Podcasts

What are some Veeky Forums approved podcasts? Something that teaches history but doesn't twist facts to make it SJW friendly and is well done.

Thanks

Other urls found in this thread:

audiobookbay.la/audio-books/the-modern-scholar-collection-i-vong-various/
youtube.com/user/RealCrusadeHistory
youtube.com/watch?v=eJ5RLLvUxaI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

dan carlin and thats it

this

History of Rome
China History Podcast
Ancient Warfare Podcast
History of Philosophy
The History Network
The Ancient World
History of Japan
Hardcore History
In our Time: History
Revolutions

That should keep you occupied for a while, you're welcome fag

The fall of Rome podcast made by an actual historian

It's good entry level stuff, but OP should see
For more

Is revolutions good? I'm really enjoying the history of rome
t. Pleb

Its quite a different sort of topic but its quite nice. It also has all of the benefits of his experience from History of Rome

>equivocates communists and SJWs
>asking for podcasts instead of books
I weep for this illiterate generation that continues to froth at the mouth over Rome and WWII cause they're the only time periods with le exciting action movies made about them

t. leftypol

"From Yao to Mao:5000 years of Chinese history" is a must listen if you're interested in Chinese history. It's by a professor who studied Chinese in Beijing and East Asia history in Harvard (PhD)

Stefan. Molyneux

This is what our society has become. Pretty fucking sad

Shame that Mike Duncan is so willing to bow down to SJWs. Have to admit, I was disappointed when I found his Twitter. Fuck social media, it makes "Never meet your idols" much harder to achieve. His content is good, though, great to listen to while commuting. I'll have to try my best to separate the man from his work, but I certainly won't buy his book now.

Podcasts are for people who read slower than a droning e-celeb can talk.

I really like the Great Courses, fuck paying them though.

A ranking of what I've listened to:
World of Byzantium > Alexander and the Macedonian Empire > The Crusades > Rome and the Barbarians > Rise and Fall of the British Empire

Currently working on turning points in Middle Eastern history

I also haven't seen anyone suggest "The Fall of Rome Podcast". It just finished, and is a nice look by an actual PHD historian at the final years of the WRE and the end of the JUSTinian period

>Hardcore History
That guy is a windbag and a dumbass. 5 hours would be worth it if it was done well. Too much of him prefacing the obvious, warning his dumbass listeners that their minds will be blown by plain open facts. And then the worst part, all his speculations where he has no idea what he is even talking about. I've heard it too many times, and I'm just done.

I'd be willing to bet there's more "exciting" action medieval movies compared with antiquity

ya bait, but what the fuck are you even talking about?

>never listened to a podcast a day his life
>can't sit still for more than 5 minutes without needing to fidget with something

shouldn't you get back to leveling up your mage?

>t.

/pol/ hates kekistan though
They're "alt-light" and "civic nationalists"

I can't read while doing a 45 minute drive numbnuts. It's a nice distraction and a way to maximize my learning time.

i don`t care, leftypol also hate idpol and you still post this shit.

Come on, now. Not only kekistan is a forced meme, but it's cultural appropriation and perversion of chan culture. Fucking failed normies, I swear to God. I almost hate those wannabe edgy fence sitters more than SJWs.

Difference is that these are actual communists. People who clearly believe in the ideology enough to join a communist youth organisations. They are, dare I say, your comrades. And franklt the only kind of communists I've ever seen, other than maybe a few dying off union guys clinging on. Whereas the Skeptic™ community is something entirely different from your average /pol/ poster.

Nothing wrong with misrepresenting and mocking your political opponent, but at least do it properly, post a fat guy in a stahlhelm or something.

>that pic
hahahaha

THANK YOU!

This. Listened to his podcast on the reformation and 30% of it could have been cut.

I've only listened to the French Revolution topic and it's very very thorough. Almost nothing it glossed over.

I get to keep my headphones in at work so it lets me make the most of my time there.
Try it user.

Revolutions is great. I loved The History of Rome, which is amazing, but there's a lot of variety in topics in Revolutions. I'm beginning now with the 1848 cycle and he really keeps up the level.

Adding to this If you like maritime history, there's a good podcast by Brandon Huebner.

I would also recommend Ancient warfare magazine. They also make an Ancient history and Medieval Warfare magazine. For all three, it's about $60 a year for overall 18 magazines.

audiobookbay.la/audio-books/the-modern-scholar-collection-i-vong-various/
>podcast
No need to settle for brainlet-tier media when you have the internet. Here is a collection of lectures by actual professors. There is a part 2 and 3 on the site too if you like what you see.

Real Crusades History has some excellent 1-2 hour long podcasts.

> youtube.com/user/RealCrusadeHistory

Currently they're going through the First Crusade every Tuesday.


Current First Crusade Podcast series
> youtube.com/watch?v=eJ5RLLvUxaI

these are pretty good, thanks user

Thanks user this is actually pretty great

History of Rome / Revolutions is great but the first couple episodes are pretty rough.

I'd skip ahead a bit.

>History of Japan
I've tried listening to it and does it get good at some point? Even Mike's early History of Rome episodes weren't that bad. He rushes through everything, has kind of a shitty voice and commits the cardinal sin of almost every history podcast I've ever heard: terrible audio quality.

Oh god, I just looked. I shouldn't have done that. Throwing childish insults to Ivanka, going all in on the "of course there were black legionnaries in Britain and to think otherwise makes you an alt-right racist FUCKING ETHNOCENTRIC DEGENERATES" shit.

It makes me really dread 1848. I've liked his ability on his podcast to generally not come off as political but I could hear stuff creeping in (notably the Charles X episode on the July Revolution where he lays on the Trump analogy really thick) and I have a bad feeling The Storm Before the Storm is going to be written in such a way as to be analogous to modern day events; that first chapter he put up didn't do a lot to put my mind at ease.

I just took a look at his Twitter and Jesus, you were right. He's defending the BBC portrayal of the "typical" black legionnaire and his mixed-up familu in Roman Britain. He says it's typical in the sense that it may have existed, but it wouldn't have been common (what the fuck is the definition of "typical", Mike?). The sheer amount of intellectual dishonesty is insane.

I sure as shit ain't buying his book either.

Yeah, I think I just got completely turned off. I mean when he's just mentioning things in a non-political context I don't have a problem but as soon as politics comes into it it's like he morphs into Bess Kalb or any of those other retards who becomes obsessed with spamming tweets at Trump like he's going to read them.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a guy from Washington who lived in Portland and Austin is an insufferable cunt regarding politics though.

RCH is a Catholic apologist who chery picks to suit his view, it not a " they dindu nuffin-they go to church " but he hides counter points, scholars who disagree with the scholars he cites etc, so thread carefully.
Also I'm sad that no one reccomended History of Byzantium which can be a spiritual successor of History of Rome.

>I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a guy from Washington who lived in Portland and Austin is an insufferable cunt regarding politics though
I keep forgetting to keep this in mind as well. I suppose I was just hoping that someone with the amount of knowledge he has about history and historical context wouldn't be be one to immediately jump to "OMG LE DRUMPF IS LITERALLY HITLER".

I'm still working my way through his French Revolution podcast series and I was really looking forward to the 1848 series. It would be a massive disappointment if he starts going all political in his more recent podcasts. My expectations are waaaay lower now though. What the hell is it with entertainers experiencing a sort of psychotic break with Trump's election that makes it impossible for them to not inject their commentary into every facet of their lives? Surely they must have had more traumatizing experiences in life than that.

HIstory on Fire is pretty good, if you dont mind a moderatly thick italian accent.
Right now he only has two series: one about the U.S. vs. the Lakota tribes, another about the spanish conquest of the mexica (aztecs).
The first one was alright but the second one, which is almost complete, is very good.

Martyr Made is an good, in depth look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His other podcast is called 'decline of the west' and looks at spangler's work, among others. Dan Carlin called him a borderline fascist on twitter, so definatly not SJW material.

But it's supposed to be the operators of those means of production doing it so you already started it wrong

Razvedopros by Dmitri Puchkov. The episodes when he invites Klim Zhukov or Yegor Yakovlev

If you can understand French, the classes of the Collège de France are available online for free, my recent favorites ones were classes on cities in preislamic Central Asia, the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, and on early globalisation.

C U M T O W N

I weep for retards like you who feel the need to use "le" like it's anything more than the grunt of a Downs child who's opinion never mattered

>tfw I looked at his Twitter
>tfw I shouldn't have

Oh man. Going to be hard to enjoy his stuff now.

>In Our Time
THANK YOU user BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE TO STOP YOU THERE AS WE'RE RUNNING SHORT ON TIME

Fuck niggers

At multiple points during Roman civil wars legions raised in Egypt were marched across the empire to fight rivals to the throne.

A black settling in Britian after fighting there really isn't totally outrageous. You have plenty of examples of soldiers taking land grants across the empire once.

It's far more believable than a black in Middle Ages Europe or an Asian in Rome (although some Asians did reach Rome).

The Empire encompassed areas with blacks and had ships to carry blacks from North African cities to Europe. Not totally suprising. Whites in the Middle East and Middle Easterns in Europe were even more common.

1848 has been good so far. Ironically, if anything it's laying out a scenerio similar to that which gave us Trump.

France is led by technocratic elite liberals. Protocommies and royalists/Bonapartists sit on the fringes. The elites are fucking clueless as to how pissed off the common person is, and nationalism is growing as a political force.

Not reading his Twitter because I love that show.

>preislamic Central Asia
Dang, I don't speak French. Sounds interesting.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that black Romans didn't exist (or didn't settle in Britain at all), just that to imply that they were at all common is just a joke. Mike did some serious mental gymnastics to say that black Romans in ancient Britain were typical. And that's to say nothing about the blatant pandering with the portrayal of the equally common "black" Celts and "black" English noblemen in the same video. And then he goes on to call the people he was debating degenerate racists. Good job Mike!

Chapo Trap House
Last Podcast on the Left
Cum Town

>Egyption legions
>Black Africans
Puh-lease.

Skeletons have been found (although one cannot conclusively say a skeleton belonged to a particular race by the bones alone). Still, a smattering of black Africans probably made it to Britain. But as camp followers, prostitutes, labourers and so on. I am highly skeptical that a former grunt would accept a cold windswept boggy piece of farmland in the rainy armpit of the empire, crawling with barbarian hostiles to boot. The Romans didn't have our modern racial biases, but still, just because it could hypothetically happen doesn't mean it was at common enough to be defended.

Lands populated by black Africans were at the fringes, and though present in the Mediterranean African provinces, they were a minority and quickly interbred with the locals.

Age of Napoleon is without doubt the best historical podcast after Carlin. Information presented is both very comprehensive and very engaging. Only problem is that Trillburne takes 2, 3 weeks to produce an episode.

History of China and History of Rome are good too.

The War Nerd podcast is mostly post Cold War history and politics, but is still absolutely essential to understand the political situations of Eastern Europe and the Arab world.

lmao what could possibly make someone this bitter? I just don't get it

>leftypol hates idpol
Wrong, you anti white cucks donated to BLM snd and Hillary

Those conspiracy guys

The Fall of Rome. Perfect companion to The History of Rome, and delves a lot deeper into institutional and economic reasons behind the fall of Rome.

SOME EXTRA TIME NOW WITH MELVIN AND HIS GUESTS

>leftypol also hate idpol
Can we stop pretending that's the case?

I'd be surprised if anybody on leftypol donated to Hillary. Leftypol is exceptionally critical of BLM because of it's bourgeois character.

Wasting so many hours giving that piece of shit a chance, more than once. The topics can be interesting, but the delivery is horrible. He talks a lot without really saying anything.

Already I was not liking his delivery, when on my third ep of his, he focussed on a place (culture) I lived in for 5 years (not the US) -- different era of course. He just spent so much time making these wild speculations trying to get in the heads of the people of the time, but he obviously didn't know anything about the place or time, and just assumed they would think exactly like modern Americans. That's how dumb he is. it's fucking annoying.

And I'm not bitter, I just think he's garbage.

Class isn't an identity, it's a material relationship that can be universally observed

It's literally just an arbitrary social structure trying to explain human relation. According to Marxist doctrine a baseball player who earns 20 million a year but doesn't own any means of production is a part of the exploited class, whereas a middle class baker owning a bakery is a part of the exploiting class. It doesn't make a lick of sense, whereas a nigger can be identified with both your eyes and with a DNA study, his niggerness doesn't hinge on some sociological consensus.

If that image is true, then why did population and life expectancy increase during the Soviet Era and then drastically decreases after capitalism was reinstated in the 90s?

No, blackness is a socially constructed category deduced from culture and phenotype, not biology or genetics. Black or negro are only useful categories to sociologists and forensic anthropologists, because while great differences obviously exist between groups, these groups do not break down genetically into clean categories of black and white and brown and yellow.

The population we call black is easily the most genetically diverse on the planet, containing more genetic diversity within it than exists across yellow and white populations. In fact, a black man from Kenya is actually more related to a white man from Germany than a black man from the Andaman Islands, because Andamanese populations broke away from continental Africans before European populations did.

Black people of different populations can even have different genes for melanin, proving that the black race is not a reasonable genetic category.

>not biology or genetics
You can give a geneticist two blind DNA samples from a white and a black man and he can tell you which is which. You can't do that when defining a bourgeoise or a proletarian, that entire thing is arbitrary.

That image isn't true, it's CIA propaganda repeated by some young conservative who probably thinks he's anti establishment.

No, he can say that a sample is German or Kenyan. Culture causes him to understand that the German is white while the Kenyan is black.

There are no genes specific to all black people but not non-black people. Genes that mark blackness (dark skin, kinky hair, and wide noses) are determined by the environment and differ by population. Two black people can look very similar, yet still be generically distinct, because identical environmental pressures caused them to develop those traits. This is why a physical similarity also exists between Africans and native Central Americans, or Europeans and native North Americans.

Australian aboriginals are one of the furthest populations from West Africans, enormously farther than Europeans, yet at first glance appear identical. Even though they have almost no genes in common, West Africans and native Australians were historically considered to both be black.

>German or Kenyan
Those aren't races but cultures. Pay attention.

>Australian aboriginals are one of the furthest populations from West Africans, enormously farther than Europeans, yet at first glance appear identical.
Nonsense, you can easily tell them apart by brow ridges, blacks are neotenic as fuck in that department. Which is why Abos were originally called archaic Caucasoids.

>hurr im le edgy teen who makes sweepig generalizations about society based on one picture XDDD

Things worthwhile historians do not do:
>make podcasts
>make documentaries
>make youtube videos
>make movies

how do you get them free?

Your appeal to scientific authority is pathetic desu. Who the fuck cares what the geneticist can distinguish physical or ancestral difference? Its the MEANING you ascribe to that difference is the basis of racism

>meaningless word salad
As expected.

No argument, I see. All i see is
>wahhh i cant prove racial difference matters, better start shitflinging so he doesnt notice!

Entitled Opinions | with Robert Harrison

your wannabe elitism is only limiting your horizons

fag

Funny enough, /pol/ is all identity politics.

Muh European heritage
Muh race
Muh religion

Class is about material allocation. Identity cancer is a bourgeois disease.

you just gonna leave me hanging like that?

Ironically, nationalist identity was about unity, at first. Let's get together everyone who speaks the same language/related groups of regiolects, etc. But since all identities are also about who is NOT included, it wasn't long before it also became exclusionary. Then, some nation-states became more based on shared "values" rather than some blood concept (i.e. USA, France, Russia-USSR, and so on). Though plenty of citizens still care about MUH HAPLOGROUP.

You a real g

I always try to avert my eyes from posts talking about Duncan's politics

Fuck you niggers don't do this to me

Chapo is great unironically

Fuck that, I want a podcast that is SJW friendly. Any suggestions?

>Class isn't an identity
Bwahahaha, even so leftists engage in allanner of idpol because politics is innately identity based , even when you are arguing in favor of a certain economic scenario you are engaging in identity politics.

Just because you don't like feminism doesn't mean you don't engage in idpol

>Blood concept
*Biological determininism you newfag , which if you knew anything about Darwinian theories of evolution you would know about but to bad most of the ethos you espouse comes from pre Darwinian thought.

>It's a social construct
Fundamentally wrong, there are major behavioral and physiological differences between different ethnic and racial groups on a genetic basis that can be tested for without the use of visual and social stimuli. Genetics is a science not a philisophy.

>Class is about material allocation.
I seeto remember a lot of propoganda about the power of the working man, and the advantage of an egalitarian state of communal stateless ownership. Guess that doesn't count as a idpol because in your wacked out mind that somehow us "post" idpol because you assume all people are uniform a priori.

>/pol/ hates kekistan though
>/pol/ hates trump though
>/pol/ hates ecelebs though
>/pol/ hates porn though

And yet those three blocks are 90% of /pol/ posts.

/pol/ has been infected with leddit and normalfag , /pol/ is having an identity crisis lately desu

You're a fucking kike apologist, go fuck yourself.

Nobody can take you seriously when this is your go to argument.