How PragerU Lies to You - The British Empire [Shaun]
50 replies, posted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HurC8aTsVCE
A hard right channel lying about things to strengthen their position when necessary? I'm shocked!
Some rando online baselessly hating on and strawmanning a respected contemporary historian, who has published multiple works and stood up for his opinions throughout his entire career? (I.e. an ‘expert’).
If their political opinions were reversed there’d be an outcry.
Zero surprises here. If something looks way to polished, yet contains very little substance or critical thought, chances are, you should run away. Prager U is an excellent example of this.
Is the person in this video really a respected contemporary historian? His works are inaccurate at best and maliciously disinformative at worst
"The Politically Incorrect Guide To History," his most prominent series of works are a series of pseudo historical, apologist drivel. This guy is defending an empire that basically enslaved 1/4 of the world. Also, the sentence that the Irish are shiftless", "cruel", "restless" is straight up fucking racist, along with his Confederate apologism. This guy sucks and his opinions suck and in no way is he respected by any historian.
I was more focused on the criticism of ‘Niall Ferguson’, google him.
The guy in the video comes from a similar school of thought though (at least seemingly), but I couldn’t speak to his credentials.
You mean the one who wrote "the south was right" in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War"? Everything in this video is refuting direct claims made in the PragerU video. It's a strawman only if you for some reason think that Imperialism was a good thing.
I can't imagine anyone in America being so laughably ignorant that they believe the obvious bullshit peddled in the PragerU video, even the most ignorant of high school drop outs must have picked up a fact or too during their life that contradicts it, I can't believe people are really this stupid holy shit I don't want to live on this planet anymore
Hell, Ferguson wrote a whole book arguing that overall the British Empire was a good thing and should be imitated. Trying to paint Ferguson as anything but an apologist for the British Empire is laughable.
Yeah I do mean that one, guardian hitpieces aside (and whatever that telegraph articles was, surely it’s good he’s happy as a historian he’s smart and not good looking?), his analysis of why British people will never see themselves as ‘European’ in Empire is spot on and lauded even by people from your camp (because we had an empire we developed an identity the other Europeans didn’t in essence).
The man has taught/studied at the best universities in the world, has multiple popular books (in academia and outside) and, as I’ve said, has fought for his opinions in academia over the course of his long career.
Who are you to disagree with him? Have you held a senior fellowship at Oxford?
Now I’m not saying that you have to have been, however your current base of ‘I don’t like him because he says things I don’t like’ and sharing media hack jobs really doesn’t paint you out as having a very nuanced, educated position to criticize him from.
Also he’s very right in his last point- I fail to see why you disagree? The two world wars saw 2/3rds of British wealth evaporate, gave independence movements ammunition (we fought for you, now gib independence) and ravaged the country’s civil and military capabilities.
Appeal to popularity, appeal to authority, appeal to popularity, appeal to... saying the same thing for a while?, appeal to authority.
And the last point is less "the british empire dissolved from wwi" and more "the british empire dissolving from wwi is a bad thing".
I think it's a grand injustice that if I was to call you an utter fucking retard, I would get banned, yet you're free to shit up Facepunch with completely moronic drivel such as this
I thought people on this forum loved the idea of listening to ‘experts’ (and you don’t get more expert than one of the most well known historians in the modern day, who has been through the academic gauntlet for his points and emerged in fairly good shape). In multiple threads on here the right has been lambasted for ‘not listening to experts’ but the second a fairly credible right wing ‘expert’ is produced suddenly we shouldn’t pay any heed... funny that.
The empire wasn’t a cut and dried bad thing. That’s the mistake a lot of people make. How long do you think it would’ve taken to crush slavery if the weight of the British empire hadn’t been on the side of emancipation?
The man literally tried to dig up dirt on students he doesn't politically agree with. That's not a "hit-piece"
In another Ferguson wrote: “Now we turn to the more subtle game of grinding them down on the committee. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
Rice-Cameron, added: "Slowly, we will continue to crush the Left’s will to resist, as they will crack under pressure."
Ferguson suggested that the original Cardinal Conversations steering committee "should all be allies against O. Whatever your past differences, bury them. Unite against the SJWs (social justice warriors)."
Someone can study and teach something and still have bad views, what kind of argument is that? There are plenty of people in tenured positions who shouldn't have gotten them.
Instead of addressing the arguments I've made, you've decided instead to attack my credentials, which frankly don't matter - especially when Ferguson himself states that he's looking to rehabilitate the British Empire.
I've read enough of his work, and enough about him to know that his work is heavily flawed.
Just because he's right about one specific thing doesn't mean he's right about other things
Just because something is popular (also source thanks) and has been to prestigious universities (more of a connections than a being right thing) doesn't mean he's right either.
This is just a lame appeal to authority, there's not a ton else to say about this
Neither does just posting things like "he's been at prestigious universities" prove that he's necessarily right in any manner.
As above, it was portrayed as a bad thing that it dissolved
There's a difference between 'experts' and 'one expert'.
There's also a difference between 'studies and measurable quantitative data by experts' and 'subjective moral views of one expert'.
Also, changing the anti-vaxxer to be a medical professional still doesn't make him right.
in fact
the whole anti-vaxxer movement
was started by a medical professional
I mean, do you have any familiarity with his work to determine whether he is just right once?
I also wrote ‘you don’t have to have been [a senior fellow at Oxford]’, but rightfully said all the individual has done is disagree with him politically and share hit pieces.
See my response to ‘empire was a bad thing’ above, it was neither, so it’s fall was neither good nor bad.
Any undergrad student can attack a well-respected historian, it doesn’t mean they’re right. It also speaks to your politics that you think ‘rehabilitation’ of the idea of empire is a straight cut bad thing.
Glad you’ve read his work, I have too. I’ve read enough to know that his work is heavily accurate.
Jesus Christ I hope you're a troll because the idea that there are people who are stupid enough to unironically believe this bullshit makes me want to kill myself
I feel you’re reading too far into the comparison. Historiography is different to the rise of the anti-vaccine movement (which, shock horror, Idisagree with too, vaccine your kids, kids).
How many quotes of Niall Ferguson going “The British Empire was a good thing” do you need to understand that he thinks that the British Empire was a good thing?
and you’re STILL on them being hit-pieces? They’re not, it’s reporting of a bad thing he did. His work is not held in high esteem. Stephen Badsey referred to his thesis as being “dug up”, since its essentially a non-argument these days.
he’s not good.
Are you a senior fellow at Oxford? I don't think you are in any position to say his work is good if you aren't.
Again, the empire was neither good nor bad. He does say it was good in many places, he leans more toward it being a good thing no doubt, but if you read his conclusions they often end along the lines of ‘contrary to popular academic opinion, the empire wasn’t literally hitler’. Funny he says it was a good thing in his books trying to point out it wasn’t as bad as most left-wing, Leninist (even if they don’t identify as such) historians try to say.
It depends on the political opinions of your faculty; he’s not a laughing stock where I was educated, he’s mandatory reading (and, yes, I went to a good school).
Ultimately you’re never going to agree with me on this, nor will you ever accept any opposing opinion can be right. It’s the Hobson/Lenin paradigm r.e. Colonialism/Imperialism.
This is called covering your ass. Pity of War was about how it would be great to still have the British Empire around. His later work focuses on how the US is basically the British Empire and needs to start taking lessons in Imperialism. Stop dodging around his beliefs.
Oh I didn’t realize you could write the conclusion for someone’s work for them. It turns out words don’t matter if someone dislikes your politics. They can just ignore your conclusion! (Which any self respecting historian knows is an essential part of you put across your central points, out simply if you haven’t got the feel of their conclusion in the rest of the book then your email misinterpreting them during the meat of the reading).
I’d like it if you could link a video of him reciting the White Man’s Burden, I haven’t been able to find it myself nor knew he did that (if he did).
Regarding one of your earlier points btw, he didn’t say ‘Slowly, we will continue to crush the Left’s will to resist, as they will crack under pressure’, it was one of the students he was emailing. He simply raised concerns about the student’s radical left-wing opinions. It just seems he did what any self-respecting professor would do, resign by association.
Why would there be an outcry if their political opinions were reversed? When has there ever been an outcry about some fascist troglodyte arguing against a left wing scholar?
Unless you consider millions of "LIBTARD CUCK OWNED by FACTS and LOGIC and REASON" videos "outcry"
Don't know if you've noticed, but right-wing grifters aren't exactly the underdog of politics
The right is consistently ridiculed by the left for ‘not listening to experts’. This guy right here is an expert, no matter if you disagree with him.
Are you now saying we shouldn’t listen to experts because their politics contradict yours? Hmmm.
You can listen to whoever you want, but I reserve the right to call you and your alleged experts a bunch of dipshits
"not listening to experts"
not
"not listening to one fringe charlatan who pretty much every other historian thinks is an absolute moron but I'm calling him an expert because he went to a prestigious college before he started spewing obvious bullshit that everyone with a high school level of history knowledge knows is obvious bullshit"
Thanks.
Yeah, the guy who has taught at the top universities in the world and written multiple bestsellers is clearly ‘a dipshit’ because he disagrees with you politically.
Tell me, in case I want to ever become an expert, who defines ‘experts’ is it you? The left in general? Or is it based on qualifications? Seems to be the former two to me right now.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.