WOW!.. this video stopped me in my tracks.. watched it all the way, twice, back to back.. really highlights some things that i never considered.. and shone a light on issues from a totally different angle.. I'm going to need to watch it again soon.. so much more to digest.. you have clearly done an incredible amount to reading and understanding of the topic and you have an incredible talent to clarify complex ideas in simple language that is easy to listen to... i am definitely sharing with family.. You are amazing.. please never stop.. ❤
Then & Now is the antidote to vapid political content. He puts in effort, releases his well-researched work, and disappears for months on end. More content creators should follow his lead.
The glossing over of the crusades neglecting to mention that nearly have of Europe was colonized and invaded seemed a bit vapid to me. The crusades went for hundreds of years, and 90 percent of the conflict was centered in Europe…🤦🏾♂️
"There is no document of civilization which is not at the same time a document of barbarism. And just as such a document is not free of barbarism, barbarism taints also the manner in which it was transmitted from one owner to another". - Walter Benjamin
@@Buckiz You know how change happens? Conversation. Conversation is the bedrock of a functional democracy. By arming people with better information and different perspectives change can actually happen. Even revolutionary movements require building a broad base of motivated believers that know the issues and understand their role and their power. The Euromaiden, Hong Kong Democracy Protests, and Arab Spring don't happen without people having conversations. The "fuck talk, now action" crowd have never achieved anything more than petty crime.
@@SatanicFragment It's been time for change. Stop conversing about it. That's a stall tactic. Just do what's right. Why is that such a hard concept to get behind? We've already talked about it. And the only crime being committed is this gov inaction regarding so called black folks standing in law.
I have literally watched all of your videos on RU-vid, you do a great job researching these topics. I like the way you apply pure reason to some of these controversial topics. That being said, you should do a video about the ‘military industrial complex’ as president Eisenhower meant it in his farewell speech. Keep up the good work
Wow! This one is brilliant. I would go as far as saying, it's one your best, but then again, I may have said this many times before for this great channel. The message that is in The Dark Side of History, is one that we need in these days.
OK, as one who has not said this many times before: this is one of the best on this channel Just thinking of the effort I'd have to put in to (merely) come up with sources as good is daunting.
I'm a social studies teacher and this has made me realize that the simple question "have things become worse over time?" is perhaps the deepest and most worthwhile question to explore for students of nearly any age.
@@gabrielgrimes8297We are literally producing our own demise, by cannibalizing the foundations of our own existence in endless pursuit of complexifying everything. Ever more inputs are required just to stand still, and so vulnerability gradually increases bit by bit. Each new problem becomes harder, and creates another even larger problem to deal with later. It cannot go on for must longer. Having been on a parabolic incline, the inevitable decline will be more vertical because we always do the easy stuff first, and there will be no more low hanging fruit. Our so-called prosperity has come by extracting all of the benefits, and ignoring the costs. Even the most resilient system has a stress threshold, which is why progress is a paradox. Improvement for some comes with costs, harms and risks which often accrue for others
You serve no purpose in society. 7/11 employees are ten times more valuable and wise than social studies teachers. Only reason any man would do that job is to be around as many children as possible.
@@gabrielgrimes8297except slavery is at an all time high, the worst wars in human history were fought just about 100 years ago, and we are headed for the trilogy wrap-up.
So much was covered in your whistle stop tour of history, and it of course, raises so many questions, especially how we keep thinking things may be different this time, but they're not essentially because events are driven by our humanness, our strengths and our weaknesses. I suppose all one generation can hope for is to pass on to the next something better whilst knowing that that isn't guaranteed.
Interesting stuff! One thing I found odd was the claim that policing began only 200 years ago. I guess it depends on your definition, but there were policing forces as far back as ancient Egypt and Rome. It's interesting to think that at many times in history, policing was left up to citizens and vigilantes.
Dang! I'm not getting my notifications (yep, the bell is smashed).. I wouldn't have known about the Hegel video if I hadn't received your synopsis via email. RU-vid is screwing up on notifications. Anyway, I'm glad you're still here and apparently well. I appreciate Then and Now because the episodes are rare and carefully constructed, not spewed out on a weekly basis.
When I saw the Goya painting that says "el sueño de la razón produce monstruos" I always understood sueño as dream, and not as sleep, thus "the dream of reason produces monsters". Radically different outlook! I mean, Napoleon sought to bring the enlightenment to Spain by... brute force? The obsession with reason, by way of establishing normalcy and therefore deviance.... THAT has produced some monsters
If we're talking epochs and accept that Romanticism followed the Enlightenment and represented a rejection of reason, what did Romanticism beget? Inward looking parochial nationalism, and two world wars. Be careful what you wish for. We are not seeing any "obsession with reason" at the moment. Far from it.
The difference between violent and non violent pain is the intention of the inflicters. Some intentions are stupidly well meant and some are evil. Rather than money, the love of power is the root of all evil.
A quote, to consider, when told of those who have committed atrocities that boggle the mind. ‘I would never do that,’ we think. We must remember: “Neither would they.” If someone is asking, or ordering, you to hurt others. To destroy them. Remember that in doing so, you also hurt and destroy yourself. If not physically, then in concept. “Neither would they,” is essentially a more visceral way of conveying, “Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one yourself.” If I defeat a foe, I have one less enemy. If they have allies, though, I have now added them as enemies. If, though, I can convince them to join me, I have still lost one enemy. But I have also gained an ally. As someone who has studied history (I went to school for anthropology/archaeology, and am generally just a big nerd), I am sometimes asked the ‘if you could go back to any time’ question, unless I can be a fly on the wall/simply observe and come back, my answer is ‘no’. And as a chronically ill/disabled person (genetic, but worsening in adulthood) who’s health has left me like ‘the princes and the pea’, the ‘what would you do in [some past context] when you didn’t have these things modern things coddling you/walk to school in the snow uphill both ways’ sentiment? The expected point is you’d have had to ‘just toughen up.’ (As though I haven’t just to get here😂) That response? I would do nothing. Because I would be dead. Not exaggerating for effect, I would literally be dead.
Wha-hey! Phillip Dwyer taught me for a class or two at Uni. He's the best, I'm sorry I didn't get the chance to do more with him (but people like him are always on secondment somewhere, so the opportunities are limited).
History is written by those who survived and were victorious. There's much of it which is dark and/or buried. As an Afro-Indigenous person from North America? Most of it is dark. What's been done to my people is despicable and ignoring history is why things are more or less falling the hell apart over here.
That isn't really true tho. History is written by historians. We know the romans commited genocides in gaul, or turkey in armenia, or ancient china in some rebellious regions/villages. The victors may have an upper hand in spreading propaganda, but with time truth reveals itself
RU-vid "philosophy" is unfortunately mired in anti-communist propaganda. There's a lot of positive things we can learn from USSR and China, the mountains of theory and praxis that has been done in those countries, but people just refuse to engage.
@@xp8969 true, Marx famously wrote that a true communist would never whip out a comically large spoon to consume all the grain in the Ukraine. And of course, the leaders of the largest and most successful socialist projects to date were anti-communist (which you shouldn't look into right because they killed a gazillion, nothing to learn from for sure). Of course, if you haven't read Marx you wouldn't know this. (I just read the communist manifesto so I know all about it ofc). All jokes aside I love reading Marx so I will definitely read some more
Advocating for socialism within a mythical race or within the proletarian group hardly makes any difference to those, who are in favor of individual liberty and freedom. All socialist ideologies are a crime against humanity.
''during the holocaust the murders were more diliberate'' seems like a cop out the Staving u mentioned happened under Churchill and he even said he would do it again
This vid just adds to the lesson that if we look at the evidence for how terrible doctrines can be, we can form what looks like a conclusion that there's no way out of paths which will lead to something terrible. Looking for an alternative which by which we reach a condition, fundamental to possibilities which don't produce long term problems, has at least the potential to reach genuine progress : something which involves the alternative to a LACK of genuine progress. To that end, consider the clue to be found in the Greek, "An", meaning without, and, "Archos", meaning rulers, or rulership. That CAN NOT MEAN, being without rules, because everyone who learns how to genuinely co-operate, is not being directed. And so, Anarchists who co-operate to overthrow rulers, are doing more than the Nuremberg, "only do following orders", excuse. They are responsible for their own actions, and thereby learn from their mistakes, (unlike those who are ruled over, who always have someone else to blame), thereby become part of inevitable evolution, (unlike those who obstruct learning). Much Love.
The introduction of police in the US was interesting as well. At first they were violent gangs, but employed by rich people, to protect their property and means of production. And that's what they've done through history. When strikes happened, police came with violence to break them up. They are used to cripple protest, that may change the status quo. Look at BLM. BUt compare that to the reaction to the 6. january capital riot. When BLM happened, it was something done by black people and poor people, those that wanted to change how the rich keep them down. When the riots at the capital happened, they didn't want to change who is rich or the income disparity. They just wanted a different leader in the same power structure. That can help explaining why BLM was teargassed and beaten, but capital rioters were given a tour through the capitol. Naturally there are practical considerations like manpower as well, but I think this helps explaining why persecution and the opposition to those groups was different.
I am glad you mentioned AI in this. I didn't see this as an attack on anything. More like a history documentary and kind of compares the dark side of history to modern times and directions we could be heading in in the future. "The quote about making every man, every child, and every woman an expert in politics and theology". Was interesting. Because, unlike just politics and theology. It sounds like that is what they are trying to do with the internet and AI. But make everyone an expert in "everything". "The positive can uncover its own negative." We'll have to wait and see. I consume quite a lot of content on AI and so maybe that's why I'm seeing it this way.
AI is like a historical source that is elevated by the powerful to being seen as truth by those who have the power to do so. Trusting those who control the algorithm to do your thinking for you, is to be potentially a slave. For what else is the motivation behind Neoliberal Capitalism? Is it not to create people who think like economic models, when those models were the creation of capitalism itself? Is that freedom? Is that individuality? Or is it to be cattle? To exist as resources to be exploited? To be subjected to processes defined by another's agenda as good, valuable, or profitable? And when you are no longer good, valuable, or profitable to their metric, be discarded? Isn't that market forces populating your mind? If you will consume, is not better to have a diverse diet, rather than fast food? Factory made thought produced by AI is mental fast food, designed to colonise your mind. Don't make it your whole diet.
a lot of literally made up numbers to completely nullify the true impact of the british empire and eurocentric culture in general. no one else on earth went across the world killing and r4p1ng and enslaving other people for simply being other people. no one else joyously partakes in inbr33ding and smashing brown babies heads against trees.
Two answers- one is, empires rise and fall and hedonism and violence are frequently found at the fall. The other is, civilizations tend to be a mix of fashionable virtues and fashionable vices and the proportions of each rose and fall over time
Because it questions the enlightenment age? Because it criticizes secular liberal progressivism and scientific materialism? Say something true to give us a break from the lies.
Modern (relatively speaking) mankind thinks generally, that it is on right side of history, when looking at the past. And then you have a new modern man after previous generation, that it is on right side of history than previous one, etc.
And there are those consistently existing within them resisting that narrative and either due to be a part of the new order that judges it’s past. Etc etc.
This is a great topic. We tend to simplistically think that History always improves. But it's more nuanced than that. Things get worse too. Look at how the concept of a fact has been manipulated in the Information Age.
What we learn from history is to trust in your own strength as a people rather than the good will of others, and if you as a people are not strong enough to defend yourselves, you are the servants of those who protect you. MIGHT MATTERS! Anyway. Capitalism sucks. The revolution is nigh. Down with the billionaires.
This has given me some inspiration to write thoughts, so here they are, though they probably disagree with the implied conclusion of the video: Since the desire for excess isn't really tied to what one has, but more to the relative feeling of overcoming limits, then everyone pursuing this feeling of excess and destabilising society in the process would not necessarily lead to everyone failing in this pursuit. Sure, we might not be able to get the specific luxuries that need others to slave away for us, but we will still be able to enjoy in this feeling of excess regardless. Socialists wish to preserve our (let's say) unnatural state of excessive herdity, our unnatural modern collectivity, our unified collective sense of good, without realising that it is the very despot that creates our modern anxiety. They wish for us to be milder, to learn to avoid excess, but the real-life effect of this has always been the creation of a class of slaves that then enables such massive levels of death and destruction to be rained down upon them by a handful of individuals (relatively speaking) who refuse to bow down to this standard, to this collectivity. We need more people like the masters to destabilise such a hive-like society. Furthermore, we on the broad left tend to criticise average, mediocre, middle-class individuals for their excessiveness and indulgence in luxuries, but from their own perspective, the feeling is quite different. Luxury isn't experienced as such, rather it becomes normalised, it becomes a mark of sameness with others, with the masses, rather than a sign of distinction. So, the morality of modesty really only serves the function of masking excess and luxury where we might say it lies, from a more "objective" standpoint. Rationality enables these appetites to become so overall destructive precisely by restraining them in the individual, by increasing the number of small, orderly, undemanding individuals who find comfort in normality, in ordinariness, so that this collective ordinariness may become the excessive element. The more individuals are restrained, the easier it becomes to form larger and larger groups, masses, and the larger a mass of people, the more it will put strain and pressure on resources. It is this unambitious normality that is thus excessive. So what may be the solution? Instead of more collective wisdom - less. Instead of more moral virtue and restraint - less. A destabilisation of society leading to a larger number of smaller groups that each seek for and are able to actually indulge in excess as such.
It's not only Whigs, but social Darwinists who predict that things have to get better and better. "If you have no absolutes, society becomes absolute." Francis Schaeffer
00:31:00 _....the more dominant the complex social organism becomes, the less it tolerates interruptions of the ordinary course of life._ What if we lived on the land; raised olives, were shepherds, and never had a government?
DO NOT LET THIS GO TO YOUR HEAD! Because I need you to keep doing exactly as you are doing. After an exceptionally comprehensive crack @ Hegel; done right, you address something even more fundamental, only gaining in pizazz and prowess along the way; WOW! Also, the choices you make, re: content and direction of thought-related are eerily familiar. Witcha on Time & Mind. Big time. (& mind) Not a bit of inauthentic in either of these super-heavy hitters. W/Hegel vid/essay/edit in mind, I find this contribution to be even more impressive. Hegel coulda been a swansong - and you'd have achieved Legendary status. ...but Something like "The Darker Side of History" done, quickly thereafter, this well, apt in SOoo many regards; is blowin my mind. So, i must say; With an expertly savvy inclination toward substance and a proprietary command of both the contemporary as well as the traditional/classical grounding required to examine the higher(and lower/darker) order structures involved - (no less present them), You got a providential groove almighty-imbued. May you be blessed w/yet more electric abstraction, and concrete idealization as you serve as our metaphysical guide, our quality rocknroll DJ, in a static age of nonsense noise, and nowhere frustrations/grievances. Thank you for inspiring our attention on The Truest of levels. Tough content: Gold Standard props, yo, T-
Right around the 16:20 mark you mentioned something about how 'emotion is at the core of our humanity'.. or somewhere along those lines.. I'd like to, not only agree with you but to push that idea even further by adding my own personal long held understanding of a (in my opinion..) quite obviously simple truth that we, as in humanity as a whole, are set aside from the rest of the animal world because of our ability to possess a structured means of communication with the invention of language.. and thus subsequently, through language we have evolved this unique ability of, what I guess could be generally categorized as "higher thought" ( ie: the practice of Mathematics, philosophy and such) BUT.. in saying that you then have to understand what the origin of language was.. as in, what was the reason behind the formation of language that made it a necessary development in the first place? For me, the only logical answer to that question is that it simply was our desire to be able to communicate our internal emotional situation with each other! which, by the by, there are only two emotional states.. either you like something and you want that thing closer to you then it currently is, or you don't like something and you want it further away from you then in currently is.. the reason why we have so many different subcategories of those two emotional states is due to whatever situational circumstances gave rise to the currently held state, which rarely is completely one or the other and is nearly always a mixture of the two in varying degrees of intensity! Basically, what I'm getting at is that without this thing that we call 'logic' or 'higher thought', or whatever you want to refer to it as, we would inevitably still have our emotional side to fall back on.. but without our emotions, higher thought wouldn't even exist in the first place! I mean, think about it, higher thought is just a combination of ideas.. when emotions are driven by a chemical process within in the brain the origins of which lie in the hyperthomas which produces these various strands of protein referd to as peptites .. which ARE our emotions! It's purely a reactionary process in response to our surroundings and our current situational circumstances! We feel the need to communicate those said emotions thus language was born and with language came logic!
