Hey Sup Forums I'm in the mood for some decent historical documentaries that are unbiased and can teach me about shit like Communism and religions
Like decent documentaries on communist regimes or just religious history, I've found myself getting into a lot of debates about these subjects and I can't be arsed reading a shit ton (seeing as I'm already clogged up on my reading list) so hit me up
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
archive.org
tgsnt.tv
dailymotion.com
en.wikipedia.org
cwporter.com
jrbooksonline.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
>en.wikipedia.org
You can watch it on Youtube, really great series
>en.wikipedia.org
Also should be on Youtube
"religion" is pretty vague, off the top of my head here's some about Judaism/Christianity
>en.wikipedia.org
On Youtube
>A History of God
Should be on Youtube
Also you probably shouldn't be getting into arguments on shit you know nothing about, maybe you'll find that out later when you grow up. It's annoying as fuck. If you don't actually know your shit, its a good time to shut up and maybe listen to people who do.
Is that the one with the fucking sad violins every 10 minutes?
The Greatest Story Never Told
Yes, TGSNT is a bretty gud one.
>Hirohito International Airport
I'm not sure which triggers my autism more, that or Greater Nazi Reich
Sound stuff I'll suck all your cocks
OP said unbiased. TGSNT is revisionist bullshit
not an argument
Do you not know what "unbiased" means ?
because all those documentaries made by the kikes are 100 % unbiased and factual?
A lot more than your nazi fanfiction, yes
the holocaust is a meme
sure shlomo
You anti-semitic fuck, my grampa literally had to fight off eagles and bears to escape from the death camps and being made into a soap
Does that mean we can make it real someday?
Y'all like cars?
>this is the intellectual level of TGSNT watchers
OP if you're still there, you can of course watch this "documentary", but keep in mind what is the agenda behind it, and try to confront anything that will seem suspect or very different than what is commonly accepter today.
I won't tell you to not watch it, history is nothing but the confrontation of different sources, but be careful
The World At War, 1973
To me it's the definitive WW2 doc series. 25 1 hour episodes covering all major nations and periods of the war. Completely unbiased, when the country that the episode is covering is advancing the tone is happy, when they're reatreating it's sad, no matter what side it is. Great narration by Lawrence Olivier, and written by people from each country. Lots of good footage that doesn't omit the uglier bits, and great interview clips. Watching the one about the Soviets, (episode 11, "Red Star") was the only time I got choked up watching a war doc.
Here's the first episode, you can probably find a torrent too:
dailymotion.com
This. Be VERY careful watching things without realizing there are agendas behind them -- but only if it shows Nazis in a not-so-bad light. Agenda only works in one direction.
The genocide is one of the most well documented history phenomenon ever, we have mountains of documents, academic researchs, testimonies, factual evidences and so on, so of course anything or anyone claiming that a lot of things we know are wrong is outright suspicious.
Just look at yourself, you're already trying to instillate doubt, instead of discussing openly.
Yeah those poor Nazis, invading countries for no good reason. I can't believe how badly they're treated! They're the real victims, they did literally nothing wrong!
>Completely unbiased
Stop.
Care to elaborate?
It's definitely biased.
how
Oy vey!
But, why is it illegal to even question it in certain countries? Certainly merely questioning an event isn't worth prison time?
But, don't question it: that would be an agenda. Doubt is the beginning of discussion. If you have no doubt, what is there to discuss? It's just affirmation. Again: agenda doesn't work in one direction; pretending it only goes one way is delusional.
You can come to your own conclusions, but if you don't doubt things you've been told, what's the use? At the very least question them.
>no good reason
They had good reason, according to their goals.
>They're the real victims, they did literally nothing wrong!
Never implied that. Your reaction is typical, however. It's anudda shoah if Nazis aren't shown as being inherent monsters and the Holocaust is questioned.
>footage of Hitler petting a dog and playing with children
>EVEN IN THE PIRACY OF HIS OWN HOME, THE FUHRER HAD TO CORRESPOND TO THE IMAGE HE WAS SELLING TO THE MASSES
Yeah that, or maybe he was just being nice to children like any human being would. It's not a bad documentary, in fact, it's probably one of the best, but it's biased.
I doubt this post exists.
>why is it illegal to even question it in certain countries?
That's an entire different debate, that has nothing to do with the veracity of the event itself, it's just a political choice.
The problem with you Sup Forumstards is that you place everything in the scope of ideology and politics, while history is about laying facts.
And as a matter of fact, the genocide happened
>history is about laying facts
lol
Nothing that has Jew involvement in any way, shape, or form. If there is a jew, then you know it is propaganda and lies.
Reagrdless of the bullshit hitjob on him the absolute best historian on everything regarding the ww2 and third reich is David irving, no historian has put as much time and effort uncovering/finding and translating documents from archives as irving. He's a perfect example of what happens to anyone who stumbles on inconvenient truths as seen by the keeness to label him a "holocaust denier" despite him explaining in great detail that the holocaust was real and whom/when orders were gave but that it simply wasn't at auswitz which was a work camp with a high mortality rate due to starvation and epidemics. Watch any of his talks on youtube.
The best documentary i've ever seen however is Adam curtis - The century of the self, it's about the genius edward bernays and his psychological work being implemented by corporates to socially engineer people to buy products via advertisement. I don't think any documentary will give a clearer picture of why the modern consumerism is the way it is.
>The genocide is one of the most well documented history phenomenon ever, we have mountains of documents, academic researchs, testimonies, factual evidences and so on, so of course anything or anyone claiming that a lot of things we know are wrong is outright suspicious
Yes and no, there is not a single legitimate document that points to gas chamber killings at auswitz however through the writings of albert eichmann we know shoot on sight death squads existed, like i said the best man for this topic IS david irving who for 50 years was considered the best historian in my land until he dared investigate a certain camp and archives which painted a different picture, the real reason for this is certain morally starved jewish entities have made literally billions on the shameless industry created on the deaths of others without any concern for the actual truth.
>They had good reason
Would love to hear them.
>the genocide happened
It did yes but not in the way or places you think and for different reasons, the genocide also includes the germans in dresden, the millions killied by bolsheivik jews in russia, the fallen allies and so on yet it's only one group that is allowed to claim supreme victim status.... funny that.
Oh dear you have a sophomoric understanding, they invaded poland as a response to poles slaughtering germans in the region something that is documented yet hardly ever talked about aside from that this idea that Hitler wanted domination or had interests outside of Germany is baloney without a single shred of evidence.
...
Yes it is. History is about trying to lay facts as precisely as possible given the sources we have, and crossing them to establish an as objective as possible perception of what happened. And of course, the closer the events, the more sources at our disposal we have.
Saying that the genocide is a hoax is a much as conspiracy theory than air trails
>there is not a single legitimate document that points to gas chamber killings at auswitz
That's wrong.
>david Irving
Ok lol
>the genocide also includes the germans in dresden
Kek no. It can qualify as a war crime, but surely not as a genocide, learn what a word means before saying bullshit
>le bolsheivik jews
Not a clear political vision at all, we have here
>it's only one group that is allowed to claim supreme victim status
Jews simply managed to secure and monopolize post war sympathy and reparations in order to create Israel. Now you can critisize that, but you don't need to deny facts to do s
Can you back these up with sources? I'm not being aggressive in just asking for proof. And what about Czechoslovakia? And Hitler saying he won't invade Poland and then does? Or what about him invading his ally, Soviet Russia? Most of these don't paint Hitler in a good light.
>one city bombed
>genocide
>>there is not a single legitimate document that points to gas chamber killings at auswitz
>That's wrong.
I can fucking assure you it isn't but go on present a bunch of hilarious "evidence". The fact you laugh at irving is precisely why i'm not going to bother with you. You don't do any investigation beyond appealto authority and laziness. To quote Christopher fucking hitchens "david irving is one of the 3 most important historians to exist in regards to the third reich" You don't have a clue how much REAL investigation and discovery in actual archives that guy has done including proving the hitler diary was a fake. You've been tainted by big business propaganda and will never investigate yourself to see otherwise, you'll listen endless to academic "historians" who hilariously use irvings archives whilst shitting on him in public for political and career preservation reasons.
>learn what a word means before saying bullshit
See pic, 100,000 innocent germans died that night you fucking kike.
>Jews simply managed to secure and monopolize post war sympathy and reparations in order to create Israel.
HAHAHAHAH you mean the israel that the UK gave to them? and you mean the propaganda and lies about the atrocities with numbers changing REGULARLY, first it was 1.2 mill then it was 2 then 4 and now 6 million! but you'll just have to trust us because we have made ALL INVESTIGATION ILLEGAL. Get the fuck out of here. Btw why don't we talk about the HAAVARA AGREEMENT? You know when hitler tried to repatriate jews to israel in 1933 and worked WITH the zionists but was blocked by the allies who wanted to go to war.
en.wikipedia.org
100k people in the most vile campaign with intent to kill everyone in the region is a genocide.
>Can you back these up with sources?
Of course but there's a fucking ton so really do your own research and that's not as cop out I can just only type so much.
It was poorly worded but I don't think they meant to imply he secretly hated children and dogs, just that they made a point of showing those things as part of their propaganda.
IMO that first episode does a good job of balancing the cold realities of Hitler's rise to power with empathy towards the German people for accepting him; which is to say it's not judgmental towards Germany but doesn't gloss over the realities of establishing a totalitarian state.
>do your own research
The burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim though. Again, I'm not trying to be antagonistic but if it happened like you said it shouldn't be too hard to find a source.
Just to throw it in and feel free to fact check this guys, the auswitz you see today was "reconstructed" in 1948 after the war as the soviets flattened it. Its now mentioned on a plaque outside the camp after pressure from the polish authorities who discovered this fact in the archives.
And heres something to read to cwporter.com
bare in mind fred leuchter was discredited because he wasnt a registered "engineer"? firstly ask yourself how hard it is to take a few samples and secondly that the body whom tested them are a highly credited science department, they found no traces of scienide.
>he burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim though.
jrbooksonline.com
>Saying that the genocide is a hoax is a much as conspiracy theory than air trails
Most people who question it don't say it's a flat-out hoax, just that the events have been exaggerated over the years -- such as how many people died.
This is always an issue with the subject and the nefarious wording of holocaust "denial" because it invokes the idea that someone DENIES it outright when merely questioning the evidence provided.
Thank you
>That's an entire different debate, that has nothing to do with the veracity of the event itself, it's just a political choice.
Right, because one of the issues in the prior posts is agenda. Censoring questioning via prison time is an enforcement of agenda.
>The problem with you Sup Forumstards is that you place everything in the scope of ideology and politics, while history is about laying facts.
Whose facts? Whomever tells history -- or repeats the telling of history -- can impart their own agendas within it. It works both fucking ways.
Just because you agree with X, doesn't mean there cannot be an agenda FOR it.
>And as a matter of fact, the genocide happened
And the question: to what extent did it really happen?
The numbers aren't consistent throughout history and people ask such things; it's not DENYING the event wholly.
>100k people in the most vile campaign with intent to kill everyone in the region is a genocide.
It was actually 100 trillion you stupid untermensch
>According to Richard J. Evans, an expert witness for the defence at the 2000 libel trial of Deborah Lipstadt,[9] Irving based his estimates of the dead at Dresden on the word of one individual, Hans Voigt, who provided no supporting documentation,[10] used forged documents,[11] and described one witness named Max Funfack as Dresden's Deputy Chief Medical Officer.[12] Funfack had made it clear by letter to Irving on 19 January 1965 that he had not been either the Chief or Deputy Chief Medical Officer in Dresden, that he had no knowledge of any documentation about the number of people who were killed in the bombing, and during the war he had only heard rumours, which varied greatly, over the number of people who were killed in the raids.[12][13]
>100,000 innocent germans died that night you fucking kike.
Number doesn't make a genocide you retard. It's the programmed and deliberate elimination of a particular group for ethnical, political or religious reasons. Dresden was a war crime.
>the israel that the UK gave to them?
It's a bit more complicated than that, user. It didn't go exactly as expected for the UK
>first it was 1.2 mill then it was 2 then 4 and now 6 million
More like 5.5 million, actually
>we have made ALL INVESTIGATION ILLEGAL
Kek no
>Get the fuck out of here
No
>You know when hitler tried to repatriate jews to israel in 1933
Yeah I know about that. It only proves that the nazis were first in a logic of deportation, which they also tried through encouraged migration before the war, but then they adopted extermination.
Dude the denial, whether complete or not, is almost always caused by persons with certain political views and agendas. That's the first thing.
The second thing is that those questioning the evidences have never managed to dismiss them.
>The numbers aren't consistent throughout history
Wow it's almost like history is moving field or something, and that sources and discoveries change the results and the pieces of information we had. Really tilts my almonds, user
Humans are complex creatures and many factors play a role in affecting their actions. Painting one side of this war as an evil villain is not being unbiased, either they are all villains or none. better yet, actually portray real humans and not caricatures. The first episode at least showed that Germany was doing well and made attempts to examine things objectively but as the series went on the allies start to be presented as the "good guys" fighting the "nazi war machine".
Hitler was a retard, and his regime did evil things. Sorry.
Of course now you can say that a lof regimes do evil things, which is true, but Hitler managed to pull some really neat barbarism, in the very heart of Europe, a continent which was supposed to civilize the whole world because we thought it knew better.
Well he proved us wrong, didn't he ?
>jrbooksonline.com
This article literally opens with a fake quote. That's a very good source.
I liked Royal Cousins at War and that one about Plantagenet dynasty. Fuck, most documentaries I've seen in recent years were re-runs because no one makes anything worthwhile.
>On Bromberg Bloody Sunday, thousands of ethnic Germans were slaughtered like pigs in an alley because the majority "poles" (the "slavic", non-Teutonic types, really Turco-Ugaric, Hunnic, Tartar and Mongoloid residue from the old "Dark Age" invasions) knew they could do so with total impunity.
No bias here, nope, the author definitely isn't a neo-Nazi. And you guys wonder why no one takes you seriously.
>because the majority "poles" (the "slavic", non-Teutonic types, really Turco-Ugaric, Hunnic, Tartar and Mongoloid residue from the old "Dark Age" invasions) knew they could do so with total impunity
Holy shit, that's funny as hell
Wait, you mean to tell me there is bias in historical reportings?!
Dude that's literally 1935 Germany tier. Especially retarded when you know that most eatern germans are from slavic ethnicities. The german race is a meme
Well that's the thing, Germany was the aggressor in WW2. It was also a totalitarian regime with a policy of persecuting minorities and political dissenters. These are objective facts which hurt Germany's moral authority, and glossing over them is disingenuous.
Another reason you might have detected bias is when it takes a sympathetic view of the Allies during episodes from the Allied point of view, but the fact is that it tends to take a sympathetic view of whatever side it's examining at the time. When they're talking about the invasion of the Soviet Union from the German perspective it takes a happy tone, the happy German songs are playing, it evokes their high spirits. Later when they're retreating sad music is playing and so on. In the Soviet episode in the same way it takes the Soviet point of view, sympathizing with how they felt at the low point of the war and the building excitement as the tide begins to turn. It's not unbiased in the usual dry academic way, but it''s still balanced and to me it's all the better for taking that approach.
do cars shit?
OP knew what he was doing when he started a thread with that image