Which was to counter ludicrous propaganda from the war years to justify the loss of lives to defend polish independence by handing them over to the USSR.
How is it bog standard? Are there other Youtubers presenting the revisionist view?
Has he expressed this sentiment anywhere? I've only seen a couple videos but this sounds uncharacteristic given his dispassionate voice.
There's posts on this thread from awhile back of him saying mass migration from Latin America is a good thing because they're all based Catholics. When people rightfully called that stupid, he sperged out on them, then tried to claim it was all a joke people were taking too seriously before he deleted everything.
He's alright, he is slimpifies shit obviously if you want to get an idea of whats happened hes not the worst.
Pretty interesting channel. I was surprised to see that video in my sub feed, I totally forgot why I was subscribed to him in the first place, good video though. I don't really like nitpicking historical films, like uniforms or other film concessions like that, but I do like when people point out major plot omissions or alterations. His accent is really confusing to my ears and I had a difficult time placing it.
I never believed the Movie was an accurate depiction of what happened, partly because they obviously employed subpar military advisors. Also if you notice a lot of the weapons used are inert props and couldn't fire blanks.
When even YouTube commenters tell him to stop being such a biased faggot you know something is wrong.
Dovahhatty's series has my favorite take on the matter, reasoning that Caesar was an Optimates plant, who was only a demagogue so he could save the plebians from themselves.
To be somewhat charitable to him, it is a bit refreshing to hear an alternate take on Julius Caesar and the Populares when most historical commentary and works set during the Last Crisis of the Republic tend to take Caesar's side and cast him as the "hero" of the narrative, but he takes it entirely too far. It's either that he's a political ideologue forcing modern Culture War bullshit and shits on Caesar to own le chuds who worship him, or it's that he is genuinely just some seething historyautist who can't get over that The Good Guys™ lost against Caesar. Either way, like I said, he crosses the line from "legitimate counter-to-mainstream-thought perspective on Caesar and the Crisis" to "Brutus did nothing wrong, sic semper tyrannus, Philippi was the worst day of my life" and it just becomes absurd.
I enjoyed the series at first until the later episodes where he began actually getting autistic over Caesar's character, and portraying a lot of his battles after the conquest of Gaul as the result of luck. It's also made me wary to his portrayal of Mark Antony because HC always renders him as a bumbling retard, although that seems to be mostly right when it comes to politics.
Was that the cultural factors inside the DF that gave A Co a bad name our Britbong alludes to?
I think it's definitely important to view just how lucky Caesar was. He was playing high-stakes gambling in Gaul and throughout his career, but I don't like HC's dismissive view of Caesar's military prowess or basically just accepting at-point-blank Optimate and later Augustan narratives of Mark Antony being a drunk retard. Antony probably wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, and he definitely had his problems (Caesar had him removed as the Governor of Italy for bungling debt forgiveness negotiations and forcing Caesar to return from Egypt early), but that doesn't make him a complete moron. Antony singlehandedly won Philippi, since Octavian got BTFOd in the first day and if Mark Antony hadn't salvaged it by beating Cassius it would've been a defeat.
Even accounting for exaggeration and political bias from historians, Judio-Claudian Rome was fuckin' metal.