I tried to look at the numbers and the years i remenber with mayor Wars in 19th and 20th centuries. And tou linda understand the Power of countries and thirsty for land
@@silverbolbo which is weird, of all the other European empires, Austria was the least genocidal, yet most people remember them for oppression and instability
@@lordyaromir6407 That was really only the function of Austria being the furthest away from the ocean and an access to colonisation out of all the empires, not an active choice. Their oppression of any internal dissidence and elevating people like Metternich or Bach into public office on the other hand, was an active choice.
The fact that you can see the soviet unions population decline during WWII really puts in to perspective how many soviet people died. Around 24 million soviets died
It is very sad fact that most of people don’t know how many Soviet people died for win. Today in Russia everyone thinks that foreigners don’t know the loss of Soviet Union and Who really won in WWll
I’m just as critical of Stalin as the next guy, as well as the Soviets’ initial cooperation with Germany in 1939. But the US should be thankful for the incomprehensible toll the USSR took to win the war. They nearly lost their country, but they persevered and turned the tide of the European theater. Maybe the Allies would not have won if the USSR didnt join Also, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria was another major reason the Japanese surrendered unconditionally. In addition to the bombs
Remember, the defeat of 1699 wasn't because the weakness of the ottoman.. But rather, the weakness of european monarchies!! How ?? All of Austria would fall in 1683 without the help of the holy league! Conclusion.. There was no country in europe that could face the ottomans alone!!!
@@umuttopal6402 If the ottomans remain strong the Russian couldn't defeat them alone... don't forget that the ottomans destroyed Moscow twice in 1571 and 1593 The ottoman empire got a good education system and was so powerful in military!
Its incredible how Britain, who had the lowest population out of the superpowers at the time, somehow managed to expand and create a vast empire that conquered almost the same surface area as the moon
The Spanish Empire: the first global empire, went around the world, discovered America, mapped a large part of the world, created the first human rights, created the world's first navy and the world's first professional army, and achieved the supremacy of the seas for 300 years and had the best army in the world for 200 years, only the Roman Empire surpasses the Spanish, greetings👋
Uh because they're on the coast. Before the new world was discovered coastal powers weren't as relevant. Once the new world was discovered they became essential to everything
@@swamicoupet4355 What the heck are you even talking about, I hope you realize he's talking about 1790. Canada and Australia were more or less nothing and in 1800 even India had a total population of only 160 millions (and not a lot of India was under British rule at the time, only a small portion). It's mathematically impossible it reached something like 400 million. At most in 1790 I'd guess it was like 50 million, a lot of Indians in it.
As an agricultural power and politically unified country, France had a early population boom. But the 19th century was a nightmare demographically speaking. IIRC if it had the same birth rate as England from 1815 to the mid 20th century, it would be above 100 million people today. But since the post-WWII reconstruction era, the pro-birth policies (social welfare, daycare, union laws) made it among the highest birth rates in the developed world.
Hahahaha that's not as impressive as it looks to be. Back then so many Portuguese soldiers were working for Spain Kingdom. Spain was gonna pay a lot to the soldiers that are attended to the exploring team and i don't even mention the glory they made. Also Magellan was portuguese but he was gonna get paid by spain if he could manage not to die. So Portugal wasn't the one explored the world and colonized the south america. If it was then Brazil wouldn't be the only country speaks portuguese.
@@kvothelamora1925 I think you have confused the exploring of indian ocean with the atlantic ocean missions , portugal had a syrong hold along almost all of the cost of west and east Africa , Yemen and India they also had colonies in east Asia like Macao which they held until the last century . all of this thanks to their impressive architectures who designed impenetrable fortresses
@@kvothelamora1925 There was portuguese working for the spanish as there was spanish working the portuguese, and thats true for other nations as well. The guy who translated the between portuese and hindu was a polish guy, for example. I dont get yout point... In south America Portugal focused on its area imposed by tordesillas treaty, that included Brasil as cisplatina (uruguay) and they had to fight the spanish, dutch amd french there. In the indian ocean, oceania and on he far east the political situation was much more complex.
Great video, especially paored with the music. I'd only have 1 suggestion - would be great to see some major historical events on the screen, especially when there are some major changes happening (partitions of Poland resulting in its disappearance from the list, fall of the Soviet Union, etc.)
Yes 15 million of it is probably Syrians and other refugees who constantly give birth And im also pretty sure that each day more Syrians are given birth than Turks which is kinda ironic
Problem wit Turkey was that it wasnt industrialized. That is why you see a population boom. If Turkey had industrilized at 1750-1850 it might have been bigger than Russia today
Yes, but remember at that time Spain included southern Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Milan, Luxembourg, Belgium and the French regions of Artois and Franche-Comte
That's what exponential population growth and demographic changes do! Africa had 1/3 of Europe's population in 1950 and now it has around 60% more people, and in 2100 it will have over 3 times Europe's population
Interesting as soon as you know your history and can deduce why the numbers change the way they do. One small mistake: you wrote Austria-Hungary from 1848, but that isn't so. Hungary became effectively independent in 1848-49 (so you would want take their population away from the two-headed eagle) then reintegrated into the Habsburg Empire after the lost war of independence. Austria-Hungary is only after 1867.
This was nice. I would've liked to see an overlay of the events that took place during major shifts in population. ie, flood, famine, plague, war, or other
Every major increase was because of territorial gains. Only in the last decades were territorial changes not much of a thing in europe (besides the USSR). Every major decrease was because of the same. I'm just a diletant in history, but I was looking out for the wars I knew more than the names, and the fighting itself didn't seem to change anything. Only territorial gains/losses.
This was nice. But also with some mistakes. Nobody is perfect. So it is completely nonsensical to call this country Habsburg Spain. This was Spain and the Habsburg Austrians were completely irrelevant. Also the term Poland-Lithuania is wrong because it was a Polish empire. Using the term Poland-Lithuanian is absolutely wrong. Because this Polish state was a Polish Empire which was completely dominated by the Poles and the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! Actually Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is also mostly used, which is also incorrect for the same reason as Poland-Lithuania because it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! By the way, the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth based on a mistranslation and is therefore wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern invention in connection with Poland. A nonsensical invention by historians that does not correspond to reality. Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. But the term should also not be used because the use of Lithuania in the name suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita is the traditional and official name of the Polish Empire as a whole, including all duchies and and all ruled territories. The name of the state Rzeczpospolita is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Never!!! So the designation for this state as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth but also as Poland-Lithuanian is completely wrong. If one wants to use a more modern term one can use Polish Empire as also the term Swedish Empire is used. In any case, it would make sense to use the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita as a designation for this state, which was actually still internationally common in the 19th century when talking about Poland before the partitions. The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term. By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. The term Swedish Empire is also used, or even Danish Empire. Here is an addition to the Polish Empire because the term is rarely used. An empire is usually a very large in terms of area multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of one ethnic group. According to this definition was Poland an empire in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries! This already proves the enormous size of the territory compared to other European countries that the Polish king and the Polish parliament ruled. Why did Poland occupy Moscow in 1610? Why did the son of the Polish king become the Tsar of Russia? Out of imperial interest. Why did Poland rule the Ukrainian and Belarusian territories and all the other areas? Why did Poland control other areas as well? Out of economic interest, because the economic interests were also imperial interests. That goes hand in hand! And those were the Poles in this Polish Empire. The Poles ruled over various peoples and 5 different religious groups. The Poles ruled over the other peoples and in some cases also assimilated them. The Lithuanians were also controlled and assimilated by the Poles. Incidentally, it was a Polish empire, because the Poles were the nation in power. The Poles ruled the other peoples and partially assimilated them. That is why the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! That was a Polish empire, which is why mentioning Lithuania in the state name is wrong.
@@giovanni-8522 Это ошибка, брат, что ты враждебен мне, так же как ошибка, что наши славянские народы сегодня враги. Кстати, я поляк и панславист. Для меня все славяне мои сестры и братья. Так что, конечно, русские тоже мои славянские братья. Сегодня разлад между славянскими народами! Это факт! Украинцы и русские даже воюют друг с другом военными средствами. Но так не должно оставаться. Поляки и чехи/словаки сто лет назад были врагами. Сегодня это дружественные страны. Сто лет назад Польша тоже воевала с Украиной. Сегодня эти два славянских народа тоже хотят дружить. То, чего достигли эти славянские народы, может быть достигнуто и другими славянскими народами. Во всяком случае, я обнаружил, что славяне всегда хорошо ладят. Даже русские и украинцы. Или хорваты и сербы. А также поляки и русские. По моему опыту, в личном разговоре, эти славяне с юмором воспринимали неприязнь и не хотели быть врагами. Я никогда не чувствовал, что разговор и диалог невозможен. Суть всегда заключалась в том, что вам нужна дружба и братство, а не конфликт. Вы можете ясно увидеть, что если присмотреться, у славян сильное чувство единения. Панславизм не умер! Это хорошо видно на RUclips! например, видео под названием «This is Slavia» или панславянское видео под названием «Slavic peoples». Второй комментарий в списке @David Trivic звучит следующим образом: Мечта об объединенной Славии никогда не умрет. Люблю всех моих славянских братьев:🇧🇦🇧🇬🇧🇾🇭🇷🇷🇸🇵🇱🇲🇪🇷🇺🇸🇮🇸🇰🇺🇦🇨🇿🇲🇰. Остальные комментарии на самом деле все братские. Вот почему я считаю, что в будущем будет Славянский Союз.В будущем, кстати, будут массовые конфликты в Западной Европе и Германии из-за неуклонно растущего мусульманского населения, что ускорит формирование Союза. В Германии и Западной Европе возникнут хаотические условия, которые перерастут в гражданские войны. Радикалы уже обустраивают склады оружия и планируют вооруженную борьбу за свержение правительства. Солдаты и полицейские уже сегодня такие радикалы. Xаос и радикализация резко возрастут в будущем, пока не возникнут восстания и гражданская война. Я знаю это, потому что долгое время жил в западной стране. В СМИ также много сообщений о росте насилия.Дело в том, что с обеих сторон уже нарастает насилие с гибелью и ранениями. С обеих сторон нарастает радикализация. Мусульманское население в этих странах составляет всего около 10%. Очевидно, что ситуация полностью обострится, когда будет 30-40% мусульманского населения. Может быть, даже с 20% мусульманского населения. Из-за более высокой рождаемости и иммиграции число мусульман в этих странах вырастет до этого уровня и продолжит увеличиваться. Германии и различных странах Западной Европы обречены! Хаос и гражданская война - будущее этих стран! Уже сегодня в этих странах происходят большие конфликты туземцев против востоковедов, хотя востоковеды достигли лишь около 10% населения этих стран. Только небольшой процент ассимилируется. Большинство хотели сохранить свою восточную самобытность! На самом деле, большинство из них чувствуют свое превосходство над местными жителями из-за своей религии, которая также препятствует ассимиляции. А если 20% или 30%? Из-за этого в этих землях будет хаос и гражданская война за господство. Мусульманские могилы оскверняются уже сегодня. Ориенталов убивают уже сегодня. На лагеря мигрантов уже совершены тысячи нападений. Восточные тоже снова и снова совершают насилие включая терроризм. Все это приведет к гражданским войнам за господство в этих странах. Эти страны точно этого не переживут! ЕС и НАТО тоже перестанут существовать. Я хорошо знаю, что в России тоже около 10% мусульман, но в России нет такого массового прироста, как в Германии и западноевропейских странах. Кстати, из чеченского конфликта они поняли, что бросать вызов русским - ошибка. Почему бы этому славянскому союзу не существовать? Все вовлеченные славянские народы только выиграют в очень смутные времена. В то время, когда безопасность всех этих государств находится под огромными внешними угрозами. Между прочим, Славянский союз был бы не созданием большого славянского государства, а объединением равноправных славянских государств. Уверен, славяне научатся на ошибках ЕС! Не предпринимается никаких попыток создать единое славянское государство. Это будет федерация равноправных наций, в которой одна нация не может господствовать. Это будет объединение независимых государств, но они будут тесно сотрудничать на экономическом уровне. Будет ограниченное политическое сотрудничество. Однако в то же время это будет и оборонительный союз. Хотя у славянских государств не будет таких проблем, как у западных государств, хаос там затронет и славянские государства. Будут экономические потери, потому что экспортные рынки исчезнут. Могут быть беженцы из этих стран. Могут быть даже пограничные инциденты. и т. д. Это автоматически приведет к сближению славянских народов. Однако создание славянского союза требует укрепления славянской идентичности в славянских народах. Поэтому необходима прославянская кампания, чтобы панславянская идея получила широкое распространение среди славянских народов. У славянских народов должно возникнуть стремление к славянскому союзу, от которого выиграют все славянские народы в этой трудной ситуации. Я продолжаю свой комментарий ниже.
@@giovanni-8522 В связи с этим, конечно, тоже есть проблемы. Но все эти проблемы можно преодолеть, если славяне будут работать вместе. Например, Россия - гигант по сравнению с другими славянскими странами. Поэтому существует риск полного доминирования России в Союзе. Таким образом, Россия сможет участвовать только в том случае, если Россия согласится с тем, что в Союзе существуют механизмы, предотвращающие доминирование одного государства. Кстати, у России не будет проблем с этим согласиться, потому что не будет существенных ограничений суверенитета вовлеченных государств, как это имеет место в ЕС. Россия также получит возможность, как и другие государства, проводить собственную внешнюю политику. Но почему бы государствам Славянского Союза не поддерживать друг друга во внешней политике? Будет Славянский Союз! Это только вопрос времени! Сегодня славянские народы все еще разделены, но ситуация в будущем будет совершенно иной из-за массовых опасностей, которые возникнут из-за хаоса на Западе, а также из-за стремления славянских народов окончательно примириться. Конечно, до создания славянского союза еще далеко, и необходим общеславянский поход, который укрепит позитивный прославянский дух в славянских народах. Потом, вероятно, будет несколько общеславянских конференций, на которых потом и славянские народы примут решение об объединении. Однако обязательным условием является наличие воли к примирению, потому что сегодня, как известно, некоторые славянские народы фактически являются врагами и два славянских народа фактически воюют друг с другом. Как я уже писал выше, если полякам удалось помириться со словаками, чехами и украинцами, то почему бы и другим славянским народам не сделать то же самое. Конечно, это не произойдет в одночасье, но через 30 или 50 лет ситуация будет совершенно иной. Кстати, неславянские народы точно не захотят быть в славянском союзе, потому что будет автоматический процесс ассимиляции. Я уверен, что ни один народ не хочет быть ассимилированным славянами. Но я уверен, что будут ассоциированные привилегированные члены. Венгрия и Румыния, безусловно, примут приглашение стать такими ассоциированными членами. Для такого ассоциированного членства было бы много экономических выгод, таких как доступ к славянским рынкам без тарифов. В любом случае это было бы очень полезно для Славянского союза, так как была бы сухопутная связь с южными славянами. Возможно также, что Греция получит приглашение к такому членству. Однако беспорядки в этой стране помешали бы этому. Таким образом, решающее значение будет иметь ситуация в Греции. Хотя интервенция могла бы умиротворить страну. Еще одной страной, которой будет предложено такое ассоциативное членство, будет Казахстан. Казахстану «попросят» согласиться на ассоциированное членство из-за большого славянского меньшинства. Следует помнить, что это будут не мирные времена. Славянский союз также был бы оборонительным союзом, и эти ассоциированные страны также могли бы быть союзниками Славянского союза. Для меня в любом случае славянский союз в будущем вполне логичен. Желаю тебе всего наилучшего!
That mainly because in that moment france prety much lose 1/4 of his teritory for exemple belgium , luxembourg and 2/3 other region was french teritory.
I thought Germany(Saxony and Habsburgs pop) would go down during the 30 years war. But according to this it increases. I always thought this was true: "During the war, Germany's population was reduced by 30 percent on average; in the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas an estimated two thirds of the population died. Germany’s male population was reduced by almost half. The population of the Czech lands declined by a third. The Swedish armies alone destroyed 2,000 castles, 18,000 villages and 1,500 towns in Germany, one-third of all German towns. "
@@tictacktictack818 Abdülhamit zamanında kaybedilen topraklar Tunus Yunanistan Romanya Kıbrıs mısır Sırbistan Karabağ Girit Bulgaristan toplamı Türkiye'nin iki katı ebatında ve başka hiç bir padişah Abdülhamit kadar toprak kaybetmedi. Ekonomi hiper enflasyon ile karşılaştı. Azınlıkların hepsi ayaklandı. Ki hala o ayaklanmaların etkisi devam ediyor ayaklanan azınlıklara kavgamız bitmedi ve bu yönetimi çok iyi yönetim diye yutturabiliyorlar. Tarihi objektif yansız kaynaklardan öğrenmek yerine dizilerden öğrenince insan bu şekilde düşünebilir tabi sen de haklısın.
@@abdullahcoskun3236 normalde sana uzun uzun aciklardim ama kapasite az olduğu icin anlaman imkansiz, sen böyle devam et elinde sonunda hem turklerden hemde kiclarini yaladigin ingilizlerden dislaninca anlicaksin aptallığın cezasını ve kimsenin umrunda olmicaksin
What country can take over Europe? Italy: I did it 2000 years ago France: I did it many times centuries ago Ottoman empire: goes brrrr Nazi Germany: all descendants of German should be in Germany including Celtics from France and UK USSR: is the second most powerful country in the world and has half of Europe Portugal, Spain and UK: don't care about Europe and take over the world instead
I am surpised they had almost twice the population as denmark-norway when denmark had the whole of sleswigh and southern sweden. I dont think the numbers hold op.
Unless you do something in your life more productive than watching random numbers on youtube floating, then not really, you're just vegetating on other's people expense.
surprised we even touched the list, it's so empty here in Finland, everywhere else in the world populations are exploding meanwhile here: 1919: 3 million 2020: 5 million at least once overpopulation starts becoming a problem elsewhere we'll be fine here.
@@Armor3d0ne idk bro not many people want to live like this, Finland's population is like 90% in the southern part of the country and 10% in the northern half and I live in the northern parts. humans aren't made for this shit.
It is astounding how small the UK population was from the 1600s right up to the 20th Century compared to the other big countries and yet managed to build its empire in that time with such a significant minority...
There are actually many reasons behind that achievement like being an Island , large navy , and focusing on occupying Over seas territories and setteling rather than waging wars in Continental Euorpe ect , but still Imperrisve.
It's completely whacky that the population of ireland was halved TWICE in the last 400 years. And yet I unironically know british people who think that britain colonizing ireland was actually good for ireland
I liked it when Russia and France began to fight for the championship and began to play Tchaikovsky's composition "1812", and when Russia took first place, the most solemn moment of the composition began to play.
I've heard that the Russian Empire would have achieved a population of perhaps 400 Million if it became a stable constitutional monarchy instead of the Soviet Union. The economy would have exploded, more cities might have been built in the southern regions, and more Russians would for obvious reasons stay in their country rather than move elsewhere. Absolutely mind boggling to think about (the current US population for comparison is a little over 330 Million).
@@C4LLI4 Not true, the US directly supported the White Army in the Russian Civil War, and actually had fantastic relations with the Czar before that. It was reportedly the Germans in World War I who backed Lenin in his journey.
That's some acceleration! Don't worry, we took their colonies and everything. Made them nice. Now they are brilliant, still near the top of population and productivity.
@@Fernando-lb3lx Lol 2 milion people killed on streets... actually it was aprox 800. When communism falls a lot of people left the country in 90-91' . In 2007 after we joined in UE , again a lot of people left for a better life...
@@theodosius8658 They were diplomatically recognized as the USSR at that time. Same with the Byzantine and Ottoman Empire. They never called themselves that but that is what their neighbors and history call them.
Savaş dönemlerinde her daim nüfus artar. Şu an Suriyelilerin nüfusunun bu kadar artması gibi. ABD 2003 te Irak'ı işgal ettiğinde 16 milyondu nüfusu. O kdr insan ölmesine rağmen 18 yılda 42 milyona çıktı nüfusu. Neredeyse 3 katına çıktı nüfusu. Bizde de öyle oldu. Birinci Dünya ve kurtuluş savaşı sonrası çok ciddi erkek nüfusunda azalma oldu. Allah'a şükür bu günlere geldik.
1. Dünya savaşı ve Kurtuluş savaşında 3 milyon insan kaybetmişiz, savaş, kıtlık ve ispanyol gribi yüzünden. 1922de Anadolu'daki Müslüman nüfusu 11 milyona kadar düşüyor yani tam doğru değil bu tablo ama bir hayli yakın. Zaten bu yüzden 2. dünya savaşına katılmayı reddetmişiz zira memlekette 17 milyon insan yaşıyor neredeyse 8 milyonu 16 yaş altı!! Savaşacak kadar yaşlı yada genç kimse kalmamış ki hangi güçle bir başka dünya savaşına katılıyorsun. Valla bir kitle küçümsemeye çalışıyor ama Kurtuluş savaşında savaşan kahramanlar olmasa bir manda olmamız veya Anadolunun çoğunu kaybetmemiz çok ama çok kolaydı zira bazı kolonilerin nüfusu bile bizden fazlaydı..
1917 год - распад Империи после Февральской и Октябрьской Революции, создание Российской Республики 1918-1922 - Гражданская война (Красные (Сторонники Ленина) против Белых (Сторонники Империи)) 30 декабря 1922 - учреждение СССР
It’s so surprising to see that at one point after WWI Romania and Czechoslovakia had bigger populations than Turkey and now Turkey is at 84+ while Romania is at 19-20 million and Czechia- Slovakia at 16.
@@anordinaryboi9506 In theory... Kinda yes. Throughout the entire period of WWII, Turkey was maneuvering, trying to stay out of the conflict. Why? Generally speaking, it did not pay off for the Turks to join the war on either side. There were several reasons for this: 1. Trauma after WW I, in which Turkey lost. They were concerned about the loss of more territories and possibly sovereignty. The example of Iran, occupied by the British and Soviets from 1941, cooled all enthusiasm. 2. Poverty in the country, Turkey at that time was underdeveloped, its arms industry was dwarf, everything was bought abroad. 3. Military weakness - in 1939 the Turkish army had 20 infantry divisions, 3 mountain brigades and 1 fortress brigades, and 5 cavalry divisions, aviation - 370 aircraft, mostly obsolete. Fleet - powerful on paper, in fact larger units (Yavuz battlecruiser, Mecidiye and Hamidiye light cruisers) completely obsolete and used as hulk, 4 relatively modern destroyers, 8 OPs and some "trinkets". Until 1941, the army was expanded - it had 43 divisions and 3 independent infantry brigades, 2 divisions and 1 independent cavalry brigade and 2 mechanized divisions, the aviation had about 400-500 aircraft, some equipment was purchased from the Germans, Americans and the British (including 2 destroyers and 2 OP for the fleet), but that was still not enough. The army was underarmed and had no combat experience. Turkey had great problems with maintaining this army in peacetime, so it was difficult to think about hostilities.
@@logannslm1593 Now that's an ignorant response. Nobody thinks that you silly fool. What he was trying to say was that the data could've began in BC or something like that. You took it to another extent saying, "Probably an American." The guy has a Greek name as well. Now that really shines the ignorance on you.
its because Turks lost a lot of territories so the population during the 1920s, after the steabilized state government policy was encouragement to have children . also health care system developed. in 1920s about %25-30 maybe more baby were dying during the birth , today it is below the %0.9..
@@lovepeace3069 yeah checking the nick name of your channel and the caveman type of agressive language you are using (ata your ass), you are indeed a contradictory type. I mean what could i expect from a gurbetçi çomarı ?
Great video but I found some mistakes in the video: Austria-Hungary was established in 1867, not 1848. Hungary was a kingdom only until 1946. It then became a republic until 1949 (The second rebublic).
@@joao_1986 If France had bring some real generals in Spain and not somes shiet, the task would have been settled. There was not best French troops in Spain and far of goods generals, and to complet, they practiced guerrilla..
@@inhocsignovinces1327 Still wouldn't be possible with Portugal easily raided by the British with local support and to even get to it you would have to cross Spain that was filled with also a hostile population and tons of guerrilla warfare, also it wasn't worth it the campaign as a whole it didn't bring any strategic gains by accomplishing it so i imagine moral in the French army wasn't very high
Turkey's leadership 6 minutes 5 seconds long France's almost 25 seconds Russia’s 8 minutes and still goes on. Turkey: I'm coming again, wait some minutes please.
This is weirdly satisfying to watch. Also, the more you know about history the more everything makes sense. Some of it is a bit sad. You can for example imagine a few places where at first glance, it seems many countries have a boom, but when you look at the numbers it's just that the populations go stagnant or decline for some of the major powers without any rapid shift. That's war. Edit: Well, this became much more apparent later on. But at the start it was a bit more interesting (that particular thing).
What is also interesting that some mistakes were made in the video. But nobody is perfect! So it is completely nonsensical to call this country Habsburg Spain. This was Spain and the Habsburg Austrians were completely irrelevant. Also the term Poland-Lithuania is wrong because it was a Polish empire. Using the term Poland-Lithuanian is absolutely wrong. Because this Polish state was a Polish Empire which was completely dominated by the Poles and the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! Actually Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is also mostly used, which is also incorrect for the same reason as Poland-Lithuania because it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! By the way, the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth based on a mistranslation and is therefore wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern invention in connection with Poland. A nonsensical invention by historians that does not correspond to reality. Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. But the term should also not be used because the use of Lithuania in the name suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita is the traditional and official name of the Polish Empire as a whole, including all duchies and and all ruled territories. The name of the state Rzeczpospolita is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Never!!! So the designation for this state as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth but also as Poland-Lithuanian is completely wrong. If one wants to use a more modern term one can use Polish Empire as also the term Swedish Empire is used. In any case, it would make sense to use the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita as a designation for this state, which was actually still internationally common in the 19th century when talking about Poland before the partitions. The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term. By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. The term Swedish Empire is also used, or even Danish Empire. Here is an addition to the Polish Empire because the term is rarely used. An empire is usually a very large in terms of area multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of one ethnic group. According to this definition was Poland an empire in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries! This already proves the enormous size of the territory compared to other European countries that the Polish king and the Polish parliament ruled. Why did Poland occupy Moscow in 1610? Why did the son of the Polish king become the Tsar of Russia? Out of imperial interest. Why did Poland rule the Ukrainian and Belarusian territories and all the other areas? Why did Poland control other areas as well? Out of economic interest, because the economic interests were also imperial interests. That goes hand in hand! And those were the Poles in this Polish Empire. The Poles ruled over various peoples and 5 different religious groups. The Poles ruled over the other peoples and in some cases also assimilated them. The Lithuanians were also controlled and assimilated by the Poles. Incidentally, it was a Polish empire, because the Poles were the nation in power. The Poles ruled the other peoples and partially assimilated them. That is why the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! That was a Polish empire, which is why mentioning Lithuania in the state name is wrong.
Just realized that I spent 15 minutes looking at moving numbers with flags
You should try playing Stellaris, you might like it
It's not just numbers, it's history
Didnt notice those were 15 min. thx
so do I)
I tried to look at the numbers and the years i remenber with mayor Wars in 19th and 20th centuries. And tou linda understand the Power of countries and thirsty for land
Spain every 30 seconds: I feel like changing my name and flag.
French did it more often
You mean France 🇫🇷 right?
Im Spanish
Actually, the last flag is put isn t the actual flag
@Діма Базалюк im spanish I know It better than you
Austria: once the second biggest empire in Europe, now people believe Kangaroos live there
Some people really hated the Austrians some time ago and were ready to kill some of them , not now ...
xD
@@silverbolbo which is weird, of all the other European empires, Austria was the least genocidal, yet most people remember them for oppression and instability
Emu Empire
@@lordyaromir6407 That was really only the function of Austria being the furthest away from the ocean and an access to colonisation out of all the empires, not an active choice.
Their oppression of any internal dissidence and elevating people like Metternich or Bach into public office on the other hand, was an active choice.
The fact that you can see the soviet unions population decline during WWII really puts in to perspective how many soviet people died. Around 24 million soviets died
It is very sad fact that most of people don’t know how many Soviet people died for win. Today in Russia everyone thinks that foreigners don’t know the loss of Soviet Union and Who really won in WWll
I’m just as critical of Stalin as the next guy, as well as the Soviets’ initial cooperation with Germany in 1939. But the US should be thankful for the incomprehensible toll the USSR took to win the war. They nearly lost their country, but they persevered and turned the tide of the European theater. Maybe the Allies would not have won if the USSR didnt join
Also, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria was another major reason the Japanese surrendered unconditionally. In addition to the bombs
and war criöes
They lost some countries that's why 😅 omg western propaganda...
@@Apo22662 Im sorry to inform you but the soviet union got bigger after ww2
Ottoman population 1600. 25 million
Ottoman population 1920. 14 million
Turkey population 2020. 84 million
@Ahmet why not?
@Ahmet Your name is Ahmet but you speaking English ( no problem, just...
Turkey- 15000000 Kurds
@@beliarek4595 F*ck off
@King of the Lilin theu still Kurds
Thank you for doing a video where the Geopolitical Entities change with history instead of being static.
ikr. its so confusing watching a video where rhe data starts in like the 14th century and it shows modern countries
Investigate Islam correctly 🕋🏜️
@@atillarustam6613 Tell that to muslims and your religion would disappear overnight 😂
@@MsPaintMr @mr ms paint I agree that my religion will disappear, but later than all religions. Only Islam is true until Qiyamah day .
@@atillarustam6613 is your real name realy Attila?
Ottomans after 1699;
"Mr. Sultan, I don't feel soo good..."
Remember, the defeat of 1699 wasn't because the weakness of the ottoman.. But rather, the weakness of european monarchies!!
How ?? All of Austria would fall in 1683 without the help of the holy league!
Conclusion..
There was no country in europe that could face the ottomans alone!!!
@@محمديونس-7 yeah it is amazing how they declined. I guess technology + russians screw them over.
@@محمديونس-7 I think Russians chould beat us alone, we were not good at tech or military. But you are right about Austria they were not do different.
@@umuttopal6402
If the ottomans remain strong the Russian couldn't defeat them alone...
don't forget that the ottomans destroyed Moscow twice in 1571 and 1593
The ottoman empire got a good education system and was so powerful in military!
nobody in the Ottoman Empire ever wanted to be in it. (except for Turkey obviously.)
Its incredible how Britain, who had the lowest population out of the superpowers at the time, somehow managed to expand and create a vast empire that conquered almost the same surface area as the moon
The Spanish Empire: the first global empire, went around the world, discovered America, mapped a large part of the world, created the first human rights, created the world's first navy and the world's first professional army, and achieved the supremacy of the seas for 300 years and had the best army in the world for 200 years, only the Roman Empire surpasses the Spanish, greetings👋
too bad the british surpasses both @@NeganGamer4646
Uh because they're on the coast. Before the new world was discovered coastal powers weren't as relevant. Once the new world was discovered they became essential to everything
You will never know, why the dispute under this comment was start
@Joe McCan its fake. It was hunger, no holodomor
@@IogannSebastianBAN brainwashed russian patriot
@Joe McCan I just know the history of my country
@Joe McCan who let you out of the dope house?
@Joe McCan dude chill
France in 1790: "I'm big!"
Ottoman: "No, I am big!"
Russian Empire: "Hold my kvass."
Ou! you know about kvass, it's an excellent drink, we really enjoy it.
And u obese.
But the british empire had like 412 million in total, this is just british empire's population in europe.
@@swamicoupet4355 What the heck are you even talking about, I hope you realize he's talking about 1790. Canada and Australia were more or less nothing and in 1800 even India had a total population of only 160 millions (and not a lot of India was under British rule at the time, only a small portion). It's mathematically impossible it reached something like 400 million. At most in 1790 I'd guess it was like 50 million, a lot of Indians in it.
I only know kvass because of Dayz lmao
all Countries changing Flags
Turkey: Nope, i like mys
*mine
@@justinblue1402
this is Honolulu english ;)
Misused in the video. There was an Ottoman flag until 1923.
I' m Turkish
@@onurexe317 yaşasın ırkımız çine bedel 40mız
As an agricultural power and politically unified country, France had a early population boom. But the 19th century was a nightmare demographically speaking. IIRC if it had the same birth rate as England from 1815 to the mid 20th century, it would be above 100 million people today. But since the post-WWII reconstruction era, the pro-birth policies (social welfare, daycare, union laws) made it among the highest birth rates in the developed world.
Title: Population of Europe until 2020...
But nobody saw that this video was posted in 2019...
Good point
Yeah thats why Corona had no impact
This is an entertainment.
I suppose that they just took estimates for December and November 2019 and made the video be until January 2020.
It's easy to project one year out.
Portugal exploring the world, setting up colonies and fighting wars in the indian ocean with just 1.5M people
now think about how impressive that is man , same goes for the dutch
Hahahaha that's not as impressive as it looks to be. Back then so many Portuguese soldiers were working for Spain Kingdom. Spain was gonna pay a lot to the soldiers that are attended to the exploring team and i don't even mention the glory they made. Also Magellan was portuguese but he was gonna get paid by spain if he could manage not to die. So Portugal wasn't the one explored the world and colonized the south america. If it was then Brazil wouldn't be the only country speaks portuguese.
@@kvothelamora1925 I think you have confused the exploring of indian ocean with the atlantic ocean missions , portugal had a syrong hold along almost all of the cost of west and east Africa , Yemen and India they also had colonies in east Asia like Macao which they held until the last century . all of this thanks to their impressive architectures who designed impenetrable fortresses
@@kvothelamora1925
There was portuguese working for the spanish as there was spanish working the portuguese, and thats true for other nations as well. The guy who translated the between portuese and hindu was a polish guy, for example. I dont get yout point...
In south America Portugal focused on its area imposed by tordesillas treaty, that included Brasil as cisplatina (uruguay) and they had to fight the spanish, dutch amd french there.
In the indian ocean, oceania and on he far east the political situation was much more complex.
@@canyou7670 Magellan or Magalhães as we call him was Portuguese. This stats count with Portuguese Brazil and Colonies?
Great video, especially paored with the music. I'd only have 1 suggestion - would be great to see some major historical events on the screen, especially when there are some major changes happening (partitions of Poland resulting in its disappearance from the list, fall of the Soviet Union, etc.)
...
All of Europe: total mess
Switzerland: chilling in the Alps
Russia: MUST. GET. BIGGER.
Ask if my country Indonesia the capital of Island Java have a population as much as Russia And Java is pretty small
@@technoimperialist9509 I mean Java has better soil and didn’t have a large portion of its population killed by Nazi’s
Will we fight the Japanese we lost so many live fighting in Japanese
And also we fight so many live for for not being the colony of the Dutch
Not basically like you guys we are a colony for like many centuries
>Random nation suddenly jumps several places in the rankings.
"Someone went a-conquering."
Mostly due to new alliances and older nations bending disassembled though.
The European way to gain people!
Mostly Prussia.
Sometimes nations unite voluntarily. ..... Not often, but it happens on occasion.
England didn't conquer Scotland in 1707, it was a mutually agreed union.
Germany : *I'm going to be second*
14:01
Turkey : *I don't think so*
Turkey: I'm not even a part of Europe.
@@ParleLeVu Turkey: Maybe I am a part of Europe.
@@TheKarahisar03 Turkey: Good thing I occupied Constantinople so I can claim to be a little European.
@@ParleLeVu I think u mean Istanbul
@@TheKarahisar03 Istanbul - Constantinople - Byzantium. Same same, just different names in different eras :-)
it's very good dude! Keep working like this!
Poland: *disappears*
Me: ah shit, here we go again
@@jsmrfuture7928 I like bread
@@jsmrfuture7928 ok
pzdr polska xd
Jeszce Polska nie ziegraly I think that is what they say. :-)
@@michaeldemus6666 "zginęła" often our language is hard for ourselves too (no joke)
That turkish comeback at the end doe
Turquia país fantástico😃😃😃👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Yes 15 million of it is probably Syrians and other refugees who constantly give birth
And im also pretty sure that each day more Syrians are given birth than Turks which is kinda ironic
@@erdniealinik yea no wonder anti syrian/arab sentiment grows many think turks have been arabified and should return to turkic culture
thats not really possible considering the dictators intention to turn Turkey into a islamist arab country
@@erdniealinik thats why hes losing popularity especially from right wing/conservative young people
The timing of the 1812 Overture is absolutely perfect, well done.
I love every single detail they put into this.
I like how you timed the climatic fanfare of the 1812 Overture exactly at 7:00 when the map shows 1812.
Or as Tchaikovsky himself called it, "the drop".
I'll be honest, this data chart is like watching a turtle race.
There's one constant always tho , France and UK racing eachother
And Russia literally twice everybody.
@@EnemyAtom65 Yea because Russia is only partly in europe, but there is data for whole country. Same Turkey.
@Tg52s yea it is, but difference will not that big
@Tg52s I mean most of Russia's population is in its heartlands in Europe, siberia is very sparsely populated despite its size.
Just for the comparison, today Istanbul has the number of entire population of 1950 Turkey or 1700 Ottoman Empire
Also count the illegal settlings
When has İstanbul ever had 25 million people?
Your music choices are always s tier
2:45 The Ottoman Empire reached ALMOST the 30 million, but failed
they have nothing to do with european civilisation!!
@@plamenjekov4568 Well. Almost 40% of the entire population was european balkan so...
@@kaganayhan8437 what u mean exactly ?!?!?
It did. If you watch on x0.25 speed
@@plamenjekov4568 europe is a continent dumbass, everyone on the continent is european. There is no such thing as "European civilisation"
11:00 its so freaking weird that someday in the past czechslovakia used to be more populated than turkey
dude back in 30s turkey was 2 times bigger than greece.. now its more than 8! they are just booming and booming
Problem wit Turkey was that it wasnt industrialized. That is why you see a population boom. If Turkey had industrilized at 1750-1850 it might have been bigger than Russia today
@@zisispit no it is getting slower and slower the max will be around 100 million and then decline
@@think9747 hayır 2060 ta 110 milyon olup zirveyi görücez knk
@NAMEKSİK not just ww1 Tripolitanian War, Balkan Wars and then ww1 with internal disturbances
there is no way to see population grow
It was just really exciting trying to recognize all the major events from the time lapse. Also, I love the sound design!
I like that this one is fairly accurate when it comes to the flags and the name of the states.
This is how historic charts should be made, with the existing coutries at the time, and how do they change.
So true, even if I wonder how accurately the borders are counted each time it changes. Nice work though.
This is called "Turkish comeback"
😂😂😂
@@oguzkarabolu9525 nabıyon la
@@seyyarsatici74 Ne
This is called Nazi Erdogan
@@parthenope. Nazi ? Do you know anything about national socialism?
Nobody :
France : let’s change my gouvernement and my flag every month
😹😹😹
Germany copied that behaviour
The fact is France will change only during 19th century (except a little part 1940-42)..
Heureusement que tu n'apprend pas l'histoire de France en cours, car j'en garde des souvenirs par sa complexité xD
No, just the government. For some reason they kept the same flag over and over lol
6:03 best harmony of a video with the music
France: I'm number one finally. Time for a REVOLUTION
Prussia around 1870: Im gonna do something thats called a Bismarck pro gamer move
My ancestors in Prussia emigrated to Australia about that time. Thank fuck.
@@aldunlop4622 what should this mean ?
For Russia and Spain to ever have had similar populations is mind blowing
Or France to have a larger population than Russia
Yes, but remember at that time Spain included southern Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Milan, Luxembourg, Belgium and the French regions of Artois and Franche-Comte
That's what exponential population growth and demographic changes do! Africa had 1/3 of Europe's population in 1950 and now it has around 60% more people, and in 2100 it will have over 3 times Europe's population
@@juliosalazar6924 they really had all of that in 1695 yeah, no
@@skland1619 normal, europeans dont want kids
Interesting as soon as you know your history and can deduce why the numbers change the way they do.
One small mistake: you wrote Austria-Hungary from 1848, but that isn't so.
Hungary became effectively independent in 1848-49 (so you would want take their population away from the two-headed eagle) then reintegrated into the Habsburg Empire after the lost war of independence. Austria-Hungary is only after 1867.
This was nice.
I would've liked to see an overlay of the events that took place during major shifts in population. ie, flood, famine, plague, war, or other
Every major increase was because of territorial gains. Only in the last decades were territorial changes not much of a thing in europe (besides the USSR). Every major decrease was because of the same. I'm just a diletant in history, but I was looking out for the wars I knew more than the names, and the fighting itself didn't seem to change anything. Only territorial gains/losses.
This was nice. But also with some mistakes. Nobody is perfect. So it is completely nonsensical to call this country Habsburg Spain. This was Spain and the Habsburg Austrians were completely irrelevant. Also the term Poland-Lithuania is wrong because it was a Polish empire. Using the term Poland-Lithuanian is absolutely wrong. Because this Polish state was a Polish Empire which was completely dominated by the Poles and the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! Actually Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is also mostly used, which is also incorrect for the same reason as Poland-Lithuania because it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! By the way, the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth based on a mistranslation and is therefore wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern invention in connection with Poland. A nonsensical invention by historians that does not correspond to reality. Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. But the term should also not be used because the use of Lithuania in the name suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita is the traditional and official name of the Polish Empire as a whole, including all duchies and and all ruled territories. The name of the state Rzeczpospolita is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Never!!! So the designation for this state as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth but also as Poland-Lithuanian is completely wrong.
If one wants to use a more modern term one can use Polish Empire as also the term Swedish Empire is used.
In any case, it would make sense to use the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita as a designation for this state, which was actually still internationally common in the 19th century when talking about Poland before the partitions. The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. The term Swedish Empire is also used, or even Danish Empire.
Here is an addition to the Polish Empire because the term is rarely used. An empire is usually a very large in terms of area multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of one ethnic group. According to this definition was Poland an empire in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries! This already proves the enormous size of the territory compared to other European countries that the Polish king and the Polish parliament ruled. Why did Poland occupy Moscow in 1610? Why did the son of the Polish king become the Tsar of Russia? Out of imperial interest. Why did Poland rule the Ukrainian and Belarusian territories and all the other areas? Why did Poland control other areas as well? Out of economic interest, because the economic interests were also imperial interests. That goes hand in hand! And those were the Poles in this Polish Empire. The Poles ruled over various peoples and 5 different religious groups. The Poles ruled over the other peoples and in some cases also assimilated them. The Lithuanians were also controlled and assimilated by the Poles. Incidentally, it was a Polish empire, because the Poles were the nation in power. The Poles ruled the other peoples and partially assimilated them. That is why the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! That was a Polish empire, which is why mentioning Lithuania in the state name is wrong.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars да всем плевать на Польшу, как при всех её разделах
@@giovanni-8522 Это ошибка, брат, что ты враждебен мне, так же как ошибка, что наши славянские народы сегодня враги.
Кстати, я поляк и панславист. Для меня все славяне мои сестры и братья. Так что, конечно, русские тоже мои славянские братья. Сегодня разлад между славянскими народами! Это факт! Украинцы и русские даже воюют друг с другом военными средствами. Но так не должно оставаться. Поляки и чехи/словаки сто лет назад были врагами. Сегодня это дружественные страны. Сто лет назад Польша тоже воевала с Украиной. Сегодня эти два славянских народа тоже хотят дружить. То, чего достигли эти славянские народы, может быть достигнуто и другими славянскими народами. Во всяком случае, я обнаружил, что славяне всегда хорошо ладят. Даже русские и украинцы. Или хорваты и сербы. А также поляки и русские. По моему опыту, в личном разговоре, эти славяне с юмором воспринимали неприязнь и не хотели быть врагами. Я никогда не чувствовал, что разговор и диалог невозможен. Суть всегда заключалась в том, что вам нужна дружба и братство, а не конфликт. Вы можете ясно увидеть, что если присмотреться, у славян сильное чувство единения. Панславизм не умер! Это хорошо видно на RUclips! например, видео под названием «This is Slavia» или панславянское видео под названием «Slavic peoples». Второй комментарий в списке @David Trivic звучит следующим образом: Мечта об объединенной Славии никогда не умрет. Люблю всех моих славянских братьев:🇧🇦🇧🇬🇧🇾🇭🇷🇷🇸🇵🇱🇲🇪🇷🇺🇸🇮🇸🇰🇺🇦🇨🇿🇲🇰. Остальные комментарии на самом деле все братские.
Вот почему я считаю, что в будущем будет Славянский Союз.В будущем, кстати, будут массовые конфликты в Западной Европе и Германии из-за неуклонно растущего мусульманского населения, что ускорит формирование Союза. В Германии и Западной Европе возникнут хаотические условия, которые перерастут в гражданские войны. Радикалы уже обустраивают склады оружия и планируют вооруженную борьбу за свержение правительства. Солдаты и полицейские уже сегодня такие радикалы. Xаос и радикализация резко возрастут в будущем, пока не возникнут восстания и гражданская война. Я знаю это, потому что долгое время жил в западной стране. В СМИ также много сообщений о росте насилия.Дело в том, что с обеих сторон уже нарастает насилие с гибелью и ранениями. С обеих сторон нарастает радикализация. Мусульманское население в этих странах составляет всего около 10%. Очевидно, что ситуация полностью обострится, когда будет 30-40% мусульманского населения. Может быть, даже с 20% мусульманского населения. Из-за более высокой рождаемости и иммиграции число мусульман в этих странах вырастет до этого уровня и продолжит увеличиваться. Германии и различных странах Западной Европы обречены! Хаос и гражданская война - будущее этих стран! Уже сегодня в этих странах происходят большие конфликты туземцев против востоковедов, хотя востоковеды достигли лишь около 10% населения этих стран. Только небольшой процент ассимилируется. Большинство хотели сохранить свою восточную самобытность! На самом деле, большинство из них чувствуют свое превосходство над местными жителями из-за своей религии, которая также препятствует ассимиляции. А если 20% или 30%? Из-за этого в этих землях будет хаос и гражданская война за господство. Мусульманские могилы оскверняются уже сегодня. Ориенталов убивают уже сегодня. На лагеря мигрантов уже совершены тысячи нападений. Восточные тоже снова и снова совершают насилие включая терроризм. Все это приведет к гражданским войнам за господство в этих странах. Эти страны точно этого не переживут! ЕС и НАТО тоже перестанут существовать.
Я хорошо знаю, что в России тоже около 10% мусульман, но в России нет такого массового прироста, как в Германии и западноевропейских странах. Кстати, из чеченского конфликта они поняли, что бросать вызов русским - ошибка. Почему бы этому славянскому союзу не существовать? Все вовлеченные славянские народы только выиграют в очень смутные времена. В то время, когда безопасность всех этих государств находится под огромными внешними угрозами. Между прочим, Славянский союз был бы не созданием большого славянского государства, а объединением равноправных славянских государств. Уверен, славяне научатся на ошибках ЕС! Не предпринимается никаких попыток создать единое славянское государство. Это будет федерация равноправных наций, в которой одна нация не может господствовать. Это будет объединение независимых государств, но они будут тесно сотрудничать на экономическом уровне. Будет ограниченное политическое сотрудничество. Однако в то же время это будет и оборонительный союз. Хотя у славянских государств не будет таких проблем, как у западных государств, хаос там затронет и славянские государства. Будут экономические потери, потому что экспортные рынки исчезнут. Могут быть беженцы из этих стран. Могут быть даже пограничные инциденты. и т. д. Это автоматически приведет к сближению славянских народов. Однако создание славянского союза требует укрепления славянской идентичности в славянских народах. Поэтому необходима прославянская кампания, чтобы панславянская идея получила широкое распространение среди славянских народов. У славянских народов должно возникнуть стремление к славянскому союзу, от которого выиграют все славянские народы в этой трудной ситуации.
Я продолжаю свой комментарий ниже.
@@giovanni-8522 В связи с этим, конечно, тоже есть проблемы. Но все эти проблемы можно преодолеть, если славяне будут работать вместе. Например, Россия - гигант по сравнению с другими славянскими странами. Поэтому существует риск полного доминирования России в Союзе. Таким образом, Россия сможет участвовать только в том случае, если Россия согласится с тем, что в Союзе существуют механизмы, предотвращающие доминирование одного государства. Кстати, у России не будет проблем с этим согласиться, потому что не будет существенных ограничений суверенитета вовлеченных государств, как это имеет место в ЕС. Россия также получит возможность, как и другие государства, проводить собственную внешнюю политику. Но почему бы государствам Славянского Союза не поддерживать друг друга во внешней политике? Будет Славянский Союз! Это только вопрос времени! Сегодня славянские народы все еще разделены, но ситуация в будущем будет совершенно иной из-за массовых опасностей, которые возникнут из-за хаоса на Западе, а также из-за стремления славянских народов окончательно примириться.
Конечно, до создания славянского союза еще далеко, и необходим общеславянский поход, который укрепит позитивный прославянский дух в славянских народах. Потом, вероятно, будет несколько общеславянских конференций, на которых потом и славянские народы примут решение об объединении. Однако обязательным условием является наличие воли к примирению, потому что сегодня, как известно, некоторые славянские народы фактически являются врагами и два славянских народа фактически воюют друг с другом. Как я уже писал выше, если полякам удалось помириться со словаками, чехами и украинцами, то почему бы и другим славянским народам не сделать то же самое. Конечно, это не произойдет в одночасье, но через 30 или 50 лет ситуация будет совершенно иной.
Кстати, неславянские народы точно не захотят быть в славянском союзе, потому что будет автоматический процесс ассимиляции. Я уверен, что ни один народ не хочет быть ассимилированным славянами. Но я уверен, что будут ассоциированные привилегированные члены. Венгрия и Румыния, безусловно, примут приглашение стать такими ассоциированными членами. Для такого ассоциированного членства было бы много экономических выгод, таких как доступ к славянским рынкам без тарифов. В любом случае это было бы очень полезно для Славянского союза, так как была бы сухопутная связь с южными славянами. Возможно также, что Греция получит приглашение к такому членству. Однако беспорядки в этой стране помешали бы этому. Таким образом, решающее значение будет иметь ситуация в Греции. Хотя интервенция могла бы умиротворить страну. Еще одной страной, которой будет предложено такое ассоциативное членство, будет Казахстан. Казахстану «попросят» согласиться на ассоциированное членство из-за большого славянского меньшинства.
Следует помнить, что это будут не мирные времена. Славянский союз также был бы оборонительным союзом, и эти ассоциированные страны также могли бы быть союзниками Славянского союза.
Для меня в любом случае славянский союз в будущем вполне логичен.
Желаю тебе всего наилучшего!
Can we just take a moment and appreciate how many times Poland went off the list and still managed to make it in the end
You figure right now is the end (of time)?
@@beorlingo exactly. history has a tendency to repeat itself
Who care
@@DreamWalkerVl I do.
@@DreamWalkerVl me
Love how the end of 1812 overture aligns with Napoleon's defeat
That mainly because in that moment france prety much lose 1/4 of his teritory for exemple belgium , luxembourg and 2/3 other region was french teritory.
@@azopeopaz3059 yeah, I know, that has nothing to do with what I said.
He is talking about the song
I thought Germany(Saxony and Habsburgs pop) would go down during the 30 years war. But according to this it increases.
I always thought this was true: "During the war, Germany's population was reduced by 30 percent on average; in the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas an estimated two thirds of the population died. Germany’s male population was reduced by almost half. The population of the Czech lands declined by a third. The Swedish armies alone destroyed 2,000 castles, 18,000 villages and 1,500 towns in Germany, one-third of all German towns. "
Take the video with a grain of salt.
Ottoman Empire in 1881: Well, something big is coming.
Yalan gardaşım yalan, Abdülhamit bir karış toprak vermemiştir yalan bu veriler sjjsshskhd
@@Yagiz.Ozturk git biraz araştır
@@tictacktictack818 Bu yaptığım şeye ironi deniyor aptal herif.
@@tictacktictack818 Abdülhamit zamanında kaybedilen topraklar Tunus Yunanistan Romanya Kıbrıs mısır Sırbistan Karabağ Girit Bulgaristan toplamı Türkiye'nin iki katı ebatında ve başka hiç bir padişah Abdülhamit kadar toprak kaybetmedi. Ekonomi hiper enflasyon ile karşılaştı. Azınlıkların hepsi ayaklandı. Ki hala o ayaklanmaların etkisi devam ediyor ayaklanan azınlıklara kavgamız bitmedi ve bu yönetimi çok iyi yönetim diye yutturabiliyorlar. Tarihi objektif yansız kaynaklardan öğrenmek yerine dizilerden öğrenince insan bu şekilde düşünebilir tabi sen de haklısın.
@@abdullahcoskun3236 normalde sana uzun uzun aciklardim ama kapasite az olduğu icin anlaman imkansiz, sen böyle devam et elinde sonunda hem turklerden hemde kiclarini yaladigin ingilizlerden dislaninca anlicaksin aptallığın cezasını ve kimsenin umrunda olmicaksin
6:40
Napoleon: *this is where the fun begins*
What country can take over Europe?
Italy: I did it 2000 years ago
France: I did it many times centuries ago
Ottoman empire: goes brrrr
Nazi Germany: all descendants of German should be in Germany including Celtics from France and UK
USSR: is the second most powerful country in the world and has half of Europe
Portugal, Spain and UK: don't care about Europe and take over the world instead
@@laytonjr6601 in colonial times, whoever controls Europe, controls the world.
I'm genuinely surprised that Sweden managed to stay on the list from start to finish, totally expected us to dip out early on tbh.
I read "from start to Finnish".😂
I am surpised they had almost twice the population as denmark-norway when denmark had the whole of sleswigh and southern sweden. I dont think the numbers hold op.
@@TheBarser Also, Norway lost 60 % of its population to the black death so they could'nt help much with the numbers either
Probably because the Swedes killed enough civilians elsewhere in the Thirty Years War and later on.
I was surprised sweden was more populous than brandenburg prussia
Good way to roll through your old history courses and see the changes.
It's devastating to watch millions go in the years of WWII... In a span of seconds from 190 to 170. And people still dare try to overwrite history
If you ever feel like your life is worthless, then remember that you contributed to population count of your country
Unless you do something in your life more productive than watching random numbers on youtube floating, then not really, you're just vegetating on other's people expense.
@@aradanat231 the points still holds tru
@@aradanat231 it hurts, but let back to work
Nice to know I’m part of overpopulation
@@ryanholder7728 if you (will) have less than 3+ children you are part of underpopulation
When you think that your country is losing a large amount of it’s population but it’s actually just another révolution
...or a plague outbreak
Ireland : yes but actually no
or you are just polish
thanks for the work and effort
10:37 Finland be like: We are here!... Oh, bye then!
Same with Norway haha :P
@William S. D. Albertsen Yes
surprised we even touched the list, it's so empty here in Finland, everywhere else in the world populations are exploding meanwhile here: 1919: 3 million
2020: 5 million
at least once overpopulation starts becoming a problem elsewhere we'll be fine here.
@@eVill420 Nah, once the Africans and Arabs fill up Western Europe, we will be sure to send them up to you guys.
@@Armor3d0ne idk bro not many people want to live like this, Finland's population is like 90% in the southern part of the country and 10% in the northern half and I live in the northern parts. humans aren't made for this shit.
germany be like:
oh we are splitted, lets get together
oh we are together, lets get splitted
oh we are splitted, lets get together
hahaha
Spilt stick spilt stick
You dont know what happend right?
@@refox0537 I do know, I'm from Germany and we do have history, but thanks for asking mate :)
@@COPROO Dann bist du einfach dumm
Double the speed, save 7 minutes of your time.
Watch the 14 minutes, save your love to music
i slowed down the speed to understand which countries go and which come
I actually did because I have to get up at 4.30am tomorrow and it’s 21.30 and I wanna sleep but can’t
I wish to read it before i watch :(
@@bahadrkelesoglu618 It can also work for future videos ;)
It is astounding how small the UK population was from the 1600s right up to the 20th Century compared to the other big countries and yet managed to build its empire in that time with such a significant minority...
There are actually many reasons behind that achievement like being an Island , large navy , and focusing on occupying Over seas territories and setteling rather than waging wars in Continental Euorpe ect , but still Imperrisve.
1:38 Cromwell's invasion of Ireland
It's completely whacky that the population of ireland was halved TWICE in the last 400 years. And yet I unironically know british people who think that britain colonizing ireland was actually good for ireland
@@perpetual_suffering1458 there are brits, specially English, who think the empire was good with its INVADED territories.
@@biohita They mass starved indians
There's a reason they put his head on a stick
@@niono1587 the only thing 1600 ireland and 1600 england agreed on is that they both hated cromwell
Switzerland deosnt like changing switzerland likes how he is forever
Lets all be like switzerland and love ourselves
(Me, just an ITSY BITSY tiny bit Swiss)
*Yes, why don’t we?*
@Alexander Ortiz NONSENSE!
@Alexander Ortiz Who tf cares?
Looks like Turkey is going back after its first place
of course after erdoğan start house erdoğan and become sultan and khalifa 😂😂😂
@@xxxxxx-rg6qr selen ne dıyon kız :D
@@xxxxxx-rg6qr abla lütfen yorumu sil. Aksi takdirde bu yorumu gelecekte okuyacak olan insanlar çok ilginç şeyler yaşayabilir.
@@xxxxxx-rg6qr selen rezil ettin kız bizi :))
@@baron2282 neden ki gerçek gelecekte olucakları söyledim sadece xD
Interesting video!
Germane: Oh nice, am second!
Turkey: get back to reality …
Türk gücü!
Şakşuk!
I liked it when Russia and France began to fight for the championship and began to play Tchaikovsky's composition "1812", and when Russia took first place, the most solemn moment of the composition began to play.
Hehe (хехе)
I've heard that the Russian Empire would have achieved a population of perhaps 400 Million if it became a stable constitutional monarchy instead of the Soviet Union. The economy would have exploded, more cities might have been built in the southern regions, and more Russians would for obvious reasons stay in their country rather than move elsewhere. Absolutely mind boggling to think about (the current US population for comparison is a little over 330 Million).
@@thunderbird1921 Yes, at that time reforms were needed, as a result, the revolution of 1917 took place
@@thunderbird1921 It was USA and European countries who sponsored Lenin, Russia and western countries always were and will be enemies forever.
@@C4LLI4 Not true, the US directly supported the White Army in the Russian Civil War, and actually had fantastic relations with the Czar before that. It was reportedly the Germans in World War I who backed Lenin in his journey.
Nazi germany spawn 100m in 6 month
Everycountry:wait thats illegal
*steal
*conquers back
@@Antarctide *No
That's some acceleration!
Don't worry, we took their colonies and everything.
Made them nice.
Now they are brilliant, still near the top of population and productivity.
@@vincent_hall Du bist aber auch ganz schön stolz deutscher zu sein hm
Very good work thank you
Everyone in 1900's : Omg Romania will be so populated
Romania after the communist fall in Romania (1989) : Lets downgrade our population lol
You mean '90
In 1990 after the communist fall Romanians were killed 4 milions because there was a guy who was still communist in the gouverment
@@Fernando-lb3lx Thats not what happen, people left the country for a better life.
@@Fernando-lb3lx thats true, but not 4 milion of them.
@@Fernando-lb3lx Lol 2 milion people killed on streets... actually it was aprox 800. When communism falls a lot of people left the country in 90-91' . In 2007 after we joined in UE , again a lot of people left for a better life...
The Spanish First Republic didn't have the three colours flag. It was only the Second Republic.
True
This video is fucked up concerning to Spanish flags, they didn't add the rojigualda in 1785 and showed the old one as the current one
Hi dude, the first republic the colous flag is, red yellow red, only changes shield, the second republic change color red below for purple and shield.
I like how it says 1600-2020 and the video was published in 2019
He already counted all pregnant woman in Europe. By hand.
@@neckreth more precisely, he took part in the conception
@@rega_710 absolute chad
a little bit, maybe 3 days to create that video
00:01 Ottoman empire
06:05 Kingdom of France
06:23 Russian Empire
06:27 France Republic
06:28 Russian Empire
07:00 French Empire
07:05 Russian Empire
10:36 Soviet Union
13:00 Russian Fedoration(?)
Adını bida değiştir ( bu yorum youtube adınla elgili(:::: )
@@Ardahanimparatorluğu4009 b küçük çaplı bir paradoks yaratır
@@surekliismidegisenkanal1890 heee(:
It took more than a whole century to overpopulate the ottoman empire
Some dude: France! What are you doing ?
France: I just dance on the chart and change my name @_@
That must take an enormous amount of research. Amazing.
They weren’t soviets. They were RUSSIANS. There weren’t any «soviet nation».
@@theodosius8658 They were diplomatically recognized as the USSR at that time. Same with the Byzantine and Ottoman Empire. They never called themselves that but that is what their neighbors and history call them.
Son yüz yılda attığımızı vurmuşuz nüfusu 5e katlamışız.
Savaş dönemlerinde her daim nüfus artar. Şu an Suriyelilerin nüfusunun bu kadar artması gibi. ABD 2003 te Irak'ı işgal ettiğinde 16 milyondu nüfusu. O kdr insan ölmesine rağmen 18 yılda 42 milyona çıktı nüfusu. Neredeyse 3 katına çıktı nüfusu. Bizde de öyle oldu. Birinci Dünya ve kurtuluş savaşı sonrası çok ciddi erkek nüfusunda azalma oldu. Allah'a şükür bu günlere geldik.
free kurdistan
@@titanyumkullanc1392 free armenia
@@jesusdontlikethatimgaybuts9493 free your mind
1. Dünya savaşı ve Kurtuluş savaşında 3 milyon insan kaybetmişiz, savaş, kıtlık ve ispanyol gribi yüzünden. 1922de Anadolu'daki Müslüman nüfusu 11 milyona kadar düşüyor yani tam doğru değil bu tablo ama bir hayli yakın. Zaten bu yüzden 2. dünya savaşına katılmayı reddetmişiz zira memlekette 17 milyon insan yaşıyor neredeyse 8 milyonu 16 yaş altı!! Savaşacak kadar yaşlı yada genç kimse kalmamış ki hangi güçle bir başka dünya savaşına katılıyorsun. Valla bir kitle küçümsemeye çalışıyor ama Kurtuluş savaşında savaşan kahramanlar olmasa bir manda olmamız veya Anadolunun çoğunu kaybetmemiz çok ama çok kolaydı zira bazı kolonilerin nüfusu bile bizden fazlaydı..
the video is wrong, for exaple the urss arose in 1922 not in 1918
1917 год - распад Империи после Февральской и Октябрьской Революции, создание Российской Республики
1918-1922 - Гражданская война (Красные (Сторонники Ленина) против Белых (Сторонники Империи))
30 декабря 1922 - учреждение СССР
Stumbled across this video. looking to do one on Europe cities population. They are rare but popular. You deserve more subs bro😧
6:32
French Revolution: "Hold my beer"
Hold my wine
@@Defensor_Fidei oui
1 tofu please
It’s so surprising to see that at one point after WWI Romania and Czechoslovakia had bigger populations than Turkey and now Turkey is at 84+ while Romania is at 19-20 million and Czechia- Slovakia at 16.
Well , romania and czeho-slovakia both participated in ww2 and they both lost territories + a lot of men ... turkey was neutral .
And both suffered Kommunism for 40 years.
...Turkey was neutral?!
Since when?! XD
It's one of the best jokes ever!
@@pawepioro2998 yeah thats true. in ww2 turkey was neutral.
@@anordinaryboi9506
In theory... Kinda yes.
Throughout the entire period of WWII, Turkey was maneuvering, trying to stay out of the conflict. Why? Generally speaking, it did not pay off for the Turks to join the war on either side. There were several reasons for this: 1. Trauma after WW I, in which Turkey lost. They were concerned about the loss of more territories and possibly sovereignty. The example of Iran, occupied by the British and Soviets from 1941, cooled all enthusiasm. 2. Poverty in the country, Turkey at that time was underdeveloped, its arms industry was dwarf, everything was bought abroad. 3. Military weakness - in 1939 the Turkish army had 20 infantry divisions, 3 mountain brigades and 1 fortress brigades, and 5 cavalry divisions, aviation - 370 aircraft, mostly obsolete. Fleet - powerful on paper, in fact larger units (Yavuz battlecruiser, Mecidiye and Hamidiye light cruisers) completely obsolete and used as hulk, 4 relatively modern destroyers, 8 OPs and some "trinkets". Until 1941, the army was expanded - it had 43 divisions and 3 independent infantry brigades, 2 divisions and 1 independent cavalry brigade and 2 mechanized divisions, the aviation had about 400-500 aircraft, some equipment was purchased from the Germans, Americans and the British (including 2 destroyers and 2 OP for the fleet), but that was still not enough. The army was underarmed and had no combat experience. Turkey had great problems with maintaining this army in peacetime, so it was difficult to think about hostilities.
Poland:
1939 29 millions
1946 23 millions
Thank you Germany
1990 38 millions
Thank you Russia
2020 37 millions
Thank you Poland's presidents!
@@emrhn471 no! Poland under Germany: 1939 - 29 mln, 1946-23 mln. You feel deference?
?
@@Wladyslaw_Raginis Occupation of Russia and Germany is big different
When I'm older, I'm going to become president of Poland and give Germany a germacost
@@Selmarya if u find some germans there sure. There are all Poles there now.
Never ask a
Woman: Her Age
A Man: His Salary
Germany: *why their population tripled in 1940*
🤣😂
Ottomans: I wanna take a break.
UK: No, you are out
**Turkey has joined the chat**
UK: DISASTER!
Republic of Turkey: *Allow us to introduce ourselves...*
@@glyphs3360 I did not say they are "that powerful". But yes they was powerful and now they are powerful too?
@Başar Başar hakkaten rezil oluyoruz
@Jackson Spieth are you even from UK because your english is really really bad
@Jackson Spieth hahahahha TURKEY>england
Republic of Turkey 82m people + 10 m syrian
Maalesef
Cidden ya maalesef
Onlar nüfusa kayıtlı Değilki😶 Türk Kürt Nüfusu Ve TC vatandaşı sayılan Suriyeliler değilmi
84,5M TC vatandaşı var en fazla 3-4M Suriyeli var
@@alikoc5739 Suriyeli mülteciler nüfusa kayıtlı değil. Sadece ikametgahları var.
Don’t know why, but it felt a little “heartbreaking” to see the Soviet population drop from 196 million to 170 million
You can say "Thank you" Nazi Germany for this
@@mordor_shire yeah, thanks Nazi Germany
@@-xnnybimb-9398
I cannot say that I am surprised by this answer. My country has done many things for which you can both love and hate
@@mordor_shire
From 172 to 147 million between 1918 and 1928 is a little Russian Red horror do you know
@@mordor_shire and who do we thank for the massive drop between WWI and WWII?
どうやって調べてるんですか？ めっちゃ気になります！！
Throughout the history of europe: starts in 1600
Probably an American dude who, as always, thinks the world has waited for America to exist to start existing too.
@@logannslm1593 comme d'habitude avec de pays répugnant
"throughout history" is NOT the same as "throughout the history of Europe"
Obviously population counts weren't accurate before 1600
@@logannslm1593 Now that's an ignorant response. Nobody thinks that you silly fool. What he was trying to say was that the data could've began in BC or something like that. You took it to another extent saying, "Probably an American." The guy has a Greek name as well. Now that really shines the ignorance on you.
@@seanbrummfield448 Idiot, my first comment was referring to the dude who broadcasted the video, not the Greek dude I replied to.
6:29 when hommie says to you he’s goin for a sec but he come back after 123 years 10:38
My country was in the top under all the years
which one i didnt see 😅
@@telmanmammadov9475 Poland
@@Sceptonic Poland-Lithuania*
@@Xavier_Renegade_Angel ¿Rusia?
Interesting to see the 1670 to 1930 continuous decline of Turkey followed by relative resurgence up to 2020.
its because Turks lost a lot of territories so the population during the 1920s, after the steabilized state government policy was encouragement to have children . also health care system developed. in 1920s about %25-30 maybe more baby were dying during the birth , today it is below the %0.9..
Because of Ataturk.
@@pgetheelderscrollsturkiye68 the decline maybe .... ata your ass .... the population grew after he died
@@lovepeace3069 yeah checking the nick name of your channel and the caveman type of agressive language you are using (ata your ass), you are indeed a contradictory type. I mean what could i expect from a gurbetçi çomarı ?
@@pgetheelderscrollsturkiye68yeah many Turks from balkan peninsula and many ethnic Turks from middle east and caucases come to turkey
Great video but I found some mistakes in the video:
Austria-Hungary was established in 1867, not 1848.
Hungary was a kingdom only until 1946. It then became a republic until 1949 (The second rebublic).
France: Do you let me enter your country to conquer Portugal?
Spain: ok
France invading spain at the same time*
Spain: •_•
On est taquin
@@baklei7100 XD
And not even being able to completely secure Portugal
@@joao_1986 If France had bring some real generals in Spain and not somes shiet, the task would have been settled. There was not best French troops in Spain and far of goods generals, and to complet, they practiced guerrilla..
@@inhocsignovinces1327 Still wouldn't be possible with Portugal easily raided by the British with local support and to even get to it you would have to cross Spain that was filled with also a hostile population and tons of guerrilla warfare, also it wasn't worth it the campaign as a whole it didn't bring any strategic gains by accomplishing it so i imagine moral in the French army wasn't very high
Turkey at #2: Started from the top and now we here
@Evet Avukatlarıyım ne dio
@@salih_bcr24 İngilizce bilmiyorsan öğren de gel, hiç utanma da yok ha. Ne diyo ne diyo biri çevirsin ühü ühü
but still its a shitty country with a bad predident
*president
@@GladbachNr1 agree :/
I love how long turkey of all places was at the top
China: hmmm interesting
India: me too )
@@dimakvac4918
India: mm interesting
UK: I think you' re even more interesting
nice choice of music. The canons of Tchaikovsky's 1912's overture starting in 1813 at 7:07
Turkey's leadership 6 minutes 5 seconds long
France's almost 25 seconds
Russia’s 8 minutes and still goes on.
Turkey: I'm coming again, wait some minutes please.
Xaxa) forget
@@ЮрийДубровский-ц2н You don't know what's going to happen in the future.
@@garibanleo4765 just remember what happened in past. Russia beat Turkey in all wars, and now we have very big technologies...
@@garibanleo4765 If Turkey continues to rely on Islam, then nothing. It will stay second.
@@ЮрийДубровский-ц2н not in all of wars, you better learn the history.
Population of Russia/USSR or Ottoman Empire/Turkey includes Asian areas? If the aswer is yes, this Data has no sense.
I guess the answer Is yes
Spain each 10 seconds: Hi guys, how do you like my newest flag?
France too
Its like this friend on whatsapp that changes his profile picture every day
@@andresommer1173 you mean me right?
Zor zamanlardan geçtik...Hâlâ geçiyoruz...
Bu ne istatiği acaba Avrupa nüfusu mu ?
@@youtubekanal8809 evet
@@atakuruoglu teşekkürler
Buna neden bu kadar güldüğümü bilmiyorum
Türk olmanın sonucu...🇹🇷
Oh this is much better than the ones on other channels
The masterstroke is that the music is in time with the changing of the years
Dude, Russian flag changed like 5 times and it's the only country which you did not reflect it with.
Actually the last Spanish flag is not the one nowadays. As it became Kingdom of Spain again, they put the flag of 1812 xD
это же надо изучать..а кому это надо...
Aber nicht die Regierungsform. Musst mal drauf achten, es ging nicht um die Flaggen.
@@АнатолийВоронец-ц8я кому интерсны аборигенские флаги
That country did not calls Russian Empire in 17 century.
This is weirdly satisfying to watch.
Also, the more you know about history the more everything makes sense.
Some of it is a bit sad.
You can for example imagine a few places where at first glance, it seems many countries have a boom, but when you look at the numbers it's just that the populations go stagnant or decline for some of the major powers without any rapid shift. That's war.
Edit: Well, this became much more apparent later on. But at the start it was a bit more interesting (that particular thing).
What is also interesting that some mistakes were made in the video. But nobody is perfect! So it is completely nonsensical to call this country Habsburg Spain. This was Spain and the Habsburg Austrians were completely irrelevant. Also the term Poland-Lithuania is wrong because it was a Polish empire. Using the term Poland-Lithuanian is absolutely wrong. Because this Polish state was a Polish Empire which was completely dominated by the Poles and the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! Actually Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is also mostly used, which is also incorrect for the same reason as Poland-Lithuania because it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! By the way, the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth based on a mistranslation and is therefore wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern invention in connection with Poland. A nonsensical invention by historians that does not correspond to reality. Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. But the term should also not be used because the use of Lithuania in the name suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita is the traditional and official name of the Polish Empire as a whole, including all duchies and and all ruled territories. The name of the state Rzeczpospolita is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Never!!! So the designation for this state as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth but also as Poland-Lithuanian is completely wrong.
If one wants to use a more modern term one can use Polish Empire as also the term Swedish Empire is used.
In any case, it would make sense to use the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita as a designation for this state, which was actually still internationally common in the 19th century when talking about Poland before the partitions. The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. The term Swedish Empire is also used, or even Danish Empire.
Here is an addition to the Polish Empire because the term is rarely used. An empire is usually a very large in terms of area multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of one ethnic group. According to this definition was Poland an empire in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries! This already proves the enormous size of the territory compared to other European countries that the Polish king and the Polish parliament ruled. Why did Poland occupy Moscow in 1610? Why did the son of the Polish king become the Tsar of Russia? Out of imperial interest. Why did Poland rule the Ukrainian and Belarusian territories and all the other areas? Why did Poland control other areas as well? Out of economic interest, because the economic interests were also imperial interests. That goes hand in hand! And those were the Poles in this Polish Empire. The Poles ruled over various peoples and 5 different religious groups. The Poles ruled over the other peoples and in some cases also assimilated them. The Lithuanians were also controlled and assimilated by the Poles. Incidentally, it was a Polish empire, because the Poles were the nation in power. The Poles ruled the other peoples and partially assimilated them. That is why the use of Lithuania in the name of the state is nonsensical, as it suggests a kind of equality that did not exist! That was a Polish empire, which is why mentioning Lithuania in the state name is wrong.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars bro i clicked "read more" and you wrote 3 paragraphs about the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth's name like wtf time to chill
@@ugetrekd9217 I'm relaxed even 3 days later!"
@@ugetrekd9217 I know right it took me at least 30 seconds to swipe down the screen because of the History Essay they wrote
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars man i just wanted to click the read more button
Turkey slowly comes back to the top.
:) we have iman power
That's true
But without the lost territories
@@based.tetovar3550 no Bcs of we haven’t enough education
@@coolstaff6415 thats true but peoples of turkey love to fight
Awesome to see. Thank you
Turkey: Hey i finished second, now time to go top again.