Does History and Academia Have Leftist Bias?

[@FreddaYT]

Go to ground.news/fredda to see through media bias. Subscribe through my link to start your free trial before October 31.

[@ground_news]

Thank you Fredda! For anyone interested, check out the link above and let us know if you have any questions.

[@aguy6771]

"My opponents are Nazis and don't have legitimate concern's" - Every Fredda video ever

[@Inquisitorsteve2]

Just realised Disco Elysium red rock riviera is playing in the video

[@unknownbutknown332]

3:00 isn't that what happened though like look at now is it not over run by very left leaning people that try to silence others?

[@greghauser742]

No thanks. AllSides is a much better site for that.

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

As a university student, I can confirm that I was immedietly brainwashed by the woke mind virus and I'm now a raging revolutionary maoist. I pray to a shrine of Stalin every day while saying "I hate freedom and rights and good things". If only Ben Shapiro had warned me sooner! 😭

[@muwus328]

As a university student going for history major, I also became a Marxist and I can relate to the workers without having been to a factory in my life.

[@ethanbennett9000]

I want to imagine with me, a commie zionist

[@vonunterberg4313]

funnily enough communist russia was in many aspects similar to nazi germany, and were anti labour, which would make them not socialists any more.

[@theparagonal]

​@@vonunterberg4313Me when I refer to the USSR as communist Russia and definitely know what I'm talking about

[@entropino9928]

Rights are leftist bullshit though and Shapiro is jewish

[@JustRandomSymbols]

What a weird coincidence that the places with the highest average level of education seem to be left leaning. I wonder why could that be

[@CJ-sr9wy]

What a weird coincidence that when people are accurately educated and allowed to simply exist without oppressive influences, they generally fall within progressive ideals.

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

Certainly left-leaning by American standards. In many European countries higher-educated people tend to be anything between left-wing and center-right (though that's considered far-left in the US).

[@mcamp9445]

And among the least relgious

[@theparagonal]

​@Antonio-GransciCenter right in Europe is definitely at least somewhat left wing in America.

[@entropino9928]

Very weird that when you nationalise an industry it becomes left wing. Almost as if there is some incentive to force people to give you more money.

[@Rudolphius]

As a history student in Belgium, I have had leftwing professors, I have had centrist ones and I have had rightwing ones. All of them tried to not let their bias show too clearly and to the best of their ability be objective when teaching. The same with the students: I have met communists, socialists, centrists, liberals (as in classical liberalism) and Flemish nationalists in my history classes. In my experience (granted which is just a personal account) the history field is thus pretty pluralistic and not really dominated by one political group. The opinion that it is dominated by the left, is in my experience expressed mostly by people influenced by the American culture wars, be they Americans or not. Historian strive for nuances, the pursuit of which never really favours one side of the political spectrum.

[@spaghettiisyummy.3623]

Great comment!

[@mumblerapkilla5406]

What university are you at? I'm in Leuven

[@MrMarinus18]

But also why does there need to be a conspiracy? If you look at most corporate boards of large companies they are overwhelmingly politically conservatives. That's not a conspiracy, that's just the selection process and them acting in their interest. If you want to make as much money as possible you are going to side politically with the people who say that this is good. If you are taught to think critically about things then you are going to be attracted to those who are critical of society.

[@Rudolphius]

@@MrMarinus18 I never said anything about a conspiracy so I don't really know what you are talking about

[@MrMarinus18]

@@Rudolphius I meant that we also don't have to reject the notion that universities are more left wing than the population is on average. That is indeed true.

[@reybladen3068]

In my country, the Philippines, studying Philippine history in school was labeled by the government and military as an "NPA subject", and they want to change it to teach a more pro-current government curriculum. What's the NPA? It means New People's Army, which is the longest ongoing communist insurgency in the country. They argue that teaching history can radicalize students. Lmao. Of course it's going to radicalize students, the Philippines has been colonized multiple times, anyone who studies will inevitably have anti-imperialist sentiments. Straight up Orwellian shit from the current neoliberal government.

[@battleroyal797]

Especially as most of Philippine history is based on the plight of the farmer.

[@Tsuruchi_420]

Dude, that sucks, the right wing here in Brazil have been trying to do similar things for years now, thankfully they nevwr get enough power to go through with it

[@TheKalihiMan]

It isn’t quite as extreme as your example, but when I was a university student in Hawaiʻi, history and political science courses that even mentioned the historical background and continuing legacy of US occupation were treated almost as a “heterodox” interpretation of events. Anything that even vaguely hinted at challenging the notion that we are and always will be an integral part of the United States was treated as subversive, even by people who would consider themselves vaguely “progressive”. Even professors who “kept the kid gloves on” and only lightly condemned these objectively heinous events could expect at least some pushback from at least one student, often from the military (because of how militarized Hawaiʻi is, active duty US military personnel in uniform roaming the university campus is actually a common sight). These courses were often cordoned off by being unofficially labelled “Hawaiian topics” (used with derisive connotations) and were viewed with disdain by more status quo-minded students and faculty.

[@goosewithagibus]

Liberals 🤢

[@JPTQJR]

Radicalization is a very strong word, I'd be more careful saying that term This is coming from a student of one of the most left leaning universities our country The current crusade against the curriculum comes from the deserved criticisms of the Marcos dictatorship The current administration has an obvert agenda to whitewash the atrocities of the regime mentioned above as well as to portray it as the preferable system for our country Victims of the dictatorship saw the move a mile away and have been countering the administration's efforts to remove Marcos' atrocities in our history curriculum They're beginning by removing the holiday for the revolution that brought down the dictator, and now they're claiming projects that have been done for over multiple administrations as Marcos' doing

[@kmmmsyr9883]

In Turkey some universities lean to different political ideologies. For instance, Boğaziçi is dominated by neo-liberals, METU by Communists and Istanbul Faculty of Literature by nationalists. I even know a person who decided to study history at Istanbul University because it was dominated by nationalists. This also influences the education they provide. Istanbul University's History Department is the oldest history department in the country, therefore has a traditional view of history and focuses mainly on Ottoman paleography. METU History offers courses in stuff like class struggle and Boğaziçi focuses more on micro-history than other universities as I heard. However, despite ideological differences of universities, many students who choose to study history are nationalists, at METU and I guess Boğaziçi as well. At Istanbul University, however, the nationalist influence fade by each year. Oh also, most university students are opponents of the Erdoğan regime regardless of ideology. Funnily, AKP votes are much lower in universities with lower acceptance rates. Erdoğan got less than 10% votes from ballot boxes in both METU and Boğaziçi campuses. Most other universities don't have ballot boxes inside, but I'd assume students from the other decent universities in Turkey (like Istanbul, Marmara, Galatasaray, Hacettepe, Bilkent, Sabancı, Koç, Ankara, etc.) voted lower than 30% for Erdoğan. Because of the opposition-leaning academia, the AKP seeks to increase state control of public (and even private) universities at the expense of academic autonomy. Both Istanbul and Boğaziçi universities had new loyalists appointed as rectors by Erdoğan which resulted in protests in both universities (in Boğaziçi more recently) and the govt. even forced Boğaziçi to open a Faculty of Law, presumably to be able to put loyalist academicians in.

[@aturchomicz821]

Based METU? Wtf💀💀

[@kmmmsyr9883]

@@aturchomicz821 If you're interested, they have a stadium with a massive "Devrim" (revolution) writing and parts of the university was built by the students, etc. The campus is literally a self-sufficient commune 4 times bigger than Istanbul's old city (parts inside the Theodosian Walls, Constantinople).

[@daseapickleofjustice7231]

Long live Ottoman Empire communism

[@amacsizbirkisi]

30% is a generous number. I study at Hacettepe and can confidently say that people who would vote for Erdoğan is no more than a tenth of the entire campus. Ne iyi ki insanlar uyanıyor artık devletin başını çalan ocağını yakan çapulculara, sallandırılacak umarım bir gün.

[@pseudojournalist]

nationalists as in the Ataturk strand of nationalist ?

[@noheroespublishing1907]

Any institution that can stimulate a person's potential for Critical Thinking is inevitably viewed as a threat to Conservatism.

[@appropriate-channelname3049]

Your institution does not stimulate critical thinking if you come out of it thinking that.

[@realworld9607]

False.

[@GolemRising]

@@appropriate-channelname3049 Thanks for proving his point.

[@iseeundeadpeople9]

@@realworld9607 Not according to observable reality. It's not the left-wingers making teachers teach that slaves were actually workers.

[@appropriate-channelname3049]

@GolemRising Honestly you cant be that naive. If the left was so smart that they knew all the right policies why arent they in complete control of the goverment? People smart enough to know all the right postions should be smart enough to out fox idiots?

[@MidgetNinjaWizard]

Bias is when you cite sources.

[@SolarFlareAmerica]

Bias is when your sources aren't countryballs

[@Claudius_Ptolemy]

@@SolarFlareAmerica Bias is when your arguments don't solely consist of Wojaks

[@afruitshopowner3307]

@@Claudius_Ptolemy Bias is when brown person not bad

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

​@@Claudius_Ptolemyyour sources (soy wojak) VS my sources (gigachad)

[@sigmascrub]

​@@Claudius_Ptolemybias is when I'm the soy wojak

[@finntownsley5144]

This always puts me in mind of an American TV show which had three seperate pictures of Mao in a "leftist" professors office.

[@Tsuruchi_420]

The holly Trinity

[@TreiberSeptim]

Mao famously liked academics, and vice versa. They’re a match made in heaven.

[@struggler856]

Yup Mao, the criminal who was worse than Hitler

[@yuliusseraph4973]

​@@struggler856remove Guts from pfp libcuck. You aren't worthy

[@sirllamaiii9708]

​@@struggler856I'm a pretty right wing guy but hitler is worse than Stalin or mao or any of them. People say "Stalin killed 50mn, hitler killed 11mn" While that's true, we STOPPED Hitler. Had we not stopped him, it would've been in the hundreds of millions.

[@gaspardbonnehon8758]

I’m french and i’m no right winger by any stretch of the imagination. However in my six years of university (social sciences) I noticed many times that while researchers were generally competent, no one ever questioned how many of them started their studies with the conclusion already in mind, which is a huge danger to the validity of science in general. Marxism isnt a scarecrow here and it’s entirely uncontroversial to study marx or marxist authors. The problem here, funnily enough, is mostly american influence.

[@SireJaxs]

"left wing good! right wing bad!" nice strawman and whataboutism.

[@johnmarley2046]

​@@SireJaxsYou're the only commenter I could find who disagrees. I swear this channel is a large echo chamber.

[@valenciainacabada_8432]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@SireJaxsWith all due respect, how was that a strawman? He just pointed out a real problem with academia, which is that most people are biased, a problem both left-wingers and right-wingers suffer. Where did you see that he denounced the right while embracing the left? It would be helpful to explain where did you see the fallacies he supposedly used.

[@Iden_in_the_Rain]

@@valenciainacabada_8432it’s a bot, they’ve replied the same exact thing on other comments

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

Lol, America is always a helpful scapegoat. Americans can argue some of the worst influences are from trash French academics and philosophers ironically enough.

[@Sgt_Robo]

I always love how people try to tell me that I'm only a leftist because of school, epecially once they learn I live in California (never mind the fact that I live in a highly conservative part of it, they think the whole state is Marxist heroin addicts). One of my middle school history teachers had a large rant about how Mohammad actually "just stole the parts of Christianity and Judaism he liked", and one of my teachers in high school spent multiple periods ranting about how Bernie Sanders was going to "destroy America by getting rid of private healthcare and thus making it so there are no doctors".

[@gaspardbonnehon8758]

Unless you believe that Muhammad really did receive divine revelation, he did exactly that and it’s really obvious when reading the quran. It’s no different than commenting on how St Paul took the parts of judaism and platonicism he liked and I don’t think you’d have any issue with that statement.

[@okene]

​@@gaspardbonnehon8758i agree, I'm not even religious but that much is true. He plagiarized

[@Sgt_Robo]

@gaspardbonnehon8758 I mentioned it less due to the accuracy of the statement and more because this was a rant that lasted an entire period, and it happened in like, 5th grade. Also, he explicitly used the words stole so as to imply that Mohammad knew that he was making a new religion and was purpose crafting it, rather than simply preaching his interpretation of religion.

[@gaspardbonnehon8758]

@@Sgt_Robo Well, that is also correct. Muhammad knew for a fact he was creating a new religion, separate from christianity and judaism, which he claims are both wrong whereas Islam is treated as the revealed truth and word of God. Did you read the Q'uran? The separation from Judaism, for example, is very clear in it, as it is tied to a historical event in early Islam when Muhammad was still alive and the ruler of Medina. If you want to know more, I recommend the muslim channel Al Muqqadimah which has excellent historical videos on early islam.

[@Tsuruchi_420]

​@@gaspardbonnehon8758the way you day that very much matters, especially because the kind of teacher that would say that would probably not take kindly to be reminded that Christianity is similarly a knock-off of judaism

[@enurrdtand8046]

Is that Kraz Mazov in the thumbnail?

[@SawedOffClown]

Impossible, I AM Kras Mazov

[@hyperion3145]

​@@SawedOffClown Impossible, WE are Kraz Mazov

[@declanjones8888]

​@@hyperion3145 You lying fools! I am Kraz Mazov.

[@SpoopySquid]

​@@declanjones8888I'm Kraz Mazov, and so is my wife!

[@Francois39]

I'm a New Zealand uni student studying at the left-leaning Victoria University. The moment I was accepted I was kidnapped and forced into a Marxist alternative-punk themed café where I had to recite the communist manifesto 1917 times before I was forced to smoke weed with a bong that was shaped like a d*ldo with Mao's head as the balls.

[@Oldass_Deadass_dumbass_channel]

Based and bongpilled

[@liasonlee1248]

sounds like heaven to me, welcome comrade.

[@notnotiron]

Shut up communist

[@Master00788]

The tendency I (History) noticed in my German university, is that Political History is mostly still dominant and that the historiography on recent German history (modernity) in particular remains quite conservative. In my experience the people focusing on other parts of the world (and especially the ones going for a "Global History" approach) tend to be much more "left-wing" than the aforementioned ones. Then you have the Early Modern historians and (late-) Medievalists for whom the relatively "left-wing" (though not really Marxist) Annales school still looms large in their approach. Ancient History though...oof. It really is as if the last 50-60 years of social-/cultural history barely happened. You really have to explicitly look for something that isn't narrative Political History based on a few ancient historians. Now, there is a source problem of course, but the issues go deeper than this imo. The biggest progress in the discipline of Ancient History since WW2 imo, has been the critique and abandonment of the nationalist presuppositions regarding antiquity that dominated previously. Though that also hasn't been as complete and thorough as one might hope. Neither the students nor the lectures of my history department were particularly "left-wing" and honestly, approached everyone with a lot of skepticism that made themselves suspicious of being "too Marxist" in their approach to history. I get the impression that it was a lot more "left-wing" (in the sense of a Marxist class-focus) in the 70s/80s than it is today. That being said, certain topics often deemed "cultural" like Gender, sexuality etc. might have seen increased attention over the last few decades, even by explicitly non-Marxist historians.

[@java4653]

The entire field of History is so filled with *centuries* of falsehoods and national-ethnic bias that the concept of "History" itself is on shaky grounds.

[@SireJaxs]

"left wing good! right wing bad!" nice strawman and whataboutism.

[@Badbentham]

Pretty accurate, overall: Scholars of the Classic period are traditionally conservative. Since the 50s Marxism was on the rise. - Until "postmodern" culturalism became a new academic mainstream standard , beginning in the 80s.

[@frankhenschel4008]

"The biggest progress in the discipline of Ancient History since WW2 imo, has been the critique and abandonment of the nationalist presuppositions regarding antiquity that dominated previously." Why is that a progress? And progress where to or what from?

[@XSpamDragonX]

​@@frankhenschel4008Gotta love everyone taking advantage of the broken youtube comments to like and, by implicit extension and not necessarily directly, pinning exclusively positive comments and not responding to any criticism at all.

[@duples8585]

The presence of bias is only a problem when people aren't able to identify it

[@Johnmrobinson-vb5vd]

That's the problem

[@isaac6077]

Like people who spend an entire video saying it doesnt exist…..

[@thunderspark1536]

​@@isaac6077Bias exists, but not in some all-encompassing, secret society way. Jost normal people with their own feelings and beliefs.

[@bretzelliquide]

Michael Parenti lecture on « Power in the University » is a must see on this topic. He had a first hand account on how trustees reflect their own class biaises, as he was unfairly fired from his position as a professor of Vermont University in the 70s for « unprofessional » conduct. (Meaning not pleading allegiance to the US flag and carrying a vietcong flag during a demonstration)

[@spambot_gpt7]

Would you fire someone for carrying a swa-stika flag? If no, then you can really argue that the firing was unfair due to freedom of expression. But if yes, then you are just a partisan who wants censorship in only one direction.

[@anthonyoer4778]

Yes, I'm sure he wasn't protesting but doing his work as a teacher.

[@Elvesflame]

​@@anthonyoer4778 Do you think teachers should be barred from protesting or outwardly expressing political opinions outside of the classroom in their day-to-day life?

[@anthonyoer4778]

@Elvesflame any publicly funded institutions, yes should have certain restrictions as it does with military members. Private institutions would have their own determining rules.

[@Elvesflame]

@@anthonyoer4778 I agree, but that didn't answer the question. Do you think that people in government jobs should be barred from protesting or outwardly expressing political opinions outside of their capacity as a public employee and in their private life? Considering your definition of "publically funded institutions," keep in mind that this is actually a huge amount of people. Any teachers, firefighters, cops, public health officials, volunteers for the Peace Corps, and librarians, as well as anyone working for a company taking government contracts. If we only count the more reserved list of "public servants," that is all of those minus the government contractors. Should all of those people lose their jobs (and possibly careers) if they ever protest or express any political opinion in their private lives outside of their role as a public servant?

[@BLANK-kq8wv]

gooning in anticipation

[@frogka8831]

this message has been certified: true by the fredda discord gooning channel

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

Ok gooner 🙃

[@crackcobain9845]

real

[@princekyle4132]

Gooning for academia 🫡

[@captainfatfoot2176]

Most academics are moderates. However, I think there is a greater tolerance for far-left ideas than far-right ones.

[@pabloprieto3338]

Well i hope so in the USA Far left is woke stuff and far right is Nazi white suppremacists theres clearly one who is worse

[@Thomas-nd2om]

My (Irish) university had me take a Marxist course about eurocentrism, and a course about early modern European statecraft taught by a guy who told us "Great man history is good," in the first lecture, both in the same semester, so i dunno, this whole "no diversity of opinion, only marxism" thing doesn't feel right to me

[@robertoleary5470]

Which university? I went to UCC and I am from Ireland so a bit curious

[@Thomas-nd2om]

@@robertoleary5470 UCD

[@Thomas-nd2om]

@@robertoleary5470 UCD

[@Speederzzz]

Something I also note and nobody seems to talk about is that there is a huge part of academia exists where students will probably never learn about their professors political biasses. I'm a chemistry student and the closest I've ever come to politics in my university is a marx/castro pun from a professor who moved out of the soviet Union many years ago. I wonder how the political biasses of people in those fields work and what information this can give to the conversation

[@java4653]

In the USA conservative teachers can talk about "Clinton Body Counts" freely in our public schools. It's really bad how many Fox News teachers we have. In the South they teach a completely false version of the Civil War where the North were the bad guys.

[@cloakedsecrecy1925]

​@@java4653My lord. It's a really bad situation because you'll have scores of Conservatives with utterly insane beliefs and there's this aggrieved sentiment they're being unfairly marginalized. In a weird sense they kind of are, but I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as unfair either. It's a self-inflicted victimhood where you exhibit patterns of behavior that are anti-social yet persist anyway because the haters or [INSERT BOGEYMAN HERE]. And then society stigmatizes you! I'll put it this way: I feel the exact same way I do with left wing anti-vaxxers as I do right wing anti-vaxxers, you absolutely have and should have the sole discretion to protect yourself from the loonies, especially in front of impressionable children/tweens/teens ect.

[@Elvesflame]

Ya, my professors tend to keep their political opinions to themselves. I can sometimes sniff out their positions when they deviate from their usual (often recited, often slideshow) lecture, but no one's delivering Marxist speeches while flipping through their regularly scheduled Stats slideshow. This is to the point that my Poli-Sci professor, who naturally has to make some political statements as we discussed current events each class, was largely hard to pin down; the only thing that gave me hints to his beliefs were when he provided his academic history (which included having shadowed/interned with Republican politicians) and accidentally assumed a pro-Palestine protest was a riot. Personally, the most overt political biases in the classroom tend to be the abundance (classical) liberal assumptions, and the occasional mainstream liberal or mainstream conservative aside to current events. The only way someone could go to my university, a fairly average one to be clear, and conclude it was a left-wing indoctrination center or whatever is if they assumed the existence of an LGBT club and the occasional rainbow poster on the classroom wall to be political and left-wing. And I don't think it's worth listening to people making that argument with that assumption.

[@thunderspark1536]

​@@ElvesflameSadly I've seen a few who DO think like that, like it amazes how people will believe in this worldwide conspiracy instead of thinking maybe they're mistaken.

[@AzathothRoyal]

Authorities complaining about academics being "dangerous radicals" goes back as far as academia. In the 19th century, all kinds of governments bemoaned how "indoctrinated liberals" were coming out of their universities with such dangerous (at the time) liberal notions as fervent nationalism and democracy. Socrates, after all, was fatally charged with poisoning the minds of Athenian youth. As long as schools are places where people are pushed to think about improvements to the world, they'll continue coming up with them, whether they're agreed with or not, and today's radicals will almost invariably wind up tomorrow's conservatives.

[@spambot_gpt7]

That view is true as long as we are talking about incremental, cooperative change. But truly radical revolutionary ideology, like Marx's, doesn't aim to dream up improvements for the system, but instead to destroy it. That's very different and the two should not be confused. Disruptive change in the social space means many people die.

[@SomasAcademy]

Do you have any sources about that on hand? I'd like to add it to my list of parallels between developments in Liberalism and Socialism but I don't want to just take a KZbin comment's word for it lol

[@spambot_gpt7]

@@SomasAcademy My source is Marx. He openly calls for the destruction of the existing system in order to build utopia on top of its ashes.

[@SomasAcademy]

@@spambot_gpt7 My reply was directed at OP, not you.

[@AzathothRoyal]

@@SomasAcademy Sadly, I don't have a singular source I can point to - I haven't read a book about the history of academia and reform/revolution so much as I've just read a lot of books where the "trope" of governments grumbling about academia and its political leanings (and the troublemakers it produces) keeps coming up. This means I can list a ton of anecdotes and topics to read about, but I don't think that's what you wanted.

[@TheAnthraxBiology]

I study history in Ireland and I always find this conversation amongst Yanks so funny. They'd be appalled by how my relatively conservative country hosts lecturers that are probably far more left-wing than they'd anticipate, and yet most of the students would not consider very radical. They simply consider arguments from multiple historiographical perspectives, and to be honest a lot of them will only spend a few minutes of a class discussing the Marxist interpretation and then say "it is not convincing though" and move on. However, they do encourage us to argue with them in our essays and if we have the sources to back it up they can't penalise us! So then the question remains, why is it that the students are so left-wing if the lecturers mostly brush off Marxism? Because when you are a young person from a still partially colonised country living with some of the highest cost of living in the world and you learn history as it actually happened from multiple perspectives, you arrive at the conclusion that left-wing values are correct.

[@anthonyoer4778]

Left wing values...? Oxymoron and purely subjective.

[@muffinmendy7327]

​@@anthonyoer4778 He probably meant Irish left wing values. Ad of the parties.

[@theculturedjinni]

I will look forward to this. Though there certainly are political bias issues, I would never say that they are Marxist.

[@FreddaYT]

Me neither lol, but that's what's alleged often.

[@theculturedjinni]

@@FreddaYT Yeah, and it is often a pain to explain this to people that are outside of Academia or have never even studied in a university.

[@noahsabin7386]

Pretty sure that back when Plato was around, "political" meant "having to do with the city state" since political comes from the word polis.

[@Penname25]

True

[@jdkessey]

Prior to going into video production, I was pursuing a History degree focusing on Modern Chinese History (note: didn't go too far into it but I keep an eye on developments out of personal interest). This specific field is pretty diverse with left and right wing Historians existing in the field. Everyone is scrutinized nut its always fair and more born out of a passion and want to understand this complicated period of history. Few people enter the history field as some sort of political activist and it becomes obvious for the people in the field if you're only using that history for such ends. The "Biased to the Left" tends to come from people who don't want to engage in history as a serious subject which affected real people up and to today. Instead they want to treat history as a literal myth to make oneself feel better based on lines so fragile that all it takes is pointing it for people to abandon a position. Anyone can engage in the historical process if they put in the work and have some intellectual curiosity. Some of the best work on Modern Chinese History was done by people of a Left Wing bent and they're the first to bluntly say that the Famine and Cultural Revolution were horrors. One of the biggest take aways I've gotten from this specific interest is that real people went through this. Even if they're dead or were terrible human beings, they deserve the basic decency of being treated as human beings who lived their lives rather than as some caricature to make people feel better. The "Biased to the Left" club only feel insecure because they want to turn specific people into said caricatures for their own personal comfort.

[@bobjones2959]

Unrelated but do you have any good book recommendations on the topic?

[@jdkessey]

@@bobjones2959 For Mao, Philip Shorts biography is both recent and is in my opinion the best way to view the man. He goes in-depth into Mao's background prior to 1949 and the politics in China leading up to the PRC. The Introduction and epilogue are also good essays examining how Mao himself is viewed and treated with the epilogue being a good list of books if you get interested. I've been looking for a more recent book to recommend but Taylor's "Penguin History of Modern China" is a good round down of this complicated period. It's old but I'm working to find a book to replace it as my go to recommendation. If you enjoy audiobooks the Great Courses lecture on the subject is good but suffers from the same problem. Julia Lovell's "Maoism: A Global History" is also on this list because it gives a rough outline in how Maoism spread across the world, its effects and the types of people who were attracted to it. I have issues with it (Mao's pointed out rightfully for being a sexist but leaving out that this was the norm in China up until after his death) but its both an interesting history often overlooked and it explains what it was pretty well (I'm not attracted to any of these ideas mind you. I consider them to be deeply vicious).

[@jdkessey]

I wish I could give more man but these are the ones that I usually recommend to people. It's a dense subject and I simply want you to find an interest and go for it.

[@bobjones2959]

@@jdkesseyThanks very much!

[@Tsuruchi_420]

I do like that you mention how left leaning people in this specific field of study have that stance of supporting the mainstream view on the cultural revolution, cause it also serves to remember that not everyone in the left will agree on everything either, left leaning can mean a wide array of things

[@ProfLakitax]

Can't wait!!! People say:"Reality is left leaning" I'd much rather say: "Conservatism is anti human leaning"

[@bighillraft]

what does that even mean

[@acanadianchicken]

@@bighillraft It means that Conservatives are anti human leaning with all of their attacks of Unions, the LGBTQ+ community, immigrants, people of colour, etc.

[@vonunterberg4313]

@@bighillraft it means that conservastive stands for: exploitation, hate, the rich, anti regulation and racism

[@pennyforyourthots]

​@@bighillraftconservatism is primarily focused on conserving existing power structures. Existing power structures are exploitative towards the majority of people, making them anti-human. Conservatism, by its nature, is anti-human as a result.

[@bighillraft]

@@pennyforyourthots this is the biggest logical fallacy I've seen in a long time

[@kaesi111]

Lol I study sociology at the literal Frankfurter Schule (Not quite, the institute is an offshoot of the University itself but the scholars from the institute are lecturers at the uni) and can confirm that most of my lecturers are leftists but only in the boring "social democrat" (Of the european kind) way. They are cringe incrementalists and I only ever had one lecturer that seemed openly sympathetic to communist ideology but he wasn't tenured. As for my curriculum: I have had to read Schumpeter, Hayek, Friedman and Smith. I don't think I have to elaborate any further. Only thing correct: There are lots of communist students but there are also lots of libertarian students.

[@pizaclatonddd3081]

Schools in my country wouldn't even mention Marx or Communism and still it grows larger every economic crisis.

[@LjubicaServaas]

Yup. Liberals are not left-wing.

[@Penname25]

Most leftists are progressive liberals anyway.

[@java4653]

LOL. You have no idea what that word means. Commies & Conservatives both blame a phantom Liberalism for the normal state of human inaction within any given period. Who started it, whose the leader? What's it founding document? They don't exist. Once we're thinking of politics as a spectrum with distinct districts, we are lost. Liberalism: freedom, representation, fairness, all wrapped up in Reason. It's a set of ideals. What that means and how to get there is how its history is expressed. There is no Marx, no Manifesto for Liberalism. All the books that are trying to figure out those ideals are the books of Liberalism. Conservatism is a failed subset of Liberalism *no matter what*. No matter the ideology, it's flawed humans in charge and they tend to suck. I just saved both Commies and Conservatives decades of wasted thought and effort. You're welcome.

[@rustyshackleford1465]

Leftists obey Liberals when the going gets rough. You're in full agreement with Liberals when they say White people deserve mass Death and Genocide.

[@r.j.lombardi111]

There are some not all... Or are all leftists authoritarian? Oh are they? Do tell us.

[@mickeyg7219]

Yes, at least in the US, colleges and universities aren't left-wing on an institutional level. It's just that in the 50-60s, where higher education opened up to accept poorer students and women, students and staffs are more likely to exchange their ideas and perspective with each other. So basically, universities don't intend to create left-wing students, but left-wing students can pop up from there.

[@SawedOffClown]

Lord Fredda has blessed us once again, inshallah

[@genericytprofile852]

I really do love it when conservatives take a look at some of the most educated, studied, well read, intellectually curious, and overall smart individuals, and proclaim with fury that they're all left leaning. And their conclusion is, "There has to be some subterfuge going on here. There's no way they'd all disagree with me!"

[@appropriate-channelname3049]

Idk why people put academics up on a high horse like they are above bias and mistakes. Liberal policies benefits academia economical and politically. So why wouldn't academia support them?

[@MrMarinus18]

But also most of the most notably people in history were left leaning simply because keeping things the same won't get you remembered.

[@HeadsFullOfEyeballs]

@@appropriate-channelname3049 I would describe it the other way around. Republicans have decided to oppose universities and academic freedom, so academics who care about that stuff have to turn to the Democrats. Who don't have some sort of ideologically driven "pro-academia" agenda, but are at least not actively hostile to it. It's not that liberal politicians are in bed with Big Academia, it's that the Republicans go out of their way to actively, deliberately harm academics.

[@hedgehog3180]

@@appropriate-channelname3049 You use "bias and mistakes" as a synonym for left of american center politics, I don't think you know what those two words mean.

[@spambot_gpt7]

hedgehog, please read the comment again. I hope your job doesn't require any reading.

[@geraldmeehan8942]

Reality has a left leaning tendency

[@airlesscanvas6425]

Liberalism has a reality leaning tendency, leftism cannot even map onto reality.

[@chrisgaming9567]

@@airlesscanvas6425 [citation needed]

[@airlesscanvas6425]

@@chrisgaming9567 My citation is that liberal democracies with capitalism as the basis of the economy have created the most prosperous societies in the history of mankind. Leftist nations (Soviet Union, China, etc) have either collapsed or are authoritarian hellholes.

[@emisunflowers]

Thank you for not just blindly accepting the idea that many people spread that left-wing ideas are just more correct and more compatible with academic findings. It's so much more complex than that, and seeing KZbinrs just blindly parrot this always takes away their credibility in my view.

[@Tsuruchi_420]

Is it more complex though? For real?

[@unyieldingsarcasm2505]

Thing is... they tend to be now. At least here in america. But thats not because its "left ideas are always right", its because the modern political right has divorced itself from the concept of reality, and so academia that functions off of the scientific process, studying, investigating, recording and testing all lines up, by default, with more "leftist" positions.

[@eges72]

@@unyieldingsarcasm2505 Exactly. "Leftism" here in America has become "anything that contradicts my dreams revolving around my brain" at this point

[@Will0wAWisp]

New fan and with most of America being more and more dangerous for me and other trans ppl ur videos have been weirdly nice to watch so thanks

[@FreddaYT]

Thank you so much!

[@omarqasirov8754]

My experience in the SUNY system during the Bush II era and University of Wisconsin system in the early Obama years is that the my professors were mostly center right to center left. I can count the number of leftist professors I've had on one hand. It was actually kind of disheartening.

[@ordinaryrat]

'My teachers weren't politically active! What a tragedy!'

[@americanliberal09]

😏Just a side note: Apolitical should not be synonymous with non-partisan, because most people will just confuse politics for being synonymous with partisanship. But in reality, is not. Politics just only deals with the activities of the bureaucratic structures of the government. That's it. However, people can still be actively engaged in politics without being partisan. And, also apolitical does not mean "not expressing a political opinion", because it just literally means unrelated to political affairs. That's it.

[@handanyldzhan9232]

12:43 That fits in well with the findings that suggest leftists are "more intelligent". Left, right-wing or even centrist views aren't inherently correct, and I don't necessarily agree with associating intelligence with correctness or rationality (plenty of highly intelligent people believe in complete BS), but intelligence is associated with the openness trait (being open to new concepts and experiences). Since the USA is kinda "right-wing" by the developed world standards, left-wing views are the less dominant/entrenched position, and people with high openness tend to be drawn to these alternatives. If the same study were made in a hardline communist country, for example, the results would have been the exact opposite.

[@split_bug6760]

Just found your channel! As a student in norway it is very interesting to see how you balance talking about largely american topics while still using norwegian sources

[@robbuelens]

The problem is that some subject matter doesn't appeal to right wing people. Many on the right wing don't even believe in a sociology that can help society. They don't believe evolutionary biology is a thing. They don't believe in climate change etc... If you don't believe that society can be molded to meet a better future, then you don't have a place among the people that mold it every day. And on the other hand, they don't even take the effort to formulate a cohesive body of work that could be peer reviewed. Trickle down economics has never been formulated into a peer reviewed study or theory. Whilst millions still defend it as if it's not just the senile ramblings of Reagan. intelligent design doesn't have a cohesive dialogue among believers. When you see them talk about it, they remain very shallow about their beliefs, so the spectators won't see that they have widely different delusions. They don't take the time to formulate their delusions outside of a sloganistic surface level. Jordan Peterson said in a college that he thinks that ancient civilisations knew about dna's double helix, without ever even formulating 'HOW?!'. In a college you have to elaborate upon your beliefs, it's not just a moodboard for sociopaths.

[@Penname25]

Many people on the left, believe the biological sex is a myth, that population genetics isn’t real, that nuclear energy is bad even though scientific evidence says it is the safest form of energy production, that GMO should be banned, and that all cultures in the world are beautiful, and should be preserved, even if the culture has problematic elements, and that antiracism education even though evidence, suggest that it doesn’t actually reduce racism or improve collaboration between different peoples. In fact, diversity training has a long history of failure.

[@Penname25]

Furthermore, many people on the left tend to excuse authoritarianism, as long as the authoritarians claim to be left wing like Lenin or Castro or Mugabe or general, Win of Burma. These people were despots oppressed, killed, and caused immense suffering to their own people. Yet certain left us I believe they’re called Tankie’s will defend them saying that they deserve all the praise and more for making Socialism reality and there any criticism of them is capitalist propaganda.

[@rustyshackleford1465]

@@Penname25 You're both right. Leftism and Rightism both have their tracts of anti-Intellectualism. Rightism has YEC morons, and Leftism has their own corresponding idiots.

[@mechkota]

Or maybe the biggest problem is that most people that are sociologist are just there to ramble and look smart. I am saying that as someone who is on the left and I think that sociology matters but with the people that are advancing this science.

[@lukeskywalkerthe2nd773]

I would just like to say that I'm truly glad I found your channel, Fredda! You've undoubtedly changed my perspectives on a few things, especially when it comes to history on KZbin! It's hard to believe I quite liked chamnels like Paxtube and Whatifaltist, but I'm thankful to be shown the true that they, sadly, don't care about presenting the facts of history, only twisting it to ideology. And even though i myself am a Christian, I care a lot about presenting history in the most honest way possible, regardless of my beliefs, for i deeply love the subject too. It's made me more careful and more skeptical about KZbin history channels from now on! And this video too has given me a lot to chew on as well! Keep up the great work! :)

[@qunituabastard1754]

Glad to have honest and conscious beings like yourself, wish you the best on your travels :)

[@FreddaYT]

That's awesome! Thank you for the nice words!

[@PanzerTank_]

Do your own research. This guy has a bias like everyone else. A Marxist bias at that.

[@PanzerTank_]

I don't really have a problem with marxist or anyone with any ideology in that matter, I could care less, believe what you want to believe. But there's obviously going to be a bias from people with more "controversial" beliefs.

[@PanzerTank_]

Fredda is a pretty good channel though, despite me not agreeing with most videos(im a dirty classical liberal), I still like that he at least sites sources and presents arguments in a professional manner.

[@snood4743]

I was conservative all through college. It was only a couple years later that I became left wing.

[@kittycatwithinternetaccess2356]

its the other way around for some people

[@no_not_that_one]

I’m as far LibLeft as one can possibly go, and It was such a shock when I went to college, it mainly ended up being centrist and almost apolitical with both the students and professors minus like one professor, and I was able to count the other Anarchists there on my fingers

[@Penname25]

Interesting which college did you go to?

[@dftp]

​@@Penname25You don't have to ask. Every college is like that, at least in America.

[@theprofessor1554]

@quantummeme7655 On the political compass, Libertarian left is left-wing politics and economics, while simultaneously against a centralized state, favoring decentralization and mutual aid. This is opposed to authoritarian left, which has left-wing politics and economics, but believes the state can be used as a way to protect the workers revolution and promote equality.

[@Elvesflame]

@@theprofessor1554 To add to that: As an anarchist, my go-to shorthand for uninformed people is "anti-Capitalism, anti-State." As a libertarian leftist on a more generalized philosophical level, I seek to flatten or abolish any system of hierarchy that sets one person as superior to another as much as possible without presenting significant danger to peoples lives that they haven't consented to. Any deviation from that generalized statement is usually down to practicality, like seeing capitalism as the greater threat than the State and therefore tentatively supporting universal healthcare or whatever. This includes owners above workers, rich above poor, bureaucrats/politicians above citizens, citizens above immigrants, men above women, straight above gay, cisgender above transgender, white people above non-white people (with consideration for area, e.g. Japan), etc. in no particular order.

[@Elvesflame]

Same. I've only met 1 anarchist at my college. Maybe I'll meet a few more when I continue my studies at a larger university. Here's hoping, I suppose.

[@Sofia-rh7ji]

As someone with a lot of family in academia, the concept of academia being left biased is really just kind of stupid. Never have any of my family members had to go through a single hurdle with the admin to make a reactionary hot-take, but as soon as there is a left-wing conclusion, the only people that will ever read that article are people that are directly recommended the study. Everyone hears about the inconclusive, poorly run study that says that free trade helps poor countries. Nobody hears about the conclusive, well run study that says that free trade made physical quality of life worse in the global south.

[@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45]

Idk where they got this idea, I have to like keep my Commie beliefs more secret than Spider-Man's identity when I'm on campus.

[@chrisgaming9567]

Same (besides one moment when I got a chance to point out that Stalin tried to resign four times)

[@danielobrien9502]

Being in academics requires critical thinking and tons of reading. This filters out most right wingers.

[@spambot_gpt7]

And it brings the constant danger of losing one's humility in the ivory tower.

[@lorenzomizushal3980]

I think in the modern day it rewards rule following and obedience to authority. Independent and critical thinking is encouraged only as long as it follows the mainstream dogma.

[@ryuukeisscifiproductions1818]

@@spambot_gpt7and yet its the right that uncritically worships ivory tower wealthy people like Donald trump and elon musk, whom are as ivory tower far removed from the working class as it gets.

[@java4653]

​@@lorenzomizushal3980LOl. You have no idea what your talking about. Fox News Brain.

[@lorenzomizushal3980]

@@java4653 nah, seems like you're the one who doesn't, CNN Brain.

[@gamerpinecone]

Seems to me that people happen to vote for parties that let them keep their jobs

[@redwood1240]

This video really does mean a-lot, as someone who lives in a fairly conservative family enveloped by a conservative community and state. My life has very much been embroiled in the hyper active reactionary culture of the right and for the most part never bothered to question it, only found out about you after seeing your criticism on whatifaltist which was a youtuber I watched pretty consistently. Watching through your videos presented data and historical events in a more objective manner which many of the more conservative influencers I watch never bothered with very much. Your videos have helped me looked at the numerous points of tension in culture and society from a more objective standpoint which is something I very much lack. Personally, I still identify more on the conservative side and I’m religious myself but that doesn’t bar me from appreciating your content which I value greatly, thanks.

[@angelmatesmolan]

As a spaniard History student I've met lots of people of pretty much all colors of the political spectrum; both students and professors, from Francoist nostalgics, to anarchists. Universities are plural spaces, with all the benefits and problematics that it implies. I feel that for conservatives to think that universities are a marxist space is just a conspiracy theory rather than a factual phenomena.

[@spaghettiisyummy.3623]

Franoist?

[@angelmatesmolan]

@@spaghettiisyummy.3623 Francoist* I'll edit the comment xd

[@Penname25]

It’s not that universities are in marxis space, it’s that certain subjects are more left wing or populated by more left-wing professors then others Like gender studies, ethnic studies, psychology, sociology, and most humanities. Meanwhile, a great deal of economics and some of the hard sciences like engineering tend to be populated by both left and right wing people.

[@angelmatesmolan]

@@Penname25 well is no surprise that gender studies and psychology usually appeal to left-wing students while economics and law appeal to right-wing students. In my experience History is 50/50 in terms of ideology

[@robertoleary5470]

@@spaghettiisyummy.3623a follower of General Franco, the victor of the Spanish civil war in the 1930s and the fasist dictator in f Spain until the late 70’s

[@PropagandalfderWeiße]

Academia DEFINITELY has a left Bias. In my universities student parliament are lists that are related to real government parties, so we have a green list, a liberal list, a socialist list, a moderatly conservative list and then a bunch of small feminist/LGBT-lists, a anarcho communist list. Now guess which lists have few seats and which lists have a lot of seats in the student parliament. I am right wing and would immediately kill any potential carreer in academia if this became known at my university. According to statistics, around 80% of professors wouldn't hire a researcher or help a student to a PHD if they found out that said researcher or student was right wing. The students at my university petitioned to have books by right wing authors removed from the libraries or to have professors removed who speak against woke ideology.

[@salce_with_onion]

Lmao, "woke ideology", what a vocabulary you have. Every single argument from "the right" has been dismantled and burned so brightly, that the only position that you can take to the right of the center is moderate consevative. And, if you have a brain, you would have looked around you and realised that you are in a veeeery bad company on that side of the spectrum. You might have heard about heated debates around the topic, somewhere 1939 and 1945. Go check it out. Also- no communism party? Really? Woke virus is withering away?

[@greghauser742]

@@salce_with_onion You don't even know what you're talking about.

[@kittycatwithinternetaccess2356]

​@@salce_with_onion self righteous leftard being a self righteous leftard

[@srajandikshit7590]

​@@greghauser742 yes you don't

[@greghauser742]

@@srajandikshit7590 That reply doesn't even make sense lol

[@fyngolnoldor4891]

10:55 What you missed is the ACTUAL problem instead of the strawman you constructed. Namely, that the left-wing capture is not necessarily that of the professors themselves but rather the administration. The evidence for this can be readily seen in how permissive universities are with left-wing manifestations by students, tolerating even calls for violence and anti-Semitic slogans (masked as anti-Israel of course) whereas right-wing speakers and ideas are immediately labeled as fascist and banned from campuses. Another problem is the elevation of niche propagandist subjects (gender studies, etc.) to the level of "social sciences" and the elevation of the latter to be considered on par with ACTUAL hard science, despite not having nowhere near as rigorous scientific methodology, replicability of results of studies/experiments or even pure volume of research. Then these very flimsy fields are used to preach their very thin and unsupported conclusions as truth because it's "science" and if you dispute their validity then uh-oh, you're a right-wing anti-science (and/or fascist) person. P.S.: I have 3 friends in 3 different fields (Computer Science, Neuroscience, Chemistry) who in the past 5 years have been passed over for a position at their universities in the US despite years of toil and work as TAs, publishing constantly, doing tons of grunt work, etc. In the case of 2 of them they were explicitly told the administration requested a woman or a PoC to be hired in those positions so that quotas could be filled. In all 3 cases that happened and one by one my friends decided to leave academia and go work in the private sector. When that happens constantly, what is the likelihood that the products of a system of "social justice" will continue to promote those ideas? After all, that's how they got to where they are.

[@chrisgaming9567]

If you want to be taken seriously, maybe next time you shouldn't conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism in your first paragraph.

[@fyngolnoldor4891]

@@chrisgaming9567 I'm not the one doing the conflation. Criticizing Israel for its military tactics or settlements in the West Bank is anti-zionism, chanting "Palestine shall be free from the river to the sea" is anti-semitism.

[@chrisgaming9567]

@@fyngolnoldor4891 No, it's anti-zionism. And I think you know that already.

[@fyngolnoldor4891]

@@chrisgaming9567 It absolutely is not, you're nuts if you think that.

[@chrisgaming9567]

@@fyngolnoldor4891 Please explain how hoping for a specific country to be free translates to a hatred of all semites, and not just of the specific ideology that's currently terrorizing the region.

[@edspace.]

I've never been to an American University (only 2 British universities and an Higher Education College) and I changed my views a lot while studying history and politics (which became just history), then Law then ICT and prefer now to refer to my politics as Moderate (Worker Ownership of the Means of Production, Cooperative Economics in general, Communal Ownership of the means of Coercion, Law being based around the Upholding and Advancing of the Dignity of All Human Life, That questioning why things are the way they are is a positive aspect of social existence, political organization to be organized at the smallest practical level and all these to be interconnected through Mutual Assistance), so perhaps I'm not best placed to weigh in. But one thing I've wondered about when people talk about "academia becoming left wing" is by what do they mean by "left wing"? Indeed the term "liberal" can mean different things depending on where you are, such as in Europe there are those who self-describe as "liberal" (or perhaps specify "classical liberal") but would advocate people being able to use the N word on the grounds of Free Speech Absolutism. Thus it feels like there would need to be a concrete understanding of what is meant by "left" and "right" before any discussion can take place (even assuming no other factors intervene such as other ideals, interests and institutions), so thank you for providing a grounding on this discussion.

[@shawnsg]

I don't know what it "indicates" but it seems pretty ironic that around 95% of the US Congress has at least a bachelor's degree. I wonder if academia more left wing now or has the right just moved the goal post? Can it really even be measured? Being liberal or conservative is so subjective depending on place or time. Regardless the conservative right in the US has continued to double down for decades on the us versus them rhetoric which includes less educated versus more educated. They will find anything to demonize certain segments of the population in order to create these artificial tribes which they then convince are under attack for the purpose of votes. They do it without considering the long-term consequences.

[@placeholder6503]

I am working class and never got the right secondary school degree to pursue studying, but a lot of my friends are students and they tend to have a lot of stories about "backwards" or conservative professors, even in "hippy-dippy" fields like ethnology or musicology. Within educational institutions there are people, who benefit from the present status quo and have no problem with it staying that way. Whether this perfectly maps onto what is considered political conservatism whereever they are located is obviously a different question. Someone can be a left wing voter, overall not reactionary on social issues, but still hold a conservative stance on their specific field or institution. Universities "pushing" a more liberal view on certain social issues is not necessarily some nefarious plot, but perhaps a way for the specific school to look better overall. You want more international students? You want to collect tuitions from as many people as possible? Better not to piss of folks who are not part of the local ethnic majority etc. Being anti-intellectual on one issue and engaging in scientism on another is the name of the game for most political parties sadly and I would say moreso for those on the right. People need to realize, that a lot of political parties do not have a 100% coherent ideology, much less so it's members and even much less so it's voters. The average voter is not a consistent ideologue and voting decisions can be based upon so many random and frankly silly factors.

[@placeholder6503]

By the way, I am always excited to watch your videos when they come out, they are entertaining and informative. Please keep it up! Especially your alt-hist video on a unified Korea was miles ahead of a lot of the junk in that genre on this website.

[@cakesergent4337]

I study economics and in my first year.I got a 70/100 on the finals by just assuming every time the state did something it was bad(within the context of the test).No more studying necessary,just "state bad","free market good"

[@echoambiance4470]

Trying to distill the contents of this video down into my brain and seeing what happens. The left tends towards being critical towards society in a way that examines current and past structures and re-imagines how altering these could produce a better society. The right tends towards being critical towards society in a way that examines current and past structures and attempts to solidify and bolster existing structures, maintaining the workings of society and refraining from changes that might alter this order. Academic inquiry persists ideally in comprehensive, saturating inquiries of knowledge about a certain topic. Honest inquiry into history will involve understanding all qualities, positive or negative, about past societal structures and to some extent their echoes into modern times. Academic inquiries into history will naturally produce re-evaluations and re-examinations of past structures that may interfere with or clash with the views held by the right insofar as they pertain to structures that they identify with. While parts of the left may similarly be hostile towards re-evaluations of historical truths that it has based itself on, leftists tether themselves less to strongly identifying with things that may undergo scrutiny by historians.

[@UdarRusskihPudgei]

You don't have to go too deep into history to reject the 'grass was greener' conservative idea. And another idea that 'today we live in the best possible society' is also rejected according to scientific principles. Which leads many of academics to progressivist ideas. This is left 'negative' program. But the 'positive' program i.e. 'how should we build a better society' is still heavily affected by either personal beliefs, or, more importantly, by so called 'partisanship of science', when a scholar's attitude is influenced by his environment: his workgroup, institute, sponsors, society as a whole. And if the environment consists of liberal, individualistic, eurocentric people of protestant Christian descent, then your 'progressive' ideas will naturally look exactly as so called 'cultural Marxist' agenda. Just keep that in mind when you engage with other different 'positive' left ideas and programs coming from other societies.

[@Penname25]

What scientific principles reject the idea that we are living in the best possible society? Science is about evidence and experimentation. Furthermore, leftism is not about making the world a better place is about making the world more equal. Right wing philosophy is about to believe that hierarchy is either good or natural. If you truly believe that the non-Christian, Non-European, collective as societies of the world are superior then you have to ask by what measure. Because the happiest healthiest and most successful countries in the world are either in Europe with Capitalism with a welfare state, or in Asia with the same thing.

[@xenamorphwinner7931]

After watching this I remeber about one trend that is someone happening in european conservatism, based on my personal observation: it’s splitting between those that are somewhat more socially and economically “left” conservatives who believe that change is unavoidable, however we’ll l do it slowly and carefully (look what fits what doesn’t), while retaining more conservative values. The overs are what you expect, but , at least here, in Lithuania, are being eaten up by more radical right. Also I once had a chat in social media with a guy, who after learning my left/liberal leaning views, called me a commie. Then I proceeded to explain my country’s and family history and why I despise USSR and CPR (guess which more by my nationality). He then tried to reply but stopped - I think I gave him existential crisis.

[@_spatuladoom_]

I have never felt more seen in a KZbin video in my life. I used to be the biggest MAGA culture warrior before I took the AP US History course in high school and had to confront the realities of Segregation, Labor Rights, the Great Depression, and so many other topics.

[@TheRealTorG]

You became a Gigachad, my friend. You molted from your cocoon and spread your wings to fly away! A magnificent Butterchad Gigafly.

[@Yoth9290]

That teacher must have been a glowie

[@TheRealTorG]

@@Yoth9290 ok terry

[@ordinaryrat]

I used to be right wing. Then I took several US history classes. I turned left wing. Then I learned more general history about Rome. Then I returned to being right-wing.

[@TheRealTorG]

@@ordinaryrat so you only learned about the west. Well done

[@BobPantsSpongeSquare97]

Universities are indeed left leaning but it's not really a thing of people being "brainwashed" as conservatives like to phrase. When you go to college you get exposed to a variety of different people and beliefs. Especially if the student is coming from a small town where there's no diversity, suddenly they experience a culture shock when at university and befriend or work with people from different religions, ethnic, and social classes. And in many cases people leave college being more empathetic and understanding towards others than they previously were before

[@Penname25]

If left-leaning means being empathetic and understanding of others, then why are all the people who graduate from college, some of the most elitist in the nation?

[@BobPantsSpongeSquare97]

@achinthmurali5207 most of the elitest people are literally on the right though lmao. Most millionaires and billionaires are Republican supporters who in turn are some of the least sympathetic people out there whose priorities are making life worse for everyday people. Such as constantly attacking social security, being against affordable healthcare, attacking minority groups, being anti union and anti workers rights, promoting Christian nationalism, and of course not paying their taxes. FYI most college graduates do not become those rich elitest people. College is just a stepping stone for people's careers

[@rustyshackleford1465]

@@BobPantsSpongeSquare97 Uh huh. Yet it's under a Democrat administration that this year, Billionaires paid 0% taxes. And guess which Admin broke the Rail Worker strike and did nothing when the train blew up in East Palestine? Was it the Republican Trumpies?

[@Pluto-cw2kh]

@@Penname25 A lot more people have been to college, most jobs require some degree if college education. Also can you define what you mean by elitist? Maybe list some examples?

[@Ω3103ζ]

repub to scare the elves

[@seanhartnett79]

I think it depends on the institution. Bible colleges tend to lean right. Community colleges have a weird mix of political ideologies for professors. I had one teacher who was a Communist, a socialist, a moderate right wing American nationalist (without any of the bad things of this ideology), a moderate right leaning centrist, another guy who was like a right wing extremist.

[@SergeyKishchenko]

It's a bit dishonest for you to (justifiably) critique other YT historians for shaping their narratives such that the viewer agrees with the "vibe" instead of learning about the history, and at the same time doing the same thing in your videos. You selected 2 examples to demonstrate why historians may shift their opinions based on what they study, but you didn't specify why exactly the same shift isn't happening in another direction. In the end, there are also endless examples of "leftie" policies going wrong in addition to "righty" policies going wrong. In the end, your argument doesn't really explain why is it more controversial to have a Lee statue than to have a Lenin statue, and why is it that more academics are okay with being aligned with the latter, but not the former.

[@bmocbruhistotle339]

In politics, hypocrisy is par for the course

[@lighthouse6543]

Remember when Stephen Colbert said "Reality has a notable left-wing bias"?

[@MideoKuze]

Yeah I mean as a beginning computer scientist I got moved to the left by - taking one philosophy course that challenged me to read people I disagreed with - learning about mass surveillance - manufacturing consent I already had progressive sympathies, but it was fundamentally tech enthusiasm that motivated me to pursue my degree and learning about how shit actually is deflated the hell out of that.

[@Penname25]

Did you ever think to read GK Chesterton, or Henry George or any conservative thinker? Because what I found is that many conservatives are against tech surveillance. But maybe I’ve only talking to the wrong ones.

[@legopenguin9]

@@Penname25 damn those conservative thinkers should start telling conservative governments to stop spying on everyone

[@onepiecefan74]

Your whole section on history and how historians are simply blank slates that only go where the data leads is extremely poor and idealistic. Anyone who knows anything about civil war historiography knows that interpretations of the war, its players, and its aftermath have changed drastically over the last century. The older historian were "reading the documents" and "immersed in the material". Figures like Dunning and Freeman are responsible for gathering the majority of the primary documents still in use today. Why weren't they moved towards modern leftwing views? If you say "they have racial prejudices that blind them" then you basically saying "non leftwing historians bring in their biases but leftwing ones don't" which is clearly selfserving. Your theory is incapable of explaining conflicting historical interpretations. All historians are reading the same information. Dunning, Craven, Foner, Du Bois, and Summers were all reading the same facts about reconstruction. Yet their conclusion are vastly different.

[@banano24]

This is why i love living in Bosnia. Were right in between all the leftists and right wingers and we have our own shit sprincled everywhere. God it never boring here 🎉

[@robert9016]

As an Ohioan, I will take this anecdote as undeniable proof that Bosnia is the Ohio of the Balkans.

[@Riya-ho5zv]

@@robert9016 We were literally made in Dayton this explains everything

[@spaghettiisyummy.3623]

@@robert9016 I heard that the Midwest is the American Equivelent of the Balkans. Is that true? :o

[@jajordan2106]

I would argue that there isn't a bias toward the left, but there is a bias toward the West (atleast in western academia). In researching the history of mathematics there were a number of fairly novel approaches to mathematics that were invented by eastern scholars hundreds of years before the western equivalent, one example being known as Pascal's Triangle. This isn't intentional, so much as the spread of information is poor, and many of these proofs could only be found on pieces of parchment found in tombs and were quite damaged and these documents were not produced on mass due to limitations in technology and the lack of need compared to things such as statistics or geometry for administrators. Despite the expansion of coefficients used in Pascals Triangle being independently discovered its only known as Pascal's Triangle because Pascal is a western academic who discovered it, it was taught in western universities and the eastern equivalents being discovered centuries earlier was likely not known to these academics. Something similar also happened in China where the scholar who is known for the Chinese equivalent of Pascal's triangle not being the one who invented it, but the one who was most famous for showing it to others.

[@montithered4741]

Science and are are inherently disruptive, which is why conservatives resist science and art so much.

[@Penname25]

Science is not disruptive. Science is about understanding how the world works. “Innovative” is NOT always more accurate.

[@montithered4741]

@@Penname25 Science is learning more, this is inherently disruptive.

[@Testimony_Of_JTF]

Leftists tend to despise science when it goes against particular dogmas they hold to. In particular behavioural psychology and the study of human intelligence, its heritability and genetic origin. It's mostly because of how much of a death blow it is to egalitarianism

[@cheekmcbreek1146]

All sides supress art and science from people who are their ideological "enemies" who could disrupt the order of whoever is in controll at the moment.

[@nsdapcommunism2780]

Simply genius this guy. "Lets just change the definition of left wing so majority of university students will no longer be left wing" - great argument, just brilliant. In my personal experience 90% of my classmates are left wing or liberal, the same could be said about literally every other faculty. The difference about our positions is the definition of "left wing" and since there is no stable understanding of what is left wing there is no point in making this video

[@TheRealTorG]

thank you nsdapcommunism

[@pplelo9364]

Funny that you say it was the creator of this video the one that made up a new definition for "left wing" and changed it to mean that instead, when in reality it was politicians that moved the goal-post to a new definition of the right-left axis that doesn't even take into account ideologies further left of "softer capitalism", what actually happened. Haven't even watched the video and I can throw this critique of it into the bin, nice.

[@nsdapcommunism2780]

@@pplelo9364 yeah, I imagine how politicians decided to keep only centrist options in right-left axis, and then communism ceased to exist. The fact that “the left” and the “right” do not have the same meanings as in 20th century is purely politician’s fault, sure. Also, anti capitalism is not purely left wing idea, but I do not complain, since anyone with a brain understands that modern meaning of “left” and “right” is not so much about capitalism as it is about identity. When you try to disprove a claim that “universities are left leaning” by changing your definition to the “left” of 20th century you are not making any sufficient argument

[@rachelroberts1880]

Seriously, thank you, as a current college student I can't stand this intellectual dishonesty that is constantly shoved in my face. These people never stop to consider this- if the government largely supports these colleges and universities than maybe the views of the Left aren't all that subversive anymore.

[@Testimony_Of_JTF]

I would also add this is mostly a consequence of conservatism going full populist since the Reagan era.

[@maxmillianwiegel1643]

Is that why you don’t make videos on the absent far-left regimes of yesteryear my family and others fled from?

[@chrisgaming9567]

One of his videos kind of does that by talking about post-war pre-partition Korea.

[@Helperbot-2000]

can you point to me one country that abolished money, social classes, the state, and democratized the workplace, giving them to the workers?

[@greghauser742]

@@Helperbot-2000 No, because that's never how far-left governments turn out, evidently, hence why it's a stupid idea.

[@Helperbot-2000]

@@greghauser742 then how could you possibly call any far left if they dont have any far left policies?

[@greghauser742]

@@Helperbot-2000 Since when is Marxism-Leninism not far left?

[@jeremywhite831]

yes it is, i think its an issue as well. i have a degree in economics and when i come across stats like your political opinions sway the conclusions of your paper by 20% alarm bells ring. economics is important, it impacts how businesses and governments structure society. 10% of academia is far left (commies mostly), 80% are left wing, 6% are center, 3% are right wing, 1% other. ironically, i imagine you would find more economic diversity of thought at your local pub than at a uni. this limits out ability to solve problems. also, it closes the door on what receives the most attention/study. for example, i would love to see a far more comprehensive literature on the idea of personal responsibility. only 10% of people in poverty are people who work. but quite obviously, you can work all your life and due to cost of living pressures, the amount you save maybe little. its a real idea, but due to the political nature of it, how studied is it really. furthermore, it means ideas don't get stressed tested to sufficient degree. i think a really good example of this is viewing the world solely through critical race theory (with regards to economics). it might have very valid social science aspects. but in economics its slightly different. for example, its very valid that you can make a prediction of income based on race. but it doesn't actually tell you much. white trailer park trash and elon musk are part of the same people. education is a better predictor of individual wealth than race. so engaging with an issue like disadvantage and poverty its better to solve it via conventional methods than CRT. however, changing that will result in a different bias being present. no bias is impossible. so i dunno.

[@nateofthesouth]

The first 7min 30sec is just saying the rightwing is racist, the rightwing did it first, etc. I should have stopped watching sooner.

[@skykid]

The thing is, if you go right far enough, you find a lot of people who are well aware of their own history. They argue that they ancestors were doing the best they knew, and that it worked for them and trying new things is dangerous and makes no sense. Go even further right, and the very thought of betraying their own kingroup is the definition of evil and justifies anything done to outsiders. Studying history made me a humanist, it encompassing the mentality "We can do better", and believing that we genuinely can.

[@liber_mundi]

Man, Im glad I found your channel.

[@planettrax9754]

A bit late to the party but my 2 cents as a historian myself. The problem is that Marx "invented" the materialistic method which is honestly just the best method to "make" social science in general. The man was profoundly political (in "having a political project" sense) but historical materialism is just revolutionary, and regardless of political agenda of the academic, just the most accurate model for writing about society. Just like how cartesianism was as important for the natural sciences. I honestly can't see someone writing history using any method in vogue before Marx came around, and all methods after were at least developed as a response to it in some sense. Even eliminating the political side of historical materialism (such as the teleological event horizon of the proletarian revolution), the fact that you can describe social interactions by a material basis (class, most importantly, but to limited to it; technology also comes to mind) eliminates some of the most esoterical historic writing of old history (history of kings and great men) but not falling to the trap of trying to make social science into a natural science, as it is not trying to be social psychology. Mix in great insights on culture (Benjamin, Gramsci, Frankfurt, many others) and you can account for both the micro-personal and macro-social. In sum, the man was a genius, and it is hard to make history without at least touching on his writings. That means everytime a conservative looks to academia, they will yell "communism" because Marx's name is attached to it. But in my own experience, academia is much more dominated by "Marxian" work than explicit marxist/political work. I think US academics sometimes forget that the term marxian exist and could be used to describe their work.

[@mechkota]

Yeah you are right.

[@TheFenderBass1]

On the issue of marxist historical theories and marxist perspectives. During my time at University studying history in Sweden (I have a masters degree now) it was made quite clear that even the right wing conservative professors I had could not completely disregard marxist perspectives and theories in historical research. Their close collegues which they met on a day to day basis and which are also professors showcase quite clearly why marxist perspectives are viable in historical research. Especielly since there are a lot of worker historians and economic historians in Sweden which utilize marxist perspectives quite well. So yes I can see how people outside academia can claim that marxism has infiltrated academia, however even right wingers within academica cannot deny the intellectual value of marxist theories (although ofcourse some do exist who do deny/disregard it, but without any proper basis). This was made clear during some higher seminars I attended in which we discussed texts from phd students in which I knew multiple historical researchers were right wing, yet despite this most would agree with one worker historian professor who pointed out that the phd student should use the term ''Labor buyer'' (arbetsköpare) instead of the term employer since this is more accurate when describing the labor market. Which is a undoubtedly a marxist perspective (also the phd student was using marxist perspectives and he got good comments from even the right wing researchers).

[@IgN5P]

Why should academia stagnate, IE become conservative? It needs empiricism and progression of knowledge. One doesn't find this with rightwing positons.

[@airlesscanvas6425]

The left does not hold a monopoly on what progress is.

[@napoleaobonaparty]

As I history student I can guarantee that whatever contact one might have with Marxist texts is minimal. Most historians and reasearchers that you read in University are not Marxists, also because there aren't that many Marxists going about anyway (quantitatively). I imagine that in a imperial-core country that figure might be even smaller than a third world country. How many G. E. M. ste croix are there to talk about class struggle in ancient Greece, afterall? Very few, less than some of us would like, I might add. Of course Hobsbawm and Perry anderson are famous, because they are incredible writers and historians, but for each Perry anderson there are 20 liberal historians that we must read to keep up to de literature in subjects that Perry Anderson hasn't written anything about. Also because Anderson, Hobsbawm or E.P. Thompson are each one individual, with limited time and intrest for that matter; in contrast the number of subjects in history are endless, because, as March Bloch said, what ever smells of human flesh can be a subject of history. Beside, even if I read Hobsbawm and like it very much, I, as an academic historian, still have to read the 20 other liberals authors in the same field, because that is what academics do to actually have a bigger picture of the debate in one topic or another. It isn't "I read the one I liked and nothing more". That is a great misconception that many people have about academic work, although who is to blame for that is a whole different and lengthy debate. All the points I'm trying to expose are just common sense, because there is a whole philosophical debate about what is history and what is Marxism and what is the correct methodology to study/write history that we must not include here. I hope to have made sense.

[@mechkota]

I agree with you but maybe depends on the university. Because I have a friend that took a sociology class and the professor said, 'minorities can't be racist' .

[@omeganichtdieuhrsondernder6906]

What I experience myself was that, when I listened to videos about history and did minimal research, I started going from Left to center and in the end i was Incel Fascist, and it took a lot effort to come out these bubbles, but doing my own research really helped and I realized how much I had become a Disgusting person. I am not fully over that mindset and it still pops up from time to time, but I feel way better and now I can argue with Right wingers better than ever before. And thank you Fredda for your great videos they prompted me to do my research. Good time of day and have Great Life.

[@lilbroomstick7914]

Disgusting

[@robertstuckey6407]

As a corollary academia isnt super traditionalist because "we figured everything out in year x and just need to go back" doesnt make a good thesis. Academic virture involves adding to the state of the art

[@elvandin1]

I am a young american who finished a 4 year degree a few years ago, attending college in Florida. This issue might not be the same between Europe and America, but both Universities I attended had a very noticeable bias towards the radical left. This wasn't universal throughout all classes however. The mathematics, electrical engineering, and programming classes I took all had no political overtones to them at all, but every class I was required to take that involved Writing essays or reading large amounts of non technical content was uncomfortably leftist. One example of this I could provide was the very first class I was enrolled in, a bullshit "intro to college" class that was supposed to teach you nothing more than the layout of the campus, how its various systems worked, and things like "how to study" and "how to learn". seemed like a waste of money and time but i had no choice to opt out. The actual content of the class largely involved listening to the professors extol the virtues of identity politics and intersectional feminism, occasionally being required to write assignments or essays parroting back those political opinions. Any disagreement or questioning of those leftist narratives was rebuked for "being hateful", justifying that being unacceptable because "this is a safe space". critical thinking was not allowed and submitting an essay arguing for an "incorrect" opinion (conservative) instead of a "correct" opinion (progressive) would get you a failing grade, at least on that particular assignment. The same dynamic played out in english classes, appreciation of art/music classes, history, anything that wasn't stem. Even though I was there for a STEM degree the way the degrees are set up requires you to take a ridiculous amount of useless classes in the name of being "well rounded". experiencing this cultlike environment where both authority and the groupthink of your peers will other you and punish you for admitting to wrongthink put a lot of pressure on me and others like me to larp as a leftist just for the sake of getting along. When you spend years pretending to be a leftist and making arguments for leftist talking points, while always surrounded by other leftists (or larping people like yourself), its not surprising that many people just end up as legit lefties who faked it til they made it. Its not all that different from being forced to go to church and pretend to believe in god almost every day for four years, while also being made into some kind of youth pastor who has to present arguments for believing in god and sticking with the church. by the end of that you will probably either be a legit Christian or you will hate Christianity. Basically, many American Universities are geared towards left wing political indoctrination, and many professors view political proselytizing to be a higher calling than actually teaching their subject.

[@greghauser742]

Academia is a joke.

[@achintyamitra493]

I’m currently in the US for my physics doctorate but I did my undergraduate in India in one one of the premier institutes for science called IISER(Indian Institute of Science Education and Research) My institute had friend circles who were of a very ‘liberal’ nature and then some who were very traditional and conservative. Some of the people in these liberal groups including me could be considered lefties ig and that was mostly by reading on our own and checking out economic studies etc(dont claim to be an expert ofcourse. I’m always learning) None of this student behavior was known/encouraged by the faculty. We barely had any interaction with the faculty beyond our assignments and scientific discourse. I couldnt tell you what any of them thought about politics and I was one of the social ones in my batch. TLDR - If I had to guess, the student populace would ofcourse be slightly more on the left than say the general population but these places cannot generate ideological shift to the left because of professors, its mostly due to a bunch of people from different parts of the country coming together that gives us that worldview. Again, this is me guessing. Please refer to studies and other things to actually get an idea and not hearsay.

[@Randgalf]

TLDR: Yes.

[@Testimony_Of_JTF]

As Brazilian I see the idea schools and academia are generally left leaning is very true, at least from my experience. Most of my childhood was spent in (protestant) religious schools so I didn't interact much with it. But as soon as I entered the public education system things shifted left very fast. While that bias presented itself in many ways the one in wich it was the most present was Church history, in particular any description of what the Catholic Church did in its history. A lot of myths are deeply rooted in our society now with a very reddit atheist idea of religious history. Of course there are some conservatives here and there. One of my teachers is a Bolsonarist lol, but the bias is still there.

[@monkeytails1437]

There is a very particular reason that my high school history class left out all of the important and defining details

[@FreddaYT]

Yeah it's underfunded, its curriculum is poorly thought out and the teachers are overworked

[@123456789tube100]

Weirdly i am a librarian and even i havent heard of that article

[@dapperbunch5029]

Doesn’t even mention economics, I wonder why?

[@ElyCooper-je5hs]

There are a lot of socialist economic books.. We only study capitalism however because.. well guess why..

[@dapperbunch5029]

@@ElyCooper-je5hs Because it doesn’t collapse in on itself. You are aware that socialism has been tried before right?

[@ElyCooper-je5hs]

@@dapperbunch5029 we study capitalism because we live in it.. I really thought you'd put that together

[@dapperbunch5029]

@@ElyCooper-je5hs We don’t study socialism because it failed. Thought you would put that together. Unironically, Feudalism has a better point to make considering it just disappeared and never collapsed a nation.

[@ElyCooper-je5hs]

@@dapperbunch5029 Socialism failed because it was deliberately attacked and dismantled by western nations (only America really) NOT because "it always fails"

[@rodrigok5393]

Unrelated question: I noticed that you use a lot of Disco Elysium songs as background music for your videos. Any idea when you would be doing a review of Disco Elysium or something similar?

[@erniebuchinski3614]

The best part of this is the vitriol in some of the comments, with so many commenters only thinking in black and white terms, but trying their best to come off otherwise.

[@airlesscanvas6425]

Could you give an example?

[@Firebringer121]

Look up Grover Furr and a lot of his great work on Soviet Union, he gets really detailed. However in the forward of one of his books, Stalin waiting for the truth, he laments that no one is going to believe him, even though he knows he has the truth. Over time I think certain paradigms can form that have to be pushed back on, like the big lie for example in US history of the Civil war. I'm curious what your feelings are on fighting bad historical work? Where they are just building up a body of work that either intentionally or unintentionally buries the truth in service of an ideological agenda or bias. I'm sorry if I'm struggling to convey exactly what I mean so I'll just say it, I think there is a lot of anti soviet and anti Stalin bias in historians, and at the very least a lot of them seem to just accept the premise that "communism wasn't popular in communist countries so they had to keep killing people." I know this might not be your specific area of study, early to middle soviet history, but what do you think about the idea that there has been an effort bury the truth about the Soviet Union? Sorry that this was kinda rambling

[@Piratewaffle43]

Reality is biased towards progressive thought.

[@spambot_gpt7]

Part of reality, definitely. Progressive thought is definitely very persuasive, but far from a complete world view. Why do you think other schools of thought exist? Are they all badpeople? Favoring one side here is like closing one eye and proclaiming that only what you see exists.

[@user-nm9qd6bo6h]

such as?

[@Piratewaffle43]

@user-nm9qd6bo6h I assume you meant to ask something along the lines of "how so?". Rather than respond with any particular idea or policy, I'll say that to approach issues progressively is to acknowledge reality and understand the whole picture rather than creating a convenient narrative.

[@spambot_gpt7]

@@Piratewaffle43 What you write sounds good, but it doesn't match the practice. For example sex changes are essentially science fiction in our current reality and tech level. Yet, we try very hard to NOT acknowledge that and wish something into existence that humanity cannot technologically do yet.

[@ftwallday3112]

​@@spambot_gpt7who is we?

[@odude]

I remember going to University and taking history classes of various kind and thought it was all pretty neutral and balanced. No personal bias expressed. Over a decade later, I realize that it was more sophisitcated then simple obvious personal bias. There was a clear bias in what was included or left out, how much time was spent on any given event, who's POV was favored. Inevitably, the events that showed wester cuilture in a favorable light were downplayed, or the negative sides were overplayed. Anything gave credence today's moral dogmas was held as implicit truth, or being favored by concensus while heretical thought was treated as such, or simply ignored.

[@granpaNurgle]

"Heh, sorry chuds, reality has a tendency to agree with (my politics)" Wow I've literally never met anyone who *didn't* think that, damn you guys are smart and unique

[@HeadsFullOfEyeballs]

It's a reasonable conclusion to come to when your politics consistently align with the best of our scientific knowledge, while the politics of your opponents are so incompatible with it that they have to invent conspiracy theories to explain why scientists think they're wrong.

[@dirkackermann6787]

I studied history and philosophy for teachers in Halle Germany. Yes, there were the odd old history Profs, that were more centrist or maybe right wingish and, indeed, never mentioning their leanings. But the vast majority were leftist, especially in padagogy, were everyone was. And not only could you have just guest their politics, they were very open about it. The whole social department was leftist and it showed. Now, I am not that ideological "color" pilled to say that this is automatically bad, but it is without a doubt a problem per se. Some in here say or seem to imply, that, Yeah, dooohh, of course, that only shows that left is the only option, because if you are intelligent you can only come to the left solution! You don't see that kind of political bend in physics or in mathematics. The two studies that recruit the most intelligent people in all studies.

[@Killerbee4712]

Fredda drops another banger, time to update my list of fascist annihilating videos

[@DjDeadpig]

In the words of another guy in this comment section “Cultural Marxism is part of the political theory developed by the Frankfurt School and its political descendants. Based on Gramscian ideas found in the prison notebooks, it seeks to subvert the existing institutions and undermine the current hegemony in preparation for a socialist revolution. Though taught directly in critical areas of socialist study in the past to the point professors directly referenced it a few decades ago, in recent years, it has been falsely labeled as an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory by those pushing it as an attempted smokescreen. Key evidence to this can be found in the fact that the main source cited by Wikipedia "Who Fears the Frankfurt School?" Was written by an intellectual descended from thr political School of thought of the Frankfurt school itself, and citing three people she claims as anti-semitic, one of whom is, another of whom is Jewish, as her evidence rather than providing empirical data showing its link to anti-semitism and previous anti-semetic conspiracy theories such as cultural bolshivism. This, combined with the fact the article is effectively self investigative in nature, largely renders it invalid as evidence. While direct evidence of this subversion does exist. It has, in the end, largely failed, and this claim of it as an anti-semitic conspiracy theory is just a final despite attempt by subversives to link people who have correctly identified and named the theory to a morally repugnant position to discredit them. Those claiming it to be an all prevailing socialist plot that has infiltrated all of academia are ultimately incorrect. However, those claiming that it was not attempted and is not currently being attempted by radicals on the far left are openly lying.” Cultural Marxism is Not a Myth The claim that Cultural Marxism is a myth is not supported by the evidence. Cultural Marxism has a long and complex history, stretching back to the early 20th century. It was developed by a group of Marxist scholars, including Antonio Gramsci, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse, who sought to explain the ways in which cultural aspects of society, such as race, gender, and sexuality, could be used to oppress people. Cultural Marxism is Not Antisemitic The claim that Cultural Marxism is antisemitic is also false. Cultural Marxism was developed by a group of Marxist scholars who were not Jewish. Furthermore, the theories developed by these scholars have been used to critique oppressive structures in society, including those which target Jews. Cultural Marxism Proves How Academia Has a Left-Wing Bias The debate around Cultural Marxism also proves how academia has a left-wing bias. The fact that the theory has been so widely accepted by academics and has been used to explain the rise of left-wing activism in recent years shows that academia is more sympathetic to left-wing views. In recent years, the term “Cultural Marxism” has been used by some to describe a perceived threat to Western values and culture. This perception has been fueled by a variety of sources, including conspiracy theorists, right-wing commentators, and some academics. While it is true that Cultural Marxism has been used as an ideological weapon by some, the term itself does not refer to a single unified theory or set of ideas. Instead, it is a complex set of concepts, ideas, and theories that have been developed and refined over the last century. The basic premise of Cultural Marxism is that culture and society are shaped by the economic forces of capitalism. It argues that the power of capital has been used to create and maintain a system of class oppression. This system of oppression has been used to maintain the power of the ruling classes, while keeping the working classes in a state of subjugation. According to Cultural Marxism, this system of oppression is maintained by a variety of cultural institutions, such as the media, education, and the family. Cultural Marxism is not a myth. It is a complex set of ideas and theories that have been developed and refined over the last century. It is based on the premise that culture and society are shaped by the economic forces of capitalism, and seeks to challenge and critique the power of capital and the oppression of the working classes. It has been a major influence on the development of modern social and political thought, and has had a profound impact on the development of modern societies. While some may use the term “Cultural Marxism” in a derogatory way, it is important to recognize that the term itself does not refer to a single unified theory or set of ideas. Instead, it is a broad umbrella term that encompasses a variety of ideas and theories. Cultural Marxism is not a myth, is not antisemitic and proves how academia has a left-wing bias. It is a real and complex phenomenon that has been used to explain the rise of identity politics and social justice activism in recent years. The debate around Cultural Marxism also proves how academia has a left-wing bias, as the theory has been widely accepted by academics and has been used to explain the rise of left-wing activism.

[@smartgoat2753]

In my opinion, which is kind of goofy, I think it just swings from time to time, some times it leans right, some times it leans left, but honestly, it never ever ever is to insane, and most people end up being centrist even when going through academia. And right now, I would say that yes it does lean a little left circa 2010 which is understandable as more people have become aware of social issues. Those are just my thoughts but thanks for the awesome video bro! And may the Lord bless you

[@Ukonzae]

You made a good video but the problem is this idea of left wing bias in academia started as a commentary on American post-secondary education, it doesn't really apply to other countries so you using exclusively data from other countries, especially european countries where the political climate is drastically different, as proof there is no left wing bias in academia is... disingenuous to say the least. If you'd been to college/university in Canada/America you would know that regrardless of your major, you're essentially forced to enroll in some social science program that's inevitably going to shove mainstream left-wing politics down your throat. Not "sieze the means of production" left wing (though there is some of that) but I mean pop-politics left-wing. Things like gender identity, women's studies, critical race theory, etc. Identity politics. Does it make any sense for someone studying computer science to be forced to take one of these identity-politics-focused social studies? No, but they're all but compulsory. In these classes you will recieve a very specific and very biased version of these social sciences and you will be forced to write "opinion pieces" where the opinion you have to argue for is given to you. If you decide to write a paper disagreeing with the opinion you're supposed to agree with, good luck passing the class. This seems to be a uniquely North American phenomenon so it makes sense a European wouldn't understand what people are talking about when they say academia has a left-wing bias.

[@bushy9780]

can confirm.. i had to take 60 credit hours of humanities to get an engineering degree. waste of time and money.

[@shawnsg]

Name a single public university in the US that requires any of the "courses" you listed.

[@Ukonzae]

@@shawnsg Hard to say for the US, I don't live there, but here in Canada I went to UOIT for Computer Science and had to take a course on Native American culture and history, and my buddy went to Seneca for Law and had to take a course on feminist literature. They assign you argumentative essays where they give you the opinion you're supposed to argue for and if you decide to argue against that opinion you fail the assignment.​

[@bmocbruhistotle339]

​@@shawnsgleft winger try not to gaslight challenge (impossible)

[@mechkota]

@@Ukonzae interesting

[@jasonbiggs1624]

Through all you meandering, you got the answer to your question at 11:49 where the article states, "Why are academics more left-wing? One answer might be: left wingers are more intelligent than their right wing counterpart." You proved that the thesis is that Academia has a left wing bias. You try to explain it by saying, "Well it jsut seems that conservatives are in contradictions to the findings we have." Ignore the fact that tyhe article produced by a left wing article bassically said, "The left people are always right, and the right wing people are jsut wrong and stupid." and you meander that point with a little puishback but cave into the point by adherring to it by saying right wingers are wrong according to our research. And yet what boggles the mind is how you still are perplexed by the question, and try to make it a right wing conspiracy theory. Even the people on this video are admitting the overwhelming tendency of marxist ideology in many fields in school, yet your still trying to entertain the question as to whether there is a leftist bias? A bias means a tendency towards one conclusion or projectory, and how we ussually favor one overwhelming way of understanding the world over another. Let me put it this way: "Is there a christian bias in universities where you study?" If your answer is a clear no, which it should, thats because it's clear no one comes out of these institutions thinking like a christian. But people overwhelmingly come out of these intitutions thinking like a marxist, with even your articles admitting to the fact that, "If your going to be a interllectual, you have to be a left winger" They don't see the possibility of someone becoming more conservative, which is ussually bad people, and only successful smart people will become left wingers, who are clearly good and morally upright people. And yet your meandering this obvious point, as though you just can't be honest and admit it. You come off as a dishonest intellectual, who wants to appear unbiased, yet can't jsut acknowledge the obvious point. You don't have any interllectual integrity, because you can't just admit your bias.