Woah user! You mean to tell me your essay on Europe's transition from agrarian to urban society doesn't include the...

I watched all of his youtube shows on LSD.

That was strange.

>plenty of people are called great but do you know about this obscure FEMALE monarch that acomplished a relatively if not declining kingdom? HMMMM HMMMM *witty joke for 14 year olds in history class so they don't fall asleep because they have a shit teacher*
almost forget he literally said this i one of videos
>and so Europe did nothing for hundreds of years while the Islamic world boomed!

I wouldn't recommend these thinly veiled propaganda pieces to anyone.

>makes one or two remarks about feminism
>THIS IS ALL PROPAGANDA
I liked the way they handled the episode on capitalism.

>one or two remarks about feminism

Excuse me Mr. Strawman, but this guy does this whole revionistic SJW history as stereotypical as it gets.

>Europe universally a shitty backwater until eeevil Imperialism, Islam so enlightened and progressive
>It's only Imperialism when Europeans do it! I really wish I could have ridden with the Golden Hoard, they were so tolerant!
>le people of colour created baroque
>look at how I idealize an iron fist and warrior ethos in other cultures and completely condem it in European culture by modern standards
>watch me do the same with female and male regents

>gives no actual argument or examples
>cries STRAWMAN when user fills in the gaps for you
wew

Ehrm, are you sure you know the exact meanings of the words you were using?
The argument was that he is oversimplyfying and often completely misrepresenting circumstances to push his trendy world view, examples of that are paraphrased claims I listed.

Is it some kind of knee jerk reflex with you kids now to scream 'no arguments' whenever you don't like a claim? Because that is a factually wrong accusation, nigga and you are just too lazy to argue against it.

...but increased urbanisation is linked to the opening of new markets that colonialism allowed, OP

Not him but I watched the Alexander the great video and he attributed Macedonia's success to the sarissa, he didn't go into their tactics or the advantages/disadvantages of Persian cavalry and chariots or Greek hoplites in comparison to the Macedonian phalanx, that was all he said about it, and his argument is ridiculous since the Persians were perfectly capable of producing their own sarissas.

For me this confirms everything that has been said about him.

>X is bad because of reasons
>I assume you mean X is bad because of Y
>HOLYSHIT STOP STRAWMANNING ME, BRO!
You are being absurd. If you gave an argument and THEN I ran off on some tangent arguing against something you didn't even argue, then I would be strawmanning you. But you gave nothing. You shouldn't have even brought it up.

>you kids
Are you trying to sound like an unapologetic shitposter?

This. He's actually pretty moderated by the standards of a lot of teenagers and young adults anyways. The supposed propaganda will be ignored as something they hear everyday and luckily they will pay attention to the historical part since it's simple and short.

Your strawman is that I got solely caught up in his
>one or two comments about feminism
and not his general sloppy, ideological and teleological re eductation attempt, but if you get so incredibly salty about this I can take back that accusation, too and call it a day.
As long as the fact remains that this guy is a revisionist shithead with a clear political goal in mind.

Have you seen the Big History series? I really like how they approach all the topics.

Do you think it pained him when he had to erased Muhammad's name there on the blackboard for the next "lesson"?

Well what about Catherine The Great? I thought that was empowering!

No one but Veeky Forums and reddit spergs says "based."

>youtube.com/watch?v=QV7CanyzhZg

I'm only ~1:20 in and I had to pause it to take a breather. The rage is too much.

>accuses Europeans of Eurocentrism for using a term that applied only really to Europe and is only used for describing Europe during the time; he presumably doesn't know that the Chinese use Dynasties to divide their history even though no one else had those dynasties or Muslims use the Muslim calendar even though no one else gives a shit and every culture uses different names for every time period, but w/e
>says that the Dark Ages were called the Dark Ages because everyone thought that they were unenlightened instead of because there was little info on the period

>people actually use this guy's videos to teach kids history, sometimes even college students

christ

Are you retarded?

His audience comes from a culture that has historically been very eurocentric (America and Europe) and already have some messed up conception of what the Dark Ages were. He is trying to undermine the biases and mistaken impressions of his audience. If Chinese were his target audience then he would be undermining their biases.

I don't think he would take a side in the whole Jews vs Arabs thing.

If your not commie swine don't go to college for anything non-stem. You don't learn anything anyway its fucking pointless.

There are no biases, he is knocking over a strawman.

When people talk about the tang dynasty everyone knows they are talking about china, wheen someone says the dark ages everyone knows they are talking about western europe after the fall of the western roman empire.

If you actually gave a shit about challenging biases you would challenge the very overt modern liberal bias rather than the biases of 1950s America.

>if you want to challenge biases then you should stop challenging X biases and start challenging the biases of people I disagree with
This is obvious bait, but good bait.

>not shopping "This machine kills infidels"

Go back to Plebbit, you sperg. Take your sperg words with you.

...

I just finished the video; mixed feelings. I think the video would have been much better if he had focused on European advancement during the Dark Ages (for example Bacon, Aquinas, Charlemagne/Alcuin of York, etc. with reference to Islamic scholars) to explain why the Dark Ages weren't really 'Dark' in the popular understanding of the period, and instead done separate videos on the Islamic Golden Age and the Tang/Song dynasties in China and gone in depth. The way he formatted the video and did the introduction, he was basically saying 'Europeans are arrogant, rest of the world was better (Euros didn't even have sewage like Harappa had), etc., now let's look at how awesome everyone else was doing at the time and juxtapose this with how we still have the gall to call this period the Dark Ages.'

Saying that he's doing it to challenge the Eurocentricity of his audience doesn't make too much sense to me as the Islamic Age among others is a ubiquitous part of Western schooling. I know I learned about it in high school and have never met a person who didn't know about it, but we refer to the Islamic Golden Age as the Islamic Golden Age and the Dark Ages as the Dark Ages, Middle Ages as the Middle Ages, Tang Dynasty as the Tang Dynasty, Viking period as the Viking period and so forth even if they are chronologically coterminous because they refer to different developments in different places. Anecdotal, but I've never met someone who thought that the Dark Ages was a global phenomenon. The closest I've ever gotten to something like that is someone understanding a time period with reference to the Dark Ages (for example, 'during the Dark Ages, China was advancing at breakneck pace'). Similarly, I've never, ever seen, read or heard someone refer to China during the time as 'Dark Ages China', nor have I heard 'Dark Ages Arabia' or something like that.

It feels like John's set up a strawman to get his digs in.

Stop shitposting.

If you wanted to challenge bias you would focus on the most popular biases first. Would you not?

Or would you say "Hey, maybe carthage shouldn't be destroyed, am I edgy yet?"?

>the Islamic Age among others is a ubiquitous part of Western schooling
Well, yeah, in Britain. Not in the Land of the Free though.

I went to an American high school and we learned all about it. It featured in every single one of my world history courses dealing with the time period, including mandatory ones.

Not really, ever heard of something like mainstream opinion?
Shitting on western culture and history is not fighting bias, it has become a trend and source of many historical misconceptions which remain completely unchallenged. Whereas I wouldn't call superiority of whitey not unchallenged per se in our current day and age...
On top of that the Dark age thing is retarded even beyond that, since it is SUPPOSED to describe a certain period in a certain area of the world. That's basic function and semantic of this word, describing a period in western Europe. It's like saying the concept of the cultural revolution is soooo China centric because - this will blow your mind- there was no cultural evolution in the the rest of the world. Make a witty face while saying that and you are all set to appear refined and virtuous to the modern world. Fucking retarded activism that is.

"The term once characterized the majority of the Middle Ages, or roughly the 6th to 14th centuries, as a period of intellectual darkness between extinguishing the "light of Rome" after the end of Late Antiquity, and the rise of the Italian Renaissance in the 14th century.[3][4] This definition is still sometimes found in popular use,[1][2][5] but increased recognition of the accomplishments during the Middle Ages has led to the label being restricted in application. Since the 20th century, it is frequently applied to the earlier part of the era, the Early Middle Ages (c. 5th–10th century).[6][7] However, many modern scholars who study the era tend to avoid the term altogether for its negative connotations, finding it misleading and inaccurate for any part of the Middle Ages.[8][9][10]"

u r dumb

>Well, yeah, in Britain. Not in the Land of the Free though.

I learned in school that medieval times where all about burning witches and completely void of a single invention, but I heard a lot about the greatness of the islamic golden age. :^)

Germany here.

So you think that dark ages is supposed to describe the whole middle ages in academic discourse, based on your misunderstanding of a wikipedia article? Ok retard, millenials really should be banned from this board.

>presuming you know jack shit about some random user you disagree with
>smug_anime_girl.jpg
This is at least the second time you've done this. Are you a one trick pony?

are you able to read things friend

The quote says nobody uses the term in academia any more specifically because of the negative connotations that you are insisting do not exist

Oh my...
I am not even the same guy, the irony is too fucking hard.

Where did he insist that they don't exist? And even if he did insist that they exist, going back to the original premise Green doesn't do anything to do away with those prejudices, if anything he reinforces them by talking about how backwards Europe was compared to its contemporaries around the globe.

Are you?That is why he is accused to be misunderstanding his cool wikipedia quote to begin with.
In conversations there's something like context and the context here was ' u r dumb' and the quote presumeably a rebuttal to the fact that dark ages have precise local and timely implications.

>arguing the exact same thing
>using the exact same nonarguments
It suuuuuuure seems like samefaggotry.

Who is this asshole?

Damn son, what did you see?

Learned the same thing here in burgerland

A peer reviewed and well-respected eminence of his field, he has won praise around the globe for his informative and exceedingly well-researched historical treatises that are condensed into brief presentations for consumption by the common man. A hero to most for his valiant efforts to bring fair, balanced, and illuminating knowledge to the masses, a villain to others who hate such knowledge and the empowerment it gives to the people. There is no traveler walking on this earth which has taken greater strides forward than he, no star in the night sky that blazes brighter than this luminary, no blade sharper than this man's incisive wit. When this titan passes, he will go down in the annals of history as a true mensch, a king among kings, standing shoulder to shoulder with the greats of ages past and finding himself in equal company, knowing that he will pass into history with his glory shone through none the dimmer. His name?

John Green.

>Arabs saved Greek manuscripts

>Not Byzantine Greeks, who singlehandedly saved all of Attic tragedy and ancient philosophy.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

First of all, no self-respecting historian ever, ever, ever, uses the term "Dark Ages" anymore.

What's your point?

>are you telling me you explained the emergence of human civilization without using critical theory or any practice of mainstream sociology?
>are you telling me you tried to write about European history without even having a class in whiteness studies?
>F- and see me after class

>what is this, "A thorough record of European innovation in antiquity and the Middle Ages"? Why the fuck doesn't it mention Islamic and Chinese innovations and how much cooler and awesomer they were? What about the fucking Mali Empire? Best I can do is a 'D' for such an incomplete essay.

Okay, we get it, you don't like modern progressivism. You can stop making this thread and filling it full of greentext. This isn't even Veeky Forums related at this point.

>Well user while your extensive citations are admirable, I can't help but notice you didn't discuss Hannibal's experience as POC and how his blackness informed his policies. This is a grave oversight which is why the best grade I can give this paper right now is a D-. However I will give you an opportunity to revise it to include a more in depth analysis of how black identity shaped Carthaginian policies.

>unironically defending modern progressivism
user Foucault won't come in and give you butt loving aids anymore he's dead. You can stop trying.

Nobody watches that shit in yurop. Meme all you want but our education is far less PoC revisionist than you Americucks.

The redditor doth protest too much.

>White Studies
You mean World History?

I know plenty of Europeans who watch it. John Green has a huge international fanbase.

I watch it and I know several people who watches it. He would never be used in our education because he's a youtube meme historian, not an actual source, that's it. His political ideology has nothing to do with it.

Yo mean this? youtube.com/user/bighistoryproject/playlists

I didn't know it existed, but I will check.

>yfw you realize that teachers and professors in the USA unironically show his videos in class as a part of the course

I've heard this but, like with everything else in America, I refuse to believe is something extended. It just can't be. The USA is big, just like "we" have gypsies living like savages, albanians dealing with body parts and ukranians with alarmant % of HIV the americans have detroit, people who believe that the earth is flat and meme teachers who use John Green at school.

It's the only sane explanation.

>the only sane explanation
>expecting sanity

America is, on average, a disgustingly ignorant place.

I say this as an extremely jingoistic burgerfat.

Do you think John Green gets stoned sometimes and realizes what a massive faggot he is, then sobers up the next morning and goes, "Man I was tripping, I'm fucking awesome! To the cereal store! and step on it!"

It was a collaboration between the Big History Project and Crash Course.

Crash Course had more regular releases of the videos and released them in the proper order. I don't know if Big History Project ever released them all, so you just want to check the Big History playlist on the Crash Course page to be safe.

I think it or something like it should be required viewing for every human on Earth and I think most Veeky Forumstorians would benefit from watching it too.

lol

I'd rather challenge the most destructive biases, but that's me.

is that edward snowden?

yes