You have 5 minutes to explain why John Green's Crash Course in History is cancer

I love how every board related to this guy hates him
>Veeky Forums
Veeky Forums
/tv/
He's like a renaissance man of being a retard

He's a full grown man whose life material is made to attract teenage girls and the occasional teenage boy.

>DUDE HISTORY IS TOO EUROCENTRIC!

>every single episode is dedicated to european based history

>Greeks were evil, they had slaves n shiet
>They should have allowed the Persians to conquer them
>On top of this, he writes books for 13 year old girls
How can one man be such a faggot?

> short entertaining accurate videos about high school level world history

Why are you hating on a program that makes history interesting to normies?

You are like a theoretical mathematician shitting on sesame street cuz for their their zany approach to math.

He also defended Anita Sarkeesian calling Sargon of Akkad a garbage human at his vidcon event. Not that I'm a massive Sargon fan but he dindu nuffin and the green brothers are both a massive pair of soppy wet vaginas.

It's not, it's a good online version of what Neil Degrasse Tyson does with Science. Oversimplified but interests people that are ignorant. It's overall a good thing. Besides there were interesting episodes that went over topics even I was ignorant about due to shitty public school system like the episode about Indian ocean trade.

Greeks were literally uncivilized barbarians while the Persians were civilized cosmopolitans that outlwed slavery though.

maybe if sesame street taught 1+1=4

Examples?

He seriously said that? What episode?

>why are you hating on leftist propaganda

He's view of history is based on shame of victory and on viewing the defeated as some kind of misunderstood victims.
He's a product of this era, a kinda pathetic one, really.

>leftist propaganda
Back 2 /pol/ nigger

he literally said native americans lived in harmony with the land and each other. Along with that they worship a single montheistic God who created and maintained the land

>civilized cosmopolitans
Athens and Sparta were more civilizaed than Persia where some perfumed stripper commands his armys to fight for him while he watches

>Genghis Khan was cool and awesome and badass but Alexander was an evil conqueror, detroyer of culture and a genocidal maniac
>this isn't leftist propaganda
Fuck off

because he's a cuck

>Fuck Greeks, they had slaves and shit
>But by gee the Ottoman Empire was so cosmopolitan and forward thinking, what a great state

panders to feminists

>Alexander wasn't great
>But every female in history was

I'd rather people remain uninterested than see them being fed outright bullshit that they will likely never bother to learn the truth about. It is the politicization of the past. It is almost as bad as blatantly revising it.

Except the facts that he rattles off are written in most high school text books. His is a leftist, him doing anything will have a leftist tinge to it. If you think that this leftist propoganda then you are simply off base with what is true.

It really isnt. It has some left leaning bias but this is nowhere near propoganda level especially in academic circles.

no he didnt
no he didnt
no he didnt

You guys read into too much into jokes and shit. He never said fuck greeks, I am sure he has praised them at other times. His entire civilization and philosophy stems from them. The ottoman empire made a lot of advances and they need to be pointed out. The mongols were very impressive and not a lot of normies know about them and their accomplishments, everyone has heard of Genghis Khan and how scary he was.

tl;dr you guys are idiots and idk why i am even trying to defend him to you. I have had plenty of people on this board not want to discuss the good that a society has done, because they did some things badly. He is pretty fair and he will occasionally drop a hard left bias, but overall the show is pretty good.

>ottoman empire made a lot of advances

>idk why i am even trying to defend him to you
Neither do I, he's a fuckwit

He doens't hand out credit so hes a worthless human being whose only job is to sing and dance to morons like you
>no he didn't
>he was joking
which one is it faggot

>outlawed slavery
>conscripted soldiers from regions they conquered

>Because he insist irrelevant history is more important than shit that actually happened and that had actual consequences.
... when did he insist this?

everyone's a cultural marxist these day, haven't you heard? Just see

john greene has low testosterone levels thus everything he says is by definition incorrect

Hmm

>He's a leftist
>wtf let him spread leftist propaganda cuz he's a leftist

Kill yourself

He is the literal embodiment of contrarian revisionism and regressive value assessment.

He establishes early on that his revisionist viewpoint is counter to the Great Man history model, so he deliberately emphasis things in history that DON'T have to do with great figures, to the literal detriment of understanding historical context. When you deliberately lead out the individuals who have become established in history because of the influence they had, you make events, like uprisings, revolutions, or other major fulcrum points seem almost spontaneous.

And second, he CONSTANTLY uses modern day values, specifically his own american progressive values, to dictate assesments of historical society or events. (x is bad because they had slaves, x is not great because he didn't do that much in relation to the modern day, x society was corrupt because they didn't allow gay people and women to blah blah blah.)

He is a walking example of the downward trend in low level academic history.

Remember the time John basically called everyone interested in military history fucking stupid and preceded to lambast and ridicule them by making a terrible video on the battles of the Civil War?

youtu.be/25HHVDOaGeE

he isn't really an academic

source?

I believe it's the 'greeks and persians' episode

...

>no he didnt
youtu.be/6E9WU9TGrec?t=3m6s

>no he didnt
>Genghis Khan
(shouldn't have to link this, he constantly sucks them off)
>Alexander the Great
youtube.com/watch?v=0LsrkWDCvxg

>no he didnt
>Fuck Greeks
youtube.com/watch?v=Q-mkVSasZIM
>Ottoman Empire
youtube.com/watch?v=UN-II_jBzzo

How about you actually put a bit more effort into your responses next time, retardo.

Holy fuck.
>muh Alexander was a MUSOGONIST!!1 so he sucks
>Persians were le progressive so they should've destroyed Western Civilisation
>muh noble savage meme
He really is cancer.

This is a classic white people trick. Other groups don't apologise and get punished for what they do. We apologise while we're doing something and keep apologising for things that happened in the past in order to balance what we're doing currently.

>conflates "history" with "the past"

History is literally the accounts of great men, how does the fact that 50% of people are women counter the fact that history is what it is? What a cuckmaster, I literally feel more retarded for having watching this filth.

he is.

don't need to make excuses for capitalism.

Look at this sperglord trying to defend this cuck.

He spent a whole video saying blacks are victims of racism because they are in jail more than whites.

They are in jail more because they commit more crime.

(((Green)))

That really isn't an excuse.

The oversimplification of events, their precedents, and their consequences inherent in crash courses. Basically, it's impossible cover the material that would have taken 100 pages in a textbook in a 10-15 minute infotainment YT video. The same problems plague Hank Green's SciShow.

They did...in medieval times.

Like what?

they were the first guys in europe to make extensive use of handheld firearms

the maps was a new league of awful.

like, how hard is it to look it up?

That was the Italians dumbo

nuh uh

He is a brilliant historian.

The people here slandering him are corrupted by envy, it's a sad sight to behold.

Its a shame people have gone this farof the deep end trying to put hard working people down, just so they can feel a bit higher.

Algebra, glass making, and advances in architecture come to mind.

John Greene is one of the brightest minds of the 21st century. The ability to condense so much information into such an favorable format is a lot harder than it looks.

He doesn't even write or research it, dummy.

He's merely the presenter

>extensive use

In 14th and 15th century European armies, arquebusiers, musketeers, riflemen, etc., were considered specialist units with the bulk of infantry consisting of pikemen or halberdiers. By contrast, firearms had entered general issue in the Ottoman army in the mid to late 15th century.

Politicized historians have always been and always will be the worst purveyors of lies and greatest barrier to an understanding of our history that there ever was or ever will be
Anyone who uses the word eurocentric in seriousness should just be killed.

t. Helios Dmitry Osmanpoulos

>sparta and Athens
>civilised

Kek

Eurocentric is admittedly a broad term but you can see how it can be applied to describe a particular worldview. We don't use the terms ANE, ME, FE, Orient/Oriental for no reason. Western historians up were unable to separate their biases and moralities from their studies.

He said life was better in the Persian empire and they didn't have slavery, I think taking that to mean the Greeks should have let themselves be conquered is putting words in his mouth though.

Well during Xerxes' Invasion/Thermopylae there were dudes from all over the Persian Empire. They weren't all ethnic Persians/Medes/Farsis or whatever the heck.

>historians from western society view things from the perspective of someone in western society
holy shit somebody stop this racism

Wasn't it the Hussites?

That doesn't prove anything
They probably just absorbed and continued using the armies they conquered

Because he's just as shitty as Veeky Forums when it comes to actually discussing/learning history.

Herodotus says that the Persians had a core elite force, but that most of their armies were made up of levies from all the different peoples of their empire, along with mercenaries. The different regions were required to provide men with some people conscripted more or in other ways because of their reputation and cultural skills, with for example the Phoenicians providing ships and sailors.

And while many other aspects of Herodotus' Histories are disputed, I have never heard of anyone saying that there was any doubt about this.

>tfw when no Turko-Greco-Persian Orthodox Christian Ottoman Empire to reclaim the mantle of Rome

>the title "the Great" is sexist
>Catherine the Great doesnt count because of muh horse rumours
>Muh cleopatra isnt "the great"
His writing is his worst part, just read some excerpts of his books and jesus christ. He acts like some historical brain when he says shit like "woah dude history was sexist how about that?bet you didnt think of that brainlet".
All in all its hard to think he exists. He is a revisionist, pro-everything, terrible young adult writer, claims to have a mental illness he is tumblr in human form. and it shows in everything he does.

How are those two things related? And what do you meam by "conscripted"? Since you mix it with slavery, are you impliying that persians went to every region of the empire to forcefully recruit young boys as opposed to requesting the respective elites to provide an amount of military troops like they probably did before being conquered?

>maybe it would have been better if Greece let themselves be conquered then Sparta winning the Peloponnesian Wars
I'm paraphrasing, but that's pretty much what he said

It's mental cuckoldry.

Slavery was never outlawed in Persia, it was highly regulated and the debtor had to work for the creditor rather than being sold to a third party

>Hitler on a horse is a cool guy but the guys responsible for western democracy can go fuck themselves
>this is leftist propaganda
Blow me

They werent, they were even

By 'leftist' he likely means a modern progressive (or his definition of one), not actual economic leftism.

That was his equally degenerate brother

lying through omission

Genghis Khan wasn't (purely) racially motivated

I never understood the liberal/progressive love for Genghis Khan. If he was a man of European descent and did what he did to Europe to Asia they would talk about how awful Europeans are.

The Alexander the Great episode

He's a cuck.

Just watch his channel and you'll understand

He actually didn't do anything to Europe. He was dead by then. Those European campaigns were mounted under his sons and grandsons. The people who should have a beef with him should be the other nomadic ethnic groups he cucked to oblivion, the Chinks who he killed literal millions of, and the Persians who he annihilated so badly that their agricultural irrigation infrastructure went bust and their population wouldn't recover to pre-Mongol levels until WW2.

He wasn't bent on killing his own subjects for the mere sake of racial intolerance. History is full of conquerors and killers, none of his caliber perhaps but he only took the steppe empire model to the next level. Hitler's death camps and extermination policies were out of sheer racial autism with no tangible benefits. Idk why it is so hard for stormniggers to grasp the difference.

Go back to /pol/ neckbeards

Fuck off John