What's your criticism of this man?

What's with the memes about John Green and Alexander the Great?

>Alexander the """""""""""""""""""""""Great"""""""""""""""""""""""

I'd like to know about this as well

None.

He got rich and famous by using his knowledge on history topics (mainly). Something that the regular Veeky Forums-tard fails. Envy creates great memes.

He got rich and famous by writing shitty YA books.

The youtube videos came after to capitalize on his tumblr fanbase even more, he doesn't actually write them.

C U C K
U
C
K

What does cuck even mean at this point? Like is it still a sexual thing or is it just a generic insult now?

>cereal

...

Man enjoys his Cheerios with extra dicks.

That aside, his ideology is obnoxious

user, I just reviewed your essay, and I noticed you wrote "Alexander the Great"
the Great?!?!
have you any idea of how sexist that is?

and how can you describe ancient Greece
without crediting the work of people of color?

Are you implying Alexander wasn't black? WTF is wrong with you John you racist piece of shit.

Nothing, he is pure perfection
>Alexander
>the Great

Have any of you seen John Green's Crash Course history lesson videos on YouTube? The way he talks is so totally FAKE, PLASTIC and ANNOYING! He is the furthest thing from down-to-earth or authentic. Does this guy even know how fake he is? lol. Is this how you have to act in order to fit into liberal America and be cool? If so, then we down-to-earth people need to GTF out of America! Sheesh. How can anyone talk like this? It's so annoying. Does anyone actually like people who talk like this? Here's one of his annoying crash course history videos so you can see what I mean. This one is about Alexander the Great.

youtube.com/watch?v=0LsrkWDCvxg

He also has really stupid humor that's tasteless and trashy. In the video above, he keeps talking about Kim Kardashian and detracting from Alexader the Great, which is stupid. And he tries to de-glorify Alexander the Great too. Who the f**k does this liberal mangina think he is, to insult Alexander the Great like that? John Green is nothing but dog shit compared to Alexander the Great. He has no accomplishments that would rival anything of Alexander the Great's. What gives him the right to think that his views can make Alexander not so great anymore? So stupid. He even calls the term "the Great" misogynistic. What a fake dumbfuck!

Notice how he uses the word "misogyny" a lot when talking about history, like he does in the video above when talking about Alexander the Great. He claims that history is misogynistic because it only named men "the great" and not women.

What a stupid dumbfuck mangina. Doesn't he know that a misogynist doesn't really exist? No one hates women other than those who have been hurt by them. Just because history places men higher than women doesn't make it misogynist. Sheesh. The guy doesn't even know what that word means. Misogyny means to hate women.

...

He is the new man.

The new sort of man. You all know the kind. He's been completely castrated. He's been divorced from anything primal. Completely shorn of any crimethink.

He's like a little, supple, baby-oiled infant. A modern Cupid. A little faggy nothing of a thing who believes in nothing and flaps in the goddamn breeze, whichever way it happens to be flapping.

Tell me, would you ever respect a man who makes a fortune telling 13-year-old girls what they want to hear? Would you ever respect a man who writes fiction for girls whose breasts are still budding?

Look at him and weep. You see a piece of yourself in him, don't you? That piece that you're ashamed of. That cringing little coward in the corner of your soul.

For like him you've never cut down a pine. Never stood on a cliff's edge, bare-chested, roaring into the great wilds. Never killed with your hands.

The fire is gone from his eyes. The fire that the ancients had. The great men of eminence.

And now we have "logic" and "reason" and they're a small consolation to a beastly heart, which still beats, faint as it may be, still beats.

Can you hear it in your chest?

>For like him you've never cut down a pine.

He has this weird tonal inflection in his voice which makes him sound like a news anchor that doesn't know which part of the sentence to emphasize.

I FIND IT REALLY FUCKING ANNOYING SENPAI! IT MAKES HIS VIDEOS UNWATCHABLE FOR ME!

...

>tfw too much crimethink

You are purring to much thought into it, he is just a PC liberal telling people what they want to hear.

I doubt any serious adult actually takes YA fiction seriously.

/pol/ has a weird and paradoxical view of masculinity and aggression. Too much of it and you're a 'nigger', too little and you're a 'nemale'. They see themselves as occupying this indeterminable 'sweet spot' in the middle somehow. When white , educated, intelligent and compassionate liberal males use all of their 'numale' powers to contribute to that 'high IQ, low crime rate' and artistic and cultural achievement comparison to blacks, /pol/ loves them but when those same paragons of white superiority disagree with /pol/ on essentially everything including racism and sexism, suddenly they are attacked and characterized as weak little man-baby pushovers.

fuck off john

He should hurt /pol/ feelings more instead of being true to facts.

Everybody hates me 'cause I stay true to the facts
/pol/fags hate me more than Jews and blacks

being intellectual in a field doesn't magically make you intellectual in everything, especially nowadays when the very vast majority of "intellectuals" are highly specialized in one field and decreasingly specialized the further they get from it
if you haven't noticed among the people who like to make themselves look like major idiots when talking about philosophy for instance there's plenty of fairly renewed scientists

who is this dude????

They were running the vlogbrothers channel long before Looking For Pussy was published

what ideology?

youtube.com/watch?v=0LsrkWDCvxg

he speaks about kim kardashian and how alexander cannot be great because 50% of humans are women and blackplague is not human. true Veeky Forums core, 10/10 gonna watch.

>john greene
jews educating the world on european history.

/pol/'s views on masculinity largely mirror that of historical reactionaries, especially assigning either hypo- or hyper-masculine traits to those that they which to ostracise. The implication is that /pol/ has "just the right" amount of masculinity (as well as the associated cultural capital from judging in and of itself)

he talks down to his audience, assumes no intelligence whatsoever and simplifies so much that he also just sometimes gives wrong information. He also talks in a hyper way as if the audience has attention deficit.
This isn't so much a problem, his target audience IS little kids. But that becomes a bit worrying when you consider he also teaches his little kid audience his biases that have no basis.
I really don't understand why an adult would watch him, it's insulting and uninformative.

Le cheerios man

applying historical revisionism and modern values on literally everything

Insufferable liberal.
Had a hearty laugh when tumblr turned on him.

/thread

I don't mean that, I mean the crash course stuff.

...

He's the archetypical western progressive. There's a plethora of problems with that already, but to simplify i basically agree with Žižek (sniff) on their lot.

His history videos are here and there but either you streamline or you go to full detail. John Green seems to land on some middle ground where he presents only the arguments that agree with his point of view.
Haven't watched his philosophy videos. He also said that he won't do a crash course history of Europe because European history is boring (which is fine, you can have bad opinions) but then went and fucking made a crash course American history. This all screams that he's being anti-euro centric for the sake of it, not because he has some good arguments to back it up. Another example is using Japan as an example of nationalism, even though if you want to study and understand nationalism as an ideology Europe is far superior of an case study.

He's a bad writer.

His computer having a "this machine kills fascists" sticker is so fucking cringy.

HOLD UP
are you saying that they don't have a black&white opinion on the matter?
whoah! how can /pol/ recover!

>Too much of it and you're a 'nigger', too little and you're a numale

You are (most likely deliberately) misunderstanding /pol/ here.

/pol/ resides in the MGTOW-camp of masculinity (Not what you believe mgtow but what it started out as) - meaning that a masculine man holds to his ideas and beliefs on his own accord and doesn't live to satisfy others.

What /pol/ calls beta/nu-male etc are men who sell their beliefs for sex. IE a man who is a feminist just to get some pussy - or because they feel they somehow owe something to women.

> sell their beliefs for sex
What if they genuinely believe in their shit? It isn't like /pol/-opinions are inherent one for every men.

they believe that the level of insecurity these men have derives from indoctrination, having some specific traits and lack of testosterone (balding, fat, short etc)

This is a different interpretation of masculinity. Traditionally masculinity is supposed to benefit women - men are supposed to 'grow up', become the family man, settle down and bring benefit to his family while /pol/ masculinity wan'ts men to stay independent.

If you are a man who takes care of his wives son, /pol/ sees you as an antithesis to masculinity while other interpretations see you as the ultimate example of masculinity.

How do you like your coffee, too hot or too cold?
We only have two sizes of shoes; kid size and obese overgrown ogre size.

There is a balance in everything.

Like my Coca-Cola, I prefer too hot one.

Case and point. demonstrates what i am talking about very well.

>Traditionally masculinity is supposed to benefit women - men are supposed to 'grow up', become the family man, settle down and bring benefit to his family while /pol/ masculinity wan'ts men to stay independent.
lol no
ever tried opening an MGTOW thread on /pol/? MGTOWs get constantly shit on, there's definitely a plurality of opinions on the matter but I'd say most of /pol/ is more on the traditional side, recognizing an active role in society for males

>when tumblr turned on him.
What happened? Tell me, I need to know.

I have killed and let me tell you that it does not make a difference

You're misreading what I am saying here. /pol/ is arbitrarily painting things as hypo- or hyper- masculine, which stands in contrast to /pol/, which is "just the right amount". It has nothing to do with the positions they actually hold, but more to do with how /pol/ portrays its enemies.

...

He's a Christfag. Apparently, he was considering becoming a priest of some sort before he decided to become an author.

>ever tried opening an MGTOW thread on /pol/

Perhaps it's changed, Veeky Forums is contrarian like that. But is definitely wrong. /pol/ doesn't claim to be a golden middle between hypermasculinity and the lack of masculinity

shit

But is definitely wrong*

The thing is though /pol/ doesn't go out of their way to claim that they're the golden mean, it's something implicit to /pol/ rhetoric.

/pol/ as the judge views "nu-males" as lacking in masculine traits when compared to themselves. Likewise hyper-masculine behaviour is also widely criticized by /pol/ particularly from minority communities. The implication is that /pol/ stands apart from these two demographics as something that is neither lacking in masculinity or is hyper-masculine.

/pol/ does not say
>Nu-males lack in masculinity, whereas I do not
They simply say that nu-males lack in masculinity, with the perjorative connotation of this implying that /pol/ does not see itself as lacking in masculinity.

He studied religious studies too.

you are making a shitloads of assumptions there
there's no "/pol/" rhetoric, the board is full of constant shit flinging between different groups

and I don't see how "negro" behavior is under any definition "hyper-masculine", unless you're using a strawman meme version of masculinity that isn't supported by the MGTOW side nor by the traditional side

moreover, you're taking things too seriously like many here, /pol/ has been for awhile a complete clusterfuck of shitposting, which led many older /pol/acks to leave
it's pretty fun by itself but serious discussion is becoming more and more rare in favor of >x >white threads and general /int/-tier shitposting on steroids

>Alexander
>the
>Great

No it isn't, /pol/ is an echochamber of the highest degree and things especially pertaining to masculinity is one thing /pol/ is unanimous on. Even /leftypol/ on *chan largely agrees with this.

>and I don't see how "negro" behavior is under any definition "hyper-masculine", unless you're using a strawman meme version of masculinity that isn't supported by the MGTOW side nor by the traditional side
This is the thing about traditional views of masculinity. What generally comes down to hyper-masculinity is an overrepresentation of what would be called base and instinctual representations of masculinity. The sexually promiscuous and extremely violence stereotype of black dudes on /pol/ is the epitome of this kind of thinking.

/pol/ supports a very paternal view of masculinity in opposition to so called nu-males and instinctual hyper-masculinity. Highlighted by /pol/'s extremely traditional view on the family.

> /pol/ has been for awhile a complete clusterfuck of shitposting, which led many older /pol/acks to leave
Yes it's very obvious you're a /pol/ refugee, you don't need to defend your board quite so much.

/pol/ here AMA

>This is the thing about traditional views of masculinity. What generally comes down to hyper-masculinity is an overrepresentation of what would be called base and instinctual representations of masculinity. The sexually promiscuous and extremely violence stereotype of black dudes on /pol/ is the epitome of this kind of thinking.
I don't think so, I consider an integral part of masculinity to be fundamentally about self-control and a certain amount of piety and I'm fairly sure this opinion is held by a fairly large demographic on /pol/.
I don't see how "hyper-" can fit in any way when describing the stereotypical black dude according to /pol/.

>Yes it's very obvious you're a /pol/ refugee, you don't need to defend your board quite so much.
I browse a shitloads of boards, I still browse /pol/ mostly for shit and giggles. I don't really need to defend it that much since I'm not from a particularly appreciated demographic(non-white, at least by /pol/ standards).
In particular there's barely any people on /pol/ nowadays who even know basic history with the exception of some who seems to know a lot, which is why I come here where at least a few more people know their shit.

Exactly, that's the kind of traditional view of masculinity I'm talking about.
However when I say "hyper", I'm not using it to mean "really masculine". More like "Beyond masculine". To quote the user at the source of this argument
>For like him you've never cut down a pine. Never stood on a cliff's edge, bare-chested, roaring into the great wilds. Never killed with your hands.
There is a certain degree of naturalistic romanticism to /pol/'s vision of masculinity. However /pol/'s vision of black people crosses over from naturalistic to animalistic, the kind of instinctual traits that can define masculinity are simply to overwhelming to the rest of their character.

>In particular there's barely any people on /pol/ nowadays who even know basic history with the exception of some who seems to know a lot
I agree, after moot nuked it /pol/ went from Stormfront-tier to /b/ tier.

youtube.com/watch?v=aeaN8UBwg2M

I feel like shaving my beard now. That's the only thing (minus the age) I have in common with these cucks.

>I feel like shaving my beard now. That's the only thing (minus the age) I have in common with these cucks.

still a fedoralord huh?

/pol/ack here.

Masculinity in the way I see it, does not mean being promiscuous or violent or anything like that. It is all about having emotional self control, knowing what matters in life, being reliable, etc. And this is not just a /pol/ thing. The Stoics would be the epitome of masculinity. And it is not only in the West, on the other side of the world, you have the great Tokugawa Ieyasu writing:

>Life is like unto a long journey with a heavy burden. Let thy step be slow and steady, that thou stumble not. Persuade thyself that imperfection and inconvenience are the lot of natural mortals, and there will be no room for discontent, neither for despair. When ambitious desires arise in thy heart, recall the days of extremity thou hast passed through. Forbearance is the root of all quietness and assurance forever. Look upon the wrath of thy enemy. If thou only knowest what it is to conquer, and knowest not what it is to be defeated; woe unto thee, it will fare ill with thee. Find fault with thyself rather than with others.[27]

>The strong manly ones in life are those who understand the meaning of the word patience. Patience means restraining one's inclinations. There are seven emotions: joy, anger, anxiety, adoration, grief, fear, and hate, and if a man does not give way to these he can be called patient. I am not as strong as I might be, but I have long known and practiced patience. And if my descendants wish to be as I am, they must study patience

Someone like Charlie Sheen is not very masculine. He lacks self control. He is a slave to pleasure. He is as non-manly as the nu-males such as John Green.

I feel like /pol/'s definition of masculinity stems from the nobility pre-French revolution. Dignified, Strong, Disciplined, enjoys pleasure but also retrained by faith/religion but with verying degrees of religiosity.

They don't think its about running around beating up people to show toughness. They also don't white knight to females but do show respect.

Great as an intro to eras you dont know about? Even though it's a plain fact that he is factually wrong about what he says?

Sounds like faggot behavior.