|
AceOfFlames posted:This alone means it's bad. Yeah, Parcast shows are… not good. I made it through a whole 6 or 7 episodes of their podcast about cults. If you’ve ever wondered what it would be like to listen to the “actors” from your work’s lovely discount annual sexual harassment training videos do a podcast with just as much enthusiasm, Parcast has got your back.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Parcast looked at iHeartRadio and asked, "How can we make this more corporate, with less of that messy personality stuff getting in the way?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:Spotify just recommended me a podcast series called Dictators, has anyone here listened to it yet? Below is a synopsis This sounds bad and I don't even know about parcast. Mike Duncan on revolutions is like the cream of the history podcasting experience. You should shop around a little to avoid quite so much of a letdown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 03:40
|
|
|
I would highly recommend Very Presidential (with Ashley Flowers) from Parcast; it's an excellent mini series about why various historical US presidents were garbage (it's sympathetic to one; I think Ford?). Every other Parcast podcast I've listened to has been robotic and monotonous, but I don't think I've tried any other Parcast podcasts since then so maybe they've gotten better?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 07:14
|
|
|
twerking on the railroad posted:This sounds bad and I don't even know about parcast. Mike Duncan on revolutions is like the cream of the history podcasting experience. You should shop around a little to avoid quite so much of a letdown. Yea I’m going to avoid it. What a shame, the topics they cover do look interesting. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:What a shame, the topics they cover do look interesting. That’s the thing about Parcast: they are essentially a bunch of former radio guys who got together to start pumping out shows (their target was 40 shows in one year. Not episodes, shows) based on what’s popular, with purely descriptive titles like Dictators, Con Artists, Serial Killers, etc. quote:PBJ: How do you come up with an idea for a new show? I do kind of agree with the dude when he complains about there being so many popular podcasts where the hosts just read Wikipedia articles (and a lot of them outright admit it on air) and there is definitely space for highly researched stuff but their drat hosts just sound like they were grown in a lab to create Local TV Morning News Host Organisms. I’d rather have the Wikipedia readings if they are done by charismatic and friendly hosts who are clearly good friends and have nice chemistry as opposed to news bots. Spotify acquired Parcast for over $50 million, so that dude definitely laughing all the way to the bank. AceOfFlames fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Jul 29, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:I do kind of agree with the dude when he complains about there being so many popular podcasts where the hosts just read Wikipedia articles (and a lot of them outright admit it on air) and there is definitely space for highly researched stuff but their drat hosts just sound like they were grown in a lab to create Local TV Morning News Host Organisms. I’d rather have the Wikipedia readings if they are done by charismatic and friendly hosts who are clearly good friends and have nice chemistry as opposed to news bots. Now you're making me wonder why there is no podcast that is dramatic readings and riffing on Wikipedia articles talk pages. You'd think that would be a goldmine of crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:43
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend a good podcast on early European colonization of the Americas and native resistance? Something on the Latin American independence movements of the 19th century would be great too!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:45
|
|
|
PerilPastry posted:Can anyone recommend a good podcast on early European colonization of the Americas and native resistance? Something on the Latin American independence movements of the 19th century would be great too! Mike Duncan's Revolutions has like a jillion episodes over three series on Spanish South America, Mexico, and Haiti.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:Now you're making me wonder why there is no podcast that is dramatic readings and riffing on Wikipedia articles talk pages. You'd think that would be a goldmine of crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:The Dollop is basically this. The Dollop tells history stories, they don't go into Wikipedia talk pages. The F Plus may have at some point though, it's the sort of thing they do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 03:36
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:The Dollop tells history stories, they don't go into Wikipedia talk pages. The F Plus may have at some point though, it's the sort of thing they do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 04:08
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:Spotify just recommended me a podcast series called Dictators, has anyone here listened to it yet? Below is a synopsis I had a friend recommend this to me and I checked out their Castro episode. They had a male and female switching off literally every other sentence and it sounded like they were reading a high school history report. Would not recommend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
a_gelatinous_cube posted:I had a friend recommend this to me and I checked out their Castro episode. They had a male and female switching off literally every other sentence and it sounded like they were reading a high school history report. Would not recommend. I have never heard anything less natural-sounding than a parcast trying to have banter between the hosts. Avoid parcast podcasts at all costs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 14:21
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:I have never heard anything less natural-sounding than a parcast trying to have banter between the hosts. Avoid parcast podcasts at all costs. I didn't think it would ever be possible to surpass Radiolab yet here we are!
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
If you're interested in Castro, just listen to the new season of Blowback. I was listening to last week's episode (on the training of the Bay of Pigs mercenaries) and my girlfriend, who normally just tunes out podcasts, was getting really into it as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 15:09
|
|
|
Listening to the latest episode of Revolutions, I think pointing out Nicholas' hypocrisy in saying how the Dumas would choose ministers incapable of doing their job is the first time I've heard Mike raising his voice or sounding genuinly angry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 16:17
|
|
|
Oh yeah, Duncan is totally done making any kind of contextual excuses for the Tsar at this point and it’s glorious how much contempt he has for him now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 17:39
|
|
|
Karanas posted:Listening to the latest episode of Revolutions, I think pointing out Nicholas' hypocrisy in saying how the Dumas would choose ministers incapable of doing their job is the first time I've heard Mike raising his voice or sounding genuinly angry. https://mobile.twitter.com/mikeduncan/status/1421975713238953984
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 19:18
|
|
|
Thwomp posted:Oh yeah, Duncan is totally done making any kind of contextual excuses for the Tsar at this point and it’s glorious how much contempt he has for him now. I think Dan Carlin is good for what he does (or used to do) and people can say things I disagree with, and I might reconsider my views. But when he described the Tsar as a good man who loved his family and just wanted the best for his country? My eyes just about rolled out back out of my head. There's a great book called "The Russian Revolution: A People's Tragedy" and it makes obvious at excruciating length that the country was a powder keg and the Tsar just handwaved it all away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
Yeah Mike has been really funny this season. With basically every other monarch he's covered you can tell he can sort of understands why they made the mistakes they made and he has a bit of sympathy for them. But with Nicholas you really feel the contempt he has for this stupid arrogant racist rear end in a top hat who thinks he literally doesn't have to bother trying to do anything because God will provide. Nicholas is so terrible at being a king and avoiding a revolution that he makes Louis XVI seem competent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 22:58
|
|
|
It's hard to imagine a couple less up to the challenge of governing a country than Nicholas and Alexandra. I'm only going off of Duncan's account of events, but it's genuinely mind boggling how poor a job they did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
The one (not counter point but something like a point) thing you can say about Nicholas II was he did genuinely care about his family. If he had an ounce of that care come naturally to running the country, he might’ve staved off revolution like his fathers did. But he didn’t and so his entire actual reason for living were (likely) executed in front of him. It’s tragic and savage and frustrating all at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
No, I get it. Nicholas isn't some sort of monster or evil plotter or a villian. He's just fundamentally wrongheaded, oblivious to the the world around him, operating on a model that doesn't hold.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:Yeah Mike has been really funny this season. With basically every other monarch he's covered you can tell he can sort of understands why they made the mistakes they made and he has a bit of sympathy for them. But with Nicholas you really feel the contempt he has for this stupid arrogant racist rear end in a top hat who thinks he literally doesn't have to bother trying to do anything because God will provide. Nicholas is so terrible at being a king and avoiding a revolution that he makes Louis XVI seem competent. The revolutions podcast makes pretty clear that as far as these things go, Louis XVI was relatively competent. When the competition is guys like Ferdinand I of Austria, you don't have much of a bar to clear.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 07:42
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:But with Nicholas you really feel the contempt he has for this stupid arrogant racist rear end in a top hat who thinks he literally doesn't have to bother trying to do anything because God will provide. It's even worse than that: Nicholas genuinely believed he was divinely appointed, placed on Earth in his role of Tsar by God in order to enact His will. His thinking wasn't just "I don't have to make any concessions because God will save me", it was "I can't make any concessions because doing so would be a betrayal of God's divine plan for myself and the people of Russia."
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 08:13
|
|
|
I do love how he's become more and more radicalized.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 08:34
|
|
|
Is he going to get into the Russian Civil War/formation of the USSR? Has he said where he plans to stop?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 14:13
|
|
|
Sydin posted:It's even worse than that: Nicholas genuinely believed he was divinely appointed, placed on Earth in his role of Tsar by God in order to enact His will. His thinking wasn't just "I don't have to make any concessions because God will save me", it was "I can't make any concessions because doing so would be a betrayal of God's divine plan for myself and the people of Russia." Yeah the dude is a walking Catch 22. He genuinely held good intentions, but was woefully and completely misinformed about the Empire he was supposed to be running, and his belief in his divine favor prevent him from resolving any of its problems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 16:45
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
What exactly do people in this thread think Nicholas's 'good intentions' were? As far as I can tell his entire motivation was "God told everyone I was in charge so now its a sin to not like and respect me". He was a spoiled brat in the body of an adult man who couldn't stand to not get his way and unleashed proto-fascist militias and loyal military units on his own people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
What it really comes down to imo is that Nicholas wasn't a particularly cruel, malicious, or corrupt monarch, as so many have been throughout history. But he was so stupid and thick-headed that there was functionally no difference in the end result - his people suffered, and suffered so badly that they would risk anything rather than remain under his reign.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:What exactly do people in this thread think Nicholas's 'good intentions' were? As far as I can tell his entire motivation was "God told everyone I was in charge so now its a sin to not like and respect me". He was a spoiled brat in the body of an adult man who couldn't stand to not get his way and unleashed proto-fascist militias and loyal military units on his own people. I mean, I think it's safe to say that Nicholas didn't really harbor ill-will towards the majority of his subjects and from his perspective genuinely tried his best to lead and guide Russia. You see this even from the very beginning where he tried to take a very active hand in the day-to-day minutia of government. The problem was that he just wasn't particularly bright or well suited to ruling, but was also stubborn as a mule in regards to using and maintaining his absolute rule. So the more he tried to more he mucked things up, which caused more people to call for him to delegate or cede power, which caused him to double down on not giving an inch. It also didn't help that he and his wife were largely surrounded by sycophants who continuously whispered in their ears that the majority of Russia's citizens actually loved and adored them, and it was just this minority rabble that wanted to lead the country astray that hated them. I definitely see it all as a "road to hell paved with good intentions" scenario, albeit acknowledging that the one paving the road is as dumb as the bricks he's laying. The whole thing definitely gets to a point though where there was just no excuse remaining for Nicholas to refuse to acknowledge his situation - even taking his upbringing, beliefs, and circumstances into account.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
I feel like a lot of the last few episodes were about Nicholas steadily going forward towards his doom because he already made all the decisions that would point him in that direction like a decade beforehand and so all the "possible ways to turn back" he already turned away from long ago. He pledged himself against constitutional government or letting the people make government decisions, he loves his wife and trusts her weird spooky wizard friend, so he's not going to countermand them. It's just kind of him steadily cruising to his demise, which is still kinda sad even though it's all his fault.twerking on the railroad posted:The revolutions podcast makes pretty clear that as far as these things go, Louis XVI was relatively competent. When the competition is guys like Ferdinand I of Austria, you don't have much of a bar to clear. Not the least competent guy, his big problem seemed to have been being weirdly indecisive, but with how chaotic things got, I wonder how much he really could've handled things as they spiraled out of control.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
I think the general message is people often think it's evil rulers who bring about revolution but a way more common cause is massive incompetence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 20:23
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I think the general message is people often think it's evil rulers who bring about revolution but a way more common cause is massive incompetence. Yeah, my opinion is that it takes a hell of a lot to convince people to throw themselves in front of guns which you need for revolution and as such, in just about every case, they could've diffused the situation by just loosening the screws in a few places before the whole machine snapped under tension.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Yeah, my opinion is that it takes a hell of a lot to convince people to throw themselves in front of guns which you need for revolution and as such, in just about every case, they could've diffused the situation by just loosening the screws in a few places before the whole machine snapped under tension. A lot of revolutions actually come when bottled up tensions boil over after a regime loosens up a bit and emboldens the people who see it as weakness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:Yeah Mike has been really funny this season. With basically every other monarch he's covered you can tell he can sort of understands why they made the mistakes they made and he has a bit of sympathy for them. But with Nicholas you really feel the contempt he has for this stupid arrogant racist rear end in a top hat who thinks he literally doesn't have to bother trying to do anything because God will provide. Nicholas is so terrible at being a king and avoiding a revolution that he makes Louis XVI seem competent. Yeah, even louis 16 accepted the need to delegate stuff and listen to his ministers. The various guys Louis appointed to run the treasury may have failed utterly to solve the problem and made the situation worse, but they at least were very skilled in finance. Nicholas thought that 'autocracy' meant having to personally approve every minute decision and never ever delegating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
Nicky is a prime lesson of how power can make what would otherwise be a normal (and flawed) person act on a world in such a way that leads to the death and suffering of millions. There are people like Nicholas in everyone's lives -- racist, not very clever or imaginative, their view of the world colored for life by some bullshit they were raised to believe, but also totally capable of love and acts of selflessness. That's what is truly scary about power. You don't have to be a monster, but concentrate enough resources into few enough people and they will do monstrous things. Take a weird uncle from your family or kid in class from your elementary school, tell them their entire life that they're divinely appointed and have absolute power over 90 million people, and they too will destroy countless lives just as happenstance to wielding that kind of power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 00:59
|
|
|
Appoda posted:That's what is truly scary about power. You don't have to be a monster, but concentrate enough resources into few enough people and they will do monstrous things. Take a weird uncle from your family or kid in class from your elementary school, tell them their entire life that they're divinely appointed and have absolute power over 90 million people, and they too will destroy countless lives just as happenstance to wielding that kind of power. Were there any monarchies in history that survived with a generally happy population? Or does a happy and efficient monarchy just switch into a democracy?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
buglord posted:Were there any monarchies in history that survived with a generally happy population? Or does a happy and efficient monarchy just switch into a democracy? The Romans come to mind. There really weren't very many popular revolts, most strife was from the ruling class or invasion. The Romans weren't a centralized monarchy though, even a thousand years after Augustus there were still some democratic institutions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 01:18
|
|