Thanks to MyHeritage for sponsoring. Click here for a free 2-week trial: bit.ly/The_Cynical_Historian Click "read more" for further info, corrections, and bibliography. Please consider supporting the channel by buying merch: cynical-historian-shop.fourthwall.com Or by donating to my Patreon: www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian *[reserved for Errata]* *Related videos* Party Switch: th-cam.com/video/hBHHIJG8Rds/w-d-xo.html Lost Cause: th-cam.com/video/5EOhXF5lNgQ/w-d-xo.html Reconstruction: th-cam.com/video/bfgsBcI-fQw/w-d-xo.html playlist of my lectures: th-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXIeBg-rugKMup9o8ohyEEL.html Lincoln and sectionalism: th-cam.com/video/Ff2AKILyi0o/w-d-xo.html playlist of pertinent political history: th-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wUpI_fz-HRGdnlxQO0EBUUg.html 1920 vs 2020: th-cam.com/video/MiyEiNvYAv0/w-d-xo.html *Some sources on the party switch* Jefferson Cowie, The Great Exception: The New Deal and the Limits of American Politics (Princeton, N.Jer.: Princeton University Press, 2016). amzn.to/35sJX4w Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877, new ed. (1988; New York: Perennial Classics, 2002). amzn.to/34lFOhq Kevin M. Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer, Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974 (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2019). amzn.to/2Zh3pxe Julilly Kohler-Hausmann, Getting Tough: Welfare and Imprisonment in 1970s America (Princeton, N.Jer.: Princeton University Press, 2017). amzn.to/2M2ol7j
@@starmaker75 Funny thing is, I just copied some of the sources from my _party switch_ episode. Real easy to give sources on something you've already published on before
@@CynicalHistorian not everyone switched right like James O. Eastland of Mississippi and Herman E. Talmadge both Pro Seg. Dems & biden allies not to mention bidens mentor klu Klux dem Robert byrd
I know how the Republicans love their thought-terminating clichés, so here's mine: If the last positive thing your party did for blacks was during the Civil War, maybe that's not the selling point you think it is.
I'm subscribed to your channel but I don't think I've ever laughed as hard as listening to your commentary in this video. You have a great sense of humor.
It’s important to note that the Indian Removal Acts were actually incredibly unpopular, even for the time. Sure, it had some support, but it also faced a lot of backlash, especially from contemporary progressives.
Some part of me will always wonder how much of it had to do with guilt over the ethnic cleansing of New England's Native American populations 2 centuries prior.
It should be kept in mind that the counter-argument wasn’t so much about something like, say, sending down the military to protect them or their lands. Most agreed that they inevitably were going to have to move for their own good as well as everybody else’s, but it was the idea of pressuring or forcing them to do so that they were uncomfortable with. The esteemed John Quincy Adams himself basically conceded that the Native Americans should be left alone and that they would wind up discovering for themselves why they should voluntarily make the journey which was of course escalating conflict with their neighbors. And obviously, that had already started. Nobody influential at least presented an ideal solution on either side of the debate. I also believe that is probably an anachronistic use of the term progressive given that the later the original group from which it is derived in the first place including such thinkers as Richard T. Ely, John R. Commons and Edward A. Ross weren’t particularly sympathetic to the native population even in their own time.
When it comes to the Right’s various token minorities, I often wonder how many are true believers who will be genuinely shocked when the Face-Eating Leopards Eat their face, despite being one of the “good ones,” and how many are grifters pulling a con, planning to take the money and run if things go too far south. Candace Owens is probably in the second category, but where do you think D’Souza falls? Con artist or true believer?
Him, Sunak, Braverman and Ramaswamy are living their best lives. We wont vote another brown person in office anytime soon, but India isnt exactly known as a bastion of social democracy. Just as italians, jews, poles and irish used to be scapegoats; sentiments shift as conservatives have to co opt new demographics in order to target their new threat: social liberalism threatening to split up old hegemonical influence.
I think D'Souza's propaganda is so hyper-partisan because it's meant for internal consumption. These kind of "documentaries" are meant for people already deep in the Republican camp who want to feel justified in their beliefs, and to keep the party base active. That's why D'Souza can play so fast and loose with history, the target audience isn't likely to question the source.
I dont like Dinesh at all but just cause he went to jail doesn't mean Hilary didn't commit any crimes. It's really just an insult meant to point out hypocrisy.
@@CommieGobeldygookAgreed, and to be fair a person in a position of power or attempting to be in a position of power, should be held to a tighter standard than the average person. Hillary is responsible for any potential crimes that she may have committed, no denying that. But he himself is responsible for the crimes he committed, and he sure has plenty of canned excuses for his own which is an interesting thing. He might not be in a position of power, but he certainly seems to be in a position of influence, he deserves all of the criticism he gets.
One thing about the party switch that makes it so confusing for so many is because they fail to understand that America's two main political parties are more like coalitions than actual political parties. Both parties are actually multiple groups, ideas, ideologies, and worldviews united more by the fact that their party is not the other party than by any shared vision. If we had a voting system other than First Past the Post both parties would immediately explode into several different parties. The "Party Switch" was essentially one group/idea/ideology (white supremacy) switching to the other side. Historians and political scientists understand this but the media doesn't explain this, thus the average person doesn't understand this concept. If you view the Democrat and Republican parties are solid, united, and cohesive parties the party switch is inconceivable.
I've always found it easier in my mind to just say conservative versus liberal (or progressive). Then there's less a tie to the name of the political party trending that direction at any particular period.
The media does a terrible job explaining anything to us, and when you're objectively sh*t at your most important job and reason to exist, then is it any wonder it's losing relevance to social media - which by the way is an even worse source of information.
I would say that the parties today are far too unified. Anyone on either side who doesn't fall in line with the party is ostracized. We really need to get rid of First Past the Post. The problem is it just benefits both parties so nobody in power wants it to change.
Problem is that the alleged party switch is portrayed as an intentional act by Republicans. Supposedly the Republican party used coded policies to entice Southern racists, through the Southern Strategy, without alienating their existing non-racist voter base. Which in turn means all Republicans are supporting racist policies without even realizing they're doing so. There's a few flaws in this argument. First and foremost, many of the supposedly racist policies are actually just common sense. When you enforce the law people are less likely to commit crimes. If you don't enforce the law people are more likely to commit crimes. Because of actually racist Democrat policies the law was not enforced in black majority neighborhoods for decades. Now when Republicans try to enforce the law in black neighborhoods to curb the crime rate they're labeled racist for policies that "disproportionately put black people in prison." Except not enforcing the law actually hurts black people the most because criminals typically target their own race, leaving innocent black citizens being victimized much more commonly than other races. You can pick basically any policy where Democrats call Republicans racist and see this same dynamic play out. It's the end stage of the "it's not happening, it's good that it's happening, it's bad that it's happening and it's someone else's fault" cycle. Second, there's not much evidence of the Southern Strategy existing. One Republican talked about it in a single interview. There have never been any memos found, no letters, no change in policy positions, no surge of funds to campaigning in the south, nor any other evidence I'm aware of proving this actually happened. With the Southern Strategy being a cornerstone of the party switch narrative it becomes hard to take seriously knowing there's so little facts supporting it. Third is the existence of the Dixiecrats. There's tons of information about them so I'll keep this short. The Dixiecrats were Democrats both prior to and after the switch was supposed to happen. Unlike the Democrats who switched parties the Dixiecrats continued supporting blatantly racist policies while in office and many were openly members of the KKK. Many of these Dixiecrats were friends and mentors of Democrats who still hold power. It's so taboo to speak out against them that even Obama praised a klan member Dixiecrat. Lastly is the behavior of modern Democrats. Supporting segregation, openly calling black people stupid or incompetent, and the vitriol shown towards any minority who even slightly leans conservative makes it very clear that the old racist attitudes of the Democratic party never switched sides.
Listening to D'Souza criticize Democrats for being in favor of forced sterilization was shocking to me because I have family who are in favor of forced sterilization, and they like D'Souza.
"Dinesh d'Souza spends a lot of time in this movie trying to convince the viewer that Planned Parenthood is trying to stop blacks from reproducing--do you think his real criticism is that their methods aren't effective enough?"
@@eliastoone4162 A likely hypothesis. I left the Republican party when I realized most of their criticism of Democrat Americans and non-affiliated to any party Americans either rings hollow with no evidence to support it or is just projection of their own flaws.
@@EatHoneyBeeHappy wait, you're shocked your pro-sterilization family likes anti-sterilization Dinesh? I'm shocked there are people who are pro-sterilizaton in 2024 and even more shocked that doesn't bother you. 😂😂😂😂
@@CynicalHistorian It's not that it's a bad book, but that it feels kind of sketchy that blatant, bald-faced acts of low-effort propaganda specifically designed to reinforce the worldview of angry chuds should be categorized alongside legitimate works of art or scholarship.
My grandma tells me to watch this all the time, because I'm a historian, and she wants to know my opinion. I've told her it's propaganda without even watching and she still tells me to give it a chance.
You can tell that you are a good scholarly historian concerned with factual accuracy over your own biases being confirmed by how you dismissed it as propaganda without watching it. Declaring things dangerous propaganda simply because they MIGHT challenge your ideology means that you're never wrong!
This propaganda was not made to convince anyone to change sides. It was made to help people on the right feel better about themselves. At least thats how i see it.
@@Sir.WillyWallace But this is right-wing propaganda. Just because propaganda can be made by everyone, does not mean that this is not right wing propaganda.
George McClellan was a union general and a democrat so the civil war wasn’t a party vs party crisis. Dudes right it was a sectional crisis nor a party crisis
Yes and George McClellan also ran in 1864 against Abraham Lincoln on the platform of peace with the confederacy. The point is that is the democrats were to have won the confederacy would still exist, meaning the civil war was in every sense of the word was about sectionalism AND about the parties.
@@ihateyourmum1000 If the dems won in 1860 I think the chances of civil war wouldve been lower or delayed, as senate and house dems would likely continuously slow down or impede legislature in the prohibition of the expansion of slavery, or even introduce their own laws to further expand slavery, a key goal of the confederacy.
@@ihateyourmum1000 The Democratic Party at that time was mostly split between copperheads and war democrats though. There isn't really a solid basis for the idea that the parties played a significant role.
This party switch denial really confuses the hell out of me, because my parents told me about it as a kid, because they were fn there when it happened! We lived in SC, which has been ground zero for a lot of crazy shit over the years
The conundrum of partisanship is actually incredibly easy to solve. This movie isn't meant to persuade anyone, it's to further radicalize the true believers in the right-wing cause. That line about "the party of Lincoln and Reagan must once again come to America's aid, not with bullets this time, but with ballots" was a very unsubtle wink and nudge--"not with bullets, but with ballots, *for now*". Sarcasmitron, in his two-part series about this exact movie and the book wherein Dinesh laid out his own personal beliefs, addressed it as follows: "'The End of Racism' doesn't really have a thesis, because as a book, it's not really making an argument, it's making a threat: 'embrace conservative policy goals and stop talking about racial disparity, and us rightists will abide by your polite fiction that whites are equal to blacks. Push for government intervention to alleviate black poverty, and, well, it's only natural that people will gravitate toward less...*polite* voices.'"
IDK. That seems to put far too much intentionality behind his omissions. A good rule to follow for interpreting motives is Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which may be attributed to stupidity
@@CynicalHistorianWith D'Souza, you can, in fact, definitely attribute to malice. TEoR features an explicit call to repeal the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in as many words, capping off lengthy diatribes about black "civilizational defects"--he's a very uncomplicated man who nonetheless knows exactly what he's doing. Not only that, but movement conservatism was very much on board with him when he wrote TEoR, and continues to be up to this day.
@@eliastoone4162I am not so sure it is that simple. People can hold many beliefs even contradictory ones. Unless people come to a realisation that their beliefs are bad or contradictory they are likely to continue to believe them and accumulate more “supporting evidence” to justify their beliefs. Even generally smart people are often uncritical of their own beliefs.
@@CynicalHistorianWhen it comes to politics, stupidity and malice are difficult to separate. That, and Dinesh is more cartoon character than human being.
@@suspicious241That's true for ordinary people, but professional conservatives like Dinesh D'Souza or Roger Stone know enough of what they're doing for it to be 100% intentional.
On the subject of D'Souza immitating Michael Moore, this is something that Corey Robin observed that the right does quite a lot. He went so far as to argue that the right are the left's most attentive students, they just take the lesson and run the other direction with it as fast and far as they can. If message or method that originates in the left or the center seems to be even modestly successful, the right will find a way to appropriate it for their own ends.
this is what's called recuperation, and it is mostly used to describe behaviors of capitalism, as anything that is at first subversive to the status quo will ultimately be absorbed into the beast, for exactly the reason you described; it's what's been proven to sell.
Everything time I remind of the "party switches", I am remind of tf2 announcer voice line "Team are being scramble!". Or the "you have been auto balance for team balance"
Hell, former KKK member Robert Byrd's contributions still ended up a net positive for the nation after the big switch after the Civil Rights Act passed
@@jordandino417 I don’t know? Maybe he did say why can’t the democrats ever do the cool shit republicans accuse them of like communism or killing God. I’d take that to mean he thinks communism is cool. Probably because it would be if we did it democratically. If communism was democratic it would be awesome
As a history buff I find this kind of thing very disturbing. It's one thing to point out the moral failings of the democratic(of which there are many) but pretending Republicans were pure and righteous is just intellectually dishonest. I know no one likes a nuanced position but both parties have had their share of ugly moments.
Watching this has been so hard personally because I went and saw this movie with my dad. I was a completely impressionable and ignorant to American history and I ate this whole movie up. Today I have taken a bit of college working towards a degree in anthropology and after taking a humanities course on constitutional change, my entire perspective on the flow of American history is completely different. I think everyone should take one of these courses as all of these topics like civil rights, Indian rights, party switching, all that is obscure depending on your teachers and curriculum locally. Developed adults should be informed on these topics so they can better understand history
The party switching thing is common knowledge. After all, it wouldn't be conservatives who emancipate the slaves and the liberals who want to keep the status quo. But Lincoln was famously a Republican who opposed the South and he represented civil rights and progressivism.
@@Edax_Royeaux well to be fair both my parents were teenage high school dropouts when I was born. I also grew up in a small town in Northern Nevada so my overall exposure and understanding of world events was obscure until basically today. We certainly didn’t discuss the party switch at my high school and in hindsight, I realize things were spun in a way to make the Civil War seem like it was a Rights vs Federal aggression kind of thing though we also discussed Uncle Toms cabin and the horrors of slavery. Understanding where and how the parties functioned through time is pretty important because it’s quite a spectrum. As a formerly radicalized Christian and Republican, what I didn’t know was absolutely weaponized against me.
It's like Republicans and conservatives know that an education is kryptonite to their propaganda. Weird. It's like their policies should endorse and tight intellectualism or something...
The reason this propaganda is so illogical is because, as you commented, a lot of it is simply confirming biases the targeted audience already believes. It’s never a rational argument
So just to be clear...is he actually vilifying Andrew Jackson? I mean don't get me wrong, AJ deserves to be villainized, but didn't some current Democrats make the move to replace him from the $20 bill? And if that actually gains any traction, won't it mostly be current day republicans getting all up in arms about it? I'm sure dopey dinesh will be spearheading the move to get jackson off the $20 bill
I just tried to lookup if he said anything over that controversy and he was oddly silent - despite making it such an integral part of his most famous documentary
Dinesh doesn't like AJ and even criticize Trump for admiring AJ. As a poc and a Republican I have no issues with AJ. He did some horrible stuff but was phenomenal on the Battle of New Orleans. We honor them for their good, not for their evil. I would never encourage to remove him off the $20 bill but also have no issues if he was replaced with Harriet Tubman because she is the GOAT!
Tigerstar made a great point when he mentioned that there is a mountain of media where the party switch plays a role. And we've been consuming it for generations!
"I bet you can't make a history of the US without going into depth about the Bushes Roosevelts, Coolidge, Hoover, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter, or Reagan " "YOU'RE ON"
12:50 I find this especially amusing when I hear modern republicans say stuff like “JFK would be a republican if he were alive today”….why would that be if the parties didn’t switch?
now i kinda wanna make a documentary film for trumpers that is a secret parody of this one, but it inspires trumpers to action, but something that's non-violent but harms trump.
Some related actual good news - the company that distributed and platformed 2000 Mules just apologized for the false claims it contains and has indefinitely shelved it. Because they were sued and it was part of the settlement.
If I had a buck for every “facts don’t care about your feelings” bro who pushed back against historical documentation because it was uncomfortable for them and/or didn’t align with their preconceived worldview, I probably wouldn’t have student loans anymore. In fairness, I’ve worked in public history since 2008, so I’ve had plenty of time to have these conversations. But I’m still perplexed at how adverse the “facts and logic” crowd is to verifiable facts and elementary logic
I haven’t personally heard that phrase, but I do have a coworker that I think believes it. I’d settle for a dollar for every time someone has or will say “facts don’t care about your feelings”, and then spout either false “facts” or spout their feelings. (Dollars delivered directly into my bank account.) I’d donate a bit of my now massive amount to established charities, then start up a foundation, hire a “dream team” of the top people in every field, and proceed to do my best to bankrupt myself by pouring so much money into finding actual cures. (First thing tackled would be cancer.) Yes, I overthink everything. Sorry.
43:00 OMG you are right. These are the people who paid no attention in school, so now they "are discovering the secret history" that we were all taught
I keep seeing a map of North America with the territories controlled by the Native American tribes delineated, with people claiming that they never learned about that in school. It's just a retouched version of the same map that was in my fifth grade social studies textbook. I'm 39, this stuff wasn't hidden, they just weren't paying attention.
"Republican", "Democrat", and any party label is just an empty brand. Always refere to conservatives and liberals, because ideologies, intellectual rigor, honesty, are forever.
I’ve worked in a truck shop for nearly 30 years and have had discussions with all sorts of truck shop type people. This movie’s talking points are almost verbatim to the comments I regularly hear. Thought my eye was gonna explode watching this.
I'm so sorry. I'm not even going to blame our education system - we learned all of this. People just want so badly to be "in the know" - they'll create their own reality to get that feeling of purpose. It's honestly sad.
His work is no different than Christian apologetics. It isn't actually designed to convince rationalists that Christisnity is true. Its designed to affirm Christians by making them think what they already believe is rationally justified.
I cannot think of a better example of party switching to disprove D'Souza's point than Ronald Reagan's own UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick who was a Socialist & then a Democrat before becoming a member of the GOP. Even Reagan was a New Deal Democrat at the start of his foray into politics.
26:20 D’Souza: “The torture and sexual assault of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are a result of modern American liberal degeneracy.” Also D’Souza: “The prisoners aren’t even really suffering, they’re basically just staying in a standard middle eastern hotel”
This was a blast to watch. I really enjoy this concept and this format. Please feed me more of this. I will be right here waiting to watch the next one.
I would love to see you cover Don't Be a Sucker. That one jumped out at me and seems like a really important topic lately. I'm not picky. I will gladly watch all of them. Whichever you decide.
So here's something funny... that life insurance salesman makes himself the beneficiary and then kills the pollicy holder thing is actually the plot of a Woody Woodpecker cartoon. I wonder if that's where D'Souza got the idea.
Seeing other channels go directly after Dinesh is a breath of fresh air. Chapo Trap House covered this propaganda on their podcast too. I recommend you check out their review of it. It’s a hoot!
This movie under review has so much historical revisionism that it makes people literally rage quit halfway through. It is sad that there are people who don’t realize that the party-swap denial narrative is laughably inaccurate. It is frustrating how political pundits spread false history to strategically misinform voters.
Hey, would it be possible to post a list of every wikipedia entry you showed on screen? Many of those I'd never heard of and it would be nice to learn something.
@@artygunnar No this is not a joking matter. If Hillary had been our president neither Ukraine nor Israel would be at war today. Trump's four years embolden despots around the world. Remember you are watching a program about propaganda. The Republican party has used Fox Cable to spread lies and misinformation from the day Fox came on line. Go read the biography of Rodger ailes. Fox News with the concept that Rodger and Ronald Reagan came up with in the 80s. Of course Ronald Reagan allowed a foreign national, Rupert Murdoch to come in and start a news organization in the United States. You could say fox cable has destroyed the United States. In fact most of the nation knows that.
It’s crazy how most of my favorite political figures in history up to the 1990s are republicans yet I’m voting mostly democrat this year (except for state legislature)
Until 2020, I tended to vote the opposite party locally as I did nationally. That was the first year I almost went straight ticket, only three exceptions
My take on the change in propaganda is that the media landscape doesn't really encourage the same methodology as it did before the internet became a place of social currency/standing. Propaganda today preaches to the choir more than tries to invite more members, and is encouraged to do so by the engagement-driving algorithms behind social media websites. What was shown in theaters and broadcast on television stations could only be accessed through restricted technologies. There needed to be some sense of reaching across the aisle of partisanship. Failure to do so risked a box office flop that theaters wouldn't risk or a broadcast network losing ratings and views that could switch over to their competition. Algorithms today tend to tailor content to the viewer in order to keep them engaged, so partisanship is encouraged and entrenched more consistently. In addition, while a centralized source technically exists (large website's servers) the media is consumed by every user from a personal environment (their phones, laptops, PC/Macs, etc) and nearly no restriction on par with cable or theaters. Political intent aside, this is what I see as the big contrast to the portrayals made in D'Suza's work and 'An Inconvenient Truth'. The latter had to be released in theaters and was assumed to air on TV in the future. To make 'An Inconvenient Truth' keep relevancy, I speculate the creators tailored it to reach more audiences than just entrenched Democrats or pro-Gore voters. This intent contrasts with 'Hilary's America', which was made expecting to work on a personal level and in isolation.
Not yet, though I did have to delay this for a week because the copyright claim didn't allow publication. I had to sign that I was willing to be sued by Lionsgate if they chose to issue a DMCA. I've dealt with some crazy copyright problems before, but that is the worst I've seen
Hey y’all, I just started the video but I’m excited for it. I’m relatively sure that at least one of the following is true: Nobody associated with the channel will read this, nobody will care, and / or many people have already said it, it was an accident, or it’s already been learned, BUT! In case none of those are the case, I’m pretty sure it’s pronounced “too-kwah-kay.” Tu quoque, the fallacy, that is. Alright, on to the rest of the video, I’m hyped! Thank you for the effort put into making these, I know it’s a great deal of work.
Ugh, this browser doesn’t allow me to edit or delete comments, anyway it looks like a variety of pronunciations are correct including the one used. Disregard the above comment’s central premise, please, and accept my apologies for my hasty correction.
Please do "Fog of War" by Errol Morris. It's an interesting piece of what I would have to label as being anti-war propaganda. McNamara and the movie itself was praised by the liberal press because it made Bush look bad over the invasion of Iraq. And also because it's a good movie. But I also think that McNamara used it as an occasion to get his back public patted by the liberal press for daring to criticize the then current Republican Bush administration so he could get his bad name cleared in the eyes of the elite intellectual liberal left (a group that he used to be a member of). He was trying to get himself off the hook. And the liberals on the left definitely use it for that purpose...Great movie.
Reefer Madness has to be one of the most over-the-top propaganda spectacles that I've ever seen. It's kind of funny at first but then gets so ridiculous that it loses the earlier humor it had. Joel
As someone with a "theoretical degree" in theoretic history, I firmly believe in the theory that the 5Cs of history are: China, Communism, Capitalism, CCCalifornia and Calvin Coolidge.
Chapo Trap House said it best that these "documentaries" are the part in the D'Souza Cinematic Universe where Dinesh snaps his fingers and makes half of American history disappear
I tend to be much more conservative/libertarian than you, and I find myself disagreeing with you on some points. That having been said, I absolutely adore your channel. You make me reexamine my viewpoints by presenting well researched and cogent arguments. This is what political discussion online should be but rarely ever is.
2:34 To be fair, everyone should immediately be skeptical of any specific and explicit claim that what they're about to say is "definitely not propaganda"
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks to MyHeritage for sponsoring. Click here for a free 2-week trial: bit.ly/The_Cynical_Historian
Click "read more" for further info, corrections, and bibliography. Please consider supporting the channel by buying merch: cynical-historian-shop.fourthwall.com
Or by donating to my Patreon: www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian
*[reserved for Errata]*
*Related videos*
Party Switch: th-cam.com/video/hBHHIJG8Rds/w-d-xo.html
Lost Cause: th-cam.com/video/5EOhXF5lNgQ/w-d-xo.html
Reconstruction: th-cam.com/video/bfgsBcI-fQw/w-d-xo.html
playlist of my lectures: th-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXIeBg-rugKMup9o8ohyEEL.html
Lincoln and sectionalism: th-cam.com/video/Ff2AKILyi0o/w-d-xo.html
playlist of pertinent political history: th-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wUpI_fz-HRGdnlxQO0EBUUg.html
1920 vs 2020: th-cam.com/video/MiyEiNvYAv0/w-d-xo.html
*Some sources on the party switch*
Jefferson Cowie, The Great Exception: The New Deal and the Limits of American Politics (Princeton, N.Jer.: Princeton University Press, 2016). amzn.to/35sJX4w
Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877, new ed. (1988; New York: Perennial Classics, 2002). amzn.to/34lFOhq
Kevin M. Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer, Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974 (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2019). amzn.to/2Zh3pxe
Julilly Kohler-Hausmann, Getting Tough: Welfare and Imprisonment in 1970s America (Princeton, N.Jer.: Princeton University Press, 2017). amzn.to/2M2ol7j
"Dinesh you keep calling Hillary a criminal when you just got of jail!"
I am glad that your giving sources when debunking stuff like this, which is something some channel don't do.
@@starmaker75 Funny thing is, I just copied some of the sources from my _party switch_ episode. Real easy to give sources on something you've already published on before
@@CynicalHistorian not everyone switched right like James O. Eastland of Mississippi and Herman E. Talmadge both Pro Seg. Dems & biden allies not to mention bidens mentor klu Klux dem Robert byrd
@@CynicalHistorian How come bidens allies James O. Eastland Herman E. Talmadge & mentor Robert Byrd never switched?
I know how the Republicans love their thought-terminating clichés, so here's mine:
If the last positive thing your party did for blacks was during the Civil War, maybe that's not the selling point you think it is.
Are you trying to roast them worse than Anakin?
In fairness, Eisenhower passed a Civil Rights act.
...back in the '50s
@@Wichitan Do you have to work to be such a clown or does it come naturally to you?
@@Wichitanlmao
@Wichitan Black men are more involved in their children's lives than white men per a ten year CDC study released nearly a decade ago.
Amazing how something can be so entertainingly bad and yet so exhaustingly frustrating at the same time.
I'm subscribed to your channel but I don't think I've ever laughed as hard as listening to your commentary in this video. You have a great sense of humor.
no clue how you guys do it. that would drive me insane xD
You know this guy?
It's a communist plot, Tigerstar.
I love right-wing content for it's hilarious wrongness and whacky cast, but it's a chore to sit through
It’s important to note that the Indian Removal Acts were actually incredibly unpopular, even for the time. Sure, it had some support, but it also faced a lot of backlash, especially from contemporary progressives.
Some part of me will always wonder how much of it had to do with guilt over the ethnic cleansing of New England's Native American populations 2 centuries prior.
It should be kept in mind that the counter-argument wasn’t so much about something like, say, sending down the military to protect them or their lands. Most agreed that they inevitably were going to have to move for their own good as well as everybody else’s, but it was the idea of pressuring or forcing them to do so that they were uncomfortable with. The esteemed John Quincy Adams himself basically conceded that the Native Americans should be left alone and that they would wind up discovering for themselves why they should voluntarily make the journey which was of course escalating conflict with their neighbors. And obviously, that had already started. Nobody influential at least presented an ideal solution on either side of the debate. I also believe that is probably an anachronistic use of the term progressive given that the later the original group from which it is derived in the first place including such thinkers as Richard T. Ely, John R. Commons and Edward A. Ross weren’t particularly sympathetic to the native population even in their own time.
Well I'll give Hillary this. She's not a convicted felon unlike someone I know...
With this video coming soon after trump felons being official, this makes documentary and the Hillary accusations more rich
I am certainly it is not because of lack of trying but it is due to lack evidence that Hillary did anything criminal.
@@starmaker75 just like what I hear all the time. All accusations are confessions.
@@TheBuckeyeHistoryGuy1776 you do know defense has a day who to pick, right?
@@TheBuckeyeHistoryGuy1776 Good luck finding people in the US without an opinion on Trump. Like, at all.
I really hate when people make me defend people I dislike with passion...
I know, right?
I wanna live in the world where Democrats are even half as based as Republicans make them out to be.
How can you go at a target as big as woodrow wilson and still miss???
@@centurionzen1005Hitler is an even bigger target, but they STILL MISS.
Dinesh D'Souza after project 2025 is enacted: "I didn't think the Leopards would eat MY face!!!"
I'm fairly certain he would still be in the useful token category. Until he is no longer, he will be privileged.
When it comes to the Right’s various token minorities, I often wonder how many are true believers who will be genuinely shocked when the Face-Eating Leopards Eat their face, despite being one of the “good ones,” and how many are grifters pulling a con, planning to take the money and run if things go too far south. Candace Owens is probably in the second category, but where do you think D’Souza falls? Con artist or true believer?
@@PMickeyDee Would he? If 2025 is enacted it won’t be because of him. There are other more successful mouth pieces then him
Dinesh D'Souza is in the Great Indian Dictionary in Hindi as STOOGE !
Him, Sunak, Braverman and Ramaswamy are living their best lives. We wont vote another brown person in office anytime soon, but India isnt exactly known as a bastion of social democracy. Just as italians, jews, poles and irish used to be scapegoats; sentiments shift as conservatives have to co opt new demographics in order to target their new threat: social liberalism threatening to split up old hegemonical influence.
I think D'Souza's propaganda is so hyper-partisan because it's meant for internal consumption. These kind of "documentaries" are meant for people already deep in the Republican camp who want to feel justified in their beliefs, and to keep the party base active. That's why D'Souza can play so fast and loose with history, the target audience isn't likely to question the source.
There's an irony in him attacking Andrew Jackson only for him to fall head-over-heels for Trump who has been publicly fascinated with Jackson.
@@Nigerian11maybe the populist authoritarian streak?
Robert E Lee and Hannibal Lecter are favorites of his too.
"Dinesh you keep calling Hillary a criminal when you just got of jail!"
I dont like Dinesh at all but just cause he went to jail doesn't mean Hilary didn't commit any crimes. It's really just an insult meant to point out hypocrisy.
@@CommieGobeldygook No, but when criminals complain about crime, it just sounds stupider.
@@CommieGobeldygookAgreed, and to be fair a person in a position of power or attempting to be in a position of power, should be held to a tighter standard than the average person. Hillary is responsible for any potential crimes that she may have committed, no denying that. But he himself is responsible for the crimes he committed, and he sure has plenty of canned excuses for his own which is an interesting thing. He might not be in a position of power, but he certainly seems to be in a position of influence, he deserves all of the criticism he gets.
It's called hypocrisy
And what crimes did Hillary commit?
One thing about the party switch that makes it so confusing for so many is because they fail to understand that America's two main political parties are more like coalitions than actual political parties. Both parties are actually multiple groups, ideas, ideologies, and worldviews united more by the fact that their party is not the other party than by any shared vision. If we had a voting system other than First Past the Post both parties would immediately explode into several different parties.
The "Party Switch" was essentially one group/idea/ideology (white supremacy) switching to the other side. Historians and political scientists understand this but the media doesn't explain this, thus the average person doesn't understand this concept. If you view the Democrat and Republican parties are solid, united, and cohesive parties the party switch is inconceivable.
I've always found it easier in my mind to just say conservative versus liberal (or progressive). Then there's less a tie to the name of the political party trending that direction at any particular period.
The media does a terrible job explaining anything to us, and when you're objectively sh*t at your most important job and reason to exist, then is it any wonder it's losing relevance to social media - which by the way is an even worse source of information.
It amazes me that people this stupid are able to function on a daily basis
I would say that the parties today are far too unified. Anyone on either side who doesn't fall in line with the party is ostracized. We really need to get rid of First Past the Post. The problem is it just benefits both parties so nobody in power wants it to change.
Problem is that the alleged party switch is portrayed as an intentional act by Republicans. Supposedly the Republican party used coded policies to entice Southern racists, through the Southern Strategy, without alienating their existing non-racist voter base. Which in turn means all Republicans are supporting racist policies without even realizing they're doing so.
There's a few flaws in this argument. First and foremost, many of the supposedly racist policies are actually just common sense. When you enforce the law people are less likely to commit crimes. If you don't enforce the law people are more likely to commit crimes. Because of actually racist Democrat policies the law was not enforced in black majority neighborhoods for decades. Now when Republicans try to enforce the law in black neighborhoods to curb the crime rate they're labeled racist for policies that "disproportionately put black people in prison." Except not enforcing the law actually hurts black people the most because criminals typically target their own race, leaving innocent black citizens being victimized much more commonly than other races. You can pick basically any policy where Democrats call Republicans racist and see this same dynamic play out. It's the end stage of the "it's not happening, it's good that it's happening, it's bad that it's happening and it's someone else's fault" cycle.
Second, there's not much evidence of the Southern Strategy existing. One Republican talked about it in a single interview. There have never been any memos found, no letters, no change in policy positions, no surge of funds to campaigning in the south, nor any other evidence I'm aware of proving this actually happened. With the Southern Strategy being a cornerstone of the party switch narrative it becomes hard to take seriously knowing there's so little facts supporting it.
Third is the existence of the Dixiecrats. There's tons of information about them so I'll keep this short. The Dixiecrats were Democrats both prior to and after the switch was supposed to happen. Unlike the Democrats who switched parties the Dixiecrats continued supporting blatantly racist policies while in office and many were openly members of the KKK. Many of these Dixiecrats were friends and mentors of Democrats who still hold power. It's so taboo to speak out against them that even Obama praised a klan member Dixiecrat.
Lastly is the behavior of modern Democrats. Supporting segregation, openly calling black people stupid or incompetent, and the vitriol shown towards any minority who even slightly leans conservative makes it very clear that the old racist attitudes of the Democratic party never switched sides.
If there's one person I despise with all of my being, it's Dinesh D'Souza.
same.. and tim pool. cannot forget tim pool.
Absolutely loathe!
and if there's two people I despise it's Dinesh D'Souza a second time.
I hate the fact his son in-law is gonna be a U.S Representative next year.
Klandace and Dinesh are so fucking hatable. Same with all the right wing grifters but particularly these two
Listening to D'Souza criticize Democrats for being in favor of forced sterilization was shocking to me because I have family who are in favor of forced sterilization, and they like D'Souza.
"Dinesh d'Souza spends a lot of time in this movie trying to convince the viewer that Planned Parenthood is trying to stop blacks from reproducing--do you think his real criticism is that their methods aren't effective enough?"
@@eliastoone4162 A likely hypothesis. I left the Republican party when I realized most of their criticism of Democrat Americans and non-affiliated to any party Americans either rings hollow with no evidence to support it or is just projection of their own flaws.
Planned Parenthood is supported by the Bush Family….beginning with Prescott Bush, aka Grandaddy Bush.
@@EatHoneyBeeHappy wait, you're shocked your pro-sterilization family likes anti-sterilization Dinesh? I'm shocked there are people who are pro-sterilizaton in 2024 and even more shocked that doesn't bother you. 😂😂😂😂
@@tsyqaib It bothers me, but I still love my pro-sterilization family members.
D'Souza has no business calling his works "books". The best that I can offer him is "book-shaped objects".
just because they're bad doesn't negate them being books
@@CynicalHistorian It's not that it's a bad book, but that it feels kind of sketchy that blatant, bald-faced acts of low-effort propaganda specifically designed to reinforce the worldview of angry chuds should be categorized alongside legitimate works of art or scholarship.
My grandma tells me to watch this all the time, because I'm a historian, and she wants to know my opinion. I've told her it's propaganda without even watching and she still tells me to give it a chance.
"Grandma, how have you been doing lately? Enjoying the weather?"
Every time she brings it up, change the subject.
@@grmpEqweer Or make a deal with her. If she watches this video with OP, then OP watches the movie
@@danieltobin4498 I like this idea
You can tell that you are a good scholarly historian concerned with factual accuracy over your own biases being confirmed by how you dismissed it as propaganda without watching it. Declaring things dangerous propaganda simply because they MIGHT challenge your ideology means that you're never wrong!
@@BrettShadow bot
This propaganda was not made to convince anyone to change sides. It was made to help people on the right feel better about themselves. At least thats how i see it.
@@Sir.WillyWallace But this is right-wing propaganda. Just because propaganda can be made by everyone, does not mean that this is not right wing propaganda.
If not book, why book shaped?
Ironically the real insurance industry acts more like organized crime than any kind of government insurance program
Yeah they ain't gums pal
@@Joshua_Froschauer ? What does that mean? (I'm genuinely confused sorry)
George McClellan was a union general and a democrat so the civil war wasn’t a party vs party crisis. Dudes right it was a sectional crisis nor a party crisis
Yes and George McClellan also ran in 1864 against Abraham Lincoln on the platform of peace with the confederacy. The point is that is the democrats were to have won the confederacy would still exist, meaning the civil war was in every sense of the word was about sectionalism AND about the parties.
@@ihateyourmum1000 If the dems won in 1860 I think the chances of civil war wouldve been lower or delayed, as senate and house dems would likely continuously slow down or impede legislature in the prohibition of the expansion of slavery, or even introduce their own laws to further expand slavery, a key goal of the confederacy.
@@ihateyourmum1000 The Democratic Party at that time was mostly split between copperheads and war democrats though. There isn't really a solid basis for the idea that the parties played a significant role.
This party switch denial really confuses the hell out of me, because my parents told me about it as a kid, because they were fn there when it happened! We lived in SC, which has been ground zero for a lot of crazy shit over the years
EmporerTigerStar: "Allah was clear from the beginning, the workers will be liberated."
Absolutely. Im going to cite this in every future paper.
"Change over time is delta, not C" - that was golden. I died laughing. Good job, Tigerstar.
“Propaganda is all fun and games until someone gets brainwashed” 😂😂😂😂😭😭
Come for dunking on D'Souza, stay for the King Richard propaganda.
King Richard would def ban this guy if he pulled up in the comment section
Agreed. Already got two folks defending him by just repeating the same conspiracy theory
Feels appropriate that this comes out on the same day that Salem Media stopped distributing "2000 Mules", one of Dinesh D’Souza's follow up films.
The conundrum of partisanship is actually incredibly easy to solve. This movie isn't meant to persuade anyone, it's to further radicalize the true believers in the right-wing cause. That line about "the party of Lincoln and Reagan must once again come to America's aid, not with bullets this time, but with ballots" was a very unsubtle wink and nudge--"not with bullets, but with ballots, *for now*".
Sarcasmitron, in his two-part series about this exact movie and the book wherein Dinesh laid out his own personal beliefs, addressed it as follows: "'The End of Racism' doesn't really have a thesis, because as a book, it's not really making an argument, it's making a threat: 'embrace conservative policy goals and stop talking about racial disparity, and us rightists will abide by your polite fiction that whites are equal to blacks. Push for government intervention to alleviate black poverty, and, well, it's only natural that people will gravitate toward less...*polite* voices.'"
IDK. That seems to put far too much intentionality behind his omissions. A good rule to follow for interpreting motives is Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which may be attributed to stupidity
@@CynicalHistorianWith D'Souza, you can, in fact, definitely attribute to malice. TEoR features an explicit call to repeal the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in as many words, capping off lengthy diatribes about black "civilizational defects"--he's a very uncomplicated man who nonetheless knows exactly what he's doing.
Not only that, but movement conservatism was very much on board with him when he wrote TEoR, and continues to be up to this day.
@@eliastoone4162I am not so sure it is that simple. People can hold many beliefs even contradictory ones. Unless people come to a realisation that their beliefs are bad or contradictory they are likely to continue to believe them and accumulate more “supporting evidence” to justify their beliefs. Even generally smart people are often uncritical of their own beliefs.
@@CynicalHistorianWhen it comes to politics, stupidity and malice are difficult to separate. That, and Dinesh is more cartoon character than human being.
@@suspicious241That's true for ordinary people, but professional conservatives like Dinesh D'Souza or Roger Stone know enough of what they're doing for it to be 100% intentional.
On the subject of D'Souza immitating Michael Moore, this is something that Corey Robin observed that the right does quite a lot. He went so far as to argue that the right are the left's most attentive students, they just take the lesson and run the other direction with it as fast and far as they can. If message or method that originates in the left or the center seems to be even modestly successful, the right will find a way to appropriate it for their own ends.
Because their collective imagination died at birth.
They use the language of civil rights to remove women’s rights to control their own bodies. I cannot stand this.
this is what's called recuperation, and it is mostly used to describe behaviors of capitalism, as anything that is at first subversive to the status quo will ultimately be absorbed into the beast, for exactly the reason you described; it's what's been proven to sell.
Unfortunately, when they do it, it makes a difference
Everything time I remind of the "party switches", I am remind of tf2 announcer voice line "Team are being scramble!". Or the "you have been auto balance for team balance"
Hell, former KKK member Robert Byrd's contributions still ended up a net positive for the nation after the big switch after the Civil Rights Act passed
"Biden is a Communist who's gunna slay God... woah, really that sounds awesome" - best line. 10/10, glad I found this channel. Keep up the great work
Tigerstar said communism and atheism is cool. Based Tigerstar confirmed
why doesn't tigerstar move to a communist country then?
@@artygunnar which communist country??
He’s joking about communism? Right?
@@jordandino417 I don’t know? Maybe he did say why can’t the democrats ever do the cool shit republicans accuse them of like communism or killing God. I’d take that to mean he thinks communism is cool. Probably because it would be if we did it democratically. If communism was democratic it would be awesome
@@jordandino417 definitely, Tigerstar is known to do that.
Poor reconstruction always gets ignored. :(
Which we are still dealing with today.
As a history buff I find this kind of thing very disturbing. It's one thing to point out the moral failings of the democratic(of which there are many) but pretending Republicans were pure and righteous is just intellectually dishonest. I know no one likes a nuanced position but both parties have had their share of ugly moments.
This is why I think we could switch to a one-party system and be functionally the same
@rodneysmith873 we absolutely couldn't, especially with the GOP and trump! Read project 2025 1:18:36
@@rodneysmith873 That is overly simplistic. When that happens there tends to be opposition parties that just oppose stuff.
Watching this has been so hard personally because I went and saw this movie with my dad. I was a completely impressionable and ignorant to American history and I ate this whole movie up. Today I have taken a bit of college working towards a degree in anthropology and after taking a humanities course on constitutional change, my entire perspective on the flow of American history is completely different. I think everyone should take one of these courses as all of these topics like civil rights, Indian rights, party switching, all that is obscure depending on your teachers and curriculum locally. Developed adults should be informed on these topics so they can better understand history
The party switching thing is common knowledge. After all, it wouldn't be conservatives who emancipate the slaves and the liberals who want to keep the status quo. But Lincoln was famously a Republican who opposed the South and he represented civil rights and progressivism.
@@Edax_Royeaux well to be fair both my parents were teenage high school dropouts when I was born. I also grew up in a small town in Northern Nevada so my overall exposure and understanding of world events was obscure until basically today. We certainly didn’t discuss the party switch at my high school and in hindsight, I realize things were spun in a way to make the Civil War seem like it was a Rights vs Federal aggression kind of thing though we also discussed Uncle Toms cabin and the horrors of slavery. Understanding where and how the parties functioned through time is pretty important because it’s quite a spectrum. As a formerly radicalized Christian and Republican, what I didn’t know was absolutely weaponized against me.
Well done man!!! Anthropology is based AF!!! Good choice!!! 🤘😁👍
@@ianfitzpatrick2230 Fellow former Northern Nevadan here. Glad ya got to learn more and better than what you did in that small town.
It's like Republicans and conservatives know that an education is kryptonite to their propaganda. Weird. It's like their policies should endorse and tight intellectualism or something...
The reason this propaganda is so illogical is because, as you commented, a lot of it is simply confirming biases the targeted audience already believes. It’s never a rational argument
I love the "Mystery Science Theater" narration
So just to be clear...is he actually vilifying Andrew Jackson? I mean don't get me wrong, AJ deserves to be villainized, but didn't some current Democrats make the move to replace him from the $20 bill? And if that actually gains any traction, won't it mostly be current day republicans getting all up in arms about it?
I'm sure dopey dinesh will be spearheading the move to get jackson off the $20 bill
I just tried to lookup if he said anything over that controversy and he was oddly silent - despite making it such an integral part of his most famous documentary
Dinesh doesn't like AJ and even criticize Trump for admiring AJ. As a poc and a Republican I have no issues with AJ. He did some horrible stuff but was phenomenal on the Battle of New Orleans. We honor them for their good, not for their evil. I would never encourage to remove him off the $20 bill but also have no issues if he was replaced with Harriet Tubman because she is the GOAT!
Surely the comments of this video will be well reasoned and level headed lol
already got one dimwit
@@CynicalHistorian At least he’s boosting the algorithm - basically working for you for free! 😊 Thank you for this video! I cannot stand DeSlimy.
Tigerstar made a great point when he mentioned that there is a mountain of media where the party switch plays a role. And we've been consuming it for generations!
Okay...you made me laugh so loud with that "He's got a mcconnell face." that I scared the cat sitting on my lap while I was watching this.
Omg it ends with “and then everyone clapped.” It actually ended with “and then everyone clapped.”
"I bet you can't make a history of the US without going into depth about the Bushes Roosevelts, Coolidge, Hoover, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter, or Reagan " "YOU'RE ON"
12:50 I find this especially amusing when I hear modern republicans say stuff like “JFK would be a republican if he were alive today”….why would that be if the parties didn’t switch?
JFK was basically Joe Biden but younger and in a different political situation.
He liked tax cuts, for one. That was considered Republican even back then, too Republican for former president Eisenhower at any rate.
@@bootmii98 I agree, but that really wasn’t the point of my comment.
Well JFK knows what a woman is, y'all don't.
now i kinda wanna make a documentary film for trumpers that is a secret parody of this one, but it inspires trumpers to action, but something that's non-violent but harms trump.
Some related actual good news - the company that distributed and platformed 2000 Mules just apologized for the false claims it contains and has indefinitely shelved it. Because they were sued and it was part of the settlement.
I get so angry at those who mislead in the name of education!
If I had a buck for every “facts don’t care about your feelings” bro who pushed back against historical documentation because it was uncomfortable for them and/or didn’t align with their preconceived worldview, I probably wouldn’t have student loans anymore. In fairness, I’ve worked in public history since 2008, so I’ve had plenty of time to have these conversations. But I’m still perplexed at how adverse the “facts and logic” crowd is to verifiable facts and elementary logic
I haven’t personally heard that phrase, but I do have a coworker that I think believes it.
I’d settle for a dollar for every time someone has or will say “facts don’t care about your feelings”, and then spout either false “facts” or spout their feelings. (Dollars delivered directly into my bank account.)
I’d donate a bit of my now massive amount to established charities, then start up a foundation, hire a “dream team” of the top people in every field, and proceed to do my best to bankrupt myself by pouring so much money into finding actual cures. (First thing tackled would be cancer.)
Yes, I overthink everything. Sorry.
43:00 OMG you are right. These are the people who paid no attention in school, so now they "are discovering the secret history" that we were all taught
I keep seeing a map of North America with the territories controlled by the Native American tribes delineated, with people claiming that they never learned about that in school. It's just a retouched version of the same map that was in my fifth grade social studies textbook. I'm 39, this stuff wasn't hidden, they just weren't paying attention.
"Republican", "Democrat", and any party label is just an empty brand. Always refere to conservatives and liberals, because ideologies, intellectual rigor, honesty, are forever.
I’ve worked in a truck shop for nearly 30 years and have had discussions with all sorts of truck shop type people. This movie’s talking points are almost verbatim to the comments I regularly hear. Thought my eye was gonna explode watching this.
I'm so sorry. I'm not even going to blame our education system - we learned all of this. People just want so badly to be "in the know" - they'll create their own reality to get that feeling of purpose. It's honestly sad.
Man, it is WILD to see republicans pre Trump. Actually at least upholding a veil of progressivism
His work is no different than Christian apologetics.
It isn't actually designed to convince rationalists that Christisnity is true.
Its designed to affirm Christians by making them think what they already believe is rationally justified.
I cannot think of a better example of party switching to disprove D'Souza's point than Ronald Reagan's own UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick who was a Socialist & then a Democrat before becoming a member of the GOP. Even Reagan was a New Deal Democrat at the start of his foray into politics.
"The Democrats killed Lincoln" was one of the funniest things Ive ever heard
Dinesh D'Souza talking makes a rock falling on top of another rock sound like a PhD thesis.
26:20 D’Souza: “The torture and sexual assault of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are a result of modern American liberal degeneracy.”
Also D’Souza: “The prisoners aren’t even really suffering, they’re basically just staying in a standard middle eastern hotel”
This was a blast to watch. I really enjoy this concept and this format. Please feed me more of this. I will be right here waiting to watch the next one.
Happy to, but which should I edit next?
@@CynicalHistorian ether of the PreggerU ones sounds completley off the wall, should be a fun watch, if you edit and upload one of those.
I would love to see you cover Don't Be a Sucker. That one jumped out at me and seems like a really important topic lately. I'm not picky. I will gladly watch all of them. Whichever you decide.
So here's something funny... that life insurance salesman makes himself the beneficiary and then kills the pollicy holder thing is actually the plot of a Woody Woodpecker cartoon. I wonder if that's where D'Souza got the idea.
The irony of Trump being convicted of campaign finance violations as well.
Laughed out a fart with the Alan Moore- Michael Moore slip.
It’s so funny how while watching historical videos on TH-cam I get so many ads that are clear historical propaganda like prageru
Seeing other channels go directly after Dinesh is a breath of fresh air. Chapo Trap House covered this propaganda on their podcast too. I recommend you check out their review of it. It’s a hoot!
“Propaganda can’t be art!” I mean *gestures to Aaron Copland*
?
OMG I can't stop laughing at Tigerstar's responses.
You know it’s a strong argument when all it takes to disprove is 2 election maps from, like, 1960 and 1990
I learned about propaganda in the 80s, during the D.A.R.E. campaign.
This movie under review has so much historical revisionism that it makes people literally rage quit halfway through. It is sad that there are people who don’t realize that the party-swap denial narrative is laughably inaccurate. It is frustrating how political pundits spread false history to strategically misinform voters.
Hey, would it be possible to post a list of every wikipedia entry you showed on screen?
Many of those I'd never heard of and it would be nice to learn something.
I like the court reinactment drama like court transcripts don't exist.😂
First time viewer. Loved this! Subscriber now.
I don't know how you guys can watch things like this without your brains oozing out of your ears
If we lived in Hillary's america things might not be so bad...
you gotta be fucking kidding me right?
@@artygunnarIt's a reasonable assumption. Instead we got a convicted felon and a talking fossil.
@@twonumber22
You can complain about Biden yet the economy is good, people are not dying 1000 a day.
The walking fossil has been great for America.
@@artygunnar
No this is not a joking matter.
If Hillary had been our president neither Ukraine nor Israel would be at war today.
Trump's four years embolden despots around the world.
Remember you are watching a program about propaganda.
The Republican party has used Fox Cable to spread lies and misinformation from the day Fox came on line.
Go read the biography of Rodger ailes. Fox News with the concept that Rodger and Ronald Reagan came up with in the 80s.
Of course Ronald Reagan allowed a foreign national, Rupert Murdoch to come in and start a news organization in the United States.
You could say fox cable has destroyed the United States.
In fact most of the nation knows that.
@@artygunnar Nope. Fully serious. Hill is still a conservative, but Iess of an issue than Biden or the Iast one
Steetmerica stole my wife.
Hey Cypher, IDK if you're aware of this, but your cartoon avatar makes you look like The Postal Dude, from the Postal games. XD
The actors clapping for him in the credits made me spit water out through my nose and mouth. Thats as a sad as Jeb Bush's "Please clap".
It’s crazy how most of my favorite political figures in history up to the 1990s are republicans yet I’m voting mostly democrat this year (except for state legislature)
Until 2020, I tended to vote the opposite party locally as I did nationally. That was the first year I almost went straight ticket, only three exceptions
Just when I thought this channel couldn't get any better
My take on the change in propaganda is that the media landscape doesn't really encourage the same methodology as it did before the internet became a place of social currency/standing. Propaganda today preaches to the choir more than tries to invite more members, and is encouraged to do so by the engagement-driving algorithms behind social media websites.
What was shown in theaters and broadcast on television stations could only be accessed through restricted technologies. There needed to be some sense of reaching across the aisle of partisanship. Failure to do so risked a box office flop that theaters wouldn't risk or a broadcast network losing ratings and views that could switch over to their competition. Algorithms today tend to tailor content to the viewer in order to keep them engaged, so partisanship is encouraged and entrenched more consistently. In addition, while a centralized source technically exists (large website's servers) the media is consumed by every user from a personal environment (their phones, laptops, PC/Macs, etc) and nearly no restriction on par with cable or theaters.
Political intent aside, this is what I see as the big contrast to the portrayals made in D'Suza's work and 'An Inconvenient Truth'. The latter had to be released in theaters and was assumed to air on TV in the future. To make 'An Inconvenient Truth' keep relevancy, I speculate the creators tailored it to reach more audiences than just entrenched Democrats or pro-Gore voters. This intent contrasts with 'Hilary's America', which was made expecting to work on a personal level and in isolation.
Wow I'm sure this video won't be demonetized at all
Not yet, though I did have to delay this for a week because the copyright claim didn't allow publication. I had to sign that I was willing to be sued by Lionsgate if they chose to issue a DMCA. I've dealt with some crazy copyright problems before, but that is the worst I've seen
American WW2 propaganda was a strange mix of extremely woke and extremely reactionary
I wouldn't call it reactionary, but yeah, there was a lot of thoughtful compassion mixed with ardent nationalism
I have to assume Dinesh's move pissed off most Republicans, right? It's pretty much calling them stupid without saying they're stupid.
The default should always be, " believe nothing question everything important
Klansman rider gets from the screen into real world. This is the greatest movie ever made and silly things like facts won't change that!
blud literally said "and then everyone clapped, the end" 💀
Hey y’all, I just started the video but I’m excited for it. I’m relatively sure that at least one of the following is true: Nobody associated with the channel will read this, nobody will care, and / or many people have already said it, it was an accident, or it’s already been learned, BUT!
In case none of those are the case, I’m pretty sure it’s pronounced “too-kwah-kay.” Tu quoque, the fallacy, that is.
Alright, on to the rest of the video, I’m hyped! Thank you for the effort put into making these, I know it’s a great deal of work.
Ugh, this browser doesn’t allow me to edit or delete comments, anyway it looks like a variety of pronunciations are correct including the one used. Disregard the above comment’s central premise, please, and accept my apologies for my hasty correction.
Where do you get your floating microphones??? I'm a musician in a few bands & also run a small recording studio. Those would be awesome to have. 😂😂😂😂
I teach more nuanced history in my 8th grade class 😂
Please do "Fog of War" by Errol Morris. It's an interesting piece of what I would have to label as being anti-war propaganda. McNamara and the movie itself was praised by the liberal press because it made Bush look bad over the invasion of Iraq. And also because it's a good movie.
But I also think that McNamara used it as an occasion to get his back public patted by the liberal press for daring to criticize the then current Republican Bush administration so he could get his bad name cleared in the eyes of the elite intellectual liberal left (a group that he used to be a member of). He was trying to get himself off the hook. And the liberals on the left definitely use it for that purpose...Great movie.
Reefer Madness has to be one of the most over-the-top propaganda spectacles that I've ever seen. It's kind of funny at first but then gets so ridiculous that it loses the earlier humor it had.
Joel
As someone with a "theoretical degree" in theoretic history, I firmly believe in the theory that the 5Cs of history are: China, Communism, Capitalism, CCCalifornia and Calvin Coolidge.
Chapo Trap House said it best that these "documentaries" are the part in the D'Souza Cinematic Universe where Dinesh snaps his fingers and makes half of American history disappear
I live in Central IL. I hear a lot of folks denying the party switch out here.
Can I be a llama instead of a sheep? Nothing against sheep, some of them are kinda cool, but llamas are cooler imo.
I love how emperor tigerstar just pops up on every history channel I’ve ever watched. (He even appears in thersites chat and was on stream)
I need to see the episode of an inconvenient truth
Your commentary is great but I can't watch the nonsense of D'Souza. It's painful, absurd nonsense.
I tend to be much more conservative/libertarian than you, and I find myself disagreeing with you on some points. That having been said, I absolutely adore your channel. You make me reexamine my viewpoints by presenting well researched and cogent arguments. This is what political discussion online should be but rarely ever is.
Dinesh is (in the words of Jean-Ralphio Saperstein): 🎶"The WooooOooOooOorst!"🎶
20:31 he sounds like he got his narrative rhythm by studying Jordan Klepper.
You two have great chemistry.. Hope to see more collabs between you both in the future
2:34 To be fair, everyone should immediately be skeptical of any specific and explicit claim that what they're about to say is "definitely not propaganda"