They were all racist dumbass

I feel that is something forgotten, and there are multiple ways to look at people in the past, in a modern sense and for their own time. I would say both should be considered

It’s kinda like how loads of people were anti gay just by default 20 years ago and have changed only recently thanks to the don’t say “that’s so gay” campaign efforts

but let me guess, karl marx was the most vile evil racist because he used the n-word in private.

​@@helwrecht1637 Nobody is Homophobic by default. People became Homophobic due to a heteronormative society that they grew up with.

Sign language has different dialects, so there's probably a regional dialect about that.

@@iamyuheismi920 .......how do you have dialect with your hands

@@evanv7420 same way you do with your mouth and tongue: shape! shape is everything.

@@evanv7420 First, you raise your hand. Next, you lower every finger except the middle one. That's how you sign in a New York accent.

@@evanv7420 Dude, COWS fucking MOO in different dialects and you're thinking that humanity, with complex language systems, can't have hand language dialects? Throw up a peace sign in several different countries. It means several different things.

So do you see why the sate shouldn't have power?

@@Fernando-iy3fg In case you didn’t catch it in my initial comment, it was dripping with sarcasm. I’m not advocating states rights in the least.

@@Dan_Ben_Michael My point is that the state does bad things, so it shouldn't have much power, decentralization is better

@@Fernando-iy3fg You should read State and Revolution

@@thirdvect0r you should read Anatomy of the State

Yeah, they exist, and they creep on internet boards and forums

13:55 here ya go for anyone in the future

​@Dos_Caffeine Sometimes if you're out walking around and you turn over a stone or a rotten log you'll see them creeping around there as well.

​@@BenJohnsonCA925 In florida they crawl right out into the open. Just like palmetto bugs.

I literally cannot stop laughing at the part. Seeing the confederate character transform into a Nazi while reading the comment is legit the funniest thing I’ve ever seen.

My gosh! Pick a lane dude!

It’s almost like in those days people weren’t educated.

Or the later quote about NYC not having a culture. Like WTF? NYC actually IS a lot of American culture

@@andrewleah1983 Actually it's more like reactionary politics are intentionally incoherent.

It’s like jreg but with a little less irony and bit more history.

It reminded me of that scene in The Two Towers where Gandalf removes the influence of Saruman from Thèoden. Maybe I'm just a massive nerd.

@@ieuanhunt552 It was a recreation of that scene.

Nazi Party wasn't created yet friend, so your statement is purely is one of ignorance

The NAZI party was an whole different organization and much worse to be honest

True. It made them money. It made the land owners very very rich. It wouldn't last, even if they won, agricultural technologies were coming that would soon make ending slavery more likely. Or perhaps not? ...... Its up in the air. It really depends on the person.

@@ericjohnson7234 Slavery was on its death throws, least here in America. Powerful notions like that tend to go out either with a whimper or a violent flame.

@@MrTwistedLizard Or it doesn't go out at all, just change forms, as you still treat prisoners as slave labour in many states.

iwilleatyoursofa hell you dont even have to look at the prisoners. Its not too much different for a whole lot of people except now theres a “wage” in front of the word slave

@@alecbarnes6917 Well it was written into the constitution that there had to be a certain amount of time before slavery could be abolished. When colonies were founded in the South, there just wasn't enough manpower to make farming profitable, so they looked to the slave trade. Slaves first arrived in the US in 1619, and by thee time the US was officially founded, almost 2 centuries of dependence on slaves had led to the South having an economy unable to survive without it. The North thankfully didn't widely adopt slavery, but only because there were no major cash crops to be grown. The reason why the North didn't stop slavery immediately is because some "Northern" states (e.g. Maryland) was still dependant on slaves, and even if the North did ban slaves, the CSA would just ignore them.

He never said that. More lies from the northern apologists.

@@mattolivier1835 it’s still gay

@@Kenyon-Brown. So, according to you, it's preferred to enslave only women? What are you even talking about? Slavery is immoral, including when Lincoln enslaved northerners through conscription.

@@mattolivier1835 You couldn't prevent a joke from flying over your head to save your life.

@@mattolivier1835 That's just what happens when there's a war, conscription. From what you're saying, school is technically slavery if you think about it.

I legit thought that maybe it was two brothers

WAIT THEY ARE THE SAME PERSON?!

It's quarantine. You gotta expand your horizons and experience the internet as it was meant to be experienced. Randomly, through the algorithm.

Exactly; just when you think you've seen it all, there's always something new around the corner; a true testament to human creativity

He also pulls the entire scene lines from Lord of the Rings when Gandalf goes to Theoden

Well... there’s a first time for everything lmao

L M A O

It's funny beaus confederacy of Independent systems

I would

@@femurbreaker4483 same 😎

@@spqrd13 the empire did nothing wrong

@@femurbreaker4483 so true.

What is a puritan?

@@fireblade696​​⁠ assuming you actually don’t know, it’s a relatively fringe sect of Christianity in the 16-17 hundreds. Very generally, think the pilgrims and the Salem witch trials

​@@thevenator3955What's Puritans precious? Whats Puritans eh?

@@fireblade696a kind of reformed Protestant, the modern day equivalent is the “Congregationalist” churches you can find all over the US

@@radfatdaddy4169 HL Mencken: "Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."

he probably drinking Bud Light now

​@@genkiferal7178 cope and seethe, transphobe

​@@genkiferal7178wat

Or a sitcom

Because Nazi Germany was definitely not trying to become a superpower.

You know who else gave power to the regional governors? The emperor.

World War 2 was about the humiliation given to the Germans from the Treaty of Versailles. Until funny mustache man used spicy air on the Jewish

@@ZackarySchejbalCODBO2RGM2 German sentiments of humiliation were directly tied to anti-semitism. Remember the Stab in the Back?

@@bigbengamer Well how else was he going to maintain control without the bureacracy?

He didn't ordered massacres of Indians?

@@historiamowiosobie4515 if you mean out in the west, no, it was a crazy Methodist in the Union (John Milton Chivingston) who wanted a seat in the government thinking he would get glory and fame from this attack, so he ordered his calvary to encircle a big camp of Indians who were not going to attack and ordered his men to fire into the crowd of people, it's called the Sand Creek Masaacre if you want to do your own research, I know this from listening in person to a lecture by Andrew Masich about the Civil War in the west, just one example =/

@@ColonialBoi all I mean I watched cynical historian and he said Lincoln ordered massacres of Indians so I think it's pretty racist speaking ur language.

@@historiamowiosobie4515 I think you're referring to the hanging of 38 Dakota

@@historiamowiosobie4515 it also seems to me that you're judging historical figures by modern standards, which is something you shouldn't do.

you dont say?

@@Holret I said 'IN CASE you DIDN'T notice'.

@@obi-wankenobi1233 Thank for pointing out that out with yet, another useless comment.

@@Holret I didn't know so ha

@@Holret thanks for posting a useless comment saying his comment is useless by letting people into a joke. Really helpful bro

He's used to hanging witches whose witchcraft consists entirely of knowing how to use plants. This is the first time he's faced genuine devilry.

@@jy3n2 And he fuckin’ rises to the occasion anyways, what a man

lol this country is doomed.

@@kenburns4547 As was alluded to in the video, it wasn't a "Northern War of Aggression". The South were the ones provoking a war long before it officially was started by them.... Did you know that in the months just before Fort Sumter, there were 11 incidents - many of them violent, that involved the South's actors.... January 4, 1861: Alabama seizes U.S. arsenal at Mount Vernon. January 5, 1861: Alabama seizes Forts Morgan and Gaines. January 6, 1861: Florida seizes Apalachicola arsenal. January 7, 1861: Florida seizes Fort Marion. January 8, 1861: Floridians try to seize Fort Barrancas but are chased off. January 9, 1861: Star of the West fired on in Charleston Harbor January 10, 1861: Louisiana seizes U.S. arsenal at Baton Rouge, as well as Forts Jackson and St. Philip. January 11, 1861: Louisiana seizes U.S. Marine Hospital. January 14, 1861: Louisiana seizes Fort Pike February 8, 1861: Arkansas seizes U.S. Arsenal at Little Rock. February 12, 1861: Arkansas seizes U.S. ordnance stores at Napoleon. ONLY THEN on April 12, 1861: was Fort Sumter fired upon by Confederates. ( source ; "Chronology of the secession crisis". ) Who was the REAL aggressor - even BEFORE the war had OFFICIALLY started ?

@@kenburns4547 That's an improper and dishonest interpretation of the situation. Lincoln's primary aim was not to abolish slavery ( at least initially ) but to preserve the Union at all costs. His statement plainly reflects this. Lincoln had said that he would tolerate slavery if it meant that the Union would hold together. He attempts therefore to first have the "referee" - the Supreme Court - arbitrate on the matter and offered this solution to the Confederacy in an attempt to prevent the coming war. The South as we know, refused because they were paranoid that their precious "peculiar institution" ( slavery ) was going to be under threat and imminently abolished. So they "jumped the gun" - the hotter heads decided that they couldn't or wouldn't wait for the umpire's decision and went ahead with their string of provocations which ended up with Fort Sumter. "...That's a very clear and serious threat, that Lincoln would engage in imperial aggression against them...". It wasn't so much a threat as a WARNING. A warning the Confederacy didn't heed. Lincoln made strenuous efforts to avoid war. He had no reason to invade the South UNTIL the South GAVE HIM a justified reason to. First by the pre war incidents I described in my earlier post, and then the subsequent firing on Sumter. The South were both the provocateurs and the instigators in both word and deeds. They were to blame. Lincoln was merely reacting to their aggressive provocations and HAD to invade in order to restore the Union - which as I said, was undeniably his intent, obligation and DUTY as leader of the nation, all along.

@@kenburns4547 "...you clearly haven't done your homework..." That's because I'm a layman and not a constitutional scholar of the war and don't presume to be. And neither I would venture to say, are you. But I'm very familiar with the overt causes. Yes I know that comment of Lincoln's was referring to the Dred Scott situation. I have just been quickly reading about it. It says about the concluding settlement that some of the Supreme Court Justices were notably biased in their findings ( pro slavery ) and that there was a suspected conspiracy afoot. Much like their modern day counterparts the Dems - they cheated without shame. So if true this doesn't surprise. So the Southern states' membership in the Union was fine for them for what - 90 years previously, but when their "rights" to slavery were threatened they suddenly want to reaffirm the status of their ( contested ) sovereignty to the point of breaking away from the rest of the United States ? They can't have it both ways. Either they respect and live with the terms of the Union or they don't. Lincoln knew this would cause instability and chaos and that it was untenable. He needed to act and he did. I'm not concerned so much with the legalities. I'm more concerned with the moral aspect of the resulting war. We all know or should know, that the war from the South's view was primarily about slavery. It always had been. The Union was not always fighting to end slavery... but the Confederacy was always fighting to preserve it. It’s pretty hard to take pride in such a horrible cause, so the attempt has been made ever since to pretend the Civil War was caused by everything BUT slavery. Their favorite red herring is the weasel phrase ‘states rights’. Notice they never elaborate any further on those so-called states rights. This is probably because the ONLY ‘state right’ they cared about was the right of White people to own Black people. On the eve of secession, wealthy Mississippi plantation owner Richard Thompson Archer declared it was time for the South to ( quote ) "stand united… in defense of the God given right to own the African.” His attitude summed up the mentality of the South. The mentality you appear happy to defend.

@@kenburns4547 No I'm not conceding that. I don't know and I'm not particularly interested. As I mentioned the legalities of it are highly contentious. However it started, the war was fought over slavery. Period. That the South were so zealous for it that they were prepared to go to war over preserving it, will forever be an indelible and bloody stain on the nation's psyche.

Why do people like but don’t comment? I want to exchange knowledge

Not all secessionist left their specific reason of leaving the Union in their secession document. Some just left without stating why they were leaving.

Totally true, war was for slavery only. Source: *am* *from* *Mississippi*

It was OBVIOUSLY about state rights. State rights to own slaves!

@@carteriffic1681 exchange knowledge? Ummmm well did you know that OMG" usage can be traced back to 1917? Or that some cats are allergic to humans? Yeah that's all I have mate

I've deliberately not let myself learn the original lyrics. As far as I'm concerned, Union lyrics are the only lyrics. When I listen to it, it's always instrumental.

The original lyrics were in a New York minstrel song which is what Dixie was.

any clue what version of dixieland he uses?

@@Anonie324 for me not deliberately But I’m just sad I can’t hum it because Union Dixie is so good

I never heard the lyrics, just the first musical notes from that crappy "Dukes of Hazzard" movie, although it did acknowledge that painting the Confederate battle flag onto a car would get you in trouble nowadays in a number of places.

Antebellum Southerners so identified with slavery as a pillar of their society, that saying anything against them was seen as “aggression”. They even banned abolitionist literature from the region.

@@timmayeaux2743 lol even if it had been legal for states to secede, that's not how federal land would be handled. What you are suggesting is outright lawless thuggery. Which is appropriate lol

The north set that up as the US gov't has done many times throughout history. The Cole?

@@timmayeaux2743 Just like a wife-beater’s “see what you made me do” excuse.

The blockade of aport is an act of war ad always ahs been.

Smokeyharrison95 *Avengers Endgame Theme Intensifies*

@@realWhiteCount GLORY, GLORY, HALLELUJAH

Smokeyharrison95 This dude is brilliant man.

Corect

Burn!

They also whine about everything, just like HOI players :p

The confederates were functionally nazis the whole time.

From neoconfederate to wehraboo

yo that shit was intense

Yoooo did you guys see the upcoming Barbarossa patch? We’re getting an official Soviet Union focus tree, and a supply system.

And in 1788, when Washington was first elected to president, only 6 states even held popular votes for the presidency. Do you count Washington and his administration as basically dictators?

@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 when I say dictator, I’m strictly referring to the methods by which they derived their authority. But to your point, yes I would. Early American elections were complete sham democracy.

@@chables74 They really couldn't make it more obvious that they pick a side first and bend the facts second, based on the way they assume that's how everyone else does it 😂

@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 The american government at that time was an oligarchy anyways, still is today. I can accept that my government is terrible whilst still admonishing the confederacy.

@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558which, of course, in no way justifies any of the atrocities the confederacy supported.

And the Confederate leadership literally wrote it into their constitution that they wouldn’t let the North take their slaves

@@dalesajdak422 even further. The CSA constitution pretty clearly stated that no state was allowed to ever outlaw slavery.

And about every single one of Lincolns actions were only to preserve the union He used slavery as a mean to save the union, not the other way around

“The war was about states rights!” A states rights to what? Lol

@@Fernando-iy3fg He used the union to save slavery

You talking about Muhammad again? Cuz he's still celebrated for his peace.

“We know the meaning of liberty. It’s important to know your enemy.” - Slave Owner

That absurd quote, perfectly sums up the broken mind state of neo-confederate fanboys

@@Kwasimitsu or maybe I've just got a Scots-Irish hillbilly in the wood pile that has had a history of being shit on by Yankees (of which I'm one), WASPs, English, and Romans? Never owned a slave, never fired on Fort Sumter, didn't vote to secede. Cabin on the homestead with mini-balls in it. Your narrative is myopic.

I Art Laughing were did that come from?

Speaking of complex and complicated, I've literally had to argue how calendars work with these people. Specifically, how 7 states seceded BEFORE Lincoln was even inaugurated. Consider what they deem "complex and complicated" when they don't even understand dates.

the elite northerners did and they now pretty much rule the south now. they exploited the south in the same way they exploited "banana republics". They come in to "help" by helping themselves to whatever they can walk off with.

Kinda makes one think of why Muslims keep hating the West for ending Islamic slave trade... Plenty of apologists there.

@@nathanbrady8529 Um, he was elected. WITHOUT A SINGLE SOUTHERN VOTE. The guy doesn’t have to be inaugurated for people to know who won.

That second point… when have we ever said that. (It’s waaaaay more complicated than that) Did you know that there was a tariff on imported/exported goods before the civil war that crippled the southern economy. That the industrialized northern states were wealthy and affluent because they were able to pay low prices for southern goods as a result of said tariff. That the homes of the majority of southerners were ramshackle shacks without windows in the middle of nowhere. That the entire south was essentially enslaved to the north except for the few people who lived on huge plantations.

When he did his 100,000 subscriber button award video he played Fritz, but with a beard. He presumably couldn't afford to shave it, with his other filming going on, but he also couldn't control when he crossed that milestone, and when UKposts sent him the award.

Yeah

Did you not watch till the end?

Amen to that man

Idk the return of VVitchfinder Generale was gold

"He captured Harpers Ferry with just 19 men so true, he frightened old Virginia till she trembled through and through, they hanged him for a traitor they themselves a traitorous crew, his soul goes marching on." Glory glory Alleluia.

Yeah, he's a witch finder not a nazi hunter

@Kade Daivis No, the Nazis detested Catholicism. "It quickly became clear that [Hitler] intended to imprison the Catholics, as it were, in their own churches. They could celebrate mass and retain their rituals as much as they liked, but they could have nothing at all to do with German society otherwise. Catholic schools and newspapers were closed, and a propaganda campaign against the Catholics was launched." He was most definitely irreligious with a veil of religiosity to appeal to the masses. With that said, fuck Hitler

​@Kade Daivis Yes, Hitler was raised Catholic (as he was from Austria) but was undeniably anti-clerical. Nazis believed in 'Positive Christianity', removing everything 'Jewish' and making it strictly about how the Aryan race was the one chosen by God. By and large, Hitler was a mishmash of beliefs but never truly Christian, obviously pagan when he adopted his anti-Semitic worldview. The Pope met under good terms with Hitler in order to secure the safety of the Catholic clergy and laity. He literally condemned Nazi views in the encyclical 'Mit Brenneder Sorge', citing them as paganistic and statist. I guess trying to avoid death and destruction is now being sympathetic to fascists? And of course Hitler would try to appeal to the religious by playing nice with the leader of the largest religious group.

@Kade Daivis I guess he realized it too late, when the war was already in full swing.

@Kade Daivis Being a current Catholic, you really do sound mental. You can’t compare the Roman times to Nazi Germany’s hatred of the clergy, they’re quite different. In addition, one literally embraced Catholicism as its state religion later on while the other detested it. Yes, obviously the Pope would try navigating his way through it all. The Church will not adhere to some random country’s politics and it will rightfully defend its own interests.

It’s like a family reunion, except nobody is related!

⁠@@peppermintyankee and they all want to kill eachother

Billy Yank is the good guy while Klaus is the worst.

Thats also the French flag lol

@@sanmarino8605 Italian too lmao

The flag of my sexual experience

@@blackrabbit2282 yeah we got our asses kicked alot

But that’s the German flag……,

Yeah, I noticed that. That was entertainingly genius.

Was so perfect, not to mention I got a GREAT laugh from seeing the name "Southernboy Outdoors" lmao

I agree. It shows the level of intelligence to which these productions appeal

Best crossover

it no longer a straw man argument because these are actual arguments

You spoke like a true Billy Yank, I 100% agree with your anyalisys

Sorry but can you point me to a source?

@@FattylipidsSuck thanks

Holy shit this is beautiful

Lincoln was one of a kind as far as leaders go.

He was an American hero. The fact he was hung and robert E. Lee was basically let off with a slap on the wrist is evidence of how fucking reactionary and conservative this country is and has always been. Anyone with any slight leftist and progressive ideas is absolutely railed on, but conservative terrorists are constantly given a pass. It's nice to finally see some justice with the Jan. 6 stuff. Still think their punishments should be harsher.

That is a complete lie 😆 if your going to tell one, don't make it that obvious.

He was a villain & murderer.

Didn't he shoot a free black man as soon as he escaped? What a champion of his people.

I went to school in North Carolina the true home of the Confederacy. They call it theArmy of Northern Virginia, when if you look at a battle field it's mostly north Carolina regiments especially Gettysburg, the state of North Carolina had more soliders than any other state at 127,000 and 5000s to spare not counting our Jr reserve teens 16-18 that saw battle field action at one of the final battles of the Civil War the battle of Bentonville, then after Gettysburg where a NC regiment went the furthest crossing enemy lines on the battlefield, took the last shoots of that battle, the last signing on the Civil War surrender was in Durham NC with Sherman and Johnston 7 days after Gettysburg, they do not teach the taxes and tariffs part in school, but every thing else they do when it's talked about, and took us on a field trip to the last surrender site in 5th grade, there is a marker there for peace and unity, you are full of it to say in the south they teach pro confederate information, and don't celebrate black history, we sure did and I lived in North Carolina in a very southern town, I even remembered having dancers from Africa come do a recital for the whole school in traditional Africa dress, and taught us a Africa song about love and peace, you don't have to lie to be a part of the conversation about the Civil War. But John brown did kill a free black man as soon as he escaped.

I cant not keep watching it. The train wreck that is then Reb.

I’m on my 8th double-back-tap and just knew the comment was here for me.

@@nonesuchone CHECKMATE, LINCOLNITE

Every time I have a beer or two I love to watch this glorious piece of work. Brings joy to me every time...

Alistair Shaw I like when the Reb transforms into a Nazi. That scene is so hilarious.

two words: bar brawl

Especially if you have seen the Hateful 8. ;)

@@gbonkers666 my cousin and i almost got into a fistfight at the gettysburg museum, arguing over the war. He's from maryland, im from south carolina. i shoved him into a glass case that amazingly didnt break, then he body slammed me. A microcosm of how the war went, more or less.

Considering it's the same person I think we have a new kind of psychosis brewing too :P /s

@@55445 hes having to brew an argument alone cause no one likes him. Hes clearly very lonely and isolated

Same. It's one of my favorite series to revisit.

History is just stories. All you need is a good storyteller.

I hope their rivalry continues. As the Nazis liked to proclaim themselves Christian (when it was convenient) and yet did have plans to do away with the faith and bring more pagan elements in, something that could lead to more glorious fights between Witchfinder and the Nazi.

@@liliththesolarexalted2206 how often they forget that Lord Christ is himself a member of the Jewish community

@@varangiangaming7178 That's it! The ultimate plot twist!

@@toddmiller5656 Nazi "Positive Christianity" is a rancid plague that seems, in some ways to have infected a chunk of the American evangelical movement. Every once and awhile I hear a televangelist talk about Jewish people in a very similar light and acting like Jesus was not a Jew himself; ignoring the fact that he was called rabbi ECT ECT. The main internal fight over religion in Nazi Germany is certainly interesting to study though, with Hitler wanting Mein Kampf treated as a religious text in churches, and the positive Christianity crowd wanting their de-jeudeism of the faith, Alfred Rosenberg wanting his Myth of the Twentieth Century as the Nazi Bible, and we aren't even getting into Himmler's weird shit.

I read this comment when I was only halfway through and was confused, Now I completely understand

Ah yes one of the two people that will make any Confederate scared sh**less the other being Sherman Jesus imagine that just witchfinder general with a bible and Sherman with a flamethrower that would make any man born south of the mason Dixon scared, they would turn French

@@frenchsoldier8485 Add Spain and the at the time colony of Mexico to the equation. As funds raised in Cuba helped pay the Revolutionary army

@@frenchsoldier8485 I mean it did help more, that's why the spanish aren't remembered.

Best reaction I’ve seen in years.

I love the pronunciation of "OH FUCK"

Agree with for more civil war videos

"I know I am but what are you" is honestly a hilarious "defense". It's always funny to me that this sort of historical revisionism about the American Civil War often has lost-causers just dig their own holes.

Lincoln hated blacks and was going to kick the blacks out of the u.s.a.

@@raymorris6209 source needed

@@raymorris6209 and you should know that he also wants black rights before he was assasinated

@@raymorris6209 thats out of context he said that but he didn't mean that cause if he said he wanted to keep black the people in the south would say "you see he's trying to take your jobs away" to the people in the north. He wanted to give time back their land and put them back in Africa.

Underrated comment

@Awesome Sauce dude hes talking about the lincoln vampire hunter thing

@Awesome Sauce Its was Axe Deodorant. Also, that is another lie propagated across Ameria, Lincon was half Black and Native. In essence, the first Person of Color to be President but that is not taken into account.

LMAO. The worst Effing movie I ever saw!! Next to the Disney Fake Wars movies...

Oh god... xd 😂 i dont even understand why that movie so underrated xd

HIIISSS SOUL GOES MARCHING OOOOONNNNN, GLORY, GLORY HALLELUJA

They were trying him for spying Over the soviets he flew In his famous plane U2 ... Wait wrong version.

GOOORY GORY WHAT A HELLOVA WAY TO DIE! Wait? Ah shit, guess I've been watching Band of Brothers too many times 😅 (Currahee!)

@@Kez_DXX what version

Glory, glory hallelujah Teacher hit me with a ruler I ducked behind her door with a loaded .44 And she don't teach there no.more

Tennessee got it worst trust me.

@@iamthehype3684 Oh hell yeah Tennessee got rekt

Virginia: Am I a joke too you?

@@someguy9293 West Virginia: yes.

@@sawyerjamesofficial488 Tennessee was bassically russia in ww1 lmao

The south was willing to die to defend their way of life. Revisionists like the channel maker like to conflate the two for their own agenda. When pushed to shove, they can't defend their position either.

Spookrockcity Well, I’ll be frank. That’s a way of life that deserved to die.

attackmaster555 Absolutely no morale thinking.

attackmaster555 Thinking Genocide, slavery and things of that sort is okay because it doesn’t effect you, makes you at best edgy and at worst someone as unhinged as hitler or Stalin. I’m going to assume your just edgy, because in your original comment, you say it’s okay in other countries just not your own, so when it effects you it starts to matter.

attackmaster555 Thats a straw man at best, never said you were obligated too do any of that. But to say you don’t care makes you edgy. Your whole argument is a straw man based off something I never said. You should morally apposed to it, doesn’t mean you have to do anything. I am morally apposed to the practices of NK but you don’t see me chanting to go to war. You have an actual room temp IQ

You bust be easily entertained....

@@ShellShock11C Maybe you recently got the Nazi Excised from you and that's why you don't like the comparison

@@user-vl5qg5rf4n "Everyone I dont like is a Nazi!" Knew there would be at least one of you.

@Arcane Raven Pretty small number.

@@ShellShock11C I didn't say that. Nice scarecrow you got there, really spooked me! You're the one that didn't like the confederate being compared to a Nazi though, so I didn't even bring it up :)

The rise of Palpatine is based somewhat on the rise of Hitler. Although obviously not the same (for one, Hitler was never elected to be the leader, the Nazis never won a majority).

@@pronumeral1446 Actually, Hitler was appointed chancellor of Germany in 1933 following a series of *electoral victories* by the Nazi Party. It was only afterwards that he took full control of the country, with support of a lot of the population......this is not implying the Nazis and Hitler weren't terrible, and that they were good. they weren't good, they where..very..veryyyy bad

@@devan6935 You're correct but also so am I. The Nazis never won a majority, they won 33%. After this, President Hindenburg appointed Hitler to be the Chancellor, while Hitler pinky swore to work with the other parties in a coalition government. Of course we all know it didnt work out, he siezed power instead and ended fair elections.

@@pronumeral1446 actually, the nazis had over 43%, over 17 million voters, for reference, the 2nd most votes in that election was at 7 million, or 10 million less. the Nazis had over 44% of Reichstag seats. you are correct that is wasn't the majority that was needed, and it was only after the reichstag burned and several intimidation techniques by the nazis that they passed the bill to make Germany a "legal" dictatorship

Damn, I came here to praise how Star Wars fans meet everywhere and landed in a whole different conversation.

This was a very expensive video to make, the studio made extensive reshoots, he ended up drinking the whole case by himself.

​@@Demiglitch 2 whole cases. One for Johnny Reb and the other for Billy Yank. Edit: By the way, what beer does the Reb have?

You think it was only the one take? Probably a sixer downed at least

Speaking as a New Orleans bartender, we don't need excuses. Two fisted drinking isn't that uncommon.

@@CAPace09 I watched the video again, he's got Canebrake American Pale. I've never had it, but it's got good reviews. www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/24822/66594/

Its one of the reasons I really like A Yankee in King Arthur's court where Twain really takes the piss out of the Southern gentry's view of romanticism the only way a wry Southern who came from limited means and eventually came to realize the excesses and BS present in the antebellum south's culture, could.

@@Terminalsanity that's on my reading list!

I always talk about southern culture but I never talk about that. I only talk about the average man

Yeah the South was very structured. Poor whites really didn't have it good. It's like being nostalgic for Wallstreet bankers and assuming they were New York.

I sympathize with the south, and we knew we weren't rich, we just didn't like fact the union destroyed our house and stole our stuff in 1862. The south said "hey wanna make sure this shit dosen't happen again?" And we said "eh sure yeah"

Now I kinda want the scene between Sam and Frodo where they're talking about going home.

Agree

Sherman always was full of shit.

@@possumverde useless negative comment that has point, or evidence. Heh

@@possumverde your right. He took all that shit, and spread it over the areas he took.

@@darkstalkerkaathe4582 The "those people made war on us" is simply a straight up lie. When Lincoln informed his cabinet of his decision to reinforce and resupply Fort Sumter and other Union garrisons in the seceded states rather than withdraw them, he also told them that he would be starting a war by doing so. Up until his dispatch to the the Governor of South Carolina informing of said decision, Sumter had been under a lazy siege with the plan being to run the garrison out of supplies so that they could "honorably" surrender. Had making war on the Union been the goal, they could have taken the fort at anytime with little effort. The attack was only ordered because Lincoln's decision made clear that the he intended to force the seceded states to remain in the union through military action. Any honest historian or military tactician (including Sherman if he weren't trying to reconcile his own actions with his conscience once his forty acres and a mule atonement was rescinded by the federal government) will (would) tell you that the only intelligent response to that would be to take the fort by force before said resupply/reinforcement could occur. The moment Lincoln made his intent known, both sides understood that he had chosen war. Thus the fort would need to be taken eventually and only an idiot would wait until it had been reinforced to do so. When you make a move against someone for which the only sound reply is an aggressive act, you forfeit the right to blame any resulting combat solely on them (Lincoln knew that which was why he claimed responsibility for starting the war and Sherman knew that because such was his profession.) Also, Sherman would have been aware of, if not the agreement made with President Buchanan prior to the siege of Sumter, then his subsequent order to the federal garrisons in the southern states, that there would be no movement of federal troops in said states without his consent. An order which was ignored by the officer who eventually took control of Sumter when he moved his garrison there from a different fort to combine it with that originally stationed there. That deal breaking troop movement was the primary reason why the fort was put under siege to begin with. Moving on... The southern states had every right to defy the US Federal Government as, once they had seceded, said government became a foreign power with no legitimate role to play in their affairs. As such, what Sherman called boasting was simply an assertion that they would defend their territory. Similar "boasts" were made by the colonies regarding the British government/military after declaring their independence. A country or state willing to simply bend over and spread their cheeks for a foreign power doesn't tend to be taken very seriously by anyone. Least of all their own people. Also, Sherman isn't exactly the best person to bring up the "doing all manner of horrible things" bit... His own professed military doctrine of "total war" is grounded on such things being legitimate options after all. Given the obvious bs factor of Sherman's quote, I did not originally see fit to go into great detail. Simply pointing out that he was full of it seeemed a more than adequate reply to such a ridiculous point. All that aside, the issues involved with the US Civil War can be boiled down to four main aspects. Legal, Political, Economical, and Moral. Anyone willing to do an honest assessment of the conflict and what led to it based on those factors will quickly realize that, if you remove the moral issue, the Union clearly loses the argument on the other three. On top of that, it's telling that the North didn't even adopt the moral aspect as their primary justification until things didn't go as smoothly as they initially thought they would and most likely only did so out of necessity rather than out of the goodness of their hearts. Personally, I'm glad the country stayed together and definitely that slavery was ended. However, unlike the modern progressive revisionists, I don't need to fashion a fanciful retcon of reality in which the Union (especially Lincoln) was fully justified to do what they did in order to approve of the outcome. That said, I find the over romanticized, culture praising tripe woven into the "lost cause" narrative equally fanciful and, like the progressive version, equally unnecessary when determining the reasons behind the war. At it's simplest, it was just the culmination of the political/economic war between the northern and southern states which had been going on in one form or another since before the country even formed. As with all such pissing matches, regardless of who ultimately declares victory, those actually doing the measuring just end up getting wet...

@@possumverde Ah, but the CSA was not formally recognized as a sovereign nation by ANYBODY (they tried to bribe/bully European nations into giving them that, but failed), and knew from the start that it wouldn't be, so prior to Lincoln even getting to the White House, they began stealing arms from federal forts, and Buchanan's secretary of war, John Floyd, began shipping arms down there while Buchanan looked the other way. So, no, it was NOT a foreign nation, no matter how much it liked to think it was. Therefore, it's firing on Ft. Sumter was an attack on federal property, and was an act of war in which they fired the first shot. I've no doubt you've been told this multiple times. Yes, the Constitution does not expressly forbid secession, but it doesn't expressly allow it, either. Ultimately, the only way to keep the Union from breaking was through war, which was brought about by stubborn refusal on the parts of Southern slave owners to accept that the abolition of slavery was inevitable and that they should take it up the ass. Their willingness to destroy their own country over something like that lays the blame squarely on them, even if the North didn't care as much about slavery as some would later pretend it did--what mattered is that the South THOUGHT that Lincoln would destroy it, or set the stage for the eventual destruction of it. And they'd been threatening to secede, even go to war over it, for years: when New Mexico wanted to be a free state, Texas tried to invade and force it to become a slave state at gunpoint, only for President Zachary Taylor (whom was a slave-owner himself, but accepted the inevitable) to threaten to crush them if they tried, and when Jefferson Davis (his son-in-law) and his buddies threatened to secede, he promised to hang them all. The Southern aristocrats were all too happy to go to war to defend slavery, which they had used to try to gain some level of economic power over the North via the Fugitive Slave Act. What do I mean by that? Well, the Act compelled Northerners to not only aid in the capture of escaped slaves, but also to cover all the expenses of paying the catchers and the transportation of said slave to the South. And since the slave-owners used it to orchestrate the kidnapping of freeborn blacks under the pretense that they were escaped slaves in disguise, it gave them a way of extorting money from Northern states as well, which they intended to use to blackmail them into letting slavery spread nationwide. It was a moral, economical, and social conundrum that the South escalated with its self-overestimation. Well, that was off-topic, wasn't it? Ultimately, the most I will blame the North for the outbreak of the war is that presidents that came between Taylor and Lincoln lacked the guts and moral conviction to be more heavy-handed and uncompromising towards the South, thereby giving them the illusion that if they seceded, the Union would not risk going to war to bring them to heel; and that if it did, they could easily win. Otherwise, the blame lays at the feet of the South, at least in my opinion. Feel free to disagree. You're clearly intelligent, and your argument is well put together, but I just think you're incorrect, and I've stated my reasons. Whatever your response is, I will not make another long-winded rant like this again. Thank you for your time, and have a nice day.

I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who recognized it

And the spawn sound when the militia was raised. That was good!

My favorite part lol

It caused a slight panic for me

It was

On snap........

To soon...

They will always whine about it. Go for it.

Nah, just right.

It was not too soon, it was over 150 years ago

John Bryant the older I’ve gotten and more I understand the cause. I mostly focus on battles, lives, and struggles of both sides. I know, I have family that fought at Ft.Morgan in Mobile who ended up in a Union POW camp. While also having distant relatives who fought for the Union being Amish from Pennsylvania. I just stand on the ground on wanting to know what my ancestors did.

@@Drew-nx5gc All of our ancestors did horrorific things. There are only two mass killing species on this planet: chimpanzees and humans. You only exist today because of 6 million years of killing off other species. Mass murder is what makes us human. There's no need to feel guilty or proud about anything. The universe is all chance. The question is what will YOU do with this knowledge?

@@machida58 yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

@@caiawlodarski5339 I'm not justifying anything.

@@caiawlodarski5339 Please re-read my comment.

oof

@Titan Rising I'm looking at the big picture

@Titan Rising The only decisive battle is the last one.

@Titan Rising Tbh I took that from Clausewitz

@Titan Rising The south lost the war. War isn't just a numbers game.

Rome 1 total war is better

Uh, the Nazi is magic.

it was State Sovereignty, and the people has less rights, in fact no rights but by the grace of the Sovereign. the problem is that the idea of State Sovereignty is still here and is not going away anytime soon. unless the stupid people wake up and find out the truth about State Sovereignty.

"Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 prohibited the Confederate government from restricting slavery in any way: "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Article IV, Section 2 also prohibited states from interfering with slavery: "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." Perhaps the most menacing provision of the Confederate States Constitution was the explicit protection Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3 offered to slavery in all future territories conquered or acquired by the Confederacy: "The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several States; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States." This provision ensured the perpetuation of slavery as long and as far as the Confederate States could extend it's political reach, and more then a few Confederates had their eyes fixed on Cuba and Central and South America as objects of future conquest."

" it was in the confederate constitution no state could limit slave trade in any way, the confederates literally had LESS states rights" This is flatly, distinctly untrue. " fun fact: the one and only way to legally leave the union there has ever been was for the union to vote and allow it" Also zero truth to that, as the Tenth Amendment makes clear.

@@kenabbott8585 "Article I Section 9(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed" stated clear as day, no ambiguity thats not what the 10th amendment means, as confirmed by the supreme court, who by the constitution are the ones who get to decide what it means indeed it wouldn't even make sense to interpret it as such, let say it did mean that they could secede, OK, as no agreement existed to give them any right to the land owned by the united states that means they are now a foreign power attempting to occupy american soil, and as a foreign power the constitution your using as the basis nolonger applies to it

@@seelcudoom1 "stated clear as day, no ambiguity " And it's also, clear as day with no ambiguity, stated in the section that lists restrictions on the central government, not the states. In fact, there is a separate section that lists restrictions on the states. One of them repeats the "fugitive slave clause," while the other repeats the findings of Dred Scot, which was already considered constitutional law for the US. Both of those are limits to the rights of free states, which would make zero sense if there could not be a free state. You can't limit a right that does not exist. The Confederate Constitution plain and simply did not do what you claim it did. "thats not what the 10th amendment means, as confirmed by the supreme court, who by the constitution are the ones who get to decide what it means" So we should definitely ignore the plain text of the Constitution because a bunch of judges appointed by Lincoln said so. I mean, the Supreme court never gets it wrong, so.... *COUGH* Scot-Roe-Korematsu-Wicker-Obergefelle-Kelo-Buck-Plessy-*Cough* Yeah, what was I saying? "let say it did mean that they could secede, OK, as no agreement existed to give them any right to the land owned by the united states that means they are now a foreign power attempting to occupy american soil," That is an argument completely untethered to any facet of law, constitution, history, logic, or simple common sense. In what universe does a state's land belong to the United States and not the state? In reality, for the Constitution to ban secession several things would have to happen: First, there would have to actually be some restriction. The Founders who had just finished fighting a war of secession, would have to have decided that there could be no secession. Second, since such a restriction without some method of enforcement would have no meaning, the Constitution would have to authorize the soldiers of one state to invade another state to force them to comply with the federal government's demands, a prospect which openly horrified several of the Founder. (Note that Lincoln's use of terrorism, brutal repression at home, and personal profiting from the war still would not remotely be authorized). Third, since such an invasion would be demanded by the Constitution, this war would have to take place no matter the will of the people, forcing them into a war whether they want it or not. Fourth, since secession was an act of the voters of each state, the invasion would have to be followed by a direct dictatorship, ruling against the will of the people, without and in direct opposition to the consent of the governed, until such time as those citizens were so thoroughly subjugated that they would not vote to secede again. Fifth, since there's no mention or implication of this anywhere in the Constitution and the entire theme of the Constitution is against such a ridiculous extension of tyranny, it would have to be somehow secretly buried within it--invisible ink, maybe, or some Dan-Brown-type code spelling it out when you squint your left eye and the moon is in the seventh house. This clause would have had to remain a secret through all of America's history up until it came into play (as well as up until the present day!), including during the multiple times that New England states voted on secession. It certainly would have to have been a secret from the states of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island, because.... Sixth, since three states ratified it with the explicit condition that they could leave if the central government abused its powers, the Constitution would be a contract that was entered into under false pretenses, with vital clauses hidden from its signatories. So either: A) the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution means what it says and what it obviously means or B) The Constitution is a fraudulent contract, and thus null and void. It's not an exaggeration in any way to say that if the Constitution means anything at all, it includes the right to secede.

Compelling evidence that the divide has never left and is just as easily torn open. Never forget history lest you seek to learn from experience.

The Wasted Wanderer Agreed

@@zedfra8014 british empire was fucking horrible. But it did some good things, still it was fucked up

We’ve done that with pretty much every war we’ve been in. The revolution: why are we fighting our fellow Englishman? War of 1812: why are we fighting the English again? Mexican - American war: why are we taking land from Mexico? American - Indian wars: why are we fighting these natives? American Civil war: why are we fighting each other? American - Indian wars (part 2): why are we slaughtering these natives? Spanish - American war: why are we fighting Spain? World war 1: why are we in Europe? -World war 2:- _notable exception_ Korean War: where are we? Vietnam war: what are we even doing here!? ✌️😤☮️ Gulf war: why are we in the desert? -War in Afghanistan:- _notable exception_ Im not saying all Americans think like this I’m just putting out the general debates people seem to have when it comes to these wars. Most of which are still around to this day.

Yeah, History doesn't change. Thus, we shouldn't be debating what happened or what the causes of what happened were because we should already know by now. It's almost like siblings arguing on the causes of why brother Johnny spilled milk all over the floor in the kitchen when they already know why he did it after watching him trip over brother Tommy's action figure while carrying the milk to the fridge. The point is, Tommy didn't want to get in trouble because he left his action figure on the kitchen floor, so he argued that he didn't leave it there. It's all a bias game. This is why our nation's politicians point to events that happened in the past but always get their shit wrong. I suggest we all read more about the civil war so we get a damn understanding before we end up 3,000 more years from now still watching videos like this lol.

Being posessed? His true colours were coming out.

@@magellanicraincloud colors*

@@DamianLopez-td3rc *colours.

turd nugget46 *colours

@@thelordchancellor3454 *kullers

The south was so relatively deindustrialized because the cotton economy was so damn lucrative. The irony was that the cotton gin, a symbol of industrialization was the reason why. In the end, the South agricultural economy was not so much something that was forced by the North, but rather they willingly choosed it.

The funniest one I've seen is a non-american arguing the same points this and the other videos debunks, and also arguing that slavery is the same as having to work a low paying job

Because it's true?

I would. He won in the end anyways. Also, let's talk about the shit show that is the New Republic.

Um what

I would too. Palpatine made alot of good points about the jedi and brought peace to the galaxy

I would vote for PALPATINE, but I would not vote for DARTH SIDIOUS. There's a slight difference. For instance, Palpatine doesn't routinely kill people with force lightning.

@@ryanwilliams1207 Only the weak-minded favor "order" over freedom. The Mandalorians have the best philosophy. Also, we can't blame Jar Jar without also blaming Padme. Palpatine played EVERYONE like a deck of cards.

There is this word called "Federal", may be you've heard of it? I doubt it.

A better example. I decided TV should be banned in my house. Your's too. Better pitch that sucker.

@@I_Art_Laughing where are you going with that example?

@@samhenriques4462 that you don't understand the Constitution or US history. One State couldn't vote for what happened in another State that wasn't outlined. Defense, trade, interstate commerce. They had interstate tariffs back then (for example).

@@I_Art_Laughing what?

Good. That means his truth still marches on.

Man, I loved Blue Moon, but after spending a week on a business trip in Harrisonburg, PA with a case of Blue Moon and a case of Michelob Dark, and eating only Papa John's pizza, I'm truly as done with it as I am with Southern Comfort. Can't believe I wasn't arrested in the Southern Comfort episode at college... Sad behavior on my part. And sorry to all of those I offended on Parent's Weekend. Some of you might not be the assholes that I thought you were at the time.

Your Wife after two many Blue Moons: STOP, SHUT UP, STOP, STOP, STOOOPPPPP!!!!!!!!!!!! Also your wife after 100,000 Blue Moons: *Becomes a Nazi* A Massachusetts bishop at the same resturant you are dinning: *pulls out a Bible from his bag and begins to preform exorcism on your wife*

Yeah American history could be made into a book honestly. From the beginning of the inspiring story of the American Revolution, to the terrible and devastating Civil War, to the Glory of the 1920, to the depressing 1930s, to the confusing and incredible Cold War to now. What a country I live in. Still sad that we dont have 9/11 2 Electric Boogaloo yet. C'mon Valve!

@@Reinboa there can been 3 books made about why American healthcare sucks

@@Reinboa I mean, when a country solves LITERALLY EVERYTHING with more guns, they are just going to inevitably have more interesting shit happening in history.

Australia is the distant cousin of America originally hailing from Racism Island I mean the UK

@@OlafoWaffle *slough noises*

A dream of mine

The South won an absolute fuck ton of battles, so he would know would sounds like more so than a union victory which were closer to phyric victories.

The sound effects!!!! 😆😂🤣That takes me back...

I heard the unit spawn and cheesed lol

@@KraNisOG But they lost the overall Civil War so that's pretty irrelevant

@@KraNisOG I can only hear the battle hymn of the republic over the raising of the surrender flag over Appomattox courthouse

@@kenburns4547 how the fuck do you get that out of this???

@@kenburns4547 bru so showing common arguments made by confederates is strawmaning?

@@kenburns4547 If the Confederacy wished to preserve these perceived rights than it threw away any chance to do so by seceding from the Union. The issue of slavery was not at all settled, Thomas Jefferson predicted slavery was the rock upon which the Union would split, after all. Calling him a bigot for shooting down the most popular arguments put forth by Confederate apologists is weak ad hominem at best.

@@kenburns4547 Federal union implies member states do not have the right to unilatierally secede without the consent of the rest of said union. Confederation on the other hand nominally permits this right. But words do not always describe the nature of a state. If they did North Korea would be a Democratic Peoples Republic.

OK, but he's drinking Blue Moon, so it's not as if it was a real beer.

Just take a US History course in College. Or Political Science Course. The reasons behind the South splitting the Union are well documented.

3 years public school? That's enough edumacationing to graduate in the south. (From what I understand).

Same here

@Church Farrel Then your US History teachers are probably pretty terrible.