183. History's Biggest Questions with Dan Carlin (Part 1)

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode is a wide-ranging conversation with Dan Carlin about how historians should think through huge counterfactuals and “big questions.” The hosts and Carlin debate siege warfare, the most consequential 20th-century leader, the value of lost ancient biographies, the Confederate States’ possible survival, and the moral and strategic legacy of atomic weapons, repeatedly stressing contingency, luck, and the outsized role of a few pivotal decisions.

Main Topics: Siege warfare and the “least bad” besieger (Priority: 5/5): The conversation opens with a playful but serious comparison of Assyrians, Romans, and Mongols as besiegers. Carlin argues the Mongols are least likely to take a city in some circumstances, while the hosts debate surrender, leadership status, and whether death, slavery, or exile would be the likely outcome. The most consequential leader of the 20th century (Priority: 5/5): Carlin identifies Kaiser Wilhelm II as the key figure because the decision to invade Belgium helped trigger World War I, which in turn shaped Bolshevism, Hitler, Stalin, the Cold War, and the decline of the British Empire. The discussion expands into broader counterfactuals about Britain, the United States, Russia, and China. Counterfactual history and structural inevitability (Priority: 5/5): The speakers repeatedly test whether history turns on individuals or on larger forces. They weigh whether war, empire, industrialization, and nationalism would have produced similar outcomes even without specific leaders, while acknowledging that some decisions—like Britain entering WWI or Lenin returning to Russia—were decisive. Lost ancient biographies and historical evidence (Priority: 4/5): A question about which empire should have left Suetonius-style biographies leads to a discussion of Egypt, Persia, and Carthage. The group argues that Persian and Egyptian court cultures suppressed personal detail, while Carthage’s library was destroyed, making these civilizations harder to know intimately than Greece and Rome. The Confederate States and American fragmentation (Priority: 5/5): The hosts and Carlin explore whether the Confederacy could have survived if the Civil War had ended differently. Carlin says yes, at least for a time, though slavery would likely have ended eventually; the discussion broadens into modern U.S. polarization, Reconstruction, and regional fracture. Atomic weapons, Truman, and moral choice (Priority: 5/5): The conversation turns to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the firebombing of Tokyo, and whether Truman’s decision was the least-worst option. Carlin emphasizes the institutional pressures, the scale of wartime killing already underway, and the deterrent effect of nuclear horror on later crises.

Key Arguments: Kaiser Wilhelm II is the most consequential 20th-century leader because the invasion of Belgium helped trigger World War I, which cascaded into revolution, fascism, the Cold War, and imperial decline. Counterfactuals matter because many major outcomes were not inevitable; small decisions by leaders, generals, and statesmen can redirect entire centuries. The Mongols are the least undesirable besiegers only in some scenarios because their siege capability was less consistent than that of the Assyrians or Romans, though surrender could sometimes improve survival odds. Persian and Egyptian civilizations would be the most valuable sources of lost biographies because they likely preserved broader archival knowledge and richer internal perspectives than Carthage. The Confederacy could have survived as a political entity if it had not been decisively defeated, but slavery would probably still have ended eventually due to long-term economic and political pressures. The atomic bombings must be judged against the broader context of firebombing, blockade, and invasion; Truman faced terrible options rather than a clean moral choice. The use of atomic bombs may have created a lasting taboo that reduced the likelihood of nuclear use in later crises such as Berlin or Cuba. Lenin’s return to Russia was a pivotal act of political “contagion,” and without him the Russian Revolution might have taken a different, possibly less radical, path.

Data Points: Hardcore History launch year: 2006 - Carlin says he started the history podcast in 2006 after a current-events show began in 2005. Current-events podcast launch year: 2005 - Carlin notes his company’s current-events podcast started in 2005. First Hardcore History episode length: 16 minutes - Carlin says the first episode they ever did was only 16 minutes long. Typical Hardcore History episode length: more than 5 hours - The hosts describe Carlin’s episodes as sometimes exceeding five hours each. Plutarch’s estimate of Caesar’s conquest: 1 million killed and 1 million enslaved - Discussing Caesar in Gaul, the transcript cites Plutarch’s claim, while noting it is probably exaggerated. World War I start year: 1914 - The discussion centers on the invasion of Belgium and the outbreak of WWI. Russian Revolution year: 1917 - The conversation links Lenin’s return and wartime collapse to the revolution. Civil War years: 1861-65 - The Confederacy discussion references the American Civil War period. Atomic bomb target cities: Hiroshima and Nagasaki - The final section debates the morality and strategic logic of the bombings. Reconstruction-related date: 1965 - The hosts mention segregation lasting until 1965 as part of the long legacy of the Civil War and Reconstruction.

Pivotal Quotes: "I think starting... I’m going to blame it on the emperor of Wilhelm in Germany." — Dan Carlin: Carlin identifies Kaiser Wilhelm II as the most consequential 20th-century leader. "I think the Mongols, because I think they have the least good chance of getting into the city." — Dan Carlin: His answer to which besiegers one would least like to face, assuming he is the city’s leader. "What if the Germans aren't in the war, do you send Lenin back?" — Dan Carlin: Carlin asks whether Lenin’s return to Russia depended on the broader wartime context and German strategy.

Implications: The episode argues that history is shaped by a mix of structure and contingency, with a few decisions and personalities producing enormous downstream effects. For listeners, it highlights how counterfactual thinking can sharpen understanding of empire, war, and modern geopolitics.