What are your thoughts on flat earth? Probably not very high, you sound like someone who readily believes the mainstream view of things...

@anon-san3975

7 ай бұрын

NO FUCKING WAY IS THIS GUY FOR REAL?

@eyraaaaaa

7 ай бұрын

genius

@TheModdedwarfare3

7 ай бұрын

What are your thoughts on flat earthers being completely unable to have a single model that shows, time of day, seasons, planets paths, and geography at the same time?

@undrscrh3194

7 ай бұрын

no he's a turtle earth enjoyer

@matheusfroehlich5727

7 ай бұрын

pin of shame

Crusades are totally one of the events of history. My favourite one is the time Venetians said "it's crusadin time" and crusaded all over the city of Constantinople.

@sonofspardauser

8 ай бұрын

Another event that is totally one of the big events in history is when Genghis Khan said "it's mongol empirin' time" and invaded all over central asia.

@InsideOutAnus

8 ай бұрын

Good god this joke was never funny. Stop spreading your cancer everywhere.

@myamdane6895

7 ай бұрын

Funniest leftist

@noone-os5pj

7 ай бұрын

@myamdane6895 My favourite part was when a conservatard tried to make fun of ''leftist'' comedy and then didn't say anything funny instead

@jeffersonclippership2588

7 ай бұрын

My favorite part is how Muslims conquered Jerusalem in the mid-8th century and western Christendom only did something about it 400 years later but people still say the Crusades were in self-defense

The "Fuck It, Let's Just Sack Constantinople" Crusade is my favorite.

@DANtheMANofSIPA

11 ай бұрын

The West had never been the same 😔

@thenamesianna

11 ай бұрын

Venice be like: Hello, I like money

@wilcowen

11 ай бұрын

The byzantine empire just had the worst luck how it survived for so long is beyond me

@wilcowen

11 ай бұрын

​@@thenamesianna pretty much the history of Venice and genoa

@SamwiseOutdoors

11 ай бұрын

@@wilcowen Somewhere between failing upwards and bumbling into a happenstance survival.

Actually the crusades were awesome and everyone respawned and there was a giant speaker playing sigma edit music

@kellarmoore9983

2 ай бұрын

can confirm it was based

@branomusuka9683

Ай бұрын

Bro don't trust this guy, he takes information from random people that aren't even labeled as true

@MartNM

Ай бұрын

​@branomusuka9683 nah it really happened It was revealed to me in a dream

@keck4022

Ай бұрын

@@branomusuka9683it actually happened tho, I was the speaker

@ediodimacaroni

Ай бұрын

​@@branomusuka9683No it's real, I was there personally

My favorite moment in crusade history was when Baldwin IV told Saladin that his army of betas couldn’t possibly mog him and his sigmas, and Saladin promised not to face him “on skibidi”

@G1hadi

Ай бұрын

what the Sigma are you talking about Saladin is the ultimate Alpha rizzler he is the goat

@petergidai4740

Ай бұрын

underrated comment

@theodiscusgaming3909

29 күн бұрын

this is the best comment on this video

@supersonicfan3522

25 күн бұрын

Fr I remember that

@D4rkmatter

19 күн бұрын

Top comment

The one actually defending was the eastern roman empire and they were the ones suffering the most at the end

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

Literally, well also the Armenians but they were also getting tag-teamed by the Seljuks and the Byzantines.

@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation

11 ай бұрын

Byzantine bois just can't catch a break ☹️

@davidwright6591

11 ай бұрын

Not just the Byzantines, even within the Crusader States all Christians who weren't Frankish Catholics were treated as second class citizens. Oh, and also the Crusaders (with the help of the Catholic Church) installed their own Latin patriarchs of antioch and Jerusalem (posts that existed in literally all of the Eastern Churches for centuries beforehand). So much for defending their brothers in the east

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

Listening to the History of Byzantium Podcast you really get a feel for how endlessly frustrating the bullshit of the Crusaders were. I mean one of the leading Crusaders, Bohemond had literally invaded the empire about 20 years ago with Papal blessing. Frankly a large part of why the First Crusade succeeded was that the Romans weren't yet completely disillusioned with Westerners and actually helped them out and guided them through Anatolia (though they didn't listen). By the time of the Second Crusade it's very obvious that the Romans have given up and the Crusaders just keep getting themselves killed in the most stupid ways because they refuse to listen to those who actually live there.

@EE-gv9wt

11 ай бұрын

@@hedgehog3180 i fucking love that podcast. We usually just glance over centuries of byzantine history and treat them as objects in histories of other polities, but the actual history of the eastern romans was so interesting and important for everything else happening at the time

There were even some weird ideological moments in terms of national identity in European Christian countries as well. For instance the leaders of the Scandinavian countries literally had speeches with claims such as these " We the children of Odin and Thor in the name of Jesus Christ will free the Holy Land."

@levongevorgyan6789

6 ай бұрын

The Eddas show there was a conflation of the god Baldur and Jesus, so this isn't so weird. Pagan religions adopting the gods of other cultures happened all the times. The Romans liked Mithra and Isis, the Greeks liked the Phoenician Ishtar, the Chinese adopted Buddha, my own Armenian ancestors mixed our indigenous gods like Astghik and Tsovinar with Persian deities like Ahura Mazda

@ottersirotten4290

5 ай бұрын

based

@denniszaychik8625

5 ай бұрын

@@levongevorgyan6789 The thing with Baldur wasn't really weird for if we are talking from a propagandistic/ideological perspective it is all completely logical. (During that particular time period of course) However proclamations that we the children of Pagan gods are going to fight in the name of the Lord despite being descendants of other gods which according to Bible scholars of the time either don't exist at all or are demonic spirits is indeed weird.

@levongevorgyan6789

5 ай бұрын

@@denniszaychik8625 I meant it wasn't weird for the Norse, who were trying to fit their old religion with their new.

@denniszaychik8625

5 ай бұрын

@@levongevorgyan6789Well from that perspective yeah I guess. Still sounds pretty weird, especially with some other historical context elements of the time. Guess just shows that Medieval ages were a bit more complicated than what we think of them today.

Dude how are you even refuting the fact that the Islamic golden age was a thing? Pax is a weeb tradlarper but he didnt get that wrong. You just disagree with everything even if its factual lol.

Hope you all have a nice day.

@blacksheepratkid646

4 ай бұрын

Thank you Ivan. I hope you also have a sweet day.

@user-gu2xp4cc9m

3 ай бұрын

Thank you Ivan I hope you and blacksheep both have a nice day as well

@suwakomoriya5145

3 ай бұрын

Thanks Ivan, I hope you have a good day too!

@angelloperez7273

3 ай бұрын

Thanks man, I hope you are doing well too.

@olekcholewa8171

2 ай бұрын

A totally nice day?

Adult Eren Yeager avatars are always a red flag.

@micromints1735

11 ай бұрын

It’s the equivalent of Joker pfps for anime

@NeostormXLMAX

11 ай бұрын

But eren turned out to be an incel cuck in the end

@user-nd3ks4mi7b

11 ай бұрын

It's wild how many of them completely missed the point of his character

@enotsnavdier6867

10 ай бұрын

​@@user-nd3ks4mi7bThey don't really understand that he was the bad guy in the end and that his "solution" didn't end up working.

@potatortheomnipotentspud

10 ай бұрын

The Titans kill because they have to eat. What's the Scout Corps' excuse?

A fun fact on the origin of the term dark ages, the term was invented by Francesco Petrarch to refer to the late latin era as a "Dark Age" for the latin world in comparison for the old Roman golden age and culture that was being rediscovered at the time and seen as superior. People have tried to bend or misunderstood the meaning of the term "Dark Ages" which leads to the misconception.

@bojangles2492

9 ай бұрын

From a modern perspective the 'dark ages' turned out to be not so devoid of literature and art.

@greatbriton8425

6 ай бұрын

The term was re-used many hundreds of years later to apply to the pre-printing press world of uneducated superstition and feudal abuses.

@bas-tn3um

6 ай бұрын

almost like it was referencing the fall of the pax romana or something. not an age of darkness ignorance and inability to make art. more like a lack of political and societal stability. @@bojangles2492

@viljaminieminen6925

6 ай бұрын

My understanding is that Dark age refers to time after Western Roman Empire. Because we really dont have a lot of information about that time.

@bas-tn3um

6 ай бұрын

their were two dark ages the bronze age collapse which cause the greek dark age and medieval dark age which as you stated was the chaos after the fall of western rome.@@viljaminieminen6925

not even 2 minutes in and your argument is calling him a incel lmao

@Chris-pg7qg

4 ай бұрын

LOL

@rorgorr2339

4 ай бұрын

For some reason leftists in general like to call everyone they dont agree with a "virgin" or "incel"

@alexanderthesortof9550

3 ай бұрын

If you start reading, or watching something with the intent of finding an excuse to disregard it completely, you will find it

@sharkape

3 ай бұрын

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it just may be a duck

@Western-Supremacist

3 ай бұрын

I agree, propagandistic nonsense from start to finish.

I love the huge difference in the newest and top comments.

@Savantastic

10 ай бұрын

Thank you

@goyonman9655

7 ай бұрын

Yup

@newend2116

Ай бұрын

Always the fun part of the comment section for polemic videos :3

I find the slave argument funny, as a Slav, considering that in the 10th century the Frankish Empire, Moravia and Venice were notorious for raiding non-Christian Slavic lands and selling them in Spain, Prague, Verdun and Venice, to Muslims, among other buyers. And as it turns out, the Christian slave merchants didn't mind selling Christian slaves to Muslims too, which can be seen by several papal bans on selling Christian slaves to Muslims that were passed across the centuries.

@enotsnavdier6867

10 ай бұрын

Doesn't the word "Slave" come from Slav because they were so commonly enslaved? I could be wrong about that tho

@Apogee012

10 ай бұрын

yes@@enotsnavdier6867

@Apogee012

10 ай бұрын

those same slav slaves became muslim nobles and janissieries with power of dethroning the kings in the ottoman empire

@Rifqiethehero

10 ай бұрын

​​@@Apogee012those janissaries are too op that Mahmud II had to nerf them

@Bigfatfrog83

9 ай бұрын

@@enotsnavdier6867yes but because they were enslaved by Turks

I’ve only watched a little bit of this video but bloody hell it’s so satisfying to see someone call out how often people like PaxTube essentially construct their lives to live in a perpetual state of LARP (more specifically, constructing their worldview to appeal to fantasies that pander to their insecurities and/or gripes about their relation to the rest of the world - falling back on comforting lies that affirm these people as the archetypes they so often desire to be). Of course, this isn’t a phenomenon that is limited to this kind of crusader ideology but it is ripe for people with this approach to life to latch onto.

What language is the map shown at 18:18 written in? Just curious. Mustameri and Välimeri sound finnish but Buda ja Pest doesn't. Is it estonian?

@theencoder1575

4 ай бұрын

Probably Finnish. Budapest was actually 2 cities in the middle ages, each on a diff side of the Danube: Buda and Pest. I googled the finnish word for "and" and it s "ja" so it s probably just "Buda and Pest"

@lennipulkkinen6446

3 ай бұрын

Looks like an old finnish map for me

@kovaketas8271

Ай бұрын

yeah it's finnish because estonian would write Mustameri as Must meri and Välimeri would be Vahemeri

In my opinion, the 4th crusade was the most cringe. But we have Crusader Kings for memes now.

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

I think they're all pretty cringe, but the First Crusade has plenty of cringe moments as well

@emperoremperor1486

11 ай бұрын

@@FreddaYT I think the VI ones was the least cringe just because there was an adult in the room(Frederick II).

@Mag_ladroth

11 ай бұрын

@@FreddaYT What about the Children's Crusade

@SulistaComunista

11 ай бұрын

Dude, here in Brazil we have an ancap (or whatever you call anarcho-capitalists) that dresses like a crusader, he ran for federal deputy (or for state deputy, I don't remember exactly) and when a guy shouted something he didn't like he ran to the police to ask to arrest this guy. He is hilarious, he already said that The Last of Us should not be watched by children because "it is against moral values" because of the lesbian sex scenes, BUT THE SERIES IS CLASSIFIED FOR OVER 18 YEARS OLD, he also denied covid (but that's not surprising here, our former president also denied seriousness saying that "it's just a little flu") and asked for a coup after our elections. Definitely hilarious and painful to watch his videos.

@enossoares6907

11 ай бұрын

@@SulistaComunista pera eu vivo debaixo de uma rocha quem diabos é esse cara?

Didn’t the crusaders kill a bunch of Orthodox Christians as well?

@something1600

11 ай бұрын

Yes.

@tricksnotreats7277

11 ай бұрын

Shhhh we’ll just ignore that part because it doesn’t support my narrative

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

Oh in the thousands.

@user-wk5dz1xp3k

11 ай бұрын

They did, and this is what they actually lamented, and those who did it after the time of First Crusade were universally condemned for it (Renaud de Châtillon's raid of Cyprus is the prime example of it). Medieval times, eh.

@johndorilag4129

11 ай бұрын

Latin Christians, mostly merchants, visitors, immigrants, etc., were massacred in Constantinople and surrounding areas in the 1180's out of jealousy, malice, and spite.

I have little doubt that Christian crusaders commited atrocities in the retaking of the Holy Land. But I also have little doubt that similar atrocities were commited by muslims in the taking of the Holy Land.

@Flintynicomod

26 күн бұрын

Actually good comment

@minestar2247

26 күн бұрын

According to sources, the local populations were surprised at how little fighting the muslims actually did

@EuGeez

23 күн бұрын

@@minestar2247 Still, the Muslims converted the locals into their faith. I understand why in those times the Church would respond in such a drastic way.

@minestar2247

22 күн бұрын

@@EuGeez they didn't even do that that much, they let you in by choice, if you don't, it's ok, you'll just pay some small tax that's supposed to go to the poor. Unlike the Spanish inquisition, which was extremely fanatical, and did murders on people if they were not christian

@Neptunes_Bounty

22 күн бұрын

​@@EuGeezPot calling kettle black.

Sorry to nitpick, but Saint Augustine was born way after 325. He was born in 354, and only converted to Christianity around 386 (according to Peter Brown). Perhaps you meant 425?

Now I know this is a minor quibble, but the map of the 1054 Schism that this guy uses for some reason just ignores Santiago, despite its rather central importance as a Catholic pilgrimage site, which is weird considering how thorough the rest of the map is and even includes stuff like Cordoba and even typically underappreciated sites like Armagh and Iona, it's probably not intentional by the mapmakers but it is rather sloppy all things considered, for someone who considers themselves a TradCath he seems to use questionable Catholic sources, but I suppose that is a running theme here.

@TheoEvian

11 ай бұрын

> Call yourself a tradcath > Don't even read Origen > Are you even trying? :D

@jmgonzales7701

11 ай бұрын

what are trad caths?

@_extrathicc

11 ай бұрын

​@@jmgonzales7701Fascists larping as catholics

@renlevy411

11 ай бұрын

​@@jmgonzales7701People that reject 2nd Vatican Council. Rejecting an ecumenical council is very heretical under Catholicism.

@voxpopuli8132

11 ай бұрын

This guy immediately begins with a HUGE strawman by stating that he (PaxTube) "discovered... that we have all been lied to, every historian was wrong" There are dozens upon dozens of books by recent Historians, who defend the crusades. Just to name a few: Thomas F Madden's books on the crusades, for example: The New Concise History of the Crusades (Critical Issues in World and International History) Rodney Stark (

The crusades were not as important as the average internet user treats them as.

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

Well, I do think the general insanity of them and the thousands dead warrants some historical importance. They saw the fabrication of early Islamophobic myths and racial concepts, as well as some proto-colonial tendencies.

@moonshinei

11 ай бұрын

No, I’d say they were pretty important because they were the first mass exposition of the colonialist tendencies of Europeans

@alexanderzippel8809

11 ай бұрын

@@FreddaYTyeah. One could argue that they had a heavy influence on the Reconquista in Iberia which had a very heavy influence on how the Spanish conducted their colonialism

@norikofu509

11 ай бұрын

@@moonshinei Every group of people has tendencies to colonialism, look at Africa Pre-europe

@moonshinei

11 ай бұрын

@@norikofu509 it’s a bit different with Abrahamic Crusades. it was a tendency not only to colonize for the sake of expansion, but to “civilize” and “Christianize” the “other”. It was the first time this became the norm, and would come to characterize many colonialist tendencies of the future

I encourage everybody interested in this topic to go read some actual literature on it. Even a quick parse of wikipedia will quickly show both Pax and Fredda are painfully biased in one direction or another.

@adamyang3264

5 ай бұрын

100%

@basicman1357

5 ай бұрын

Not disagreeing with you but, can you point out a few examples?

@mungobestmage

5 ай бұрын

@@basicman1357 do as my original comment suggests and go educate yourself. The whole point is to go find reliable information instead of trusting random internet videos and comments. If you care to have an impartial view, that is; I suspect you don't, based on this comment.

@basicman1357

5 ай бұрын

@@mungobestmage don’t have to be so defensive eh? Just want to know what different people have to say

@bruhnou1348

5 ай бұрын

​@basicman1357 free palestine! 🇵🇸

Well, anything that can be conquered can be reconquered. Force is available to all parties. Nothing done by the Crusaders in exercising that option was out of the ordinary for their time. If you want legalism, they had a patent from the Emperor at Constantinople. What more could a 21st century person ask for?

Right-wing history youtubers are a different breed. I remember skimming through a 40 minute video about how the ancient greeks didn't have homosexual relations actually

@Dr-Jesus

11 ай бұрын

And the video itself presentend supposed "evidence" that actually proved the opposite if you thought about it for 5 seconds

@LPVince94

11 ай бұрын

​@@Dr-Jesus Oh leather apron or so. Saw that one as well. The thing that stuck in my mind for some reason was when he pointed at some video about the color blue not being mentioned in Homer's works (Which is just curiosly interesting and I hadn't noticed this before while reading) and tried to mock it by basically admitting that he only read the words in the thumbnail ("haha look at these liberals. They actually believe that the ancient greeks didn't see the color blue").

@nizam5568

11 ай бұрын

Metatron's one? mf used *Zeus* as evidence that the greeks did not have homosexual relations

@phillidaadamus4349

11 ай бұрын

"how the ancient greeks didn't have homosexual relations actually" that was not he pont of most videos that I saw though. Most debunkign videos on greek homosexuality that I saw simply disputed the narrative that homosexuality was somehow accepted and even normalized, and that it was videly portrayed in a positive light in greek art. These videos are VERY explicit about this, (be it Metatron's or Leather Apron's) and do not deny that yes there were gay people in the past. The only thing that they assert that the greeks were just as homophobic as any other ancient civilization.

@LPVince94

11 ай бұрын

​​​@@phillidaadamus4349he only "narrative" I am aware of is that the extreme homophobia of the past millenium was an outlier in the history of the western world. That said using the word "normalized" seems kinda off. As if homosexuality is the abnormal thing and not the homophobia responsible for pretending the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus was only a very veeery deep friendship.

I LOVE WHEN HISTORY KZread IS RIGHT WING I LOVE DISINFORMATION SO MUCH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

@konstancemakjaveli

11 ай бұрын

How does right wing instantly mean disinformation? Wouldnt all bias be disinformation, including left wing? Either all bias is disinformation, or bias doesnt mean disinformation. Which is it?

@electricVGC

11 ай бұрын

​@konstancemakjaveli bias =/= disinformation. The suggestion OP is making is that right wing KZreadrs have a tendency to make bold statements about history in videos without citations, especially no pinpoint citations, tend to run counter to most sources on this topic including right wing historians, often explicitly geared to counter pop history narratives. This also happens on the left but mostly about VERY specific topics, such as revision of Soviet history (I think mostly due to the differences in palate of their audiences).

@konstancemakjaveli

11 ай бұрын

@@electricVGC whats the difference? They both lie and disinform, who cares the selectivity of topics. If both lie, it doesny matter how much one lies in a specific topic, they both lie. Stop being selectively critical, lol.

@Pensnmusic

11 ай бұрын

​@konstancemakjaveli bias doesn't equal misinformation You can be biased towards understanding reality, even when you dislike the answers you receive. In fact, this attitude is more or less a justification to believe whatever you think feels good because everyone else is doing it, and why can't you cynically do the same? It's a post hoc rationalization. Many people may believe whatever feels good, but that doesn't mean that's what everyone does. It doesn't mean that's what you should do.

@Pensnmusic

11 ай бұрын

​@@konstancemakjaveliyou are selectively defending right wing bias. Currently, right wing bias leans into fascism which explicitly argues that facts are tools to be created and used. That reality, if it exists, doesn't matter. Only the narrative. Only what you can get someone to believe. The right wing belief structure is uniquely bad. I'm sorry if that doesn't feel good.

There is a methodological error you committed. You compared and juxtaposed the Crusaders first conquering Muslims to Muslims conquering Christians during the Crusades' period. Instead, the appropriate comparison would have been Muslim conquest of Christian lands, to which you well know the Crusades were a response to. Tariq ibn Ziyad is said to have made a great pile of skulls of Spaniards in Spain. A companion of Mohammed is said to have raped the wife of his Christian enemy in a pool of the late husband's blood, when they conquered the then-Christian Middle East.

@chrisgaming9567

5 ай бұрын

It's hilarious that, in a "newest first" order, this comment is directly below one pointing out how ridiculous this exact point is.

@Sheragust

2 ай бұрын

The Crusades came half a millennia after the Islamic conquests of Byzantium and Persia in the 600's which has nothing to do with the Franks, English or Germans that made the frontline of the Crusades, this is like Mexico waging war on England now because of the events that happened 400 years ago between Spain and England just a stupid and reductionist way of ready history. The Crusades were launched because of the Byzantium empire demand for help after failing to defend against the Suljics. Also who is having double standards here ? So what if the Turks make an expansionist empire on the expense of the Romans ? didn't the Romans also conquer these very same territories ? As for the Companion of Mohammed story, it's laughable how you don't even have a name of said companion but I can't find any story of the raped Christian wife this is just your fantasy. The Muslims ruled the Iberian Peninsula for more than 700 years but they still kept a Christian majority during that time, there is no evidence of genocide happening against the Christians and forced conversions only happened during the Almoravid & Almohad dynasties in the 11 to 12th century 400 years after the Conquests.

@sarwatarannya8786

Ай бұрын

It is said? Where is it said? ISIS used to spread rumours that the Christian church used needles to turn children homosexual, is it some kind of reputable source like that?

@run4fun143

Ай бұрын

That wouldnt fit his biased lizard brain... lol

@timurtheterrible4062

Ай бұрын

The conquest of Spain was 300 years before the crusade. The crusades were not a response to them.

to be fair, i don't think the crusades should be viewed with as much emotion like this. I think we should just view them as just one of the many events of history, from the neutral perspective of a historian. The crusades weren't bad or good, they were just the result of political strife between faction as well as religious zeal , but that stuff wasn't new, in fact it happened several times before and after them. They are distant events that i as a history nerd find fascinating but should not be politicized. We should not view one side or the other as good or bad, but just analyze the fact while taking into account or biases and using the standards and values of the time (though even by the period's standards, crusaders were indeed quite violent in the first crusade).

@artifaxx9986

5 ай бұрын

Yeah a historical perspective. They had negatives and positives. Positives it benefited Europe with Islamic knowledge propelling them to the scientific revolution and more. Negative because it carried out the genocide of Jerusalem and caused a lot of death. But I think the video is trying to set the balance to neutral here because the one by paxtube made the crusades only good

@jeanettewu2537

5 ай бұрын

Tell that to all the Crusades apologists who seem to infest the subject. All sarcasm aside, though, valid take, one that every historian should keep in mind.

@alexlehrersh9951

4 ай бұрын

Nope Pax did not make the crussade only good I asume you didnt watch the video@@artifaxx9986

@suwakomoriya5145

3 ай бұрын

I agree with everything you said. I think people in general are too obsessed with the crusades when religious conflicts were aplenty both before (persecution of Jews and “heretical” Christian’s) and after (reformation and the Thirty years war). For the Muslim side, there was persecution of Zoroastrians, and after the crusades, there were conflicts between the Islamic gunpowder empires. As we can see from these examples, the crusades are just another example of historical conflicts, and when people mention them it’s usually for some agenda. Ironically, there points in history where the crusaders traded with Muslims. Why don’t people talk about that as well?

@JesusChrist-rz3ll

2 ай бұрын

Yeah while by our standards the crusades were horrible in reality they were no more brutal than any other standard medieval war.

That's what happen when someone treat history as a jerk off material rather than a study.

@blacktigerpaw1

10 ай бұрын

Coming from someone who openly denies acts of genocide committed by Muslims, that's hilarious.

@Jonathan-tw4xm

10 ай бұрын

You realise this man had a biased agenda against the guy. Watch the last few minutes and the opening minute and you see clearly. He is upset at the fact the extremist in his country killed many people in the honour name and the fact pax has similar ideas.

@lawkig

7 ай бұрын

and yet much milder than yours, most likely

@theobell2002

7 ай бұрын

A problem of many mentally ill far-right weirdos online.

@alexlehrersh9951

4 ай бұрын

This guy is worse

I think the Crusades in general are frequently misrepresented as some sort of Altruistic Sacred Ideological Mission, rather than just another flavor of the same Feudal Dynastic Politics that characterized the rest of the High Medieval period. It still seeps into real-world politics today, especially - and strangely, considering the catholic fixation of it all - into evangelical protestant rhetoric.

@seekingabsolution1907

11 ай бұрын

From what I know from my brief foray into the crusades history in university, they were in many ways a predecessor and foundational moment in the creation of the ideological justification for later European colonialism.

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

This is a thing a lot of the authors I've read talk about, but that'd spiral into a whole other discussion so I didn't talk about it in the video. Could be the topic of a future video.

@vaiyt

11 ай бұрын

The Crusades are almost a big a litmus test of someone's ideological filter as the "fall of Rome".

@PyroFTB

11 ай бұрын

Yeah the Crusades should rather be seen as an action fuelled by greed and ambition rather than pure religious extremism

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

Yeah it's kinda a mistake to trust the Crusaders own rhetoric about this too much because clearly their actions don't line up with them. It seems pretty clear that a lot of the leaders were just somewhat opportunistically looking for some land to rule, that definitely seems to have been Bohemond's plan. At the same time we have to remember that the Pope was also part of this political game in Western Europe and calling for the Crusades was clearly a way to help assert his own authority. As well as the roles of the Romans who wanted more mercenaries to help them fight the Turks and Alexios who had quite good relations with Pope Urban the II and had given him some assistance.

This makes me like the christian crusades even more now

Crusades were awesome! The people on Constantinople: 💀

My brain cannot compute how you can be a "traditional" "catholic" and also be a weeb.

@norikofu509

11 ай бұрын

If a man from the 19th century saw a "Traditional man" nowedays who likes Anime, he would call him a f**

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

If You leftist actually went to Mass or interacted with real catholics You would know that catholics arent puritans like most of You americans think Christianity is (because of your protestant background). And if You actually knew how practicant catholics are You would know that Priests and people in The seminary in process of becoming Priests have some "mundane" tastes in entertainment, and sometimes that includes anime

@aliasmcgames

11 ай бұрын

@@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl Found who hasn't lived through conservative catholics trying to ban anime because it "corrupts youth", "goes against christian values", "promotes satanism and black magic", etc.

@ChiefMasterGuru

11 ай бұрын

@@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl Yes we know catholics nowadays are larpers

@norikofu509

11 ай бұрын

@@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl Been living among Caths ALL MY Youth, no one, NO ONE, liked or mentioned Anime

Pax’s opinions on anime are also insane, he says anime is free of feminism, androgynous characters, or women in “men’s roles” as if Evangelion, Inuyasha, Princess Mononoke, fucking Sailor Moon and Utena aren’t some of the best influential pieces of animation not just in Japan but the world over. The guy is so deluded he thinks Attack On Titan, a manga made by a far right military history geek, is secretly marxist.

@lordofthewasps8583

11 ай бұрын

Anime crimes aside, another banger of a video dude. I apologize on behalf of all catholics for whatever the hell trad caths are

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

Anime absolutely trounces western media when it comes to queer representation. I mean it's where the genres of Yuri and Yaoi originate and the oldest Yuri anime I know of is The Rose of Versailes from 1979 which features Oscar who is a woman raised as a man who becomes the captain of Marie Antoinette's Royal Guard, and everyone thinks she's super hot. The oldest anime to feature an explicitly trans character is "Stop! Hibari-kun" from 1984 IIRC and queer characters have abounded ever since. This year alone something like 6 separate yuri series are airing and one of them is fucking Gundam, it's like if the main character of the sequel trilogy was a lesbian. But the first Gundam series to have a queer person was 1999's Turn-A Gundam where one of the main characters is a gay man, also the main character constantly cross dresses in it. Feminism is also quite common in anime. Most yuri I've watched and read have some pretty explicit feminist themes in them. But again Gundam itself, the biggest anime franchise of all time, has been explicitly feminist since the start. The original literally makes fun of the idea that anyone would ever believe in sexist ideas and has really good representation. The follow up Zeta Gundam spends the second half almost exclusively focused on women's issues and how sexism impacts their daily life in a series of conversation between the female main characters about this. This isn't to mention all the other very left wing views that you can commonly find in anime. Gundam is again a very good example and is pretty explicitly anti-capitalist. Fundamental works like Akira and Ghost in the Shell are both critiques of neo-liberalism. And you have modern works like 86 that are literally all about how racism works as a system and how it corrupts society, the current Gundam series also deals with oppression quite a bit. Like Japan has some fucked up policies in a lot of areas but anime is often reflective of more progressive views.

@Brslld

11 ай бұрын

Okay that guy is the most stupid i've ever seen.

@neoqwerty

11 ай бұрын

@@ikengaspirit3063 Gonna need to know what he considers popular because all the popular ones I can think of are either pretty feminist, have androgynous characters, or women in "men's roles". And sometimes multiple ones at once. Unless all he watches are hentai, he's pretending not to see the blatant things.

@cjclark1208

11 ай бұрын

I’m just gonna throw this out here like a true Chad and say... 95% of anime is gayer then a 2$ dollar bill, thanks for stopping by.

I mean you need only look at modern day britain to realize the statement about islam and islmaists is correct

So a war in response to multiple large conquests of land is wrong? Not at all. Some of the stuff that happened during the war was wrong? Sure, that happened with every war.

@williamchamberlain2263

Күн бұрын

Yes _but_ Paxlord claims that _everything_ that was wrong was because of Muslims, and _everything_ done in the crusades was justified. Which are both obviously lies, but if you look through the comments you'll find plenty of folk who like Paxlord because he's expressing what they want to believe for various reasons.

Glorification of brutal events is the natural consequence of being an Eren fan

@fullmetaltheorist

11 ай бұрын

Mfs think they're Eren but they're Floch.

@hue-wp6ip

11 ай бұрын

AoT is a different story, he had no other choice (I haven't read manga btw)

@fullmetaltheorist

11 ай бұрын

@@hue-wp6ip I kinda don't like that. I probably should make a video about it if I have the energy. But the way AOT frames Eren’s actins like he had no choice is not very good. "Our enemies won't rest until they destroy us so we have to destroy them first." Is not accurate to real life. The show seems to assume that people can't live in peace or just exist without conflict u less they have a common enemy but if you just go outside and look at the world you'll see that people overall prefer peace over war.

@hue-wp6ip

11 ай бұрын

@@fullmetaltheorist Whether its accurate to real life or not is a different story (and something that I don't necessarily have a side on) but Paradis already tried diplomacy for 4 years straight and it got nowhere, and the world was assembling an alliance to destroy the island. Hange and Armin had no plans other than words and hugs so Eren was left to wipe out the world to ensure they dont do it again

@kovacsnovak6745

11 ай бұрын

​@@fullmetaltheoristdeterrence, besides the wall titans, ensures those words are backed up but unfortunately they didn't have it. Unless you count the fanfic, "freedom's ring" where America comes into the picture of AOT to back Paradis

I'm VERY glad that you pointed out that most crusades were failures with only the first not being a total failure. It honestly is rather baffling to see propaganda from the Medieval period resonating with the people of today.

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

I mean, on the one hand, you had the Northern Crusades, the Reconquista and literally everything that went down in the new world which were all pretty successful "calls to cristianize the pagans by the pope through the means of war", but on the other hand, there's the 4th crusade... Yeah, pretty much equal

@marvelfannumber1

11 ай бұрын

Not really true. The Third Crusade was not really a failure for either side as it resulted in in a status quo that benefited both sides. The Fourth Crusade did not reach its intended target, but it was actually very successful in its revised goal. The Sixth Crusade was absolutely a success for the Crusaders thanks to some clever politicking. Not to mention the Northern Crusades and the Reconquista, which were indisputable successes.

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

@@marvelfannumber1 correct

@Luzeru362

11 ай бұрын

Ok so imagine for a second that you're a french man going to war all the way to Anatolia going through the hole of europe and then have to battle for months against enemies on they're home turf, ofc youre going to struggle. Infact the guy that made the original video makes this exact point in his video and you would have known this if this guy would bother giving the full context of the vid he's responding to

@randomchannel8656

11 ай бұрын

The Northern Crusades were very successful

How do you make a video nit-picking bias and respond with more bias 💀

@Inventor1488

Ай бұрын

Because thus KZreadr is a self proclaimed communist

@vez3834

Ай бұрын

​@@Inventor1488 show me where he called himself a communist

@FengBaoYolotli

Ай бұрын

It’s not bias if he is right

@Rag_ab

Ай бұрын

@FengBaoYolotli yeah well it is bias and he's completely wrong his whole video was "Christian bad Muslim good" and he dosent cross reference sources to see which holds any validity he literally only uses muslim sources so yeah it is bias and the crusades were needed when you have a hostile ravaging your lands and massacring everyone in their way.

Wrong. Armenians rebled against arabs, establishing independent kingdoms and only after that greeks attacked. Arabs were colonizing our lands, not "coexisting". Like they colonized North Africa.

@Tarathiel123

4 ай бұрын

Wrong. Armenians sometimes rebelled, at other times they preferred the Arabs over the Byzantines, they were stuck between two of the largest powers in the world at the time. Independence was tenuous at best. The Armenians helped the Caliphate over the Khazars, there were rebellions whenever Islam was forced or the jizya was increased. In 885 Armenia was established a buffer state ultimately. To say it was because they were attacked its the opposite, it was Byzantium and the Caliphate.

@Corben.TopMingerC

4 ай бұрын

Nationalists when history isn't a simple, romantic narrative of victimhood and triumph in which their nation is god's chosen ;((((

@randomhuman2595

4 ай бұрын

​@@Tarathiel123 Fascinating

@tomdalzell2407

4 ай бұрын

FALSE. Muslim rulers never ever tollerated Christianity. Instead, they gave their subjucated Christians 3 choices: 1) Convert to Islam. 2) Be beheaded. 3) Become a subservient slave.​@@Tarathiel123

@CatholicCrusader__30

4 ай бұрын

ya this guy don't know what he is talking

Hi, I don't ban people from commenting on my videos pretty much ever, but due to the topic and how this specific rhetoric relates to people I know, I will straight-up just remove your comment and not show you the light of day if you come in here looking to recite far-right mass shooter manifestos. EDIT: No, I'm not removing all negative comments or comments that are right-wing, if you believe that's what I meant by the above comment you're telling on yourself.

@professorcube5104

11 ай бұрын

Understandable, Nazis get the boot

@davidwright6591

11 ай бұрын

Good move, it's genuinely very sad that these people don't see the cognitive dissonance of wanting to kill people in the name of someone who said we have to pray for our enemies

@fsexplorer9727

11 ай бұрын

Jazakallhukairan my friend! I'm tired of seeing this stuff an seeing my Muslim brothers being called as less than human is, at this point, something I'd prefer to stop seeing.

@F_Yale

11 ай бұрын

You keep babbling about the "far-right" in several of your comments like they're living rent-free in that HRT-infused head of yours. Calm down, buddy, ok?

@thespartanwarrior2986

11 ай бұрын

You should make a video on Undead Chronic. He is very far right and argues that women shouldn’t vote and hates equality. He has about 50k subscribers.

Honestly, I appreciate how you give there's creators the same respect they give to actual history.

@seandawson5899

11 ай бұрын

These* I would edit, but fredda liked it

@wikipiiimp9420

11 ай бұрын

i have one problem with the video though. The weird insert about "WeSTeRn iMPeRiALiSM" Nothing wrong with criticizing weird christians supremacists supporting horrible stuff like the crusades, but there is something very wrong with this weird "yeah, western power doing war for democracy is morally similar to Jihad/Crusades/genocidal wars of the old testament" Equating modern western "imperialism" to ancient holy wars led by christians, muslims or jews is absolutely stupid. Yeah sure, do Fredda seriously believe that liberal democracy is morally comparable to religious supremacism ? Also "what the west consider a good society" what IS a good society you should mean. I mean, should the Serbs continue to genocide the muslim population in Fredda worldview ? Because i mean, NATO intervening seem pretty justified. should the British continue the war aganist the Nazis or make a truce ? are Talibans not a bad society ? First : not every western war is comparable. I mean there is a moral differece between wanting oil (Lybia) and fighting terrorists (Afghanistan). Is figting ISIS bad for Fredda ? When the US make a war on false pretense like WMD, (Irak) : it's not justified. When France/UK/US make a war using a sound justification (democracy) but for bad real motives (oil) (ex Lybia) : it's not justified. But when the western power fight nazis, a genocide, terrorists : I believe it's justified. Also there is a how to do a war. War in afghanistan was justified, but some of the tactics used by western powers like drone bombings were not, because it did too much harm to civilians. This weird anti western sturnt is so unjustified, like, how do this is useful for the overall message of the video. Also Fredda relativism is weird. So he thinks the position of the west is not justified, he don't believe liberal democracy is politically superior to a racist dictatorship, a terrorist group, genocidal warlords ? I mean, ISIS, Talibans, AlQaeda, Nazis or other genocidal racists, Bachar El Assad are worth fighting aganist. Doing a war can be justified, supporting fiting parties while no direct involvment can also be justified. (ex : sending weapons to the kurds is justified. Sending weapons to the Ukrainians is justified.) Sure, a war will always hurt civilians. But sometimes, it's a necessary evil. My country, like many others in Europe got occupied by nazis... and the allies (UK and US) bombed some cities in it, targetting bridges, train stations, railroads, factories, ports and other logistical hubs. During those bombings, civilians died. Do i believe those deaths are sad : yes, But do i believe this was necessary : yes. The allies were justified, bombing cities was justified. Doing a war, or supporting a fighting party during a war can be morally justified, and i believe doing a war for democracy is a good moral justification. Doing a war for christianity, islam or judaism is a horrible justification, it's religious supremacism, equating the two is so wrong. Especially, doing this video currently, doing a weird stance aganist "WeSTeRN iMPeRiALiSm" when there is an acual war of invasion going on... not done by the west, but by Russia. And western "imperialism" is the main argument of russian trolls to oppose sending weapons to Ukraine "iT wiLL LeAd tO MoAr DeAThS" they say, forgetting that the Ukrainian people for the majority actually want those weapons to fight, they want to join the west (EU/NATO) and fight Russia This is just fuel for Russian trolls. The problem with western military interventions is actually that most wars were not done for good justifications like fithing fascism/nazis/terrorists/etc and instead done for more mundane reasons (like oil, geopolitical power, influence, etc). If vietnam is bad, it's because supported the south (which was a dictatorship too) and did horrible warcrimes. If irak is bad, it's because the US lied about WMD, lied about Irak involvment in 9/11 (and were hypocrites because they spared Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, despite the fact that those countries actually supported 9/11) Those wars were wars of imperialism But sometime a war can be done for good moral justifications, for example the war aganist ISIS in Irak/Syria, the war aganist BokoHaram in Nigeria, the war aganist ISIS in Mali, the war aganist Talibans in Afghanistan, the war aganist Serbia, etc.

@yankieowl7663

11 ай бұрын

Is it because he butchers history for his own marxist goals and claims it to be fact

@astrobullivant5908

11 ай бұрын

Overall, Pax Tube's facts are more accurate. @12:03, this bozo even suggests that Algebra hadn't been discovered until the Islamic Golden Age!

@bllehh

11 ай бұрын

@@astrobullivant5908 well, according to wikipedia the name Algebra at least stems from the arabic language, although they say the oldest known work on it was by some greek? idk why you can't bear the idea that not all our great knowledge stems from some Greek, Roman or European but it sounds like a bad you problem to me and yes, what he said might suggest to some that Algebra was first used and spread in Islamic countries, this is not actually what he is factually saying

The fact that Pax COMPLETELY brushed over the Siege of Constantinople and just claimed that the Crusades were the greatest thing to ever happen to Christianity was just insulting.

@thenobody1641

2 ай бұрын

Paxtube literally called the fourth crusade a dismal failure

@fenixchief7

2 ай бұрын

​@@thenobody1641 yeah, I dunno what he expects.

@daniel8181

2 ай бұрын

I heard a story once about crusaders burning down a sinagogue while it was full of worshippers, while surrounding it and singing "ave maria" I was sad to learn it was unsourced.

@Moderately_Merciless

Ай бұрын

"He glossed over the only point I have!" But he didn't, he went into detail as others have already said.

@ShepardCZ

Ай бұрын

By your logic, liberating western europe from nazism was bad because allied soldiers raped, murdered POWs and bombed cities.

hearing the way this guy describes the crusades you'd think the Islamic side were fucking tyranids

@JohnBrowningsGhost

19 күн бұрын

Considering at the time of the Crusades Muslims had violently conquered half of Christendom thats probably an apt description.

@teamjam2863

7 күн бұрын

@@JohnBrowningsGhost The Roman’s and Persian had either at the time already occupied Arab lands or attempted to invade previously. This was one reason the vessel states under Rome and Persia joined the Muslim Arabs in what the Muslim Arabs and non-Muslim saw as a just war against their traditional enemies who attempted to conquer them before. Roman and Persian aggression was already occurring. Calling it a conquest akin to saying the allies conquered Germany

3:53 dear God, to be declared within the top 10 most Islamophobic people in 2011 America is almost terrifying

@user-xq3vt3co7r

11 ай бұрын

The fabled competitive racist 💀

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

Yeah, almost as if the SPLC has an agenda or something 😐

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

@@user-xq3vt3co7r how exactly is, disliking a cult, founded by a slave-owning, pedophilic warlord, racist?

@voxpopuli8132

11 ай бұрын

"to be declared within the top 10 most Islamophobic people in 2011 America is almost terrifying" Meaningless accusation. You can be anything-phobe, if you don't toe the line, it is just a matter of time.

@stanisawkasprowicz5947

11 ай бұрын

​@@voxpopuli8132you know very well thats not how it works. you reactionaries always try to make correct labels seem weightless

I am not that knowledgeable about Western history but watching his video I was very suspicious. I deal with many creators like him in my sphere that are convincing and seemingly truthful until you peel back the layers, the old tweets usually always get them lol.

@bobgriffin2070

9 ай бұрын

Oh shit it's north02

@coryfice1881

9 ай бұрын

I assume they're the "europeans were the actual natives of america" types. Given your content.

@NORTH02

9 ай бұрын

@@coryfice1881 Yep people say that about the native americans, claiming Europeans came across Atlantic ice. It's called the Solutrean hypothesis and has little to no evidence to support it. Other people claim that humans started in Europe and spread from there. This is pretty hilarious considering the evidence we have.

@coryfice1881

9 ай бұрын

@@NORTH02 Even if it was true it would mean absolutely nothing. It's ironic they'd think europe was the origin of the human species when the europeans themselves back in the 19th century assumed humanity originated in asia.

@NORTH02

9 ай бұрын

@@coryfice1881 the genetic proof of anzick 1 shuts down that the Americas were first walked upon by Europeans

1:47 Reconquista in the context of the video is not the one of Latin American is the one about retaking the actual territory of Spain, the one that was taken by the expansionist Islamic 1:54 That’s another misconception of the conquest of America, the thing with the first years of conquest were very cruel, because they were not seen by the Spanish authorities being private organizations the ones that colonize the lands and not Spanish government. The conquest process after the “leyes de Burgos” were a big advance being a kind predecessors of human rights make for treating the relation that the people of Spain must have with the indigenous of the continent. That was veeery different of what was the expansionism on those times. Isabel la Católica in her testament declared that the indigenous people of the empires (yes because the Aztecs; Incas and Mayas were empires and not peaceful people) and tribes (all tribes and not just the ones that joined the Spanish conquistadores for fighting some of the empires that had them slaved) must been treated with the same dignity that any other subject.

@subashira

3 ай бұрын

I am sure the native populations who were massacred following 1512 (The Incans at the Battle of Cajamarca, the Aztecs slaughtered in the Alvarado Massacre, the Cholultecans murdered at Mexico-Tenochtitlan) were treated with immense amounts of respect and dignity.

@facuuu2809

3 ай бұрын

​@@subashira I'm also sure that laws that defended rights at the time were definetly not ignored by the encomenderos and they treated the natives that "worked" for them with more respect afterwards

It's quite easy to condemn the "find out" when you ignore the 800 years of "fuck around".

@chrissant6277

Ай бұрын

@@kevinortiz2597 So... how?

@briantarigan7685

Ай бұрын

lol, The muslims conquers Jerusalem from mid 8th Century AD yet only 500 years later does, the retaliation came, even then, the sacking of Jerusalem by the crusader is so brutal beyond measures.

@Inventor1488

Ай бұрын

​@@briantarigan7685W crusaders

@FengBaoYolotli

Ай бұрын

@@Inventor1488psycho

@gangstaspongebob3622

29 күн бұрын

Cope harder​@@FengBaoYolotli

Not surprised by this considering that he claimed prostitution and sexual immorality played a role in causing the French Revolution

@robinrehlinghaus1944

11 ай бұрын

Honestly, I found that video interesting to understand his point of view, but I can't say I agreed with it.

@justinpachi3707

11 ай бұрын

I mean he’s not necessarily wrong. France floundered because Louis XV was too busy banging his mistresses to properly focus on government. Sometimes he made their favorites or appointed them to positions of power which led to France wasting its potential during this era of cultural and scientific progress.

@mickeyg7219

11 ай бұрын

One of the oldest professions somehow only causing problems in the relatively modern era.

@Thunderous333

11 ай бұрын

​@@mickeyg7219yep, it's been casting problems since the beginning.

@Thunderous333

11 ай бұрын

@David_Icke-ou5jz You're putting words in my mouth.

If anyone is interested in an actual PhD in Medieval warfare talking about the Crusades ideology, they should be watching Schwerpunkt

@Pompeius_Strabo

11 ай бұрын

Any chance you could comment on the quality of his work, I know he’s accredited but seeing so many videos produced so rapidly makes me worry about the quality of his work. I also can’t seem to find where he cites his sources, seems like there sources for his images but not any academic sources

@geoffroydegodefroy2374

11 ай бұрын

@@Pompeius_Strabo Schwerpunkt is beyond political chit chat, he just teaches you history topics as if he were making a 2h lessons at university which he's evidently habituated to from years. I've never seen on KZread a person making a video every day either but from his historical regions series to the one on Medieval warfare, etc., he talks way much in unusual depth for the average historical KZread channel. Honestly I don't know how he does it but the content speaks for itself

@charlesk22

11 ай бұрын

​@@geoffroydegodefroy2374thanks for the recommendation.

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

Exactly, Schwerpunkt, Historiansplaining or Rediscovery Channel or basically any videos of lectures in academic institutes or downright universities. This video responses are more often than not just internet drama and political chitchat where people isnt really interested in learning a profound understanding of a subject, but just to impose their ideas that are quite clearly politically driven, thats why i don't trust any of these youtubers (except for the ones listed above) specially if they are blatant leftists like this guy Fredda or intellectually deshonest like that guy Pax Tube

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

Btw, "crusades" are not an ideology pal, remember, ideologies didnt existed until the French Revolution

10:14 If it wasn’t that bad expanding your empire and mistreating people on those times. What makes so bad the crusades?

@GerardDeRideford

3 ай бұрын

Don’t bother, he is just pushing soy agenda. Google the sources he used lmfao

@marny3559

3 ай бұрын

No, you don't understand, Christianity = Bad and Islam = Good.

@generalpierogi7781

2 ай бұрын

Exactly

@maciejbala477

17 күн бұрын

for the time, sure, not really a "bad" thing if you view it from that perspective, just a big conflict, which had a lot of impact. But big conflicts are not good

24:04 interesting how you dismiss all the Christian claims of muslim agression as propaganda, but present this record from muslim sources as fact

@basedfemboi9401

6 ай бұрын

It's honestly the most pathetic thing ever they just completely ignore the things Islam does. Look what happens to LGBTQ people in Europe because of open borders

@monkeymoment6478

6 ай бұрын

How does he think they got to the Levant in the first place? Did they just appear out of nowhere as a grassroots movement? They pillaged, annexed, and colonized historically Christian lands.

@lazcentral4828

6 ай бұрын

did you even see the part about cannibalism@@monkeymoment6478

@WTF2BlueTiger

6 ай бұрын

@@monkeymoment6478 It's a religion... It literally did have a grassroots movement out of the sparsely populated tribal societies of the arabic deserts...? You think of islam as some horde of people just conquering removing and taking over Christian lands when there barely existed any bedouins that could even replace those christians? Christian Egypt was ruled over by a muslim minority for centuries before they eventually assimilated and became majority muslims. Like do you think Christians popped out of the ground like dwarves out of little holes or something? Religions have the same history, they don't spread without the help of institutions like churches/kingdoms/empires or nations. But yes they do generally convert people it's not like the Christians murdered all the pagans and replaced them (but there was some murder involved at different times and events). Islam did this much better than most (maybe they had to since it's one of the most modern day, youngest religions), because islam prefered to convert people practically (e.g introducing a non muslim tax for christians/jews) rather than force conversion that was so common in Christianity especially during/after the crusades. It took longer but caused less internal conflict, which is exactly why they could rule over larger groups of non muslims quite successfully without as many issues

I always find it very tragic how easy it is for misinformation to be pumped out and how much more difficult it is to slog through all the misinformation to prove them wrong.

@jg8060

10 ай бұрын

"misinformation". A word used today to silence anyone who disagrees. Commonly associated with "fact checkers".

@MensHominis

10 ай бұрын

The view count of Pax Tube’s video and all the dull folk applauding him in the comment section below blackpills me so bloody hard. Anyone pointing out crusader atrocities will literally be told to “do some unbiased research, dunce”. _What could be more unbiased than reading Christian crusader chroniclers themselves, dunce?!_ 😩

@a.hakimfatehali1493

9 ай бұрын

You just described Gish galloping!

@imarock.7662

8 ай бұрын

@@MensHominis For real...

@ryanparker4996

7 ай бұрын

​@@MensHominiswhats more blackpilling is the sheer amount of armchaor historians who swear blind that they would have been more moral if they were there themselves, unironically judging historical events by modern moral standards from your comfy little house sure doesnt inspire me with much confidence in your perspective on reality.

I am a small history KZreadr and making videos (especially on Christianity) kinda worries me when I do, because I fear that I might be using harmful information when I strive to use non-biased stuff.

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

All you can do is strive to understand the historiography, be honest about your sources and attempt to reflect what historians understand of the period. You will get things wrong, and many things you got right will later be proven to be wrong. It's just the nature of history. Writing history is never "done" so you will never get everything right. Academics are generally responsible enouhg to recognize when they're contributing to harmful narratives and have to do a lot of reflection on ethics, and so if you base yourself in the words of academics you are generally safe.

@Balon-Breakspear

11 ай бұрын

I just subscribed to you bud

@Balon-Breakspear

11 ай бұрын

Good luck

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

As long as You don't base your content on pleasing a right wing audience or viewpoints (like that guy Pax Tube) or pleasing a left wing audience and viewpoints (like this guy Fredda) You should be fine

@Balon-Breakspear

11 ай бұрын

@@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl The difference being that Fredda never said anything incorrect and cited sources during his video. It’s weird how you equate citing sources and accurate information to “pleasing a left wing audience”. That’s how information should be given. Accurate and sourced on somebody whose done years of study. Especially when talking about historical events.

as someone who is politically and sociologically center it is a really cool position that I get to see from different perspectives. Im gonna subscibe! Not because our beliefs align, but bc even if they dont I still find it interesting to hear other view points.

@taxes.death.christ

26 күн бұрын

hmm, on second thought thats a lie im actually right-skewed-center but i try to keep an open mind, i try to avoid staying in my own echo chamber, but sometimes i get an "ick" from exposing myself to leftism lol.

It always restores my faith in humanity when I see people make response videos calling out clowns who misrepresent history for their own warped agendas. Well done, and thank you.

@daniel8181

2 ай бұрын

Yeah thats why it was neat to see paxtube make that upload.

@keto0303

2 ай бұрын

The only ones who misrepresent history are those who deliberately paint Christians and Europeans as the bad guys without considering the true circumstances

@Raansu

Ай бұрын

Now actually look up historical events and realize this video is pure BS lol.

am I ever glad i'm at a point in my life where I can watch content I disagree with, the amount of information you learn. Able to see clear biases in previously held opinions ect. Just a random comment, thanks for the videos. Very thought provoking!

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

No problem!

@dnegel9546

10 ай бұрын

Haha same here. The paxtube guy hates muslims, this guy hates christians. Im just eating popcorn 🍿😲. Enjoying the shit show. Hoping one day soon jupiter crashes into earth at 2mph hitting me first preferably. 😃

@blacktigerpaw1

10 ай бұрын

Even genocide denial?

@dirtydangler

10 ай бұрын

@@blacktigerpaw1 Every modern society plays its part in GeNoCiDe DeNiaL lol, see how useful ur comment was?

@blacktigerpaw1

10 ай бұрын

@@dirtydangler Difference is, you people only believe that Christians - specifically white ones - are the *only ones* capable of this. I do not see BreadTube videos on Muslim conquests and what they did to the non Muslim populations. None. Instead, we get video like this one getting dates wrong and wholescale *ignoring* the Muslim atrocities done during the Crusader era. It's done on purpose, but at least you feel better than those dumb Christians, right buddy? There are other KZread channels discussing both sides, like Real Crusades History. You aren't watching those, though, you're watching BreadTubers because it gives you that one of a kind smug satisfaction only leftists have.

I watched the video last week, and it's genuinely got some strange schizo history takes. For example, he says that the "dark ages" were actually a golden age of medieval European trade etc but also that it was a dark age ONLY because of Muslim piracy.

@dr0g_Oakblood

11 ай бұрын

ah yes, the incredibly wide reaching effects of the Maghrebi Corsairs were truly the bane of.... Post-Roman Britain? I think that was the assorted North Germanic raiders, but of course blaming pale-skinned people is nothing but woke nonsense I am sure.....

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

@@ManiacMayhem7256 Mainly that by most chronologies it had ended almost 300 years ago. We're well into the High Middle Ages at this point and the Crusades are literally one of the defining characteristics of them.

@SorceressWitch

11 ай бұрын

He called islamic golden age "so called" as in to deny it. However dark ages is just meant to refer to lack of historical writings. Modern scholars don't use that term anymore they instead split it into early, high and late middle ages. But things definitely weren't golden in Europe at that time. He also brings up slavery without mentioning that slavery still existed in europe at the time.

@Projolo

11 ай бұрын

Dark age is a term from the modern age to mock the middle ages

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

​@@SorceressWitchI don't know man, many historians Even get to the conclusion that the splendor of the 12th Century Renaissance wasnt matched until past the 17th Century crisis

history shouldn’t be left or right politically. we should try look at history from an unbiased and factual perspective

Comments did not disappoint, good job people.

@maciejbala477

17 күн бұрын

it's a shitfest lol. If you have the YT dislike extension on as well, you can see that the video has a pretty huge number of dislikes too. Kinda weird how the whatifalthist stuff doesn't even come close to that one

Great video, as a medieval history student i can netpick a lot of your arguments such as around 10:19 where you speak about medieval living conditions (they weren't awful as some might thinks) but your mistakes are often common misconception and do not spoil the real critique which i think you nailed, i also praise the fact that not only you share your sources but also do not claim that you are a professional nor that you have all the knowledge. Even doctors and master degrees get some facts wrong and are constantly debating. Anyways cheers

@Gripen1974

7 ай бұрын

also when they talk about medieval Europe do many forget medieval times was over a long time and on top of it was over a large area so living conditions wasn't the same all over the era and space. So the terrible living conditions ppl point to could be during one specific set of time in some back water area and not the common place in the larger whole time era and Europe in general.

@leilagorrilla4842

7 ай бұрын

@@Gripen1974 yes, very true

@David-vp3eq

7 ай бұрын

"Factually you're wrong but ideologically you're right"

@leilagorrilla4842

7 ай бұрын

@@David-vp3eq Yeah kinda, even thought i wouldn't say that

@JaceDeanLove

7 ай бұрын

​​@@leilagorrilla4842*agrees with statement* but also, "I wouldn't say that" 😂

If you look at some of his other videos you'll find one where he says that Germany, Italy, and Japan are not real democracise. During such video he complains that Italy and Germany arent real democracies because they both banned their fascists parties. This guy also heavily implies that he doesnt belive in democracy and if not a outright Fascists he is certainly sympathetic to it.

@kitcloudkicker14

10 ай бұрын

That weirdo Pax Tube literally defends the inquisition and says that the french revolution was bad because the revolutionaries murdered the king and many rich nobles. So, his ideal society is definitely some sort of absolutist theocracy, the funniest thing with this kind of freaks is that they always envision themselves as said kings or nobles reading and writting in palaces or castles in a comfey chair, when in fact, they would have been peasants working 24/7 in farmlands with miserable conditions and paying abusive taxes to the nobles.

@based_kaiser9015

10 ай бұрын

@@kitcloudkicker14 Being a medieval peasant is better than the soulless bugman life of modernity

@kitcloudkicker14

10 ай бұрын

@@based_kaiser9015 Lead with the example and delete your social media accounts, no more memes, no more videogames, no more "trad-chad" videos here, cuz medieval peasants didn't have all that stuff. You won't endure one weekend by just staring the walls PD: I don't know why you are defending a catholic reactionary like Pax Tube while having a Kaiser pfp, when the german emperors were protestant and the country as a whole was the first to ever defy the catholic church thanks to Martin Luther. For him you are also part of the "liberal degeneracy" since he believes only catholicism is the true faith.

@goyonman9655

7 ай бұрын

If you ban political parties. You're not a real democracy

@dopaminedreams1122

4 ай бұрын

sounds fair to me, "fascist" is a term with zero meaning after all you guys used it to refer to anyone to the right of Stalin. Cry more

I gotta say man you had me til the end there. Wishing the guy never finds peace? I also think your comparison of him to the car bomber was a bit much. Pointing out historical inaccuracies is one thing, but trying to draw comparisons to a terrorist is a whole other level. A little more temperance might be needed next time dawg.

@Hollero71

7 ай бұрын

I thought the same thing

@JanJansen985

7 ай бұрын

Dude lost me at 6:30 when he said there was no christian identity In 1100s europe

@Hollero71

7 ай бұрын

@@JanJansen985 this is video is about essentially the modern leftist viewpoint on the crusades. Once he ran out of facts/reasons he resorted to insults which is common place in today’s political arguments.

@JoneThePwn

5 ай бұрын

I'm so glad I found this thread. Now I don't need to bother watching the video. Comparing people who disagree to terrorists? Claiming 1100s Europe didn't have a Christian identity? Yeah, that's enough to not take the video seriously.

@draco_1876

5 ай бұрын

@@JanJansen985there wasn’t. Christians and Muslims have been constantly fighting and killing each other.

I’m very impressed with how your video immediately attacks your adversary personally before saying anything else. Truly I’m already convinced before I hear any evidence.

@Jack-iu2gl

5 ай бұрын

This, these Marxist types are eternally trapped as spoiled kids who use elementary school logic to attack their opponents

@thepakistanipotato

5 ай бұрын

Did you not watch the video? Or even read the bibliography?

@bjcantrell1990

5 ай бұрын

It's what people like this do when they don't have any real argument to make, amplified by his own admission of not being an expert on the crusades to begin with. All he has is spite, and it shows.

@thepakistanipotato

5 ай бұрын

@@bjcantrell1990 in other words, you didn’t watch the video Or read the bibliography Or even consider that someone might be upset or offended at paxtube’s heinously wrong and misleading narrative on the crusades

@mattata-san

5 ай бұрын

jew

great video, honestly im surprised how cannibalism keep appering in ancient warfare history every time i read it, a few days ago i read about the mercenary war and that had also an instance of it, it seems that cannibalism is really common in ancient warfare when a siege happens

@InquisitorThomas

11 ай бұрын

Pre Industrial War Logistics tended to be pretty shitty, and “pork” tends to be fairly abundant in disease rife sieges.

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

One thing I didn't mention is how one source pretty much says "They ate humans, but the bad part was they may have cooked it wrong." And another says "They sometimes ate humans, and even dogs."

@sinthoras1917

10 ай бұрын

It partially might have just be a returning motif. Medieval sieges are often described in very similar manners. Sometimes people just assumed that the besieged were surely suffering from sicknesses, when there is no other evidence confirming that. Same can always be true with cannibalism

@picahudsoniaunflocked5426

10 ай бұрын

@@sinthoras1917 I'd be interested in seeing an expert or panel of experts separate "folkloric motifs" of siege warfare with "actual practices" & go thru the evidence.

@sinthoras1917

10 ай бұрын

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 Maria Pieschacon-Raffael from the Uni Munich was researching into the sieges of the hundred years war, also covering such things, and I think Prof. Dr. Christof Paulus, also from that Uni, specifically noted such motifs.

5:26 Also that identity did not include all of what we would call Europe today. It mostly included Western and Central Europe. The Romans certainly did not feel apart of it considering they were more often fighting against the Crusaders than alongside them, and Eastern Europe also wasn't really included since it was also more often the target of Crusades than apart of them. 6:08 And it also wasn't true of all Christians that they viewed all Muslims the same way. Namely the Romans were well acquainted with the fragmented post-Caliphate Islamic world. The Roman Empire had operated within this world for centuries by now and had, had close contact with Muslims since the literal birth of Islam so they were pretty familiar with it and the different groups within them. At times they even had Muslim vassals in the form of Antioch and Edessa, and they also often made alliances and signed treaties with Muslim powers. Of course very often Roman sources will display classic Roman arrogance and describe all of these in classical terms, calling all Muslims Persians or all Turks Scythians but they did that with the Latins too. Predictably the European Crusaders who understood none of the complexities of the Eastern Mediterranean often got angry at the Romans for negotiating with Muslim powers because they didn't understand the difference between them. Often the crusaders wouldn't listen to Roman advice or would ignore Turkish targets to instead focus on those in the Levant which held basically no strategic importance to the Romans. The Romans themselves often considered the Europeans a bigger threat and within the Roman aristocracy it's clear that many would have preferred alliances with other Muslim powers against the Turks, who were trying to conquer said powers. We even see examples like the Siege of Nicea where the emperor has to go to great lengths to prevent the crusades from massacring the mostly Roman Christian inhabitants of the city, which is exactly what happened in Jerusalem and Antioch when the Romans weren't there to act as middle men. In general the Eastern Roman Empire pokes a great big hole in most of these narratives about the crusades being a "clash of civilizations" by just not fitting into it even slightly. 7:15 And ironically the actual Roman Empire considered the Arabian Muslims much less barbaric than the European Christians, this is clearly reflected in their sources. While the Arabs are often referred to as Persian, an empire that the Romans always had a begrudging respect for as a fellow empire and treated somewhat as an equal, the Europeans are referred to as Franks or Goths, the tribes that were blamed for the fall of the western half of the Empire. In descriptions of the Crusaders it also seems very clear that the Romans found them uncivilized and uncouth, the sources hold quite a lot of contempt for their lack of manners and the lack of respect and deference they showed towards the emperor. Meanwhile you can't really find the same complaints about Muslims, except Turks but again the Romans knew that they were a recent arrival that most Muslims didn't like either. You even find some Roman sources that praise Bagdhad and concede that it is beautiful though of course second to Constantinople. This doesn't exactly matter but I do just find it funny how he uses these terms that the Romans loved as if the Romans weren't still around at this time and using them. I mean I think Anna Komenene quite literally called the crusaders barbarians. 8:30 Jihad should really be viewed as part of an imperialist ideology that developed within the Caliphate in response to its stunning military successes. It only really starts making it appearance well after the Caliphate has become an empire and there's very little evidence for it within the Quran itself. We have to remember that by the time of the Arab conquest Islam was still a very young religion and in the early stages of its development and we have almost no contemporary Muslim sources from that time period. We have some Christian sources but a lot of them seemed to believe that Muhammad was a jew and that Islam was a sect of Judaism, which is either a mistake because Islam does have a lot in common with Judaism, or a reflection of Islam not having a clear identity yet. The sources start appearing about a century later and they're mostly written by scholars in the now established Caliphate who are trying to push their own ideas and sometimes political connections by claiming to have familial connections to the Prophet. These aspects of imperialist ideology are of course not unique to any empire, the Romans who were right next door had already had their idea of "Just War" for ages propped up by the blatant like that Rome only ever fought defensive wars, and somehow conquered the entire Mediterranean in the process (though at this point their justification was more that they were God's Kingdom on Earth so they had natural dominion over the entire world). Similarly you get later European empires who justify their conquest by claiming that they're spreading civilization or Christianity. Also the stuff about slavery sorta falls flat on it's face when you think about the Roman Empire or the triangle trade. 11:07 That quote is just straight up wrong. While trade in the Eastern Mediterranean was absolutely impacted by the wars between the (IIRC) Abbasid Caliphate and the Roman Empire the fact that the Romans were still taxing merchants in their ports makes it pretty clear that it was still happening. Also the fact that piracy was happening means that there was something to pirate, this is like concluding that there must have been no trade in the Caribbean during the Golden age of Piracy because of all the pirates, like it was the opposite the piracy happened because this was one of the most valuable regions for trade in the entire world. The same could easily be said of the Eastern Mediterranean in this period, it still had some of the richest regions in the world and trade was very valuable. People forget that piracy is often a targeted campaign to take over trade in a region, not an attempt to destroy it. The Vikings had done the same in the North Sea two centuries earlier and the English and Dutch would both use this tactic themselves much later. 11:44 What kinda time frame for the dark ages is this? Everyone considers it to have ended with the Carolingian Renaissance in the 8th and 9th century, about 200 years before he says it ended. At this point basically every chronology would be well into the High Middle Ages. Also usually you'd have it start in the 5th century with the fall of the Western Roman Empire, I don't know what he considers the 200 years between it and the start of his dark ages to have been. 12:17 The best argument against him here is to simply point out that the Islamic Golden Age outlived the Caliphates by about 400 years so clearly it was not based on imperialism. It is usually considered to have ended with the Mongol sack of Bagdhad not the fall of the last Caliphate. 16:02 He also completely misunderstands Turkish tribal politics. These invasions were not centrally planned imperialist expansions but rather individual tribes striking out for themselves in search of loot and pasture lands trying to escape the central power of the Seljuk Sultan. Part of the lead-up to the Battle of Manzikert was actually Sultan Asjan trying to strike a deal with Emperor Diogenes in order to prevent these migrations but it would see the Romans cede a lot of land in Armenia which was unacceptable to them. Also it's a bit disingenuous to call the Turks Muslim at this point, they had converted only two generations prior and their conversion was clearly out of political expediency to gain some manner of legitimacy in the region so they probably weren't very Muslim. And as I've also mentioned before the other Muslims in the region weren't particularly fond of the Turks either and at one point it even seemed like the Romans and the Fatamids were gonna strike an Anti-Turkish alliance. And of course the Romans even had fairly peaceful relations with various Turkish groups at some point and the local population definitely figured out a way to live alongside them. 19:10 Anna probably isn't completely reliable in this aspect. It does seem like Alexios was pleasantly surprised by the Crusade at first and then later came to regret it, mainly because of Antioch. Anna is writing with that hindsight but she also is clearly expressing some of her personal opinion on the Crusaders since most of the Roman elite were quite disgusted by them. She was also writing during the reign of her brother, John, who spent basically his entire life trying to deal with the Crusaders so that probably did a lot to color her views. And she's likely trying to make it seem like her father isn't to blame for this by making him a reluctant participant.

@jbstarkiller4626

11 ай бұрын

you're ignorance is showing.

It’s unnecessary to attack his character just prove him wrong.

1:47 it was the saracens that engaged in such acts, and that is why many joined the crusade, they didn't like that happening to their wifes and daughters; inverting the truth as much as possible to make an argument, I'm out.

@williamchamberlain2263

Күн бұрын

Okay Snowflake, you just go ahead and deny the written accounts of the crusaders themselves

You have your own biases too. I disagree with you on some of the points you made. Why don’t you two settle this down over a debate?

@marcoeire44

10 ай бұрын

Communist scum does not debate. This is the case with them all, they don't have a leg to stand on in a real debate.

@alexlaw1892

19 күн бұрын

He would lose and he knows it.

yes fredda i understand you like disco elysium but there exists other music tracks than whirling in rags

@FreddaYT

11 ай бұрын

I'VE BEEN LOOKING BUT IT HAS TO BE ROYALTY FREE IT'S NOT EASY

@user-su7nk7zp2c

11 ай бұрын

@@FreddaYT lol

Guys, the start of this video isn’t ad hominem. It’s outlining PaxTube’s biases by reference to the behaviour he’s exhibited online. Some of the language used (e.g. ‘LARPing’) may seem harsh but they’re clearly thrown in to outline the biases that PaxTube’s account is influenced by. If there’s any issue to have with this, it’s that this channel didn’t do the same for their own bias.

This "narrative" is as biased as the one it is criticising. Christianity is not worse than Islam, the European Catholic Kingdoms are not worse than the Arab Caliphates and white people are not worse than brown people. The north of Africa, the Mediterranean portion of the Middle East and the plains of Anatolia were christian territories until they were conquered by the muslims. The European Kingdoms were being raided by the muslims, the regions where today are Spain and Portugal were conquered by the muslims and remained under a caliphate's control for centuries, the Arabs coming from Spain didn't conquer France because the French didn't let them, the Christian Byzantine Empire fell to the Otomans and one of the most traditional cities of the Christian civilization is now known as Istanbul. The person who did this video is as fundamentalist as the person who did the other one, fascists of a different kind.

@BurnBird1

5 ай бұрын

This is absolutely hilarious.

@somerandomcanuck9432

5 ай бұрын

​@@BurnBird1 He is right you know, two sides of the same coin, both oblivious to the other.

@BurnBird1

5 ай бұрын

@@somerandomcanuck9432 Sure, the historical consensus is definitely just as reliable as religious crackpots.

@freddy105

5 ай бұрын

@@BurnBird1 i think the op of this comment exaggerated but i agree to the notion that islam is just as bad as christianity

@cesruhf2605

5 ай бұрын

@@BurnBird1 You racist but the other way around lol

I can't imagine living in fear due to events which happened about 1000 years ago

@damianjblack

7 ай бұрын

You've never been an Elf living during the Second Age of Middle-earth then. ;-)

@shaydowsith348

6 ай бұрын

considering some religions are based on events that happened (or didn't) thousands of years ago .....

@eedeneel

6 ай бұрын

@@shaydowsith348 yeah exactly

@wanderingskeleton52

6 ай бұрын

​@damianjblack I am lead to believe that Tolkien's Middle Earth Books (famously exemplified in The Silmarillion and The Lord of Rings) are a deconstruction of Romanticism, of Mythology and Folklore. The fact that no one culture is perfect nor infallible. There is conflict, adapting, success, failures, grey area. All of those cultures have their pros and cons, expressed fairly. Ofcourse neutral aspects, moral grey area, motives, insight and all else relevant and indicative. This reflects in the time period JRRT grew up in, the UK still had these Victorian ideas, mindsets and all alongside the popularity of fairy tales at the time which glorified the whole happily ever after endings and implied European superiority. Thankfully him and Christopher Tolkien (his son) went against that, especially with the emphasis on change and adaptability. Mind, I am no virtue signaller and I hate all that. My stances derive purely from ethics and critical thinking. The Tolkien setting (not just LotR) is relatable, but it's non self inserting. What I mean by non self inserting is that it asks the hard questions and gets you to self assess your beliefs and how you see life and the moral categories of right and wrong.

@wanderingskeleton52

6 ай бұрын

​@@damianjblack^^

He didn't glorify slavery at all, what

@goyonman9655

7 ай бұрын

You're trying to convince a determined liar

@FengBaoYolotli

Ай бұрын

@@goyonman9655projection

This left me with so many more questions then answers 😅

@MrsNeedlemouse

3 ай бұрын

Welcome to history

@user-gu2xp4cc9m

3 ай бұрын

That's the study of history for ya

@muhammadedwards8425

3 ай бұрын

Do you place your contextualise your data for accuracy or storytelling? That is the difference between history and propaganda. Pax tube was heavy on propaganda, and this guy is all over the place

@dewoitine

2 ай бұрын

Welcome aboard, the study of history is deeper than "brown man bad, white man good"

@goteemos5334

2 ай бұрын

@@dewoitine no one thinks that way it’s white man bad brown man oppressed

I got 2 minutes in and couldn't take any more of your obviously leftist ranting. Try just sticking to the facts and avoid rampant leftist commentary.

@thomasferguson2193

7 ай бұрын

Go back to enjoying unreferenced history content in your echo chamber! Thanks for the visit :)

@jenniferzoch3309

7 ай бұрын

@@thomasferguson2193 Typical arrogant leftist, always assuming things completely without knowledge. I can't say I'm surprised by your ignorant comment.

@ackee39

22 күн бұрын

its amazing how every right wing comment here is like ‘i watched six seconds of this thirty minute video and declared it was communist propaganda. unwatcheable, back to my echo chamber i go!’

2 episodes in a week? Hopefully, this trend continues and this becomes like a daily 30min turkish soap opera

@TheoEvian

11 ай бұрын

"Hirem Sultan, the Franks are at the gates! We must send a messenger to Beyazid!" or something :D

@girthquake5231

10 ай бұрын

It's about as believable as a soap opera.

@burakasik3937

7 ай бұрын

​@@TheoEvianturkish soap opera plot litterally as a turk

@TheoEvian

7 ай бұрын

@@burakasik3937 i know i am referencing one i know

He also ignores how ireland seemingly wasn’t impacted by the dark ages. They like the Muslims preserved ancient texts and knowledge. They taught classical Latin as a trade language and used Roman metalworking techniques that died in Italy but survived in Ireland. He ignores them because the type of Christianity they practiced was later deemed heretical by Rome.

@hedgehog3180

11 ай бұрын

There was also the whole ass Roman empire still kicking around.

@TeikonGom

11 ай бұрын

The muslims were so moral and peaceful that they conquered Iberia and built forts in the Alps.

@Bigchangues

11 ай бұрын

@@TeikonGomassigning morality to conflicts before colonialism is pointless basically everyone was awful so nothing was “unjustified” it’s just the way the world worked

@zippyparakeet1074

11 ай бұрын

​@@TeikonGomOh yeah and the Germanic Christian barbarians conquered the Roman Empire and abused its citizens. Especially the Visigoths of Iberia- literally the worst of the Barbarian kingdoms. There are no good guys in history. Grow up.

@TeikonGom

11 ай бұрын

@@zippyparakeet1074 I'm well aware of that. That's why I wrote my comment.

Your arguments and attitude are shit throughout the video but that's expected. What wasn't expected was the blatant attempt at linking Pax to a bomber at the end (among all the ists). Really desperate and destroyed all credibility (what little you had) for anything else in the video.

@meanbeaver3192

3 ай бұрын

Right wingers throw out ad hominids. Explain to me how this video is in anyway poorly explained

@krakenmckraken9128

3 ай бұрын

@@meanbeaver3192 No If you read my comment and decided that claiming “right wingers” are the ones throwing out “ad hominids” then you’re being dishonest and this conversation will go nowhere. History is straight forward on the subject. This guy attempted linking pax to a terrorist. Not wasting time on someone who refuses to comprehend that.

@meanbeaver3192

3 ай бұрын

@@krakenmckraken9128 History is never this straightforward though, there’s always nuance in things like this. If it was really about “liberation” why would they go to war with Byzantium. Also, bro be Fr, every political ideology throws insults at each other. Even the left

@meanbeaver3192

3 ай бұрын

@@krakenmckraken9128 Also, did you Fr really like your own comment 😭

@meanbeaver3192

3 ай бұрын

@@krakenmckraken9128 My point was right wingers throw out Ad hominids all the time. So a leftist doin it really doesn’t take away any credibility.

I wonder what your thoughts would be on the reconquest of Iberia

@SanctusPaulus1962

4 ай бұрын

"How dare those evil Spaniards fight back against the invaders of their homeland! Don't you know that Islam is a religion of peace?!"

@unique00925

3 ай бұрын

​@@SanctusPaulus1962Look! A strawman, I'm glad there wont be any birds around here.

@dusk6159

2 ай бұрын

​@@unique00925 There are literal accusations or mentions of "anti-islam" in this video

@unique00925

2 ай бұрын

@@dusk6159 please for the love of everything search up what a strawman is.

@dusk6159

2 ай бұрын

@@unique00925 So basically the exaggerations, preposterous and far-fetched too, made by the commentators and by the guy in the video on the other guy's characteristics and arguments boths. Which I get it, on the reverse he would pull the same exaggerations too.

His video of him 'debunking' the 'myth' of America being a country of immigrants is pretty bad too.

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

Why

@F_Yale

11 ай бұрын

@@ijon-y4549 Mostly because it doesn't say what he wants it say.

@user-di7bb4yk1y

11 ай бұрын

Wait, was he really trying to "prove" that modern Americans are somehow native to the continent?

@ijon-y4549

11 ай бұрын

@@user-di7bb4yk1y he didn't, he argued that the og whites were settlers, not migrants and that, in the centuries that followed, most migrants would be european

@user-di7bb4yk1y

11 ай бұрын

@@ijon-y4549 European migrants aren't migrants?

"The so called 'Islamic Golden Age' came at the expense of Europe." Almost all Golden Ages throughout history have been at the expense of some other region or culture, Pax Romana happened during Rome's height of imperialism and exploitation yet i've never seen someone claim it wasn't a golden age because of that.

@norikofu509

11 ай бұрын

Usually many of the "discoveries" from those golden ages were in fact, knowledge from more ancient civilizations

@salamyaya162

11 ай бұрын

The Romans killed and enslaved 500,000 from Carthage.

@davidmason4244

11 ай бұрын

​@@norikofu509which the muslims proceeded to burn.

@norikofu509

11 ай бұрын

@@davidmason4244 When ?

@davidmason4244

11 ай бұрын

@@norikofu509 from 600 to 1000 AD. Did I ask

Starting with character attack immediately weakens your argument which you claim to be objective.

@jamesnelson9919

4 ай бұрын

No it does not. It may be unsavory, but he never used his opinion on his character to justify his arguments. You should look up the definition of ad hominem.

@stylesmarshall6990

4 ай бұрын

Twas a damn good character attack tho

@alessandrozanzarella9203

4 ай бұрын

@@jamesnelson9919 Yes it does weaken his argument. If the other side was so clearly in the realm of objective fallacy you wouldn't even need to discredit their credibility in the first place, as their fallacy would be more than sufficient for a complete debunk. But no, this guy chose to begin his video by undermining the 'opponent' to make him look bad and already place him in a bad light at the eyes of his viewers so that he could further guarantee a pre-bias coming into the video. Lame.

@sonderistic7664

Ай бұрын

@@alessandrozanzarella9203 This doesn't make sense, the ad-hominem you're claiming wasn't used to fuel his argument, as he hadn't started his argument yet. When he does the debunking, he makes it academically rigourous. And let's be real, he is most likely right that PaxTube is an incel

@alessandrozanzarella9203

Ай бұрын

@@sonderistic7664 It makes perfect sense. You are right, it didn't fuel his arguments directly as of one by one but it did affect the overall gravitas of his points which had a crucial role in convincing tens of thousands of people that his view was the correct one, which it was only partially. Why? Well all he did was list a bunch of reasons why bad things were done during the crusades, which is true because at the end of the day, it's war that we're talking about. Not a posh teaparty at 4PM in west London. But all this missed the main points of paxtube: 1.The fact that the first crusades were a REACTION to the tens of attacks that Europe had suffered from the south. 2. The crusades united Europe like it never happened before and never would happen again until the EU became a thing almost a thousand years later. 3. The crusades were not this OTHERWORDLY CATASTROPHE like many in the antichristian sphere want to make of. And I agree paxtube is waaaaaaaaay too biased and this does downgrade his points a lot because many of them are not factual but just a rephrasing of the concept in his own light. But at the same time sometimes he does bring up interesting and correct arguments like the core argument of his video. And finally that ad hominem goes to show the viciousness and cowardness of the creator. Bear in mind: No academic debunking needs an ad hominem. Period.

So this debunking video feels personal, what with the insults at the beginning. Hard to feel that this guy isn't biased

@biscuit4951

7 ай бұрын

He's a Norwegian commie, of course he is biased

@ColourizeTheStreets

7 ай бұрын

Agree, he even says he hopes Pax burns in hell at the end. Sounds like something an evil crusader would say about his enemies. He makes a lot of good points with good references, but just like Pax this video is extremely bias.

@LonelyKnightess

6 ай бұрын

Bigots don't need to be treated nice, a bias against misinformation peddling fascists is good and you're deeply in the wrong if you find that troubling.

@thunderwing2124

6 ай бұрын

@LonelyKnightess Sure, but then it makes him sound like an extremist or bigot too.

@LonelyKnightess

6 ай бұрын

@@thunderwing2124 No it doesn't lmao. You aren't an extremist or a bigot for not liking Nazis. If you think it's extremist to say Nazis can go fuck themselves, especially when their ideology has *every year this decade* led to hundreds of innocent deaths, then you are the one who needs to reevalute your viewpoints. If you try to be some sort of enlightened centrist between the Nazis and those who oppose them, you're just a diet Nazi. Oppose them or fuck off, we don't need to constantly bend over to be 'fair' to a group of genocidal idiots who base their viewpoints off of hatred of other races. If that's bigotry to you then you don't know bigotry, and should consider listening to victims more than you listen to Nazis.

First Crusade : The cult classic first movie. Norwegian Crusade : The weird hilarious The Asylum rip-off. Second Crusade : The disapointing sequel with weird love drama. Second Crusade (in Spain) : The unnecessary, but enjoyable, spin-off. Third Crusade : The back-to-basics masterpiece conclusion of the first trilogy. Fourth Crusade : The controversial relaunch of the saga. Fifth Crusade : The bad and forgotten movie. Sixth Crusade : The underrated movie which try new things. Seventh Crusade : Continuating the downfall of the franchise. However, the main character is amazing. Eighth Crusade : The last universally hated bad movie who butcher lore and characters. Lord Edward's Crusade : The Netflix adaptation.

@aandwdabest

8 ай бұрын

Making history relevant in 21st century media speak. Simply brilliant.

@rKhael53

7 ай бұрын

@@aandwdabest Thank you

@jeffersonclippership2588

7 ай бұрын

Forgot the Baltic crusade

@IgN5P

7 ай бұрын

They still haven't dramatized the Baltic crusades? Hulu will get on those immediately.

@damianjblack

6 ай бұрын

@@cosmopreston343 and the only one that actually had long term success. I don't see many Cathars around after Montsegur fell in 1244...

First Whatifalthist, now Pax Tube. HE IS THE CHOSEN ONE!

@Not_Nican

11 ай бұрын

Exactly what I was thinking

@davidmason4244

10 ай бұрын

Yeah let's see him debunk the lost cause, that will be his gauntlet.

@potatortheomnipotentspud

10 ай бұрын

@@davidmason4244 Or both types of the unga bunga partisans who simp for long dead factions of a long dead war. US Civil War discourse is so fucking toxic and retarded, and when you dig deep enough, you find that everyone sucked and that there were no heroes in it, only puppets and assholes.

@davidmason4244

9 ай бұрын

@@Blakbox92 ah yes the most cited series online about the lost cause. It still hasn't proven the civil war was about slavery and in my opinion it's why when Fredda makes a video on the civil war I will be ready to debunk his trash. Even atun shei was garbage.

@phr3ui559

9 ай бұрын

@@davidmason4244 do you have a critique of it?

@20:00 dude totally skips over Pax’s point three because it’s indisputable lmao

@chrissant6277

Ай бұрын

@@kevinortiz2597 Say why he's wrong, or that the point is mute. Don't deflect.

@educateyourself3872

Ай бұрын

@@kevinortiz2597 don’t really care what you consider to be insufferable tbh but glad to see it’s working! :)

@daeemabrar7243

10 күн бұрын

@@educateyourself3872 dude is right, say where he is wrong instead of being retared in the commet section

@educateyourself3872

6 күн бұрын

@@daeemabrar7243 I said he skipped over point number three of Pax. This is true. He DID skip it. It’s not my responsibility to explain why Pax’s point #3 is right. It’s Fredda’s responsibility to explain why Pax’s point 3 is wrong. It’s the whole point of this video. How can he “debunk Pax ideology” when he’s skipping over major points??

Kinda glad i learned a rough outline for a lot of historical points before history youtube took off. I also will randomly fact check things in some vids and if something sounds sketchy with no source, I'll pause and do a dive. If I'm consuming historical content i want it to be accurate

"this is a deeply unserious individual" gonna use this one

11:00 the Byzantines were actually DEFENDING themselves from Saracen pirates and Islamic khalifs

@boogalooter7280

4 ай бұрын

This is anti white history so nuh uh

@karlirosek

4 ай бұрын

Exactly !

@maciejbala477

17 күн бұрын

nobody said the byzantines werent defending themselves?

Starts with attacking the person not the idea. A classic

@archiebuchan2563

4 ай бұрын

Well he’s got about 28 minutes of attacking the idea right after

@candaniel

4 ай бұрын

@@archiebuchan2563 He didn't attack the idea of the much larger Muslim aggression preceeding the Crusades at all. He focusses on irrelevant details while ignoring Pax Tube's (correct) point. This video is trash.

@archiebuchan2563

4 ай бұрын

@@candaniel his point is that pax is inherently wrong in his framing of an evil Muslim empire rivalling a good Christian empire- just like it would be wrong to present the inverse. The “much larger Muslim aggression” were unrelated groups that didn’t have as huge an effect as Pax suggests (whilst conveniently leaving out the Christian groups who did parallel acts. In the end the crusades were just empire expansion under the guise of religion from two morally corrupt sides.

@alexlehrersh9951

4 ай бұрын

And Pax didnt say evil and good. Pax did say it was a logical follwoup of the islamic wave and was not out of the medival standart at that time But everyone who is not anti cristianity is a facist incel for you@@archiebuchan2563

@GerardDeRideford

3 ай бұрын

@@archiebuchan2563are you crazy? Muslims pushing into Europe from both the east and the west while pirating in the Mediterranean had no effect?

Average "Deboonker"

@chrisgaming9567

6 ай бұрын

Implying that most debunkers are good at debunking? I agree!

@dhimankalita1690

3 ай бұрын

Average incel modern knight

@lethalkillazz

Ай бұрын

his deboonking consists of insulting catholics and resorting to ad hominem

@nuckelaveez5029

Ай бұрын

@@lethalkillazzA large proportion of Catholics believe some pretty messed up things. I think using an appeal to “wah you’re insulting my people”, when people critique traditional Catholic beliefs, is pretty cowardly, and intellectually dishonest

@FengBaoYolotli

Ай бұрын

better than you are

The crusades are a terrible time in history to glorify it was a big waste of time and life.

@randallbucholz314

11 ай бұрын

All those men, both the Crusaders and the Jihadists, lived and died by their faith and achieved a meaningful existence. You will die bitter and alone.

@chamma505

11 ай бұрын

@@randallbucholz314RIP bozo💀💀💀💀💀💀

@davidmason4244

11 ай бұрын

​@@randallbucholz314image being without purpose and talking about men who actual fought for their god.

@Jakster840

11 ай бұрын

​@@randallbucholz314 ok go off, bro lol

@wikipiiimp9420

11 ай бұрын

@@randallbucholz314 if being a war criminal is what you consider a good meaningful life, you are deluded.

so just doing a literal cursory search on the gawr gura thing, absolutely literally NOTHING shows up to confirm this. no clips, no nothing. You'd think that if something like that came up it would get clipchamped super hard like everything else she says does. Instead, the only thing that shows up is unironically pax tube making the accusation lol.

I just recently watched pax tubes video now I am watching yours and then I will come to a conclusion at the end because that is intellectual honesty

5:05 Newsflash! The Crusades was not the first "Islam christianity" conflict . The first crusade was Year 1096 The first christianity Islam conflict was The 711 Umayaad invasion and conquest of The Visigothic Kingdom in Hispania (Spain) and the following 719 invasion and attempted conquest of Gaul (France) resulting in the Christian victory at Toulouse in 721 by Duke Odo of Aquitane over Al-Samh ibn Malik al-Khawlani for which he was praised by Pope Gegorius II as a champion of Roman Christianity.

@wordart_guian

9 ай бұрын

What about the conquests of syria? Egypt? Heck even the maghreb? Those were all christian and remained christian for a while for the most part

@benlunch7618

9 ай бұрын

"What about the conquests of syria? Egypt? Heck even the maghreb?" Christianity existed 600 years before Islam and thus conquered a ton of things before Islam was founded. For obvious reasons those werent christianity vs islam conflicts. @@wordart_guian

@wordart_guian

9 ай бұрын

@@benlunch7618 i mean the arab conquest of Egypt and syria duh Also neither of those were "conquered" by Christianity, pretty sure they were already largely Christian by condtantine's time

@benlunch7618

9 ай бұрын

If you treat Syria Palestina as a christian nation yes but its not that simple. Rome/Byzantum had conquered Syria/Palestina from the jews and then turned Christian (thus they werent conquered BY christians)... Later arab muslims conquered the area YES. However the arab muslims didnt conquer it from Rome did they? Byzantium was around 600-615 partly conquered by the Sasanian empire (Persia) and while the Byzantine Christians were fighting the Persians the Rashidun Empire (Arab muslims) flooded in from the south beating both of them. Parts of the lands the muslims took were former Byzantine which now the Persians controlled. Thus the area was a mix of jewish, christian and persian and then to that was added arab muslims and then to that was added christian crusader states. No wonder its such a mess today. @@wordart_guian

@wordart_guian

9 ай бұрын

@@benlunch7618 no i mean normal syria. Modern syria. It was majority christian before 300 AD.

That Paxtube video is what happens when you play Crusader Kings and use it as the sum total of your knowledge of the time period

@AManWithNoName

10 ай бұрын

PaxTube is when you jerk off to Crusader Kings 2 and 3 too much.

@indrickboreale7381

10 ай бұрын

But from my experience in Crusader Kings 2 you fight heretics more often than Muslims

@Nachy

9 ай бұрын

The consequences of Paradox Interactive's successful grand strategy games include a plethora of DLCs to nickle and dime everyone, and generating a new wave of armchair historians who treat real historical events as a vehicle for non-nuanced black-and-white power fantasy narratives.

@damianjblack

7 ай бұрын

@@indrickboreale7381 And of course the odious French.

@michaelaker4531

6 ай бұрын

i have almost 1000 hours in ck2 and when i saw his video i laughed my ass off

I know I'm late, and I respect your opinion and the research that went into it, but I completely disagree with your thesis. It seems as if you're judging the means without analyzing the ends. Christian Europe had a choice: let the Islamic Empire continue their expansion, or retaliate. Why throughout all of history is it okay to retaliate against a rival power expanding into your empire except in the case of the crusades? Do you really think they were going to stop in Spain? No. History isn't all sunshine and rainbows. There were barbaric individuals on both sides. Don't start looking in to what the Romans did when they were Pagan. And the tie back to modern lunatics is extremely dishonest. Horribly unethical for you to pull a lone wolf from 1000 years later to talk about how something was bad. Alexander must also have been bad, as Hitler and Mussolini aligned themselves with him.

@sven1966

4 ай бұрын

This guy chats rubbish if he cherrypicks someone from Pax’s ideology we could also grab one from his.

@psolo3

4 ай бұрын

@@sven1966 I watched the Pax video too and disagreed with his opinions on almost all of the evidence he cited, but at the very least I agreed with his thesis that the crusades were necessary. There's very little in this video, on the other hand, that I agree with

@forsubingsteam1565

4 ай бұрын

Except there is no "Christian Europe". The "Christian Europe" was not a unified and coherent whole, the "Catholic Europe", you could make a weak argument for, but Christian Europe? No. And in addition to that, "Catholic Europe" did not have a choice. The Pope had a choice between doing nothing or turning Catholicism into a increasingly militant sect which would later display it's colors in extreme brutality of increasingly local crusades, which is something one should feel concerned with, especially adherents of said religion. And this was expressed in a series of localized anti heretic crusades against Christians in your Christian Europe.

@redbird3697

4 ай бұрын

There is no such thing as "The Islamic Empire" various Caliphates emerged and often fought against each other, it was the Seljuk Turks who were at war with the Byzantine Empire while the Umayyad Caliphate had conquered Spain. And the Crusades were not a war of retaliation regardless of how they saw it. Jerusalem had been controlled by various Muslim Caliphates since the 7th century, almost 400 years before Pope Urban II's speech calling for a crusade. This would be like saying Mexico would be justified in retaliating against the U.S by taking Nevada, New Mexico and California. And before the various Caliphates, Jerusalem was part of the Byzantine Empire, despite this the "reclaimed" territory was not returned to the Byzantines and was instead ruled by Frankish and Norman nobles who's ancestors had never set foot in the Holy Land. If the goal of the Crusades was to stop the Seljuk Turks from taking more of Byzantium and the Umayyads from taking more of Europe then they would be justified, but that's not what the First Crusade accomplished.

@dopaminedreams1122

4 ай бұрын

@@redbird3697 you know what he means, jesus if your only argument is "actually it wasn't ONE evil empire but a few" you know your LOST. Stop trying to attack Christians for fighting back jsut because leftists have some insane need to side with the brown people NO matter what. Your probabaly some self hating anglo american

8 minutes in and still not a single historical inaccuracy has been pointed out from the original Pax Tube video. You've only stated that his source is biased, but never actually shown why it's incorrect. You've spent 8 minutes of a video basically saying nothing other than slandering the person you're supposed to be debunking, and yet you called him out for trying to explain the intricacy of the Crusades in 15 minutes. I'm going to do the same as you did to the "biased source" Pax Tube provided, and disregard this video as a biased source and as such inadmissible as evidence against the Crusades.

@dhimankalita1690

3 ай бұрын

Seems like you've purposefully ignored all he debunking. You can't expect to see the truth by closing your eyes.Pax is a wannabe KZread historian and doesn't understand history which is evident from his dumb videos.The ct that he thinks crusade was something good is itself evidence of his delusional state of mind.

@algernonsidney8746

2 ай бұрын

He spends round half the video meticulously debunking what pax tube has to say.

@ajuuran2890

2 ай бұрын

Yeah just watch 8 Minutes and not the rest. That’s truly a good mindset

@Inventor1488

Ай бұрын

​@@ajuuran2890muslim cope

@FengBaoYolotli

Ай бұрын

@@Inventor1488papist

For a guy nicknamed Pax Tube, he seems awfully thrilled about war.

@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl

11 ай бұрын

Catholic peace only Will come in the paraousia, My friend, before that, christians are called to fight evil that go against go, for "I did not come to this world to Bring peace, but a sword"

@HeadsFullOfEyeballs

11 ай бұрын

@@LuzMaLopez-uq6xl And Jesus tells us what happens to people who pick up that sword, doesn't he? “Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword". See also the Sermon of the Mount, where he specifically tells Christians not to resist aggressors: "If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them." It's almost like the Bible is incoherent and people will just pick out whatever bits support their pre-existing beliefs.

@mousakandah5188

11 ай бұрын

@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs the only thing incoherent here is your understanding of scripture Christianity is not a pacifist religion, "turn the other cheek" is about not returning evil with evil

@juanito3979

11 ай бұрын

@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs maybe look into it a bit more and not be so rude

@juanito3979

11 ай бұрын

@@mousakandah5188 exactly