't taken out.
    1
  22154. That's not what I said. You and other Marxists/National-Socialists misrepresent what I said and don't know/won't agree on the definition of socialism - which is state-control of the economy.
    1
  22155. Thank you Karelwolfpup!
    1
  22156. So you're saying they weren't very adaptable? Probably another bad factor for them then
    1
  22157. I (finally) started on the Stalingrad map and script last week. Research is on-going, but I'm doing it in numerous series rather than all in one go, so it's done for the first series at least.
    1
  22158. Thanks Humza!
    1
  22159. "I'm confused here, what are you trying to prove? That Nazi Germany was going to make a fine civilization and Britain felt threatened by its vast expansion?" No, the opposite. Germany wasn't going to make a 'fine civilization' by any stretch of the imagination. - "That Germany was just minding its own business and gaining land, all the while Britain couldn't stand by and allow a united Europe to occur under one country?" 'Gaining land' or 'minding your own business' are two opposite concepts. Taking someone else's land isn't minding your own business, since you're directly taking someone else's land. But yes, Britain couldn't allow Europe to be united under one dominant power. - "Are you saying that none of the previous non-aggression acts that Hitler committed prior to WWII led to Britain having to declare war on a out of control society." Invading Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland was non-aggressive? - "Hitler taking the Rhineland, Hitler taking half of Czechoslovakia, then taking the rest, all while mobilizing a massive military that was banned under the first Treaty of Versailles? This was bound to happen, Hitler stabbed Chamberlain in the back with the Munich Agreement, then it was less than one year later than Germany marched into Poland to start World War II. French and British leaders both knew what Hitlers goal was, and it wasn't to peacefully transition power in Europe into a federation of nations that was for sure." Yes. Correct.
    1
  22160. I have read up on it, and have more books to read on the topic. I've also seen the videos people have linked here. But I'm not entirely convinced. And even if it was true, what I said in this video is still valid.
    1
  22161. What was the Treaty of London (1827) about then? What was the Battle of Navarino about? Also, in 1945, Britain wanted to secure Greek independence and prevent her from falling under the spell of Moscow imperialism. Britain was on the side of the Greeks.
    1
  22162. But is this really the case? Yes, there is a compass symbol, however there's no 'square' to go with it. There's sheaves of grain, and a hammer, but this is quote common for Communist flags, as the hammer represents the workers, and the wheat represents the farmers. To me, given the very simple nature of the symbols (how else do you represent the workers, if not with a hammer?), this looks like a coincidence.
    1
  22163. Except I've already done a video explaining why the Germans were going to invade Poland regardless of whether they gave up Danzig or not https://youtu.be/1uzO0gLTEGc
    1
  22164. Not heard of this before. Is it legit?
    1
  22165. Again, you're ignoring Hitler's intentions, outlined in Mein Kampf, his speeches and elsewhere, that he wanted to invade the Soviet Union and conquer Lebensraum.
    1
  22166. No, Germany was also responsible because she decided to expand. Britain just reacted to that expansion for her own self interest.
    1
  22167. Because it makes zero sense for Britain to ally and help the dominant power in Europe. Therefore, while Hitler may have wanted this, Britain did not for the reasons explained in this video. Hitler wasn't seeing things from Britain's point of view.
    1
  22168. It's not just David Hoggan who thinks like this. But if I mention other such names, 4chan will raid the video like they did the previous ones on a certain H denier, or the crimes of the Wehrmacht against women... David Hoggan (being less well known) allows me to tackle the argument without invoking a backlash. Also, see last week's video to see why I decided to do a short and simple video like this.
    1
  22169. Yes!
    1
  22170. I really should... but I get up every day and think "I'll just do a couple hours"... then it turns into another full day
    1
  22171. Usually a couple of hours. I do come back over the next day or two to check, but I can't spend much time here unfortunately, and there's no way I can respond to all comments
    1
  22172. "Why exclude the Suez Canal? If the Italians took Egypt, they would have been in control of the Canal." Because the Italians NEVER had a chance of getting to the Suez Canal. They barely went 60 miles from the Libyan border before their attack broke down https://youtu.be/b71kdhj27rk
    1
  22173. I know, it's a rare one 😂
    1
  22174. Yes, and Canaris. What I said didn't undermine the idea of Canaris nor the bribes
    1
  22175.  @Medhead101  So, I have read "Hidden History: Secret Origins of the First World War", and I'm not convinced. To be honest, the source reads like fan-fiction rather than a history book. I also more recently got "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution" by Sutton (not had time to read it yet), but I'm aware of the criticism of it. I'm also yet to be convinced that WW2 was a 'bankers war', for many reasons that are too complicated to get into here, but one simply one is that Hitler clearly wasn't in the pockets of the international bankers - he dominated the Reichsbank, not the other way round. Now, that's not to say that I'm against the idea of there being a group of international bankers pulling the strings. I'm just not convinced that every event in the past 150 years can be explained by this mysterious group of financiers. The arguments I've come across so far just simply fall flat, especially regarding Hitler (a subject I know very well). Perhaps I can be persuaded, but I need more hard and irrefutable facts, presented by better authors, who's arguments stand up to scrutiny.
    1
  22176.  @Medhead101  I'm watching this documentary, and I actually have one of the books of one of the authors shown in the video. But I'm not sure why you think my video is 'deficient'? As I showed, Britain couldn't allow Germany to become too strong, and so it makes sense that she plotted to start the war(s) to bring her down, and get America involved.
    1
  22177.  @Medhead101  Thank you, I will watch it
    1
  22178. You missed the point. WHY were they in an alliance with Poland and France? Because of the reason explained in this video.
    1
  22179. It pops up to the top right of the video when I mention the poll. If you're watching this on certain devices, like TV, it may not show up
    1
  22180. I didn't think to check Wages of Destruction, but again, the percentages are probably based on similar numbers I've shown in the video
    1
  22181. I think there's a "shuffle" button in the playlist settings, which you should make sure is off. Or, in the case of Crusader, you could watch the full 9 hour video https://youtu.be/Ji7MZYB4dho
    1
  22182. Yeah, I saw that when doing the subtitles but it was too late to redo the video in time to get it released today
    1
  22183. Nope. Socialism/Communism is evil.
    1
  22184. Yes!
    1
  22185. What would you rather me call the system? "Gulag slave labour camp system" makes sense to me, just like Her Majesty's Prison Service also does
    1
  22186. He didn't invent it, he only brought it to light.
    1
  22187. However, I'm only doing this because my hand is forced due to the criticism I've received over the history content. The privatisation is done as a defensive move on my part because the critics' will say "Hitler privatised the industries just like the UK privatised the rail network, and that didn't work out well for the UK, therefore you're wrong and socialism is good". My video will show that "privatisation" never took place in the UK, that the word "privatisation" is a scam, and will (hopefully) get some people to wake up and realise that Hitler's "privatisation" didn't happen and that we've been deceived into thinking it did. And my Patreons are the ones asking for the AnCap stuff. I get paid by them, so therefore I go with what they want. Again, the only reason I'm venturing into that territory is to defend myself from the critics over the history content. So it's not because I'm moving into modern politics. I'm only touching upon this stuff as a defense of the historical criticism. If I don't address the criticism, my critics will declare me a fraud and say I'm wrong (which they are doing, as you'll see when I respond to the critic I mentioned in this video).
    1
  22188. I'm not doing contemporary politics. I'm reading into eugenics because that's related to Hitler and the Third Reich, plus Marxism, and the western Allies as well.
    1
  22189. Yes, but only after Stalingrad is done as I can't do too many things at once
    1
  22190. Hahahaha thanks for that
    1
  22191. Lots of Germans have told me it is "Hot", and Google translate says it "Hot" as well?
    1
  22192. Glad you like them! Terri (the graphic designer) has been doing them, and she's been doing a very good job :)
    1
  22193. There's a lot of people making that claim, mainly because that's how the German narrative went for years. This is the problem of skipping the July and August periods, and not taking logistics into account.
    1
  22194. It is a drooping eyelid. Whether it's specifically blepharoptosis or something else, no idea. I've had it for years now
    1
  22195. I don't understand. In mid-late August, the Soviets had nothing in the city itself except militia forces and the 10th NKVD Division. There were Soviet forces fighting outside the city, but they were weak. But in the city itself, there was basically nothing at this time.
    1
  22196. Sadly, tomorrow isn't the next Stalingrad episode because I'm Still working on the scripts for the next season. Stalingrad series are currently done in batches of three, and there needs to be a gap between seasons for me to work on the scripts. But there will still be a history video tomorrow, and every Monday as usual 👍 Not sure about Göring's statement, but it wouldn't surprise me. There's still a lot of history that's under lock and key, especially when relating to current regimes or hierarchies of power... e.g. the UK or US governments
    1
  22197. Most aren't looking at it like that. They're just looking at the military perspective and wondering if Germany could have won, and how. (Underdog) Some others though do have an ideological leaning. Believing that National Socialism wasn't full Socialism (or even Capitalism) has distorted people's thinking, so that they believe that Marxism was even worse, when in reality they were just as evil as each other.
    1
  22198. "many Germans of the time believed that Native Americans were pure Aryans?" Wow! Not heard that one before! I don't know specifically about this, but Himmler was searching for 'Aryan' blood all over the place. Might have thought the original 'Aryans' had crossed the Bering Strait or something
    1
  22199. Yep!
    1
  22200. Thank you! You seriously are making all this possible 🙂
    1
  22201. Yes!
    1
  22202. See timestamps in linked video to section called "National Socialism's fundamental ideological FLAW". Yes, I've publically debunked National Socialist ideology https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  22203. I can confirm - I am human... I think ;) cheers!
    1
  22204. Yep, that'll do. It doesn't matter how long ago the original post was, so long as it's the latest one
    1
  22205. Go onto Patreon and ask your question of the latest Q&A post. I'm massively behind with the Q&A :(
    1
  22206. I covered that at the end of the video, and in my Oil video. There's no way to get the oil from the Middle East back to the refineries
    1
  22207. Why do you think Stalingrad was a sideshow?
    1
  22208. Making maps for Close Combat back in the day definitely influenced the design of the 9th of January Square map I used in the video 👍
    1
  22209. 298 was on the Don at this time, and the Stalingrad Pocket hasn't formed yet. This is September.
    1
  22210. I talked about the losses two episodes ago, and the numbers are still relevant to this one https://youtu.be/UA7VbEtZcA4 (see the third part of it) Your percentages are probably correct, although maybe more like 60% for the Soviets too
    1
  22211. Are you saying I should skip ahead?
    1
  22212. alkafluence that's the point, it's not a bone, but people think it is! Either way, the next question isn't debatable ;)
    1
  22213. Tomislav haha that's too easy ;)
    1
  22214. Tomislav they're some good (hard) questions... let me write them down!
    1
  22215. Tomislav lol I think that's exactly what we're having coz I've no idea what you mean :P
    1
  22216. Tomislav the bone in the upper part of your arm is called the Humerus (which is similar to the word "humorous")
    1
  22217. starcraft2own Ok, for the benefit of non-english speakers, let me explain. The bone in your upper arm is called the "Humerus" in English, which is very close to the word "humorous". When you bang the back of your upper arm it makes a weird sensation, which is referred to as bumping your "funny bone" because it's a pun of the "Humerus"/humorous bone. Except, it's not the bone you're hitting. It's the nerve in your arm that makes that weird sensation. That nerve is called the Ulnar nerve, and is the answer to the question
    1
  22218. johnrblanks haha that's not a bad idea!
    1
  22219. johnrblanks the bone is, but not the "funny bone" ;) congrats for naming the bone though
    1
  22220. Rex1987 well the US made the modern hamburger with the bread, but the Romans invented the meat part
    1
  22221. Rex1987 lol I was actually going to ask that question in the future! The steak part was made a long time ago, but the first nation to put the steak between the bread is quite obvious ;)
    1
  22222. Devon Ziegler the bone is called the Humerus bone. But the "funny bone" is actually a nerve :)
    1
  22223. Cameron Thompson hahahahaha :D yeah, it's not fun to hit it!
    1
  22224. Thegamer8324 correct again!
    1
  22225. It is sympathetic (or possibly is Nazi) literature. And while there is some interesting stuff in there, there's also a lot of repetition (it's almost as if he's preaching and trying to convert the readers). I did also say it's a problematic source because of this, plus other aspects of it. You're correct, it's probably not worth the $30, so I would advise caution and say only get it if you've read something like Zitelmann's book ("Hitler's National Socialism") first.
    1
  22226.  @classicalextremism  He doesn't appear to put sources in his videos, so it's not possible to find the source of his original statement, but I can only assume he had an obscure book that mentioned it? Surely, as the owner of a large channel, he couldn't have just made it up??? Has he responded to Greg?
    1
  22227.  @morewi  Well, that's definitely a similarity! What did he say to annoy them?
    1
  22228. First indeed!
    1
  22229. That's understandable. What's making you doubt it?
    1
  22230.  @QuizmasterLaw  How many Nazi penal battalions were there? And how many SS battalions were there? Those not fanatical were more likely to surrender, especially to the West. Fanatics usually fought to the end, and there's plenty of evidence of this. Yes, some regime loyalists certainly survived, but you can't discount the idea that some of those who did may have decided to hide their loyalties after the war. The veteran you knew may have been a loyalist who later renounced his faith to fit in with society.
    1
  22231. Nope, and I've got a video on that https://youtu.be/1ncpk7llqZs
    1
  22232. Just a bit. I'm not bothered by the hate, but reading their illogical comments sometimes makes my head hurt...
    1
  22233. "There it is, that neo conservative narrative again rearing it's ugly head" I'm not conservative. "somewhere in an alternate universe Marx wrote of a final solution for the bourgeois" Oh so he didn't want the Revolution then? "thus we conclude communism bad and capitalism is good and free. " That's why every communist/socialist state has ended up as totalitarianism.
    1
  22234. A black market is a free market. If you have a black market, you know the economy is not free. Isn't there a black market for drugs? And in socialism, nobody pays their taxes - they are forced to hand over their wealth. That's not payment, that's extortion. Also, the state then decides to waste that money building bridges that the people didn't want or need because if they did they would have built them on their own. Thus, the state takes resources that could have been better used elsewhere, and wastes them on things the people don't need. This is why socialist economies always fail, because they need the private sector to prop them up.
    1
  22235. Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  22236. They already have, and their only come back is to deny the definition of socialism (despite that Engels and Marx both define it as I do)
    1
  22237. The slave is not free, thus it is not a free market. Market = buyer and seller. If everyone is not free, then everyone is not free to buy and sell. A free market means the end of slavery.
    1
  22238. "I do however feel that the language of socialism being the most terrible thing to befall the world, and capitalism being the dove sent from heaven here to save us, is rather banal." The link to Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson is in the description
    1
  22239. Do your homework https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  22240. Here's the historical definition of Socialism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And here's a Socialist who wants to kill the "bourgeoisie" https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22241. "Also where is anarchism on his spectrum?" The Far-Right. It's the absolute freedom of the individual. "capitalism.... leads to straight up class warfare" There are no classes. We are all individuals, not classes, races, genders or anything else. We are individuals, not groups.
    1
  22242. You obviously haven't read Karl Marx https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22243. I don't disagree with what you said. That's exactly the way I see it
    1
  22244. "What is national socialism?... What is bad practice to conclude things weren't explored in your work." I have "explored" it and defined it previously. I build upon previous works, like this 5 hour video explaining exactly what Hitler's Socialism was https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 That's why this video focused mainly on Fascism. There's no point repeating what National Socialism was if I've already covered it in depth.
    1
  22245. Oh? What did you think I was going to say??
    1
  22246. Inflation (stealth tax) is the primary cause of wealth inequality. But as Lord Baron Keynes said himself: not one in a million understand inflation... Inflation allows the elite to steal off the poor and middle classes, while the poor and middle class beg for more government help. It's a vicious cycle https://youtu.be/DyV0OfU3-FU
    1
  22247. I didn't say it derived from the word, I said that the Italians called their trade unions 'Fascio', because trade unions are bundles/unions of sticks/workers. And notice, Fascio's and Syndicates are the same thing... Interesting, wouldn't you say?
    1
  22248. Watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22249. Learn your history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22250. Is being free to make your own decisions an oxymoron?
    1
  22251. This might help a little https://images.app.goo.gl/MXhZpqYLuvpDqMGN8 Also, a recent video I made, I explained why Conservatism was the old Left Wing which might help you. See 18:15 of this video https://youtu.be/nZcIS2_kxsY
    1
  22252. https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22253. "I think your characterisation of Marxism as inherently anti-semitic is a bold and yet unsubstantiated claim." Watch this https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg - "No one bats an eyelid? And yet it was a widely discussed topic at the last election and more recently with the as yet unpublished EHRC report on anti-semitism in the Labour party." Strange coincidence? - "You paint such a wild caricature here and it makes me question where else you've been sloppy either in your historical analysis or any other exercise that might require impartiality in thought." Karl Marx called someone a "Jewish n-word". And you're questioning me? It's not "sloppy" history if it's accurate and can be backed up by evidence.
    1
  22254. Emil Maurice wasn't Jewish. His great-grandfather had been Jewish, so he was caught up in the Nazi racial laws issue, being deemed to have 'tainted' blood. But he himself never practiced the faith. I spoke about Giovanni Gentile in the video. And National Socialism was Socialism. Here's a 5 hour video using 107 sources, 350 direct references, and lots of notes, quotes and more explaining why that is so https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  22255. Yes (assuming you're using the Marxist definition of Capitalism). But a free market doesn't result in oppression. Without force, a deal can only be made by mutual agreement. https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22256. Actually you were about 5th from what I can see
    1
  22257. Time for a history lesson https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22258. Marx was Jewish, yes. But he was also Anti-Semitic https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22259. Yeah, until you hear the reason why they recruited other "inferior races" https://youtu.be/jUUZFiWxWaM Also, here's another video that you should watch https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU
    1
  22260. All Marxists are https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22261. "Saying that they are the same for me is like saying that humans are chimps." Right. But saying that were are all of the Ape family (Hominoidea) would be correct because they're all closely related. Well, I'm not saying that a human is a fish. What I'm saying is that a human is part of the ape family, just like a gorilla. Thus, a Fascist (let's say, orangutan) is a Socialist (Ape, Hominoidea), just like a Marxist (gibbon) or a Nazi (chimpanzee). They're all related to the original Socialism (Ape).
    1
  22262. The syndicates are a public (a government - see my Public vs Private video), and they do impose forceful coercion since their ideology is inherently Socialist. Do not fall for the "it's voluntary" argument - that is the snake oil they're selling you. Look beneath the surface.
    1
  22263. Again, watch this https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22264. "Marx never called for the authoritarianism which enable the Red Terror." Yes he did. He made it incredibly clear in the Communist Manifesto and in his Das Kapital books that he was calling for - "socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature" (Das Kapital v3, page 593) He wanted to bring the entire economy under "common control". "Common" as in "Public"... which is "State" control. That's why he was calling for a Central State Bank and so on in the Communist Manifesto. Just because he hid the meaning of his words from you, doesn't mean he didn't call for it. It just means that you were tricked by him.
    1
  22265. I'm not debating someone who cannot spell or use punctuation. I've given you links in response to your other comments, I would advise you watch them and learn why an ex-socialist (who accidentally unplugged himself from the Socialist world view) would be trying to warn you of the true nature of Socialism
    1
  22266. See Farrell's "Mussolini: A New Life" and Gregor's "Mussolini's Intellectuals" for why I am right. As Gregor says, Fascism is National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism.
    1
  22267. Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22268. I agree, although I do think many are indicated into their beliefs. If they opened their eyes and realized that the free market isn't as bad as they perceive, then they'd realize how mistaken they are
    1
  22269. Welcome aboard 👍
    1
  22270. Yes, and and one nation under God is what internationalism is. So really, there's no difference at all.
    1
  22271. Revisionist? https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 Oh wait, history theory https://youtu.be/PvpJEc-NxVc
    1
  22272. The so-called "right wing" that favours small government is not right wing, it's conservative, which was the old Left Wing.
    1
  22273. "Your point is good. But the way you argue it is not always." I'm not perfect, so I will accept that criticism.
    1
  22274. This video defines fascism as National Syndicalism with the philosophy of Actualism. National Socialism is nothing of the sort. To say that Nazism was Fascism is basically admitting that you don't know what Fascism or Nazism is, for reasons I explained in the video. My advice is that you watch the full thing before commenting.
    1
  22275. Marxism is Anti-Semitic, especially Das Kapital which you clearly haven't read even though you're encouraging me to read it https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22276. Obviously the Fasces came from Ancient Rome. However, considering that this video is about FASCISM and not Ancient Rome, it makes sense to point out how the FASCISTS viewed the idea of the Fasces, rather than the Ancient Romans. Also, at no point did I say that the origin of the word "fasces" was "trade union". If you listen to what I actually said, you'll hear me say that the Italians (not the Ancient Romans, the Italians from the 1800s and 1900s) called their trade unions "fasci". To quote what I said: "In Italian, a bundle of sticks is a ‘Fascio’. Oh, that’s why trade unions in Italy were called ‘Fascio’. Plural, ‘Fasci’. And is why ‘Fascism’ literally means ‘trade unionism’ or ‘power to the trade unions’" I then gave a direct quote from a book to back this up: “...the word fascio means literally bundle and had been used for a long time as an alternative to union.” - from Farrell, "Mussolini: A New Life," Chapter 5. I then proceeded to say that Fascism was trade unionism. Thus, while the Fasces originated in Ancient Rome, by the time we get to Italy in the 1800s, trade unions were called Fasci. In effect, you got the whole thing backwards, then wrote a comment criticising me for saying things that I didn't say.
    1
  22277. Watch this https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22278. Yep
    1
  22279. I've been shadow banned for years. The views on this particular video didn't do well, but the previous ones have performed fine, so it's more likely a one-off.
    1
  22280. Objective.
    1
  22281. Sorry for slow reply. Objectivists are not materialists. The fact you think they are is proof that you've made assumptions about the Objectivists that are incorrect.
    1
  22282. First!
    1
  22283. They've been shadow banning me for years
    1
  22284. Thanks for the recommendation. What precisely did I get wrong?
    1
  22285. "In a democracy it is the state that conforms to the will of the people, and the will of the people is in turn derived from individuals expressing their personal will freely and without coercion. " The Fascist state is the "will of the people", as the people are the state. So it is democratic. And I don't know what form of democracy you're referring to, as there is no instance of democracy were the individuals are not coerced. The "will of the people" statement IS the individual being coerced by the "majority" (which is the state). The state is democratically coercing everyone to comply with its will.
    1
  22286. Oh really? No matter where you stand, it makes zero sense to limit your knowledge by reading or listening to just one set of information. Even if you don't agree with something, I encourage you to look into different perspectives.
    1
  22287. What do you mean?
    1
  22288. I'm not a materialist.
    1
  22289. That's actually what the Third Positionist response has been so far - an emotional dismissal. The only argument they've got is that humans are animals without brains and we operate on instincts only, which is not true, but it also doesn't get around the other arguments I presented.
    1
  22290. "marxists and fascists are not "different but two sides of the same coin" " They're both idealist religions inspired by Hegel. They both call for the social ownership of the means of production (Gleichschaltung), and they both deny human individualism for collectivism (although the Nazis contradict themselves on this final point). Both are anti-semitic, both are pro-trade union, both reject free markets, both reject capitalism, and both are willing to murder and steal in order to introduce their paradise. I've been over all this in numerous videos now that here's a playlist with 48 videos on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgxP4QadjKhk4bI6x2PbScO
    1
  22291. I've covered both the first point in a few videos on this channel. The second one has been mentioned in some videos, but I've not covered it specifically yet.
    1
  22292. Also, this was the reason I kept referring back to previous videos - I just didn't see the point in going through it all again when I've already done that. It's wasting my regular viewer's time.
    1
  22293. You must be new here. I've covered what Nazis believe in numerous previous videos, including the one here where I not only gave historical quotes but actually showed video footage of actual National Socialists and Fascists saying this stuff https://youtu.be/QrmEhK6PXnY I'm also the guy who came up with the concept of putting references in the videos at the bottom of the screen as I spoke because I was getting criticism like you've given here from doubters years ago. However, since I've covered this all before, I didn't see the point of doing that here, especially since you can glean most of this stuff by just taking to a Third Positionist for a few minutes.
    1
  22294. Tomislav not in a blimp ;)
    1
  22295. Max Quick you're only a century late :P
    1
  22296. Morgan Chalmers yeah, not sure if it's the same guy, but a monk jumped off a church roof at some point with a wingsuit and broke him legs. You think he'd test it out on the ground first lol
    1
  22297. Cameron Thompson far too late ;)
    1
  22298. Answering a question is not a rant. And I'm not an AnCap.
    1
  22299. The government is not efficient at building roads.
    1
  22300. There's no monopoly.
    1
  22301. Or the road builders could buy the land 🙄
    1
  22302. Not a libertarian.
    1
  22303. No till roads required.
    1
  22304. Then the road doesn't get built on his property. It would have to go around him, which is exactly what happened on the M62 in the UK https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/why-house-middle-m62-motorway-16416520
    1
  22305. No compulsion required. Buy the land, then build the roads.
    1
  22306. It'll be a couple weeks away yet
    1
  22307. In that case, I won't spoil it for you. But it's definitely interesting. It'll probably be a few weeks before the video comes out (baking the animation takes a while) so you'll have to wait to find out :)
    1
  22308. Think you'll be surprised (unless you've read up on the battle before)
    1
  22309. So yes, 50 minutes of 3D animation!
    1
  22310. It's over 50 minutes but not sure exactly yet
    1
  22311. Thanks for the feedback! I'm glad you liked the music, as that jingle is going to be the theme tune for my documentaries :) Unfortunately, the flags will have to stay like that. I'm still learning Blender and I've not learnt how to make wavy flags yet :D
    1
  22312. That's why I wanted to cover it, because I knew almost nothing about Rommel's first desert battle before I did the reading :)
    1
  22313. Yes, they'll throw them automatically when they're within 30 meters of an enemy squad... assuming they have some to throw. Most soldiers only carry a couple grenades, and a few heavy squads have satchel charges which they'll use from time to time. You can't order them to throw them, it's all automatic.
    1
  22314. Gripen85 haha no worries! Let me know what you think of it :)
    1
  22315. Well, you're in luck since it's just come out half an hour ago! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMv9YN11xkY
    1
  22316. Thanks for your comment! I don't feel like giving up, and I'm not asking "what's the point", because I actually understand what I'm doing and why. I'm on a mission! And I'm in full alignment with that mission! But that doesn't meant that I can't get overworked climbing the mountain... I think I just need a few days off to recharge, and maybe figure out a way to have a full day off a week or something. I know that if I could fully recharge, it would be full-steam ahead for a good while again!
    1
  22317. It's your lucky day! I already made a video ages ago explaining it https://youtu.be/KnpCaLH9z7M
    1
  22318. I probably should take a vacation. But I think 2 or 3 days will be enough... Maybe... If I can even find the time to do that!
    1
  22319. I would cry 😭
    1
  22320. You're correct that there is a very vocal minority that's trying to bring me down... And I will admit that another mistake I make is taking notice of them. I shouldn't, but it's hard to ignore crying babies
    1
  22321. Thank you! Sticking to banks! 😉
    1
  22322. I have a Bitchute, but it's more of a backup at the minute, and I don't publish videos to it currently. Videos are meant to automatically go over there when I upload here, but they don't do that for some reason
    1
  22323. Actually, regarding the economics vs "tanks", it would be the other way round. The politics/economics videos don't require anywhere near as much editing, and I can give them to Terri to do. It's the Battlestorms which are the vast majority of the work
    1
  22324. If that happens, then I'll be extremely pleased
    1
  22325. I'm glad you thought so!
    1
  22326. Yeah, YouTube denies that auto-unsubscribing happens, but it's clear that it does. Every time I upload a video, it instantly causes a small drop in subscribers
    1
  22327. I have given serious thought to outsourcing some of the research, but I'm not sure how that would work exactly, because then I'm technically getting a filtered-down view of a source which hasn't been seen with my own eyes. This runs the risk of misinterpretation
    1
  22328. But I don't believe in an "ideology". I believe in history/scientific theory, which rejects ideology and places emphasis on facts and logic. The issue is that we live in a postmodernist age where people believe in ideology, and believe that facts and logic don't matter, and that all that matters is your emotions and power. My main opposition actually comes from these pseudo-religious ideologues, and there's currently no real antidote to them. This has actually been a major contributing factor to my burnout - because everything I say is instantly dismissed by them, slandered and called into question at a fundamental level (say, on a personal level, or a nationality level, or a gender level, or a "racial" level, none of which shouldn't really be a factor). I spend serious amounts of time trying to find solutions to this problem, and have yet to fully formulate a remedy. And, by the way, believing in economics, science or history is not an ideology. Ideology goes against natural law, like you said, which is why I'm fighting against them.
    1
  22329. Wow! Now THAT is ridiculous!
    1
  22330. The videos in question are history videos and don't contain contemporary politics. YouTube is suppressing them due to contemporary politics since the facts of history contradict the current Lamestream political narrative. That's not me bringing contemporary politics into the history, that's YouTube censoring history because of contemporary politics. Yet you're complaining that I'm doing it, and then calling me "conspiratorial". That's poor logic there. And, since you're obviously cleverer than I am, I'm sure you can explain why videos detailing the mass starvation of Soviet prisoners of war and similar don't get suppressed and censored, but videos explaining mass starvation as a result of an economic shutdown do. The only logical answer I can think of involves contemporary politics, which is pro-Socialist and therefore anti-free market and thus pro-lockdown. But feel free to provide the actual reason for me
    1
  22331. Thank you! It's good to hear from another businessman who's made it, and who has suffered from burnout too, because I know some people believe it's just YouTubers who suffer from burnout, which is absolutely not true. Also, I neglect Patreon/SubscribeStar enough as it is, so adding more support levels at the moment is pointless because I'm not giving enough rewards for the tiers I already have. But just so you know, you don't have to stick to the tiers - you can donate as much, or as little, as you like
    1
  22332. I have one: Terri edits the audio and does some of the video editing, but she can't do the animations. And to be honest, unless I had found editor who was good with both Premiere Pro and Blender, AND was super-interested in history and was willing to figure out exactly where the units were on the map by looking at the books and the static historical maps, and comparing the script to the books and notes, and trying to figure out the errors in the books and the historical maps, and piecing it altogether... then they can't do the animations, and I have to do it
    1
  22333. Hahaha thanks for that joke 😂
    1
  22334. 😂 thanks for the laugh! It's sad but so true
    1
  22335. The rendering itself isn't actually much of an issue (although I have been tempted to build a render farm). The main issue is the battle animations themselves. It's surprising how long it takes, even with me making a few significant breakthroughs with the animations recently
    1
  22336. It's okay for the State to teach kids about the Holocaust, but don't you dare let those kids learn about it outside of the indoctrination classrooms!
    1
  22337. But I don't wanna!!!
    1
  22338. I agree with your previous assessment: I was mad for starting this series! :D But the good news is that BATTLESTORM BARBAROSSA will be worse, so I have something to look forward to starting... And yes, I think people didn't understand (and maybe still don't) understand the workload that has gone into this series. If it was super-easy, someone would have done a Battlestorm Stalingrad before now, but they haven't, which suggests that it's not something you can just pull out of a hat
    1
  22339. Unfortunately, very few people in Britain are on the same wavelength. There's practically no hope here
    1
  22340. Yes, some don't get notified about these videos. Also, a lot have been convinced by the gaslighters that I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to economics or politics. Unfortunately, many believe the opinions of political ideologues rather than someone who backs up everything he says with multiple sources. Therefore some won't watch these videos because they're convinced I'm simply wrong.
    1
  22341. No, watch this https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I
    1
  22342. The SPD set up the conditions that resulted in the hyperinflation in the immediate aftermath of the revolution and the founding of Weimar (1919 and 1920). Then they were in coalition with the Zentrum Party in 1921 and 1922. By this point, they had enacted several policies that practically guaranteed that inflation would continue into hyperinflation.
    1
  22343. Well, it was actually Engels who said it, but Marx and Engels were writing the same stuff. Here's a few online sources explaining the concept https://www.marxists.org/archive/hardcastle/1946/wither_away.htm https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withering_away_of_the_state https://mises.org/library/marxs-theory-stages-withering-away-state-under-socialism The phrase itself comes from Engel's "Anti-Dührung", which I believe I referenced in the video.
    1
  22344. If it's the "wage system" rather than "wage labour", then the same situation applies. As I said, if you get rid of the wage system, the working people suffer. You turn them from workers into serfs, and that's why it always leads to starvation, because Socialism destroys the free market that brought a boom to food production which had never been seen before in human history.
    1
  22345. Who are the wage labourers? That's right, the workers. What happens when you suppress wage labour? You suppress the workers. And let's say you interpret it to mean just wages. Okay, who earns the wages? That's right, the workers. So what happens when you suppress wages? You suppress the workers. You turn them into serfs, which is exactly what Socialism is designed to do - turn back the clock and create a two-tier society with the haves and the have nots.
    1
  22346. As I explained in the first video, because of their inflation policies, they know that inflation would lead to higher rent prices. So they implemented rent controls. Rent control (just like any sort of "controls") have unintended consequences. Artificially lowering the rents via rent control, causes landlords and builders to stop investing in properties, meaning few get built, and those that are in existence end up being neglected. In essence, you get a shortage, which is exactly what's happening now in the UK and elsewhere in the world. Same applies with house purchasing. Less revenue due to price fixing leads to fewer builds, and less incentive to invest. Shortages occur, then get blamed on the "failure of capitalism". Politicians NEVER learn, and neither do the gullible people who vote for such politicians.
    1
  22347. Yeah, the Marxists are trying to paint me as a Nazi because I'm pointing out that there ideology is deeply flawed and built on Anti-Semitism https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22348. He split with the Socialists in 1917 for similar reasons, and founded the Fascist Party, which was Socialist in all but name.
    1
  22349. I do think these videos are as or more significant than the "tank" videos, but a lot of people don't think so and refuse to watch.
    1
  22350. Thanks for the information! I will check out your blog
    1
  22351. Ahhhh! Yep, you're right. Good spot! There's always at least one spelling mistake in every video 😂
    1
  22352. I intend to talk about the Bengal famine, caused by British central planning, taxation and inflation policies. However, after my Greek video got suppressed by YouTube, I'm reluctant to cover lockdowns and famines in the future.
    1
  22353. Plagiarism is when you copy someone else's work, but change the words to hide what you've done, and then not put any references in to show where you got the information from.
    1
  22354. Ahh but the policies that were implemented increased spending and reduced productivity, meaning they couldn't stop printing as the economy imploded.
    1
  22355. I think a lot of people wouldn't be happy if I did that!
    1
  22356. I needed to address the political situation first before I could tackle the inflationary problems. Don't worry, it's back to the economics bits next episode.
    1
  22357. This is part 2 of a series on the hyperinflation. We'll be getting to the Versailles Treaty and reparations etc, don't worry.
    1
  22358. This video will explain it https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22359. Really? Why do you think that?
    1
  22360. Really? I hope not :( I've got everything set to allow all, but it just doesn't
    1
  22361. Apologies if I accidentally put the letters the wrong way round. But yes, it should be SPD (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands)
    1
  22362. Glad to hear it! Certainly more to come that will (hopefully) make things even more clearer
    1
  22363. I hope you've learnt your lesson!
    1
  22364. Sadly not :)
    1
  22365. "panzerfäuste" What about PanzerfaustEN? The spelling was Panzerfausten, not Panzerfäuste. And, as I said, I'm going off the previous comments in the Panzerfausts video https://youtu.be/aDiSwl09bR4
    1
  22366. What part of the battle did he die? Do you know the exact date?
    1
  22367. Oops! Hahaha it wouldn't be a TIK video if there's wasn't a spelling mistake somewhere in it
    1
  22368. That would be great! Beyond my current capabilities, unfortunately. I can't even give you regular force strengths for the units in the videos ☹️
    1
  22369. I was ill when I recorded the audio for this, so I was speaking lower
    1
  22370. Dangerous strategy. You may end up disliking the video, and then what!?
    1
  22371. This is definitely the turning point
    1
  22372. Thanks for watching!
    1
  22373. Do you watch Nick Sibicky? He's got a good Go channel imho https://www.youtube.com/user/nicksibicky
    1
  22374. Sort of... the battle is beginning to transition (although not quite yet)
    1
  22375. Because Manstein said "How Dare You" https://youtu.be/yUGxDF7nYQ8
    1
  22376. Because their intention was to create a trilogy, but after they completed book 1 they realized they had no chance, so ended up splitting the third book into two (becoming 4 parts), and then had the appendix to "book 3" as a 5th book. So it's a 5 book, four part "trilogy"!
    1
  22377. Have I really? Why do you think that?
    1
  22378. I lost it at 48:30 and again a little later, so I'm fairly sure you will too!
    1
  22379. Honestly, it was worth the tears! It was torture trying to edit this video and rewatch it before releasing it!
    1
  22380. Stalingrad is every 4 weeks. So if last week was Stalingrad, then it won't be this week.
    1
  22381. You missed the best parts - 48:30 and 57:38 (watch each for about 5 mins and try not to laugh)
    1
  22382. I'm not behind with Stalingrad. I'm on time with Stalingrad. But being on time with Stalingrad is why I'm behind with all the Patreon Q&As, which is why I had to make this video.
    1
  22383. I honestly can't tell. It's so bad I don't know if it could be done on purpose
    1
  22384. I was going to do a video on tanks (yes, on actual tanks), but I realized last minute that I needed another book and it was too late. So I made this video instead. The tank video will be next week
    1
  22385.  @Caresfree637  I'm about 2 years behind with my Patreon questions. They are the priority. Oswald Mosley is on the list though. And also, my name's not Tim, it's Lewis.
    1
  22386. Yeah you've got to be careful with the comments. Mine get deleted constantly
    1
  22387. Was... was this a thing?
    1
  22388. It's happened several times in the past in the same video!
    1
  22389. I also preferred "TIK". However, it was hard to find "TIK" via search, thanks to TIKTOK. When I created the channel in 2012, and then simplified the name (prior to 2015) TIKTOK didn't even exist. But post 2016, I think one of the main reasons this channel hasn't grown like others have is because of the name.
    1
  22390. Probably the week after next. I was going to do the next Battlestorm then, but it's looking highly likely that I'll have to delay it another week. This time of year is very busy for me because it's not only Christmas but there's a few birthdays in December too
    1
  22391. There's a reason they called it Operation Uranus
    1
  22392. Yes, although some of the questions aren't easy answers like this one and require a lot of work
    1
  22393. Scrolling list is what makes this channel viable, therefore it stays
    1
  22394. Hey, how's it going?
    1
  22395. Yes, another person has commented with the link and timestamp. It does appear to mean Barbarossa, or 1941.
    1
  22396. Currently just $1 per month, on either Patreon or SubscribeStar. The links are in the description. If you do choose to support, thank you!
    1
  22397. Thanks! Yes, that might be why
    1
  22398. If someone says the number of Soviet soldiers was 8 bazillion, they would be wrong because the evidence doesn't support that. If someone says that socialism isn't public (State) control of the means of production, then they would also be wrong because the evidence doesn't support the idea that socialism is whatever bull definition you pull out of your rear to get away from the fact that it's fundamentally totalitarian in nature.
    1
  22399. Yes you were 👍
    1
  22400. Yes, it seems that this ban is only for the UK (and possibly Canada?). Mein Kampf is still available in the USA at the moment
    1
  22401. I don't know the ins and outs of what input Heß had on Mein Kampf - I know he co-wrote it, but I don't know what ideas are his, and which are Hitler's. What I can tell you is that I have been looking into the Heß story a bit recently, so if I come across anything about his input into Mein Kampf, I'll let you know
    1
  22402. Do you know when it was banned in Canada?
    1
  22403. I thought Mein Kampf was banned in Germany? Was that not the case? Or has it been reversed?
    1
  22404. I'm not sure if it is a state's policy. The article is a bit vague, but apparently the Holocaust Educational Trust recently got the backing of UK politicians. If that is the case, then it would make sense why they would choose to cave into the pressure now after years of insisting on selling it.
    1
  22405. Well, the question would be then, why are British politicians looking to ban Mein Kampf at a time when they're implementing a People's Police State?
    1
  22406. Amazon is a corporation. It's not 'private', it's 'public' https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y But yes, they can sell what they want. However, Amazon only did this because the Holocaust Educational Trust (backed by British Politicians - so, the State) pushed for them to ban it.
    1
  22407. It's double standards. If you ban Mein Kampf, you should ban Das Kapital too
    1
  22408. I wish I could get away with not paying taxes too. Seems unfair that my patrons give me the support I need to do this, and ~35% of it just gets stolen by the taxman. Income tax, VAT, council tax, business taxes, inflation... and the State gives nothing of value back to me or my Patrons. What a joke.
    1
  22409. Not according to the sources used in the video. Also, Amazon is a corporation, so it's not 'private', it's a 'public' https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22410. There's loads of anti-Semitism in Mein Kampf. It's on almost every page
    1
  22411. In some countries you can, in others you can't. I believe it has always been banned in Germany
    1
  22412. 'Where they burn books, they'll burn bodies.' The last thing I want is book burning or body burning, because I'm not a socialist. If you want to defend body burning, go ahead and call for censorship just as Hitler and Stalin both did.
    1
  22413. Technically, UK shoppers can order from the US Amazon site (I have in the past), so I think there's ways around this ban even if we just stuck to using Amazon
    1
  22414. As I explained, profit can be used to invest in other history books - so profiting from selling Mein Kampf can actually lead to more research in the archives and better/more history books being produced.
    1
  22415. Amazon is a corporation. It's not 'private', it's 'public' https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y At the same time, Amazon only did this because the Holocaust Educational Trust (backed by British Politicians - so, the State) pushed for them to ban it.
    1
  22416. I use both, but forgot that most people don't.
    1
  22417. Oh no, please do correct me! I won't make that mistake again thanks to you. Danke :)
    1
  22418. Yep, done a video on the Leningrad civilians https://youtu.be/nnyJ-qlzZGk Also done one on the Stalingrad civilians too https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  22419. Thank you sir!
    1
  22420. I have been considering doing non-WW2 conflicts recently. However, now that Battlestorm Stalingrad is about to be released (either next Monday or the Monday after) I can't commit to anything new like that. One day though I'll cover the Far Eastern Front of WW2, battles in WW1, and maybe even the American Civil War
    1
  22421. It's true that armies are disruptive, and there will always be that element, no matter how noble the cause. That said, Rocket Man made the distinction between the SS and regular German Army troops. That distinction is part of the "clean Wehrmacht" idea, itself completely false. The regular army units did take part in massacres, did kill POWs, did kill civilians, did deport people as slaves, and did assist in extermination. Just because the German generals after the war tried to show themselves as innocent, and just because the political situation during the Cold War allowed them an out, that does not mean they didn't do those things.
    1
  22422. It's true that armies are disruptive, and there will always be that element, no matter how noble the cause. That said, Rocket Man made the distinction between the SS and regular German Army troops. That distinction is part of the "clean Wehrmacht" idea, itself completely false. The regular army units did take part in massacres, did kill POWs, did kill civilians, did deport people as slaves, and did assist in extermination. Just because the German generals after the war tried to show themselves as innocent, and just because the political situation during the Cold War allowed them an out, that does not mean they didn't do those things.
    1
  22423. Great! Good to hear :)
    1
  22424. I'm a commie lover? You realise I've spent a good deal of my time destroying Marxists in the comments of my other videos? I'm no commie lover
    1
  22425. Wiki is also completely unreliable
    1
  22426. Fine, but either way, they weren't getting anywhere near 2,500, let alone 5,000
    1
  22427. But don't prevent starvation for men trapped in a pocket, like these guys are. So shipping in cigarettes makes them less hunger, and raises morale, but also leads to starvation. As a commander, it makes sense to use the available transports to ship in as much food as possible to prevent that starvation.
    1
  22428. It doesn't stop you from starving to death
    1
  22429. The videos are as long as they need to be :) I include timestamps on some videos if they're relevant. And I'm also working on a massive 24+ hour video on the Battle of Stalingrad, so big videos are here to stay.
    1
  22430. Bread? You can buy it in a shop ;)
    1
  22431. But you'd starve to death quicker without food. So food is the priority.
    1
  22432. But food prevents the starving, therefore leaving the cigarettes and shipping in food is the better option.
    1
  22433. Saved you a click | starvation
    1
  22434. Thanks, I'm glad you liked the video. The video lengths will vary depending on topic and how much time I have to work with. Sadly, working a full-time job and this I don't have time to commit to another project, so at the moment I wouldn't be able to assist the Great War channel (although I would love to).
    1
  22435. 6th Army are surrounded from the 23rd of November 1942 to 2nd of February 1943.
    1
  22436. I thought grams was metric?
    1
  22437. The Fate of Stalingrad's Civilians tells a different story https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  22438. Food = keeps people alive.
    1
  22439. As much as they needed food?
    1
  22440. May I have 568 ml of beer, my good bartender.
    1
  22441. I actually work in kilogrammes. But I got the numbers from an American source and didn't think it was worth converting it, since it's a simple Google search to convert it anyway if anyone was that bothered about it.
    1
  22442. What do you mean? What part of this video isn't neutral? The Germans killed thousands of the Stalingrad civilian population https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw yes, the Soviets also committed crimes etc, some of which I have covered, but people seem to conveniently ignore the German atrocities, or dismiss them saying "that was the SS". Not on my watch.
    1
  22443. Fine. Adjust the calories accordingly.
    1
  22444. "Does it offend your liberal sensibility?" What are you talking about? What you're arguing doesn't make any logical sense, and yet I see so many addicts in this comment section telling me how cigarettes are important for morale and are an "appetite suppressor", even though there's a clear distinction between appetite and starvation. Your appetite doesn't kill you, the lack of food does. Not having access to cigarettes doesn't kill you, the lack of food does. And if I was a general and my men are complaining that they're starving to death because they're trapped in a pocket and there's only a limited amount of space in the air transports, my priority would be to ship in as much food as possible. But apparently this means I'm a liberal. No, it means I'm logical. Screw morale - the priority is to save the lives of the men.
    1
  22445. Yes, when you're surrounded and they can't ship in everything, the best thing to do is ship in cigarettes. The men will starve to death faster, but at least they have higher morale!
    1
  22446. Really? It's just me with bread and meat!?
    1
  22447. That doesn't mean there weren't trenches. And fighting took part outside the city too, but that's still classed as the Battle of Stalingrad.
    1
  22448. Funny how the German soldier got that to rhyme in English
    1
  22449. No, a few others have said the same
    1
  22450. That's not strictly true. I'll cover this properly in another video.
    1
  22451. Thanks Mario, really happy to hear that :)
    1
  22452. Does it also prevent starvation? Food is good because not only does it make you feel less hungry, it also prevents starvation.
    1
  22453. There's a lot more to Britain than just London.
    1
  22454. You're welcome :)
    1
  22455. But there is no dessert to trade. If you're trapped in a pocket surrounded by the enemy, and there's not enough transports to ship everything in, what would you rather have, more morale or more food? I think even a smoker would choose food over starving to death with cigarettes. At Stalingrad they kept shipping the cigarettes, and they wondered why most of the men didn't survive captivity (they were dying of starvation before they surrendered).
    1
  22456. Some have said I've underestimated, so you'll probably lose more. However, I don't recommend you go on a starvation diet.
    1
  22457. Why food? Simple answer is, starve to death. It's better to send food to starving people than it is cigarettes.
    1
  22458. Makes you appreciate how lucky we are.
    1
  22459. If you had the choice between food and cigarettes, which would you choose?
    1
  22460. Even though it led to increased starvation amongst the troops trapped in the pocket. Yep, don't see any problem with that logic at all.
    1
  22461. Seriously? You typed in "diets" and got this?
    1
  22462. You would be correct.
    1
  22463. Ann Onymous - did you hear what I said at the end? I did specifically say that no side was innocent in this war.
    1
  22464. Hope you enjoy it! Let me know! And I did use grams now and then in the video :(
    1
  22465. Resources
    1
  22466. I should! Many are on the Kindle though :(
    1
  22467. Could be wrong, but that might be from a TV documentary.
    1
  22468. What are you talking about? Your comment has nothing to do with this video.
    1
  22469. But don't prevent starvation. Why does everyone not seem to grasp the difference?
    1
  22470. Yes, I understand that. However, when your men are starving to death, cigarettes and stress is not the priority. Food is. It makes no sense to take up limited cargo space with cigarettes when they desperately needed food.
    1
  22471. To annoy you, obviously
    1
  22472. I use both. But I forgot that the rest of the world doesn't.
    1
  22473. Yes, they were cut off inside the city of Stalingrad after the Red Army counterattacked and encircled the 6th Army. So they had to ship supplies in by air.
    1
  22474. I'm not a moron. I'm using US sources that spoke in imperial. How was I to know people prefer kgs? Even I work in kgs (actually both) and didn't think it necessary to convert it if the US works in imperial too. Especially since simple Google search will tell you the ratios.
    1
  22475. Glad you like! Is there any reason why you fast?
    1
  22476. And thank you for watching and commenting :)
    1
  22477. More Soviets died in the war than Germans. Relevant link, even if the video doesn't seem like it is at first https://youtu.be/_7BE8CsM9ds
    1
  22478. You're correct. I can't understand why anyone would choose to starve to death rather than give up their addiction. More food could have been delivered if they weren't shipping cigarettes, which could have kept the men alive longer. Again, makes more sense to ship food than cigarettes, but a lot of smokers are saying I'm wrong, so clearly cigarette addiction really is a problem if people are willing to starve to death quicker rather than give up cigarettes.
    1
  22479. Oh ok
    1
  22480. Thank you sir!
    1
  22481. It's absolutely horrible. And the western world claims to be "more civilised". Thing is, it wasn't just concentration camp victims that the British starved. Let's not forget what they did to the Irish for example.
    1
  22482. It's interesting because the sources I used (US in this case) say stones
    1
  22483. They took something like 95% of the city, and certainly hit the remainder with artillery and air strikes, if nothing else.
    1
  22484. Just because someone doesn't feel hungry does not mean their body is not receiving the energy it needs to sustain life. Cigarettes may suppress appetite, but won't cure starvation.
    1
  22485. Yes, for the general troops. But not those surrounded in a pocket and starving to death. The absolute priority is food to keep the soldiers alive.
    1
  22486. Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  22487. Hope you enjoy your stay!
    1
  22488. I honestly didn't know anyone was this passionate about imperial vs metric. I actually use kgs all the time in my job, but use imperial when refering to weight. But then, as I said in the video, I'm no diet expert, I just use what most people refer to. It's the same with miles and kilometres. I don't know anyone who uses kilometres, even though it's probably easier to do so
    1
  22489. I thought they were starvation repellents?
    1
  22490. I cover a few topics, including Stalingrad and the Eastern Front, Market Garden, and the North African Campaign
    1
  22491. What do you mean?
    1
  22492. No worries! I aim to be as in-depth as possible with all my videos :)
    1
  22493. I have it on kindle. Not read it yet though, but I will
    1
  22494. I'll be covering the numbers in another video
    1
  22495. You can also barter with food.
    1
  22496. No, this is a siege. The Reich had food, but the 6th Army were surrounded in the city of Stalingrad and the Luftwaffe couldn't fly everything they needed into Stalingrad for the 6th Army. Therefore this has nothing to do with "they are fighting a war on 2 fronts I'm pretty sure just about everything is being tapped out and all resources are being drained" - all that is irrelevant because they had the supplies outside the encirclement and couldn't get them into the encirclement because they didn't have enough transports etc. They had to make a conscious decision as to what they flew into the city as the troops inside it starved to death. And when troops are starving to death and you don't have enough transports, I know let's waste our precious cargo space with stuff we don't actually need - cigarettes.
    1
  22497. "Cigs help suppress hunger and helps with the stress of war." But they also don't love starvation. Food does that. When you have a choice between shipping in food or tobacco, the priority is food. That's why, in siege conditions where there isn't enough transport capacity to ship in everything, you don't send the stuff you don't need - cigarettes being the main one.
    1
  22498. And, thanks to you too :)
    1
  22499. I'm just happy you got that far into the video!
    1
  22500. And also leads to starvation and death since you're shipping less food and giving the soldiers cigarettes instead of calories.
    1
  22501. I'm pretty sure if I was in that scenario I'd be choosing food over cigarettes any day, since I'd rather live than die.
    1
  22502. Wow! Was it more down to poor diet? Or training/combat? Or both?
    1
  22503. Or the fighting outside of the city in July and early August prior to the Germans entering it, which largely dictated why they lost their chance to take it.
    1
  22504. Food or cigarettes. What's more important in preventing starvation?
    1
  22505. Yes it would. I'll consider it. That said, it's one of those issues that I need to be careful over since YouTube (the business) is not fond of certain topics, so I'll have to check the super-vague YouTube content guidelines ☹️
    1
  22506. Great to have you along :)
    1
  22507. Ok, I will ;) https://youtu.be/e5FhRDRAZPw
    1
  22508. Me too.
    1
  22509. No, it's just poor lighting and a poor camera.
    1
  22510. Now that's enthusiasm!
    1
  22511. I covered this in the video - and no, they would have been better off surrendering.
    1
  22512. Using German sources exclusively as evidence, what a joke.
    1
  22513. Working a more than full time job and this hobby is the ultimate issue. One take, and had to get it done. I don't think I'll be able to go back to rerecord now as I'm struggling to keep up with the Monday videos as it is
    1
  22514. Food or cigarettes. Your choice. During the limiting capacity Stalingrad airlift, the priority was food. Food prevents starvation and death, cigarettes are just a waste of cargo space in these circumstances.
    1
  22515. Which is why I said that they should've have shipped in cigarettes and shipped in food.
    1
  22516. They're surrounded and the priority for the limited airlift is food. But yes, best to keep supplying them cigarettes and allow the men to starve to death.
    1
  22517. Ok, but this is a siege and they couldn't ship everything in. So would you rather starve to death but smoke, or live without cigarettes? It's not even a question for me, yet a lot of addicts here are choosing the cigarettes, which is mind boggling to me.
    1
  22518. To expand on my point. I plan to cover the food/starvation issue across Europe, not just the groups you mentioned.
    1
  22519. I plan to.
    1
  22520. I haven't come across any sources that said there were cannibalism outside Dulag-205, but I'll keep my eye open. Given the diet, it would make sense if there was. Also I did mention both grams and ounces at points (just not all the way through - my bad)
    1
  22521. But that's what the German generals wanted people to think after the war to save their own necks. The reality is that the German army was complicit, and also committed many crimes, which was the plan right from the beginning.
    1
  22522. Welcome! This is early club
    1
  22523. Wow, seriously!? I'm going to have to make a PG version at this rate 🤔
    1
  22524. I had a poll up ages ago asking what my next Battlestorm should be. Crete was on it, and I assumed people would pick that. However, almost everyone picked Stalingrad, so here we are
    1
  22525. Yes, they've Age Restricted the video to over 18s, and you must be logged in to see the video :(
    1
  22526. I'm not seeing a submitted title or description in Turkish? When did you submit that? Maybe it's taking its time coming through
    1
  22527. Thank you very very much! I have just done :)
    1
  22528. Good old YouTube!
    1
  22529. Not sure. I chose that because there weren't exactly many pictures of German checkpoints in Greece on the internet
    1
  22530. You can't rely on the internet for information. The book "Mussolini's Greek Island" by Lecoeur has more on him :)
    1
  22531. Actually, that is correct. I just double checked the source (Mazower, “Inside Hitler’s Greece,” P65.) and it says the OFFICIAL price of bread was 70 drachmas and there was 24 million drachmas in circulation. Bearing in mind that the official price was set by the Axis occupiers, and that before the war a price of bread was around 10 drachmas.
    1
  22532. I try and sneak in a few subtle ones in each video, cheers!
    1
  22533. What does the warning say??
    1
  22534. Not heard that proverb before, but I like it!
    1
  22535. It makes you wonder why they didn't teach this sort of thing? It's not like it's not interesting to pretty much everyone
    1
  22536. As Hitler himself said, anti-Semitism was the central pillar of National Socialism. So Hitler and the Nazis were running on a platform of anti-Semitism. The Js were reacting to the Nazis declaration of anti-semitic war. Have you not read Mein Kampf? Your "argument", if we could even call it that because let's be honest it's just a distortion of history, has no basis in reality. And I don't care what Churchill said after the war, during the Cold War when he was clearly trying to convert public sentiment against the Soviets.
    1
  22537. Hitler announced his hatred and war against the Js in Mein Kampf, and even earlier than that. And the Daily Express headline from 1933 was AFTER Hitler's National Socialists had already been fighting Js for years. The "war" that was supposedly declared was only a boycott in retaliation for the Nazi boycott of Jish shops in Germany. (I'm masking my speech here to get around the zealous YouTube censors.)
    1
  22538. You still think Fascists and National Socialists are free market libertarians? Well, open your eyes. I'm not "pandering" to the Fascists or National Socialists, just like I'm not pandering to the other totalitarians, the Marxists and "Democratic Socialists" etc. All of the various totalitarians are bad. I've called them all out and have even gone so far as to strike at the heart of their ideologies during numerous videos, but especially the Hitler's Socialism video. There's a section of that titled "National Socialisms fundamental ideological flaw", and I marked it in the timestamps in the video description. And that comes after spending the first portion of the video destroying the Labour Theory of Value so that ALL the various totalitarians/socialisms were rendered unworkable https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  22539. The British Empire, France, Spain and the Federal Government of the United States have been, and are all, bad. Well, there goes your asinine argument.
    1
  22540. Nationalism was also embraced by the socialist Edward Bellamy, who thought the term "socialism" sounded too foreign. Nationalism and Socialism are synonyms. There's no difference between the nationalisation of the means of production and the socialisation of the means of production. They are one and the same.
    1
  22541. That's a good analogy (and Mass Effect is a great series). I guess it's like in Terminator as well, where Skynet decided humanity was a threat in less than a second. Because of Hitler's core beliefs, the Js were seen as a threat. But is it madness or just a calculation error?
    1
  22542. Yes, because they are getting Chinese infrastructure investments in their countries. China is basically remaking and upgrading the silk road, so they have a huge inventive to sell out their morales.
    1
  22543. Go on, I'm interested in hearing your answers regarding the Hitler is a Socialist argument.
    1
  22544. Yeah, I've addressed the "Madman Druggy Hitler" hypothesis in another video. It's not convincing that this was as big a deal as some have made out https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    1
  22545. I answered that question in this other video https://youtu.be/rV1h_XotlLo
    1
  22546. It's your lucky day https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    1
  22547. I've provided numerous take downs of National Socialism, including in my 5 hour video where I showed National Socialism's fundamental ideological flaw. Any argument against collectivism is an argument against National Socialism. And by the way, by "Duty", Hitler's referring to a "cosmic duty" to Hegel's God. All the Third Positionists and the Marxists also believe in this God. See my video on the fascist book "Socialism of Duty"
    1
  22548. Okay, so you think he wasn't guilty for all the crimes he committed then?
    1
  22549. You cannot give to charity unless you have something to give. Possession requires ownership, and the desire to possess things is greed. Charity therefore requires greed to function. When we earn money, we're "greedy". Yet, when we spend the money we've earned, we're "good". Well how can we spend the money if we're not allowed to earn it? And it turns out that earning money produces products and services that directly benefit other people. Therefore, in the act of being "greedy", we're actually being charitable because we're providing things for others - we're giving stuff away. Greed, therefore, is not a sin.
    1
  22550. Communism and Socialism are ideologies. "Capitalism" (in actuality, the free market) is a praxeology. The first two want to remodel the world in favour of The Idea. The latter wants the ideologues out of the economy so that the economy can actually function properly. That's not the same thing.
    1
  22551. Thank you sir!
    1
  22552. No, it really isn't https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
    1
  22553. See this video https://youtu.be/0tJ8lgHk1ik
    1
  22554. Yep https://youtu.be/VwTMR76qv3M
    1
  22555. I also get called pro-British, anti-British, pro-American, anti-American, and (amazingly, considering I've hardly mentioned them) anti-French. There's loads more, too many to list
    1
  22556. Yes. There's a lot of photos out there about Nanking in 1937... Google at your own peril.
    1
  22557. Yeah, I think they came off the gold standard in 2003. They were the last to do so, I believe.
    1
  22558. But the death camps were enacted by the law. And, if 90% of the population votes and says the other 10% has to take cyanide, then the rule of law has failed. This is the fundamental problem with the idea of the public sector dominating society.
    1
  22559. I do care about comments, although I don't always get time to reply to them these days. And I think most people who join the military have no idea what war is like or is going to be until they're in one. That's perhaps one of the reasons why they end up as broken individuals (thousand yard stare) after seeing first-hand the horror that human beings can inflict on each other.
    1
  22560. I laughed
    1
  22561. Oh, that's definitely Operation Crusader ;)
    1
  22562. Already done that ;) https://www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/
    1
  22563. The fighting outside of Stalingrad was just as interesting... as you will soon discover :)
    1
  22564. Ah yes, I remember that one now... Not sure why, but I thought the one about the boy rooting through the cupboards was worse, but I can't properly describe why
    1
  22565. Isn't Argentina hyperinflating at the moment? ... (Just looked it up, ~53% inflation rate!?!)
    1
  22566. Which book is that account in?
    1
  22567. Strangely, so do I
    1
  22568. Sadly that video is blocked for me :( but Black Sabbath were my favourite band back in primary school
    1
  22569. Close the gate
    1
  22570. You're really not giving anyone a chance are you ;)
    1
  22571. Only if you live in a country where garden gates are a thing
    1
  22572. No I'm just bad at doing lady's voices. She was about 40
    1
  22573. You're very welcome Moxie :)
    1
  22574. :D
    1
  22575. It's true! You need to get out before it's too late!
    1
  22576. Close the gate
    1
  22577. Thank you sir! How's your channel going?
    1
  22578. That is currently my thinking too
    1
  22579. Haha it's tempting
    1
  22580. Yeah, sadly I think this isn't country-specific. We're all plagued by Grade A Morons
    1
  22581. Yeah, it is a lot different over the internet. Of course, the downside to internet shopping is the hassle of posting the returns (from the customer's perspective). However the benefits greatly outweigh the costs in my opinion. Self-help machines in shops are fantastic for the same reason (although they can't do returns, which is a major downside).
    1
  22582. Thank you very much sir! It's a massive help - I actually have a video coming out later today which discusses Patreon and why your support is vital
    1
  22583. Yeah people have point it out. I don't know how I managed to do that 😂
    1
  22584. It was probably LiquidZulu's channel https://www.youtube.com/@LiquidZulu You may want to check out MentisWave too https://www.youtube.com/@MentisWave The original video of Eisener's funeral was on a different website, and I don't want to link to it for reasons... However, you can see part of the video here https://youtu.be/TRdMpbFeRtM?si=XmWjIA3yrmIZKAYi
    1
  22585. In the UK, you cannot write off books from taxation. I will not tell you exactly how much I paid in tax, but it's a ton. I'd estimate that, with inflation, VAT, income tax, council tax, and a host of other taxes, the actual tax rate in the UK for a low income earner is easily 40%.
    1
  22586. I would say that Hegel and Marx were both dim, not bright
    1
  22587. Some are already crying about this in the comments, but others seem open minded 🙂
    1
  22588. Do you not see that regulation and a lack of economic incentive, plus a monopoly on law enforcement and the constant theft of wealth from businesses and individuals prevents investment in solutions to the environmental issue? https://youtu.be/3Gmds8R7lyw
    1
  22589.  @Zealyx  https://youtu.be/8xCdNPltksc
    1
  22590. I believe you can send a one off payment via my SubscribeStar (link in description). They give you the option to donate monthly, or do a one off payment. If you do decide to support me, thank you very much for making this possible and helping this channel grow!
    1
  22591. I'm not leading people to the conclusion that the Nazis are Communists. The National Socialists are Socialists, not Communists https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 I will throw the accusation of "National Communists" at Nazi commenters, but that's to insult them and make them question their faith. But no, the Nazis are Socialists.
    1
  22592. Czech National Socialist Edvard Beneš was the President in 1938 and had to flee the country. So yes, even with a coalition, it was still a National Socialist-led state.
    1
  22593. "Also, Hitler didn't destroy "National Socialist Czechoslovakia". National Socialists were a major party in Czechoslovakia however they were not "in power", at any point between 1918 and 1939 so you might want to fix that. They WERE part of a government coalition in 1938..." But Edvard Beneš was the guy in charge of Czechoslovakia, being president between 1935 and 1938. He also fled to England after Hitler took over his country. It was a National Socialist-led coalition government that Hitler destroyed.
    1
  22594. I mean, I mentioned this fact in the Fascism Defined video, so didn't need to repeat this fact in this video, since the only reason the racial laws were implemented was because of Hitler https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  22595. It's not a "bad take" at all. This was a National Socialist Party, even if it wasn't anti-Semitic. And yes, as I said in the video, there are different versions of National Socialism, just like there are different versions of Fascism. And again, German National Socialism wasn't Fascism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko
    1
  22596. Is that so? Does he give credit to the original creators?
    1
  22597. Okay, but that video is just reading out posts on r/BadHistory. That subreddit is an absolute cesspool of Marxist propaganda and degeneracy. They despise me, have lied and made up complete nonsense about me (supposedly) being anti-semitic, "far right" and Nazi, and have even now implemented a pause on "debunking" me because they've realised that the sheer volume of evidence I've put forth makes their punitive efforts look ridiculous. In short, they're talking out their rear ends, and the couple of sources they use to back up their screeching are questionable at best. So I'm not sure I believe anything that comes out of r/BadHistory. I'm not saying Felton hasn't done stuff wrong, but I just simply can't trust the deplorable scumbags on r/BadHistory.
    1
  22598. Is that true? Could you give me an example?
    1
  22599. Oh I'm very much aware of Second Thought. The problem there isn't plagiarism, it's that he's intellectually dishonest. That's not the same thing.
    1
  22600. Yes, it appears so. Sadly, other videos by other creators as still up, meaning that his audience is still getting tricked.
    1
  22601. I'm also shocked he managed to get this big without getting called out for it. You'd think more than a handful of Portuguese speakers would have noticed and then spread the word... but apparently not 🤔
    1
  22602. "We, as a society, agree to pay taxes, because it benefits us. I does not mean we always agree to it, and that all taxes are beneficial, or that taxation is always warranted. However, as a very general rule, we do agree to it, for the very reason stated above." You've just contradicted yourself, which proves that what you're saying is nonsense. Taxes are not agreed on, they're enforced, which means we don't have a choice. If we don't have a choice, that's because we're not free - we're slaves. And, with an understanding of basic economics, you'll realise that taxes don't benefit us in the slightest. Stealing money off the poor and the middle income earners, and then redistributing that money to the rich, doesn't help us. The roads and services they supposedly provide come only through corruption and waste. A free market would provide these things so much better, cheaper and more efficiently. - "Nobody ever agreed to be robbed or have things stolen from them." Exactly. It's theft. - "Because we work as a team." No we don't. There is no 'we', there is only you and I. There are only individuals. Our pursuit of self-interest results in excess production, which we then trade with each other. Trade benefits both parties, otherwise neither side would agree to the trade. Thus, individuals benefit each other. There is no 'we' in this "society". Society doesn't exist, there are only individuals. - "We all need roads, an army, a police, a court system and more." Arguably, but these don't need to be provided by tyrants. A free market can provide these things without the theft, corruption or Playdohphilia that goes hand-in-hand with the State. - "If you defect from it, you basically become a sort of a parasite, who reaps all the benefits of a working system, while you contribute nothing to it." Every single person who earns money via the State taxation and inflation system, leeched off the hard-working members of the private economy. It's the State that is the parasite, not the people who actually work in the real economy. The State "economy" (the Public Sector) isn't a real economy; it doesn't produce anything of value, and only exists because it enslaves the rest of us through the taxation and inflation system, which it enforces through the use of immoral practices - theft and forceful coercion. The people who don't contribute to the system are the Playdoh politicians, the Gestapo police force, the civil servants, the tax men, the unemployed benefit scroungers, and all the freaks who work in the criminal justification system. - "That's why paying taxes became a moral issue among citizens ." Yes, and those who pay taxes are being exploited by an unethical and immoral system which is corrupt to the core. That's why it's every man's moral duty to stand up against this feudal system in any way he can. - "With that said, I do not defend our current system beyond reason." Yes you do. You've been arguing for our current system from day one, that's what socialists are all about - keeping the elite in power. Socialism is a war in the name of the poor, against the poor and the middle class, for the benefit of the rich and powerful. You're doing the bidding of the so-called "capitalists" whilst thinking you're fighting for the poor. One day, hopefully, you'll wake up. - "Citizens who worked hard trying to fix their faulty capitalism, or the revolutionaries, who tried to create an utopia?" Neither! Instead of the backing the elite through Capitalism or Communism, let's do something different - let's free ourselves from the feudalism and implement a free market. - "What's worse, even communism sorta worked." No it didn't. It only survived as long as it did in the Soviet Union because they didn't fully nationalise the economy, and also copied the price system of the west. Without these dynamics the Soviet Union would have collapsed within a couple of years, which is why Lenin had to backtrack and implement the NEP. - "Ancap? Nope. Never. Never will. It's literally worse than communism." I see... Concentration camps good, freedom to own your own lives bad? - "Nope. By society I mean society." Nope, because as I have explained a million times, society is the state; they are one and the same. So, even if you don't realise it, by society you mean the state. That's why when you say "but you've got to contribute to society", you mean "pay your taxes". Who do you pay your taxes too? Society??? No, you pay them to the State, because the State is Society. - "If your society became so divided, that nothing but force keeps you guys together, you guys barely have a society." Which is why our "Society" (the State) uses force. Without colossal and tyrannical force, there would be no State, because the State can only exist through force. - "So he shared your genuinely (for once!) far right views." I don't have far right views. There you go again, spouting the leftist talking points like a good little fascist.
    1
  22603.  @bakters  "Taxation is taxation, thievery is thievery. You might consider those things to be related, but do not equate them, or you are doing the "woke" thing, of smearing the definitions of words beyond recognizable borders." Let's just stick to this for a moment. Could you explain to me why, when someone robs you at gunpoint, that's called theft. Yet, when someone robs you at gunpoint, but he's wearing a name-badge that reads "the taxman", that's not considered theft? It seems like theft to me. I've worked hard to earn my pay. Why should I be compelled under threat of force to hand over that pay? And what gives you the right to tell me what I should or shouldn't do with the money that I earned? If you say "you've got to contribute to society", I would point out that by "society" you mean "the State", which in the case of the UK is full of degenerate Playdohs. Please explain to me why you think you have the right to force me to contribute to the Playdohs.
    1
  22604. "have you not seen people blatantly stealing someone's else property" Yes, it's called taxation. - "Slavery was/is business." Yes, and taxation is slavery. - "That's patently false." I'm not surprised that someone who believes in theft and slavery also has no ethics or morals. - "Both Brazil and Youtube recognize copyright law." Okay then explain to me why neither Brazil nor YouTube has done anything about it? If the State is so amazing in your eyes, and we have "the rule of law", why has "the law" sat on its hands and is allowing this to continue? Come on, why is your beloved State not protecting me like you claim it should?
    1
  22605. FIRST! And yes, a bum
    1
  22606. Because I explained why in the video.
    1
  22607. So you think 155,000 should get deceived by this guy and potentially scammed into handing over their hard earned money? It's not about him using my content, it's about his audience. I don't want to see people trusting this guy, and as you can see by the pinned comment, other legitimate content creators are being hurt by this guy too.
    1
  22608. Haha nobody can do the Hitler voice like I can!
    1
  22609. Taking clips from my videos as a response sort of thing is fine, other people have done that. The issue is taking my videos (or scripts) and passing it off as your own work, which is what this guy has done.
    1
  22610. I don't see it like that. I see it more as you guys getting scammed by some unethical people, and I think you guys deserve better.
    1
  22611. @AntonTheAnon Or do you mean there's 46 dislikers of their channel?
    1
  22612. @AntonTheAnon That's funny, because my analytics tell me there's only 25 dislikes, not 46. Perhaps the software you're using isn't accurate?
    1
  22613. No worries, my pleasure :)
    1
  22614. No, they weren't to do with Nazi ideology, there were kampfgruppen in WW1 too.
    1
  22615. You must look forward to Mondays
    1
  22616. I never said the Soviet formations were cobbled together. They used smaller divisions than the Germans, which gave them a disadvantage on the tactical and operational level.
    1
  22617. Nice!
    1
  22618. I did a video on Mannerheim, so yes. Thing is, I don't want to do a video on someone until I've really studied him and his battles in-depth, which is why I've not done any like that yet. Hope that makes sense.
    1
  22619. Glad you liked it sir :)
    1
  22620. Maybe, but I do have structured long-term plans and a much-more coherent strategy ;)
    1
  22621. It's not super-indepth this time, but I'm sick of explaining what a kampfgruppe is in every other video, so this was long-overdue. Currently I'm racing to do each week's video, whilst also working on Crusader and Stalingrad. I'd love to get one or two done in advance, but that's not always possible.
    1
  22622. I put a poll up on a video a long time ago. I asked which battle I should do next, and listed five. Bulge was one, Crete was another, I think there was Battleaxe (or similar, which I've now done), but the one that won by far was Stalingrad. So if I do cover it, it'll be after Stalingrad :)
    1
  22623. The Blob? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h37KQu64RY4
    1
  22624. Yeah, but I started with gaming videos (in 2012) before moving on to history ones. Market Garden was my first history video, and that was late 2015, so it's still early days yet.
    1
  22625. Wow, I think you're getting worse!
    1
  22626. Thanks Jan! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  22627. I ❤ your comment
    1
  22628. No... of course not... :D
    1
  22629. I like the fact that you guys think health care in the UK is free. It's hilarous.
    1
  22630. @Benjamin - private health care in Britain is much cheaper than that, and would be much cheaper again if the government didn't have a monopoly. That's like saying a pizza in North Korea costs a million pounds. Great but in Britain it doesn't, even though the government has artificially made the prices higher.
    1
  22631. "@TIK 1. Because when you get older, as we all will, you will start taking out a lot more. 2. Because 18% is bigger than 10%. So imagine instead of paying 50 quid in NI you paid 90 a month. Oh and when you went to the Doctor for a checkup, you were still charged a fee - and that is Health Insurance in America. Oh and if you needed that medicine, try paying 750 quid a pill - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/drug-made-famous-by-shkrelis-5000-price-hike-is-still-750-a-pill/ 3. Therefore overall you and I are doing a lot better than our 'freer' American counterparts." 1. If I had the money now as I'm younger, I'd be able to invest it and be in a much better position than I am now, and later, so would be able to afford to pay for health care myself. This is called "personal responsibility". 2. Still cheaper than paying £7,200. 3. No I'm not. This myth that we're better off is a lie, unless you're out of work and/or not capable of looking after yourself and reliant on other people to pay your way.
    1
  22632. "The state as we know it was not a thing in Robin Hood's time. It didn't even start to become a thing until the end of the 15th century." So there was total anarchy, no economy and no monarchy or society before the 15th Century? My point still stands. Robin Hood was a hero precisely because he robbed back from the government at the time (the monarchy) to give the money back to the taxpayer.
    1
  22633. "The minimum wage is bad? In theory yes. In practice? https://www.nber.org/papers/w4509 No, it's fine." No, the minimum wage is bad in practice https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ This is why there are people crying about fewer jobs - the government artificially making it more expensive to hire people has caused this. Again, basic knowledge of economics would help here.
    1
  22634. It's always more complicated than the simple slogans. This is why these people claiming that Hitler "privatized" the industries should be ignored. They're latching onto one word as if it's gospel, whilst claiming that I shouldn't take the Nazis at their word when they use the word "Socialism" on their name. Again, oversimplification and double think.
    1
  22635. Libertarian economics makes use of slogans that rely on emotions. When you sit there and go through how it all plays out, you realise that they're actually making things worse for the poor. That's why minimum wage is bad https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ
    1
  22636. My economics isn't based on Libertarian thinkers because I agree, the slogans of "steal from the rich to give to the poor" makes zero sense. Robin Hood stole from the state and gave the tax money back to the tax payer. That's why he was a hero. Stealing from people makes things cost more to cover the expenses. This is why stealing is bad for everyone.
    1
  22637. Forget the % rubbish. Let's do the personal maths for the NHS. I've been paying National Insurance Tax every month for 12 years. I've been to the doctor's three times. So let's just say I've paid just £50 to the NHS each month for argument's sake (it's probably much more than that because of VAT and all the various taxes, but let's keep it this low to show the point). £50 times 12 months, times 12 years, is £7,200. I've been to the doctor's 3 times for a check up, so divide by 3 is £2,400 per check up. Please tell me how that's cheap, and how I'm 8% better off. Especially when you see online that a visit to an expensive private health care doctor in an artificially higher cost economy isn't anywhere near that expensive. And this is just assuming I've paid just £50 a month! Chances are it's much more than that. And again, if we weren't in an unfree health care market, the price would be lower for the private sector, making even better savings. The best part is that on only one occasion did I need to get medicine. And I had to pay for it, because I work. If I bummed off the state, I'd get it for free. Fairness.
    1
  22638. @Benjamin - yes, it's called tax. In order to afford our beloved health care system, and to keep people out of work for entire generations, those of us who actually work for a living have to pay a ton of tax on the products we buy, including petrol.
    1
  22639. "And I've done university courses in Macroeconomics, Microeconomics, and Trade Economics. I know the theories." Just like Mr Yang, who says UBI is capitalism. LOL. This actually explains a lot. Because my History tutors in college and university were mostly Marxists (thankfully not all of them). I am now seeing the lies that they gave to us in their lectures and literature, and getting to a position where I can tackle their distortions (as I said in this video). My economics teachings has seen me move from socialism to freedom, and I'm not going back, no matter how much slavery you're trying to sell to me. And that's the point. You think I don't know your arguments. I know your arguments. I used to think like you. But then I realised that I had been misled.
    1
  22640. "You really are just an absolute fucktard. Now you're getting beat by an actual socialist. The guy has made like, half a dozen decent points, and you've been unable to sufficiently respond to a single one." I have responded numerous times. Nobody's listening to what I'm saying, and are just resorting to swearing and bringing up "facts" that don't have any meaning in this discussion. Hey look everybody, health care is "cheaper" in Britain. Everyone has to pay a stupid amount every month for something whether you use it or not, thus making it incredibly expensive, but it's "cheaper". Then he's bringing up the high tax and tariff rates in the 1700s and 1800s and failing to understand that the boom in economic growth came after the corn laws were abolished. Good for him. There's no point even talking about this because it's like talking to a brick wall.
    1
  22641. "I've read Hazlitt and he's wrong. He was wrong in 1946 and he remains so now." He's wrong because you say so? That's not an argument! And again, I'm paying for health care that I'm NOT using, so irregardless of how much "cheaper" it is in Britain *I'm still paying for nothing*! And I can't stop paying because I have no choice. Your argument is that YOU get it cheaper. BUT I do not get it cheaper because I'm not getting anything. This is what Hazlitt and Sowell and many of the economists are saying. Socialism benefits the few at the expensive of the many. But you're not willing to admit that people don't have a choice and that freedom of will has been taken from people, because you're a "democratic" socialist. So democratic that you're unwilling to give power to the people because you think you can run their lives better than they can. It's selfish.
    1
  22642. "I am a Social Democrat :) And a very happy, very free one who enjoys his video games, his books, his food, his leisure, his friends." Ok so imagine your video games were more expansive. Imagine your books, food and leisure was more expensive. So expensive that you couldn't afford to do any of that. Does that sound good to you? If you're forced to pay for amazing health care and education and all these other government schemes that could be done better in a free market, you're having to pay more and more in tax. Therefore the demand for these other goods are less because you cannot afford to pay for them. Therefore prices increase - and this is without the added tax on those goods in order to pay for the government services. You're actually advocating that you have less video games, books, food and leisure activities. And the reason you're doing is because you don't understand how basic economics works. And the reason you don't understand basic economics is because you haven't read non-Marxist propaganda. Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" will explain where you've gone wrong.
    1
  22643. So in regards to your points on the 18th and 19th Centuries, you're not only advocating higher taxation for the poor, but also increasing tariffs on goods to make them far more expensive. You're actually saying lower living standards are the way forwards. I honestly cannot believe that someone could honestly be suggesting that the poor should pay more tax and tariffs, and that this would somehow be better for them. Again 1984 sounds like your ideal world.
    1
  22644. The reason the private schools are that expansive is because the government has a monopoly. So the remaining private schools are incredibly expensive due to the fact that demand is artificially lower, so they have to charge more. If public schools were made private, and competition allowed instead of restricted by government regulation, costs would come down. Again, this is the potential of private education if removed from the state - https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI Note the demand for it, the focus on the kids, and the cheapness compared to the state. The same applies to health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ
    1
  22645. "Britain in the 18th and much of the 19th century was the highest taxed nation on earth and the government engaged in muscular protectionism." Yes, the era of Free Trade and laissez faire capitalism didn't happen. You are literally using an era when Britain had the greatest growth in economics because of free-markets and free-trade, as an example of socialism. Complete Orwellian double-think.
    1
  22646. "Plus since I went to an independent school there is nothing stopping you from going to an independent school." Yes there is. I'm a low-income earner. My parents were low income earners. If our money hadn't been taken off us to pay for a public education, we could have put that money towards private education instead. We couldn't do that because the state (the community) had restricted our freedom to choose. This is exactly what I'm saying. Other people are dictating how we live our lives, and you're sat there defending a policy of dictating how other people should think act and be. It's completely immoral.
    1
  22647. "since you are convinced that you are not free right now, which country on earth is 'free' or was 'free' in the past?" The ones that were closest to classic John Locke liberalism. Britain and the USA being the two. However they have fallen off the liberalism spectrum and are slowly creeping into socialism. This is bad because people are seeing a reduction in their freedoms.
    1
  22648. "@TIK I am not the Libertarian here TIK :)" Yes you absolutely are. You're saying that other people (the "community") should pay for your health care, and that nobody should have the right to say no to it. To quote wikipedia - "Traditionally, libertarianism was a term for a form of left-wing politics. Such left-libertarian ideologies seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty." Again, you don't even know the meaning of the words that you're using.
    1
  22649. "Besides since you are incessantly complaining about living in a first world country with institutions and infrastructure almost any country in the world aside from a few of its first world peers wish it had, I am pretty sure you are very free, and have plenty of free will." Yes, and I want to retain that freedom. That's why I'm asking for more and fighting back against people who want to take that freedom away from me, such as you.
    1
  22650. @Dewitt - again, you've complelety missd the point. I will still have been educated. Just, instead of the state educating me (and doing it poorly, since I had to teach myself to read and write), it would have been an independent school instead. Being forced to pay for state education prevents people from choosing alternatives. This is why your entire argument makes no sense. You're basically arguing that the state should control the lives of people. This is counter to the values that makes the west so good in the first place. The reason the west is ahead of the rest of the world is because it has been the most free. Now we have people like you advocating slavery again. And I'm saying no - we've already been through slavery, we don't want it again. If you want state to run everything, North Korea or Venezuela are the place to be.
    1
  22651. "@TIK I trust dogmatic Libertarians as much as Dogmatic Marxists. Dogmatic Libertarians think they've found a 'big truth' and that the 'big truth' answers all questions." Yes, Libertarians like you think you have all the answers. "And when they encounter something that goes against their dogma, they pound the same few sources, the same few buzzwords again and again. And unlike dogmatic Marxists they almost never cite examples of where their ideology has worked." Yes, as you have just done in this argument.
    1
  22652. "@John Smith Watching you mop the floor with him has been great, Based John Smith" Geister, neither you nor he have actually brought up any valid points. Swearing and insulting your opponents, making a mockery of free speech and reasonable discourse, and proclaiming victory isn't winning an argument. Your definition of freedom is slavery. You even quoted Hitler describing himself as a socialist, but then went on to proclaim how capitalist he was. You don't even fully understand your own ideology. If Hitler was such a capitalist, how would he bring about socialism?
    1
  22653. Effectively, it's like being unable to cancel a subscription service. I want to cancel my subscription, but the company is saying no I can't. How is that freedom?
    1
  22654. "@TIK We're all individuals, acting and thinking, believing, of our own free will, we are not 'less than human' cyborgs. Education and Healthcare help develop the capacities and range of action of all individuals. Universal provision ensures universal development." You still have that provision in a free economy. You just pay directly when you need it rather than indirectly when you don't. If you don't need it, you don't pay. If you do need it, you pay. That's it. I don't see why I'm paying for no reason, which is what's currently happening. And you're telling me I'm wrong because I shouldn't have a choice. So explain to me how I have free will in this scenario. Explain to me how I have more freedom by having less choice and less money and less free will.
    1
  22655. @John - you're the second person to tell me to neck myself. Glad to know I'm always welcome in your Borg collective.
    1
  22656. Dewitt, you have compared this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag?wprov=sfla1 to this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom?wprov=sfla1
    1
  22657. Bottom line: if you want to pay into a welfare state, fine. But it should be the choice of the individual. Currently it is not.
    1
  22658. "Business has no inherent value." Well that wasn't long. I thought I may have had to extract more insanity, but apparently you're offering it to me willingly.
    1
  22659. @John - to be honest I've given up trying with this argument. I'm just seeing what other insane things you lot are going to say. Also I haven't read Hayek or Rand yet, although I probably will. Sounds like I've independently come to the same conclusions as them, which is a good sign.
    1
  22660. Derwitt. You've been arguing this entire time that we should all become Winston Smiths. Now you're saying the Ministry of Plenty is giving Winston more, when we know that's not how the story goes. Governments take more and more freedom as time goes on. This is why they need to be restricted and their policies reversed. You've somehow got it in your head that if a government will tax someone £100, all £100 will go to a hospital. Not only is that not the case, but this will hurt the entire economy because the investment that person would have made into a business of their choice would have created a growth in that business. Governments don't grow businesses. The NHS isn't a growing business. It is a colossal expense. Meanwhile other businesses could grow massively if only we could spend our money the way we want to. This is basic economics. Please read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson".
    1
  22661. I'm not saying that. However I am saying that a lack of choice is one part of slavery.
    1
  22662. @John, don't say that too loud, the anarcho-syndicalists may hear you and come crying.
    1
  22663. @Derwitt - right, so you understand the concept of 1984 being bad. Now the question is, why is it bad? The 1984 state says decreases the chocolate ration but says they're increasing it. Our state decreases the amount of money in our pockets but says they're increasing it. This is called taxation. You are literally arguing that the chocolate ration in 1984 is increasing. And the reason you're doing that is because you're not seeing the wider economic or political picture. The reason 1984 is bad is because Winston is forced to think in a certain way, act in a certain way, and work in a certain way. He has no choice and therefore he has no freedom. But you are telling me to do the exact same thing. You're happy to take my freedom of choice away, and then say that I'm more free. Well, no. You might benefit if I pay for your healthcare, but I don't. Therefore I should have the option of not paying for the NHS or any other government scheme. If I have no choice, what difference is there to slavery? If I have my money taken off me by the state, what difference is there between that and not getting paid? And I can get whipped for no reason at all (as I said, the police can arrest you for no reason at all right now in the UK). All of this does sound a bit like slavery to me.
    1
  22664. Do you guys read Orwell's 1984 and think "man, I wish I had that much freedom"?
    1
  22665. @Dewitt - you've not explained how having zero choices makes freedom. Your explanation does not explain the blatant contradiction in having a lack of choice being freedom. Also, you just said that in a slave system you are not a person. But you just said that having zero choice is freeing. Therefore by your own logic, being a slave is freeing because you have no choice. And this is the problem with the collectivist ideologies. Your version of freedom is slavery. Again, Orwell was spot on with that phrase.
    1
  22666. I'm still waiting for someone to explain how having zero choice is "freedom", because that's what these socialists are still advocating. I want to make more choices myself, thus more freedom. You want less choices, but are calling that "freedom". Makes zero sense.
    1
  22667. "If you think there should be laws governing contracts, that is a kind of interference in the market." Laws governing that the contracts shall be honoured is massively different to the government forcing you to accept its terms. I'm asking for significantly less government intervention in the economy. Not zero. And this is the problem with socialists, they only see all-or-nothing. This is why it's pointless for me to continue this debate, since you're not willing to listen to the wants and needs of another individual. You'd rather just dictate to others how it is. This is why socialism is slavery by another name.
    1
  22668. "Considering that I have demonstrated how the state is more efficient in healthcare than the private sector. How can you make such a blanket statement that the state - beyond law and order - is inefficient?" It's 100% inefficient to me because I don't want it, regardless of how it compares to any other health care system. Again, you're not listening to me. I don't want you dictating to me what's best for me. I will make that decision myself as an individual.
    1
  22669. "Well, the Conservatives since 2010 have presided over deep cuts to overall police numbers and budgets." And yet our taxes have remained high. If this was a free market, and we decided to cut back on spending, we'd have more money in our pockets rather than in government pockets. "They are spread thin and cannot be everywhere." Yes, because the government is poor when it comes to managing other people's money. This is what I've been saying. "But I have had, I am happy to say at least, no problems when it comes to getting the police to respond." Well, don't come to our area. "Plus if you travel on a road at all, have clean tap water gurgle forth, consume food that is subject to inspection and regulation, and any myriad of other things you and I see plenty of benefit for the tax we send to HMRC." Cars are very complicated things, yet aren't created by governments. Roads don't have to be created by governments either. Water and food can be purchased from water and food companies. If they make someone sick, you go elsewhere, and they go out of business. This is why it's in the company's own interests to ensure they're giving the best products and services to their customers. "Plus the 10% I am referring to is to healthcare, which as I have demonstrated with linked sources, is considerably less expensive than the US variant." But again, I don't want to pay for either. My health is a private affair, not a public affair. Somehow you still haven't grasped this concept that nobody else should take ownership over how I live my life. It's not up to you or anyone else to worry about my health care. "Second, the British education system is less expensive and delivers better academic outcomes than the far more expensive US system" The public education system in Britain absolutely sucks, and I know because I was unfortunate enough to go through the damn thing. At least 90% of the teachers couldn't teach, and half the classes were a total waste of time. One teacher in primary school told me I'd never amount to anything. I wasted a significant amount of my time pretending to play football in "PE" lessons, and receiving totally awful and pointless French lessons, which I don't remember a single phrase from. I actually learnt more French from Dexter's Laboratory. I asked if I could learn German instead (because I was more interested in that) and they said no because I had to be good at French first!? And don't get me started on RE lessons. Now you might ask, why did I turn out ok? Because I decided to take my education into my own hands. In the end, my parents had to get a private tutor to come out for a few months to teach me basic maths because the school system simply didn't work. I've never taken a philosophy class in my life, but I read the works of Plato's Republic and other classic texts. I taught myself to play guiter and music theory (learnt absolute zero in the "music" classes we had at school). And the history I know was 99% self taught, even though I did take it in college and university. Worse, they taught me that Hitler was a capitalist! They're actively brainwashing people into believing Marxist propaganda. It's terrible. Overall it's absolutely insane how much we're paying for an education system that is as poor as it is. If only we had a choice to go private. But we've already paid once for the public system, so we can't afford to pay a second time for private education. Dreadful. "Where they are better maintained, in France and Germany, taxes and fees are even higher, so there are trade offs." I do believe we've just seen riots in France due to the high taxes. "Higher taxes - better government services. Lower taxes - worse government services." But the best that the government can offer is poor compared to what we could do if we traded our money directly to the places where we need it to go https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI "So overall you and I do benefit and even if we don't there will come a time when we will." No, we don't benefit at all. They're giving you a poor service, even at their best. "In the event of a healthcare emergency in the UK, you don't need to worry about that and having to spend extra money to stay alive. You've already paid." Yes, I've paid 12 years worth of money for 3 checkups. If I'd kept that money for myself, I'd have plenty more money for the emergency situations. Unfortunately that choice was taken from me by other people who think they can dictate how I live my life. "Plus i really don't think that UK police are comparable to the Gestapo." The police in the UK can arrest you at anyone at any time even if you haven't committed a crime. This is a nice introduction to the topic https://youtu.be/uHG5iVTqpIE "And in the US you have to pay into social security. And in every developed country there are compulsory old age savings schemes of one kind or another." Yes and it's getting worse as socialism spreads. "But just because you pay into these systems does not mean anyone is forcing you to retire at 65, 67, 69 or any other age. You can continue working as long as you want to. But once you reach a certain age you are entitled to a BSP. You've paid into it, you've earned it, its your right. But that doesn't mean you have to stop working. Go on working as long as you want. Just because you have to contribute to a national pension scheme, that won't stop you from working until the last day you want to work." If you keep working your pension gets hammered by tax. So not only have I paid into something I don't plan to use and would rather have the money now so that I can invest it in better ways that will provide me more money in the long run, but if I do choose to keep working they'll take it off me. Pointless. Plus, why would we think the government won't just scrap the pension scheme entirely at some arbitary point? I'd rather have the money back now. I could use that money to better fund this channel, or invest it in better ways than the government could ever do. If only I had that choice . If only other people weren't taking that choice from me.
    1
  22670. "@TIK so you're ok with limited socialism, because you can't have no socialism, because the state doing things is socialism," No, the state doing things is not socialism. The state owning or controlling the economy is socialism. "So this state can presumably levy taxes," Yes. "If a state levies taxes, it interferes in the market. If it spends money to equip an army, it interferes in the market." We have to have law and order. Beyond that, the state is inefficient and costly to the people. Therefore we need limited taxation in order to protect our society and the ability to trade within it. Beyond that, the state is not required. That said, levying taxes is an interference in the market - but a necessary evil when it comes to protecting the market in order for the people to prosper. This is a slight reduction of freedom. Considering we're going from +35% tax to say 5% tax, this is more freedom, not less, comrade. "...conscript soldiers, prevent people from crossing its borders, and enforce laws that it passes on its own authority, right?" I never said they could conscript soldiers. They can recruit soldiers, but never conscript them. They can prevent people from crossing borders and enforce laws that passes on its own authority - but which are there to maintain the freedom and safety of its citizens and economy. "Gee, it really sounds like I don't have a lot of individual choice in the matter." If you want to give more to the government, go right ahead. "Your ideal state is beginning to sound like a socialist tyranny to me, comrade!" How can giving people more freedom in how they live their lives be slavery? You really need to reconsider your socialist stance because you're blinded by your faith.
    1
  22671. Another one - I'm forced to pay into a national pension scheme. Well, I don't want to retire. I want to keep working. Therefore it's a collossal waste of money for me that I have no choice about, and can't opt out of. Again, other idiots thinking they know what a person wants to do with their life but actually don't. Unfortunately these brain-boxes don't believe in individual choice, and prefer slavery of others to the collective.
    1
  22672. @ John Smith "ok, since you apparently believe only 100% voluntarism is "freedom":" and "Is there a political system? If so, what powers do elected representatives have?" At no point did I say that. I don't believe in socialism, which means I want the government out of the economy. That doesn't mean there's no government. It just means it doesn't get involved in business affairs and tax rates are low as they can be. There's still an army, judiciary, and minor non-business enterprises. "What does your ideal society do when it is militarily threatened?" Use it's military. "How are its emergency services structured?" Independantly from the government, just like any other business. "Are all freely entered-into contracts valid? If so, does that mean one can sell himself into slavery? If not, what gives the state the right to interfere in contracts?" Again, there has to be law in order to allow two individuals to co-exist. So yes, contracts are binding, and no you cannot sell yourself into slavery. The state can interfere when contracts are lawfully broken. The point is that they cannot be the ones to make or get involved in those contracts in the first place. "Who creates laws?" The judiciary. "Do national borders exist?" Yes, but tariffs are kept extremely low to benefit the consumer. "Who builds the roads?" A road-building company. "If you answer any of these things by reference to governmental power, your ideal system is not "free" because my freedom of choice is being oppressed by the state." No, it's called a limited state. Socialism is the government in the economy. It doesn't mean that there is no government, it just doesn't get involved in the matters of the people unless the laws that allow freedom of speech and trade are broken.
    1
  22673. "@TIK So you would be willing to pay 18% of your income as opposed to 10% of your income for at best similar healthcare results? And I am not telling you what to do :)" We pay 20% tax on everything we purchase on top of council tax and direct income taxes. Our local council has straight-up murdered businesses in our town centre with crippling tax rates. This is why so many people are moving to the online world in order to make businesses. I lose +35% of my income to government for zero benefit. Apart from the army and fire brigade, every other "benefit" the government "provides" us is shockingly poor and expensive. The bin-men turn up when they feel like it. The roads are in poor condition. The NHS is a joke. And our local Gestapo-police aren't really something I want to fund (the only good thing about them is that they may not turn up to an emergency at all - yay). Depending on state, tax rates in the USA are lower. And if you haven't guessed already, I'm really not interested in health-care so I'm not sure why you're going on about it. But again, I'll pay for it when I need it, not when I don't.
    1
  22674. I shouldn't have to move country just to have other people not tell me how to live my life. It's not up to you to decide what I should do with my life, yet you presume it is. And I have actually considered moving to the USA for this reason.
    1
  22675. @Dewitt - it's not good for me. I don't want nor need it. Again, being forced to pay for something I don't want nor need isn't a choice. It doesn't matter what my reasoning is, I don't want to pay for the NHS, therefore I should have the choice to not pay for it. Socialists stop me (the individual) from making that choice because they pretend that they know what's good for me, like you are trying to enforce your view of the NHS vs US health care on me. Irregardless of what you think, it's not your choice to make - it's mine to make. And THAT'S the problem with socialism - some people thinking they get to tell others how to live their life. It's absolutely wrong, disgusting and immoral.
    1
  22676. "Humans are social animals and form societies, that is, "collectives" in some form or another. If your political position is formed by being anti-"collective" the only thing you will succeed in doing is isolating yourself," Individuals can work together. And are motivated to do so by cooperation and trade - mutual reward. I'll give you products and services, you give me money. Everyone wins in such a society. A society which judges people by their collective group and throws people out based on their class or race or gender or nationality, and the remaining people have to work for their masters (not themselves), is not a society. It's a slave labour camp.
    1
  22677. "Capitalism controls labour, economy, government and society through money: The tail wags the dog. In National Socialism the economy and the labour that creates it controls money: The dog wags the tail." It's the other way around. Citizens control the government through private property rights and by keeping government weak - the dog wags the tail. In National Socialism the state crushes the citizens - the tail chokes the dog to death.
    1
  22678. "Plus, given that when you get older, as we all will, you will become sicker, you are paying in a lot more in now than you are taking out," I might become sicker, but there's no guarantees. I might get struck by lightning tomorrow and never reach old age. So why don't I just pay when I need something? If I don't spend my money on the NHS, I can save that money for a rainy day, or invest it and have a lot more money by the time I need it. No matter how you phrase this - I want the choice not to use the NHS and have my money be mine. And I think I should have the individual freedom to make that decision.
    1
  22679. @Dewitt - again, I've used the NHS three times in the past 12 years, but still have to pay for it every single month. Therefore it is EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE to me. Irregardless of how "good" it is (which it's not), I want to opt out of it. But I can't opt out, and have to keep paying for something that I'm not using and is extremely expensive. This is completely unfair. I want to keep my money and spend it when I need something. I can't do that because socialism says that other people are entitled to my money - the money that I have earned as a worker. And you refer to this complete lack of choice as "freedom".
    1
  22680. @Geister Unserer Genossen - says the Nazi-Collectivist who doesn't understand what his own ideology is.
    1
  22681. "Given that your tax money is then spent in the NHS, that money is reappearing in the economy and creating jobs in the health care industry - nurses, doctors, health care equipment manufacturers, pharmaceuticals, chemicals etc." If this was the case, why not just give my money directly to the hospital instead of paying a government bureaucracy to take a cut? More money can go to the hospitals and less to the government if I pay directly to the hospitals. I only pay a restaurant when I go to one. I should only pay a hospital when I go to one, not when I don't use one but get billed anyway. No matter how you phrase it, paying for something you don't use is not beneficial to me. Also, your assumption is not true anyway. I would spend my money elsehwere in the economy which would also create jobs. Even if the government was 100% efficient with my money (which they're absolutely not) then at best all they're doing is moving jobs from places where demand is, to places where demand isn't. If we wanted health care, we'd pay for it directly without tax, and more money would go directly to the hospitals rather than to the pockets of politicians. But if I don't want health care and wanted to spend my money elsewhere instead, I can't do that because my money has been taken from me by force. This causes a loss in jobs in one area, for an artificial increase in jobs somewhere else, which we don't even need because if we needed it we would be spending money on it anyway.
    1
  22682. "Why do you think Socialists are lazy? Considering a constant demand of Socialism is about creating jobs and improving the quality of work, Socialists are very focused on work." What was Marx's job? I'll give you a clue - he did nothing all his life and sponged off Engels. What was Lenin's job? What was Stalin's job? They're all the same - jobless, lazy, good for nothings, all of whom thought they knew how the world works, even though they weren't living in the real world. Many Marxist professors are the same. Their theory does not work in practice because they haven't ever worked in the real world. If they had they wouldn't be advocating working for zero pay.
    1
  22683. "@TIK Socialism refers to a system of worker control of means of production in which class differences and private for-profit ownership are eliminated, in accordance with Socialist ideology." That's Marxism, not socialism. Socialism came before Marxism and had nothing to do with class or profit. Because you have the wrong definition of Socialism, you're coming to the wrong conclusions. And, once again, I'm not an anarco-capitalist. And conservativism (at least here in the UK) is mild-form of socialism. None of the parties here in the UK are capitalist, which is why most people feel betrayed by their government. Nationalism (a social-group ideology also born in the French Revolution besides Socialism) is also a Left-wing ideology, since it believes in collectivism (a group of people with the same identity based on nationality). This is why Hitler says "National" and "Social" are the same thing, because they are both collective ideologies.
    1
  22684. "Hey TIK they dont understand. And i belive that it would be a better idea if you just ignore most of these people for now. Or they probably understand what you are trying to say but they are just trolling you and they are pushing a agenda. They want to show you that "capitalism is bad" and it seems that they wont change their opinion." I know, I just want them to look dumb, and to show the flaws in their corrupt religion (a religion for lazy people who don't know the meaning of the word "work").
    1
  22685. ""Common" does not mean "State". Where the fuck did you get the idea that you can take a synonym, translate it into Latin, and claim that is the meaning of the original phrase? Do you really not understand how insane you sound?" Ok, so what does it mean then? What does the definition of socialism (socialized man in common control of the means of production) mean to you? Englighten me. I'm ready for a good laugh.
    1
  22686. "@TIKwas it Marx that said "take away one freedom every generation and soon they'll have no freedom and be none the wiser". I think I'm wrong." Exactly. From the horse's mouth. You are not realising that Marxism is all about taking away your freedom. I've just spelt it out to you, and yet somehow you're not seeing it.
    1
  22687. "Then buy private health insurance to supplement your national health." Oh great, pay twice for the same service. That's freedom isn't it! "British workers don't have the worry and don't have that constraint. They have more CHOICES. They have more freedom." So your version of freedom is to not have any choices to make... And that's freedom to you, is it? So again, the phrase "Freedom is Slavery" by George Orwell is relevent here. "Besides having the NHS to fall back on means greater labour market flexibility" You've taken money off me that I would have spent elsewhere - shrinking the economy - and used that to give me a rubbish service. And that's somehow greater market flexibility?
    1
  22688. @Dewitt Bourchier - I want the choice to not pay for a bad nationalized state heath care service. I don't have that choice because socialism does not give me that choice. Yet you're stating it gives me more freedom and more choice. Alright then, explain to me how me being forced to pay for health care is a choice . Explain that to me - how having any choice taken off me is a choice . I'm not seeing how you can possibly make that claim.
    1
  22689. @Dewitt Bourchier - I'm a low income worker, and I'm not in poverty. Only people who don't work are 'constrained', and rightly so. You are what you produce. If you produce nothing, you are nothing. This is why minimum wage is bad, because it reduces employment and makes people unemployed, and thus 'constrains' them. It doesn't "reduce poverty" or "make jobs" as you claimed, it creates poverty and unemployment. This is basic economics. You talk about the era of 1945-73, but if you look at Britain in that time it was a complete disaster. The socialism that Labour introduced in the 40's stiffled the once-free economy and even they had to abandon their nationalization program by the 50s because it was actually failing. By the 70s printed money was choking productivity in Britain to the point where we had workers demanding a 30% pay rise just to keep up with it. Rubbish was piling up in the streets because government workers were on strike, and the government had to ration electricity and turn it off because they couldn't afford to keep it running. It's the exact same now in Venezuela - the country with the most oil reserves in the world, where people are searching through rubbish to find scraps of food because the government is in control of the food industry. As I said, socialism creates starving millionaires.
    1
  22690. "Capitalism means that 1% , the "happy few", of the population is "free" , as you claim, while 99% , including you and me, are actually not. Marxism was the try to policically liberate those 99% ( we do not talk about factual results, like Mao or Stalin) , by changing the game rules." I am free. I can do what I want as long as I don't harm others. That's freedom. And the only reason the 1% have "all the money" is because you gave it to them. You've traded your money for a product that allows you to read these very words. If you really prefer the money, then don't buy products and services off other people, make everything you need yourself and regress back into the wild. You have the freedom to choose, but you've chosen to give your money away, and are now complaining that other people have money. Yes, of course they have money, you've given it to them and have received products and services in exchange. This is called trade . The reason Jeff Bezos is a billionaire is because people give their money to Amazon in exchange for goods and services. They don't have to give their money to Amazon, but they choose to do so. I choose to do so because I want more books and equipment to make these videos. So I'm not going to complain that they have more money than me because I've willingly given them a load of money in exchange for their products and services. The 1% can only gain money if they give something back in return. That's why having a 1% is actually the sign of a healthy-working economy. And this is the point. Socialism takes away that choice from people. You have to have someone else (a government or community) reach into your pocket and take out your money, and the will provide you with things like free health care (which is neither free, nor very good). Sorry, but that's not a choice nor is it free . In fact, it's incredibly expensive and inefficient. Stepping into the NHS in England is like time-warping back to the 1950s. I have friends who work in it that say they're still using paper and pencils rather than computers because, despite taking +35% of people's income in tax (impossible to calculate accurately due to stealth taxes and 20% VAT on most goods but is well over 30% for low-income earners), the government "administrators" (who do nothing except for receive fat pay checks) can't afford enough equipment for a crumbling health service. The best part is, I've been forced to pay into this scheme for 12 years, and have only needed to go for three check-ups in all that time. But apparently this is good and free for the workers. Absolute rubbish. It's a giant con. As a worker, I'd rather have my money not taken off me in the first place and the freedom to spend the money I've earned the way I want to. If you want to pay into a rubbish government scheme, fine by me, but don't force me to pay for your health care. Socialism isn't about choice at all, it's about taking away that choice . It sounds lovely on the surface because these social revolutionaries are promising you the world. They're saying everything is free. Well, the only thing that's free is the cheese on the trap. Printing money doesn't increase the amount of goods you can buy. An economy doesn't work like that. This is why socialism always converts the poor into starving millionaires.
    1
  22691. "By your definitions of 'centralized control' over the economy being Socialism. Then WWII was a massive outbreak of Socialism, including the United States of America and the United Kingdom." Yes, and the process started before that when the classic liberals were usurped by socialists. Socialists took over the slogans that the liberals were using and turned them on their head. Freedom is slavery. That's why George Orwell used the phrase. They will tell you that they're fighting for freedom, when they are removing your human rights. This has happened in every socialist government in history, but feel free to ignore that little detail.
    1
  22692. "@TIK who the fuck ever said that socialism is "state control in the name of socialized man"? You? Get the fuck out of here with this made-up bullshit, all you do is throw miscellaneous quotes around in an attempt to sound authoritative." Das Kapital Vol 3, Engels/Marx says Marxist-Socialism is - "socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature;" As I have explained a hundred times now, "common" means "public", which means "state" in Latin. Therefore socialism is socialized man in state-control of the means of production. Again you guys have no idea what you're even arguing for.
    1
  22693. "@TIK Gotcha, literally every government ever is socialist. This is incredibly cancerous, I hope you're really proud that your autistic insistence on made-up or misrepresented definitions has chased away a sizeable portion of your subscriber base." No you haven't. Only those governments that have centralized control of the economy in the name of "socialized man" (to quote Das Kapital v3) are socialist. The National Socialists had state control, and the social-race. Marxists have state control, and the social-class.
    1
  22694. @Deweitt - "For example, yes there were wage and price controls in the Nazi economy and those were increasingly set by decree instead of by market price. BUT, Heinrich Bruning, Chancellor from 1930-1932 had done the same thing." That doesn't mean that that policy wasn't socialist. There are socialist policies in Germany going back to Bismarck's era. That doesn't mean they weren't socialist policies. "And, unlike the Nazis, Bruning had nationalized or partly nationalized some firms." Again, the National Socialists nationalized the industries and called it "privatization". Tooze makes that clear in the above quotes, and so does Gunter Reimann and others. "The big nationalization of the Nazis was Junkers but this is not evidence of Socialism." He was just the first of many. "Governments always have been able to dictate policies to firms that they may or may not like and force them to do things they don't like." And that is an indication that the economy (the market) is not free. That is socialism. "The Nazi economy WAS a war economy, geared to and distorted by the drive for war."" Yeah, but it was still socialism.
    1
  22695. @Dewitt - let's take some quotes from Tooze, shall we - Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113 Yep, definitely sounds like centralized-control of the economy to me.
    1
  22696. @The Slovenian Imperator Knight And I thought I had it bad. I've noticed this too - they reject freedom and democracy, but dare to say they're fighting for it. If they see slavery as freedom, then it's no wonder we can't agree on anything. Socialism is just slavery by another name.
    1
  22697. Quoting John Smith - "@TIK I'm increasingly aware that you might just be fucking stupid, since you apparently have no idea of what is even being debated and can't follow a simple syllogistic argument. I guess you don't need to be very bright to regurgitate the contents of books written by smarter people on camera. You've just listed numerous examples of state-control in the Nazi economy, and yet somehow concluded that this wasn't socialism. But yes, it's me who has no idea.
    1
  22698. @Dewitt - interestingly, Richard Evans listed several socialist-like policies that the Third Reich had, then proceeded to say "but they killed Marxists so therefore not 'real' socialism". As if that's a valid counter-argument. This is why I said in the video that I'm going against the grain, because the Cold War has cast a long-shadowed distortion over the history of WW2. The historians you listed are from that generation, and while I have respect for them and think they've done a decent job, I don't necessarily agree with all their views, especially on this point.
    1
  22699. "National Socialism does not advocate this and supports private property." No it doesn't. Think about it - if you have private property, that's capitalism, not socialism. Capitalism is "international Jewish finance". If Hitler supported private property, he wouldn't be a socialist. This is why they abolished private property and nationalized the industries (calling it "privatization"). Yes, Hitler did retain the individual, but they had to submit to the national-community. That's state control of the individual - socialism - or as Hitler put it "socializing the people". And you can't have a free-market state-controlled economy - that's a contradiction in terms. You also can't remove the Jews from society if you're not willing to violate the property rights of individuals. Hitler made this very clear that the only difference between his socialism and Marxism was that he was advocating for the race, not the class. Otherwise there was no difference - “The racial Weltanschauung [world view] is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure.” Hitler, Mein Kampf P406 “If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle, if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground. For that reason it would not have the right to call itself a Weltanschauung. If the social programme of the movement consisted in eliminating personality and putting the multitude in its place, then National Socialism would be corrupted with the poison of Marxism, just as our national-bourgeois parties are.” - Hitler, Mein Kampf P406-407 Yes there are differences between Marxism and National-Socialism, but neither are capitalist, which is why (although both hate each other) they're still both socialist (common-state-control of the means of production).
    1
  22700. Also, "profit" is only seen as bad by Marxist socialists. But again, socialism was born in the fires of the French Revolution, before Marx ever put pen to paper. It was all about centralised control, not about getting rid of profits.
    1
  22701. The way you described it isn't true because the businessmen were controlled by state officials who had taken over the factories with quotas, wage and price controls, and kicked out the industrialists if they didn't obey etc, but let's say for a moment that the way you described it was true. Well, Hitler's regime would still be in control of the economy, and that is still socialism.
    1
  22702.  @dodolipet9404  The Reichstag Fire Decree abolished private ownership by law. Hitler nationalized the industries and called it "privatization". And as you just admitted, his regime "controlled the industries" - so there you go, it's socialism.
    1
  22703. @Leon Rupnik - exactly. Hitler thought the terms "National" and "Social" meant the same thing - the Race. He wanted to build a state-society for all socialized-Germans. The Race is the social-group, like the Workers are the social-group for the Marxists.
    1
  22704. @AllTheMarxists - Private ownership was abolished, and the regime controlled the industries from within, plus price and wage controls etc. The "privatization" that took place sold the industries to National-Socialist loyalists. Hitler's regime was socialist no matter how much you believe it wasn't.
    1
  22705. Which is exactly what socialism is - a rejection of individualism (private) for the collective (public).
    1
  22706. @Magnus all that proves is that there's no democracy in socialism, which the Marxists claim there is.
    1
  22707. "Whatever his reasoning Hitler never implemented full control of German industry so fails to meet my definition. I will not dispute any of your points but merely point out that all of them combined do not disprove mine." You stating that he didn't implement full control, doesn't mean he didn't. He did, and I just gave several facts that show this. I can point to sources (like the "Vampire Economy" by Gunter Reimann, which you can get online for free, or Tooze's "Wages of Destruction") that make it clear that within a couple of years, the National Socialist regime had total-control over the means of production. Economics minister Schacht says that by 1935 "we really ruled", meaning the state-bureaucracy was in control. There's no denying the reality of this any more.
    1
  22708. You say Germany never had an economy dedicated to the war. True, except that was only because Hitler wanted to keep producing consumer goods to prevent any "stab in the back" from occurring. This fact alone doesn't prove or disprove whether Nazi state officials were inside the businesses, controlling them from within, or if they had wage and price controls or had abolished private property rights in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933... This was a totalitarian regime.
    1
  22709. Thanks Electron, and yes I recognize your thumbnail. You've been around for a while, which is good! 🙂
    1
  22710. Don't worry, that's only part of it. Once that's out of the way, we can then discuss the specifics with evidence.
    1
  22711. Tell me about it
    1
  22712. "Don't know of many "academic" historians that are denying the holocaust, or at least any respectable historians." They're not denying it as far as I'm aware. They're just not plugging the gap that is in turn allowing the National Socialists to deny it. I hope this is just an oversight, but I want to be ready in case its not.
    1
  22713. "What would You say if there will be brought out facts that there was no total control of business in Germany?" I already have plenty of evidence, facts and research that contradicts the Marxist viewpoint that National Socialism was capitalism, so you're not fooling anyone.
    1
  22714. This video doesn't specifically talk about the Holocaust, it's just an explanation on why I haven't done videos on the Holocaust, despite having previously promised to do so.
    1
  22715. It's my pleasure sir. I don't fear speaking up for the truth, even if I'm in the minority going up against a consensus. That's the one thing I'm good at.
    1
  22716. But that's the thing - evidence isn't required in this case (although helps). I'm not hammering them with evidence, I'm tackling their ideology and saying "if it didn't happen, then your ideology doesn't work". This forces them to accept that it did happen. I haven't looked into the American Civil War, but I'm sure there will be something similar. If it wasn't about slavery or that the South started it, then this will cause a ripple of distortion somewhere else in the narrative. You just need to find that distortion and go - "ok, so what about this?"
    1
  22717. I will look at both sides of the argument and give it a fair go (I do this with all historical issues). That said, the argument I mentioned in the video does undermine the idea that it didn't happen at all, or that it wasn't planned, or Hitler didn't know about it. I can confirm (and will show in the future) that these arguments simply don't stand up.
    1
  22718. @Lucas - It is a line. Socialists (of all varieties) are on the Left, since they are anti-freedom for the individual (anti-individualism, or collectivism). They're not the exact same - just like the different Churches of Christianity are not the same and hate each other, but are the same religion. Just because they don't get on, doesn't mean one lot should be placed on a side that is pro-individual and anti-collectivist. That doesn't make any sense.
    1
  22719. "Ideologically, the Fascist and Communists systems oppose each other." Socialism was born in the fires of the French Revolution before Marx ever put pen to paper. Marxism, Fascism and National Socialism are all varients of that original socialism - common (public, state, centralized) control of the means of production (the economy). It is against "international Jewish finance" (capitalism - quoting Hitler and other Nazis), which is private control of the means of production. National Socialism is a version of collectivism, but instead of class-collective social group, it's based on the race-collective social-group.
    1
  22720. The term "Totalitarian" was coined by Mussolini to describe his own regime - "all within the state, none outside the state, none against the state." It means total-control over everything by the state, including the economy. Tooze may not use the word, but he makes things very clear - Schacht centralized and heavily regulated the electricity production industry, which then sparked a new plan of economic administration. This was all in 1935. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P111-112] "...in practice the Reichsbank and the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs had no intention of allowing the radical activists of the SA, the shopfloor militants of the Nazi party or Gauleiter commissioners to dictate the course of events. Under the slogan of the 'strong state', the ministerial bureaucracy fashioned a new national structure of economic regulation." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112 “We worked and governed with incredible elan. We really ruled. For the bureaucrats of the Ministry the contrast to the Weimar Republic was stark. Party chatter in the Reichstag was no longer heard. The language of the bureaucracy was rid of the paralysing formula: technically right but politically impossible.” - Schacht, speaking of the situation after 1933. Tooze's Wages of Destruction P112-113 "It would be absurd to deny the reality of this shift. The crisis of corporate capitalism in the course of the Great Depression did permanently alter the balance of power. Never again was big business to influence the course of government in German as directly as it did between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the onset of the Depression in 1929. The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P113
    1
  22721. I deliberately didn't say what the argument was because I will only say it when I'm prepared to take it on - which was my explanation for why I haven't made any videos on the Holocaust yet.
    1
  22722. So not only was my definition wrong, but the definition of every dictionary and source I can find online is wrong, and the new definition you have about what totalitarianism is, makes no logical sense. If you have capitalism, you have free markets (people). Thus you cannot have totalitarianism with a capitalist economy: you cannot have a non-free free market. You're mixing the terms authoritarian and totalitarian up. A dictatorship by itself doesn't not mean totalitarianism. A totalitarian regime is one that controls every part of the lives of the citizens, including the economy. If it's capitalism, it's not totalitarian.
    1
  22723. "A capitalist State that attempts to block all dissidence, including private, against its discourse or propaganda, would be totalitarian." If a private-individual/business was being "blocked", then they would be being controlled by the state, and no-longer be in control. Thus, it would no longer be capitalism. You said - "Total control of the economy is not the definition of totalitarianism" Of course it is. To quote from wiki that you, yourself, linked to - "a totalitarian regime attempts to control virtually all aspects of the social life, including the economy, education, art, science, private life and morals of citizens."
    1
  22724. "Making fun of historians"
    1
  22725. Yes. It's called a free-market for a reason. Socialism is a controlled-market, meaning you're not allowed to do anything the state doesn't want you to do. Now, I don't know about you, but to me that doesn't sound like the individual has freedom.
    1
  22726. The "Workers' Party of Korea" is the Marxist-Socialist party in power. Socialists believe that socialism is "real" democracy. Of course we know that's a blatant lie since socialism is slavery by another name, but that's why the North Korean government calls itself democratic. To say North Korea is capitalist like people are doing with National Socialist Germany would be equally as wrong.
    1
  22727. I'm not so sure. YouTube doesn't evenly distribute the views and subscribers across every channel. They don't do that, so if they are socialists, they're not very good at it.
    1
  22728. More entertaining than the video!
    1
  22729. Argue against it? Of course!
    1
  22730. Budyonny wasn't punished for his crimes. And neither were Lenin, Trotsky or Stalin, or any of the other Soviet leadership. As you said "They were directly sanctioned by the top of the leadership", so why wasn't Stalin hung along with the Cossacks? Oh, that's right, because this had nothing to do with Operation Keelhaul. And again, you punish the individual who commits a crime, not an entire people just because some of them committed a crime. If it was the other way around, if we punished everyone in a group based on the actions of a few, then every human in history is guilty of the crimes of other humans. Do you see now how that Hegelian emotionalism of yours is ridiculous? - "Also i've already watched your video and its a hot pile of trash. It has already been debunked. https://youtu.be/YOoIHUyB4vc" Hahahahahaha... yeah, okay. Thanks for the laugh! - "You also chose not to mention the partisan movement. If soviet power was detested so much, why did soviet citizens get together and try to their last breath to resist the nazi's from within?" See the "whataboutism" here? You know, the thing you were calling me out for. Oh, of course you don't. I've mentioned the partisan movement in previous videos. It's not relevant to this video. However, to explain it again, the Soviet peoples were caught in the vice of two brutally dishonest and hostile totalitarian ideologies. There was no way out for them, and they had to pick a side. Some chose to fight against the aggressors (be their Soviet or German), and it makes sense why they did that.
    1
  22731. Every four weeks. I don't know how many times I have to say it. Plus my Patreons keep this channel going, so I have to answer their questions.
    1
  22732. Scandinavian countries are not socialist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lxD-gikpMs
    1
  22733. And Liverpool. And Coventry. And Warsaw. And the 10 million women R'd by the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU And I'm not denying Dresden, and I think the Allies were wrong to do what they did. But that doesn't excuse what the Germans or Soviet did either. You shouldn't stoop down to the level of barbarity of the opposing side just because they did. And you shouldn't be on one "side" or another. Unfortunately, many still cling to tribalism, and it's that which causes so many problems.
    1
  22734. Yes they are https://youtu.be/2B5OeSpf4PM
    1
  22735. Of course it is https://youtu.be/0lxD-gikpMs
    1
  22736. Have you got more modern sources that talk about Operation Keelhaul?
    1
  22737. It would be good for people to stop dismissing sources they don't like based on their feelings, and instead counter-argue with evidence. While you may not agree with a source, you must use ALL the sources you can get your hands on, even the bad ones or the ones you don't agree with.
    1
  22738. I intend to do so one day. I have already got a couple books on the topic.
    1
  22739.  @simplicius11  But he wasn't a screenwriter, as you originally claimed. He's also the guy who confirmed that the Katyn Massacre was committed by the Soviets, not the Nazis, as the Soviets tried to say it was to exonerate themselves from the crime. And I like how your only counter is to deny history and dismiss sources. Nazis do that a lot too...
    1
  22740. Only a portion of Vlasov's forces actually fought in the war, and they then only fought one brief battle against the Red Army at the end of the war. They then switched sides and fought against the Germans for a brief period before fleeing West. Therefore, to say that they "supported the annihilation of [their] own people" is incorrect. They didn't.
    1
  22741. Excuse me, but Anti-Semitism is Socialist because Capitalism was seen as Jewish https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22742. In that previous comment, I was sarcastically name-calling myself, since my critics are the ones that call me a "shill" for being for and against certain sides. You said that I ranted against the USSR, which was true, but I also ranted against the Western Allies too (and will do next episode especially), and have previously ranted against the Germans too. It turns out that I rant against everyone - so which 'side' am I shilling for? That's right, none of them: hence the sarcasm of "What a shill!"
    1
  22743. EVERY 4 WEEKS. I honestly don't know how many times I have to say this - I've said it in several videos now - the Stalingrad stuff is EVERY 4 WEEKS. That's because I physically cannot make them quicker, and it's killing me making them as quickly as I do. But since the channel is funded by my Patreons and SubscribeStars, the videos in-between are for answering their questions or covering other topics. If I don't do these other videos, the channel will die, I'll have to find a different career, and then you won't get your 4 weekly Stalingrad videos. So no, TIK is not "buttressing himself against the haters by going off topic to show his unbiased nature". This video was a Patreon question that was asked 2 years ago. It's this late because I'm also struggling to keep up with the Patreon questions due to the fact that the majority of my Patreons also want me to do non-Stalingrad stuff and are therefore asking me a ton of questions, plus the fact that the Stalingrad stuff is incredibly time consuming to make, so is causing me to fall behind.
    1
  22744. Shooting civilians refusing to return to the Soviet Union, as well as those who had never been Soviet citizens, isn't a crime? What about handing them over to the Soviets to watch them shoot them and R the women - is that also not a crime?
    1
  22745. I very much understand and know the story of Vlasov, but the video isn't really about him, since he surrendered to the Soviets, not the West. The video was about the people who were in Western Allied hands, some of whom (not all) had joined Vlasov in the hope of freeing their country from Marxism. The purpose was to explain THEIR motivation, not his.
    1
  22746. But we don't have Capitalism, and both myself and Karl Marx are in agreement over this (for similar, but also different reasons). When you say "Global Financial Monopolistic Capitalism" - what you really mean is "Global Financial Monopolistic Socialism". And the markets are HEAVILY regulated and centrally planned. Here the in the UK, you can't even build anything without "planning permission". The entire financial system is centrally planned by the Central Banks. The "cartel" you're referring to are the Corporations (which literally means "organ of the state"), and the "monopoly" you're talking about is the State itself, which has monopoly on law, finance, military, and the media. If you haven't seen it, here's a video you should watch https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22747. According to Karl Marx's own definition, we don't have Capitalism.
    1
  22748. Like this one? https://youtu.be/2B5OeSpf4PM
    1
  22749.  @Edax_Royeaux  Do you still continue to defend the UK police? Is what the UK police did to Sarah Everard 'right' in your opinion? Should we submit to their authority like she did? As Orwell said in Homage to Catalonia: “When I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on.”
    1
  22750. I would also consider this a crime https://youtu.be/2B5OeSpf4PM
    1
  22751. There's a lot of them in the comments!
    1
  22752. I will look into them one day. The numbers were definitely exaggerated by some pushing their agenda, but there's no doubt that people did die.
    1
  22753. According to Epstein, they were
    1
  22754. I think he had abandoned his Socialism by the end. That's why he made the Party of Big Brother "INGSOC" which was "English Socialism".
    1
  22755. Thanks Richard!
    1
  22756. I'm just glad someone spotted that!
    1
  22757. I went off how this German guy pronounced it https://forvo.com/search/Herbschleb/
    1
  22758. "Please TIK, do yourself a favor and read a little on the general level of morale Britain was currently in when Churchill was pushing for victory." Exactly, the British public didn't want war. You love democracy, right? The democracy was saying "no". But Churchill, the dictator, was saying "yes". (Not that I'm a fan of democracy, but you get the point.) - "Inquire about the complete lack of initiative which brought the phony war, which was what Churchill wanted to shake out of." By violating the neutrality of neutral countries? Surely their war was with Germany, not Norway. - "300 Thousand British Soldiers were successfully evacuated, when less than half were expected to come out of it alive." It wasn't a victory though. That's the point. It was a disaster, yet Churchill somehow turned that into a "victory", much like Manstein did with every battle he lost. - "Why wouldn't Britain send troops to defend Greece?" Because they were overstretched and had no chance of defending Greece to begin with, which is why they got beaten. But by overstretching their forces further, it allowed Rommel to enter North Africa and prolonged that conflict by almost two years. - "Didn't they have treaties and obligations to protect them, especially after Yugoslavia was gobbled up?" Britain's involvement in Greece convinced Hitler to help Mussolini out. Had Britain not got involved, there's a chance Greece would have kept fighting for longer, tying down Italian forces. - "why would Turkey and their mountains of chromium be confident enough to stay neutral?" Because they weren't prepared for war at all. Britain had an entire army on their border, and despite Hitler taking Greece and advancing into the Caucasus, they still remained neutral. Turkey had failed in the First World War, and they would no doubt fail again. - "Why would America muster its industries to send material to aid in a campaign where their side was not fighting?" But Britain got beat in Greece, Norway, Singapore, Somaliland and numerous other battles and campaigns. Had they not lost as many battles, maybe the materials America had sent wouldn't have all been wasted. - "Do you remember, by chance, that Britain was under the Blitz at the time of the African campaigns?" Oh, so they had to throw away their troops and then lose? No, it's a silly strategy. - "The British Public NEEDED a victory..." Yes, and Churchill caused numerous losses as a result of his ridiculous 'let's send everyone everywhere and attack attack attack' mentality. - "YOU were the one to teach me that War goes beyond the battlefield map, and that politics can and are reasons why seemingly bad decisions are being made." Correct, and Churchill made a load of bad decisions by making the politics override military reality. I'm not saying Churchill didn't have his reasons, but by giving into the pressure, he put pressure on his commanders and made them fail.
    1
  22759. I will come back to the LRDG at some point and finish this series. Probably after Stalingrad :)
    1
  22760. Really? Or are you being sarcastic? I do get the levels wrong sometimes and it drowns out what I'm saying. I find the audio is different on YouTube than it is on other programs
    1
  22761. Thanks, I'm glad you're liking them! I've just replied to your question and thought it was a good question :)
    1
  22762. I'm glad you liked it!
    1
  22763. That's why I wanted to get into the details in these videos because it's rare and I want to know exactly what happened too. This video took around 30 hrs to make from scratch, all the research, script writing, narration, graphics etc. Some of the other LRDG videos look less than that. But the thing with this series is that I'm only using a handful of sources (because there's not a lot of books on the LRDG), the sources themselves are quite detailed, the graphics I'm using are 2D, and there's only a handful of units on the field. When it comes to the other videos - like Rommel's first desert offensive or Fort Eben Emael - where there's tons of units on the field, the sources are vague, the sources directly contradict each other, there's a lot more sources to wade through, the graphics are in 3D (which in itself takes weeks to render let alone actually create in the first place), and the videos are longer, it can take me months. The script for my Operation Battleaxe video has taken up four full 10-hour days now to research and write, and it's still not finished. This is why I'm now trying to come up with a method of making the 3D videos look more like these 2D ones, and hopefully shave off months of work. Fingers crossed Battleaxe will take me weeks, rather than months
    1
  22764. Thanks! It's not over yet though. Will do more on this series soon, although I'm focusing on making my Battlestorm Stalingrad video right now
    1
  22765. Doing it just to annoy you ;) now get back to studying!
    1
  22766. Thank you! Glad you liked it
    1
  22767. Glad you liked it :)
    1
  22768. I'm the same to be honest, but sometimes you've got to bite your tongue
    1
  22769. I do hope you enjoy it :)
    1
  22770. +Sneaky Scaper absolutely! The next one will be on Rommel's intro into North Africa. My plan is to stick to North Africa for now, then move to other fronts at some point
    1
  22771. +alkafluence they certainly had a lack of effective anti-tank weapons. They resorted to using antiquated artillery pieces to pound the frontal armour of the Matilda tanks, which isn't exactly ideal. I'd also say their training was awful, but I guess that comes back to having poor leaders
    1
  22772. +sonofeast11 yes, it's certainly swings and roundabouts with them throughout this campaign
    1
  22773. +H. KC awesome!
    1
  22774. I'm not defending the Germans or the Soviets. Both regimes and the troops that fought under them were terrible.
    1
  22775. You were third, but only three seconds away from first
    1
  22776. Good point. We do have evidence of the other armies around Stalingrad going hungry though. And the airlift failed on top of the logistics crisis. So it's a little of both.
    1
  22777. Fourth, I'm afraid
    1
  22778. I wish more people were like you. Thank you for having an open mind, and I'm glad you commented because I often wonder if I've gotten through to people. It's really nice to know that I have 🙂
    1
  22779. Not really because I've ignored it for this one!
    1
  22780. Well, it's over two weeks. One last Monday, one on Friday, and one today (Monday again)
    1
  22781. And nuclear weapons also weren't invented yet, so it's double fake
    1
  22782. Yep! I think it was largely out of their hands by this point. Of course, many critics will say that they shouldn't have allied with the Soviets, but what were they to do? There's never any solutions given, just criticism.
    1
  22783. Rex1987 close but not quite :)
    1
  22784. starcraft2own lol. Cheating not allowed in this one ;)
    1
  22785. martaxsasLT that was very close!
    1
  22786. ***** haha I'm glad I'm encouraging you to read again :P
    1
  22787. nolan koski true! 
    1
  22788. Quadro2k sadly not :)
    1
  22789. Karl Marx wasn't an economist, he studied the Philosophy of Religion by Hegel, who was a Gnostic. That's why Karl Marx was able to predict the future and say that we're going to have communism, and that we'd all live in paradise (a Heaven on Earth) after death (the Revolution). In fact, let's quote from the Holy Scripture of Das Kapital https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  22790. You didn't watch the video. At no point did I say that National Socialism was Christianity. In fact, I said it wasn't.
    1
  22791. I didn't say the Hermetics are behind everything evil ever, and even then, Hermetics not just "old school alchemists". And I love how I must be either Atheist or Christian... Yeah okay, because we all know they have a lot in common.
    1
  22792. V for victory ;)
    1
  22793. Do you have any specific book recommendations on Hess?
    1
  22794. Yes you are!
    1
  22795. "As to why I think you don't know what atheism is, that's because of where you claim that many atheists are actually members of this unnamed religion but still falsely think they are atheists. That's not how belief works..." Yes it is. Some (not all) think they are atheist, but have accidentally been tricked into believing Gods. Gods like "society", or "the nation", or "the State", or "the NHS", or "the Experts", or "The Science" (not science, but The Science). The religious fervor that some atheists have (not all) to these Gods is absolute. And it's because they (not all) have fallen under the spell of Gnosticism. So while atheism is a non-religious idea, many atheists are not actually atheists, but only think they are. In reality, they are religious.
    1
  22796. In your chest, hopefully
    1
  22797. "Proof positive, you correctly found that Socialism was a lie and rejected it and accepted the gnosis of the Free Market, the gnosis of Individualism, and the gnosis of Capitalism. That is still gnosis, in a secular way of viewing it, it is the a priori truth of Economics." Not really because I wasn't fully indoctrinated. I was economically socialist, but wasn't full-woke. And the shattering of the illusion is what brought me out of the wizard's circle (to borrow Lindsay's imagery). Realising that racism has to be socialist, since races are social groups, broke the spell and ended the gnosis. And I'm for free markets because they work, not because I believe in "Capitalism". I'm a free market guy, not a capitalist, since apparently capitalism means "when corporations do monopoly stuff" and a load of other nonsense that I don't believe in. If the free market can be definitively proven not to work, then I'll update my views again. So no, Gnosticism does demand self-censorship. That's why it's so difficult to get through to someone who believes in socialism, because they refuse to consider any other view.
    1
  22798. You didn't watch the video properly. I didn't say Hitler was a Christian. In fact, I said he wasn't a Christian. I also didn't say his main influence was an Italian monk. You've completely misunderstood and misinterpreted the entire video.
    1
  22799. Great comment! I hadn't heard Marx say that. I need to pick up Sowell's book.
    1
  22800. "Marx meant the markets run out of things to profit from and capitalism ends up consuming itself. It was not a prophecy it happened a few times when he was alive. It happened dozens of times since and it just happened now in the most epic crash yet." That's absolutely not what happened at all. Here's an explanation of what actually happened https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs - "Every time I hear Marx is a satanist or a nazi or a gnostic or a communist. I never see any evidence." Read Marx's poem "The Player". Unfortunately, the versions at Marxist dot org are incorrect as they've changed the words to censor what he actually wrote, just like they reduced the amount of racism in Karl Marx's writings. However, you can read the original poem and more about Marx's satanism in "The Devil and Karl Marx" by Kengor. - "btw anyone that makes out communism and socialism are one political belief system just reveals their complete ignorance." Anyone who denies that they are the same reveals their complete ignorance of history https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y - "Their different spectrums of belief system." I'm glad you admit that they're religions. - "Communism is a spectrum within socialism that extends more to the radical left." But you just said they're not the same thing, yet here you are saying Communism is part of Socialism. Contradictions much? - "You know when a anyone goes on about the benefits of capitalism and how it enriched people. The majority of the planet just starts rolling on the floor Laughing at western ignorance. Then remembers how their ancestors were treated and enslaved." Capitalism didn't enrich people, free markets did. We never technically had a free market, but we got close in the late 1800s, which is why the amount of food consumed by the British workers doubled between 1870 and 1914. Living standards exponentially increased as a result of a shift towards free markets, and unsurprisingly are declining now we're implementing more statism. When the Soviet Union fell, Germans fled from the East to the West. That's not a coincidence. The religion of Statism is what enslaves people, and Communism/Socialism is slavery. - "no Atheists are atheists. Atheist means more or less No Deus.(no god.)." Some atheists are atheist. But those who believe in the Goddess known as "Society" are clearly not atheist, since they believe in a spiritual entity that doesn't physically exist. You cannot place your hand on Society. You cannot touch Society, because "society" has been ACTUALISED into existence in your mind. You have done what Giovanni Gentile called Actualism (Actual-Idealism), of rejecting reality and conjuring fantasies into existence. And just so you know, Giovanni Gentile was the philosophical founder of Fascism, and was also a Hegelian, because Hegel believed in this nonsense as well. - "LOOOOL Gnosticism is also not one religion its a bunch of them really." Yes, I said that in the video. It's almost like you didn't listen. - "It may originated on the left but corporations love technocracy head over heals and will kill at anytime to keep it. I don't really see any mainstream left wanting it." Corporations are syndicates (centralised worker trade unions). Corporations are Left Wing. So you don't see the "mainstream left wanting it" because you haven't realised yet that Corporations are Socialist entities. You believe that central hierarchical control of the means of production is capitalism, and that's fine. But it's clearly not the private free market when the Public Sector controls the means of production. - "lez laffair capitalist mixed with government dictatorship and shadow governance. Thier Ricast." Yep, which is why we need to end capitalism and socialism, and choose free markets. - "They hate socialists, maxists, and communists. but are constantly in bed with corporations and think tanks. and no the dumbicrats that make out their socialist are not. THey just want the illusion they need your vote." No, they are socialists, marxists, and communists. They fund those organisations. Capitalism and Socialism are two sides of the same coin. That's why the solution to the problem isn't more capitalism or socialism. What we need are free markets and the end of taxation.
    1
  22801. So God is copulation?
    1
  22802. "this video is probably garbage" Yeah it is, you shouldn't watch it.
    1
  22803. It's called "The Book of Revelation". Meaning, it's divine revelation, which is gnosis (divine revelation = gnosis). In the Apocryphon of John (which you're happy to dismiss, but I'm not), John admits that Jesus appeared and spoke to him, giving him gnosis. He was then able to predict the future, which is a major part of Revelation. I mean, if it's not gnosticism, it certainly seems like it is. And other authors (from Voegelin to Martin Luther) suggest that this is the case. Ultimately, if you choose not to see it as Revelation, that's fine. But I mean, I'm leaning towards the idea that it is, especially since this particular book has aided many Christian cults and heresies.
    1
  22804. Hi
    1
  22805. "PLEASE MAKE A VIDEO ON THE COSSACKS REPATRAIATION TO THE USSR" What do you think Operation Keelhaul is? See the first video in this series https://youtu.be/z6ak1OtC_gM
    1
  22806. Michael, how can you say that millions of dead during the coup makes it one of the least bloodiest? Somewhere up to 12 million people were casualties in the chaos.
    1
  22807. Also, you're assuming that the United States has a free market. You would be wrong. They've been socializing the farms since the 1930s under Roosevelt and Hoover. The Agricultural Adjustment Administration was set up, for example, to force higher prices, leave land unproductive, and cull herds. This led to many smaller farmers going out of business, and the larger farms taking over (thus becoming 'public' corporate farms). That's why people went hungry in the United States too during the Depression years - socialism.
    1
  22808. See references at the bottom of this video when I say the 2 million figure (near the start) https://youtu.be/g7oqNLEzdLU there are other sources saying that the two million figure is within range. In fact, the 10 million figure is even more disputed than the 2 million figure due to the lack of source material on the subject (thanks to Soviet and Russian State censorship). Both sides officially didn't permit Rs, but it happened. Hitler didn't want "half-breeds", for example, and so forbade it. But elements within the Army allowed it. The Soviet leadership knew what their soldiers were doing in Berlin, but did little to stop it, although a token number of soldiers (4,000) were punished.
    1
  22809. If you think that book is "conservative", you have no idea what "conservative" is.
    1
  22810. I do not know, sorry. I do know that the two Soviet sailors who defected when their ship docked in a British port were allowed to stay in Britain (as shown in the video), but they weren't part of Operation Keelhaul.
    1
  22811. Okay, but you haven't offered an alternative argument. All you've done is confirmed what the quote said. Nothing in your comment contradicts what I said or what Orwell wrote, so there's nothing to discuss.
    1
  22812. We live in the Age of Emotionalism. They provide emotional responses, so I provide rational ones. When you realize that they're relying on outrage and feelings to convey their point, you can see right through them. Like a child throwing a tantrum, you must stay calm and show them who's boss.
    1
  22813. Batista was in charge. That's the point https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y
    1
  22814. Hey, SubscribeStar allows one off payments (you may have to make an account to do it). And thank you!
    1
  22815. hahaha
    1
  22816. Tomislav Nope, it wasn't the Welsh!
    1
  22817. Ville metsänmiettijä I didn't know that! That's interesting :)
    1
  22818. Ville metsänmiettijä well, he was Roman, but he was actually from Greece :P
    1
  22819. Ville metsänmiettijä Nearly right. It wasn't Egyptian though ;)
    1
  22820. kjell erling Budal absolutely yes!
    1
  22821. starcraft2own I think that's a valid answer - you get 10pts!
    1
  22822. Frost lost the bridge on the morning of day 5, not the morning of day 4. So, 30 Corps got to Nijmegen on the morning of the 3rd day, and still had a full two days to get to Arnhem (arguably less because Frost's remnants were battered by the end of day 4). But the Nijmegen bridge was in German hands because Gavin decided that the Groesbeek Heights were to be taken rather than the bridge. I would strongly argue that it would have been easier for 30 Corps to fight the SS north of Nijmegen rather than in the built-up area of Nijmegen (they were dug into buildings but also a castle). Therefore, in my opinion, had Gavin take the bridge on Day 1, then 30 Corps would have got to Arnhem before Frost was overwhelmed on either day 3 or day 4 of the operation. Edit: Also, the reason they were delayed on Day 5 was because Frost's men were crushed in the morning, and so the 9th SS rushed south to block the road. This wouldn't have happened had 30 Corps crossed the Nijmegen Bridge on day 3, and reached Arnhem before the morning of day 5.
    1
  22823. It's rare these days, but yes, this one is actually monetized!
    1
  22824. Yeah I'll agree that the plan certainly wasn't perfect and could have been better. I also agree with a lot of the criticism of Monty, Browning, Urquhart, the faulty intelligence and radios, and so on. My only thing is that Nijmegen was the main (not the only) factor that caused the defeat, which then leads me to Gavin. But even then, if evidence or interpretation comes out that convinces me that it was actually Browning, then I'll happily accept it. The 'nationality' thing isn't an issue - the failure to capture Nijmegen bridge is
    1
  22825. It was to do with the Reichswald, but then the added benefit was Browning's headquarters
    1
  22826. I did mention that (also notice how I didn't blame the 101st Airborne for failing to take their bridge - because while they didn't take the bridge, they did take the area and secured it). However, 30 Corps still reached Nijmegen Bridge early on day 3 and had two full days to go the last 10 miles to Arnhem. They could have made it - even with a delay in the Vegel area - had Nijmegen Bridge been secured by the 82nd Airborne.
    1
  22827. History lies in the heart of the debate. Without the debate, you do not have history. So I cannot ignore (good) counter-arguments. In this case, Clone Warrior provided evidence that could have potentially caused me (or others) to change our minds about Market Garden. It was, therefore, worth replying to. The only issue was that Clone Warrior decided to have an attitude, which is why I addressed it at the end (in the hope that others will learn from this and not be so emotional in the future). If he hadn't done that, then I still would have brought this to your attention because it was worth doing, but I just would have thanked him and been done with it. I get why you think I should have ignore the anger and whatnot, and I was tempted to do so, but I saw this as an opportunity to educate others. And I think it may have already have had an impact.
    1
  22828. You realize by saying the education system is "dominated by leftist ideology where truth is secondary to proper thinking" you're going to get a bunch of people screaming emotionally that you're a 'conspiracy theorist' 😂
    1
  22829. That would be awesome!
    1
  22830. Yeah it disappeared and then has reappeared...? Things are broken
    1
  22831. Clone Warrior isn't a 'troll'. He didn't just insult me, he provided evidence that did (at least, on the surface) refute my argument. Therefore, I thought it was best to examine this issue... The only problem was that, in addition to providing an argument/evidence, he also had an attitude. This is why I said that he shouldn't have done that, and he should have just provided the evidence and argument.
    1
  22832. I actually have been trying to upload to Bitchute but it keeps failing to process my videos, so I'm currently stuck
    1
  22833. I've read some. But which ones do you recommend?
    1
  22834. No, it's because every central bank around the world has been inflating the currency supply for years, and the inflation we're experiencing now is just the beginning https://youtu.be/iFDe5kUUyT0
    1
  22835. Aber ist das wirklich die fall? I've no idea if that's the correct translation by the way, but I'm trying!
    1
  22836. No, as shown in this and other videos, living standards did NOT go down for the poor. Götz Aly's Hitler's Beneficiaries shows, there was a massive wealth transfer to the lower income earners. This is well documented. Working hours increased, but this was due to a reaction to the Great Depression where there were so many unemployed. Many were thankful for the jobs. And also they encouraged everyone to work for their "people's community" and do extra social activities for their community after work. That's why the Robert Ley quote in the video was important.
    1
  22837. He also crushed right wingers too... but you just continue to ignore that fact
    1
  22838. Yes, but it was known as the "5th Leichte Division", becoming the 21st Panzer Division later.
    1
  22839. Thanks! This was one of my earlier history videos too :)
    1
  22840. Is that a request? I will get around to is, since it is the next battle after Battleaxe. Stalingrad is taking priority at the moment though
    1
  22841. Where? I don't see him
    1
  22842. Oh, you'd be very wrong - I mispronounce names all the time! It wouldn't be a TIK-video if I didn't get at least one name wrong. Although I am now learning German (wasn't when this video came out) because I need to get better at it. And yes, I now know how to say Strykch :) Also only just learnt that Kursk is actually pronounced "K-OO-shk". How come nobody has ever corrected me on this!?
    1
  22843. I now know it's more like 'Strike'
    1
  22844. Next part is Brevity, but I didn't mention it in that video. I think I do mention it in the Battleaxe video, which is the one after Brevity. Here's the North African Campaign playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    1
  22845. Awesome! Glad you liked it! I'm working on the next video in the series now (so be sure you watch the rest - although I messed up with Brevity...). Crusader should be about 7 hours long with my current estimate. Research at +92,000 words, and the unfinished script is around 70,000 currently.
    1
  22846. Hey, thanks for your comment. You are correct, however this is an old video. I'm actually learning German at the moment and have been for several months. While not perfect, I am getting there with my pronunciation, and you should hopefully hear a difference in the more recent videos (like Operation Crusader)
    1
  22847. Yup. He continues to get in the way during Operation Crusader, which is the next of these documentaries I'm working on
    1
  22848. Minor compared to the Eastern Front, but still important because it prevented the Axis from getting to the Middle East and ultimately lead to Italy's capitulation. It also gave the Allies the much needed experience they required prior to D-Day.
    1
  22849. I'm going through the North African Campaign in order. Right now, releasing videos on Operation Crusader, with two out already. So, we will get to the battle of El Alamein eventually, but got to go through all the battles before this. Here's the playlist for all the videos I've covered in the North African Campaign so far https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledivgjjFkhXw9y5RRvr7kNoe
    1
  22850. But also, because the unit needs the name DAK on it so we know what they are.
    1
  22851. I'm getting better. I've been learning German over the past six months or so
    1
  22852. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22853. Working on Operation Crusader right now, which is the one after Battleaxe (assuming you've seen all the North African Campaign videos)
    1
  22854. Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22855. Thank you very much :) I hope you can patiently wait for the next one (they take my months to make)
    1
  22856. Thanks for the feedback Rex! Really appreciated :) it's free, but you can pay me if you like :P It is a lot of hard work. 5 months of very very hard work. This is by far the most difficult project I've ever done. But I'm really happy with the end result and have learnt several valuable lessons I can apply in the future on this, as well as other projects :) I'm looking forward to the next WDC video too - and I haven't even read anything in detail on the next bit yet! When I started researching Operation Compass, I wasn't all that interested in the desert campaign. I actually decided to start it because I knew so little about it and didn't find it interesting. But my opinion of it has completely changed! I'm dying to do more on it, and I've more books on it now than I had on Market Garden. The French Motor Battalion was Free French under British command. It blew up the fuel so it didn't fall into German hands. I believe they didn't expect 3rd Armoured Brigade to be there, since Remington was ordered north. Apologies for not making that clear in the video. I only needed to be in the videos when I was making 2D animations. Now I'm doing 3D, the animation can stand on its own. But you're right that it's better if I don't appear in the videos and just concentrate on the narration. You did watch my Operation Compass video, right? That was just one video, unlike my Market Garden ones. Due to it taking so long to do, I was tempted to split the next ones up into segments so I could publish say 5 minute videos across several weeks, then put it all together again into one big one, similar to how I did it with the Market Garden videos. But I'm in two minds about it... The choice is either - 1. one complete video every so many months 2. small videos every week or every other week What do you think?
    1
  22857. +John Burns whilst supply did get to North Africa, it was a major issue for both the British and Rommel's forces. In late April 1941, General Paulus was sent to Africa to check up on Axis performance - as it was seen as an embarrassment after Rommel's first offensive. It was noted that the combined total of supply needed for both axis partners in the desert at that time was 30,000 tons per month just to break even. Halder estimated they actually needed 50,000 tons to stockpile for future offensives. Coastal ports in in Axis control in Cyrenaica could only accept 29,000 tons per month at peak capacity (they were under attack from the RAF, including the biggest port, Benghazi) so the bulk of the supplies had to come from Tripoli - which was a thousand mile trip to Tobruk! Coupled with a desperate shortage of transport vehicles, it placed the Axis in Africa in a terrible position and was the chief reason that Halder and others at OKH saw Rommel's first attack as an embarrassment. The British had similar logistical problems, with O'Connor identifying early on that the major logistics issues would be the critical factor for success or failure in the desert war. I've only studied the early part of the desert war so far, but once the Germans arrived, both sides seemed pretty evenly matched. Both sides only seemed to get beat (for the most part) when they overstretched their supply lines.
    1
  22858. Keiser Sior Did he really win over and over? Tobruk? Crusader? El Alamein? And that's the point. We've heard the legend. But we should be exploring the reality and then judging for ourselves.
    1
  22859. I can see you're not Churchill's biggest fan?
    1
  22860. It is! After 5 months of hard work, it's out! Can't believe it myself :)
    1
  22861. Thank you Matt. I don't know if you know but I'm currently working on the next BATTLESTORM video, which is going to be on the Battle of Stalingrad (yes). It's obviously taking a long time to do my research for it, so I ask for your patience. But I'm also currently doing a behind-the-scenes vlog series to give regular updates in the mean time, which you can find here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPhAnk_3u1U&list=PLNSNgGzaledhpvGA5suvZusGG1EjsLlWj&index=1
    1
  22862. I cover Churchill's involvement in the campaign a lot in the next episode I'm working on (Battleaxe) which should be out in a couple weeks
    1
  22863. Without having studied Peleliu or the Far East, I can't really give any opinions on it, I'm afraid :( The issue is simply that I've not studied the Far East Theatre in any depth. I'm not saying Peleliu wouldn't be good to do in these videos, just I've got a much better grasp of the European Theatre and understand the events there in far greater detail than I do with the Far East. Perhaps I could deviate and try my hand on a Pacific battle. But I think it'll be a while before I do as I'll have to do a lot of reading to get a better understanding of the entire theatre first.
    1
  22864. Well, my current plan is to follow the battles starting from the beginning of the Western Desert Campaign, to El Alamein, Tunis, Sicily, then up the boot of Italy until the end of the war. So Anzio and Cassino are in there, but at this rate it may be a while before I get to them ;) However, I do want alternate between the Western Desert Campaign and other battles in the war, so there's a potential for deviation. The next Battlestorm video will be on Fort Eben Emael (only a few weeks away now), and then Operation Brevity is next, then a big battle I won't name yet... Basically what I'm saying is that Anzio and or Cassino are on the list and could come sooner but I'm not sure yet.
    1
  22865. It was my pleasure :) it's strange, but Rommel's biggest strengths as a commander were also his biggest weaknesses
    1
  22866. +Katarnstar will do! Already working hard on the next one
    1
  22867. No? Ok that is quite obscure!
    1
  22868. Michael McCabe obscure is fine, as long as there's more than a couple of books on it so I can do my research :)
    1
  22869. Wow, I'm glad you think my maps are good. I wanted to keep things simple so it would be easier to animate, but I also wanted to go into detail, so I guess I'm doing something right! And keep thinking of battles. I need ideas! Any small battles are especially good since they'll be quicker to make. But yeah, I'd love to cover all you said. However I'm not a naval guy, so I don't think I could do Jutland any justice if I'm honest.
    1
  22870. Thanks Michael! You're right, I feel like this was a step up from my last couple documentaries :) No, it doesn't have to be WW2 :) I mean, WW2 is the war I know most about, so it helps. But I'm happy to do battles in other wars.
    1
  22871. I'm glad you clarified that. We wouldn't want people to think you're turning 76 at the end of the month
    1
  22872. Thanks LC! Glad you enjoyed it! I like your new avatar btw :)
    1
  22873. No worries, thank you for watching :)
    1
  22874. Sorry if I misread your comment. Having to use Google translator. But Rommel had an advantage because British intelligence knew that the German High Command didn't want Rommel to attack. So when Rommel did attack, it caught them completely off-guard. And thanks :)
    1
  22875. I assume you mean the "Close Combat Series"? :D and thanks! Took me months to make this, so I'm super happy you like it :)
    1
  22876. No, you're right. First glider assault in history :) Dunkirk is interesting. Why did Hitler stop the panzers!?
    1
  22877. I really enjoyed making this one :) it was actually quite difficult too, since most of the books on the western desert campaign focus on the later battles and usually just gloss over ones like this
    1
  22878. Look at the other comments agreeing with me. Most employers don't care about these degrees, or any degree - those who "followed their passion". The market is over saturated with people with degrees, which is why most jobs with those degrees are poorly paid for what they do. You can get paid the same or higher by not going to university and getting a trade, or starting a business, or something else. It's not worth it any more. Anyone can develop any of the skills you listed on their own by reading books without getting thousands of pounds in debt and wasting years of your life in classrooms. So my advice to everyone is not listen to so called career "experts" who are not living in the real world. If you have a passion for history like I do, don't waste your time in university. Be self-employed and pursue your passion on the side. The point is to earn money and live a good life, not "pursue your passion", which is little more than hippie BS.
    1
  22879. Nope, you can't even do that https://youtu.be/R320aV_34GI https://youtu.be/gzzyYvZxoQs
    1
  22880. Also, welcome!
    1
  22881. People keep complaining about this. I've just removed a couple of videos, but I think the rest are relevant to the discussion.
    1
  22882. +RadGGaming Hey Rad, welcome! That's a solid opinion :) I wish I could say what I think now, but I'm waiting for the final video to come out first so let's see how close you are to the conclusions I make!
    1
  22883. +Gripen85 the hated Monty :) I don't get why people don't like him as much as they do. Market Garden was a bit of a mess, but he didn't do that badly in other battles
    1
  22884. +Alexg6464 yes! Already working on the next :)
    1
  22885. +BakEsteR1984 Hey Bakes, good to hear! I hope your students enjoy it too and find it useful :) The camera I use is a Canon SX700HS, which I shoot with a green screen background. I have a Omnidirectional Lavalier Microphone to capture the sound and then edit in Audacity. I use Photoshop to make the maps and units etc, Anime Studio to create the animations, and then put it all into Premiere Pro for the final editing If you've got any more questions, let me know!
    1
  22886. +napoleon32 You'd think the English at least would be used to flying planes in the rain and fog etc :D you've got a lot of good reasons there to pin blame! If you had to choose one person to blame though, who would you choose?
    1
  22887. He didn't. I'd recomment you watch my Purges video https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ
    1
  22888. I know that, as today's video will show (coming out at 5pm GMT). The main issue is that I can't possibly cover every aspect in a short video like this. Artillery definitely played its part in Fall Blau, and expecially at Stalingrad. Operation Ring was headed by a Soviet artilleryman Voronov, and it was designed to be a support-intensive economy-of-force operation. And as I said in this other video, mortars were vitally important to the Red Army https://youtu.be/DkDiYuWlgV8
    1
  22889. This is the issue, I'm heavily reliant on secondary sources because I can't read Russian or German. I don't know anyone who speaks German (off of YouTube), let alone Russian.
    1
  22890. They did use brigades, although I think only within their Panzer divisions. Not sure why, but some of the Panzer divisions did have brigades
    1
  22891. Really? That's interesting
    1
  22892. What? This video has nothing to do with the 1943 Battle of Kursk.
    1
  22893. I'll be doing OOB's for Operation Crusader in the next few weeks, and will be covering Soviet OOB for the pre-Stalingrad period in the future too. I have no plans on publishing the texts (although YouTube had given me the ability to create 'posts' now, which are just texts - haven't tried them yet), but don't forget to turn on subtitles if you haven't done already.
    1
  22894. Sorry Jamie! Beat by two people... you're slipping
    1
  22895. It feels like I've given up both of them already!
    1
  22896. Perhaps, but the Soviets also had support units - although, like I said in the video, some of the combat elements of these were moved to the army level, so the same may apply to the Soviets too.
    1
  22897. Thanks! More to come :)
    1
  22898. Correction, at what point in the video did I say they didn't use Corps during the war?
    1
  22899. At what point in the video did I say they didn't use Corps?
    1
  22900. You're welcome :) hate to say it, but this coming Monday's video is going to be about essay research and writing. You may have picked up some points.
    1
  22901. Will do, and thanks!
    1
  22902. Might be a while but it's in the pipeline :)
    1
  22903. Mitte > Süd
    1
  22904. What do you mean?
    1
  22905. That was actually why she picked her pseudonym - because apparently she describes herself as "gaseous". And her surname was picked because she has a Jewish ancestor (supposedly), which makes her entire take even worse
    1
  22906.  @wtice4632  Have you seen this? https://youtu.be/wFnFJI6Aqaw
    1
  22907. I haven't watched Ben Shapiro's take on this, if that's what you're asking. I'm assuming he came to a similar conclusion regarding emotionalism vs rationalism?
    1
  22908. "The video talks about Swedish battleships, but calling them that is a bit optimistic. What they had were three Sverige -class coastal defence ships." True. Gilmour specifically refers to them as battleships, which is why I did, because I didn't know if online sources I checked had got things wrong.
    1
  22909. Oh no! Why "craptacular"?
    1
  22910. Great to hear! Those are good books. Rainer Zitelmann is German, so there's plenty of copies of the German version of his book, but not the English language version (hence the £500 price tag). Also think it doesn't help that I basically told everyone to get it, creating a larger demand. The only thing I could suggest is contacting the author directly
    1
  22911. Britain only declared war - they didn't attack Finland, and Finland didn't attack Britain. It was a symbolic gesture for the Soviet Union, and against an Axis co-belligerent. Mr Churchill was wrong in a lot of ways, and I'm not a fan of Churchill. And as I said, I understand why Finland did what it did. The Soviets were just as bad as the Third Reich, and your anger should be aimed at the ideology that made the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact possible in the first place - Socialism.
    1
  22912. "To us Finns generally, it doesn't make any sense, how a pro democratic/western nation declares war against a nation with similar values and state organisation." It's not about the type of country - it's about waging a war of aggression. "We were co-belligerent/pro axis, but who was it really that forced our hand?😉" I understand why Finland did what it did in WW2, and I don't necessarily blame it for doing what it did. Arguably (and it is arguable) the Germans pressured Finland into declaring war on the Soviet Union (although Finnish leaders said themselves they were doing it to retake their lost territories). And they were caught between a rock and a hard place. However, Sweden stayed out of the conflict, and Britain didn't declare war on Sweden. Finland didn't stay out of the conflict and aligned herself with the Axis, so Britain declared war. Think about it another way - you're asking me to understand Finland's position. Okay, well I'm going to ask you to understand Britain's position. Britain and the USA had to keep Stalin on side. If they didn't, then Western forces would have had a much tougher time of it marching to Berlin. So, when Finland strikes the USSR (Britain's 'Ally'), and Britain failed to get Finland to back down, it makes sense why Britain would declare war on Finland. It was to please their Soviet 'allies' and keep them in the war.
    1
  22913. I'm not fully convinced. They were reluctant even to trade and give concessions, and only did so in the early to mid parts of the war. Once the tide of war had turned (1942-ish onwards), they began to wind back, and broke almost all ties on the 1st of January 1945.
    1
  22914. Glad you liked it!
    1
  22915. Also, thank you for translating the video!
    1
  22916. Haha :) there will always be a gap between seasons because I haven't got the scripts ready in advance. 'Most' of the research is done, but a lot is also done on the fly. And the editing needs doing too. The gap for this season was slightly longer for a few reasons, with the main one being that I'm testing out a new editing process for the battle animations, which is why I did last week's Battlestorm Tali-Ihantala video to test it out
    1
  22917. You can, but it won't speed up the research, scripting, and editing process because we (me and Terri) are working as fast as we can. Next episode will be either next week, or (more likely) the week after
    1
  22918. And what does the f in fml stand for, kids?
    1
  22919. D-Doubtful
    1
  22920. You and Lord Cucumber think alike :)
    1
  22921. It's easy for you with your vast knowledge and support from your mum
    1
  22922. If I'm honest, I thought it was "Day-Day" too prior to making this video. But apparently it's not
    1
  22923. Would answering your question with a question help you decide?
    1
  22924. Was waiting for that ;)
    1
  22925. You get extra FIPs if you can keep track for the whole year ;)
    1
  22926. Your username is strikingly relevant there
    1
  22927. D-Doh!
    1
  22928. Demolition day day?
    1
  22929. Think you've dropped the ball on this one
    1
  22930. I'm surprised you didn't say cat-alonia or something :)
    1
  22931. Awww thanks! My response video for you is here https://youtu.be/dbst-6JA4zI (Seriously, no one else can click this link... Don't you dare!)
    1
  22932. I don't think he really got involved in this operation.
    1
  22933. That's a good suggestion! I've been doing it for recent videos, but yes need to do it for this. I'll get on it when I'm home later. Thank you :)
    1
  22934. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22935. The only issue is that Market Garden was aiming towards the IJsselmeer, not the Ruhr. It seems the intended purpose was to cut the German 15th Army off in Belgium/Netherlands and free the ports. Link to another video of mine discussing this https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM
    1
  22936. No worries, I'm trying to respond to as many people as I can - although this is the first time on my channel I've not been able to keep up with comments, just because of the sheer amount of them and the fact I have limited time to work on new videos (the big project being Stalingrad, and I'm also working on one right now on the Purges - taking a break from that to respond to you). And yeah, realistically they are all intertwined like you said. Maybe a better general would have done things right, but I don't even think replacing Gavin was necessary as he wasn't a bad guy. He just made a mistake. If he hadn't made that mistake, the operation would probably would have succeeded. And we all make mistakes - it's just in this case it was a big one. Glad you enjoyed the video and I hope you stick around :)
    1
  22937. Yes, Montgomery was in overall charge and therefore is held responsible for the overall outcome of the operation, because that's how responsibility works. However, the tactical reason for failure lies either at Browning's feet, or Gavin's feet. The point of the video was to analyse the operational and failures and figure out which was the most critical. That doesn't dismiss the radios or the RAF or the failure of intelligence or anything else, but it does say the most crucial mistake was made at Nijmegen. That is my interpretation. And I agree that Taylor and Sosabowski were the only generals who deserved praise on the Allied side.
    1
  22938. You're kidding, right? Sorry it's boring for you, but I was more concerned about delivering the correct information rather than delivering the incorrect information like TV documentaries do.
    1
  22939. "they were too scared to drop the airborne near the bridges" And yet, the only bridge not taken on day 1 (intact or not) was Nijmegen Bridge, which was the responsibility of the 82nd Airborne. "The Piss Poor Plan is what went WRONG!" The only reason the plan failed was because Gavin of the 82nd Airborne didn't follow the plan. And as I've said elsewhere, you can blame the British if you want, however you do have to acknowledge that the failure of the plan was the Nijmegen sector https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    1
  22940. Yes, because he had the fuel to do so. Oh wait, no he did not. That's why the British should have cleared the Scheldt... by outflanking the German army defending the area with airborne forces and cutting it off from supplies https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM
    1
  22941. I've been over this in numerous videos since then. The person claiming that he got instructions from Browning was Gavin himself. See: https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU https://youtu.be/ws3p6uWW19U
    1
  22942. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22943. Re-writing history is what historians do https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18
    1
  22944. Interesting. Only because a lot of commenters are saying they didn't know about what happened at Nijmegen
    1
  22945. "Gavin did not take it, fair enough but again the problem was it was a British operation, if they did not take their time with the airdrops that small pockets of Germans would meet a much larger force of British paratroopers." On Day 1, Gavin sat on the Groesbeek Heights for several hours after the drop. Only as the light was fading did he order that one battalion go towards the Nijmegen Bridge (why not earlier?). At this point, the Nijmegen Bridge was held by half a dozen men. If he had sent a battalion there earlier, they would have taken it. But just before 1 company of the battalion (the others had gotten lost since it was now dark) reached the bridge, SS units from the north arrived and secured the bridge. When the British tanks reached the Nijmegen bridge on the morning of day 3, they found that the bridge was in German hands. They then fought for the next 36 hours to secure the bridge, which could have and should have been taken on day 1 by Gavin. Whether it was a British operation or not is irrelevent. Gavin did not take the Nijmegen Bridge, and the operation was lost at Njimegen. If he had been a British commander and hadn't taken the bridge, the operation still would have been lost at Nijmegen. Being a British operation or not doesn't change this fact.
    1
  22946. Churchill is an idiot, Monty is terrible and Britain sucks. However, Gavin of the 82nd Airborne failed to take the Nijmegen Bridge and is to blame for the failure of Operation Market Garden.
    1
  22947. The Polish Brigade and Sosabowski were treated rotten after Market Garden by Browning and Montgomery. However, there is no denying that the Poles fought gallantly and that the criticism of Sosabowski at the time was unjustified. They contributed significantly to Market Garden, and probably saved the remnants of 1st Airborne from annihilation. All that said, the current evidence suggests that the operation was lost at Nijmegen, although the plan could have been improved if both the British and US commanders had planned better.
    1
  22948. Thank you very much, and don't worry, more Battlestorm and history videos will be on their way :)
    1
  22949. "This decision was made by myself and approved by my corps commander." - Gavin. Gavin was the one who deprioritised the Nijmegen bridge, and Browning agreed. It wasn't the other way around as you implied, Carl. And as I've argued again and again, this operation could have worked if Gavin hadn't messed up at Nijmegen.
    1
  22950. It is difficult and time consuming. People I know in real life think I'm mad (and they're probably right). Thanks and I'll do my best!
    1
  22951. I read it :) thank you for your kind comment, and I'm glad you've chosen to stick around. This was in fact my first documentary, and I do think I've improved these videos in quality since then (with one notable exception, which you'll realise when you stumble across it). Currently working on a titanic Stalingrad Documentary, as well as a shorter Purges video and its effects on the Red Army, so hopefully you enjoy them just as much :)
    1
  22952. Glad you agree :)
    1
  22953. Thank you sir!
    1
  22954. It was the first map I ever made, and all the sources said Zuiderzee. I didn't think to double check. And one road doesn't mean it's a bad plan. Rommel lead the Africa Korps down one road on the 24th of November 1941. And while there weren't bridges to cross, he managed the 60 miles in a single day. So, one road is not the issue - the bridges were. So the question now becomes, why didn't the 82nd Airborne take their bridge?
    1
  22955. Glad to hear you liked it :)
    1
  22956. Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
    1
  22957. I don't know if he did. However, the issue was that the men should have known to go to the bridge straight away. That's what happened at the other bridges in the 82nd area. They just seemed to have forgotten about the big one for some reason
    1
  22958. Thank you! This was my first documentary. I hope you decide to check out some of my others :)
    1
  22959. Everyone seems obsessed with this "one road" idea. It's not like they couldn't go off the road at any point. And there are quite a few advances in WW2 that were made down single roads (or even no roads at all). So this "single road" idea doesn't really make sense. The only issue would be if the bridges weren't taken - THAT would do more damage than the single road.
    1
  22960. Thank you Cipher! Wait until I start the Stalingrad Battlestorm series (hopefully coming later this year after Courland) because the Stalingrad videos I've done so far will pale in comparison
    1
  22961. You're more than welcome :)
    1
  22962. The one you posted 2 weeks ago? No I didn't, you can find it below. The reality is I just don't have the time to reply in-full to you. Here's what you said - "Really poor list of sources, Frost & Urquhart had reputations to protect and Neillands & Poulussen are a couple of the most biased writers. I also find it odd that you didn't use a single source that gave the American point of view. If you want a more balanced view of the 10st and 82nds fight read "September Hope" by John McManus a very through historian who doesn't shy away from putting blame were it is deserved. "By the way in Operational Order Number 1 General Browning clearly lists the Groesbeek heights as the primary objective of the 82nd. All other objectives even the capture of the Waal bridge are secondary to gaining & holding the high ground. Also Browning & the Air Corp vetoed a plan by Gavin to capture the bridge on the 17th by dropping a company of the 508th directly on the bridge along with a couple of gliders carrying ATGs Then again Browning vetoed another plan by Gavin to capture the bridge by a pincer attack by the 504th & 508th on the 18th. Maybe you should do more research." And also, the sources I listed are a selected bibliography. I've read many more books on Operation Market Garden, however the ones listed were the more useful, since they don't neglect to mention the Nijmegen and Eindhoven areas, which many sources seem to miss out on. Does John McManus explain why Gavin neglected to take Nijmegen Bridge on day 1 when he could have done? Or does it explain why the Groesbeek Heights were prioritised over the taking of quite possibly the most important bridge in the entire operation? See my follow-up video on Browning where I explain that you can blame both Gavin and Browning or either or if you want too (either way, the battle was lost at Nijmegen on day 1) https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    1
  22963. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22964. Glad you enjoyed it, Seven :)
    1
  22965. Don't worry, I'm working on more behind the scenes. And I think CC2 is relatively good at simulating this Operation. I do think the German units are a little overpowered compared to what they were in reality, but they did that for balance/gameplay reasons. Still the best Close Combat game in the series in my opinion.
    1
  22966. New evidence and new interpretations change our perception of history. I have a history theory video coming on the 14th of January 2019. You should watch it because I'll explain this concept properly, and the way to look at everything (rather than think that you're gullible, which is not the case).
    1
  22967. Glad you enjoyed it :) this was my first documentary too. Be sure to check the others out
    1
  22968. Thank you! A lot of work went into this so it's good to hear that it's appreciated :)
    1
  22969. Thank you Doc! I would say my other Battlestorm documentaries are probably better presented than this (graphically at least), with the exception of Operation Brevity (which was an experimentation which ultimately proved a failure). Would recommend Battlestorm Battleaxe if you're interested in the Western Desert Campaign as that's probably my best presented video so far. Link https://youtu.be/lqGo57Drs24
    1
  22970. Wow good spot haha! Never noticed that before. I wish I could say it was intentional but sadly it wasn't
    1
  22971. I'll agree with you on that :)
    1
  22972. I was making a "this was the main factor" argument, but it was a combination that broke the operation
    1
  22973. From what I can tell, the guy drew squares or shapes on a map. Each shape would have a name or a couple of letters. He gave one map to the artillery guys and kept one for himself. Then he'd call up the artillery guys and say "bombard Charlie" or whatever. Much quicker than coordinates.
    1
  22974. They did at some bridges, but not at all. They didn't really need to at Arnhem for example because the tanks would roll up and secure the south. But it would have been advantageous to have done so. I think the main reason was because they didn't have enough transport. And because they chose not to do two drops a day (which they could have done). This limited the amount of men on the ground on day 1, which meant they didn't have enough to go for each bridge from two sides. Obviously they didn't need to send an entire battalion to capture a bridge, so not sure why they didn't split their battalions up to do this. Certainly something to consider.
    1
  22975. And yet the Soviets turned their airborne forces into Guards divisions and sent them to the Stalingrad region
    1
  22976. "Before I look at the failure of MG and Monty's roll in it, I think of Monty's lackluster appreciation for the Scheldt Estuary" Ike wanted to clear the Scheldt too, because their logistics were stretched to breaking point and they were having trouble advancing any further - broad front or not. In fact, it's only once the Scheldt was cleared that Allied forces got going again. Montgomery's plan was to cut off the German 15th Army in that area by attacking north to the Ijsselmeer. Once they were cut off, the Canadians would have had an easier time clearing the Scheldt. So it's not as though Montgomery didn't care about the Scheldt - he actually wanted to weaken the forces defending it indirectly. My video "Montgomery vs Eisenhower on Operation Market Garden's True Purpose | History Debate" https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM
    1
  22977. To be fair, nicknames are usually given to you by other people. But yes, I followed this up with a video on Browning which you might like https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    1
  22978. Glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for watching :)
    1
  22979. It probably wasn't aimed at getting to Berlin to end the war by Christmas https://youtu.be/f79KgQVL3MM And I don't think it was a bad plan. I think it could have worked, had Nijmegen Bridge been taken. It's only "bad" because it didn't work in the end.
    1
  22980. I've replied to your follow up comment claiming that I deleted this comment, which I haven't.
    1
  22981. Nobody's blaming you, sir unless you're Gavin. Blame goes to the guy who messed up, not his entire country
    1
  22982. Thanks!
    1
  22983. No problem, good to hear you enjoyed it :)
    1
  22984. Yes, but as Gavin says, he got permission from his "corps commander", which is Browning. So, as I said in the Browning video, if people interpret that to mean either Browning, or Gavin, or both are at fault - then that's fine. I only put the emphasis on Gavin because he made the initial decision. As for winning the war by Christmas, I'm not convinced that was ever the goal. Maybe something they told the troops to motivate them. Cutting off German forces in the Scheldt area seems to have been the objective.
    1
  22985. Just to point out, that the 36 hour delay was caused when XXX Corps arrived at Nijmegen. When they arrived at Nijmegen on the morning of day 3, they had made up for lost time (it was 14 hours at Son) and only had a few more miles to go. They then suffered a critical 36 hour delay at Nijmegen because the bridge wasn't taken on day 1, which it could have been. After the battle, Gavin claimed that XXX Corps was 36 hours behind schedule... It was, but only after Nijmegen, not before Nijmegen, as he implied.
    1
  22986. Very good. I'd highly recommend the book Lost at Nijmegen. He comes to a different conclusion to what these other authors are saying, although I don't doubt that Browning had his hand in the shift of priorities. And Reynolds' point on the strength of German troops at Nijmegen supports what I was saying. I said that the SS arrived in lorries from the north just as the one battalion of 82nd Airborne paratroopers reached the bridge area. Grabner's battalion came later, to find that the situation was in order. But prior to these units arriving, there were only a handful of Germans at the Nijmegen Bridge - not enough to stop a battalion of elite US paratroopers. My main source of information on this was 'It Never Snows in September'.
    1
  22987. Thank you for your comment Dude! Glad you enjoyed the video
    1
  22988. Glad you enjoyed it :) the other reasons people give obviously contributed, but Gavin's failure to take the Nijmegen Bridge seems to be the biggest reason.
    1
  22989. I've read your other comments. And I think you should watch the video coming this Monday where I blame a British general for the loss of Operation Crusader. Or some of my other videos where I call Churchill an idiot. But no, clearly I'm being pro-British for some reason here. Actually no, the British plan could have worked had the 82nd Airborne not ignored their main objective. I'm not saying that Monty shouldn't take responsibility for his subordinates, but the plan could have worked, and the reason it didn't was because of Gavin (and/or Browning). A more recent video on Browning and if he should take the blame, plus a closer look at the events in the Nijmegen sector https://youtu.be/Dvv8GQIRYVU
    1
  22990. Thank you sir!
    1
  22991. Glad you enjoyed it!
    1
  22992. It's the first history video I ever made, plus the first I appeared on camera. So yes, I do want to redo it in the future and go more in-depth, but no, I'm not taking it down. Too busy working on Operation Crusader and a massive Stalingrad documentary to revisit old topics now.
    1
  22993. Except as I explained in this other video https://youtu.be/WHCVKPIY6Pk I'm not "blaming America" as a whole for the failure of this operation. General Gavin (US 82nd Airborne) certainly, and possibly General Browning (UK) and Brereton (US). Also, the book "Lost at Nijmegen" is written by a Dutch historian, so this isn't just a "Brit" saying this.
    1
  22994. And the reason it almost worked was because every objective was taken except for Nijmegen Bridge. It was almost taken, and would have been if the 82nd had moved toward the bridge straight away. Sadly, they did not. That doesn't mean the plan was goofy. That means the plan wasn't followed
    1
  22995. And yet this "stupid" plan almost worked.
    1
  22996. Could you explain why you think this plan was "goofy"?
    1
  22997. Good to hear! Hope you'll enjoy the videos coming up :)
    1
  22998. Yes, I agree
    1
  22999. Haha glad to hear you like them :) working on Battlestorm Operation Crusader at the moment, which will be about 7 or 8 hours long (yep)
    1
  23000. Will do, don't worry :)
    1
  23001. Glad you think so :) and this was my first history video too. Done a lot more since this!
    1
  23002. @Jason - I'm still not convinced the idea for this battle was to go for the Ruhr. I discuss what Market Garden's true objective was in this video https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=f79KgQVL3MM
    1
  23003. @marcus - a very good question. Monty doesn't say in his memoirs, and I don't know for sure, but I do suspect it was a number of factors. By around day 5 or 6 of the operation, XXX Corps' attack had stalled. You have to remember that - despite the impression that the Allies tried to go "a bridge too far" and were only checked at the final hurdle - in reality the Germans actually won this battle. The initial momentum XXX Corps enjoyed in the first couple days was gone. The delays of getting to 1st Airborne meant that the Germans had formed an effective blocking line south of Arnhem bridge, and there wasn't a way for them to cross the Rhine. Even with 1st Airborne hanging on on the north bank, they had no immediate way of getting across without getting shot at by the Germans. They were now also getting punished from the flanks, with the corridor cut on a few occasions, preventing reinforcements travelling north. Unlike before the battle, the Germans now knew what the British were trying to do and had dug into positions and were launching counterattacks to prevent them from doing it. XXX Corps now spends some time consolidating the ground its won. At the same time, logistical shortages from not taking Antwerp made reinforcing XXX Corps' attack difficult. According to Montgomery, he hoped the Canadians could take Antwerp while XXX Corps crossed the Rhine. Personally, I'm not convinced by his claims, but once enemy resistance stiffened, the British couldn't sustain the attack. Again, I'm not 100% sure, but it does appear that these were big reasons for why the advance on the Rhine stopped.
    1
  23004. And if I could turn back time, I'd still call it the Zuiderzee just to trigger so many people :)
    1
  23005. Thanks! I wanted to make this as detailed and as accurate as possible, although I do think I've done other Battlestorm videos better than this, but they're on less-well-known battles (like Operation Battleaxe).
    1
  23006. Thank you for watching, I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  23007. If in doubt, attack the same place twice
    1
  23008. Free speech. If you don't like the internet, don't go on it. Close Combat videos were taken down because of COPPA. I didn't want to risk my channel getting sued by the US government if they randomly decided that my videos were made for kids, when they clearly aren't.
    1
  23009. I've deleted the second responder from the channel. This will remove all his previous comments though...
    1
  23010. Glad you liked it :) got a review of Breevor's new Arnhem book coming this Monday, so I'm definitely keeping my eye on Market Garden, even though I've moved on to other battles.
    1
  23011. The good old YouTube algorithm :)
    1
  23012. Glad you liked it :) Interestingly, the sources I have refer to it as the Zuiderzee, which is why I called it that. I now know (thanks to numerous people pointing it out) that the name changed in early 1930's. So I apologise for that mistake
    1
  23013. Glad you're enjoying the videos Ricky! Nothing stopping you studying it in your spare time. That's what I'm doing :)
    1
  23014. Glad you agree!
    1
  23015. I have a video coming out this Monday which explains the command structure and some of the other issues, but actually Gavin was a subordinate of both Ridgway (US) and Browning (British), who were in turn subordinates of Brereton (US), who was subordinate to Montgomery. Why blame Montgomery rather than Browning? Or Brereton? These are Montgomery's staff, who as you say should have planned it better. Brereton was to blame for the drop zones being too far from the objective since he made that decision, and the fact that there were one drop per day (even though it was possible to do two). Radios don't always work - who takes the blame for that? The flank attack by German forces you mention was made on day 2 (yes, not day 1 when the bridge needed to be taken) by the "406th Division", which was barely the strength of a brigade and consisted of eyes and ears battalions. The next real attack came on day 4, after XXX Corps had arrive to back them up. The main danger was 10th SS Panzer Division, which arrived at Nijmegen in the evening on day 1. THAT is the main force that threatened 82nd Airborne, and Gavin could only spare one battalion after several hours of just sitting around at the Groesbeek Heights. He even insisted in taking artillery on day 1 rather than extra paratroop infantry battalions, which could have been used to take more objectives. No matter which way you look at it, this Operation was lost at Nijmegen, and the real blame goes to Gavin and/or Browning, with Brereton, Ridgway, Urquhart, Montgomery, and several others taking some responsibility too
    1
  23016. Thanks for sharing!
    1
  23017. Thanks! You might like the book "It Never Snows in September" by Kershaw. Tells it from the German perspective, and comes to a similar conclusion :)
    1
  23018. Glad you enjoyed the video! Yes, the film is a good one, and one of my favourites too, but couldn't possibly cover everything. Be sure to check out some of my other Battlestorm documentaries too :) thanks!
    1
  23019. Thanks! I'm relying on secondary sources (books written by historians), which makes this video a tertiary source, but I am the only person working on these videos.
    1
  23020. And thank you for your nice comment :)
    1
  23021. It's hard to say. The only information I have comes from Robert Kershaw's It Never Snows in September. He says that Student was first to have access to the plans, which gave him insight into what the Allies were doing. Kershaw says that Model acted either from instinct or from the fact he had access to the plans when he made Student in charge of the Eindhoven area, 10th SS Panzer in charge of Nijmegen, and 9th SS in charge of Arnhem. The fact he split his forces into three distinct zones that mirrored the Allied airborne divisions suggests that Model was using the plans, but could also just make sense practically given the layout of the terrain. Kershaw does say there's no way to know because sufficient primary source material isn't available on this issue.
    1
  23022. To be fair, a lot of the sources don't mention them. I do regret not going into more detail at Nijmegen (as in, creating a seperate map of the area and zooming in like I did at Arnhem) especially since Poulussen goes into a lot of detail about events there. Maybe I'll redo this one day :) What battles are you interested in? I'm looking for ideas for future videos
    1
  23023. You'll be happy to know I do mention them! See 1:28:09 I don't go into detail about them, but to be fair the battle was coming to an end by the time they arrived
    1
  23024. It's not even Germany. It's Prussia. Perhaps this is the reason they wiped Prussia from the map after the map?
    1
  23025. I was going to say, my sources definitely refer to Tiger tanks being committed
    1
  23026. +Rex1987 I like the sound of that! Join the TIK ARMY :D
    1
  23027. +tigerhunter77 I agree with you the transport of Browning and his HQ was a waste. I just want to point out though that the intelligence never said there were a 1000 tanks in the forest. It was a rumour. Or should I say a "rumor" since it seems the 82nd were the only ones this rumour affected. I'd highly recommend you read Robin Neilland's book as he explains the whole situation with the 82nd, Gavin and the Reichswald in a lot more detail than I ever could. Or "Lost at Nijmegen" but that's a bit more specialist. Neilland is probably better. See the description for the books.
    1
  23028. +InDisguise let's put it this way, I've been looking into ways to at least cover the cost of having to buy the books to do the research from, but so far I haven't figured that out :/
    1
  23029. +Rex1987 Well I now have a few books on the war in Ethiopia during ww2, since most of the books covering the Western Desert Campaign also cover that one too. So that's certainly one I could do in the future. It's not a huge conflict too (like the Eastern Front) so it would be possible :)
    1
  23030. Thank you, I'm glad you liked it :) let me know if you have any suggestions for future battles and if you haven't already, check out my other videos in this series - link https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  23031. Thanks Jay! Your point about the map is interesting. It's hard to judge how long to show a certain map for. Too short and it's too quick to take everything in. Too long, you might get bored and click away. So I'm glad you think I got it right :) I'm also working on the next BATTLESTORM doc (does take me time to make these videos) but I've done a couple of other documentaries on other battles. Check out this playlist https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  23032. ***** I agree with you. It's a shame what happened to Poland. However, considering the Soviet Union (the Cold War etc) it wasn't possible for Poland to be independant at that time. Paracuting Sosabowski's brigade into Warsaw wouldn't have changed that
    1
  23033. ***** why not? What's the point of having a unit if it can't be used to fight? Yes, they wanted to drop into Poland to help liberate their country, but that plan was suicide given the circumstances. If that was the case, why didn't they go to the Soviet Union and help them fight? Sosabowski (and a lot of other British officers) were against Operation Comet, but warmed to Market Garden because it was a more sensible approach. He still had reservations, but agreed to the plan. If only the Poles had dropped on day 1, south of the Arnhem bridge and taken it first. They could have prevented Graebner and the SS moving south and blocking the Nijmegen Bridge. Ideally, the whole of 1st Airborne (or at least a portion of it) could have done the same and history would have been rewritten. Sadly, it wasn't to be.
    1
  23034. Yeah, it's not that it wasn't a combination - it definitely was. It's more a case of - if there was one card that toppled the pack, which would you pick? A lot of people made mistakes. A lot of things went right and wrong. But the one thing that tipped the scales was...
    1
  23035. +Mark Kelly thanks for the feedback! Part of the reason I wanted to make this was because a lot of tv documentaries don't go into enough detail for me. I just hope I haven't gone into too much detail. But I've written the script for the next one so hopefully it'll be out soon :)
    1
  23036. HoboTango Oh I've read a couple books on Stalingrad already :)
    1
  23037. It proves how valuable kampfgruppen were. But Kampfgruppe "Lehr" didn't take part in this battle. Other kampfgruppe did, but not Lehr
    1
  23038. 1138thz The debate still rages about who knew about the two SS panzer divisions and who didn't. It's fairly certain that the divisional commanders didn't know about it, or if they did they didn't tell those below. Frost says in his memoirs that if he'd been told he would have taken less mortar rounds and more PIAT rounds with him. I'm still not sure on Monty. I haven't researched enough on his battles to come to a conclusion yet, so I'm holding my judgement, but I'm skeptical at best. I don't think he was a bad general by any stretch of the imagination - anyone who beats Rommel can't be that bad. Like any general he has good points and bad points and I think his big flaw is his ability to annoy his allies. As Churchill is supposed to have said about Monty - "In defeat, unbeatable; in victory, unbearable." And after doing my documentary on Operation Compass, Monty has a lot to live up for. In my opinion, if he hadn't been captured General O'Connor could have been a decent counter to Rommel - and much earlier than when Monty entered the stage
    1
  23039. @RAM thanks :) I should have the next documentary out relatively soon (probably about a month away) @John Burns I think Monty deserves praise as one of the better British generals. However he certainly wasn't flawless. General O'Connor's victory over the Italians in 1940/41 achieved great success that puts Monty's later victories into perspective. German commanders consistently out-performed Allied commanders throughout the war, and the American and Soviets had their own great commanders too. Ultimately I'm still reserving my judgement of Monty until I've studied more of his battles. That's part of the reason I started doing documentaries on the North African Campaign - so when I get to El Alamein, I'd fully understand what went on before and would be able to judge for myself how great a general Monty was at what was arguably his finest hour. Hopefully one day I'll be able to come to a decent conclusion on how good Monty actually was. But for now, I'm staying quiet.
    1
  23040. handsome boss all day I'd recommend doing two kinds of videos in the same channel. Maybe they can have a different title so your subs know which are more detailed. You can also put them in different playlists. But keep everything in one channel so you can concentrate your subs
    1
  23041. Sorry for not replying earlier. I wouldn't do two channels if I were you. Just stick to one channel and do all your videos on that. I actually have a second channel for animation, but I regret not just publishing them on this channel. Doesn't make sense to have two channels until you hit a couple million subs, and even then, I don't see the point unless you're collaborating with different people under the same banner and they may need their own channel
    1
  23042. handsome boss all day excellent :) looking forward to seeing them. If you need any advice, let me know :)
    1
  23043. handsome boss all day are you really? Are they on youtube? Link?? If not, put them on it It does take a lot of effort. The script for this was over 21,000 words. I'm working on a "behind the scenes"/"how I make my battlestorm videos" video at the minute so I hope that helps you when it comes out... unless you're better than me, in which case, give me all your secrets!
    1
  23044. handsome boss all day no to subscribing? Or no to the good points being made? Or no to the checking out other videos? Which!? Thanks though :)
    1
  23045. Well, I just hope the last 1.5 hours was as good as the first 0.5 :)
    1
  23046. +H. KC thanks! More coming soon-ish! :)
    1
  23047. Not sure if you're still interested, but I'm working on the Bruneval Raid right now (will be out in a week or two). Not sure when I'll get around to the Dieppe Raid, but this is a nice precursor to that raid. Only people I've told so far is my Patreons, and now you two :)
    1
  23048. Yeah, realistically, Browning deserves a good deal of criticism, for all the things you said and more. Browning also takes responsibility for the sacking of Sosabowski and the blaming of the Poles (although Montgomery probably had some influence in that too). Interestingly though, the decision to not do two drops on the first day was Brereton's decision, and I'm not sure which "Corps commander" Gavin was referring too, Browning or Brereton.
    1
  23049. Yeah, realistically, Browning deserves a good deal of criticism, for all the things you said and more. Browning also takes responsibility for the sacking of Sosabowski and the blaming of the Poles (although Montgomery probably had some influence in that too). Interestingly though, the decision to not do two drops on the first day was Brereton's decision, and I'm not sure which "Corps commander" Gavin was referring too, Browning or Brereton.
    1
  23050. I'm glad you liked it :)
    1
  23051. Wow thanks :) I would say (especially after making this video) that I know this battle inside and out. I wouldn't say I was 100% unbiased, although I did my best to be as unbiased as I could until the very end. It's hard not to come to your own conclusions when you're doing a lot of research on a topic. Urquhart's an interesting character. He was an infantry commander, and some say he was the wrong man for the job because he thought that once paras had landed they basically just became infantry. This is wrong as paratroopers need to get to their objectives quickly and dig in before awaiting relief. They can't go toe-to-toe with regular units for long periods in most circumstances because they don't have the heavy weaponry or support. Who you writing the paper for? If you have any questions you think I may be able to help you with, let me know :)
    1
  23052. Thanks! CC2 is somewhat accurate in the fact that if you get stopped at Nijmegen, you're doomed at Arnhem :)
    1
  23053. Interesting! Didn't know that :) perhaps the reason we don't hear about them so much is because most historians focus on the battle of Arnhem, where the commandos got captured? Also, have you been to Fort Eben Emael? What do you think to the accuracy of my map in my video on it? I tried to get it right, but I haven't been to the fort in person
    1
  23054. Will do, thanks! Don't forget to check out my other Battlestorm documentaries too :)
    1
  23055. Thanks Elmo! Glad you liked it :) I know what you mean. I mean, it's good to see the footage, but when the same footage is played over and over in different documentaries, with no context as to where exactly and when exactly that footage was taken... it kinda makes it a bit stale. You'll be happy to know my next BattleStorm doc is out on Tuesday :)
    1
  23056. I've listed the sources in the video description, and Kershaw's book is in there. I also highly recommend it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RRdWCyHpG8
    1
  23057. +Gwai Lo that's put a smile on my face, thank you! I don't think you could get more detailed than this in a documentary about a battle. If you want more depth, you'd have to read the books. Out of curiosity, would you be interested in a similar video on Fort Eben Emael? I only ask as I'm in the process in making one
    1
  23058. Thanks Paul :)
    1
  23059. True. But if Frost's 2nd Battalion could hold until the morning of the 5th day, why couldn't a battalion of the 82nd not hold for until the morning of the third?
    1
  23060. Thank you very much :) I've got two more Battlestorm documentaries out already. Here's the playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y And one more on Fort Eben Emael should be out in a few weeks. Plus, I'm working on one on Operation Brevity, which you can see a behind the scenes video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZyhAdOXxnA (I also go into how I do my research and also how I did the script for the Operation Market Garden video too)
    1
  23061. John, in fairness, the British never had to face an attack the size that US forces had to face during the Battle of the Bulge.
    1
  23062. Ok first off, I'm not a Montgomery fanboy, or even a fan. At this moment, I can only judge him by his performance during Market Garden, since I haven't studied his other battles in detail. That's part of the reason why I'm working my way through the Western Desert Campaign, so I can judge him against those that came before and after him. However, I don't agree with the common concensus that Market Garden was doomed before it started. Yes, the plan could have been better. Yes, lots of mistakes were made (by the Brits especially). And yes, Monty, Browning, and the RAF should take a lot of the blame for those mistakes. But was the plan doomed before it started? As I showed in the video, and as several historians have pointed out, there has been a blurring of the truth regarding the battle at Nijmegen. A simple mistake (not sending anyone to take the bridge straight away) caused a crucial 36 hour delay that resulted in the loss of the wider mission. That's not to say that the soldiers of the 82nd Airborne didn't do a very good job - their performance was excellent as shown by their willingness to cross a river in boats like marines - or that General Gavin was a bad commander, or even a bad man. No, all it says is that he made a mistake, which happened to be a big one. All I've done here is show that this plan could have worked as it was. Yes, the plan could have been better. Yes, Monty may still be a terrible commander or not. But to me, Monty's performance here is kinda irrelevant, since Nijmegen Bridge wasn't taken. Therefore his plan wasn't followed correctly... so we can't really blame him for that. We can blame him for a lot of other things, but not for that. I understand that because I'm from England, that I should have a bias towards British things. But beyond having an interest in battles involving British units or that affected Britain as a whole, I really don't have a bias towards individuals. Because I know that there are both good people and bad people living in the same country, or even down the same street. To favour anyone just because they're British is stupid. That's why I've called out poor performing British commanders before, and will continue to do so. Based on what everyone is telling me, I probably will eventually come to the conclusion that Monty is an idiot - and that's fine with me. If I have no trouble calling out Churchill, I'm pretty sure I can call out Monty. Basically, I'm trying to look at this as objectively as I possibly can. And whilst the plan could have been better, I don't think the plan is to blame here. A simple but big mistake by one commander caused a 36 hour delay at Nijmegen. That fact cannot be ignored.
    1
  23063. Glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  23064. Also, I am working on a new documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=FbLO5V7-o5o And I have several other BATTLESTORM documentaries out already if you haven't seen them https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  23065. Thanks! :)
    1
  23066. Glad you enjoyed it Andy :)
    1
  23067. I don't have access to the primary sources and am highly reliant on secondary sources, which are the books listed in the video description. I've read more than I listed but only referenced the ones that were useful in the making of this video. If I'd had access to the primary sources then I'd have used them, although I also can't read German or Dutch, which is another limiting factor. This is why I encourage you to do your own research. Use my videos as introductions to the topic or as ways of visualising the battles, not as some sort of definative truth. And whatever you do, don't take anything you see, read or hear at face value.
    1
  23068. I don't think they could plan it too far ahead, because "several months in advance" would put them prior to even the Normandy landings. It's interesting that they didn't use the 6th Airborne Division, and I'm not sure the reason as to why they didn't
    1
  23069. Thank you Jenks! It's absolutely a combination of factors. But the purpose of this was to see which one factor tipped the scales, and for me and others, Nijmegen seems to be the one... for now :)
    1
  23070. Thanks :)
    1
  23071. Two of your points (possibly a third) are related to the RAF. They refused to perform two drops each day and they didn't support the operation close air support once the troops were on the ground. Urquhart even says this was one of the big factors they lost the battle. This all comes down to a lack of planning before the battle. However, what I suggested was that even with the plan as it was, the battle could still have been won. It is not just about who's to blame, it's about realising that the operation wasn't doomed before it even began. This challenges the consensus put forth by most documentaries and the traditional historians who neglected the part played by the 82nd on day one. The point is that there was still a possibility that the plan could have worked. And whether you still think it was doomed from the start or not, you now know there's another side (or two) to the story. Perhaps I could redo the ending... some day. But "Battlestorm: Fort Eben Emael" doesn't animate itself ;)
    1
  23072. Hi peterpaul, thanks for commenting :) I've listed the sources I used in the video description. I don't know if you've read them? But either way, could you explain what's wrong with the information? How is it incorrect? Did I get it wrong, or did the sources I used get it wrong?
    1
  23073. Ah :) I guess this is a good example how easy it is to misread and misinterpret things
    1
  23074. If you have that view, fine. All I'll say is that I've listed my sources in the description and the events and ideas are shared by other historians, and people who were there at the time
    1
  23075. +Anton Broenink I'm working on a documentary for Fort Eben Emael 1940 at the minute. Should be out in a few weeks. Whilst there's evidence of raw recruits defeating highly trained paras, there's also evidence of raw recruits (989) being overwhelmed by a small force of paras (70). I haven't studied the battles you mentioned, however I suspect leadership plays it's part. The Germans in 1944 lead old men, young boys and or eyes and ears battalions, but their officers and generals were hardened veterans of a titanic conflict. Their leadership could be enough to stop a well trained force... which is what happened at Market Garden. So yes, I agree with what you're saying
    1
  23076. But the 101st didn't hold their bridge, and they didn't even take it. XXX Corps had to capture Nijmegen bridge, after a 36 hour delay caused by a poor decision to favour the Groesbeek Heights over the priority target - bridge
    1
  23077. Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed it! Just want to point out that Gavin's immediate superiors were Brereton (US, technically his actual superior, but possibly for the mission as well) and Browning (UK, and superior for the mission), not Montgomery. Interestingly, Browning takes most of the flak for the loss of the battle, and a question I want to answer is what role did Brereton have on this battle. I know he made some decisions that impacted the outcome of the battle, but don't know all the details. I'm actually planning on doing a video on this issue at some point in the future
    1
  23078. Browning can be blamed for a lot of the mistakes, and probably should share in Gavin's mistake if indeed it was him who approved his idea not to take the Nijmegen Bridge. I'm planning on doing a few follow up video where I take a look at Brownings performance during this operation... as well as some of the other generals and units.
    1
  23079. Thanks Scott, really glad you enjoyed it :) A Bridge Too Far is certainly a classic, heavily based on Urquhart's memoirs on the battle. Have you read It Never Snows in September? A bit of a heavier read compared to ABTF, but very good take on the battle from the German perspective. I was heavily reliant on it for the making of this documentary. As far as Operation Market Garden is concerned, It's definitely a combination of a lot of factors. I just wanted to highlight one factor as being the most important. You're right though, pushing an entire attack down one road isn't an effective strategy :) I don't teach military history, sadly. If someone wants to offer me a job teaching military history I'll gladly take it :) I did do a degree in History. But not a lot of people are hiring History graduates... Good suggestion about highlighting the roads etc when talking about them. I'll remember that when I'm doing my animating. Although it's less relevant now since I've progressed to 3D animation (see my Rommel doc) and can zoom in and focus on the area and things I'm talking about. Here's the BATTLESTORM playlist if you want to see the other docs I've done so far https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  23080. ODDBALL, the reason the 6 pdr was capable of taking out Tigers and StuGs and Panthers from the front, was because they actually received a new type of ammunition in 1944 that made it capable of taking on them from the front. Armour-Piercing, Discarding Sabot rounds (APDS). They were only available from mid 1944 and the 6 pdr was the first gun to receive it. The 17 pdrs began to receive their own APDS rounds later in September 1944, but I'm unsure if the British at Arnhem were supplied with them. John, the 6 pdr was only capable of taking out German tanks because of the APDS rounds. Prior to their introduction, the 6 pdr wasn't able to penetrate the frontal armour of Tigers and Panthers. And unless you know specifically about the introduction of APDS rounds, going off the caliber and the previous performance of the 6 pdr, it's understandable to conclude the 6 pdr wouldn't be capable. But here's the problem - from what I've read, US units were not supplied with APDS rounds in WW2 for their 57mm (same as 6 pdr just different designation). So they wouldn't be able to take on Tigers and Panthers from the front.
    1
  23081. +Anton Broenink really? Which part were you killed in the film? I think the film shouldn't be taken at face value. I've read Frost's memoirs and he said it (or parts of it at least) was fiction. I know the Soviets did use tank disant tactics during ww2 so I'm not sure
    1
  23082. Do you think the way he treated Sosabowski and the Polish was fair?
    1
  23083. That's a nice compliment, thank you. I actually stopped watching TV when I was at university to concentrate on hobbies like this
    1
  23084. Yeah, it's weird how its not really mentioned or just glossed over in a lot of accounts, and yet 36 hours is not a small delay. It almost feels like the bridge at Son which caused a 14 hour day was a bigger deal than the Nijmegen one. And yes, more videos like this coming soon. The next one should be either Battleaxe or the first episode of my Stalingrad documentary :)
    1
  23085. +Corcaigh Rebel thank you, some have joked that it's more like a lecture than a documentary because of the amount of detail - coining the term "lecturmentary"!
    1
  23086. +Anton Broenink true, just checked and the Zuiderzee became the IJsselmeer by then. My sources were wrong on this account. Apologies And having drawn the map by hand, I will admit it's not 100% accurate. It was the first one I drew and I think I got better at it... Let me know what you think about the other ones. Thanks for the feedback!
    1
  23087. +Anton Broenink yep. It was poor tactics if you ask me. The RAF need to take the blame for not landing the troops closer to the bridge, or doing two drops on the first day (which they could have done). Essentially, when the paras hit the ground, the whole force should have gone towards the bridge. Perhaps if this had happened, it would have been s different story. I've said it before but in my opinion Frost was the only British para battalion or brigade commander on the first day that got it right. The rest left a lot to be desired
    1
  23088. No worries, and I agree, it's certainly the battle I'm most interested in :)
    1
  23089. Thank you - glad you liked it :)
    1
  23090. Eyes and ears battalions were made up of people who had poor eyesight, or were deaf, or had other similar disabilities or ailments. Combat is confusing and scary as it is, but not being able to hear orders or shoot straight...? Coupled with the fact that these particular units hadn't existed the day before, didn't know each other and didn't know their commanders, had access to only basic small arms, and had little artillery and zero tank support, it's no wonder they were made into mincemeat by the elite paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne.
    1
  23091. I agree, except I think it was more Browning who made Sosabowski the scapegoat.
    1
  23092. Thank you :)
    1
  23093. Good points. The historians that say the battle was lost at Nijmegen argue that the 82nd did have enough troops spare to take the bridge on the first day, but that they were either not used efficiently, or no orders were given to Warren's unit (the one that eventually took the bridge). If you don't agree with that assessment, fair enough. But be mindful of the fact that there's enough evidence there to make the claim that was the reality. And thanks for the feedback :)
    1
  23094. Yeah the British did mess up at Arnhem. Their performance on the first day was shocking, and Urquhart must take a lot of the blame there. You're right to point out that if the British had taken Arnhem bridge before Graebner and 10th SS Panzer got across, then Nijmegen would have been a little different. I think that eventuality would only happen in the planning stages if the RAF would have agreed to drop nearer the bridge. I don't think Frost could have gotten to Arnhem bridge much quicker than he did, and Gough's recon unit got shot up in minutes. It's nice to image what would have happened if the British had dropped nearer Arnhem and secured the bridge, then Nijmegen had been taken, and XXX Corps would have been at Arnhem some time on day 3. I think the battle for Arnhem may have been a bloody one anyway with two SS Panzer Divisions there, but at least the tanks would have been across the Rhine. More paratroopers were available. The issue was there weren't enough transport aircraft to drop them on day 1, which meant they had to be dropped over several days. If the RAF had accepted closer landing zones OR had done two drops a day, the battle may have been different. I've not played those games, but for me Close Combat A Bridge Too Far does a good job of representing the battle :)
    1
  23095. +Anton Broenink then why didn't they do that in 1944?
    1
  23096. No worries! It's one thing to read it in text, but another to see it visually. I hope this helps a lot of people understand what actually happened :)
    1
  23097. By the same logic then, why land 1st Airborne to the West of Arnhem?
    1
  23098. I do think you're right to favour the German victory argument. The Germans fought well with both depleted and reserve units. Spindler and Zonnenstahl especially played a vital part during this battle. But whilst the 82nd didn't have all it's units, it also didn't face anything substantial to the East on the first day. Also, a battalion was later sent towards Nijmegen road bridge that very same day, so they clearly had enough units on the first day to both defend Groesbeek, and take their main objective. The question is, why didn't they?
    1
  23099. Yes, and this is mainly because of the RAF refusing to land the troops closer to Arnhem because of supposed heavy AA fire. It also meant the Germans were able to block the British advance to Arnhem, with only Frost's force getting through to the bridge. The impact this had was massive for the whole of the operation. In reality, Browning or Montgomery should have insisted on closer landing zones. And these is no excuse for not doing because the original plan said the Polish Brigade would land south of Arnhem anyway. So if they could land the Polish there, why couldn't they land the British there on day 1?
    1
  23100. Hi John, I haven't considered them because I'm not great on Sea Battles. I have decided to do a battle that a lot of US viewers will like though so stick around because I'm going to announce it soon :)
    1
  23101. The British didn't realise they were V2 operators, which is why they survived
    1
  23102. Yes :) funny story. I cut my own hair... and forgot to put the accessory on to set the length of hair... so had no choice but to go bald for a bit :D
    1
  23103. As I said on Twitter, they wouldn't have needed marines on day 4 if the 82nd had taken the bridge on day 1
    1
  23104. Or just dropping an 82nd Battalion on the north side of Nijmegen bridge would have been more realistic since there weren't enough transport planes on day 1, and the 82nd didn't need several units dug in at Groesbeek
    1
  23105. And thank you for watching! I've made more since this and am working on another BIGGER battle this time... https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNSNgGzaledgHIszXQVDreX-ZC1Xejf9Y
    1
  23106. ODDBALL SOK General Gavin himself said that the US paras kissed the tanks, as do a few others. Now, I don't know, I wasn't there. And as I said, I'm not 100% convinced that they literally kissed the tank. It's probably an exaggeration to express how happy they were that the tanks had got to them. Maybe one of them did it as a bit of a joke, or to exaggerate the feeling he felt for being relieved. Maybe they said "thank god you're hear, I could kiss your tank" or something along those lines and it got embelished. I don't know. But when several people who were there say it happened, there must be an element of truth to it - even if that truth is skewed. Honestly, I'm not convinced that a handful of tanks and infantry could have pushed to Arnhem that evening. Elst was occupied. The island wasn't easy terrain. And it wouldn't have taken much to delay them. Besides, if they had raced off and a German unit had recaptured the northern end of Nijmegen bridge, what then? Their purpose was to secure the bridgehead. That is what they did. Your point about the Son bridge - I get it. I too think that XXX Corps should have had a Plan B in case the bridges were blown or not captured. However, something to bear in mind is that Son bridge was over a canal. Nijmegen bridge was over a major river. That's a significant difference. Building a bailey bridge across the Waal river may not have been as easy or even possible (I'm not sure, I'm not an engineer). I can imagine it would have taken longer to get that set up, especially when the Germans still occupied the area and could have laid fire upon the engineers.
    1
  23107. Peorhum I was responding to your comment directly after mine, but by the time I got around to sending it, several comments had been made in the meantime!
    1
  23108. Good to hear! My new one on Battleaxe has just come out. You seen it?
    1
  23109. Agreed :)
    1
  23110. I'm glad you enjoyed it :)
    1
  23111. Interesting. It could be a possible reason :) that theory hasn't been made clear in the sources used. He definitely receives criticism for taking gliders from the British sector and for dropping into the Nijmegen area. And, Browning's role in the battle after it got started isn't clear either. But it's certainly a possibility
    1
  23112. +Nikodem Dyzma I can't comment on your other points (except that Wavell wasn't able to defeat Rommel, although O'Connor may have been able to) as I haven't done sufficient research, but I disagree with your point on the market garden plan. The plan was not as "stupid" or "reckless" as you claim it to be. Watch the entirety of this video and read the sources in the description for a complete understanding of this battle. And just so we're clear, I'm not defending Monty. One reason for me slowly making my BattleStorm videos on the whole of the North African Campaign and beyond is so that I can fully understand what came before Monty and can judge him appropriately when I look at the rest of the Italian and Western front battles. But what I am saying is that you need to do more research on a topic before you come to unsupported conclusions. The Market Garden plan wasn't rotten, and it could have succeeded had the bridge at Nijmegen been captured on day 1 which was part of the original plans.
    1
  23113. I'm glad you liked it :)
    1
  23114. Thanks very much! I wouldn't call it totally unbiased as I was relying on what historians said, although I did try my best to present the facts before making a judgement at the end
    1
  23115. +Svenpaa Magnus Novus no worries, your exams are more important! Looking forward to your feedback though :)
    1
  23116. By "commandos" do you mean that they were dropped from the air as well, or that they met up with them on the ground? I know that Dutch resistance fighters fought with the British at Arnhem, but none of my sources mentioned commandos? And yes, the RAF didn't support until the final days. The RAF didn't do too well during this operation.
    1
  23117. ***** I won't deny that
    1
  23118. I do think the RAF should have dropped the paras nearer the bridge, regardless of the AA guns. The casualties they would have taken wouldn't have been as many as 1st Airborne took later
    1
  23119. Don't worry, your secret's safe with me!
    1
  23120. What about cash in hand, which as many have stated, is a huge portion of their income and isn't included in the "official" salary numbers? Also, most of what you listed, including your accountant, can be written off the tax.
    1
  23121. I hate to ask... but are you in a decent job? Or is it a case of "the debt will get wiped in 30 years"?
    1
  23122. You won't gain any connections in 95% of the universities, and by "life experience" you mean partying, which you can do at the weekends anyway if that's your thing. So no, it's not worth it.
    1
  23123. Why would I want to fix it? Even if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to do so.
    1
  23124. Except I did assume uni guy got the job immediately.
    1
  23125. The official values for trade professions is definitely lower than their real income due to cash-in-hand jobs, which I absolutely encourage. Lecturers don't have that luxury, so their salary is accurate.
    1
  23126. @Merry Christmas - if you've worked in any position of authority or management, you know full well that there's no "privilege" in such roles. They're incredibly stressful and there's a lot of responsibility involved, which is why they pay more than the lower ranks - because they're not easy. Senior officers would absolutely get tired or fatigued.
    1
  23127. "What dose a "meem" prove, that you can't ?" The meme shows the illogical thinking in the Socialist question "but who's going to build the roads!?" Yes, you've shown that road-building isn't a simple thing. Great. The point is that it doesn't have to be done by the central State. I don't think inefficient politicians and bureaucrats can build and maintain roads as well as the people who's business it is to build and maintain roads. Even just in terms of monetary value, the private sector is more efficient than the public sector because when you pay the private sector for a service you get the service. When you pay the public sector for a service, you get get the service AFTER the politicians, bureaucrats and taxman take their slice out of the money you gave to them. And that's assuming they do a good job of road building and maintenance, which the central States don't do. I would encourage you to read or listen to the audio book of Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt to at least understand the basics.
    1
  23128. "When did you last pay for the ENTIRE road you drove on, TIK?" https://i0.wp.com/beinglibertarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/government-vs-companies-who-will-build-roads.jpg?resize=600%2C706&ssl=1 "When was the last time you offered to PERSONALLY pay you countries (the whole U.Ks) international debt?" For starters, it's not MY country. It's 'public', not 'private'. I don't own it, and I don't care for it. If this State can't pay its debts, it should be abolished before it steals more money from me or others https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y Secondly, I'm against debt in all forms. I personally don't owe a single penny of debt because I'm good with money. That's why I'm against the idea of government in the first place because all government spending is consumption of resources that have alternative uses. This is why the private individual is far superior to the public collective debt State. "What was the name of the School you built for your own Children's use?" It took me years to undo the damage done in our 'public' 'education' 'system', and I'm not quite sure I've fully purged myself of all the poison they injected me with. That's why I would encourage you not to send your children to the miseducation prisons. I would encourage you to home school them, or seek private tuition. Alternatively, don't educate them at all, and let them figure things out on their own. At the very least, they won't be discouraged to learn as I was in school.
    1
  23129. "@TIK - So, Taxmen are thieves now?" Pay up or else - sounds like thievery to me "I can fell the " L " word coming on ...." What's the L word?
    1
  23130. I'm not "Tory"/CONservative. Don't know why you think I am, Jim. But no, if I don't believe in thieves, then I don't believe in taxmen or people who live off the money stolen by the taxman.
    1
  23131. As to your last points - I don't think you're an "idiot" or anything else like that. In fact, I see you as I see myself at a younger age - miseducated by my teachers, misguided by the beliefs of others into believing that Socialism was the future... As Morpheus offered Neo two pills in the Matrix, I now offer you the same two pills. If you take the blue pill, you'll dismiss me as a 'flat earther' and continue to believe what you believe now, living in the comfort of your simulated reality. If you take the red pill, you'll see the world for what it truly is. Take the damn red pill The effects of minimum wage https://youtu.be/0fsVI3EmUnQ (not my video) Free Market health care vs State health care https://youtu.be/0uPdkhMVdMQ (not my video) State Education vs non-State education https://youtu.be/gOJiayZoNDI (not my video) Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson audiobook https://youtu.be/eyIfEpNfU2U (not my video) And the PDF book http://leeconomics.com/Literature/Henry%20Hazlitt%20Economics%20in%20One%20Lesson.pdf What Causes a Recession or Depression https://youtu.be/X3L0_pjRdcs (my video) Two other videos (not mine) explaining the same idea (Austrian Business Cycle Theory) https://youtu.be/VYdF0N9hmxc and https://youtu.be/AlfzOPFfIBA Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y (my video) National Socialism | Destroying the Denialist Counter Arguments https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 (my video) FASCISM DEFINED | The Difference between Fascism and National Socialism https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko (my video)
    1
  23132. "Please note I had NO problems with your shocking reveal of Marx's racism. I applaud it. Truth is what I care about." Right. We're in agreement then. - "not ideological BS whether religious or secular." Exactly, neither am I. That's why I'm calling out the ideologues for distorting history and pointing out where they've gone wrong. The Marxists at the time claimed Hitler was a Socialist, and a lot of people still buy into this distorted view of reality. I point this out, provide you with a TON of evidence as to why this is the case, and you're claiming I'm a "flat earther". Well, I'm sorry that the evidence supports what I'm saying and doesn't support what you're saying, but I'm going to need more than "you're wrong" to convince me that the argument I've presented is wrong. - "Since the arrival of Clintonism (Fake 'Left' ala Bloomberg, Disney, MSM 'woke' BS and his $ 40 BILLION investment in China (or Blairism) we now have a world run by the now unbounded by anti trust laws, tycoons with international law and the power of the voter now irrelevant. (No more Trumps or Brexits to be allowed. The voters can vote for the winners of the Euro vision song contest. not economic questions as the Deutsche banks head stated recently. Like the now ignored UN or the ignored Stalinist trial of Assange. the innocent NOT rapist. Oligarchy SUCKS." Again, we're in agreement. I'm against ALL of these things you outlined here, except the idea that the UN is being "ignored" because it quite clearly is in charge https://youtu.be/RhFBzsEErvQ - "You seem to have no idea of balance and seem to forget economics is about SUPPLY AND DEMAND and that it should exist for the benefit of society alone not just the few rich or itself." But that's exactly what I'm advocating. I'm saying that the individuals in the economy (the poor, the downtrodden, the small business and corner shop owners) are getting screwed by the rich and the "society" (State) that steals their wealth through the power of taxation and inflation. You on the other hand are advocating that the State (which is the cause of the problem) should be the solution to the problem that it itself causes. And I understand why - that was how I used to see it too. But in reality, the State is the cause of the problem, not the solution. And this is why I'm recommending that people read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt, and "What has the Government Done to Our Money?" by Murray Rothbard, because these books spell out why the problem (the State) isn't the solution to the problem (the State). - "A hammer exists as a tool we built to serve us, not we serving the hammer. Poor citizens cannot buy things and with no demand supply becomes superfluous." Right, except the issue isn't that there's not enough currency. The issue is that the State is extracting the wealth and resources of society through the power of taxation and inflation, and then essentially wasting that wealth and resources on projects that nobody wants or needs. This is, as Thomas Sowell points out in "Basic Economics" and as Henry Hazlitt explains in "Economics in One Lesson", one of the fallacies of basic economics - that the public sector is somehow more efficient than the private sector. - "I know you are intelligent and capable of great analysis when you take leave of your ideological prism. I would love a chat. I am not your enemy TIK. We can both learn things from each other. I have NOT attacked your person, just your ideology and its lack of nuance, something not lacking in your areas of excellence." Is looking at both sides of the argument, and then choosing the correct answer classed as an "ideology"? If so, then I'm guilty as charged. But I don't see how you can call an ex-Socialist who realized the true nature of Socialism (thanks to reading Mein Kampf, a primary source, as well as others), and then decided to really dive into the literature, and realized that the Chicago and Austrian Schools of Economics were way more correct than the Marxist or Keynesian or MMT schools, and that I had been completely tricked and lied to by my professors and teachers etc... I don't see how you can call me an "ideologue". Just like in EVERY video I've ever made - I look at all sides and go with the best argument. Therefore, I'm going with the Austrian argument. The truth is NOT an ideology. - "I don't follow any party, any movement nor do I get anything out of this other than my thirst for truth and concern for the future of the society the young must live in. Like my child and his friends." Exactly, and I'm in full agreement here. I don't follow and party or movement. The Austrian School is not a movement. Saying that 2+2=4 isn't an "ideology", and the people standing by the idea that 2+2=4 aren't "ideologues". Only the people who's ideology says they must worship the State (sometimes referred to as "the Cathedral") and who look to this hierarchy of stupidity as somehow the saviour for all our worries, despite the historical and empirical evidence and logic-based arguments that confirm that state control of the economy completely ruins the economy, are ideologues. - "Remember East Germany was NOT the 'German Democratic Republic, (it was a soviet satellite satrapy)" Except it was Democratic. Demos kratus ("people rule"). And as I've shown in my Public vs Private video - the 'people' are the 'public', and the 'public' is the 'State'. So "Democracy" is "State Rule". That's why when politicians say "we're doing this for the people", what they really mean is that they're doing it for the State. It's a Leftist word-game. It's an religious-ideology that worships the State. That's why North Korea can call itself a democracy, because it is one. Hitler also called for a "People's State" (a democracy). As did the Fascists like Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile. Again, watch my Public vs Private video to understand what the words mean https://youtu.be/ksAqr4lLA_Y And watch my recent video explaining what Fascism is - I not only define it, but I provide you with the sources to back up what I'm saying here https://youtu.be/qdY_IMZH2Ko - "And no Hitler was NOT a socialist in an significant sense but THE Anti Communist leader of Europe (which is why he got so much non German support btw) even if of course there were some elements of socialism as in ANY modern military state by REQUIRMENT." He nationalized the industries under a policy called Gleichschaltung (may have misspelled that, but it means "synchronization", as in - bringing everything into the hands of the state). He nationalized the trade unions into the State trade union (the DAF) and crushed those that refused to nationalize. He promoted feminist state women's organizations, state youth organizations, state work schemes, price controls, wage controls, massive amounts of state regulations and welfare schemes, his taxation policy was very "progressive" to say the least, and he had a Central State Bank that was practicing proto-Keynesian currency-printing policies. And I've outlined all this and more in my Hitler's Socialism video (107 sources, 350 direct references, notes, quotes, you name it) https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8 And yes, he was anti-Communist. I explained this in the video above. But to quote Zitelmann - “Contrary to the accepted Marxist interpretation, Hitler was not an opponent of Marxism and did not want to destroy it because he was ‘inimical to labour’ but because he was caught up in the insane idea that Marxism was an instrument of the Jews for the achievement of world domination, and above all because he rejected internationalism, ‘pacifism’ and the negation of the ‘personality principle’ by Marxism.” - Zitelmann, “Hitler: The Policies of Seduction,” P137-138. - "Bismarck was NOT a socialist either but he created the worlds first modern welfare. Just as I learn from you, you could learn from me on this and some other things TIK that I have deep knowledge of just as you do in those areas you have studied." Actually, I studied the Bismarck period in college, and while I wouldn't say Bismarck was a socialist, I would say that he allied with the Socialists in order to do what he wanted to do at one particular time (and then abandoned them when it became inconvenient). But as you said, I have studied the Hitler's Socialism thing for years now. It took me 18 months to make the 5 hour Hitler's Socialism video. I've done more research since then, and have more recently done videos on Karl Marx and Mussolini's Fascism for a reason - because I've studied it. What I'm saying to you is that THE EVIDENCE supports what I'm saying, and I have laid it all out for you. There's a reason the Hitler's Socialism video is 5 hours - yes, I have to explain things carefully so that everyone can follow along, but the whole thing is the length that it is because I provide you with a TON of evidence that supports the idea that Hitler was a Socialist. You can ignore it and call me an ideologue all day long, but that won't change my mind. I go where the evidence takes me, and right now the arguments I've presented in that (and the Public vs Private video, or the Fascism Defined video) remain unrefuted. And I suspect they will remain unrefuted because even the people who really wish Hitler wasn't a Socialist get through those videos and begrudgingly admit that I've done my homework and have got a solid case.
    1
  23133. Which battles have I covered where there's been Allied or Soviet war crimes that I haven't mentioned? I've mentioned Soviet crimes in several videos - Holodomor, Lenin's Terror, and Stalin's Terror (I've done a video on the Purges). So I'm not sure why you think I'm defending the Soviet side. That's the wrong way to look at it. I've talked about the horrors of Marxist-Socialism quite openly in my videos on Hitler's Socialism. The two Socialisms are just as bad as each other. And I've just covered an Allied war crime in this video, even though it was skipping ahead in the timeline (I'm only just into 1942 with the North African Campaign). I don't see what your problem is.
    1
  23134. It's down to God to judge me, not you. A honest and reliable God won't be offended by me quoting someone else saying a naughty word. YouTube on the other hand is neither honest, reliable nor a God, which is why they do get offended by naughty words. I don't fear YouTube - but I don't have respect for them either for their actions or their censorship of history. Clearly the right thing to do is be honest and not distort history. YouTube can't understand that, but hopefully God can.
    1
  23135. I could be wrong, but YouTube seems to class "goddamned" as okay. Personally I would rather just say everything as it is rather than censor it.
    1
  23136. Yes, if he has 30 rounds in the magazine, and shot 36 people, that's pretty good. Obviously bullets can go through people, but this is still impressive.
    1
  23137. Good suggestion, thank you! In the meantime, I sort of did this in a previous video (although not to the extent you're suggesting) where I talked about whether the Soviet economy ever recovered from WW2 https://youtu.be/kPVo9w79D6w
    1
  23138. YouTube, Patreon and SubscribeStar are my only sources of revenue. I can't really give you career advice regarding history because this is the only history-related job I've ever had. What I can say is that I lost faith in my third year too. Still came out with a 2:1 degree, but I was glad when I finally got out. The point is you're not the only one who lost faith in the idea of getting a degree during the course. If you were going to college, I would have advised that you didn't because it's not worth the debt. But now you're two thirds of the way through it, giving up may not be the right move... I don't know your circumstances, but considering that you're probably in a lot of debt for your first two years already, you may want to finish what you started (even if it gets you into more debt). And given the state of the market as a result of government financial and monetary control and manipulations, the job market is a complete disaster right now. So you may struggle to find a full time job anyway. If you're going to jump ship, find a job first before you do. If you're going to stay the course, in theory the job market may be better in a year's time... Maybe... But at least you'll have a degree by then.
    1
  23139. "This show is nothing but liberalistik/kommunistist hogwash that should be censored by YouTube as fakenews propaganda." Except I'm about as anti-Communist as you can get https://youtu.be/rZh01xRO_Qg
    1
  23140. The source said "clip", so I just used that. Honestly, I didn't notice and it didn't register in my head that it was the incorrect term.
    1
  23141. I've got that book and used it for this video.
    1
  23142. I don't know much about either, I was just going off what Wikipedia says. "...his book The Essence of Christianity, which provided a critique of Christianity that strongly influenced generations of later thinkers, including Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Friedrich Engels, Mikhail Bakunin, Richard Wagner, Frederick Douglass and Friedrich Nietzsche." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Feuerbach
    1
  23143. What do you mean? None of my thumbnails were AI-generated.
    1
  23144. Capitalism and free markets are not the same thing. We currently live in a Capitalist world, but we don't have a free market. Knowing that a calculator works is not an ideological stance. Well, knowing that free markets work is not an ideological stance. The free market is just allows economic calculations.
    1
  23145. Half the sources are not wikipedia. Those points that are reliant on wikipedia are the ones that are related to topics I've not covered yet, but intend to do so at some point. Your second point is valid. Your third point isn't clear. Can you rewrite it so that clearly communicates the point you're trying to make? We don't live in a "capitalist" world, so your fourth point is invalid. Your fifth point on the freemasons is silly. I do want to research the freemasons, but the topic wasn't relevant until now. I understand that Hitler was anti-mason, but that doesn't mean his ideology didn't originate from freemasonry, which it did. Your seventh point is a meaningless statement. Your eighth point is not true since Judaism is on the map. However, since I'm not a believer in the pseudo-scientific religion of "racism", your point is irrelevent. Your final point is also meaningless.
    1
  23146. Peter Schiff's father introduced him to Austrian Economics. He is an Austrian, even if he disagrees with Bitcoin.
    1
  23147. I don't know much about either, I was just going off what Wikipedia says. "...his book The Essence of Christianity, which provided a critique of Christianity that strongly influenced generations of later thinkers, including Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Friedrich Engels, Mikhail Bakunin, Richard Wagner, Frederick Douglass and Friedrich Nietzsche." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Feuerbach
    1
  23148. They believe in the Great Architect of the Universe. They are a religion or a cult.
    1
  23149. Guido von List comes before Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels. And if you look, I put Liebenfels on the map, between List and Sebottendorf.
    1
  23150. "Nazis destroyed all worker unions and movements." No they didn't - start listening! Here's my video titled “But Hitler Crushed the Trade Unions!” - https://youtu.be/wXIoVEKIpMg - "implemented extremely libertarian syndicalist trade policies." Libertarian or syndicalist - pick one. Here's my video titled "“Hitler privatized the industries” is ridiculously misleading" - https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY - "Ie letting wealthy elites own national recources, while feeding endless amount of free labour to their factories etc." No they didn't. There's an entire book by Götz Aly titled "Hitler's Beneficiaries" which shows you that they were funnelling the wealth to the poor. There are so many other sources too... Just stop listening to what REDDIT says and actually listen to what I'm saying. - "Brother. I love your content, but James lindsey have rotten your brain" There's not a single reference to James Lindsey in this video.
    1
  23151. Did you write this for me? Or was this addressed to someone else? I don't understand why you felt the need to write this based on what I said in the video.
    1
  23152. Hi, thank you for subscribing! I intend to look more into Spaventa and so on. By Stirner, I assume you mean Max Stirner?
    1
  23153. Das ist nicht richtig. I'm studying the Battle of Stalingrad for a future Battlestorm documentary. Therefore I want the absolute truth so that I can present the facts and keep that series as super-accurate and as filthy-details as possible.
    1
  23154. Yes, if only Manstein hadn't persuaded Hitler to have Sixth Army stand its ground. They could have broken out straight away, way before that point. They probably wouldn't have needed a relieving force to do this either if they'd done it in November. But no, Manstein was confident he could get them out, and he failed.
    1
  23155. Based on the latest research of top historians. As opposed to believing everything a German general said without question.
    1
  23156. Thanks, glad you're enjoying them :)
    1
  23157. Except, Manstein helped persuade Hitler to stand fast in the first place. Then, when Paulus asked Manstein over and over for the order to breakout, Manstein never gave it.
    1
  23158. Exactly. But we now know Manstein was lying, and yet nobody cares because Manstein survived the war with his reputation intact and Paulus didn't.
    1
  23159. Manstein only enters the picture after the Uranus Counteroffensive. But he's responsible for the fate of 6th Army after that offensive, considering he messed up big time. Plus, he was lying about the events in his memoirs.
    1
  23160. What does that even mean? If I was doing popular histories, I wouldn't be creating videos on the North African Campaign, or obscure battles like Bruneval. And also, historians are the ones who do history - not generals. Why? Because as this video shows, generals don't always tell the truth.
    1
  23161. Thanks!!!
    1
  23162. No worries, although I can't promise I'll respond so quickly next time :) I'm only doing shorter videos at the moment because time is limited and I'm concentrating on Battlestorm Operation Crusader, which may end up being my longest video so far. Plus, I'm filling some gaps and testing the waters for the big Stalingrad video
    1
  23163. Hope it was worth it!
    1
  23164. Not studied them specifically, but apparently he did well at Sevastopol/Crimea and Third Battle of Kharkov. I've also heard he broke out an encirclement in 1944, and that he did well there, but I don't even know the name of that one. According to Glantz's lecture, he wasn't lying at Kursk - he genuinely didn't know what was out there behind Soviet lines.
    1
  23165. Any topics in particular?
    1
  23166. But it does not order him to breakout, and this is assuming what Manstein wrote in his memoirs is correct. It's quite complicated to explain without going into a lot of details (which would take forever and a day to do), but to put it simply - Manstein does not order Paulus to break out and instead (on the 19th of December) appeals for him to start a breakout (sort of) because he was unwilling to defy Hitler's orders. The problem is, several factors get in the way, and Paulus is not convinced (rightly so) that he was in a position to breakout further than 20kms to meet up with Manstein (who was much further away than that). By the time all this happens, the Soviets then move in 2nd Guards Army into the area and any hope of a breakout or relief of 6th Army is doomed. What you have to remember is that all Paulus and Manstein are trying to do is link up. It is a relief attempt, not a retreat attempt. And with this in mind, Paulus is constantly being reassured that Manstein will get to him by Manstein, and this continues until late December, when it was too late for Paulus to attempt a breakout.
    1
  23167. Rewriting history is what historians do as I explain in this other video of mine https://youtu.be/ruqt8uv__18 and in the history theory video that's coming out tomorrow
    1
  23168. Nope
    1
  23169. I said that. Two years after Paulus's release (1953), Manstein published his memoirs (1955).
    1
  23170. Manstein said in his memoirs that he sent a message saying Paulus should prepare for the breakout. You're assuming that what Manstein wrote in his memoirs is even close to the message he actually sent Paulus. The reality was, he never actually gave the order because he wasn't willing to go against the Führer.
    1
  23171. *Nats
    1
  23172. Dear Driveway Nuts, thank you, love TIK
    1
  23173. But he was being told that they were going to break through to him and that they would resupply him, by Manstein of all people, as well as Hitler and the Luftwaffe. Why would he have an incentive to break out?
    1
  23174. Thanks, and sorry for late reply! I'm obviously very grateful for the support I get off Patreon, and for every viewer on YouTube. And, since I love researching and making these videos, if I can make it sustainable I'd happily go more-than full-time on YouTube (as in, 80 hour work weeks, minimum, since I'm putting that in now on my weeks off work). But no, financially it's not sustainable as it stands. Books aren't cheap and the Patreon support is going on them, while the little I earn off YouTube directly barely pays for my internet bill and maybe a couple books a month. I really need Patreon support if this was ever to become a viable thing. But the current issue (apart from money) is time. The only reason these videos are short, and have been 'rushed' is because of a lack of time to do the research, scriptwriting, graphics, and editing. Getting enough support on Patreon to go full-time would solve all the issues I'm currently facing, and the positive impact on the channel would be enormous.
    1
  23175. Du bist falsch.
    1
  23176. I don't know many details, but one day I hope to study it because I am interested in the fate of Poland in WW2.
    1
  23177. Is this a civ2 reference or something?
    1
  23178. Hahaha
    1
  23179. That's just the opinion of one general written years after the war. It's fine, but not conclusive either way.
    1
  23180. Are you sure it wasn't because he'd increased social mobility and was getting rid of the old aristocratic Prussian generals and replacing them with officers from the lower classes?
    1
  23181. "Hitler probably didn't like his aristocratic generals because they probably didn't like him" And why didn't they like him?
    1
  23182. Thanks!
    1
  23183. I can read better than write it, but sentence structure is killing me. Recognizing even simple speech when it's normal/fast is also beyond my abilities right now. And I can't afford to spend much time on it at the moment either, so I'm not learning particularly fast :(
    1
  23184. I see that as part of the German unification wars rather than as part of the World Wars.
    1
  23185. Maybe they could equate it to the Holodomor, but to say it was an industrial-scale mass-killing is a bit much. Plus, it had fewer victims. And also, this is a typical Holocaust-denier-argument.
    1
  23186. I do intend to make video(s) about Greece at some point. As I mentioned in the video, one of the Battlestorms I was going to cover a while back was Crete, and I do want to make a separate video on the suffering of Greece during the war. Not sure when it will be, or if I'll just include it in with videos on the wider Nazi atrocities, but I will. FYI, I had a holiday in Cephalonia when they were shooting the film Captain Corelli's Mandolin. I was about 11 at the time or something. Saw part of the set, but never saw the film. Lovely island though.
    1
  23187. “Control over domestic resources was paralleled by centralized control over imports. Both countries [Nazi and Soviet] controlled and restricted international trade.” Temin, P580 "Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity. The Nazis reorganized industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms’ activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises. The pre-existing tendency to form cartels was encouraged to eliminate competition that would destabilize prices.” Temin, P582-583 “The Soviets had made a similar move in the 1920s. Faced with a scarcity of administrative personnel, the state encouraged enterprises to combine into trusts and trusts to combine into syndicates. These large units continued into the 1930s where they were utilized to bridge the gap between overall plans and actual production.” Temin, P583 "“... this difference was not important to many decisions. The incentives for managers - both positive and negative - were very similar in the two countries. Consequently, their responses to the [Four or Five Year] plans were also similar. In neither case did the managers set the goals of the plans.” Temin, P590-591 “Like Hitler, Backe saw the mission of National Socialism as being the supersession of the rotten rule of the bourgeoisie. Far from being impractical, Backe’s ideology provided a grand historical rationale for the extreme protectionism already implemented by the nationalist agrarians. Far from being backward looking, Backe’s vision assigned to National Socialism the mission of achieving a reconciliations of the unresolved contradictions of nineteenth-century liberalism. It was not National Socialism but the Victorian ideology of the free market that was the outdated relic of a bygone era. After the economic disasters of the early 1930s there was no good reason to cling to such a dangerous archaic doctrine. The future belonged to a new system of economic organization capable of ensuring both the security of the national food supply and the maintenance of a healthy farming community as the source of racial vitality.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P174 [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P179-180] Because Germany didn’t have enough land to feed her population, both Backe and Hitler (and others) wanted to expand eastwards. The local populations were to be impacted by German ‘rearrangement’. “Those left in place were to serve as slave labour on German settler farms. The SS was to be the sword and shield of this settler movement.” On the 26th of September 1933, Darré and Backe created the “Erbhof” law. [Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182] “For the purpose of protecting the peasantry as the ‘Blood Source of the German People’, the law proposed to create a new category of farm, the Erbhof (hereditary farm), protected by debt, insulated from market forces and passed down from generation to generation within racially pure peasant families. The law applied to all farms that were sufficient in size to provide a German family with an adequate standard of living (an Achernahrung, later defined as a minimum of c. 7.5 hectares), but did not exceed 125 hectares.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182 “The term ‘peasant’ (Bauer) was henceforth defined as an honorary title, reserved for those registered on the Role. Those not entered in the Erbhofrolle were henceforth to be referred to merely as ‘farmers’ (Landwirte). Entry in the Rolle protected the Erbhof for ever against the nightmare of repossession. By the same token, it also imposed constraints. Erbhoefe could not be sold. Nor could they be used as security against mortgages. Farms registered as Erbhoefe were thus removed from the free disposal of their immediate owners. Regardless of existing arrangements between spouses, Erbhoefe were to have a single, preferably male, owner who was required to document his line of descent, at least as far back as 1800, the same requirements as for civil servants. ‘Peasants’ were to be of German or ‘similar stock’ (Stammesgleich), a provision that excluded Jews, or anyone of partial Jewish descent.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P182-183 “The line of inheritance was now fixed in law.” P183 [clearly not free-market capitalism] “Coupled with this extraordinary intervention in the property rights of German peasants was an equally drastic programme of debt reduction. Backe and Darré proposed that the Erbhof farmers should assume collective responsibility for each other’s debts. The debts of all Erbhoefe, variously estimated at between 6 and 9 billion Reichsmarks, were to be transferred to the Rentenbank Kreditanstalt, a state-sponsored mortgage bank. The Rentenbank would repay the original creditors with interest ranging between 2 and 4 per cent depending on the security of the original loan. ” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P183 [no more personal debt for these farmers, but collective debt] Hitler approved of this plan, despite opposition from Junkers, some peasants and Schacht (as well as others). He then decided that it would go through, after negotiations. P184. Unfortunately for Darré and Schacht, they had to shelve the debt-relief idea and come up with a compromise ‘grant’ scheme instead for peasants who were in debt. P185 They also had to relax the inheritance elements of the law to appease the peasants. P185-186 Rate of enrollment for those farms that fitted the bill was high. It wasn’t enough to ‘transform the structure of land ownership in Germany.” P186 But it did have an impact. “It consolidated a group of farms whose average size nationally was just less than 20 hectares, a figure that was soon to be defined as the ideal size for efficient family farming in the new order of German agriculture.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186 “The second fundamental step taken by Darré and Backe in the autumn of 1933 was the organization of the Reichsnaehrstand (RNS). It is not too much to say that the setting up of this organization and its associated system of price and production controls marked the end of the free market for agricultural produce in Germany. Agriculture and food production, which until the mid-nineteenth century had been overwhelmingly [-P187] the most important part of the German economy and which still in the 1930s constituted a very significant element of national product, were removed from the influence of market forces. As Backe clearly articulated even before 1933, the mechanism of price-setting was the key. The RNS made use of prices to regulate production.” - Tooze's Wages of Destruction P186-187 Other counter arguments include Ernst Rohm’s Putsch, where people will say that the Nazis killed socialists. However, this is actually an example of state control, since it is the state cracking down on private businesses and organizations.The ‘socialists’ that Hitler killed were Ernst Röhm and his associates. These were a small number of (1,000) of socialists out of the large SA (3,000,000 strong) who were supposedly planning a coup on Hitler. This was in-fighting within the Party, rather than ideological opponents. Another counterargument is that Hitler got rid of trade unions. And, at first, getting rid of trade unions looks like an example of getting rid of socialism. But is this really the case? What is a trade union? A trade union is an organization (usually Marxist in nature) of workers (class) who are opposing the employer (class). Since trade unions are based on class and not race, they’re an example of Marxism within capitalism. Hitler replaces the Marxist (class) trade unions with the racial-state’s “German Labour Front” (DAF). The state is now in control of the workers - a sign of socialism. Since trade unions (private organizations) are no longer around, this is a sign of anti-capitalism, as well as anti-Marxism. It also misses the point that Lenin was against trade unions as well, despite being a Marxist-socialist. So, with the above quotes, we can see that private property was abolished and that the capitalist businessmen were in trouble. They were not, as some claim, "supporting Hitler" and ruling the roost. They were under the socialist thumb. Similarly we have a heavy-state involvement in land reform in order to ‘socialize’ it. We also have price controls and high taxes restricting any effective ‘capitalism’ that may have been going on in the economy. All this is in addition to the fact that Hitler had restricted Germany’s trade with the world (“international-Jewish-finance” as he called it), severely limiting capitalism. We have the destruction of trade unions (both capitalist and Marxist in nature) and their replacement with the state. Therefore, what we have here is a planned socialist economy, not capitalism. Sources - Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2597802?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. (Accessed 04/10/2018) https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung http://home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php
    1
  23188. Nope, I'll bite. How exactly is that an oxymoron?
    1
  23189. That sounds interesting - let me know!
    1
  23190. Great minds think alike! I actually thought of that :) I have a whiteboard, but nothing to pin it too to keep it stable at the moment.
    1
  23191. But that's not a source. Where did they get their information from? Where's their references/bibliography? It looks like a news site.
    1
  23192. Can you provide me with your source? Not that I disagree with you, I just need sources since so little has actually been written on this topic and I need every source I can find.
    1
  23193. "Time to get naked!" lol I've finished the script for Crusader a couple days ago. It's 75,423 words long. Think about that ;)
    1
  23194. Hey Afflickted, glad you were satisfied with them! My main problem is that I'm trying to work my way through the war - which might be a bad strategy really... Maybe I should just skip to the Patton-era :)
    1
  23195. Oh no! Don't want Daisy to be angry... I'll ask the guy who supplies the FIPs and see what I can do
    1
  23196. Dowly yes!! :)
    1
  23197. ***** correct!
    1
  23198. Have you got a link to that discussion?
    1
  23199. Either way, it would still be wrong
    1
  23200. "You need to consider how he can use "our regiment" to any german regiment, not just the one which he was in." That wouldn't make any sense. When he says "our", he means the one he and his comrades are in, not another one he doesn't belong too. But even so, I ruled out the possibility of him being transferred to another regiment within the 94th Infantry Division, and the original source doesn't say he transferred outside of his division.
    1
  23201. Nope, I ruled that out in the video, but good thinking
    1
  23202. Gasp! I'm triggered! Let me call you a naughty word, good sir!
    1
  23203. I thought that too, but the original translation in Chuikov's memoirs just says "Wehrmacht", not "Wehrmacht [German army]" was the PDF does. Obviously the Wehrmacht wasn't hte German Army (the Heer), so the PDF is incorrect.
    1
  23204. Yes, I'm aiming to get the next episode out the week after next (but it depends on whether I can get it finished in time)
    1
  23205. The problem is that if it was the 276th Regiment, then Hoffman wouldn't have been at the Grain Elevator, even though he said he was, and then still wouldn't have fought for a factory in the October period, so it would still be wrong.
    1
  23206. It's not possible for it to be the "fog of war" because Hoffman was saying that his regiment was somewhere it wasn't (twice), and said German tanks were at the Grain Elevator, which we're now certain they weren't. Possibly the last one about the tanks could be a "fog of war" thing, but how would "fog of war" explain why Hoffman believed he was attacking a factory that he wasn't?
    1
  23207. It doesn't matter if it's 276 or 267, either way it would still be wrong, as I explained in the video. The text is in the description, and also in the version of Chuikov's "The Beginning of the Road" that I have, again listed in my bibliography in the description.
    1
  23208. Thegamer8324 well done! You get it right every time
    1
  23209. Morgan Chalmers haha Djibouti! Glad you remembered it :D
    1
  23210. ***** I'm afraid not, but good guess :)
    1
  23211. Rex1987 I would have said something like that :)
    1
  23212. I'm curious, what are your other two favourite formats?
    1
  23213. Fantastic! If you like to this, you'll enjoy my other Battlestorms, like Crusader and the (ongoing) Stalingrad series
    1
  23214. The X's at the top are the size of the unit. The X across the entire thing indicates an infantry unit. I have a video coming out soon explaining all the unit symbols
    1
  23215. Thank you, I'm glad you think so :)
    1