>ruins her reputation as a historian by defending retarded multicultural revisionist propaganda
what did she mean by this?
>ruins her reputation as a historian by defending retarded multicultural revisionist propaganda
what did she mean by this?
Other urls found in this thread:
>female academics
>reputation
She's a patsy.
...
>multicultural
What is the "redpilled" thing to advocate, monoculturalism?
She probably went from 10 twitter followers to 1000 because of this shit
the actual historical truth. Revisionism for the goal of a modern political goal is cancer and should be called out. I shut down denier fags and I will continue to mock and shut down left wingers who do similar shit
Otherwise known as just culture.
...
>>>/leftypol/
>roastbeef person
>having academic value
Pick one and only one.
Cannot unsee this desu
why is calling out people who lie about history /pol/? Do you think its okay to lie about history as long as it serves left wing ideas?
you can keep posting that cancer just make sure not to post the only good female character
how will she ever recover now that racists people that think women are inferior anyway dislike her
how is not believing in lies about history racist user?
Okay, so basically what happened here:
1)The BBC overrepresented black people. The Roman one while a tad dark, wasn't too bad (compared to Ironage/Norman ones)
2)/pol/ goes 'EVERYONE IN THE EMPIRE WAS 100% WHITE AND NOT MULTICULTURAL'
3)Historians see the verbal minority in 2, have a '...huh? The Empire was a mix of cultures, the hell are you on about?' and write off the complainers as racists
4)/pol/ thinks this is the same as the historians agreeing that 'THEY WUZ KANGS', writes them off as libtards
It's two sides arguing different topics ('BLACKS' V 'The Roman Empire was all white') and getting angry that the other side doesn't seem to be listening.
If the initial complainer had chosen to rant about the celtic/ironage/norman blacks? He'd have a point. Alas, he picked the one one that actually had a shread of possibility to it.
So instead of it coming across as 'that's a lot more black people in celtic britain than there should be', it's coming off as 'racists don't grasp that the roman empire was more than one ethnic group'
She will die as a lonely hippie boomer piece of shit.
Generation Z incoming.
TRUTH IS RACIST GOY!
No, BBC lied and produced propaganda for children and was called out on their lies. Then a few left wingers who agreed with the propaganda message tried to defend it while having nothing to back up their claims. Now all you are doing is calling everyone who called you out on your lie racist.
revisonist history lies are a cancer that will always be called out by this board
you are at the point where Paul Joseph Watson is making you and anyone who agrees with your use of lies look like an idiot
>you
You realise I look down on both sides, yes?
The 'ROMANS WERE 100% WHITE' side are morons.
The 'THERE WERE BLACK CELTICS' is moronic.
>it's coming off as 'racists don't grasp that the roman empire was more than one ethnic group'
this is literally a strawman you are using since your lie was called out and even you know you cant defend it. Its disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself
Such is the state of this board
>not being white means you're a nigger
This is what (((Anglos))) actually believe.
>You realise I look down on both sides, yes?
No, you realize you cant defend this lie and are trying to save face for that side. They lied about history. They are scum. Stop shilling for them please. You wouldnt give concessions like this to holocaust deniers, so you shouldnt give it to left wing propagandist either.
?
The guy in the twitter post used the roman bit as his 'rewritting history' arguement, which came off 'reee how dare there be black romans', which could have happened (personally, it should be a lighter brown for Moor)
The black celts, nobles, ironsmiths and normans is lies though. If he'd used any of those, then his arguement wouldn't get classed as 'just a racist'
>children indoctrinated into believing hateful propaganda
Yes /pol/ is a terrible blight.
>repeatedly point out that they were dishonest, but the person calling it out used the wrong example
>point out why their arguement is being misunderstood
>this is shilling for the bbc
???
>There were no black ro.......
that's not black.
There were -unlikely- to have been any subsaharan ones in any large numbers.
Moors? Yeah, some.
Persians? Yeah.
Black as ash? No
It's the exact same skin tone as the man in the cartoon.
It is possible you could find a black blacksmith and soldier, but it would be extremely rare case.
Why is this such a problem? Why does it threaten your life? It's just one character in each video that is black. I understand as historians we strive for the facts as much as possible, but I fee like /pol/ and some people,are way to but blasted about this. There were some Black African in Rome the same way there were some jews, North Africans, central asians, and germananics. Were they all nobles? Likely not, but they could have been at least one rich Black African if a former slave to a rich man.
black cells is dumb but not something to gwt butt blasted over.
Wasn't there three Roman emperor from Africa.
Your eyes are broken, sir
North african, not south.
See, the african is fine.
It's the black celts, normans and english barons that are 'this makes no sense'.
I don't get why /pol/ is focused on the roman bit of it
>Implying emperor DeAndre aka "Hadrian" wasn't black
Why are whites so insecure and supremacist at the same time?
>Why is this such a problem?
because its a lie in the name of promoting multiculturalism, specifically to children. Stop playing dumb and pretending theirs no motive to this or that any other group of people would be unjustified in being angry if someone lied about their history like that.
> There were some Black African in Rome
the video said it was a typical roman family. Again, stop playing stupid user.
This isn't about saying the Romans were 100% white, it's about the Britons being almost 100% white bar some legionaries that may have been Middle Eastern or Berber. Nobody's denying that.
What people are denying is the claim that a black family is somehow representative of a typical family in Roman Britain.
yyeah, in the sense that charlize theron is from Africa
Is leftypol an actual board is or is it just a name for circlejerk left-leaning threads on pol?
>but it would be extremely rare case.
exactly, so dont show them.
its pretty bad when fucking paul joseph watson is smarter than these fucks. Seriously, why are people here unironcially defending we wuzian shit? trolling?
Even if it is an extremely rare case. What is wrong with showing one scene of an extremely rare case happening for entertainment.
I'm not supporting black Roman Britons or anything, I'm just asking what is wrong with showing a black blacksmith even if it was rare?
>What is wrong with showing one scene of an extremely rare case happening for entertainment.
its not entertainment, it was an educational show for children. And it serves we wuzian shit in the form of forced diversity quotas enacted by the BBC. I dont understand why since its european history, we have to let this stupid shit slide.
I didn't watch the whole video. I thought they meant in terms of practices for ordinary romans not nobility or in terms of race. Did they imply that black Africa character was patrician or even well to do?
I will watch the whole thing later.
People don't care about the truth. They care about whatever narrative advances their interests. They will lie through their teeth. This is the true redpilled.
red pill*
yes. the video was about a typical roman family living in british roman territory. It was pure we wuzians dogshit
shut up. you don't understand the argument at hand. there were black Romans. They just weren't typical and they would all be ex slaves obviously.
A typical Roman family was not well to do or patrician so you failed to answer my question but ok. I will watch.
anti-culturalism
>all ex-slaves
Says who?
>they would all be ex slaves obviously
A pretty substantial portion of the Roman population, by which I mean >50% of it, would have been either ex-slaves or the decendents of ex-slaves. If you don't accept this as true immediately, you're supremely ignorant of the sheer number people who were brought into the city as slaves. It's not even questionable. It is a mathematical certainty considering the number of slaves brought into the city per month.
She's British what do you expect they've been brainwashed into completely revisiting what their history has been so as to fit the current PC narrative. It's all garbage of course and it's going to end up where the only historians worth listening to are ones from countries not infected with this filth like former eastern bloc countries and russia.
British historians are a fucking joke.
It's a board on 8gag
In Iron Age Britain? Come on now. That's just ridiculous. Where are the remains of these African men that seem to be present at every stage of early British history? Where are they in the records ? We found tombs and remains of every other kind of people that ever set foot on Great Britain, but as far as I know the only pre-modern non-European ones were 4 skeletons dated to Roman time, in York, of North African or possibly Arabic relatively wealthy people, presumably merchants. One study then uses this to claim that Britain was very ethnically diverse at the time, and that study has been parroted and blown out of proportion by progressive media.
Now, regarding that particular Black guy in that BBC Roman Britain cartoon: just consider the amount of suspension of disbelief needed to imagine that maybe, possibly, one Nubian guy somehow went from Aegyptus to Brittania either as an auxiliary, despite the fact that auxiliary troops in Britain were traditionally Germanic, as a soldier, which means he would have had to enlist in the legion despite not being a Roman citizen, and somehow managed to not only become an officer wealthy enough to have a large house and multiple slaves, but also take a native wife. This is something straight out of a fan fiction and shouldn't be in an state-sponsored educational show for children. And certainly not something that should be endorsed in any way by any self-respecting historian, especially not for political reasons.
Only barely heard of her before this whole thing, but I'm not from an anglophone country and didn't pursue classical history more than the required, so I guess it makes sense. I doubt any prominent historian will call her out on her obvious bullshit, at least if British academia is anything like academia here. Either too mild-mannered, or too leftist. Seems like she's already got a bit of a bad reputation, though.
It's a board on 8ch that's composed of about 5 people who do nothing but create shitty memes and circle-jerk on youtube. They're a bigger boogeyman than /pol/.
I really don't give a shit what lies and bullshit they broadcast as long as it helps the little fatherless niglets grow up with a role model that's not a rapper or a gangster.
It's important for the uneducated masses of mudskins to see that they can at least try to be something they are not.
>giving role models to niggers is more important than historical accuracy
>ruins her reputation
As if anyone knew who she was before you autists started sperging.
>he thinks lil tyrones watch bbc teach
>Black Africans in Rome
>Central Asians
Where are the goddamn archeological proofs ? At least show me your sources, if you make that claim. If there was such a population, it should be more than easy to prove, right? Apparently Britain was home to Africans and Arabs and I've even seen claims of East Asians, but somehow I've never read about remains of such people in Rome itself.
Shut up you Nazi.
If someone wants accuracy they wouldn't be watching a cartoon.
There's enough of the propaganda everywhere that lil tyrones will soon have trouble not watching dindus doing.
>it is possible
No, no its not
Nah, she's the British media's token leftist academic. She's on panels and shows loads of time.
The continued existence of culture
>educational show for children
>Not entertainment
You what mate? Besides one extremely rare case of a black blacksmith being show isn't the end of the world.
Celtic and Roman Britons was stupid.
Who the fuck said its the end of the world? Its historically inaccurate and should be changed.
That fresco is from Pompeii and he is the same ethnicity as his wife next to him
>this shilledittor awkwardly trying to fit in while defending bbc
I'm in the middle of her SPQR book. Should I stop or is it still good?
it's good for light reading, don't take it too seriously. I recall it being basically the Labor Party version of history
It's not "someone", it's kids. 8 yo kids slightly interested in History. Are you proposing that they should go read Tacitus, and in Latin to avoid translation errors? There's no way accurate vulgarisation is possible, right?
Yeah, she's a really big socialist. Doesn't mean everything she says is wrong though
the book is fine
...
I should have used that trick when my doctoral advisor was busting my balls about sources.
...
Big missed opportunity user, you could have made your career by exposing that fascist.
I'm a slav and we got a ton of uneducated gypsies, I wouldn't give a single shit if they started broadcasting propaganda showing how able gypsies were in history or how they contributed to society and were a part of everything.
Why? Because it's better for them to see fiction and maybe motivate them tiny little bit to stop being them and be more like us.
Showing non-whites in historically white-only roles is an amazing tool for assimilation.
>Besides one extremely rare case of a black blacksmith
that isnt all it was and you know it. You know this shit is stupid which is why you have to reduce it to that strawman in the first place.
wow you are very ignorant of the expansion of the Roman empire if you deny the existing of any Black Africans in the empire. Rome had slaves from almost everywhere touching the European continent .
abut here my proof: there was a passage by Juvenal, a famous Roman misanthrope and satirist, basically complaining about the possibliities of Roman women being "blacked" by African slaves of their household. I will look for it later. It was in a book called As the Romans Did by Shelton though.
>monoculturalism
You mean... culture?
I was almost certain this was your source. A passage from a satirist. Nice proof. There's no way this guy could have taken a single incident and used it to make a point about perceived Roman moral decay, right? Are Suetonius or Procopius' Secret History good sources for you?
Where are the remains of these slaves? Where is the archeological proof? African remains can be easily identified, and there has been numerous studies of everything from tombs to mass graves, surely all these Black slaves would have been identified, right?
I'm not arguing that there has never been a single African slave in Rome. However, Black slavery certainly wasn't a staple of Roman society. We wouldn't have to rely on a questionable source to prove that it existed if it had been a staple.
Mary Beard also viewed remains of a Black African with another Archeologist in Pompeii. Watch her documentary Meet the Romans.
Why would Juvenal make up seeing black African slaves in Rome? Like I can understand you being skeptical of the idea Roman women were cheating on their husbands with then(that's likely just his inner /pol/tard and troll channeling) but what reason would he have to make up a story that their were black slaves in Rome considering Rome had a large institution of slavery with slaves imported from all over?
Why are you so against the idea that black Africans could be imported to the empire as slaves? Rome did not limit themselves to only North Africa as the Empire continued to expand. Is it that hard to believe? Rome conquered far and at least some black Africans did migrate to different parts of Africa. FOR GOODNESS SAKES, there were still Nubians and blacks being used as servants and body guard in Egypt.
How is it hard to believe that black Africans could be anywhere besides subsaharan Africa? Your case is as highly improbable as a black Celt.
Mind you, I'm not talking about these videos where supposedly blacks are taking on roles as nobles(it is highly unlikely that woul happened) but still your argument is pretty silly and as I probable.
Improbable*
Also to make this clearer, no one is arguing it was a staple! BBC, maybe(tough they seem to also be arguing they were commonly nobles too).
They weren't numerous, but there was some. More than just a single case every 10 years is what I'm saying. It wasn't common but it's not like a black African in Rome was as rare as a shiny Pokemon or anything. You're being ridiculous was my point and missed the debate hand while doing so.
>However, Black slavery certainly wasn't a staple of Roman society
Romans weren't picky about who they enslaved, dude.
Her books suck.
This is the truth.
BBC did over present black. But Rome was super fucking diverse. That was how they were able to keep all of these different cultures under their yolk.
>INB4 libtard
Were you agreeing with me or disagreeing? I really can't tell what you're arguing or if you're just saying exactly what I said and explain shit to me that I already know.
You can't be a "Roman"[citizen] unless you're a a freedman/woman.
If the latter, are you retarded?
Blacks wouldn't be the only ex slaves obviously. They wouldn't even make the 4th highest percentage. I'm just saying to claim that they were exceedingly rare, or worst, didn't exist is pure retardation.
If you want to give them role models then write comic books with fictional nigger superheroes, stop distorting history and teaching people lies for ideological purposes you evil fucking cunt.
Uhm... Roman law?
You fool, slaves aren't Roman. You can't be a Roman[citizen] as a slave. Only ex-slaves could become Romans, otherwise, they would just be slaves living in Rome. Actually learn about Roman law and culture before you splerg all over a thread about historical inaccuracies.
>I have a small amount of time to teach about several centuries of history
>I will waste it on irrelevant anecdotical shit
You've yet to demonstrate the "lie" yet. Yes, there were in fact black Africans in the Roman empire. It would be a lie to say otherwise.
Seriously though, why can't there be more black heroes like Static Shock? He was so based and original. Instead we get Spiderman remakes with an African American or James bond remakes.
I'm hopeful for this new Black Panther capeshit movie though.
Nigger Celts never existed.
That's probably true, but this thread is about Romans.