3 ms·

If you are referring to to the video "If you Live in Freedom, Thank the British Empire", it is factual regarding its objective claims but heavily spun in its su

If you are referring to to the video "If you Live in Freedom, Thank the British Empire", it is factual regarding its objective claims but heavily spun in its subjective claims and in which material it chooses to cover and omit. It would be wrong to call it wrong- no history professor would claim that the historical events it discussed did not happen. Disagreement would only occur regarding how beneficial they were and whether important details were omitted. In the context of that particular video, the degree to which the value judgements disagree with academic consensus is mostly reflective of the ideological leanings of current history departments in comparison to PragerU. And to address the main thesis of the video- Western democratic freedom is almost certainly more widespread nowadays than it would have been without the presence of the British Empire (also assuming that France or similar colonial competitors didn't swoop in to fill the power vacuum). The way that the video seems tone-deaf is that it isn't sufficiently critical of Britain's moral failings. However, its central thesis is not incorrect.

UncleMeat 7y ago
> It would be wrong to call it wrong- no history professor would claim that the historical events it discussed did not happen. My time to shine! I'm married to a history professor. All of the history faculty I know would call that video wrong. History is not the collection of facts but instead putting those facts into a narrative. If you make a narrative that is ill supported by evidence then you've done wrong history.
- mech1234 7y ago
  What is the main thesis of the particular video? It is that the spread of the British Empire spread Western democratic norms. This particular facet is well-supported by the facts. I agree that it fails to be sufficiently critical of the British. However, it falls well within the Overton Window and any claim that this particular video is incendiary, or that it is sufficiently wrong that it should be discouraged for people to watch it, is absurd. To the degree that History departments want to tell a moral narrative, they need to be a lot more careful than a youtube channel, I agree. I remember my British History professor in college implied that any Republicans taking courses at a state-supported university are hypocrites, so I'm well-aware of the ideological leanings of the ivory tower. If it came down to it, I'd prefer a left-leaning history department to a right-leaning one, just for the fact that you can (typically) squeeze more nuanced narratives out of the (typically) increased moral relativism of the left. It's a pretty slight preference though, subject to the tradeoff that a bleeding-heart professor still has enough assertiveness to admit to moral failings across all sorts of different cultures. Regarding objective facts of a video- they remain true on the ground. Regarding the moral narrative- I see no reason to hold the rest of the world's commentariat to the same standard of preference as a history department. I would also remark that PragerU has the merit of making it's moral leanings obvious enough that you don't have to guess at their direction of bias, in contrast to other presenters who may be willfully disguising their revisionism. Perhaps it's easier to discern the truth when you give competitors on all sides of the moral landscape a fair fight.
  - UncleMeat 7y ago
    > This particular facet is well-supported by the facts. Oh boy. I've got some friends who would be set off on a multi-hour rant if you said this in front of them. PragerU's history is shit. Absolute garbage.

UncleMeat 7y ago

> It would be wrong to call it wrong- no history professor would claim that the historical events it discussed did not happen. My time to shine! I'm married to a history professor. All of the history faculty I know would call that video wrong. History is not the collection of facts but instead putting those facts into a narrative. If you make a narrative that is ill supported by evidence then you've done wrong history.

mech1234 7y ago
What is the main thesis of the particular video? It is that the spread of the British Empire spread Western democratic norms. This particular facet is well-supported by the facts. I agree that it fails to be sufficiently critical of the British. However, it falls well within the Overton Window and any claim that this particular video is incendiary, or that it is sufficiently wrong that it should be discouraged for people to watch it, is absurd. To the degree that History departments want to tell a moral narrative, they need to be a lot more careful than a youtube channel, I agree. I remember my British History professor in college implied that any Republicans taking courses at a state-supported university are hypocrites, so I'm well-aware of the ideological leanings of the ivory tower. If it came down to it, I'd prefer a left-leaning history department to a right-leaning one, just for the fact that you can (typically) squeeze more nuanced narratives out of the (typically) increased moral relativism of the left. It's a pretty slight preference though, subject to the tradeoff that a bleeding-heart professor still has enough assertiveness to admit to moral failings across all sorts of different cultures. Regarding objective facts of a video- they remain true on the ground. Regarding the moral narrative- I see no reason to hold the rest of the world's commentariat to the same standard of preference as a history department. I would also remark that PragerU has the merit of making it's moral leanings obvious enough that you don't have to guess at their direction of bias, in contrast to other presenters who may be willfully disguising their revisionism. Perhaps it's easier to discern the truth when you give competitors on all sides of the moral landscape a fair fight.
- UncleMeat 7y ago
  > This particular facet is well-supported by the facts. Oh boy. I've got some friends who would be set off on a multi-hour rant if you said this in front of them. PragerU's history is shit. Absolute garbage.