Subverting the Narrative | Holocaust Denial and the Lost Cause
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 06. 2018
- Many people who are telling alternate versions of history or providing different reasoning for the actions of historical actors have gained a lot of traction recently. It's worth examining what they have to say and why they're saying it.
Website ► knowingbetter.tv
Store ► standard.tv/knowingbetter
Patreon ► / knowingbetter
Paypal ► paypal.me/knowingbetter
Twitter ► / knowingbetteryt
Twitch ► / knowingbetteryt
Facebook ► / knowingbetteryt
Instagram ► / knowingbetteryt
Reddit ► / knowingbetter
---
teachingamericanhistory.org/li...
[Confederate VP Stephens - Corner Stone Speech]
www.civilwarhome.com/leepierce...
[Robert E. Lee's Letter]
ropercenter.cornell.edu/publi...
[American Opinions on Cause of Civil War]
www.adl.org/blog/no-the-ok-ge...
[OK Sign Hoax]
Three Arrows - / threearrows
Debunking the Alt-Right: Pool Parties at Auschw!tz - • Debunking the Alt-Righ...
What People get Wrong about the Bombing of Dresden - • What People get Wrong ...
Shaun - / shaunandjen
Charlottesville: The True Alt-Right - • Charlottesville: The T...
ContraPoints - / contrapoints
Why the Alt-Right Is Wrong - • Video
Decrypting the Alt-Right: How to Recognize a F@scist - • Decrypting the Alt-Rig...
---
Video Credits -
The Sum of All Fears (2002)
2017 Maps of Meaning 11: The Flood and the Tower - Jordan B Peterson - • 2017 Maps of Meaning 1...
TDS #245: The Red Pilling of Andy Warski - Part 1 - Real McGoy - • Video
TDS #245: The Red Pilling of Andy Warski - Part 2 - Real McGoy - • Video
The Truth About Charlottesville | "Unite the Right" - James Allsup - • Video
O'Reilly Factor, July 26, 2016 - archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_...
H3 Podcast #7 - Post Malone & Joji - H3 Podcast - • H3 Podcast #7 - Post M...
H3 Podcast #37 - Jordan Peterson - H3 Podcast - • H3 Podcast #37 - Jorda...
Say Goodbye To Your History - Lauren Southern - • Say Goodbye To Your Hi...
The Truth About The Native American Genocide - Stefan Molyneux - • Video
Charles Koch opens up about his 'classical liberal' views - Fox News - • Charles Koch opens up ...
Tomi Lahren - Giving a Voice to Conservative America on "Tomi": The Daily Show - The Daily Show with Trevor Noah - • Tomi Lahren - Giving a...
'Hail Trump!': Richard Spencer Speech Excerpts - The Atlantic - • 'Hail Trump!': Richard...
Cultural Marxism: A Measured Response - Hbomberguy - hbomberguy - • Cultural Marxism: A Me...
Tommy Robinson- "Day For Freedom" 6th May, Whitehall, London Official Promo - JONAYA - • Video
Photo Credits -
i.pinimg.com/originals/0c/29/...
pics.me.me/ulysses-s-grant-sl...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_un...
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...
images-na.ssl-images-amazon.c...
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...
www.biography.com/.image/t_sh...
Music Credits -
"Furious Freak" and "Inspired" by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Intro Art and Channel Avatar by PoetheWonderCat
/ thatcatnamedpoe
---
Hashtags: #history #holocaust #jews #nazis #csa #rebelpride #confederate #southernpride #whitepride #hitler #camps #adolfhitler #germany #south #unitetheright #confederateflag
Abraham Lincoln: "I've heard much about the benefits of slavery, but I've yet to meet a man who wanted to become one"
Abraham Lincoln: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the White and Black races" also the slavery thing was just an exuse he didn't give a damn about the slaves,if the South was going to unite with the North he would have let them have slaves, he did think that slavery was moraly wrong but he also said that if he could have riunite the States without freeing the slaves he would do it
@@loneokami6560 the quote still good tho
@@loneokami6560 yes because it was poliitcs. You do realize lincoln had to content with a voter base of white supremacists right? So obviously when he speaks publicly he will make it seem like he would never be in favor of abolition. Its clearly him just being a politican. He drafted thr emancipation pretty early on in the Civil War as well waiting for the right time.
@@orlandof6496 That's just not true he didn't want equality, he only tought that slavery was moraly wrong,still in that regard he was ahead for shure i give him that credit
@@loneokami6560 "also the slavery thing was just an exuse..."
It wasn't an excuse, it was a strategic maneuver. Lincoln was an abolitionist, but he was also a politician. During the war, he maintained that he fought to maintain the union, rather than to free slaves, and stated that he felt this attitude was his duty as president, regardless of his own personal disposition. Making slavery a focal point of the war was a maneuver to make sure that England didn't help the South. The fact that it happened to align with his abolitionist beliefs, he might say, was a happy coincidence.
"Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower
Too bad they never once got a single piece of paper from the German government describing any orders for the 'Final Solution'. Seems that'd be a nice thing to have.
@@fnhatic6694 you gonna shit on my boi Eisenhower?
@@fnhatic6694 "But the most interesting -- although horrible -- sight that I encountered during the trip was a visit to a German internment camp near Gotha. The things I saw beggar description. While I was touring the camp I encountered three men who had been inmates and by one ruse or another had made their escape. I interviewed them through an interpreter. The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where they [there] were piled up twenty or thirty naked men, killed by starvation, George Patton would not even enter. He said he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit deliberately, in order to be in position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to 'propaganda'."
Letter, DDE to George C. Marshall, 4/15/45 [The Papers of Dwight David Eisenhower, The War Years IV, doc #2418]
So maybe not the exact words, but the meaning and intent are on target.
There's a similar quote from an officer in the 45th I.D. He worked for the rest of his life to make sure people knew the Holocaust was real also!
@@Vatniks_are_clowns It ends up being among the best-documented events in all of history. Still, there will always be someone trying to pretend it didn't happen - kind of like we have millions of people insisting that the earth is flat.
I wonder how many “per capita Nazis” need to present at a rally before Allsup begins to questions his life choices…
I had a similar thought: "Why only 10 nazis per nazi flag? I think if anyone brings a nazi flag to participate in a rally, everyone going to that rally is suspect."
Edit: of course I mean bringing a nazi flag to actually participate in a rally and not to counter-protest any kind of leftist movement, and of course by "everyone going to that rally" I mean "everyone also participating in that rally for that rally's goal", and not people showing up to counter-protest facist shit
So glad this clown got banned off CZcams.
If I went to a wedding and they had one Nazi flag I would leave and then I would no longer be friends with that couple. Any Nazi symbolism that isn't in the context of a museum or a history book it's too many
@@breadtubediet1524 Yeah I agree.
Sure, maybe some people just showed up to see what's going on, but I think anyone who didn't decide "what's going on" isn't anything they are interested in *once the nazi flags come out* is pretty suspicious imo.
@Peeshy let’s assume for a moment you’re correct and I can’t dispute anything James Allsup claims. Even if what he were saying is true, his world view I vehemently oppose and will never agree with. White people do not deserve an Anglo Saxon nation. Europeans fucked that up when your ancestors decided to exploit minorities. Historically, you’ve lost the fight. So anyway, while I’m enjoying life with my beautiful Caucasian wife and adorable mixed children, stay mad on the internet. I have my guns, we all know you do too, but we also know y’all wouldn’t target people who can actually fight back lmao.
For 18:43Absolutely NO! Germany does NOT suppress that part of history. Japan does with their part. How the Nazis rose to power and what they did is thuroughly taught in school (multiple times) and callbacks are very very present in political speeches and/or actions. Just never in any glorifying way, hence it may look to you like "suppression". But it's not, we remember, as a warning.
I think he means the banning of far-right symbolism etc., otherwise the phrasing makes little sense in context. And while I do agree that education on our own country‘s past wrong-doings luckily is extensive, more so than in probably any other country, I wished we were taught a lot more about the long-term consequences for marginalized groups pretty much everywhere (like the idea of eugenics, the impact on Jewish culture but also that of Sinti and Roma and so on, and very importantly the hallmarks of modern day fascism)
That isn't at all what he meant by 'Suppress'
didn‘t Gauland (member of the German Parlament) said in public that he wanna be proud again of the deeds of german soldiers in two world wars
@@jakobschober8261 and he is widely hated for (among other similar things) this view
@@isnitjustkit Exactly, but the wording was a bit odd, especially for non-native English speakers. Also I wouldn’t agree that our remembrance culture exists (merely) out of shame (or for that purpose anyways), as was rightly pointed out in the original comment.
🏳️This is the real Confederate Flag.
Get fucked rebels
Polish Lad thats not a flag sir
No.
It’s not white enough.
@@Llamasomenumbers 👀 I see what you did there...
Looks like the Taliban flag to me
Fun Fact: If you say “Heritage, not Hate” 3 times in the mirror, General Sherman will appear and burn your House down
That is an awesome joke 😂
I'm going to do that right now
Sherman was actually very bothered to be so remembered for his march to the sea specifically.
@@rafal2959 I like Atun-Shei's explanation on Sherman's memetic celebration; he claims it's a mirror of Stonewall's.
@@TeeComedian except Sherman was a winner, and Stonewall was killed by his own men.
In Sweden we call it: the American Civil War, and we usually view it as a good thing to end slavery, but a terribly tragic and bloody way of accomplishing it
Eh, thems the brakes.
In all honesty I don’t view ending slavery in any other way besides a bloody conflict, liberation is often bloody that doesn’t make it any less important and good though. The switch to the more peaceful approach to Reconstruction simply allowed terrorist groups like the KKK and White Supremacists to run rampant with lynchings being able to get away with it. A peaceful approach is not always a good idea, violence is often more effective. And before anyone says the Civil Rights Movement, even MLK said riots and more violent methods played a huge role towards equality, and the riots that started after the murder of MLK provoked further legislation towards solidarity to pass.
Violence should not be glorified but I think it’s downright ignorant to say that it’s not necessary for liberation.
@@fishsteakyelk341 I agree that the violence was necessary to a degree. A riot held for the good of mankind is a thing of beauty. However, I wouldn't compare a series of riots to a full-blown war. Yet the fact remains that the the white southerners would rather sacrifice the lives of their sons and fathers than give up power to freely and monstrously abuse their fellow humans. And if that isn't tragic, then I don't know what is
@@fishsteakyelk341 I mean we are the only country that had to fight a war among ourselves to end it.
@@idek6585 That’s because we were one of the few countries that had it in the mainland and not just in a colony. Many countries that abolished slavery kept it in their colonies, and it isn’t the first time liberation from slavery was a bloody conflict nor will it ever be the last. And half of the war was fighting to keep it and the other half was mostly trying to preserve the union only then abolishing slavery to deter Britain and France from going on the side of the confederates.
I dont know where you got the idea from but in germany we dont hide the past or are too ashamed to talk about it. It is near impossible to go through school without being taught what happened. And it usually is taught in brutal honesty. We dont want to forget the events to prevent them repeating.
I had to read at least 2 books from the perspective of victims in class and some schools even travel to the camps to let you see the inhumane history in person.
you misunderstand the meaning of supress in this context. germany is not trying to hide it but instead trying to supress it as in banning flags, symbols and songs and that typ of stuff
@@rdtarcade7644 Ooh that makes more sense
He is saying you don't celebrate it, like how America has reenactments of the civil war. You don't have a designated day, like Nazi day or something like that, you don't romanticize it. "They don't forget it, but they don't encourage reenacting it" literally his words.
@@lobear3074 Indeed, someone else explained it too, I simply misunderstood. Though I figured I could leave my original comment up. I admit I kinda brainfarted while watching the video
@@TheGrandSilence all good friend, I do the same thing all the time.
I did not realize this but The republic Texas lasted longer than the south
fucking star wars and avatar lasted longer than the south
Gay marriage has been around longer than the Confederacy as well ;-)
*SO HAS MINECRAFT!!*
NASCAR: lasted longer than the South
Babylon 5, Farscape, and the Vine video service lasted as long as the Confederate States of America.
Fucking My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic lasted *over twice as long* as the Confederacy. That's more my heritage than the Confederacy is theirs.
"They're not lootboxes, they're suprise mechanics"
@Jack the Gestapo but god does not exist?
@@imakevideos5377 Says the Atheist
Well played sir! XD XD XD
Precisely
“It’s not an invasion it’s just surprise democracy”
This video really hit me hard.. because it always baffles my mind.. if the holocaust didn't happen then what the fuck happened to 75% of my family? Why the hell did I have a very lucky relative with numbers tattooed on his arm against his will? I'm sorry but NEVER AGAIN.
It's horrific to think that there are apologists for the Holocaust especially in the US. I hope you're well prepared because what was old is renewed again under a party that technically was OK with Hitler until they couldn't ignore it anymore. Nearly every single one of those comments used on the "others" is constantly in the news and social media its just a rebranded version of 80 years ago. Whether it's the border, social programs that help all Americans and not just the white ones, to Putin and his efforts to rebuild the Soviet Empire they all use some of the same rhetoric that was used a century ago to justify the actions then.
As someone who personally knew an active school shooter, the phrase "causing the maximum amount of mayhem in the least amount of time" really sounds absurdely familiar
weird flex
I mean, thats what theyre going for usually. Right?
nice name :I
Which one? I happen to know a lot about them.
@@blackcorsair8466 2 boys from a city called suzano, in brazil, they were full of shit honestly
As a Southerner, I love to point out to the "Heritage Not Hate" crowd that the history of the American South is 400+ years old, while the Confederacy lasted no longer, as you pointed out, than the time that most spent in high school. Well done!
One of my guilty online pleasures is pointing out to the Confederate fanboys that the Spice Girls lasted longer than the CSA did.
@@gaiusjuliuspleaser 💀
@@gaiusjuliuspleaser I will have to use that one :)
But the flag went on to be used in other places after the confederacy disbanded
@@andrewprahst2529 Yes, it was used at every MAGA rally, every Klan gathering, every pro-Segregation demonstration ...
in Australia our major conservative party is called the "liberal" party and it makes talking about them to non Australians really annoying lmao
Ha ha ha, I'm so glad I found your comment! That explains my friend's FB posts while she was living in Australia.
Interesting, here in Latam being pro free market/libertarian is called being Liberal
The conservative party used to be called liberal until recently
In Sweden, one of our more conservatie parties are called The Moderates, and for a while they were known as The New Moderates, which makes no sense.
To be fair, our Liberal party would be considered centre at best in the states.
Their left makes our right look centre.
Yeah the bit about Germany not talking about things is false. I personally minored in German in school for a while, and my teacher (who was born and raised in Frankfurt, Germany) noted that one could not escape this growing up and that you got hammered with WWII history and the atrocities that occurred more than any other period of history that was taught. And I know this is true for most other Germans I have met as well.
when he says "suppress" he doesn't mean to ignore/deny, he means to teach about how wrong it was, to get it into everyone's heads that it happened once and should never happen again, which is exactly what germany is doing
Do you learn about the atrocities during the 2nd Reich with Shark Island?
Only time I heard someone argue that the internment camps were concentration camps they went on to argue that the Nazi concentration camps were death camps. So they still maintained that one was worse then they other, their argument was that we downplay the severity of both of them.
Concentration camps kill through inaction. Generally through putting people in crowded conditions so that disease spreads more easily and then not attempting to properly deal with the disease. That's what they initial did anyway when the UK came up with the idea.
Death camps are places that actively kill people.
Since the camps in America did see people die from lack of medical care it was to some extent a concentration camp.
Yep. ‘Concentration camp’ is often used synonymously with ‘death camp’, hence why there’s so much controversy around calling various countries’ immigration detention camps (including the ones on the US-Mexican border) concentration camps.
By the original definition, the camps in which Japanese-Americans were interned were definitely concentration camps.
@@skyclaw it’s because they are associated with FDR. If it had been a republican it’s guaranteed to be referred to as a concentration camp
They are both terrible and should have never happened. But, yes, one is worse than the other. The one that resulted in the deaths of millions is worse.
@@citywinesspirits6583 I'm afraid to even look up what the mortality rate in the US Japanese internment camps was. I'd probably say that the one where they deliberately murdered millions of people was worse.
In Japan the US Civil War is called the "Nanboku sensou," or literally "north-south war," which in addition to being fairly accurate, is an interesting metaphorical reference to Japan's own civil war during the 14th century, when two separate lines of the imperial dynasty tore the country apart in civil war for half a century.
in Poland we usually call it "wojna secesyjna", "wojna" meaning war and "secesja" means "secession", so it is named after secession (withdrawal) of southern states from the Union
Then there's the Korean war next door...
@@JG-bi6ci same in France ! We call it "Guerre de Sécession", or War of Secession
In Australia we just call it the American Civil War. I feel boring.
In Brazil we call the secession war too
D-Day was not the point where Germany started losing. Most high ranking Nazis and Generals likely knew the war was lost shortly after the Battle of Stalingrad.
The loss at Stalingrad and the subsequent losses in Africa was the beginning of the end for Germany.
The war was lost from the very start.(that is with hindsight now, obv) Just cause they steamrolled over Europe means nothing. They had huge supply problems when they invaded the Soviet Union, and also half of the army was using horses, which is pure insanity, but thats all they had because they couldn't motorize the whole army. You can see supply issues when Dunkirk happens.
All hail the motherland
The YT channel WW2 hints that the nazis started loosing in June 1941 by invading Soviet Union.
@@Soundbrigade Stalin was gearing up to declare war on Germany which could have taken place in 1942 or 1943. The supply problems Germany exacerbated by invading the USSR would have proceeded anyway even if they didn’t, just slower. Not invading the USSR wouldn’t have saved Germany either.
As a German, I met those who say: "The Holocaust was real and I'm for it."
Bruh such people are in every country, just hop onto /Pol/ and see for yourself.
@@heathernicholson5052Germany has sadly but quite literally the receipts. Not just reports from the survivors and perpetrators, which are rather compelling and plenty…. Lots of paperwork, Germans generally love paperwork and produce way too much that it could be all destroyed… in addition people wrote diaries and letters… The Holocaust is one of the best researched Genocide in history. Denying or minimising the Holocaust is just rather pathetic…
The turning of the 'ok' hand symbol into a dog whistle pisses me so much. I often use that hand gesture in place of a chefs kiss, and immediately remember and cringe after the fact. Wankers, fucking up everything they touch.
The thing that pisses me off the most about it was it started as a 4chan troll and then actual white supremacists latched onto it.
@@amoureux6502 The whole point of the 4chan trolling operation was to make the media (and their audiences) think actual white supremacists use it. The fact that you think they DO use it unironically is proof that the trolling worked!
@@_MysticKnight the Christchurch shooter used the sign in court. It WAS originally a troll, but that doesn't mean no actual white supremacists have used it since then.
Just because some white supremacists try to use it as a clearly stupid sign, doesn’t mean it’s all of a sudden a white supremacist sign. If a white person eats a taco, does that make it American food?
I heard about it being a dog whistle before people started trolling with it.
If I had to second a guess it probably wasn't very widely used before it was in public attention, but someone who knew about it and could get that information out there brought it to public attention and unintentionally spurred further use of it as a way to troll or dogwistle. The trolls only further legitimized this and then use of it in an inappropriate manner only went on from there.
*Sees thumbnail*
Me: "I wonder if he's critical of JBP here."
*Sees dislikes*
Me: "Yep."
If completely taking him out of context and trying to make him out to be a neo-nazi counts as "criticism" that is.
Yeah the jordan cult is definitely in this thread...YUNG WAS A MORON AND JORDAN PETERSON IS DOING THIS FOR MONEY
@@TheLastSoundNL wtf is a "thought crime"?
By strawmanning his positions
I'm not a fan of Jordan Peterson, but he's not a Nazi sympathiser.
I saw this in a different comment section, thought it was funny so I'll share it:
Never ask a woman her age
Never ask a man how much he earns
Never ask an Argentinian their SS rank
This sounds quite racist, bro.
@@itacom2199 Nah
... or how many FIFA World Cups Argentina has
@@itacom2199 Then you ain't no Italian communist.
@@numbersix8919 but you're surely full of crap.
When I was a teenager i had some skinheads try indoctrinating me, it's scary shit. I'm half Mexican which was no secret, i just don't look it. Anyway, It was obvious what was happening so I distancd myself from those aquaintances. They gave me books, cd's, told me all about there beleifs and I wan't having it. I knew what was going on. However, I had a teacher who was very kind and friendly to me that I thought the absolute world of who was attempting to do the same to me. It wasn't as obvious at first, he went into this whole thing about Dresden and i researched it. After that I paid very close attention to his rethoric and noticed he was no different than the skinheads, only he had a cleaned up granddad way of talking.
Thanks for sharing but skinheads aren’t racist , their culture was heavily birthed & influenced by Jamaican immigrates to Europe
You are mexican, you just don't look it? Wtf, being Mexican isn't a type or a racial thing, it's a cultural heritage thing, and yes, it is something that shows. At least, it shows for people of Mexican origin.
I think you mean you don't look like most Mexicans with predominant indigenous ancestry (which, I grant you, counts for a large chunk, if not a majority, of Mexican population, especially from the High Plateau and the Southeast)
What happened in Dresden was disgusting nonetheless...
@@jacques.cousteau Looks like someone didn’t watch the video lol
@@heretic1157 are you trying to justify war crimes?
Peterson's "max mayhem" theory seems wrong for other reasons, but to counter it on the idea that Germany does not start losing until June 1944 is ridiculously uninformed. Each winter, Germany lost massive areas they would never recover starting in 1941. By 1943, even the high-spin Wochenschau cannot conceal the impending defeat.
Also, I believe Peterson refers to the April 1944 spike in holocaust deaths, at which point the front was less than 100 miles from Treblinka and utterly collapsing. The expansion of Auschwitz in 1943 mentioned in the video actually occurs after Operation Reinhardt and does not coincide with a major increase in killing rate.
It's not just wrong, it's a deliberate attempt to put people to sleep about contemporary fascists.
I have always interpreted Peterson's "max mayhem" theory as saying that Hitler was evil for the sake of being evil. I can't possibly see that as a defense of Hitler. It just isn't.
@@EpicEverz Even that is an intentional obfuscation of the ideological component to the holocaust. It creates the narrative that Hitler was just a subhuman anomoly and that no ordinary person would or could be motivated to participate in such atrocities based on politics. And once you believe that, you won't feel suspicious when Peterson starts whining about "degeneracy" and calling Elliott Page's doctor a criminal and stuff.
It's a goddam Trojan Horse!
5:19 "clean up things that disgusted him"... isn't that about the same as "he hated them"?
@@tophan5146 splitting hairs
@@tophan5146 Saying "somebody is disgusted by something" doesn't mean he doesn't hate it, right? JP: - Hitler was disgusted by the Jews. OP: - Owww, JP meant that Hitler didn't hate the Jews. Don't you see the logical fallacy here? You can be and disgusted and hating something at the same time.
Tophan really you hate things you’re disgusted by. And being disgusted by anybody because of their race still makes you horrible. That’s Jordan Peterson‘s point
Brice Lafond if your mother were covered by feces you would be disgusted by her but not hate her.
Disgust is primal, visceral.
Hate is one level higher, emotional.
Animals can be disgusted but they don’t hate (there may be exceptions for the most intelligent ones)
I’m not saying you can’t be disgusted and hate someone at the same time. But these are very specific, separate things.
@@tophan5146 Just that you're disgusted by other humans... which is.. well dehumanization at it's ultimate form with eradication of entire group of people as it's end goal. Which allows the perpetrator to think one is doing "good job" while at it.
How is this making light of anything?
You're not disgusted of mother, but of feces, of which what you do? Clean, remove.
Disgust is primal, visceral. - yes.That's why it's so dangerous it subverts all of the "higher level" processes as you describe. It's far more entrenched and sinister than just mare emotion.
I think people like you are simply afraid that admitting this somehow minimizes the responsibility of the person following it's path. Short answer - it does not. However to explain that would require to go deep into personality and how different neural circuits develop as a person interacts with the world.
"The South was fighting for states rights, not slavery!" Yea if you just ignore all the declarations of secession, Alexander Stephens, the Confederate Constitution and the views on slavery and abolition that the majority of Southern politicians and civilians alike had consistently expressed
A large majority of why the South fought was definitely about and for slavery, but that doesn't mean they weren't also fighting for state rights to govern themselves as they saw fit. They saw the encroaching federal government and that it was slowly gaining power in ways it was never meant to, and today it can be seen in the vast over extension of the federal governments power and influence in strictly state affairs.
One small example of this unlawful over extension of power, certain states have voted into law the right for licensed dispensaries to legally sell Marijuana yet the federal government regularly and illegally shuts down these businesses.
@@malachor5ve actually this is the Knowing Better channel if you wanted to be featured in Atun Shei’s cringe compilation on his Checkmate Lincolnites series then you’ve come to the wrong place my friend
@@scl1332 I stand by my comment. The majority of why the south fought was for slavery that's not under debate, but that doesn't mean they didn't also fight for individual states rights to govern themselves as they saw fit. The federal government was never meant to rule over the the states, it was meant only to be there in cases of emergency and to help coordinate the states against foreign invasion. The federal government was overextending it's power then, and continues to overextend it's power now
@@malachor5ve Um, slavery is a direct violation of basically the entire Bill of Rights, which the federal government has the right to impose on the states. That may not be how the north and south justified the civil war at the time, but from a legal perspective slavery was always constitutionally illegal.
The perfect response any time someone says this is to simply ask them 'A state's right to *what*, sir?'
And then you watch them gape like a fish.
Hi KB, maybe you should make a whole video on dog whistle politics like the Reagan Campaign "Cadillac driving welfare queens", or "healthy young bucks buying t-bone steaks with food stamps".
Yup. And protesters are actually antifa.
And people who do/will do "crime".
9:00 I’d argue D-Day wasn’t what turned the war against Hitler. Him invading the Soviet Union prior and refusing to retreat was a huge loss and created a war on two-fronts, which would make Petersons point make a little more sense
Peterson has no cogent point when talking on this subject.
the only thing that turned the war in the favor of the german queen was alan turing's invention of the computer which allowed koneaghn saxe-humbug (the german queen of england) to break hitler's enigma code! later she forced alan onto hormones because he was gay. he later took his own life!
"there is a reason no one studies history, it just teaches you too damn much!" Noam Chomsky.
@@thenaturalmidsouth9536 erm yes he does, it's Knowing better who has proven he knows nothing.
The writing was on the wall for Germany by February 43 with the Soviet victory at Stalingrad, denying Germany fuel, combined with the defeat of Rommel's Afrika core, also denying Germany fuel.
This combined with an immediate Soviet offensive after the destruction of the 6th army on top of the knowledge an imminent allied invasion of mainland Europe is what signalled the death of the third Reich. Not Normandy.
Meaning when knowing better says his BS about Germany not losing the war in 43, he is objectively wrong.
Hatred of things that disgust you means you hate the things that disgust you. Ergo Hitler hates the Jews because they disgust him. Knowing better isn't an idiot, so he is purposely changing the context of not only Jordans words but the nature of words in general. Evidence for bias.
Also by summing up Jrodan Peterson as a man who simply tries to defend freedom of speech against feminism, is evidence Knowing better is biased and just has a grudge.
This is evidence that knowing better isn't actually Tring to educate you on the matter, but has a grudge against Jordan Peterson and is trying to besmirch him by grasping at straws with this flimsy argument he's constructed with historical inaccuracies, assumptions and insults.
@davidbowie50yearsofbowiean23 sorry, but that rambling reply doesn't change the fact that Peterson, with a definite axe to grind, has no more expertise in WWII history than any other layman, which is exactly what he is in regards to this subject.
Peterson is very subtly using his Gish gallop style of nonsense rambling to undermine the criticality of the Holocaust. There's a reason why Holocaust deniers love Peterson.
@@thenaturalmidsouth9536 it's funny because you call my argument " a rambling reply" yet despite this can't actually refute it, because if you could you would yet you can't, so you just insult it.
My last comment speaks basic historical facts in regards to years and dates, the facts do support the argument Jordan was making, not Know betters argument.
Now fyi the support of one group or another doesnt actually mean anything.
And proving my point that you and your ilk don't actually have an argument but are just clutching at straws to make JP look bad, is that his argument isn't downplaying the Holocaust, it isn't even making excuses for Hitler, he's finding motivations and common psychological patterns in Hitler, the most retarded part of this video is when he says that JP tells people that Hitler didnt hate Jews just found them disgusting. But the reality is why would he hate them if he didn't find them disgusting? It's language spagethii that propaganda artists like this youtuber are using to deceive people because they can't make counter arguments honestly. Ones that may very well be true, but hey any argument that isn't just "Hitler the devil" can be misconstrued not only by holocaust deniers but you people aswell.
You and the Holocaust deniers are two different sides of the same coin.
"According to this narrative, he didn't hate the Jews. He just wanted to clean up things that disgusted him"
And how in all of Earth and Narnia are those not the same thing? This is a total strawman of his position.
Sporeguy, dude, I've been listening to Jordan peterson like non stop for the past week and if I have to hear "straw man" or "throw the baby out with the bath water" or "dominance hierarchy" again I'm poking my eyes out 😂😂😂
It is a strawman
What about mentions of lobsters? Did you know they have a dominance hierarchy?
Haruhi Suzumiya, ik, but there are so many different phrases you can use lol. I'm not saying he's wrong.
in this lecture JP is actually discussing indicators of sociopathy/psychopathy. He is explaining that many sociopaths are easily repulsed/disgusted by things and are often driven by those feelings of disgust. It's different from hatred, its deeper and more divisive than hatred. I dunno go listen to the JP video if u want a better explanation. I don't have time to reinvent the wheel.
It's kinda weird to me. I am german and in school we were taught about the holocaust. To us its undeniable...like..who exactly would deny that? I mean wtf
Speaking words are harmless. Let them deny it, show that they're wrong. Censoring them just means the German government doesn't believe it happened either, otherwise they'd be happy to show every generation what happened. I'm sorry, but this is the only way in a free country. Although Europe doesn't seem to be very open to free dialogue anymore. Tragic because Europeans have alot to offer.
@@deadpilled2942 did you even READ my comment? I am from germany and we are taught about it. We germans know and accept it happened. We teach about it at school so yeah.
@@YvaiatheDemon yes, I'm aware that you were taught it. I was saying that it's better to prove it than make a law saying you cant deny it. I don't know maybe I'm overestimating people. I've done that with Anglo Saxon Europe before
Dead Pilled but it’s never mentioned that there is a law against it, just that no one would deny it because it’s considered common knowledge learned in school...
I'm Irish, and we're also taught about the Holocaust in secondary school, and I remember knowing about it from an early age, so I'm glad that's the case.
7:03 I looked up this whole clip and his final point was that hitler was so evil that he neglected the war effort because he was so fixated on committing genocide. The title is literally, how hitler is more evil than you think.
Yes! He took it completely out of context.
Yes, Jordan would have won the war first then committed the genocide, because he's much less evil.
Yes, you’re right. I am somewhat bothered by KB’s inaccuracy, but I also think you’re missing the point. I think KB is calling more attention to the fact that Jordan is seemingly seen trying to disassociate Hitler (evil) from the movement he stood behind, effectively isolating him as the evil of the Nazi Party, rather than the party itself. I think he makes his intentions pretty clear with the dog whistle to the fourth reich, allegedly showing his support for the ideas in the modern era though not the man. Take note of the placement of the supposedly referential “glorious” before the “error of speech.” There is always the possibility that this was an earnest mistake, but the arguments for that idea are relatively unconvincing for me at least.
@@ryan-yh7vo I just really think it’s disingenuous to frame it as though JP was “dogwhistling”. Dogwhistles imply intent. JP’s intent was, as his title stated, Why hitler was more evil than you think. So to frame it as though JP was in any way defending or advancing nazism is just ridiculous
yeaaaaa the argument was lost for me there. JBP isn't a holocaust apologist nor denier, he made a presentation about why Hitler was even more evil than you thought...inclusion of the fourth/third reich comment is only a dogwhistle if his intent was to show some sort of apologism, but I think the content pretty clearly shows that that wasn't his intent.
But also, the statement about Hitler's mentality moving from keeping things clean and killing insects, to keeping things clean and killing Jews, was likely EXACTLY his thought process at the time. Keep in mind that JBP is a psychologist, which means he takes a lot of time in analyzing peoples' thought process, even if they are compulsive, illogical, or evil. Hitler's mind had likely become so terribly pathological that he probably truly believed that Jews were the lowest possible scum creature, like an insect. This isn't apologism, but rather an attempt at understanding the mind of a truly deplorable person, and honestly if after listening to that JBP video you conclude that he's even an ounce of an apologist regarding this topic, you really have to listen again to what he said about Hitler in that video...it is really hard to hear about someone so evil and analyze them as if they are a person, but that whole presentation from JBP was meant to attempt that. Side note: I dislike that there's weird political narratives and dredging peoples' reputations in videos that are meant to be informational, that's actually way more pernicious than a dogwhistle (which you're not certain is an actual threat). Misconstruing someone's explicit words is far far worse.
I belong to a group of historical reenactors that covers all times and places from before 1600. Vikings are one of the most popular cultures in the group, and while most of us are into Vikings because Vikings are cool, there's a small percentage who are into Vikings because Vikings are, um, white.
Sometimes they're easy to deal with: They get kicked out of social media groups as soon as they reveal their true colors, vendors who sell racist merch are blacklisted, and non-racist craftspeople avoid using racist symbols in their work. (Not always easy because white supremacists are constantly co-opting new symbols, and because the runes are literally letters of the alphabet. The symbol on the neo-Nazi flag toward the end of this video is the letter O. If your character's name is Olaf, Ottar, or Oddny, better give up on monogramming your gear.)
And sometimes they're harder to deal with. If they have social capital and they're willing to fly under the radar most of the time, they can get into positions of power, or at least collect major awards despite the protests of most of the rest of the group. (Those awards are a massive help in rising to power.) The group as a whole trends liberal, but some regions are more conservative than others, and of course the culture wars have made it a badge of honor among some folks to "stand up to bullying," even when the "bullying" amounts to "Stop being a massive goddamned racist."
So there are conversations to be had, and issues to be grappled with. The good news is we're having those conversations and grappling with those issues.
And if you like Vikings because Vikings are cool (or if you like any other pre-1600 culture because it's cool), then the Society for Creative Anachronism would love to have you.
Super unrelated but it's super cool seeing an SCA member in the wild, when I was a kid my family would go to every event and I loved it so much, we hung out with the pirates and danced all night. I'm happy to know it's still going strong even after COVID
What do you call racist viking symbols?
@@hodor6994 Do you mean, which ones are racist? The ones that white supremacists like to use most often are Odal and Tiw.
@@mrjones2721 i like vikings because im from iceland and being norse is my heritage ……stop banning our symbols 😡you are part of the problem… can you not see that?
@@mrjones2721 i almost never comment on anything…ever. But reading your speech really made me upset
(grabs combat helmet)
(checks gear)
(grabs weapon)
(breathes)
*JUMPS INTO THE COMMENT SECTION*
ur gae
*WATCH MY BACK, CHARLIE IN THE TREES*
"A rifle and a hammer in my hand, I'll be a fighting man."
DIVES INTO THE COMMENT WARS
Well, KB *is* a veteran
@@Pat4ever. giết người mỹ!
18:50
Germany also doesn't build public monuments to Nazi generals and soldiers. The majority of Confederate monuments were built between 1890 and 1920. You can find timelines of monument installations and compare them to important legal battles and racially charged events (Plessy v Ferguson, foundation of the NAACP, the Klan's resurgence in 1915, the Red Summer and Tulsa race riots). Funny how installations spiked afterwards, isn't it?
Even Robert E Lee opposed Confederate statues because he believed it would glorify all the violence and bloodshed. Most of them were built by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, pretty much to celebrate racists. United Daughters of the Confederacy still also somehow exists 🤦♂️
I don’t find it mysterious that a war monument would be built after a war. When would you expect it to be built?
Museums are where they ought to be.
@@goblinslayer7096 lol
@@ferrisbueller9991 k fine sure but honestly, why are people confused about the timing? Like, "OMFG they built the monuments about 30 years AFTER the war!?! 0.o" like, yeah, that's probably the average amount of time it takes kids and grandkids to get around to making monuments of their parents. A lot of us still perceive time as linear right?
I'll never understand why a group so focused on pride and superiority pretends that their biggest accomplishment never happened. They're so snakey, they don't even realise it contradicts their entire movement.
The problem with dog whistles is that people who don't know about them might use them by accident, so they kind of lose meaning.
Like, imagine someone saying "hey, I like that froggy, I will get one"
Exactly. And that makes it dangerous to read intentions into ambiguous actions
min 17:20 "I think I saw a combined... three?... three swastika flags "
Three swastika flags are three too many.
Seriously! The number should be zero. The fact that anyone would voluntarily march alongside anyone flying those flags means that they're in solidarity, and at best a Nazi sympathizer, which isn't much better than being an outright Neo-Nazi. Who is really fooled by these bottom-barrel apologetics?
Not to mention it's easy to assume that the people tagging alongside are sympathetic to the cause of the flag bearer.
Just like the guy with the rebel flag who were one of the protestors who stormed the Capitoleum. Anyone who let him bear it hates America as much as him.
@@AbandonedVoid also there were plenty of other (neo )nazi or “alt right “ or “identitarian” -whatever they want to rebrand themselves as -
flags , ffs they even had the black sun flag
Don't blame the swastika, it's been around for millenia. It's used in ALL other contexts as a symbol of "hope" and "doing good", "wellbeing". A quick check of Buddhism, ancient Norse culture, even some American first nations and many more used it as a symbol of "good" things.
Just because one "evil" regime , for 6 years used it as their symbol shouldn't change the 1,000's of years it has been used as a symbol of goodness. At the very least, only the reversed black swastika on red and white should be reviled.
I usually use 88 in screennames (my youtube handle pre-dates that) because it's a lucky number in many Asian cultures and it's also my birth year. It's interesting how some things are an evil secret code to one group and auspicious to others.
Don't worry, in Germany it is also literally being used to mean "HEIL HITLER" because "H" is the 8th letter of the alphabet. (also 18 is used for Adolf Hitler). We had a Neo-Nazi Biker-Bar in our city called "Club Doppelacht" (Double 8). Then again the swastika is still being used in India by a lot of Gurus and Holy people
@@scivi7060 not sure if I understood you correctly on that last part. The swastika that's used in India and Nepal predates WWII, it was a religious symbol long before hitler came around and flipped it around for his banner. So if you are saying it is wrong they still use this symbol I must disagree. However I could have just misread and you were pointing out the different meanings of symbolism around the world. In that case I agree.
@@yoda538 I think that’s what he meant
@@scivi7060 its not a swastika in Hindu culture its not a 45 degrees angle its a religious simple thats thousands of years old be quiet
Yes it is considered lucky in both Asian countries that I lived in, China and Vietnam
6:54 - 9:22 I always interpreted this speech of Peterson's to say that Hitler was evil for the sake of being evil. Even hearing your explanations, I really can't see how that was possibly a defense of Hitler.
I was about to say the same thing, if anything Peterson is explaining why hitlers hate was so obsessive and disturbing.
It's so disgusting how none of their symbology is even original. Like, they basically plagiarized and bastardized all their symbols because of course they have to ruin everything
Edit: Before this gets any more upvotes, I need to admit that I was mistaken; Haidt hasn't said anything affirming Peterson's theory about hitler. The hypothesis that disgust sensitivity and bigotry are linked is a mainstream view among psychologists, but not one that Haidt has espoused.
If you're going to criticize JBP for linking Hitler's evil to disgust sensitivity, you're going to have a problem with Johnathan Haidt and many other psychologists. They aren't denying hate, they're explaining its roots.
Including Bret Weinstein.
Thus dude has been showing his left leaning bias of late.
Dude, don't use the term "important psychologists." You clearly don't read psychological literature or know the experts in the field. You know 2 people who hold your anti left views, who aren't respected in the field, because you want to criticize the left. That's your agenda and ideology and not Knowing Better's problem or any of ours.
@@jasong7373 Is the idea of Hitler having disgust sensitivity inherently an anti-left view? I think it's more nonpartisan, evaluating Hitler on the individual level. Could Peterson be wrong in his examination? Hell yes but that doesn't mean he's some evil anti-left biggot from hell.
@@JoeyPerp Buddy, reading comprehension. Haidt doesn't discuss Hitler as far as I know. The views that the two have in common are that universities are too homogeneous, free speech is under attack, we can't discuss certain ideas (usually racist ones), all that usual complaining.
The reason OP knows about Haidt and Peterson is not because he has an undergrad degree in psychology or because he reads, but because of Haidt and Peterson's anti left positions.
Last, Peterson is absolutely a bigot, from his debunked sexist theories about women to his comparing trans rights to fascism. Haidt (as far as I can tell) isn't a bigot, is more serious, but gained notoriety through the standard IDW grift.
Neither are particularly respected or read.
"there were 3 swastika flags" well, that's already 4 to many
Turnip Singularity
obviously, I was exaggerating to get the point across.
-1 is still too many!
The entire point was not everyone there was a Nazi not condoning Nazi flags.
@@bernie421 and my point was that there were too many Nazis, even if you lowball your estimate
@@marcopohl4875 really brave thing to say, we will be sending your nobel peace prize soon
@@Brandovichielol
About the first Jordan Peterson clip: it sounded to me as if you thought Jordan was trying to almost make Hitler sound less bad or that he didn't hate jews. If i got that right, why's that? I haven't seen that whole clip so don't know the entire context. Disgust and hatred aren't mutually exclusive. I have listened a podcast in the past, where Robert Sapolski said that the same part of the brains that detects disgusting objects (like the taste of rotten food) is also activated by moral judgements, and that's often why in propaganda people used to compare their adversaries to vermin and cockroaches etc. to stimulate a more visceral response. Sapolski also mentioned a study in which people did a survey of their political interest, but the room had a foul smell, and a considerable amount of the participant answered more conservatively than they normally would. I haven't personally checked the study so i don't know what the exact numbers are.
So a strong sense of morality and sense of disgust can possibly correlate with each other. I think he had both. Using literal pesticide to kill the group he hated kinda also plays into the disgust he likely felt. I also think he might have really thought he was cleansing the world of something foul. He talked of jews as parasites and something like the root of what's wrong in the world.
I don't personally understand what could be even downplayed or defended if Jordan would even say "oh he didn't hate them, he was just viscerally repulsed by them to the point of committing genocide".
But like i said, i haven't watched the whole clip, neither have i followed what Jordan's been talking about for a long while.
Edit: also his comment on hitler wanting to maximize mayhem goes along with the public consensus of the events. I've understood that as he noticed the incoming defeat, and thus he started killing more and more of the jews to kill the witnesses and evidence (for war crimes), and possibly to just destroy as many of the group he hated before he went down. I think this is what JP meant by 'causing mayhem'
His argument of inferring motivation from the end results is pretty damn flawed though. I don't think there's any valid reason to think that the whole nazi thing was just a Joker in real life. But it still doesn't click with me how this would be promoting nazism or it's modern equivalents in any way.
Peterson’s hypothesis about Hitler and Nazism are absolutely ludicrous. Any reputable historian would dispute his claims as Hitler/ Nazi apologetics that are not based in facts. Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels… were simply racist. They embraced Nazism due to it being a racist ideology. “Aryan/ Germanic” superiority appealed to them as a racist ideology. Blaming minorities for everything that went wrong worked for them. If you read the writings of the Nazis leadership you realise that they were rather pathological in their hate towards specific Ethnic groups and minorities…
"They had a pool, they had a gym"
They had gas chambers too.
They unironically didn't. There is no proof, this guy is a midwit... Every holocaust historian agrees that witnesses are 99% of evidence. He should have done atleast and hour of research and he would know this.
Sadly a rather intentionally misleading “debate bro” culture has become acceptable regarding the Holocaust/ Nazi war crimes/ Nazism/ Hitler amongst some people… some people are just poorly informed or educated, however most are racist themselves
Putting Jordan Peterson next to neo-Nazis and saying everything is a dogwhistle is a bit misleading.
True, the problem on the left is they don't take care to differentiate between the groups, the problem on the right is everybody is claim Jordan Peterson as their own and taking his words out of context to fit the narrative of their faction.
I think Jordan Peterson is just interested in history and tried to get himself into the mind of someone with no compassion when he talked about Hitler. So he said all the things he said. JP isn’t a Nazi he’s just trying to make sense of the most evil man to ever live
Yeah, like, that would be one hell of a failed dog whistle if he were trying to make a nod to the deniers, but in the next sentence outright stated that it got used to kill people.
Yeah dudes kinda looking into a little too much
@@thomasbrady3827 yeah, no. For the 3-4 years Ive been aware of him, he has continually made these kind of dogwhistle statements and championed neo Nazi propaganda. He is an entirely reprehensive person. He is so far out of acceptable "debate", that Ive only ever seen him on far right propaganda "shows". That he actually get to teach students.... what the actual fuck. Might work for u on the other side of the pond, over here in Continental Europe we can no problem recognizing, what he is.
The rest of u - thats the point, he does dog whistles. He also just goes full in. So hes "just discussing". Funny how hes always "discussing" the Nazi side. Jesus, how obvious does he need to be? Wear an SS uniform?
Analyzing hitlers psyche doth not make you a sympathizer. It's sooo important to not only remember history, but to understand it as much a s possible too.
Analyzing Hitler's psyche is important, but I fail to see how making it about "Hitler just had a OCD and thought Jews were gross" is helpful. It ignores a literal century of eugenic thought and even moderate practices that led up to that worldview. If Hitler just thought Jews were gross due to a mental disorder, then that's not actually a lesson we can broadly apply to combat bigotry in the world today. Whereas if we take for granted that Hitler was shaped by the popular noxious beliefs of his day, then there's something we can do about it to keep it from happening again.
I'm saying this as someone who has a mild neurodevelopmental disorder (ADHD). I can tell you that my disorder does not make me take the political and social positions I do (unless you count the fact that every time I hear about the inner thinkings of bigots, I just think it sounds way too complicated and I could never maintain that level of attention to essentially meaningless differences to make an entire worldview out of it). Does it affect my expression of them? Probably. But not to any extent that's useful to consider in shaping policy.
@@erraticonteuse amazing response mate, seriously
@@brunothekiwi7804 no it's shit
Erraticonteuse
1. It doesn’t matter if you can’t get a lesson out of it to combat bigotry. That’s *really* dangerous. What matters is the truth. If it was just OCD, then that’s it; how ‘useful’ that truth is to your personal causes should have *0* effect.
2. Peterson wasn’t just saying it was OCD. If you had actually watched his content and actually listened to his words, you’d have heard him talk about a variety of other factors. He was just talking about OCD because it seemed to be how Hitler’s feeling towards Jews was contextualised.
@The Icon of Sin and a lot of people are vegetarians, who also was a vegetarian? hitler. all vegetarians are nazis and if you try to correct me or even just disagree with me well guess what bitch, you're a nazi too
I gotta say, when I listened to Jordan Peterson I took away the exact opposite interpretation. I took away the conclusion that: yes, Big Adolph really was incredibly, evilly racist. He wasn't sabotaging Germany's war machine out of spite to the people who betrayed him; rather, he was focusing on his real priority of genocide.
So if Jordan Peterson was trying to convince me that Big Adolph wasn't all that bad, well he kinda failed miserably
The idea that Hitler's "main priority" was genocide at all costs (rather than domination/power) is ludicrous, and Peterson suggesting this is WILDLY at odds with what we know about Hitler historically. There's so much information about this. But, as usual, Jordan Peterson waxes on a limited set of information about a subject.
While the Jews were commonly refered to by Nazis as enemies of the state and instrumental in Germany's surrender in WW1 (they weren't), Hitler very intentionally took control of all major facets of society by eliminating those most able to challenge him: political opponents. Jewish people were regularly terrorized - but the Reichstag fire (resulted in eliminating political opponents) was before the Night of the Long Knives (in which Hitler killed important Nazis who weren't 100% in line with him) was before the Night of Broken Glass (which became an excuse to really start terrorizing the Jewish population).
Hitler's economy was also *ENTIRELY* dependent on conquest, and usage of those resources. They fully intended to conquer other countries and use resources via slave labor to expand the war effort. Because conquest was his goal.
One of the many, many things that Hitler was very poor at though was establishing an organized chain of command, despite the seemingly common belief that the German army or gov't at the time was like a well oiled machine. Like many poor leaders from ALL up and down the chain, all he valued was in them was loyalty. Nothing else. Because all he wanted was power. So you get a bunch of shitty people running things that don't know WTF they're doing. I mean - the economy in the 1930's started recovering significantly with some pretty impressive policies for the time. And that person (Schacht), after pointing out the fucking disaster that was German military spending, was basically ousted form his position, and GOERING was put in place of the four year plan because Hitler wanted to DOMINATE EUROPE. Yes, part of his world vision was eliminating those he saw as sub-human: because he had a psychotic view of what an idyllic German society would be. He talked about this *A LOT*.
I could go on here, but I'm not a historian. Other people are though. And none of them would agree with this nonsense Peterson is talking about. He's taking a VERY limited amount of information, and then applying what he knows about psychology to it. Which is inherently highly speculative. And it doesn't need to be because WE ALREADY KNOW A LOT OF THIS STUFF.
@@MESchem You kinda missed the point of my comment. Let me spell it out in a more convenient format.
Peterson claims: Big Adolf was deliberately sabotaging the German army by pouring resources into bad investments as a calculated move to spite his own commanders. (which is self-evidently wrongs)
KnowingBetter claims: Peterson isn't just wrong, but deliberately lying to his audience.
KnowingBetter further claims: that Peterson is secretly an anti-semite, as evidenced by his blurting out the words "fourth reich".
I say: that if Peterson was trying to make me doubt the historical understanding of Big Adolf, then he screwed up, because I'm now convinced that Mr. 88 was completely incompetent and would rather perpetuate genocide than actually win the war.
As for historical stuff: yes, I know that Germany at the time was dependent on conquest. But I've also heard it said that attacking Russia when he did was completely the wrong idea: Germany relied on Russian treaties and Russian-controlled trade routes to acquire rubber, tungsten, and molybdenum (especially rubber) as well as access 70% of Poland's oil; so attacking Stalingrad did nothing but cut off Germany's most desperately-needed resources. Basically Mr. 88 completely screwed himself over in his deranged attempt to kick all those semites and poles off the planet, because he literally couldn't wait to do so even if his life literally depended on it
@@MESchem I'm also of the idea that Hitler while obviously had a genuine hatred for jews gypsies homosexuals and communists etc. that wasn't his motivation for war. Rather it was blind nationalism along with his views on German superiority. Jordan downplays that by saying he had some sort of odc rather than admitting that he was just an extreme anti semite.
The Nazis did use Jews as slaves. The concentration camps were divided into labour camps and extermination camps. Only those who were determined to not be helpful as workers were killed immediately. The others would be worked to death.
@@akshatgupta4817 regardless of that fact that does not make Jordan Peterson a Hitler sympathizer. The video that clip is taken from is literally titled "why Hitler is even more evil than you think."
You express concern that Peterson is saying that Hitler had a unique pathology and this enables the idea that not anybody could turn out exactly the same. The problem is that he EXPRESSLY says this in other places, even saying that everyone is capable of immense evil not different to that of the Nazis.
Dresden is literally my state's capital. I'm sure the bombing would've been a much bigger point of discussion in my history class if it had actually happend after the surrender and that many people would've actually been killed.
Which state do you live in by chance?
@@alexbesong5731 Saxony, Germany
@@m4rieh166 Was denken du oder deine Familie über die Bombardierung ?
Außerdem Props an dich sonem coolen youtuber zu folgen 👍🏻
@Christs Revenge ...great job defeating the history deniers by being completely and utterly misinformed about the dresden bombing and denying it even took place.
Would it have been a bigger point of discussion in Soviet occupied East Germany? Or in West Germany where any dicussion of German history between 1933-1945 that seems sympathetic to the Nazis is subject to criminal complaint? Maybe we will never know the actual death toll, but the fact that for over 50 years any party to the event had no interest in examining it speaks volumes and when an investigtation was done the stated goal was to silence right wing nationalists, the conclusion is dubious.
Using the term "the Media" is not a Nazi dogwhistle.
Carl Smith he gets a lot wrong. The alt right wasn’t popularized by Spencer but brightbrait (I probably spelled that wrong). When it started was for conservatives against the the mainstream republicans similar to the tea party. Then the alt right was taken over by neo Nazis.
@@ONEIL311 +1 Andrew Breitbart would have disavowed Richard Spencer in a heartbeat.
Carl Smith he did but the media didn’t care
Neither is cultural Marxism
Attacking the free press is a pretty standard sign of authoritarianism or fascism.
Similarly, "experts" who claim to have hidden secrets and denounce entire disciplines or scientific consensus are usually frauds, like Peterson, or Sam Harris.
Attacking the press can absolutely be a dog whistle, often paired with a racial coding.
"Did Hitler do anything wrong?"
"NO!"
Damn, didn't know Nazis were pro-suicide but ok
Was it wrong for Hitler to kill himself though?
Which is funny, because by his Christian ideology, he'd go straight to hell. Do not pass go, and so on...
Lmaooo imagine blieving he actually committed suicide.Good goy.
@@blackcorsair8466 but he did tho it was either that or he would have been captured and executed
@@blackcorsair8466 "Goy"? Why the claim that Jewish people labelled it as a suicide, and not the Christian Americans who helped defeat Germany, or the Soviets? And further, why would they hide the fact that their troops, vehicles or artillery killed Hitler and label it as a suicide, when killing Hitler would have been such a boost for morale?
Putting Jordan Peterson and H3H3 Ethan on the same team is funny after recent events
I mean, when you said that Jordan Peterson was saying that it was "an extension of killing rats", and that Hitler didn't hate Jewish people, I think you misunderstood what he meant. Mr Peterson was saying that Hitler couldn't handle anything that disgusted him, and I'm pretty sure if Jewish people disgusted him, he probably hated Jews...
So i like your reasoning and all, it could be a great argument, but the biggest mistake almost everyone makes is making Hitler out to be that big figure that the nazis wanted you to think he was. That was one way of the government to subtle "brainwash" and manipulate people into the new system. It wasn't only Hitler. There was a whole government and many many people behind that one man. This man just came in handy at the right time. The nazi regime could have put any other person in Hitlers shoes if there was a better option in their eyes. Saying "Hitler killed all the jews" is like saying "Hitler build the autobahn" which is both not entirely wrong but implies, that he did all that by himself- which he didn't he maybe had a say in these decisions at most.
So reasoning with that "Hitler" was not okay with jews and more or less based on that assume he had OCD which made him do even more horrible/extreme things is just kinda pretty dumb and pretty wrong at that too. And kinda makes it seem more "harmless" but that could be just me.
I mean yes he hated the jews that was part of his view on life and because of that and his history with drunken uprisings in bavaria he was seen as such a perfect candidate to do that representing job for the npd.
There are other reasons than "Hitler" and his "OCD" that Nazi Germany killed the jews or hunted them down in the first place.
Not like Germany was the only country that absolutley hated jews at that time, but to be fair they took it to a rather extreme level.
So i would rather advise you to look this up in some history books or find yourself some WWII survivors or Holocaust survivors preferable from Europe maybe even Germany to inform yourself about this topic.
@@ploppsilly yes, hitler had a government to organise things for him.
are you arguing that Hitler didn't hate jews? or...
Jumped into the comment section right after hearing this part, glad to see people are on top of it.
@@ploppsilly Peterson's point about the link between ethnic cleansing and disgust applies to the German nation as a whole, not just to Hitler. It's also useful for explaining anti-immigration policies: people sub consciously see foreigners and minority groups as a source of disease. Peterson's points have been made by other psychologists like Johnathan Haidt.
@@ploppsilly You must understand that, while the Nazi party existed before Hitler joined, it was his manifesto that the party coalesced to. He made the party, not the other way around. anti-Semitism was rampant throughout Europe at the time, so it would have been hard to find people to do what he needed them to.
10th graders in my country usually go on a one-week buss trip to Germany and Poland to visit the concentration camps, usually with a time witness who had been sent there (or some other camp in Europe) during the war, or a close family member to someone who had. It's been half a life since I went, so there were still time witnesses left to join us back then. Even so many years later, I still think about it from time to time. We could just walk out through the front gates when we were done with the tour, free, I don't know why, but that specific thing made an impact on me. I can never forget the rooms filled with glasses, or hair, of suitcases, prosthetic limbs even. When I say filled, I mean filled. You could probably drown in them.
what country do you live in?
@@save_bandit Norway
I’m from Norway too, we were supposed to go on that trip this year, but corona made that impossible. I was pretty disappointed, it was an experience I think I would’ve found very important.
Do you plan to go visit Gaza too? Maybe that would stop you from passing a blank check to murderous colonialists
@@TheAussieRod I didn't realize that the decisions of Israel represented the Jewish people as a whole. Unless this is a new angle to shoe horn antisemitism back into the main stream. Have a little nuance you edge lord.
Amazing video. I do think from a historical context that the biggest issue of people saying the civil war was about "states rights" is that that is a true statement but it isn't a complete statement. The "states right" that led to the war was the right of New states to be free states or slave holding states. Bleeding Kansas had happened before the war as did John Browns march. Both were about slavery.
I like the fact that all of the people reframing hitler kinda forget he was abusing amphetamine and heroin all the time and a lot of primary sources call him crazy.
I‘ve only now come to see the rest of the video. Dresden was definitely a warcrime, since they attacked civilians along with industry to destabilize and decenter Germany. Churchill should be shunned more for his treatment of India. He was a terrible person overall, however, the nazi propaganda and the way Germany worked in 1945 kinda required the allies to do what they did.
Uh, Jordan Peterson constantly brings up the book “Ordinary Men,” and how part of becoming a real individual is realizing that if you were born in Nazi Germany the chances that you’d be Oscar Schindler are next to zero. He’s actually bringing Hitler into more understanding by not saying he’s evil and being done with it and actually getting into his personal pathologies. He did a whole lecture on Hitler if you’re interested in more than accusing him of something extraordinary, with extraordinarily little evidence.
You are SO right! ... I am happy others are enlighten instead of this fool in the video..
Orrrr you just hate jews and want to say it didnt happen
@@blooblefwarden4432 what? Around 3 million Polish Jews died during the war, and around 3 million Slavic Poles.
Is Peterson denying that?
@@blooblefwarden4432 Unless you are trying to say Peter's on claimed that (he didn't. His point centered around the holocaust being Hitler's clean frankness and horrid beliefs about jews escalating), then that point is wholly unneeded.
It would be like a friend telling me that their spouse really wants to be a parent, and me answering "or they could be a pedofile". See the problem? Not impossible, sure, but you really are going to assume that the pursuit of understanding one of the most infamous twisted minds is their excuse for that shit?
Gee Buttersnaps please....
>They intentionally dilute terms like concentration camp
I see what you did there
if you dilute a concentration camp, you just get... camp
@@yourunclejoe9500 it feels a bit wrong to laugh, but dammit, you got me.
@@yourunclejoe9500 Or at dilution camp.
Important point. Although Vonnegut did get the number from Irvine's book; Irvine didn't come out as a holocaust denier much after Vonnegut had published his novel Slaughterhouse 5...
14:16 "legitimate over the top feminists"
Ah yes, Zarna... I actually know her in real life, or well knew... I live on the opposite corner of the continent now, but back in 2013 and 2014, I actually used to work with her in a non-profit organization called "SAFE" (Seattle Against Foreclosure and Eviction) that protested fraudulent foreclosures that banks were sometimes doing back then, and worked with Seattle's politicians to try to find solutions to help the homeless rather than attack them... and yeah... she was cartoonish even when she wasn't going on about social justice. Frankly, I stopped volunteering there partly because of her.
It was so surreal to me when the video of her and Hugh Mungus started circulating on the internet.
Hugh Mungus was the man lol
I do understand her point with the Hugh Mungus thing and I do think it could be taken as sexual harassment. I don’t find that to be a stretch by any means. However, her reaction was extremely obnoxious and is working on the assumption that she knows for sure it was intended to be sexual, when it also could have been intended as a weight joke. I think it would’ve been more productive to calmly ask him what he means and have him expose himself because the way she reacted made her out into a villain and allowed him to assume an innocent persona lmao
Grant did buy slaves when he lived in Missouri, but he did it to free them. He was nearly destitute, and continued doing it. Some say to piss off his wife's family.
Thank you, Columbo ....we fight for the betterment of mankind....not to argue what is right or wrong....we already know !
He didn't buy them he got them from his wife's father.
I have no clue about if Grant bought slaves or not but I know for a fact if it weren’t for Grant there would be a huge chance the north would’ve lost
He inherited a slave but let him free within the year, at a time where he was struggling financially and could have made a pretty penny selling that person.
The story goes that he was given a slave by his wife’s father, and after some time, he chose to free him. HOWEVER, what often goes unsaid is that his wife had slaves, and kept them while they were married. Now here’s a question: isn’t it interesting that in the 1800’s, a man’s WIFE owned slaves, but he didn’t? At a time when wives were considered to be the property of their husbands?
It’s almost like there’s some kind of special carve-out to push the historical slave-owning on the wife in order to protect Grant’s heritage…
Ah yes, Grant, the guy who had a slave as a present then immediately freed that slave, proves that the north was just as bad.
For more context. Grant was in financial hardship at the time and slaves were extremely expensive. An average slave in 1860 cost about $800, which was the equivalent to $22,000 today. (I strong slave able to work fields would be worth $33,000).
Meaning Grant could have sold the slave to save his financial situation, but stuck to his moral code and freed the slave instead, forfeiting a potential 20k.
Many people even now would struggle to reject that kind of money for the sake of a personal belief. It takes a lot of character to stick to your principles with so much to lose.
While the humble general Lee, sold them like candy when he felt like it.
@@Conns2239 Honestly I feel like I wouldn't need as much money if I had a slave. You can rent them out and shit to make passive income...
Point being that there ARE a lot of reasons (mostly financial) to own slaves if you can - but We as a People have decided that the moral costs outweigh the benefits.
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor Bro’s got the capitalist brain rot, yes owning a person is very profitable because you can work them to death and don’t have to pay them 💀 it’d also cost more to feed two mouths opposed to one, so no you couldn’t just rent the one you have out. That’s why it was common place to own several
@@Binowhy depends on how many of my other costs are offset by the slave's labor and the quality of the food I give them lmao
Anyway the point is is that slavery is a Moral Wrong and not necessarily a Pragmatic Wrong. We don't own slaves *because they're **_people_* and not because slaves don't function as intended.
visiting back to this video and the denier at 3:52 is hilarious. In an ironic sad way I mean. The image of the strong 'bavarian looking German soldier' was of one Werner Boldberg. The Nazi's made him into a literal poster boy until they found out to late that his grandfather was Jewish. He was discharged, put into menial labor details but when the government tried to round up his grandpa to deport him to a camp he came in with all his medals[he'd been decorated during the Polish invasion] with his uniform and all of their saved posters and fliers of him used that to support a point to not deport his grandpa. It Worked! They both survived the war but it's an example of the idiocy of anti-semitic racism type thought.
Also, later on in the video, the critiques of Hitler actively trying to lose the war through his orders was levied by his own generals and political elites. And, yes, the process did accelerate long into the point where Germany was already losing the war. Not from the Western front, but the Eastern front. Russia, not mentioned here, was at that time beating the socks off of Germany. Almost all of the camps found by the Allies were found by the Russians, not the UK or US, as the USSR moved West. Hitler knowing that he was losing the war from the Eastern front ordered the acceleration of the camps extermination as to prevent USSR troops from stopping his efforts. He dedicated loads of resources away from both fronts to accomplish this. This is the action that his own generals were highly critical of as it diverted troops, ammunition, vehicles, and food from the fronts to these camps - and in no small insignificant way. Also, the start of the roundup was before 1941, the pivot point, as recognized by most historians, is Kristallnacht in 1938. It is then that the ghettos were constructed, or rather walled off sections of a city, to concentrate those who were going to be shipped to the camps.
Again, someone using these actions from decades prior as an example, a stark one that is very clear to understand, as to how people who are wholly depraved behave with their thoughts in actionable ways - then attributing that as to their thought process - is highly disingenuous and a gross mischaracterization.
The problem with dog whistle accusations is that they are impossible to prove or refute unless the alleged dog whistlers announce their intentions.
Jordan Peterson is a fraud with Fascist tendencies
@@just_a_turtle_chad you dont become a professor by being a fraud. and peterson is quite outspoken against fascicm/nazis
Honestly, since hes the only one who's hearing the dogwhistle its obviously hes the 1 who's racist
@@just_a_turtle_chad May God bless you with the virtues Jordan Peterson tries to teach.
He literally doesnt run for political power
8:46 I have to disagree. The turning point of the war was not D-day but when the invasion of the Soviet Union failed, and this failure became clear in autumn of 1941. Yes, so early. Before that, Nazi Germany had known only success in the war. Many Germans were enthusiastic about it. Now, they became worried, but it was still a vague situation. The obvious point at which Germany had lost the war was the Battle of Stalingrad in late 1942, more that a year before D-day.
That's a very euro-centric view of the second world war.
@@soulofastro because Germany is in Europe, they wouldn't admit defeat unless they saw it at their borders, I doubt they'd capitulate just by seeing the African front or Japan losing some islands at the other side of the planet
@@soulofastro the war was, in large part, euro-centric
@@PutinsMommyNeverHuggedHim The over 20 million dead Chinese would disagree with you.
@@soulofastro That had nothing to do with Hitler, that was a Japanese crime. The Japanese and Germans were allies but they were fighting separate wars.
I live in Israel, The first clip of Jorden Peterson speaks exactly of what we learn in schools, framing it as something you see different is in itself trying to change history
Occupied Palestine*
Interesting how do you feel about what you all are doing to the Palestinians???
Peterson has engaged in rather classical Holocaust denialism and Nazi apologetics on numerous occasions… He also loves to bang on about “cultural Marxism”, which is literally what the Nazis described as “cultural Bolshevism”. He constantly talks about the influence of the Frankfurt school on academia in North America when those academic scholars and researchers were forced to leave Germany due to the Nazis. They didn’t want to leave, but he makes fleeing your native country sound like some “conspiracy theory to spread cultural Marxism”. Or he describes the Nazis doing wonders for the German economy… when the Nazi economy was a kleptocracy (stealing from oppressed and murdered groups as well as occupied countries), used slave labour and was basically kept alive through war. It is such a classic trope when people want to minimise the evil of Nazism…
If dog whistling is so vague that a slip of the tongue can be interpreted as nazi signalling, how can we possibly use it as a strategy to distinguish nazis from non-nazis? I’m not denying that dog whistling exists, but it seems damn near impossible for the everyday person to keep up with the new phrases and signals.
I could type, “Fourth Reich”, and have a bunch of people suspect that I’m a nazi without knowing that I had just read Night by Ellie Wiesel and bawled my friggin eyes out, or watched Come and See and felt depressed for several days after. As much as I feel disgusted by nazi ideology and the tragedies it’s created, one accidental slip up and now I’m the nazi.
I’m not trying to argue against dog whistling so if someone smarter than I could trash me in comments please go ahead. I’m just confused about how we can actually use the knowledge of dog whistling to our benefit without persecuting innocent people.
I mean, that's kind of the point. They're meant to be subtle enough for people to not be fully sure what they are, so that if someone calls them out on it they can deny it.
Context and prevalence.
One text with the OK sign is probably just someone saying OK.
Somebody with 88 in their pseudo, doing the OK sign in response to an apology of George Floyd murder... While none of those are individually damning, the combination does point to something
From dictionary: Liquidate also has a meaning of "get rid of by killing". Jordan is clear to condemn Hilter many times.
JP is known to obfuscate
The point is that to most people killing is a much clearer and more shocking term but liquidate sounds far more removed from human life and is less abrasive
@@Alter292 No he is not xd
@@mikeellsworth750 also it is obvious that in that context liquidate means to anihilate
also, killing people doesn't imply that you want to eradicate all people of a particular category, while that's what liquidate implies
@@tjer4635 The precise dictionary definition is not nearly as relevant as the way the words are commonly perceived by the majority of people. Liquidate feels less human and less explicit regardless of what is technically a correct use of the word. It's the same difference between saying "Grandma passed away last night" and "Grandma died last night". They both clearly mean the same thing but are not understood with the same tone are harshness. It's use of language that softens the blow of the words and let's the listener avoid some of the hurtful reality. Although I suspect actual reason and logic are not really the intention of your comments.
As soon as he said "Dresden happened 2 months after the end of the war" I got weird looks for saying "where the hell did you get that idea" at work. It's just not often I'm met by historical incompetence at that level.
It’s mad that he and his wife are ethnic Jews like bruh of all people you should be the last to facilitate that kind of bigotry
Bombing of Dresden Feb.1945, Germany surrendered May 1945.
@@spiritualanarchist8162 hey look another idiot who doesn't understand the bombing of dresden at all. get in the back of the line buddy
@@joedatius then instead of slinging insults like a mad lad educate us then.
@@Budderluvr educate yourself its not difficult whatsoever im not gonna spoonfeed you history because you're lack of ability to learn things yourself.
Inferring motivations:
Mr X had an accident and died
Motivation : Mr. X wanted to kill himself so he had a hearty breakfast , kissed his wife and kids goodbye and promised them that they would definitely go to Disneyland this weekend.
That's how Jordan Peterson's inference works
It doesn't soften the Holocaust to say Hitler had cleaning type OCD. That doesn't make it any better... for one thing, it wasn't done by one person.
To be fair to jordan peterson, he sees chaos as the worst possible human condition and the root of all evil, so framing hilter in that state would hardly be a defence of him
Yeah also I don’t understand how framing hitlers hatred of Jews as a form of disgust makes it at all more palatable, it sounds to me like he’s explaining hitlers evil pathology not condoning it in any way
Is it not true to say that many active racists are primarily motivated by their disgust towards a particular race??
Yeah In my opinion this video is his worst researched. It feels like he doesn't understand who Jordan is at all and got to deep into the left wing Twitter.
@@Whobgobblin true, just saying he's evil and calling it a day is a disservice to history, and do not prevent it reoccurring in the future.
I'm pretty confident that the title of the video he used is something like "Why Hitler is worse than you imagined" I don't know why this guy thought he was defending Hitler. If Peterson is a Neo nat that he's the worse one in existence.
Peterson was once asked to mention a moment when the right went too far, he responded,
"How about Auschwitz?"
I believe he attempts to rationalize whatever Hitler's methods were by analyzing his erratic behavior. Rationalize, not validate. I hardly think anyone is willing to validate Hitler's actions, outright.
He could be wrong about Hitler's intentions, but doesn't validate his actions. Because that would be insane.
"...And the 'all-meat-diet' lobster guy never does anything /insane/."
@@nabii5951 Well what exactly has he done that is insane to you? I'm thinking maybe that one time he mentioned that he worked 50 something hours a week for like 5 years. That's pretty insane
@@thisisdavidvarela No, no, no - I'm agreeing with you! The meat-diet guy, who thinks that lobsters form the foundation of sociology, has never done anything insane in his life!
@@nabii5951 "who thinks that lobsters form the foundation of sociology", what drug are you on? I want it too
@@nabii5951 God.. Lobsters form the foundation of sociology? I’m not gonna call you an idiot, but I’m going to call you lazy. Go look at what Peterson says about lobsters.
Man it's crazy coming back to this 4 Years later and seeing that H3 podcast clip, he's always been this way, he never changed.
What clip? I es so surprised seeing him on here saying that shit esp with his background and how outspoken he usually is against anti semitism
@@MsJassi13Thats the thing though it doesn’t matter if he genuinely believes in antisemitism or not he knows his audience he literally got famous off of transphobia and anticommunist rhetoric he will tell them what they want to hear even if not so explicitly
@@BasedProletarianJacob420 Ethan Klein is jewish. He met his wife while he was vacationing in Israel to get in touch with his heritage, where she was serving in the Israeli military. He's an Israeli dual citizen.
@@alkeemist007 It doesn't change the fact Ethan Klein spread anit-Semitic propaganda (knowingly or not) back when CZcams was chalk full of that sort of content. Have people forgotten how far to the right CZcamsrs used to be? Philippe deFranco, Chris Ray Gun, Idubbbz, Amazing Atheist -- they're all left-leaning today, but they spouted a bunch of right-wing, anti-progressive, and/or alt right propaganda back when CZcams was popular for that sort of content.
These things seem to have culminated in the election of Donald Trump, Brexit, and the 2017 Charlottesville riots. Only then did CZcamsrs realize what they were saying was actually popular in real life and not just some edgy internet joke. I'm genuinely fascinated by how much things have changed since then.
@@alkeemist007
He (Ethan) apparently does not seem to understand very well known conspiracy theories used to minimise or apologise Nazi war crimes… maybe, for whatever reason, he gives people with academic cloud or qualifications the benefit of a doubt when they postulate ludicrous excuses for the Holocaust… He appears to be rather gullible when it comes to serious historical topics.
It's amazing to see how someone like me used to be involved in all of this. All it took was someone to help me get out of it and understand more perspectives and use critical thinking to assess what's rational and what's not. I wish I saw this video sooner.
The original Jordan Peterson clip said that you shouldn’t infer the motives from outcomes, and he said to use it carefully.
Funny because thats what this guys videos are about - adding context. Yet with JP he cherry picked some clips and forced his own interpretation on them, even if that wasnt what was meant
So Peterson said not to intefer motives from the outcomes while interfering motives from the outcomes
It's almost as if what ppl say and what they do are two different things
Trump said he wouldn't play golf ever if elected or that he was gonna drain the swamp and yet he did the opposite.
@Eriko. Oy this is the classical Jordan Peterson fanboy argument. Jordan Peterson is right 100% of the time
He only seems to be wrong cause you misinterpreted or you are leaving the it context. Jordan Peterson has never been wrong in the fanboys eyes
@@topranked5465 Here comes the "everything you say is wrong because you're a JP fanboy" while not debating the actual reasons of the accusation used against him. It doesn't matter what you say, so long as it is not a valid argument. This is a discussion, not a verbal battle.
Imagine defending Jordan Peterson
Holy crap I feel like this video was just bait for a civil war in the comments.
LOL, that would be meta-cool if that was in intent, the comments are fucking hilarious.
War between the comments
20 minutes of misinformation, disinformation, out-of-context commentary and a nasty guilt-by-association argument supported with a heaping helping of "you're too stupid to understand the Neo Nazis are dogwhistling you, so you can't think for yourself" will do that.
@@kma3647 ♡
Yoda, what are you doing in our world? Are you sick of Star Wars?
19:13 "The instant anyone stops defending their argument and starts complaining about their right to have it - something has gone horribly wrong."
Exactly this^^^
It's the most absurd statement. It forgets the fact you can't defend an argument if you first have to defend your right to have it.
@@davidbowie50yearsofbowiean2318:50
It's weird, because in 12 Rules for Life, Jordan Peterson very frequently refers to the events of the 20th century (the Holocaust, and the acts of Stalin and Mao) as atrocities and the worst of humanity (pretty standard opinion, but just showing that he explicitly holds this view). I'm not sure how his points here mesh with the points he made in the book about the Holocaust.
Hardly anyone states publicly “I like Hitler/ Nazis/ Holocaust”, however when the person starts talking about it and makes factually wrong and/ or misleading statements on different occasions… at some point there is a pattern. Maybe he just has a poor grasp of Nazism/ the Nazis….
As a German (was Grandpa fought in the east) i found Jordan Peterson explanations, how ordinary people could do such pure evil things, very interesting. When you want to avoid that in the future, you need to know how overall kind and rational people were led on that path of brutal genocide. Peterson doesn't defend it, he tries to explain it, in hindsight most protagonist didn't start as monsters, they ended as them.
I think it's a goog thing to try to find explainations, it also strengthens the fact that these things really happened. Look at the japanese, turkish or russians, they forget and start to deny the attrocities of the past.
I think you're misunderstanding OPs point. You may not agree with him, but I'll try to clarify what Knowing Better is trying to say. He's saying that JP is assigning some convolunted motive to Hitler's actions (Hitler was illogical, he was obsessed with cleanliness) and then arriving at the same conclusion that we are all capable of this violence. The fact that we are capable of the same atrocities as Nazis has been evident by the fact that the US genocided Native Americans, enslaved Africans and even interned Japanese Americans at the same time. That "point" that normal people can horrible commit crimes that Jordan Peterson is making isn't new or even really interesting, its how he gets there that is confusing. Why does he need to talk about Hitler's obsession with cleanliness to justify this? And his weird point about Hitler not wanting to win the war? Okay? Doesn't it strike you as weird, like why he's he talking about this just to get to the same point? Knowing Better is arguing that he's doing it because its supposed to be a 'dogwhistle' to those who believe the conspiracy letting them know he's one of them. And he's done this before, like how he's made tons of random Bible illusions while saying he's an athiest lol. Jordan Peterson is great at talking in circles about nothing but somehow connecting with tons of people through these random points.
@@wonderfulworldofmarkets9033 why? Very easy question, he’s just trying to offer an explanation of Hitlers strange behavior in the war. Ya know, like a psychologist might try to do? What is strange about that exactly? He is not misinterpreting what knowing better said, he very obviously alluded to him being some sort of holocaust denier in a video about holocaust denial like cmon man, it’s just ignorant of everything JP says, who on dozens of occasions denounced everything about the holocaust and has said just as many times that he wasn’t trying to justify his behavior, merely offering a interpretation of motive.
@@thepracticalgymnast8001 It's okay if we disagree, I thought this video was bullshit when I first watched it too. I was a huge fan of Jordan Peterson and was always confused why he brought up the halocaust as much as he did (before I ever found this video). Just like I was confused why he kept talking about the bible and biblical stories, but claimed he was agnostic. Or about how he kept talking about transgender pronouns , but claimed he was left wing. What I realized is that Jordan Peterson never says anything so he can't get pinned to it. He'll talk around subjects forever without any real point. But eventually I realized THAT IS the point. It's like your friend that keeps talking about a girl, but at the end of the story insists he doesn't like her.
@@wonderfulworldofmarkets9033 yeah I don’t think were talking about the same person here, because their could not be a poorer characterization of what JP says. First of all, why does it matter he speaks about religion as an agnostic? That does not effect the content of his arguments, it is literally his job to understand the things that influence peoples mindsets and thought…. Like religion. He doesn’t go anywhere with his arguments you say… really? That comment gives me doubts you have watched anything more than short clips on instagram or twitter. Once again, he’s an extremely educated psychologist, he interprets things not purely on opinion, but mostly on statistical fact. I haven’t seen a single clip pf the man saying he is a leftist, usually when asked he says he follows what the science says, especially when it comes to political and social issues like transgenderism he relies on the available data. Watch literally any one of his debates with feminist or trans activists and he adheres to the data, I’m willing to accept your disagreement, but only if I believe you’ve actually watched his content not short clips. I call bs.
@Loki Fish I don't like JPs interpretation of Hitlers motives either but interesting nonetheless. It is in fact deeply irrational to fabricate such an enormous act of an genocide, in a manner the world has never seen it before, in midst of the greatest war to this date. Hitler was by fact a dilluded narcissist who thought of all his actions to be approved by destiny, so he could never be wrong. He strongly believed, that he was gonna win everything because he was the only one who could do it and he was successful all the time before. But I'm not sure if the agenda which he followed were his true intentions or just merely a tool for his gain of power. At the end of the day everyone's doing what he believes to be right and so did he and the nazis. But here JPs interpretation becomes interesting because it depicts him as someone, who does something knowing it was wrong. And Hitler being someone who loves Hegel, you know, a Thesis needs an Antithesis which then concludes in a solution (basically), knows that from a great catastrophe the learning process and the good that comes from it is also great if not greater. Also wars improve science and technology, so the greatest war in history led to the the greatest jump in technology research and human rights.
And as no one can be sure of his true intentions (everyone that could have known this committed suicide as Eva Braun, Goebbels, Himmler or Goering) this still needs to be a considerable interpretation of his intentions
I don't think Peterson was apologizing for Hitler, or suggesting he wasn't evil & racist. I think the point he was making was that Hitler's deeper personality traits & temperaments might give us some insight on why he was so racist & evil.
He's a psychologist trying to understand a dead dictator. He's not a lunatic.
And, he spent decades researching tyrannical governments, including Nazi Germany, and wrote a book called Maps of Meaning about them....but what does he know, right?
Thats just a judgemental cat doing its job, guys.
You're missing the point. Peterson isn't apologizing for Hitler, but for Hitler's ideology, which he is doing by pretending that Hitler's ideology didn't have anything to do with the holocaust. The idea that Hitler's crimes weren't motivated by his authoritarian and racist beliefs exonerates modern authoritarians and racists, as it removes that black mark on their beliefs' record.
If the desire for a white ethnostate wasn't responsible for the problems it seems to have caused last time, why not try it again?
I don't meant to assert that this was Peterson's intention. I don't know, though I don't think it's off-the-wall to imagine that he is pandering to the fringes of his audience.
If you had listened to Peterson for a longer time you would see how very off-the-wall it is to imagine him pandering to these fringes.
All i'm saying is that one could never come to these conclusions about him if not A) pre-biased B) misinformed C) malicious. The guy is constantly disevowinng the far left AND far right. Constantly talking about pulling people AWAY form identiterian ideas. Constantly talking about the individúal over the tribe, about handling rage and misfortune within oneself... i really dont get why people wanna see him as this secret nazi agent. Im still voting green (left-center left) in my country, i dont agree with everything Peterson says, but what some people here, and "Knowing Better" are saying is just ridiculous if you had listened to more of his stuff.
There exist man-made objects that can be seen from space. One is the Great Wall of China. Another is Jordan Peterson’s ego.
One note is that Grant owned a single slave he inherited for about a year before freeing him.
Also with the North’s motivation, it did start out as simply preserving the Union but after the Emancipation Proclamation, many Union soldiers(the ones who didn’t desert in protest) did genuinely believe their cause was abolitionist.
Peterson has said over and over we're all capable of that type of evil
you certainly are
@@abhisheksah and you're not?
I'm sorry but I don't buy that.
Maybe all Nazis were capable of that and maybe all the members of that party were capable of that but there were ppl who opposed Hitler and others who didn't say anything simply cause they couldn't
Not all of us are capable of that
I'd say most of us aren't capable of that unless we choose to be brainwashed by someone.like Hitler
Hitler doesn't have to lead you to do horrible things! You can do them on your own and if you find yourself in the right place (wrong place) you can commit unspeakable violence! If you don't think so you're in complete denial!
Fyi I would have spoke out against the nazi party myself!
also: not all “dogwhistles” are dogwhistles. some people might be using them regularly withiut knowning the meaning
this is so stupid. No shit Sherlock if i throw up an okay sign after someone compliments me im not dog whistling. However if your the ChristChurch shooter a white supremacist and you throw it up in your court photo after killing 50 people thats a DOGWHISTLE
@@Brandon-bc1fz first of all you're a disgrace to shinobu
second of all the ok symbol is a 4 Chan meme no one actually uses it as a sign for white supremacy
third of all the issue with this video is that he claims that people who would have no reason to use dogwhistles (ie Jordan Peterson) did use them
But then he would say the fact that there's no evidence to suggest it would be used in that way is why it's a dogwhistles which is just a really stupid argument
sh1nobu why did a bunch of people at Charlottesville throw that sign up
@@rossman3388 just a bunch of trolling 4channers duh rofl lmao xD triggered them libtards.
@@Brandon-bc1fz Or maybe it's just trolling and not an attempt at subcommunication. It'd be an awful "dogwhistle" anyway, if cats can hear it more clearly than dogs.
This angers me. I'm really interested in history. From what I have gathered and I am no expert. Hitler was calculated and determined he was driven by hate and anger. He cannot be described as anything less than evil. Also he didn't just come up with hatred of Jewish people, this is littered throughout history. The reality is antisemitism has been around for so long. And wasn't uncommon in the era. Including in the US and UK. It took witnesses true atrocity to really start seeing action on anti semitism and create safety for Jewish people. I worry that diluting the holocaust will increase hatred and then create more atrocities. We cannot forget what happened or the lessons we have learnt from history
It's very interesting that moral disgust and hygenic disgust are so similar, beyond even a metaphorical level. It's because it's the same feeling: literally, our brains are using the same systems to feel both things. It's jury-rigged the hygenic disgust system for moral disgust. There was a study where people who lied, and those who washed their hands felt better. Dr. Sapolsky (an actual biologist from Stanford University) has a great series of lectures of biology free on youtube.
All very interesting… but using this as an excuse or explanation for the Holocaust is rather ludicrous and pathetic. Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels… were all extremely racist. Nazism is a deeply racist ideology. The Holocaust happened due to racism. Conspiracy theories that blame Jewish people for everything and anything are rather old in Germany and Europe…. the Christian majority in Germany and other European countries has blamed the Jewish minority for over a century for all kind of things…It is simple racism.
5:19
No. Following the logic, Hitler wanted to eradicate what he saw as a pest
Which lends to having a god complex
Exactly
He certainly wasn't the first or the last to consider those people rats
Exactly. He saw the Jews as a "pestilence", to use the Biblical term.
@Emmet Anderson if you want to "clean a group up" you can't do it wothout hating that group, so it wouldn't even make sense for the speaker to even claim that Hitler didn't hate the jews. He just expained Hitler's perspective.
Didn't JP meant that Hitler consider jews as bugs? Also he said himself that he hate nazi?
Exactly. He completely misunderstood JP's thought
I don’t believe that he’s a Nazi, just that he fell for some dog whistles like Ethan did.
"Life unworthy of life", "useless eaters." I think the that is a good description of someone you consider an insect.
@@geraltdirivia8278 he didn't misunderstand. KB did this as a massive virtue signal to this tiny extreme (m)arxist minority. I don't know why, but he's getting worse
@Nelson's Rudolph but you still have no idea if he's a antisemitic, or a bigot. You're just accusing him because someone else did. You're a follower and you reason with yourself that you have to be right. Exactly what a young nazi would do
I have to say, it is always a pleasure to watch your videos. Thanks for the hard work.
This aged well
The problem with dog whistles is that you can literally see them anywhere you claim they exist.
Yes, i see them in your comment. You're a nazi, Bobby.
Yup, it’s ghost hunting. “Oh I see it over there!”
Where? I didn’t see it! “Right there!”
“Oh I see one here!” Oh I didn’t see that one! Wait wait, now I do!
Yeah it’s very easy to claim there are hidden motives in those you dislike. It’s natural bias, really.
It's called inductive reasoning
@ThirteenFourteen lol
Yeah that's a great point but tbh I've always been weirdly put off by how much Jordan Peterson brings up his Hitler hygiene theory and how "we would all be Nazis if we lived in Hitler's Germany". It does feel like an odd normalization of it and considering JP has this habit of pussyfooting around an issue he believes in but refusing to say it so he can't be pigeonholed (Christianity, Gender Roles, Transgender Rights).
Like I do see merit in Knowing Better's point that JP wants to normalize what Hitler did as "obsession with sanitization" instead of the hatred of the jewish race, something we see everywhere today as well.
I used to believe JP was very logical and "thought of ideas for decades before presenting them" until I watched a clip of him on the Joe Rogan's podcast where Joe is telling him how MMA is the most intense fighting form. You can watch JP create a "theory" before his very eyes, and change it when Joe mentions it conflicts with reality, to fit the end conclusion that MMA is great. It was really an eye opening moment that showed me how this guy is a great speaker at forming narratives but they are in pursuit of supporting his previously held beliefs (his religious views, societal views, gender views and political views) and not a authentic exploration of ideas to come to a real truth.
i dont think you're seeing the same line of thinking that jordan peterson is on.
You mean the one where he's wrong?
I mean in the clip around 7:50 he says Hitler should have "put them to work instead of exterminating them if he wanted to win".
Except guess what Hitler did? He put them to work! That's why they had "labor camps". They were intended to be worked to death, but they weren't dying fast enough so they ramped up to death camps.
Peterson has a horrible grasp on history. He is not an historian, and should stop pretending to be.
@@KingBobXVI ya know what Jordan Peterson never did? Condone hitlers actions. Not once. Just because he talks about Hitler doesn't mean he is a secret supporter of him. Its okay its a obviously a hard line of thinking to follow but at least you did your best. Kudos to you brah
@@KingBobXVI He not is trying to be a historian, he's trying to psychoanalyze Hitler. By the way he is a CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST!
my favorite thing about the Dresden bombing myth is that after the war (when they say the allies bombed it) it was in soviet hands and would have at best caused a incident that would be talked about today and at worst started ww3
"Dresden bombing myth". You're a monster, it did happen and Hitler did everything possible to avoid war. Churchill and the allies ignored any peace proposals. and I would remind you that what happened in Dresden, and many other German localities, was unjustified and also happened in other parts of Europe. my grandfather still remembers when the "good Americans" bombed his hometown for no reason, killing children and women whose names my grandfather still remembers. do the world a favor and find some compassion.
@@MAPkiller_shitsummoner-wizard ah yes he tried to avoid war like when he invaded: austria, denmark, norway, poland, Czechoslovakia luxembourg belgtuim and the netherlands
and im only counting the countries that were not colonys, were not invaded by his allies first, and did not declare war on nazi germany first so saying he tried to avoid war is insane
also you did not provide evidence to it happening and i provided evidence it didnt happen as well as knowing better in his video the allies bombed it during the war for military reasons with minimal civilian deaths hitler invaded poland which the uk and france warned hitler would lead to war with them and bombing military targets is just part of war and if those targets are in a city civilians may get caught up in the crossfire it sucks but it happens and i dont see you complaining about hitler bombing the uk to all hell during the battle of britain
it sucks your grandfathers town got bombed but dont blame the allies who were protecting a innocent nation blame the meglomaniac who lead germany to commit genocide and start the biggest war in world history
Trying to post part 2 but CZcams keeps deleting it. That's funny I've actually provided links to documents to prove im right.
>it sucks your grandfathers town got bombed but dont blame the allies who were protecting a innocent nation
Don't blame the allies? Yes i do blame the allies, i do. No German wanted war, no Italian, no brits nor any other European. Roosevelt wanted it, Churchill wanted it, stalin wanted it. The only thing they protected was their own interests.
[Part 2/4]
>and start the biggest war in world history
You as many other people do mot understand the roots of your frustration, hence you stick to false truth. You as many others want to rebel and luckily the system is able to fill your needs by province a list of accepted things to rebel against. Many people will take the bait thinking they're the "resistance", thinking they're fighting for a better future, but in the end you will continue to be this way and the world will be worse day by day because of you, and you will never question anything you are told. the important thing is that behind you there is a majority of people like you who support you, and you could be wrong, but in the end you won't do anything to fill that void left by the lies. I hope you can live with it, I can't, that's why I'm here to talk to you now. call it love if you want but you won't understand me anyway, you don't want to understand. at the end of the day no matter how much proof i show you, you will stay that way and continue to hate me. Have a nice day. [Part 4/4]
I don't think Peterson is a nazi, but it is a first portal to more radical thinking, the introduction to many principles of fascism and other racial logic
The fact that Jordan Peterson said 'fourth' and corrected it to 'third' being a "dog whistle" has got to be the single stupidest thing I've ever heard.
I'd never even heard of the term "fourth reich" until I just googled it in response to this video. He clearly just literally forgot what it was called.
(the article says that fourth reich has also been used in recent times as a joke about German dominance in the EU)
Gordon Freemason If you've studied neo nazis or just been exposed to white supremacist rhetoric you will come across "fourth reich" eventually. I'm guessing you're pretty young.
Though I agree Peterson saying was probably just a mistake, I have no doubt he is aware of the concept. It's the foundation of neo-nazism.
I'm 30. I've just never bothered studying neo nazi material. Don't see any point.
Gordon Freemason If you haven't then you're not really in a great position to critique this video are you?
That's irrelevant for the point I made.
Gordon Freemason Actually it's incredibly relevant if we're talking about neo-nazi dogwhistles...
“War of Northern Aggression?”
Did they forget the south shot first.
The Southern narrative is the Special Edition edits of history.
@Fizzy Fusion Well it should not make you feel embarrassed unless you called the Civil War, "The War of Northern Aggression."
Fizzy Fusion Buddy, there is no “we” let’s just get that clear. The South lost, therefore you’re a part of the Union. GG, good fight, the South lost, end of story.
@Fizzy FusionFair enough! Just clarifying.
Well sort of. The beginnings of the war are very complicated. The Confederacy knew it couldn't military conquer the Union and never really tried. When you say that the South shot first I assume you are talking about Ft. Sumter. Well think of it from their perspective. You think of yourself as a sovereign state (South Carolina). You leave the Union you were apart of, but their military garrison just won't leave. From your perspective that is a foreign army on your territory.
There are a couple of other interesting examples. Thomas Jackson was in charge of defending Harper's Ferry which is an impossible task. He put artillery on the nearby Maryland heights, but Lee told him to bring them down as there was still hope that Maryland would join and they didn't want to piss them off.
As crazy as it sounds to our modern ears Kentucky actually declared neutrality, and that they would join the side that didn't violate that neutrality. Oddly enough North Carolina, Virginia, Arkansas, and Tennessee basically did the same thing. General Polk violated Kentucky's neutrality, whereas from the other borderstates perspective the Union violated theirs by asking them to raise regiments.
Please leave Texas.....the north invaded the southern state that had succeeded....thereby causing the Southern army to fire on them.....seriously go live up in the Yankee states......we don't want you here.
I love this channel but also I feel like everything I've ever known is a lie everytime I finish one