Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "Whatifalthist" channel.

  1. Ah yes. Yet another random video drop. Thank you Rudy
    2
  2.  @quisqueyanguy120  But they share the same civilization and so what hampered them was their governmental system which is the only real difference. On paper they should be as wealthy and powerful as the US. They should have been much like northwestern Europe. But it's poor and has been poor the entire time. And it's been around while being independent and exposed to the west for far longer. Basically everyone else who isn't wealthy is because they haven't been independent and have only very recently been exposed to industrialization. Thus, they're only poorer by not having enough time to grow. But Latin America, which has been around longer than Anglo America, is still poor. We know the factors of why Eastern Europe isn't rich and it's because of the Soviets really which hampered a lot of that growth. The Asian countries aren't rich because they industrialized in a generation and the only one which started to industrialize earlier is already rich. They'll almost certainly be rich before Latin America is as they always have been. Turkey will likely drag in much of the Arab world along with it as it's largely already industrialized. And then some parts of Africa are industrializing and growing very quickly such as the newly formed EAF which was a region entirely under British rule
    2
  3. I've come out of this learning 3 things: America really does foot the bill for the world despite how arrogant it sounds, war with China is all but guaranteed, and more world empires will rise again.
    2
  4. Iran's fertility rate is actually 1.71. They've been at 1.8 about as long as the USA has been at 1.7. They're stable. But that's it. Also, birth rate differences that small matter less when the population difference is over 3 times. But that's not exactly the point anyway.
    2
  5. Ancient Roswell?
    2
  6.  @Archenw  That's actually kind of funny
    2
  7. Only issue is that Islamic was fundamentally derived from Roman civilization and the influences of the others by the bronze age collapse can barely be felt
    2
  8. Yeah let's me honest, the history of Russia is the history of coming back from levels of death and horror that would cripple literally any other population. But not THE RUS. They're the embodiment of "It doesn't matter how many times you get beaten down just how many times you get back up."
    2
  9. I think the most damming thing for the Euro is that it only exists to supplement the dollar and as an extension of the empire.
    2
  10. Yeah I take issue with the statement about the "more technologically advanced Germans" as they weren't really ahead and in some ways were behind. The biggest thing they had was coordination and the initiative to move quickly which is how their early victories and all successes of the war came. However you can see the deficiencies with such things as getting to the semi-auto rifle last, the fact that their tanks were worse than the French and even Soviet tanks (but had radios and had better economics) and weren't industrially capable of actually fully motorizing. They were certainly great at engineering and invention but honestly it was only to a certain point. It was really rough technological parity the whole time without any significant advantage. It's not like the soviets were 10 years behind. This really isn't comparable to the US who is ahead and always attempting to be ahead and if you keep up with any of the military stuff seeing that it's once again making a leap ahead.
    2
  11.  @emperorarima3225  Doesn't matter as much if your army gets routed and your capital is surrounded in 6 months. Which is about what I expect to happen. I doubt the Chinese can even really replace their heavy equipment so quickly since that takes time to build and it's even harder when you're having your industry taken over. And unlike Russia which is big and MOVED its industry, there's nowhere to move the Chinese industry to. You're just going to lose it no matter what. Your population is going to no longer be under control of your government so you can't coordinate, and overall trying to actually resist would be just the Chinese government handing rifles to a bunch of random citizens to then get blown up by artillery fire.
    2
  12.  @emperorarima3225  Honestly the thing here is that China is more a bunch of scared peasants with rocket launchers if that. Honestly the Chinese might be able to pump all of that out but kind of hard to do that when you're being blown up by close air support and artillery about a kilometer out. I'm not trying to simp for the US, but currently the morale difference is just really huge. And you know... don't quite replace loses that quickly when you're not at total war levels. Also yeah all of this is hypothetical. You're not getting to the Chinese mainland. This is the biggest thing I don't understand when people speak about possible war with the Chinese: WHAT LAND WAR!!??? Any boots on the ground are going to be in Taiwan or Korea providing support. Not the Chinese mainland. There's nowhere to invade from. And honestly it's a lot easier to just hold a coast than an actual invasion. Not sure who the hell is thinking of an actual invasion of China. Best I can think of is maybe they base in Korea and invade a small into Beijing to get them to sue for peace after defending Taiwan for long enough of they don't agree to a cease-fire in a year.
    2
  13.  @emperorarima3225  Yeah I broke down the reasons for that guy why the US couldn't just invade China. Tbh I think even a war inside China's borders could be won, but the question is why bother and also where to invade. There's no reason for it and if there's such little reason for it then you just don't to it.
    2
  14. @loissio481  Family memory not really. We just have last name to go by. And the all important 40% Portuguese in genetics (probably Galicia)
    2
  15. 5:20 What about the smoking snakes bro? You forgot about them when saying Sabaton couldn't sing about them
    2
  16. Well sadly the issue is that the left is actually going around and killing people (often beating people to death), and in a few times were armed with guns. On top of that, the right is a mostly unrelated Coalition that hold a lot of the older values which allowed our Society to function for so long so in terms of overall social impact they're less important. As an overall social impact, they're also in many ways less in power. The ideas of social justice have spread to all sectors of the elite (even business) as the counterculture of the 60s won out and became the mainstream culture in many ways. These all tie much closer to the left wing being the greater danger. The right has little institutional power so for as bad as many of their extremist movements are, they have little overall impact thus they really don't deserve the same scrutiny in the context of macro shifts in society. Also the right tends to purge their extreme wings MUCH more. Most of the right doesn't associate and condemns such actions and in many ways is forced due to not having institutional control as they'd otherwise be purged (when you have values, practices, and ideas most people can agree on you will likely exist even when institutional power doesn't necessarily like you as normal people then start to notice due to no longer having the popular support to purge them). Compared to the left which realistically only has its extreme in the mainstream due to tacit agreement and factional institutional control thus not necessitating such purges.
    2
  17. Also while correct about MLK, he was explicitly a socialist and on top of that what did survive were the things that most people could agree on. Also he was martyred.Thus what survived in history was the agreeable while the disagreeable fell to the wayside.
    2
  18.  @JellyAntz  Yes increase the industrial production and crash the cost which decrease standard of living.
    2
  19. @scorpixel1866  Yah that's true the Brits only need like one tank brigade to make pushes. I can't forgive their neglect of the air force though. It's so small with a force which depends on air Supremacy and have sacrificed like half of their navy just to get out the nuclear carriers. Whatever with the army, the navy keeps you safe long term. Though yeah both France and Britain are in the corner of the map away from any land wars. They're not built to fight a land war. So I'm curious to see how they'll go for it again.
    2
  20. ​@ransakreject5221 It's because in real terms he knows very little about hard science. He's very much in the humanities and nowhere near entrenched enough in modern science to really speak on it with authority. I trust him on his humanities because he's read hundreds of books on the matter. He very much has not read enough science or really gone into that world at all to speak about it.
    2
  21. well if that's what had to be done that's perfectly understandable
    2
  22. Because it's concentrated among a very small group, which is the point which has been made. It's why incels Exist at all. Apart from prostitution, most guys aren't finding relationships (which is how sex normally comes) with many women cycled among a small "chad" class rather than more evenly distributed. Due to all conventions being released, it's easily attainable... for the guys who are most sought after. If you're not sought after, you don't get much.
    2
  23. 39:37 I think the story Harrison Bergeron embodies this quite well
    2
  24. We're just genuinely the romans but with the ability to actually make new technology besides architecture
    2
  25. The difference between Mongol invasion of Europe and the current timeline seems largely to be "What would happen if the central European powers were weakened when the powers of the peripheries decided to invade this time?" and that is this version of Europe.
    2
  26. The appropriate question to this is if the conquest is discussing just that of direct European contact, of which that 55 to 60 million surely is not doing, because most of the disease was spread from already infected indigenous populations. Thus, they're not directly responsible. 8 million died in present day Mexico from the conquest, but the lions share even there was disease. Because of disease, by 1650 (before most colonies were established), that 55 million figure was already gone.
    2
  27. Now for you: fundamentally your timing is off as there are two fundamental issues you've missed: The millennials are an American only phenomenon. Everyone has boomers but only Americans have millennials. Boomers refused to have kids and so a baby bust occurred in the WWII areas at the time of that cohort getting into age (1970s) and it's what's causing the demographic issues of today. Secondly the demographic crisis is hitting NOW. The reason Russia had to invade THIS YEAR was because this was the LAST year that it could even ATTEMPT to start an invasion as it is entering into terminal decline. China has already entered into terminal decline back in the early 2000s since they over-counted their population on scale of over 100 million people. Their population bulge goes into mass retirement within 10 years and the idea that we'll even get there before something in the Chinese system gives is simply ludicrous (Chinese already suffer numerous issues which are country killers such as insane debt to gdp) and such a give will Permanently stop their economy (China is where Japan was 30 years ago but on the scale of 10x the population and 1/3x the wealth with probably 2x the bubble size) and thus they will suffer a stop which is simply unprecedented given the size and situation. As for the other things please understand that Xi didn't condone the Ukraine war because he didn't even know it was going to happen. On top of this, while they know the war for Taiwan will go poorly they're in a state where they too will need a diversionary effect because they're about to start running exclusively on nationalism. This means that there's a more than 10% chance of war for Taiwan. You think the US has no appetite for war but the Americans are self-righteous quickly and frankly they'd get into a "splendid little war" type scenario because war with China looks like a level of sanctions that was put on Russia and blocking the strait of Malacca which results in the complete deindustrialization of China. The US doesn't need troops on the ground to win that war it just needs to stay far away from the mainland and then not allow any shipping into China. Frankly the biggest thing is that I don't see the Americans fighting war in Europe. THAT is liable to be completely ignored. The global crisis is coming within the decade. And in real terms if we want to kick it off it would be with a famine. That comes November to December 2022. Dominoes fall from there.
    2
  28. I'll be honest I have to disagree. I think it simply comes with being an empire as when it weakens and falls the countries which form the cultural heartland lose their holdings and revert to their more homogenous center. The Roman empire eventually fell to its more Italian center under Ordoacer and founded the kingdom of Italy. The byzantines which carried on the empire were majority Greek until the turkic migration which displaced the majority of the population and thus rose the Ottoman empire in its place. Which then expanded to the more Middle Eastern from its imperial status (as well as incorporating the Greeks and Serbs) to then fall and retreat to its more homogenous heartland of present day Turkey. Persian empire fell and retreated to its more homogenous heartland of Iran. Btw I said "more" homogenous not just completely. But the point is that as an empire expands, they incorporate more and more diverse peoples from the lands they conquer. And thus they pull their conquered peoples into the fold. Until the empire falls. The exception to this: is migrations. When it's basically the population being the dominant one in the area, then they retain a lot of their ties to their homeland. Case in point: the Latins first conquered Italy and now the people before them basically don't exist. Which is how you see the current Italy. Now more important than ethnicity is culture, however it is entirely disingenuous to say that the success was of very mixed populations when they're almost exclusively empires which conquered those populations and then lost those terroritories later on as they fell.
    1
  29.  @bruhtonbruhkkinson6848  Tbh even China is an empire and its not a particularly loved one by the people in its western holdings (especially Tibet)
    1
  30.  @innosam123  Yeah fur trade and lumber took a fair amount of time to be profitable and needed a fair amount of people to start being profitable. Also, even worse, initially the colonies weren't self-sustaining despite the fact that the environment could sustain a population for the most part. It was that bad in the early days and they needed outside support to stay alive. When they didn't well they resorted to cannibalism.
    1
  31. The thing is that many actually DO want that because they think a society run by them from the top will be better than that from the bottom. In many ways it's been the way China has been ruled for millenia however what that runs up against is no way to really advocate for people and society and keep people downtrodden until they organize an actual rebellion or get conquered.
    1
  32. Pakistan front will be like that, but the Himilayan front will be much more like WW1 western front. Mountains are incredibly easy to defend and with how much will be at stake for them it'll be defended to the teeth.
    1
  33.  @obamabinladen5055  As much as the US really doesn't like such actions, it hates the Chinese much more and honestly the only thing holding us back currently from full on aggression is memories of the world wars. That changes with an actual attack. With a war starting there's no stopping the Americans since the US has such a low opinion of China it'll be quick to rally together for a full scale war.
    1
  34.  @henrytsang5200  Honestly it sounds like "Peking" was actually a variant of "Peiping" because we've a historical event called I think "15 days at Peking" around the turn of the century which then further adds to the confusion.
    1
  35. I think it was about a month after this video dropped that China's hypersonic missile circumvented the earth
    1
  36. How to avoid this: CANZUK and Anglosphere federation to regain their English identity. And then the US expands south to annex Mexico.
    1
  37. We actually know why. It's due to moral foundations theory. There are 6 moral foundations and leftists only pull on two, while conservatives pull on all 6. Thus, the left is missing most of the picture while the right knows intuitively what's missing.
    1
  38.  @mweskamppp  So is much of Latin America lol
    1
  39.  @mweskamppp  That's because the Spanish had a lot of integration and the native population died.
    1
  40.  @mweskamppp  Well Spain itself has such diversity with many looking Arab. The issue with Spain is that you have just as many dark Skinned and dark haired as you do blonde-haired blue-eyed. You're correct in it varying from region to region, but the biggest thing is that the nobility was largely wiped out or converted to Spanish nobility which made the whole thing overall convert into mostly Spanish culture.
    1
  41. I'll say that from the springboard 4 years ago when i saw things were happening, my mind was always going to "This is going to be fun. Can't wait to see it all"
    1
  42. 27:47 Once you got to Mauryan you really started to stretch the definition of "Fascist" beyond needing, and Macedonia doesn't count because it had a military genius. If this is just evaluating the cultures who united their civilizations then that's really doing the work for them. I also don't know enough about the others to say anything about them. Also no the Aztecs were far closer to the definition of Fascist with how absolutely brutal and militaristic they were than a republic.
    1
  43. America is what happens when you take an island's values but give it an entire continent to work with. Edit: honestly more like take Britain and stretch it across a continent
    1
  44.  @ayushanjay4983  Yeah but those are both American backed anyway.
    1
  45.  @UwU-ok2jr  Low grade authoritarian but at this point basically just capitalists much like the Chinese 10 years ago.
    1
  46.  @viethungle8627  In terms of pure self-interest this largely sums up the geopolitical situation of the region.
    1
  47. i am in an interesting predicament since from a young age i never really saw the Simpsons or John Hughes America. In fact, i never even had that delusion since I'd never watched any of that to a significant degree as a child. By middle school, so about the time i could become conscious, i could already see what was happening and following that YouTube rabbit hole of the modern culture war as it was gearing up. I already lived in a feminist and female dominated world with a single mother. So, to me, I've never had the delusion destroyed that i lived in a functional society, since all I've known from my window into society is dysfunction. In fact, I've actually seen excitement at the chaos in the modern world, liking to see what comes next even if i have to go through it honestly quite excited to see what comes next and rise through it. Though, of course, this is also profoundly stupid because i don't even have a proper girlfriend at 22, and my entire life was more about studying and grades while living in the capital of Latin America, and thus divorced from most of the decay in much of the rest of the US, though still feeling the effects of managerial bloat. So, quite different from this.
    1
  48. oh shit here it is
    1
  49. That's true. But most of those are usually the descendants of actual material elites, and on top of that much of it. On top of that, it's still the lefty elites who are voting for that war as it's become a court-like scenario with fake manners and fake virtues. Also that local sociology professor usually votes to make said utility more expensive which hurts the poor.
    1
  50. @Pierre-Olivier Jolin Few things here to address: Mongols were completely sweetly sufficient nomads. In fact their logistics were AMAZING because they didn't need nor use any and it's the reason they could operate with impunity. The fundamental issue of industrial warfare is logistics in a way that wasn't a problem in the ancient world. Before and during the early stages of gunpowder adoption the chief limiting factor was food and repairs. Now you have to worry about oil, bullets, and complex parts which require resources from around the world. And another thing to address here: only fully Eurasian powers have been the Russians and Mongols. Of which Mongols were primarily a central Asian power and Russians have primarily been a European power who wanted to never have a Mongol horse army exist again. Conflicts in Asia were also very limited from Russia.
    1