>That man is getting all his history knowledge from Youtube videos!
YouTube does not exist.
>That's our democratic principles applied to Academia
>Well let's hope he fact checks every claim outlined.
>>18101387>DONT CHANGE THE SUBJECT! YOU WERE AUDIBLY MASTURBATING TO PREGNANT ANNE FRANK PORN!
Only pretentious nerds care that others are consuming history in a casual way for fun. You still have all the same studies and articles you had before, all that's changed is normies having fun. Seeth and cope.
>>18101387>learning from history in a visual, entertaining way, which lends itself the most to memorization is LE BAD>learning history from a dry academic source written by a crusty jew full of propaganda and lies is LE GOOD
>18101897>>>/pol/tranny
>>18101874I agree with you, but the real point is that youtube is filled with schizoslop and only edgy slop that is uncritically consumed by people so everyone just ends up as retarded freaks. Theres also two levels of this. Someone whos well read on the topic and cites sources in a youtube video is fine. Some asshole just reading off the wikipedia article sucks.
>>18101874>Only pretentious nerds care that others are consuming history in a casual way for fun.>You still have all the same studies and articles you had beforeI generally agree, but a lot of the people bitching on /his/ about shitty youtubers aren't actual historians or reading academic histories. They're reading pop-history trash or discredited activist authors from the 60's.
