Comments by "Not Today" (@nottoday3817) on "What was the Point of Langermann's 24th Panzer Corps? (And more...) Stalingrad Addendum 4" video.

You would be surprised how many people would be so shocked they won't believe it. I've got a lot of them in my familly
12
Except the election espionage is mostly an overinflated hoax meant to keep the dissidents in line. Whenever somebody goes ultra-radical, he goes 'Russia is supporting the opposition' and there it goes.
8
If I may, what went different in Mars I believe it's the deployment of both forces. In Uranus, basically the Soviets created a Schwerpunkt of their own. They led the Germans into a trap, making it seem that they try to hold out in the city, but they concentrated their forces on the flanks where the defences were the weakest. With Mars, the Germans had no desire to attack. They would launch counter-operations at Rjev to regain crucial lost territory or disturb soviet preparations, but no strategic strike like the drive towards Groznyi or Stalingrad was supposed to be. Since the Germans were on the defensive, there were not quite a lot of gaps to be exploited. And the Germans also had reserves to be sent in.
3
@brunozucconi2409 The problem with TIK is exactly how he goes into detail. It's the old cliche of not seeing the forrest from the Trees. I will take one example. He mentioned something like: if the price of water is too high, people would buy tea (in highschool I was given this example with coffee since it made even more sense). This makes sense in capitalist economic terms: if the demand for water is too high (aka the price is high) some people would switch to tea. However, what his argument does not take into account is that you need water for tea. So if the demand for tea increases, the one for water would still not drop that much. And you still need water for more things than drinking, like cooking or washing (That's what I said it made more sense with coffee, since it's a direct, non-interfering, competing product) But, there is another aspect. If we compare tea vs coffee. Coffee is generally preffered to Tea because coffee gives you energy in the morning and people are literally addicted to it. Soo, even if the price is too high, people might still go out and buy it. In short, economcally, short-scale, speaking, TIK is right in water vs tea (or Coffee vs tea) But when you compare their usefulness, you might see that people would still opt for coffee rather than tea, even if more expensive. And, on a side note. Disaproving with someone is 3 times harder than constructing an argument. Once comes from the prep-work trying to see where the person is wrong and where he's right. (according to your logic). The second is you deconstructing their arguments with logic and/or facts. And the third comes from assembling facts and logic to build up your own argument. The problem with TIK is that he goes into so much detail that you cannot claim 'This is utter bullshit' You have to carefully analyse everything, which takes time and resources. I remember I once lambasted one of his bullshit arguments about Black Market. But even if what he said was like 1 minute in an hour long video about Soviet economy (i believe), it still took me a comment that would be like 1 page long in a standard word format. And that was for something which was pure bullshit, so I only had to give counterexamples and put some logic to tie them together. Eidt: That's why we don't go into so much detail. We are not youtubers. We are not paid to do this. We are just people trying to prevent misinformation while struggling with our realy daily lives, so we do not have time for this. If you want to get better yourself, do what I, and perhaps many others, do. Start back from his details and rebuild the system. And once you rebuild the parts of it, set them in motion and see how they compare to the real world. That's how I knew TIK economics is bullshit. I compared his 'private society' (an oxymoron, I know, perhaps 'society of privates?') with a system of particles having attractive interactions between them (electronic or gravitational) . Then I went to look for the practicality of things (could a small business build giant things that we need today? most likely not)
2
errrm. let's hope you are right
1
Disregarding the insulting comment of MegaRaven, I would have to say that TIK spews some bullshit, mostly be omission. The problem with Tikonomics or TIkeconomics, as we call his views on capitalism and such, is that they lack a general, dynamic picture. He often portrays capitalist societies in a state fixed in time, never altering. The problem is that in the context of capitalism which promotes free market and individual growth, the two things are total opposites. You cannot have a system of particles all maintaining their relative position to each other while you expect them to grow and develop or fail and shrink to disappearance. That is practically impossible. That's why TIK only promotes a fixed point in an anarcho-capitalist world, usually the time zero, when you only have small businesses with soft trade relationships between each other. In a dynamic, free, system, as the particular individuals develop the relationship between each other, they will become closer to each other and distance themselves from others. And this is how you gain things like corporations. If you prevent such things from happening, then the system is no longer free. In short: if you include time, TIKs ideea of capitalism is not valid: you either have to include the 'public sector' (with corporations and such) or you have to agree that you don't have a free market. That would be the basic theoretical problem with the view on economics he promotes. There are also practical problems. No single pebble can break a stone castle wall. You need a big rock with an expensive system to breach it. What I mean is that for big projects that would advance humanity, you cannot rely on individual businesses. You need big companies that have to deal with either building a thing and maintaining it, or building multiple things (and maintaining them). Wright brothers invented the controls for the airplane. Do you see any 'Wright Brothers' company today on the aviation market? You don't even see Russian airplanes that much, despite being a whole country with tradition in making pretty good planes (I am from this field and I can say that despite the propaganda, they make some damn good and sturdy planes) Why you don't see either of them? Because only Boeing and Airbus and companies they finance have the ability to adapt to the changes in the market demand, build enough planes to satisfy the demand and maintain their products. (Russia built a good jet in the form of Sukhoi Superjet, but the inability to provide enough maintainance led to various problems and cancellations of orders, aside from a tragic accident) And, for the final, I still have to say that there are times when TIK does go straight out moronic on an outrageous level. The best example is him promoting Black Market as a good thing because it's a 'free market'. Like screw basic things like Consumer Protection. I don't know about him, but in my Eastern European comunistoid logic, when we eat at McDonalds we like to eat some beef or chicken burgers, not rat meat and others.
1
@MegaRaven100 When I was referring to insulting I meant you trying to bring the ideea that he is trying to sell some sort of PC agenda. I honestly do not feel like he's selling someones agenda, but rather that he believes what he says. Accusing him of selling agendas is an ad-hominem propagandistic argument which kills any sense of debate. When I was calling out his bullshit and saying he goes moronic, I was talking about his statements (and the mimics he puts on when presenting them). I was not talking about him. Yes, you could say a person is not a moron, but he spews out moronic bullshit, like a Rocket Scientist saying Coronavirus is caused by Chinese 5G towers. The guy is not a moron, because he actually does something that requires quite a lot of skill. But in the context, he speaks only idiotic stuff. When I mentioned disregarding your comment, I meant I did not want to be associated with your view of calling out TIK as some propaganda outlet since I hold no such belief and I find it detrimental. You are entitled to your own opinion if you wish I hope I got myself clear and sorry if I insulted you
1
@brunozucconi2409 What? Comparing water vs tea? That I am not sure in which exact video he was talking about, but I believe it was Public vs Private. Talking about black market, the first time I heard him do that is during his tackle at the Soviet economy after WW2, around 30min mark?. (Note: I know he mentioned black market in videos before, but I stopped looking into his TIKnomics videos because they basically say the same thing )
1
I think he meant the concept. There are other ways to punish people, not just beating them up like in 1984. The best way is usually to discredit them. Kill them and they become a martyr. Discredit them and they become useless. Just look at the 'Russian meddling'. You need to pass an unpopular decision or need to remove somone from power? Just scream: 'RUSSIA'. An Austrian politician got fished by a news agency that had nothing to do with Russia, still it was blamed on Russia. A Montenegrin politician trying to enslave its countr to a group that a few years ago bombed them and thier kin in Serbia? Just scream Russia. Want to literally give control of the Parliament to a foreign controlled ethnic group and change the name of your country despite presidential opposition? 'RUSSIAAAAA'. Romania running rampant with corruption involving fund and companies from all the western world? NAh, bro IT's THE DAMN RUSSIANS. You see something similar with hate against minorities or women. The dude does not agree with a woman spitting bullshit? He's sexist. The dude does not like a Female Doctor that cannot act and literally tells a guy who confesses having cancer to fuck off cause she's socially awkward? He's sexist. Etc. etc.
1