Comments by "Classical LP Vault" (@classicallpvault8251) on "History Debunked" channel.

These aren't rights but merely a socially ingrained sense of (false) entitlement. People are free to behave in bizarre ways as long as they don't break the law but they should also be ready to put up with whatever ridicule that's coming their way because of it.
12
Yes but he even underestimated the problem. Hollywood was investigated but by and large, academics got away.
8
McCarthy was correct, if anything he was underestimating the degree of Communist subversion in America.
4
Canvas is routinely re-used in oil painting because that type of paint completely covers the material underneath. Having a white canvas is a prerequisite for water colouring though.
3
@fahedal-ajmi4015 Zionism comes in various forms and one of them is secular Israeli nationalism. Which was the ideology of the founders of Israel and every single Israeli prime minister with the exception of Naftali Bennett. Even Netanyahu, although allied with conservative religious parties for political reasons, is secular himself. So no, that's not true. Zionism can be religious but doesn't have to be and its secular form is easily the most influential one as evidenced by its impact on Israeli politics. This is slowly starting to change though due to demographic trends. Secular Israelis have replacement-level fertility but the ultra-orthodox have very large numbers of children.
3
@dragonofhatefulretribution9041 There is no centralised religious authority nor even a real equivalent of the priesthood in Sunni islam. Shia islam does have a centralised hierarchical structure and the equivalent of priests and bishops but that's a different story and they're not exactly on friendly terms with Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family has no authority over Sunni muslims outside of Saudi Arabia although their enormous wealth does give them plenty of influence, but of course authority and influence aren't the same thing. They cannot issue legally binding commands in religious matters to clerics abroad like a Shia Grand Ayatollah can and instead have to resort to bribery and sponsoring terrorism.
3
@fahedal-ajmi4015 My response to this is going to be quite complex so please bear with me: I don't mind people who are hostile to Israel based on what they perceive as the problem of Jewish political and economic influence but I do think they're basing their ideas on faulty logic. The '1948 ethnic cleansing' and this talk about 'apartheid' makes no sense to me when applying elementary laws of logic. Israeli leadership called on the Arabs to stay out of the war, and those who did were granted citizenship. Arab Israelis have full political and economic rights and have been in the highest positions of political leadership including as junior coalition partners, have become government ministers, high court judges, and are, if they're islamic or Druze, exempt from army service (although many of them volunteer). If blacks in South Africa had those rights there would have been no apartheid in South Africa so there's none in Israel either. After 1948 100.000 more Jews were driven out of Arab nations than Arabs were driven out of their homes in Israel. Many of whom, by the way, were labour migrants from surrounding countries who came and work for the British and the Jews and therefore didn't have a strong claim to 'indigenous population' status anyways. Things like that happen during and in the aftermath of wars and this is a similar issue to the Benes doctrine in post-war Czechoslovakia, which removed Sudeten Germans who did not have family ties with Czechs from their homes and transferred them to Germany. This was simply a logical outcome of Germany losing WWII. At the time, population transfers were not yet regarded as illegal by definition. I don't have any issues with Jews in Israel. By and large they support traditional family values and regard themselves as Westerners. Nor do I have issues with diamond cutters in Antwerp for instance. Nor with the many succesful Jewish classical musicians, both performers and composers, I own records of. They're not enemies of Western civilisation. I have issues with the highly influential Jews in the financial sector, in Hollywood, and in the media in the West, especially in the US. People like George Soros. Board members of big banks, executives in the pornographic industry and in mainstream cinema, and financial administrators. They tend to be left-wing, vote Democratic, and are hostile towards both western civilisation and to Israel and should be stopped. There is absolutely some truth to the notion of Jewish bad actors undermining western civilisation but it's a very small and easily identifiable sub-group of wealthy secular Jews mainly in the US which causes the problem. Which can easily be solved by dealing with their source of income. Ban porn. Reform banking regulations and make it unprofitable to engage in rent-seeking and introduce capital punishment for irregularities in banking at the systemic level, like the bad credit scam which caused the 2007 financial meltdown. Remove the accreditation of any learning institution which promotes woke ideology. Gender studies and colonial literature departments and other humanities faculties should no longer have the right to award degrees. And most importantly: stop watching dumb mainstream films promoting woke ideology. Stop watching television. Stop giving cellphones and tablets to children. Not only would this cut us free from the bad influence of societally undermining activists and businesspeople wether Jews or gentiles, it would deal with the nefarious influence that all kinds of celebrities, most of whom are abject degenerates, have on our hearts and minds.
3
It has, just not via immigration and not in societies already more advanced than islamic ones like western nations. Islam was an improvement, at least in terms of social organisation and technological development, in tribal lands in Africa like northern Nigeria. At least it was a step up from the quasi prehistoric tribal culture which was native there before Arab and Berber slave traders introduced islam, at least to the Muslim converts who then went on to wage war on and enslave their neighbours and sell them to the Arabs by the millions. Islam also likely improved the standing of formerly Hindu populations in Java, who, without it, could not have risen to dominate what later became Indonesia. Yet again, at the peril of their neighbours, be it the Batak from Sumatra or the remaining Hindus on Bali, whom they have been treating as inferior to them since Dutch colonial times. The irony is that the even more devout Aceh muslim population isn't exactly on friendly terms with them either and has only been kept from rebellion by federalisation and allowing them to introduce Sharia. So yeah, there's instances where islamisation actually benefits the societies adopting it - just not via immigration but via conversion and then doing what islam does best: causing its adherents to subjugate their non-muslim neighbours.
2
@davehunter9342 You don't vote for a government, you vote for a candidate. I live in the Netherlands which has proportional representation and no vote threshold and it's customary for party leaders to speak out on their preferred coalition partners, or exclude potential coalition partners, before a general election so we just take that into consideration and a significant amount of strategic voting takes place as a result. It works but just through a different type of dynamic than with a first-past-the-post system. In which small parties can have enormous influence just as well, remember the DUP helping the Conservatives to a parliamentary majority? This can happen each time when the election winners end up just a couple of seats shy of a majority.
2
More valuable than that of other nations I'd say even. I'm a classical music enthousiast and the works of Gustav Holst, Ralph Vaughan Williams and Arnold Bax are among the greatest musical achievements of mankind. But there's cultural relativists who seem to think that a great classical composer is just as valuable as a bunch of tribesmen banging a drum while chanting rhythmic gibberish or that Rembrandt, Turner, or Dürer's paintings are equally valuable to some rock drawings by cavemen. I'll treat cultures with the amount of respect they deserve. And occasionally it can happen that no respect is due. Take gangsta rap and its culture completely based around crime, sexual deviance and substance abuse.
2
I don't think this is a good idea given that we'll be basically making sure that the next generation of British-born jihadis will have had combat training.
2
True but he stayed active until the end, as a sought-after political advisor and negotiator.
1
@HuHWhat-yi8cp Not just the Sumerians. Ancient Egyptian polytheism also influenced the monotheistic faith which later became known as Judaism (and one of its offshoots as Christianity). Basically religions evolve just like people do and are under Darwinian selection (which is why Jainism for instance is dying out due to low birth rates of its ascetic adherents). It's why the future of the West is conservative and nationalistic, both through the rise of islam and the rise of fundamentalist Christianity. SSPX catholics and fundamentalist Protestants (like parts of the Dutch reformed churches - reformed towns like Barneveld and Urk in the Netherlands have a very young and rapidly growing population) have large families while more secular Christians are deleting themselves from the gene pool. Ed Dutton described this phenomenon as the 'Talibanisation of the West', e.g. the demographicv expansion of people who reject enlightenment values.
1
@logicius Yeah, ask the women of Monte Cassino how that played out for them, you absolute bell end.
1
@dragonofhatefulretribution9041 Yes it is. I explained that Sunni islam has no centralised religious authority and not even priests and thus cannot be 'ruled' by anyone due to its decentralised nature. An imam in Sunni islam derives his authority purely based on being regarded as knowledgeable in religious affairs but is simply a layman just like the members of his congregation. Only Shia islam can be ruled because it has a priestly class and centralised hierarchically organised leadership. Sunnis number 85% of Muslims or thereabouts. This means that at least a part of your statement is incorrect. You can only control a religion if it has a hierarchical structure and centralised religious authorities. Sunni islam lacks both.
1