Unfortunately, I recently discovered that Nzinga, the African queen who I said was morally good actually massively upheld the slave trade. When I researched her during the making of this video I found several sites and even videos detailing her as a righteous character fighting for freedom, this is wrong. She fought the Portuguese so she could control the slave trade herself (in the end she sold tens of thousands of people into chattel slavery). Additionally she gave thousands of slaves to the Portuguese as diplomatic gifts including the one she sat on when she negotiated with them (a famous and real story about her that many sources leave out what became of the slave). Apologies for finding this after the fact.
I think the shows is forced to paint the CCP in a good light or the CCP won't let it exist in China which would make it lose a large amount of its viewership.
I'm very curious what your opinion on Tanya the Evil may be. I found it to be one of the most interesting and unique takes on the isekai genre, but I admit my knowledge on the topic of war history is pretty limited, so I'm very interested in what you may think of it. Most people I've seen talk about it and the many recent shows don't go anywhere near as in depth on the actual historical tie-ins as you, which I very much appreciate with this channel. I'm also exited to see your takes on Eminence in Shadow, I enjoyed that one quite a bit for the most part.
Absolutely love Tanya the evil. Great story, themes, characters and setting. as for it's history I really like how it blends ideas from both world wars - the trenches and map from the first alongside vehicles and governments from the second (flying magic troops not withstanding). Also the plan at the end of the season to blow a massive hole in the trenches and sweep around to the coast were both real events in history. The sweeping around the enemy to the coast is obviously blitzkrieg from WW2 but blowing up a massive hole in the trenches was a real event from WW1. In 1916, I think, the british dug beneath the german trenches and planted a huge amount of explosives and detonated all at once (it was so massive the blast was heard in London) and they sent infantry through. However the commander halted the advance as the artillery couldn't keep up and the germans dug a new line (historians debate whether this could've lead to an early allied victory). Really like how this was incorporated in the anime. As for Eminance in Shadow, there's a lot to talk about there. it was a real rollercoaster of enjoyment for me, some brilliant great parts followed by aweful moments. As it went on however the bad outweighed the good for me but I'll explain all that in the next video.
It is great to see a new video and a pleasant surprise to find out it is a review of movies instead of anime. Well, one Chinese anime and two movies. I love anime and the wide variety of stories it can tell but it is also good to see you cover these kind of works. It is also important that people go look for themselves what the truth is, my interest with Chinese history began with Overly Sarcastic Productions and then I looked up various other sources and it influenced the path I took when I went to college. As for the 2020 elections, I am from South America so I barely paid it any attention in the news until I saw a video of John Oliver speaking about it and it was both fascinating and horrifying. And there are ton of other movies that deserve to be called out for their liberties with actual history, most can be argued as harmless like the Greatest Showman and the story of Barnum but others hurt the people that learn history from them, like how my parents learned about the history of the Falklands or the Islas Malvinas which is how many Argentinians insist on calling them.
Absolutely love learning about world history as it provides such a vast collection of inspiration, ideas, stories and perspectives - I'm a big fan of overly sarcastic productions as well. I'm from the UK and here the news couldn't stop talking about Trump during the 2020 election (perhaps more so than Brexit) and especially during January 6th where our whole family were glued to the screen. I'm honestly scared at what the 2024 election will bring as so many officials are arguing the democrats are rigging the election and others are putting even more obstacles for democratic voters. Also a fan of Last week tonight. Totally agree about other *finger quotes* historical films. I remember seeing a video about the Patriot, a film where Mel Gibson fights alongside free black people against the evil british in the American war of independence. That guy really doesn't shy away from horribly inaccurate roles (video was made by Brandon F by the way). I've wondered what Argentina teaches about the Falklands, I knew it wasn't nuanced when I saw the top gear crew being chased out of the country a few years ago (they weren't exactly diplomatic but they didn't deserve having mobs pelt them as they fled). I'm assuming the history of the conflict still isn't properly taught, not to argue Britain is any better as it's simply not taught at all here. Most people will say we defended the islands and that Thatcher ordered a ship sunk instead of the reason for the Argentinian invasion, the difficulties of the British taskforce or the details of that warship's sinking outside the conflict zone (Thatcher wasn't the one who gave the order either). As it might've come across in the video, I'm quite bitter against the UK's teaching of history.
@@dlfarmer7601 it is my very limited experience that when there is too much coverage of exterior news there is something local they don't want to talk about but that is mostly because there is always St least one myor news outlet completely under the government thumb that screams louder than other media. Now I am depressed of Latin America's politics in general... Now that you mention the patriot I can think of several other films that were clearly made to pull on the patriotic string of Hollywood's main target audience, the list goes from Pearl Harbor, were you have people making blood transfusions with coke bottles to the idealised versions of founding fathers. As for Argentina, my parents are from there, it is fascinating because the war was in great part to whip the people in a patriotic frenzy to hide the incompetence of the military dictatorship but even now that frenzy is still going strong. ... I was going to make a comparison between that and the World Cup but it would be in bad taste. I am all over the place it is just that how each nation represents their history and how they want to be remembered coupled with the desire of the filmmakers to ultimately turn in a profit makes for such interestingly colored movies, documentals and series that I could ramble about it a lot.
@@martinratagris Agreed. There is a massive conversation to be had of how nations and cultures portray their history and the incentives for filmakers. Also i forgot about the coke bottles in michael bay's Peral Habour, man that was a choice.
Oh, and I am waiting the review of Eminence in Shadow. It is an undeniably good time, but it lacks in some areas as an adaptation like how they adapted a small part of the second half of the fourth volume of the light novel into the first episode or how Cid often puts on a really boring face, like when he is being tortured when the impression I got from reading the manga and LN is that he is a guy constantly enjoying what he is doing, never bored because even when he is just a mob character he is living his dream. As for things like the names where the author just forgets to create names for other countries and has Cid say that the expensive bottle of wine he got is from France or his allias is basically Mundane Man and the fiancee of Rose is Perv Asshat. All that is from the source material. It seems the author worldbuilds like Cid creates new setting and evil cults on the spot but ends up working out for him. I believe the author is a he but I am not sure. Anyways, Eminence in Shadows was fun even if it will not be a classic or even my favorite Isekai.
Man there is so much to cover with Eminence in Shadow. Trying to sum up the plot is headache inducing let alone the characters which I honestly lost track of who's who during watching (something that I'm ussually perfectly fine at) Honestly feels like either there were three writers working on a tongue in cheek satire, an emotional deep fantasy and fanservice. Either that or it's a single writer with absoltuly zero attention span writing the first thing that comes to mind. There were many parts I enjoyed, like shadow killing the terroists as that girl fails at sneaking around or him playing the partner for the princess near the begining. If I'm being honest however I didn't enjoy the second half of the show as it started to show character dealing with emotional situtions and the stakes ramping up. It felt as though the show suddenly wanted me to care about the charcters involved despite me barely remembering who's who and the plot being so carefree until then - like as if Monty Python tried to be serious. Hence it'll be difficult to review this thing.
@@dlfarmer7601 I totally understand and I feel that I'd in part an adaptation problem. I really believe we aren't meant to worry or care that much about these characters or the large stakes of what the cult and Shadow's harem influence is at large. The feel I got from the LN and the manga is that this was supposed to be a lot like that seréis about the Demon Lord in high school, the one where he kills a guy with his heart beat and tosses a castle like it is a basketball. The characters that matter are never in any danger so things like their trauma and the bloody battles they get into are meant to be taken as dark comedy. I mean, Spoilers by the way, in the second season they will introduce the concept of banking, paper money instead of coins and loans but it is ultimately a set up for a joke, the same for vampires. The vampires are meant to have an origin similar to the Crimson Demons from KonoSuba but I can see them being treated as tragic. But that is for the second season.
@@martinratagris The werid thing is when the show tries to be serious, like the terrorist father of the pink haried girl dying in a seemingly tragic way or the second princess wanting to be better with her sword or the red princess or how the king dies. It really felt to me as though the anime tried to be both a funny satire and a serious drama.
You should review The Heroic Legend of Arslan. Aside from Genius Prince it is the only anime I know of that portrays realistic kingdom management while still being an entertaining drama.
Unfortuantly, I dropped it several episodes in as it really disapointed me. What I was expecting was a smart show that focuses on clever tactics and a nuanced conflicted (not a simple goodies baddies plot). I found it focused too much on individual fighters and it really was a plain goodies baddies plot. I gave up when the christian invaders took over the capital by inciting the slaves to revolt but then decided to keep them enslaved. The nuanced conflict suddenly became plain. Really liked Genius Prince and a similer anime would be Alderamin of the sky - great military anime with a nuanced plot with meaninful and fun characters (kinda one of my favourites). My only problem with it was that it never got a second season.
Eminence in Shadow review after the Gigguk video I didn't watch is sounds like it'll be fun. A fun dissection of what I assume is an awful show based on exactly 1 scene I saw in a video.
Honestly it's a show that feels like it had 3 different writers. A genius who thought he was writing a brilliant satire of Isekai, an idiot who thought he was making a epic meaningful, deep show and a guy who wanted to cram in as many gril characters as possible. Then all three scripts got shuffled into one another without thought or reason. Became quite the roller coaster of enjoyment.
@@dlfarmer7601 King Jadwiga of Poland was a woman king. The reason she was a king and not a queen was because only a king could rule by themselves so they said screw it she's a king until they found her a husband who can be king instead
31: 44 take onwards about slavery is dog shit. (1) Slavery has been around a long time, showed that the system has been in place because it worked for the people in the past. We, as people of the future, have the luxury of casting close-minded judgement to call everyone who benefited from the slave trade evil. A present day example of this would be people who benefit from products made by sweatshops and child labour. It is morally wrong, but it exists cause it is a working business model. (2) Regarding the 'they eventually ended it' argument I find it completely disingenuous of you to not take into account the good that the abolishionists have done. They only had morality on their side against a global trade, which "helped" nations grow. The British enforcing this at the risk of economic and international relation backlash was nobel of them. Personally I find that Nobel act atoned for every past sin of slavery that the British have done. Video was otherwise good.
While slavery has been around for a long time (dating back to the ancient Egyptians) it pales in comparisons to the sheer scale and cruelty of the Atlantic slave trade - literal millions died in the journey alone. My point is that it was exceptionally evil to do and was done purely for profit (just like torture or brutal capital punishment, slavery is still an evil act no matter which time period by the way) and I didn't say everyone who benefited from the slave trade was evil I said the slave trade was evil. I would very much argue sweatshops and especially child labour shouldn't exist but because of the pursuit of maximising profits they do; companies outsource factories to other countries that have lower wages and rules. Side note: there is a good discussion to be had on the morality of sweatshops in poorer countries, particularly places with high unemployment but best save that for another time. As for my "they eventually ended it argument", my point was it tends to divert the conversation away from the real harms countries involved in the slave trade committed. Yes, people like Wilberforce and many other abolishments rightly deserve respect and attention for the heroic work they did but it doesn't address the point that it shouldn't have happened in the first place. The great demand for tobacco, sugar and other plantation grown things spurred on the need for human labour. Rather than paying for regular workers or encouraging further settlers in the region to work the farms (who would've obviously been treated better), organisations captured/bought black people from sub-Saharan Africa simply because it was far cheaper (and consequently Britain and other European powers became reliant on it). Effectively, chattel slavery didn't need to exist. "Personally I find that Nobel act atoned for every past sin of slavery that the British have done." Three very problematic things with this statement. 1) the way Britain ended slavery was via compensating the slavers for their lost property (the human people) so it wasn't exactly noble. 2) If someone was constantly committing a crime, say thievery, then someone else convinces them to stop stealing but without giving back the goods taken, would that second person's actions absolve the thief? Unfortunately not 3) slavery for Britain lasted for two to three hundred years and was a major player in the Atlantic slave trade. Would you make the same argument if it lasted for five hundred years? Take Brazil, slavery lasted until the 1880s but including the Portuguese empire, slavery started in the 1400s would you say the work done by their abolishments absolve their deeds? Britain and her empire has done many, many great and glorious things but it has done many terrible things also, and neither should be forgotten or forgiven for the sake of the other. But I'm glad you liked the rest of the video.
@@dlfarmer7601 In regards to the death's during the journey I mainly contribute it to to the dangers of naval transportation, not necessarily to the evils of the slave trade (Beatings and what not). In regards of it "not needing to exist" is a narrow view moral. Take into account the views of British society back when they engaged in the slave trade; People in Africa were regarded as savages, therefore stuff like gold or money wouldn't be of use to them. Excluding the rich african slave traders who had a use for said gold and money. Thereby the British traded money for "savages" in order to fill up labour needs. The slave trade existed to solve the issues caused by the "savage" Africans not wanting the British money and Britain needing people as labour. On regards to the ending arguments: (1) The government paid off slavers for 2 reasons: -To appease the people who still supported slavery. -To compensate people for the loss in labour when the govt freed the slaves. Remember that slaves were necessary to run a lot of farms, and the farms would fall to unproductivity (Slaves taken, no compensation) and in turn hurt the British economy. (2) 🤔 I don't think the theif comparison fits. I'll put forward my own one. A killer, who worked for an organization of killers, was convinced to stop the entire org by the police/another individual, how much of the killer's sin is absolved? 🤔 While the answer varies, you have to take into account the good the killer has done by stopping the org (Such as the lives of future org targets being saved). Increase this in scale from 1 org to a global wide network of killers and the good caused by the shutdown would increase tenfold. (3) I don't take time into consideration when making the moral judgement of absolving Britian. If Britian ended slavery last year I'd still consider their sins absolved fully.
@@aceknightgaming1542 The sheer amount of death on the slave ships was because of the slave trade not on their contemporary current technology (they weren't exactly like any other transport vesel at the time and those on board weren't in cosy conditions). Around 1.8 million died on the ships alone. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I would agree the British no doubt saw themselves as superior but why would that lead them to believe African people didn't want to be paid. The slave trade was caused by a large demand for cheap labour, there was no thought put into the morals or complexities involved other than simple profits. It didn't need to exist. Economically (morrally, and politcally too) it would've been sustainable to pay fairly well treated labour than slaves. It would've benifited diplomatic ties to African kingdoms and their people, it would've shown Britain as a bright beacon for immigrants across Europe and the world, there would be far less revolts in the americas, the life span for those on plantations would be greatly improved (obviously), British companies could market their goods as non slave labour (compared to other European powers), etc, etc. Instead the desire for short term profits lead the charge. 1) and it wasn't exactly noble. Paying the slavers for their losses in freeing their captives isn't something to be proud of. It was a compromise to convince parliment to put an end to slavery (there're also a bunch of other astericks involved such as the slaves being free in 1833 not 1807). 2) Using your own metaphor, the comparison would be between the British empire and the deadly organisation. The killer ending the organisation's terror is deserving of merrit but it doesn't absolve what the organisation has done till that action took place. Britain wasn't what ended slavery for Britian it was a small number of abolishments fighting hard. Using your metaphor, it is the killer that deserves merit not the organisation he was a part of. 3) Good greif that is a horrid statement to make. What you're implying is that it doesn't matter how many slaves Britain traded, how many lives Britain took so long as Britain stopped, regardless of the reason, then it's all forgiven. Like as if a creul man kidnapped someone and kept him locked in his basment, mercilessly whipping him day after day, until eventually he lets him go after a full year of torture. What you said essentially means the kidnapper's perfectly absolved, whether it was a year or a decade, all because he stopped.
@@aceknightgaming1542 I did recieve the comment alert and saw the first few lines of your comment but when I clicked on it, I couldn't see it. TH-cam definitly deleted it. I even set it to allow all comments as well. Perhaps comment each paragraph in seperate replies?
![NONT TANONT - คลั่งเธอ (Dopamine) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/imr2dwueUxs/mqdefault.jpg)
Unfortunately, I recently discovered that Nzinga, the African queen who I said was morally good actually massively upheld the slave trade. When I researched her during the making of this video I found several sites and even videos detailing her as a righteous character fighting for freedom, this is wrong. She fought the Portuguese so she could control the slave trade herself (in the end she sold tens of thousands of people into chattel slavery). Additionally she gave thousands of slaves to the Portuguese as diplomatic gifts including the one she sat on when she negotiated with them (a famous and real story about her that many sources leave out what became of the slave). Apologies for finding this after the fact.
Just got your self a sub
"The absurd idea that democrats are competent for petes sake." I love how you summarized why I voted for them.
Oh I’m not surprised you voted for them because they’re “competent”.
Nice to see new video.
Thanks
I think the shows is forced to paint the CCP in a good light or the CCP won't let it exist in China which would make it lose a large amount of its viewership.
I'm very curious what your opinion on Tanya the Evil may be. I found it to be one of the most interesting and unique takes on the isekai genre, but I admit my knowledge on the topic of war history is pretty limited, so I'm very interested in what you may think of it. Most people I've seen talk about it and the many recent shows don't go anywhere near as in depth on the actual historical tie-ins as you, which I very much appreciate with this channel.
I'm also exited to see your takes on Eminence in Shadow, I enjoyed that one quite a bit for the most part.
Absolutely love Tanya the evil. Great story, themes, characters and setting. as for it's history I really like how it blends ideas from both world wars - the trenches and map from the first alongside vehicles and governments from the second (flying magic troops not withstanding).
Also the plan at the end of the season to blow a massive hole in the trenches and sweep around to the coast were both real events in history. The sweeping around the enemy to the coast is obviously blitzkrieg from WW2 but blowing up a massive hole in the trenches was a real event from WW1. In 1916, I think, the british dug beneath the german trenches and planted a huge amount of explosives and detonated all at once (it was so massive the blast was heard in London) and they sent infantry through. However the commander halted the advance as the artillery couldn't keep up and the germans dug a new line (historians debate whether this could've lead to an early allied victory). Really like how this was incorporated in the anime.
As for Eminance in Shadow, there's a lot to talk about there. it was a real rollercoaster of enjoyment for me, some brilliant great parts followed by aweful moments. As it went on however the bad outweighed the good for me but I'll explain all that in the next video.
It is great to see a new video and a pleasant surprise to find out it is a review of movies instead of anime.
Well, one Chinese anime and two movies.
I love anime and the wide variety of stories it can tell but it is also good to see you cover these kind of works.
It is also important that people go look for themselves what the truth is, my interest with Chinese history began with Overly Sarcastic Productions and then I looked up various other sources and it influenced the path I took when I went to college.
As for the 2020 elections, I am from South America so I barely paid it any attention in the news until I saw a video of John Oliver speaking about it and it was both fascinating and horrifying.
And there are ton of other movies that deserve to be called out for their liberties with actual history, most can be argued as harmless like the Greatest Showman and the story of Barnum but others hurt the people that learn history from them, like how my parents learned about the history of the Falklands or the Islas Malvinas which is how many Argentinians insist on calling them.
Absolutely love learning about world history as it provides such a vast collection of inspiration, ideas, stories and perspectives - I'm a big fan of overly sarcastic productions as well.
I'm from the UK and here the news couldn't stop talking about Trump during the 2020 election (perhaps more so than Brexit) and especially during January 6th where our whole family were glued to the screen. I'm honestly scared at what the 2024 election will bring as so many officials are arguing the democrats are rigging the election and others are putting even more obstacles for democratic voters. Also a fan of Last week tonight.
Totally agree about other *finger quotes* historical films. I remember seeing a video about the Patriot, a film where Mel Gibson fights alongside free black people against the evil british in the American war of independence. That guy really doesn't shy away from horribly inaccurate roles (video was made by Brandon F by the way).
I've wondered what Argentina teaches about the Falklands, I knew it wasn't nuanced when I saw the top gear crew being chased out of the country a few years ago (they weren't exactly diplomatic but they didn't deserve having mobs pelt them as they fled). I'm assuming the history of the conflict still isn't properly taught, not to argue Britain is any better as it's simply not taught at all here. Most people will say we defended the islands and that Thatcher ordered a ship sunk instead of the reason for the Argentinian invasion, the difficulties of the British taskforce or the details of that warship's sinking outside the conflict zone (Thatcher wasn't the one who gave the order either). As it might've come across in the video, I'm quite bitter against the UK's teaching of history.
@@dlfarmer7601 it is my very limited experience that when there is too much coverage of exterior news there is something local they don't want to talk about but that is mostly because there is always St least one myor news outlet completely under the government thumb that screams louder than other media.
Now I am depressed of Latin America's politics in general...
Now that you mention the patriot I can think of several other films that were clearly made to pull on the patriotic string of Hollywood's main target audience, the list goes from Pearl Harbor, were you have people making blood transfusions with coke bottles to the idealised versions of founding fathers.
As for Argentina, my parents are from there, it is fascinating because the war was in great part to whip the people in a patriotic frenzy to hide the incompetence of the military dictatorship but even now that frenzy is still going strong.
...
I was going to make a comparison between that and the World Cup but it would be in bad taste.
I am all over the place it is just that how each nation represents their history and how they want to be remembered coupled with the desire of the filmmakers to ultimately turn in a profit makes for such interestingly colored movies, documentals and series that I could ramble about it a lot.
@@martinratagris Agreed. There is a massive conversation to be had of how nations and cultures portray their history and the incentives for filmakers.
Also i forgot about the coke bottles in michael bay's Peral Habour, man that was a choice.
Oh, and I am waiting the review of Eminence in Shadow.
It is an undeniably good time, but it lacks in some areas as an adaptation like how they adapted a small part of the second half of the fourth volume of the light novel into the first episode or how Cid often puts on a really boring face, like when he is being tortured when the impression I got from reading the manga and LN is that he is a guy constantly enjoying what he is doing, never bored because even when he is just a mob character he is living his dream.
As for things like the names where the author just forgets to create names for other countries and has Cid say that the expensive bottle of wine he got is from France or his allias is basically Mundane Man and the fiancee of Rose is Perv Asshat. All that is from the source material.
It seems the author worldbuilds like Cid creates new setting and evil cults on the spot but ends up working out for him.
I believe the author is a he but I am not sure.
Anyways, Eminence in Shadows was fun even if it will not be a classic or even my favorite Isekai.
Man there is so much to cover with Eminence in Shadow. Trying to sum up the plot is headache inducing let alone the characters which I honestly lost track of who's who during watching (something that I'm ussually perfectly fine at)
Honestly feels like either there were three writers working on a tongue in cheek satire, an emotional deep fantasy and fanservice. Either that or it's a single writer with absoltuly zero attention span writing the first thing that comes to mind.
There were many parts I enjoyed, like shadow killing the terroists as that girl fails at sneaking around or him playing the partner for the princess near the begining. If I'm being honest however I didn't enjoy the second half of the show as it started to show character dealing with emotional situtions and the stakes ramping up. It felt as though the show suddenly wanted me to care about the charcters involved despite me barely remembering who's who and the plot being so carefree until then - like as if Monty Python tried to be serious.
Hence it'll be difficult to review this thing.
@@dlfarmer7601 I totally understand and I feel that I'd in part an adaptation problem.
I really believe we aren't meant to worry or care that much about these characters or the large stakes of what the cult and Shadow's harem influence is at large.
The feel I got from the LN and the manga is that this was supposed to be a lot like that seréis about the Demon Lord in high school, the one where he kills a guy with his heart beat and tosses a castle like it is a basketball.
The characters that matter are never in any danger so things like their trauma and the bloody battles they get into are meant to be taken as dark comedy.
I mean, Spoilers by the way, in the second season they will introduce the concept of banking, paper money instead of coins and loans but it is ultimately a set up for a joke, the same for vampires.
The vampires are meant to have an origin similar to the Crimson Demons from KonoSuba but I can see them being treated as tragic. But that is for the second season.
@@martinratagris The werid thing is when the show tries to be serious, like the terrorist father of the pink haried girl dying in a seemingly tragic way or the second princess wanting to be better with her sword or the red princess or how the king dies. It really felt to me as though the anime tried to be both a funny satire and a serious drama.
You should review The Heroic Legend of Arslan. Aside from Genius Prince it is the only anime I know of that portrays realistic kingdom management while still being an entertaining drama.
Unfortuantly, I dropped it several episodes in as it really disapointed me. What I was expecting was a smart show that focuses on clever tactics and a nuanced conflicted (not a simple goodies baddies plot). I found it focused too much on individual fighters and it really was a plain goodies baddies plot. I gave up when the christian invaders took over the capital by inciting the slaves to revolt but then decided to keep them enslaved. The nuanced conflict suddenly became plain.
Really liked Genius Prince and a similer anime would be Alderamin of the sky - great military anime with a nuanced plot with meaninful and fun characters (kinda one of my favourites). My only problem with it was that it never got a second season.
the anime forgets that the Chinese civil war is a real event and not a fictional event.
I got this video recommended
the way the Xue yu xin depicts communist China is like Akame ga kill portraying rebels but minus the edgy
Eminence in Shadow review after the Gigguk video I didn't watch is sounds like it'll be fun. A fun dissection of what I assume is an awful show based on exactly 1 scene I saw in a video.
Honestly it's a show that feels like it had 3 different writers. A genius who thought he was writing a brilliant satire of Isekai, an idiot who thought he was making a epic meaningful, deep show and a guy who wanted to cram in as many gril characters as possible. Then all three scripts got shuffled into one another without thought or reason. Became quite the roller coaster of enjoyment.
King can be gender neutral term depnding on culture.
Can you tell me which culture because I can't think of a single example
@@dlfarmer7601 Hungary and Poland come to mind first
@@dragomanpl1109 Interesting, I genuinely didn't know that.
@@dlfarmer7601 King Jadwiga of Poland was a woman king. The reason she was a king and not a queen was because only a king could rule by themselves so they said screw it she's a king until they found her a husband who can be king instead
31: 44 take onwards about slavery is dog shit.
(1) Slavery has been around a long time, showed that the system has been in place because it worked for the people in the past. We, as people of the future, have the luxury of casting close-minded judgement to call everyone who benefited from the slave trade evil.
A present day example of this would be people who benefit from products made by sweatshops and child labour. It is morally wrong, but it exists cause it is a working business model.
(2) Regarding the 'they eventually ended it' argument I find it completely disingenuous of you to not take into account the good that the abolishionists have done. They only had morality on their side against a global trade, which "helped" nations grow. The British enforcing this at the risk of economic and international relation backlash was nobel of them.
Personally I find that Nobel act atoned for every past sin of slavery that the British have done.
Video was otherwise good.
While slavery has been around for a long time (dating back to the ancient Egyptians) it pales in comparisons to the sheer scale and cruelty of the Atlantic slave trade - literal millions died in the journey alone. My point is that it was exceptionally evil to do and was done purely for profit (just like torture or brutal capital punishment, slavery is still an evil act no matter which time period by the way) and I didn't say everyone who benefited from the slave trade was evil I said the slave trade was evil.
I would very much argue sweatshops and especially child labour shouldn't exist but because of the pursuit of maximising profits they do; companies outsource factories to other countries that have lower wages and rules. Side note: there is a good discussion to be had on the morality of sweatshops in poorer countries, particularly places with high unemployment but best save that for another time.
As for my "they eventually ended it argument", my point was it tends to divert the conversation away from the real harms countries involved in the slave trade committed. Yes, people like Wilberforce and many other abolishments rightly deserve respect and attention for the heroic work they did but it doesn't address the point that it shouldn't have happened in the first place. The great demand for tobacco, sugar and other plantation grown things spurred on the need for human labour. Rather than paying for regular workers or encouraging further settlers in the region to work the farms (who would've obviously been treated better), organisations captured/bought black people from sub-Saharan Africa simply because it was far cheaper (and consequently Britain and other European powers became reliant on it). Effectively, chattel slavery didn't need to exist.
"Personally I find that Nobel act atoned for every past sin of slavery that the British have done." Three very problematic things with this statement. 1) the way Britain ended slavery was via compensating the slavers for their lost property (the human people) so it wasn't exactly noble. 2) If someone was constantly committing a crime, say thievery, then someone else convinces them to stop stealing but without giving back the goods taken, would that second person's actions absolve the thief? Unfortunately not 3) slavery for Britain lasted for two to three hundred years and was a major player in the Atlantic slave trade. Would you make the same argument if it lasted for five hundred years? Take Brazil, slavery lasted until the 1880s but including the Portuguese empire, slavery started in the 1400s would you say the work done by their abolishments absolve their deeds?
Britain and her empire has done many, many great and glorious things but it has done many terrible things also, and neither should be forgotten or forgiven for the sake of the other.
But I'm glad you liked the rest of the video.
@@dlfarmer7601 In regards to the death's during the journey I mainly contribute it to to the dangers of naval transportation, not necessarily to the evils of the slave trade (Beatings and what not).
In regards of it "not needing to exist" is a narrow view moral. Take into account the views of British society back when they engaged in the slave trade; People in Africa were regarded as savages, therefore stuff like gold or money wouldn't be of use to them.
Excluding the rich african slave traders who had a use for said gold and money. Thereby the British traded money for "savages" in order to fill up labour needs. The slave trade existed to solve the issues caused by the "savage" Africans not wanting the British money and Britain needing people as labour.
On regards to the ending arguments:
(1) The government paid off slavers for 2 reasons:
-To appease the people who still supported slavery.
-To compensate people for the loss in labour when the govt freed the slaves. Remember that slaves were necessary to run a lot of farms, and the farms would fall to unproductivity (Slaves taken, no compensation) and in turn hurt the British economy.
(2) 🤔 I don't think the theif comparison fits. I'll put forward my own one. A killer, who worked for an organization of killers, was convinced to stop the entire org by the police/another individual, how much of the killer's sin is absolved?
🤔 While the answer varies, you have to take into account the good the killer has done by stopping the org (Such as the lives of future org targets being saved). Increase this in scale from 1 org to a global wide network of killers and the good caused by the shutdown would increase tenfold.
(3) I don't take time into consideration when making the moral judgement of absolving Britian. If Britian ended slavery last year I'd still consider their sins absolved fully.
@@aceknightgaming1542 The sheer amount of death on the slave ships was because of the slave trade not on their contemporary current technology (they weren't exactly like any other transport vesel at the time and those on board weren't in cosy conditions). Around 1.8 million died on the ships alone.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I would agree the British no doubt saw themselves as superior but why would that lead them to believe African people didn't want to be paid. The slave trade was caused by a large demand for cheap labour, there was no thought put into the morals or complexities involved other than simple profits.
It didn't need to exist. Economically (morrally, and politcally too) it would've been sustainable to pay fairly well treated labour than slaves. It would've benifited diplomatic ties to African kingdoms and their people, it would've shown Britain as a bright beacon for immigrants across Europe and the world, there would be far less revolts in the americas, the life span for those on plantations would be greatly improved (obviously), British companies could market their goods as non slave labour (compared to other European powers), etc, etc. Instead the desire for short term profits lead the charge.
1) and it wasn't exactly noble. Paying the slavers for their losses in freeing their captives isn't something to be proud of. It was a compromise to convince parliment to put an end to slavery (there're also a bunch of other astericks involved such as the slaves being free in 1833 not 1807).
2) Using your own metaphor, the comparison would be between the British empire and the deadly organisation. The killer ending the organisation's terror is deserving of merrit but it doesn't absolve what the organisation has done till that action took place. Britain wasn't what ended slavery for Britian it was a small number of abolishments fighting hard. Using your metaphor, it is the killer that deserves merit not the organisation he was a part of.
3) Good greif that is a horrid statement to make. What you're implying is that it doesn't matter how many slaves Britain traded, how many lives Britain took so long as Britain stopped, regardless of the reason, then it's all forgiven.
Like as if a creul man kidnapped someone and kept him locked in his basment, mercilessly whipping him day after day, until eventually he lets him go after a full year of torture. What you said essentially means the kidnapper's perfectly absolved, whether it was a year or a decade, all because he stopped.
@@dlfarmer7601 I think YT keeps deleting my comment
@@aceknightgaming1542 I did recieve the comment alert and saw the first few lines of your comment but when I clicked on it, I couldn't see it. TH-cam definitly deleted it. I even set it to allow all comments as well.
Perhaps comment each paragraph in seperate replies?