Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "The History Guy: History Deserves to Be Remembered" channel.

It's generally known as proto-industrialization but Britain didn't add much but steam power and steel. There was already proper industrial organization, with standardization and a high degree of specialization. There were other big industries like printing, lens manufacturing, cloth, weapons, fake china. The Dutch also already designed the internal combustion engine, on gunpowder, but that was too far ahead of it's time to go beyond a concept. It was the kick off of modern capitalism as we know it.
10
I don't know this channel, but I give him an A for not being anglocentric, not regurgitating English propaganda from the past as serious history but make a well researched video that shows understanding of the Dutch Republic, unlike most YT video's on the subject.
8
The Ruyter's father was a brewery drayman, he became admiral on merit alone when the Engllish fleet still had be commanded by nobles. The Dutch Republic had nobility but social mobility unlike any other country, and that's how you get the right people in the right place with such a small population. Equality made the less than 2 million Dutch people the supreme economic wold power.
7
@vbscript2 Those two probably made it into a revolution because of it's impact on ordinary people's lives, but there's the industrial revolution and there's industrialization. The latter, as an approach to production, already existed, just like modern capitalism. The steam power allowed for production to pick any location and for the power to be fully controlled, the steel allowed for smaller tolerances. That's a big change so it seems fair to me to make the distinction between the industrialization of the industrial revolution and the proto-industrialization from before, which many historians do. That was what I was saying.
5
The VOC as it's called didn't dominate world trade. It was dominant in Asian trade, also between Asian nations often, but the vast majority of the trade was much closer to and within European seas and that was done by individual merchants or small companies. But because the risk, the one year journeys and the war effort, Asian trade was organized in one big state supported company with a monopoly on trade East of the Cape. It was very important culturally, strategically and for the history of finance, but only a tiny part of the Dutch Republic's economy. Even in it's peak year it wasn't as profitable as the good old herring fishery. The VOC is a bit of a British obsession, but if the English hadn't been outcompeted on the Baltic, North Sea and Mediterranean, they would have encountered the real moneymakers a lot more often.
3
@johnlewis9158 No, that's propaganda. Dutch propaganda that is, Stadtholder Willem III invited the English lords to invite him while already preparing the invasion. He was aiming for a stable protestant power more than anything and knew the idea of beeing conquered nor bloodshed would help his cause. John Locke who was one of the enlightenment philosophers living and working in the Netherlands because it was free, was part of the conspiracy too. With the 80 years war for independence against the Spanish in mind, he was well aware of the value of popular support, nobles support and propaganda. As a Stadtholder, him beeing prince of Orange was irrelevant to his capacity as elected leader of the Dutch Republic, he was used to sharing power and did not object to forming a constitutional monarchy. So he put on a show, starting by asking the lords to invite him, but also his troops were under strict orders to treat the locals with most respect and never ever use the word invastion or conquest. He paraded his massive fleet along the coast, he rode a white horse and shiny armour like he was the saviour himself, he brought a regiment of black soldiers in white turbans to impress as a global power, he held speeches and he brought a printing press to further get the message across that he was liberating England rather than conquering it.
2
The land of fries is south of the Netherlands. Friesland is where the Frysians live.
2
@sparqqling The initial plan for the VOC was to kick some Portuguese ass and bring back silk. But it soon saw the potential and wanted to reinvest money rather than pay dividend. It only started paying dividend in 1631, almost 30 years after it's foundation. But it was also a nationalistic enterprise right after the Dutch Republic had it's borders stabilized. So a lot of very ordinary people bought shares at one of the offices in their own city. Craftsmen, maids, people like that. But of course those people could not wait 30 years for ROI so the invention of the stock exchange was a neccesity for the VOC to grow and escape the legal obligation of paying dividend.
2
Many other philosophers of the enligthenment had their works printed in the Dutch Republic too, because it had freedom of thought and the Dutch printed more than half of Europe's books.
1
Relative? The Azkhenazi jews and the Sephardic jews had a street fight with eachother once, but I'd say the peace was as absolute as for the protestants. The catholics were kept on a tight leash so they didn't get any ideas of ruling and end freedom of religion, but the jews were no threat. Simon Schama claims they were seen as a kind of brother people, because the Dutch protestants saw themselves as the New Testament's chosen people with little garden of Eden carved out of the North Sea. You only have to take a look at the 'Portuguese Synagoge' in Amsterdam from the 17th century to know this was not a community that was somehow under threat.
1
@TheHistoryGuyChannel It's a bloody job but someone had to do it. Just good freedom loving people defending their nation on the high seas.
1
Your both full of it. Tolerance has brought us nothing but getting more and more to tolerate. It's being taken advantage of. Mass immigration has always been right wing and still is, it's for big money alone and the Dutch citizens have to make it work at their own expense.
1
On a side note, the Act of Departure is a correct translation but it refers to the departure from the legitimate throne of the Netherlands by king Philip II through having become a tyrant. He had done so by trampling on the people's inalienable right to freedom of conscience, of how to believe in god, as well as ancient rights and privileges of dealing with local matters themselves, like religion's place in the public domain. This freedom conscience was already codified in the Union of Utrecht of 1579, where the 7 Northern Netherlands rallied around to form a union against Spain and turn the rebellion into a war. This became the de facto constitution of the Dutch Republic so there was a hard limit to interference with one's personal religion practiced in the private sphere which allowed even the catholics to congegrate. Anyway, by declaring the king had left the throne himself by his own actions, it was not a frontal attack on the legitimacy of kings and the divine right of kings, it was merely made conditional. Over a 100 years later, the king having left the throne himself and this time physically, was also used by the Dutch to get around the legitimacy issue, this time with William III of Orange.
1
@stevedietrich8936 What impressed me, in comparison with most YT video's is that he didn't portray the Dutch Republic as some miniature British Empire with an unjustified focus on what the British encountered, the VOC. He also researched the Oresund toll myth regarding the fluyt's design, which requires some depth. And allthough getting it wrong because getting the wrong video, he actually researched the pronunciation of Friesland. So that's pretty thorough for a first impression. In return I like to mention Defragged history. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5kdplBvGykUDWHX8m5HwPfn-h302Oe7d It's more of a podcast, it's much longer and much more detailed, but it's fun and very accurate.
1