can u imagine trying to get along with people who have never watched the same tv shows or listened to the same songs as you, doesn’t know any of the same memes, and never intends to?
Welcome to human nature and mammal biology. What exactly shocks you about this? Pretty sure we, as a species, have made great progress by moving away from this style of thinking compared to our past. Maybe appreciate that fact?
A note here on the issue of class systems: It's important for an empire not to become too top-heavy with it's class system. What i mean is that, while you almost inevitably have classes in any society, just from the way societies work (The notable exception here being the incans, who were probably the closest thing to rEaL cOmMuNiSm in all of history), the elites must always remember on whose shoulders they stand. The french revolution happened because the first and second estates had gathered the vast majority of wealth in their hands while the third was starving. The october revolution happened (in large parts, though the entirety of WW1 certainly was a big factor too) because the nobility lived in absolute luxury while the peasants were starving. Generally speaking, if the top of society gets too heavy, the bottom starts to ask itself why it should keep carrying the top. Plus, of course, this also makes you vulnerable towards invaders. Why should you fight to maintain a nobility that stuffs itself with food in evermore ridiculous displays of gluttony while you starve producing the food they feast on for every meal, when you might as well let a foreign power overthrow that nobility? You're already starving, it's not like the invasion can make things much worse for you.
That rule isn't quite so universal. More accurately it needs to keep the keys to power up. In many instances the bottom will be a key to power, but in ages like when the chariot dominated bronze age warfare, they were so disconnected they largely had no part in any of it. They were repressed by everyone and everything. This made countries rise and fall in the same areas incredibly common, but since it had little to no effect on the living standards of the people (that is to say... barely any at all no matter who) it doesn't work. The class structure can't be too top heavy while the bottom can actually do something. If they just can't do anything regardless no matter what, they might as well not even be in the system at all and contribute nothing to whether or not it exists.
@@buddermonger2000 There have been peasant revolutions since the dawn of time. Hunger being a catalyst for revolt is such a well-known phenomenon that even 2000 years ago the ancient roman empire subsidized food for the poor to negate it.
@SPCv4 No, there were peasant revolts that occurred, but not peasant revolutions. The difference is success for the most part, as well as motive. Not to mention, in 46 BC, the peasants were still largely armed and represented in the Roman senate, meaning that the bottom was indeed a key to power. However, that's not always the case, as in the example I listed above. The iron age was very different from the bronze age, in that you just needed a lot of men in order to do anything militarily, and it was pretty easy to equip people, which wasn't the case with the bronze age.
6:10 a small correction, the Byzantine (Greek Eastern Roman) Empire didn't use the Latin Numerals but Greek. So 16 would be ΙϚ', Ι is 10 and Ϛ is 6. We actually learnt that at school in Greece at one point, I think it was a one day seminar. The numerals aren't that hard, they work like Arabic but each digit has a different symbol of the Greek alphabet if it is a multiple of 1, 10 or 100. Then 1.000 has the same symbols as 1, 10.000 has the same symbol as 10 and so on. This is because the very archaic Greek alphabet had 27 letters, so they were split in three teams of 9. The first nine were 1-9, the second nine were 10-90 and the third nine 100-900
all 330 Americans who believe in the constitution, sounds about right (I'm pulling your leg there) either way the druids didn't make Stonehenge, it preceded Celtic being spoken in Britain by about 2000 years. Also cuneiform isn't just numbers, it was a whole writing system with words and syllables being written.
How to Build a Civilization (Part II): 6. Have a COMMON BELIEF. 7. Make representations through ART. 8. Create a whole LANGUAGE and NUMERALS. 9. Create some SOCIAL CLASSES.
great, now you need to make a video detailing which specific inventions will be most important to speedrun the modern era, which resources you need to find and how to find them etc.
and methods to insure that you can use them to advance yourself as fast as possible while ALSO keeping the methods as secret as possible so as not to make an arms race.
Dude, cuneiform was not etched into stone. It was pressed into wet clay tablets. That is why cuneiform looks like bird claws on a dried mud puddle. It was designed to be easy to placed in and read from mud.
*Goes back 10k years after watching this* My British Arse: "Hello my fellow primitives! Look at me, as I bring the fire of civilization!" The locals: "Agabadsantabapapokto?" MBA: "Ah. Do any among you speak the queen's english?"
Tbh there is another way of creating a massive "empire". You should of course start with giving the people a writing system, a language and beliefs, but after that you should just form a nomadic army that "forcibly" enlists people into it just like the Mongols did at the beginning. After that just break this army into pieces and hope that your language would be preserved by their writing just like Jews preserved Hebrew, their warlike nature would allow them to conquer more tribes and forcibly enlist them and they wouldn't fight because they share the same language, beliefs and you can also give them some idea patriotism and religious fanaticism in order to make them expand outwards instead of infight.
This is the tutorial queen Elizabeth the 2nd saw because she led England/Britain/SomethingSomething in Britain. Cause she led them for thousands of years
@@PotatoBoy44 I know, but don’t explain the joke right after you type/ say it, because many people already know it. If they didn’t know it, then explaining it won’t make it funny
@@muricanpepe3100 it’s a bad joke when you need to explain it. If the people don’t understand at first, explaining it will help them understand, but no it won’t make it funnier
Hundreds of thousands died in the battle of France, while the army mostly just sat there watching Poland die, it did actually fight the germans when they were on the offensive, saving the ass of numerous brits in Dunkerque and fighting even while encircled on the maginot. The state had to surrender when the enemy was in front of Paris, as beyond that point you're effectively asking your entire population to fight to the death, which many after WW1 or even in general did not really want to. Remember the fascists were an oddball, the worse you'd usually expect as France would have been losing Alsace again and getting humiliated like in 1870-1871, not being fully occupied and having to participate in genocide.
Awesome video, really interesting to watch :) I‘ve got a question for you, did you read Yuval Harari‘s Books? I‘m asking because of the way you described France not actually being a real thing.
@@fafalawaniusa2883 why not? Its generally the idea of social constructs taken to its logical conclusion. Even human rights are as fake as the gods people worship.
2:50 I agree, all the decrees and laws that say that human rights are inherent or that we have them by default are wrong, I think they should be rewritten. They should specifically state that it is not god or nature that gives us our rights, but it is WE who guarantee our rights, we who fought for them who died for them, and who benefit from them, and that we should continue fighting for them even for people not within our nations, china, Russia, Afghanistan, those dictatorships should fall and be replaced by humanitarian republics. GLORY TO HUMANITY!!!
Eh, at the end of the day it's all idealism, so saying it's wrong or right would be... inaccurate? By the same principle we keep human rights around at all, we can still keep the "they are inherent for anyone no matter what" rule.
It's risky. By giving the decree that rights are given also means they can be taken away. For example, in our American constitution, we are by birth situated with inalienable rights, which means that we aren't given them, but have always had them and always will. They can't take back something they didn't give you.
it doesn't really matter. the adrian helmet was used in ww2 as the m26. the rifle appears is a MAS 1936 infantry rifle, the most widespread rifle in service during the war. But hey, what else can I expect from an average 16 year old strategy game player :)
3:48 ayo This 4 colour flag is the flag of interslavic with represents all slavic nations And i think that slavs have not much to do in acient america building piramids lol
How did we skip to statehood? Tribal warfare local trade assimilation. Why on a video on statehood does it not talk about rule of law, currency, etc is odd
It is absurd to believe that all people are equal. It's obvious that people are qualitatively different. Some people ARE superior to others in certain ways. That's a fact of natural reality.
I don't think you can claim that was the goal of monuments is to tie a people together. That is the result, but rarely the goal. That is a like saying humans were the goal of evolution
1- religion is not necessary, the USSR was a super power, and it was Atheist.... you could use a common culture, Ideolgy, or nationalism. 2- the early Islamic culture had very little in the form of arts, they banned painting, sculpting, music, singing, dancing etc...... yet they thrived and were a super power, so... art is not essential, you can substitute it with ther things and keep it to bare minimum. 3- a common language..... most of medieval Europe did not follow this rule, you'd have people of different languages in your country, fighting people of other many languages of the other country.... 4- classes could be substituted with more (specialization) instead, you don't need serfs to build a super power, look at the western world for example.
1, atheist civilizations wont last long because their birth rates almost always collapses, they have less sense of morality and the few that they have are directly copied from religions. 2, the early islamic civilization didnt ban any of thise things u mentioned, actually arts flourished in that era(there are entire frescos,sculptures and mosaics remaining from those times), poetry flourished like never before and many of the most well known middle eastern folk songs were made in the courts of the ear Muslims, additionally mamy musical instruments were invented then, a simple google search can confirm what i just stated, it wont be a exaggeration to say islam was less strict back then than later eras.
love it.
thank you mr. kraut
The German history man like the video
Pog
@@vladimirlenin843 I think Kraut is Austrian
@@maple2524 insert austrian painter joke
@@vladimirlenin843 lmao
I like tribalism its so cool to divide ourselves based on superficial differences.
I LOVE tribalism too!
can u imagine trying to get along with people who have never watched the same tv shows or listened to the same songs as you, doesn’t know any of the same memes, and never intends to?
Saudi Arabia: "I got you fam"
Tribalism is cool
Welcome to human nature and mammal biology. What exactly shocks you about this? Pretty sure we, as a species, have made great progress by moving away from this style of thinking compared to our past. Maybe appreciate that fact?
A note here on the issue of class systems:
It's important for an empire not to become too top-heavy with it's class system. What i mean is that, while you almost inevitably have classes in any society, just from the way societies work (The notable exception here being the incans, who were probably the closest thing to rEaL cOmMuNiSm in all of history), the elites must always remember on whose shoulders they stand.
The french revolution happened because the first and second estates had gathered the vast majority of wealth in their hands while the third was starving. The october revolution happened (in large parts, though the entirety of WW1 certainly was a big factor too) because the nobility lived in absolute luxury while the peasants were starving. Generally speaking, if the top of society gets too heavy, the bottom starts to ask itself why it should keep carrying the top.
Plus, of course, this also makes you vulnerable towards invaders. Why should you fight to maintain a nobility that stuffs itself with food in evermore ridiculous displays of gluttony while you starve producing the food they feast on for every meal, when you might as well let a foreign power overthrow that nobility? You're already starving, it's not like the invasion can make things much worse for you.
That rule isn't quite so universal. More accurately it needs to keep the keys to power up. In many instances the bottom will be a key to power, but in ages like when the chariot dominated bronze age warfare, they were so disconnected they largely had no part in any of it. They were repressed by everyone and everything. This made countries rise and fall in the same areas incredibly common, but since it had little to no effect on the living standards of the people (that is to say... barely any at all no matter who) it doesn't work.
The class structure can't be too top heavy while the bottom can actually do something. If they just can't do anything regardless no matter what, they might as well not even be in the system at all and contribute nothing to whether or not it exists.
The incas had that too
@@buddermonger2000 Oligarchical collectivism
@@buddermonger2000 There have been peasant revolutions since the dawn of time. Hunger being a catalyst for revolt is such a well-known phenomenon that even 2000 years ago the ancient roman empire subsidized food for the poor to negate it.
@SPCv4 No, there were peasant revolts that occurred, but not peasant revolutions. The difference is success for the most part, as well as motive.
Not to mention, in 46 BC, the peasants were still largely armed and represented in the Roman senate, meaning that the bottom was indeed a key to power. However, that's not always the case, as in the example I listed above. The iron age was very different from the bronze age, in that you just needed a lot of men in order to do anything militarily, and it was pretty easy to equip people, which wasn't the case with the bronze age.
6:10 a small correction, the Byzantine (Greek Eastern Roman) Empire didn't use the Latin Numerals but Greek. So 16 would be ΙϚ', Ι is 10 and Ϛ is 6. We actually learnt that at school in Greece at one point, I think it was a one day seminar. The numerals aren't that hard, they work like Arabic but each digit has a different symbol of the Greek alphabet if it is a multiple of 1, 10 or 100. Then 1.000 has the same symbols as 1, 10.000 has the same symbol as 10 and so on. This is because the very archaic Greek alphabet had 27 letters, so they were split in three teams of 9. The first nine were 1-9, the second nine were 10-90 and the third nine 100-900
1000-9000 would require a foreign language
Not scalable
@@gwho Read it again
maybe it is the first centuries of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Pre-Justinian Era
Historian realizes countries aren't real
Physicist realizes rocks aren't real
Mathematician knows you can define reality to be whatever you want
Reminds me of a saying in STEM, all biologists wanna be chemists, all chemists wanna be mathematicians and all mathematicians wish they were god.
@@dogetaxes8893 I'd put physics in between chemists and mathematicians but otherwise I agree lol
all 330 Americans who believe in the constitution, sounds about right (I'm pulling your leg there) either way the druids didn't make Stonehenge, it preceded Celtic being spoken in Britain by about 2000 years.
Also cuneiform isn't just numbers, it was a whole writing system with words and syllables being written.
The most Stonehenges are actually in Korea. Random af.
Please do a part 3 on how civilizations are destroyed. Parts 1 and 2 were excellent but there is something that makes great civilizations go away.
Part 3: ignore steps 1 and 2 to collapse civilisation
Disease, famine, war, and death.
Most empires collapse from the inside due to mismanagement and failing to overcome hard times.
How to Build a Civilization (Part II):
6. Have a COMMON BELIEF.
7. Make representations through ART.
8. Create a whole LANGUAGE and NUMERALS.
9. Create some SOCIAL CLASSES.
I thank the 330 Americans who do the good job of remembering constitution.
great, now you need to make a video detailing which specific inventions will be most important to speedrun the modern era, which resources you need to find and how to find them etc.
and methods to insure that you can use them to advance yourself as fast as possible while ALSO keeping the methods as secret as possible so as not to make an arms race.
@@grayfox6930 exactly
Very interesting and insightful!
Imagine being an archaeologist and digging up an exact replica of France just west of the Appalachian Mountains that dates back to 3000 BCE
This is great👏 definately subscribed and I love the countryballs.
Have you read "a brief history of Mankind" by Yuval Noah Harari by any chance?
yes, this video was inspired by that
@@h0ser Nice.
@@thebestevertherewas nice
My husband loves that book.
@@h0ser no wonder the ideas seemed familiar.
Underrated presentation about civilizations bravo
Dude, cuneiform was not etched into stone. It was pressed into wet clay tablets. That is why cuneiform looks like bird claws on a dried mud puddle. It was designed to be easy to placed in and read from mud.
3:42 Classic New Zealand as always.
Amazing video man!
*Goes back 10k years after watching this*
My British Arse: "Hello my fellow primitives! Look at me, as I bring the fire of civilization!"
The locals: "Agabadsantabapapokto?"
MBA: "Ah. Do any among you speak the queen's english?"
Except nobody really speaks like the Queen did.
I love all your videos! Keep up the good work 🙌
3:08 I have have feeling you said 330 instead of 330 million on purpose, if so, it's accurate😂
Tbh there is another way of creating a massive "empire". You should of course start with giving the people a writing system, a language and beliefs, but after that you should just form a nomadic army that "forcibly" enlists people into it just like the Mongols did at the beginning. After that just break this army into pieces and hope that your language would be preserved by their writing just like Jews preserved Hebrew, their warlike nature would allow them to conquer more tribes and forcibly enlist them and they wouldn't fight because they share the same language, beliefs and you can also give them some idea patriotism and religious fanaticism in order to make them expand outwards instead of infight.
Had to stop you at they wouldn’t fight because they share the same language,
@@aegonii8471 Roman civil wars go brr.
Yeah but Jews didn’t go around conquering stuff, so that’s why their language stayed while the mongols didnt
@Sheep Builder they did, they just couldn't conquer much because they had stronger neighbors
so spain?
This is the tutorial queen Elizabeth the 2nd saw because she led England/Britain/SomethingSomething in Britain. Cause she led them for thousands of years
The joke is bad when you gotta explain it
@@a.hrankopri6153 the joke is the Elizabeth II is Immortal
@@PotatoBoy44 I know, but don’t explain the joke right after you type/ say it, because many people already know it. If they didn’t know it, then explaining it won’t make it funny
@@a.hrankopri6153 him explaining the joke makes it funnier
@@muricanpepe3100 it’s a bad joke when you need to explain it. If the people don’t understand at first, explaining it will help them understand, but no it won’t make it funnier
Modern-day politicians could learn from this video.
Epic video
This is done beautifully
h0ser: Some dusty old piece paper
Me(an American): *Cocks Shotgun* You wanna say that again 🤣
GOATed
Great job
Noice
Using this for my minecraft world lmao
Nice vid
Simply immaculate.
Finally a how to video for me
I found you from recommendations and binged all your videos!!! You're awesome man
Accounting 😎 nerd 😎 gang 🤪
I literally do not like accountants.
@@h0ser seethe😎
@@h0serworst take so far. accountants are the backbone of our society.
Please make more, and add chill music in the background too
But French people didn't necessarily fight to the death in WW2...
Hundreds of thousands died in the battle of France, while the army mostly just sat there watching Poland die, it did actually fight the germans when they were on the offensive, saving the ass of numerous brits in Dunkerque and fighting even while encircled on the maginot.
The state had to surrender when the enemy was in front of Paris, as beyond that point you're effectively asking your entire population to fight to the death, which many after WW1 or even in general did not really want to.
Remember the fascists were an oddball, the worse you'd usually expect as France would have been losing Alsace again and getting humiliated like in 1870-1871, not being fully occupied and having to participate in genocide.
A very good take.
Awesome video, really interesting to watch :)
I‘ve got a question for you, did you read Yuval Harari‘s Books? I‘m asking because of the way you described France not actually being a real thing.
2:42
Lol good one.
They didn't need a resson to stop them from fighting to protect it
0:40 hehe, this is actually our glorious temple to the God of Wisdom
2:15 so your basically saying is " hey guys all your gods are fake and your religion is bs" yea bud that doesn't sound so god to me.
I know what you mean but you could of worded it better so it doesn't sound insulting yah know.
@@fafalawaniusa2883 why not? Its generally the idea of social constructs taken to its logical conclusion. Even human rights are as fake as the gods people worship.
If someone feels their false beliefs are being insulted that’s on them
fine to me
Religion is a spook
Since religiously has greatly fallen, ideologies has took on the role of religion.
Nazbol is larp.
@@dancingisraelisgaming2466 Nazbol is a coherent ideology, the liberals invented the political spectrum
@@NovajaPravda True but I disagree so you are wrong.
@@dancingisraelisgaming2466 i also hate the spanish empire
@@nao2361 Nice.
Super vid
I'm ready, time to get isekai'd.
why did you stop this series?
France is a figment of our imagination? I KNEW IT! TAKE THAT FRANCE!
Where parte 3?
Nice
2:15 we all know someone is going to take this part too sierously
I almost did, but resisted the temptation.
As soon as he said france dosnt exist i realized it was just for fun lol
Culture is selling the idea of a set of people.
'doesn't stop the French to fight to their death in WW2', hahahahaha
please use levelator in future vids it will make your voice better to hear ;)
check google if you dont know what is it
Quality stuff
2:50 I agree, all the decrees and laws that say that human rights are inherent or that we have them by default are wrong, I think they should be rewritten. They should specifically state that it is not god or nature that gives us our rights, but it is WE who guarantee our rights, we who fought for them who died for them, and who benefit from them, and that we should continue fighting for them even for people not within our nations, china, Russia, Afghanistan, those dictatorships should fall and be replaced by humanitarian republics. GLORY TO HUMANITY!!!
Eh, at the end of the day it's all idealism, so saying it's wrong or right would be... inaccurate? By the same principle we keep human rights around at all, we can still keep the "they are inherent for anyone no matter what" rule.
It's risky. By giving the decree that rights are given also means they can be taken away. For example, in our American constitution, we are by birth situated with inalienable rights, which means that we aren't given them, but have always had them and always will. They can't take back something they didn't give you.
Humanism.
swear down this British jokes are getting better and better
So you basically summarized Sapiens?
You are so spot on. Love your videos. In depth research
"that didn't stop them from fighting to their deaths in WW2 for it" *proceeds to show a WW1 frenchie*
it doesn't really matter. the adrian helmet was used in ww2 as the m26. the rifle appears is a MAS 1936 infantry rifle, the most widespread rifle in service during the war.
But hey, what else can I expect from an average 16 year old strategy game player :)
pt 3 please
Lovely
I love how he explained religion.
3:48 ayo
This 4 colour flag is the flag of interslavic with represents all slavic nations
And i think that slavs have not much to do in acient america building piramids lol
How did we skip to statehood? Tribal warfare local trade assimilation. Why on a video on statehood does it not talk about rule of law, currency, etc is odd
Earth
I love all the jabs about some of our beliefs
❤
It is absurd to believe that all people are equal. It's obvious that people are qualitatively different. Some people ARE superior to others in certain ways. That's a fact of natural reality.
By people do you mean individuals? Because that would be correct.
@@pale_oblivion9496no, he means race.
@@rizkyadiyanto7922 races have no inherent “superiorities”. At least, no important ones
God damnit i was about to make a video about that
3:08 all 330 of us
Pls make more
Druids didn’t make Stonehenge. Very interesting video nonetheless!
Don’t you mean the Stone Bruh Face
@@Kaiserboo1871thats moai.
Hey where’s part 3
The 330 Americans...
Is the approval for the declaration of independence really 1:1 000 000?
Is it that bad?
𓃱⚣︎𓃱𓃟𓀡 ♔︎𓅷𓃟𓅷𐂂𓃗♔︎𓅷 𓅓𓆙𓅰𓂻𓅷
I can into egyptian language XD
Part 3 development
Gud
First whole part is prejudice, but hear me out...
Very few Egyptian pharaohs were actually buried in pyramids
Ok what's step 3
WHERES PART 3?
🗿
I don't think you can claim that was the goal of monuments is to tie a people together. That is the result, but rarely the goal. That is a like saying humans were the goal of evolution
comment for algorythm
Canadian must support Canadian
"ummm your belief isnt real, stop making it a reality because ujhhj reddit atheism said you cant"
“why are u saying i cant build a hospital where only god heals the sick? im making my belief a reality, reddit athiesm much?”
Wait does that mean France doesn't exist? Are you saying countries don't exist? 😳
that's what 'e's sayin
and it's notin but da truth
As long as you believe a country doesn't exist, it doesn't exist. For an example, i believe the only country that exists currently is yugoslavia
Yeah, like China doesn't regocnise Taiwan
All the other countries exist but Fr*nce is invalid
What is France but the Enemy?
first
3:08 no way so many?
Native britons made Stonehenge not the Celtic.
So the numbers on people represent:
1) Asians
2)Europeans
3)?
4)?
5)?
6)?
7) Indigenous people
8) Black people
What are the others?
6 is aliens
*showing roman empire* says KiNg
i love the notion that france is not a real country
The Druids did not make Stonehenge
330 Americans living in America... interesting.
"So this will make your society last for a thousand years... unlike most civilizations from 3000BC."
_laughs in Judaism_
Can you do a video on POLAND? PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
1- religion is not necessary, the USSR was a super power, and it was Atheist.... you could use a common culture, Ideolgy, or nationalism.
2- the early Islamic culture had very little in the form of arts, they banned painting, sculpting, music, singing, dancing etc...... yet they thrived and were a super power, so... art is not essential, you can substitute it with ther things and keep it to bare minimum.
3- a common language..... most of medieval Europe did not follow this rule, you'd have people of different languages in your country, fighting people of other many languages of the other country....
4- classes could be substituted with more (specialization) instead, you don't need serfs to build a super power, look at the western world for example.
1, atheist civilizations wont last long because their birth rates almost always collapses, they have less sense of morality and the few that they have are directly copied from religions.
2, the early islamic civilization didnt ban any of thise things u mentioned, actually arts flourished in that era(there are entire frescos,sculptures and mosaics remaining from those times), poetry flourished like never before and many of the most well known middle eastern folk songs were made in the courts of the ear Muslims, additionally mamy musical instruments were invented then, a simple google search can confirm what i just stated, it wont be a exaggeration to say islam was less strict back then than later eras.
3 (again), latin was used as a common language in medieval Europe.