How come he's the only Youtube "historian" worth talking about?

>hundreds of courses available on youtube for free by renowned historians.
>prestigious universities uploading seminars on different historical subjects
>people watch a random british dude who plays with cheap reconstructions he bought on amazon for a couple of bucks
>they quote his "expert" opinions on sites all over the internet

he's not wrong

He's actually likeable.

ameritards BTFO

Because he keeps making stupid statements, which lead to those statements being discussed, which leads to more people watching his videos, which makes him more money, which leads to him making more videos, which leads to him making more stupid statements etc etc.

After the whole spandau shitstorm it should be obvious that he's now in it for the cash, not just some guy videoing his thoughts on different topics.

Universities need to modernize, they are too stuck in the past. They don't have a monopoly on information anymore, and they don't seem to realize this well enough.

mate it didn't even start with the spandau video. At one point years ago he wasn't making enough money so he decided to create a bunch of videos with controversial opinions such as letting children smoke, denying the holocaust, climate change doesn't exist, the boer concentration camps were justified, etc.

reminder that Lindybeige claims:

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>battle of Zama didn't happen
>Romans carried one pilum
>Vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
>climate change isn't real
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space

Please admit you have ADD and you want to be entertained rather than educated.

I haven't watched all his videos but he doesn't claim half of those things at all.

People study history primarily for entertainment.

You are an anti-intellectual if you don't find education entertaining by itself

Yeah, lets give all professors toy weapons, make them swing those around for a few minutes and then give a full seminar about the profound knowledge they acquired on the subject.

Why not?

Youtube celebrities are just the modern equivalent of Bill Nye and Carl Sagan now that people don't watch TV anymore.

I know about those bidets but they're still his opinions. The Spandau and followup vids really drove him off the cliff and into being deliberately antagonistic.

Bidets? Yes clearly that's what I was writing....

By definition Lindy is an expert on many of the things he talks about. He does have a degree in Archaeology that Veeky Forums likes to pretend doesn't exist.

>Hello noble ones this is the Metatron speaking...

Is anybody else unsettled by all of metatron?
He seems like a guy that I wouldn't want to be in a conversation with. He's unkempt, talks really slow, has a very weird accent, larps and seems like he's on the spectrum

>Bill Nye and Carl Sagan
Bill Nye isn't really of the same caliber as Sagan though.

>he's on the spectrum
Is this how young people say "on drugs" now?
Also, main "issue" with Metatron is that the "information" he gives is actually very shallow, it's wikipedia level or so most of the times if not every times I took time watching him.
Also cringey af but well it can't be a serious complain in itself.

What is with this generation being so infantilized that they need knowledge to process to be entertaining so that they will swallow it?

Idm people watching these educational entertainment but these people best shut the fuck up when the grown ups are talking

>a degree in archaeology makes you qualified to talk about WW2 tanks and machine guns

He even says his archaeology degree had very little to do with warfare and weapons.

He claimed the cannon on Malta has an effective range of 8 miles. Which is about as far as one can see. He never claimed it would go to space just that the brits never figured out its maximum range because it still maintained an amazing velocity at the 8 mile mark

this meme is ridiculous

the UK has a rate of health not at all different from our own

and no one I know is obese

it infuriates me, and I might beat anyone that repeats it in front of me at this point

Because the alternative is this.

He never said most of those things.

Please, God, not him

Who is this guy? Is he another fucking biased asshole like Sargon?

Same could be said for your British teeth meme 2bh.

pretty much

>talks really slow, has a very weird accent,
English isn't his first language

>larps
He made a video explaining why he doesn't

>and seems like he's on the spectrum
aren't we all?

He has an english accent

principally he's a massive weeb, and such a person isn't one I'd associate with

Fuck off Lindy

>denying the holocaust
To be fair to Lindy, that video isn't about Holocaust denial. It's about acknowledging all the civilians killed by the Nazis. His basic point is that people talk about the Holocaust (specifically the deaths of Jews) so much that tends to overshadow the deaths of the around 5 million other people who were also killed. That's a perfectly reasonable point to make, and I've talked to a number of educated, professional historians who have expressed the same opinion.

>By definition Lindy is an expert on many of the things he talks about.
How? By his own admission, most of his experience in those areas comes from LARPing and conjecture based on some barebones facts. For all of his topics except dancing, he's not an expert, and never really claims to be.

>He does have a degree in Archaeology
He has a bachelor's he got years ago and never used for anything. He's never worked or done research in the field, and most of the subjects in his videos aren't even things that would be covered by a degree like that. Obviously, it's not completely meaningless, but it hardly makes him the kind of authority many people seem to think he is.

will the french ever recover from his pristine and wholly just banter?

>he doesnt know who Lindy is
fuck off back to /r/askhistorians

The 5 million figure was made up though. jta.org/2017/01/31/news-opinion/united-states/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians

He's shilled this place since 2013, starting on Veeky Forums

>yfw Trump is so despised by the media that he indirectly caused Jewish newspapers to become holocaust revisionists

God damnit I haven't laughed this hard in years

I assure you, your generation is just as bad as theirs.

he pissed off weebs with his samurai sucks knights all the way videos, no way he is a weeb

STOP POSTING THIS SHITTY LIST OVER AND OVER AGAIN

Fucking based

>climate change isn't real
it isn't

t.Le frustrated Pierre De La See Voo Plee Baguette

>Is he another fucking biased asshole like every human being who has ever engaged in any historical pursuit?
ftfy

>on the spectrum
We all are; welcome to Veeky Forums.

has any man in recent memory levied such devastating blows upon the frog in the service of the crown as he?

(you)

I think he hurt more weebs than frogs, and with a single video rather than with constant banter.

>made up
Even according to that article, it's not made up per se, just a number that isn't based on any discernible criteria. That doesn't mean five million civilian weren't killed (the article even says that up to 35 million total people were killed by Nazi aggression), just that specifying a number at 5 million wasn't factual because there was no basis for who those five million, out of everyone killed, were. Considering that the rest of the article is arguing for the special status of the Holocaust because of the targeted nature of killings, it makes sense that it would be focused on criticism a number with a vague, unspecified origin.

That also has no real bearing on Lindy's argument. If the five million number isn't good, then we can come up with a new one and remember it as well as the six million Jews. The issue is that popular narratives of the war tend to ignore the hardships that non-Jewish civilians went through.

He is the greatest jewel on the Queen's crown

So it's made up.

>W-we have actual proof, b-but it still totally happened, go- i mean guys!
Nice try Schlomo, the truth is that the Lie is falling apart

Do you even know what this discussion is about? I'm specifically talking about non-Jewish deaths, and responding to an article someone posted (from a Jewish website) which was trying to downplay the number of non-Jewish deaths in WWII by talking about how the typically cited number is made. It takes a special kind of retarded to get Jewish shilling out of that.

If you want to be pedantic about the nature of that specific number, then yes. As I stated above, your article is a pretty biased source, and certainly doesn't reflect any kind of controversy that can be found in most mainstream sources (plus the Jewish virtual library, and other Holocaust-specific websites and publications). Fringe historians with a political agenda don't dictate historical discussion. The point is that lots of non-Jewish people died (about 29 million, even according to the article you cited), and those are worth talking about as well. Just because five million non-Jews (as a counterpoint to six million Jews) was chosen by one historian as a figure somewhat arbitrarily doesn't mean that five million people didn't die. Just as a counterpoint, there's been plenty of debate over where the six million figure for Jews comes from, even from mainstream historians. It's all just nitpicking about where specific numbers come from, and that shouldn't take away that millions of people died, and one group shouldn't have a monopoly on that story.

>the article even says that up to 35 million total people were killed by Nazi aggression
>by Nazi aggression
That's sketchy. I'm skeptical of even counting every person who died in a German POW camp as part of the actual Holocaust kill count. This phrasing makes it sound like someone is trying to sneak in a combat casualty count as well.

I get that everyone wants to make the Nazis as evil as they can (personally I think they were evil but getting caught up in hatred stops us from really understanding precisely how evil they actually were), but going even beyond THE SIX/TWELVE MILLION to some sort of "Total Nazi Death Toll" is taking it too far. Not that that's necessarily what the quote implies, just something I noticed.

Who did Napoleon genocided?

As i said, the 5 million figure is made up.

That is one key difference. But on the big picture they're very similar.

Oh, now that I think about it he did liquidate a fuckload of Haitians after a rebellion, and its been claimed that they burned sulphur to use as poison gas as a method of mass execution. So there you go.

Let's say it is. Then what? Less millions were murdered?

...

That was the work of Rochambeau, not Napoleon. At worst, you can claim indifference to Rochambeau's tactics.

Good thing he's not discussing them academically then?

hes atleast not pompous about it and warns you he might be completely wrong
he is often but thinking is not forbidden

...

m.youtube.com/channel/UCv_vLHiWVBh_FR9vbeuiY-A

Why don't you Roman cucks love this cuck?

the metric is indeed rubbish, and but for a slight nudge the french easily could have befallen the fate of Germany as a villain of history

The Holy Roman-ness of Germany

this action on his part helped give rise to prussia

the french created their own worst enemy yet again

>Metric is indeed rubbish

>when even the most basic calculations become a complete nightmare but at least your system wasn't invented by the French

nothing nightmarish about it, it's all easy to gauge and logical, you simply don't know it, so it befuddles and threatens you

>3/47ths of a grain x 5/875th of a pennyweight

>easy and logical

>easy to gauge and logical
this is what the anglo actually believes

only 4 of those measurements are relevant to the modern era

>none of those measurements are relevant to the modern era
fixed