Does Cynical Historian do good research?

[@veritasetcaritas]

For those identifying Cynical Historian as a centrist, he has this comment. "I think a lot of folks who view me as a centrist either have an extremist view of "everyone is centrist except them" or they saw my Crypto/Chyka characters are [and?] were actually stops [stupid?] enough to believe those were the only perspectives. Either way, they're unworthy of consideration" Cynical does not identify as a centrist.

[@fraktaalimuoto]

Great to see Cypher featured here. One of my favourites.

[@LarshHill]

same! this is like a crossover episode haha

[@Masterhistory1492]

I have also noticed a trend that modern criticism of PT Barnum is from modern disgust toward ‘freak shows’, human exhibition, etc. When in reality these were some of the few social spaces among the otherwise disadvantaged could find a living and community for past generations. Homelessness, poverty, and institutionalization often followed for these individuals once these niche entertainment industries collapsed.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Yes, to a large extent it's a result of our very privileged position. To people at the time, as disadvantaged as they were, such employment offered opportunities for agency, as well as community, shelter, and income, as you note. Looking at this situation from our very privileged point of view, it looks horrific, but that's a very idiosyncratic perspective.

[@danbongard3226]

Had society not stopped treating such people as dehumanized freaks, they still wouldn't enjoy basic human rights today. Barnum wasn't exhibiting such people out of a kind-hearted desire to employ the needy in the only way he could. He was doing it to cash in on bigotry. It is certainly true that the subset of so-called "freaks" that were able to find work in Barnum's shows did much better than they would have otherwise. However, for every one such person there were countless others who enjoyed no such employment, but still got to experience the dehumanization Barnum encouraged.

[@timkohler]

Really great point right at the beginning - to be "non-political" is a political choice. Not taking an action is a choice, with consequences, just as much as taking an action.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Absolutely. I appreciate the fact that Cypher is sensitive to this,.

[@BasedKungFu]

Exactly. Politics permeates everything in a world where people organize themselves by man-made constructs. To be non-political is to basically say you have 0 say in the most important institutions and frameworks dictating your life.

[@veritasetcaritas]

@@BasedKungFu it also implies you're ok with the status quo, and probably benefit from it.

[@Fortigurn]

@@phr3ui559 which economy, and how are you measuring this? Which metrics? Do they involve actual human beings and measurements of their welfare, or do they simply involve wealthy people becoming more wealthy, while worker wages stagnate and people die from lack of shelter, food, and healthcare?

[@veritasetcaritas]

@@phr3ui559 so you're not discussing the topic at hand. You asked what was wrong with the status quo, and claimed the status quo is fine because the US economy is fine. That doesn't remotely address the reasons why many people are dissatisfied with the status quo in the US and in other countries. Reasons to object to the status quo in the US and many other nations include poor social welfare, widespread homelessless, lack of access to medical care, stagnated wages, rising cost of living, wealth disparity, lack of political respresentation, and restrictions on human rights. In comparison with other First World nations, the US is a borderline failed state when measured against thes metrics. The political system is medieval, human rights are regularly violated, it has no universal public healthcare system, it has pathetic literacy and infant mortality rates, and it has extremely limited social mobility. I would rather live in an Eastern European nation than in the US.

[@nguyenhoangnam8609]

Yay finally someone I'm familiar with 🎉. Yeah I've been a fan of his for a while now. Seeing a self-identified "centrist" that's not just a thinly disguised opportunist is splendid. Very accessible yet mostly remain rigourous. As an introduction to the history profession he's excellent

[@veritasetcaritas]

I don't think Cypher is a centrist, he is a progressive. He explicitly says history is political, and his channel has been political since his first videos. He doesn't use the "both sides" strategy, and he says war is bad and it's wrong to exploit people and land. I've never seen him try to "both sides" a historical or political issue. On Twitter I have seen him mocking centrists. x.com/Cynical_History/status/1354265633823858696

[@nguyenhoangnam8609]

@@veritasetcaritas I remember an old vid of his where he talk about his political view and its progression. In it I remember he call himself a "centrist" at the end. Still, I retract my assessment because A) It's an old vid. he very much could have changed his political self-identification after all these years seeing how the term function in most discourse, B) the reason why I put "centrist" in quotation mark is not just because the category itself is dubious, it's that I also always see him as a progressive as well and always feel baffled about the his old political self-identification. Either way, I make a mistake in identifying him politically so my sincerest apology to him.

[@veritasetcaritas]

@@nguyenhoangnam8609 that is a very fair and gracious comment, thank you. It's worth noting he is averse to political labeling, so he wouldn't call himself a progressive in the political sense either, but he is definitely not a centrist these days.

[@nay3843]

Yes! I was really expecting this one to come out! It was such a great interview. Excellent job.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thnaks!

[@neongrey333]

Really appreciate this-- I've had this channel pop up on my youtube recs occasionally, and I've always taken a look and gone 'hmmm, self-described as cynical... claims centrism...' and would always just resolve to answer the question of 'in the good way or the bad way' later, and never got around to it. I still see some points of disagreement even from this interview, but certainly none of the kind I was worried about. Probably give him more of a watch. :)

[@veritasetcaritas]

I am interested in the idea that he has claimed centrism. Can you provide a quotation? I've never seen him "both sides" a historical or political issue, he states explicitly that history is necessarily political, his channel has been political from the start, his views on historical and political issues are always anti-conservative, anti-Republican, and progressive, and I've seen him mock centrism on Twitter. x.com/Cynical_History/status/1354265633823858696

[@Dosisgreat]

Really enjoying this series interviewing good historical youtubers

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thank you, I am so glad to hear it. I was very uncertain about whether or not this series would be well received. I know many people like a good debunking, but I think it's very important to understand what sets good history KZbinrs apart from the bad ones, and to help people understand good research practices and historiographical method. I also want viewers to gain a greater appreciation of just how much effort is required to make a well researched history video, which is why so many channels simply don't.

[@seanbeadles7421]

17:29 I think it’s important to acknowledge this but also to acknowledge that certain assumptions in the treaties would not have always been obvious. In the US, while many tribes knowingly signed away some rights and lands, assumptions about land rights (usufruct vs full ownership) really caused century long legal issues for tribes in the Pacific Northwest for example.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Yes that's definitely true, and I think Cypher addresses that idea at 21:55 when he says that often people in the past made decisions which turned out to be bad because they just didn't have enough information at the time and were consequently unable to forsee certain consequences.

[@LarshHill]

not to make a pathos/ethos argument, but i LOVE Cypher's content, I find it an extremely helpful resource to explain some of the more complicated cultural facets of American History. There is a GOOD REASON sir now holds a Philosophical Doctorate

[@veritasetcaritas]

I have learned a lot from about US history from his videos.

[@SpoopySquid]

The flash of panic I felt when I saw the notification lol

[@veritasetcaritas]

I put the answer in the thumbnail for that reason!

[@lucasmatiasdelaguilamacdon7798]

Bro literally peer reviewing history youtubers

[@veritasetcaritas]

I think there's good value in this kind of discussion.

[@parahype]

I really enjoyed this interview although I wished it was longer. Thanks a lot!

[@veritasetcaritas]

I'm so glad. I thought people might think it was too long. I still have at least another half hour of interview with Cypher, in which we talk about the use of AI in history KZbin. I'll upload that eventually.

[@matthewsetlak5589]

I really love that you do these videos, truly!

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thank you! I have been a bit uncertain about how well they would be received, and if people would think they weren't really worth watching.

[@joanny_bricaud]

Thanks for introducing another high-quality history channel. its a shame that the algorithm tends to prioritize low-effort content...

[@veritasetcaritas]

You're welcome.

[@Ghostracer786]

Awesome collaboration

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thank you!

[@odothedoll2738]

34:11 I hate box ticking. I get where it comes from but I would hate to be chosen for something because I’m a disabled autistic lesbian. This sort of patronizing pity makes my blood boil. Just because God decided to add a few modifiers to my stats doesn’t mean I’m some sort of perpetual child.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Yeah there comes a point at which well meaning efforts at representation become condescending and counter-productive.

[@Masterhistory1492]

Many Indigenous people in the Americas and Aboriginals in Australia knew war, violence, territorial exchange, etc. The Aztec and Inca empires alone demonstrate that. Horses used to exist in the Americas before being hunted to extinction by pre-Columbian peoples, man will always change their environment to suit their purposes.

[@Dutchwheelchair]

climate change also was a factor with the horse thing

[@randomchannel-px6ho]

I mean I'd sincerly hope so given he's an active academic... He's done a great job of cheerleading citing sources and has gotten some of his peers to change their habits That will never stop Kraut and his enlightened european centrism though lol

[@veritasetcaritas]

I love his emphasis on proper research and citation methods.

[@nikkovalidor4890]

unexpected collab

[@Mrax_Taylor]

You red my mind

[@davidogundipe808]

According to me, Cypher does excellent research, and is open to more knowledge, that he's not knowledgable about.

[@ZachariahtheMessiah]

I am a little confused about his take on the mormons and the native Americans - granted he didn't do a deep dive, i got banned for "grievance posting" for trying to bring yp Kurt Ralph Armann and his work on the mormons and the native Americans of the "Utah territory/state" - maybe you could both look into that channel if you ever would be interested? I love both of your work and hope you are both having an awesome weekend

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thank you! What was it about his take on the Mormons and the native Americans which confused you? I'll take a look at Kurt Ralph Armann.

[@ZachariahtheMessiah]

@@veritasetcaritas I was somewhat bothered by his very passive take on how the Mormons considered Native Americans. He gave a very summarized statement about how the Mormons first tried to unite the Natives under the book of Mormon, and later greatly disenfranchised them, but Cynical Historian says "the Mormons were not as bad as other Americans in these relations" - I moved to Utah a bit less than 3 years ago (so I have much to learn still on its history), Kurt Ralph Armann shows quotes from direct (I may be mistaken if these sources are "primary" or "secondary") sources , from journals and correspondence between prophets, church leaders, etc. all saying in quotes "kill every last man, woman, and child" when referring to the Natives. He shows in detail how the Mormons poisoned their food supplies and even sent missionaries to "Black markets in Singapore" for the explicit purpose of finding more potent poisons - (while also depriving these groups of access to any other food source or agricultural land) - ultimately forcing the tribes onto a reservation where they could not grow food and were threatened under penalty of death if they left. This is important to me because the Mormon church has spent years trying to erase any of its own misdeeds, and re-framing their relationships with natives as always being more beneficial (revisionism) - I know I am not using specific tribal names for the purpose of staying breif

[@ZachariahtheMessiah]

He also touches on the Mountain Meadow massacre, another subject that Kurt Ralph Armann covers in depth - Kurt makes a pretty good argument that the Mormon church spent decades trying to blame the massacre on Native Tribes and cover up their own members complicity in the event. Cynical Historian says that tribes were directly involved in the massacre (I may be incorrect on this, so my apologies if any time is wasted) I am not sure if it is worth mentioning that tribes were directly involved if we don't have corroborated or direct sources saying such (I absolutely could have missed some details and I am not a historian) - thanks for reading my responses - I am GREATLY interested in both of your channels and respect you both very highly. I would LOVE to discuss the dishonesty of people like metatron if you ever have spare time or interest

[@mirdordinii5783]

Id hope so! Id love an episode on Homemade Documentaries. They've got some incredibly professional work out... but i can actually check his sources cause his bibliographies are paywalled on Patreon. Sigh.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Thank you, I will take a look.

[@adb4522]

👍

[@Thumbdumpandthebumpchump]

Not the answer I wanted, I really can't stand this man, but if he does good research, he does good research.

[@veritasetcaritas]

Well that's a very principled response.

[@erdood3235]

I'm going to start this year studying for a b.a. in the history of the Jewish people

[@Lauph1tup]

I should hope so he's an academic it would reflect poorly on his other career if he didn't

[@erdood3235]

Unrelated to this video, But i noticed that you didn't do a video about how bad empanada was wrong about Ukraine and Russia

[@veritasetcaritas]

No, because I didn't want my channel brigaded by him and his fans.

[@erdood3235]

@@veritasetcaritas I understand.

[@erdood3235]

@@veritasetcaritas can i ask why did you do a video about his takes on Taiwan?

[@saampam894]

@@veritasetcaritas So badempanada is a brigader. Why promote him in your community tab?

[@veritasetcaritas]

@@erdood3235 because at that point, much earlier, I thought he might respond in good faith. He didn't brigade me then, and he didn't even make a response video, which I believe is because he knew he was wrong, but he did attack me personaly on Reddit, while avoiding the issue. After that I realised he was never going to respond in good faith.

[@erdood3235]

Shalom Boguslavsky, author of the book, The improbable and insufficiently remembered story of the rise and fall of Jewish Eastern Europe, which an English translation of is in the works, said: "History doesn't have to be useful, it doesn't have to lead us to any conclusions. In many ways, it's better not to. Those who read history to look for answers to topical questions tend to find exactly the answers they were looking for in the first place. A history that is a political pamphlet is, above all, a boring history." Is that contradictory to what you and cipher said about history being political?

[@veritasetcaritas]

I don't think so. History shouldn't be a political pamphlet, but the political cannot be removed from history.

[@erdood3235]

@@veritasetcaritas so how can the study of history be political without deteriorating into becoming a political pamphlet? I'm beginning in less than a month to sturdy for a b.a. in the history of the Jewish people.

[@erdood3235]

His book has been praised by the adviser of the b.a. history of the Jewish people unit in the Hebrew university for making the academic knowledge about eastern Europe Jews accessable to the wider public. And some other experts in the field from what I've seen online

[@veritasetcaritas]

@@erdood3235 a political pamphlet advocates for a political cause or ideology. Historical analysis can take into account the political dimensions of history without advocating for a political cause or ideology.

[@erdood3235]

@@veritasetcaritas thank you

[@7BigJoe7]

So good to see anarchist/socialist/syndicalist creators working together

[@veritasetcaritas]

I'm not sure if Cypher is a syndicalist, but it was generous of him to collaborate.

[@Tasmantor]

Opening with pointing out that "I'm not political" is just being conservative but calling yourself a centrist is a powerful move. One "side" think war is bad and it's wrong to exploit people and land. The other think might makes right and the poor are suffering the punishment they deserve for being lazy. I'm smart though I look at history very soberly and decide to be right in the middle.

[@veritasetcaritas]

I don't think Cypher is a centrist, he is a progressive. He doesn't use the "both sides" strategy, and he says war is bad and it's wrong to exploit people and land. I've never seen him try to "both sides" a historical or political issue. On Twitter I have seen him mocking centrists. x.com/Cynical_History/status/1354265633823858696