Comments by "" (@sir_humpy) on "Why I Love Great Britain" video.

@kzual1 , indeed but they didn't not even need to cross the Channel to make a world-wide impact today. It's fairly safe to assume that whatever progress the Moors would've been able to make in France without Martel's pivotal victory, they would've have upset the internal dynamics of France sufficiently enough to affect Rollo's establishment in Normandy less than 2 centuries later, the consequent invasion of British Isles by his descendants and Magna Carta which, if my memory doesn't fail me, was a 100% Norman, not Anglo-saxon, barons doing. And Magna Carta is at the root of why Brits are what they are now. So all hail Charles Martel and his men.
2
@michaeljones5069 , I read with interest what you wrote. Growing to my teens in the Soviet Union which was still an authoritarian state even in Gorby's years and maintaining an interest in Russian (I'm not russian, though) post-Soviet Union and modern narrative, I'm familiar with several claims that soviets and russians were and are still making about their contribution to the world. Most of them are dubious and spurious (russian ballet, literature, music) or fall into technological discovery section (Sputnik and space program, nuclear and arms race etc) you've already mentioned. One claim though, imho, merits more attention and I'd like to run it past you. It's the claim that setting an example of apparently successful state management by the lower classes (yesterday's peasantry, low-skilled workforce) the USSR induced the Western world in the 20's and 30's to adopt progressively more left-wing policies like social welfare and universal suffrage to appease local proletariat and avoid the Russian revolution scenario. Now, if that claim is right, it means that the totalitarian USSR did actually, albeit indirectly, further civilisational change for the better for a lot of people. I'd be curious to hear your opinion on this.
2
I doubt there would've been Brits if it hadn't been for Charles Martel.
1