@@VloggingThroughHistory I don't even think you should post the second half of this, vile misinformed try to be tough guy. You shouldn't be sharing your platform with this type of idiot. I am also not saying not to watch people you disagree with or different point of views, but this guy is embarrassing, he creates a straw-man and then has trouble beating his own weak straw man.
At 27:47, he says that the south was under represented, but due to the 3/5 Compromise in the Constitution it gave them 30 + more Representatives than they should have.
Not to mention the Electoral College which gave them more representation when choosing a president. It really must have burned a lot of people when Lincoln got elected anyway.
Wait, just to be clear, you're saying the south shouldn't have had those representatives because black people shouldn't have been counted, right? The 3/5th compromise is an interesting example where the south said blacks were people, and the north said they weren't.
If they were over respresented, as you claim, then why would the South vote to hurt themselves economically? specifically, the tariffs that the gov't imposed which affected ONLY the Southern economy. Your argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Exactly. I am sub to Razor but i haven’t seen this guys video “yet” because i have a feeling he may be one of those bias clowns, and reading that andrew jackson comment (Probably an argument used in this video) as if it was a “GOTCHA! TAKE THAT!” is just pure idiocy because it changes nothing. Another president being a dick doesn’t make the president we are discussing any less of a dick. That’s just pure denialism
@@metallica1fan1 It's one thing to learn from history as to not repeat past mistakes but its another thing to say [insert party here] is literally Hitler or literally the Confederates or literally [insert group I don't like here]. History doesn't repeat unless you make the same mistakes.
@@metallica1fan1 History never truly repeats 'itself' - that's a proposition that physics and even miracles cannot accommodate. But history _does_ rhyme, sometimes. Less often than the phases of the moon, anyhow.
Yes! I kept thinking about how if you’re half as worked up as this guy while trying to do serious research how can you even dream of being able to look through the information with a clear and analytical mind.. just seems absolutely pointless. Being passionate about a subject is great being emotionally cranked to 11 is going to make it impossible to learn anything
I wonder if this guy even practiced his speech/rant/argument in the mirror with his reflection. I can imagine his reflection looking back at him and responding with "What!? You lost me at... (Probably somewhere near the beginning)"
Woodrow Wilson -- born in Virginia, raised in Georgia and the Carolinas. His father helped form and lead the Presbyterian Church of the Confederacy. Spent pretty much all his formative years in the South and that includes during the Civil War and the first half of the Reconstruction era. Sure, he spent a lot more time later in life in Jersey (and other northern states), but yeah, Wilson was unquestionably a southerner at heart. As Wilson himself once said, "a boy never gets over his boyhood, and never can change the subtle influences which have become part of him...the only place in the world where nothing has to be explained to me is the South."
Among other things, Rageaholic omits these factors: 1. Lincoln's approach to slavery was to restrict its expansion, and he believed this would kill slavery in the long run. 2. One goal of the Emancipation Proclamation was to prevent England and France from recognizing the Confederacy.
Yeah, the thought that by restricting new slaves slavery would disappear without the need for radical action was one of the most popular anti-slavery idea of the time. It basically means you can play the good guy without ever putting yourself directly into conflict with the slave owner which is why England and France were more than happy to accept it as a compromise. The only problem was that it wasn't any effective as it just ment slaves became even more of a commodity and people would just outright lie to keep acquiring new slaves anyway.
@@gabrieldossantos1116 Well, I would say that Lincoln's strategy worked, because it got the South to secede and spark the civil war. Lincoln said in his House Divided speech that the nation would become either all free or all slavery. The South knew this was true, and could not abide restrictions on the expansion of slavery.
I mean it is a very simple fact that Lincoln could not free the slaves. There is often much elaboration on what he thought about it or what his aim was. That is misssing the fundamental issue: Slavery was states law. That is a plain and simple fact. The (ANY) president had no means of any sort whatsoever to abolish slavery! You could have elected the most radical aboltionist and it would be the same. It took some creative use of his war powers but only the states could actually do it for real and eventually did.
@@johnmiwa6256 Exactly. The Southerners even picked up on the strategy which is why despite all of Lincolns words - which people now try to use to prove he wasn't opposed at all- the repeatedly claimed that he had a radical hostility towards "the peculiar institution." The Confederacy themselves said Lincolns words were a smoke screen he was using to get rid of slavery. Yet somehow southern revisionists refuse to listen to them on that point.
It's one of the most common conflations I see made by Lost Causers. They never discern the difference between typical anti-slavery views of the period, and abolitionism. They use a false dichotomy that simply wasn't true in the first half of the19th century: If you didn't want to end slavery immediately and unconditionally, you didn't care about slavery at all. Which is only true in the 20th and 21st century, and displays their limited (or non-existent) ability to try and understand the politics of the period. It's one of the most basic political concepts you need to understand before you can even discuss Civil War politics. Without it, your entire perception will be easily skewed and distorted.
I love the part where Julius Howell, the so called “evidence” as to why the Civil War was being fought, literally says “As a young man I didn’t understand why the war was happening”
And even if we believe what this guy was saying (which is a very big if, by the way), that doesn't at all change what hundreds of thousands of other soldiers or the Confederate government thought they were fighting the war for. And it sure as sh*t wasn't taxes.
@@cargopilotguy305 like how the then young men purged most of the CSA's declarations of Secession from theirs? Seriously look it up and press ctrl+f and search out "slave". What op is saying is that those guys are coping, and possibly seething.
@@occam7382 This might be long... Abraham Lincoln famously said, "If there are those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Republic without freeing any slaves see I would do it..." In 1858 Lincoln said quote, "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors out of negros, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and as much as any other man am in favor of having superior position assigned to the white race." Two days before Lincoln's election on November 3, 1860, Charleston Mercury wrote in a newspaper outlining why Virginia should leave the Union. Quote "The real causes of dissatisfaction in the South with the North, are in the unjust taxation & expenditure of the taxes by the government of the United States, & in revolution the North has effected in this government from a confederated Republic, to a national sectional Despotism" Jefferson Davis (president of the South) said "The North was mad and Blind; it would not let us govern ourselves, and so war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize the musket and fight our battle. Unless you acknowledge our right to self government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for our independence, and that, or extermination" James Spencer, British Cotton trader & trade advisor, Scottish Journal wrote "The tariff question, again enters largely, more largely than is commonly supposed; into the irritated & aggrieved feelings of southerners. And it cannot be denied that in this matter they have both a serious injury & an unconstitutional injustice to resent... All Northern products are protected; and the moral tariff is a very masterpiece of folly & injustice" Charles Dickens (famed author) wrote "The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the South" A British correspondent "The outlook of the War" said "Everybody still professes to disapprove of slavery. Of course, so in the cant of the day runs, slavery is a very dreadful thing, and everybody the South above all, would be glad to see it abolished; but slavery has nothing to do with the current war" The Weekly Athenaeum (1865) "As a rule, the great mass of the public expenditures were made from the North, not in the South, so that Southerners found themselves doubly taxed; taxed first for the benefit of Northern manufacturers, & then, in the disbursement of the public funds, denied an equal participation in the benefits accruing therefrom" Charles Beard, scholar and historian did an in depth analysis of the war and summed his conclusions up with this quote. "Since therefore, the abolition of slavery never appeared in the platform of any great political party, since the only appeal ever made to the electorate on that issue was scornfully repulsed, since the spokesman of the Republicans emphatically declared that his party never intended to interfere with slavery in any shape or form, it seems reasonable to assume that the institution of slavery was not a fundamental issue during the epoch preceding bombardment of Fort Sumter" On January 21, 1861, five days before Louisiana withdrew from the Union, The New Orleans Daily Crescent wrote an editorial explaining the cause of secession "They (The South) know that it is their import trade that draws from people's pockets 60-70 million of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, & in the protection and encouragement of Northern interests...These are the reasons why these people do not wish the South to secede from the Union. They (The North) are enraged at the prospect of being despoiled of the rich feast upon which they have long fed and fattened" These are but a handful of quotes from people at the time from both sides of the war and onlookers. It's worth noting as Razorfist points out, Lincoln didn't even abolish slavery in the states held by the union and allowed it to continue despite the fact his army was supposedly fighting to abolish it. In fact, some of the worst practices of slavery were carried out in northern states and were exempt from abolition during the entire course of the war. Michigan was especially horrible towards it slaves. In addition to this, all Lincoln did was offer the change from slavery to indentured servitude and the introduction of the income tax made slaves out of all of us. History is written by the victorious and leading up to the war and during it was apparent on both sides what the war was over and slavery wasn't it.
Just be a loud, confident guy yelling into the microphone and those who already shared your beliefs, will agree with anything you say. No matter if it's true or not.
Unfortunately this is becoming more and more prevalent in the online space. "Influencer effect" I call it. People are more susceptible to believing and following someone who has a strong charismatic screen presence. Because outspoken charismatic people tend to appeal primarily to the viewers emotions. This gets the viewer to return to the content over and over until they consider themselves a fan of that youtuber. The end result is you end up with a fanbase who chooses not to question the accuracy or knowledge of the influencer they follow because it's uncomfortable to consider the possibility that this person you've come to admire could be full of crap on many points. It's exhausting to fact check every claim made by all the content creators you follow. So people don't bother and just repeat what they've heard from people that make them feel a strong emotion. Be that joy or anger. We used to only deal with this problem with politicians and celebrities. But now anyone with decent editing skills and the gift of gab can carve out a little bubble of the internet for themselves for like minded people to isolate themselves in and repeat the influencer's opinions back to each other.
@@dudemcguy1227 yeah (maybe a little bit political so dont hate me), i feel like people like jordan b Peterson and Andrew Tate have this cult following that accepts whatever they say as long as they are confident in their wrongness
He absolutely did in the beginning. "If you need an hour to convince your audience, it's probably not a good argument." Which is such a farce statement to say when there is a plethora of information to go over before even hearing the perspective of someone else. Also Razor does bring the receipts and sources to his perspective and argument. Mainstream government school narratives teach one perspective of the civil war while Razorfist definitely showed a different side of Lincoln and information I wasn't aware of. I imagine the truth lies somewhere in the middle. But after seeing how much of my youth education was lies in regards to history, I'm open for historical interpretation and more facts to be brought to the forefront.
I just busted up laughing because the minute he said Wilson was a Northern, we screamed in perfect synch “NO HE WASN’T!” One thing I will always credit this channel with is even if we come from different points of view and disagree on some topics, at least we can analyze and be civil about it, something that is sadly lacking these days.
@@shortlivedglory3314 True. Twain said it best - “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to speak and remove all doubt.” Why I pick and choose my battles and try, as best able, to make sure I’m on pretty firm ground. Even then, I’ll admit if I got something wrong.
@@epicurius1 I’d need to check the math on that. Born in Staunton, VA, know he was there until at least 4, then moved south to Georgia and I don’t think he left Georgia until his teens or 20s.
Dude is so angry and passionate about this you'd think Lincoln himself broke into his house beat him up, slapped his wife and kicked his dog or something.
De Tocqueville did not say that slavery was more brutal in the North! He said that he thought "the prejudice of the race appears to be stronger in the States which have abolished slavery" because in the South "the master . . . knows that he can in a moment reduce him to the dust at pleasure", whereas in the North a man "fears lest they should some day be confounded together". Incredible how far this guy managed to twist those words into a totally different shape.
@@jeramysteve3394 He got it (and most of his video) from a widely panned book by Lost Causer hack Thomas DiLorenzo, who in turn took his paraphrased and mutilated quote from De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America".
@@justinheads5751 Unclear how I've done that by pointing out De Toqueville wasn't talking about the "brutality" of (nearly nonexistant) slavery in the north, which the maker of the video blatantly lied about. Indeed, he frequently opined on the callous brutality of slavery in the south, and even does so in this quote ("in a moment reduce him to the dust at pleasure"). Him talking about the anxiety felt by northern whites at the prospect of equality has nothing to do with supposed northern brutality towards the slaves that most of them didn't even have. As he astutely points out later in his book, southern whites didn't feel this anxiety at all because they could brutalize their slaves at their pleasure.
@@pawanyr360 aw shit! Get him bruv! Teach this man the difference between listning and comprehension. Or to quote one of my favorite sound bites, "NOO STOOOOP! He's already deeeaaaddd!" - cant remember from ehere though lol.
Literally 80% of "Linclon's" quotes are either paraphrases or direct Biblical scriptures. Matthew 12:25 " Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand." To say he is an Athesist or non Christian is literally insane
Which is probably why he didn't belong to a certain church he read the Bible himself and interpreted it as he saw it written likely seeing all churches having peices of the intended faith but not the whole thing
@@QuartetGhostHe grew up in a Baptist family and went to Protestant churches, but when you live in the middle of nowhere, you get used to reading and respecting the Bible on your own.
This guy feels like the archetype for the loud, aggressive commenters who leave small novels in the comments section of social media that are always overflowing with pseudo-knowledge and deceptive quotes to draw in the impressionable. Keep up the great work, VTH! You have the patience of a saint to sit through this stuff, lol
@@untruelie2640 AND THATS SOMETHING YOUR LIBERAL VEGAN PROFESSOR WOULD DROP THE CHALK OVER IF YOU SAID IT IN CLASS, AND ALL THE REDPILLED STUDENTS WOULD CLAP So exhausting.
This was a great reaction video, there's just one thing I want to add: When the guy said that Lincoln was trying to incite a bloody slave revolt which would lead to disproportionately high numbers of murdered women and children (because the husbands were away fighting), he didn't just invent that argument but echoed contemporary opinions. Many Southerners, northern Democrats and Europeans saw the Emancipation Proclamation exactly as the attempted incitement of an extremely bloody slave revolt that he describes here. The massacres of Haiti were still in the peoples memories, so it made sense that many people thought so. Of course, as Atun Shei said, "it was a doomsday prophecy that just didn't come true". But for many contemporary people (many non-southerners among them) it was a real concern.
@@cyberus1438 Not only Southerners were losing sleep over it, but also many Northerners and Europeans. Most people who were anti-slavery didn't want the slaves freedom to be bought with the blood of women and children.
You know, people can say what they want about atun shei, but the dude actually supports his points with real evidence and doesn't sit there and scream at the camera which a bunch of BS falsehoods lol. You can see that through your reactions lol. You pause and either agree or disagree cordially with atun shei and this dude you just couldn't let him keep talking lol. Love the reactions and the content you add.
@@commandershepard7742 he is definitely, in many ways, the *opposite* of Atum-Shei. That includes his argumentative style. Atun-Shei is more cordial and levelheaded, arguing passionately but coolly while citing all his sources, whereas this guy kinda rants at a camera for an hour and makes multiple basic mistakes (Jackson being the first non-founding father president, for example).
I’d love to see a debate between the Rageaholic and him. In his epic war of aggression vid he used quotes from Steve Douglas about slavery and how it was a cornerstone
Everyone I’ve ever seen that says that Checkmate Lincolnites is extreme and insulting to those who hold the opposite view probably have never seen this or consumed this type of content, because if they had, they would not be saying that. And if they have and still call it that, then they truly are tone deaf.
@@nukclear2741 I think maybe there was some miscommunication here. I love Atun-Shei and his content. I was stating that those who have seen the content in this video and still call Atun-Shei's content insulting and grating are tone deaf.
"the Civil War was not fought abput slavery, but economic matters" ...is he implying slavery was not an economic matter? Free labor force which literally bred more free labor? The entire economy of half of the United States? They way of life for millions of people, both workers and owners? Plantations? Tobacco? Cotton? Is this guy for real? Yes, there was a humanitarian component to the war, but to imply slavery is disjointed from the economy is simply nuts. Thank you VTH for sitting through this madness.
I mean for the most part it is disjointed. Are you seriously naive enough to think the economy was just slavery? Newsflash. The 1619 project isn't real history.
@@CallanElliott of course, there is a social component to the matter, but in essence it remains an economic one for sure. Trying to separate slavery from the concept makes little sense when analysing the Civil War and all its causes and consequences.
The idea about it being about tariffs is a complete myth, for one the majority of tariffs were actually being processed through the North through New York and Boston. As for taxes, taxes weren't really a thing in the Antebellum era, it had existed for things like whiskey but there was no income taxes. Back on tariffs, the two tariffs prior to the Civil War were actually very favorable to their slave-based economies with the Walker Tariff of 1845 and the Tariff of 1857, low rates and it encouraged international trade, especially with Britain who had become reliant on cotton for textile industries Implying that these things were the cause of the Civil War is Lost Cause horseshit
@@HanHonHon It's always very hard for a nation, a country or a people to confront their past and the misdeeds of their ancestors, and finding alternative theories is a great temptation, just look at Japan and their war crimes, their history books say they "just wanted to free Asia from European colonialism" which is not even close to what happened, and also doesn't explain the millions of Asian corpses they left in their wake. But it's easier than confronting the past, and the same is true for the South, "states' rights" sounds much better than "we wanted to own Black people".
I think my favorite part was him saying that the soldiers sent to put down the riot were 'recently defeated Fredericksburg troops', only to then immediately play a video mentioning that they were actually fresh from Gettysburg, a resounding Union victory
When he said that the troops from Fredericksburg were sent to New York. I litterally was like "does he mean Gettysburg" and then the clip confirmed it. Litterally could not imagine being those soldiers. To go from a horrific battle against General Lee's "Immortal Virginian Army" then to suppressing a riot of your own countrymen must have been a god awful experience.
@@Torente32 the only thing is the battle of Fredericksburg was six months before the NY riots. I'm not doubting that there were soldiers who served in the battle. I just think it's just a little bit of a mislead to say "they came from the recent battle of Fredericksburg".
@@Scornfull true, and I know to compare them is a bit insensitive, but the men who were at Gettysburg were in New York 2 weeks after not 6 months. Still hell for the soldiers regardless. Also I can be wrong but I thought a nice amount of armies (especially for the north) were moved by train during this war. Not saying that was the only way it was done but this wasn't the same conditions as combat in the napoleonic wars. Like when Napoleon's army marched to Russia and then back to France(oversimplification).
@Someone Somewhere Like that doesn't happen everywhere? The comments made on his video in response to this one are not constructive with the exception of a few people simply pointing in the direction of this video as a counter argument that brings more facts to the table. The comment section in most videos are sycophants, trolls, haters resulting in hot garbage when disagreement is on the table.
Sir, I am 5 minutes into the whole video and am debating stopping. Not because of you. But because of the material at hand. All props to you for making it through this.
Me too. Decided to read the comments before I decided to continue. Based on what I've read here, I think I'll just stop and hit the like button on my way out.
I've had to stop and restart a few times. The gentleman that made the original video seems to live in some sort of fantasy bubble. His arguments are wild and incredibly flimsy but he argues that anyone who knows all the evidence against him must be an idiot sheep or something.
Razor fist tries to make the argument that Lincoln was responsible for the first draft in American history. However, Davis insisted the first draft in American history to hope to combat the south’s manpower problem
“I know that some of his people are going to be coming over here to try and rip me to shreds, bring it on”. That’s the position of someone who knows and trust the information they’ve given, challenging opposition to a discussion rather than telling them to play in traffic. Props to you.
@@zagorith14 his exact words were "I encourage such people to do something more productive, such as cartwheeling in traffic." So no, we aren't misrepresenting what the guy said.
@@zagorith14 Wow. How does it feel to be so brutally wrong? You either never watched the video to begin with, or you're one of his "defenders," in which case, I got no time for you.
Trust me, most of them were already going to agree with him. The internet has become a fantastic resource for people who just want to be proven right about something. Even when they're wrong. Especially when they're wrong.
Most of them probably didn't even watch his video. They most likely watched 30 seconds, didn't understand a single word because of the yelling, and just blindly agreed with him because they like a confident sounding guy with a viewpoint they like. Dunning Kruger effect in full force with this guy.
I mean, that guy's previous videos is him ranting about the Republicans' clusterfuck in the 2022 midterms. Ironic for someone who supports the GOP to shit on perhaps the greatest President in American history, who was a Republican.
The fact that he kept getting history wrong, like forgetting that John Quincy Adams was not a founding Father, his credibility was destroyed as was proving his point.
If we strip away all the quotes and historical occurrences this man used out of context, what is his video left with? A series of rants (often self-contradictory) and footage of him trying to look like the coolest and most angsty kid in his high school's graduating class. None of this even shows me that he's even tried to curate this to be persuasive and refined rhetoric. He isn't even trying
IDK if Lincoln could be called an atheist, but quoting a politicians speech to prove what his beliefs are is a slippery slope. Lincoln by your own admission had to temper his speeches not alienate the voters. He probably wasn't an atheist, but could very well been agnostic
Being agnostic and being an atheist aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, many people who identify as atheist also identify as agnostic aka agnostic atheists; which means "I'm not sure if there is a God but I think that more than likely there isn't one." It's very likely that Lincoln was an Agnostic Deist; not sure about the existence of God, but believes that if there is one, they are non interfering type of deity.
Lincoln undoubtedly was atheist early in his life. I think he was more open to a deity by the time he became president, and was moving towards Christianity by the time of his death. If you ever read about the notes he would write himself-they were just random thoughts he would jot down and comeback to later- you can really see his evolution on the subject of God. The notes were never meant for publication. To get a good idea how Lincoln’s thoughts are expressed, watch the movie Lincoln. Even if you think it’s propaganda; the scene at the telegraph office is an excellent example of how his thought evolves in the real life notes.
16 minutes in and I've already gone for the old shoebox to the face more than once. How you manage to hang on for just under an hour is impressive, Chris! Now back to the video.
Yeah. This guy is honestly just… really bad at arguing this. Like, it really says something that in most video, Chris will say something like “Alright guys, please stay civil in the comments. We can have reasonable disagreement, but we don’t want to get vicious, okay?” But Chris in this video? *”Bring it on.”*
Yeah. And thankfully I haven’t seen anyone say anything which is good because when he said this guys people will come over and try to rip him all I could think was “this idiot has a following. How scary”
I'm surprised nobody has reported him for a lot of misinformation, I don't think he even realizes he's doing it, I think he just doesn't understand his sources. It's like he just gets to exist care free, just think about how many of his subscribers think he's right most of the time.
‘Before you accuse me of being a LOST CAUSER, allow me to gradually check off nearly every tenet of the Lost Cause under the sun all while gaslighting you into believing that you’re just imagining things, FRIENDO!!’ Good lord, I think even half of Lost Causers would be taken aback by the mass murder and rape of women by escaped slaves part, what a Birth of a Nation take that was (the best part being the ‘See where I’m going with this?’ part, cuz no I absolutely didn’t weirdo and I would thank you not to arrogantly act as though it were the most obvious conclusion one could reach)
I've come to realize that lost cause there is just something y'all throw out when someone criticizes Lincoln or the Union, I half expect to be called a lost cause when I criticized the US invasion of Iraq at this point
@@ronniehopper2726 Allow me to list out all the very not Lost Cause ideas espoused in the video in question: 1. The Tariff of Abominations being definitive proof that the South seceded over tariffs in 1860 2. The Corwin Amendment being definitive proof that the South did not secede over slavery in 1860 (it did not guarantee its expansion, which is why it was denied) 3. Fixating to a near obsessive degree on the military inadequacies of the North during the early period of the war 4. The infamous video of that one isolated Confederate veteran insisting that secession was a matter of states’ rights rather than slavery (uploaded to RUclips by the clearly even-perspective source which is the channel known as ‘blackconfederate1’, cuz what would a Lost Causer need from a source like that?) 5. Asserting that the downtrodden South was shouldering the brunt of the US economy leading up to the war and being outrageously extorted by the tyrannical North Come on, these are classic cherry-picks and distortions with such time-tested associations to the Lost Cause that you may as well be lifting them straight from the Sons of Confederate Veterans website (and it’s worth noting that this is a born and raised North Carolinian saying all this, just to be clear)
@@aidanvannynatten2787 what I'm trying to get through to you is the point of rageaholic video was not why the civil war was fought which is his only f****** report but the tyranny of Lincoln
@@ronniehopper2726 If I understand you right, you’re gonna have trouble getting that thru to me, cuz you can’t have a conversation about Lincoln without expressing some sort of perspective on the Civil War, since that was literally his entire presidency, thus the video reasonably contains lots of commentary it
@@aidanvannynatten2787 yeah this video by this failed academic contains a lot about the civil war the rage-aholic video doesn't it's about his authoritarian his dictatorial overstep if you pay attention in the first 5 minutes of rageaholic video he blatantly states that slavery was an issue for the Confederacy but not its sole reason, to put it in modern terms the Confederate States was more akin to the European Union then to the federation that we see ourselves in now, each state in the Union and independent republic. They were a myriad of reasons given for secession, Kentucky succeeded from the union and its main reason neutrality, the same for Missouri, they didn't want to take up arms against their people they consider their Brothers
@@darkbrightnorth Razorfist is not a Libertarian. He considers himself a Goldwater Conservative. Vlogger Through History is a scammed type, lies about never watching Razor video but stops the video to pull out some damn site to push his BS narrative. VLG is trash.
I lost it at Chris’s dive into the past talking about the wishes for titles to be inherited almost immediately followed by his deadpan delivery of “Oh, so not family friendly” when the Rageaholic went Rageaholic F-Bombity Bomb
It should be noted that the "Tariff of Abominations" was actually written by Southern Democrats, chiefly John Calhoun, because they felt that it wouldn't pass and they could then blame the failure on the New England States and the National Republicans, who were the forerunners of the Whig party. Calhoun even admitted that slavery was a major sticking point during the crisis. Henry Clay was also a supporter of eventual emancipation.
So your argument is elected politicians ALWAYS represent those who they claim to represent? And simultaneously, your other argument is that politicians say nothing but the truth.
@@irsmedic First off, Strawman argument much. Secondly, I never said anything close to what you say here. Third, I learned what I wrote above through actual research and reading books.
Razor's claim that Thomas Lincoln was a slave catcher is a brazen lie. Thomas Lincoln moved out of Kentucky (a slave state) to Indiana (a free state, and brand new as well!) in 1816. Even before that, he was known to dislike slavery, for both religious and economic reasons. In Kentucky, he chose to join an anti-slavery church. And in Indiana, the church the Lincolns were members of--Pigeon Creek Baptist--split over slavery, with the anti-slavery members, including the Lincolns, leaving to start their own church.
Actually, it's 100% the truth. Yes why would a slave catcher move from a slave state or free state? Because that's where the business was! Prior to the southern secession the biggest political controversy of the time was the fugitive slave act. This was a constitutional law that essentially ordered free states bordering slave states to capture and return any slaves who escaped into those terrories. To the South, this was part of the constitutional agreement that was agreed upon when they joined the Union, to the north, it was completely unfair that they had to raise taxes and militias dissolve what they saw as a Southern problem. The slave-catchers like Thomas Lincoln, it was their bread and butter.
@@branden3785Ask VTH for his damn proof he hasn't watched Razorfist video before. He has too many damn convenient BS "facts" ready to diarrhea out for a reaction video.
I have to say you have the most mature and restrained demeanor imaginable to be able to sit through this intro at 6:40 with such a calm face. You are a saint
I've listened to my fair share of insane people but this dude might just take the cake as the crown prince of historial reimagining long may he reign. And for context I live in Finland so I get to listen to our eastern neighbours tell me how bloodthirsty savage Finns invaded the peace loving Soviet Union forcing them to defend themselves. That's the level of insane that this is.
This guy’s name before was Razor Fist (interestingly, someone I haven’t seen or heard from in many many years and did not expect to find him on this channel, of all places), and he is a well known libertarian / weird nationalist-esque guy who consistently gave all the worst takes on domestic issues here in the USA. I’m pretty sure he rose out of the anti - SJW movement, but he has always been one of those weird larping guys that wears leather gloves and aviators in almost every single video.
@@MeowingWhale I can tell you hes not a real Libertarian. Most of us are normal people who just want the Government to mind its own business, not whatever this idiot is saying
Some more comments to add. “If you look at previous secession crises It doesn’t fit the pattern!” Except yes it did…in this case that is. He completely ignored the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, John C. Calhoun’s influence on southern politics and the argument of states right (to preserve slavery), The Dred Scott Decision, The Fugitive Slave Act, Kansas-Nebraska Act, and all of the compromises and debates that were had over the slavery issue before the Civil War. It’s just a mix of half-truths, out of context quotes, and straight up lies. It’s legitimately one of the most embarrassing historical videos I have ever seen. He doesn’t even bother to get his dates and times right.
Come oooooooooooooon, how are dates and times important to anything historical at all? For all we know, the south could have originally seceded in 1922 after the great crisis that was the constipation riots following World War 2 in 1569. To back this up I will give a quote of President U.S Grant on the importance of unification and a core essential of human life "Water".
@@ZairokPhoen You say this jokingly but someone actually tried arguing against me, a historian, on this very principle-that we can’t know anything for 110 percent certainty, therefore anything goes. This was over transatlantic trade (or lack thereof) in the first millennium BC.
Glad you covered this. I had an argument with a family member who still believes the lost cause and even believes in the south will rise again . Man is my grandfather and doesn't even use 5 dollars bills because of Lincolns face or 50 dollar bills because of Grant's face. Just shows even with the amount of time since the Civil War it's still a hot topic to this day and a divisive on as well . Glad you could go here . Keep up the great work Chris 👍
i always wondered about this (a bit). I mean had they succeeded the US would have split (at least once, possibly more). It's BS anyway but i never got the motivation for the whole southern excusism. Seeing americans always being crazy with heir flags and how amazing everything is... what do these people want? I mean today. A split US? A less United States or powerful US? Slavery back? Or just a lame excuse for ones darker history parts and a lost war? Nobody aside from people who want to believe such excuses will.
Tbh, Johnny Reb once said after he suggested Billy yank that "Slaves were treated equally and better in the south" with *"True, I am a Cartoon Character, Not an Idiot"* Of which Rage guy clearly said about French Ambassadors looking at the situation of Slavery in the north
As soon as you said that someone describes him as “the opposite of atun shei” I immediately thought “uh oh.” And this video turned out to be even worse then I expected. I didn’t expect this to be a genuine lost cause video.
What makes no sense is you said slavery was the reason for secession but then said the Corwin Amend allowed them to keep slaves which means there was no reason for secession.
On the contrary, it proves the Union understood it was about slavery. The reason for secession (and the reason the Corwin Amendment wasn't enough) is the Republicans opposed the expansion of slavery to new territories. In the minds of pro-slavery southern politicians, ending expansion = the slow death of the institution of slavery. The Corwin Amendment did nothing to protect the expansion of slavery. That's why the Confederate Constitution banned the admission of free states (so much for States' Rights)
@VloggingThroughHistory valid point, can't disagree. Anyone can argue the union (after the war) didn't allow states to rejoin the union unless they abolished slavery either which is violation of states rights then too. It's never as simple as slavery vs not slavery. In every conflict there's vaults of money in the center of it and the Victors of that conflict get to spin the story of that conflict however they wish.
@VloggingThroughHistory hold on, on the principle of states rights, any random state/country can declare itself a member of the confederacy, and the confederacy has to let them join to adhere to this principle? Is that what you implied by "so much for states rights"?
I genuinely try to be nice and civil when it comes to stuff like this but I legitimately lost brain cells listening to this and it was a struggle to even get through this video even with you talking about it and correcting him. there’s simply so many factually false statements that its almost impossible to not get a headache.
I do love that he cites the exact same Confederate survivor interview from 1948 that Atun-Shei used in his last video, to make his point much more convincingly I might add, that the Lost Cause revisionism was long underway by this time and the interview was evidence of that attempted rehabilitation of the South’s war aims as compared to what men actually said at the time - remember his big bag? Just amusing that Razor started off saying he has no interest in the Lost Cause or Southern revisionism, then does the exact thing that would reinforce that narrative even further. 😂
I was expecting it to be bad but even I was suprised when the guy made the "Lincoln made the Emancipation proclamation because he wanted to kill ladies" arguement.
Yeah, that's not even Lost Cause, that's actual Civil War era Southern sentiment of why slavery needs to be preserved. Longstreet even said as much in outrage against Northern freeing of Southern slaves.
it blows my mind that people watch that guy unironically. Well, its actually crazy how that guy is being serious with any of his arguments. I'm getting the, no one talked to me in High School, vibes.
The shear bredth of your knowledge is impressive. The fact you were able to respond to this whole video just off the top of your head is insane. This video probably took him a while to research & put together and in 1 hour youre just like "no"
@@Bigcheese1334 Well looking up specifics is whatever. The fact hes able to mount a counteragrument in his head is impressive when most people are out here like "uh, so when did the civil war happen?"
He ignored like half of his points, sometimes calling them "irrelevant" when they revolved around Lincoln himself as opposed to the civil war, when in fact the video itself is about Lincoln not exclusively the civil war. Absolute clown
@@PercocetPete I'm sorry that you have difficulty reading English but the title clearly states the topic and intention of the video; "Abraham Lincoln: American Dictator". Razor bringing up the civil war (naturally due to it being one of the most prominent events during Lincoln's presidency) is supplementary to his central point, not integral.
On Julius Howell, soldiers fight for many reasons. Doesn't change the policy that put the war in place. Plus, Mr. Howell is almost certainly nostalgic to the time period and has told himself over the 80 years since the war what he needed to hear to justify his actions and the actions of his state.
Julius Howell even says in that clip that he didn't understand the states rights cause when he was fighting in the war, and only later understood it. You know, after the Lost Cause Myth had taken hold. By 1947, not only had the Lost Cause Myth fully formed, it had entirely permeated Southern culture, but one tenet of the myth was even beginning to expire in that time, as that was the front end of the Civil Rights movement: and that's the idea that slavery was a largely benevolent institution for slaves, and that they were happy. Julius Howell was also "commander in chief" of the UCV, who basically invented the Lost Cause Myth. For the cherry on top, we get a little stolen valor as well. Retired Cpl Howell is often seen wearing a mockup of a General's frock coat.
@@night6724 So you just ignoring the most famous part of the cornerstone speech? Or all the secession letters where they say they are leaving for slavery? You are cherry picking a few quotes and ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Let me help by posting a little more of the cornerstone speech for you: "African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. [...] Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."[5
@@night6724 It is bizzare that you are putting modern politics into the Civil War. Easy to see why you and Razor come off with the views you do. You desperately want this conflict to be about mean tyrannical liberals oppressing small government saints. I'm sorry but that isn't reality. Why are you trying to tie your cause to a group that was obviously in the wrong and wanted to leave to preserve slavery? You can still be a small government libertarian in the present without trying to force a narrative on the past that isn't correct. The South left over slavery, not tarrifs and you can show that by just looking at what the South and Southerners of the time said in all their declarations. You can see it if you understand Bleeding Kansas, look at the supreme court, look at the politics leading up to the war, and just have a basic understanding of what was going on at the time. Again you ignoreall of that because you've got a political axe to grind in the present. Lost Causers peddle that bullshit because they don't want their grandpappys looking bad. They want to be proud of their families. In a way you can understand why they want that to be true, but it isn't. So don't fall for it just because it's convenient for your political views.
@@Deadener Likewise the myth that the Union went to war only to free the slaves was a post-war invention. Just because one side lies doesn't mean the other didn't. Its GOOD the Union eventually free the slaves, but resupplying the Fort before fighting broke out was not meant to free Slaves.
@@IcyPhilosopher "All" the letters? Did you skip over the actual letters where they go on for paragraphs about Tariffs? Stop watching youtube and read.
I would love to see a live debate between Atun-Shei and Rageaholic. That would be the youtube History community's greatest showdown. Almost every point he makes seems already addressed by the 9 episode Checkmate Lincolnites show, so its amazing how this video still exists when it's talking points have been so thoroughly debunked already.
One thing you should know about that dude is that he has some great videos talking about the history of big recording artists like Black Sabbath, Queen, and Michael Jackson. He should stick to covering that subject. He has no business covering historical topics. I had watched that video earlier, and it was a tough one to sit through. Thank you for offering your expertise on this subject.
Yeah razor was wrong about that. As a kid Abe was vocal about his lack of faith, but he was very much a Christian. The way I understand it was he accepted Jesus but he didn’t subscribe to any church, or specific denomination. That’s probably the part of the “lack of faith” as a child. More a lack of faith with the institutions of Christianity of the time, rather than a lack of faith in God.
I guess if i were to criticize atheism it would be how anti-moralism (due to how liberal and atheist circles tends to often be antimoralists) can lack common sense on right and wrong, since they strictly go with facts. But falsely calling someone an atheist is weird just to win cheap points
His (Razor’s) whole argument there is very much giving history teacher during the Cold War arguing that bc Communist states (USSR, China) tended to be broadly atheist that made them inherently evil (rather ya know the war crimes/crimes against humanity that the leaders of these countries often committed)
@@Sparrows1121I'm sorry, but as an atheist, I still have a moral code. I'm still equipped with that thing called "empathy". To me it is the epitome of arrogance to believe that those without your faith cannot have morals. To claim most liberals and atheists have no morals is just childish. I, and the vast majority of those you attacked with this, would never rape kids. Yet there is almost not a day gone by, where I didn't read about another priest, or youth pastor, doing just that.
It’s as if you take Jonny Reb from Atun Shei’s videos and remove any bit of charm or charisma and replace it with sound and fury signifying nothing. He even uses many points that Checkmate Lincolnites already covered and picked apart. It’s painful to watch.
@Vlogging Through History that wouldn't be too surprising, plus I saw one comment on the original video that said "Lincoln was right about one thing black people" and it had a lot of likes and people agreeing in the reply section That says a lot about who these people are
@@malcolmferguson4869 it is ironic that someone who is so obsessed with the government controlling people goes out of his way to make sure that no one expresses an opinion that disagrees with him. And he’s not the only or even the first person like that I’ve encountered.
Dude talked for an hour and it seems like his argument was little more than "Lincoln agreed with Henry Clay once, also a british newspaper and one confederate veteran said some stuff, so hes a dictator."
I barely made it thru this vid WITH your commentary, but I can’t imagine watching it raw, on my own without you setting things straight every couple of minutes 😂
Also being African American myself, people with similar views like this guy dumbfounds me. Like wtf do you have to gain by this argument. It doesn’t make you special lol
Ngl I USEd to like rageoholic back when he was an occasional guest on Steven Crowders show but now seeing guys like him describe themselves as “conservative” makes me wince and want to put as much distance between myself and the speaker as possible.
I’m a black American myself. When I saw the thumbnail for Razor’s vid I wasn’t necessarily shocked, just disappointed. Not only did Razor spread mass amounts of disinformation about the Civil War/Lincoln, he also squandered the experiences of my ancestors who fought and died for their freedom during the War. I half expected him to bring up “black Confederates” to make himself/the CSA look better.
@@t700e Have you done any search for, I don't know, black people waving "Confederate" flags. Maybe you'd like to do that. So, I'm curious what you would refer to those people as. I mean, are they stupid for supporting a flag that was flown by Armies "fighting for slavery?" Are they condoning slavery? I find it odd how a black person would be flying a flag of the Confederacy. When the Confederacy was so "evil" to blacks. If I could send links, I would. They'd probably get deleted. Let me know when you find them.
I think its fair to say the individual in this video someone I think I watched like 10 years ago is using the civil war and Lincoln and not viewing them by the histories that exist or existed at the time but as a way to push modern politics at least his constant references to something akin to modern politics points me to make that determination.
I watch him now and his biggest problem is how strongly opinionated he is. so he often goes into these videos already with the desired outcome and bleeds his opinion hard into the fact to make points. He does use historically truths but it’s so fast and loose it can’t really be practical
@@jacksonperez5615 He uses historical "facts" I'll never forget him arguing that Nazis were communists or socialists (don't remember exactly which) and it instantly became a meme.
Not sure if he really ignores the histories at the time or just bought fully into Confederate and lost cause propaganda and then applied that to modern politics.
He's one of these modern, edge lord, right-wing, pretend, tough guys, who try to act all smart in the name of giving ignorant, right-wing, arguments a pseudo, quasi-intellectual legitimacy when all the guy is, is a partisan hack. If you don't believe me, check out the rest of his content.
Oh yeah, and I just noticed this too: He's doing the Ben Shapiro thing where he's talking really quick and explaining things fast, and you're supposed to think that because he can rattle this stuff off so fast that he must be really sure of himself and must know what he's talking about. Therefore, he's probably correct. Its rhetorical trickery.
"And also block people, delete their comments and insult them if they dont see your point of view" now thats how you get a loyal audience! "According to Razorfist"
Lol, do people think this guy is comparable to Atun-Shei? Say what you want about Atun-Shei's beliefs at least he can coherently and reasonably argue them with a solid basis in facts.
California part made me laugh. He seems to forget the reason California's economy is so large is that California's population is so large, on top of agriculture, on top of being the main import state for America, ie most imports and exports come through California. ie California is the trade hub of America and California gets a big slice of that pie. It isn't about Agriculture.
He's not forgetting. The point is people joke Cali could leave and be fine - because its rich on its own. The South was rich on its own and could also leave. The issue being the Federal tariffs went towards financing internal improvements for Industry in the north. (Likewise the south wished to reverse the tariffs tables on the north if they got into power, so no one is innocent there!)
@@Pangora2 Actually that isn't true. New York City was the biggest Port in the United States at the time, and most of the trade went into that City. Most of the Federal Government's income through Tariffs came from New York City, and I mean the lions share, more than the combined South. I think it was over 80%, so more than all other ports in the USA combined including the South. So the Tariff excuse is actually a huge lie. I mean if it was "True" then the South leaving the North would of crippled the North Financially, which well.. didn't happen did it? ps those tariff were almost exclusively on imports and lessor so exports. Which also throws a wrench into the argument.
he's not arguing pro south, he's just saying lincoln was no saint like he's been painted as. he was just human. our country has repainted lincoln as a myth like figure, but yes, I really wish he wouldn't rage about it like he does, hard to keep up, but I guess thats why his channel is rageaholic...
@Justin M No no no, he is definitely arguing pro-south. He is sanitizing their rebellion of its slaver intent, framing the war as a result of the US not respecting the PERFECTLY VALID RIGHT to split the country when your guy loses an election (and because "high tariffs"), and lying about Lincoln's motivations and actions to paint him in the worst possible light (such as stating that the Emancipation Proclamation never intended to hurt slavery as an institution but instead to instigate a literal "servile rebellion" which if you aren't aware is the justification given for why slavery was necessary by the South before and after the war). Lincoln needs to be viewed as a complicated figure who did a lot of stuff we shouldn't encourage in the future, but nuance doesn't mean completely villainizing him while whitewashing the Confederacy. Razorfist is just doing this to support his own narcissistic political point that central government is the devil and social justice is bullshit, and Lincoln is a sacred cow for both causes. It's a direct attack on modern day proponents of an agenda he despises by calling them all tyrants by association.
15 minutes in and I'm forcing myself to keep watching just so Chris gets the credit for a video view, but christ this is hard going. Listening to this guy makes me think he's the historian version of Alex Jones. Honestly, his Clay-Lincoln argument is like saying someone who admired one of Hitlers paintings automatically agrees with his political ideology.
Holy crap was that a painful episode. It’s hard to believe there are people out there like this. He kinda reminded me of the shock jock radio personalities, speak quickly and say crazy stuff but they are going so fast (and badly) that it is hard to argue the points.
@Ogami Yes I made the mistake to get involved in that comment section. Before I knew it a potato was telling me to take the red pill and some rando was calling African Americans beasts. True degeneracy in that comment section
@Ogami Unfortunately this is becoming more and more prevalent in the online space. "Influencer effect" I call it. People are more susceptible to believing and following someone who has a strong charismatic screen presence. Because outspoken charismatic people tend to appeal primarily to the viewers emotions. This gets the viewer to return to the content over and over until they consider themselves a fan of that youtuber. The end result is you end up with fanbases who choose not to question the accuracy or knowledge of the influencer they follow because it's uncomfortable to consider the possibility that this person you've come to admire could be full of crap on many of thier points. Like I'm sure many of the people who follow this Ragoholic guy do so mostly because they find him funny with his wordplay and cadence. They don't' want to think the entertainer is lying or wrong. Because that's depressing and goes against the main reason they follow him in the first place. So they don't bother questioning it and end up believing falsehoods about Lincoln because the falsehoods were delivered in an entertaining way. I don't know if there is a solution to this problem. I think humans will always be attracted to strong personalities 1st, and then examine their credibility 2nd. Its a sad realization for online discourse.
I’m surprised you are responding to history videos done by channels who usually focus more on modern political commentary and issues, my respects to you for stepping into new territory!
I really wouldn't call what Razorfist (lol that name) is doing history in any meaningful sense of the word. It's libertarian propaganda. He should just state up front that he'd be ok if slavery lasted a lot longer as long as "property rights" weren't violated.
I really appreciate that he put a lot of work in to making sure the initial impression from his attire was backed up with how he expressed his point of view.
I love how you can see VTH slowly losing his sanity as this video progressed. I've never seen this dude before but he legitimately sounds like a character Atun Shei would make up to be the foil in a skit XD All he does is badly argue falsehoods and conflate irrelevant facts/events.
It's propaganda. Good old propaganda. And look in this comment section to see how many people fell for it. Someone is aggressively saying what you want to be true, no matter reality, and insults people who disagree, so he's got to be right.
The difference being that Atun Shei is fun. From what I understand, Johnny Reb’s dialogue is almost entirely taken from his own comments section, including the weird pronunciation/spelling and the guy who rants that this time the war will come from space.
@@professorbutters Johnny Reb's points are usually taken from the comments, but at times also just goes with classic stuff from the Lost Cause. At times branching off of the comments. Also, to quote Johnny Reb: "I am a cartoon character, not an idiot!"
to be honest I would be disappointed if he did not feel at least the desire to face palm after watching the video. There are some positions that are just so stupid that you just have to say "are you for real bro ?"
It's less of a Sesquipedalian issue and more a style alliteration move. I watch a lot of his music and movie content and its more like a branding thing to use odd words and turns of phrase in conjuction with alliteration to make it more memorable.
How is it that folks still manage to ignore anything other than the Eastern Theatre? He also conveniently doesn't mention that the Confederacy had a draft and a pretty serious problem with desertion.
Because the Western Theater wasn't as flashy or dramatic as the East... and the CSA barely had any wins so Lost Causers don't like to think about that.
Love your channel mate. Well done for addressing this. As a Brit I admit my civil war knowledge is lacking, but blimey that was a hard watch. There’s nothing like getting a warped point across by shouting at the camera for an hour 🤦🏻♂️
After recently watching the movie Lincoln (2012), he really comes off to me as Fernando Wood from the movie, from how he loudly argue to force his viewpoint into the audience to how he insists that Lincoln is a tyrant based on Confederate apologia.
@@VloggingThroughHistory You are a legend for sitting through 1 hour of the video without breaking eye contact. I have forgotten how many times i have to paused the video and do sth else just over how obnoxious, loud and somewhat immature over how loaded the entire video is with emotional languages, which basically gave away how biased his viewpoint is
He's just such a troll. This is a product of the "death of expertise" - anyone with a microphone assumes that they are an expert. They think they can skim 2.5 paragraphs of few wikipedia articles and ignore things they don't like and assume that they are an expert.
Sabaton released a new song called "The First Soldier" about Albert Roche, the most decorated French soldier of WW1. Would you consider reacting to it? He's a relatively unknown figure, even in France, and while I'm not a great fan of war heroes in general, the fact that he's so largely unknown is a shame.
You know you're about to hear from a lunatic when he's wearing leather gloves and sunglasses while staring at a computer screen indoors. We love you. Please don't do this to yourself again.
I am laid up in severe pain with diverticulitis. I thank God for VTH bringing a reasonable take on this crazy video. I try to be as centrist as humanly possible and may not always agree with VTH but respect his reasonable fact based take on things. Also, not sure who was more confused about Chappaquiddick being mentioned VTH or myself. Back to the fetal position.
I think that the problem here is that this guy hasn't learned to check the consistency of his own views and the consistency of his beliefs with actual historical facts. These are skills that one learns as a scientist, but they are not generally a part of education.
Well, when I teach literature they are, but I’m a literary historian. It doesn’t matter to me how many cool theories it has: if there’s no support in the text and no support in the documents, I’m not interested. I think students are trained to write “research papers” with a pre-selected thesis, and then they cherry pick four or five arguments that support their point of view. That’s not a research paper. If you’re going to play with history, you have to include the stuff that doesn’t support your argument and be willing to say, “huh. I was wrong.” Which this guy can’t or won’t do.
As a Brit, I always find your reactions to any related to the American Civil War totally fascinating. I genuinely don't think there is anything in recent British history that divides us Brits half as much as the Civil War appears to divide you guys over the pond. Fascinating stuff, and outstanding job as always Chris!
I cant believe he forgot to mention LIncoln's successful campaigns against the vampires.
Abraham lincoln vampire hunter may actually be more historically accurate than this guys version of lincoln and the civil war.
@@Fitz0fury cope and seethe
@@Clown_the_Clown apt username
Checkmate
@@Clown_the_Clown Bro got ratioed by being called an apartment username 💀
Literally told myself “I would pay to watch VTH debunk this.” Im a man of my word
Appreciate it!
Yep. Same thought I had.
@@VloggingThroughHistory I don't even think you should post the second half of this, vile misinformed try to be tough guy. You shouldn't be sharing your platform with this type of idiot. I am also not saying not to watch people you disagree with or different point of views, but this guy is embarrassing, he creates a straw-man and then has trouble beating his own weak straw man.
deboonked
updooted
hecking
pRedditors are a plague
w
At 27:47, he says that the south was under represented, but due to the 3/5 Compromise in the Constitution it gave them 30 + more Representatives than they should have.
Not to mention the Electoral College which gave them more representation when choosing a president. It really must have burned a lot of people when Lincoln got elected anyway.
Wait, just to be clear, you're saying the south shouldn't have had those representatives because black people shouldn't have been counted, right? The 3/5th compromise is an interesting example where the south said blacks were people, and the north said they weren't.
Yeah if anything they were overrepresented in the Government 🧐
Right! I had the same thought.
If they were over respresented, as you claim, then why would the South vote to hurt themselves economically? specifically, the tariffs that the gov't imposed which affected ONLY the Southern economy. Your argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
If Razorfist commented on one of Atun-Shei's videos it would probably be used as one of Johnny Reb's arguments in Checkmate Lincolnites.
People were hoping that the two of them would get into a slap-fight because of just how passive-aggressive it would be.
@@SirBlackReeds, this is totally unfair towards Andy... but I would pay to see that.
Now, don't disrespect Johnny Reb like that. Even he isn't insane enough to buy into this man's horsesh*t.
@@occam7382 agreed
@@occam7382 Johnny reb is ignorant, this dude was actively anti intelligence
Lincoln wasn’t even the first president you could accuse of being “tyrannical”. Adams and Jackson have that label thrown at them all the time.
Exactly. Like hello Alien and Sedation Acts.
@@gennybaratta2460 and it well deserve honestly Lincoln not so much even tho he stretch it a lot he didn’t break it
@@painvillegaming4119 Lincoln helped break the American experiment. It was trashed after the war even harder too.
@@networknomad5600 what the hell is the American experiment
And that makes Lincolns reign any less evil?
You shouldn't have to go through this for free.
Appreciate it Ian!
I find it highly unlikely that this man isn't being paid for this video.
@jnewgot There is a MUCH higher chance that Rage was paid off. The anti woke mob pays very well, though all top dogs do.
You shouldn't pay him for his lack of nuance either
@@IgnoreMeImWrongYep there are definitely people that are terrified of narratives being changed in the mainstream NPC consciousness.
This guy is why Checkmate Liconites exists
Yep
This guy is why the comment sections on history videos are a toxic swamp.
Lmao facts
I want CL make a video on this
The real historian responding to a dollar-store historian.
"Hey! Tell us what Andrew Jackson thought of native Americans" almost made me choke. That was hilarious
What's even more hilarious, is the fact that it opposes his previous argument, and proves Whats His Glasses right.
He did NOT like them… or soon told 😂
what does that have to do with Lincoln's racism? Is it a contest?
Exactly. I am sub to Razor but i haven’t seen this guys video “yet” because i have a feeling he may be one of those bias clowns, and reading that andrew jackson comment (Probably an argument used in this video) as if it was a “GOTCHA! TAKE THAT!” is just pure idiocy because it changes nothing. Another president being a dick doesn’t make the president we are discussing any less of a dick. That’s just pure denialism
That wasn't the point of saying that. I think it's pretty clear in the video
You know a Civil War discussion is going to be fruitful and insightful when they bring up modern day politics.
You mean drawing correlation from history to modern day events? It's almost as if history repeats itself.
@@metallica1fan1 It's one thing to learn from history as to not repeat past mistakes but its another thing to say [insert party here] is literally Hitler or literally the Confederates or literally [insert group I don't like here]. History doesn't repeat unless you make the same mistakes.
@@metallica1fan1 History never truly repeats 'itself' - that's a proposition that physics and even miracles cannot accommodate.
But history _does_ rhyme, sometimes. Less often than the phases of the moon, anyhow.
You mean...we SHOULDN'T study history to avoid repeating its mistakes?
That's a new one.
Quick question: why is he wearing sunglasses in a dark room?
This man is a prime example of why when you form an idea you MUST discuss it with other's, instead of cementing it in yourself, by yourself.
Yes! I kept thinking about how if you’re half as worked up as this guy while trying to do serious research how can you even dream of being able to look through the information with a clear and analytical mind.. just seems absolutely pointless. Being passionate about a subject is great being emotionally cranked to 11 is going to make it impossible to learn anything
Yup. This is a result of someone doing research to support a conclusion.
I wonder if this guy even practiced his speech/rant/argument in the mirror with his reflection.
I can imagine his reflection looking back at him and responding with "What!? You lost me at... (Probably somewhere near the beginning)"
Fair point.
Very well put
You know what always helps get your point across? Condescension and screaming
And unnecessary gloves
@@stevenrobinson2047😂
@@stevenrobinson2047 they're totally necessary! They match with his indoor shades!
What a strawman complaint. He's called the RAGE-aholic. You know you can't debunk his points, so you just whine about his vlog style. Or his wardrobe.
@@ethantoise4073 it’s a joke man
You do gotta give it to him, man can rant. I don't think he took a breath this entire time, which would actually explain a lot.
I think this guy debated Kyle kuliniski
And got obliterated in the process.
@@proudbrogressive315 exactly 💯
@@Spencerwalker21 Did he take a pro-choice stance during that debate?
The dude is basically a beer bottle, he puts on a show but he's empty from the neck up
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how he argued the lost cause was created by northerners and cited Woodrow Wilson as evidence for it.
Because he’s a very stupid man and doesn’t realize it. AKA the Dunning Kruger effect
Woodrow Wilson -- born in Virginia, raised in Georgia and the Carolinas. His father helped form and lead the Presbyterian Church of the Confederacy. Spent pretty much all his formative years in the South and that includes during the Civil War and the first half of the Reconstruction era. Sure, he spent a lot more time later in life in Jersey (and other northern states), but yeah, Wilson was unquestionably a southerner at heart. As Wilson himself once said, "a boy never gets over his boyhood, and never can change the subtle influences which have become part of him...the only place in the world where nothing has to be explained to me is the South."
@@cervanntes at no point did he call Woodrow Wilson a northerner he called him a Northern academic and his education was predominantly in the North
@@ronniehopper2726 No, his education was in Maryland which was a pro-slavery state that wasn't allowed to secede
Wilson's education was in Virginia, North Carolina, New Jersey, and Maryland. How is that "predominantly in the North" exactly?
Whether he was good or evil, you can't deny that he had one hell of a beard.
You understand that he’s playing a character don’t you?
@@nickoppedisano7225 we are all but actors on the stage of life.
King of the Neckbeards
@@RamboJoe He wore a neck beard well.
based
Among other things, Rageaholic omits these factors:
1. Lincoln's approach to slavery was to restrict its expansion, and he believed this would kill slavery in the long run.
2. One goal of the Emancipation Proclamation was to prevent England and France from recognizing the Confederacy.
Yeah, the thought that by restricting new slaves slavery would disappear without the need for radical action was one of the most popular anti-slavery idea of the time. It basically means you can play the good guy without ever putting yourself directly into conflict with the slave owner which is why England and France were more than happy to accept it as a compromise. The only problem was that it wasn't any effective as it just ment slaves became even more of a commodity and people would just outright lie to keep acquiring new slaves anyway.
@@gabrieldossantos1116 Well, I would say that Lincoln's strategy worked, because it got the South to secede and spark the civil war.
Lincoln said in his House Divided speech that the nation would become either all free or all slavery. The South knew this was true, and could not abide restrictions on the expansion of slavery.
I mean it is a very simple fact that Lincoln could not free the slaves. There is often much elaboration on what he thought about it or what his aim was. That is misssing the fundamental issue: Slavery was states law. That is a plain and simple fact. The (ANY) president had no means of any sort whatsoever to abolish slavery! You could have elected the most radical aboltionist and it would be the same.
It took some creative use of his war powers but only the states could actually do it for real and eventually did.
@@johnmiwa6256 Exactly. The Southerners even picked up on the strategy which is why despite all of Lincolns words - which people now try to use to prove he wasn't opposed at all- the repeatedly claimed that he had a radical hostility towards "the peculiar institution."
The Confederacy themselves said Lincolns words were a smoke screen he was using to get rid of slavery. Yet somehow southern revisionists refuse to listen to them on that point.
It's one of the most common conflations I see made by Lost Causers. They never discern the difference between typical anti-slavery views of the period, and abolitionism. They use a false dichotomy that simply wasn't true in the first half of the19th century: If you didn't want to end slavery immediately and unconditionally, you didn't care about slavery at all. Which is only true in the 20th and 21st century, and displays their limited (or non-existent) ability to try and understand the politics of the period. It's one of the most basic political concepts you need to understand before you can even discuss Civil War politics. Without it, your entire perception will be easily skewed and distorted.
I love the part where Julius Howell, the so called “evidence” as to why the Civil War was being fought, literally says “As a young man I didn’t understand why the war was happening”
It seems you purged “as a young man” from your brain.
@@cargopilotguy305you'll find the majority of these guys have purged context from their brains.
And even if we believe what this guy was saying (which is a very big if, by the way), that doesn't at all change what hundreds of thousands of other soldiers or the Confederate government thought they were fighting the war for. And it sure as sh*t wasn't taxes.
@@cargopilotguy305 like how the then young men purged most of the CSA's declarations of Secession from theirs?
Seriously look it up and press ctrl+f and search out "slave".
What op is saying is that those guys are coping, and possibly seething.
@@occam7382
This might be long...
Abraham Lincoln famously said,
"If there are those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Republic without freeing any slaves see I would do it..."
In 1858 Lincoln said quote,
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors out of negros, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and as much as any other man am in favor of having superior position assigned to the white race."
Two days before Lincoln's election on November 3, 1860, Charleston Mercury wrote in a newspaper outlining why Virginia should leave the Union. Quote
"The real causes of dissatisfaction in the South with the North, are in the unjust taxation & expenditure of the taxes by the government of the United States, & in revolution the North has effected in this government from a confederated Republic, to a national sectional Despotism"
Jefferson Davis (president of the South) said "The North was mad and Blind; it would not let us govern ourselves, and so war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize the musket and fight our battle. Unless you acknowledge our right to self government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for our independence, and that, or extermination"
James Spencer, British Cotton trader & trade advisor, Scottish Journal wrote
"The tariff question, again enters largely, more largely than is commonly supposed; into the irritated & aggrieved feelings of southerners. And it cannot be denied that in this matter they have both a serious injury & an unconstitutional injustice to resent... All Northern products are protected; and the moral tariff is a very masterpiece of folly & injustice"
Charles Dickens (famed author) wrote
"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the South"
A British correspondent "The outlook of the War" said
"Everybody still professes to disapprove of slavery. Of course, so in the cant of the day runs, slavery is a very dreadful thing, and everybody the South above all, would be glad to see it abolished; but slavery has nothing to do with the current war"
The Weekly Athenaeum (1865)
"As a rule, the great mass of the public expenditures were made from the North, not in the South, so that Southerners found themselves doubly taxed; taxed first for the benefit of Northern manufacturers, & then, in the disbursement of the public funds, denied an equal participation in the benefits accruing therefrom"
Charles Beard, scholar and historian did an in depth analysis of the war and summed his conclusions up with this quote.
"Since therefore, the abolition of slavery never appeared in the platform of any great political party, since the only appeal ever made to the electorate on that issue was scornfully repulsed, since the spokesman of the Republicans emphatically declared that his party never intended to interfere with slavery in any shape or form, it seems reasonable to assume that the institution of slavery was not a fundamental issue during the epoch preceding bombardment of Fort Sumter"
On January 21, 1861, five days before Louisiana withdrew from the Union, The New Orleans Daily Crescent wrote an editorial explaining the cause of secession
"They (The South) know that it is their import trade that draws from people's pockets 60-70 million of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, & in the protection and encouragement of Northern interests...These are the reasons why these people do not wish the South to secede from the Union. They (The North) are enraged at the prospect of being despoiled of the rich feast upon which they have long fed and fattened"
These are but a handful of quotes from people at the time from both sides of the war and onlookers. It's worth noting as Razorfist points out, Lincoln didn't even abolish slavery in the states held by the union and allowed it to continue despite the fact his army was supposedly fighting to abolish it. In fact, some of the worst practices of slavery were carried out in northern states and were exempt from abolition during the entire course of the war. Michigan was especially horrible towards it slaves. In addition to this, all Lincoln did was offer the change from slavery to indentured servitude and the introduction of the income tax made slaves out of all of us. History is written by the victorious and leading up to the war and during it was apparent on both sides what the war was over and slavery wasn't it.
Just be a loud, confident guy yelling into the microphone and those who already shared your beliefs, will agree with anything you say. No matter if it's true or not.
Unfortunately this is becoming more and more prevalent in the online space.
"Influencer effect" I call it. People are more susceptible to believing and following someone who has a strong charismatic screen presence. Because outspoken charismatic people tend to appeal primarily to the viewers emotions. This gets the viewer to return to the content over and over until they consider themselves a fan of that youtuber. The end result is you end up with a fanbase who chooses not to question the accuracy or knowledge of the influencer they follow because it's uncomfortable to consider the possibility that this person you've come to admire could be full of crap on many points.
It's exhausting to fact check every claim made by all the content creators you follow. So people don't bother and just repeat what they've heard from people that make them feel a strong emotion. Be that joy or anger.
We used to only deal with this problem with politicians and celebrities. But now anyone with decent editing skills and the gift of gab can carve out a little bubble of the internet for themselves for like minded people to isolate themselves in and repeat the influencer's opinions back to each other.
@@dudemcguy1227 yeah (maybe a little bit political so dont hate me), i feel like people like jordan b Peterson and Andrew Tate have this cult following that accepts whatever they say as long as they are confident in their wrongness
@@dudemcguy1227makes me glad that this guy just makes me annoyed by the way he talks, VTH is loads more ‘charismatic’
Within a minute of that video, I basically got “If A. Jones wore black in high school and never stopped” vibes. Yikes.
This guy is just a whit supremist and nothing more.
This is why I love this channel, you don't come in with an almost superior preachy attitude, your videos are good vibes with knowledge.
Always tons of knowledge 👍
Even if he did that by the end he would be hammered and still more accurate than this guy!!!!
He absolutely did in the beginning. "If you need an hour to convince your audience, it's probably not a good argument." Which is such a farce statement to say when there is a plethora of information to go over before even hearing the perspective of someone else. Also Razor does bring the receipts and sources to his perspective and argument.
Mainstream government school narratives teach one perspective of the civil war while Razorfist definitely showed a different side of Lincoln and information I wasn't aware of.
I imagine the truth lies somewhere in the middle. But after seeing how much of my youth education was lies in regards to history, I'm open for historical interpretation and more facts to be brought to the forefront.
@@occheermommy no need to be preachy. Historians need to talk about history in a polite way
Never ever pretentious.
I just busted up laughing because the minute he said Wilson was a Northern, we screamed in perfect synch “NO HE WASN’T!” One thing I will always credit this channel with is even if we come from different points of view and disagree on some topics, at least we can analyze and be civil about it, something that is sadly lacking these days.
@@shortlivedglory3314 True. Twain said it best - “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to speak and remove all doubt.” Why I pick and choose my battles and try, as best able, to make sure I’m on pretty firm ground. Even then, I’ll admit if I got something wrong.
Wilson was an academic, so one thing wrong
I mean, Wilson lived in the north longer than he did in the south, I guess.
@@epicurius1 I’d need to check the math on that. Born in Staunton, VA, know he was there until at least 4, then moved south to Georgia and I don’t think he left Georgia until his teens or 20s.
@@epicurius1 Even if true, he was born and reared in the South, and adopted Southern values
Dude is so angry and passionate about this you'd think Lincoln himself broke into his house beat him up, slapped his wife and kicked his dog or something.
I wouldn't be surprised if by some miracle of God, Lincoln decided to wake up from his grave and go to this dude's house to do what you just said
Well Lincoln spat on our constitution and destroyed federalism so he deserves being hated
@@Mgaming61 He just punches the ground and it creates a shock wave flinging the dude 15 feet in the air
@@dr.aisaitl7439I mean, he did kill Vampires.
Well Lincoln was a wrestler and Vampire Hunter so maybe he did beat up one of Razorfist’s ancestors
De Tocqueville did not say that slavery was more brutal in the North! He said that he thought "the prejudice of the race appears to be stronger in the States which have abolished slavery" because in the South "the master . . . knows that he can in a moment reduce him to the dust at pleasure", whereas in the North a man "fears lest they should some day be confounded together". Incredible how far this guy managed to twist those words into a totally different shape.
Can you post where he even got that info from. Primary ones like letters, speeches and such.
@@jeramysteve3394 He got it (and most of his video) from a widely panned book by Lost Causer hack Thomas DiLorenzo, who in turn took his paraphrased and mutilated quote from De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America".
thanks for conceding the point you lambasted. lol
@@justinheads5751 Unclear how I've done that by pointing out De Toqueville wasn't talking about the "brutality" of (nearly nonexistant) slavery in the north, which the maker of the video blatantly lied about. Indeed, he frequently opined on the callous brutality of slavery in the south, and even does so in this quote ("in a moment reduce him to the dust at pleasure"). Him talking about the anxiety felt by northern whites at the prospect of equality has nothing to do with supposed northern brutality towards the slaves that most of them didn't even have. As he astutely points out later in his book, southern whites didn't feel this anxiety at all because they could brutalize their slaves at their pleasure.
@@pawanyr360 aw shit! Get him bruv! Teach this man the difference between listning and comprehension.
Or to quote one of my favorite sound bites, "NOO STOOOOP! He's already deeeaaaddd!" - cant remember from ehere though lol.
Literally 80% of "Linclon's" quotes are either paraphrases or direct Biblical scriptures. Matthew 12:25 " Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand." To say he is an Athesist or non Christian is literally insane
Which is probably why he didn't belong to a certain church he read the Bible himself and interpreted it as he saw it written likely seeing all churches having peices of the intended faith but not the whole thing
Antiest quote the bible all the time. It's got a lot of good quotes so I don't blame them.
@@QuartetGhostHe grew up in a Baptist family and went to Protestant churches, but when you live in the middle of nowhere, you get used to reading and respecting the Bible on your own.
I'm not a christian and I quote the bible and phrases all the time because they are logical and make sense.
"literally insane": literally? Using quotes from the bible does not make him a Christian...that should literally go without saying.
This guy feels like the archetype for the loud, aggressive commenters who leave small novels in the comments section of social media that are always overflowing with pseudo-knowledge and deceptive quotes to draw in the impressionable. Keep up the great work, VTH! You have the patience of a saint to sit through this stuff, lol
Including all caps sentences and multiple exclamation marks.
WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!
This guy sounds like a massive Alex Jones fanboy.
@@untruelie2640 AND THATS SOMETHING YOUR LIBERAL VEGAN PROFESSOR WOULD DROP THE CHALK OVER IF YOU SAID IT IN CLASS, AND ALL THE REDPILLED STUDENTS WOULD CLAP
So exhausting.
He's the confederate guy in Atun-Shei's videos.
@@malcolmferguson4869That series was hilarious 😆
This Tommy Wiseau cosplayer heard "If you can't be right, be loud" and took it to its most literal bloody extreme.
This deserves more likes
This was a great reaction video, there's just one thing I want to add: When the guy said that Lincoln was trying to incite a bloody slave revolt which would lead to disproportionately high numbers of murdered women and children (because the husbands were away fighting), he didn't just invent that argument but echoed contemporary opinions. Many Southerners, northern Democrats and Europeans saw the Emancipation Proclamation exactly as the attempted incitement of an extremely bloody slave revolt that he describes here. The massacres of Haiti were still in the peoples memories, so it made sense that many people thought so. Of course, as Atun Shei said, "it was a doomsday prophecy that just didn't come true". But for many contemporary people (many non-southerners among them) it was a real concern.
That makes sense. Although I'm sure there's also a big element of fear mongering by people who were against it for other reasons.
@@rayquaza1245 Yes, there was fearmongering by pro-slavery agitators, but I can understand the people who believed it.
If you don’t want the possibility of a bloody slave revolt, don’t own slaves. I don’t mind them losing sleep over the idea
An hour straight of it?
@@cyberus1438 Not only Southerners were losing sleep over it, but also many Northerners and Europeans. Most people who were anti-slavery didn't want the slaves freedom to be bought with the blood of women and children.
You know, people can say what they want about atun shei, but the dude actually supports his points with real evidence and doesn't sit there and scream at the camera which a bunch of BS falsehoods lol. You can see that through your reactions lol. You pause and either agree or disagree cordially with atun shei and this dude you just couldn't let him keep talking lol. Love the reactions and the content you add.
I agree the fact people tried to make some comparison between Atun-Shei and whatever in the hell this is, is insulting.
@@commandershepard7742 he is definitely, in many ways, the *opposite* of Atum-Shei. That includes his argumentative style. Atun-Shei is more cordial and levelheaded, arguing passionately but coolly while citing all his sources, whereas this guy kinda rants at a camera for an hour and makes multiple basic mistakes (Jackson being the first non-founding father president, for example).
also, Atun-Shei IS ENTERTAINING with his snarking, sarcasm, dry replies, playing to the audience...
Andy has integrity just like Chris.
I’d love to see a debate between the Rageaholic and him. In his epic war of aggression vid he used quotes from Steve Douglas about slavery and how it was a cornerstone
To me this video just shows how necessary the “Checkmate Lincolnites” series and your channels reactions to them were.
Everyone I’ve ever seen that says that Checkmate Lincolnites is extreme and insulting to those who hold the opposite view probably have never seen this or consumed this type of content, because if they had, they would not be saying that. And if they have and still call it that, then they truly are tone deaf.
@@rookcapcoldblood2618 That's ironic since his caricature of a lost causer gets his opinions from lost causers in the comment section
@@nukclear2741
I think maybe there was some miscommunication here.
I love Atun-Shei and his content. I was stating that those who have seen the content in this video and still call Atun-Shei's content insulting and grating are tone deaf.
@@rookcapcoldblood2618 ah.
My bad. 😅
You mean in perpetuating a false narrative?
"the Civil War was not fought abput slavery, but economic matters"
...is he implying slavery was not an economic matter? Free labor force which literally bred more free labor? The entire economy of half of the United States? They way of life for millions of people, both workers and owners? Plantations? Tobacco? Cotton? Is this guy for real? Yes, there was a humanitarian component to the war, but to imply slavery is disjointed from the economy is simply nuts. Thank you VTH for sitting through this madness.
I mean for the most part it is disjointed. Are you seriously naive enough to think the economy was just slavery? Newsflash. The 1619 project isn't real history.
I've always seen it separated out from the other economic concerns with regards to the American Civil War.
@@CallanElliott of course, there is a social component to the matter, but in essence it remains an economic one for sure. Trying to separate slavery from the concept makes little sense when analysing the Civil War and all its causes and consequences.
The idea about it being about tariffs is a complete myth, for one the majority of tariffs were actually being processed through the North through New York and Boston. As for taxes, taxes weren't really a thing in the Antebellum era, it had existed for things like whiskey but there was no income taxes. Back on tariffs, the two tariffs prior to the Civil War were actually very favorable to their slave-based economies with the Walker Tariff of 1845 and the Tariff of 1857, low rates and it encouraged international trade, especially with Britain who had become reliant on cotton for textile industries
Implying that these things were the cause of the Civil War is Lost Cause horseshit
@@HanHonHon It's always very hard for a nation, a country or a people to confront their past and the misdeeds of their ancestors, and finding alternative theories is a great temptation, just look at Japan and their war crimes, their history books say they "just wanted to free Asia from European colonialism" which is not even close to what happened, and also doesn't explain the millions of Asian corpses they left in their wake. But it's easier than confronting the past, and the same is true for the South, "states' rights" sounds much better than "we wanted to own Black people".
I think my favorite part was him saying that the soldiers sent to put down the riot were 'recently defeated Fredericksburg troops', only to then immediately play a video mentioning that they were actually fresh from Gettysburg, a resounding Union victory
When he said that the troops from Fredericksburg were sent to New York. I litterally was like "does he mean Gettysburg" and then the clip confirmed it.
Litterally could not imagine being those soldiers. To go from a horrific battle against General Lee's "Immortal Virginian Army" then to suppressing a riot of your own countrymen must have been a god awful experience.
@@Qsefe99 If you listened further, more troops were pulled in to suppress the riots, and they werent all from Gettyburgs. So it confirms both.
@@Torente32 the only thing is the battle of Fredericksburg was six months before the NY riots. I'm not doubting that there were soldiers who served in the battle. I just think it's just a little bit of a mislead to say "they came from the recent battle of Fredericksburg".
@@Qsefe99 6 months is pretty recent for a battle in the 1800s it took a long time to travel on horseback and especially on foot
@@Scornfull true, and I know to compare them is a bit insensitive, but the men who were at Gettysburg were in New York 2 weeks after not 6 months. Still hell for the soldiers regardless.
Also I can be wrong but I thought a nice amount of armies (especially for the north) were moved by train during this war. Not saying that was the only way it was done but this wasn't the same conditions as combat in the napoleonic wars. Like when Napoleon's army marched to Russia and then back to France(oversimplification).
Yeah this video was tough to go through. I never disagreed with somebody so much about Lincoln or the causes of the Civil War before.
@Someone Somewhere ain't that the truth.
dude ive seen this guy do political debates before. he’s got a base of people who wanna hear his propaganda so he does it. He’s a fraud.
Me either.
I found myself shockingly agreeing with him in later chapters but I thought 1 was all rubbish
@Someone Somewhere Like that doesn't happen everywhere? The comments made on his video in response to this one are not constructive with the exception of a few people simply pointing in the direction of this video as a counter argument that brings more facts to the table.
The comment section in most videos are sycophants, trolls, haters resulting in hot garbage when disagreement is on the table.
Sir, I am 5 minutes into the whole video and am debating stopping. Not because of you. But because of the material at hand. All props to you for making it through this.
If you didn't continue, trust me, it gets worse, it gets a lot worse. You got out at the easy part and I envy you.
I only made it 20 minutes and couldn't take it anymore.
Same here. A list of factual errors and ignored facts to create and support a biased viewpoint.
Me too. Decided to read the comments before I decided to continue. Based on what I've read here, I think I'll just stop and hit the like button on my way out.
I've had to stop and restart a few times. The gentleman that made the original video seems to live in some sort of fantasy bubble. His arguments are wild and incredibly flimsy but he argues that anyone who knows all the evidence against him must be an idiot sheep or something.
Razor fist tries to make the argument that Lincoln was responsible for the first draft in American history. However, Davis insisted the first draft in American history to hope to combat the south’s manpower problem
United States of America takin' credit for Confederate Firsts isn't something you want to do.
“I know that some of his people are going to be coming over here to try and rip me to shreds, bring it on”. That’s the position of someone who knows and trust the information they’ve given, challenging opposition to a discussion rather than telling them to play in traffic. Props to you.
Unlike the dude, who, in the video, basically told everybody who disagreed with HIM to go and do cartwheels in traffic.
@@jacob4920 That's not what he said but, please, continue to misrepresent people. Shows the low intellectual quality of the viewers this guy attracts.
@@zagorith14 his exact words were "I encourage such people to do something more productive, such as cartwheeling in traffic."
So no, we aren't misrepresenting what the guy said.
@@zagorith14 Wow. How does it feel to be so brutally wrong? You either never watched the video to begin with, or you're one of his "defenders," in which case, I got no time for you.
@@zagorith14whatever you are smoking, i want some. How can you be so wrong and yet so bold at it as well?
The worst part this video is all the comments under it taking it as a cohesive and factual piece of media.
Trust me, most of them were already going to agree with him. The internet has become a fantastic resource for people who just want to be proven right about something. Even when they're wrong. Especially when they're wrong.
@@TheAngryXenite Indeed, everyone just trusts the opinions of people who they find entertaining. No need to look into their claims any deeper.
The internet destroyed critical thinking
Most of them probably didn't even watch his video. They most likely watched 30 seconds, didn't understand a single word because of the yelling, and just blindly agreed with him because they like a confident sounding guy with a viewpoint they like. Dunning Kruger effect in full force with this guy.
I mean, that guy's previous videos is him ranting about the Republicans' clusterfuck in the 2022 midterms. Ironic for someone who supports the GOP to shit on perhaps the greatest President in American history, who was a Republican.
The fact that he kept getting history wrong, like forgetting that John Quincy Adams was not a founding Father, his credibility was destroyed as was proving his point.
If we strip away all the quotes and historical occurrences this man used out of context, what is his video left with?
A series of rants (often self-contradictory) and footage of him trying to look like the coolest and most angsty kid in his high school's graduating class. None of this even shows me that he's even tried to curate this to be persuasive and refined rhetoric. He isn't even trying
@@noahwinberry2475 exactly
IDK if Lincoln could be called an atheist, but quoting a politicians speech to prove what his beliefs are is a slippery slope. Lincoln by your own admission had to temper his speeches not alienate the voters. He probably wasn't an atheist, but could very well been agnostic
Nah.
While possible if all your proof is 'I say so' it's not proof he's an atheist.
Being agnostic and being an atheist aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, many people who identify as atheist also identify as agnostic aka agnostic atheists; which means "I'm not sure if there is a God but I think that more than likely there isn't one." It's very likely that Lincoln was an Agnostic Deist; not sure about the existence of God, but believes that if there is one, they are non interfering type of deity.
Lincoln undoubtedly was atheist early in his life. I think he was more open to a deity by the time he became president, and was moving towards Christianity by the time of his death. If you ever read about the notes he would write himself-they were just random thoughts he would jot down and comeback to later- you can really see his evolution on the subject of God. The notes were never meant for publication. To get a good idea how Lincoln’s thoughts are expressed, watch the movie Lincoln. Even if you think it’s propaganda; the scene at the telegraph office is an excellent example of how his thought evolves in the real life notes.
It wasn't just his speeches
16 minutes in and I've already gone for the old shoebox to the face more than once. How you manage to hang on for just under an hour is impressive, Chris! Now back to the video.
I feel the same . It wasn't easy lol
Yeah. This guy is honestly just… really bad at arguing this. Like, it really says something that in most video, Chris will say something like “Alright guys, please stay civil in the comments. We can have reasonable disagreement, but we don’t want to get vicious, okay?” But Chris in this video? *”Bring it on.”*
Man, you have more control than me....
Yeah. And thankfully I haven’t seen anyone say anything which is good because when he said this guys people will come over and try to rip him all I could think was “this idiot has a following. How scary”
I'm surprised nobody has reported him for a lot of misinformation, I don't think he even realizes he's doing it, I think he just doesn't understand his sources. It's like he just gets to exist care free, just think about how many of his subscribers think he's right most of the time.
I've only watched ten minutes and this is the exact definition of the lost cause myth
Well it lost cause 2.0, but of which is because they declared lost cause 1.0 is norther false flag because it list all credibility
"The lost cause" is modern double speak bullshit designed to gaslight.
‘Before you accuse me of being a LOST CAUSER, allow me to gradually check off nearly every tenet of the Lost Cause under the sun all while gaslighting you into believing that you’re just imagining things, FRIENDO!!’
Good lord, I think even half of Lost Causers would be taken aback by the mass murder and rape of women by escaped slaves part, what a Birth of a Nation take that was (the best part being the ‘See where I’m going with this?’ part, cuz no I absolutely didn’t weirdo and I would thank you not to arrogantly act as though it were the most obvious conclusion one could reach)
I've come to realize that lost cause there is just something y'all throw out when someone criticizes Lincoln or the Union, I half expect to be called a lost cause when I criticized the US invasion of Iraq at this point
@@ronniehopper2726 Allow me to list out all the very not Lost Cause ideas espoused in the video in question:
1. The Tariff of Abominations being definitive proof that the South seceded over tariffs in 1860
2. The Corwin Amendment being definitive proof that the South did not secede over slavery in 1860 (it did not guarantee its expansion, which is why it was denied)
3. Fixating to a near obsessive degree on the military inadequacies of the North during the early period of the war
4. The infamous video of that one isolated Confederate veteran insisting that secession was a matter of states’ rights rather than slavery (uploaded to RUclips by the clearly even-perspective source which is the channel known as ‘blackconfederate1’, cuz what would a Lost Causer need from a source like that?)
5. Asserting that the downtrodden South was shouldering the brunt of the US economy leading up to the war and being outrageously extorted by the tyrannical North
Come on, these are classic cherry-picks and distortions with such time-tested associations to the Lost Cause that you may as well be lifting them straight from the Sons of Confederate Veterans website (and it’s worth noting that this is a born and raised North Carolinian saying all this, just to be clear)
@@aidanvannynatten2787 what I'm trying to get through to you is the point of rageaholic video was not why the civil war was fought which is his only f****** report but the tyranny of Lincoln
@@ronniehopper2726 If I understand you right, you’re gonna have trouble getting that thru to me, cuz you can’t have a conversation about Lincoln without expressing some sort of perspective on the Civil War, since that was literally his entire presidency, thus the video reasonably contains lots of commentary it
@@aidanvannynatten2787 yeah this video by this failed academic contains a lot about the civil war the rage-aholic video doesn't it's about his authoritarian his dictatorial overstep if you pay attention in the first 5 minutes of rageaholic video he blatantly states that slavery was an issue for the Confederacy but not its sole reason, to put it in modern terms the Confederate States was more akin to the European Union then to the federation that we see ourselves in now, each state in the Union and independent republic. They were a myriad of reasons given for secession, Kentucky succeeded from the union and its main reason neutrality, the same for Missouri, they didn't want to take up arms against their people they consider their Brothers
If you can't trust a guy in sunglasses, leather jacket and gloves to give an accurate account of history, who do we trust???
My world is destroyed
The libertarian stereotype is not accurate? How could this be? My values are broken
@@darkbrightnorth Razorfist is not a Libertarian. He considers himself a Goldwater Conservative.
Vlogger Through History is a scammed type, lies about never watching Razor video but stops the video to pull out some damn site to push his BS narrative. VLG is trash.
"A statement without any evidence is just an opinion"
Abraham Lincoln (probably)
Source: trust me bro
I see what you did there.
Hitchen's razor is better here: "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"
I lost it at Chris’s dive into the past talking about the wishes for titles to be inherited almost immediately followed by his deadpan delivery of “Oh, so not family friendly” when the Rageaholic went Rageaholic F-Bombity Bomb
It should be noted that the "Tariff of Abominations" was actually written by Southern Democrats, chiefly John Calhoun, because they felt that it wouldn't pass and they could then blame the failure on the New England States and the National Republicans, who were the forerunners of the Whig party. Calhoun even admitted that slavery was a major sticking point during the crisis.
Henry Clay was also a supporter of eventual emancipation.
So your argument is elected politicians ALWAYS represent those who they claim to represent? And simultaneously, your other argument is that politicians say nothing but the truth.
@@irsmedic First off, Strawman argument much. Secondly, I never said anything close to what you say here. Third, I learned what I wrote above through actual research and reading books.
Do you drink whisky? You deserve a bottle for putting up with this review.
I do indeed :)
@@VloggingThroughHistory make it an old and smooth one.
Do you think this chap could be the Real life Johnny Reb?
@@thehandoftheking3314, nah, Johnny Reb is infinitely more reasonable than our sunglass-wearing friend here.
@@occam7382 Yep Davis.
@@occam7382 that's Razorfist's whole shtick. Hard-core conservative Libertarian.
Razor's claim that Thomas Lincoln was a slave catcher is a brazen lie. Thomas Lincoln moved out of Kentucky (a slave state) to Indiana (a free state, and brand new as well!) in 1816. Even before that, he was known to dislike slavery, for both religious and economic reasons. In Kentucky, he chose to join an anti-slavery church. And in Indiana, the church the Lincolns were members of--Pigeon Creek Baptist--split over slavery, with the anti-slavery members, including the Lincolns, leaving to start their own church.
Actually, it's 100% the truth. Yes why would a slave catcher move from a slave state or free state? Because that's where the business was!
Prior to the southern secession the biggest political controversy of the time was the fugitive slave act. This was a constitutional law that essentially ordered free states bordering slave states to capture and return any slaves who escaped into those terrories. To the South, this was part of the constitutional agreement that was agreed upon when they joined the Union, to the north, it was completely unfair that they had to raise taxes and militias dissolve what they saw as a Southern problem. The slave-catchers like Thomas Lincoln, it was their bread and butter.
@@snakey934Snakeybakey Proof? Excerpts? Sources? (not that it's relevant to the discussion anyways...)
@@branden3785Ask VTH for his damn proof he hasn't watched Razorfist video before. He has too many damn convenient BS "facts" ready to diarrhea out for a reaction video.
@@DD2225 Someone's butthurt...
@@branden3785 Like you had any?
I have to say you have the most mature and restrained demeanor imaginable to be able to sit through this intro at 6:40 with such a calm face. You are a saint
I've listened to my fair share of insane people but this dude might just take the cake as the crown prince of historial reimagining long may he reign. And for context I live in Finland so I get to listen to our eastern neighbours tell me how bloodthirsty savage Finns invaded the peace loving Soviet Union forcing them to defend themselves. That's the level of insane that this is.
This guy’s name before was Razor Fist (interestingly, someone I haven’t seen or heard from in many many years and did not expect to find him on this channel, of all places), and he is a well known libertarian / weird nationalist-esque guy who consistently gave all the worst takes on domestic issues here in the USA. I’m pretty sure he rose out of the anti - SJW movement, but he has always been one of those weird larping guys that wears leather gloves and aviators in almost every single video.
@@MeowingWhale I can tell you hes not a real Libertarian. Most of us are normal people who just want the Government to mind its own business, not whatever this idiot is saying
The clown prince might be more accurate, no offense to the Joker.
Go easy on him, Brett Hart has suffered a lot of head injuries over the years.
He's a joke in the metal scene, and now he's ruining history.
Some more comments to add.
“If you look at previous secession crises It doesn’t fit the pattern!”
Except yes it did…in this case that is. He completely ignored the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, John C. Calhoun’s influence on southern politics and the argument of states right (to preserve slavery), The Dred Scott Decision, The Fugitive Slave Act, Kansas-Nebraska Act, and all of the compromises and debates that were had over the slavery issue before the Civil War.
It’s just a mix of half-truths, out of context quotes, and straight up lies. It’s legitimately one of the most embarrassing historical videos I have ever seen. He doesn’t even bother to get his dates and times right.
Come oooooooooooooon, how are dates and times important to anything historical at all? For all we know, the south could have originally seceded in 1922 after the great crisis that was the constipation riots following World War 2 in 1569. To back this up I will give a quote of President U.S Grant on the importance of unification and a core essential of human life "Water".
@@ZairokPhoen
You say this jokingly but someone actually tried arguing against me, a historian, on this very principle-that we can’t know anything for 110 percent certainty, therefore anything goes.
This was over transatlantic trade (or lack thereof) in the first millennium BC.
Glad you covered this. I had an argument with a family member who still believes the lost cause and even believes in the south will rise again . Man is my grandfather and doesn't even use 5 dollars bills because of Lincolns face or 50 dollar bills because of Grant's face. Just shows even with the amount of time since the Civil War it's still a hot topic to this day and a divisive on as well . Glad you could go here . Keep up the great work Chris 👍
i always wondered about this (a bit). I mean had they succeeded the US would have split (at least once, possibly more). It's BS anyway but i never got the motivation for the whole southern excusism. Seeing americans always being crazy with heir flags and how amazing everything is... what do these people want? I mean today. A split US? A less United States or powerful US? Slavery back? Or just a lame excuse for ones darker history parts and a lost war?
Nobody aside from people who want to believe such excuses will.
That is like having a American of British descent who hates the Revolutionary War.
Imagine a debate between Atun-Shei and this guy moderated by VTH.
I'd pay to watch that. Rageholic would play the role of the cartoonishly silly confederate easily
@@zombieoverlord5173 Yeah without even trying
Tbh, Johnny Reb once said after he suggested Billy yank that "Slaves were treated equally and better in the south" with
*"True, I am a Cartoon Character, Not an Idiot"*
Of which Rage guy clearly said about French Ambassadors looking at the situation of Slavery in the north
@@aribantala It was "Slaves were happy and treated well?"
"GOD NO! That's batshit even for you!"
@@undertakernumberone1 Yep, I definitely paraphrasing... Only remembered the Quote from Johnny
As soon as you said that someone describes him as “the opposite of atun shei” I immediately thought “uh oh.” And this video turned out to be even worse then I expected. I didn’t expect this to be a genuine lost cause video.
Also this guy unironically said “red pilled” I want to die
Yeah this guy is apparently a neo-Nazi
@@vodyanoy2 Would not surprise me
@@extrahistory8956 I'd argue Atun-Shei is more Confident than smug personally
@@ClawedAsh Yeah, good point. I think that choice of words might have been a bit too strong, so I do really like his content.
What makes no sense is you said slavery was the reason for secession but then said the Corwin Amend allowed them to keep slaves which means there was no reason for secession.
On the contrary, it proves the Union understood it was about slavery. The reason for secession (and the reason the Corwin Amendment wasn't enough) is the Republicans opposed the expansion of slavery to new territories. In the minds of pro-slavery southern politicians, ending expansion = the slow death of the institution of slavery. The Corwin Amendment did nothing to protect the expansion of slavery. That's why the Confederate Constitution banned the admission of free states (so much for States' Rights)
@VloggingThroughHistory valid point, can't disagree.
Anyone can argue the union (after the war) didn't allow states to rejoin the union unless they abolished slavery either which is violation of states rights then too.
It's never as simple as slavery vs not slavery. In every conflict there's vaults of money in the center of it and the Victors of that conflict get to spin the story of that conflict however they wish.
@VloggingThroughHistory hold on, on the principle of states rights, any random state/country can declare itself a member of the confederacy, and the confederacy has to let them join to adhere to this principle? Is that what you implied by "so much for states rights"?
What a straw man argument. The corwin amendment shows exactly why slavery was the cause. Keeping it wasn't the issuem expanding it was
@@thedislikebutton9819No, the "so much for states rights" was about how the Confederacy doesn't allow any State in unless they abide by slavery.
I genuinely try to be nice and civil when it comes to stuff like this but I legitimately lost brain cells listening to this and it was a struggle to even get through this video even with you talking about it and correcting him. there’s simply so many factually false statements that its almost impossible to not get a headache.
The dude was ranting throughout the video with political rhetoric🤣
@@WestValleyTransparency Almost like the politics is relevant, huh? Try again.
@@networknomad5600
Gonna cry?
@@networknomad5600 wait you’re telling me a video essay about political opinions is *ghasp* political in nature?
@@yinsolayanot an argument
I do love that he cites the exact same Confederate survivor interview from 1948 that Atun-Shei used in his last video, to make his point much more convincingly I might add, that the Lost Cause revisionism was long underway by this time and the interview was evidence of that attempted rehabilitation of the South’s war aims as compared to what men actually said at the time - remember his big bag?
Just amusing that Razor started off saying he has no interest in the Lost Cause or Southern revisionism, then does the exact thing that would reinforce that narrative even further. 😂
I recognized the video as well. This psycho shows how adept Atun-Shei is in his videos.
I was expecting it to be bad but even I was suprised when the guy made the "Lincoln made the Emancipation proclamation because he wanted to kill ladies" arguement.
You love to see people in year of our lord 2023 making the same arguments as Birth of a Nation.
I know. He really used servile insurrection as an argument in 2023, this guy is just racist.
Yeah, that's not even Lost Cause, that's actual Civil War era Southern sentiment of why slavery needs to be preserved. Longstreet even said as much in outrage against Northern freeing of Southern slaves.
you can throughly dismantle his arguments without misrepresenting it as "Lincoln made the Emancipation proclamation because he wanted to kill ladies"
That's cause you've been brainwashed to believe the lies.
Dudes a modern politics "anti-woke" commentator, suddenly him not understanding history and being so angry makes sense.
Precisely
No, it makes more sense when you consider that he's not a right-wing Libertarian, but an oafish libertine.
So he's anti-woke like most actual historians. Weird how the people that are actually knowledgeable about history tend to disfavor wokeness.
Pretty sure Lincolns dislike of slavery was partly from his hatred of his father who abused him
“His father used to punish him severely”
Whelp, I normally like to support the original content creators, in this case I think I'll take a pass. Keep up the good work VTH
it blows my mind that people watch that guy unironically. Well, its actually crazy how that guy is being serious with any of his arguments. I'm getting the, no one talked to me in High School, vibes.
I watch him unironically
@@jacksonperez5615 me too. GOD FUCCKKKING SPEEEEEEEDDD
I used to when he talked about video games. Then he went into politics and now pseudo-history.
The thing is I can't tell the difference.
He was 100% the weird kid in high school that got bullied, it is so apparent the whole time.
The shear bredth of your knowledge is impressive. The fact you were able to respond to this whole video just off the top of your head is insane. This video probably took him a while to research & put together and in 1 hour youre just like "no"
Not really off the top of his head didn't he take a break to look stuff up and have extra tabs open?
@@Bigcheese1334 Well looking up specifics is whatever. The fact hes able to mount a counteragrument in his head is impressive when most people are out here like "uh, so when did the civil war happen?"
He ignored like half of his points, sometimes calling them "irrelevant" when they revolved around Lincoln himself as opposed to the civil war, when in fact the video itself is about Lincoln not exclusively the civil war. Absolute clown
@@supasf okay bud, i dont think we watched the same video lol.
@@PercocetPete I'm sorry that you have difficulty reading English but the title clearly states the topic and intention of the video; "Abraham Lincoln: American Dictator". Razor bringing up the civil war (naturally due to it being one of the most prominent events during Lincoln's presidency) is supplementary to his central point, not integral.
On Julius Howell, soldiers fight for many reasons. Doesn't change the policy that put the war in place. Plus, Mr. Howell is almost certainly nostalgic to the time period and has told himself over the 80 years since the war what he needed to hear to justify his actions and the actions of his state.
Julius Howell even says in that clip that he didn't understand the states rights cause when he was fighting in the war, and only later understood it. You know, after the Lost Cause Myth had taken hold. By 1947, not only had the Lost Cause Myth fully formed, it had entirely permeated Southern culture, but one tenet of the myth was even beginning to expire in that time, as that was the front end of the Civil Rights movement: and that's the idea that slavery was a largely benevolent institution for slaves, and that they were happy. Julius Howell was also "commander in chief" of the UCV, who basically invented the Lost Cause Myth.
For the cherry on top, we get a little stolen valor as well. Retired Cpl Howell is often seen wearing a mockup of a General's frock coat.
@@night6724
So you just ignoring the most famous part of the cornerstone speech? Or all the secession letters where they say they are leaving for slavery? You are cherry picking a few quotes and ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Let me help by posting a little more of the cornerstone speech for you:
"African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. [...] Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."[5
@@night6724
It is bizzare that you are putting modern politics into the Civil War. Easy to see why you and Razor come off with the views you do. You desperately want this conflict to be about mean tyrannical liberals oppressing small government saints. I'm sorry but that isn't reality. Why are you trying to tie your cause to a group that was obviously in the wrong and wanted to leave to preserve slavery? You can still be a small government libertarian in the present without trying to force a narrative on the past that isn't correct.
The South left over slavery, not tarrifs and you can show that by just looking at what the South and Southerners of the time said in all their declarations. You can see it if you understand Bleeding Kansas, look at the supreme court, look at the politics leading up to the war, and just have a basic understanding of what was going on at the time. Again you ignoreall of that because you've got a political axe to grind in the present. Lost Causers peddle that bullshit because they don't want their grandpappys looking bad. They want to be proud of their families. In a way you can understand why they want that to be true, but it isn't. So don't fall for it just because it's convenient for your political views.
@@Deadener Likewise the myth that the Union went to war only to free the slaves was a post-war invention. Just because one side lies doesn't mean the other didn't. Its GOOD the Union eventually free the slaves, but resupplying the Fort before fighting broke out was not meant to free Slaves.
@@IcyPhilosopher "All" the letters? Did you skip over the actual letters where they go on for paragraphs about Tariffs? Stop watching youtube and read.
I would love to see a live debate between Atun-Shei and Rageaholic. That would be the youtube History community's greatest showdown. Almost every point he makes seems already addressed by the 9 episode Checkmate Lincolnites show, so its amazing how this video still exists when it's talking points have been so thoroughly debunked already.
It would be the funniest shit ever
Atun Shei at least uses actual facts and history.
Watch Razors debate with Kyle Kulinski. He got completely steamrolled. He would get steamrolled by Atun-Shei as well. All he can do is talk real fast.
I don't know how well it would work. This guy would just try to shout down anything he couldn't argue, I suspect.
Atun-Shei, though I have rare disagreements with him, argues in good faith. He backs his stuff up consistently.
One thing you should know about that dude is that he has some great videos talking about the history of big recording artists like Black Sabbath, Queen, and Michael Jackson. He should stick to covering that subject. He has no business covering historical topics. I had watched that video earlier, and it was a tough one to sit through. Thank you for offering your expertise on this subject.
He should stick to metal bands.
I enjoy his take on comics, metal, and gaming but this was WAY off.
Great point on the “atheist” thing. That is your strongest argument and it makes me doubt Razor’s exhaustive research.
Yeah razor was wrong about that. As a kid Abe was vocal about his lack of faith, but he was very much a Christian. The way I understand it was he accepted Jesus but he didn’t subscribe to any church, or specific denomination. That’s probably the part of the “lack of faith” as a child. More a lack of faith with the institutions of Christianity of the time, rather than a lack of faith in God.
I guess if i were to criticize atheism it would be how anti-moralism (due to how liberal and atheist circles tends to often be antimoralists) can lack common sense on right and wrong, since they strictly go with facts. But falsely calling someone an atheist is weird just to win cheap points
His (Razor’s) whole argument there is very much giving history teacher during the Cold War arguing that bc Communist states (USSR, China) tended to be broadly atheist that made them inherently evil (rather ya know the war crimes/crimes against humanity that the leaders of these countries often committed)
This guy has never done exhaustive research in his life. 😂
@@Sparrows1121I'm sorry, but as an atheist, I still have a moral code. I'm still equipped with that thing called "empathy". To me it is the epitome of arrogance to believe that those without your faith cannot have morals. To claim most liberals and atheists have no morals is just childish. I, and the vast majority of those you attacked with this, would never rape kids. Yet there is almost not a day gone by, where I didn't read about another priest, or youth pastor, doing just that.
The expression at 27:46 is the general mood when watching this rambling. Thank you for your patience and persistence Chris
It’s as if you take Jonny Reb from Atun Shei’s videos and remove any bit of charm or charisma and replace it with sound and fury signifying nothing. He even uses many points that Checkmate Lincolnites already covered and picked apart. It’s painful to watch.
It's funny that on the original video, I couldn't find a single comment disagreeing with him. It's almost as if he's deleting those comments...
Quite a few people have said he is.
@Vlogging Through History that wouldn't be too surprising, plus I saw one comment on the original video that said "Lincoln was right about one thing black people" and it had a lot of likes and people agreeing in the reply section
That says a lot about who these people are
I think it's a combination of that and just the fact that the kind of people who follow him would probably blindly agree with what he says.
@@malcolmferguson4869 it is ironic that someone who is so obsessed with the government controlling people goes out of his way to make sure that no one expresses an opinion that disagrees with him. And he’s not the only or even the first person like that I’ve encountered.
Dude talked for an hour and it seems like his argument was little more than "Lincoln agreed with Henry Clay once, also a british newspaper and one confederate veteran said some stuff, so hes a dictator."
I barely made it thru this vid WITH your commentary, but I can’t imagine watching it raw, on my own without you setting things straight every couple of minutes 😂
Also being African American myself, people with similar views like this guy dumbfounds me. Like wtf do you have to gain by this argument. It doesn’t make you special lol
Ngl I USEd to like rageoholic back when he was an occasional guest on Steven Crowders show but now seeing guys like him describe themselves as “conservative” makes me wince and want to put as much distance between myself and the speaker as possible.
I’m a black American myself. When I saw the thumbnail for Razor’s vid I wasn’t necessarily shocked, just disappointed. Not only did Razor spread mass amounts of disinformation about the Civil War/Lincoln, he also squandered the experiences of my ancestors who fought and died for their freedom during the War. I half expected him to bring up “black Confederates” to make himself/the CSA look better.
Just shows you don’t think for yourself
@@t700e Have you done any search for, I don't know, black people waving "Confederate" flags.
Maybe you'd like to do that.
So, I'm curious what you would refer to those people as. I mean, are they stupid for supporting a flag that was flown by Armies "fighting for slavery?" Are they condoning slavery?
I find it odd how a black person would be flying a flag of the Confederacy. When the Confederacy was so "evil" to blacks.
If I could send links, I would. They'd probably get deleted.
Let me know when you find them.
Thank you sam for teaching the indians you normally talk about to learn about abraham lincoln. its very important we teach eachother about history
rofl
I think its fair to say the individual in this video someone I think I watched like 10 years ago is using the civil war and Lincoln and not viewing them by the histories that exist or existed at the time but as a way to push modern politics at least his constant references to something akin to modern politics points me to make that determination.
I watch him now and his biggest problem is how strongly opinionated he is. so he often goes into these videos already with the desired outcome and bleeds his opinion hard into the fact to make points. He does use historically truths but it’s so fast and loose it can’t really be practical
@@jacksonperez5615 He uses historical "facts" I'll never forget him arguing that Nazis were communists or socialists (don't remember exactly which) and it instantly became a meme.
Not sure if he really ignores the histories at the time or just bought fully into Confederate and lost cause propaganda and then applied that to modern politics.
He's one of these modern, edge lord, right-wing, pretend, tough guys, who try to act all smart in the name of giving ignorant, right-wing, arguments a pseudo, quasi-intellectual legitimacy when all the guy is, is a partisan hack. If you don't believe me, check out the rest of his content.
Oh yeah, and I just noticed this too: He's doing the Ben Shapiro thing where he's talking really quick and explaining things fast, and you're supposed to think that because he can rattle this stuff off so fast that he must be really sure of himself and must know what he's talking about. Therefore, he's probably correct. Its rhetorical trickery.
“Maybe if I yell loudly and raise and lower the pitch of my voice a lot people will believe the nonsense spewing out of my mouth”
"And also block people, delete their comments and insult them if they dont see your point of view" now thats how you get a loyal audience! "According to Razorfist"
Lol, do people think this guy is comparable to Atun-Shei? Say what you want about Atun-Shei's beliefs at least he can coherently and reasonably argue them with a solid basis in facts.
This guy is a riot. His name is accurate as hell
LOL
He should call himself "RageAlcoholic", it would be more accurate
I laughed so hard when you said "Hey, tell us all how Jackson felt about Native American" omg. Lol
California part made me laugh. He seems to forget the reason California's economy is so large is that California's population is so large, on top of agriculture, on top of being the main import state for America, ie most imports and exports come through California. ie California is the trade hub of America and California gets a big slice of that pie. It isn't about Agriculture.
And a bunch of other industries.
Wasn't he talking about the California in the 1860's?
How big was it back then?
He's not forgetting. The point is people joke Cali could leave and be fine - because its rich on its own. The South was rich on its own and could also leave. The issue being the Federal tariffs went towards financing internal improvements for Industry in the north. (Likewise the south wished to reverse the tariffs tables on the north if they got into power, so no one is innocent there!)
@@Pangora2 Actually that isn't true. New York City was the biggest Port in the United States at the time, and most of the trade went into that City. Most of the Federal Government's income through Tariffs came from New York City, and I mean the lions share, more than the combined South. I think it was over 80%, so more than all other ports in the USA combined including the South. So the Tariff excuse is actually a huge lie. I mean if it was "True" then the South leaving the North would of crippled the North Financially, which well.. didn't happen did it?
ps those tariff were almost exclusively on imports and lessor so exports. Which also throws a wrench into the argument.
My worst fear if I was making content like this would be seeing a VTH facepalm thumbnail reaction, I know I’m screwed
His arguments are arguing against each other, he is self destructing.
he's not arguing pro south, he's just saying lincoln was no saint like he's been painted as. he was just human. our country has repainted lincoln as a myth like figure, but yes, I really wish he wouldn't rage about it like he does, hard to keep up, but I guess thats why his channel is rageaholic...
@Justin M No no no, he is definitely arguing pro-south. He is sanitizing their rebellion of its slaver intent, framing the war as a result of the US not respecting the PERFECTLY VALID RIGHT to split the country when your guy loses an election (and because "high tariffs"), and lying about Lincoln's motivations and actions to paint him in the worst possible light (such as stating that the Emancipation Proclamation never intended to hurt slavery as an institution but instead to instigate a literal "servile rebellion" which if you aren't aware is the justification given for why slavery was necessary by the South before and after the war). Lincoln needs to be viewed as a complicated figure who did a lot of stuff we shouldn't encourage in the future, but nuance doesn't mean completely villainizing him while whitewashing the Confederacy. Razorfist is just doing this to support his own narcissistic political point that central government is the devil and social justice is bullshit, and Lincoln is a sacred cow for both causes. It's a direct attack on modern day proponents of an agenda he despises by calling them all tyrants by association.
15 minutes in and I'm forcing myself to keep watching just so Chris gets the credit for a video view, but christ this is hard going. Listening to this guy makes me think he's the historian version of Alex Jones.
Honestly, his Clay-Lincoln argument is like saying someone who admired one of Hitlers paintings automatically agrees with his political ideology.
Horrible analogy, jesus christ
Regardless of who is right, I think we can all agree that Razorfist fans coming here to white knight for their husbando is cringe squared.
Holy crap was that a painful episode. It’s hard to believe there are people out there like this. He kinda reminded me of the shock jock radio personalities, speak quickly and say crazy stuff but they are going so fast (and badly) that it is hard to argue the points.
@Ogami Yes I made the mistake to get involved in that comment section. Before I knew it a potato was telling me to take the red pill and some rando was calling African Americans beasts. True degeneracy in that comment section
@Ogami Unfortunately this is becoming more and more prevalent in the online space.
"Influencer effect" I call it. People are more susceptible to believing and following someone who has a strong charismatic screen presence. Because outspoken charismatic people tend to appeal primarily to the viewers emotions. This gets the viewer to return to the content over and over until they consider themselves a fan of that youtuber. The end result is you end up with fanbases who choose not to question the accuracy or knowledge of the influencer they follow because it's uncomfortable to consider the possibility that this person you've come to admire could be full of crap on many of thier points.
Like I'm sure many of the people who follow this Ragoholic guy do so mostly because they find him funny with his wordplay and cadence. They don't' want to think the entertainer is lying or wrong. Because that's depressing and goes against the main reason they follow him in the first place. So they don't bother questioning it and end up believing falsehoods about Lincoln because the falsehoods were delivered in an entertaining way.
I don't know if there is a solution to this problem. I think humans will always be attracted to strong personalities 1st, and then examine their credibility 2nd. Its a sad realization for online discourse.
His biggest comedic influence is Dennis Miller
I’m surprised you are responding to history videos done by channels who usually focus more on modern political commentary and issues, my respects to you for stepping into new territory!
I really wouldn't call what Razorfist (lol that name) is doing history in any meaningful sense of the word. It's libertarian propaganda. He should just state up front that he'd be ok if slavery lasted a lot longer as long as "property rights" weren't violated.
Got to protect the golden top hat cow
@@oldluke7653 going after Lincoln is the equivalent to tugging on superman cap
The gloves he was wearing gave me "I had a one man band in high school" vibes.
He used to be a singer in a black metal band. He was nothing special.
I really appreciate that he put a lot of work in to making sure the initial impression from his attire was backed up with how he expressed his point of view.
Never seen a black metal band? Pretty common.
I love how you can see VTH slowly losing his sanity as this video progressed.
I've never seen this dude before but he legitimately sounds like a character Atun Shei would make up to be the foil in a skit XD
All he does is badly argue falsehoods and conflate irrelevant facts/events.
It's propaganda. Good old propaganda. And look in this comment section to see how many people fell for it. Someone is aggressively saying what you want to be true, no matter reality, and insults people who disagree, so he's got to be right.
@Nitidus Literally nearly all history taught in education and schools is propaganda with most of it made up.
The difference being that Atun Shei is fun. From what I understand, Johnny Reb’s dialogue is almost entirely taken from his own comments section, including the weird pronunciation/spelling and the guy who rants that this time the war will come from space.
@@professorbutters Johnny Reb's points are usually taken from the comments, but at times also just goes with classic stuff from the Lost Cause. At times branching off of the comments.
Also, to quote Johnny Reb: "I am a cartoon character, not an idiot!"
I love watching vth get tilted in videos. He’s always so calm and rational and watching him lose it is entertaining. Im a sadist?
to be honest I would be disappointed if he did not feel at least the desire to face palm after watching the video. There are some positions that are just so stupid that you just have to say "are you for real bro ?"
I truly believe that this guy is the definition of a Sesquipedalian (using overly big words to confuse or to use big words as logos for an argument).
I wouldn't say that at all. Dude is dropping the f bomb every other sentence to emphasize his argument.
@@rayquaza1245 That is another good point, but I prefer to attack the argument and not make it a moral war where we win even easier.
It's less of a Sesquipedalian issue and more a style alliteration move. I watch a lot of his music and movie content and its more like a branding thing to use odd words and turns of phrase in conjuction with alliteration to make it more memorable.
seeing that youre making a similar face of the thumbnail of the woodrow wilson was a good president video, i'm nervously excited for this reaction
How is it that folks still manage to ignore anything other than the Eastern Theatre? He also conveniently doesn't mention that the Confederacy had a draft and a pretty serious problem with desertion.
Because the Western Theater wasn't as flashy or dramatic as the East... and the CSA barely had any wins so Lost Causers don't like to think about that.
Can confirm, two of my CSA veteran ancestors were confirmed deserters.
Love your channel mate. Well done for addressing this. As a Brit I admit my civil war knowledge is lacking, but blimey that was a hard watch. There’s nothing like getting a warped point across by shouting at the camera for an hour 🤦🏻♂️
I’m a 66-year-old woman and I thoroughly enjoyed his style.
After recently watching the movie Lincoln (2012), he really comes off to me as Fernando Wood from the movie, from how he loudly argue to force his viewpoint into the audience to how he insists that Lincoln is a tyrant based on Confederate apologia.
Fernando Wood makes an appearance in his video too!
@@VloggingThroughHistory You are a legend for sitting through 1 hour of the video without breaking eye contact. I have forgotten how many times i have to paused the video and do sth else just over how obnoxious, loud and somewhat immature over how loaded the entire video is with emotional languages, which basically gave away how biased his viewpoint is
Not even seeing the leather jacket, gloves, Black Sabbath shirt, and aviators in the house could prepare me for how wrong this dude was lmao
Don't diss Black Sabbath like that lol
As a Black Sabbath fan, he doesn't represent us. lol
@@vodyanoy2 don’t worry, I also enjoy enjoy Black Sabbath. But when you combine all the parts of his outfit it’s like collecting the infinity stones
Hey! Aviators are cool sometimes. Lol
@@bismergleow4031 yes, but never while indoors
He's just such a troll. This is a product of the "death of expertise" - anyone with a microphone assumes that they are an expert. They think they can skim 2.5 paragraphs of few wikipedia articles and ignore things they don't like and assume that they are an expert.
Sabaton released a new song called "The First Soldier" about Albert Roche, the most decorated French soldier of WW1. Would you consider reacting to it? He's a relatively unknown figure, even in France, and while I'm not a great fan of war heroes in general, the fact that he's so largely unknown is a shame.
You know you're about to hear from a lunatic when he's wearing leather gloves and sunglasses while staring at a computer screen indoors. We love you. Please don't do this to yourself again.
The only thing that would have absolutely made it better is if he were sitting in his car.
That is just his look since the earlier days of RUclips.
I am laid up in severe pain with diverticulitis. I thank God for VTH bringing a reasonable take on this crazy video. I try to be as centrist as humanly possible and may not always agree with VTH but respect his reasonable fact based take on things. Also, not sure who was more confused about Chappaquiddick being mentioned VTH or myself. Back to the fetal position.
Hope you feel better soon!
Feel better soon that’s pretty….. errr…. Shitty lol
Two words.. carnivore diet. It will help out a lot!
@@ThomasG_Nikolaj Uhh low fiber diets are usually the cause.
@@bigcrackrock not according to the recent 0 fibre diet studies done by Dr Paul Mason. Fibre is an irritant to the gut
I think that the problem here is that this guy hasn't learned to check the consistency of his own views and the consistency of his beliefs with actual historical facts. These are skills that one learns as a scientist, but they are not generally a part of education.
Well, when I teach literature they are, but I’m a literary historian. It doesn’t matter to me how many cool theories it has: if there’s no support in the text and no support in the documents, I’m not interested. I think students are trained to write “research papers” with a pre-selected thesis, and then they cherry pick four or five arguments that support their point of view. That’s not a research paper. If you’re going to play with history, you have to include the stuff that doesn’t support your argument and be willing to say, “huh. I was wrong.” Which this guy can’t or won’t do.
As a Brit, I always find your reactions to any related to the American Civil War totally fascinating. I genuinely don't think there is anything in recent British history that divides us Brits half as much as the Civil War appears to divide you guys over the pond. Fascinating stuff, and outstanding job as always Chris!
you guys got over your Civil War, we restarted it and are keeping it going! USA, USA :)
I think The Troubles was a tad divisive.?
Northern Ireland might...
Edit: Even Brexit
Let’s face it. Any country that has been around awhile has or will have its share of problems. Yeah?
We have a fair bit of divisive stuff in the uk.
Lincoln killed vampires. He's a badass.
I unironically love that movie
There's a reason why people call Razor "Metal Spoony"
Is that supposed to be an insult?
@@METALGEARMATRIX have you seen Noah lately? Or over the past several years?
I’m not surprised because razor fist is basically Captain contrarian.
Does he pander to a specific side or is he a contrarian
@@TOAOM123 mostly just a contrarian.