Was it REALLY the WAR of NORTHERN AGGRESSION By Atun Shei Films | First Time Reactions 

And somehow goes hard lol

Good name for a metal band.

Crackpot archaeology is brilliant. Atun shei's Witchhunter and Klaus the Nazi are hilarious. Frozen 50,s guy is a hoot.

Bro the Nazi Roommate was funny

I really hope they do react to Frozen '50s Man vid My favourite one

He actually said in another vid that he used to believe the lost cause myth as a kid, and he wants to hope that at least one person who watches his vid will change their minds because of his videos.

​@@liftforkThe guy just changed from one propaganda school to another. He's viciously anti-southern and anti-white.

@@hellenicboi14 If being against an imperialist slave state that killed US soldiers is anti-southern and anti-white then count me in

@@liftfork Thanks for revealing your true colors.

@@hellenicboi14 “You dislike slavery? Truly, anti-white”

@PoptartInvasion Yeah I agree with both of you. It's completely true that for the most part, the professional historians have disavowed the Confederacy completely, and picked apart their arguments long ago. However, in the popular social consensus of the south, the lost cause myth has been adopted en masse by many. And the stories have passed on from parent to child over time. And they have even evolved with time to match what the Lost Cause myth needs to survive. This is why modern southerners who defend the confederacy, or some aspect of it, often aren't doing so out of a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the truth. It's often because they're so mislead by stories, and previously held beliefs. It's like the myths the nazis propagated about their people, and war machine. You often see people even to this day propagating old Nazi Propaganda when it comes to things like tank designs, failed military operations, and other such things which could be criticized. You often still see people repeating things German generals post war wrote to cover their ass. Like all of the generals accusing Hitler of losing them the war, and arms designers deflecting criticism of their tanks and planes by making shit up about the enemies. Like telling the Americans that their tanks died a lot because "Russia was stronk, and they were rugged, and winter held us back" to cover up the fact their designs were poorly thought out. And modern people who take history in as their hobby, often repeat these same things back to others because this is what they've been told for years, and it fits into popular conception. It's not done out of a deliberate desire to lie, or cover up the truth.

Your definitely gonna have a hard time seeing historians today defending the confederacy but a couple of decades I’m sure there where plenty of Britain’s defending the confederacy 🤷🏾‍♂️

I honestly love the movie and perhaps I'm "glossing over" them as you say, but none of said ideological issues in that film even come close to overshadowing the colossal ç ü ň ț that Scarlett is. I've seen Percy Jackson and other movies with terribly written main characters, but nothing can redeem that girl for me. At the very moment you start thinking she has some redeeming quality, she ruins it the very next minute and reminds you that she is the woman that a man should put as many walls, miles and preferably continents between. Yes, slavery was awful. Yes, the blacks were treated awfully. Yes, it portrays Sherman and the north as evil and wicked war-mongers. NONE of that holds a candle to how bad I want to Falcon Kick Katie-Scarlett in her B cup chest. She is a BITCH.

I'd say Attun Shei's series on the film gettysburg is better

I think you're right. Very Sus.

True true, a badass.

Pass laws that inhibit Northern state's rights to protect escaped freed men women and children

The south

Trump got more non-white support than past Republican nominees too-despite the 24/7 propaganda saying he was an evil racist nazi.

No one willing who get incredibly defensive about their arguments can argue well. It’s just easier to make fun of trumpsters due to the ease to catch them with low quality bait. In my experience, at least. Edit: hell, Americans in general are easier bait than anyone else (‘cept ccp bots)

Except the GOP was founded with explicit goal of abolishing slavery.

@@zenenglund8325 Yeah and the Soviet Union was founded on ideas of equality and worker's rights but we sure don't judge stuff for what they came from but what they are, now do we?

@@gabrielegenota1480 Well, considering most republican voters still desire for decentralized government, lower taxes, and liberty for all Americans (including black Americans). I'd say they're not terribly far from where they came from. Edit: The politicians on the other hand, that's a different story.

@@zenenglund8325 So the republican voters and the people they vote for don't believe in the same things If only there was a way to not vote for people you dont believe in

@@gabrielegenota1480 Yea, rhetoric is a hell of a tool. Tbf, that's not all republican politicians though. Just like not all democrat politicians are power hungry tyrants trying to strip are only means of defense away and rule uncontested. That's why it's a shame we only have two dominant parties.

That's a dumb way to broadly conduct policy. A deal that neither side likes could very easily be just a shitty deal that helps no one, either accomplishes nothing or just ruins the current situation

Even though confederates were democrats and democrats voted for Jim crow and the klan was democrats to

Thinking on this more, I do appreciate your reacting to this bringing more attention to Atun-Shei films. By the way Who’s name is pronounced (Ah-toon-shay) good day and I do recommend watching more checkmate lincolnites.

Can you go into more detail good sir?

@@zombieoverlord5173 I have left over 20 detailed comments on his videos, but they might be buried by now. One example is how in one video he has images of ( I think) four books purporting to buttress his case yet when you look them up on Amazon you find that two of them are kinda about another topic while the other two are only tangentially related to the topic at hand. Another deception of his is when he uses graphics or shows a map and you see explosion symbols and you hear a loud bang to show places where Southerners 'raided' Federal armories across the South. He does not mention the fact that these confiscations were all bloodless. It is a whole lot of stuff like that. He is smart enough to know of the nuances of the times, yet he persists in pedaling his pseudo- history in order to propagate his leftist ideology, it is just activism disguised as scholarship. On top of it all he admits his view that secession is OK and can be justified - so if his view had prevailed there never would have been a war in the first place and he thus makes himself a near Southern independence supporter, all the while he trashes the South and the Confederacy.

@@marshalkrieg2664 A couple of things. I have no idea what the book thing you're referring to is from and want at least what video it appeared in. Second I have no idea what "leftist ideology" he is propagating. The South seceding primarily because of the tensions of slavery is just true and you'd be hard pressed to find an academic who disagrees. And no bloodshed doesn't mean non violent. The southern states annexed and seized what was at best contested land and property, and used force to seize these federal property. The main reason there prob wasn't bloodshed until Fort Sumter was the underfunded union troops in these forts and armories felt that there was no point in fighting back. And to his point about Secession can be justified and correct is not hypocrisy. Because seceding because you don't like the president and because you want to keep enslaving people isn't a good reason to secede. Also allowing states to secede because they don't like a particular president is a horrible precedent that would just further tear America apart

@@zombieoverlord5173 Secession occurred for many reasons, slavery was just one, and for several of the breakaway states slavery was not an issue. The north made it clear that they hated and envied the South. The South was trapped by northern legalisms meaning imposts and regulations that by then held the South down- the balance of power had shifted- this is the real meaning for the controversy over admitting new states either free or slave- these states then send representatives to Washington DC to make laws. Curiously, one of the books Aten Shei holds up is almost pro South, the one about modernizing the slave economy. These books I refer to are in his video about "Did the Confederacy fight for slavery?" or some such title, I cannot remember. Out of four books only one directly deals with the topic and that one is a bad book, just skewed selected readings from a small selection of letters. For a real insight into the Southern mentality for fighting you better try James McPherson. The video then goes on about 'serville insurrection. Man, he really messes that one up. Aten Shei is so ignorant that he tries to apply it to post 1865, when in reality it was a concern ( a legit concern) in the late 1850's up to the start of the war- he is off by about 5 years, he mangles the issue so badly, fails to explain it at all. Yes these fort seizures were bloodless for mostly the reasons you mention, Ft. Sumter was bloodless too- but he uses psychological tricks to induce a scenario of violence warranting revenge. The forts stood on Confederate soil, and were meant to defend the Southern lands, but then the guns were turned against her. Jefferson David tried valiantly to purchase these forts and armories from the Union- but Aten Shei is not concerned about that. He grinds his axe.

@@marshalkrieg2664 For the first part, hated and envied the south? What? while there was a rivalry between north and south along political and cultural lines I don't see how the North "envied the south." And yea the southern states being outnumbered in the senate and the house was a big reason with Lincoln winning the presidential election being the straw that broke the camels back. And can you name a state that doesn't mention slavery as a breakaway cause? Tennessee is an often example but even Tennessee clearly states it was bout slavery. And I looked up James McPherson and he seems to agree that the main reason the south started the civil war was over the issue of slavery "Unlike many slaveholders in the age of Thomas Jefferson, Confederate soldiers from slaveholding families expressed no feelings of embarrassment or inconsistency in fighting for their own liberty while holding other people in slavery. Indeed, white supremacy and the right of property in slaves were at the core of the ideology for which Confederate soldiers fought." He talks about Jefferson having feelings of embarrassment of inconsistency on the issue of slavery which is true. I find it interesting how Jefferson despite owning many slaves himself wrote an original condemnation of slavery in the Declaration of independence. And a Union soldier did die at Fort Sumter so it was not bloodless as you claim. And the forts were legally US property. the dead to the land was given to the federal government. It was federal land and the federal government didn't want to sell them to a government they didn't see as legitimate. The last thing you should do in a border dispute is seize it through force like a hotheaded buffoon I also want citations on "but then the guns were turned against her" as Lincoln didn't even raise an army until Fort Sumter. You call Atun Shei biased and full of half truths. With statements like "the guns were turned against her" and " Jefferson David tried valiantly to purchase these forts" would you willing to admit that you're as if not more biased than Atun Shei? Jefferson Davis was a slave owning piece of shit that fought for Slave owning aristocracy. There's nothing valiant about that

Stop it, go get help.

The Vice President literally said their main reason for existing was to preserve and expand slavery.

Can you be more specific of the "Heavily taxed" part? Almost all of the taxes at the time came from Tariffs which had more to do with trade and not the rural southern civilians. Also because a president you don't like is in office it is not at all open for southern states to secede that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard