He's saying anyone could beat Jimmy Carter in 1980. Gerald Ford barely lost in 1976 because of 3 things: People had a bad taste in their mouths from Nixon, Reagan gave him a heavy primary challenge which divided the conservatives and demoralized Ford supporters, and Ford was viewed as illegitimate since he was 3rd in line to the Presidency aka an unelected President. People quickly realized Jimmy Carter was a big, fat mistake after he was inaugurated. He was never popular.
@@drakekendall5095 One more thing: the NY Daily News's "Ford to City: Drop Dead" headline. Ford went on to lose NY by 4%. If that 4% swung the other way, New York would have gone red and cost Carter the election.
Mr. Gorbachev might also want to tear down this video. It kinda breaks my heart how little credit he gets for ending the Cold War. That pudgy bastard was 80% of the reason it ended. With another Brezhnev in office, the Cold War might have gone on to this very day.
"A lot of reagans policy's weren't popular at the time" *1980 election wins 44 states and 489 electoral votes* *1984 election wins 49 states and 525 electoral votes*
David L a lot not all. You can still win with some policies that are not popular as long as the rest is popular? Reagan won big, really big, but that does not make all his views beling to the majority. Moreover, if 40% oppose a certain view does hot mean 60% is in favour of it, it means that 60% of people are in either in favor or do not care.
@Swahara man That means the emphasis was WRONG. The statement should have been "Most of Reagan's policies were popular at the time, leading to his reelection with even more impressive numbers." Making a technically correct but WRONG statement is just partisan spin. David L. is just illuminating the biases of the presenter for us all to see.
John Green is living some sort of Kafka-esque nightmare. He is forced to sit in a white room while lecturing to his younger self about history while occasionally berating him. He is forced to by a mysterious figure named "Stan", who occasionally makes him answer game-show style questions where the only reward is a lack of punishment via this "shock pen". Somebody HELP HIM!
@@gregorymalchuk272 Republicans have long been a national minority. In the last 28 years, they have gotten a majority of the vote only once in 7 elections.
@@stephenb6016 *well. You mean "why is the country doing well". It's not. It's doing just as well as it was under Obama, which is mediocre. Maybe your low standards and psychotic partisanship play a role in this perception? Obsession with stock market too.
Considering how Reagan was politically in his youth, he did a complete about face. From Democratic leaning, sympathetic to Trades Union and campaigning for people like Harry Truman, to being pro-business, Anti-Union and the darling of Conservatives as Republicans think of him to this day
Hopefully trump cuts spending on things like common core, and SOME military spending. I used to be for more military spending until I found out how much it adds to the debt
One Question? Why didn't you mention anything about the mass incarceration, the war on drugs, the private prisons making money from people in prison, police enforcement profits nor the effects on the black communities These are many things that were really important for many people in this time. There is a good Documentation about the Prison system in america called "the 13th".
The breakdown John has in the middle of the episode about why he wants us to learn about our history is one of the best moments of any Crash Course episode ever.
Thank you for bring up the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. This has had drastic effects that linger to this day. American's mental healthcare system is so fraught with holes many people are not getting the help they desperately need. This has led to the increase in homelessness and also violent crimes committed by people with untreated mental illness.
Sadly, add to that the growing number of veterans coming home to the US-the highest number of women vets, too who need good mental healthcare...and that makes it even more dismal.
I hope that you realize that it was an ACLU lawsuit that forced the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. The ACLU argued that institutionalizing the mentally ill took away their rights and freedom. It was NOT a policy initiated by Reagan. John Green, conveniently, leaves out that important fact.
mydh122 I didn't say Reagan did anything, I was just pleased anyone has brought up the issue at all! But yes the lawsuit was the initiator. What I do know is that one hospital in my city, just kicked out its patients onto the street upon its closing. Leaving these people with nothing else but to live on the streets. There were not then nor now enough safeguards to allow the severely mentally ill a safe place to live where they would be monitored.
@@raghul0078 If one spends more, one must FIRST have more to spend. During the 1980 campaign, Ronald "Dutch" Reagan promised that tax cuts would trigger an economic boom that would balance the budget, then running a $133 billion deficit, in 2 years., as well as finance an increase in the defense budget. It was not defense spending, but tax cuts that blew a hole in the budget, just like they did under George W. Bush and just like under Trump. Under Reagan's timetable, 2 years later, the budget was not balanced, but the deficit had shot up from $133 billion to $300 billion and instead of a boom, we were in the worst recession since the Great Depression. Then Reagan reversed course and began signing tax increases and the deficit dropped, even as defense spending rose.
Fun fact about trickle-down economics: Poverty in the US hit an all-time low (far lower than in the 50's or the 60's) in 2000, during the height of trickle-down economics when US was the most capitalist country in the world.
***** Well overall there was less regulation. Some areas of business might have had more and some less but overall 2000 was the peak of US economic freedom.
+Markus FIN Oh, how interesting: mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/09/us-poverty-rate-1959-to-2009.html Johnson's War on Poverty appears responsible for most of that drop from the 50s, and the ten years after Johnson had a comparable poverty rate to the SINGLE YEAR that you are celebrating. The 70s run ended because of loss of working class jobs and stagflation due to the rising global economy, whereas the "prosperity" of the dotcom boom is shown clearly to be an unsustainable sugar-high.
Len Arends Sure, as long as you actually bother responding after I give them. US poverty rate: 1.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/TJgxEwPv7RI/AAAAAAAAObs/AU8XbvZCSdo/s1600/poverty.jpg US economic freedom (in this graph compared to Denmark's economic freedom): fee.org/media/12279/3m.png?width=100%&height=auto
I was worried how you were going to handle this era: I spent a significant amount of it arguing with my Mother on the pros and cons of Regan and his policies (she the daughter of Democrats who became a Republican when she hit voting age, and me the opposite). But it was balanced. Looking forward to next week.
How will he cover the current admin??? maybe it's best not covered since the current admin is still cutting deals to line their pockets before 2016 ends and the pardon pen starts to spill ink
The fact that John was able to talk about Supply-side economics and call it trickle-down economics with a straight face lost any possibility of me taking this video seriously
2:17 "He even carried the traditionally Democratic states of Illinois and New York" Illinois was actually considered to be a swing state during (and before) Reagan's time. It wasn't until Bill Clinton's 1992 election that Illinois became more consistently Democrat-leaning. California has a similar history in this regard. However, imo West Virginia might be a better example in this regard, considering it was a Democrat-leaning state during the time, and Bill Clinton's elections would be the last time it voted for a Democrat leading to today.
I have to say that I'm really impressed with the restraint shown in this episode. It was a very even handed take on a very polarizing presidency. I'm not sure I could keep my political bias out of a discussion of this presidency.
Is it as polarising as Margaret Thatcher was this side of the pond? (To the point some people - though a lot of the Left did give them grief for it as well, to be fair - held parties celebrating her recent death).
It's interesting though, Baroness Thatcher (she got the title after resigning as PM) might be more so because Reagan could be optimistic and "speak without condescending" (I paraphrase), whereas she couldn't.
You bring up a good point. In his day, I think that Reagan was fairly well liked in both parties precisely for that reason. I think that most of the criticism of Reagan era politics came afterwards, when the negative effects of "trickle down" economics began the rear their ugly head in full.
Also possibly the industrial disputes in the USA were nowhere near as vitriolic as some of the ones over here. By the sounds of it, Reagan's showdown with the controllers doesn't sound anything like as divisive as the 1984 coal miner's strike.
I am continually amazed at how pragmatic John is- this topic and course of events in most anyone's hands in this day and age would become a segue into political soapbox diatribes (I know I can't refrain) My most sincere respect for relaying accurate info, instilling a sliver of your opinion without digressing, and offering a balanced assessment that leaves the viewer plenty of things to ponder. At this point even if John did forget to be awesome, the residual compensates.
John Green, you're a gem. Thanks for these videos (you as well Stan and also John from the past) they make my mornings and inspire me to learn more about the world I live in. Which is pretty great.
When you realize that Hillary has never lost the popular vote in her life but Reagan lost twice in his life, and that Hillary won more votes then he did
No, but like many presidents who have bad stuff happen that they have no control of, he was blamed anyway. And he got blamed mostly for how long it took to end, although it was a very tough situation and he did eventually negotiate an end to it.
@@leokennedy7624 I mean, after the shah died in America, Khomeini literally said he would only release the hostages when Carter was no longer president. Soooo...
It's also a complicated logic joke. Because he is me-from-the-past's future. So he's reminding his past self that insulting his own future is still insulting himself.
I like how John Green does his shows from a liberal point of view, but makes really solid arguments for the conservatives viewpoint. He does a great job staying fairly neutral. And as always, the history lessons was great.
Joe Davis Sorry, I have difficulties to dealing with modals :p (pour french guy with bad english teachers) but you said "can be" interpreted. Is this interpretation necessarily pros or cons, our could it be, as any interpretation, more subtle? To be frank I really don't know which part of the course we are talking about...
Centide Aiphix As far as which part of the course we are talking about, I'm talking about the whole thing in general. For the rest of your comment, I don't know how to directly answer. Basically, as Americans, we view our history through one of two lenses, for the most part. Those lenses being conservative and liberal produce, at times, opposite conclusions. This channel purports to teach history, and does a pretty good job; but when it comes to teaching something that can be interpreted in two opposite directions, I believe it is appropriate to teach the facts and leave the interpretations to the students
Honestly, I just watched this for a quick overview of some information for a History course... but, I have to say this was incredibly interested and entertaining. I appreciate the candid thoughts about where we were and where we are now as a country (and how it really has not changed much). Thanks for a fun and informative video! Wish you were my history teacher.
I would love to see a Crash Course series on US Presidents. I think it would be interesting. Have an episode per president amd go over life, policies, running mates, people running against them, et cetera. I think it would help put into perspective our presidents and politics, and would really help those who will be voting for the first time in 2016 to really be able to choose the candidate that is right for them, and not just who their parents like (or dislike). Just a thought.
So I halfway expected this to be a hit-job on the Gipper, and was pleasantly surprised that it wasn't. I suspect that there are a huge number of Neocons that would be utterly offended that Green wasn't slobbering in adoration over Reagan, but for myself, despite his faults, he is one of my favorite presidents.
Surprise surprise, John Green doesn't have an agenda. Although you get the impression that even pure neutrality counts as an evil liberal agenda to some people.
"agenda" implies planning, organization, and action. An explicit goal. "To make an agenda". You can't accidentally have an agenda purely due to your biases. At least not in the way I see the word. It's either intentional or it doesn't exist. Everyone has biases; not everyone has an agenda.
Leaving the French joke aside, I liked this episode a lot. I would've liked to hear about Reagan's financial deregulation which led to the current financial meltdown. The point of choosing Reagan over some other REAL politician was the fact that he was a known actor, a good communicator as John said. Why? Because the agenda was already planned by others (financial powers, lobbyists, etc.), all they needed was a face/image that could sell it to the people and that was a job for a PR agent, an actor like Reagan, who could deregulate away with a smile in his face.
RonaldReaganRocks1 The liberals certainly have their share of the blame... Reagan started the ball rolling with the financial deregulation... He literally cut positions of the people who were supposed to keep Wall Street honest. Every president since Reagan (Bush1, Clinton, Bush2, etc.) conservative and liberal alike, have continued on this trend of deregulating wall street and getting big donations to their party from the the wall street companies who operate in the dark.
Do a crash course on the Wilcox revolutions in a Hawaii. It was a violent and often glossed-over period in our 50th state's history that was essential for making it what it is today.
7:58 Remember when we wanted to stay neutral in world war 2 and FDR invited his defense cabinet to strike back at Japan because of the lives of many loss in Pearl Harbor and the defense Department was like "Uhhh we cannot." Then FDR stood up from his chair seeing the defeat in his countrymen and told them "Don't tell me it can't be done." And then had Congress declare a state of war against Japan.
I didn't think this video was too biased. He brought up a lot of the positives of the Reagan administration such as their economic boom, clamping down on the out of control unions (us Brits had a similar problem that got so bad that not even bodies were being buried at one point), and his role in steering the US out of the Cold War (I wouldn't give him full credit, but I believe he was the last important figure in a long line of presidents who had worked towards realising that goal). I've got to say that there hasn't been a president since made of the same mettle that Reagan was. Look at the videos of his negotiations with the university lecturers during the student riots, the man was certainly a great communicator!
Supply side economics is NOT trickle down economics ( which in itself is not a economic theory and has never been proposed). The “trickle Down” stuff is a straw man and the purpose of supply side economics is that the government takes less of a percentage of the taxpayers money ,which will spur economic growth, therefore people will invest their money back in to the economy to generate wealth, and the government will receive more in revenue because the people in general are making more money. And it is not only the rich that receive tax cuts but all of the population of every social class I just want everyone to know that the Supposed “trickle down theory” is not the same as supply side economics Hope everyone has a nice day😁
supply side economics is what supporters called it and "trickle down economics" is what foes called it. U may be right in a different way, but in this case he was just quoting the literal history book that I and many others use for their AP US history class lol just an explanation
It spurs economic growth... for the ultra-wealthy. The statistics on wealth distribution since the '80s are extremely clear. There is no real debate to be had about it. The wealthy have benefitted from Reagan's policies. That is all. The middle class has been consistently shrinking, while the lower class continues to grow. People have unprecedented amounts of debt, wages have not increased at all, and the cost of living has been rising ever since. The top 1% owns approximately 50% of the total wealth in the country. The bottom 90% owns 20%. This is Reagan's fault. Before he took office, the numbers were far more equally distributed. We desperately need another FDR to implement a New Deal type program for the modern era. It worked to pull us out of the Great Depression; it can work to repair the damage done since Reagan too. We need checks and balances on the economy as well as on the government. The only difference between dictators and CEOs is the type of power that they have. One has the power to control other people's lives through the government; the other has the power to control other people's lives through the economy. They are both elites that must be restricted for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the common people.
No Name you realize CEO's can be fired, right? That billionaires don't own even half their money in liquid funds, and that billionaires spend their money, right?
TheNonArtist Billionaires have most of their money invested in their company. You're showing your naïveté. How do you think they own their companies if they don't own a majority of the stocks lmao.
Dear John Green, Fan here. Your condescension and assuming posturing as if pained to judge others' efforts from on high is...delightful. Best wishes, Someone other than John Green
Reagan's push for additional testing of who he considered "High Risk" groups(Specifically homosexuals) lead to a national mindset, or at least rode on it, that AIDS was the Gay's Disease. To quote Reagan himself when it comes to his prejudice towards the GLBT community... "My criticism is that [the gay movement] isn’t just asking for civil rights; it’s asking for recognition and acceptance of an alternative lifestyle which I do not believe society can condone, nor can I." And before anyone says "Reagan wasn't a racist", let us not forget that this is the man that loudly opposed the CRA and the VRA both. He often talked about States Rights when it came to voting(And by proxy, the state's "Right" to discriminate), even though he flipflopped on the CRA later on. However, he went on to veto the Civil Rights Restoration Act(Congress overrode his veto), and attempted to veto the establishment of MLK Day as a national holiday(He only withdrew when a veto-proof majority made it clear that it was going to happen whether he liked it or not). He was unapologetic in his racism, and in his homophobia, and the world is far, far better off without him.
Why do you suggest states rights is by proxy the right to disciminate? Are suggesting even the federal government by proxy has a right to discriminate because at one point in time there was slavery? It seems to me you associate "states rights" with the civil war(slavery) because that is what it was fought over. States rights could do a lot of good for everyone in any aggenda LBGT, legalizing weed, gun rights, health care. Why do we need big brother telling us when we can do something when we already know what and how to do it?
TheTurbofish Because it was historically clear and TODAY (see Republican voting restrictions enacted as we speak since the recent Supreme Court ruling) still clear that when left to certain states to decide on voting laws, they'll lean towards discriminatory practices. Do you even have the slightest clue of American history over the past 100yrs? If southern states were using discriminatory voting practices and the federal government had to step in to stop such practices how can you ask why would someone assume there's a correlation between states rights and discrimination? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but you don't seem to properly understand the context of which these topics are based in. That's why you had the government establish Civil and voting rights because the States (mostly southern) were allowing abuse on an egregious level. Heck they didn't even allow minorities and women to vote until only several decades ago. So the government had to step in to create said rights because the states refused to do anything about discriminatory practices. So clearly this country needed a "big brother" at a time when the States refused to acknowledge all of their citizens.
I'm sad to see John labling the French "cowardly" for their distaste for war, as if it's a bad thing. They, as a nation, have been through some horrendous history, bloody and wrought with war (a lot of which their own doing *cough* Napoléon *cough*) and culminating in their country being brutally invaded by Germany on no less than three occasions.
7:30 is the most candid moment ever to not get cut from the final production in all of CrashCourse video history ua-cam.com/video/2h4DkpFP_aw/v-deo.htmlm30s
How are the french cowards!? We were the first people to fight for a egalitarian revolution and we work towards Liberty, equality and fraternity. However I agree that the US is really a special country because it is capable of recover from very severe crisis.
Well the American Revolution did happen several years before the French Revolution ... and also didn't lead to a tyrannical warmongering dictatorship just saying.
The US loves to mock the French. It's like a national hobby or something. France is seen as being weak and effeminate, since they needed allied assistance in both world wars, but then later seemed quite ungrateful to the US and British for it. Strangely their problems against the Germans in WWII and defeat in the Napoleonic Wars and the Franco Prussian War have created a strange image of the French as poor fighters, when the French have a long and brutal military tradition. Also France hasn't jumped into wars in the last 30 years. They focused on trying to be a world leader that wasn't going to demand obedience like the US or USSR.
Patrik Lilja Because our founding fathers knew that young people were idealistic idiots, with no practical experience that would make them successful at the job (I can say this because I am one as well).
And that tax increase is destroying their tax base. You can't suddenly increase rates by that much in today's world if you want to avoid driving everyone making over $1 million out. Since the Socialist government raised that tax, the amount of people leaving France has increased 500-600%, destroying their tax base.
takebackkean I'm assuming you're referring to me. I am not making up facts. French businessmen and the wealthy elite are leaving France in droves because of the policies of the Socialists, and it is having a definite effect on the French economy and tax revenues. The rich need to pay their fair share, certainly, but when there are nations right next door that don't tax their millionaires to 75% of their income, the cost of migration is far less than the cost of paying the damned tax, aiding the exodus.
TheIrishSpectre All this is nonsense. On witch analysis do you claim this? As a french, well aware about what's going on in my country, I can tell you that our tax base is not the problem but only that fact that most wealthiest people aren't paying enough because we don't have the same laws for the french citizen that live outside the country as you USA does. In France, you pay your taxes in the country you live in. So most of the rich guys prefer live in Switzerland, Monaco or Belgium so that they can't be legally taxed on their income made in France! And it cost around 35 billons euros a year to the french state!
mustang6172 I used to live in a single-wide trailor built in the 90's, and the bathroom in it had one of those...... and whats worse is the entire room....toilet, bath-tub, walls, and for a while... the floor, was PAAAAYNK..... I dont mean pink, I mean PAAYNK...... Its literally gave you a migraine just to look IN THE ROOM..... God, I hated it....
I just checked my remote learning APUSH notes my teacher provided on presidential domestic/foreign policies, and this video hit basically every major point and historical event that was in my notes. Great video!
Diana Peña the more quotes are misquoted the further it can get from it's core truth. This misquote the same fact is conveyed however if someone, somehow, manages to misquote that then we may change the meaning entirely.
This is the part of US history that I really hate. The part that I have lived through and lead to all the problems I see around me today. I look at that generation that was in charge of the US back then and wonder why they didn't do more to fix our country and our world to give all of us a better life than what we've had. It's frustrating, and I can only hope that when my generation is finally in a position to reshape our world that we do so favorable for generations to come, not just to suit ourselves.
Maybe you should hold the next administration more accountable so ; "We won't be fooled again" or just stay the course and continue to throw red and blue kool aide finger points at others. Same as it always has been seems the rich get richer Yes,? Yes they can ?
SECTION 8. Clause 1. The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. When ever you say the founding fathers wouldn’t recognize our country because of welfare programs like social security etc. I just think of this part of our constitution.
This wild assumptions about conservatives bother the heck out of me. 9:27 The "Christian right" is not equivalent to "Conservatives". The Christian right is only a subset of the Conservative set. 9:31 No common Conservative is proposing to have women leave the workforce. Conservatives respect each woman's decision: you want to join the workforce? Fine. You want to be a stay-home mom? Fine. Supporting stay-home moms is not equivalent to being against women joining the workforce. The two positions are not mutually exclusive. When will people understand that? 9:35 No common Conservative is against appointing women to the supreme court. Since when is that a thing attached to Conservationism?
+Marcos Beni I literally got the same result as you on that test. I bet you noticed how incredibly bias that test is as well. The creators think that people like Marco Rubio and Cruz and all those republican candidates are like 9.0,9.0 on that graph. They think Obama is like a 6.0,6.0. Makes no sense to me since I'm in the lower right and I consider myself an American conservative.
+Benedict Feser sure the black lives matter may have destroyed property (which i do not agree with, it puts a negative light on the whole movement), but you cant forget the KKK has also stabbed anti protestors and then later got released form jail with no charges. I dont see any ways that we give "special treatment" to African Americans other than affirmative action. and thats not because theyre inferior. Its because heavy oppression and segregation ended 50 to 60 years ago and it takes time for those communities to get on their feet. You really think that as soon as that stuff ended that everything would just fall into place? It goes a lot deeper than that. Systematic racism is very real and a lot of people dont notice it. There are a lot of people alive today that lived through segregation and saw it end which means that there are still a lot of people with racist and/or prejudice mentalities, whether that person is aware or not.
I am a conservative since Reagan, but I enjoyed your look at the era. Anyone who thinks critically, should be looking at opposing views more than just immersing themselves in views that bolster their own opinion. Thank you for this video. It was greatly informative and inspirational.
"It's about us collectively deciding what we mean when we talk about freedom and equality." Explain how we collectively decide something and what happens when someone disagrees.
10:19 - Where he's calling the Soviet Union "the Evil Empire".... Notice the Rage Against the Machine album at the bottom of the shelf... Also named "Evil Empire"..
I especially like how Reagan ramped up the drug war, by militarizing our police forces and creating mandatory minimum sentences. Policies that continue to this day. Thanks Ronnie!
***** It's a Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reference, I was reminded of that particular bit when John Green said 'I'm glad to be almost interesting me from the past. Someday maybe you'll be almost interesting'. And than imagined how that would look like if you had to condense any noteworthy thing in the galaxy into one or two words.
The founding fathers already laid out the government's goal, it's not a vague mystery what they meant. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
Video about Keynes- “keynes is literally the father of all economics, he is one of the greatest men of all time” Video about Reagan- “he appealed to racist whites, he hated poor people, he did trickle down economics,”
I've noticed that as we get into later time periods more and more of your opinion comes through, not a complaint, or even a criticism just an interesting observation.
Finally find an informational video that is critical of Reagan & everyone is salty, talking about bias and fake news... We all have our own beliefs on what constitutes a good political leader, but no politician will ever be perfect for everyone - chill out, nobody is safe from criticism.
1:05 "Anyone could have beaten Jimmy Carter."
Except Gerald Ford.
He's saying anyone could beat Jimmy Carter in 1980. Gerald Ford barely lost in 1976 because of 3 things: People had a bad taste in their mouths from Nixon, Reagan gave him a heavy primary challenge which divided the conservatives and demoralized Ford supporters, and Ford was viewed as illegitimate since he was 3rd in line to the Presidency aka an unelected President. People quickly realized Jimmy Carter was a big, fat mistake after he was inaugurated. He was never popular.
That’s not true. Carter was popular for a decent chunk of his term.
@@0108dylan Not at the end.
@@drakekendall5095 One more thing: the NY Daily News's "Ford to City: Drop Dead" headline. Ford went on to lose NY by 4%. If that 4% swung the other way, New York would have gone red and cost Carter the election.
He had a 74% approval ratting before Delta Force failed the Hostage rescue mission
Reagan’s best moment is when he is giving a speech and hears gun shots and then goes “missed me”
Abhi Prakash it was a balloon popping, but it sounded like a gunshot during the speech. Still hilarious
@Abhi Prakash yep it happened. It's even better in the context that he survived a previous legitimate assassination attempt
In the surgery room following his assassination attempts, he said to the surgeon "I hope you're not democrats" before going under anaesthesia.
Nah his best moment was dying
@@Saoirse_don_Phalaistín Ye, & supposedly the head surgeon dude responded with "we are all Republicans today, Mr. President".
It isn't American history, without a jab at the French
It isn't anyone's history without a jab at the French.
AlternateHistoryHub so true
Yet, they were a huge factor in the creation of this country.
Garrett Baumann This. America arguably would not have won their independence without French naval help.
Shawny D and they wouldn't have won theirs in wwI and WWII without our help. 2 to their 1 they still owe us one
anyone else here bc your teacher can't find something better to assign you for online classes during coronacation
that would be me
And Me
I'm just here so I can understand what the hell my teacher is trying to teach during corona lol
Yes
Me
is it just me who's watching this series for fun not for AP tests? I'm not even American.
I am, btw I'm an American
That's not too surprising. Americans aren't known to learn for fun.
GregTom2 but, i am watching for fun and im an american whos too lazy to put lines in my words
Oh yes. I'm an Indian (from India) and have watched the entire Crash Course US History series. It's quite fascinating!
I'm watching it for fun. I love history
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this comment section!
Heheh I see what you did there
Mr. Gorbachev might also want to tear down this video. It kinda breaks my heart how little credit he gets for ending the Cold War. That pudgy bastard was 80% of the reason it ended. With another Brezhnev in office, the Cold War might have gone on to this very day.
@@browngirlinaclownworld2077 agree. Thank god we had Reagan.
😂
Wow!🙄
"A lot of reagans policy's weren't popular at the time"
*1980 election wins 44 states and 489 electoral votes*
*1984 election wins 49 states and 525 electoral votes*
David L a lot not all. You can still win with some policies that are not popular as long as the rest is popular? Reagan won big, really big, but that does not make all his views beling to the majority.
Moreover, if 40% oppose a certain view does hot mean 60% is in favour of it, it means that 60% of people are in either in favor or do not care.
David L he didn’t win bc of his policies.
David L I was hoping somebody would point out that fact. If no one did I was going to.
@Swahara man That means the emphasis was WRONG. The statement should have been "Most of Reagan's policies were popular at the time, leading to his reelection with even more impressive numbers." Making a technically correct but WRONG statement is just partisan spin. David L. is just illuminating the biases of the presenter for us all to see.
I R A N C O N T R A
5:45 look very closely at John Greens forehead. A mark emerges at the same time his voodo doll is stabbed. Genius
That was so painful to watch!
That freaked me out. Is this clever or sinister🤔
i saw that and thought i was tripping for like 5 minutes straight
I feel that an analysis of the War on Drugs and its effects on mass incarceration should have also been included in the video.
What a stupid idea! This guy is covertly liberal but you want him to be in your face liberal.
Absolutely
the most shocking part of this video was the "carpeted bathroom". WHY AMERICA?
100% true
Gustavo Palamone my house was built in 1980 and the floor in the bathroom was carpet before we changed it several years ago.
I was born in 92 and I remember carpeted bathrooms. Terrible, terrible idea.
Because America. Love it or GTFO
THE HORROR
John Green is living some sort of Kafka-esque nightmare. He is forced to sit in a white room while lecturing to his younger self about history while occasionally berating him. He is forced to by a mysterious figure named "Stan", who occasionally makes him answer game-show style questions where the only reward is a lack of punishment via this "shock pen". Somebody HELP HIM!
Someone must have been telling lies about John G., for without having done anything wrong he was arrested one fine morning.
please sir no more shocks
MORE HISTORY GREEN
uh...Mongols? AAAAAA
We don't care about John Green, individuals don't matter after all
Get your r/woooshes ready everyone
"Keep your bureaucratic hands off my thermostat" LMAO
STOP STOP STOP. STOP SCROLLING DOWN. DON'T DO IT
+TheArtunism Cant.... avoid.... it..... sorry.....
+TheArtunism Thanks for the warning :o
+TheArtunism I should have listened, that hurt my brain.
+Alex Marcoe I didn't listen either.... I thought just skimming wouldn't hurt. I was WRONG!!!
Don't do it.
+TheArtunism Why didn't I listen? Ugh my eyes burn
I'm British... but i'm going to become an AP US history teacher very soon so def feeling the pressure.
Thank you John Green.
Make sure not to be biased against conservatives! This guy is definitely biased against Reagan.
@@drakekendall5095
Reagan flooded the country with Democrat illegal aliens and republicans are about to be made a national minority because of it.
@fm'latghor
You do know how immigration and demographics works, right?
@@gregorymalchuk272 Republicans have long been a national minority.
In the last 28 years, they have gotten a majority of the vote only once in 7 elections.
@@garfieldfarkle
That's because of amnesty and democrats flooding the country with immigration. The elections aren't legitimate anymore.
Trump took Reagan's slogan.
"Let's Make America Great Again"
Its a good goal.
And is coincidentally also a moron. History will not be kind to Boomer clowns.
More like he ruined Reagan's slogan
@@telescopicS627 why is the country doing so good then
@@stephenb6016 *well. You mean "why is the country doing well". It's not. It's doing just as well as it was under Obama, which is mediocre. Maybe your low standards and psychotic partisanship play a role in this perception? Obsession with stock market too.
Considering how Reagan was politically in his youth, he did a complete about face. From Democratic leaning, sympathetic to Trades Union and campaigning for people like Harry Truman, to being pro-business, Anti-Union and the darling of Conservatives as Republicans think of him to this day
I moved to the United States two years ago, and your videos are the reason I understand American politics and history!
if you're looking for a career in american politics try a lobotomy
"It's never about individuals, it's always about collective hivemind"
thanks Comrade
Good one.
+Amon Ra To the shadows comrade!
Lmaoo
This video is annoying and Commies aren't people.
LMao
Tax cuts are great but only if you cut spending.
Ronald Reagan did.
Rishant Dutt Not enough to balance the budget.
Richard Underwood you have to think the house and senate were both controlled by the democrats
Hopefully trump cuts spending on things like common core, and SOME military spending. I used to be for more military spending until I found out how much it adds to the debt
damn maybe we really do have a problem here. I heard Bill Clinton reduced the debt, what did he do? Trump should just do that
One Question?
Why didn't you mention anything about the mass incarceration, the war on drugs, the private prisons making money from people in prison, police enforcement profits nor the effects on the black communities
These are many things that were really important for many people in this time.
There is a good Documentation about the Prison system in america called "the 13th".
The breakdown John has in the middle of the episode about why he wants us to learn about our history is one of the best moments of any Crash Course episode ever.
Thank you for bring up the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. This has had drastic effects that linger to this day. American's mental healthcare system is so fraught with holes many people are not getting the help they desperately need. This has led to the increase in homelessness and also violent crimes committed by people with untreated mental illness.
Sadly, add to that the growing number of veterans coming home to the US-the highest number of women vets, too who need good mental healthcare...and that makes it even more dismal.
I hope that you realize that it was an ACLU lawsuit that forced the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill. The ACLU argued that institutionalizing the mentally ill took away their rights and freedom. It was NOT a policy initiated by Reagan. John Green, conveniently, leaves out that important fact.
mydh122 I didn't say Reagan did anything, I was just pleased anyone has brought up the issue at all! But yes the lawsuit was the initiator. What I do know is that one hospital in my city, just kicked out its patients onto the street upon its closing. Leaving these people with nothing else but to live on the streets. There were not then nor now enough safeguards to allow the severely mentally ill a safe place to live where they would be monitored.
mydh122 You are correct, however being a "conservative" Reagan had no problems defunding anything with health care+poor people.
Imhornydadcomeinside "liberals"
He completely skipped over the fact that Reagan had a great sense of humor
like trump
Parrot Boss yes, just like trump
@@lavaniadelrey2807 Much, much, greater then Trump's.
That Guy Over There the best
and he liked jelly beans. I have seen his portrait made in jelly beans
D.A.R.E.
Drugs Are Really Expensive
I was not a fan of Reagan when he was in office. I'll say this, though: his successors made him look a lot better.
I am still a fan of Reagan for that reason. Very well said!
Clintonomics outperformed Reaganomics and balanced the budget.
@@garfieldfarkle at that time US was at an arms race with USSR so spending was very high.
@@raghul0078 If one spends more, one must FIRST have more to spend.
During the 1980 campaign, Ronald "Dutch" Reagan promised that tax cuts would trigger an economic boom that would balance the budget, then running a $133 billion deficit, in 2 years., as well as finance an increase in the defense budget.
It was not defense spending, but tax cuts that blew a hole in the budget, just like they did under George W. Bush and just like under Trump.
Under Reagan's timetable, 2 years later, the budget was not balanced, but the deficit had shot up from $133 billion to $300 billion and instead of a boom, we were in the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Then Reagan reversed course and began signing tax increases and the deficit dropped, even as defense spending rose.
@@garfieldfarkle ok
Fun fact about trickle-down economics:
Poverty in the US hit an all-time low (far lower than in the 50's or the 60's) in 2000, during the height of trickle-down economics when US was the most capitalist country in the world.
Fun fact about your comment bill clinton was president. With major regulations on companies.
***** Well overall there was less regulation. Some areas of business might have had more and some less but overall 2000 was the peak of US economic freedom.
+Markus FIN
Link...
+Markus FIN
Oh, how interesting:
mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/09/us-poverty-rate-1959-to-2009.html
Johnson's War on Poverty appears responsible for most of that drop from the 50s, and the ten years after Johnson had a comparable poverty rate to the SINGLE YEAR that you are celebrating.
The 70s run ended because of loss of working class jobs and stagflation due to the rising global economy, whereas the "prosperity" of the dotcom boom is shown clearly to be an unsustainable sugar-high.
Len Arends Sure, as long as you actually bother responding after I give them.
US poverty rate:
1.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/TJgxEwPv7RI/AAAAAAAAObs/AU8XbvZCSdo/s1600/poverty.jpg
US economic freedom (in this graph compared to Denmark's economic freedom):
fee.org/media/12279/3m.png?width=100%&height=auto
Reagan didn't cut the Medicare, Social Security, etc... Because of the congress
8:20 Real talk though, what's up with carpeted bathrooms in the 80s???
I was worried how you were going to handle this era: I spent a significant amount of it arguing with my Mother on the pros and cons of Regan and his policies (she the daughter of Democrats who became a Republican when she hit voting age, and me the opposite). But it was balanced. Looking forward to next week.
How will he cover the current admin???
maybe it's best not covered since the current admin is still cutting deals to line their pockets before 2016 ends and the pardon pen starts to spill ink
The fact that John was able to talk about Supply-side economics and call it trickle-down economics with a straight face lost any possibility of me taking this video seriously
finally somebody gets it
Yeah, that was painful. Also it's not about the rich spending more, unless you call investment spending (which you don't).
2:17 "He even carried the traditionally Democratic states of Illinois and New York"
Illinois was actually considered to be a swing state during (and before) Reagan's time. It wasn't until Bill Clinton's 1992 election that Illinois became more consistently Democrat-leaning. California has a similar history in this regard. However, imo West Virginia might be a better example in this regard, considering it was a Democrat-leaning state during the time, and Bill Clinton's elections would be the last time it voted for a Democrat leading to today.
Illinois went for Kennedy in 1960 in an election that was completely honest, lacking any interference
Oh, stagnated wage.. It is still with us in 2019.
Still waiting for those trickle-down economics to kick in.......
I have to say that I'm really impressed with the restraint shown in this episode. It was a very even handed take on a very polarizing presidency. I'm not sure I could keep my political bias out of a discussion of this presidency.
Is it as polarising as Margaret Thatcher was this side of the pond?
(To the point some people - though a lot of the Left did give them grief for it as well, to be fair - held parties celebrating her recent death).
Probably pretty close, and definitely for the same reasons that Thatcher was so reviled by left-leaning parties.
It's interesting though, Baroness Thatcher (she got the title after resigning as PM) might be more so because Reagan could be optimistic and "speak without condescending" (I paraphrase), whereas she couldn't.
You bring up a good point. In his day, I think that Reagan was fairly well liked in both parties precisely for that reason. I think that most of the criticism of Reagan era politics came afterwards, when the negative effects of "trickle down" economics began the rear their ugly head in full.
Also possibly the industrial disputes in the USA were nowhere near as vitriolic as some of the ones over here. By the sounds of it, Reagan's showdown with the controllers doesn't sound anything like as divisive as the 1984 coal miner's strike.
I am continually amazed at how pragmatic John is- this topic and course of events in most anyone's hands in this day and age would become a segue into political soapbox diatribes (I know I can't refrain)
My most sincere respect for relaying accurate info, instilling a sliver of your opinion without digressing, and offering a balanced assessment that leaves the viewer plenty of things to ponder.
At this point even if John did forget to be awesome, the residual compensates.
John Green, you're a gem. Thanks for these videos (you as well Stan and also John from the past) they make my mornings and inspire me to learn more about the world I live in. Which is pretty great.
I guess Hillary was just as unelectable as Jimmy Carter.
When you realize that Hillary has never lost the popular vote in her life but Reagan lost twice in his life, and that Hillary won more votes then he did
Jack Bat How did it damage his reputation? Was the crisis his fault? Did he start it?
No, but like many presidents who have bad stuff happen that they have no control of, he was blamed anyway.
And he got blamed mostly for how long it took to end, although it was a very tough situation and he did eventually negotiate an end to it.
@@zionnuby842
That was an awkward "when you realize..."
@@leokennedy7624 I mean, after the shah died in America, Khomeini literally said he would only release the hostages when Carter was no longer president. Soooo...
Good episode, John. Much appreciated.
I love the way John roasts himself.
Big props for talking about politics while not getting personally political.
"Someday maybe you'll be almost interesting"
dang he just roasted himself
It's also a complicated logic joke. Because he is me-from-the-past's future. So he's reminding his past self that insulting his own future is still insulting himself.
I like how John Green does his shows from a liberal point of view, but makes really solid arguments for the conservatives viewpoint. He does a great job staying fairly neutral. And as always, the history lessons was great.
He is good at reporting the facts neutrally, but does a bad job staying neutral with anything that can be interpreted either way.
How can anyone be neutral with anything that could be interpreted?
Centide Aiphix you said it, "could be," not has to be. If something cannot be said neutrally he could say it both ways.
Joe Davis Sorry, I have difficulties to dealing with modals :p (pour french guy with bad english teachers) but you said "can be" interpreted. Is this interpretation necessarily pros or cons, our could it be, as any interpretation, more subtle? To be frank I really don't know which part of the course we are talking about...
Centide Aiphix As far as which part of the course we are talking about, I'm talking about the whole thing in general. For the rest of your comment, I don't know how to directly answer. Basically, as Americans, we view our history through one of two lenses, for the most part. Those lenses being conservative and liberal produce, at times, opposite conclusions. This channel purports to teach history, and does a pretty good job; but when it comes to teaching something that can be interpreted in two opposite directions, I believe it is appropriate to teach the facts and leave the interpretations to the students
Honestly, I just watched this for a quick overview of some information for a History course... but, I have to say this was incredibly interested and entertaining. I appreciate the candid thoughts about where we were and where we are now as a country (and how it really has not changed much). Thanks for a fun and informative video! Wish you were my history teacher.
I would love to see a Crash Course series on US Presidents. I think it would be interesting. Have an episode per president amd go over life, policies, running mates, people running against them, et cetera. I think it would help put into perspective our presidents and politics, and would really help those who will be voting for the first time in 2016 to really be able to choose the candidate that is right for them, and not just who their parents like (or dislike).
Just a thought.
I wish Republicans were still this optimistic.
So I halfway expected this to be a hit-job on the Gipper, and was pleasantly surprised that it wasn't. I suspect that there are a huge number of Neocons that would be utterly offended that Green wasn't slobbering in adoration over Reagan, but for myself, despite his faults, he is one of my favorite presidents.
Surprise surprise, John Green doesn't have an agenda. Although you get the impression that even pure neutrality counts as an evil liberal agenda to some people.
Eugene Conniff Nah. Everyone has an agenda, even J. Green. For sure, Green shoots left of center, but he tends to be fair, and I'm okay with that.
"agenda" implies planning, organization, and action. An explicit goal. "To make an agenda". You can't accidentally have an agenda purely due to your biases. At least not in the way I see the word. It's either intentional or it doesn't exist. Everyone has biases; not everyone has an agenda.
Leaving the French joke aside, I liked this episode a lot.
I would've liked to hear about Reagan's financial deregulation which led to the current financial meltdown. The point of choosing Reagan over some other REAL politician was the fact that he was a known actor, a good communicator as John said. Why? Because the agenda was already planned by others (financial powers, lobbyists, etc.), all they needed was a face/image that could sell it to the people and that was a job for a PR agent, an actor like Reagan, who could deregulate away with a smile in his face.
You mean the part where liberals forced banks to give mortgages to poor people? That is what caused the meltdown.
RonaldReaganRocks1 The liberals certainly have their share of the blame... Reagan started the ball rolling with the financial deregulation... He literally cut positions of the people who were supposed to keep Wall Street honest. Every president since Reagan (Bush1, Clinton, Bush2, etc.) conservative and liberal alike, have continued on this trend of deregulating wall street and getting big donations to their party from the the wall street companies who operate in the dark.
Scott Matthews deregulation didn't do anything to hurt the economy
Do a crash course on the Wilcox revolutions in a Hawaii. It was a violent and often glossed-over period in our 50th state's history that was essential for making it what it is today.
Having been alive and paying attention at the time your synopsis of Reagan gets a D+
The dude is literally just stating facts.
7:58
Remember when we wanted to stay neutral in world war 2 and FDR invited his defense cabinet to strike back at Japan because of the lives of many loss in Pearl Harbor and the defense Department was like "Uhhh we cannot." Then FDR stood up from his chair seeing the defeat in his countrymen and told them "Don't tell me it can't be done." And then had Congress declare a state of war against Japan.
Thanks to everyone at crash course (especially Stan). You are helping me study for my APUSH test and my teacher taught me nothing lol.
I didn't think this video was too biased. He brought up a lot of the positives of the Reagan administration such as their economic boom, clamping down on the out of control unions (us Brits had a similar problem that got so bad that not even bodies were being buried at one point), and his role in steering the US out of the Cold War (I wouldn't give him full credit, but I believe he was the last important figure in a long line of presidents who had worked towards realising that goal).
I've got to say that there hasn't been a president since made of the same mettle that Reagan was. Look at the videos of his negotiations with the university lecturers during the student riots, the man was certainly a great communicator!
"we never fix the problems we always fix the things that are fine" John Green.
Not an unfair reading of Reagan. Good episode.
"the government is the problem so make me incharge of the government so i will make the military bigger thus giving the government more power"
Supply side economics is NOT trickle down economics ( which in itself is not a economic theory and has never been proposed). The “trickle Down” stuff is a straw man and the purpose of supply side economics is that the government takes less of a percentage of the taxpayers money ,which will spur economic growth, therefore people will invest their money back in to the economy to generate wealth, and the government will receive more in revenue because the people in general are making more money. And it is not only the rich that receive tax cuts but all of the population of every social class
I just want everyone to know that the Supposed “trickle down theory” is not the same as supply side economics
Hope everyone has a nice day😁
supply side economics is what supporters called it and "trickle down economics" is what foes called it. U may be right in a different way, but in this case he was just quoting the literal history book that I and many others use for their AP US history class lol just an explanation
@@tunajinnie You have a biased history book.
It spurs economic growth... for the ultra-wealthy. The statistics on wealth distribution since the '80s are extremely clear. There is no real debate to be had about it. The wealthy have benefitted from Reagan's policies. That is all. The middle class has been consistently shrinking, while the lower class continues to grow. People have unprecedented amounts of debt, wages have not increased at all, and the cost of living has been rising ever since. The top 1% owns approximately 50% of the total wealth in the country. The bottom 90% owns 20%. This is Reagan's fault. Before he took office, the numbers were far more equally distributed. We desperately need another FDR to implement a New Deal type program for the modern era. It worked to pull us out of the Great Depression; it can work to repair the damage done since Reagan too.
We need checks and balances on the economy as well as on the government. The only difference between dictators and CEOs is the type of power that they have. One has the power to control other people's lives through the government; the other has the power to control other people's lives through the economy. They are both elites that must be restricted for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the common people.
No Name you realize CEO's can be fired, right? That billionaires don't own even half their money in liquid funds, and that billionaires spend their money, right?
TheNonArtist Billionaires have most of their money invested in their company. You're showing your naïveté. How do you think they own their companies if they don't own a majority of the stocks lmao.
Dear John Green,
Fan here. Your condescension and assuming posturing as if pained to judge others' efforts from on high is...delightful.
Best wishes,
Someone other than John Green
Reagan's push for additional testing of who he considered "High Risk" groups(Specifically homosexuals) lead to a national mindset, or at least rode on it, that AIDS was the Gay's Disease. To quote Reagan himself when it comes to his prejudice towards the GLBT community...
"My criticism is that [the gay movement] isn’t just asking for civil rights; it’s asking for recognition and acceptance of an alternative lifestyle which I do not believe society can condone, nor can I."
And before anyone says "Reagan wasn't a racist", let us not forget that this is the man that loudly opposed the CRA and the VRA both. He often talked about States Rights when it came to voting(And by proxy, the state's "Right" to discriminate), even though he flipflopped on the CRA later on. However, he went on to veto the Civil Rights Restoration Act(Congress overrode his veto), and attempted to veto the establishment of MLK Day as a national holiday(He only withdrew when a veto-proof majority made it clear that it was going to happen whether he liked it or not). He was unapologetic in his racism, and in his homophobia, and the world is far, far better off without him.
*****
According to you. Reality has a different view.
Why do you suggest states rights is by proxy the right to disciminate? Are suggesting even the federal government by proxy has a right to discriminate because at one point in time there was slavery? It seems to me you associate "states rights" with the civil war(slavery) because that is what it was fought over. States rights could do a lot of good for everyone in any aggenda LBGT, legalizing weed, gun rights, health care. Why do we need big brother telling us when we can do something when we already know what and how to do it?
TheTurbofish Because it was historically clear and TODAY (see Republican voting restrictions enacted as we speak since the recent Supreme Court ruling) still clear that when left to certain states to decide on voting laws, they'll lean towards discriminatory practices. Do you even have the slightest clue of American history over the past 100yrs? If southern states were using discriminatory voting practices and the federal government had to step in to stop such practices how can you ask why would someone assume there's a correlation between states rights and discrimination? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but you don't seem to properly understand the context of which these topics are based in. That's why you had the government establish Civil and voting rights because the States (mostly southern) were allowing abuse on an egregious level. Heck they didn't even allow minorities and women to vote until only several decades ago. So the government had to step in to create said rights because the states refused to do anything about discriminatory practices. So clearly this country needed a "big brother" at a time when the States refused to acknowledge all of their citizens.
I'm sad to see John labling the French "cowardly" for their distaste for war, as if it's a bad thing. They, as a nation, have been through some horrendous history, bloody and wrought with war (a lot of which their own doing *cough* Napoléon *cough*) and culminating in their country being brutally invaded by Germany on no less than three occasions.
7:30 is the most candid moment ever to not get cut from the final production in all of CrashCourse video history ua-cam.com/video/2h4DkpFP_aw/v-deo.htmlm30s
"Oh yeah, the French." Haha laughed so hard at this xD
If a politician uses the word freedom a lot, or claims to act in the name of it, that is already a red flag for me
So you would rather hear em talk about oppression?
The French comment won me over. I’ll subscribe now.
How are the french cowards!? We were the first people to fight for a egalitarian revolution and we work towards Liberty, equality and fraternity. However I agree that the US is really a special country because it is capable of recover from very severe crisis.
Seriously, the hating on the French is totally baseless and bullshit.
Well the American Revolution did happen several years before the French Revolution ... and also didn't lead to a tyrannical warmongering dictatorship just saying.
Quinn Weber We also fought to keep in place most policies of Great Britain, but under local rule.
Because you didn't join the Iraq war. That's literally all it is.
The US loves to mock the French. It's like a national hobby or something. France is seen as being weak and effeminate, since they needed allied assistance in both world wars, but then later seemed quite ungrateful to the US and British for it. Strangely their problems against the Germans in WWII and defeat in the Napoleonic Wars and the Franco Prussian War have created a strange image of the French as poor fighters, when the French have a long and brutal military tradition.
Also France hasn't jumped into wars in the last 30 years. They focused on trying to be a world leader that wasn't going to demand obedience like the US or USSR.
I’d love to see a redo of the us history series every fifteen years .. not too far now
Or at least much closer than when I first had this thought a few years ago
Is it to late to nominate John Green for the 2016 election?
He'd get my vote!
***** I think that the minimum age in the US to be president is 35 (or at least that is what the internet is telling me), and John is 36.
BoulderOpal Why do they have an age limit?
Patrik Lilja Ageism
Patrik Lilja
Because our founding fathers knew that young people were idealistic idiots, with no practical experience that would make them successful at the job (I can say this because I am one as well).
the french are not cowards they just raised the tax on the rich back up to a reasonable 70%
And that tax increase is destroying their tax base. You can't suddenly increase rates by that much in today's world if you want to avoid driving everyone making over $1 million out. Since the Socialist government raised that tax, the amount of people leaving France has increased 500-600%, destroying their tax base.
then that would make them stupid cowards.
he is also just making up facts. ignore the trolls.
takebackkean I'm assuming you're referring to me. I am not making up facts. French businessmen and the wealthy elite are leaving France in droves because of the policies of the Socialists, and it is having a definite effect on the French economy and tax revenues. The rich need to pay their fair share, certainly, but when there are nations right next door that don't tax their millionaires to 75% of their income, the cost of migration is far less than the cost of paying the damned tax, aiding the exodus.
TheIrishSpectre All this is nonsense. On witch analysis do you claim this?
As a french, well aware about what's going on in my country, I can tell you that our tax base is not the problem but only that fact that most wealthiest people aren't paying enough because we don't have the same laws for the french citizen that live outside the country as you USA does. In France, you pay your taxes in the country you live in. So most of the rich guys prefer live in Switzerland, Monaco or Belgium so that they can't be legally taxed on their income made in France! And it cost around 35 billons euros a year to the french state!
I want all the kids watching to know that the carpeted bathroom was a real thing and remains a terrible idea.
That is just inconceivable to me. I still cant believe they existed.
My parents house still has TWO carpeted bathrooms
Weird thing is my grandma was such a neat freak, her carpeted bathrooms actually worked! But she was a rare breed.
mustang6172 I used to live in a single-wide trailor built in the 90's, and the bathroom in it had one of those...... and whats worse is the entire room....toilet, bath-tub, walls, and for a while... the floor, was PAAAAYNK..... I dont mean pink, I mean PAAYNK...... Its literally gave you a migraine just to look IN THE ROOM..... God, I hated it....
AttentionJunkie mine too! it's just very inconvenient.
I just checked my remote learning APUSH notes my teacher provided on presidential domestic/foreign policies, and this video hit basically every major point and historical event that was in my notes. Great video!
"Greed is Good" is a misquote, John. He actually said "The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good".
Diana Peña the more quotes are misquoted the further it can get from it's core truth. This misquote the same fact is conveyed however if someone, somehow, manages to misquote that then we may change the meaning entirely.
The only reason why I remember what "voodoo economics" is is because of Ferris Bueller's Day Off
”This wasn’t bias whatsoever”...
I love Reagan even more now! Thanks John!
This is the part of US history that I really hate. The part that I have lived through and lead to all the problems I see around me today. I look at that generation that was in charge of the US back then and wonder why they didn't do more to fix our country and our world to give all of us a better life than what we've had. It's frustrating, and I can only hope that when my generation is finally in a position to reshape our world that we do so favorable for generations to come, not just to suit ourselves.
Maybe you should hold the next administration more accountable so ; "We won't be fooled again"
or
just stay the course and continue to throw red and blue kool aide finger points at others.
Same as it always has been seems the rich get richer
Yes,? Yes they can ?
CARPETED BATHROOMS. I THOUGHT I WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO HAD ONE GROWING UP.
SECTION 8. Clause 1. The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
When ever you say the founding fathers wouldn’t recognize our country because of welfare programs like social security etc. I just think of this part of our constitution.
Reagan was one of the best and the most funniest president. He always has the jokes.
heck yes night before AP exam
Anika Jackson I felt that in my soul, I have an exam tmrw morning
This wild assumptions about conservatives bother the heck out of me.
9:27 The "Christian right" is not equivalent to "Conservatives". The Christian right is only a subset of the Conservative set.
9:31 No common Conservative is proposing to have women leave the workforce. Conservatives respect each woman's decision: you want to join the workforce? Fine. You want to be a stay-home mom? Fine. Supporting stay-home moms is not equivalent to being against women joining the workforce. The two positions are not mutually exclusive. When will people understand that?
9:35 No common Conservative is against appointing women to the supreme court. Since when is that a thing attached to Conservationism?
+Marcos Beni You seem to be confusing contemporary conservatism with the conservatism of 30 years ago
+Andrew Kaster No he isn't. The crap that this liberal site says about conservatives is BS.
+Marcos Beni I literally got the same result as you on that test.
I bet you noticed how incredibly bias that test is as well. The creators think that people like Marco Rubio and Cruz and all those republican candidates are like 9.0,9.0 on that graph. They think Obama is like a 6.0,6.0. Makes no sense to me since I'm in the lower right and I consider myself an American conservative.
Alex A. Yeah, I'm not entirely sure either how they come up with those assessments for certain politicians.
+Benedict Feser sure the black lives matter may have destroyed property (which i do not agree with, it puts a negative light on the whole movement), but you cant forget the KKK has also stabbed anti protestors and then later got released form jail with no charges. I dont see any ways that we give "special treatment" to African Americans other than affirmative action. and thats not because theyre inferior. Its because heavy oppression and segregation ended 50 to 60 years ago and it takes time for those communities to get on their feet. You really think that as soon as that stuff ended that everything would just fall into place? It goes a lot deeper than that. Systematic racism is very real and a lot of people dont notice it. There are a lot of people alive today that lived through segregation and saw it end which means that there are still a lot of people with racist and/or prejudice mentalities, whether that person is aware or not.
John, I sooo appreciated your headdesk! Yes, the US is great at fixing things that work...*sigh*...
I am a conservative since Reagan, but I enjoyed your look at the era. Anyone who thinks critically, should be looking at opposing views more than just immersing themselves in views that bolster their own opinion. Thank you for this video. It was greatly informative and inspirational.
"It's about us collectively deciding what we mean when we talk about freedom and equality."
Explain how we collectively decide something and what happens when someone disagrees.
10:19 - Where he's calling the Soviet Union "the Evil Empire".... Notice the Rage Against the Machine album at the bottom of the shelf... Also named "Evil Empire"..
T H A T S T H E J O K E I D O T
A spot on Gorbachev's head :)
This guy has one of the most perfected historical humor on youtube
Good show. 43 years old & I love crash course in history!!!!!
I especially like how Reagan ramped up the drug war, by militarizing our police forces and creating mandatory minimum sentences. Policies that continue to this day. Thanks Ronnie!
🤯😡
All while the CIA was paying a drug lord in Panama to kill communists. But eventually, like Saddam he fell out of favor with the Republicans.
Earth - Mostly Harmless.
John Green - Almost interesting.
***** It's a Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reference, I was reminded of that particular bit when John Green said 'I'm glad to be almost interesting me from the past. Someday maybe you'll be almost interesting'. And than imagined how that would look like if you had to condense any noteworthy thing in the galaxy into one or two words.
The founding fathers already laid out the government's goal, it's not a vague mystery what they meant.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
Reagan was one of America's greatest Presidents, a true patriot.
A true patriot, he negotiated with the Iranians hostage takers to keep the hostages until he was inaugurated! The man was traitor.
Trickle down economics: "the rich pissing on the poor"
Trickle down economics is a fallacy in it self
11:22 I see that Fallout reference
+Paladin Gunny he did one in the episode before where he shows vault boy. think that's Caesar at 10:15. also i didn't catch it. i saw mad max though
I can't tell what the guy on the left is. I know the right is probably a raider.
+Anartik Guy on the left is wearing the iconic power armor from the covers of Fallout 1, 3 and possibly either BoS or Tactics.
TheRealPentigan Ahh, I kinda see it now. Thank you.
I love that their symbol in the document for relief was a toilet :P
I finally understand American History, and I am more fearful of the future because of it
Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
Alright.. The French
hahahha the french
As a French minority politician I agree with that joke.
Come on we deal with some of our problems *look at the actual situation in France* Bon nevermind I'm moving to Canada anyway
Perhaps we'll all move to Canada next week X')))
I just wish Voldepen would go home and not invade France's presidency.....
It’s 11 right now and I still haven’t finished studying for APUSH which is tomorrow
GINI coefficient (measure of inequality) doesn't seem to change with respect to left or right political power.
Video about Keynes- “keynes is literally the father of all economics, he is one of the greatest men of all time”
Video about Reagan- “he appealed to racist whites, he hated poor people, he did trickle down economics,”
This is indeed accurate.
He didn't even cover the Guatemalan genocide. I think he was rather kind to reagan; what reagan supported in Latin America was evil.
We have a broken printer in my school's library that I've named "Trickle-Down Economics".
Because it doesn't work.
That's because you are a government employee who wants to be taken care of.
It didn't work because it was funded by the government
Very good argument, I am impressed, do you teach gender equality as well ?
10:25 Aight, Imma let the jab at the French pass just for this once because of the RATM reference, but I'm keeping an eye on you guys
I've noticed that as we get into later time periods more and more of your opinion comes through, not a complaint, or even a criticism just an interesting observation.
Finally find an informational video that is critical of Reagan & everyone is salty, talking about bias and fake news... We all have our own beliefs on what constitutes a good political leader, but no politician will ever be perfect for everyone - chill out, nobody is safe from criticism.