As for the history is written by the victor, studying some Roman writings you see that they told that Carthage preformed brutal child sacrifice. For a while it was considered a propaganda push to justify everything spent in the war effort (the multiple navy’s lost, the salting of the earth, ect), but looking at other contemporary texts there are other reports of this practice and relatively recently archeological finds of burned baby bones that match the era. Kinda off topic but I find this tid-bit interesting and it proves that broader analysis of the time and place has to be done before judgment should be passed.
Yeah, like I get the idea "oh we can't trust enemies at war to be honest about how bad the other is" but at the same time anything that is actually bad about the other will be brought up.
The Japanese government was hoping that the Soviets would help negotiate a peace deal that was less than an unconditional surrender, but the Soviets kept stalling. It was the nuclear bombs and the knowledge that the Soviets were no longer in a position to negotiate an acceptable treaty that forced the emperor to face the inevitable.
I love how the communists can never give America credit for anything ever. We dropped the sun on a literal country, and they're still like "Nah nah, that wasn't it."
It's not even the communists in my experience. REAL communists are trying everything they can to escape (Unless they're up in the leadership somewhere) It's MOSTLY college kids and idiots that look at the communism on paper (Which NO communist country EVER follows) and absolutely simp for the perfect world they think it SHOULD be that make these kinds of arguments
It will never be a character flaw to see the good in humanity. The character flaw, Kip, is to be blind to it's vices. Which you are not. You acknowledge that sometimes kumbaya just isn't enough.
Man, this guy pauses way too much. If i wanted an opinion i'd go watch a talking head! ..... And now that we're here Kip, heyya buddy, how ya doing? Hope you're well man. Love the content, love the reactions. Hope you can ignore the obvious trolling/teasing. Keep doing what you're doing and keep being amazing!
I prefer your reaction videos because you do actually add something to the videos. Most other channels just sit there and watch and maybe add one or two words throughout the video but you actually pause and go through your thoughts in an intelligent manner
My favorite way to put it is this: the ideal way the world should be is no civilians are killed in war and war doesn’t even happen. due to the imperfect nature of humanity and this world however that will not happen so instead you do the best that you can, and sometimes that means due to the actions of others, you have to sacrifice One to save 10, 10 to save 100, 100 to save 1000, 1000 to save 1 million.
I mean for all the "mah N*tz*s" complaints folks make, the Imperium of Man has far more in common with Imperial Japan. It even has the Navy-Army divide/rivalry.
You have to find the time they talk about crpytic nic. He's like buff as hell with antlers, and has no pants on running through the woods and just appears out of nowehere when communism is mentioned. Its hilarious!
“The only surrendered because Soviets” well the Soviets only moved their invasion date up because Stalin was only convinced the Nuke was real because of the first nuke drop…both reasons mentioned by the Emperor are both a result of the Bomb.
You would think stalin knew the bomb was real because he had a bunch of spies in the nuclear program, it's also why the soviets had an atomic bomb within a couple years of the end of ww2.
I ran into a guy in a youtube comment for a video I don't recall, that said Mao never killed 50 million people. I don't recall him giving a source either, he instead said we should do our own research. Have fun arguing with people like that.
The Fat Electrician's historical distaste for communism awakens mine and I have to be very careful when commenting on videos where he mentions it because I will get bonked by RU-vid. American history textbooks glossing over the period between WW2 and the first military conflicts of The Cold War is a major disservice because that period paints the USSR in a horrible light. From The Berlin Airlift to refusing to honor the deal they signed in exchange for American planes, tanks, guns and trucks during WW2... but that paints the birthplace of communism in a bad light and needs to be glossed over as just "heightening tensions between the east and west."
Mine is malicious compliance. In school a lot of rules changed because of me. People knew who I was before they met me just by going through classes with teachers I had years ago. And it struck again today. Because last time I went airsofting, they chrono'd my revolver at sniper power output. Over twice the advertised level. But they only said snipers must obey a minimum engagement distance and use a magnified optic. So... I put a 4-32x day/night scope on. As well as a bipod. They never specified it had to be a rifle.
For me the goal isn't to prevent conflicts, an impossible task so long as two humans exist. It's to prevent devastating and or violent conflicts that cost human lives. Be it one or billions
14:09 I already mentioned this in my comment bellow the original but I wanna point out that here in the former Eastern Bloc countries, they DO teach us about the Molotoff-Ribbentrop Pakt. And if not, the Soviets and/or Russians will get shade anyway for the time they overthrew most of Eastern European governments (including my country - 1948), and for invading most of Eastern Europe to suppress the more liberal-thinking populations which just wanted more freedom (example from my country again: 1968 - Socialism with a human face, an initiative for liberal reforms, freedom of speech and so on under the Dubček (Dubchek) administration - that got shut down with the invasion of Czechoslovakia on the night from the 20th to 21st of August when the Warsaw Pact armies lead by the Russians went in with tanks to "normalize" things again, calling the reforms a coup attempt made by NATO). The most popular case of Soviet aggression against its own ally was in 1956 though (the Hungarian uprising) which by far had the most bloodshed.
All I know is that if me and my neighbor was feuding over a tree on the property line. Then one day the tree detonates into saw dust. You aren't going to catch me yelling at my neighbor anymore. Now obviously I'd let law enforcement and the courts handle it from there. But I won't be out there getting face to face with said neighbor. When someone hits you with two portable Suns and you have no equivalent methods of retaliation. Continuing direct violence seems like an unwise decision. I'll defend one small element of communism. In that I can do something that it's supporters can't. I can name one place where it kind of works (even then limited). Small like minded groups. To include families. Again, to a limited degree though. Usually best in unique situations like emergencies. The problem with socialists and communists is that the never let the emergency end. They keep looking for excuses to continue it. Because they love the emergency powers. See covid and the Patriot Act for example. Of course the use of emergencies to extend power isn't just limited to communists/socialists. It's something we all have to be watchful for. That is what was meant by that "eternal vigilance" quote.
Yo kip thank you for showing me this podcast. Im only 40 episodes in. But i have been laughing my ass of at work. Keep up the good work. An have a good day man. : )
Honestly, one of the funniest things ever that proves that Marx was an _absolute moron_ that I'm sure Kip would find hilarious, is that at one point Marx wrote a paper entitled "Note on Mathematics" where he tried to prove that the concept of the derivative is a contradiction with the following proof: Suppose dy/dx exists and takes an arbitrary given value a, however dx = 0 and dy = 0. Hence, 0/0 = a, i.e. 0 = 0a. Therefore dy/dx can take any arbitrary given value; a contradiction Q.E.D. The man literally wrote a proof saying that if we suppose that something _literally impossible_ is the case, the derivative is a contradiction. This is the man who according to a bunch of morons online created the best economic system to ever be devised... a guy who "disproves" calculus by saying "well, if this impossible thing happens, math makes no sense."
All throughout the history of warfare civilians have always got caught in the middle of the fighting. I feel that's a terrible thing, but it's war, all sorts of terrible things are happening. In the last 50 years in the conflicts more and more civilians are getting caught in the crossfire as urban warfare is becoming the norm.
"History is written by the victors" is a less accurate form of the very true "the dead tell no tales". The victors' truth is always more likely to survive because a part of victory is suppressing the resistance which has a different truth. The suppression is not always total, and thus history is not always written solely to the victors' tune, but the dead do not have the opportunity to appeal and continue leaving the mark of their counter narrative, eventually the language will change and only the common victors' tale will be what persists, or perhaps the whole conflict will be overshadowed and left only to the most nuanced of historical study. The full extent of the truth in "History is written by the victors" doesn't apply within the same generation as the conflict, it's many generations later when the losers' identity fades away leaving their truths to rot.
You should have seen the transition at the VA when they quit paying travel pay in cash…so many guys were just stuck with no gas money to get home. Immediately organized the waiting room on an organic level to get everyone home.
I love the Fat Electrician's rants on Communisim, but I've gotta say he still doesn't fully get into the real WHY of it. It's not JUST that there are always bad actors who mess it up, it's also because Communism just doesn't actually work as an economic system. The major issues with Communism, economically speaking, stem from the realities of scarcity and natural inequalities. Communism IS NOT perfect on paper, in fact it's very much the opposite. Resources are scarce, and based on that scarcity different resources have differing (and ever-changing) levels of supply and demand. Capitalism does what Communism struggles with, and that is allocation of resources to different industries based upon the scarcity and how much that industry NEEDS those resources (supply and demand). As a hypothetical: would Titanium make a better dinner fork? Maybe, but other industries need Titanium more than fork manufacturers. Because of the scarcity of the resource, and the demand being higher in certain industries than others, the free and open market of Capitalism generally serves as a measurement of how to efficiently allocate resources to where they're needed most. Communism doesn't have a free and open market, which is why they struggle with resource allocation so much, and why the most successful Communist nations NEED Capitalist countries to support their economies. Additionally, when it comes to services provided by individuals, certain skillsets and experience are more difficult to attain, or more needed during specific times, making them more valuable than others. The supply and demand of specialized skillsets leads to natural inequalities between individuals, meaning that certain people are necessarily more valuable than others. A doctor is more valuable than a retail worker, that's just reality, and to pay them the same would not only be unfair, but also an improper allocation of resources given the difference in scarcity between those skillsets, thus contributing to a less stable economy. Capitalism has its problems (mainly that the allowance of chrony-capitalists to lobby and influence government policy and regulations to stifle competition, completely goes against the entire concept of a free and open market), but Communism is inherently flawed at its core concepts, which is why it constantly and repeatedly fails time and again. Even one of the most well known idealogical cornerstones of Communism, the "seize the means of production, own your own labor" is so inherently flawed, because under Communism YOU DO NOT OWN YOUR LABOR. Under Communism EVERYBODY owns your labor, and everyone is entitled to your labor, as well as everyone elses. That means that if the collective decides your labor is needed in the mines, that's where you're headed. Independence, self-reliance, autonomy, and being a private individual with personal property, are all inherently opposed to the core ideology of Communism. That's why those who have ACTUALLY lived and left Communism never want to go back. Most often when you hear "well that wasn't real Communism", no that actually WAS real Communism, the results therein were in fact the inevitable result of Communist ideology and economic practices. When I say that "chrony-Capitalism isn't real Capitalism" that's legitimately just true, because it flies directly in the face of the core principles of Capitalism. Most problems people have with Capitalism are a direct result of Capitalism not being allowed to function the way it's supposed to, with lobbying corporations using the government to stifle competition and allow them to operate as effective monopolies. This is why I no longer try to argue with Communists on the social/cultural front. The idea of corruption always being a problem doesn't fully register with these people because they believe that all they need is a single person who isn't corrupt to get enough power and fix everything, and they're able to believe that kind of person exists because they themselves believe that they themselves wouldn't become corrupt. The human nature argument DOES NOT WORK on these kinds of people, it's too subjective and variable to them. But if you argue on the actual logical and provable economic factors of what is ultimately an economic system, there's not much they can do to effectively refute it.
One small thing: Germany was not fascist, that was Italy. Germany was socialist. (I'm aware there's next to no difference between the two but people always split hairs when you call socialism out)
To tell you how bad Japan was at suppressing details during WW2 The Japanese people never leaned until after the war that they lost 5 carriers at midway. Hell the families of those lost never knew many of their sons died at Midway as the Japanese government would only release a small number of letters to the families each month so that the scale of deaths never hit the public. And alot of these letters attuned their son’s deaths not to combat casualties but training ones or small aerial skirmishes. Literally even by 45 a lot of families who had lost their son at Midway had still not received a letter telling them their son was dead.
I've never thought communism is a good way to be, but I also don't think it's the worst. The problem is that human nature works out such that the people in charge aren't interested in helping those lower than them, and a communist form of government with selfish people at the top is absolutely primed for corruption and human rights violations left right and center. It's not the fault of communism, but it's also directly the result of using communism as a governing format. This comes off like I approve of communism; I don't. I just think it truly hasn't had a fair shake, because human beings are... well, human. I don't think we as a species are capable of actually making communism work how it should. TL;DR The idea is good, the execution is egregiously flawed.
Japan got hit with two suns, and they came back from that and started making THE best vehicles on the road at the Honda and Toyota plants. Mitsubishi cars are mid, and Nissans are boring. As for Suzuki's cars, they exist, but that's about it. Suzuki's bread and butter is motorcycles, and they should stick to those. Honda makes cars and trucks, but they also make motorcycles, ATVs, UTVs, jet skis, boat engines, generators, push mowers, and maybe some other thing I don't know about that last a LONG time with only the required maintenance. The only fun Mazdas are Miatas.
I would like to contest Nick's version partially, but not in the way people usually say. Hear me out: The bombs are what got them to surrender, the Soviet entry into the war accelerated their surrender. Japan's Plan A was to fight to the death taking as many enemy troops with them as possible, as is fitting the cultural honorable ways to die and so on. They planned to take 98% losses to their population dying out of spite, with the rest being enslaved at the end, because they assumed everyone would do to them what they had been doing. Then the bombs dropped, and they realized America was going to sit off shore, incinerate most of the nation, then move in with next to no casualties and enslave what was left and claim victory. No honorable final fight, no taking their enemies with them. So they began to work on Plan B: what can they do to negotiate a surrender that keeps things from being unconditional and at minimum benefited the top brass getting out of the worst of things. Then the Soviets entered the war, and Japan realized that if the USSR has *any* say whatsoever in what happens with the enslavement of Japan then the entire island would be turned into the next Nanking, because they understood the Soviets were just as bad as they were, and decided their only option was to just drop to America's feet and grovel because the US hellbent on revenge is still not as horrific as what the USSR was casually doing *to it's own people* .
Potential History had a great take on this and breaks up the myths/view points on this topic that are coming from those clearly of a self-center view from side US/USSR stance on the matter claiming their actions which cause the final end of the war and brought Japan to the peace talks and raise the white flag. Got to say as much as I do at times like some of these people they honestly don't always know what they are talking about and this is one of them.
In a perfect world Communism works, but of course we don’t live in a perfect world. Communism requires people to be inherently good and unselfish. And while most people I think tend to be good. The bad ones will take advantage of the good people every time.
Yeah communism as a whole like the ideas are amazing at their roots and even nic agrees with that in one of the episodes but there's just no way for them to actually work in the world we live in, there is way too much greed for it to ever truly work. Like small scale stuff like hippie comunes can work but even then a lot of times it's quite a weird power dynamic going on. Really the way the native Americans lived is the closest thing to it ever truly working that I can think of, like it was different but their tribes worked in a similar way to communism. I wish we lived in a world where it would work like the world could be such an amazing place in a world like that but there's no realistic way for it to work large scale
