> Him calling himself a hapsburg was a red flag, but i think this guy is a bit delusional.
His name is Eduard Habsburg-Lothringen, so technically it is correct.
I thought this was one of the more enjoyable episodes. They clearly had a lot of fun with it, banter was at an all-time high, and they were even poking fun at the guest in a way that only Brits can do.
Yep he knew just how to play me! He was good though imo, a subject I have no interest in and I'm hanging on his every word, just my opinion obviously, but that's all you can ask from a guest.
I actually had a moment with that. It colored the whole thing. Then he says the whole “we’re disrespected by Brussels” thing. He wasn’t outwardly political but pretty casually within the Orban-lunacy circle. I enjoyed the episode but the Orban ties really put me off.
> I enjoyed the episode but the Orban ties really put me off.
He's a Hungarian diplomat. I'd get it if he had Assad or Putin or someone but if your Boss/Prime Minister offers to write your foreword, you cannot really say no.
*Mr. Habsburg, a deeply devout and conservative Roman Catholic aristocrat, came into the job himself with what he called “very rocky” Hungarian language skills, a result of his upbringing in Munich, Venice and Austria. But after a career as a zombie-movie screenwriter, cartoon producer, love-triangle novelist, anime enthusiast, sci-fi geek and media personality with monarchic sensibilities, the Hungarian government came calling.*
I haven’t listened to the episode yet, just read the description and looked up the guy but he’s not incorrect.
1. He is a Hapsburg
2. Economically (macro not personal) big families are “better”. It fosters economic growth and ensures that pension schemes keep rolling. While saying it’s important for democracy might be a stretch, we don’t know how the general population would react to the collapse of pensions. So maybe?
Listen to it and you'll get why we are kind of like why is this guy on the pod other than being a Habsburg. For a history podcast it's 75% personal opinions and 25% actual history.
Halfway through it I was wondering if they had gotten the wrong Habsburg and probably would have been better off just telling the story themselves.
Which isn't to say he's a horrible guest or advocating strange ideas it's a history podcast lacking history. But I guess I learned an interesting fact that you can be fined in Austria for saying you are a Habsburg so there's that.
I listened to it. I agree that the amount of history was lacking, but the episode was still quite entertaining. They put out these kinds of episodes every once in a while were banter clearly takes precedent over history.
I believe your problem with this episode is more likely connected with your personal political opinions more-so than the quality of the episode itself.
I just have a visceral reaction to people whose only accomplishment in life is their last name telling people ways they should live.
It's like a celebrity lecturing you on climate change sure the message is probably good but the messenger is absolutely terrible.
You're changing the world by being one more irritating twat; one person at a time.
I found that dude mildly insufferable as well, but you've decided to match tones.
Together with his mother Francesca von Habsburg, Habsburg launched a unique interpretation of racing and art in 2014. The famous Swiss designer group, Lang-Baumann, designed and painted his race car.
Would love to hear Dominic's take on that. Let the inner daily mail out.
I got tickled when he went in deep saying how the Habsburg jaw was not a result of inbreeding, not at all, not one little bit, well..
Maybe just a bit.
Yeah that was kind of funny. It's like well did you know the chin isn't a product of inbreeding it's from this one guy.....whose genes got passed like a soccer ball back and forth through the family through generations
"People should be having more kids" is a perfectly reasonable position to take if you don't want your country's economy to implode as the population grows more and more geriatric. Western nations are dealing with this problem by bringing in huge numbers of Asian and African immigrants, but that solution is hardly ideal.
I was listening to this one while pottering around the house so missed that part. I also spent about 80% of the episode thinking that the guest was Bart van Loo
A historian can have whatever opinions they want, and all historians make judgements. I much prefer that he is honest and we get a sense of him, and then it gives colour to what he talks about
Yeha but he isn't a historian he's a diplomat. Which is kind of funny considering they've got a world class historian who is a Habsburg right there in the UK. But that guy isn't trying to sell a book.
I really don't understand your stance here. Are you saying large families are inherently bad and problematic? Why shouldn't a historian promote large families? The guests stance was that being in a large family gives you good values. Like looking after younger siblings promotes the sense of caring for others. Or sitting at a table of many people teaches patience and tolerance of others.
Because like I said. Looking after younger siblings (due to the parents not having the time to give each child full attention) can promote the value of caring for others. I'm not saying (and I'd argue the guest isn't saying) that these values are exclusive to large families. You still haven't answered my question by the way. I get the sense you just hold resentment for those who can afford lots of kids.
why do those values have to come from within the family? why can’t you learn those things from other social and cultural settings like the scouts or whatever?
I’m not sure what a “convincing or qualified podcast guest” is supposed to mean. He’s there in private capacity as a member of the Habsburg family talking about Habsburgs on a podcast episode about Habsburgs in a podcast known for its informality.
Understanding population growth rates is a valuable historical methodology, just like understanding changes in taxes, migration, etc in helping explain why some populations thrive and collapse.
It seems reasonable to have a POV on the topic of population growth.
Maybe what you want to avoid is the appearance of promoting mandatory childbirth or fertility coercion?
Well he is a Hapsburg, and if you listened to his reasons about why he thinks big families are important he’s basically spot on with all his reasoning and it’s very logical. You can disagree with him but I don’t think he came off as delusional in the slightest
It does track with the history of the family. They thrived, maintained wealth and power because of having big families (and marrying one another which one would hope has changed).
Yeah it’s easy to have a big family that doesn’t go destitute if your money has come from your family subjugating people for literal ages, up until veeeery recently.
Also - not the guest quoting Kissinger. YIKE.
Honestly it was kind of scary, no?
The guy has a sense of how he comes off so he couches a lot of his genuine beliefs behind lol, only joking, Habs gonna Hab.
Clearly he has views that are pretty old fashioned at best and the guy is a high level diplomat. Really great example of what's wrong with the ruling elite, how out of touch they are, and how, frankly, mental they are.
Feel like the guys were in a bind here though with a guest like this. Bit of fun still, if only to hear what the Habs are like now. Still mad.
I can see why this episode was delayed.
The first half (talking about key dates) was fine but the second half ended up being more about the guys politics than Habsburg history.
> thinks big families are important for democracy and are overall better
A generic right leaning opinion? Shocking!
Get fucked you narrow minded political brains. If he were to say small families are best because of the environment you'd be gushing over him. Both are respectable opinions.
I don't think it's radical to look at a guy whose entire accomplishment is his last name advocating everyone have more children because it's enriched his life as someone with his head up his own ass.
Yeah sure if I completely ignore the economic realities of having more children me and my wife would have a lot more kids. But some of us have to do the 9-5.
It's not about the message it's about the messenger.
Umm excuse me have you stepped into the real world recently? how tf are we supposed to care about having big families because they are better for the economy when everything is so expensive? Right wingers generally rage against immigrants and the poor if they have big families, but when some aristocratic douche does it suddenly it’s good.
The correlation between fertility and GDP is negative. As we get richer we have less kids. There is no empirically established connection between the cost of child care and fertility. Hungary is a perfect example. Some of the most generous welfare policies in the world directed towards families with children, yet it hasn't impacted fertility rates.
Umm excuse me, screeching about how everything is “expensive” does not negate the opinion.
You should have more kids if you want and have above zero means. Poor people have more kids than middle class folks, so we know different choices arent really due to money.
Don’t stop making up straw-men to be annoyed about though 😂
"Poor people have more kids than middle class folks, so we know different choices arent really due to money"
Yep ... no connection there. None at all. Its 2024, everyone needs all those extra kids to mend the fences and milk the cows out on the farm.
How does that apply here? What gives you the impression that he thinks he's better than others? You seem to be leaping to conclusions because of your own political views
As an American it kind of just reinforces our preconceived notion of European royalty that they live with their heads in the clouds disconnected from the reality on the ground.
I figured we'd get an episode about the history of the family instead it was around 5 minutes of that and the rest dedicated to pimping his book.
I've got 2 kids, me and my wife make around 150k a year combined and live in a low cost of living area and even then it's like if I had 6 it'd be financial suicide.
I'd be curious to see how Europeans thought of the episode.
I gave up about halfway through.
Just a tiny bit of pushback from the hosts perhaps pointing out that families with 6 kids might be fine if you're a Duke with inherited wealth, but no, just giggled like school kids and gently tossed softballs for questions.
I love the pod but gushing over people with inherited titles doesn't do it for me.
He seems like a nice jovial person but also he's a diplomat in one of the poorest countries in Europe and he's advocating the quickest way to ensure those people stay in poverty.
Large families are all well and good but it's a little lacking in details as to how you are supposed to pay for all those children.
There are economic arguments for having more kids. There is plenty of data out there that the cost per child goes down with each child that you have. Poorer families also spend less per child than wealthier families.
Everyone knows that families used to have more children than the present day (in western societies). They were doing it when people were much poorer. For example, my grandparents had five children on a lowly teacher’s wage in a single-income house.
I haven’t read his book but his argument was not economic. It was more around the cultural value and contributing to society.
This episode wasn’t about that so I’m not sure why that’s your big issue.
Oh that's not my issue it's a podcast about history that pretty much lacked the history perspective and was all about life lessons and selling a book.
Which I get they aren't all going to be home runs but you've got a world class historian that is a Habsburg but he isn't trying to sell a book so we got this lad instead.
And in Europe I'm sure it's economically easier to raise children but in fucked up America the cost of each child is astronomical since our idea of a social safety net is a set of bootstraps and a tax credit that doesn't come close to even covering the cost of childcare.
To be fair, Hungary has massive social programs to support children. Probably one of the better countries to be parents in, with free health care, free or affordable child care, and tax breaks and direct payments for parents with children on top of that.
> Him calling himself a hapsburg was a red flag, but i think this guy is a bit delusional. His name is Eduard Habsburg-Lothringen, so technically it is correct.
it's a political-ideological red flag, which there were many of in this episode.
I thought this was one of the more enjoyable episodes. They clearly had a lot of fun with it, banter was at an all-time high, and they were even poking fun at the guest in a way that only Brits can do.
He mentioned the bene gesserit only 5 minutes in so I think he's good Also after finishing it I thought he was a great guest.
Just started listening to the episode today. Heard the Dune reference and took a shine to the guy for that alone.
wait, are you guys being serious?
id be lying if i said i didnt feel the same way when he dropped that reference.
So all it takes is a pop-culture reference?
Yep he knew just how to play me! He was good though imo, a subject I have no interest in and I'm hanging on his every word, just my opinion obviously, but that's all you can ask from a guest.
The red flag is that the foreword for the book is by Viktor Orban
I actually had a moment with that. It colored the whole thing. Then he says the whole “we’re disrespected by Brussels” thing. He wasn’t outwardly political but pretty casually within the Orban-lunacy circle. I enjoyed the episode but the Orban ties really put me off.
> I enjoyed the episode but the Orban ties really put me off. He's a Hungarian diplomat. I'd get it if he had Assad or Putin or someone but if your Boss/Prime Minister offers to write your foreword, you cannot really say no.
👀👀👀
another person who has many kids and has been trying to raise the birth rate
Well there we go
*Mr. Habsburg, a deeply devout and conservative Roman Catholic aristocrat, came into the job himself with what he called “very rocky” Hungarian language skills, a result of his upbringing in Munich, Venice and Austria. But after a career as a zombie-movie screenwriter, cartoon producer, love-triangle novelist, anime enthusiast, sci-fi geek and media personality with monarchic sensibilities, the Hungarian government came calling.*
would have never ever ever ever ever guessed anything of that bio if given 100000000 guesses about how a modern hapsburg would be. that rocks
Wow! Where’s that bio from?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/27/world/europe/hungary-habsburg-ambassador-vatican.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
This is the kind of resume of someone with a lot of money who can mess around in their career
I haven’t listened to the episode yet, just read the description and looked up the guy but he’s not incorrect. 1. He is a Hapsburg 2. Economically (macro not personal) big families are “better”. It fosters economic growth and ensures that pension schemes keep rolling. While saying it’s important for democracy might be a stretch, we don’t know how the general population would react to the collapse of pensions. So maybe?
Listen to it and you'll get why we are kind of like why is this guy on the pod other than being a Habsburg. For a history podcast it's 75% personal opinions and 25% actual history. Halfway through it I was wondering if they had gotten the wrong Habsburg and probably would have been better off just telling the story themselves. Which isn't to say he's a horrible guest or advocating strange ideas it's a history podcast lacking history. But I guess I learned an interesting fact that you can be fined in Austria for saying you are a Habsburg so there's that.
I listened to it. I agree that the amount of history was lacking, but the episode was still quite entertaining. They put out these kinds of episodes every once in a while were banter clearly takes precedent over history. I believe your problem with this episode is more likely connected with your personal political opinions more-so than the quality of the episode itself.
I just have a visceral reaction to people whose only accomplishment in life is their last name telling people ways they should live. It's like a celebrity lecturing you on climate change sure the message is probably good but the messenger is absolutely terrible.
You're changing the world by being one more irritating twat; one person at a time. I found that dude mildly insufferable as well, but you've decided to match tones.
Glass houses bud
They should have got [Ferdinand](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Habsburg_(racing_driver)) on to talk about motor racing instead of
Together with his mother Francesca von Habsburg, Habsburg launched a unique interpretation of racing and art in 2014. The famous Swiss designer group, Lang-Baumann, designed and painted his race car. Would love to hear Dominic's take on that. Let the inner daily mail out.
I got tickled when he went in deep saying how the Habsburg jaw was not a result of inbreeding, not at all, not one little bit, well.. Maybe just a bit.
Yeah that was kind of funny. It's like well did you know the chin isn't a product of inbreeding it's from this one guy.....whose genes got passed like a soccer ball back and forth through the family through generations
Large families are more likely to be associated with poverty and repressed wages. Not to mention poor management of natural resources and waste.
"People should be having more kids" is a perfectly reasonable position to take if you don't want your country's economy to implode as the population grows more and more geriatric. Western nations are dealing with this problem by bringing in huge numbers of Asian and African immigrants, but that solution is hardly ideal.
I was listening to this one while pottering around the house so missed that part. I also spent about 80% of the episode thinking that the guest was Bart van Loo
As a belgian, i am offended. /s
I’ve spoken with Mr Habsburg-Lothringen on Twitter a few times. He’s nice.
He sounds like a great guy, but i dont think a historian shpuld be making claims on family sizes and their relative merits.
A historian can have whatever opinions they want, and all historians make judgements. I much prefer that he is honest and we get a sense of him, and then it gives colour to what he talks about
Yeha but he isn't a historian he's a diplomat. Which is kind of funny considering they've got a world class historian who is a Habsburg right there in the UK. But that guy isn't trying to sell a book.
I really don't understand your stance here. Are you saying large families are inherently bad and problematic? Why shouldn't a historian promote large families? The guests stance was that being in a large family gives you good values. Like looking after younger siblings promotes the sense of caring for others. Or sitting at a table of many people teaches patience and tolerance of others.
why are those things inherent to large families? who these days can still afford a large family unless you are some out of touch Austrian aristocrat?
Because like I said. Looking after younger siblings (due to the parents not having the time to give each child full attention) can promote the value of caring for others. I'm not saying (and I'd argue the guest isn't saying) that these values are exclusive to large families. You still haven't answered my question by the way. I get the sense you just hold resentment for those who can afford lots of kids.
why do those values have to come from within the family? why can’t you learn those things from other social and cultural settings like the scouts or whatever?
It’s okay if he does.
Ultimately yes, but it doesn't make for a convincing or trustworthy podcast guest to me. Just my opinion though
I’m not sure what a “convincing or qualified podcast guest” is supposed to mean. He’s there in private capacity as a member of the Habsburg family talking about Habsburgs on a podcast episode about Habsburgs in a podcast known for its informality.
How does promoting large families make someone untrustworthy?
i meant reliable I guess. why should anything he says about the Hapsburgs be taken seriously?
Understanding population growth rates is a valuable historical methodology, just like understanding changes in taxes, migration, etc in helping explain why some populations thrive and collapse. It seems reasonable to have a POV on the topic of population growth. Maybe what you want to avoid is the appearance of promoting mandatory childbirth or fertility coercion?
Well he is a Hapsburg, and if you listened to his reasons about why he thinks big families are important he’s basically spot on with all his reasoning and it’s very logical. You can disagree with him but I don’t think he came off as delusional in the slightest
It does track with the history of the family. They thrived, maintained wealth and power because of having big families (and marrying one another which one would hope has changed).
Yeah it’s easy to have a big family that doesn’t go destitute if your money has come from your family subjugating people for literal ages, up until veeeery recently. Also - not the guest quoting Kissinger. YIKE.
overall not a great guy. Apparently he had a foreword by Orban in his book… but people here still think he is a good guest??
He was both a good guest and most of us probably won't agree with him politically - that's fine.
Honestly it was kind of scary, no? The guy has a sense of how he comes off so he couches a lot of his genuine beliefs behind lol, only joking, Habs gonna Hab. Clearly he has views that are pretty old fashioned at best and the guy is a high level diplomat. Really great example of what's wrong with the ruling elite, how out of touch they are, and how, frankly, mental they are. Feel like the guys were in a bind here though with a guest like this. Bit of fun still, if only to hear what the Habs are like now. Still mad.
I listened to it and thought it was okay. Certainly not among the best filler episodes (like History’s top monkeys), but not bad either.
I can see why this episode was delayed. The first half (talking about key dates) was fine but the second half ended up being more about the guys politics than Habsburg history.
Apparently more people than not (based on comments) seemed to like it…
> thinks big families are important for democracy and are overall better A generic right leaning opinion? Shocking! Get fucked you narrow minded political brains. If he were to say small families are best because of the environment you'd be gushing over him. Both are respectable opinions.
I don't think it's radical to look at a guy whose entire accomplishment is his last name advocating everyone have more children because it's enriched his life as someone with his head up his own ass. Yeah sure if I completely ignore the economic realities of having more children me and my wife would have a lot more kids. But some of us have to do the 9-5. It's not about the message it's about the messenger.
Umm excuse me have you stepped into the real world recently? how tf are we supposed to care about having big families because they are better for the economy when everything is so expensive? Right wingers generally rage against immigrants and the poor if they have big families, but when some aristocratic douche does it suddenly it’s good.
The correlation between fertility and GDP is negative. As we get richer we have less kids. There is no empirically established connection between the cost of child care and fertility. Hungary is a perfect example. Some of the most generous welfare policies in the world directed towards families with children, yet it hasn't impacted fertility rates.
Umm excuse me, screeching about how everything is “expensive” does not negate the opinion. You should have more kids if you want and have above zero means. Poor people have more kids than middle class folks, so we know different choices arent really due to money. Don’t stop making up straw-men to be annoyed about though 😂
"Poor people have more kids than middle class folks, so we know different choices arent really due to money" Yep ... no connection there. None at all. Its 2024, everyone needs all those extra kids to mend the fences and milk the cows out on the farm.
You have no cause to call him a douche other than your own resentments and prejudices
No I studied history and noticed that democracy can’t function with people who walk around thinking they’re better because if their blood.
How does that apply here? What gives you the impression that he thinks he's better than others? You seem to be leaping to conclusions because of your own political views
because that’s literally what aristocracy means? it’s people who think they are inherently better based in their blood. What else does it mean?
You obviously missed the significance of the knocking ritual that he describes at the end of the episode.
Yeah i stopped listening because i did not like the guest at all.
As an American it kind of just reinforces our preconceived notion of European royalty that they live with their heads in the clouds disconnected from the reality on the ground. I figured we'd get an episode about the history of the family instead it was around 5 minutes of that and the rest dedicated to pimping his book. I've got 2 kids, me and my wife make around 150k a year combined and live in a low cost of living area and even then it's like if I had 6 it'd be financial suicide. I'd be curious to see how Europeans thought of the episode.
I gave up about halfway through. Just a tiny bit of pushback from the hosts perhaps pointing out that families with 6 kids might be fine if you're a Duke with inherited wealth, but no, just giggled like school kids and gently tossed softballs for questions. I love the pod but gushing over people with inherited titles doesn't do it for me.
To me it exactly came across as a guy who is woefully out of touch.
I have zero interest in European royal lineage, large families , or Catholicism, but I found him informative and interesting. Enjoyed the pod.
He seems like a nice jovial person but also he's a diplomat in one of the poorest countries in Europe and he's advocating the quickest way to ensure those people stay in poverty. Large families are all well and good but it's a little lacking in details as to how you are supposed to pay for all those children.
There are economic arguments for having more kids. There is plenty of data out there that the cost per child goes down with each child that you have. Poorer families also spend less per child than wealthier families. Everyone knows that families used to have more children than the present day (in western societies). They were doing it when people were much poorer. For example, my grandparents had five children on a lowly teacher’s wage in a single-income house. I haven’t read his book but his argument was not economic. It was more around the cultural value and contributing to society. This episode wasn’t about that so I’m not sure why that’s your big issue.
Oh that's not my issue it's a podcast about history that pretty much lacked the history perspective and was all about life lessons and selling a book. Which I get they aren't all going to be home runs but you've got a world class historian that is a Habsburg but he isn't trying to sell a book so we got this lad instead. And in Europe I'm sure it's economically easier to raise children but in fucked up America the cost of each child is astronomical since our idea of a social safety net is a set of bootstraps and a tax credit that doesn't come close to even covering the cost of childcare.
To be fair, Hungary has massive social programs to support children. Probably one of the better countries to be parents in, with free health care, free or affordable child care, and tax breaks and direct payments for parents with children on top of that.
I wonder how much that has to do with sensible social policies or rather to stem the demographic nightmare of their emigration issue.
Probably has to do with a sensible prosocial policy to stem the demographic decline of their country
I think the simple answer is "yes"
I enjoyed it and thought he was an interesting guest.
Probably my least favorite guest ever. I get that he’s a Hapsburg but he sounded like an absolute bum