OYENTE

Anónimo

  • 4
  • opiniones
  • 2
  • votos útiles
  • 39
  • calificaciones

A good intro into a complex subject

Total
4 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
4 out of 5 stars
Historia
4 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 12-14-20

Good overview or intro of the cold war. many unexpected anecdotes. this is a starting point to help guide those just starting their studies of the cold war.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

great

Total
5 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
5 out of 5 stars
Historia
5 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 12-09-20

a great trip culminating in the last half hour. The presenter identified key truths in the last lecture.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

World History Through the Lens of Economics

Total
4 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
3 out of 5 stars
Historia
4 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 11-09-20

Great introduction to modern world history through the lens of economics. It is jumbled and there are a few fluff lectures that seem to lack coherence to their inclusion. Also, he gets a few points wrong or does not explain his interpretation which contradicts the normal narrative. For example, he doesn't appear to know why the Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers. The reason was the Berlin-Baghdad Railway which attempted to bypass British controlled Suez Canal and break British monopoly on shipping goods cheaply from Asia. Most of the wrong points were minor through an economic lens.

I don't believe the Harreld was biased in presenting Keynes, Soviet Union, or China. He stated prevailing thoughts and motivations. I agree that he excessively loops through post-WWII history. Still, it didn't feel too redundant. I also agree there should have been more Economics either as cause or effect.

For an intro course, good stuff.

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Clark's stumbles to a rambling ending

Total
2 out of 5 stars
Ejecución
3 out of 5 stars
Historia
2 out of 5 stars

Revisado: 11-14-19

Clark mischaracterized key personalities and events in American military history. He emphatically claims "No more Vietnams", which he lived through. Yet, he appears to have failed to compare and contrast why Afghanistan and Iraq were likened to Vietnam. He earned the second star due to personal insights on the Balkan wars and follow on peace keeping operations despite failing to mention the restrictive Rules of Engagement. Lastly, little in first 23 lectures prepared or linked to the 24th lecture. While of the closing points are valid, he undercuts himself about the political nature of war..

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_webcro805_stickypopup