I had some sympathy for what he said about Vaush's communication style possibly encouracing harrassment and that he could maybe go a bit lighter on that but that went out the window so fast when he refused to apply the same logic to Luna. Holy hypocrite.
Yep. "I'm okay with being mean to people" might seem like a toxic attitude until you have a bird's eye view of what's really going on. Nothing wrong with boiling a bad egg.
This is one of the funniest conversations you've ever had. Non-Compete has no clue. He went from "hey, be responsible with your platform" to "hypotheticals are idealism" to "uhh the Nazis were bad because they were factually incorrect" - what a rollercoaster.
@@sluttyMapleSyrup it's almost like NC thinks he owns his wife as the paternalistic master and that she's too docile and passive to argue for her own dignity. How hierarchical
@@daffyuser Don't worry, his behaviour is the most toxic masculinty in my opinion, it's like assuming his wife cant argue for herself (which she cant, that's pretty clear) but he makes it because she is such a poor poor marginalized frail vietnamese woman, and he, the white knight come to beat down on the bully, is the only one who could ever save her from herself. It's so disgusting, everytime he has been on vaush it's because "mah wife's feelings hurt". That is some serious saviour complex, abandonment issue hellhole weirdo toxic masculinity shit. You are probably good bro/brer/brex
40 minutes in and I'm tearing my hair out. Half of Philosophy is metaphore and allegory. People aren't literally chained in a cave, there is no literal runaway Trolley, there is no literal machine that makes you happy. These are all thought experiments that investigate our feelings and sense of morality.
wait... I wasnt supposed to tie people to trolley tracks and cut the trolley brakes? edit: the better version of the joke: "You are a moral philosophy teacher, do you tie people to trolley tracks to keep your job?"
Physics teacher: Let us consider a frictionless ball going down a slope... NonCompete: Do you think you can learn anything by thinking about unrealistic hypotheticals? You have to base your analysis on objective data. Marx and Engels listed two sources of objective data, and hypotheticals are not one of them.
The "your fans are attacking me" card is such a dirty silencing tactic. The accuser doesn't have to provide a shred of evidence, yet if you challenge the accusation, you look like the bad guy. If you agree not to respond to the accuser anymore, you're implicitly saying the accusations are valid. If you refuse, you look like the bad guy. It's a lose/lose situation.
Im a centrist Just gonna say what was said at 48:25 and your reaction, is you trying to escape the right-wing spell But you have a following now, you can't really change now understandably. You gotta put food on table somehow in this economy. And you technically aren't selling your people out like Candace Owens or anything So just do you
I was on NCs side until Luna's comment about pedophilia was quoted. What are the real-world effects of being labeled a pedophile vs. being labeled "useless."
@@totenwache88 EJ said he'd prefer a more explicit "rabid nationalist" so that no one (even as uncharitable as EJ) could misconstrue that being Vietnamese is the problem
@@Turalcar but shes using Vietnamese textbooks as her sources in the vid... Being Vietnamese isnt the problem but Vietnamese nationalism has its own intricacies just like german, italian, american, etc nationalisms all have varying aspects and historical contexts. If shes pushing vietnamese flavored nationalism then its important to talk about the specifics. To do otherwise would be...well unironically racist to pretend all nationalisms are the same.
Hypotheticals are like stress testing planes. You aren’t going to fly a jet through the worst possible storm on earth but it might be useful to see what might happen if you do. You can learn if, when, where, how, and why it breaks. Same thing with your ideas, hypotheticals let you identify weak points and flaws that might slip you notice otherwise. This is basic philosophy you don’t need a PHD to get that.
"No because stress testing planes is a material thing and not hypothetical so it's materialist not idealist" - NonCompete who missed the analogy's point because analogies are idealism!
That's not the only thing he doesn't understand here. Vaush pointed it out directly to him as well. "Using intuitive morals is what leads to mass slaughters then being post hoc justified instead of prevented altogether." Also, I watched the Ben Burgis commentary of this exchange and he used the term "Sam Harris Marxist" to describe how NC was trying to frame dialectical materialism, referencing that Sam Harris believes science can tell you what morals to have instead of science providing information to which you can better decipher how to apply your morals and ethics. NC literally keeps saying over and over that the framework of thinking (dialectical materialism) somehow reveals what's moral or not and doesn't even understand with a critical theory even is it seems. In the fighting game community, we call this 'getting exposed', i.e. he walked right into that hyper telegraphed super finish.
How did this guy miss the point so thoroughly? Non-Compete seemingly doesn’t realize that Vaush is asking about why a moral position is good or bad and Non-Compete continually thinks Vaush is giving his moral position.
He was fishing for a good clip. Notice how he says "I got everything I needed" before he hangs up - the ONLY reason he was in the debate was to get a clippable moment he could burn for clout.
Shark30zero put it kinda funny, something along the lines of "he actually doesnt understand he's in a simulation right now, like vaush put the vr headset on him and he thinks its real, he thinks vaush is actually arguing from his own position" maybe I just think this is way funnier than it actually is, but I just had to share this
Okay I know the hangup is funnier, but can we talk about how Noncompete got stuck on correlation and responsibility like two minutes in? He just kept repeating that Luna got hate after Vaush discussed her, in spite of Vaush explaining how that was likely an inevitable consequence of him discussing her, rather than his language or community being racist towards her. Then he got stuck on the stepchild thing, as though Vaush was supposed to agree that it was somehow inciting racism. And then finally just being stymied when Vaush admitted it was vitriolic (while not conceeding it was racist or irresponsible, because...how?) but said he was fine with being mean. Plus he kept saying he'd proven that Luna was getting harassed when he never actually presented ANYTHING. I believe him, but what is Vaush supposed to do about harassers without knowing who they are or what they're saying, despite his best efforts to find out? Clown shit from minute one.
Ya I suppose if you are stuck in a competitive all or nothing mindset it's hard to understand the value of being kind yourself when it's not likely to cause others to do the same
We can also talk about how EJ tried desperately to twist Vaush's words on policing his community into clutching his pearls that Vaush's community would need any policing at all. Pathetic attempt at a catch-22. "Oh you need to police your community? That's pretty Y I K E S Y!"
@@FantaLiteBrav what if the racism doesn’t come from the community? What if it’s kiwi farmers who hate both parties but track the bigger platform because being a neet is a hell of a drug. Wasn’t this already addressed?
@@FantaLiteBrav also Vaush had like, a group of people go check on the people who were harassing Luna on twitter and ended up proving that literally none of them were part of his community, I'll see if I can find the tweets again
Non-compete's mistake was not acknowledging how much emotional attachment he has to the given topics. It's so obvious he came here to defend his partner.
People like this NonCompete person are really scary for me. He clearly knows all the philosophy vocabulary, had exposure to lots of the concepts and narrates them very confidently, but he barely understands anything about it. He doesn't even know the difference between dialectic and ethics, he has no idea what idealism is... The scary thing is I can easily see myself being duped by someone like him, if i knew a little bit less about the subjects.
@@jamespace5429 Noncompete is much more competent than Jordan Peterson. They're similar in how they abuse vocabulary but Noncompete is just better at doing it.
People like NC are always problematic when allowed to "thrive", and it's not about what he said in this video, but rather the idea that he was a hardcore right winger until only a couple years ago. Similar with Shoe on Head or any number of these goofs. If you are not being fundamentally brainwashed by your parents, anyone who instinctively goes right wing and then switches, but wants to be a public figure.... Is suspect as can be, because one, they have already established that they can't be trusted to not be easily tricked? Like imagine someone in real life you know that strongly has an opinion against all logic for years and then they switch that opinion entirely? Great you changed your mind, but holy crap nobody should ask your opinion about anything. Guess who I don't look to for opinions? People who can't functionally process information.
This is why video essays can sometimes be just as dangerous as they claim debate to be. There's nobody to challenge the video you already spent hours watching unless you spend the same amount of time rewatching the video with someone critiquing it.
But… she did quote the video. You’re lying and you know it… Secondly, Vaush lied and said the clip was “spliced together”. How do you all see him lying and just go along with it? This is a cult of personality, I guess. Hang on to that parasocial pleasure while you can kids.. so cringe..
@@TurtleChad1 Can’t we have a civil discussion about basic facts? Idk what a tankie is I’m not very online. Isn’t EJ an Anarcho-Syndicalist? Either way, it’s very strange to just ejaculate “GO BE A TANKIE” because I insisted that facts are facts and lying for a cult of personality is wrong.. but okay.
That was hillarious, he is simping so hard for his wife. Which i would not mind if she wasnt smearing someone for being a pdf-file. I went and watched the video..and it litrally cuts him mid sentence. Its disgusting really...wonder if he could file for defamation.
@@charliekowittmusic Vaush was right, though. The clip literally cuts him off mid-sentence. She quoted a clipped fraction of his actual argument meant to make him look bad. That’s a fact.
As a guy who's previously found himself in humiliating positions while defending a toxic spouse because I was too insecure to admit they're wrong...this just hits different.
yeah no, their relationship doesn't even seem close to that. they are not superstars, they don't owe us anything, he can just break up at any point that he wants, and it actually took them fairly long into their youtube career for them to start dating
Im still amazed how often vaush is clipchimped. I think part of it is he kind of has the Obama pause/separation of words so it's really easy to cut the clip off with a natural sounding ending
He's clearly not saying he never engages in hypotheticals. If you disagree with him on the validity of the hypothetical, explain why. This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding an issue.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 “if you disagree on the validity of the hypothetical, explain why.” How can NC and I disagree on the validity of Vaush’s hypothetical? NC rejected V’s hypothetical, and by NC’s definitions almost all hypotheticals generally, out of hand without even hearing the hypothetical or engaging with it in the slightest. Which is exactly my point. NC resoundedly rejects a foundational tool of philosophy, used by every single philosopher I’m aware of as well as Marx. What’s more, NC changes his mind is willing to use hypotheticals himself when he arbitrarily deems them acceptable/convenient. “This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding the issue.” In what way is that what I’m doing? Because at least by your description, it sounds like your behavior so far has the same or more “toxicity” and “debate culture”-ness compared to my one comment. I don’t think NC is a stupid person. But he’s definitely being stupid on this issue, purposefully or not.
@@zen_tewmbs Once again, he never said he was against all hypotheticals. You do realize it's possible to create a bad hypothetical? Particularly if the point of the hypothetical is to illustrate a larger point, but the concept of the hypothetical doesn't apply equally in more general ways.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 Except the entire time he kept saying “I refuse to engage with hypotheticals, this is idealism” and couldn't explain why he thought it was a bad hypothetical. He literally dismissed it on the basis of it being a hypothetical.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 “do you realize it’s possible to create a bad hypothetical?” Yes, I do. That is also irrelevant, because NC didn’t say “that hypothetical is not applicable to this situation and here’s why”. NC repeatedly interrupted Vaush to say that he would not engage with any hypothetical that wasn’t “grounded in material reality” - which by NC’s definition, is almost every hypothetical used by Marx and every philosopher I’ve read. It’s directly what NC said, and the direct consequences of what he said. So two questions. 1) Do you have even a single instance of NC engaging with a hypothetical presented by Vaush, and NC then saying it is not applicable to the situation because of any reason besides a variation of “that wouldn’t happen IRL”? 2) you said “This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding the issue.” In what way is that what I’m doing? Because at least by your description, it sounds like your behavior so far has the same or more “toxicity” and “debate culture”-ness compared to my one comment.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle making a metaphysical venn diagram that Non-Compete is refusing to allow himself to favorably fall into
Here's the thing about that hypothetical situation. NC would have been correct if Vaush's logic was "I can conduct a single unrealistic hypothetical situation under which this would be ethical, therefore it is ethical in the real world." But that was nowhere close to the argument he was making because he's not an idiot. NC literally could not understand the difference between using hypotheticals to illustrate a point or explore nuance and basing your entire worldview on hypotheticals. The saddest part of all of this is that NC will walk away from this not recognizing how little he understands and this entire exchange will instead become evidence of how unreasonable Vaush is. There's a real problem today where very few people are willing to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong about something. That's why flat Earthers act like everyone else is too stupid to understand their nonsense when they fail to convince anyone
We use hypotheticals all the time. How does he and his wife decorate their house? They just randomly buy shit and throw in places or do they come up with ideas and make hypotheticals about where to put shit by what would look best where. I watched one of his videos to where he states what is wrong with the Left and in it he said Vietnam went through a peaceful transition which is not true. It is apparent neither he nor his wife who were not alive during that time have never talked to those who went through it. Re-education camps were not pretty. They created farming community zones up in the highlands on indigenous land and it failed miserable. Others were outright killed. Southerners were distructed by the North. According to the Peace Treaty over the US leaving a North and South were supposed to remain independent countries. The NLF thought they were get to form the new Southern govt but then got betrayed by the North who then unified which was supposed to be after the South had a stable govt and then both countries decided to have the vote. Nope, the North just did a big FU, nullified the political power of the NLF and put people from the North in charge. Foreigners were told leave or we make you leave and NC stated this was voluntary but necessary for decolonization and then implied that this happened and thus now then left foreigners in. He COMPLETELY ignored their economy tanked and due to mid 80s reforms of allowing foreign business in they turned their economy around. I am not really impressed with him.
@@DevinMacGregor His takes are 100% just Luna's regurgitated when it comes to Vietnam. He doesn't *dare* disagree. Check Voosh's video on her, it's either here or on The Pit, I forget which, just. Holy shit the cope when it comes to the Vietnamese love of free market. 'NO! THE SURVEY WAS LIIIES!', it's absolutely absurd.
@@Revan058 Yeah, I saw that. I do not think he was ever a capitalist either. Just some western dude wjo has a kink for Southeast Asian chicks. My late brother in laws oldest is in Vietnam. He likes them because they can be more submissive than western women. I know of people who like to go to the girly bars in Thailand.
Hypotheticals are used to determine whether there are inconsistencies in an ideology or ethical system - not necessarily to determine which course of action would have the best empirical outcome. Dont understand why he couldn't comprehend this
Actually, you’re incorrect. If using that hypothetical as a *starting point* is the means by which you arrive at your conclusion, it is Idealism. This is a fact which is not debatable.
I was honestly having trouble understanding Vaush's perspective on this drama until Noncompete started trying to explain away Luna calling Vaush a p*do. He completely lost me as soon as he did that.
Yeah that's basically why Vaush has this take at this point. A lot of bad faith people are gonna do what they want at this point so fuck em. It's not pretty or the most productive but it's also not unwarranted.
Luna calling a queer man a pedophile isn’t homophobic (even though she’s also said the LGBTQ+ movement in Vietnam is a colour revolution lmao) but calling a Vietnamese nationalist a propagandist is apparently racist.
Polish nationalist being anti lgbt whole left gets its wrong Vietnamese nationalist being anti lgbt calling them counter revolutionaries lots of people are ok with it. Poland was under the control of three European empires for two centuries who all tried to erase their culture and language. A lot of polands far right is the way it is because of that but the left makes no excuse for it’s problematic behavior but they do when the colonized anti gay people are poc like Luna.
@@alexalexandrov9684 I wouldn't call noncompeat and his possy of inbreads the hole left but the online left has an large minority of people that are total simps for any poc persone no matter what they actually say or belive Their brains just shut down when they see poc cas their minds have brakns rotted by Liberal Idpol otherwise they might be totally reasonable people
@Nobody Luna doesn't hold any anti lgbt positions, nor did she say vietnamese lgbt activism is from foreign agents or whatever. Your projecting something (known weirdo)Maupin would say onto Luna.
This dude really showed his ass when he just kept harping in on one thing said about his wife. This wasn't a good faith debate on his part, just him airing his grievances.
Yeah like, just say “I don’t like you being mean to my wife” instead of “you don’t understand that dialectical materialism dictates you be nice to my wife”
yeah and what's funny is if you look at the comments on his reply video the comments are along the lines of "wow i love how you are always acting in good faith really exposed his bullshit" kind of sad yet funny at the same time
To be fair, Vaush's hypothetical wasn't grounded in reality, yours was. NC wanted something that can be mapped onto reality, Vaush was giving hypotheticals about time traveling and shit
He should have just made it about him trying to defend his partner. That's like normal human behavior. The issue was trying to pretend his position was based on leftist theory. Then he showed how fucking little he actually knows about about a lot of things.
That's the classic tankie move, isn't it? Pretend all your emotional biases are empirically reasoned theory so you can have the aesthetics of intellectualism with zero of the effort.
Yea. NC : "Please can you stop making videos of my wife. We have had alot of harassment and i will pressent the usernames and printscreens of the worst offenders" Vaush: "i cannot prommis i will never critizise her. But i could possibly choose my words better and i will of course ban all racists shits that is harassing Luna and you" NC: "sounds fair. Will email the details, goodbye" Would have been a waaay better outcome.
Anyone could respect someone defending their partner. The man's a coward for going in under the guise of wanting a constructive discussion. Obviously obsessed with his image.
LMAO Vaush: *tries to force him to pick a standard for moral positions by asking why things are bad* NonCompete: *can't keep up and starts breaking down* Vaush: It would be nice to have an ethical system you could apply to answer these questions, right? NonCompete: No
"we're not getting anywhere" is a great code-phrase for "you didn't immediately submit to my bad faith argument and now I don't want to reflect on your valid response."
@@E.J.Crunkleton I don't think I have any social responsibility to be civil to people who imply that I'm a pedophile by misrepresenting and quote-mining me either. That's just being a normal human being.
@@E.J.Crunkleton Don't you think it's kinda absurd to say it's you social responsibility to be civil to fascists and people who falsely accuse you of pedophillia? Clearly you don't believe this
Seems like he just came here with a bone to pick and to defend his partner and spin it like it was some anti-racist personal responsibility moral policing. Like when Vaush said “you’re obviously closer to this than I am” and he said “well yeah I recognize that she’s a PERSON” kinda just shows your dishonest intent. Just go out and defend your partner if that’s what you want to do but don’t act like it’s anything different
I don't think it's dishonest if it's obvious to everyone involved. He had PF on his stream too but he didn't feel forced to talk directly to Vaush in that case.
@@Turalcar I think it's dishonest in it's presentation, like "I came here because you insulted muy wife" vs "I came here to explain to you how insulting my wife hurts socialism and Marx said so"
It's so painful seeing him not knowing what the fuck idealism is. I saw that concept on my first fucking semester in college, and he doesn't even know the difference between a hypothetical and idealism
It's funny because an Idealist would probably use EJ's misunderstanding of Idealism as support for Idealism. "You see, the subject's perception limits his knowledge. By opining on a subject he is unfamilar with, his mind creates assertions to support his speech, independent of what could be considered "objective"".
Defending your wife: Usually pretty morally good. Defending your wife's terrible takes: Okay we're slipping here. Defending your wife calling someone a kidler didler by calling your opponent a kidler didler: The plot has been lost Batman, go home.
Luna Oi seems really cowardly and manipulative to me. Her weird tangeants and victim blaming reminds me of an abuser from my life, and some Theramintrees stuff. Wouldn't be surprising if her boyfriend is being manipulated.
Haha exactly! Or when Vaush has a good counter argument and hes just like " anyways we arent going anywhere with this ". I can see it in his eyes, the panic, hoping Vaush would actually move on.
Some honesty about that would’ve been worthy of respect. Sure, stick up for your girl, king, but be less of a weasel and just admit that’s what you’re there for.
"The material conditions will dictate what's acceptable or not" is the most ominous shit I've heard in some time. Please don't let these people gain any more social traction.
What's weird is people on Twitter trying to justify this framing with this idea that material conditions can be defined in such a way so that it's literally impossible for bad things to be justified. As if you can just stretch the definitions a bit to make internal and external morality the same thing.
I can't really see what's wrong with that statement. Our material conditions is the basis for moving up Maslow's hierarchy of needs. As an example, a woman might find it preposterous to sell herself for sex and wrong, but if she has a hungry kid and an empty bank account she might overcome that initial moral dismissal of sex work and do whatever she has to fed her kid and make money. What's a more clear example is looking at worker's rights and salaries in western countries. They have all but gone up and that increase in material wealth (and workers rights) are seen as the "new" acceptable standard for society. No one is gonna find it fair to be paid 50% less than others in the same field of work. Material conditions does indeed inform our idea of what is acceptable or not in our societies.
@@lameduck3105 Forecasting the conditions for when an action is and is not acceptable is what an ethical framework is for. I personally think it's always acceptable for someone to "sell their body" in this way. The distinction between assault and self-defense is more illustrative. Assault is what you enact physical violence upon someone without the proper justification. Enacting physical violence upon someone with the intent (and reasonably likely outcome) of protecting yourself or someone else is a justification for violence that is prescribed by the ethical framework. To simply say, "the material conditions will dictate what is justified" is just another way of saying you intend to post-hoc justify whatever attrocities you commit in the fulfillment of your goal.
NC comes across as a mid-level manager. Who’s trying to argue with an employee during a yearly review. So he can write them up and fire him for not liking his wife.
It’s the passive aggression and constant deflection away from getting to any kind of answer. Along with the demeaning tone and “I have concerns” attitude. My skin was crawling just listening to him dance around.
@@colinmurphy525 Ergh... Yeah. I just finally "made the effort" to listen to that preposterous so-called debate... And I am really dismayed by his irratating kind of snarky patronising demeanor right from the start. Quite early, I felt very compassionate with Vaush for remaining so composed.
How did NC get so fired up about hypotheticals being idealism when he started with the hypotheticals in the beginning of the conversation about dealing with vitriolic commenters
Right? I think he heard Vaush use the alien example and decided to latch onto the idea that Vaush won’t work in the material world, so he doesn’t have to acknowledge that it’s the ethical question of “would you sacrifice one person so many people can survive” not the actual aliens that are important to the question. It’s literally just the trolley problem and NC either knew he’d crumble under the slightest pressure if he went down that road or he really was just looking for clips.
Because he's not upset about hypotheticals. He's upset about hypotheticals that have no basis in reality. When Marx uses hypotheticals, he's comparing the value of yards of linen to coats to illustrate a point about how economics work. When vaush uses hypotheticals he abstracts away all the context and nuance that gives things meaning in order to make useless universal statements that have no basis in reality.
I hate it when people use words like "marginalized" at incorrect contexts. It just turns it into a buzz word. Luna is not from a society that marginalizes her for her ethnicity. This is not to say she doesn't experience racism over the internet but these are two different but related concepts.
What Noncompete doesn’t realize is that he already is utilizing an ethical system, just subconsciously. Because we all do, it's literally unavoidable, so we might as well take the time to sit down and sort through it. Morals should be applied to situations and be proactive, not responding to situations and be reactive.
He had absolutely no concept of what vaush was talking about and it was agonizing to listen to. "It depends on the material conditions", ok, how do you decide whether something is good or bad once you know the material conditions? Don't understand why he can't make that additional step
Vaush shouldn't lecture people about moral systems because he acts like an asshole all the time. I don't believe he cares about socialism at all because he can't take 2 seconds to notice the humanity in another person.
I was subbed to Non-Compete and unsubbed when Vaush fans came to his stream to peacefully discuss with him. They were banned although they were so respectful. And the 2-3 out of 100s who were not respectful were shown on stream as an example how bad Vaush fans are. Even Non-Compete fans criticized his mods for this sneaky stuff. Good job to the Vaush community.
Idk if that’s true? Did this happen after the conversation with Vaush? Because before I saw some Vaush viewers in his comments and he seemed okay-ish with it
17 minutes in I feel like this dude only wanted to talk to vaush because he was offended on his wife's behalf. He's clearly fishing for vaush to apologize or give some sort of admission of guilt. Its almost comedic how you can tell that vaush's stone-faced refusal to take any responsibility for the harassment is clearly frustrating him but he is trying to still remain calm.
100% my interpretation too. There were a few clues: 1) The number of times he said "I don't know what to tell you". Like, that phrase CAN say a lot, but when you keep saying it, maybe you just have nothing good to say. 2) His clear excitement - later on - in dragging the conversation into really arcane theory debate just because Vaush brought up a hypothetical, while also refusing to allow any philosophy that is "idealist" (read: something I haven't read before). It was never about the hypothetical. It was because he didn't like the hypothetical and he needed an out. 3) How he went from a detailed dissection of things Vaush has said and how that incites online hate, to..."no, she didn't TECHNICALLY say that!" You don't get it both ways. You can critique someone's implications and/or the wider context and consequences of what they've said, OR you can be an idiot right winger who says "words have a dictionary definition and that's that!" You don't get to do both. Unless you're a dishonest fuck defending his wife with no regard for truth or equal treatment.
The fact that he misunderstood you so thoroughly and then said you were unironically "supporting Nazis" is almost unbelievable to me. How can he miss every point so completely and be unaware of it?
It's like a perfect overlap of being stupid, feeling stupid, and responding with dishonesty People will do the craziest shit if you make them feel stupid
@@rainbowkrampus Well, Noncompete has such a fragile ego, he once went on an insane rant against UA-cam support bots (lmao, he screenshotted it on his own twitter as if it would make him look good) where he seemed utterly convinced that Trevor Noah, a liberal comedian who almost 100% certainly has no idea who he is, had a personal vendetta against his channel. Why? Because he uploaded some video accusing Noah of being some kind of anti-worker neolib based on an old comedy bit he did poking fun at a worker's protest in Africa, and the video got DMCA'd. It's almost guaranteed that what actually happened was just another generic instance of capitalist PR bots mindlessly taking down anything that resembles bad optics, or bog standard copyright trolling by the algorithm servants. No plausible scenario involves Trevor Noah, a wildly bigger public figure, giving the slightest thin shit about some nobody tankie. But that's the thing: For people with such inflated egos, everything is about them, even as the air in their heads makes their self-esteem incredibly fragile.
@@PancakemonsterFO4 Guilt by association, a favorite tactic of dishonest moral purity crusaders (oops, that's redundant, that's all of them) to facilitate witch burning. Can't criticize the argument? Just cite vague proximity to a thing you've already predetermined to be Bad.
To be honest you could have done the same with vaush position. -Why is genocide bad vaush. -It produced harm and negative utility -Why -Because it is bad -How can you know it's bad -Because it produces negative utility Every single time vaush talk about philosophy it is an emparasement
@@balghar493 what? Vaush wouldn't say that, he would say that his founding axiom is humans thriving and being free and happy, so he knows genocide is bad because it goes against his foundational moral axiom of "I think people should get to live free and happy and thriving lives" What do you mean how do you know it's bad? Obviously at some point you have to make an assumption that you can't really justify, such as "happiness is good, sadness is bad". You can't really logically justify your preference for happiness because someone could have the axiom of "happiness is bad, sadness is good" and it would be just as valid. So you can't really justify why YOUR preference is the correct one. Do you think Vaush doesn't know this?
@@balghar493 this is were moral anti realism comes in. You can't objectively prove anything to you have to arbitrarily establish axioms first then work from there.
EJ calling hypothetical philosophical exercises “idealism” should immediately discredit him for literally everyone in his audience that has actually read Marx - though I doubt they exist.
don't worry, Emerican makes sure the only theory their audience knows is that which they are being fed through the puppet videos. the videos in question can be good, but i sure as hell won't be watching them any time soon.
I had a whiplash when NC went "idealism bad" then going on misusing the term idealism when he actually means thinking and imagination. Thats basically an all gas, no breaks leap before you look mentality.
He wasn’t calling philosophical hypotheticals themselves idealist he was saying that The construction of an ethical system off the back of abstract ideals/hypotheticals not rooted in the concrete social conditions of the world is idealist. Which, according to the Marxist tradition, is overwhelmingly true. Whether vaush wants to admit it or not his notion of utilitarianism is textbook idealism and thus is extremely incompatible with dialectical materialism.
@@KikomochiMendoza but EJ was correct. To create a political system based on ideas, I.e rationalism, as opposed to material experience, I.e empiricism, is idealism. Marx was a radical empiricist and EJs ultimate point about how Vaush’s approach to coming to the ultimate conception of a political system, I.e the idea that rational debate gets you closer to the truth, is 100% idealism and in a sense anti-Marxist. It seems rather ironic that Vaush would openly admit that “idealism” means different things in different contexts when pressed for a definition, but then confidently claim that “hypotheticals” could never fit into a definition for idealism Edit: I'm surprised I didn't point it out earlier, but I want to reiterate that thinking and imagination is philosophical idealism... If you were to name things that contribute to idealism you would point to functions which are necessary in the formulation of ideas, i.e the mind. If you were to name things that contribute to philosophical materialism, you would refer to the senses as the means of experientially investigating the material world
Watching Noncompete get more mad about having to listen to a hypothetical for five seconds and being wrong about idealism than Vaush was about being called a literal pedophile is incredible.
Vaush has the mental stamina of a psychopath, I wouldn't be even a third of as calm as he is for a fraction of the amount of insults. Though, he's been doing this for long enough to make people who debate him look like unhinged Fast-Food Customers just by face value comparison.
That hypothetical would piss off anyone with a braincell. It's incredibly insulting to be asked to sit quietly and entertain some nonsense about aliens when you know it's going to be used to justify something ridiculous. Vaush's outlandish hypotheticals have always been his most patronizing and tedious argumentative trick.
@@zetizahara I can tell that you are someone who also didn't "sit quietly and entertain" the hypothetical even though you're a random UA-cam viewer. You really don't lose anything from it man, it ain't a gun, it's a guy on the internet shooting these hypotheticals around so no need to avoid them no matter how nonsensical.
@@zetizahara “Outlandish hypotheticals”It was literally just the trolley problem, probably the most famous ethical though experiment in the world. “Would I intentionally kill one person to save more than one person?”
It's incredible that someone could make a whole video series about a hypothetical anarchist society and then impune other people for being "idealistic".
Never ask a tankie to imagine a hypothetical. Not. Even. Once. In all seriousness though I empathise with him for wanting to defend his wife, but it really seems like it's centring his disagreement in this debate, especially when he *keeps* going back to the stepchild thing.
The difference between “tankies” and “libertarian socialists” is that tankies deal with reality, and lib socialists ideas only exist within their imagination
@@cool88905 “Well ackchually, what I believe corresponds to physical reality and what the bad libs I don’t like believe is completely feelings-based.” Tankies sounding right wing as hell like always. This is literally the Ben Shapiro stance, bro.
@@cool88905 the time for tankies has passed. Go back to the 1900’s if you wanna live that shit. The reality of how it turned out is not something you’ll wanna go through again once you’ve lived it
Bro, this debate is so sad because he had pretty good vibes at the beginning. But DAMN, this guy exploded! Imagine *Wife-knighting so hard that it forces you to disengage from a discussion that you wanted to have. The problem here is Non-compete (and probably Luna) wanted an apology. He didn’t get it, so he shit his pants and malded hard.
Well if you are ever going to knight, knighting for your wife seems like a no brainer. I mean if all goes well they will be together for decades after Vaush ascends to being a brain in a jar screaming donos in the god emperor voice across the solar system.
Now I'll agree he was dumb, and luna is dumb, but I can respect the fact that he tried to defend his wife. I just don't think he should be taken seriously, but I appreciate loyalty to a spouse
To this day my theory about Noncompete hanging up is that he was trying to emulate Vaush suddenly leaving the MrGirl discussion he had just a short while before this discussion. Hence the simultaneous eagerness to do it, as if he was looking for a trigger point to do the theatrical performance he planned, and the awkwardness of it. "Alright Vaush, we're done here. Gooooood bye... This has been, uh. That's all I need to hear." Doesn't sound like someone spontaneously and unplanned quitting the conversation indignantly.
Yeah, he definitely wanted to do the "you hung up on me, so now I'm gonna call you under the auspices of trying to 'work it out' just so I can hang up on you." Mature adult stuff.
I'm kind of happy I was pulled left by Vaush and not someone else. I get to hate Vaush and call him stupid when he says stupid things that I hate and I don't get shamed for it, I just have to present evidence. Even then it mostly that just boils down to I disagree with this based on opinion and ... whatever.
@@sdjslkdjlsskldjslkdjsl8262 no my worldview was changed by Trump having a swat team gas people passing out masks and hand sanitizer in front of a church. You know before he took a picture in front of the church? The time when the bible was upside down.
You mean like when Luna was talking about human consciousness and Vaush started screeching about how she's wrong about class consciousness even though that's obviously not what she was talking about
@@SefirothPH yea totally comparable to being called a pedophile... also, he wasnt quoting her and using the quote as an argument. it was a fuckin live video reaction lol it is so irrelevant
Just going off the first 20 mins, it's clear his only reason for doing this,is him being upset his wife got minorly insulted. Just be blunt about it, instead of trying pretend you want to have a constructive discussion.
Idk I think he has pretty obvious points. 1. Platforms come with responsibility. Where as Vaush is dying to be he next Destiny and doesn’t care who gets hurt. 2. Vaush didn’t understand the concepts enough to even discuss them, hence he used knowingly fallacious arguments and lobbed insults at Luna. “Marxism-Leninism isn’t revolutionary. My evidence? You can get a PhD in Capitalist countries”. “I’m not an Idealist. And Marx’s Dialectical Materialism doesn’t exist as commonly understood. My evidence? Marx had a doctorate and thought a lot.” I think it’s pretty normal to be upset that someone you thought was a like-minded comrade attacked your wife for the lulz and the clicks.. look at the comment section. This cult of personality likes it. This makes real Socialists with respect for the struggle quite sad. Those who are just mindlessly consuming content and calling themselves Socialists aren’t Leftists at all, just capitalist consumers.
@@charliekowittmusic Hey um... I have this package here that says "Open soon: Live Specimen". Was told it's some grass for you to touch or something, I'm not sure
I loved when you kept asking him 'why?' enough times he ended up saying that he believes oppression is bad because Marx and Engels thought so. I guess he hated thinking so much that he just based his entire moral framework on whatever some other guys said. And called you an idealist the whole way through
The difference between when Vaush hung up on MrGirl and this situation was that here they were in the most crucial part of the debate instead of going off topic because of inappropiate jokes and about to start the most central part of the debate which was the ideology that drives EJ. And, let me ask you, what do you do when you're a content creator and someone bigger than you just spews nazi bullshit in a debate you specifically requested? Of course you capitalize on it, a mask-off moment from a supposed socialist? That's huge! (Of course, he wasn't actually defending that ideology). But instead he declared it was enough and hung up because he was already scared and used it as an excuse to chicken out from a conversation that made him look bad
It is so intellectually and morally bankrupt to bring up a topic that has so much red tape and then just bounce because they are incapable of doing "the thing." My god dont ask for it, if you cant systematically articulate a clear framework about something, dont talk about it. It is one thing to go on twitter or whatever and make statements passively or directly supporting a topic. It is another to be debating the topic and outlining perspectives, arguing both for and against the facts . . . with facts. Example: You can most definitely DEBATE slavery was good WITH THE INTENTION OF DEBUNKING IT during a debate while someone articulates the proper social response toward it which is that we shouldn't allow it . . . as a pure form of performative satire to expose the mindset. In the theoretical and on a debate stage, one doesnt have to commit to BELIEVING the argument . . . just that you did your due diligence to understand the perspective to fairly argue the points. This is seen in mainstream forums and debate stages. "Devils Advocate" Non-compete? I dont think it was that, his good faith evaporated quite quickly with his feels. This sort of benefit of the doubt and commitment to intellectual honesty, integrity should not be extended to certain discussions. No one in the public eye would ever attempt it be it for optics or bad exposure. You will NEVER hear a TedX talk about childrens underwear.
why do we even feel the need to constantly defend the easily defensible mrgirl shit like the only ones with a problem with it aren't just destiny and his goons?
@@malum9478 mr girl was creeping on underage girls so Vaush hung up . Noncompete rage quit. I don’t know how hatewatchers and destiny dorks can think these 2 are comparable
@@thefatherinthecave943 yep. My take was that Mr Girl actually thought vaush was a paedophile, and was trying to bait him to admit what was an "acceptable" lower age to find kids "attractive". Vaush saw this was going haywire and hung up. But tbh, vaush should have hung up before then. But maybe we wouldn't have seen how sick Mr girl was...
When NonCompete couldn't own up to the fact that Luna called Vaush a pedophile, I lost all respect for him. It's unfortunate because I liked him and really liked a lot of his videos, especially the ones inspired by Kropotkin. I was excited by this discussion because I thought it would be fruitful and would result in agreement. I was very very wrong.
The more I think about it, the more insane his answer on the Holocaust becomes. "That was false consciousness, it wasn't true" That's his response. So, in an alternative universe where there actually WAS a jewish minority oppressing germany, would the Holocaust have been justified? Something tells me that's exactly what his stance would be, if he could ever be pinned down on it.
It certainly highlights a very concerning lack of empathy for minorities and other POC. It's almost like all of Vaush's talk about socialism and equality is just a grift.
@@E.J.Crunkleton 100%. I've been a not very invested, but consistent watcher for a couple of years now. But this whole thing sucks. Vaush not to be trusted. He just introduces chaos for the purpose of succeeding in the attention economy.
@AN8m8f8n11 Thought Slime unironically thinks capitalism lead to slavery. Like, cool NC and TS' heart is in the right place, but when you come, you fucking come correct. Being ahistorical (in slime's case) or making up definitions to words to support your uninformed view on philosophy, theory and critical frameworks (NC) is not coming correct.
@Jeremy Capitalism did lead to chattel slavery though, it was intentionally fostered by the owners of industry. I don’t mean to say that Chattel Slavery is only possible under capitalism, just that in this instance capitalism made it possible.
@@xXRickTrolledXx I would say incentivized that specific form of slavery or exploitation but not like “made it possible” just a pedantic thing slavery was plenty possible under monarchies or tribal systems and those systems did plenty to incentives free labor from marginalized and powerless groups
@@xXRickTrolledXx This is akin to saying "It's light green not bright green". The slave trade and slavery existed long before capitalism was invented. Entire civilizations were ravaged by it. Making a distinction isn't meaningful and he didn't say chattel slavery, he said slavery because you don't need capitalism to incentivize dipshits to do dipshittery. Capitalism sucks, yes, but you don't have to be ahistorical to point out how it sucks.
NonCompete is gonna be floored when he takes his first college philosophy class and finds out about the idealist bozo who wrote the analogy of The Cave.
I mean, yeah? Plato literally invented idealism. Doesn't that example just prove his point, or do you really think he has never heard of that? Although it's funny that people keep bringing that up bc I attacked NC by comparing him to Plato on his Vaush video.
"I'd like to have a conversation in good faith" Immediately overstates Vaush's responsibility for the actions of his audience, then underplays the responsibility of Luna for her own tweets 🙄 Ok, I could maybe give that a pass as it's his wife But the complete inability to comprehend hypotheticals BIG red flag
I love the harassment thing slowly shifting from “your viewers are harassing people and sending death threats” to “you should be more responsible for what you say about marginalized people” to “you're just being mean and I don't see the utility” to desperately make something, ANYTHING stick. What a weasel lol, just come out and say “I'm mad you insulted my wife,” it'd be way less patronizing and sad.
@@checkeredcheese What? I was talking about EJ's claim that Vaush's community is harassing Luna/EJ and when pressed on it he had to water down the claim several times to try and smear him. I'm not saying Vaush was harrassed if that's what you thought.
"You called her a *checks notes* stepchild? "Yea as like a reference to the red-headed stepchild thing" "Ok so you were being racist got it" Bruh wtf is non-compete
@@dylanc9174 dudeeee as far as I’m aware NC isn’t gay, there is no need to lie to make fun of him. He has already shown he is a clown (thou if he is gay I’m open to correction if I’m wrong. But isn’t it pretty lame to make fun of his sexuality. What are we? Boomers?) And heyyyy feminism isn’t also about throwing feminine women under the bus. Let’s give some appreciation to feminine women
@kiwikemist come on let’s not be stupid. I’m a hardcore Marxist but the Holodomor was a genocide plain and simple. Talkies usually deny this.even though it’s irrefutable.
“Do you think idealism means when you construct hypotheticals? Have you read Capital? It is full of hypotheticals.” - Yes Lol he’s unwittingly doing the work.
@@charliekowittmusic It doesn’t matter if a hypothetical is based on material conditions. By their nature hypotheticals are a perfect form. Like the difference between Triangles and triangles. The perfect form Triangles has never been observed outside of the mind. They may exist, and understanding the form is useful. But we do not interact or experience them outside of the mind. We interact with triangles, which do not fit the form Triangle.
That moment at 40:30 spoke volumes to me. When dude starts in with "where are you getting this from?" it really cements the fact that he doesn't understand what any of these words mean.
@@nackskott12 Marketers I get being brain dead. But attorneys was always the big surprise for me. And honestly after RGR, Sidney Powell, and worse, I think a mid-life career switch to law can't be that difficult.
I think the ‘useless’ part was the stinger. That’s a more harmful word than most swear words and slurs in many cultures (as social responsibilities are often the most valued thing in many third world countries as the data shows)
@@totenwache88 but how is NC gonna get people to knee jerkingly attack Vaush if he doesn't try to frame this as racist and interprets his words in good faith ?
Isn't it shown that people who can't understand hypotheticals are often very intellectually weak? Like being unable to consider hypotheticals means you can't make decisions based on critical thinking that requires consideration of outcomes and systems.
It's a core attribute of an authoritarian personality, demonstrating a lack of introspection. But in this case it might be more due to him realizing he couldn't defend his position, and he was desperately trying to keep from painting himself into a corner.
I’m pretty sure there must be a part of the human population that does not have the mental resources to engage in hypothetical thinking, just like some people do not have an inner voice, and some do. I am inclined to think that those capabilities may be related , but that’s just a (hypothetical) thought
Literally anyone can understand hypotheticals. Every day we consider hypotheticals such as "is it going to rain?", "should I eat this or that?" "What is the best way to get from place A to place B". These are hypotheticals based on the material reality. Thinking about what would happen if aliens came down or if people had 6 arms and 4 legs is pointless unless you're a fiction writer.
@@matheusvillela9150 the reason people say "if aliens came down and did x" is to simplify the question. The "aliens" don't have the baggage of human history, so we don't have to consider other aspects, only their action and effect. As vaush said, the point of a hypothetical is to isolate variables. If you're asking "why are the aliens doing that" then you've missed the point of the question.
@@Froggsroxx Variables can't be isolated, though, because they only exist in relation to each other. This sort of hypothetical thinking not grounded in reality but in pure abstraction is what ancaps base their ideology on.
Yes when you level attacks a POS and other minorities, you make the community less safe for them. Is this too hard a concept for fragile white 12 year olds to grasp?
I'm impressed at how dense he is to not realize that his liking of political theory is completely incompatible with his blatant anti-intelectualism. He thinks all things should be analyzed through the lens of material conditions, including ethics, and yet simultaneously believes that one's principles should come from some intuitive understanding, but will also criticize others for trying to universalize their ethical systems, all the while acting surprised that anyone would even challenge his intuitively derived ethical framework as though he believes it to be universally applicable. In summary, I have seen many people much, much more crazy than this guy, in fact I wouldn't even call him crazy. However, I will say that his cognitive dissonance is among the greatest I've seen in a while, and while he made fun of people for "sitting around and thinking", I think that's exactly what he needs to do to sort out what he believes. You could say that he needs to "resolve the antagonisms between his ethical and political frameworks", if you'd like.
That's because Noncompete never stopped being a conservative, he just switched his aesthetic to red and black. Which means he thinks like a conservative - morality is based on My Feels! He even does the same exact conservative grifts with shit like "pattern of behavior" vagueing while trying to make spurious claims of culpability.
@@FelisImpurrator wait he was a conservative before? That would explain the black-and-white thinking. As an ex-conservative and ex-fundamentalist I'm more than familiar with how even when you leave, the kind of thinking that is drilled into you stays unless you actively try to get out of it. I know there was a recent video essay from an ex-Christian I saw talking about this exact issue that was pretty interesting. Though I must admit, there's a comically large concentration of dogma in NonCompete's worldview that certainly seems like he hasn't made as much progress as most.
18:49 NonCompete: I'm using hypotheticals here 29:35 NonCompete: I'm not an idealist; I'm not gonna talk about hypotheticals that don't have a bearing on the actual reality.
Man, it sucks that your basically-identical comment to mine (and made before mine, it looks like, yay independently coming to the same idea) didn’t get any attention.
This dude is the definition of "blinders on", he only sees the last 7 seconds of dialogue and forgets all context. He needs a "topic" indicator to remind him what the hell is being talked about.
@@veganvanguard8273 obviously. i don't get why anyone would think this could be a legitimately fruitful conversation when it's literally a guy defending his wife.
Yeah I had no clue who he was unfortunately before this so the moment I heard he was married to Luna Oi I was like “Oh shit is that the whole reason he’s here”
why i get the feeling NC thinks Marx is the only Philosopher worth reading? it’s like he can’t wrap his head around some very basic stuff like utilitarianism or empiricism without tying it up to some up to some marxian jargon, like DUDE, Marx didn’t literally wrote about everything, he was an economist, if you only based your entire worldview on Das Kapital you’re gonna be left with some serious blindspots
@@amellirizarry9503 yeah but if he'd actually read Marx and his best buddy Engels he'd understand how stupid some of the stuff he and Luna said is anyhow. They wrote a lot about a lot of stuff and it's actually really good and worth reading but the comments him and she have made show they haven't read that stuff beyond a few fun quotes.
I’m honestly so tired of this “poor marginalized person victimized by Vaush’ community” thing. Professor Flowers, for example, got to come on here and spew racist and fascist talking points for hours, and then go on Twitter and play victim and milk the situation for months. It’s annoying. In all actuality, I see Vaush and the community talked badly about all day long. He trends on my Twitter damn near daily and it’s always people saying awful things. I’ve seen zero racist comments to these so called oppressed people, but I’ve seen a lot coming FROM them. It seems like a lot of people thrive on the victim mentality, and guys like this eat it up because they want to feel like they’re fighting for something. Meanwhile leftists on Twitter get to openly express genocidal beliefs day in, day out. I’m not able to feel much sympathy for these people tbh. I don’t know who the woman in question here is, but I’ve seen her type all over Twitter, and I can say that in regards to professor flowers who loves to play victim, I’m not about to feel sympathy for someone who advocated for being able to kill me because of my skin color.
@azimuth they don't. Off the top of my head I can think of at least a few black and indigenous content creators who have both talked to and defended Vaush publicly.
16:25 This is fucking ridiculous. The way he GENUINELY expects you to remember every single word you speak at ALL times is ACTUALLY insane. I know DAMN well he couldn't be held to the same standard.
Noncompete can’t go to the store because planning the shopping list is creating a hypothetical and therefore idealism
By that logic, nobody could plan for anything
That’s the point. Hypotheticals are imperative to progress
His response to that would literally just be "but thats not politcal"
LMFAO
I had some sympathy for what he said about Vaush's communication style possibly encouracing harrassment and that he could maybe go a bit lighter on that but that went out the window so fast when he refused to apply the same logic to Luna. Holy hypocrite.
Yep. "I'm okay with being mean to people" might seem like a toxic attitude until you have a bird's eye view of what's really going on. Nothing wrong with boiling a bad egg.
Holy hypocrisy batman!
What ive always believed is that you should be toxic to toxic people and wholesome to wholesome people
@@Darkslayer0117Unless you are playing Civ 1, or else you get nuclear Ghandhi.
People like NoCompete believe being mean to minorities is inherently wrong and being mean to whites is fine.
This is one of the funniest conversations you've ever had. Non-Compete has no clue. He went from "hey, be responsible with your platform" to "hypotheticals are idealism" to "uhh the Nazis were bad because they were factually incorrect" - what a rollercoaster.
This has such "you hurt my wife's feelings, say you're sorry" vibes
If he came out the gate saying that, I think Vaush may have reacted a little differently
@@jons4934 How could you dare talk to _MAH WAIFE_ like that!
@@sluttyMapleSyrup it's almost like NC thinks he owns his wife as the paternalistic master and that she's too docile and passive to argue for her own dignity. How hierarchical
I have to check my toxic masculinity every time i listen to a debate with non-compete because he genuinely comes off so pathetic lmao
@@daffyuser Don't worry, his behaviour is the most toxic masculinty in my opinion, it's like assuming his wife cant argue for herself (which she cant, that's pretty clear) but he makes it because she is such a poor poor marginalized frail vietnamese woman, and he, the white knight come to beat down on the bully, is the only one who could ever save her from herself. It's so disgusting, everytime he has been on vaush it's because "mah wife's feelings hurt". That is some serious saviour complex, abandonment issue hellhole weirdo toxic masculinity shit.
You are probably good bro/brer/brex
40 minutes in and I'm tearing my hair out. Half of Philosophy is metaphore and allegory. People aren't literally chained in a cave, there is no literal runaway Trolley, there is no literal machine that makes you happy. These are all thought experiments that investigate our feelings and sense of morality.
wait... I wasnt supposed to tie people to trolley tracks and cut the trolley brakes?
edit: the better version of the joke: "You are a moral philosophy teacher, do you tie people to trolley tracks to keep your job?"
If you brought up the Chinese Room, Ignorant Johnson would call you a racist.
@@Jnihil00 But does the room *speak* Chinese?
@@ariandynas Hypothetically...
@@Jnihil00 HA!
NC: You were mean to my wife.
V: Yeah, and I’m ok with that.
NC: ………… you were mean to my wife.
Honestly hilarious moment
Vaush: You are stood on a runaway trolley car, when you see up ahead-
NonCompete: That's idealism, my city doesn't have a trolley car.
Physics teacher: Let us consider a frictionless ball going down a slope...
NonCompete: Do you think you can learn anything by thinking about unrealistic hypotheticals? You have to base your analysis on objective data. Marx and Engels listed two sources of objective data, and hypotheticals are not one of them.
tbf I wish I could have said that to my physics/math teacher back in school. It's all useless theoretical nonsense
@@Tacklepig relativity kinda is important, for instance it's used to adjust GPS for more accuracy. In terms of everyday use though, yeah
Would a frictionless ball roll?
@@echiko4932 Nope. Even if you picked it up. It would just slip through your hands, always keeping its original rotation.
@@johnsmith34 thats pretty wacky to think about ngl
The "your fans are attacking me" card is such a dirty silencing tactic. The accuser doesn't have to provide a shred of evidence, yet if you challenge the accusation, you look like the bad guy. If you agree not to respond to the accuser anymore, you're implicitly saying the accusations are valid. If you refuse, you look like the bad guy. It's a lose/lose situation.
That’s because it’s reality that his fans are attacking her 😂
inb4 they’re not “fans” they’re “hate-watchers”
@@AIRburst95 Case in point.
Im a centrist
Just gonna say what was said at 48:25 and your reaction, is you trying to escape the right-wing spell
But you have a following now, you can't really change now understandably. You gotta put food on table somehow in this economy.
And you technically aren't selling your people out like Candace Owens or anything
So just do you
@@sad10promo what???
I was on NCs side until Luna's comment about pedophilia was quoted. What are the real-world effects of being labeled a pedophile vs. being labeled "useless."
Well, invoking her nationality was the main issue. Still relatively minor in comparison
@@Turalcar more like invoking her nationalism
@@totenwache88 EJ said he'd prefer a more explicit "rabid nationalist" so that no one (even as uncharitable as EJ) could misconstrue that being Vietnamese is the problem
@@Turalcar but shes using Vietnamese textbooks as her sources in the vid...
Being Vietnamese isnt the problem but Vietnamese nationalism has its own intricacies just like german, italian, american, etc nationalisms all have varying aspects and historical contexts.
If shes pushing vietnamese flavored nationalism then its important to talk about the specifics. To do otherwise would be...well unironically racist to pretend all nationalisms are the same.
@@douglaslangley9251 I get that. Hence the bad faith requirement
Hypotheticals are like stress testing planes. You aren’t going to fly a jet through the worst possible storm on earth but it might be useful to see what might happen if you do. You can learn if, when, where, how, and why it breaks. Same thing with your ideas, hypotheticals let you identify weak points and flaws that might slip you notice otherwise. This is basic philosophy you don’t need a PHD to get that.
THIS! this is what people who don't engage in hypotheticals do not understand
"No because stress testing planes is a material thing and not hypothetical so it's materialist not idealist" - NonCompete who missed the analogy's point because analogies are idealism!
That's not the only thing he doesn't understand here. Vaush pointed it out directly to him as well. "Using intuitive morals is what leads to mass slaughters then being post hoc justified instead of prevented altogether."
Also, I watched the Ben Burgis commentary of this exchange and he used the term "Sam Harris Marxist" to describe how NC was trying to frame dialectical materialism, referencing that Sam Harris believes science can tell you what morals to have instead of science providing information to which you can better decipher how to apply your morals and ethics. NC literally keeps saying over and over that the framework of thinking (dialectical materialism) somehow reveals what's moral or not and doesn't even understand with a critical theory even is it seems.
In the fighting game community, we call this 'getting exposed', i.e. he walked right into that hyper telegraphed super finish.
This is a giantly great analogy.
@@heavysystemsinc. mans got hit with the Taunt -> Get Bodied true combo
How did this guy miss the point so thoroughly? Non-Compete seemingly doesn’t realize that Vaush is asking about why a moral position is good or bad and Non-Compete continually thinks Vaush is giving his moral position.
He was fishing for a good clip. Notice how he says "I got everything I needed" before he hangs up - the ONLY reason he was in the debate was to get a clippable moment he could burn for clout.
@@JRexRegis NC felt very bad faith so I would have to agree with you.
It was a bit painful to see him not understand the Socratic method approach, but very telling that he didn’t recognize what the Socratic method is.
Shark30zero put it kinda funny, something along the lines of "he actually doesnt understand he's in a simulation right now, like vaush put the vr headset on him and he thinks its real, he thinks vaush is actually arguing from his own position"
maybe I just think this is way funnier than it actually is, but I just had to share this
Okay I know the hangup is funnier, but can we talk about how Noncompete got stuck on correlation and responsibility like two minutes in? He just kept repeating that Luna got hate after Vaush discussed her, in spite of Vaush explaining how that was likely an inevitable consequence of him discussing her, rather than his language or community being racist towards her. Then he got stuck on the stepchild thing, as though Vaush was supposed to agree that it was somehow inciting racism. And then finally just being stymied when Vaush admitted it was vitriolic (while not conceeding it was racist or irresponsible, because...how?) but said he was fine with being mean.
Plus he kept saying he'd proven that Luna was getting harassed when he never actually presented ANYTHING. I believe him, but what is Vaush supposed to do about harassers without knowing who they are or what they're saying, despite his best efforts to find out? Clown shit from minute one.
Ya I suppose if you are stuck in a competitive all or nothing mindset it's hard to understand the value of being kind yourself when it's not likely to cause others to do the same
If your followers are racist and you claim to be against racism then logically you would want to work against having racist followers???
We can also talk about how EJ tried desperately to twist Vaush's words on policing his community into clutching his pearls that Vaush's community would need any policing at all. Pathetic attempt at a catch-22. "Oh you need to police your community? That's pretty Y I K E S Y!"
@@FantaLiteBrav what if the racism doesn’t come from the community? What if it’s kiwi farmers who hate both parties but track the bigger platform because being a neet is a hell of a drug. Wasn’t this already addressed?
@@FantaLiteBrav also Vaush had like, a group of people go check on the people who were harassing Luna on twitter and ended up proving that literally none of them were part of his community, I'll see if I can find the tweets again
as a vietnamese person i give vaush the "stepchild of vietnam" pass because this is apparently a grievous insult
It was a tactical “stepchild of Vietnam” statement
I love how easily non-compete is defeated by the incredibly advanced strategy of repeatedly asking why.
Color me surprised a guy named non-compete is a pushover.
@@aennaenn7468 fair point
"She didn't call you a pedophile, she just said that you make arguments defending pedophilia "
Why does this sound so familiar?
Because that's literally what Vaush has done but Vaushites can't accept that.
@@isaacanderson4795 ratio + L + Bozo + morrowind better
@@isaacanderson4795 Yes the famous examples (which you have not provided) where Vaush has engaged in clip-chimping.
@@isaacanderson4795 meanwhile MrGirl fans are malding because he cut that discussion short. Can't win, can he?
RGR moment
I’d have more respect for NC if he showed up at Vaush’s house and threatened to fight him for insulting his wife.
@John Cobblepot it would also be really entertaining
@John Cobblepot Nah. You’re just a beta.
@@Gum_Cuzzler Okay keyboard warrior.
@John Cobblepot still less embarassing than whatever the fuck this was
He would seriously come out looking better if he just stayed away from any philosophy and literally just focused on the "you insulted my wife" thing.
Non-compete's mistake was not acknowledging how much emotional attachment he has to the given topics. It's so obvious he came here to defend his partner.
People like this NonCompete person are really scary for me. He clearly knows all the philosophy vocabulary, had exposure to lots of the concepts and narrates them very confidently, but he barely understands anything about it. He doesn't even know the difference between dialectic and ethics, he has no idea what idealism is... The scary thing is I can easily see myself being duped by someone like him, if i knew a little bit less about the subjects.
This guy might as well have been taught by the Vietnamese schooling system. His wife for sure as hell was.
And thus you can understand the phenomenon that is Jordan fucking Peterson
@@jamespace5429 Noncompete is much more competent than Jordan Peterson. They're similar in how they abuse vocabulary but Noncompete is just better at doing it.
People like NC are always problematic when allowed to "thrive", and it's not about what he said in this video, but rather the idea that he was a hardcore right winger until only a couple years ago. Similar with Shoe on Head or any number of these goofs. If you are not being fundamentally brainwashed by your parents, anyone who instinctively goes right wing and then switches, but wants to be a public figure.... Is suspect as can be, because one, they have already established that they can't be trusted to not be easily tricked? Like imagine someone in real life you know that strongly has an opinion against all logic for years and then they switch that opinion entirely?
Great you changed your mind, but holy crap nobody should ask your opinion about anything. Guess who I don't look to for opinions? People who can't functionally process information.
This is why video essays can sometimes be just as dangerous as they claim debate to be. There's nobody to challenge the video you already spent hours watching unless you spend the same amount of time rewatching the video with someone critiquing it.
"she quoted a video of you..."
"it wasn't a quote"
"but anyway, she quoted the video..."
But… she did quote the video.
You’re lying and you know it…
Secondly, Vaush lied and said the clip was “spliced together”.
How do you all see him lying and just go along with it? This is a cult of personality, I guess. Hang on to that parasocial pleasure while you can kids.. so cringe..
@@TurtleChad1 Can’t we have a civil discussion about basic facts?
Idk what a tankie is I’m not very online.
Isn’t EJ an Anarcho-Syndicalist?
Either way, it’s very strange to just ejaculate “GO BE A TANKIE” because I insisted that facts are facts and lying for a cult of personality is wrong.. but okay.
That was hillarious, he is simping so hard for his wife. Which i would not mind if she wasnt smearing someone for being a pdf-file. I went and watched the video..and it litrally cuts him mid sentence. Its disgusting really...wonder if he could file for defamation.
@@charliekowittmusic Vaush was right, though. The clip literally cuts him off mid-sentence.
She quoted a clipped fraction of his actual argument meant to make him look bad. That’s a fact.
@@charliekowittmusic “How do you … pleasure … kids” - Charlie
And that’s a direct quote.
As a guy who's previously found himself in humiliating positions while defending a toxic spouse because I was too insecure to admit they're wrong...this just hits different.
Vaush is a sexual abuser don't support him
That’s rough.
yeah no, their relationship doesn't even seem close to that. they are not superstars, they don't owe us anything, he can just break up at any point that he wants, and it actually took them fairly long into their youtube career for them to start dating
@@Breakbeat90s Ok. And? This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read. It's actually just completely unrelated.
Im still amazed how often vaush is clipchimped. I think part of it is he kind of has the Obama pause/separation of words so it's really easy to cut the clip off with a natural sounding ending
NonCompere: I’m speaking hypothetically
NonCompete: I don’t engage in hypotheticals
18:41 29:35
He's clearly not saying he never engages in hypotheticals. If you disagree with him on the validity of the hypothetical, explain why. This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding an issue.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 “if you disagree on the validity of the hypothetical, explain why.”
How can NC and I disagree on the validity of Vaush’s hypothetical? NC rejected V’s hypothetical, and by NC’s definitions almost all hypotheticals generally, out of hand without even hearing the hypothetical or engaging with it in the slightest.
Which is exactly my point.
NC resoundedly rejects a foundational tool of philosophy, used by every single philosopher I’m aware of as well as Marx. What’s more, NC changes his mind is willing to use hypotheticals himself when he arbitrarily deems them acceptable/convenient.
“This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding the issue.”
In what way is that what I’m doing? Because at least by your description, it sounds like your behavior so far has the same or more “toxicity” and “debate culture”-ness compared to my one comment.
I don’t think NC is a stupid person. But he’s definitely being stupid on this issue, purposefully or not.
@@zen_tewmbs
Once again, he never said he was against all hypotheticals. You do realize it's possible to create a bad hypothetical? Particularly if the point of the hypothetical is to illustrate a larger point, but the concept of the hypothetical doesn't apply equally in more general ways.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 Except the entire time he kept saying “I refuse to engage with hypotheticals, this is idealism” and couldn't explain why he thought it was a bad hypothetical. He literally dismissed it on the basis of it being a hypothetical.
@@maximusstirnimus5210 “do you realize it’s possible to create a bad hypothetical?”
Yes, I do. That is also irrelevant, because NC didn’t say “that hypothetical is not applicable to this situation and here’s why”.
NC repeatedly interrupted Vaush to say that he would not engage with any hypothetical that wasn’t “grounded in material reality” - which by NC’s definition, is almost every hypothetical used by Marx and every philosopher I’ve read. It’s directly what NC said, and the direct consequences of what he said.
So two questions.
1) Do you have even a single instance of NC engaging with a hypothetical presented by Vaush, and NC then saying it is not applicable to the situation because of any reason besides a variation of “that wouldn’t happen IRL”?
2) you said “This is why debate culture is so toxic, everything is about proving someone to be stupid quickly instead of actually understanding the issue.”
In what way is that what I’m doing? Because at least by your description, it sounds like your behavior so far has the same or more “toxicity” and “debate culture”-ness compared to my one comment.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle making a metaphysical venn diagram that Non-Compete is refusing to allow himself to favorably fall into
It would be easier if he just said Luna is his wife please don't say mean things.
Honestly, just drop any façade and roll with that ffs
Mai wife !
Here's the thing about that hypothetical situation. NC would have been correct if Vaush's logic was "I can conduct a single unrealistic hypothetical situation under which this would be ethical, therefore it is ethical in the real world." But that was nowhere close to the argument he was making because he's not an idiot. NC literally could not understand the difference between using hypotheticals to illustrate a point or explore nuance and basing your entire worldview on hypotheticals.
The saddest part of all of this is that NC will walk away from this not recognizing how little he understands and this entire exchange will instead become evidence of how unreasonable Vaush is. There's a real problem today where very few people are willing to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong about something. That's why flat Earthers act like everyone else is too stupid to understand their nonsense when they fail to convince anyone
We use hypotheticals all the time. How does he and his wife decorate their house? They just randomly buy shit and throw in places or do they come up with ideas and make hypotheticals about where to put shit by what would look best where.
I watched one of his videos to where he states what is wrong with the Left and in it he said Vietnam went through a peaceful transition which is not true. It is apparent neither he nor his wife who were not alive during that time have never talked to those who went through it. Re-education camps were not pretty. They created farming community zones up in the highlands on indigenous land and it failed miserable. Others were outright killed. Southerners were distructed by the North. According to the Peace Treaty over the US leaving a North and South were supposed to remain independent countries. The NLF thought they were get to form the new Southern govt but then got betrayed by the North who then unified which was supposed to be after the South had a stable govt and then both countries decided to have the vote. Nope, the North just did a big FU, nullified the political power of the NLF and put people from the North in charge. Foreigners were told leave or we make you leave and NC stated this was voluntary but necessary for decolonization and then implied that this happened and thus now then left foreigners in. He COMPLETELY ignored their economy tanked and due to mid 80s reforms of allowing foreign business in they turned their economy around.
I am not really impressed with him.
@@DevinMacGregor His takes are 100% just Luna's regurgitated when it comes to Vietnam. He doesn't *dare* disagree.
Check Voosh's video on her, it's either here or on The Pit, I forget which, just. Holy shit the cope when it comes to the Vietnamese love of free market. 'NO! THE SURVEY WAS LIIIES!', it's absolutely absurd.
@@Revan058 Yeah, I saw that. I do not think he was ever a capitalist either. Just some western dude wjo has a kink for Southeast Asian chicks. My late brother in laws oldest is in Vietnam. He likes them because they can be more submissive than western women. I know of people who like to go to the girly bars in Thailand.
Hypotheticals are used to determine whether there are inconsistencies in an ideology or ethical system - not necessarily to determine which course of action would have the best empirical outcome. Dont understand why he couldn't comprehend this
Actually, you’re incorrect.
If using that hypothetical as a *starting point* is the means by which you arrive at your conclusion, it is Idealism.
This is a fact which is not debatable.
"If all these accusations against you can't be substantiated, why are we constantly making them?" -actual harassers
Vaush: I'm not a witch
NC: Well someone cursed our turnips, coulda been you
I was honestly having trouble understanding Vaush's perspective on this drama until Noncompete started trying to explain away Luna calling Vaush a p*do. He completely lost me as soon as he did that.
Yeah that's basically why Vaush has this take at this point. A lot of bad faith people are gonna do what they want at this point so fuck em. It's not pretty or the most productive but it's also not unwarranted.
@@FireTrainer92 It's just crazy that I was falling so hard for the concern trolling without that context. It really isn't unwarranted.
Yes. My empathy to NC kinda disappeared at that point.
Luna calling a queer man a pedophile isn’t homophobic (even though she’s also said the LGBTQ+ movement in Vietnam is a colour revolution lmao) but calling a Vietnamese nationalist a propagandist is apparently racist.
yep...why are they like this
Polish nationalist being anti lgbt whole left gets its wrong
Vietnamese nationalist being anti lgbt calling them counter revolutionaries lots of people are ok with it.
Poland was under the control of three European empires for two centuries who all tried to erase their culture and language. A lot of polands far right is the way it is because of that but the left makes no excuse for it’s problematic behavior but they do when the colonized anti gay people are poc like Luna.
@@alexalexandrov9684 I wouldn't call noncompeat and his possy of inbreads the hole left but the online left has an large minority of people that are total simps for any poc persone no matter what they actually say or belive
Their brains just shut down when they see poc cas their minds have brakns rotted by Liberal Idpol otherwise they might be totally reasonable people
@@alexalexandrov9684 Luna is not anti lgbt
@Nobody Luna doesn't hold any anti lgbt positions, nor did she say vietnamese lgbt activism is from foreign agents or whatever. Your projecting something (known weirdo)Maupin would say onto Luna.
This dude really showed his ass when he just kept harping in on one thing said about his wife. This wasn't a good faith debate on his part, just him airing his grievances.
100%
Yeah like, just say “I don’t like you being mean to my wife” instead of “you don’t understand that dialectical materialism dictates you be nice to my wife”
yeah and what's funny is if you look at the comments on his reply video the comments are along the lines of "wow i love how you are always acting in good faith really exposed his bullshit" kind of sad yet funny at the same time
@@coleb2264 😂😂😂
MAI WIFE
*Adult:* Don't hurt little Lenny
*Kid:* Why?
*Adult:* How would you feel if someone hurt you?
*Kid:* I, like NonCompete, don't deal with idealism.
Fuck that got a laugh out of me.
Wokest kid alive 💯💯💯
I’m more interested in praxis, mom.
To be fair, Vaush's hypothetical wasn't grounded in reality, yours was. NC wanted something that can be mapped onto reality, Vaush was giving hypotheticals about time traveling and shit
Silly Dad he probably be sniffing some of that hegelian dialectic
He should have just made it about him trying to defend his partner. That's like normal human behavior. The issue was trying to pretend his position was based on leftist theory. Then he showed how fucking little he actually knows about about a lot of things.
That's the classic tankie move, isn't it? Pretend all your emotional biases are empirically reasoned theory so you can have the aesthetics of intellectualism with zero of the effort.
I agree with this take 100 percent
@@FelisImpurrator Nailed that one.
Yea.
NC : "Please can you stop making videos of my wife. We have had alot of harassment and i will pressent the usernames and printscreens of the worst offenders"
Vaush: "i cannot prommis i will never critizise her. But i could possibly choose my words better and i will of course ban all racists shits that is harassing Luna and you"
NC: "sounds fair. Will email the details, goodbye"
Would have been a waaay better outcome.
Anyone could respect someone defending their partner. The man's a coward for going in under the guise of wanting a constructive discussion. Obviously obsessed with his image.
LMAO
Vaush: *tries to force him to pick a standard for moral positions by asking why things are bad*
NonCompete: *can't keep up and starts breaking down*
Vaush: It would be nice to have an ethical system you could apply to answer these questions, right?
NonCompete: No
Bro i just saw that bit and came looking for this comment that was awesome it hits hard if ure high too 😂
"we're not getting anywhere" is a great code-phrase for "you didn't immediately submit to my bad faith argument and now I don't want to reflect on your valid response."
Vaush denied he had any social responsibility to be civil.
Mind reading is a fallacy just FYI.
@@E.J.Crunkleton I don't think I have any social responsibility to be civil to people who imply that I'm a pedophile by misrepresenting and quote-mining me either. That's just being a normal human being.
@@E.J.Crunkleton Don't you think it's kinda absurd to say it's you social responsibility to be civil to fascists and people who falsely accuse you of pedophillia? Clearly you don't believe this
Seems like he just came here with a bone to pick and to defend his partner and spin it like it was some anti-racist personal responsibility moral policing. Like when Vaush said “you’re obviously closer to this than I am” and he said “well yeah I recognize that she’s a PERSON” kinda just shows your dishonest intent. Just go out and defend your partner if that’s what you want to do but don’t act like it’s anything different
I don't think it's dishonest if it's obvious to everyone involved. He had PF on his stream too but he didn't feel forced to talk directly to Vaush in that case.
Helicopter white knight hubby 🚁
@@Turalcar I think it's dishonest in it's presentation, like "I came here because you insulted muy wife" vs "I came here to explain to you how insulting my wife hurts socialism and Marx said so"
@@at5203 The latter is worse, actually. The 1st part is wrong and the 2nd is an appeal to authority (which is sus for a self-proclaimed anarchist)
@Gilgamesh4238 IDK, i also just get slight fetishist who moves to fetish country vibes as well, and did before this debate
Absolutely agonizing that this person is trying to argue against having a moral system
It's so painful seeing him not knowing what the fuck idealism is. I saw that concept on my first fucking semester in college, and he doesn't even know the difference between a hypothetical and idealism
It's funny because an Idealist would probably use EJ's misunderstanding of Idealism as support for Idealism.
"You see, the subject's perception limits his knowledge. By opining on a subject he is unfamilar with, his mind creates assertions to support his speech, independent of what could be considered "objective"".
Defending your wife: Usually pretty morally good.
Defending your wife's terrible takes: Okay we're slipping here.
Defending your wife calling someone a kidler didler by calling your opponent a kidler didler: The plot has been lost Batman, go home.
This one made me blow air out of my nose with a slight grin, congratulations you win
The whole thing is so cringe.
I'm pretty sure he's trying to earn his annual oral session
Luna Oi seems really cowardly and manipulative to me. Her weird tangeants and victim blaming reminds me of an abuser from my life, and some Theramintrees stuff. Wouldn't be surprising if her boyfriend is being manipulated.
@@frocco7125 NC and Luna are the embodyment of Cry bullies. Their cope stream afterwards was golden.
@@jizburg I saw they had like 5 people on a video call afterwards, so fucking extra lmao
"The main problem with Nazis is they didn't have their facts straight."-NonCompete, literally
Right up there with Jordan Peterson saying Hitler’s issue with the Jews was caused by OCD
Noncompete: *creates a circle*
"This is just going around in circles can we move on??"
Haha exactly! Or when Vaush has a good counter argument and hes just like " anyways we arent going anywhere with this ". I can see it in his eyes, the panic, hoping Vaush would actually move on.
Did anyone else get the sense he was just mad Vaush made fun of his wife
Yep lol
reverse ted cruz
Definitely butt hurt
Some honesty about that would’ve been worthy of respect. Sure, stick up for your girl, king, but be less of a weasel and just admit that’s what you’re there for.
Hey at least he did a little more than Ted Cruz ever did about it
"The material conditions will dictate what's acceptable or not" is the most ominous shit I've heard in some time. Please don't let these people gain any more social traction.
Yuuup. That’s how you get the reign of terror and gulags.
invisible hand of the free market 2
What's weird is people on Twitter trying to justify this framing with this idea that material conditions can be defined in such a way so that it's literally impossible for bad things to be justified. As if you can just stretch the definitions a bit to make internal and external morality the same thing.
I can't really see what's wrong with that statement. Our material conditions is the basis for moving up Maslow's hierarchy of needs. As an example, a woman might find it preposterous to sell herself for sex and wrong, but if she has a hungry kid and an empty bank account she might overcome that initial moral dismissal of sex work and do whatever she has to fed her kid and make money.
What's a more clear example is looking at worker's rights and salaries in western countries. They have all but gone up and that increase in material wealth (and workers rights) are seen as the "new" acceptable standard for society. No one is gonna find it fair to be paid 50% less than others in the same field of work. Material conditions does indeed inform our idea of what is acceptable or not in our societies.
@@lameduck3105 Forecasting the conditions for when an action is and is not acceptable is what an ethical framework is for.
I personally think it's always acceptable for someone to "sell their body" in this way. The distinction between assault and self-defense is more illustrative.
Assault is what you enact physical violence upon someone without the proper justification. Enacting physical violence upon someone with the intent (and reasonably likely outcome) of protecting yourself or someone else is a justification for violence that is prescribed by the ethical framework.
To simply say, "the material conditions will dictate what is justified" is just another way of saying you intend to post-hoc justify whatever attrocities you commit in the fulfillment of your goal.
NC comes across as a mid-level manager. Who’s trying to argue with an employee during a yearly review. So he can write them up and fire him for not liking his wife.
Holy shit this so spot on.
I think that's actually his origin story lamo.
Yeah I think his background was marketing lol
It’s the passive aggression and constant deflection away from getting to any kind of answer. Along with the demeaning tone and “I have concerns” attitude. My skin was crawling just listening to him dance around.
@@colinmurphy525 Ergh... Yeah. I just finally "made the effort" to listen to that preposterous so-called debate...
And I am really dismayed by his irratating kind of snarky patronising demeanor right from the start.
Quite early, I felt very compassionate with Vaush for remaining so composed.
How did NC get so fired up about hypotheticals being idealism when he started with the hypotheticals in the beginning of the conversation about dealing with vitriolic commenters
TRUE LOL
Right? I think he heard Vaush use the alien example and decided to latch onto the idea that Vaush won’t work in the material world, so he doesn’t have to acknowledge that it’s the ethical question of “would you sacrifice one person so many people can survive” not the actual aliens that are important to the question. It’s literally just the trolley problem and NC either knew he’d crumble under the slightest pressure if he went down that road or he really was just looking for clips.
Because he's not actually upset about hypotheticals, he's just distracting from the fact he has no real arguments. That's my guess anyway..
Exactly
Because he's not upset about hypotheticals. He's upset about hypotheticals that have no basis in reality. When Marx uses hypotheticals, he's comparing the value of yards of linen to coats to illustrate a point about how economics work.
When vaush uses hypotheticals he abstracts away all the context and nuance that gives things meaning in order to make useless universal statements that have no basis in reality.
I hate it when people use words like "marginalized" at incorrect contexts. It just turns it into a buzz word. Luna is not from a society that marginalizes her for her ethnicity. This is not to say she doesn't experience racism over the internet but these are two different but related concepts.
What Noncompete doesn’t realize is that he already is utilizing an ethical system, just subconsciously. Because we all do, it's literally unavoidable, so we might as well take the time to sit down and sort through it.
Morals should be applied to situations and be proactive, not responding to situations and be reactive.
He had absolutely no concept of what vaush was talking about and it was agonizing to listen to.
"It depends on the material conditions", ok, how do you decide whether something is good or bad once you know the material conditions? Don't understand why he can't make that additional step
That's why people like that often end up falling for reactionary ideas
Was thinking the same thing, but couldn’t have said it better myself!
Vaush shouldn't lecture people about moral systems because he acts like an asshole all the time. I don't believe he cares about socialism at all because he can't take 2 seconds to notice the humanity in another person.
@@zetizahara "Moral systems is when you aren't mean"
Back to phylosophy 101 with you
I was subbed to Non-Compete and unsubbed when Vaush fans came to his stream to peacefully discuss with him. They were banned although they were so respectful. And the 2-3 out of 100s who were not respectful were shown on stream as an example how bad Vaush fans are. Even Non-Compete fans criticized his mods for this sneaky stuff. Good job to the Vaush community.
When even his viewers see how shitty that is, you'd think he'd stop that.
Watch what his yt mods where saying during the live stream
we're good fellas, some of us are just a bit stupid and some are simply not in our community.
Idk if that’s true? Did this happen after the conversation with Vaush? Because before I saw some Vaush viewers in his comments and he seemed okay-ish with it
@@joeyjose727 yes, after
17 minutes in I feel like this dude only wanted to talk to vaush because he was offended on his wife's behalf. He's clearly fishing for vaush to apologize or give some sort of admission of guilt. Its almost comedic how you can tell that vaush's stone-faced refusal to take any responsibility for the harassment is clearly frustrating him but he is trying to still remain calm.
Exactly the reading I got
100% my interpretation too. There were a few clues:
1) The number of times he said "I don't know what to tell you". Like, that phrase CAN say a lot, but when you keep saying it, maybe you just have nothing good to say.
2) His clear excitement - later on - in dragging the conversation into really arcane theory debate just because Vaush brought up a hypothetical, while also refusing to allow any philosophy that is "idealist" (read: something I haven't read before). It was never about the hypothetical. It was because he didn't like the hypothetical and he needed an out.
3) How he went from a detailed dissection of things Vaush has said and how that incites online hate, to..."no, she didn't TECHNICALLY say that!" You don't get it both ways. You can critique someone's implications and/or the wider context and consequences of what they've said, OR you can be an idiot right winger who says "words have a dictionary definition and that's that!" You don't get to do both. Unless you're a dishonest fuck defending his wife with no regard for truth or equal treatment.
The fact that he misunderstood you so thoroughly and then said you were unironically "supporting Nazis" is almost unbelievable to me. How can he miss every point so completely and be unaware of it?
It's like a perfect overlap of being stupid, feeling stupid, and responding with dishonesty
People will do the craziest shit if you make them feel stupid
@@rainbowkrampus Well, Noncompete has such a fragile ego, he once went on an insane rant against UA-cam support bots (lmao, he screenshotted it on his own twitter as if it would make him look good) where he seemed utterly convinced that Trevor Noah, a liberal comedian who almost 100% certainly has no idea who he is, had a personal vendetta against his channel. Why? Because he uploaded some video accusing Noah of being some kind of anti-worker neolib based on an old comedy bit he did poking fun at a worker's protest in Africa, and the video got DMCA'd.
It's almost guaranteed that what actually happened was just another generic instance of capitalist PR bots mindlessly taking down anything that resembles bad optics, or bog standard copyright trolling by the algorithm servants. No plausible scenario involves Trevor Noah, a wildly bigger public figure, giving the slightest thin shit about some nobody tankie.
But that's the thing: For people with such inflated egos, everything is about them, even as the air in their heads makes their self-esteem incredibly fragile.
People who hatewatch you = you share the takes of your haters? I was facepalming in the first 5 minutes of the video already
@@PancakemonsterFO4 Guilt by association, a favorite tactic of dishonest moral purity crusaders (oops, that's redundant, that's all of them) to facilitate witch burning. Can't criticize the argument? Just cite vague proximity to a thing you've already predetermined to be Bad.
@Nara Puppy vaush literally never called dude a Nazi or anything once in this convo lol
I like when he gets stuck in an infinite loop when Vaush asks him to try to apply his principles to a hypothetical situation.
To be honest you could have done the same with vaush position.
-Why is genocide bad vaush.
-It produced harm and negative utility
-Why
-Because it is bad
-How can you know it's bad
-Because it produces negative utility
Every single time vaush talk about philosophy it is an emparasement
@@balghar493 what? Vaush wouldn't say that, he would say that his founding axiom is humans thriving and being free and happy, so he knows genocide is bad because it goes against his foundational moral axiom of "I think people should get to live free and happy and thriving lives"
What do you mean how do you know it's bad? Obviously at some point you have to make an assumption that you can't really justify, such as "happiness is good, sadness is bad". You can't really logically justify your preference for happiness because someone could have the axiom of "happiness is bad, sadness is good" and it would be just as valid. So you can't really justify why YOUR preference is the correct one.
Do you think Vaush doesn't know this?
Lol especially when the dude screams Marks angles an Haggle repeatedly
@@balghar493 this is were moral anti realism comes in. You can't objectively prove anything to you have to arbitrarily establish axioms first then work from there.
@@balghar493 I was going to point out why your argument is stupid but thankfully two other gents did it for me.
Non compete fans: “Oh my god Vaush fans are so toxic.’
Also noncompete fans: *Sort your comments section by newest and have a look*
they are crybully abusers
EJ calling hypothetical philosophical exercises “idealism” should immediately discredit him for literally everyone in his audience that has actually read Marx - though I doubt they exist.
They exist, they just stop watching EJ afterwards lol
don't worry, Emerican makes sure the only theory their audience knows is that which they are being fed through the puppet videos. the videos in question can be good, but i sure as hell won't be watching them any time soon.
I had a whiplash when NC went "idealism bad" then going on misusing the term idealism when he actually means thinking and imagination. Thats basically an all gas, no breaks leap before you look mentality.
He wasn’t calling philosophical hypotheticals themselves idealist he was saying that The construction of an ethical system off the back of abstract ideals/hypotheticals not rooted in the concrete social conditions of the world is idealist. Which, according to the Marxist tradition, is overwhelmingly true. Whether vaush wants to admit it or not his notion of utilitarianism is textbook idealism and thus is extremely incompatible with dialectical materialism.
@@KikomochiMendoza but EJ was correct. To create a political system based on ideas, I.e rationalism, as opposed to material experience, I.e empiricism, is idealism. Marx was a radical empiricist and EJs ultimate point about how Vaush’s approach to coming to the ultimate conception of a political system, I.e the idea that rational debate gets you closer to the truth, is 100% idealism and in a sense anti-Marxist.
It seems rather ironic that Vaush would openly admit that “idealism” means different things in different contexts when pressed for a definition, but then confidently claim that “hypotheticals” could never fit into a definition for idealism
Edit: I'm surprised I didn't point it out earlier, but I want to reiterate that thinking and imagination is philosophical idealism... If you were to name things that contribute to idealism you would point to functions which are necessary in the formulation of ideas, i.e the mind. If you were to name things that contribute to philosophical materialism, you would refer to the senses as the means of experientially investigating the material world
Watching Noncompete get more mad about having to listen to a hypothetical for five seconds and being wrong about idealism than Vaush was about being called a literal pedophile is incredible.
Vaush has the mental stamina of a psychopath, I wouldn't be even a third of as calm as he is for a fraction of the amount of insults. Though, he's been doing this for long enough to make people who debate him look like unhinged Fast-Food Customers just by face value comparison.
And making it into an 30 minute nonsensical debate instead of just shutting tfu and hearing the hypothetical
That hypothetical would piss off anyone with a braincell. It's incredibly insulting to be asked to sit quietly and entertain some nonsense about aliens when you know it's going to be used to justify something ridiculous. Vaush's outlandish hypotheticals have always been his most patronizing and tedious argumentative trick.
@@zetizahara I can tell that you are someone who also didn't "sit quietly and entertain" the hypothetical even though you're a random UA-cam viewer. You really don't lose anything from it man, it ain't a gun, it's a guy on the internet shooting these hypotheticals around so no need to avoid them no matter how nonsensical.
@@zetizahara “Outlandish hypotheticals”It was literally just the trolley problem, probably the most famous ethical though experiment in the world. “Would I intentionally kill one person to save more than one person?”
It's incredible that someone could make a whole video series about a hypothetical anarchist society and then impune other people for being "idealistic".
LMAOOOO I JUST REALIZED THIS
@@Sergio-nb4hjWhat’s next? Needing a license to make toast in your own damn toaster?
But we have seen anarchist societies in the past.
How is that idealistic, Rojava and EZLN/Zapatistas are doing well (the closest anyone came to socialism, in fact)
Never ask a tankie to imagine a hypothetical. Not. Even. Once.
In all seriousness though I empathise with him for wanting to defend his wife, but it really seems like it's centring his disagreement in this debate, especially when he *keeps* going back to the stepchild thing.
The difference between “tankies” and “libertarian socialists” is that tankies deal with reality, and lib socialists ideas only exist within their imagination
@@cool88905 “Well ackchually, what I believe corresponds to physical reality and what the bad libs I don’t like believe is completely feelings-based.”
Tankies sounding right wing as hell like always. This is literally the Ben Shapiro stance, bro.
@@cool88905 the time for tankies has passed. Go back to the 1900’s if you wanna live that shit. The reality of how it turned out is not something you’ll wanna go through again once you’ve lived it
@@cool88905 Found the tankie. Opinion discarded.
@@Noah_McCurry they imagine themselves at top is the issue.
Bro, this debate is so sad because he had pretty good vibes at the beginning. But DAMN, this guy exploded! Imagine *Wife-knighting so hard that it forces you to disengage from a discussion that you wanted to have.
The problem here is Non-compete (and probably Luna) wanted an apology. He didn’t get it, so he shit his pants and malded hard.
“White knighting”…. It’s his wife lol
@@cvmdracula you’re right, I just edited the comment.
Wife knighting. I’m using that.
Well if you are ever going to knight, knighting for your wife seems like a no brainer. I mean if all goes well they will be together for decades after Vaush ascends to being a brain in a jar screaming donos in the god emperor voice across the solar system.
Now I'll agree he was dumb, and luna is dumb, but I can respect the fact that he tried to defend his wife. I just don't think he should be taken seriously, but I appreciate loyalty to a spouse
To this day my theory about Noncompete hanging up is that he was trying to emulate Vaush suddenly leaving the MrGirl discussion he had just a short while before this discussion. Hence the simultaneous eagerness to do it, as if he was looking for a trigger point to do the theatrical performance he planned, and the awkwardness of it. "Alright Vaush, we're done here. Gooooood bye... This has been, uh. That's all I need to hear." Doesn't sound like someone spontaneously and unplanned quitting the conversation indignantly.
Yeah, he definitely wanted to do the "you hung up on me, so now I'm gonna call you under the auspices of trying to 'work it out' just so I can hang up on you." Mature adult stuff.
I'm kind of happy I was pulled left by Vaush and not someone else. I get to hate Vaush and call him stupid when he says stupid things that I hate and I don't get shamed for it, I just have to present evidence. Even then it mostly that just boils down to I disagree with this based on opinion and ... whatever.
misread that as "I disagree with this based opinion," lmao
@@soccerguy325 based on opinion, this opinion is not based
@@sdjslkdjlsskldjslkdjsl8262 How come?
@@sdjslkdjlsskldjslkdjsl8262 no my worldview was changed by Trump having a swat team gas people passing out masks and hand sanitizer in front of a church. You know before he took a picture in front of the church? The time when the bible was upside down.
Vaush gets better at keeping his cool each debate
I would’ve been laughing. Noncompete talking about philosophy sounds like Charlie Kelly talking about the law.
@Boxcarcifer this is exactly what I got from it. He gets on and says I don't understand then proceeds to argue....
Anyone who can survive for an hour against a creep like Mr Girl is pretty much invincible
I don't know if it was a debate as much as a tongue lashing that turned on the lasher.
@@LimeyLassen I was shocked at how long Vaush let that creep go on.
“I’m here to discuss in good faith”
Famous last words
Quoting a strategically clipped portion of what someone said is not "quoting what they actually said." What the hell?
By this logic the Bible says “In the beginning […] Adam […] created […] God” and that’s “quoting what it actually says”
You mean like when Luna was talking about human consciousness and Vaush started screeching about how she's wrong about class consciousness even though that's obviously not what she was talking about
@@SefirothPH yea totally comparable to being called a pedophile...
also, he wasnt quoting her and using the quote as an argument. it was a fuckin live video reaction lol it is so irrelevant
@@AlienZizi Correction: "Being accurately identified as a pedophile"
@@SefirothPH worms for brains, mama.
Just going off the first 20 mins, it's clear his only reason for doing this,is him being upset his wife got minorly insulted. Just be blunt about it, instead of trying pretend you want to have a constructive discussion.
Idk I think he has pretty obvious points.
1. Platforms come with responsibility.
Where as Vaush is dying to be he next Destiny and doesn’t care who gets hurt.
2. Vaush didn’t understand the concepts enough to even discuss them, hence he used knowingly fallacious arguments and lobbed insults at Luna.
“Marxism-Leninism isn’t revolutionary. My evidence? You can get a PhD in Capitalist countries”.
“I’m not an Idealist. And Marx’s Dialectical Materialism doesn’t exist as commonly understood. My evidence? Marx had a doctorate and thought a lot.”
I think it’s pretty normal to be upset that someone you thought was a like-minded comrade attacked your wife for the lulz and the clicks.. look at the comment section.
This cult of personality likes it.
This makes real Socialists with respect for the struggle quite sad.
Those who are just mindlessly consuming content and calling themselves Socialists aren’t Leftists at all, just capitalist consumers.
@@charliekowittmusic Hey um... I have this package here that says "Open soon: Live Specimen". Was told it's some grass for you to touch or something, I'm not sure
@@towablewarrior2426 People can see when you like your own comment. You must not have known that.
I loved when you kept asking him 'why?' enough times he ended up saying that he believes oppression is bad because Marx and Engels thought so. I guess he hated thinking so much that he just based his entire moral framework on whatever some other guys said. And called you an idealist the whole way through
That was one of the best moments. But why is it bad?
"BECAUSE MARX AND ENGELS SAID SO, stop asking hard questions :-("
@@steffenjensen422 This is just "because the Bible says it's wrong' but for Tankies.
The difference between when Vaush hung up on MrGirl and this situation was that here they were in the most crucial part of the debate instead of going off topic because of inappropiate jokes and about to start the most central part of the debate which was the ideology that drives EJ. And, let me ask you, what do you do when you're a content creator and someone bigger than you just spews nazi bullshit in a debate you specifically requested? Of course you capitalize on it, a mask-off moment from a supposed socialist? That's huge! (Of course, he wasn't actually defending that ideology). But instead he declared it was enough and hung up because he was already scared and used it as an excuse to chicken out from a conversation that made him look bad
It is so intellectually and morally bankrupt to bring up a topic that has so much red tape and then just bounce because they are incapable of doing "the thing." My god dont ask for it, if you cant systematically articulate a clear framework about something, dont talk about it.
It is one thing to go on twitter or whatever and make statements passively or directly supporting a topic. It is another to be debating the topic and outlining perspectives, arguing both for and against the facts . . . with facts. Example: You can most definitely DEBATE slavery was good WITH THE INTENTION OF DEBUNKING IT during a debate while someone articulates the proper social response toward it which is that we shouldn't allow it . . . as a pure form of performative satire to expose the mindset. In the theoretical and on a debate stage, one doesnt have to commit to BELIEVING the argument . . . just that you did your due diligence to understand the perspective to fairly argue the points. This is seen in mainstream forums and debate stages. "Devils Advocate" Non-compete? I dont think it was that, his good faith evaporated quite quickly with his feels.
This sort of benefit of the doubt and commitment to intellectual honesty, integrity should not be extended to certain discussions. No one in the public eye would ever attempt it be it for optics or bad exposure. You will NEVER hear a TedX talk about childrens underwear.
"The clippers have been fed, that's enough for today"
why do we even feel the need to constantly defend the easily defensible mrgirl shit like the only ones with a problem with it aren't just destiny and his goons?
@@malum9478 mr girl was creeping on underage girls so Vaush hung up . Noncompete rage quit. I don’t know how hatewatchers and destiny dorks can think these 2 are comparable
@@thefatherinthecave943 yep. My take was that Mr Girl actually thought vaush was a paedophile, and was trying to bait him to admit what was an "acceptable" lower age to find kids "attractive".
Vaush saw this was going haywire and hung up. But tbh, vaush should have hung up before then. But maybe we wouldn't have seen how sick Mr girl was...
When NonCompete couldn't own up to the fact that Luna called Vaush a pedophile, I lost all respect for him. It's unfortunate because I liked him and really liked a lot of his videos, especially the ones inspired by Kropotkin. I was excited by this discussion because I thought it would be fruitful and would result in agreement. I was very very wrong.
Hey, the poor fellow finally got laid. He’s gonna cling to her like stank to a wet dog lol
@Nara Puppy what the fuck
Imagine being attached to your wife, that’s pretty cringe
@@csrjjsmp "Oh yeah, she is mai waif, therefore she could do NO wrong"
There are logs of Vaush making sexual comments to a person he knows is underaged.
The more I think about it, the more insane his answer on the Holocaust becomes.
"That was false consciousness, it wasn't true"
That's his response.
So, in an alternative universe where there actually WAS a jewish minority oppressing germany, would the Holocaust have been justified?
Something tells me that's exactly what his stance would be, if he could ever be pinned down on it.
only a few minutes in but Vaush calmly explaining why he's okay with being mean to NonCompete's wife is my favourite thing
"You were mean to my wife."
"Yeah, it was awesome."
It certainly highlights a very concerning lack of empathy for minorities and other POC.
It's almost like all of Vaush's talk about socialism and equality is just a grift.
@@E.J.Crunkleton did you... watch the video?
?
@@E.J.Crunkleton 100%. I've been a not very invested, but consistent watcher for a couple of years now. But this whole thing sucks. Vaush not to be trusted. He just introduces chaos for the purpose of succeeding in the attention economy.
Lol Noncompete’s cope stream after this debate was hilarious
@AN8m8f8n11 Thought Slime unironically thinks capitalism lead to slavery.
Like, cool NC and TS' heart is in the right place, but when you come, you fucking come correct. Being ahistorical (in slime's case) or making up definitions to words to support your uninformed view on philosophy, theory and critical frameworks (NC) is not coming correct.
@Jeremy Capitalism did lead to chattel slavery though, it was intentionally fostered by the owners of industry. I don’t mean to say that Chattel Slavery is only possible under capitalism, just that in this instance capitalism made it possible.
@@xXRickTrolledXx I would say incentivized that specific form of slavery or exploitation but not like “made it possible” just a pedantic thing slavery was plenty possible under monarchies or tribal systems and those systems did plenty to incentives free labor from marginalized and powerless groups
@@ineedapharmists you misspelled "made up"
@@xXRickTrolledXx This is akin to saying "It's light green not bright green". The slave trade and slavery existed long before capitalism was invented. Entire civilizations were ravaged by it. Making a distinction isn't meaningful and he didn't say chattel slavery, he said slavery because you don't need capitalism to incentivize dipshits to do dipshittery. Capitalism sucks, yes, but you don't have to be ahistorical to point out how it sucks.
It is unbelievably embarrassing that EJ literally defends not thinking
"You think idealism is when you think, which is why you don't" EVERYONE TAKE COVER, VAUSH JUST LAUNCHED THE TSAR BOMBA! XD
2022 best moments compilation hype
Tsar Bomba 💀
NonCompete is gonna be floored when he takes his first college philosophy class and finds out about the idealist bozo who wrote the analogy of The Cave.
I mean, yeah? Plato literally invented idealism. Doesn't that example just prove his point, or do you really think he has never heard of that? Although it's funny that people keep bringing that up bc I attacked NC by comparing him to Plato on his Vaush video.
@@JebeckyGranjola if he thinks Idealism is when hypothetical, it’s certainly possible he doesn’t know who Plato is or where that analogy came from.
Destroying NonCompete speedrun any% WR
Holy shit I can't believe people unironically say Vaush is washed up and is bad at debates now
that defo also counts as 100%
"I'd like to have a conversation in good faith"
Immediately overstates Vaush's responsibility for the actions of his audience, then underplays the responsibility of Luna for her own tweets 🙄
Ok, I could maybe give that a pass as it's his wife
But the complete inability to comprehend hypotheticals
BIG red flag
I love the harassment thing slowly shifting from “your viewers are harassing people and sending death threats” to “you should be more responsible for what you say about marginalized people” to “you're just being mean and I don't see the utility” to desperately make something, ANYTHING stick.
What a weasel lol, just come out and say “I'm mad you insulted my wife,” it'd be way less patronizing and sad.
@@checkeredcheese What? I was talking about EJ's claim that Vaush's community is harassing Luna/EJ and when pressed on it he had to water down the claim several times to try and smear him. I'm not saying Vaush was harrassed if that's what you thought.
@@nackskott12 I misread. Still a fash community though.
@@checkeredcheese Who's the fash community?
@@desmondtheneworder918 Vaush's who attack anyone who disagrees with Vaush, even when he is proven wrong and refuses to apologises or outright lies
@@brokenman58 cope
Vaush: “Luna Oi is Vietnamese”
NC: “ok so you’re racist”
"You called her a *checks notes* stepchild?
"Yea as like a reference to the red-headed stepchild thing"
"Ok so you were being racist got it"
Bruh wtf is non-compete
I love how at 18:40 NC understands and even uses hypotheticals.
Marx and Engels would be ashamed of him.
B b b b b b b but that’s idealism. Reeeeeeeeee
This guys clearly just butthurt that someone insulted his wife. Which is fine, just dont pretend that you're in the right.
Nothing gayer then having a wife
@@Hchris101 imagine being attracted to femininity
@@aby110 alright it’s fine making fun of Luna Oi (a individual person) but making fun of all women is pretty cringe.
@@melaniey.5596 It is, but it's also funny to see gay guys act like it's the superior sexuality. Also not all women are feminine.
@@dylanc9174 dudeeee as far as I’m aware NC isn’t gay, there is no need to lie to make fun of him. He has already shown he is a clown (thou if he is gay I’m open to correction if I’m wrong. But isn’t it pretty lame to make fun of his sexuality. What are we? Boomers?)
And heyyyy feminism isn’t also about throwing feminine women under the bus. Let’s give some appreciation to feminine women
noncompete talks about people's quotes as if they were scripture. thats fuckin weird to me
"the Nazis are bad cuz they didn't have a good reason when they committed genocide SMOOTH " WAITWHAT
this is why they dont have a problem with genocide. morals come after political ideology.
Yepp. Literaly "the end justify the means" but post hoc.
@kiwikemist they (Non compete and Luna) had professor Flowers on after I think that is what was referenced here though I could be wrong
@kiwikemist come on let’s not be stupid. I’m a hardcore Marxist but the Holodomor was a genocide plain and simple. Talkies usually deny this.even though it’s irrefutable.
Guy seemed out of his depth, saw an opportunity to bail and took it ASAP.
“Do you think idealism means when you construct hypotheticals? Have you read Capital? It is full of hypotheticals.” - Yes
Lol he’s unwittingly doing the work.
Explore the connection between "hypothetical" and "hypothesis"
@@drizzd1
I just look at it as forms.
@@charliekowittmusic
It doesn’t matter if a hypothetical is based on material conditions. By their nature hypotheticals are a perfect form. Like the difference between Triangles and triangles.
The perfect form Triangles has never been observed outside of the mind. They may exist, and understanding the form is useful. But we do not interact or experience them outside of the mind. We interact with triangles, which do not fit the form Triangle.
tbf no one nowadays should read capital, it's more than a century old and not really accurate to how te world is anymore
@@Tacklepig
That’s interesting. In science a theory is judged by how accurately it predicts.
The Socratic bit was excruciating to watch, with NonCompete not being able to compute basic philosophy.
Non compute
NonCompute
That moment at 40:30 spoke volumes to me. When dude starts in with "where are you getting this from?" it really cements the fact that he doesn't understand what any of these words mean.
This dude took an hour to say "hey bro, don't talk to my woman like that". smh.
EJ doesn't understand philosophy. At all. Kids, this is your brain after being marketing/advertising shill.
What's with braindead tankies being lawyers and marketers? This is like the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this.
@@nackskott12 Marketers I get being brain dead. But attorneys was always the big surprise for me. And honestly after RGR, Sidney Powell, and worse, I think a mid-life career switch to law can't be that difficult.
46:20 "Why is oppression bad?" "Ummmm.... uhhhh...." and then vaush just looks at the camera like "this guy doesn't get anything"
He's trying to spin "stepchild of Vietnam" as a racial remark when it's obviously a remark on Luna's political simping for their government
You seem to understand Vaush's words better then Vaush does
@@MrElionor vaush says this in the video
I think the ‘useless’ part was the stinger. That’s a more harmful word than most swear words and slurs in many cultures (as social responsibilities are often the most valued thing in many third world countries as the data shows)
@@poerava ok it stings sure but it's not racist
@@totenwache88 but how is NC gonna get people to knee jerkingly attack Vaush if he doesn't try to frame this as racist and interprets his words in good faith ?
Isn't it shown that people who can't understand hypotheticals are often very intellectually weak? Like being unable to consider hypotheticals means you can't make decisions based on critical thinking that requires consideration of outcomes and systems.
It's a core attribute of an authoritarian personality, demonstrating a lack of introspection. But in this case it might be more due to him realizing he couldn't defend his position, and he was desperately trying to keep from painting himself into a corner.
I’m pretty sure there must be a part of the human population that does not have the mental resources to engage in hypothetical thinking, just like some people do not have an inner voice, and some do. I am inclined to think that those capabilities may be related , but that’s just a (hypothetical) thought
Literally anyone can understand hypotheticals. Every day we consider hypotheticals such as "is it going to rain?", "should I eat this or that?" "What is the best way to get from place A to place B". These are hypotheticals based on the material reality. Thinking about what would happen if aliens came down or if people had 6 arms and 4 legs is pointless unless you're a fiction writer.
@@matheusvillela9150 the reason people say "if aliens came down and did x" is to simplify the question. The "aliens" don't have the baggage of human history, so we don't have to consider other aspects, only their action and effect. As vaush said, the point of a hypothetical is to isolate variables. If you're asking "why are the aliens doing that" then you've missed the point of the question.
@@Froggsroxx Variables can't be isolated, though, because they only exist in relation to each other. This sort of hypothetical thinking not grounded in reality but in pure abstraction is what ancaps base their ideology on.
NonCompute
Thought Slime going properly off the fucking rails over this one. "Making the community less safe"???? Jesus this has been so bad.
That is the soft, weak shit right-wingers mock us for. It's a discussion, nobody got hurt, try not to cry about it 😒
Yes when you level attacks a POS and other minorities, you make the community less safe for them.
Is this too hard a concept for fragile white 12 year olds to grasp?
@@E.J.Crunkleton what do you really mean by "less safe"? That you have to read mean words?
@@kevinbeck8836 Damn, are all Vaush fans reactionaries now?
@@einrombelpthemajestic9616 is it ok to criticize hyper nationalism in say Poland and if it’s ok there why so not in veitnam ?
I'm impressed at how dense he is to not realize that his liking of political theory is completely incompatible with his blatant anti-intelectualism. He thinks all things should be analyzed through the lens of material conditions, including ethics, and yet simultaneously believes that one's principles should come from some intuitive understanding, but will also criticize others for trying to universalize their ethical systems, all the while acting surprised that anyone would even challenge his intuitively derived ethical framework as though he believes it to be universally applicable.
In summary, I have seen many people much, much more crazy than this guy, in fact I wouldn't even call him crazy. However, I will say that his cognitive dissonance is among the greatest I've seen in a while, and while he made fun of people for "sitting around and thinking", I think that's exactly what he needs to do to sort out what he believes. You could say that he needs to "resolve the antagonisms between his ethical and political frameworks", if you'd like.
That's because Noncompete never stopped being a conservative, he just switched his aesthetic to red and black. Which means he thinks like a conservative - morality is based on My Feels!
He even does the same exact conservative grifts with shit like "pattern of behavior" vagueing while trying to make spurious claims of culpability.
@@FelisImpurrator wait he was a conservative before? That would explain the black-and-white thinking.
As an ex-conservative and ex-fundamentalist I'm more than familiar with how even when you leave, the kind of thinking that is drilled into you stays unless you actively try to get out of it. I know there was a recent video essay from an ex-Christian I saw talking about this exact issue that was pretty interesting. Though I must admit, there's a comically large concentration of dogma in NonCompete's worldview that certainly seems like he hasn't made as much progress as most.
It's so sad that you think you smarter than anyone.
@@zetizahara I'm literally the smartest human currently alive though lol
*John Lennon:* Imagine there's...
*NonCompete:* You're expecting me to "imagine" something, John? *Crosses arms and huffs* Sing about objective data!
18:49
NonCompete: I'm using hypotheticals here
29:35
NonCompete: I'm not an idealist; I'm not gonna talk about hypotheticals that don't have a bearing on the actual reality.
That was painful
Man, it sucks that your basically-identical comment to mine (and made before mine, it looks like, yay independently coming to the same idea) didn’t get any attention.
@@zen_tewmbs
lol
@@zen_tewmbs It would if I cared
This dude is the definition of "blinders on", he only sees the last 7 seconds of dialogue and forgets all context. He needs a "topic" indicator to remind him what the hell is being talked about.
I've never seen someone melt down over the existence of hypotheticals before. "ALIENS AREN'T REAL VAUSH, THIS IS INSANE!!!"
You could tell he was emotionally compromised from the start. This was never going to end well.
I felt the cringe as soon as he signed on.
@@veganvanguard8273 obviously. i don't get why anyone would think this could be a legitimately fruitful conversation when it's literally a guy defending his wife.
It’s honestly disappointing, maybe they’ll be able to mend those wonds somehow and leave on better terms.
Yeah I had no clue who he was unfortunately before this so the moment I heard he was married to Luna Oi I was like “Oh shit is that the whole reason he’s here”
@@BlueTyphoon2017 that would require Luna and NC to get out of their feelings and rub their collective brain cell together
NonCompete: The scientific method is idealism.
why i get the feeling NC thinks Marx is the only Philosopher worth reading?
it’s like he can’t wrap his head around some very basic stuff like utilitarianism or empiricism without tying it up to some up to some marxian jargon, like DUDE, Marx didn’t literally wrote about everything, he was an economist, if you only based your entire worldview on Das Kapital you’re gonna be left with some serious blindspots
@@amellirizarry9503 yeah but if he'd actually read Marx and his best buddy Engels he'd understand how stupid some of the stuff he and Luna said is anyhow. They wrote a lot about a lot of stuff and it's actually really good and worth reading but the comments him and she have made show they haven't read that stuff beyond a few fun quotes.
@@amellirizarry9503
Anyone: Let's get sushi
NC: There is no Marxist precident for the consumption of sushi, so I can't have an opinion on this.
What's the time stamp where he said this?
@@thegoodspringguy You can watch and tell us.
I’m honestly so tired of this “poor marginalized person victimized by Vaush’ community” thing. Professor Flowers, for example, got to come on here and spew racist and fascist talking points for hours, and then go on Twitter and play victim and milk the situation for months. It’s annoying. In all actuality, I see Vaush and the community talked badly about all day long. He trends on my Twitter damn near daily and it’s always people saying awful things. I’ve seen zero racist comments to these so called oppressed people, but I’ve seen a lot coming FROM them. It seems like a lot of people thrive on the victim mentality, and guys like this eat it up because they want to feel like they’re fighting for something. Meanwhile leftists on Twitter get to openly express genocidal beliefs day in, day out. I’m not able to feel much sympathy for these people tbh. I don’t know who the woman in question here is, but I’ve seen her type all over Twitter, and I can say that in regards to professor flowers who loves to play victim, I’m not about to feel sympathy for someone who advocated for being able to kill me because of my skin color.
@azimuth they don't. Off the top of my head I can think of at least a few black and indigenous content creators who have both talked to and defended Vaush publicly.
16:25
This is fucking ridiculous.
The way he GENUINELY expects you to remember every single word you speak at ALL times is ACTUALLY insane.
I know DAMN well he couldn't be held to the same standard.