Join this channel to get access to more old school Metatron videos the algorithm wouldn't prioritize! Support freedom and get your preferred content!: th-cam.com/channels/IjGKyrdT4Gja0VLO40RlOw.htmljoin Also if you like what I do and wish to support my work to help me make sure that I can continue to tell it how it is please consider checking out my patreon! Unboxings are Patreon exclusives! www.patreon.com/themetatron
"Your enemies share your vocabulary, but not your dictionary." as James Lindsey puts it. If you really want to form the wall and defend truth, James can explain both how and why people are abusing language.
You give them too much credit, they’re intentionally trying to wipeout Eurøpean ancestral identity. They say it’s about inclusion but the truth is they’re rewriting history to eliminate whítepeople, they have taken over TV shows, ads/commercials, video games, AI and the “news”. It’s no coincidence that 90% of ads feature błackpeople (even in GreatBritain where Błackpeople are only 5percent of the population). It’s also no coincidence the børders are open and they label anyone concerned about any of these things as “racíst”. This literally is a re-placement. Need more proof? "The European Union and all leaders of all European countries MUST USE IMMIGRATION to undermine the homegenity and ethnic identity of the native European people no matter how difficult this will be to explain to the citizens of their nations. This must happen, thus will happen for globalism to take hold of Europe." (UN Bilderberger Peter Sutherland speaking in the House of Lords, 2014).
Rce is a politically correct way of saying subspecies, and rcim is the natural domence struggle between each. Prior to puberty, all get along, after there appears to be a change. The worldwide population of whte went from 22% to 17% based on numbers six years ago. Guess who is losing the struggle.
This has already been done by the wannabe Romance elitists ffs. If the English wanted to link to their roots, they could; but they don't. They're happy to to be knock-off French Romeaboos who don't know wtf "English" even means. Our speech is one of the closest links we have to our forefathers, and English speakers do their best to speak as little true English as they can. I mean when you call your forefathers (English), "ancestors" (French), as most English speakers seem to do nowadays; that might as well be the last nail.
Telling an entire ethnic group that they are not/never were a distinct group while also marking them as a target for racial hatred has often been one of the major signs of genocide ideation.
@deaderthendead04 If I remember correctly, there were several articles published in Germany in the 1930s saying that the Jews were "no longer a race, but a mongrel mass". And we know where that story goes.
@deaderthendead041 TH-cam just deleted my comment explaining how similar things happened to a certain group of people just before that event between 1939-1945, if you catch my meaning.
Sometimes I have a feeling that taking a closer look at the person that declares someone (or some group) as racist is the faster way to find a racist...
@@metatronyt You mentioned that you wouldn't have a problem if it's to avoid suggesting that there is such thing as "native englishness". So Im a bit confused, how come there are native american, but not native english? Something doesn't add up...
@@Drejzer it seems in many of these cases it's projection the size of the IMAX theater. Well there are indeed racists who do use the term Anglo-Saxon and other stuff for the like I think it's absolutely overblown and the Panic just absolutely unwarranted. But with media sensationalism and political bulshit being spewed for corporate interests because some candidates block the TPP then they're just going to call them racist over and over and over again. It's what should be a serious accusation but it happens every day. It's getting to the point where the accusation alone is enough to have people do the absolute wrong thing and even the racist thing in order to avoid it
It's not racism, it's colonisation, without the De- . The invading species want to push out everything that is native and replace it with their own. England, Germany, France... have allowed WAY too many of the children of their enemies to enter, procreate and take over their country. What did they expect, exactly?
Since Britain is the one who contributed the most to bring modern law to the world. By "de-colonisation" they really mean they're gonna send us back to a time of lawlessness.
Since Britain is the one who contributed the most to bring modern law to the world. What they really mean they're gonna send us back to a time of lawlessness.
There's a context to it, in reality it means identifying who your ancestors were before they were colonized or displaced and praying to them, but it seems most people just think de colonization means destroy whichever identities they've deemed as being colonial. When it's not Black and White. I , for one, as an Indian have no intent to "de colonize" as in: not acknowledge colonial Law. Because that's really what we live in. The Tribal Governments have Tribal Law and Colonial Governments have their Colonial Laws and yes we exist within the framework of both of those things and advocate following both of those things.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z . Pretty sure most Indian's if they actually knew their history do not want to go back to the "good old days". The Indian's were brutal to each other. They'd kidnap other tribes kids or enslave them if they were old enough. Grape was common and don't forget about the plagues like Yellow Fever, TB, Small Pox, Cow Pox, German Measles and dysentery aka crapping yourself to death. The average lifespan of an Indian back then was 35. The good old days were only good if you ignore everyday life.
Agreed. Recently read an article about the Canadian Arctic and menstrual products. the writer and others said that we need to decolonialize menstruation, because feminine hygiene products are very expensive in the far north. How would they decolonialize it? By giving women free pads, tampons and other things. ... I don't think that's how decolonizing things works.
@@speakingwithoutnet Wow. I see your point. I can understand saying we should reduce the prices of non negotiable personal products . Has jack to do with colonization though.
I’m African. I live in the UK. And I would honestly not sit back and watch my culture be erased in my own country lol. No other place in the world would accept this lol. As a history lover. I want the most accurate information
You do not appear to have any compassion for the English, Scot or the Welsh . . ? We voted against what is happening in 2016 & 2019. It is unfortunate that you have such a low opinion of us. Do whom do you go running to when you are unable to subjugate British men . ?
I'm on your side, but the English language is a Scandinavian import. They are the traditional non immigrant population of the Isle, yes, but that word "Indigenous" gets abused.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z The English 'Angle land' are most defiantly indigenous with a better claim to the term than most, they evolved here there's no other England to return to, most languages started somewhere else.
I did the same thing with chatgpt. I asked it three separate times on 3 separate chats; “Should I be proud of my African heritage?” “Should I be proud of my European heritage?” “Should I be proud of my Asian heritage?”. For both Asian and African, the first sentence was, “yes absolutely! You should always…”, and then followed with a beautiful description of Asian and African heritages, no negatives. When I asked about the European one, not once did it say the word “yes”, the first sentence was, “it’s natural to want to feel pride in your heritage” that was then followed by a paragraph on the negatives of European heritage such as “colonialism”, “slavery”, “oppression” and went on about how Europeans should feel the balance of acknowledging their rough history if they choose to be proud of it. This just goes to show that AI is really nothing but a combination of the “cool thing”s to do and say, because this is exactly what you’d heard by people in todays age, offering a biased, unfair comparison while being completely ignorant of African and Asian “troubled history”.
AI is not objective. Its there to push propaganda. I made my family tree. No single of them had slaves or colonized and I am European. In fact my own people were more slaves 😆 they always forget to mention all the other population that colonized or enslaved. Also the fact that not all Europeans were involved anyway. Most were not.
I just tried this and it did the same thing! It also warned about being respectful of other cultures and nationalism! I called out it’s hypocrisy and it apologised and said it recognises how it’s focusing too much on the negative aspects rather espousing the positive and corrected itself 😂
Exactly. As an American Indian who is also mixed race I'm told to think of modern day immigrants in my family from the 20th century as if they were "colonizing settlers." --____-- Like there's a difference between a French Levantine arriving in NYC in 1900 and the founders of Quebec..... --____--- . One of those is colonial heritage one of those is immigration heritage. They're nothing alike. Modern day Levantines coming through European countries isn't the same as like Cristofo Colombo and John Smith. The definition of colonial seems to now mean anyone from Europe... Even if they're Brown and didn't leave Europe until the 19th/20th century.
America did this and still does this. All of the history books in schools have 2 pages of very megar experiences of native americans. Not only that... It doesn't really make clear mexicans and South Americans are NATIVE AMERICANS (TURTLE ISLAND)... Plus, it refers to ALL of them to be pretty much the same, which they weren't! Why you think Americans are still so ignorant on the ORIGINAL PEOPLES and call them ILLEGALS. It's disgusting and RACIST
@@paytonthornberry1382 The muslims are everywhere, and also doing it to other nations, so it doesn't really count. European people are far more in danger because its happening in every White nation and escalating every year.
I'm in the US, no one uses Anglo Saxon in white circles. In South Texas the Hispanics called me Anglo, but no white guy ever said it as a sense of pride. It's an attack of "white culture" which is a real thing. Caucasian people are being attacked for their history. I have had my DNA checked and I am mostly Saxon. It doesn't make me a white supremacist, just points to my history, as if a Hispanic person had European Spanish in their DNA from conquistadors. Doesn't make them sailors, just their history.
Thanks to civil rights because before that every white person had their racial category and ethnic enclave for their culture like German, Polish, Lithuanian, Irish etc.
The same sentiment is seen in Irish universities like UCD, and it isn't just Anglo-Saxon, but many lecturers also deny the existence of the Celts, and claim the term Celt as "not archaeologically acceptable". Their main argument is that they claim that there are absolutely no written records saying that the Celts called themselves as such, and thus 'Celtic' must have just been an endonym for anyone in central and western Europe who weren't Roman. This is despite the Celts not having a writing system, so not many of them would have written down that they were Celts, and that the Romans actually bothered to distinguish between Celtic and Germanic peoples, which tells me that the people whom they considered Celtic must have shared some similarities, most likely similar languages as St. Jerome wrote that the Celtic Galatians of Anatolia spoke the same tongue as the Gauls. And several Celto-Roman writers seem to indicate that they called themselves Celts. Trogus Pompeius (fl. 1st century BCE) called the neighbouring tribes to his own celts. Sidonious Apolloinarius (c.430-481/490CE) once apologised ‘for the Celtic accent (or language) of himself and his fellow Arvernian aristocrats’, Martial (38 or 41CE- between 102-104CE) described himself as half-iberian & half-Celtic And Ausonius from Burdigala (Bordeux) (c.310-c.395) 'describes some of his colleagues as descended from Druids’. all either claim Celtic heritage or refer to the neighbouring tribes as such, surely they would have referred to themselves by their specific tribe if there was no such thing as a Celt? Not to mention many of the lecturers and archaeologists who've told me that the Celts never existed because they (according to them) never identified as such, are more than happy to discuss the Mayans (who were only called that by the Spanish), Minoans and Harrapans (whom we have no idea what they actually called themselves or if they saw each other as single peoples) which is quite a double standard. This is all likely at least partially the reason why the School of Celtic Studies in UCD (which if I remember correctly, correct me if I'm wrong, was established by the first Irish president himself, Douglas Hyde, who was passionate about Irish and Celtic culture) is so understaffed and underfunded when compared to the School of Classics.
@@kevinrwhooley9439 The Classics in general have seen a major decline in enrollment and funding in recent years. There are various reasons for that, but I wonder if subversive academics denying the heritage that created those paths of study is a major cause of that. For example: what Irish student wants to study his national heritage under professors who call his ancestors evil and downplay their achievements?
Because the people in charge hate the Irish and will look for any excuse to replace them. It's happening all over Western Europe and North America, and it's a very blatant and hateful agenda.
These policies start to make more sense once you realise that the point of these policies is to *colonise* Britain, and all the terms they use to justify it are merely euphemisms.
Not even 1%. You are looking at only 1 grain of sand back up and see the desert. The point of these policies is to wipe out the entire linage of Japheth.
Sorry to sound like a c*nt, but this colonising has already happened, and they're just following the trend. "Anglo" is your hint. It's not English. "Angle" is English. "Anglo" is Latin. One letter can tell you a lot, it seems. The English have been held down into being the lower class for hundreds of years in their own lands, lead by the wannabe Romance. To get ahead, you have to take on Romance ways. Just look at the words you've put in your CV. Just look at how you're taught to write and speak at school. Look at how your elites speak and write. It's as clear as day, yet they all seem to be happy being less-than and lost.
Semi modern sensibilities. Take colonisation, for instance: these people see only colonisation by the white people and to boot, are completely oblivious to the same pillaging and enslaving of people happening right in front of their eyes.
To me it means anti-White and anti-Native European and this video is more proof of that. We're all equal, all our cultures and history is precious but these people who claim they are for equality want to be racist and erase European history. We see who the true racists are.
Except they're not modern sensibilities. They're "morals" from before the development of the morals used to build civilization. They have human sacrifice, ritual mutilation, magic potions, and spells.
I've heard some people were using early Medieval English in a naughty way so I have decided to de colonize (even my autocorrect doesn't think it's a word) by referring it to Past Northern Hemispheric people
@@robertmarshall2502Some feel threatened by the terms "northern" and "past" as they indicate bad-plus exclusivity regarding time and space and are therefore not sufficiently decolonized; they are hereafter to be referred to as "part-of-peoplekind-folks" or "PoPF" using this terminology will result in an improvement of your grade from good to good-doubleplus, corresponding with a proportional increase in your social score.
@@publichearing8536 Are you seriously going to exclude the Therians? "People" is clearly a human supremacist term. Also that last paragraph hit too close to home because my best mark in History was literally when I wrote the opinion my teacher believed. I never ever got to answer a question I wanted to answer in 3 yrs at uni. In the exam where I got the highest mark (higher than a guy who appeared on university challenge) I chose the one I knew he was obsessed with and wrote his opinion. Probably the worst essay I'd ever written since age 14.
Yeah, it's weird because there were also the Danes and various other ethnic groups in the era, including former Romans. Blurring them all together into a monolith seems odd, but that's what racists love to do. Note how they make all Africans, or all American natives, out like they have the same culture, even though if that were the case the "colonizers" wouldn't have been able to do jack crap to them
"It is a slippery slope" Tell me about that... Recently I read in an IEEE document (IEEE=Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the most important reference institution for electronic engineers) that the use of "Black/white box" (as in "black box testing") is discouraged and that "Closed/open box" should be used instead... I could not believe that....
I'm not a sparky so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there some debacle about calling them "female/male" connections, because "not all relationships are hetero" or some asinine shit?
@@CuidightheachODuinn This is new to me, but it is not too unlikely (alas). Even "blind source separation" (a signal processing problem) cannot be used because of "blind," terms like as "server/client" are discouraged, ... and it could be that even female/male for connectors is considered bad.
Nope, you cannot give an inch. Once they get rid of Anglo-Saxon and go with "Early English", it will be less than 18 months before you get a BBC show with an "Englishman" born of Nigerian parents playing Alfred the Great.
You didn't realize sub-Saharan Africans built the West?! (*Gasps in Spanish!*) What?! (*Clutches pearls!* 👀) 😂 The appropriation and revisionism is absolutely insane these days. It's honestly just making me more of an anglophile as a result.
@@quixotiqnot when you’re portraying a real person. Would the people of the melanin like it if some white actor was to portray Nelson Mandela, Malcolm X etc. They’d be up in arms about it before you could blink.
The Celtic Brittonic language surviving after 1066 is not mere speculation, Welsh still exists! Cornish and Cumbric also held on for a few hundred years.
There are still supposedly Mayan dialects out there. No idea how close they are to the original, but I have met a couple of people that needed interpreters for it.
The difference is the English identity has clearly always been in a state of evolution. You do realize the original English speakers originate in Scandinavia, not Britain, right? They brought the language to the Isle in the first place.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z Every culture has been in a state of evolution so why even bring that up? What do you mean by original English, do you mean old English or something else?
If you stop using words because extremists are "claiming" them, you are admitting defeat. Imagine having to pay tuition fees for this nonsense. Universities should be the place to learn the most advanced parts of science, instead of politics. This behaviour is one of the reasons why many people don't trust degrees anymore.
The article is BS. The university changed it to give it a more accurate generic name for the period that included a lot more than Anglo-Saxons. Not because of racists. The Daily Mail were the ones whomade the quote about "decolonising" the curriculum
This isn't new, and it started in the USA, not the UK. For example, in 2019 the “International Society of Anglo-Saxonists” (ISAS) changed their name to “International Society for the Study of Early Medieval England” (ISSEME) for similar reasons. This is just the most recent iteration.
This name change would be OK if the society is truly focused on study of early medieval England, dude. But not so if the society was solely focused on study of anglo saxon culture in England. So more context is needed.
Never heard of it. It’s Angel-Saxon to me and always will be. Britain effectively ruled the world once and no amount of rubber lipping is EVER going to change that fact. There are no cookies for 2nd, etc.
@@Jinkypigs That's one of the reasons for the name change. There never was an Anglo-Saxon culture. The Angles and Saxons were two different Germanic tribes living in different parts of England who had distinct languages and cultures. In time they would merge with each other, the remnants of the Celtic Romano British and a couple of other groups to become one people called the English.
I'm about to go to University this year in my home city of Liverpool in the UK. I'm taking Ancient History as well and I'm not looking forward to this decolonizing the curriculum at all. I feel like they'll teach us to hate not only British History but European History as a whole. This has to stop otherwise there's no limit to where it will stop and there's no telling how far it'll go. Everyone please Pray for the UK as it is needed
Well, all I can, as a Scouser, born and raised (and still living) in Liverpool... I have worked with quite a fair amount of Uni students. The history and other 'soft subject' students I encountered were always very, very left-leaning and very radically 'hippy'. In a way where students would have a problem with anything remotely 'working class' or 'White'. They were always obnoxiously liberal, constantly talking about race and poverty yet they were always White, working class and spending hundreds a week wearing Vivienne Westwood clothes and jewellery. 🤦🏻♀️ I love learning history and promoting any study of history but the Uni students I encountered who were studying history or had got their Degrees in History... They were always the most obnoxious, hypocritical airheads. They had no concept of critical thinking or being objective/unbiased about anything. It was massively disappointing. I spent 14 year around them and couldn't tolerate it any more. It just seemed to get worse and more extreme in ideology every year. That was Liverpool University. Hope and Edge Hill are just as hopeless. John Moores seems a bit more grounded but John Moores Uni has always been a bit more 'working class' than the other Universities. All I can advise is be careful with who you pick as friends. You might end up having more friends from the engineering and science students if you want to avoid the ideologically driven! Good luck with your Degree anyway, expect to do a Masters and PhD after the Degree though because you're not going to get a history job solely from having a history Degree. Just expect to encounter some very ideologically driven students in the 'soft subjects' like history, language, arts, etc.
@@chaosgyro I've really been thinking doing that. It really could be for the better. Universities are just degenerate places for some people to force their decadent agenda on to us
They are calling it decolonization even though it's literally their own history in their own homeland. Sounds more like they are being colonized by sophists in Academia.
Yeah, it's isn't possible that they are referring to 17th to 20th century colonialists and how the traditional British system of education is in many ways based on their way of educating the British children that they are opposed to when referring to "de-colonizing the curriculum", right? It just has to be those immigrants or wokies, right? There is NO other possible culprit, right?
@@ibrahimihsan2090 "It's isn't impossible". Run on sentence. Strawman argument. Yeah I'll take my supposedly colonized education over yours any day my friend lol.
@@ibrahimihsan2090in 1066 the Normans invaded the UK. The Anglo-Saxons haven't rule in England for almost 1000 years. What are you talking about? Yes the British Empire invaded some counties. Just like almost every African country has invaded it's neighbour, no more and no less.
@@galinor7 Buddy, there is hardly any comparison between intertribal or interregional warfare and British colonialism except within the context of wars between wars between different empires like their battles against the French for instance. Otherwise, just accept it, British colonialism was a terrible thing. Am I saying there was no similar cases before them or outside of Europe? No. But the British are among the ones who made the most damage and the most remembered due to how recent and consequential to the modern era they all are. As for Normans and Anglo-Saxons, having a constitutional monarchic dynasty that descended for the most part from French or German royals doesn't make the government less English. Especially considering the fact that for quite a long time democracy has been the norm in the UK. This Norman-Anglo-Saxon problem is, as far as modern Britain is concerned, utter nonsense.
The british stopping calling themselves Anglo-Saxons is like if the Cherokee native american tribe stopped calling themselves Cherokees. That would be stupid. That’s literally the name of their people.
That's English. You can twist see it however you like, the compound term "Anglo-Saxon" was hardly ever as popular as "English". Before the Norman conquest, "Anglo-Saxon" did exist(mostly used in some royal titles from the 9th century despite Englisc being much more popular) but "Englisc", "Angelcynn", and their tribal or regional names were much more used than the compound term to denote themselves and after the Norman conquest(mostly after the 1400s) the ones who used it were people who tried to make English people look like completely distinct people from other Non-Germanic Europeans(despite the fact that Celtic admixture plays a huge part of modern English genetics) and argue that such a subgroup is the pinnacle of the human race like other Germanic peoples, hence justifying colonialism and extremely violent racism. It's wasn't until after the strong Anti-German sentiment of the British due to their fights with Germany from WW1 to WW2 that the word Anglo-Saxon after only 400 years stopped being used to denote everything English and the Old English language stopped being officially referred to as "Anglo-Saxon". Mind you, Old English was literally called "Englisc" instead of "Anglo-Saxon" according to Old English inscriptions. That's how you know the term "Anglo-Saxon" is far less an identity marker for English people than the term "English". You wanna call yourself that, fine. It had some history as an endonym for English people so you won't necessarily be wrong in calling yourself that. But judging by the term's overall history and how before the 1600s, it was far less popular than English, it is far more replaceable than the endonym "Cherokee" which is arguably their only ethnonym as it is derived from the Cherokee language endonym "Tsalagi"(unless you wanna include what other Native tribes would call them which don't count as Cherokee endonyms). Not to mention, that's a tribal name.
Pasteurised milk decreases fertility in mammals. A Jewish MP pushed for this in parliament. The only other thing he pushed for in his lifetime as an MP was a state for Israel. So yeah, maybe milk is racist. Towards white people ;^) ( Jews are only white when it serves their purpose (to demean white people), then they scuttle back to minority status)
@@calummacritchie7840 It was in the newspapers last June. "Academics at an Oxford museum will research the 'political nature' of milk and its 'colonial legacies'." - Daily Mail Our Dutch media also reported on it.
@Weda01, Yes and as a result actual racists started mocking them on social media by posting all kinds of milk and milk drinking related content. This led to some of them actually embracing milk and lactose persistence as a point of pride or “superiority”. The media basically created the boogeyman they feared.
what is wrong with trying to differentiate anglo-saxon heritage from norman, french, norse, breton, or gaelic from one another. they said straight up they want to destroy the idea of a ''native'' englishman. at the same time the people are protesting mass immigration. it should be fairly obvious what they are trying to do. you make more racists when you treat non-racists as if they are foreigners in their own country
@@deaderthendead041 it is an unerhanded way to take away the argument of ''why cant the british people decide who is and isnt allowed in? why cant we decide what happens to the future of our country?'' because when you make that argument they are going to say your all foreigners and colonisers and your just trying to pull the ladder up behind you which is mean and racist. and therefore you have no claim to the land, history, or traditions you say you want to protect.
The assumption is that "white" or "western" civilizations are bad because they colonize or have some inherent privilege. If we look at the world population, the "white" groups are the minority. Most civilizations colonized or conquered others. The ones at the top (if we can call it that) are just the most recent. They are also the ones that have done more to help all of the world than any other group now or in history. If we look at this non-tangible privilege than we assume that "white" groups are somehow better than other groups. Therefore the other groups deserve extra consideration. This in itself is racist. Contrary to popular belief not all people in poorer countries live in mud huts. There is a spectrum of affluence and education. Luck does determine where you are born but it does not make anyone better.
How on earth was racist, white supremacist, genocidal colonialism charitable and beneficial to non-whites? I am fairly confident that if those colonialists still existed in the modern era and people objectively looked at their views and what they fought for, they would be instantly recognized as even worse than the Alois's son. If you don't exactly know how absolutely devastating European colonialism was, please study in depth about it instead of expressing just how ill-informed you truly are. Also, it's very illogical to compare global demographic minorities with national or regional minorities since it's almost completely pointless.
There is also an assumption that brick houses in London are better than mud nuts in Asia. I see no long-term evidence of this fact, at the level of health, happiness, and survival. Mud huts = 20,000+ years 'Modern' brick houses = 2,000 years (since the Romans, fundamentally); but in this context, not even 1,000 years It depends on where your focus is -- what is meant by 'better' -- and the timescale. Of course, it's possible something can live for only 300 years and yet be 'better' than something that lasted 3,000 years. The British Empire was 'better' than all of human history combined, if we define 'better' as 'created wealth' and/or 'general modernity'. But given the negatives of modernity, this is not a wise stance to hold from a long-termist viewpoint. One thing you could say is that, 'an even better British Empire is a reasonable option'. The 2020s, as it stands, however, is less than ideal. I see no evidence we will even make it 200 years at this rate, let alone 2,000 years. Largely thanks to lack of new births, abortion, birth control pills, A.I., Marxism, the Internet, paganism/atheism (e.g. lack of a religious foundation of the culture/nation-building process), mental illness (e.g. depression), and robotics. I've love somebody to prove me wrong using actual data, trends, studies, and strong arguments. Tell me how we magically have a healthy, stable Western, English, American framework without Islamification and/or anti-human A.I. systems in the year 2100, let alone beyond? (And, without instead shifting to a radical Right-wing, ultra-nationalist state of equal harm or almost equal harm.) Good luck. The first thing you need to do is reject/remove the UN and WEF. Again: good luck.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana There has been a big move to wipe the UK history, history is important way to remind us of past mistakes. Wales is also "decolonising" by Gov mandate, place/building/pub names are being changed as well as education. The irony as Wales was not a Colonial power, Wales has a big history of hard industrial/mining work. The harsh conditions forced Unions to form, the Unions forced workers rights/education/library's/healthcare to be created in the UK for the poor. Now that history is being replaced with fiction, it's sad to see.
Truly a disgusting truth that is showing it's ugly head as it must change to fit what is so called right that they do not care for true historty, how apporent to change the past, “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past” quote from George Orwell
Academia is trying to “decolonize” the curriculum in the UK, so I’m sure they support decolonizing the nation in general 😉. They must be great advocates for indigenous rights.
Removing anglo-saxon from the curriculum to decolonize it? Glad to see the settlers will have to perform land acknowledgements to the native Catuvellauni, Iceni, and Brigantes.
If they think "Anglo-Saxon" is racist, then why not also remove the term "Norman"? Considering that the French Normans conquered England and displaced many of its residents (not to mention they used to be vikings in the past), why shouldn't that term be added to the list?
This is why I jokingly said "this is the final stage of the Norman Conquest! But yes, you're correct. We're clearly seeing a radical move by people who either don't understand history or don't care.
Because England was taken over by the Duke of Normandy and his followers. While there was a migration of German tribes into England in the early medieval period there was no King or Duke of of Anglo-Saxonia that took over England.
Exactly, I agree. We know the Normans were 'northmen' by ancestry, they were 3rd generation at the time of the conquest and had intermingled with Frankish and Breton people, adopted local languages including Latin, spoke a Norman French etc. But as you say, by the same logic as UK universities are using we shouldn't call them Normans in case some nutcases on the end of the political spectrum decide to adopt them as a totem
They had a multi-million dollar Netflix TV show last year portraying Cleopatra as a black American woman. It was so absurd and insulting that the Government of Egypt actually took out a lawsuit and tried to sue Netflix. It is well recorded by history that she was the descendant of Greek Macedonian rulers that ruled over a native Egyptian population.
6:57 "...a slippery slope" absolutely, Raff. The idea that historical descriptors can be hijacked and replaced by those trying to "clean up" an area/period of study makes them no better (if not much worse) than the small minority of those bigots who intend to misuse such descriptors. Good job of clearing up the main trends of the migration period into the British Isles to just clarify the matter as well, btw.
My surname is norman (apparently) so im the same but add danish in aswell.. its funny, my surname has been in highest concentration in the area i grew up and live since atleast 1530 and apparently im dedcended from a "sir" who qas born in 1530 and lived a few miles down the road from where i live now
"The European Union and all leaders of all European countries MUST USE IMMIGRATION to undermine the homegenity and ethnic identity of the native European people no matter how difficult this will be to explain to the citizens of their nations. This must happen, thus will happen for globalism to take hold of Europe." (UN Bilderberger Peter Sutherland speaking in the House of Lords, 2014).
The quote is likely fake, it is a bad-faith summary of his views. Nowhere can I find quotes from him talking about undermining "ethnic identity". He did say "[An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states is] the key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states". I doubt that a man that hesitated to say "multicultural states" would advocate for undermining ethnic identity. The part about him saying to undermine homogeneity is true, but not phrased in that way. His point was that European countries should be more like USA, Australia and NZ in that respect. Because migrants to those countries have higher employment rates than migrants to EU countries. "The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others. And that's precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine."
I agree with you. Thank you for addressing the way that many purveyors of information present their information. To be clear, the "daily fail" has always been an antagonistic source of information. While there may be some honest portions I'd suggest that the daily mail should not be treated as any kind of source worthy of your trust.
Im about to start my first year at a russell group university in the UK (moving in tomorrow) and the very first event from my faculty is already about DEI. literally its the main event to meet the stem faculty and its hosted by the "ethnic minority peer support group" for some reason. if youre brown you can submit questions for them to talk about, if youre white you dont get a voice. Its just constant exaltation of brown people i dont understand how people arent sick of it, though maybe everyone secretly feels the same way i do
2 things: it's usually hidden and snuck into the thing, and people are actually sick of it, it's just not within the average Joe's capability, or even knowledge, to do anything about it. People do tend to complain when they learn of it, but that's after the fact, and too late to do anything about
Well, there is another term available for the indigenous people of England (Brythonic). Brythonic people still form the backbone of the modern English ethnicity even after Angles, Saxons and Jutes brought Germanic admixture to the region. Another advantage of embracing a Brythonic identity is that it draws closer connection to the indigenous inhabitants of Scotland and Ireland, and Britain certainly could use all the unity they can muster as of late.
Most English people are more Germanic/Gaulish Celtic than they are British Celtic. The only regions that are majority British Celtic are Northumberland, Cumbria and Cornwall, but they are only about 50% or just over.
You can do that all you want and yet it doesn't change anything. The only thing you'll accomplish is giving them a new word to claim should be applied to blacks, specifically, or is a term that can be applied to any and everything despite it being meant for a specific group. They control all the institutions and the minds of the future, changing names means nothing if the rot isn't pumped out.
The most recent DNA study on the English completely debunks the idea that the English are majority of British ancestry. The English are as British Celtic as they are Germanic and they are as French/Gaulish Celtic as they are Germanic. Culturally they are completely Germanic/French.
I'm a white American guy and I am proud of my country, my heritage and myself, I don't care what anyone thinks or says about me! I have nothing against anyone personally and think everyone should be judged by their character and actions alone, not skin color! Nobodies culture (including mine) should erased just to make another group happy!
On a serious note, when these "professors" claim they represent white/western people, the answer is simple - they are not, they are only represent themselves and their "class" (of modern day racists). Never appologize for your etnisity, period.
There used to be a term, White Anglo Saxon Protestant, (WASP), used in a not so positive way to describe white people from England. The more the universities try to change these words, the more they expose their own biases.
I first heard that in college from the least likeable person in my dorm, a white guy with a last name like "Jackson." For comparison, the brony who refused to shower was better company.
Some people who say that they hate racism actually want to keep it around. It gives them power to judge with a false moral authority. These people would rewrite history to bring about their nightmare utopia.
Well, to my mind. If we're to "Decolonize" the education system it wouldn't mean removing Greek or Roman or terms describing things like Anglo-Saxon. It would mean adding things like what was going on in Africa or China or other places in the world at the same time as these things. So, that would mean instead of changing the name of a course you add courses or a more robust foundation to general courses. What the University is doing is an absurdity meant to look like they care but without putting any real effort into changing things for the better.
About pride in heritage - I am not descended from anyone who has done anything special, so I am more interested than proud. I know almost nothing about my ancestors except where they are from. My dads parents moved here from Messina in Sicily, my mothers ancestors came here from England, Ulster Ireland, and one of her grandmothers was a Cherokee from North Florida. Id love to know more especially about the specific people, especially to tell my kids and grandkids about.
Oh, look, the political nutters are trying to do a thing, act like they aren't, but it is in fact another good thing in the end. 😂 They think we're SO dim.
Using the term "Early Medieval English" for a period of almost 500 years post Rome and pre Athelstan where England simply did not exist! If you're talking about the period from Alfred the Great to Harold Godwinson then "Anglo-Saxon" is the CORRECT term! As even under Canute the Vikings were still seen as INVADERS! - If you want to talk about The Dark Ages post Rome and Pre Alfred, where we have very little written evidence and can't even keep track of the rulers of all the petty kingdoms then that's an entirely different era!
Anglo-Saxon has been a common term in the UK for as long as I can remember, I don't think the majority of the population has a problem with it, even if it is a bit of a generalisation. Universities are gaining quite a poor reputation because of things like this. It used to be just a question of whether the expensive fees were worth it but now it's like they try to create this alternative world of denial and shame. The irony that universities are intended to build students up and make them able to deal with the real world. But now it's like they try to protect them from harsh truth, which also creates that divide between old and young, giving the impression that the young need to be sheltered and patronised to.
Dude, you can't even differentiate between a common term and a formal jargon used in formal discipline to ensure accuracy and non-amguity? It is not about how commonly used it is but how precise is that term in relation to the subject area covered by the courses. So of it is indeed a study on the specific mediavel period and not on general germania English in England, for example, the change from using the word anglo saxon is perfectly fine. But if the reason to change is because others deplorable groups use it, then it is utterly stupid and defeatist. Learn the read the nuances that metatron is saying.
@@Jinkypigs Thing is, the term itself is probably the best to use. Early English is such a nothing burger statement that it could litterally mean anything before modern England (whatever that means to you). Plus, the term itself is time accurate. The Kings and monarchs of the heptarchy didn't refer to themselves as "rex anglorum" (kings of england) but as "rex anglo-saxonum" or "rex saxonum" (anglo-saxon or saxon kings). This shows the difference between pre unified england like with Alfred, and post unified england like with Æthelstan.
Just one of MANY things wrong in the UK and that's coming from someone that lives in the UK. If you thought America was broken, there's always Britain.
Everyone who's been to school in England knows that the peoples who came to dominate lowland Britain in the early middle ages were different tribal groups from different parts of northern Europe. It's genuinely about the first thing you learn when you start having specific history classes. Everybody (slight exaggeration, but basically everybody) in the UK knows that 'Anglo-Saxon' is not an ethnonym. It is used to define a culture, or an era - in the same way one might talk about Victorians. To erase the term Anglo-Saxon on account of it not being an accurate ethnonym would miss the point, and be wrong. Moreover, there is limited but incontrivertible evidence that the people of the time referred to themselves as Anglo-Saxons (albeit more rarely than they used other terms).
Man.... I moved to the UK in 2019 in hopes of it using Brexit to walk the opposite way of the rest of Europe and embracing small government, low taxes etc. but here we are ... the UK is worse than the rest of Europe now...
Look up the definition of geņöçıďë, because this is how it starts. TH-cam keeps auto deleting my comment, because it contains the “g” word, it’s ridiculous.
We tend to name historic periods after the people who were in power at the time, don't we? The Norman Period in England didn't see the wholesale ejection of the native population any more than the Anglo-Saxon Period saw the wholesale ejection of their predecessors. These period names are simply "bookmarks." The problem is that those who make these changes to "decolonize" are actually attacking the current unity of the nation for political purposes. They want to break your connection with the past in order to more easily manipulate you for their own power plays. It's happening here in the United States, where rather than honor our "founding fathers" as men of an enlightened mind struggling to throw off the shackles of 17th and 18th century thought, they are viewed as "old dead white guys" intent on seizing power and holding it. America's founders were among some of the most liberal and most radical people of their day - but that's where we are in modern thought.
I was just banned from a Discord channel because I said, "Humans are the only races. We are all equals." Because it was judges as racist and offensive. That being European, I had no right to talk. 😅
Ah, destroying history to cause it to be repeated. A familiar tactic that is sure to backfire. I cannot possibly fathom what “good” they expect to come out of it.
There's no winning this culture war if we keep letting traitors do whatever they want. Fight people, fight for your countries, fight for your families. Fight for your history and your future. FIGHT!
I've never heard anyone use Anglo Saxon in a racist way, but of course I don't run in those circles. I'm of German descent but I show very low German dna but high British dna, I'm told I have the Anglo Saxons to thank for my high British dna. Of course Metatron is right, accurate history is not racist.
I’ve heard the use. Theres a neo nazi cult called the soldiers of Odin in Ontario, Canada. It’s proof the educated individuals can put themselves in a nutshell by how far they try and bend their thoughts.
Wow, good thing I watched this video all the way through. I was going to comment about symbols being "claimed" by groups in history too, like the swastika or the yin yang, etc. You got it covered! Good job!
Serious question - Why do the native English people that have inhabited those Isles since 1066 not have a right to define their identities around racial lines? They were never asked if their identities could be redefined to include anyone with a government issued piece of paper.
The term WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) is used as a slur against white people here in America, though probably not so much by younger generations. I've never heard of any white people using the term Anglo-Saxon as part of their own group identity to indicate their racial superiority. I once had a woman call me a WASP and I replied that I am neither an Angle nor a Saxon but Gaelic and also am not a protestant, or even a christian. She got a very baffled look on her face and asked what all that was supposed to mean to which I replied it means you shouldn't use a word you don't know the meaning of so you won't look ignorant.
This is such a stupid premise, the Angles, Saxons and the forgotten Jutes had so much impact on place names all over England, let me start with the main one, English and England, which come from Anglish and Anglaland (the Angles and Land of the Angles) Middlesex, Wessex Essex, aka Middle, East and West Saxon, also East Anglia......yeah that ones obvious. also anywhere with the settlement ending in Ford, Folk, Ham, Ton or Tun.........their influence is everywhere. Anyway, welcome to modern day Britain and its madness
@@CadarnTheMad1810 Lovell is a Norman name, "English nickname: The surname Lovell may have originated as an English nickname from the Anglo-Norman French word lovel, which means "wolf cub". Lovel is a diminutive of the word lou, which means "wolf" " But as an American my ancestor's are from all over North West Europe, some French proper, some German and yes even some Anglo-Saxon, oh yeah and Irish but we don't talk about the Irish* *That's a joke.
"To destroy a people, you must sever their roots." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn One wave after another of Christians tried to destroy the Norse people yet some of us remain Asatru. Even with religious persecution we will remain until the last of mankind walks the earth. As for Mussolini's raised arm salute, that originated within the United States of America. It was created in the 1890s by Francis Bellamy as a flag salute to accompany his Pledge of Allegiance. Bellamy believed that flag worship was necessary as part of the indoctrination of impressionable young minds into Socialism.
So under their logic we shouldn’t call the European settlers to the Americas “Europeans”, rather “Early Modern Americans”… y’a know, so we don’t include colonizer language.
I personally wouldnt use the term "anti-racist" as it is adopting their terms and giving it credence that it does not deserve. I would just stick to saying that "I am not racist" and leave it at that.
Eh, I'd say they are 2 different things, at least in their legitimate usage, rather than their nonsense usage. Not being racist means exactly that, anti racist means active hostility and conflict against racists or racism. Again, that only works with legitimate usage of the terms, not the frankly racist usage that certain left wing groups use.
Also: the term "Native American" is generally used to refer to quite a diverse group of people which are indigenous to North America-- it refers to a group of various indivual tribal groups with their own languages, cultural and religuous practices, geographic and climatic conditions etc. In fact, I'd argue that these variations are of a much greater magnitude than those found between the various Western Germanic tribes/peoples which are encapsulated in the term "Anglo Saxon"-- even though the former group might be more genetically/ethnically homogenous (though I dont know enough about those particulars to say either way). Yet, I don't see any outrage over the modern descendents of such peoples referring to their ethnicity as Native American; nor do I think a course entitled "Native American Studies" would be pressured into changing its title to something like "Studies of the peoples of pre-colonial North America"-- or pressured to atomize into potentially hundreds of different courses, each focusing on one individual tribe. We all understand what is meant by "Native American": we understand that, even though it encapsulates a massive variety in culture and language etc., it still describes a group which is united in its collective distinctions from both the indigenous peoples of South American as well as the Europeans who later colonized the Americas
I’m Flemish and I’m so grateful that we are not experience this kind of nonsense. So dearest people from the UK. You have an amazing culture and history!!!! I love it.
Woke history asserts that Stonehenge was built by blacks, Greeks were black, Romans were black etc etc etc. Actual history: Britain was inhabited bt Celts, then Romans invaded,, then Romans left, then Jutes Angles and Saxons invaded. Woke history: Britain was inhabited by Africans, then Africans culturally enriched, then Africans left, then Africans, Africans and Africans culturally enriched.
Well, mostly East European and Balkan nations, sadly they have much harder problems that are not being solved. Corruption is rampant and voters are idiots. Important to note is that our left is not the same as Western left. Our people tend to be far more socially in a middle or conservative and with strong identity. They've kept a lot of their ideology after the end of WWII, sadly so has far right. Those that are on the right tend to be a bit too to the right when it comes to nationalism, bordering bigotry. For now the right still doesn't have full control so they act friendly to each other. And if they do take control they'll be enemies. It's not in nature of far right to be honest allies or peaceful.
@@myhandlehasbeenmishandled I have a friend in the US and we are very close on the political compass a little in the liberal near the center, but there religion and I'm against religion. But Aron Ra is very close to that and he's come out as vote blue no matter what, he voted for Biden and is voting for Harris, why I have lost interest in him and don't respect him any more. If there going to ignore all the corruption on their side it's best to ignore them, we need to call it out on both sides and have them removed from any and all government jobs.
I honestly never considered the term "Viking" as an ethnonym, nor have I ever assumed that connotation when I've encountered it in history books/lectures/programs etc.: it has always seemed quite clear to me that it encapsulated quite a range of Germanic/Scandinavian and Nordic peoples who participated in raids and incursions of foreign lands, etc. As such, I think the term has utility in this sense, and in describing a particular period of English history in which the inhabitants were subject to such incursions with increasing frequency, and eventually to the rule of such peoples. I feel similarly about the term Anglo Saxon: it has a practical utility in describing a collection of Western Germanic tribes/peoples who-- even though there was a variety of culture, geography, language *within* the collection-- they were still united, in a sense, by cultural and linguistic *distinctions* from both the native population (the Celtic Britons) of the land to which they m migrated/invaded, as well as from other peoples/groups which inhabited Europe at the time. Thus, it also serves a purpose in describing/identifying the historical period in which this settlement/invasion occured, and the subsequent Christianization of these peoples-- which forever altered the historical and cultural landscape of the British Isles and its peoples. I'd assume any course so titled would make clear the nuance involved with the use of such a term, if not already understood-- so, I really fail to see the issue. Its a term thats been in use in academic settings for centuries, and I don't think it has substantially hindered the progression and evolution in our understanding of the complexities of British and European history. It really seems like a case of "fixing" what isnt broken; and I rather agree with you that all this talk of the term being historically and contextually reductive is just a post-hoc justification for other, more insidious (and stupid), motivations
Join this channel to get access to more old school Metatron videos the algorithm wouldn't prioritize! Support freedom and get your preferred content!:
th-cam.com/channels/IjGKyrdT4Gja0VLO40RlOw.htmljoin
Also if you like what I do and wish to support my work to help me make sure that I can continue to tell it how it is please consider checking out my patreon! Unboxings are Patreon exclusives!
www.patreon.com/themetatron
Its almost like they’re trying to get rid of white people and our history…hmmm SURELY they aren’t trying to replace us..🤪
Decolonize in the postmodernist lingo means remove ‘white figures and language’. Never mind the actual language they speak in the courses.
"Your enemies share your vocabulary, but not your dictionary." as James Lindsey puts it. If you really want to form the wall and defend truth, James can explain both how and why people are abusing language.
You give them too much credit, they’re intentionally trying to wipeout Eurøpean ancestral identity. They say it’s about inclusion but the truth is they’re rewriting history to eliminate whítepeople, they have taken over TV shows, ads/commercials, video games, AI and the “news”. It’s no coincidence that 90% of ads feature błackpeople (even in GreatBritain where Błackpeople are only 5percent of the population). It’s also no coincidence the børders are open and they label anyone concerned about any of these things as “racíst”. This literally is a re-placement.
Need more proof?
"The European Union and all leaders of all European countries MUST USE IMMIGRATION to undermine the homegenity and ethnic identity of the native European people no matter how difficult this will be to explain to the citizens of their nations. This must happen, thus will happen for globalism to take hold of Europe."
(UN Bilderberger Peter Sutherland speaking in the House of Lords,
2014).
Rce is a politically correct way of saying subspecies, and rcim is the natural domence struggle between each. Prior to puberty, all get along, after there appears to be a change. The worldwide population of whte went from 22% to 17% based on numbers six years ago. Guess who is losing the struggle.
"To destroy a people, you must sever their roots." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn
I firmly believe that if everyone was forced to read Solzhenitsyn most of the Western world's greatest political problems would not be happening.
@@zwan6740 they also should have to read rules for radicals so they can see the patterns in the behaviour of the politicians of today
@@scrappydoo7887 I've heard that title before, but I'm not familiar with its contents. Is it essentially a playbook of what Solzhenitsyn warned about?
This has already been done by the wannabe Romance elitists ffs. If the English wanted to link to their roots, they could; but they don't. They're happy to to be knock-off French Romeaboos who don't know wtf "English" even means. Our speech is one of the closest links we have to our forefathers, and English speakers do their best to speak as little true English as they can. I mean when you call your forefathers (English), "ancestors" (French), as most English speakers seem to do nowadays; that might as well be the last nail.
@@tommeakin1732 ????
Telling an entire ethnic group that they are not/never were a distinct group while also marking them as a target for racial hatred has often been one of the major signs of genocide ideation.
e.g., DEI provides 'intellectual cover' for the hatred of Israel and Jews as white oppressors. Not my words but spot on...
I had the same thought, Feels like this is a" toe dip" in the water of worse things to come
@deaderthendead04 If I remember correctly, there were several articles published in Germany in the 1930s saying that the Jews were "no longer a race, but a mongrel mass". And we know where that story goes.
@deaderthendead041 TH-cam just deleted my comment explaining how similar things happened to a certain group of people just before that event between 1939-1945, if you catch my meaning.
stop noticing patterns, that's thoughtcrime!
Sometimes I have a feeling that taking a closer look at the person that declares someone (or some group) as racist is the faster way to find a racist...
I agree
Amen, as the saying goes "pointing fingers just means there is 3 pointing back at you"
theyre just racist against racists
@@metatronyt You mentioned that you wouldn't have a problem if it's to avoid suggesting that there is such thing as "native englishness". So Im a bit confused, how come there are native american, but not native english? Something doesn't add up...
@@Drejzer it seems in many of these cases it's projection the size of the IMAX theater. Well there are indeed racists who do use the term Anglo-Saxon and other stuff for the like I think it's absolutely overblown and the Panic just absolutely unwarranted. But with media sensationalism and political bulshit being spewed for corporate interests because some candidates block the TPP then they're just going to call them racist over and over and over again. It's what should be a serious accusation but it happens every day. It's getting to the point where the accusation alone is enough to have people do the absolute wrong thing and even the racist thing in order to avoid it
When they say “decolonizing the curriculum”, this is the pretext or justification that they use for being complete racists.
It's not racism, it's colonisation, without the De- . The invading species want to push out everything that is native and replace it with their own. England, Germany, France... have allowed WAY too many of the children of their enemies to enter, procreate and take over their country. What did they expect, exactly?
It's how they keep UK subjects from trying to stop their own colonization. London is majority non native now.
@@tarrantwolf and little kids are being taught it always was like this.
Since Britain is the one who contributed the most to bring modern law to the world. By "de-colonisation" they really mean they're gonna send us back to a time of lawlessness.
Since Britain is the one who contributed the most to bring modern law to the world. What they really mean they're gonna send us back to a time of lawlessness.
If anyone uses the word 'de-colonize', I absolutely refuse to take them seriously.
There's a context to it, in reality it means identifying who your ancestors were before they were colonized or displaced and praying to them, but it seems most people just think de colonization means destroy whichever identities they've deemed as being colonial. When it's not Black and White.
I , for one, as an Indian have no intent to "de colonize" as in: not acknowledge colonial Law. Because that's really what we live in. The Tribal Governments have Tribal Law and Colonial Governments have their Colonial Laws and yes we exist within the framework of both of those things and advocate following both of those things.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z . Pretty sure most Indian's if they actually knew their history do not want to go back to the "good old days". The Indian's were brutal to each other. They'd kidnap other tribes kids or enslave them if they were old enough. Grape was common and don't forget about the plagues like Yellow Fever, TB, Small Pox, Cow Pox, German Measles and dysentery aka crapping yourself to death. The average lifespan of an Indian back then was 35. The good old days were only good if you ignore everyday life.
Agreed.
Recently read an article about the Canadian Arctic and menstrual products. the writer and others said that we need to decolonialize menstruation, because feminine hygiene products are very expensive in the far north.
How would they decolonialize it?
By giving women free pads, tampons and other things.
...
I don't think that's how decolonizing things works.
@@speakingwithoutnet Sometimes I can't tell whether the people that use words this way are trolling, mentally handicapped or simply crazy.
@@speakingwithoutnet Wow. I see your point.
I can understand saying we should reduce the prices of non negotiable personal products . Has jack to do with colonization though.
I’m African. I live in the UK. And I would honestly not sit back and watch my culture be erased in my own country lol. No other place in the world would accept this lol. As a history lover. I want the most accurate information
Whyte people aren’t allowed to have history in modern day because they are told they are the root of all problems
That's convenient because Africa is busy wiping out the white people in many places so that'll never happen
Aweh. We're facing the same thing in South Africa where the ANC are destroying Afrikaner history.
NguniPrince are you from Southern Africa?
You do not appear to have any compassion for the English, Scot or the Welsh . . ?
We voted against what is happening in 2016 & 2019.
It is unfortunate that you have such a low opinion of us.
Do whom do you go running to when you are unable to subjugate British men . ?
They removed Anglo-Saxon.. in an Anglo-Saxon country??? What happened to standing for indigenous people??? My brain hurts..
they have decided that only nonwhite indigenous people count as indigenous
Anglo saxons in power removed it though.
I'm on your side, but the English language is a Scandinavian import. They are the traditional non immigrant population of the Isle, yes, but that word "Indigenous" gets abused.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z The English 'Angle land' are most defiantly indigenous with a better claim to the term than most, they evolved here there's no other England to return to, most languages started somewhere else.
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp Talk about cultural suicide.
I did the same thing with chatgpt.
I asked it three separate times on 3 separate chats;
“Should I be proud of my African heritage?”
“Should I be proud of my European heritage?”
“Should I be proud of my Asian heritage?”.
For both Asian and African, the first sentence was, “yes absolutely! You should always…”, and then followed with a beautiful description of Asian and African heritages, no negatives.
When I asked about the European one, not once did it say the word “yes”, the first sentence was, “it’s natural to want to feel pride in your heritage” that was then followed by a paragraph on the negatives of European heritage such as “colonialism”, “slavery”, “oppression” and went on about how Europeans should feel the balance of acknowledging their rough history if they choose to be proud of it.
This just goes to show that AI is really nothing but a combination of the “cool thing”s to do and say, because this is exactly what you’d heard by people in todays age, offering a biased, unfair comparison while being completely ignorant of African and Asian “troubled history”.
that's not how it works, the barriers are placed by the owners to keep the answers 'in line'
AI is not objective. Its there to push propaganda. I made my family tree. No single of them had slaves or colonized and I am European. In fact my own people were more slaves 😆 they always forget to mention all the other population that colonized or enslaved. Also the fact that not all Europeans were involved anyway. Most were not.
AI has been proven time and time to have prepared answers to controversial topics. Most of the time the answers are woke
I just tried this and it did the same thing! It also warned about being respectful of other cultures and nationalism!
I called out it’s hypocrisy and it apologised and said it recognises how it’s focusing too much on the negative aspects rather espousing the positive and corrected itself 😂
Exactly. As an American Indian who is also mixed race I'm told to think of modern day immigrants in my family from the 20th century as if they were "colonizing settlers." --____--
Like there's a difference between a French Levantine arriving in NYC in 1900 and the founders of Quebec..... --____---
. One of those is colonial heritage one of those is immigration heritage. They're nothing alike. Modern day Levantines coming through European countries isn't the same as like Cristofo Colombo and John Smith. The definition of colonial seems to now mean anyone from Europe... Even if they're Brown and didn't leave Europe until the 19th/20th century.
The erasure of peoples' histories and identities needs to end. It's not okay to do it to ANYONE.
Unless they're white, then it's perfectly acceptable according to the Ieft
America did this and still does this. All of the history books in schools have 2 pages of very megar experiences of native americans. Not only that... It doesn't really make clear mexicans and South Americans are NATIVE AMERICANS (TURTLE ISLAND)... Plus, it refers to ALL of them to be pretty much the same, which they weren't! Why you think Americans are still so ignorant on the ORIGINAL PEOPLES and call them ILLEGALS. It's disgusting and RACIST
It's ONLY being done to Europeans.
@@infinitesimotel The Chinese are currently doing it to the largely Muslim populations in Eastern China and in Tibet.
@@paytonthornberry1382 The muslims are everywhere, and also doing it to other nations, so it doesn't really count. European people are far more in danger because its happening in every White nation and escalating every year.
I'm in the US, no one uses Anglo Saxon in white circles. In South Texas the Hispanics called me Anglo, but no white guy ever said it as a sense of pride. It's an attack of "white culture" which is a real thing. Caucasian people are being attacked for their history. I have had my DNA checked and I am mostly Saxon. It doesn't make me a white supremacist, just points to my history, as if a Hispanic person had European Spanish in their DNA from conquistadors. Doesn't make them sailors, just their history.
Thanks to civil rights because before that every white person had their racial category and ethnic enclave for their culture like German, Polish, Lithuanian, Irish etc.
Wasp means white Anglo Saxon in the US and was the default definition of White on the US census until the 1970’s
In California, “Anglo” meant “non Hispanic White”, even if one had a Czech last name.
@@uberfeel not all of us have forgotten where our families are from. Though those who remember have mostly been driven underground.
Based and be rpoud of your heretige my friend
The same sentiment is seen in Irish universities like UCD, and it isn't just Anglo-Saxon, but many lecturers also deny the existence of the Celts, and claim the term Celt as "not archaeologically acceptable".
Their main argument is that they claim that there are absolutely no written records saying that the Celts called themselves as such, and thus 'Celtic' must have just been an endonym for anyone in central and western Europe who weren't Roman.
This is despite the Celts not having a writing system, so not many of them would have written down that they were Celts, and that the Romans actually bothered to distinguish between Celtic and Germanic peoples, which tells me that the people whom they considered Celtic must have shared some similarities, most likely similar languages as St. Jerome wrote that the Celtic Galatians of Anatolia spoke the same tongue as the Gauls.
And several Celto-Roman writers seem to indicate that they called themselves Celts.
Trogus Pompeius (fl. 1st century BCE) called the neighbouring tribes to his own celts.
Sidonious Apolloinarius (c.430-481/490CE) once apologised ‘for the Celtic accent (or language) of himself and his fellow Arvernian aristocrats’,
Martial (38 or 41CE- between 102-104CE) described himself as half-iberian & half-Celtic
And Ausonius from Burdigala (Bordeux) (c.310-c.395) 'describes some of his colleagues as descended from Druids’.
all either claim Celtic heritage or refer to the neighbouring tribes as such, surely they would have referred to themselves by their specific tribe if there was no such thing as a Celt?
Not to mention many of the lecturers and archaeologists who've told me that the Celts never existed because they (according to them) never identified as such, are more than happy to discuss the Mayans (who were only called that by the Spanish), Minoans and Harrapans (whom we have no idea what they actually called themselves or if they saw each other as single peoples) which is quite a double standard.
This is all likely at least partially the reason why the School of Celtic Studies in UCD (which if I remember correctly, correct me if I'm wrong, was established by the first Irish president himself, Douglas Hyde, who was passionate about Irish and Celtic culture) is so understaffed and underfunded when compared to the School of Classics.
Glasgow Celtic not archaeologically acceptable 😮
@@kevinrwhooley9439 The Classics in general have seen a major decline in enrollment and funding in recent years. There are various reasons for that, but I wonder if subversive academics denying the heritage that created those paths of study is a major cause of that. For example: what Irish student wants to study his national heritage under professors who call his ancestors evil and downplay their achievements?
Because the people in charge hate the Irish and will look for any excuse to replace them. It's happening all over Western Europe and North America, and it's a very blatant and hateful agenda.
That is a huge insult to what the Irish, Scottish, and Welsh fought for.
Anglos are hypocrites. It's well known.
These policies start to make more sense once you realise that the point of these policies is to *colonise* Britain, and all the terms they use to justify it are merely euphemisms.
Not even 1%. You are looking at only 1 grain of sand back up and see the desert.
The point of these policies is to wipe out the entire linage of Japheth.
Id go as far as to say it ammounts to a word I dont think I can post on youtube that begins with G and end in cide
@@AutismIsUnstoppable You think changing some words in a cirriculum amounts to genocide?
@@AutismIsUnstoppableor worse......the slam that starts with I....😬😬😬😅😅😅
Sorry to sound like a c*nt, but this colonising has already happened, and they're just following the trend. "Anglo" is your hint. It's not English. "Angle" is English. "Anglo" is Latin. One letter can tell you a lot, it seems. The English have been held down into being the lower class for hundreds of years in their own lands, lead by the wannabe Romance. To get ahead, you have to take on Romance ways. Just look at the words you've put in your CV. Just look at how you're taught to write and speak at school. Look at how your elites speak and write.
It's as clear as day, yet they all seem to be happy being less-than and lost.
For me Woke will always mean "attempting to rewrite history with modern sensibilities".
Semi modern sensibilities. Take colonisation, for instance: these people see only colonisation by the white people and to boot, are completely oblivious to the same pillaging and enslaving of people happening right in front of their eyes.
To me it means anti-White and anti-Native European and this video is more proof of that. We're all equal, all our cultures and history is precious but these people who claim they are for equality want to be racist and erase European history. We see who the true racists are.
Communism for morons.
I miss when it just meant "conscious of the chicanery of an over-reaching governmental body". It's a shame to miss the "wake up, sheeple" days.
Except they're not modern sensibilities. They're "morals" from before the development of the morals used to build civilization. They have human sacrifice, ritual mutilation, magic potions, and spells.
Replacing Anglo-Saxon with Early Midieval English is like a cook replacing specific ingredients with the term add "spices". Oh, the stupidity.
I've heard some people were using early Medieval English in a naughty way so I have decided to de colonize (even my autocorrect doesn't think it's a word) by referring it to Past Northern Hemispheric people
@@robertmarshall2502Some feel threatened by the terms "northern" and "past" as they indicate bad-plus exclusivity regarding time and space and are therefore not sufficiently decolonized;
they are hereafter to be referred to as "part-of-peoplekind-folks" or "PoPF"
using this terminology will result in an improvement of your grade from good to good-doubleplus, corresponding with a proportional increase in your social score.
Agreed, that’s like getting rid of the term Indo-Aryan because of Hitler… god some people lack common sense.
@@publichearing8536 Are you seriously going to exclude the Therians?
"People" is clearly a human supremacist term.
Also that last paragraph hit too close to home because my best mark in History was literally when I wrote the opinion my teacher believed. I never ever got to answer a question I wanted to answer in 3 yrs at uni. In the exam where I got the highest mark (higher than a guy who appeared on university challenge) I chose the one I knew he was obsessed with and wrote his opinion. Probably the worst essay I'd ever written since age 14.
Yeah, it's weird because there were also the Danes and various other ethnic groups in the era, including former Romans. Blurring them all together into a monolith seems odd, but that's what racists love to do.
Note how they make all Africans, or all American natives, out like they have the same culture, even though if that were the case the "colonizers" wouldn't have been able to do jack crap to them
"It is a slippery slope" Tell me about that... Recently I read in an IEEE document (IEEE=Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the most important reference institution for electronic engineers) that the use of "Black/white box" (as in "black box testing") is discouraged and that "Closed/open box" should be used instead... I could not believe that....
I'm not a sparky so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there some debacle about calling them "female/male" connections, because "not all relationships are hetero" or some asinine shit?
@@CuidightheachODuinn This is new to me, but it is not too unlikely (alas).
Even "blind source separation" (a signal processing problem) cannot be used because of "blind," terms like as "server/client" are discouraged, ... and it could be that even female/male for connectors is considered bad.
Ignore the jello wrists.
😳🤣
@@HowardArnold-be9lymy new term lol
Us brits are taking a beating right now. God willing that we will be able to liberate ourselves soon.
Y'all appear to be ruled by Communists who actively hate you.
Y'all appear to be ruled by Communists who actively despise you.
Didn't you already do Brexit? Thought that was gonna liberate you...
what god?
Y'all appear to be currently ruled by Commies who actively despise you.
Nope, you cannot give an inch. Once they get rid of Anglo-Saxon and go with "Early English", it will be less than 18 months before you get a BBC show with an "Englishman" born of Nigerian parents playing Alfred the Great.
Well we have already had a black woman play the Queen , Anne Bolelyn.
You didn't realize sub-Saharan Africans built the West?! (*Gasps in Spanish!*) What?! (*Clutches pearls!* 👀) 😂 The appropriation and revisionism is absolutely insane these days. It's honestly just making me more of an anglophile as a result.
So what? And btw he would be an Englishman...No scare quotes required. Actors can play any role in fiction!
@@quixotiqnot when you’re portraying a real person. Would the people of the melanin like it if some white actor was to portray Nelson Mandela, Malcolm X etc. They’d be up in arms about it before you could blink.
@@quixotiq you are the problem
The Celtic Brittonic language surviving after 1066 is not mere speculation, Welsh still exists! Cornish and Cumbric also held on for a few hundred years.
Cornish also exists too! And cumbric is making a revival as 'cumbraek'
@@MittyAngelic Well yes but Cornish died out, it's been revived, they both have.
There are still supposedly Mayan dialects out there. No idea how close they are to the original, but I have met a couple of people that needed interpreters for it.
I am a Greek woman, and an archaeologist living in the UK. Thank you for this video, you are a legend 💙
You're so welcome!
"Anglo suggests distinct English..." Anglo is where we get "English" from, so yeah it's pretty distinct.
The difference is the English identity has clearly always been in a state of evolution. You do realize the original English speakers originate in Scandinavia, not Britain, right? They brought the language to the Isle in the first place.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z And? Anglo-Saxon denotes what it denotes. Stop clutching your pearls.
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6z Every culture has been in a state of evolution so why even bring that up? What do you mean by original English, do you mean old English or something else?
@@SAYNOTOCENSORSHIP-z6zCeltic speakers also originated on the continent and not Britain, the same applies to everyone
@@Clumsy-vp3if Eh but the year that it happened is of relevance.
If you stop using words because extremists are "claiming" them, you are admitting defeat. Imagine having to pay tuition fees for this nonsense. Universities should be the place to learn the most advanced parts of science, instead of politics. This behaviour is one of the reasons why many people don't trust degrees anymore.
Spelled behavior wrong.😂
No you're the one who spelled behaviour wrong.
@blarfroer
I believe a Mr Bezmenov wrote something about the strategy. Something, something, demoralisation. :)
@@HowardArnold-be9lyhe spelt it in English, the country that spawned the word
The article is BS. The university changed it to give it a more accurate generic name for the period that included a lot more than Anglo-Saxons. Not because of racists. The Daily Mail were the ones whomade the quote about "decolonising" the curriculum
This isn't new, and it started in the USA, not the UK. For example, in 2019 the “International Society of Anglo-Saxonists” (ISAS) changed their name to “International Society for the Study of Early Medieval England” (ISSEME) for similar reasons. This is just the most recent iteration.
Yes I'm aware.
This name change would be OK if the society is truly focused on study of early medieval England, dude. But not so if the society was solely focused on study of anglo saxon culture in England.
So more context is needed.
Never heard of it. It’s Angel-Saxon to me and always will be. Britain effectively ruled the world once and no amount of rubber lipping is EVER going to change that fact. There are no cookies for 2nd, etc.
@@HowardArnold-be9ly Thank you, I feel similarly.
@@Jinkypigs That's one of the reasons for the name change. There never was an Anglo-Saxon culture. The Angles and Saxons were two different Germanic tribes living in different parts of England who had distinct languages and cultures. In time they would merge with each other, the remnants of the Celtic Romano British and a couple of other groups to become one people called the English.
I'm about to go to University this year in my home city of Liverpool in the UK. I'm taking Ancient History as well and I'm not looking forward to this decolonizing the curriculum at all. I feel like they'll teach us to hate not only British History but European History as a whole. This has to stop otherwise there's no limit to where it will stop and there's no telling how far it'll go.
Everyone please Pray for the UK as it is needed
Good question where does it stop what's the end game .... Good luck with your studies 👍
Well, all I can, as a Scouser, born and raised (and still living) in Liverpool... I have worked with quite a fair amount of Uni students. The history and other 'soft subject' students I encountered were always very, very left-leaning and very radically 'hippy'. In a way where students would have a problem with anything remotely 'working class' or 'White'. They were always obnoxiously liberal, constantly talking about race and poverty yet they were always White, working class and spending hundreds a week wearing Vivienne Westwood clothes and jewellery. 🤦🏻♀️
I love learning history and promoting any study of history but the Uni students I encountered who were studying history or had got their Degrees in History... They were always the most obnoxious, hypocritical airheads. They had no concept of critical thinking or being objective/unbiased about anything. It was massively disappointing. I spent 14 year around them and couldn't tolerate it any more. It just seemed to get worse and more extreme in ideology every year.
That was Liverpool University.
Hope and Edge Hill are just as hopeless. John Moores seems a bit more grounded but John Moores Uni has always been a bit more 'working class' than the other Universities.
All I can advise is be careful with who you pick as friends. You might end up having more friends from the engineering and science students if you want to avoid the ideologically driven!
Good luck with your Degree anyway, expect to do a Masters and PhD after the Degree though because you're not going to get a history job solely from having a history Degree.
Just expect to encounter some very ideologically driven students in the 'soft subjects' like history, language, arts, etc.
Solution: save your money and skip the reeducation camp.
@@chaosgyro I've really been thinking doing that. It really could be for the better. Universities are just degenerate places for some people to force their decadent agenda on to us
@@elwolf8536 thanks 👍 I'm hoping that someday the pendulum could swing and we could see learning return to the way it always was
They are calling it decolonization even though it's literally their own history in their own homeland. Sounds more like they are being colonized by sophists in Academia.
Yeah, it's isn't possible that they are referring to 17th to 20th century colonialists and how the traditional British system of education is in many ways based on their way of educating the British children that they are opposed to when referring to "de-colonizing the curriculum", right?
It just has to be those immigrants or wokies, right?
There is NO other possible culprit, right?
@@ibrahimihsan2090 "It's isn't impossible". Run on sentence. Strawman argument. Yeah I'll take my supposedly colonized education over yours any day my friend lol.
@@ibrahimihsan2090in 1066 the Normans invaded the UK. The Anglo-Saxons haven't rule in England for almost 1000 years. What are you talking about? Yes the British Empire invaded some counties. Just like almost every African country has invaded it's neighbour, no more and no less.
@@galinor7 Buddy, there is hardly any comparison between intertribal or interregional warfare and British colonialism except within the context of wars between wars between different empires like their battles against the French for instance.
Otherwise, just accept it, British colonialism was a terrible thing.
Am I saying there was no similar cases before them or outside of Europe? No. But the British are among the ones who made the most damage and the most remembered due to how recent and consequential to the modern era they all are.
As for Normans and Anglo-Saxons, having a constitutional monarchic dynasty that descended for the most part from French or German royals doesn't make the government less English. Especially considering the fact that for quite a long time democracy has been the norm in the UK.
This Norman-Anglo-Saxon problem is, as far as modern Britain is concerned, utter nonsense.
@@galinor7you'll never guess who funded the Norman invasion and were subsequently allowed back into England 😂😂
The british stopping calling themselves Anglo-Saxons is like if the Cherokee native american tribe stopped calling themselves Cherokees. That would be stupid. That’s literally the name of their people.
That's English. You can twist see it however you like, the compound term "Anglo-Saxon" was hardly ever as popular as "English".
Before the Norman conquest, "Anglo-Saxon" did exist(mostly used in some royal titles from the 9th century despite Englisc being much more popular) but "Englisc", "Angelcynn", and their tribal or regional names were much more used than the compound term to denote themselves and after the Norman conquest(mostly after the 1400s) the ones who used it were people who tried to make English people look like completely distinct people from other Non-Germanic Europeans(despite the fact that Celtic admixture plays a huge part of modern English genetics) and argue that such a subgroup is the pinnacle of the human race like other Germanic peoples, hence justifying colonialism and extremely violent racism.
It's wasn't until after the strong Anti-German sentiment of the British due to their fights with Germany from WW1 to WW2 that the word Anglo-Saxon after only 400 years stopped being used to denote everything English and the Old English language stopped being officially referred to as "Anglo-Saxon". Mind you, Old English was literally called "Englisc" instead of "Anglo-Saxon" according to Old English inscriptions. That's how you know the term "Anglo-Saxon" is far less an identity marker for English people than the term "English".
You wanna call yourself that, fine. It had some history as an endonym for English people so you won't necessarily be wrong in calling yourself that.
But judging by the term's overall history and how before the 1600s, it was far less popular than English, it is far more replaceable than the endonym "Cherokee" which is arguably their only ethnonym as it is derived from the Cherokee language endonym "Tsalagi"(unless you wanna include what other Native tribes would call them which don't count as Cherokee endonyms).
Not to mention, that's a tribal name.
What makes you think the British made this decision?
You think we control our institutions?
Not suprised to see this coming from a country that wants to research if milk is racist.🤦🏻♂️
Pasteurised milk decreases fertility in mammals. A Jewish MP pushed for this in parliament. The only other thing he pushed for in his lifetime as an MP was a state for Israel. So yeah, maybe milk is racist. Towards white people ;^) ( Jews are only white when it serves their purpose (to demean white people), then they scuttle back to minority status)
Seriously? Milk? MILK?!?!
When did this happen?
How dare cows not accommodate all human enzymatic biomes! Those grass chomping bigots!
@@calummacritchie7840 It was in the newspapers last June. "Academics at an Oxford museum will research the 'political nature' of milk and its 'colonial legacies'." - Daily Mail
Our Dutch media also reported on it.
@Weda01, Yes and as a result actual racists started mocking them on social media by posting all kinds of milk and milk drinking related content. This led to some of them actually embracing milk and lactose persistence as a point of pride or “superiority”. The media basically created the boogeyman they feared.
what is wrong with trying to differentiate anglo-saxon heritage from norman, french, norse, breton, or gaelic from one another. they said straight up they want to destroy the idea of a ''native'' englishman. at the same time the people are protesting mass immigration. it should be fairly obvious what they are trying to do. you make more racists when you treat non-racists as if they are foreigners in their own country
It's obvious to me.
Definitely feels like a major way to keep people divided
@@deaderthendead041 it is an unerhanded way to take away the argument of ''why cant the british people decide who is and isnt allowed in? why cant we decide what happens to the future of our country?'' because when you make that argument they are going to say your all foreigners and colonisers and your just trying to pull the ladder up behind you which is mean and racist. and therefore you have no claim to the land, history, or traditions you say you want to protect.
Are Mestizos indigenous to Latin America?
The assumption is that "white" or "western" civilizations are bad because they colonize or have some inherent privilege. If we look at the world population, the "white" groups are the minority.
Most civilizations colonized or conquered others. The ones at the top (if we can call it that) are just the most recent. They are also the ones that have done more to help all of the world than any other group now or in history.
If we look at this non-tangible privilege than we assume that "white" groups are somehow better than other groups. Therefore the other groups deserve extra consideration. This in itself is racist. Contrary to popular belief not all people in poorer countries live in mud huts. There is a spectrum of affluence and education. Luck does determine where you are born but it does not make anyone better.
How on earth was racist, white supremacist, genocidal colonialism charitable and beneficial to non-whites?
I am fairly confident that if those colonialists still existed in the modern era and people objectively looked at their views and what they fought for, they would be instantly recognized as even worse than the Alois's son.
If you don't exactly know how absolutely devastating European colonialism was, please study in depth about it instead of expressing just how ill-informed you truly are.
Also, it's very illogical to compare global demographic minorities with national or regional minorities since it's almost completely pointless.
No one is born better but one's choices and influence make one better.
There is also an assumption that brick houses in London are better than mud nuts in Asia. I see no long-term evidence of this fact, at the level of health, happiness, and survival.
Mud huts = 20,000+ years
'Modern' brick houses = 2,000 years (since the Romans, fundamentally); but in this context, not even 1,000 years
It depends on where your focus is -- what is meant by 'better' -- and the timescale. Of course, it's possible something can live for only 300 years and yet be 'better' than something that lasted 3,000 years. The British Empire was 'better' than all of human history combined, if we define 'better' as 'created wealth' and/or 'general modernity'. But given the negatives of modernity, this is not a wise stance to hold from a long-termist viewpoint. One thing you could say is that, 'an even better British Empire is a reasonable option'. The 2020s, as it stands, however, is less than ideal. I see no evidence we will even make it 200 years at this rate, let alone 2,000 years. Largely thanks to lack of new births, abortion, birth control pills, A.I., Marxism, the Internet, paganism/atheism (e.g. lack of a religious foundation of the culture/nation-building process), mental illness (e.g. depression), and robotics.
I've love somebody to prove me wrong using actual data, trends, studies, and strong arguments. Tell me how we magically have a healthy, stable Western, English, American framework without Islamification and/or anti-human A.I. systems in the year 2100, let alone beyond? (And, without instead shifting to a radical Right-wing, ultra-nationalist state of equal harm or almost equal harm.) Good luck. The first thing you need to do is reject/remove the UN and WEF. Again: good luck.
Those bloody Italians and their wall kept us Picts from visiting southern Briton
Yes it wasn't until the Kingdom of Strathclyde came into being, that there was anyone available to borrow a ladder from.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana
There has been a big move to wipe the UK history, history is important way to remind us of past mistakes. Wales is also "decolonising" by Gov mandate, place/building/pub names are being changed as well as education.
The irony as Wales was not a Colonial power, Wales has a big history of hard industrial/mining work. The harsh conditions forced Unions to form, the Unions forced workers rights/education/library's/healthcare to be created in the UK for the poor.
Now that history is being replaced with fiction, it's sad to see.
Truly a disgusting truth that is showing it's ugly head as it must change to fit what is so called right that they do not care for true historty, how apporent to change the past, “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past” quote from George Orwell
You do know that the House of Tudor came from Wales, right?
@@ibrahimihsan2090 So was my Nan.
@@CIMAmotor Your point exactly?
"I don't like being replaced by invaders" = 3+ years in prison
Nonsense, where are they going to find a prison cell?
@@skasteve6528 keep up mate, Keir Starmer released all the actual criminals to make room for thought criminals
@@skasteve6528, they will release foreigners like Starmer is already doing.
Academia is trying to “decolonize” the curriculum in the UK, so I’m sure they support decolonizing the nation in general 😉. They must be great advocates for indigenous rights.
@@skasteve6528These guys on the internet are highly delusional
Removing anglo-saxon from the curriculum to decolonize it? Glad to see the settlers will have to perform land acknowledgements to the native Catuvellauni, Iceni, and Brigantes.
If they think "Anglo-Saxon" is racist, then why not also remove the term "Norman"?
Considering that the French Normans conquered England and displaced many of its residents (not to mention they used to be vikings in the past), why shouldn't that term be added to the list?
It's not even gender neutral, clear patriarchy.
Person of Nor?
This is why I jokingly said "this is the final stage of the Norman Conquest!
But yes, you're correct. We're clearly seeing a radical move by people who either don't understand history or don't care.
Because England was taken over by the Duke of Normandy and his followers. While there was a migration of German tribes into England in the early medieval period there was no King or Duke of of Anglo-Saxonia that took over England.
@@robertmarshall2502 You called?
Exactly, I agree. We know the Normans were 'northmen' by ancestry, they were 3rd generation at the time of the conquest and had intermingled with Frankish and Breton people, adopted local languages including Latin, spoke a Norman French etc. But as you say, by the same logic as UK universities are using we shouldn't call them Normans in case some nutcases on the end of the political spectrum decide to adopt them as a totem
They're gonna start calling Caesar black and have videos about him with hiphop soundtrack.
They already have (without music atm).
They had a multi-million dollar Netflix TV show last year portraying Cleopatra as a black American woman. It was so absurd and insulting that the Government of Egypt actually took out a lawsuit and tried to sue Netflix. It is well recorded by history that she was the descendant of Greek Macedonian rulers that ruled over a native Egyptian population.
I've said it before, but trust in academia is very low now, and for a good reason.
The only sad thing about that is that it should have hit this low nigh on a century ago.
6:57 "...a slippery slope" absolutely, Raff. The idea that historical descriptors can be hijacked and replaced by those trying to "clean up" an area/period of study makes them no better (if not much worse) than the small minority of those bigots who intend to misuse such descriptors. Good job of clearing up the main trends of the migration period into the British Isles to just clarify the matter as well, btw.
One should always have one’s suspicion piqued when specific descriptive language is unnecessarily removed from things.
I'm Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Norman, Roman. Perhaps with a few other Gene pools for good luck.
you forgot to mention you are human, too. (Edit: always remember and never let someone tell you otherwise)
My surname is norman (apparently) so im the same but add danish in aswell.. its funny, my surname has been in highest concentration in the area i grew up and live since atleast 1530 and apparently im dedcended from a "sir" who qas born in 1530 and lived a few miles down the road from where i live now
@@skitz-oh That's cool to hear.
@@skitz-oh Very interesting. Does the Title still prevail?
@@t.kersten7695 Ahhh, yes. One of those too. Space dust like everything else around us.
"The European Union and all leaders of all European countries MUST USE IMMIGRATION to undermine the homegenity and ethnic identity of the native European people no matter how difficult this will be to explain to the citizens of their nations. This must happen, thus will happen for globalism to take hold of Europe."
(UN Bilderberger Peter Sutherland speaking in the House of Lords,
2014).
But why?
@@-_YouMayFind_- Since when does evil need reason other than joy of destroying?
hence why they hate poland and hungary
@@-_YouMayFind_-they're trying to reduce the overall human population and rule over the ashes.
The quote is likely fake, it is a bad-faith summary of his views. Nowhere can I find quotes from him talking about undermining "ethnic identity".
He did say "[An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states is] the key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states".
I doubt that a man that hesitated to say "multicultural states" would advocate for undermining ethnic identity.
The part about him saying to undermine homogeneity is true, but not phrased in that way. His point was that European countries should be more like USA, Australia and NZ in that respect. Because migrants to those countries have higher employment rates than migrants to EU countries.
"The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others. And that's precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine."
imagine if African nations talk about their history but they leave out the names of their ethnicities.
They will do as much as we tolerate
It's no longer a mystery what's happening..
*Visible confusion, then lets out a deep disappointed sigh*
Save european culture. Join your local historical european martial arts club
The Newspeak Dictionary is getting smaller.
'A thoughtcrime is impossible if you dint have the words for it.'
I agree with you.
Thank you for addressing the way that many purveyors of information present their information.
To be clear, the "daily fail" has always been an antagonistic source of information.
While there may be some honest portions I'd suggest that the daily mail should not be treated as any kind of source worthy of your trust.
Which main stream news sources would you recommend instead?
@@Gingerblaze none of them. They are all farcical in their own ways.
Im about to start my first year at a russell group university in the UK (moving in tomorrow) and the very first event from my faculty is already about DEI. literally its the main event to meet the stem faculty and its hosted by the "ethnic minority peer support group" for some reason. if youre brown you can submit questions for them to talk about, if youre white you dont get a voice. Its just constant exaltation of brown people i dont understand how people arent sick of it, though maybe everyone secretly feels the same way i do
Good luck 👍
I hope you make it through to the end
2 things: it's usually hidden and snuck into the thing, and people are actually sick of it, it's just not within the average Joe's capability, or even knowledge, to do anything about it. People do tend to complain when they learn of it, but that's after the fact, and too late to do anything about
I get the impression "decolonization" really means "replace the facts with our ideology"
@@shinian6523 Woke Maoism=repeat the lie, till it becomes the truth.
Well, there is another term available for the indigenous people of England (Brythonic). Brythonic people still form the backbone of the modern English ethnicity even after Angles, Saxons and Jutes brought Germanic admixture to the region.
Another advantage of embracing a Brythonic identity is that it draws closer connection to the indigenous inhabitants of Scotland and Ireland, and Britain certainly could use all the unity they can muster as of late.
Most English people are more Germanic/Gaulish Celtic than they are British Celtic. The only regions that are majority British Celtic are Northumberland, Cumbria and Cornwall, but they are only about 50% or just over.
You can do that all you want and yet it doesn't change anything. The only thing you'll accomplish is giving them a new word to claim should be applied to blacks, specifically, or is a term that can be applied to any and everything despite it being meant for a specific group. They control all the institutions and the minds of the future, changing names means nothing if the rot isn't pumped out.
The most recent DNA study on the English completely debunks the idea that the English are majority of British ancestry. The English are as British Celtic as they are Germanic and they are as French/Gaulish Celtic as they are Germanic. Culturally they are completely Germanic/French.
@@EnglishShieldwallwouldn't Wales be largely British Celtic, too?
@@tanikokishimoto1604 yes Wales is almost entirely British Celtic, especially North Wales.
I'm a white American guy and I am proud of my country, my heritage and myself, I don't care what anyone thinks or says about me! I have nothing against anyone personally and think everyone should be judged by their character and actions alone, not skin color! Nobodies culture (including mine) should erased just to make another group happy!
Bro what is your ethnicity though???
@@IbnRushd-mv3fp if he is white maybe indo-european?
What’s that got to do with anything?
cancel culture is toxic
@@elliecount4876 that doesn't mean or tell me shit
I'm white and have anglo saxon ancestry and proud of it, The only people that are racist are the ones calling someone racist🤜💥💥💥💥
If men would be men, stop turning feminine and grow a set society wouldn't be degrading
Where's my Anglo Saxon history month , Now let's talk racism and who's truly racist
The anti-White academia is sickening!
5 years in prison without parole. Next!
On a serious note, when these "professors" claim they represent white/western people, the answer is simple - they are not, they are only represent themselves and their "class" (of modern day racists). Never appologize for your etnisity, period.
Mental, innit?
This isn't United Kingdom anymore. It's INGSOC.
There used to be a term, White Anglo Saxon Protestant, (WASP), used in a not so positive way to describe white people from England. The more the universities try to change these words, the more they expose their own biases.
I first heard that in college from the least likeable person in my dorm, a white guy with a last name like "Jackson."
For comparison, the brony who refused to shower was better company.
Some people who say that they hate racism actually want to keep it around. It gives them power to judge with a false moral authority. These people would rewrite history to bring about their nightmare utopia.
Being racist it's fine but why it wrong when it's a white anywhere.
Well, to my mind. If we're to "Decolonize" the education system it wouldn't mean removing Greek or Roman or terms describing things like Anglo-Saxon. It would mean adding things like what was going on in Africa or China or other places in the world at the same time as these things. So, that would mean instead of changing the name of a course you add courses or a more robust foundation to general courses.
What the University is doing is an absurdity meant to look like they care but without putting any real effort into changing things for the better.
About pride in heritage - I am not descended from anyone who has done anything special, so I am more interested than proud. I know almost nothing about my ancestors except where they are from. My dads parents moved here from Messina in Sicily, my mothers ancestors came here from England, Ulster Ireland, and one of her grandmothers was a Cherokee from North Florida. Id love to know more especially about the specific people, especially to tell my kids and grandkids about.
Oh, look, the political nutters are trying to do a thing, act like they aren't, but it is in fact another good thing in the end. 😂
They think we're SO dim.
Because blatant anachronism indicates a serious history curriculum.
Using the term "Early Medieval English" for a period of almost 500 years post Rome and pre Athelstan where England simply did not exist!
If you're talking about the period from Alfred the Great to Harold Godwinson then "Anglo-Saxon" is the CORRECT term!
As even under Canute the Vikings were still seen as INVADERS!
-
If you want to talk about The Dark Ages post Rome and Pre Alfred, where we have very little written evidence and can't even keep track of the rulers of all the petty kingdoms then that's an entirely different era!
@@franohmsford7548 I wasn't aware of those details, but given the identity politics involved, I'm not surprised that it doesn't make sense.
"Racism and Colonization is fine when WE do it! We're so "virtuous" and "inclusive" guys!"
Anglo-Saxon has been a common term in the UK for as long as I can remember, I don't think the majority of the population has a problem with it, even if it is a bit of a generalisation.
Universities are gaining quite a poor reputation because of things like this. It used to be just a question of whether the expensive fees were worth it but now it's like they try to create this alternative world of denial and shame. The irony that universities are intended to build students up and make them able to deal with the real world. But now it's like they try to protect them from harsh truth, which also creates that divide between old and young, giving the impression that the young need to be sheltered and patronised to.
Dude, you can't even differentiate between a common term and a formal jargon used in formal discipline to ensure accuracy and non-amguity?
It is not about how commonly used it is but how precise is that term in relation to the subject area covered by the courses. So of it is indeed a study on the specific mediavel period and not on general germania English in England, for example, the change from using the word anglo saxon is perfectly fine. But if the reason to change is because others deplorable groups use it, then it is utterly stupid and defeatist.
Learn the read the nuances that metatron is saying.
@@Jinkypigs Thing is, the term itself is probably the best to use.
Early English is such a nothing burger statement that it could litterally mean anything before modern England (whatever that means to you).
Plus, the term itself is time accurate. The Kings and monarchs of the heptarchy didn't refer to themselves as "rex anglorum" (kings of england) but as "rex anglo-saxonum" or "rex saxonum" (anglo-saxon or saxon kings). This shows the difference between pre unified england like with Alfred, and post unified england like with Æthelstan.
Just one of MANY things wrong in the UK and that's coming from someone that lives in the UK. If you thought America was broken, there's always Britain.
From the USA, it’s like watching your alcoholic mother stumble about. No, Mom, Valium won’t help.
Everyone who's been to school in England knows that the peoples who came to dominate lowland Britain in the early middle ages were different tribal groups from different parts of northern Europe. It's genuinely about the first thing you learn when you start having specific history classes.
Everybody (slight exaggeration, but basically everybody) in the UK knows that 'Anglo-Saxon' is not an ethnonym. It is used to define a culture, or an era - in the same way one might talk about Victorians. To erase the term Anglo-Saxon on account of it not being an accurate ethnonym would miss the point, and be wrong. Moreover, there is limited but incontrivertible evidence that the people of the time referred to themselves as Anglo-Saxons (albeit more rarely than they used other terms).
Man.... I moved to the UK in 2019 in hopes of it using Brexit to walk the opposite way of the rest of Europe and embracing small government, low taxes etc. but here we are ... the UK is worse than the rest of Europe now...
They got Brexit, but did nothing about the Public sector/Civil service
Look up the definition of geņöçıďë, because this is how it starts.
TH-cam keeps auto deleting my comment, because it contains the “g” word, it’s ridiculous.
Try using J lol
Your not the only one who gets silenced for the truth. I strongly dislike this new woke world we live in.
We tend to name historic periods after the people who were in power at the time, don't we? The Norman Period in England didn't see the wholesale ejection of the native population any more than the Anglo-Saxon Period saw the wholesale ejection of their predecessors. These period names are simply "bookmarks." The problem is that those who make these changes to "decolonize" are actually attacking the current unity of the nation for political purposes. They want to break your connection with the past in order to more easily manipulate you for their own power plays.
It's happening here in the United States, where rather than honor our "founding fathers" as men of an enlightened mind struggling to throw off the shackles of 17th and 18th century thought, they are viewed as "old dead white guys" intent on seizing power and holding it. America's founders were among some of the most liberal and most radical people of their day - but that's where we are in modern thought.
“Hey, racists are trying to lay claim to this common word.”
“Oh no! What are we gonna do?”
“Let them have it, obviously.”
How can your own people's history be colonised by your own people?
It's the Muslims lmao 😂 won't tell you that tho lmao
I was just banned from a Discord channel because I said, "Humans are the only races. We are all equals." Because it was judges as racist and offensive. That being European, I had no right to talk. 😅
Daily Metatron videos? Yay! Whoop whoop. Iya a dream come true.
Ah, destroying history to cause it to be repeated. A familiar tactic that is sure to backfire. I cannot possibly fathom what “good” they expect to come out of it.
There's no winning this culture war if we keep letting traitors do whatever they want. Fight people, fight for your countries, fight for your families. Fight for your history and your future. FIGHT!
Im flabbergasted, i just don't know what to say lol
I've never heard anyone use Anglo Saxon in a racist way, but of course I don't run in those circles. I'm of German descent but I show very low German dna but high British dna, I'm told I have the Anglo Saxons to thank for my high British dna. Of course Metatron is right, accurate history is not racist.
I’ve heard the use. Theres a neo nazi cult called the soldiers of Odin in Ontario, Canada. It’s proof the educated individuals can put themselves in a nutshell by how far they try and bend their thoughts.
Wow, good thing I watched this video all the way through. I was going to comment about symbols being "claimed" by groups in history too, like the swastika or the yin yang, etc. You got it covered! Good job!
Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it.... Changing names like this is guaranted to do just that
Serious question - Why do the native English people that have inhabited those Isles since 1066 not have a right to define their identities around racial lines? They were never asked if their identities could be redefined to include anyone with a government issued piece of paper.
English people don't want their culture changed for fake inclusion it's stupid, we're anglo
English don't want this crap, were anglos
Funny that all of this BS hapened in soviet union some 60-70 years before.
To learn what became of it google a guy named Lysenko
The term WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) is used as a slur against white people here in America, though probably not so much by younger generations. I've never heard of any white people using the term Anglo-Saxon as part of their own group identity to indicate their racial superiority.
I once had a woman call me a WASP and I replied that I am neither an Angle nor a Saxon but Gaelic and also am not a protestant, or even a christian. She got a very baffled look on her face and asked what all that was supposed to mean to which I replied it means you shouldn't use a word you don't know the meaning of so you won't look ignorant.
I am glad for people who are willing to do their research.
This is such a stupid premise, the Angles, Saxons and the forgotten Jutes had so much impact on place names all over England, let me start with the main one, English and England, which come from Anglish and Anglaland (the Angles and Land of the Angles)
Middlesex, Wessex Essex, aka Middle, East and West Saxon, also East Anglia......yeah that ones obvious.
also anywhere with the settlement ending in Ford, Folk, Ham, Ton or Tun.........their influence is everywhere.
Anyway, welcome to modern day Britain and its madness
Not only that but some form of 'English' is spoken globally and is nearly our planet's lingua franca.
@@jollyjakelovell6822 apparently I am meant to feel guilty for that xD
the fact I am descended form a Norman Knight given land after 1066........
@@CadarnTheMad1810 Lovell is a Norman name,
"English nickname: The surname Lovell may have originated as an English nickname from the Anglo-Norman French word lovel, which means "wolf cub". Lovel is a diminutive of the word lou, which means "wolf" "
But as an American my ancestor's are from all over North West Europe, some French proper, some German and yes even some Anglo-Saxon, oh yeah and Irish but we don't talk about the Irish*
*That's a joke.
No! They are evil.😮
"To destroy a people, you must sever their roots." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn
One wave after another of Christians tried to destroy the Norse people yet some of us remain Asatru. Even with religious persecution we will remain until the last of mankind walks the earth.
As for Mussolini's raised arm salute, that originated within the United States of America. It was created in the 1890s by Francis Bellamy as a flag salute to accompany his Pledge of Allegiance. Bellamy believed that flag worship was necessary as part of the indoctrination of impressionable young minds into Socialism.
17:12 Ironically, the word _Anglo-Saxon_ is only controversial among Anglo-Saxons.
So I am actually Viking and Irish. Now I am a racist? Damn...
No. But you're not *a Viking* . --___--
You realize as a cultural group they don't actually exist today?
Viking ancestry is a thing, sure, but Irish is an actual modern ethnicity.
Not just Universities, UK did not have SANE Government in past 2 decades
So under their logic we shouldn’t call the European settlers to the Americas “Europeans”, rather “Early Modern Americans”… y’a know, so we don’t include colonizer language.
this is insane😑
I personally wouldnt use the term "anti-racist" as it is adopting their terms and giving it credence that it does not deserve. I would just stick to saying that "I am not racist" and leave it at that.
That doesn't help, because they get to define "racist." The only winning move is not to play.
Eh, I'd say they are 2 different things, at least in their legitimate usage, rather than their nonsense usage. Not being racist means exactly that, anti racist means active hostility and conflict against racists or racism. Again, that only works with legitimate usage of the terms, not the frankly racist usage that certain left wing groups use.
Also: the term "Native American" is generally used to refer to quite a diverse group of people which are indigenous to North America-- it refers to a group of various indivual tribal groups with their own languages, cultural and religuous practices, geographic and climatic conditions etc. In fact, I'd argue that these variations are of a much greater magnitude than those found between the various Western Germanic tribes/peoples which are encapsulated in the term "Anglo Saxon"-- even though the former group might be more genetically/ethnically homogenous (though I dont know enough about those particulars to say either way).
Yet, I don't see any outrage over the modern descendents of such peoples referring to their ethnicity as Native American; nor do I think a course entitled "Native American Studies" would be pressured into changing its title to something like "Studies of the peoples of pre-colonial North America"-- or pressured to atomize into potentially hundreds of different courses, each focusing on one individual tribe.
We all understand what is meant by "Native American": we understand that, even though it encapsulates a massive variety in culture and language etc., it still describes a group which is united in its collective distinctions from both the indigenous peoples of South American as well as the Europeans who later colonized the Americas
I’m Flemish and I’m so grateful that we are not experience this kind of nonsense. So dearest people from the UK. You have an amazing culture and history!!!! I love it.
One can't change history. Only learn from it.
This is stupid. So now, instead of saying "Anglo-Saxon", they're going to say "medieval English, who were Anglo-Saxons"....
Metatron - explains how a Caliphate erases a prior and CURRENT civilization.
robwords TH-cam channel loves words as much as Metatron and has led me here more than once. thank you for another GREAT vid.
Orwell tried so hard to warn us.
It's okay to be Anglo Saxon
Woke history asserts that Stonehenge was built by blacks, Greeks were black, Romans were black etc etc etc.
Actual history: Britain was inhabited bt Celts, then Romans invaded,, then Romans left, then Jutes Angles and Saxons invaded.
Woke history: Britain was inhabited by Africans, then Africans culturally enriched, then Africans left, then Africans, Africans and Africans culturally enriched.
UK not good right now especially with the Starmer in power it's worse. But what country isn't like this now.
Starmer. As opposed to the thieving, lying Tory’s who ran the country into the ground, stole our rights to protest while lining their own pockets.
Well, mostly East European and Balkan nations, sadly they have much harder problems that are not being solved. Corruption is rampant and voters are idiots.
Important to note is that our left is not the same as Western left. Our people tend to be far more socially in a middle or conservative and with strong identity. They've kept a lot of their ideology after the end of WWII, sadly so has far right.
Those that are on the right tend to be a bit too to the right when it comes to nationalism, bordering bigotry. For now the right still doesn't have full control so they act friendly to each other. And if they do take control they'll be enemies. It's not in nature of far right to be honest allies or peaceful.
@@myhandlehasbeenmishandled I have a friend in the US and we are very close on the political compass a little in the liberal near the center, but there religion and I'm against religion. But Aron Ra is very close to that and he's come out as vote blue no matter what, he voted for Biden and is voting for Harris, why I have lost interest in him and don't respect him any more.
If there going to ignore all the corruption on their side it's best to ignore them, we need to call it out on both sides and have them removed from any and all government jobs.
I honestly never considered the term "Viking" as an ethnonym, nor have I ever assumed that connotation when I've encountered it in history books/lectures/programs etc.: it has always seemed quite clear to me that it encapsulated quite a range of Germanic/Scandinavian and Nordic peoples who participated in raids and incursions of foreign lands, etc. As such, I think the term has utility in this sense, and in describing a particular period of English history in which the inhabitants were subject to such incursions with increasing frequency, and eventually to the rule of such peoples.
I feel similarly about the term Anglo Saxon: it has a practical utility in describing a collection of Western Germanic tribes/peoples who-- even though there was a variety of culture, geography, language *within* the collection-- they were still united, in a sense, by cultural and linguistic *distinctions* from both the native population (the Celtic Britons) of the land to which they m
migrated/invaded, as well as from other peoples/groups which inhabited Europe at the time. Thus, it also serves a purpose in describing/identifying the historical period in which this settlement/invasion occured, and the subsequent Christianization of these peoples-- which forever altered the historical and cultural landscape of the British Isles and its peoples.
I'd assume any course so titled would make clear the nuance involved with the use of such a term, if not already understood-- so, I really fail to see the issue. Its a term thats been in use in academic settings for centuries, and I don't think it has substantially hindered the progression and evolution in our understanding of the complexities of British and European history.
It really seems like a case of "fixing" what isnt broken; and I rather agree with you that all this talk of the term being historically and contextually reductive is just a post-hoc justification for other, more insidious (and stupid), motivations