And those who so adore the noble savage and the virtues of such a way of life - so often do not live such a life... So often, such people want everyone else to live such a life, while they keep their luxuries of science and technology such as indoor plumbing, antibiotics, refrigeration, dentistry, etc... For they are the Elites who will rule over the serfs.
@doge fm thank you! At last someone who thinks in colour! We have work to do, but we don't have to throw away our whole history and culture, Molyneux veers on the side of apologist/cheerleader, completely uncalled for, most of the world is clever enough to not need these things to be explained, it's just logic!
@@joeroberts2156 If you think that most of the world is clever enough to not need things explained, surely you would support the dissolution of all forms of formal education. The fact of the matter is that people learn faster from the work of others than by figuring things out on their own.
Lebron Fitzgerald Unlike us. We're really getting somewhere. Elon Musk is guna get us all off this dustbowl in time, isn't he? With his space ships. The Aussies will run back to Europe in a few decades first though. Wait till their water crisis really hits. Along with the rest of the shit
there's a Neil Young song, "Cortez the Killer", where he describes Montezuma's culture..."hate was just a legend, war was never know"; which is known to be false.
Yeah, Same song Neil sings "they offered life in sacrifice so others could go on." It was mass slaughter. Even as a kid when I was more of a Neil Young fan I knew this glorification of the Aztecs was bullshit.
Damn, this feels like some matrix stuff here... These guys addressed a lot of the thoughts I was having.. I lot of what I thought to be compelling arguments just sound so silly once they come out of Louis` mouth.
Not a fair comparison, because Louis CK was doing stand-up, and the things he says have a comedic objective, but Stefan is right to debunk the noble savage myth anyway
@Phuk Yu Not meaningless per se, but I'd take whatever shit a comedian says on stage with a grain of salt, at the very least. They are trying to entertain, with varying degrees of success, arguably, but they are not preaching or teaching anything.
For a so called comedian (mysogynist) to protheletize cant be called comedy.. its staged rhetoric for claps, absent the laughter. In this context, Lou is a pundit, not a comedian.
@@iurk0_streaming His stand-up is pablum though. It is not sharp social criticism as George Carlin's was. He merely iterates a tired script that is utterly witless. He is dull and boring. Are you familiar with wit at all? Are you black, by any chance?
I like both of these guys. On this particular subject, I agree with Molyneux. I get Louie is a comedian and it's not meant to be taken too seriously, but the problem is a lot of people do, it's the extent of their philosophical outlook, and they should at least consider the other side of the argument.
Self hate helps no-one, at the same time honesty in a historical perspective also needs to balance things out. America was remarkably well looked after and cultivated pre-European arrival. It's not exactly like Louis CK says, it's not exactly like Molyneux says big surprise.
Louis took his schtick to the level of performance art. I miss him anyway but it'll never be the same so he's lucky he made a fortune before it all came out.
The only reason why the Native Americans had such a huge a disadvantage is because they did not unite into one nation and instead were split into various tribes. When you have established nations, provinces, and countries, said nation is much more likely to have cities with a high population density. When cities are slowly formed over time, things like disease, plague, and virus are more likely to occur. Over even more time living in cities infested with such things, resistances start to form so diseases become less of an issue. Then when disease resistant people go to a different continent and give disease to vulnerable people, the disease resistant people have already won at that point. European colonists and American forces were still very cruel to Native American societies in the last 500 years or so. We have to ask ourselves though if our views would be any different if we were born in a time when Native American hatred was normal.
That's right. He ironically downplayed the "chopping off the heads thing". Too bad most people in this comment section are too angry and dumb to see this irony.
Ich wollte damit nur implizieren, dass es eine Gegenüberstellung zweier Positionen ist, welche zu sehr von der Rhetorik und Fundierung abweicht. Ich lehne erstere Position der neuen Linken, so nenne ich sie mal, auch entschieden ab und stimme Stefan zu. Ich sehe nur links das Niveau eines Schreiers wie Volker Pispers und rechts die fundierte Arbeit von z.B. dir. Daraus leite ich die Kritik einer Nennung der beiden in einem gegenüber (versus) auch ab.
Doch natürlich, aber ich würde den Titel eindeutiger Benennen. Wie z.B. "Warum Moritz Neumeier unrecht hat." oder "Halbwissen nach neumeierischer Art". Z.B. würde ich mich nicht mit ihm vergleichen. Außer du bekommst mal einen Hang-Out hin ;) Dann bekommst du offiziell meinen Segen.
Another cliché among the American chattering class is that the European discovery of the Western hemisphere was an unmitigated disaster for the native peoples. Columbus Day is now an occasion for mourning and self-flagellation. But, Sowell points out, there were benefits as well as costs. Diseases that ravaged the natives were spread by whites-ruthless conquistador and benevolent missionary alike-but so was the ability to combat all disease. Liquor led to much drunkenness, but European manufactured goods, such as cloth, were superior to the products the Indians could produce themselves, and they gladly traded to get them. There certainly was inexcusable brutality against the Indians, but, given the degree of brutality that had existed among Indians for centuries, establishing the Western idea of the rule of law undoubtedly reduced the prevalence of violence in the long run. - Thomas Sowell
so why did all the first cultures to transition from hunter gatherer to farmer suffer from new diseases and have a reduced life expectancy? don't believe the hype
Philosophically, minorities represent truth whereas majorities tend towards neglect and abuse. Civilization these days has empowered through pc the expungement of truth and extended neglect and abuse to well organized minorities. Arguably then civilization becomes an incubator for tribalism as a fundamental and manageable ideal to acquire power, absolute power.
@@marcpadilla1094 Neither minorities nor majorities represent truth. Truth has no representative. One of the only ways you know you have stumbled on some truth is when you create something which relies on certain assumptions, and then find that it works as expected; then you know some of those assumptions were true.
Ganz so viel von der Methodologie weiß Molyneux dann doch nicht, wenn er von 100%iger Sicherheit in der Wissenschaft spricht. Für einen selbsterklärten Philosophen scheint er sich außerdem ziemlich überhaupt nicht mit dem kritischen Rationalismus auseinandergesetzt zu haben. Ansonsten hat er natürlich recht.
Das Problem ist auch, dass Molyneux zu seiner Zeit als aktiver UA-camr mit einem absolutistischen Wahrheitsanspruch bzgl. seiner Ansichten unterwegs war. Schon allein dieser Aspekt disqualifizierte ihn meines Erachtens als halbwegs ernst zu nehmenden Denker.
Mach mal einen verdammten Kommentar zu deinen Einspielern!!! Kein Mensch ist sich 100% sicher, was deine Position ist oder was du aussagen willst! Ich bin nicht unfähig mir meinen Teil zu denken, aber es INTERESSIERT mich, was Gunnar Kaiser selbst dazu meint und aus welchen Gründen und wie er sich artikuliert und so weiter... Wäre doch interessant.
Well, this is a funny-sad video and made me think. But still, nothing new on the planet, no questions solved. It's the same story again, we have to do it ourselves...😉😅
Schau dir Gunnar Kaisers Videos an, sehr informativ und auf hohem Niveau. Meine Einschätzung nach ist er ein libertärer Anhänger der Österreichischen Schule und hier insbesondere Ludwig von Mises. Meines Wissens zählt Stefan Molyneux ebenfalls zu den libertären Anhängern, der auf mich sehr eloquent und teilweise lustig wirkt. Aber auch etwas von einem Prediger hat, der in missionarischem Eifer seinem Publikum die libertäre Marktreligion als das Gute schlechthin, verkaufen will. Meine Einschätzung dazu: letztlich geht es auch hier nur um die Interessen bestimmter Akteure; weniger für den normalen Bürger geeignet.
Karen C Adam, like all the prophets, was a type of Christ. This verse highlights that symbolism. The story is clear that Adam, who, as we learn from Paul, “was not deceived” chose to leave the garden and follow eve so that he could save and bring back his disobedient wife. Likewise, Christ comes down to save and bring back his bride (us). This symbolism is repeated throughout scripture. Yes, you can say the man was disobedient but this is only partly true. the whole truth is that the man chose to disobey because his hand was forced by the poor choice of his wife. It all begins with the woman.
Karen C unfortunately, because eve was flesh of adams flesh, they were acting as one unit, Adam was responsible for the choices of eve like a parent is responsible for the choices of their young child. This is why women are told to “honor” their husbands in scripture - because he is the captain of their union and ultimately bears the responsibility for it. It would be nice if eve would have taken responsibility for her own choices but women in general don’t seem to be especially adept at that.
Stef is trying to make his insecurity acceptable to those around him so he can feel comfortable and unafraid. Spit game and get a girl, don't talk about how bad her boyfriend is so she is calling you a hero BE A FUKN HERO.
Verstehe irgendwie die Gegenüberstellung hier nicht. Der eine hält eine ernsthafte Rede und der andere zieht beide Ansichten satirisch durch den Dreck. In wie fern ist das bitte ein "versus".
@@GunnarKaiserTV Also bitte, diese Nachfrage grenzt ja schon an eine Beleidigung. Wahrscheinlich wird der Stand Up Comedian seinen Auftritt mit vollkommenem Ernst durchgeführt haben. C.K. hat den Auftritt eigentlich schon dermaßen überspitzt und mit dem nötigen Sarkasmus abgeliefert, so das auch der letzte verstanden haben sollte das die scheinbar von ihm vertretene Meinung purer Blödsinn ist.
What was the point of this? One's a comedian and puts on a "character" when he gets on stage. The other is an online cult leader and puts on a "character" when his followers are listening to him
@@peddazz2365 If you model your thinking after a comedian, you're already an idiot. If you are indoctrinated by Stefans online cult leader preachings, you're already an idiot. There's probably truth to what he was saying, but the guy is still a douche.
@@OreoVII Pushing the narrative does not mean that people are basing their thinking after him but that he is further enforcing a fake narrative in peoples minds Why would Stefan be a duche lol the guy advocates personal freedom and critical thinking hardly the marks of a cult
@@peddazz2365 You obviously have never even attempted to play devil's advocate against Stefan. What a wonderfully indoctrinated donater you are. No $5 donations from you, right? 😉 Stop, and think about what this video is literally doing. It's comparing a COMEDIAN, who is acting and saying everything in as humorous of a way against a very accomplished pseudo-philosopher. The two are not the same. It's not apple's to oranges -- its a lambo to a pencil. Both amazing accomplishments, both wonderful to have, but you aren't judging them how they should be. It's like comparing a court jester against a king who truly believes god has annointed them to rule the masses. As England ruled a quarter of the planet and now has an area less than the size of Massachusetts, Stefan believes he rules your minds but will himself have no one who believes or follows him 10 years from now. His surface level ideas are great, but there is a reason he acts so pathetic to garner donations - it's because he isn't actually great and needs to manipulate your emotions, as any cult leader does (but unfortunately, he is online and can't use physically force so must appeal to your sympathy) to get your money. This guy had about 8k subs on youtube when this vid was released and has been around since about 2003. Stefan is crying about money, but had nearly 20x more subs. You are in a cult. You are in a cult. You. Are. In. A. Cult. Here's an exercise for you: if you respond to me again, list three very valid criticisms that you find obvious against Stefan Molyneux. If you aren't an indoctrinated cultist, this should be easy. If you follow him as your idol, your god, then this will be very hard.
@@OreoVII I don't have to play devils advocate against Stefan since I disagree with him on a bunch of fundamental stuff and no I am not donating 5$ or any other sum to him nor have I ever donated money to any other YTber "Stop, and think about what this video is literally doing. It's comparing a COMEDIAN, who is acting and saying everything in as humorous of a way against a very accomplished pseudo-philosopher. The two are not the same. It's not apple's to oranges -- its a lambo to a pencil. Both amazing accomplishments, both wonderful to have, but you aren't judging them how they should be." this comparison also hardly serves as the ground to disprove advocates of the noble savage myth but merely to show how ridiculous the average guys idea of the noble savage is against reality, and I am not saying that everything Stefan is saying in this video is 100% factually true but that it is fundamentally true, there was no noble savage, they were extremely brutal and lived in quite horrible ways you have to make videos like this, ridiculing believers of the noble savage myth in order to destroy that myth "His surface level ideas are great, but there is a reason he acts so pathetic to garner donations - it's because he isn't actually great and needs to manipulate your emotions, as any cult leader does (but unfortunately, he is online and can't use physically force so must appeal to your sympathy) to get your money." just point to where Stefan acts pathetic in order to get money.....idk do you simply consider him asking for donations at the end of videos pathetic? "This guy had about 8k subs on youtube when this vid was released and has been around since about 2003. Stefan is crying about money, but had nearly 20x more subs. You are in a cult. You are in a cult. " when was he crying about money? .....I seriously hope this is not just about asking for donation because that would be really dumb especially given how much work goes into a lot of Stefan's videos "You. Are. In. A. Cult." no not really I actually prefer other YTbers over Stefan with radically different views on morality and how things should be run "Here's an exercise for you: if you respond to me again, list three very valid criticisms that you find obvious against Stefan Molyneux. If you aren't an indoctrinated cultist, this should be easy. If you follow him as your idol, your god, then this will be very hard." hmmmmm I don't like his idea of objective morality I think morality comes more from a self-serving point, the last debate I saw with him (I only saw 2 of them and not fully so maybe this is not so general) he constantly asks "right?" after making a statement which is quite annoying, he sometimes says some stupid stuff and I also don't share his anarchy believes don't really see how that could function You. Need. To. Stop. Assuming. Things.
"No wheel, no pants..." yeah Stephan...also, no monarchy, no holocaust, no pandemics, no environmental disasters...This twerp will go down in history, not unlike a blackface minstrel show icon.
I think Louis CK is just more funny. This Steven molyneau needs to work on his material more, his set just wasn’t funny. I didn’t hear the audience laugh much so I’m not alone. The part about having no pants was good tho
What Stephan Molyneux gave was a regular speech, not a Comedian gig. He was just debunking the noble savage myth the same way he does it in his show. He's a self-taught philosopher and comentator, not a Comedian.
I agree with the others. Stefan Molyneaux doesn't even qualify as a comedian at this point. I get that he's doing satire but it's simply not funny. He should retire.
romzen Also, louis ck stellt die Jäger und Sammler oder Indigenen Völker als wohlwollende Animisten dar, welche wundervolle Leben hatten und in Harmonie mit der Natur lebten ohne dabei die "Fehler" dieser Kulturen aufzuzeigen wie Molyneux es tut. Natürlich sind die Dinge wie wir sie tun nicht perfekt, aber wir ermöglichen damit unglaublich vielen Menschen der Welt Wohlstand und Frieden. Molyneux hingegen lässt aus, dass nicht wir der Westen, sondern viele Völker der Welt gleichzeitig zivilisatorischen Fortschritt erreichten, beispielsweise die landwirtschaftliche Revolution welche, auch wenn Zeitversetzt, auf vielen Punkten der Erde geschah und einer der Grundbausteine für das Leben von Gruppen von vielen Menschen war. Es ist natürlich ein Fakt, dass der Westen für den Großteil des Fortschritt unserer modernen Welt zuständig war, aber wenn Molyneux sagt das Sachen wie der freie Markt und free speech funktionieren muss ich ihm widersprechen. Ein zu freier Markt ohne staatliche Einschränkungen generiert zu große Monopole wie in einer Paretodistribution die in vielen kompetetiven Systemen vorkommt. Nur das sie oft vorkommt heißt ja nicht das sie gut oder moralisch richtig ist und der Gesamtheit einen Mehrwert bringt. Von den Umweltproblemen von Konzernen ohne Einschränkungen mal abzusehen. Zudem bin ich nicht mehr der Meinung das man die Intolierbaren tolerieren sollte im öffentlichen Diskurs. Wir sind im Pseudofaktischen Zeitalter leider nicht mehr in der Lage Realität von Fiktion zu unterscheiden, man siehe Trump man siehe Afd. Natürlich ist darin eine große Gefahr für uns alle wenn der Staat oä vorschreibt über was man zu reden hat, aber ich finde man muss auch mal auf die Auswirkungen gucken die der freie Diskurs mit sich bringt. Es ist eine schöne und noble Idee alle Meinungen zuzulassen im Willen des freien Marktes der Ideen wo die Öffentlichkeit entscheiden kann was gut und schlecht ist. Jedoch habe ich sehr niedrige Erwartungen an alle Menschen und glaube nicht das wir dazu in der Lage sind, da wir alle in unserer eigenen Filterblase leben. Nun zu meinem letzten Punkt, die Welt und wir Menschen sind deterministisch. Keine unserer Entscheidung kann aus einem freien Willen getroffen werden ohne Innere oder äußeren Stimulierungen die diese Entscheidung beeinflussen. Wir sind zwar soziale Wesen die einander oft helfen und andere Menschen brauchen, aber trotzdem fühlen wir keine emotionale Verbindung zu einem Kind was auf der anderen Seite der Welt leidet, wir sehen es nicht und es gehört nicht zu unserem sozialem Umfeld. Wir sind Egoisten, weshalb der Staat Entscheidungen treffen muss, die es für uns auch schmackhaft machen Entscheidungen zum wohle anderer zu fällen und uns so lenken kann.
"Ein zu freier Markt ohne staatliche Einschränkungen generiert zu große Monopole wie in einer Paretodistribution die in vielen kompetetiven Systemen vorkommt." Das stimmt nicht. Nenn ein Monopol, welches rein durch den freien Markt entstand. Es gibt und gab so etwas nie oder es hielt sich zumindest nicht auf natürliche Weise. Die einzigen Monopole, die wir haben, sind unmittelbare Konsequenzen des Staates; entweder weil der Staat Dinge wie Gesundheit/Bildung/Infrastruktur/Finanzsystem/Währung durchreguliert, verstaatlicht, oder weil der Staat demokratisch legitimiert Macht erhält, welche die Anreize für Lobbyismus erhöhen, sodass sich unnatürliche Monopole halten können. "Von den Umweltproblemen von Konzernen ohne Einschränkungen mal abzusehen." Die Nachfrage nach sauberer Luft, sauberem Wasser und sauberer Umwelt wird durch den Markt effizienter als durch den Staat beantwortet. Länder mit mehr Kapitalismus haben deswegen die sauberste Luft, das sauberste Wasser und die sauberste Umwelt. "Wir sind im Pseudofaktischen Zeitalter leider nicht mehr in der Lage Realität von Fiktion zu unterscheiden, man siehe Trump man siehe Afd."" Dies ist kein Argument. Wenn du aber dessen nicht in der Lage bist, dann sollten wir aufhören zu diskutieren. "Jedoch habe ich sehr niedrige Erwartungen an alle Menschen und glaube nicht das wir dazu in der Lage sind, da wir alle in unserer eigenen Filterblase leben."" Lasse alle Meinungen zu und die Filterblasen platzen. "die Welt und wir Menschen sind deterministisch. Keine unserer Entscheidung kann aus einem freien Willen getroffen werden" Pseudointellektuelle Masturbation ohne Aussicht auf einen Höhepunkt. Die Debatte Determinismus vs. Freier Wille führt zu nichts. Vor allem tut sie hier nichts zur Sache. "aber trotzdem fühlen wir keine emotionale Verbindung zu einem Kind was auf der anderen Seite der Welt leidet, wir sehen es nicht und es gehört nicht zu unserem sozialem Umfeld." Tugendheuchelei. Wer sich mehr oder zumindest gleich sehr um anderer Leute Kinder sorgt, der wird weniger Aufmerksamkeit für die eigenen Kinder haben und damit eine miesere Erziehung abliefern. Dies resultiert unmittelbar im Zerfall einer Zivilisation. "Wir sind Egoisten, weshalb der Staat Entscheidungen treffen muss, die es für uns auch schmackhaft machen Entscheidungen zum wohle anderer zu fällen und uns so lenken kann." Hier ist der Knackpunkt. Wenn wir Egoisten sind und der Staat wird von Menschen geführt, wer garantiert, dass diese keine Egoisten sind? Hier ist der grundlegende Unterschied in den Weltanschauungen zwischen rechts und links zu erkennen: Linke glauben an das Schlechte im Menschen und sehen deshalb die Notwendigkeit beim Staat, um diese Eigenschaft auszugleichen. Rechte glauben an das Gute im Menschen, verkennen aber nicht, wozu der Mensch in Machtpositionen in der Lage ist und sprechen sich deshalb gegen den Staat aus. Konzentrierte Macht ist grundsätzlich gefährlicher als verteilte Macht; insbesondere angesichts unserer korrupten Politik. Politiker dürfen ungestraft lügen und sie tun nichts anderes. Medienvertreter lügen, misrepräsentieren und verleumden und es gibt keine Konsequenzen, weil sie von korrupten Politikern durch unsere Gelder zwangssubventioniert werden. Und Konzerne haben immer mehr Anreize Lobbyarbeit zu betreiben, weil Naivlinge wie du niemals ihre Staatsgläubigkeit ablegen. Schließlich tun ja staatliche Schulen einen guten Dienst daran, dich in den Glauben zu führen, den Staat niemals anzweifeln zu müssen.
Are you seriously comparing a comedy routine to a philosophical speech? Here’s a hint: ones not to be taken seriously and is intended to make you laugh, the other is informative and ought to be fact and logic-based. Comedy is funny because it is BASED ON FALLACY.
@Alex Davila yeah he only supports white nationalism way better than jerking off on someone. Funny how right wingers bitch about cancel culture yet in actual cases of a guy getting dog piled you just use that to support your narrative.
@Alex Davila they weren't unsuspecting it was Garfunkel and Oates. And the guy is litterly a ethno nationalist dont play koi. I'll take a dude who jerks off on people over a nazi especially considering it wasnt a kid or against anyone's will. Go look at his channel since your asking for a citation. Guy litterly went to Poland to muse about how since there are no black that everything is perfect. Nazis dont like the term nazi so they prefer terms like ethno nationalist or race realist but ideologically there nazis. What narrative. The whole conservative victim complex you guys have whenever litterly anyone calls you dude out, that narrative because you gotta make your self out to be the victim. If you honestly dont think stephan is a white nationalist of some form your either ignorant or a member of his cult. If your not bad faith go do like 5 minutes of research trust me hes a racist and a fan of eugenics.
@@xoxonaotchan_7902 You are not yet old enough or wise enough to see your delusion. The black utopia movie BLACK PANTHER, is nearly absent of whites (good ones anyway) suggesting that blacks may desire ethnocentric government (eg nationalism). In fact I suspect you even agree with those Africans that dont want more whites coming to thier home, because many of the hypocrites in your illiberal tribe would not move to Africa out of respect.
@@synersonix yeah I'll just trust you. The guy talking about why black panther means black people want a ethno state which I will also add is a try to obfuscate away from a real ethno nationalist that being Stephan.
I hate the noble savage myth.
And those who so adore the noble savage and the virtues of such a way of life - so often do not live such a life...
So often, such people want everyone else to live such a life, while they keep their luxuries of science and technology such as indoor plumbing, antibiotics, refrigeration, dentistry, etc...
For they are the Elites who will rule over the serfs.
Even the word "savage" is ridiculous, all humans have the potential to be savage, all races and cultures have committed savage acts.
@doge fm thank you! At last someone who thinks in colour! We have work to do, but we don't have to throw away our whole history and culture, Molyneux veers on the side of apologist/cheerleader, completely uncalled for, most of the world is clever enough to not need these things to be explained, it's just logic!
@@joeroberts2156 If you think that most of the world is clever enough to not need things explained, surely you would support the dissolution of all forms of formal education. The fact of the matter is that people learn faster from the work of others than by figuring things out on their own.
The myth is not true, but please don’t go to the other extreme by thinking the same as pedantic Molyneux
Anyone got a feeling we’ll never see Stefan on Ted talk
@USS Liberty did 911 hahahaha
... or youtube
Because he is not credible
What's the point of comparing the words of a comedian and a philosopher :D
You know one is simply entertainment, the other one is wisdom.
Cunt's saying we did Aboes a favour by murdering them
dave erwin they certainly weren’t going to be getting anywhere on their own.
Lebron Fitzgerald Unlike us. We're really getting somewhere. Elon Musk is guna get us all off this dustbowl in time, isn't he? With his space ships. The Aussies will run back to Europe in a few decades first though. Wait till their water crisis really hits. Along with the rest of the shit
Comedy is not just entertainment.
@John wayne he has the largest philosophy program of all time. He is definitely, at the very least, a philosopher.
there's a Neil Young song, "Cortez the Killer", where he describes Montezuma's culture..."hate was just a legend, war was never know"; which is known to be false.
cmpdas if you read the actual accounts of Cortez and his men, they found human sacrifices and little boys being kept in cages to be eaten.
Yeah, Same song Neil sings "they offered life in sacrifice so others could go on." It was mass slaughter. Even as a kid when I was more of a Neil Young fan I knew this glorification of the Aztecs was bullshit.
Louis is a comedian doing hyperbole to make people laugh, Stefan is doing it straight.
Damn, this feels like some matrix stuff here... These guys addressed a lot of the thoughts I was having.. I lot of what I thought to be compelling arguments just sound so silly once they come out of Louis` mouth.
Danke, das war echt verwirrend.
THis is great, thanks for making this
Not a fair comparison, because Louis CK was doing stand-up, and the things he says have a comedic objective, but Stefan is right to debunk the noble savage myth anyway
@Phuk Yu Not meaningless per se, but I'd take whatever shit a comedian says on stage with a grain of salt, at the very least.
They are trying to entertain, with varying degrees of success, arguably, but they are not preaching or teaching anything.
El Ángel Gris you know the saying “it’s funny cause it’s true”...?
@@yeboscrebo4451 Yes, but in comedy the line between true and simply funny or relate-able is not always clear cut.
For a so called comedian (mysogynist) to protheletize cant be called comedy.. its staged rhetoric for claps, absent the laughter.
In this context, Lou is a pundit, not a comedian.
@@iurk0_streaming His stand-up is pablum though. It is not sharp social criticism as George Carlin's was. He merely iterates a tired script that is utterly witless. He is dull and boring. Are you familiar with wit at all? Are you black, by any chance?
I like both of these guys. On this particular subject, I agree with Molyneux. I get Louie is a comedian and it's not meant to be taken too seriously, but the problem is a lot of people do, it's the extent of their philosophical outlook, and they should at least consider the other side of the argument.
Molyneux is straight out racist and arrogant
Sources Stephan...sources please
Self hate helps no-one, at the same time honesty in a historical perspective also needs to balance things out. America was remarkably well looked after and cultivated pre-European arrival. It's not exactly like Louis CK says, it's not exactly like Molyneux says big surprise.
Pics or it didn't happen
Louis took his schtick to the level of performance art. I miss him anyway but it'll never be the same so he's lucky he made a fortune before it all came out.
But which one reached more people? Which one planted a thought or reenforced a mindset?
Louis is funny. Doesn't make him right.
he's right
hello my fellow white people.
nett zusammengeschnitten :D
Stephan Molyneux FTW
There are truths in both perspectives and falsehoods in both perspectives. I enjoyed this mash up thx
Whew. Thanks for letting us know.
Vkng Vron This person let us know for the same reason that you commented back. So if they’re wrong for commenting, so are you.
The unfunny red haired fat dude pretty much lied and made up stuff. He sounded like an uneducated boob.
The only reason why the Native Americans had such a huge a disadvantage is because they did not unite into one nation and instead were split into various tribes. When you have established nations, provinces, and countries, said nation is much more likely to have cities with a high population density. When cities are slowly formed over time, things like disease, plague, and virus are more likely to occur. Over even more time living in cities infested with such things, resistances start to form so diseases become less of an issue. Then when disease resistant people go to a different continent and give disease to vulnerable people, the disease resistant people have already won at that point. European colonists and American forces were still very cruel to Native American societies in the last 500 years or so. We have to ask ourselves though if our views would be any different if we were born in a time when Native American hatred was normal.
"the only reason" you sound very sure of your self. The only reason? Your sure of that?
It IS normal. Last residential school in Canada close in '97!!
I kind of feel like louis ck is making the same argument though, by pointing out the ridiculousness of the modern zeitgeist.
That's right. He ironically downplayed the "chopping off the heads thing".
Too bad most people in this comment section are too angry and dumb to see this irony.
“Hello fellow white people”. Put your own echos around that.
To the people calling Stefan Molyneux a great philosopher, I ask you why is he not recognized by any of the prominent philosophers of today
Because he doesn't kiss the ass of the government in order to attain tenure, fame, or resources.
Oh look at that, an appeal to authority. Not an argument.
Louis C is just a bad comedian
Ich sehe einen komödiantischen Agitator gegen einen unkonventionellen Denker, wo ist da ein gleichgestelltes Versus gerechtfertigt?
Womit ist denn das "gegen" in deinem Satz gerechtfertigt?
Ich wollte damit nur implizieren, dass es eine Gegenüberstellung zweier Positionen ist, welche zu sehr von der Rhetorik und Fundierung abweicht. Ich lehne erstere Position der neuen Linken, so nenne ich sie mal, auch entschieden ab und stimme Stefan zu. Ich sehe nur links das Niveau eines Schreiers wie Volker Pispers und rechts die fundierte Arbeit von z.B. dir.
Daraus leite ich die Kritik einer Nennung der beiden in einem gegenüber (versus) auch ab.
Dann darf ich etwa auch keine Videos gegen Moritz Neumeier mehr machen?
Doch natürlich, aber ich würde den Titel eindeutiger Benennen. Wie z.B. "Warum Moritz Neumeier unrecht hat." oder "Halbwissen nach neumeierischer Art". Z.B. würde ich mich nicht mit ihm vergleichen. Außer du bekommst mal einen Hang-Out hin ;) Dann bekommst du offiziell meinen Segen.
Robert Ripley Jr. warum würdest du dich nicht mit ihm vergleichen?
I agree with Louis CK. 100%.
You think his account of Native American life pre- white man is accurate?
Another cliché among the American chattering class is that the European discovery of the Western hemisphere was an unmitigated disaster for the native peoples. Columbus Day is now an occasion for mourning and self-flagellation. But, Sowell points out, there were benefits as well as costs. Diseases that ravaged the natives were spread by whites-ruthless conquistador and benevolent missionary alike-but so was the ability to combat all disease. Liquor led to much drunkenness, but European manufactured goods, such as cloth, were superior to the products the Indians could produce themselves, and they gladly traded to get them. There certainly was inexcusable brutality against the Indians, but, given the degree of brutality that had existed among Indians for centuries, establishing the Western idea of the rule of law undoubtedly reduced the prevalence of violence in the long run.
- Thomas Sowell
Innovatives Konzept!
Absolutey, Rousseau's Confessions was a Romantic answer to Augustine who was not a Romantic.
Civilization brings the bacon.
so why did all the first cultures to transition from hunter gatherer to farmer suffer from new diseases and have a reduced life expectancy? don't believe the hype
Philosophically, minorities represent truth whereas majorities tend towards neglect and abuse. Civilization these days has empowered through pc the expungement of truth and extended neglect and abuse to well organized minorities. Arguably then civilization becomes an incubator for tribalism as a fundamental and manageable ideal to acquire power, absolute power.
@@marcpadilla1094 very eloquently put and can't fault your logic, I just hope it's not true but it probably is!
@@joeroberts2156 Because change is often difficult and volatile perhaps?
@@marcpadilla1094 Neither minorities nor majorities represent truth. Truth has no representative. One of the only ways you know you have stumbled on some truth is when you create something which relies on certain assumptions, and then find that it works as expected; then you know some of those assumptions were true.
They both talk bs. At least the comedian dude wasn't serious about it.
Comedians are.not suppose to be serious, the other guy is speaking facts
@@RapidFire175 Same goes for cult leaders.
And yes, there is a difference between talking facts and talking about talking facts.
Delete noble from savage and you have the truth.
LCK is magnificent.
Eigentlich zeichnen beide gemeinsam ein realisitsches und "komplettes" Bild
Stefan zeichnet das komplette realistische Bild. Louis hat diesbezogen gar keinen Anspruch und will ausschließlich unterhalten.
romzen Er arbeitet es unrealistisch, "romantisch" auf. Das kann ich auch nicht leugnen. Das kann man jedoch eigentlich beiden vorwerfen
Ganz so viel von der Methodologie weiß Molyneux dann doch nicht, wenn er von 100%iger Sicherheit in der Wissenschaft spricht. Für einen selbsterklärten Philosophen scheint er sich außerdem ziemlich überhaupt nicht mit dem kritischen Rationalismus auseinandergesetzt zu haben. Ansonsten hat er natürlich recht.
Das Problem ist auch, dass Molyneux zu seiner Zeit als aktiver UA-camr mit einem absolutistischen Wahrheitsanspruch bzgl. seiner Ansichten unterwegs war. Schon allein dieser Aspekt disqualifizierte ihn meines Erachtens als halbwegs ernst zu nehmenden Denker.
Mach mal einen verdammten Kommentar zu deinen Einspielern!!! Kein Mensch ist sich 100% sicher, was deine Position ist oder was du aussagen willst! Ich bin nicht unfähig mir meinen Teil zu denken, aber es INTERESSIERT mich, was Gunnar Kaiser selbst dazu meint und aus welchen Gründen und wie er sich artikuliert und so weiter... Wäre doch interessant.
Schadowization Productions NICHT IN DIESEM TON!!!!
John Galt Wer ist John Galt?
Well, this is a funny-sad video and made me think. But still, nothing new on the planet, no questions solved. It's the same story again, we have to do it ourselves...😉😅
Schau dir Gunnar Kaisers Videos an, sehr informativ und auf hohem Niveau. Meine Einschätzung nach ist er ein libertärer Anhänger der Österreichischen Schule und hier insbesondere Ludwig von Mises.
Meines Wissens zählt Stefan Molyneux ebenfalls zu den libertären Anhängern, der auf mich sehr eloquent und teilweise lustig wirkt. Aber auch etwas von einem Prediger hat, der in missionarischem Eifer seinem Publikum die libertäre Marktreligion als das Gute schlechthin, verkaufen will.
Meine Einschätzung dazu: letztlich geht es auch hier nur um die Interessen bestimmter Akteure; weniger für den normalen Bürger geeignet.
Brilliant
Why would they be malnourished?
before I you or I even listen to Stefan; Let me save you the 13:36 mins., it's the mothers fault!
Karen C it’s eves fault. Stefan’s not a believer, but the Bible had this pegged all along.
@@yeboscrebo4451 what about Romans5:19?
Karen C Adam, like all the prophets, was a type of Christ. This verse highlights that symbolism. The story is clear that Adam, who, as we learn from Paul, “was not deceived” chose to leave the garden and follow eve so that he could save and bring back his disobedient wife. Likewise, Christ comes down to save and bring back his bride (us). This symbolism is repeated throughout scripture. Yes, you can say the man was disobedient but this is only partly true. the whole truth is that the man chose to disobey because his hand was forced by the poor choice of his wife. It all begins with the woman.
@@yeboscrebo4451 we all are responsible for our own choices. so we can't blame others for our decisions.
Karen C unfortunately, because eve was flesh of adams flesh, they were acting as one unit, Adam was responsible for the choices of eve like a parent is responsible for the choices of their young child. This is why women are told to “honor” their husbands in scripture - because he is the captain of their union and ultimately bears the responsibility for it. It would be nice if eve would have taken responsibility for her own choices but women in general don’t seem to be especially adept at that.
How is Stefan comparing a culture that has steam engines to a culture that doesn't have agriculture.
Stef is trying to make his insecurity acceptable to those around him so he can feel comfortable and unafraid. Spit game and get a girl, don't talk about how bad her boyfriend is so she is calling you a hero BE A FUKN HERO.
Lock v Hobbs 2019
Verstehe irgendwie die Gegenüberstellung hier nicht. Der eine hält eine ernsthafte Rede und der andere zieht beide Ansichten satirisch durch den Dreck. In wie fern ist das bitte ein "versus".
Wen meinst du?
@@GunnarKaiserTV Könntest du die Frage genauer Formulieren?
Das war eigentlich eine bitte deine Aussage genauer zu formulieren. Wen meinst du mit ernsthafte Rede? Wen mit satirisch?
@@GunnarKaiserTV Also bitte, diese Nachfrage grenzt ja schon an eine Beleidigung. Wahrscheinlich wird der Stand Up Comedian seinen Auftritt mit vollkommenem Ernst durchgeführt haben.
C.K. hat den Auftritt eigentlich schon dermaßen überspitzt und mit dem nötigen Sarkasmus abgeliefert, so das auch der letzte verstanden haben sollte das die scheinbar von ihm vertretene Meinung purer Blödsinn ist.
Du denkst, Satire hätte keine ernsthafte Aussage?
West is the best.
What was the point of this?
One's a comedian and puts on a "character" when he gets on stage. The other is an online cult leader and puts on a "character" when his followers are listening to him
one is pushing a false narrative while hiding behind the shield of "it is just comedy" while the other is telling the truth
@@peddazz2365 If you model your thinking after a comedian, you're already an idiot.
If you are indoctrinated by Stefans online cult leader preachings, you're already an idiot. There's probably truth to what he was saying, but the guy is still a douche.
@@OreoVII Pushing the narrative does not mean that people are basing their thinking after him but that he is further enforcing a fake narrative in peoples minds
Why would Stefan be a duche lol the guy advocates personal freedom and critical thinking hardly the marks of a cult
@@peddazz2365 You obviously have never even attempted to play devil's advocate against Stefan. What a wonderfully indoctrinated donater you are. No $5 donations from you, right? 😉
Stop, and think about what this video is literally doing. It's comparing a COMEDIAN, who is acting and saying everything in as humorous of a way against a very accomplished pseudo-philosopher. The two are not the same. It's not apple's to oranges -- its a lambo to a pencil. Both amazing accomplishments, both wonderful to have, but you aren't judging them how they should be.
It's like comparing a court jester against a king who truly believes god has annointed them to rule the masses. As England ruled a quarter of the planet and now has an area less than the size of Massachusetts, Stefan believes he rules your minds but will himself have no one who believes or follows him 10 years from now. His surface level ideas are great, but there is a reason he acts so pathetic to garner donations - it's because he isn't actually great and needs to manipulate your emotions, as any cult leader does (but unfortunately, he is online and can't use physically force so must appeal to your sympathy) to get your money.
This guy had about 8k subs on youtube when this vid was released and has been around since about 2003. Stefan is crying about money, but had nearly 20x more subs. You are in a cult. You are in a cult.
You. Are. In. A. Cult.
Here's an exercise for you: if you respond to me again, list three very valid criticisms that you find obvious against Stefan Molyneux. If you aren't an indoctrinated cultist, this should be easy. If you follow him as your idol, your god, then this will be very hard.
@@OreoVII I don't have to play devils advocate against Stefan since I disagree with him on a bunch of fundamental stuff and no I am not donating 5$ or any other sum to him nor have I ever donated money to any other YTber
"Stop, and think about what this video is literally doing. It's comparing a COMEDIAN, who is acting and saying everything in as humorous of a way against a very accomplished pseudo-philosopher. The two are not the same. It's not apple's to oranges -- its a lambo to a pencil. Both amazing accomplishments, both wonderful to have, but you aren't judging them how they should be."
this comparison also hardly serves as the ground to disprove advocates of the noble savage myth but merely to show how ridiculous the average guys idea of the noble savage is against reality, and I am not saying that everything Stefan is saying in this video is 100% factually true but that it is fundamentally true, there was no noble savage, they were extremely brutal and lived in quite horrible ways
you have to make videos like this, ridiculing believers of the noble savage myth in order to destroy that myth
"His surface level ideas are great, but there is a reason he acts so pathetic to garner donations - it's because he isn't actually great and needs to manipulate your emotions, as any cult leader does (but unfortunately, he is online and can't use physically force so must appeal to your sympathy) to get your money."
just point to where Stefan acts pathetic in order to get money.....idk do you simply consider him asking for donations at the end of videos pathetic?
"This guy had about 8k subs on youtube when this vid was released and has been around since about 2003. Stefan is crying about money, but had nearly 20x more subs. You are in a cult. You are in a cult. "
when was he crying about money? .....I seriously hope this is not just about asking for donation because that would be really dumb especially given how much work goes into a lot of Stefan's videos
"You. Are. In. A. Cult."
no not really I actually prefer other YTbers over Stefan with radically different views on morality and how things should be run
"Here's an exercise for you: if you respond to me again, list three very valid criticisms that you find obvious against Stefan Molyneux. If you aren't an indoctrinated cultist, this should be easy. If you follow him as your idol, your god, then this will be very hard."
hmmmmm I don't like his idea of objective morality I think morality comes more from a self-serving point, the last debate I saw with him (I only saw 2 of them and not fully so maybe this is not so general) he constantly asks "right?" after making a statement which is quite annoying, he sometimes says some stupid stuff and I also don't share his anarchy believes don't really see how that could function
You. Need. To. Stop. Assuming. Things.
why is stef volume down a notch in pitch?
this video was 2 short
Comedian
= generalises from anecdotes
= ignorant hypotheses
Molyneux is showing how much of an intellectual and philosophical lost cause he is.
"and they'd wake up and they'd fuck."
How so?
@@yeboscrebo4451 by saying the dumbest most ignorant shit imaginable
@@ToBeIsWasWere The West is indeed the best. Only because you don't like it that doesn't mean it's not true.
der elde Wilde Gunnar?
der elde Wilde?
But Louis ck is funny 😆
People actually huddle up to watch Stefan Molyneux? What a con man. He’s added nothing to philosophy that wasn’t already there.
If he only got people to practice what was already there, I tip my fedora to the man.
Not an argument
Enjoy sitting on my couch and listening to Mr Molyneux 🙂
300th..wooo!!
...god im bored.
Imagine being such a pseudo intellectual that you give a factual response to a joke
who the f is this guy
Louis CK, he's a second rate comedian
Philosopher and a pervert
Bogus philosopher conning loser incels
@@daveerwin6981 lol, the NPC's spitting out their daily programming all in the chat. Idiots.
"No wheel, no pants..." yeah Stephan...also, no monarchy, no holocaust, no pandemics, no environmental disasters...This twerp will go down in history, not unlike a blackface minstrel show icon.
Lck 🤦🏻♂️
Stefan's a better comedian without even trying to be.
I think Louis CK is just more funny. This Steven molyneau needs to work on his material more, his set just wasn’t funny. I didn’t hear the audience laugh much so I’m not alone. The part about having no pants was good tho
As regards the West: It's easy to look down on a giant when you're standing on its shoulders...
He’s not a comedian 🤷🏻♂️
What Stephan Molyneux gave was a regular speech, not a Comedian gig. He was just debunking the noble savage myth the same way he does it in his show. He's a self-taught philosopher and comentator, not a Comedian.
I agree with the others. Stefan Molyneaux doesn't even qualify as a comedian at this point. I get that he's doing satire but it's simply not funny. He should retire.
I'm not sure how much dumber you can get but I have faith in you--you can do it!
Interesting ... They both speak the truth.
Pathetic arguments.
What's your counter-argument?
Which one are you referring to?
Rebut them then.
Any moment now...
Pathetic comment!
😂😂 first guy is funny but he is trying to be funny! The other guy is very funny cause he’s being serious
Beide erzählen nicht die ganze Wahrheit
Argumente?
romzen Also, louis ck stellt die Jäger und Sammler oder Indigenen Völker als wohlwollende Animisten dar, welche wundervolle Leben hatten und in Harmonie mit der Natur lebten ohne dabei die "Fehler" dieser Kulturen aufzuzeigen wie Molyneux es tut. Natürlich sind die Dinge wie wir sie tun nicht perfekt, aber wir ermöglichen damit unglaublich vielen Menschen der Welt Wohlstand und Frieden.
Molyneux hingegen lässt aus, dass nicht wir der Westen, sondern viele Völker der Welt gleichzeitig zivilisatorischen Fortschritt erreichten, beispielsweise die landwirtschaftliche Revolution welche, auch wenn Zeitversetzt, auf vielen Punkten der Erde geschah und einer der Grundbausteine für das Leben von Gruppen von vielen Menschen war.
Es ist natürlich ein Fakt, dass der Westen für den Großteil des Fortschritt unserer modernen Welt zuständig war, aber wenn Molyneux sagt das Sachen wie der freie Markt und free speech funktionieren muss ich ihm widersprechen. Ein zu freier Markt ohne staatliche Einschränkungen generiert zu große Monopole wie in einer Paretodistribution die in vielen kompetetiven Systemen vorkommt. Nur das sie oft vorkommt heißt ja nicht das sie gut oder moralisch richtig ist und der Gesamtheit einen Mehrwert bringt. Von den Umweltproblemen von Konzernen ohne Einschränkungen mal abzusehen. Zudem bin ich nicht mehr der Meinung das man die Intolierbaren tolerieren sollte im öffentlichen Diskurs. Wir sind im Pseudofaktischen Zeitalter leider nicht mehr in der Lage Realität von Fiktion zu unterscheiden, man siehe Trump man siehe Afd. Natürlich ist darin eine große Gefahr für uns alle wenn der Staat oä vorschreibt über was man zu reden hat, aber ich finde man muss auch mal auf die Auswirkungen gucken die der freie Diskurs mit sich bringt. Es ist eine schöne und noble Idee alle Meinungen zuzulassen im Willen des freien Marktes der Ideen wo die Öffentlichkeit entscheiden kann was gut und schlecht ist. Jedoch habe ich sehr niedrige Erwartungen an alle Menschen und glaube nicht das wir dazu in der Lage sind, da wir alle in unserer eigenen Filterblase leben. Nun zu meinem letzten Punkt, die Welt und wir Menschen sind deterministisch. Keine unserer Entscheidung kann aus einem freien Willen getroffen werden ohne Innere oder äußeren Stimulierungen die diese Entscheidung beeinflussen. Wir sind zwar soziale Wesen die einander oft helfen und andere Menschen brauchen, aber trotzdem fühlen wir keine emotionale Verbindung zu einem Kind was auf der anderen Seite der Welt leidet, wir sehen es nicht und es gehört nicht zu unserem sozialem Umfeld. Wir sind Egoisten, weshalb der Staat Entscheidungen treffen muss, die es für uns auch schmackhaft machen Entscheidungen zum wohle anderer zu fällen und uns so lenken kann.
"Ein zu freier Markt ohne staatliche Einschränkungen generiert zu große Monopole wie in einer Paretodistribution die in vielen kompetetiven Systemen vorkommt."
Das stimmt nicht. Nenn ein Monopol, welches rein durch den freien Markt entstand. Es gibt und gab so etwas nie oder es hielt sich zumindest nicht auf natürliche Weise. Die einzigen Monopole, die wir haben, sind unmittelbare Konsequenzen des Staates; entweder weil der Staat Dinge wie Gesundheit/Bildung/Infrastruktur/Finanzsystem/Währung durchreguliert, verstaatlicht, oder weil der Staat demokratisch legitimiert Macht erhält, welche die Anreize für Lobbyismus erhöhen, sodass sich unnatürliche Monopole halten können.
"Von den Umweltproblemen von Konzernen ohne Einschränkungen mal abzusehen."
Die Nachfrage nach sauberer Luft, sauberem Wasser und sauberer Umwelt wird durch den Markt effizienter als durch den Staat beantwortet. Länder mit mehr Kapitalismus haben deswegen die sauberste Luft, das sauberste Wasser und die sauberste Umwelt.
"Wir sind im Pseudofaktischen Zeitalter leider nicht mehr in der Lage Realität von Fiktion zu unterscheiden, man siehe Trump man siehe Afd.""
Dies ist kein Argument. Wenn du aber dessen nicht in der Lage bist, dann sollten wir aufhören zu diskutieren.
"Jedoch habe ich sehr niedrige Erwartungen an alle Menschen und glaube nicht das wir dazu in der Lage sind, da wir alle in unserer eigenen Filterblase leben.""
Lasse alle Meinungen zu und die Filterblasen platzen.
"die Welt und wir Menschen sind deterministisch. Keine unserer Entscheidung kann aus einem freien Willen getroffen werden"
Pseudointellektuelle Masturbation ohne Aussicht auf einen Höhepunkt. Die Debatte Determinismus vs. Freier Wille führt zu nichts. Vor allem tut sie hier nichts zur Sache.
"aber trotzdem fühlen wir keine emotionale Verbindung zu einem Kind was auf der anderen Seite der Welt leidet, wir sehen es nicht und es gehört nicht zu unserem sozialem Umfeld."
Tugendheuchelei. Wer sich mehr oder zumindest gleich sehr um anderer Leute Kinder sorgt, der wird weniger Aufmerksamkeit für die eigenen Kinder haben und damit eine miesere Erziehung abliefern. Dies resultiert unmittelbar im Zerfall einer Zivilisation.
"Wir sind Egoisten, weshalb der Staat Entscheidungen treffen muss, die es für uns auch schmackhaft machen Entscheidungen zum wohle anderer zu fällen und uns so lenken kann."
Hier ist der Knackpunkt. Wenn wir Egoisten sind und der Staat wird von Menschen geführt, wer garantiert, dass diese keine Egoisten sind? Hier ist der grundlegende Unterschied in den Weltanschauungen zwischen rechts und links zu erkennen:
Linke glauben an das Schlechte im Menschen und sehen deshalb die Notwendigkeit beim Staat, um diese Eigenschaft auszugleichen.
Rechte glauben an das Gute im Menschen, verkennen aber nicht, wozu der Mensch in Machtpositionen in der Lage ist und sprechen sich deshalb gegen den Staat aus. Konzentrierte Macht ist grundsätzlich gefährlicher als verteilte Macht; insbesondere angesichts unserer korrupten Politik. Politiker dürfen ungestraft lügen und sie tun nichts anderes. Medienvertreter lügen, misrepräsentieren und verleumden und es gibt keine Konsequenzen, weil sie von korrupten Politikern durch unsere Gelder zwangssubventioniert werden. Und Konzerne haben immer mehr Anreize Lobbyarbeit zu betreiben, weil Naivlinge wie du niemals ihre Staatsgläubigkeit ablegen. Schließlich tun ja staatliche Schulen einen guten Dienst daran, dich in den Glauben zu führen, den Staat niemals anzweifeln zu müssen.
Diese Unterhaltung kommt in mein nächstes Video
Gunnar Kaiser don't roast me daddy
Are you seriously comparing a comedy routine to a philosophical speech?
Here’s a hint: ones not to be taken seriously and is intended to make you laugh, the other is informative and ought to be fact and logic-based.
Comedy is funny because it is BASED ON FALLACY.
Your comment is based on fallacy my friend. A comedian tells uncomfortable truths. Like Homer Simpson said "it's funny 'cause it's true"
That's what makes this video poignant. The comedian has a better grasp on the facts, than the white supremacist
There's a reason Loiuse CK does comedy and Stefan Molyneux does not.
@Alex Davila yeah he only supports white nationalism way better than jerking off on someone. Funny how right wingers bitch about cancel culture yet in actual cases of a guy getting dog piled you just use that to support your narrative.
Because he can't do philosophy isn't a good reason to attempt comedy.
@Alex Davila they weren't unsuspecting it was Garfunkel and Oates. And the guy is litterly a ethno nationalist dont play koi. I'll take a dude who jerks off on people over a nazi especially considering it wasnt a kid or against anyone's will. Go look at his channel since your asking for a citation. Guy litterly went to Poland to muse about how since there are no black that everything is perfect. Nazis dont like the term nazi so they prefer terms like ethno nationalist or race realist but ideologically there nazis. What narrative. The whole conservative victim complex you guys have whenever litterly anyone calls you dude out, that narrative because you gotta make your self out to be the victim. If you honestly dont think stephan is a white nationalist of some form your either ignorant or a member of his cult. If your not bad faith go do like 5 minutes of research trust me hes a racist and a fan of eugenics.
@@xoxonaotchan_7902 You are not yet old enough or wise enough to see your delusion. The black utopia movie BLACK PANTHER, is nearly absent of whites (good ones anyway) suggesting that blacks may desire ethnocentric government (eg nationalism).
In fact I suspect you even agree with those Africans that dont want more whites coming to thier home, because many of the hypocrites in your illiberal tribe would not move to Africa out of respect.
@@synersonix yeah I'll just trust you. The guy talking about why black panther means black people want a ethno state which I will also add is a try to obfuscate away from a real ethno nationalist that being Stephan.