@@jojomathew8176 Yes I think this could be leading factor. I'm a big history buff and I'm surprised how many times people call the Germans fascists when I talk to them.
@@BigMeechEJ25 There's another reason: when the Soviet-German war broke out, the Soviets had a difficult time explaining to the locals how Socialists fight Socialists, and thus the construct "German Fascism" was born. Naturally, the Soviets' Western "buddies" adopted this terminology, for it's simple, does not demand thinking, and does not insult the Commie "friends". :)
I've learned that "Man of the Year" has no rating in itself; At least not in an only glorifying, positive way. It's just a person that has done something very considerable/history-changing - let it be for the worse or better - and thus became "Man of the Year". Anyway, love your works. Interesting video & very informative, as always!
I've always heard this too, and the example that people always give along with it is "you know, Hitler was 'Man of the Year'". So I wondered if there were other examples of a negative awardee, and looked it up on wiki. And wow, I actually lost respect for the award. There's not very many really bad guys on there, and a few that are debatable. But there are a lot more entries that are kind of just dumb. For example, they just cop out a lot: one year it was just "the American Scientists", in 1982 it was "The Computer". I think the dumbest one though, was Wallis Simpson. She didn't do anything or have any political position, she was just in the news a lot that year. It would be like giving it to Kim Kardashian.
I think that's how it's sold, but I would point out that Churchill won in 1940, and Roosevelt won in 1941. If the reward is about the most influential person, why on earth did Hitler not win in either 1940 or 1941?
@@TheImperatorKnight And there have been in fact repeats, even close repeats. BUT... let's just say by 1940-41 Time Inc. could know how that would be received. They're in the business of selling magazines. It's one thing to point to the "achievements" of "controversial" figures who are tearing down the old order, it's another when they are the ones bombing your cultural/economic partner (Britain). Last time they chose an overt antagonist of the US was 1979's Khomeini and they've never done that again.
There are those that interpret Time’s narrative on Hitler as being a bit hostile. I think they like to pick “good guys” but will veer toward significance and impact. Vladimir Putin should get a second mention for the impact of his invasion of Ukraine, but I am not holding my breath. (He was Person of the Year in 2007.)
@@TheImperatorKnightOh no, get a grip Tikky, your middle English twang adds itself to any immitation and I can tell you are dying to let rip so please crack on Sir. 😉☘️
@@TheImperatorKnightI saw you don't have Albert Speer's "Inside the Third Reich" among your source books. If you read it, I guarantee that it will add a great deal to your perspective, and material for future videos. It seems that Hitler was more interested in his architectural dreams than anything else. Based on what I have red or saw or heard before it, I would have never thought the Germania Project had this much importance. Another new thing to me was Hitler's sickness. In the late thirties he thought he would only have years to live. This accelerated the execution of his plans. Thanks for the uncompromising quality.
@@TheImperatorKnight I recall reading in the late 1970s and early 1980s a lot of newspaper material from the 1930s, and it was obvious to me (~14-16 years old) that the Nazis were socialists more than anything else, yet the school system insisted that the "socialist" in the Nazi name was a "mistake" or a "symbol to garner support, but didn't stand for it" or something silly like that. And my older brother just made one quick comment to put it all in perspective "Winners write the history books". GREAT VIDEO...again.
.. Do you know Jesus Christ can set you free from sins and save you from hell today Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell Come to Jesus Christ today Jesus Christ is only way to heaven Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today Romans 6.23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Jesus
"Man of the Year" used to be given to the person who made the most news that year, or were the most notable. In the last 40 years or so it has evolved into a more honorific title. If you read the article with this knowledge it sounds more critical of Hitler than the spin you gave it. The "magnificent" autobahn and social programs looked magnificent at the time. I'd call China's high speed trains magnificent, even though I know the government is a dictatorship with lots of blood on its hands. I remain a loyal viewer, and believe that you are doing important work.
Because many people were leaning towards communism, socialism, etc... at that time even more people believed in communism. Nowadays we know this is wrong, so in that case xi jinping will never be man of the year
as he’s reading it I can’t help but give the text a massive sarcastic undertone. it’s like “hey you all silly little freedom loving democrats, look at was this massive fuckhead is doing and you all are just staring blankly”
And people of the time were singing the praises of Fascism as well. FDR praised the system as a wonder of urban planning and said "I have no trouble telling you in confidence that I am keeping up with that fine Italian gentleman." of Benito Mussolini. Irving Berlin praised Mussolini in song. Hell, W.E.B. DuBois all but stated that the rise of the Nazis was a good thing, arguing that that was necessary for Germany to get its affairs in order.
If Lord of the Rings and Middle Earth had TIME magazine, I'm certain Saruman would've been on the front cover too. Just before the Ring was discovered.
For a long time I thought that "Man of The Year" was kinda neutral thing, like highlighting somebody who was important for that year, in a good or a bad way.
It kind of is. It doesn't really have a very fixed criteria it seems. Sometimes it's not even a person at all. Groups of people such as "American Women" or even a concept such as "The Spirit of Ukraine" have got it before.
"Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened." Dwight D. Eisenhower (attributed)
Yeah they started their lies and justification for the war of aggression on Germany before Germany was even defeated. The Propagandists got to work with the lies as soon as the war started.
@@thhseeking it was already to late by 1943 MIC was fully blown and in control WW2 was allowed to happen to make the MIC come into being U see rich ppl get a lot richer form war then they do from peace. They needed another real big war to finish what WW1 had started Rich ppl have been in control form day one (when the first village of farmers with a strong man in charge) So face it kid buy ur land in Antarctica now while it is still cheap and decide who u will take with u for food
@@thhseeking You must know that most of the IMC (and academic don't forget) influence was a reaction to Kennedy using the "Missile Gap" in the 1960 election as a campaign issue. Eisenhower knew there was no 'gap' but was not willing to use his classified knowledge as a political tool, putting himself into the Nixon/Kennedy election. It seems that Johnson was the real shill for the IMC anyway. Look up the way Johnson and his cronies worked AirForce contracts for Convair/General Dynamics (Texas Company) involving the F-111. Most of that was while he was VP.
TIK, I know you struggle with people fighting against the evidence you put out there, but I have to give you a pat on the back for how well your scripts are written. Your wording and explanations are very clear and precise and easy to understand. That may be part of the pushback you get as your information is so clear on its face that Dorian Grey dies when he looks at his painting. Keep up the videos and don't be disheartened. You are making a huge difference.
What Tik is talking about highlights the mistake of not only judging events of the past by current knowledge but talking about events of the past without the context. That does not mean excusing or apologizing for what followed. It means talking about the event according wot what the people of day knew and thought, to the extent that can be done of course. One of your best Tik. Shared on both Facebook and X.
this why we need to talk the history of where we are to this day not just isolated parts of it. How we got to where we are is the important thing not so much what happened to get us here. No event happens in total isolation. Each effects the next and the others at that time and into the future from that time. There are so many things that gave us uncles Frank, Wennie, Adolph, Joe, Benito, Franko and so on. To really understand why we got these ppl we must look at the history of the Ww not just parts of it and more then just the last 3 centuries (18th,19th, 1st half of 20th),
Time listed Rachel Leivine, Lia Thomas, and Michaela Jae "MJ" Rodriguez in their top 100 women of the world in 2021. It doesn't look like much as changed at Time Magazine in nearly 100 years.
note not a single woman activist from the early part of the 20th century and there were a lot of them The womens suffrage movement was and still is going on. It was and is a lot more then just giving women the right to vote. If u dont know what i mean i think u need to get urself a little more education
Well with man of the year it’s for better or for worse the people who have had profound impacts on the world, it’s weird the video doesn’t mention that. Times isn’t saying he’s the greatest man to breathe that year
Could you make a video about the "fascism is capitalism in decay" myth, you should talk about national socialism in said video since lefties consider them to be synonymous.
@@Joebob1119 Ya know I could be wrong but I have been folllwing TIK for quite some time and I could have sworn he's done several videos dedicated to the subject
"Socialism in decay" is probably a more correct statement. Trying to subordinate business into the socialist state, rather than immediately dismantling it into utopian communism, is what happens when the socialist ideologue realizes that the worker doesn't know how to manage the factory and a herd of workers is probably worse than the one at it (as well as being remarkably reactionary and needing to be 'educated' into socialism). These more intelligent socialists who realized that fact then rely on massively invasive price controls, rationing schemes, subsidies, replacing uncooperative industrialists with their wiser lieutenants, adding commisariat overseers to the hierarchy, and more to make the capitalist class's interest the exact same as the socialist state's interests.
Going forward, this video should be required viewing for every modern history class in all institutions everywhere. That brilliant conclusion encapsulates so perfectly the things many of us learned about collectivism years ago and have been screaming into deaf ears ever since. Thank you, TIK.
Hi! I live in Russia and I'm leaning english. I like history. Your channelis one of the best channels about History on UA-cam. I wish you to gain a hundred million subscribers!
So I always got confused even as I tried putting myself into the shoes of an American of that era seeing that. This give me so many more answers and I really am impressed by how you use one part of the past, to give nuance and answers to other questions, especially how the narrative changed. You're right. We need to look back as if we were there as much as possible, not our current standards. This gives me a surprising insight, the subversion of the west started much earlier than we expected, as you described. I honestly has no idea that the fist decades of the Cold War, the Holocaust was unknown. Though I should not be surprised as much as I am that the Marxists are the ones behind the narrative as the west accepted it. This falls in line with the time Herbert Marcuse and the other academic Marxists had taken over education, Paulo Freire being the one who changed education for the worse. I look forward to your videos on eugenics, not because I support the idea, but because you're the right guy to present that kind of topic. Tanks are fun to learn about, and I love tanks, war strategy, but sticking to them has allowed some truths to get buried. This is why I say don't "stick to tanks!"
Good insight, but just to clarify, the Holocaust was known because Eisenhower made it known. However, due to circumstances, it wasn't really a popular subject to talk about. The interest in the Holocaust only really came about in the 1970s, but it was known about.
@@TheImperatorKnight It's understandable, being a dark period of history, so i'm glad Eisenhower made it known as he did. I kind of grew up with the marxist narrative for much of younger years, I did have a good history teacher who did teach me to question things, so there were some questions I had about it since he taught me Nazis were Socialists at least, I just thought the Holocaust was more talked about for much longer before this video. I hope one day, Japan's Unit 731 also gets more attention, since so few know about that too.
@@TheImperatorKnight see comments 'above' but then there is that 'Big X connection'... And yes Eisenhower was right, as have 'Shchindler's List' and 'Band of Brothers' and the English and german dramatisations of the Wannesee Conference.
@@GarteBera His remark where he says "the Jesus?" TIK is being slightly sarcastic, meaning everyone knows of Jesus from Christianity. He's talking of how the narrative changed from Nazis were Socialists, to Nazis are Capitalist or Fascists.
@@GarteBera "The War" in a German or French accent, referring to propaganda that had to be manufactured during WWII when the Western Powers had to ally with the Soviets
It was "international" in the sense that it extended beyond the boundaries of what comprised the state of Germany post Versailles but it was very different from Lenin's international focus.
In the UK it was 27 March 1974 that we became aware of the horrors of the Holocaust (well pre-internet). That was the date "The World At War" episode "Genocide" was broadcast.
Fantastic and informative video as always. The keys to understanding our current situations and what could portend for our future are in understanding our history
Have you ever seen the documentary "The Soviet Story"? It contains many of the parallels between NS and Bolshevism/Communism. This video here reminded me of that documentary. Many Thanks for your work! I really enjoy your videos on this topic.
This is why I love media of that time period, it gives us a glimpse of what and how people thought back then, as it was actually happening. Gives us some perspective we otherwise wouldn't have.
@@spiderknight9893 Hey, when the propaganda machine basically out does your publishing output, covering someone else is preferable. (Unless they already did that and just picked another Axis leader, in which case just roll the dice again.)
Fascinating analysis. I had to watch twice in an effort to digest the many points you bring up. This word 'fascism' has always bewildered me as to its true meaning. The present generation doesn't seem to have that problem. For them it's been boiled down to someone, or some group, they fundamentally don't agree with.
The funny thing is they think the right is fascist, yet the left supports censorship and no free speech, forced vaccines, they prosecute their political opponents and nearly every institution in society shares their viewpoint. If you don't have a high ESG score, you will lose money and investors. All of this shares a similarity with the fascist nazis and how tyrannical they were.
Fascism is a very simple concept. Government authoritarianism for the benefit of the people and nation. The government must unilaterally have absolute power to do anything, for your own good. Theoretically, it could work. Also theoretically, nobody would allow the people who would make it work to be in charge. Also in theory, if those right people were in charge, they would establish some sort of democracy, a la the US founders.
@@bobjohnson1633the issue with true democracy is that the masses are the deciders, and the masses are also, en masse, fools. America, on the other hand, has issues too. To have anyone vote based age alone is an issue, not allowing territories’ votes to be valid while under American rule is a problem, immigrants have to learn more to enter this country than Americans do to vote. I don’t see why any immigrant coming into the country would need to know all this information unless they’re planning on voting and being involved in politics (I’m not saying they shouldn’t learn, mind you). Having Public schools isn’t enough to assume the masses know what they’re doing. For some reason we were taught in second grade about the branches of government just so we can forget them, meanwhile the school will have us go over the same math and history for for the most part for six years
The part when TIME refers to NatSoc’s and Commie’s as religions was undeniable that what TIK has been saying this whole time is correct, these are religious cults not political ideologies, even journo’s in the 1930’s understood this, thanks for highlighting that point TIK 👍
Thanks again, TIK! Let me add that I believe Franco was not a Fascist, but a Nationalcatholic who managed to assemble under his cape (after General Molas's death in accident at the start of the uprising) different and dispersed political movements of very different ideology: Monarchists (for the Borbons), Carlists (a different Borbon sect), Falange Española (nacionalsindicalists), JONS (fascists, Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista) among others...
I see the argument that Italy was fascist but Spain and Germany did think they were fascist despite the reactionary v revolutionary contradiction. Probably grifters making it up as they went along, so as to suit their own needs.
I can confirm, as I have said several times Franco took away the little power the fascists had after some time passed and started to do his own doing, tha fascists hate him for it
Hi TIK! Maybe you could make a video about the similarities between NS Germany and GDR. That would certainly weaken the irrational belief that national socialism has nothing to do with socialism.
"I don't mind telling you in confidence that I'm keeping in fairly close touch that admirable Italian gentleman. [Fascism] is the cleanest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious" - Franklin Delano Roosevelt on Benito Mussolini and Fascism
Hi TIK, great video man, i had a question though, do you think one day you could make a video on the frankfurt school and its influence on the mainstream view of fascism? I personally need to look into this more, however i heard (and read briefly) it was one of the main driving forces which influenced the conflation of national socialism and Fascism together. How true is this? Anways, cheers man, keep up the good work!
Saying nazi Germany was not fascist because it had problems with Mussolinis Italy is like saying communist china wasn't communist because it had problems with the USSR after the sino-soviet split. The argument falls apart if you think about it for 10 seconds.
Except it doesn't, the USSR and PRC had a dispute over Marxist-Leninist theory. German Nazism and Italian Fascism were not the same, and had major divergence. They were both socialists, however the Fascists were nationalists primarily, where as the Germans were racist(in the literal sense, Nazi ideology was based upon race, not nationalism)
@@hex2637 socialism has nothing to do with class, it predates class. Socialism is an economic system where the means of producing and distributing goods are controlled by a centralized government (the public)
@@firesb7791 the means of production are owned by "the community as a whole" - or in praxis a government that is controlled by the public/community as a whole - the notion that only a certain race or nationality is entitled to the means of production and controls the government goes against the notion of the public controlling the means of production, the core notion of socialism
Tik, an outstanding video, again. It makes me want to reach out to my old history teacher for A -level and show them these exciting revelations about communism and nazism. It's taken me years of watching Tik to come around to his holistic political understanding of the 20th century, especially nuances of fascism. The enthusiasm and diligence put into the videos is seriously breathtaking. Professionally sourced, transparently credited and altogether well thought-out arguments make these shattering conclusions more palatable. I think the summaries are so refined and conclusively cutting edge, we should be grateful that we are afforded free access to this content. To live in a time in history with such clarity in history, our conscious understanding of our past is the best we have ever had. I'm grateful that the battlestorm stalingrad series is being lovingly continued also. With consideration to the compensation return on that series being slightly less fruitful, it is all the more appreciated. All the best, John
Oh my goodness we are really in a golden age of media with creators like tik, the time ghost army, armchair historian, epic history, and a few others You are a absolute legend tik, i cant thank you enough, i gotta just get some money put aside for a patron membership
Actually going through the list to me it seems like the title has always been more or less about who ''stirs some shit up'', with global consequences of course. And then followed by people who mopped up the shit that was stirred, if it was too stinky... And if there is no single defining person, then they go for some current and relevant movement or idea. I know people complain about this, but it is good that Hitler, Stalin, Khomeini and Putin were these people because they were really important at their specific period, and each of them have Churchill, Roosevelt, Zelensky, Gandhi and Gorbachev as a counter force... And then there are pretty much all recent US presidents which sometimes makes much less sense
@@lkrnpk of those u say r "counter forces" only one was a pacifist Can any one guess whom it is? U must remember that time is a mag used by corps to control the working class with the flawed capitalistic system
@@TheImperatorKnight Possible explanation: because Hitler a) got it already and mainly b) was the enemy (yeah, not officially yet. Cash-and-carry and later lend-lease show where America's loyalty lay). 'Cancel culture' may not have been called that at the time, but there were lines you didn't cross, also back then.
The award is given to the person who "for better or for worse ... has done the most to influence the events of the year". The key is in how "influential" they have been on world affairs. It does not refer to any implication of "good" or "greatness".
Except they do praise him. And they only mention Hitler's persecution of the Jews in one sentence. You'd think they'd mention that a bit more if they were trying to be even in their reporting.
@@TheImperatorKnight "Führer of the German people, Commander-in-Chief of the German Army, Navy & Air Force, Chancellor of the Third Reich, Herr Hitler reaped on that day at Munich the harvest of an audacious, defiant, ruthless foreign policy he had pursued for five and a half years. He had torn the Treaty of Versailles to shreds. He had rearmed Germany to the teeth- or as close to the teeth as he was able. He had stolen Austria before the eyes of a horrified and apparently impotent world. All these events were shocking to nations which had defeated Germany on the battlefield only 20 years before, but nothing so terrified the world as the ruthless, methodical, Nazi-directed events which during late summer and early autumn threatened a world war over Czechoslovakia. When without loss of blood he reduced Czechoslovakia to a German puppet state, forced a drastic revision of Europe's defensive alliances, and won a free hand for himself in Eastern Europe by getting a "hands-off" promise from powerful Britain (and later France), Adolf Hitler without doubt became 1938's Man of the Year." I'm not seeing it?
@@TheImperatorKnight Reading and rereading the article, I see recognition of Hitler's "achievements" (and I use the term advisedly), but they are always qualified with full recognition, apprehension and horror at the price paid by others to attain them?
It always surprises me that people don't understand that socialism necessitates authoritarianism since if "the people" own the means of production, "the people" will have to say what is done with their means of production or it's not theirs.
Funny seeing you here. I think the creation of fake unions also is a sign. You join the union and do what you're told because the govt represents the people so you can't actually unionize. TIK has talked about this with nazi germany. The old video about whether China is communist by China Uncensored also says this happens in China (which is nowadays just fascist).
It's surprising that people can't put two and two together, but then again, a lot of people also have massive credit card debt, are informed that interest rates on their credit card are high, but will spend spend up to their credit limit anyway. Destructive cognitive dissonance over simple things is quite common. Maybe it's just that 40 hour work weeks make some people dumb and unable to focus on anything else? I dunno
@@kylereece5511Dictatorship as it was being used by Marx is that the proletariat are the ones in control. If you have class dynamics the bourgeoisie will end up in power and take it away. It is a term meant to mean the end of hierarchy in a sense. In the end this has been used in many ways and it comes down to interpretations. Socialism necessitates democracy. I believe we must overthrow the status quo with the will of the people. Issues such as climate change will never be handled properly if we rely on profits. The spending will never happen. I want America, the economic centerpiece, to lead this change globally. We are uniquely in the position to do this.
Time Magazine had often stated that the term "Man of the Year" (as well as "Woman of the Year", and "Person" of the Year") was not meant to be a honorific, but just to note what personage affected the World the most, for good or ill, which is why as pointed out Stalin would be MotY a year later and in more recent times Yuri Andropov (1983, although he shared the title with Ronald Reagan). Just who agitated the World the most.
Time magazine must have explained that many dozens of times. The guy in the video reads all these awful things and seems to think that Time is writing approvingly, but I don’t see that at all. Well, he got me to view anyway, and maybe that was the point.
I love that you actually use real hard sources, be it a posh self biography, or critical stats, thank you for bringing back the book, this youth missed out with bulls rap opinions and lunacy illusions instead. Thanks Tik, Canadian great again saying *were not worthy* 😂
The problem was with the term "Man". If they had called him "Newsmaker" of the year there would have been no argument whatsoever. Let's be honest, in 1938 the entire world was standing around waiting to see what his next move would be. If anyone controlled or dictated the "narrative " of the day it was him.
It's inaccurate to describe the Dollfuss government as "fascist." Despite having close ties to Fascist Italy, Austria under "Austrofascism" (a highly inaccurate term) resembled Salazar's Portugal a lot more than Mussolini's Italy. It was an authoritarian government largely focused on Catholicism, with an intact free market system (Austrian school economists even acting as advisors to Dollfuss). Please look into the Austrian Vaterland Front more! Im sure you will find it an interesting topic in and of itself.
I'd say it was ambiguous. The writer (or writers) of the article wanted to sound neutral so as to appear objective. It seems outrageous in hindsight when one is trying to adopt the center an extreme and moderate position; especially when contemporary to the period.
I think back then there was more of an understanding that "man of the year" meant arguably the most influential or notable individual of the year. I really liked the perspective analysis you gave on the rest of it article. I hadn't read it before. Going over the information in that book was the best part!
I wasn't around in 1938. Over the years since the 1970s the editors have frequently made clear that Man and now Person of the year is an individual that had the most impact or consequence, not necessarily one to be admired. The PC was named one year. It could be how one views the overall context. Given the context of the time the article is fairly balanced, it does foreshadow the tradagdy to come. That said your presentation of alternative views demonstrates how complex the debate was in that year, no surprise that these issues are still difficult to gain concensus on today.
That's why Churchill was Made Man of the Year in 1940, despite Hitler affecting the world much more than him, and why Roosevelt was made Man of the Year in 1941, despite Hitler being at the peak of his power...
@@TheImperatorKnight could be because he already got it in 1938 and the magazine doesnt need to have a rigorous criteria or because they would not risk being censored or having a very negative backlash for now Hitler was a declared enemy of the allied powers with a major war going on. Maybe Time and the public were just okay with jew and czech oppression but not with western european nations being oppressed afterwards.
I think another interesting view on this is would Time have labeled someone they hate as "Man of the year"? would or do they want to risk publicizing someone to the entire world? If they made articles on people they don't agree with or hate what kind of article is that going to be? It seems like that could get into the comedy/mockery field.@@mengo0456
I really want an in depth video on fascist economics. Especially on the difference between falangism, italian, legionarist, and rexist. Pretty please.🥺🥺
What an incredible episode, thank You for that kind Sir! Although i put foward an idea to stop using the name of Austrian painter in titles, so YT algorithm won't bury the video. I suggest codename aquarellist.
Isn't the Time magazine man of the year award supposed to go to whoever made the biggest and most news of the year whether it be for good or bad? So Hitler winning time magazine man of the year isn't saying he was the best man of the year but rather the worst... I could be wrong but that's how I always took it.
That's largely a rationalization they started using years later when called out on their choice. Time had many people who laminated the fact that Roosevelt was kept in check by Congress and the Supreme Court. They wanted a "Nice" Hitler in charge of America.
I'm currently listening to the book, "The Wages of destruction" by Adam Tooze. I'm not far into it but something that's come up is the U.S. Trying to get the Allies to ease up reparations to protect American investments in Germany and everyone trying to change their monetary system's. I feel there's a video topic in there somewhere. Heck many in America don't even realize it took a coalition for the Nazis to get the ball rolling. It wasn't merely an election and the Reichstag is on fire.
Great video as always, TIK! I don't believe you have touched on Pope Pius XII before in any significant detail (apologies if I am wrong). Seen as his name was mentioned - I thought I would mention that I think you would find this topic very interesting as it relates to your research. This is because Pope Pius XII is constantly labelled a Nazi sympathizer nowadays. This is despite Nazism and Christianity being at odds with each other (which you detail excellently in your videos). Ronald Rychlak's book, 'Hitler, the War and the Pope' is great. The author attributes the Nazi Sympathizing Pope theory to a KGB plot to smear Pius XII's name and establish a link between Nazism and Christianity/Catholicism. If true, It is another example of how Communist/Soviet supporters have confused our understanding of what Nazism as an ideology is.
It's a timeless struggle between different peoples/cultures. Russia was already seen as barbaric and foreign in the Middle Ages, that's why the Teutonic Order attacked Novgorod.
Will you in future make a video about George Orwell's "Democratic socialism" (Ryan Chapman made a good video about it), debating if socialism can be democratic? Also maybe a video about anarcho-comunism, because i think that you have gone over it to quick and not gave it to much insight. Would be very interesting.
Very good. Very good indeed. I'll say you TIK deserve a professor degree on these topics you do. They are so good and clear. But, but so far I understood you are against such prestigious degree. Anyway, well done. We are looking forward to the 'Eugenics' video. Thank you.
I found Mises' 'Liberalism' (1927) enlightening as it gives a view into the attitudes in Europe in the early 20s. When I considered it, I was always bothered that "history" seemed to start in the 1930s, with prior eras a bit thin in the common teachings. Reading works published on the other side of the 1930s has been interesting.
@@Samuelwastaken Fascism is very modernist. Many important actors were atheists, fascism was heavily influenced by futurism, which wanted to destroy everything old and build industry and machines instead.
@@Samuelwastaken National Socialism is Reactionary Modernism, a symbiosis of revolution and tradition. Hitler hated modernist architecture and modern art, urban "asphalt literature" was destroyed in book burning. The Nazis thought cities were rootless and decadent, that mankind needed to return to Nature, they were Environmentalists.
It doesn't seem like it's good for society to feature evil people on the cover of a magazine. It's like how the news overreporting on school shootings inspires other school shooters so that they can get a lot of attention
I seriously recommend the recent stream on CIA involvement in culture during the cold war by Academic Agent (here on youtube) to understand how the narrative shifted, it was deliberate policy and some important figures were involved. Also it reveals a faction so far hidden to your analysis, the American backed leftists, it wasn't just the Soviets who deployed such people. If you are going to continue research into ideology this is important information to factor in.
Great narration. Excellent idea for a video. Very interesting topic and analysis. Don't be too taken by Time's decision-making. Mostly, they were looking for a new person to put on the cover and shoved Hitler into the space. Also the notion of true revolutionists who represented working people and beaten down peasants was a generally appealing idea.
If i may. Please. Dont pressure yourself or feel pressured to increase your timetables of distribution because the feeling like we want ,it unless its your way of course. You explain topics in a way that many think we know and open up those topics in or with a whole new spin and insight. And more over then and to it . Thanks ever much for what you do '
Hi Tik. I would recommend getting hold of these books on National Socialism. Nazi Germany explained, Vernon Bartlet, 1933. The Meaning of Hitlerism, Wickham Steed, 1934. The house Hitler built Stephen Robberts, 1937. Interesting, pre war books on Germany under Hitler.
Excellent video once again. Your work on socialism and economics are your most significant contributions to the world. Please never stop making them, we have an epidemic of young people brainwashed by cultural Marxists & academia.
Cultural Marxist. Nazi term that although they were more precise and called it Cultural Bolshevism. Tik has done some great work but his definition of socialism makes no sense. And his economic theories are disproved daily. He once said the nazis would not have killed the Jews if they hadn't interfered with the market economy. That is mental.
Another aspect of the late 1930's was almost no one had read Mein Kampf and so very few people knew what Hitler had planned for the future. At the time he came across as just another strongman like Mussolini, Stalin and Franco among others.
Great video, thank you TIK. At the end I kinda felt like you were talking about the era we live in today though.. Maybe I am the only one 😀Hopefully we can avoid the fate that followed in the 40s.
Both Churchill and Eisenhower DID in fact discuss the Holocaust in their books and writings. However, it is not mentioned under that name, as it wasn't often spoken of under that name until the 1970s.
9:43 This interests me greatly. The "confusion" between nsoc and fas dates back to before the war. I'd like to know how they're connected. Perhaps they share ties that make it reasonable to say that nsoc is a form of fas?
both do state control not worker control Now the commies say the gov will wither away while the fas just keep control Read the Book "WE" Animal Farm and Brave New World said a lot but "WE' is the end game of both commieisim and Fas
7:35 -- RE: How to Win Frens and Dictate to People; Well Done again on another great video and a superb topic. I've often wondered why it was that *after* WW2 the "Leader Principle" had never formally surrendered and, if anything, had become ubiquitous by *our* period in history. Sideways -- I noted on another video in the last 2 months, a video not by you I hasten to add, that "leadership" is not the quality best assigned to Robert Oppenheimer; rather, that intelligence is a shared trait is the pearl to find in the proverbial oyster.
Interesting topic. I was unaware of the fact that the Holocaust wasn't taught or talked about in the 50''s or 60's. Makes sense, I suppose. Hope you are doing well
it was taught and talked about just not by the ruling class My 5th grade teacher brought it up for over a week in the history part of her class She also did civil right movement. This was 1959. She was first black person i ever knew. Knew lot of Native Americans but no black ppl until then. She was just 30 and had been teaching for only 8 yr. She had a very distinguish carrier ending as Super for a district of over 5000 students. I never heard her raise her voice. A cousin who taught math under her at school she was super at said he never heard her speak louder then needed to be heard. By the way she taught him in 5th grade to. In fact my family mostly living in district she taught 5th grade in for 15 yr did so for most of us on both sides. The best teacher i ever had
The Jews who survived it were humiliated by what had been done to them and didn't want to relive it. This was before it became a widespread badge of honor to have suffered some kind of oppression. Their children convinced them that it was important to tell their story so that the historical lesson would not be lost, especially in light of the repeated Arab attempts to "drive the Jews into the sea." If you talk to young Israelis even today, they will tell you that even 2 generations afterward, they carry some of the psychological burden of the Holocaust through the effect on the parents and grandparents who raised them.
@@klavassassini b/c it is the largest genocidal action to ever happen and the way it happened It is not the first time Europeans tried to kill of the Jew, Gypsy and other so called undesirables such as the Wise Women of the Middle ages killed as witches. Yet none of these are taught. Not much of anything negative to Western Europa is taught in USA schools unless u take a lot of history class in College; This is why the internet is so important to keep un censored yet we allow here to censor what we can see. Most of history this site says is to violent to be allowed on here. They claim it is to protect kids. I say BS. It is to keep ppl form putting on here the dirty side of history. Violence is part of life kids need to see it and so realize that it gets u no where. If more kids saw that when one does violence all it does is make for more violence maybe then we would have a lot less of it. But wait the ruling class lives off violence. Without it they cant rule...
I don't often watch TIK videos because I'm not super interested in the Battle of Stalingrad. This video, however, is superb. Excellent work. I wish more people were aware of the facts presented here.
Vegetarian, Dog lover, Man of the year and Nobel peace prize nominee.
Right wing gamer nice
@@Ismael_Malikshahi Like most people i'm not right or left. mix of both.
Oh wow, You're here too!
@@Ismael_Malikshahihe was clearly a leftie, he only has his left eggie down there.
@@AFGuidesHD that was joke man by the way love your videos keep up the good work 👍
Glad you finally brought up the hostility between the Austrian Fascist and Nazi Parties.
It's curious why this dynamic is all-but-forgotten.
@@TheImperatorKnightmaybe because it fits the narrative that National Socialism and Fascism are the same ideology
@@jojomathew8176 Yes I think this could be leading factor. I'm a big history buff and I'm surprised how many times people call the Germans fascists when I talk to them.
@@TheImperatorKnight pple left these details out to shorten the story telling.
@@BigMeechEJ25 There's another reason: when the Soviet-German war broke out, the Soviets had a difficult time explaining to the locals how Socialists fight Socialists, and thus the construct "German Fascism" was born. Naturally, the Soviets' Western "buddies" adopted this terminology, for it's simple, does not demand thinking, and does not insult the Commie "friends". :)
Time also made Stalin Man of the Year in 1939
2022 - Зеленский дух Украины!
With that logic, they should make Wladimir Purin the man of the year now
Zelensky@@justuseodysee7348
@@СергейНиколаев-б8ж
That guy is a joke
@@12yearssober"Joker"
who has stayed in power for nearly 24 years and survived multiple colour revolutions.
Who must go ?
I've learned that "Man of the Year" has no rating in itself; At least not in an only glorifying, positive way. It's just a person that has done something very considerable/history-changing - let it be for the worse or better - and thus became "Man of the Year". Anyway, love your works. Interesting video & very informative, as always!
I've always heard this too, and the example that people always give along with it is "you know, Hitler was 'Man of the Year'". So I wondered if there were other examples of a negative awardee, and looked it up on wiki. And wow, I actually lost respect for the award. There's not very many really bad guys on there, and a few that are debatable. But there are a lot more entries that are kind of just dumb. For example, they just cop out a lot: one year it was just "the American Scientists", in 1982 it was "The Computer". I think the dumbest one though, was Wallis Simpson. She didn't do anything or have any political position, she was just in the news a lot that year. It would be like giving it to Kim Kardashian.
Indeed. That is why people get confused when someone like Hitler shows up on it. For better or worse anyone can end up on the cover.
I think that's how it's sold, but I would point out that Churchill won in 1940, and Roosevelt won in 1941. If the reward is about the most influential person, why on earth did Hitler not win in either 1940 or 1941?
@@TheImperatorKnight And there have been in fact repeats, even close repeats. BUT... let's just say by 1940-41 Time Inc. could know how that would be received. They're in the business of selling magazines. It's one thing to point to the "achievements" of "controversial" figures who are tearing down the old order, it's another when they are the ones bombing your cultural/economic partner (Britain). Last time they chose an overt antagonist of the US was 1979's Khomeini and they've never done that again.
There are those that interpret Time’s narrative on Hitler as being a bit hostile. I think they like to pick “good guys” but will veer toward significance and impact. Vladimir Putin should get a second mention for the impact of his invasion of Ukraine, but I am not holding my breath. (He was Person of the Year in 2007.)
I like how TIK mimics the 1930's radio announcer style voice. Once again TIK delivers a informative and descriptive video.
I'll be honest, I was worried people wouldn't like the impression
@@TheImperatorKnightOh no, get a grip Tikky, your middle English twang adds itself to any immitation and I can tell you are dying to let rip so please crack on Sir. 😉☘️
@@TheImperatorKnightIt was kinda a Hitler Lite accent...
@@TheImperatorKnightI saw you don't have Albert Speer's "Inside the Third Reich" among your source books. If you read it, I guarantee that it will add a great deal to your perspective, and material for future videos. It seems that Hitler was more interested in his architectural dreams than anything else. Based on what I have red or saw or heard before it, I would have never thought the Germania Project had this much importance. Another new thing to me was Hitler's sickness. In the late thirties he thought he would only have years to live. This accelerated the execution of his plans. Thanks for the uncompromising quality.
your hitler impressions are amazing and funny at times,you definetly know how to pull it off in a convincing and great way@@TheImperatorKnight
I rarely comment on a video but this one was so exceptional that I had to leave a huge “thank you” for making this.
Glad you enjoyed it!
@@TheImperatorKnight I recall reading in the late 1970s and early 1980s a lot of newspaper material from the 1930s, and it was obvious to me (~14-16 years old) that the Nazis were socialists more than anything else, yet the school system insisted that the "socialist" in the Nazi name was a "mistake" or a "symbol to garner support, but didn't stand for it" or something silly like that. And my older brother just made one quick comment to put it all in perspective "Winners write the history books". GREAT VIDEO...again.
I'm in the same boat; this was an amazing video!
@@niclash That's in line with "real communism has never been tried" of course they deny it.
..
Do you know Jesus Christ can set you free from sins and save you from hell today
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
Romans 6.23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
2023. TIME cant even define a man
Damn right!
Hahah stuff like this is why I instantly scroll down for the comments. You win sir
@@E_-_- I do same before i watch I read
Good point.
Lol
"Man of the Year" used to be given to the person who made the most news that year, or were the most notable. In the last 40 years or so it has evolved into a more honorific title. If you read the article with this knowledge it sounds more critical of Hitler than the spin you gave it. The "magnificent" autobahn and social programs looked magnificent at the time. I'd call China's high speed trains magnificent, even though I know the government is a dictatorship with lots of blood on its hands. I remain a loyal viewer, and believe that you are doing important work.
Because many people were leaning towards communism, socialism, etc... at that time even more people believed in communism. Nowadays we know this is wrong, so in that case xi jinping will never be man of the year
as he’s reading it I can’t help but give the text a massive sarcastic undertone. it’s like “hey you all silly little freedom loving democrats, look at was this massive fuckhead is doing and you all are just staring blankly”
And people of the time were singing the praises of Fascism as well. FDR praised the system as a wonder of urban planning and said "I have no trouble telling you in confidence that I am keeping up with that fine Italian gentleman." of Benito Mussolini. Irving Berlin praised Mussolini in song. Hell, W.E.B. DuBois all but stated that the rise of the Nazis was a good thing, arguing that that was necessary for Germany to get its affairs in order.
If Lord of the Rings and Middle Earth had TIME magazine, I'm certain Saruman would've been on the front cover too. Just before the Ring was discovered.
He had a dynamic economy with a lot of manufacturing.
@@asumazilla Huge population boom too. GDP was way up and he was investing in renewable hydrodynamic energy.
Yes. It's most influential not nicest.
Would they also consider Sauron? I think he had a bigger impact on Middle Earth.
@@ZER0ZER0SE7EN Sauron got his strength from Morgoth and everyone thought Sauron was dead at but his spirit endured within the ring.
For a long time I thought that "Man of The Year" was kinda neutral thing, like highlighting somebody who was important for that year, in a good or a bad way.
It kind of is. It doesn't really have a very fixed criteria it seems. Sometimes it's not even a person at all. Groups of people such as "American Women" or even a concept such as "The Spirit of Ukraine" have got it before.
It traditionally has been, but has morphed into a usually positive thing during the past few decades.
"Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened."
Dwight D. Eisenhower (attributed)
Yeah they started their lies and justification for the war of aggression on Germany before Germany was even defeated. The Propagandists got to work with the lies as soon as the war started.
Ike was the last of the great Rup After him everything changed as the MIC took over our world and still has it by the balls
@@fredbays He tried to warn against the MIC in his exit speech, but either it was too late (probably), or nobody paid attention.
@@thhseeking it was already to late by 1943 MIC was fully blown and in control
WW2 was allowed to happen to make the MIC come into being
U see rich ppl get a lot richer form war then they do from peace. They needed another real big war to finish what WW1 had started
Rich ppl have been in control form day one (when the first village of farmers with a strong man in charge)
So face it kid buy ur land in Antarctica now while it is still cheap and decide who u will take with u for food
@@thhseeking You must know that most of the IMC (and academic don't forget) influence was a reaction to Kennedy using the "Missile Gap" in the 1960 election as a campaign issue. Eisenhower knew there was no 'gap' but was not willing to use his classified knowledge as a political tool, putting himself into the Nixon/Kennedy election. It seems that Johnson was the real shill for the IMC anyway. Look up the way Johnson and his cronies worked AirForce contracts for Convair/General Dynamics (Texas Company) involving the F-111. Most of that was while he was VP.
TIK, I know you struggle with people fighting against the evidence you put out there, but I have to give you a pat on the back for how well your scripts are written. Your wording and explanations are very clear and precise and easy to understand. That may be part of the pushback you get as your information is so clear on its face that Dorian Grey dies when he looks at his painting. Keep up the videos and don't be disheartened. You are making a huge difference.
Like it on how you shed light on (mostly)forgotten history,keep it up
What Tik is talking about highlights the mistake of not only judging events of the past by current knowledge but talking about events of the past without the context. That does not mean excusing or apologizing for what followed. It means talking about the event according wot what the people of day knew and thought, to the extent that can be done of course.
One of your best Tik. Shared on both Facebook and X.
this why we need to talk the history of where we are to this day not just isolated parts of it. How we got to where we are is the important thing not so much what happened to get us here. No event happens in total isolation. Each effects the next and the others at that time and into the future from that time. There are so many things that gave us uncles Frank, Wennie, Adolph, Joe, Benito, Franko and so on. To really understand why we got these ppl we must look at the history of the Ww not just parts of it and more then just the last 3 centuries (18th,19th, 1st half of 20th),
Time listed Rachel Leivine, Lia Thomas, and Michaela Jae "MJ" Rodriguez in their top 100 women of the world in 2021. It doesn't look like much as changed at Time Magazine in nearly 100 years.
note not a single woman activist from the early part of the 20th century and there were a lot of them The womens suffrage movement was and still is going on. It was and is a lot more then just giving women the right to vote. If u dont know what i mean i think u need to get urself a little more education
Who has more balls, Hitler or Rachel Levine, Lia Thomas, or Michaela Jae "MJ" Rodriguez?
@@ZER0ZER0SE7ENaccording to "Hitler was a British Agent," Adolf only had one ball, which is less than Lia Thomas.
I've never even heard of any of these people lmao
Well with man of the year it’s for better or for worse the people who have had profound impacts on the world, it’s weird the video doesn’t mention that. Times isn’t saying he’s the greatest man to breathe that year
Could you make a video about the "fascism is capitalism in decay" myth, you should talk about national socialism in said video since lefties consider them to be synonymous.
@@Darius0109 Sure, but I'm referring to an entire video on that subject, not a 5-minute conclusion from several videos
@@Joebob1119 Ya know I could be wrong but I have been folllwing TIK for quite some time and I could have sworn he's done several videos dedicated to the subject
@@Joebob1119 Here ya go, pretty sure he covers it quite well in this... ua-cam.com/video/eCkyWBPaTC8/v-deo.htmlsi=s_fe7JAFDmgb1Vra
"Socialism in decay" is probably a more correct statement. Trying to subordinate business into the socialist state, rather than immediately dismantling it into utopian communism, is what happens when the socialist ideologue realizes that the worker doesn't know how to manage the factory and a herd of workers is probably worse than the one at it (as well as being remarkably reactionary and needing to be 'educated' into socialism). These more intelligent socialists who realized that fact then rely on massively invasive price controls, rationing schemes, subsidies, replacing uncooperative industrialists with their wiser lieutenants, adding commisariat overseers to the hierarchy, and more to make the capitalist class's interest the exact same as the socialist state's interests.
@Alex_Fahey no such thing as utopian communism.
Going forward, this video should be required viewing for every modern history class in all institutions everywhere. That brilliant conclusion encapsulates so perfectly the things many of us learned about collectivism years ago and have been screaming into deaf ears ever since. Thank you, TIK.
Hi! I live in Russia and I'm leaning english. I like history. Your channelis one of the best channels about History on UA-cam. I wish you to gain a hundred million subscribers!
you seem smart. get out while you can.
@@karl_3885 And go where? We're all fucked.
@@karl_3885 why leave your country when you can stay and improve it for future generations. Fleeing a fault country prolongs suffering.
@@queuedjar4578 you think current Orcville is worth saving? lol
Andreyev, please don't learn how to behave _or_ how to speak English from the comments section. What terrible examples these all are.
So I always got confused even as I tried putting myself into the shoes of an American of that era seeing that. This give me so many more answers and I really am impressed by how you use one part of the past, to give nuance and answers to other questions, especially how the narrative changed. You're right. We need to look back as if we were there as much as possible, not our current standards.
This gives me a surprising insight, the subversion of the west started much earlier than we expected, as you described. I honestly has no idea that the fist decades of the Cold War, the Holocaust was unknown. Though I should not be surprised as much as I am that the Marxists are the ones behind the narrative as the west accepted it. This falls in line with the time Herbert Marcuse and the other academic Marxists had taken over education, Paulo Freire being the one who changed education for the worse.
I look forward to your videos on eugenics, not because I support the idea, but because you're the right guy to present that kind of topic. Tanks are fun to learn about, and I love tanks, war strategy, but sticking to them has allowed some truths to get buried. This is why I say don't "stick to tanks!"
Good insight, but just to clarify, the Holocaust was known because Eisenhower made it known. However, due to circumstances, it wasn't really a popular subject to talk about. The interest in the Holocaust only really came about in the 1970s, but it was known about.
@@TheImperatorKnight It's understandable, being a dark period of history, so i'm glad Eisenhower made it known as he did.
I kind of grew up with the marxist narrative for much of younger years, I did have a good history teacher who did teach me to question things, so there were some questions I had about it since he taught me Nazis were Socialists at least, I just thought the Holocaust was more talked about for much longer before this video.
I hope one day, Japan's Unit 731 also gets more attention, since so few know about that too.
@@TheImperatorKnight see comments 'above' but then there is that 'Big X connection'...
And yes Eisenhower was right, as have 'Shchindler's List' and 'Band of Brothers' and the English and german dramatisations of the Wannesee Conference.
@@GarteBera His remark where he says "the Jesus?" TIK is being slightly sarcastic, meaning everyone knows of Jesus from Christianity. He's talking of how the narrative changed from Nazis were Socialists, to Nazis are Capitalist or Fascists.
@@GarteBera "The War" in a German or French accent, referring to propaganda that had to be manufactured during WWII when the Western Powers had to ally with the Soviets
It was "international" in the sense that it extended beyond the boundaries of what comprised the state of Germany post Versailles but it was very different from Lenin's international focus.
Not really it was within germany,and they wanted to exterminate everyone to replace them by germans if you don't remember
In the UK it was 27 March 1974 that we became aware of the horrors of the Holocaust (well pre-internet). That was the date "The World At War" episode "Genocide" was broadcast.
The prime minister of NewZealand at the time tried to have that episode censored fortunately he failed the war veterans opposed his attempt loudly
Fantastic and informative video as always. The keys to understanding our current situations and what could portend for our future are in understanding our history
Have you ever seen the documentary "The Soviet Story"? It contains many of the parallels between NS and Bolshevism/Communism. This video here reminded me of that documentary.
Many Thanks for your work! I really enjoy your videos on this topic.
Babe wake up. New Tik History just dropped
TIK is the wide awake historian. God bless him and his viewers. Amen.
Yes, honey
But is this really the case?
@@alexfilma16 more of a six-pack than a case tbf
This is why I love media of that time period, it gives us a glimpse of what and how people thought back then, as it was actually happening. Gives us some perspective we otherwise wouldn't have.
Or that New York elites have been totalitarian leftists for far longer than most realize.
Not to defend TIME: their choices of "Man of the Year" have frequently been about who is important, not so much who deserves admiration.
Then why wasn't Hitler made Man of the Year in 1940 or 1941?
@@TheImperatorKnightMight be because the fact the war was already happening and him being the bad guy was too obvious.
But that still contradicts the idea that it was about the most influential person
@@MatthewCobaltsooooo all the stuff he did in the 30s didn’t make him the bad guy? 😂
@@spiderknight9893 Hey, when the propaganda machine basically out does your publishing output, covering someone else is preferable. (Unless they already did that and just picked another Axis leader, in which case just roll the dice again.)
Will you ever do a video about Stalin being "Man of the Year" by TIME?
yes do it
Fascinating analysis. I had to watch twice in an effort to digest the many points you bring up. This word 'fascism' has always bewildered me as to its true meaning. The present generation doesn't seem to have that problem. For them it's been boiled down to someone, or some group, they fundamentally don't agree with.
The funny thing is they think the right is fascist, yet the left supports censorship and no free speech, forced vaccines, they prosecute their political opponents and nearly every institution in society shares their viewpoint. If you don't have a high ESG score, you will lose money and investors. All of this shares a similarity with the fascist nazis and how tyrannical they were.
TIK's videos are so informative and dense, in a good way, that I need to and enjoy a repeat viewing.
Fascism is a very simple concept. Government authoritarianism for the benefit of the people and nation. The government must unilaterally have absolute power to do anything, for your own good.
Theoretically, it could work. Also theoretically, nobody would allow the people who would make it work to be in charge. Also in theory, if those right people were in charge, they would establish some sort of democracy, a la the US founders.
@@bobjohnson1633 Imagine a country ruled by a genius philosopher king
@@bobjohnson1633the issue with true democracy is that the masses are the deciders, and the masses are also, en masse, fools. America, on the other hand, has issues too. To have anyone vote based age alone is an issue, not allowing territories’ votes to be valid while under American rule is a problem, immigrants have to learn more to enter this country than Americans do to vote. I don’t see why any immigrant coming into the country would need to know all this information unless they’re planning on voting and being involved in politics (I’m not saying they shouldn’t learn, mind you). Having Public schools isn’t enough to assume the masses know what they’re doing. For some reason we were taught in second grade about the branches of government just so we can forget them, meanwhile the school will have us go over the same math and history for for the most part for six years
The part when TIME refers to NatSoc’s and Commie’s as religions was undeniable that what TIK has been saying this whole time is correct, these are religious cults not political ideologies, even journo’s in the 1930’s understood this, thanks for highlighting that point TIK 👍
Thanks again, TIK! Let me add that I believe Franco was not a Fascist, but a Nationalcatholic who managed to assemble under his cape (after General Molas's death in accident at the start of the uprising) different and dispersed political movements of very different ideology: Monarchists (for the Borbons), Carlists (a different Borbon sect), Falange Española (nacionalsindicalists), JONS (fascists, Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista) among others...
I see the argument that Italy was fascist but Spain and Germany did think they were fascist despite the reactionary v revolutionary contradiction.
Probably grifters making it up as they went along, so as to suit their own needs.
I can confirm, as I have said several times Franco took away the little power the fascists had after some time passed and started to do his own doing, tha fascists hate him for it
Perhaps the plane were not so reliable, but other nazionalist generals all falling from the air was not an accident.
Franco was not a fascist, but initially, his regime was.
Hi TIK! Maybe you could make a video about the similarities between NS Germany and GDR. That would certainly weaken the irrational belief that national socialism has nothing to do with socialism.
"I don't mind telling you in confidence that I'm keeping in fairly close touch that admirable Italian gentleman. [Fascism] is the cleanest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious" - Franklin Delano Roosevelt on Benito Mussolini and Fascism
Hi TIK, great video man, i had a question though, do you think one day you could make a video on the frankfurt school and its influence on the mainstream view of fascism? I personally need to look into this more, however i heard (and read briefly) it was one of the main driving forces which influenced the conflation of national socialism and Fascism together. How true is this? Anways, cheers man, keep up the good work!
Yes. Klaus Analschwabs school!
What you said at 27:32 makes me think of the quote Mark Twain once said that “History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.”
Saying nazi Germany was not fascist because it had problems with Mussolinis Italy is like saying communist china wasn't communist because it had problems with the USSR after the sino-soviet split. The argument falls apart if you think about it for 10 seconds.
Except it doesn't, the USSR and PRC had a dispute over Marxist-Leninist theory. German Nazism and Italian Fascism were not the same, and had major divergence. They were both socialists, however the Fascists were nationalists primarily, where as the Germans were racist(in the literal sense, Nazi ideology was based upon race, not nationalism)
@@firesb7791 how was it socialist if it's based on race or nationalism, not class
@@hex2637 socialism has nothing to do with class, it predates class. Socialism is an economic system where the means of producing and distributing goods are controlled by a centralized government (the public)
In short
National socialism - Race Socialism
Fascism - Nationalist Syndacalism
Communism - class socialism
@@firesb7791 the means of production are owned by "the community as a whole" - or in praxis a government that is controlled by the public/community as a whole - the notion that only a certain race or nationality is entitled to the means of production and controls the government goes against the notion of the public controlling the means of production, the core notion of socialism
Tik, an outstanding video, again.
It makes me want to reach out to my old history teacher for A -level and show them these exciting revelations about communism and nazism.
It's taken me years of watching Tik to come around to his holistic political understanding of the 20th century, especially nuances of fascism. The enthusiasm and diligence put into the videos is seriously breathtaking.
Professionally sourced, transparently credited and altogether well thought-out arguments make these shattering conclusions more palatable. I think the summaries are so refined and conclusively cutting edge, we should be grateful that we are afforded free access to this content. To live in a time in history with such clarity in history, our conscious understanding of our past is the best we have ever had.
I'm grateful that the battlestorm stalingrad series is being lovingly continued also. With consideration to the compensation return on that series being slightly less fruitful, it is all the more appreciated.
All the best,
John
Oh my goodness we are really in a golden age of media with creators like tik, the time ghost army, armchair historian, epic history, and a few others
You are a absolute legend tik, i cant thank you enough, i gotta just get some money put aside for a patron membership
At the time “man of the year” meant the guy who has the biggest balls to go and conquer something
That's why Churchill was made Man of the Year 1940, not Hitler... wait.
Actually going through the list to me it seems like the title has always been more or less about who ''stirs some shit up'', with global consequences of course. And then followed by people who mopped up the shit that was stirred, if it was too stinky... And if there is no single defining person, then they go for some current and relevant movement or idea.
I know people complain about this, but it is good that Hitler, Stalin, Khomeini and Putin were these people because they were really important at their specific period, and each of them have Churchill, Roosevelt, Zelensky, Gandhi and Gorbachev as a counter force... And then there are pretty much all recent US presidents which sometimes makes much less sense
@@lkrnpk of those u say r "counter forces" only one was a pacifist
Can any one guess whom it is?
U must remember that time is a mag used by corps to control the working class with the flawed capitalistic system
@@TheImperatorKnight Possible explanation: because Hitler a) got it already and mainly b) was the enemy (yeah, not officially yet. Cash-and-carry and later lend-lease show where America's loyalty lay). 'Cancel culture' may not have been called that at the time, but there were lines you didn't cross, also back then.
Most influential not nicest.
The award is given to the person who "for better or for worse ... has done the most to influence the events of the year".
The key is in how "influential" they have been on world affairs. It does not refer to any implication of "good" or "greatness".
Except they do praise him. And they only mention Hitler's persecution of the Jews in one sentence. You'd think they'd mention that a bit more if they were trying to be even in their reporting.
@@TheImperatorKnight "Führer of the German people, Commander-in-Chief of the German Army, Navy & Air Force, Chancellor of the Third Reich, Herr Hitler reaped on that day at Munich the harvest of an audacious, defiant, ruthless foreign policy he had pursued for five and a half years. He had torn the Treaty of Versailles to shreds. He had rearmed Germany to the teeth- or as close to the teeth as he was able. He had stolen Austria before the eyes of a horrified and apparently impotent world.
All these events were shocking to nations which had defeated Germany on the battlefield only 20 years before, but nothing so terrified the world as the ruthless, methodical, Nazi-directed events which during late summer and early autumn threatened a world war over Czechoslovakia. When without loss of blood he reduced Czechoslovakia to a German puppet state, forced a drastic revision of Europe's defensive alliances, and won a free hand for himself in Eastern Europe by getting a "hands-off" promise from powerful Britain (and later France), Adolf Hitler without doubt became 1938's Man of the Year."
I'm not seeing it?
@@TheImperatorKnight Reading and rereading the article, I see recognition of Hitler's "achievements" (and I use the term advisedly), but they are always qualified with full recognition, apprehension and horror at the price paid by others to attain them?
Thankyou for the video. I've always wondered the reasoning behind putting Hitler on Time. This video was very imformative. Great job, as always.
It always surprises me that people don't understand that socialism necessitates authoritarianism since if "the people" own the means of production, "the people" will have to say what is done with their means of production or it's not theirs.
Funny seeing you here.
I think the creation of fake unions also is a sign. You join the union and do what you're told because the govt represents the people so you can't actually unionize. TIK has talked about this with nazi germany.
The old video about whether China is communist by China Uncensored also says this happens in China (which is nowadays just fascist).
It's surprising that people can't put two and two together, but then again, a lot of people also have massive credit card debt, are informed that interest rates on their credit card are high, but will spend spend up to their credit limit anyway. Destructive cognitive dissonance over simple things is quite common. Maybe it's just that 40 hour work weeks make some people dumb and unable to focus on anything else? I dunno
The people always vote for others to take responsibility away from them, so it must also be a dictatorship.
This is why the operating word in “dictatorship of the proletariat” is “dictatorship” and not “the proletariat”.
@@kylereece5511Dictatorship as it was being used by Marx is that the proletariat are the ones in control. If you have class dynamics the bourgeoisie will end up in power and take it away. It is a term meant to mean the end of hierarchy in a sense.
In the end this has been used in many ways and it comes down to interpretations.
Socialism necessitates democracy. I believe we must overthrow the status quo with the will of the people. Issues such as climate change will never be handled properly if we rely on profits. The spending will never happen.
I want America, the economic centerpiece, to lead this change globally. We are uniquely in the position to do this.
Awesome video again Tik! Thank you for the research.
An excellent video and an example of why I support TIK on Patreon
Time Magazine had often stated that the term "Man of the Year" (as well as "Woman of the Year", and "Person" of the Year") was not meant to be a honorific, but just to note what personage affected the World the most, for good or ill, which is why as pointed out Stalin would be MotY a year later and in more recent times Yuri Andropov (1983, although he shared the title with Ronald Reagan). Just who agitated the World the most.
Time magazine must have explained that many dozens of times. The guy in the video reads all these awful things and seems to think that Time is writing approvingly, but I don’t see that at all. Well, he got me to view anyway, and maybe that was the point.
Hey man, Just wanted to say, Love the work you do! Please continue making more amazing content!
I love that you actually use real hard sources, be it a posh self biography, or critical stats, thank you for bringing back the book, this youth missed out with bulls rap opinions and lunacy illusions instead. Thanks Tik, Canadian great again saying *were not worthy* 😂
The problem was with the term "Man". If they had called him "Newsmaker" of the year there would have been no argument whatsoever. Let's be honest, in 1938 the entire world was standing around waiting to see what his next move would be. If anyone controlled or dictated the "narrative " of the day it was him.
It's inaccurate to describe the Dollfuss government as "fascist." Despite having close ties to Fascist Italy, Austria under "Austrofascism" (a highly inaccurate term) resembled Salazar's Portugal a lot more than Mussolini's Italy. It was an authoritarian government largely focused on Catholicism, with an intact free market system (Austrian school economists even acting as advisors to Dollfuss). Please look into the Austrian Vaterland Front more! Im sure you will find it an interesting topic in and of itself.
Young English people did not know where Poland was located but the war started at that point.
The allies could have occupied Germany very rapidly in 1938 but the Western industry was feeding Germany at the same time. History is a bunch of lies.
Are you a david irving follower or something like that?
As someone whose actually read the Time article, it was pretty clear they were not calling him a role model with their nomination.
read that art back in '66 re-read it for this
I'd say it was ambiguous. The writer (or writers) of the article wanted to sound neutral so as to appear objective. It seems outrageous in hindsight when one is trying to adopt the center an extreme and moderate position; especially when contemporary to the period.
I think back then there was more of an understanding that "man of the year" meant arguably the most influential or notable individual of the year.
I really liked the perspective analysis you gave on the rest of it article. I hadn't read it before.
Going over the information in that book was the best part!
I wasn't around in 1938. Over the years since the 1970s the editors have frequently made clear that Man and now Person of the year is an individual that had the most impact or consequence, not necessarily one to be admired. The PC was named one year. It could be how one views the overall context. Given the context of the time the article is fairly balanced, it does foreshadow the tradagdy to come. That said your presentation of alternative views demonstrates how complex the debate was in that year, no surprise that these issues are still difficult to gain concensus on today.
“Person of the Year” has nothing to do with good or evil. It reflects the person’s effect on the world.
This
That's why Churchill was Made Man of the Year in 1940, despite Hitler affecting the world much more than him, and why Roosevelt was made Man of the Year in 1941, despite Hitler being at the peak of his power...
Eh, kinda suspicious. People would be mighty upset is Putin was man of the year when arguably he's made a huge impact...
@@TheImperatorKnight could be because he already got it in 1938 and the magazine doesnt need to have a rigorous criteria or because they would not risk being censored or having a very negative backlash for now Hitler was a declared enemy of the allied powers with a major war going on. Maybe Time and the public were just okay with jew and czech oppression but not with western european nations being oppressed afterwards.
I think another interesting view on this is would Time have labeled someone they hate as "Man of the year"? would or do they want to risk publicizing someone to the entire world? If they made articles on people they don't agree with or hate what kind of article is that going to be? It seems like that could get into the comedy/mockery field.@@mengo0456
I love these little dives into history.
You are on fire this week Tik, that's good for me ,thank you
I really want an in depth video on fascist economics. Especially on the difference between falangism, italian, legionarist, and rexist. Pretty please.🥺🥺
Thanks for bringing up that judging people and events of the past without accounting for modern bias and belief is misleading.
Extremely good video! I appreciate all the research and context you bring to history!
What an incredible episode, thank You for that kind Sir!
Although i put foward an idea to stop using the name of Austrian painter in titles, so YT algorithm won't bury the video.
I suggest codename aquarellist.
Remember when packing the court was viewed as a bad think?
Great video. Thanks for doing all the work you do.
Isn't the Time magazine man of the year award supposed to go to whoever made the biggest and most news of the year whether it be for good or bad? So Hitler winning time magazine man of the year isn't saying he was the best man of the year but rather the worst... I could be wrong but that's how I always took it.
That's largely a rationalization they started using years later when called out on their choice.
Time had many people who laminated the fact that Roosevelt was kept in check by Congress and the Supreme Court. They wanted a "Nice" Hitler in charge of America.
Thank you so much, TIK, keep these up.
I'm currently listening to the book, "The Wages of destruction" by Adam Tooze. I'm not far into it but something that's come up is the U.S. Trying to get the Allies to ease up reparations to protect American investments in Germany and everyone trying to change their monetary system's. I feel there's a video topic in there somewhere. Heck many in America don't even realize it took a coalition for the Nazis to get the ball rolling. It wasn't merely an election and the Reichstag is on fire.
This is one of your best videos this year.
Great video as always, TIK!
I don't believe you have touched on Pope Pius XII before in any significant detail (apologies if I am wrong). Seen as his name was mentioned - I thought I would mention that I think you would find this topic very interesting as it relates to your research.
This is because Pope Pius XII is constantly labelled a Nazi sympathizer nowadays. This is despite Nazism and Christianity being at odds with each other (which you detail excellently in your videos).
Ronald Rychlak's book, 'Hitler, the War and the Pope' is great. The author attributes the Nazi Sympathizing Pope theory to a KGB plot to smear Pius XII's name and establish a link between Nazism and Christianity/Catholicism.
If true, It is another example of how Communist/Soviet supporters have confused our understanding of what Nazism as an ideology is.
Thank you, TIKhistory.
first time i caught a video on time. Love all your vids
Thanks! Glad to see you here early
It feels like Hitler's East/West struggle didn't end in 1945 but continues to the present day.
It's a timeless struggle between different peoples/cultures. Russia was already seen as barbaric and foreign in the Middle Ages, that's why the Teutonic Order attacked Novgorod.
Will you in future make a video about George Orwell's "Democratic socialism" (Ryan Chapman made a good video about it), debating if socialism can be democratic? Also maybe a video about anarcho-comunism, because i think that you have gone over it to quick and not gave it to much insight. Would be very interesting.
Very good. Very good indeed. I'll say you TIK deserve a professor degree on these topics you do. They are so good and clear. But, but so far I understood you are against such prestigious degree.
Anyway, well done. We are looking forward to the 'Eugenics' video.
Thank you.
Hmmmmmm, I wonder if something happened in the years after 1938 that stopped him from receiving the prize again?
Nothing better than sources from the time, just before all hell let loose. Great video TIK. What an enlighting video.
Another great myth buster. Thank you, Tik!
Thanks for making this video! People don’t know about this stuff!
My grandmother always said the 1930s were a strange period in our (US) history.
They were not strange, people simply had less Zio influence and brainwashing than today.
A very good, informative video! Thank you, TIK
Brilliantly enlightening! The true history is much more exciting than the established narrative! Thank you!!
I found Mises' 'Liberalism' (1927) enlightening as it gives a view into the attitudes in Europe in the early 20s. When I considered it, I was always bothered that "history" seemed to start in the 1930s, with prior eras a bit thin in the common teachings. Reading works published on the other side of the 1930s has been interesting.
Dollfuss was not a fascist, he was a catholic traditionalist. His views idolized feudalism, completely contrary to the modernism of fascism.
Isn't fascism pre-enlightenment also? I don't think it's really modernist, nazism on the other hand
@@Samuelwastaken Fascism is very modernist. Many important actors were atheists, fascism was heavily influenced by futurism, which wanted to destroy everything old and build industry and machines instead.
@@Samuelwastaken National Socialism is Reactionary Modernism, a symbiosis of revolution and tradition. Hitler hated modernist architecture and modern art, urban "asphalt literature" was destroyed in book burning. The Nazis thought cities were rootless and decadent, that mankind needed to return to Nature, they were Environmentalists.
Hitler was NOT a vegetarian.
So packing the court has been in the playbook since back in the day
One of your best videos! I always wondered about this topic. Thank you!
Man of the year isn’t based on being the best moral man it’s about being powerful and influential
Like a criminal in commission of a felony …..
Like someone stealing billions in assets from Normal people then you get away with it.
Bcz you know ppl of the same religion..
It doesn't seem like it's good for society to feature evil people on the cover of a magazine. It's like how the news overreporting on school shootings inspires other school shooters so that they can get a lot of attention
@@5ve1e79 I don’t even know what you are talking about
@@insideoutsideupsidedown2218 a criminal isn’t influential
This is a great topic!
I love the videos about these topics!
I seriously recommend the recent stream on CIA involvement in culture during the cold war by Academic Agent (here on youtube) to understand how the narrative shifted, it was deliberate policy and some important figures were involved. Also it reveals a faction so far hidden to your analysis, the American backed leftists, it wasn't just the Soviets who deployed such people. If you are going to continue research into ideology this is important information to factor in.
yes our world was shaped by those bustajds in the CIA expose them for the asjholes they were and still are
Great narration. Excellent idea for a video. Very interesting topic and analysis.
Don't be too taken by Time's decision-making.
Mostly, they were looking for a new person to put on the cover and shoved Hitler into the space.
Also the notion of true revolutionists who represented working people and beaten down peasants was a generally appealing idea.
Another great job TIK! Ironically, I was born in 1938.
If i may. Please. Dont pressure yourself or feel pressured to increase your timetables of distribution because the feeling like we want ,it unless its your way of course. You explain topics in a way that many think we know and open up those topics in or with a whole new spin and insight. And more over then and to it . Thanks ever much for what you do '
Hi Tik. I would recommend getting hold of these books on National Socialism.
Nazi Germany explained, Vernon Bartlet, 1933.
The Meaning of Hitlerism, Wickham Steed, 1934.
The house Hitler built Stephen Robberts, 1937.
Interesting, pre war books on Germany under Hitler.
Fascinating.
Thanks a lot for such fascinating videos. Hello from Crimea! I really enjoy ur explanation and video montage. It's awesome
he is unofficially "Man of the Century" of 20th century
Another excellent video Tik.
That's all. Helping the algorithm in your favor.
Excellent video once again. Your work on socialism and economics are your most significant contributions to the world. Please never stop making them, we have an epidemic of young people brainwashed by cultural Marxists & academia.
Cultural Marxist. Nazi term that although they were more precise and called it Cultural Bolshevism.
Tik has done some great work but his definition of socialism makes no sense.
And his economic theories are disproved daily.
He once said the nazis would not have killed the Jews if they hadn't interfered with the market economy. That is mental.
TIK's videos are a large reason why I've begun to realize just how much I was lied to in school.
Another aspect of the late 1930's was almost no one had read Mein Kampf and so very few people knew what Hitler had planned for the future. At the time he came across as just another strongman like Mussolini, Stalin and Franco among others.
among others Why most of the worlds leaders at that time were but strongmen very few were not and it is still true today
By 1939, the book had sold 5.2 million copies.
@@richardstephens5570 mostly in Germany to Party Members
There were a few sold here but very few
Great video, thank you TIK. At the end I kinda felt like you were talking about the era we live in today though.. Maybe I am the only one 😀Hopefully we can avoid the fate that followed in the 40s.
Both Churchill and Eisenhower DID in fact discuss the Holocaust in their books and writings. However, it is not mentioned under that name, as it wasn't often spoken of under that name until the 1970s.
Churchill never mentioned the Holocaust or death camps in his History of WW2.
@@Occident. he did, in fact. holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/ has everything you can want on the subject.
9:43 This interests me greatly. The "confusion" between nsoc and fas dates back to before the war. I'd like to know how they're connected. Perhaps they share ties that make it reasonable to say that nsoc is a form of fas?
both do state control not worker control
Now the commies say the gov will wither away while the fas just keep control
Read the Book "WE"
Animal Farm and Brave New World said a lot but "WE' is the end game of both commieisim and Fas
7:35 -- RE: How to Win Frens and Dictate to People; Well Done again on another great video and a superb topic. I've often wondered why it was that *after* WW2 the "Leader Principle" had never formally surrendered and, if anything, had become ubiquitous by *our* period in history.
Sideways -- I noted on another video in the last 2 months, a video not by you I hasten to add, that "leadership" is not the quality best assigned to Robert Oppenheimer; rather, that intelligence is a shared trait is the pearl to find in the proverbial oyster.
Interesting topic. I was unaware of the fact that the Holocaust wasn't taught or talked about in the 50''s or 60's. Makes sense, I suppose. Hope you are doing well
it was taught and talked about just not by the ruling class
My 5th grade teacher brought it up for over a week in the history part of her class
She also did civil right movement. This was 1959. She was first black person i ever knew. Knew lot of Native Americans but no black ppl until then. She was just 30 and had been teaching for only 8 yr. She had a very distinguish carrier ending as Super for a district of over 5000 students. I never heard her raise her voice. A cousin who taught math under her at school she was super at said he never heard her speak louder then needed to be heard. By the way she taught him in 5th grade to. In fact my family mostly living in district she taught 5th grade in for 15 yr did so for most of us on both sides. The best teacher i ever had
The Jews who survived it were humiliated by what had been done to them and didn't want to relive it. This was before it became a widespread badge of honor to have suffered some kind of oppression. Their children convinced them that it was important to tell their story so that the historical lesson would not be lost, especially in light of the repeated Arab attempts to "drive the Jews into the sea."
If you talk to young Israelis even today, they will tell you that even 2 generations afterward, they carry some of the psychological burden of the Holocaust through the effect on the parents and grandparents who raised them.
Here's the question you should ask yourself: why is the Holocaust the only genocide in world history given so much time in American schools?
@@klavassassiniBecause it's the only one socialists have managed to deflect responsibility for.
@@klavassassini b/c it is the largest genocidal action to ever happen and the way it happened
It is not the first time Europeans tried to kill of the Jew, Gypsy and other so called undesirables such as the Wise Women of the Middle ages killed as witches. Yet none of these are taught. Not much of anything negative to Western Europa is taught in USA schools unless u take a lot of history class in College;
This is why the internet is so important to keep un censored yet we allow here to censor what we can see. Most of history this site says is to violent to be allowed on here.
They claim it is to protect kids. I say BS. It is to keep ppl form putting on here the dirty side of history.
Violence is part of life kids need to see it and so realize that it gets u no where. If more kids saw that when one does violence all it does is make for more violence maybe then we would have a lot less of it.
But wait the ruling class lives off violence. Without it they cant rule...
I don't often watch TIK videos because I'm not super interested in the Battle of Stalingrad. This video, however, is superb. Excellent work. I wish more people were aware of the facts presented here.