Hearted Youtube comments on Whatifalthist (@WhatifAltHist) channel.

  1. 229
  2. 229
  3. 223
  4. 218
  5. 215
  6. 215
  7. 212
  8. 211
  9. 211
  10. 210
  11. 206
  12. 204
  13. 204
  14. 202
  15. 196
  16. 195
  17. 195
  18. 1) I agree with you on all points. I would like to point out that if you haven't looked into the relationship of wealth and status with attractiveness, that maybe be a good jump to go to next. 2) I'm out of my depth on this one but I have come to the conclusion that Western Philosophy isn't dead and doomed to failure, but is at a limited dead end. Like taking the wrong turn at a Y intersection, we are going to have to go back to the intersection and take the other path. (From my own understanding, Liberalism and the Enlightenment were absolute wins (grounding that each person has social rights that they should be treated with by the state was great) however, the evolution of that where people believe that people deserve economic rights has done little but hypercharge envy.) 3) Agreed 4) As a geopolitical person, I think geography (topography and climate) is one of the major pillars in economic development. You will notice that thriving civilizations have gone from Rivers, to Basins, to now Temperate Climate Zones. Couldn't disagree more that geography is "easily disproven." Pretty much agree on anything else. 5) Agreed 6) That's an interesting take, I kind of agree. That being said, I think if Millennials can't answer up to those who came before us we are totally fucked. The systems are breaking down, either we get through it or we don't. 7) BASED, and part of where I disagreed with you in the last part. People act like everyone back in the day was just harder, tougher, and the like. However, when it comes down to it, very few point out how many people dealt with their issues by drinking bottle after bottle. 8) There is a balance between Unitarianism and Diversity. Societies that are Unitary are easier to move but far more rapidly fall into decay with a need for revolutionary overhauls. Diverse Nations tend to be disjointed (sometimes to to point of collapse) however, they tend to have manpower, resource, and intellectual capacities that more Unitary states just can't match. 9) Simple answer is yes. While war can absolutely break nations, it is in short a geopolitical competence check. Nations that are uncompetitive absolutely get crushed in war, and with that comes their removal or replacement. Without war it is very likely most people wouldn't have access to WRITING. 10) I am fully convinced that Men and Women have a massive underlying dislike for one another. For reasons you talk about in this video, men and women want to play by different rules. Whenever one sex feels it is injected into the rules of the other sex, I find that there is massive amounts of distain. One of the biggest issues Liberalism and Tolerance has it that it tries to treat people as equals, but that clearly breaks down when coming into the conflict of the sexes.
    194
  19. 194
  20. 191
  21. 190
  22. 189
  23. 188
  24. 188
  25. 187
  26. 186
  27. Im history student in Mexico and my favorite topic is religion and spanish institutions in the colonies and there's a lot of this new age indigenists ideas that are so absurd and exagerated once you have a quick check to the archives. I'm not graduated and I'm not a pro either but here's a quick sum of stuff people believe about colonial america that aren't very true. (Sorry for my English) 1. The Spanish conquered america to rob it. Literally were a bunch of guys in the edge of the law that went on its own to do adventuring and by sheer will, cunning and absurd luck (everyone hated the aztecs and the inca were at civil war) they conquered a lot of stuff and gifted it to the king of Spain. It's free real state i guess. 2. The aztecs were a cool civilization that didn't deserve to be murdered. Also, aztec Identity in general. Yeah, no civilization deserves to be exterminated. But literally (almost) everyone hated the aztecs because they were a supremacist ultra militarized human sacrificer tribute demanding society. Cortez had the idea to invade Tenochtitlan because the totonacas asked him to please protect them. Also there's a lot of people in Mexico that said the aztecs are the ancestors or that there's a lot of aztecs in the country... No... There are Nahuas, Wich is a cultural and linguistics group to Wich the aztec kinda were part of (they migrated from the north) similar to how spartans were greeks but not totally greeks. Yeah it's like saying that you're ancestor was totally leonidas because youre Greek. Also the aztec empire wasn't an empire like rome, were 3 allied cities who only colected tribute and dropped it into his capital. For cool mega indigenous civs there's the inca. Anyway I'm not saying aztecs were totally bad. They're cool and were wonderful engies. 3. Spanish looted america and didn't leave anything behind. Have you seen mexico city? Puebla? Veracruz? Guadalajara? There's a lot and I mean a lot of stuff left by spanish. Like... You know... Universities. Libraries. Administrative centers and so on. Yeah of course they take most of the metals to spain but they weren't 19s colonialist who only extracted raw resources. American states were kingdoms, no colonies, similar to Nápoles, Flanders or Castilla itself (yes, they were the lest prestigious but still) so the spanish did try, with various grades of success, to improve the land. 4. Indigenous peoples were brutally oppressed by the spanish. This semester like... Al my assignments have coincidentally been about this and now I'm disgusted to this statement. I could argue, that the indians have actually more privileges than the average spanish peasent. Of course they didn't were to the level of spanish nobility but they have a lot of rights. They lived in the indians republics. Basically autonomous mini states ruled by indian nobility that only awnsered to provincial governors or the viceking. There were corts specially for indians matters and usually they favored the indians republics over the spanish republics. Indians who founded towns get instantly huge swaps of land. Indians were forbidden to be slaves. (Unless they rebeled or something) There were indian right, written by priests. And yes, they were considered inferior only for being indians but it's the 17s please. But they didn't live under systemic oppression. Actually most of there rights were stripped by the liberal mexican government after the independence. 5 and last because I'm tired. Everything about the inquisition. The inquisition was asked for the spanish settlers so they were some kind of police to watch over the conquistadors and keep the morals. Also because secular priests that were in charge of that before were kinda rads sometimes. The inquisition killed like... Half a dozen non foreigners in 3 centuries. The indians were actually not subject to the inquisition. They were christians in development. Inquisition it's only for spanish mestizos and for some reason blacks. The inquisitors were 2. Like... Just 2. They didn't went in a CIA operation cracking down witches. They were like supream court judges with a team of local priests and civilian spies. They were cool. Also they were useless most times. America wasn't very prestigious so... There's was a lot of inquisitors who just didn't do anything. Witch hunts... They do belived in witches... But they didn't believe every girl was one. There were very specific proves to witchcraft. And healers and shamans weren't considered satanic. Just immoral and ignorant people who make people fall in sin. But they really didn't care much about them besides the casual lashes when something scandalous happened. But again, this is the middle ages, the inquisition punishments (unless you had very good proves against you) were the merciful ones. Also if you denounce someone for something to the inquisition and they didn't get proves... You had to pay reparations and be ashamed. To conclude. I don't want to fall into the pink leyend of the spanish. I also could go on a list about everything they fucked up. But for another time. There are just some things that people say about colonial times that are, as always, not black and white. And one last thing. The independence of Mexico was against the spanish government, the liberal constitution, and Napoleon. The original goal was, a mexican ruled, catholic and conservative kingdom under the king of Spain. Yeah i mean the criollos wanted to rule but they were loyal to the empire. And liberalism? This is México. Religión Independencia y Unión.
    186
  28. 186
  29. 185
  30. 185
  31. 183
  32. 183
  33. 182
  34. You’ve heard of convergent evolution, right Rudyard? Well, that’s what I feel I’m witnessing everytime I view one of your videos from the past two years. Even though I’m almost twice your age we’ve arrived at almost the exact same conclusions about history, geopolitics, and the role of Judeo-Christian tradition in shaping the beautiful symphony that is Western Civilization. What I find the most curious is that we arrived at these conclusions about life while coming at it from two completely different vantage points — lived experience and intellectual research respectively. I’m a child of revolution and war, born in Iran to a Zoroastrian father and a Jewish mother, educated at British boarding schools in the Classics, a US citizen by choice, and civilian attaché to military advisers on behalf of the State Department in post civil war Cambodia and pre-revolutionary Indonesia, and a professional musician of 25 years. I was born at about the median point of Gen X, and I’ve lived in 36 different countries including Russia and China. We have drastically different experiences in life, but there’s this parallel inner path that we share and lately it’s gotten super uncanny…I returned home from a Peter Zeihan presentation a few months back to find you talking about him in a couple of your latest videos. Meanwhile, you came about this knowledge through book learning, and what I find most astounding is not the amount of books you read because I was the same at your age, but rather that unlike many in your generation you actually arrive at the correct conclusions from the books. The main conclusion I’m referring to besides the importance of religion in shaping our modern world is the Hobbes versus Rousseau debate. Suffice it to say that I’ve witnessed enough of mankind‘s inhumanity to man to have been thoroughly disabused of the notion that people are essentially good. Nor do I hold that we are essentially bad, but rather that we need the steadying hands of tradition and religion to keep us from the beastly aspects of our nature and to keep us on the path towards our higher selves. Keep up the good work! Cheers, and warm regards 🙏🏼
    179
  35. 176
  36. 173
  37. 171
  38. 167
  39. 166
  40. 165
  41. 162
  42. 161
  43. 161
  44. 160
  45. 157
  46. 156
  47. 154
  48. 153
  49. 153
  50. 151