General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

ricardo kowalski
TIKhistory
comments

Comments by "ricardo kowalski" (@ricardokowalski1579) on "TIKhistory" channel.

Always remember that socialism is not the "goverment ownership " of the means of production... it is the "government control " of the means of production It matters not who "owns" something, if someone else "controls" it It is always about power. It is only about control.
208
In Venezuela they keep repeating that they are "building socialism"... but they never show the blueprints!! 😁
82
In LatAm we have a joke about an exchange university profesor from some european country (say Germany). He saw that people in LatAm wash their cars on the streets, and the run off makes puddles and damages the pavement. He asked; hey, why do you wash the cars on the street? The LatAm reply was: the street is public, it's for everybody, so we CAN do that. The profesor goes back to Germany and asks his neighbor; Would you wash your car on the street? The german answer was: No. The street is public. It's for everyone to use. We CAN'T do that! same word, "public". Two very different understandings of what it means. respectfully
35
min 25:00 TIK spot on. We may never know, everyone has to make up their own mind. We cannot and should not quarterback from 80 years in the future peoples that were exhausted after five years of war. The lesson here is that we should avoid placing ourselves in positions where we are limited to bad outcomes.
30
Yes. You would create a lot of confusion. Yes it would be "fair". As long as it is clear that "nationalism" is different in every nation . German-nationalism cannot be the same as Czech-nationalism. They do not have the same "nation" at the core, and they do not share the same (external locus) strawmans required to seize power. I get the same blank stares in LatAm when I tell people that Pinochet was a socialist. Their little minds can't process the state owned copper industry, the military control of the copper industry, and the "ley reservada del cobre".
29
@KoleKojot 1- No, it cannot be done without bloodshed. The collectivists are many and they are willing to use violence. 2- An-Caps do approve to the right to self defense, against violent impostion from people that use violence first. AnCaps are not against violence, just against initiating violence. This is an important point. AnCaps don't turn the other cheek. Respectfully
21
@TheImperatorKnight I agree with you 100%. As always you are hitting the nail on the head. ===== Private ownership INCLUDES control. This is why in most legal texts it reads (In spanish "Es el derecho que tiene toda persona de usar, gozar, disfrutar y disponer sus bienes de acuerdo a la ley." ) "It is the right that every person has to use, enjoy, enjoy and dispose of their assets according to the law." It is the "dispose" part where they excert control while (pretending) to respect private property. And this is not disposal as in end of life what we do with the trash. "dispose" means what you do with somehing, where would you locate it, and the authority to have or delegate CONTROL over it From Merriam Webster dispose 2obsolete : to come to terms dispose of 1a(1): to get rid of how to dispose of toxic waste (2): to deal with conclusively disposed of the matter efficiently b: to transfer to the >>>control<<< of another ///// disposing of personal property to a total stranger 2: to place, distribute, or arrange especially in an orderly way disposing of the weapons in the new fort Cheers!!
19
There is a saying: "Victory has many fathers, but defeat doesn't even have a mother" That is why everything is "mad hitler's " fault
19
@wasneeplus Calling it "bonkers" does not make it wrong. Nazis were socialists, the fact that they fought other socialists just tells you that they eat their own. There is only ONE definition of socialism, and TIK is 100% right.
18
Make no mistake. This kind of criminals have NOT been erradicated. They are STILL in government positions. The methods have changed, the criminal intent is the same.
15
In Cuba they changed it to "work will make men of them". (El trabajo los hara hombres) The "them" were homosexuals.
14
@wasneeplus TIK's definition is the correct one: state ownership or control of the means of production
14
In order to clarify the difference between "ownership" and "control" consider: You "own" a car or a gun. Someone runs over or shoots another person with your car/gun. Police will come knocking at the door of the owner, even if you "lost control" of the asset. When they catch the one that did the shooting or driving... you would want the car/gun returned to you... because you "own it" and need to be better at "controlling it". Control is the only thing that matters. You can be killed with your OWN SWORD, if someone elses controls it.
12
"non violence" and "H1t\er" are only acceptable in the context of comparing against Stalinism.
11
Premises: 1- If Hitler secured the eastern front before attacking west (Ribbentrop/Molotov pact), it was because he already feared soviet strength. Enough fear that he did not want to take on the soviets first, without securing the western front. 2- The germans planned for a fast, mobile, different kind of war. And it was succesful. TOO SUCCESFUL. France fell so fast that the germans were (positively) surprised, and learned the wrong lesson from this. 3- The quick victory in the west changed Hitler's perception of the relative risk the soviets poised........ QUESTION... when did the hubris from the "fast and easy" western campaign convince Hitler that invading russia was going to be equally easy? He feared the soviets enough in 1939, but at some point he stopped fearing them, as evidenced in the "just kick in the door" comment.
9
11:45 Solid Totalitarians implement their theories. When they start seeing that the results are bad, they claim that they need to apply said theories EVEN HARDER After they apply them FULLY and fail miserably ... then they claim "it wasn't real (whatever)" 👍
9
@maurices5954 yes 👍
8
@untruelie2640 There is only ONE definition of socialism. Socialism is the government control of the means of production. Socialism has no other definition.
8
It has been said before. You can't spend, devalue nor print your way to proserity. As much as Keynesians hate it, only delayed consumption, savings and investment create wealth.
8
@untruelie2640 The definitions are not up for discussion. Dogmatism is saying something without evidence, based upon belief. The definition of socialism is not a "hypothesis" that has to be tested, it was created by Marx and it is "a priori", not a result of the discussion. 1-If you do not like Marx's definition of socialism, take it up to him. 2-If you are a revisionist that wants to claim you know what "real socialism", you are rejecting history. 3- I care not for the "nothing is absolute" because if nothing matters and everything is relative then no values or morals are possible.
7
@Leotv1948 there is no such thing as "state capitalism" If the state is the owner of the capital... well.. THAT IS SOCIALISM SK an Oligarchy and a government controling the means of production? Sorry, that is exactly what socialism means Your argument seems to imply that free markets can somehow exists under a government controlled economy. Here is a hint: they don't and they can't. When they do they are outlawed and called "black market" There is but ONE form of capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit , rather than by the state. STATE capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism by definition is PRIVATE ownership and control. The STATE cannot be a "private owner"
7
“Amateurs talk about strategy and tactics. Professionals talk about logistics and sustainability in warfare” - General Robert Hilliard Barrow. Of course Napoleon, also knew this. TIK is making sure everybody that wants to learn knows this.👍
6
Another example of "state control" is state defined, mandated and enforced school curricula. In most countries the state defines what is taught at schools, public or private. It also engages in unfair competition by providing "universal schooling" and repeating ad nauseaum that it is "free" (it is not, it is paid by taxes) In some countries, private schools are outlawed, because state controlled schooling cannot allow competition. If you attempt to home school or teach your own children outside of the state enforced system... you get violence and coercion
6
@Leotv1948 1- it was their plan. And their rethoric. Go talk to them 2- what do you mean "can't get anything in borders or ports"? They traded freely with Rusia, Iran and China. They imported weapons and military equipment. What stopped them from bringing in chinese rigs or service equipment? NOTHING STOPPED THEM. They bought and received chinese rigs, cement pumps and steel pipe. They just can't manage them. There are no sanctions on stupidity, inefficiency and theft.
6
@wasneeplus I am sorry. Isn't the government meant to obey the citizens? What policy does a government have to "enforce" if it is only doing what the citizenship is already doing willingly and voluntarily? Yes, your opinion is as valid as mine. I just don't pass my opinion as arguments. My argument is socialism is government ownership OR control of the means of production. Both Marxists and Nazis controlled the means of production. Both are socialists. Your opinion is that it wasn't "meaningful way"... but that is NOT an argument
6
@Leotv1948 strawman What I have said is that socialism is the government ownership or control of the means of production There is nothing about "free markets" or "pure market capitalusm" in that definition. Keep government out of ownership and control. Ad hominem attack "old men". stop talking about me, talk about the argument. ad hominem attack "mega pseudo intellectual". name calling is not an argument.
6
I see what you did there. Approved 👍 🪨🧻✂
5
@Leotv1948 There is no lockdown. As I said, they import weapons and oilfield equipment. Humanitarian aid was stopped at the borders by the venezuelan government, not by the US They weren't fine, oil extraction started declining a decade before the sanctions.
5
@wasneeplus strawman argument. I have not said that ALL GOVERNMENTS must be socialist. You asked about the governments that have existed in modern nation-states. Strawman argument, I have not said that a society has to lack government to avoid socialism. You make up strawmans so that you do not have to face the definition of socialism
5
@Leotv1948 special pleading fallacy. "you haven't read" "4th grade understanding" is enough for "government ownership or control of the means of production" No if, no buts, no exceptions
5
@wasneeplus I don't believe in the possibility of utopia. Neither do I That is why I do not believe the government can deliver utopia That is why I want to take the government's thumb of the scales I rather have the hobbsian "brute, short, violent" life than the totalitarian "long, obedient, safe" life And here is the thing... I don't want to force my choice on you... I just want YOU to not impose YOUR choice on ME
5
@jboss119 there is no reason roads cannot be private, paid by tolls Many roads, railroads, bridges, ferries and canals were and still are private.
5
The german socialists lost the war they waged against rusian socialists, french socialists and british socialists Socialists eat their own, the wage war among themselves. But that does not mean they hold different ideas from each other. The worst tragedy for a socialist is to live in a socialist country where the socialists leaders are not in his SAME socialist party.
4
@untruelie2640 "you could just claim as well that Britain and the USA were "socialist" states during WW2." Why yes I do claim that. And the interesting thing is the return to private property, and the things that remained under government control.
4
@untruelie2640 There is only ONE definition of socialism. Socialism is the government control of the means of production. Socialism has no other definition.
4
@georgea5991 here is the thing. If you buy a house with a mortage, you are doing TWO things. 1- you are buying a house, it is now yours. 2- since it is YOURS you can pledge it as collateral for a loan. Item #2 is what "disposal" of an asset is. Under socialism, where housing is not asset, you can't ask for a loan on a house. Even if you say the house is "yours"
4
@georgea5991 Word matter, that is why they are so interested in changing the meaning and use of words. What would be equal to "socialism"? What do you mean by "same thing"?
4
@brucetucker4847 How do these "workers" exercise control over the means of production?
4
@Leotv1948 tell you what. If you can get that video taken down for "misinformation" I will say you are right. But YT allows it. And what is YOUR source? These fact remains. There is no blockade. Venezuela has imported weapons and oilfield equipment. Oil extraction was in decline before the sanctions. Can you get the video I presented taken down? As "misinformation"?
4
@wasneeplus Imagine a government that DOES NOT put forward socialist policies. There is no need for population to resist such a government. Thus a government that does not try to control the economy and the means of production is the non-socialist government. Your opinion on what is meaningful is just your *opinion*. You are free to assign value and judgement, but not to use it as an argument. A non-socialist government would have a defense minister and a foreign service minister. Not much else at the federal level.
4
@alexgray2482 the "difficulty" of "going about it" is the price to compare against the market. You should know that the great depression and the great recession were not prevented by regulation, but CAUSED by it
4
min 26:09 TFW being a slave under nazis is actually a better gig than being a "patriot" under Stalin. 😱 /// guess the land-lease money given to Stalin purchased much more than expected
4
@MisterBoggins you fail to understand there is nothing to "enforce' Ancapstan is completely voluntary. There is no need to enforce anything.
3
@MisterBoggins again, you are mistaken. There is government: SELF-government. The ONLY moral government is to govern thy self. Also, Anarchism is literally "no government" So saying "no-government" is impossible is denial a priori. Your argument cannot be your desired conclusion. Try again!
3
@MisterBoggins no I am not Me as an individual am my own government. There is no contradiction. I have control and monopoly of violence over myself. If I am to delegate or elect representatives, I must first be able to self-govern. A slave cannot vote, delegate, or elect an external government. Do slaves vote for their masters? But a free man can choose self-government. Or choose to associate volutarily, to delegate to representatives. In all cases, it is voluntary because it is the expression of the will. "by the *conscent of the governed*... remember?
3
@untruelie2640 "You literally gave an example of dogmatism with your first sentence. If something is not up for discussion, at least in principle, it is dogmatic, because it can't be corrected, challenged or critizised." The definition of socialism is not up for discussion because it was established "a priori" to this conversation, not because of "dogmatism". You don't like the definition of "socialism"? Then go and hash it out with your "socialist" buddies. NOT ME Do not attempt to undermine the discussion of what socialism WAS and DID with you future unknown and irrelevant definitions of "socialism"
3
@brucetucker4847 yes they are coercive and violent. If I have a factory, and it is MINE.If I refuse to give the control of MY factory to the "workers"... what happens? Don't they take it by force? "By your definition every government or form of social organization from a tribe of 8 Neanderthals to today has been coercive and socialist." Yes, every form of government has been coercive No, social organizations that are voluntary and follow the non-agression principle are different
3
You will be glad you spend time on TIK's videos. Happy trails.
3
This. 👍
3
This 👍
3
@Leotv1948 so you finally settled on insults and name calling The facts remain: Venezuela has imported weapons and oilfield equipment from Rusia and China. If the oil extraction is in "chaos" is not because of any sanctions
3
You asked the question, you are the one that accessed an "alternate reality" and came back saying that "we will never know" In THIS reality we know what they did, and there is no reason to speculate it would have change had they won. What they did is put yes men as front men to do their bidding. They controlled the means of production. That is what would have continued Can't help but notice you sidestep the "public works" issue. And the separation of government from nation/country.
3
@wasneeplus again strawman I am not saying that the government must obey the citizens as a collective. Every citizen, and all citizens, must be obeyed by the government. Any compromise must be struck between the citizens themselves, one with another. No government intervention required. Strawman argument. Not every application of power is socialism, as I have said, the government can apply military power beyond the frontiers to whatever end the citizens allow. That governments excert violent power over the economy is not proof that the government has the right or mandate to do so.
3
@Leotv1948 "you haven't read" again, fallacy stop talking about me. what is the argument? Why are you taking me seriously? seriously enough to keep attempting to personalize the discussion Socialism is the government ownership or control of the means of production. Marxists did it. Nazis did it. decades of LatAm "neo liberal" countries did it. All socialist.
3
@alexgray2482 companies agree to arbitrage. PRIVATE arbitrage. Outside "legal" government courts. It happens everyday. There is no need for enforcement, because you accept the outcome voluntarily. And it is cheaper, faster and more reliable than government courts Let people sort it out themselves.
3
@alexgray2482 You already agreed to the arbitrage. This isn't a court that is imposed on you, that you then say you did not recognize. You agreed to it willingly. You and me agreed to it when we make a contract. It is no different than establishing the "legal venue" in a contract...just PRIVATE. not GOVERNMET. criminal matters would be an insurance service. A private insurance service would be highly motivated to solve the case and transfer the cost of the insurance. If you refuse the arbitrage you agreed to, again it's an insurance issue. All other of your commitments will be called: loans, employment, banking. Nobody will deal with you. And the consequence would be so terrible you dare not risk it. And here is the important thing...no government would step in to save you, to say you are a victim, to use someone else's money to paper up your broken word, to defend your humanity or your "rights" after denying the rights of others. Government won't even step in to give you free food, medical and shelter for life for being a criminal.... no such safety net. F# around and Find out.
3
@wasneeplus where have I said I want society to be an utopian "free of crime"? What I want is the right to defend MYSELF What I want is to take away the monopoly of violence from the government... because we DO NOT live un an utopia where the government can, want or will save me Will you, please, stop strawman-ing? Stick to what I written, not what YOU want to believe.
3
@wasneeplus (((Again, the only reason you'd wanna do that is if you want everyone to be able to commit \/olence. That would be the logical result of your suggestion.))) What I want is the right to defend myself. You are attempting to equate self-defense with wanton agression against others. Please stop making strawman arguments
3
@wasneeplus No i do not have that right “You can’t use a gun for self-protection in Canada. It’s not a right that you have,” says Trudeau. And that is in Canada. In LatAm you will fare even worse.
3
@wasneeplus why I would pay myself for the BEST PRIVATE hospital I can afford Your false dichotomy is useless. The choice is not between dying and a government hospital... unless the government has FORCED to be the single provider.
3
@alexgray2482 "a state monopoly"... is still a monopoly So as all socialist claim.. .there is "good monopolies" and "bad monopolies"? And the "good monopolies" are the ones YOU approve of?
3
@alexgray2482 anecdotal is not an argument I know plenty of places where rail and water are government owned and they are disasters try again
3
@alexgray2482 "the system" that is upheld by governments? "the system" that has protections and barriers to entry codified in laws and regulations? "the system" that supports FIAT currency with guns? How much of the system is government?
3
Here is the thing If you "believe" then proof is irrelevant, because belief is actually holding something as true even in the face of facts that disprove it If you deal with proof and facts, you hold *no beliefs*... you only KNOW things. And are always open to being proven wrong. This is why the new rally cry is "feelings are more important than facts"
3
@lindsayheyes925 there is no such thing as "public ownership". There is no tension between a non-existing "public ownership" and ownership, which can only be PRIVATE. Much less tension against freedom, that includes ownership, again by definition private in all instances.
2
I see a TIK video, I click on it. Add a like. Feed the algo. 11:50 There is something to be said that this was the exact same reaction of Churchill when France was invaded, that the germans had stuck their neck out and were vulnerable to being cut off. 16:30 This 👍 Was Montgomery competent ? Was he a decent tactician? That is another matter. I say "no", but that is my own very shallow opinion. 41:30 THIS Montgomery clearly was Once bitten, twice shy. BUTTTTTT..... The differences between airborne or armor units when surrounded is crucial. I know TIK understands it, but I am still not sure Montgomery did
2
@CantusTropus any regulation made by the government makes it "state controlled". If the regulation comes from the market participants, and they choose not to buy children, then it is a "free market". I am not advocating for child anything, just saying that citizens must not pass along the responsability of choice to the government.
2
The leftards always say "that wasn't socialism"... egalitarism, equality, justice is not socialism.
2
13:35 BINGO Government ≠ State When a country has elections... the GOVERNMENT changes.. but the STATE remains the same. Until the dictator starts messing around with the institutions. What is STATE? State is a collection (constellation? that would be poetic) of institutions: common law, bill of rights, carta magna, guilds, cooperatives, private arbitrers, private companies, people that speak the same language, people that live in the same territory, the territory itself, traditions, even intagibles as regional food or festivities. What is GOVERNMENT? An institution hellbent on applying violence to control any and all aspects of the STATE. (What is the objective of this control is irrelevant, sometimes is for economic profit, sometimes is just lust for power itself) AnCAPs have a problem with GOVERNMENT, because by definition it cannot be voluntary. 14:19 " politics are the affairs of the people" This is where we get "res publica" => republic ----Res publica (also spelled rēs pūblica to indicate vowel length) is a Latin phrase, loosely meaning 'public affair'. It is the root of the word 'republic', and the word 'commonwealth' has traditionally been used as a synonym for it; however, translations vary widely according to the context. Solid content. Respect and regards.🎩
2
YT is shadow banning TIK hard
2
Something to keep in mind is that Stalin agreed to sell oil, food and raw materials to Germany. But Stalin being no fool... he never sold Hitler too much oil... just enough so that Germany could invade France... but NOT enough so that Hitler could squirrel it away for a "Barbarrosa" day. Somewhere, there is the grave of some unknown and unsung russian economist/statistician. Someone that calculated in 1939~40 how much oil could be safely sold for Germany to consume....but not risk them stockpiling it. He nailed it.🎩
2
Solid content Revisionists want to install the idea that "unconditional surrender" meant "humiliating extermination" This is a strawman argument. Terms and conditions were hashed out for Operations Manna, Chowhound and Faust. Reasonable acts were paid with reasonable action. If the Nazi government had declared an unilateral cease fire, pulled back to the 1939 borders, and left behind all aircraft and artillery, the war could have ended two years earlier, saving millions of lives. But the Nazi government did not. The Nazi government didn't want to take the political cost of this decision. They rather see the country razed to the ground. Nero decree and all.
2
super AI still is vulnerable to "garbage in = garbage out" Even if it could be computed, there is no guarantee that your data is correct or accurate enough to give a correct output As far as britain knew, they were doomed to loose the battle of britain. But their data was all flawed... and one day the germans did not show up. Doing the "right things" based on "wrong data" is ALSO A FAILURE To claim you "won" because your assumptions and data was all proven wrong... is the ultimate propaganda coup.
2
@jonstoddard8288 On the whole, you are correct. Of course some people would argue the semantics, but not me. 👍
2
49:00 Another example of socialist time travel is the sugar harvest in Cuba WLRN 91.3 FM | By Tim Padgett Published May 28, 2022 at 6:42 AM EDT "Cuba this week is reporting its worst sugarcane harvest since 1905 . The official communist regime newspaper Granma concedes the island reaped considerably less than half a million tons. That’s only about half of what officials had forecast — and it’s less than half of the sugarcane Cuba harvested last year."
2
@andreamarino6010 if it is not "needed" ... why did the officials "forecast" it? The forecast is wasteful? Try again!!!
2
All careers in politics are based on "divide and conquer". Power is captured by driving wedges, us vs them, and then stoking one group against another.
2
Solid content
2
@Laskuna keep voting for leftists politicians until they have enough power to destroy the markets. Then you will understand that it is very simple: you cannot have snakes in your bed because they will kill you.
2
@Laskuna agreed. 👍
2
@alexgray2482 (((is their some kind of metaphysical force that prevents companies from conspiring with each other?))) Yes... it is called competition. Like I have said. Any resources devouted to conspiring would result in exposure to a cheaper/better competitor UNLESS the government to cover or protect you from the in-efficiency. With tariffs, captive markets or barriers to entry As for companies getting together to share information. I have no problem with that. Corporations have agreed on standards, joint projects, and information sharing for decades. The laser disc format wars, the usb consorsium, the individual credit scores... you have a problem with any of these? (((Hint: corporations are only interested in giving the customer "a better product at a better price" IF IT INCREASES THEIR PROFITS ))) And what is the problem with this? As I said... collusion is not a way to increase profits, because it opens the door to a competitor that devotes ALL it's resources to the customer.
2
@wasneeplus nope. I have been very clear. It is weapons and guns I am talking about weapons, guns, armoured cars, bodyguards, private armed security
2
@alexgray2482 Why should they be "government owned"? If they are "inevitable"... they would happen without the need of government What is preventing the "unnatural" accumulation of profits by the central banks?
2
@alexgray2482 is the CCP neoliberal? Who writes the laws? The government or the entrepeneurs?
2
@alexgray2482 "some amount of government is necessary"... I disagree I have no "necessary" amount of thieves, murderers or liars.
2
@alexgray2482 what does "reducing crime" have to do with disarming law abiding citizens?
2
@azerty8866 1- slavery existed in rome, and Egypt long before capitalism. It was capitalism in England that started the anti-slavery patrols. 2- the chopped off hands were King Leopold of Belgium. By definition a king is the government. Government control of the means of production is what chops hands off. 3- the most polluted rivers and cities in the world are in China. Plus they have terrible air quality. Meanwhile capitalism has improved environmental metrics for decades.
2
@mikemcmike6427 It’s a trend of the Nazis seeing the right as their allies: Sooooo... the Ribbentrop pact was with a "right wing" ally?
2
@mikemcmike6427 "Out of convenience"? "Temporary"? So convictions and values are only "cast in stone" when it suits you? What if the conservative party connection you mention is also "out of convenience"?
2
In spanish we have: "Verdad, mi amor, que todo es mentira?" (Tell me the truth, my love, everything is a lie?" 😊😊😊
2
After 1945, it still was a war crime. The war never ended, it became a "cold war". A cold war, was still a war.
2
The media makes up words to suit the narrative Gleichschaltung is dropped, "privatization" is used "bliztkrieg" was made up, instead of using Bewegungskrieg Orwell warned us... every word is changed, every date altered, every street renamed.
2
@MisterBoggins yes
2
@MisterBoggins the advantage of ancap is the elimination of tyranny. In all the other systems the door is open, and it's a matter of time, slow boiling the frog, one little slice of freedom at a time. Remember it was "only" two weeks. And it's "only" giving up meat.
2
@MisterBoggins There was a mexican leader, called Benito Juarez. Now I wouldn't call him "ancap" , but this is a pretty solid quote: Entre los individuos, como entre las Naciones, el respeto al derecho ajeno es la paz” Manifiesto a la Nación, julio de 1867 "Among individuals, as among Nations, peace is the respect for the rights of others” 1867 Benito Pablo Juarez Garcia In spanish, this combination of words is particularly strong. "others" just doesn't convey the power of "ajeno". Respectfully.👍
2
Solid content.
2
Stalingrad takes one more casualty! Even decades later it is still deadly...... Take care of yourself. 👍
2
Cutting off the Volga river traffic was not enough. The railway line east of the Volga was underestimated. // Saying that "time makes no difference" is notable (Min 19:45). Time was the essence!
2
@davidburroughs2244 👍 . That is the thing, in the stepes, there are no doors! 😁 ... You are not gaining territory, you are isolating your armies from their support bases., while coming ever closer to the enemy's support.
2
18:30 German voters: vote for a strong state that could take over the economy, fast Strong state takes over the economy, quickly German voters: Pikachu face 😲 Left leaning, Gramscian, historians ever since: "it's a mistery, we will never know🤷, not real socialism...in fact not socialism at all, nothing to see here🧑‍🦯.... look!!! over there... a facist!!! "
2
The only moral government is to rule ONLY oneself. Subjectivism is a problem only when conversion and adherance to a narrative is mandated by government upon others. The solution is not to seek "right" or "truth". Science is not concerned with truth, just verifiable facts. This is why science papers have results (data,facts) separated from conclusions ( interpretation, opinions) 18:35 reality is objective. Those that deny reality still get out of the way when a bus is coming. The problem is when they deny the bus by making the government outlaw and ban buses. 34:25 TIK channeling Dumbledore. 😂👍
1
19:45 And then you find out there is also a shortage of paper, ink and pencils!!!
1
they "were" wildly accepted But the left cannot accept them anymore Class warfare failed. Capitalism blew socialism in regards of productivity and life quality https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ?t=197 So the left has had to re-brand itself for "feelings", pronouns, feminicide, abortion... create as many and as polarizing divisions as possible. A 50/50 split population can be ruled by a few votes at the ballots. So "who counts the votes" becomes the deciding factor.. and very few votes are needed to tip the scale.
1
The "return to society" is what Orwell's ending of 1984 is all about. It is not good enough to kill the "trouble-makers", there is a risk they become examples, or martyrs. The goal is to break the will of the individual, and parade him as a useless wretch in front of all his acquaintances. Everybody must know that there are consequences, that the consequences are severe, and that it is futile to challenge the status-quo. The objective is a prision of the mind in every cranium Respectfully
1
@alphana7055 strawman argument Having your kids outside the statist forced indoctrination system is not "isolating" them from society. If I send my kids to a private posh school. there is no isolation. If I create my own cooperative school with other like minded people, there is no isolation Ad hominem You are implying that I am some sort of pervert or mental patient That is all you've got?
1
Shooting fish in a barrel... with howitzers Solid content
1
I just want to make a small pedantic comment on the semantics. Nit-picking for precision. I apologize in advance. Part of the success of the collectivists is to fuse and confuse party, government, state and nation. Anarchy means NO GOVERNMENT... but there is still a STATE. When you vote, the government changes, the state remains the same. Prime ministers come and go, but the institutions of the state are not replaced suddenly by vote. Governments are affected by votes. GOVERNMENT is only one thing: a criminal organization with the monopoly of violence in a certain territory, over a certain population. STATE is the constellation of institutions that are part of a nation. This includes churches, rotary clubs, country clubs, trade associations, guilds, common law and legal precedent. Justices of peace appointed by populations, and voluntary arbitrage tribunals. Again, it is the collectivists desire to confuse words, and specifically to confuse party-government and state into one single concept , that allows them to brand as "traitors" anyone who opposes them. 1:40 "when the government builds a bridge" correct. The GOVERNMENT is the problem. 5:24 "the state is not a god" no it is not... but we should stick to the correct use of the word "government". It is the government that taxes, not the state. 6:50 "corporations are created by the state "... again no. GOVERNMENT creates and provides violent coercion to corporations. State does not It is a hard habit to break. The collectivists have been extremely successful in fusing state and government into the same. We must separate them, in the same way we separated church from state a long time ago. Respectfully
1
It's always the same... this is not "true" freedom... Only the leader knows what freedom is... is "collective"™ freedom!! this is not "true" liberty...Only the party knows what liberty is.... let me introduce you to "scientific"™ liberty this is not "good" for you.... the union will tell you what is "good" for you... let me present "class concience"™ And when they fail....it never was "true" (fΔcism, socialism, collectivism)
1
@MisterBoggins There is no consent under a certain age. We can argue about the age, but once there is an "underage" there is no consent. Your strawman failed. Self sacrifice is a personal decision. If you want firemen to run into burning buildings, you must accept "occult practices" to be morally consistent. So far you failed: 1- attempted to deny self goverment exists 2- attempted to make "enforcement" part of anarchy Please stop running, changing the subject will not retroactively validate your previous comments. You already failed.
1
@MisterBoggins My will is the only way I take things. Stating the obvious is indeed boring. Yes, yawn. 🥱
1
@MisterBoggins "against" what? are you hallucinating that either of us is a spokeman for TIK? This is between you and me, buster.
1
@MisterBoggins In your hallucination you make comments but I initiated the argument. Don't cast a stone, or a message with a facepalm, if you are going to pretend you didn't start it.
1
@MisterBoggins geez. you can't keep your own word? You just said you stopped! Which one is it? stop or go? Make up your mind.
1
@MisterBoggins I am so sorry that your will depends on the actions of others. I have made no claims to stop. YOU DID. And now you backtrack upon YOURSELF I would feel sorry for you, but your contradictions are delicious and I am not prone to mercy.
1
@brucetucker4847 "government is only one of the options" here is where you fail to understand the video https://youtu.be/jKIYuOxxZWs?t=644 and reality Whatever you call it (councils, unions, themselves), from the moment they can coerce another one with threat of violence, then that (council, union, themselves) BECOMES THE GOVERNMENT. All you listed is the one and the same violent coercive organization, just wearing different makeup and clothes. The only other "option" is free market voluntary exchanges (no threat, no violence, no force) . The complete opposite of "socialism" . The "option" is private individuals doing as they will with what they own. And the "collectives" can go jump in the lake ============= "Get three socialists in the same room and you'll get at least four answers to it. " So the socialists do not know what socialism IS... but they all agree that it must be impossed BY FORCE
1
@adolfstalin1497 No it is not. Who is responsible for crashing a rental car? The driver or Hertz? When you rent a car... do you sell the ownership?...or the control? 🤔
1
@voltage80x that is COMMUNISM In socialism, the workplace is property of the state. That is why in socialism all business is a government owned enterprise. I stand by my definition.
1
@Biren-jf4ol it depends on the coercive nature of the co-operative. If it is strictly voluntary, and people are allowed to engage in the same business outside the co-operative, then it is not socialist at all. If you MUST join the co-operative because they have a government enforced privilege, then it is socialist in nature. For example. Say there is a co-operative of fishermen in a port. If you are forbidden to go out fishing WITHOUT co-operative membership, then it is socialism. If a co-operative of truckers demands that you join them to service certain areas, that is socialism. If your guild ( lawyers, doctors) requires you to join them or you can't practice, that is socialist.
1
19:43 "less than one year" This would also suggest a shortage of auditors and mentors. "learn on the job" means very little if there is nobody that can provide feedback or best practices. The fact that these low seniority offices were "better educated for a modern war" is noted but was wasted. Given the shortage of radios at the start of Barbarrosa, it doesn't matter if these young officers knew what a radio could do, they still didn't get any radios . And if they knew what combined arms warfare was...well, they had no radios to coordinate, no trucks to move infantry, and not enough anti-tank weapons or anti-personnel mortars to combine them.
1
In LatAm the "struggle" was initially described as "permanent revolution" Today they use the present continuous tense (gerundio -ando) and repeat the word "process" (proceso) They are build ING the socialism... but it is a never ending present, socialism is never defined, so it can never be achieved "Contruy-ENDO el socialismo"... "vivir vivi-ENDO" All this was recognized by Orwell: There is no past, no future, just and endless present where the party is always right
1
17:50 communicate not ofuscate The collectivists have been successful in fusing the concepts of leader-party-government-state-fatherland into a single entity to suit their needs. This is where the confusion between state and government comes from. The colectivists created this confusion over decades from academia and newspapers. They shaped the debate, debased the words of meaning. This fusing is the keystone of all the forms of name calling and propaganda leader-fatherland allows you to call any opposition traitors and spies (North Korea huche) leader-state allows you to call any oppositon as violent "anti-system" (Italian Facism) leader-government allows you to call any opposition as "terrorists" (Fauci covid) leader-party allows you to call any oppositon as radical and reactionary (Chavez "escualidos")
1
@bostonrob360 YT is the NaSocs. They are fully synchronized with the government.
1
Solid content
1
Min 57:30 The similarity with today's (country that shall not be named) is unavoidable. ----- It was clear that (ejem!!) was turning into two countries, a coastal/urban (ejem!!) based on exporting goods, dependant on the rural hinterland or imports for food, Australia for coal, middle east for oil. ---- Is this a Weimar-style economic reset, without the trench warfare?
1
nothing new under the sun yesterday "genuine hecklers" today " mostly peaceful"
1
@ZER0ZER0SE7EN That is the point. France only had a defensive strategy, and would never make good the promises to aid Poland. France and England would not have started a second front until much later. The alternative was not to attack Russia towards Moscow first, it was to attack Russia towards Stalingrad first, taking over Romania on the way. Leave Poland alone, as a buffer.
1
@aranos6269 no argument here. Someone should be responsible. And we also should understand why they made these decisions. The objective here is not to punish, but to prevent.
1
@frederickbays405 You DID understand that this was done because of Stalin's threats? (real or imagined)
1
@frederickbays405 In hindsight we know Stalin was weak. But keep in mind that all this was agreed for in Yalta. The commitments made in Feb/45 in Yalta contemplated continued and bloody war in the pacific, with Russia as an ally, maybe for two more years. The Trinity test was not until July/45, so it was still unproven pipe dream. Maybe, if Yalta had happened after the the Trinity test, Stalin would have not been able to obtain so much.
1
@frederickbays405 That is NOT what I said. What I said is that WHEN Yalta took place, they all expected two more years of war, and they needed Stalin to chip in against Japan. So the promises to return the prisioners were made to keep Stalin "happy". Had they already tested the Abomb before Yalta, maybe they would have not promised so much to Stalin
1
@frederickbays405 As you say, Stalin could kill 30M japanese. Now if the allies wanted Stalin to do this, they had to surrender the POWs to Stalin to keep Russia on their side. --- Imagine for five minutes if Stalin had brokered peace with the japanese in exchange for (whatever)... and had sent the leftover lend-lease equipment and supplies to Japan.
1
@frederickbays405 no argument here. You are making my point. All the commitments and plans made before the Abomb were changed after it was used. The allies agreed to repatriate the peoples Stalin demanded, because they needed him for an extended war with Japan. Stalin changed his plans to take Manchuria, Korea and China, when he saw what the Abomb could do. /// Also, that Stalin played the allies like a fiddle? Yes, yes and yes. The western allies were unprepared to deal with people like Stalin.
1
If you know recent LatAm history: "Expropiese" 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩
1
When panzer-chocolate fueled rage is not enough for your dear leader goals
1
Solid content. Feed the algorithm
1
@Iv4Bez there is no embargo. Cuba trades with the "super powers" Russia, China, Venezuela, Iran and Brasil They export Niquel, at pretty good prices And, what does the "embargo" have to do with growing sugar cane? Is the sun embargoed? The water? The soil? Go cry "embargo" somewhere else
1
@Iv4Bez I call BS, because Cuba has "exported" the "success" in healthcare to Venezuela and Brasil. So pick one lie. Can't have it both ways. Either Cuba is a sport, health and public schooling power house, that exported (for money) doctors and trainers... or it is "affected by the embargo"
1
@Iv4Bez if there is a "lack of access to medicine", it is because they send their doctors overseas instead of treating their own population These "exports" deny the "blockade" allegation, since they ARE able to export any good or service they want, and charge hard currency for it. Venezuela paid Cuba in hard dollars and oil. So a) there is no embargo, b) the deficiencies of the Cuban government are self inflicted
1
@Iv4Bez there are trade restrictrions. But these are self imposed wounds of the socialist ideas set forth in the Cuban law. Not an embargo. Statetism, lack of respect for property rights and corruption
1
@Iv4Bez false. There was an armed blockade to stop missiles coming via ships. It was never a commercial sanction. Furthermore, the blockade failed, the missiles DID go thru. So the "excuse" is even less credible.
1
@Iv4Bez cubaplatform org "Significant sources of imported food include Vietnam (rice), Brazil (rice, soybean oil, and chicken), Argentina (rice), Canada and France (wheat), Russia (soybean oil) and the United States (soybean oil and chicken)." So where are the "sanctions"? They trade freely, with many countries. Even the USA sells them food! What the cuban government can't explain is WHY don't they feed themselves? Why can't they grow their OWN food? Is there an embargo on the soil? The rain? The sunlight? The cows? Or the cornstalks?
1
The one ( and ONLY) redeeming quality of Churchill is that he held inmense power...twice. Think about that for a minute And TWICE he stepped down. No coup, no palace assesination, no toppling of the monarchy, no kristallnatch If you agree to this.... I will agree to every and all nasty things you want to say about him Respectfully
1
A point well made and clear. Just one little bit of nit-picking. For the European balance of power strategy to succeed, it is only required that Europe remain DIVIDED. If the divided Europeans actually are FIGHTING each other, 🤷 that is not Britain's making. Britain would much rather trade with a divided and peaceful Europe. Second best is to trade with a divided Europe busy in a dog-eat-dog war within. The last thing Britain wants is a warmongering single government taking over most of Europe, and this is the only goal of the "balance of power". Divided Europe? Yes, please. Fighting Europe? Only as a side dish. ///// I submit to you that the moment talks about an "european aircraft carrier" begin... then the EU becomes a "warmongering single government controlling most of Europe" (https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/germany-proposes-european-aircraft-carrier/). Maybe an idea for a future video?
1
@Leotv1948 You forget all the chavista rethoric about self-suffiency (endogeno they called it). One of the flag projects was "el pozo venezolano", by which they would locally produce all the required technologies, equipment and materials. They created a branch of PDVSA called PDVSA-Servicios to kick out the foreign service companies "because they are not needed". They claimed that sanctions would not harm the industry. And yet they failed. I will also point out that they bragged about technological partnerships with Russia, Iran and North Korea, and that they had "all the technology required". If there is chaos, it is not due to sanctions, it is due to the poor planning of these projects.
1
@bludfyre the root of socialism economic failure is the destruction of incentives to the individual. If I come up with a better mousetrap, I gain nothing from it. So creativity and entrepeneurship disappear. That is why iPhones are invented and designed by free people in USA, and built by slaves in China. You DO KNOW which one is the "socialist one" between China and USA
1
@Leotv1948 The US has left socialist Venezuela fail. Sanctions are a response to drug trafficking, giving venezuelan passports to terrorists from the middle east, money laundering and cooperation with the FARC
1
@Leotv1948 yes there are videos of humanitarian aid being stopped... BY THE VENEZUELAN GOVERMENT https://youtu.be/gKQaGzELROQ name calling does not change the fact that weapons and oilfield equipment from china and russia did enter Venezuela. Where is your so called "blockade"?
1
@wasneeplus " nor did they act on any such beliefs" Yes they did. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8?t=8204 The "difference" is that MARXIST state took away from "burgeois" to give the workers (class warfare) NAZI state took away from jews and foreigners to give to the germans (race warfare) In both cases, it is state control of the means of production. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8?t=8903
1
@bludfyre The proof that the government cannot fund innovation is that the iPhone was not created in North Korea. You still believe that a government "can do a better job"... but the evidence is against your faith
1
@tharrrrrrr that is not relevant. The issue here is IF the government-state controls property, companies or corporations. If the government state has a "five year plan", set wages, orders production runs and goals... that is socialism And the Nazis did all that.
1
@bludfyre Government funds created many things, but none of them are products. GPS is nothing without google maps or Garmin. DARPAnet was useless until netscape made the internet useful Microprocessors were expensive, single purpose, low yield production was acceptable for military contracts... until Zylog and Motorola solved the instruction set and yield problems. The few government R&D that is not a total writeoff cannot be used to justify the wasteful spending of government. You are cherrypicking the successful ones post facto. How many supersonic SST did Boeing produce? 😁 How are those pharma grants doing in gain of function research? What was the ROI on rail guns? Or hovercrafts? Or the supersonic sea plane? Remember the nuclear jet engines? It is not a myth. Government can spend, but it cannot deliver value for money. Only private entrepeneurs unlock value. Sometimes it is found in the trash heap of government wasteful spending.
1
@wasneeplus "no large scale nationalisation" Again, they suspended private property rights. All "property" was conditional to be used in favour of the party objectives. Remember that the definition is "state ownership OR control". If the state can take private property and give it to selected front men...it is in control. hence socialism.
1
@wasneeplus Yes I do think the US became a socialist economy during the war. And the first thing they did after the war was over was to dismantle the war controls. I do not discuss their "main issues" or mind read their "motivations". Even if you call the economy "window dressing"...the fact was that all property was subject to be taken, a front obedient man put in charge, and it WAS state-government controlled. Hence socialism. You want to draw distinctions in the motivations, or justifications, imaginations or machinations? Fine. But the facts remain stubborn: socialism is the state-government ownership or control of the means of production. Marxists and Nazis BOTH controlled the means of production. Hence both equally socialist.
1
@wasneeplus We do know what the nazis would have done with private ownership had they won. They would STILL CONTROL IT . Of course there is no trouble if only "yes men" have property and do your bidding. "deemed necessary" by WHOM? I for one reject eminent domain and public works as well. If it HAS to be bought, then it MUST be bought in a voluntary transaction. Between individuals. Let them sort out the price. The fact that governments advance socialist policies, and that they are contained and prevented from polluting the economy... that is why nobody would mistake the Dutch for a socialist economy. The Dutch economy is not socialist because the people oppose the tyranny of government every day. Not for lack of trying. To answer your question clearly: there has never been a government that isn't socialist. If the economy and the country are not infected by government socialist action, it's because citizens resists and reject it. You will agree that the government IS NOT the economy. Neither is the government the same as the country. Because that fusion and confusion between leader-party-government-country is the hallmark of socialism (ein fuhrer, ein volk)
1
@wasneeplus the two citizens hash it out. one pays the other enough until they yield. They go to private arbitrage Thunderdome. pistols at twelve paces I don't care as long as the government stays out of it Calling all the governments socialists is the first step in calling out all the taxes, fiat money, currency debasing, government controlled corporativism
1
@wasneeplus people do murder each other everyday It matters not if I am ok with it, or not The issue is that you believe the government can prevent it ( it can't) The issue is that you want me to be helpless so that the government has the monopoly of violence. please stop strawman-ing me. Go watch the cathy newman interview. "so you're okay" is strawman at it's best. Don't tell me what you believe I think. "doesn't understand economics" special pleading. Try again as for "organizing society". I don't want to organize society. But I also don't want you or anyone else to do it.
1
@wasneeplus so... how is it going for you? Does your government keep the people that want to harm you "in check"? You have no fear of criminals? Here is the poison you sell: I want to self defend. You attempt to equate self defense with extremism, willfull harm of others. Self defense is not a crime... except for those that want to slaughter helpless sheep. Strawman... i never said violence will be used to solve disagreements. What I said is i don't know and I don't care how two people agree to solve their differences... what I said is ONLY leave the government out of it And yes, for someone that defends government totalitarism...that "is a crime"
1
@alexgray2482 the government is a mafia protection racket poor people can't afford the government protection, that is why they pay no taxes AND GUESS WHAT? the poor areas that pay lower or no taxes are the high crime areas! So you are accusing my plan of what YOUR plan already is doing? Subdidized high crime areas would disappear under my system. People would leave those places. As I said, the investigation would be made by private insurance. It would be swift, ruthless and effective. As for the gangs. Let them roam free. And let them freely reap the retribution that the community will give them. Gangs don't exist in a vacuum. Without government protecting their life and "human rights" .... gangs would be erased by citizens, almost overnight. Fuenteovejuna. look it up.
1
@alexgray2482 This is interesting # What would happen if an insurer, a corporation and an arbitrator conspired to bring down a smaller competitor to the corporation. # Conspired... with WHO? You see, companies can only conspire WITH THE GOVERNMENT. Only Governments can give and protect monopolies. "All monopolies have been established with government help" https://youtu.be/lWZu0HcsjG4 Any company using resources on "bringing down" a competitor is not using these resources to give the customer a better product at a better price. If such company does not fail... it is ONLY because of government protection (airline regulations, shipping flag requirements, farming subsidies, internet and EV tax breaks, government charters, banks and exchanges government protected monopolies)
1
@alexgray2482 people don't rise against government because the government insists on taking weapons away from them That is why the US is different That is why LatAm is so miserable Only criminals (gangs and government) have weapons in LatAm The difference between a citizen and a slave is a weapon.
1
@alexgray2482 The banks, employers insurance ALREADY act like a cartel. And the do so because the government gives them that privilege To set up a bank you need a government license. To set up an insurance company? government license... these are protections, barriers to entry See what I mean when I say that a conspiracy must include the government? (((but I was mentally unwell and you falsely induced me into signing the contract that took away my right?))) Well, go ask all the seniors that get scammed by hedge funds and Tele-marketers... and then those same hedge funds are protected by the government when they allege that the seniors are "sophisticated investors" and "knew all the risks" Why you keep accusing MY PLAN of what YOUR REALITY is already doing?
1
@wasneeplus (((No, right now you live in a normal society where the government usually tries to look out for everybody's interests, as it should be.))) Would you fly on an airline that " usually tries " to make safe landings? How about a hospital that " usually tries " to amputate the sick limb? Is that normal for you? Fine.. not for me. I do not want to fly "goverment airlines"
1
@alexgray2482 there are no "natural" monopolies. All monopolies are un-natural, created and enforced by government coercion Banks existed long before regulation. What needs barriers to entry is the FIAT money ponzi scheme
1
@alexgray2482 If what you say is true. Please explain how IBM lost the PC market. Why Nokia lost the cellphone market. Why the "real McCoy" oiler was lost. All these companies were run by angels inmune to "collusion"? Did they not desire "profit"?
1
@alexgray2482 Pray do tell, have the federal trade commission or the European commision attempted to dismantle the monopoly of money by central banks? Don't think so... so it is no that they are against "collusion" or "monopolies... just the ones that do not OBEY their designs
1
@alexgray2482 "communist party" is your problem You blame private companies for the things government companies do
1
@alexgray2482 by definition, if the government is making regulations, it is not a "neo liberal" laissez faire free market system You are angry at the collusion between government and corporations (socialism)... please stop pretending government intervention is the fault of free market
1
@alexgray2482 Strawman argument: I have never advocated for ankle tags Why are you discussing what I have NOT said? The liars, thieves and murderers are all in government, not among the population
1
@mikemcmike6427 "Or the fact every single left wing party leader was either forced to flee Germany or killed." The left kills and eats their own Just because Stalin purged everybody else does not make him a "right winger'
1
@mikemcmike6427 Oh as allies and friends and brought them into their party. Hahahaha keep going clown boy. I’m owning you here call me daddy By your own admission, they made deals with anyone if it suited their interest. If it was "convenient". So even IF they treated the "conservatives" as "friends"..IT WAS ONLY FOR CONVENIENCE I’m owning you here call me daddy Having a conversation with an leftist is like playing chess with a pigeon. They knock down the pieces, shit the board, and then strut around claiming they won!
1
@makhnothecossack4948 "State capitalism" CANNOT exist If it's "capitalism", it's PRIVATE ownership If it's "state" it's not private Please stop repeating leftist sound bites, stop making up words. Stop changing the meaning of words. Stop pretending "it wasn't real socialism"
1
@makhnothecossack4948 "...isn't the definition of socialism..." Please stop making up definitions of socialism. Please stop saying "it wasn't real socialism" The definition of socialism is the GOVERNMENT CONTROL of the means of production.
1
@MadManRob thank you for your kind comment. 😁👍
1
@JohnBickner So? The "chavistas" have claimed for years that they had alternate markets. They also claimed the path to grow was "endogeno" , similar to north korea's "huche" ideals. from 2004, much before the sanctions, Chavez was loudmouthing about not "one drop of oil" to the USA 10 de marzo, 2004 - 00h00 “Si Bush trata de desestabilizarnos, no tendrá ni una gota más de petróleo”, afirmó el presidente venezolano Hugo Chávez al diario francés Le Figaro, en entrevista efectuada en Caracas y publicada ayer en ese periódico.
1
@JohnBickner roads can be charities. Or can be paid by subscription. I do not buy the "monopoly" argument. One: governments are already charging "monopoly" prices to enter London or Paris, so it has already happened. TWO, in this age of remote presence and internet, nobody has to go or be anywhere anymore.
1
"wrong but useful " is the cornerstone of "trust the experts" Let's see how many ways "wrong but useful" has shown it's ugly head over the years... -the Malthusians doom cult of the Club of Rome -the Hubbert peak chicken littles -the twelve years until global WINTER kills everyone -then twelve years until global WARMING drowns everyone -Six to eight portions of carbohydrates in the food pyramid -adults don't need to drink milk The sleigh of hand is that it is never specified useful to WHO ? Certainly it is never the public.
1
36:00 Someone saw this video and offered money for captured tanks https://youtu.be/aff_x87IIjs
1
👍
1
7:30 1942 ukraine.. bread basket... overrun (NOT asking for a video on current events, that is just too much of a hassle and exposure to YUtube harassment.) What would be interesting is this: What is a historian reaction to the same themes repeating? 80 years later it is still (again?) about oil(gas, energy), food (ukraine, breadbasket), excuses (it was the winter/weather), logistics (railheads vs trucks), and places (Kiev, Donbass, Karkhiev), hidden documents locked for "state security" for forty or more years. Are we repeating these tragedies because we have forgotten history? Or because history has been falsified with an agenda? Is the death of the last survivors opening the door to the same horrors? Not sure I get my idea across. Just that I believe you have a unique perspective on history itself, not the events that make history.
1
"god wants to know himself" The arrogance and hubris to claim to KNOW what "god" wants is baffling. We suffer buying gifts to the man that "has everything".... what would a "god" want for? How can a mortal know what "god" wants?
1
2:20 "lack of shipping" <<< THIS. Only thanks to TIK we get to the levers that moved history. If you were an incompetent political establishment that had left an island nation with overseas territories wanting for shipping capacity... you cannot admit that ... you made sure everybody believed it was the Uboat threat👻. /// The famine in India does deserve it's own video.
1
min 19:50 "before reinforcements come from the east of the Volga" . This is key. The plan depended on a quick victory. Once it became a dragged out attrition affair, the plan is not viable
1
Imagine being surprised when told that bankers loan money to governments and industrial concerns.🙄 Also, imagine being surprised and outraged that bankers provide funds to politicians that grant banking licenses.🙄 Then imagine being outraged that bankers profit from the placement of government bonds, debt, ratings, and fees.🙄 To spin the above into "banks support such and such IDEOLOGY" is dishonest. Banks will loan money to Saint Peter, or the devil himself, if the premium is worth it.
1
We have birds-eye' view, full intelligence from both sides, and decades to review it... and we are still arguing about the decisions made by exhausted commanders, pressured for time, shelled round the clock, with incomplete information and life-and-death responsability of thousands of men on their shoulders. War IS be hell, but it is a very difficult hell.
1
This subject is a freaking minefield. Axis technological advantages in 1939 1- The japanese Type93 torpedos. 2- The Enigma machines (later leapfrogged by project Ultra) 3- The night time optics in Italian and Japanese ships. 4- The war tested Stukas and Zeros. 5- The snorkel (leapfrogged by airborne radar) 6-The 88 gun /// The real advantage is experience in doctrine and combined arms use Germany gained in Spain, and Japan gained in China. ✅
1
Isn't it West Formosa? Well done.
1
@chrislambert9435 Yes. Churchill was an equal opportunity stubborn a-hole. Respectfully
1
Why people believe propaganda? Because people are dangerous emotional irrational beings driven by fear that seek safety in herds and need shepherds. In contrast, CITIZENS stand alone, are brave in front of fear, are not willing to trade freedom for "safety" , need no leaders. This is why propaganda is directed against citizens, and is made for people consumption. Why would a government need a Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda? That is the tell.
1
solid content
1
Leftards keep harping about the (imaginary) "embargo" on Cuba, but they can't see the REAL government intervention and subsidies in "private" business. TIK is over the target. 🎯
1
Subscribed to the channel, and this video does not show up in my subscription page. Yes they are actively throttling you.
1
Imitation is the best form of flattery. Try to get a cut from his revenue, there is a sizeable portuguese population that doesn't speak english. And there is a LOT of history in portuguese that has never broken into english. If he behaves like an idiot, then yes copyright him
1
@MisterBoggins your attempt to change the subject has failed You hallucinate that you or me are spokepersons for TIK or others. I do not speak for TIK, nor can you. Stay on topic.
1
@MisterBoggins you do understand that the owner of the content is TIK. That stealing is frowned upon. Did you search youtube to find my comments in another video to? This is your "permanent stop"?
1
9:35 "somehow historians" HOW? ---->>>> money, tenure positions, media, cultural hegemony, government mandated school curriculum, government mandated patriotic holydays and celebrations HISTORIANS? ---->>> not historians, Gramscian clean up crews with an agenda, passing propaganda as history
1
Tik. You do not HAVE to get thru to the collectivists/socialists. It is not an obligation. The point is to prevent cultural hegemony from taking hold.
1
Solid content. The interpersonal and political problems cannot be denied. "Victory" has covered up many ugly warts for too long of a time.
1
This is completely outside your area of expertise, but it contributes to the observation that the meaning of words changes to suit the narrative, In LatAm, on election day, the military takes over the schools to "protect" the voting centers. And they handle and guard all the polling materials, boxes and documents. Civilian police is locked up in the stations and their weapons removed for the day. So basically you have a military coup every few years, on the clock. And military allowing some puppet to "win"..... and they call it "democracy" and "fair elections" If you think that saying "hitler was a socialist" is frowned upon.... try explaining one of the "perfecto idiota latino-americano" that Pinochet also wanted the economy to be under government control. I tried, they scream back "he was a military dictator"... and they short circuit when you ask them if Stalin was a military dictator as well. Guide to the perfect Latin American idiot - Stanford University
1
seventy years later, we are still discussing these matters. With hindsight and data the actual people at the time could not dream of having. Good stuff. 25:20 airborne divisions that needed to be utilized. Politics and image dictating operations, imagine that! Here is a question: Did the germans leave sleeper agents inside France during this retreat? The planning of the battle of the Bulge would require some (real time) knowledge of where and how large the fuel depos where behind allied lines. It is one thing to say you expect to run on your enemy's fuel... but pretending to do that without knowing WHERE the fuel actually is going to be would be reckless.
1
Solid content
1
Gazala? Sweet
1
@slimjim5097 "fight against them" means nothing. two drunks will fight for an empty bottle... both are drunk. two nazis can fight, one believes the "nation" is defined by race, the other believes the "nation" is defined by religion. They fight each other for power.
1
@Zombehnation1001 did you search about "ley reservada del cobre" "some sectors" is what you always say "it wasn't real socialism" Hell, some of you are still saying that because there is an old lady selling food by the side of the road in Caracas "that is still private enterprise and therefore Venezuela is not socialism"
1