The Alt-Right Playbook: Why Don't You Respond to Criticism?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 вер 2024
- patreon: / innuendostudios
tumblr: / innuendostudios
twitter: / innuendostudios
nebula: nebula.tv/innu...
research: innuendostudio...
transcript: www.tumblr.com...
Not bad for four trenchcoated eels.
They switched to hoodies. Gah, didn't you even watch the video?
Hoodied eels*
That explains why they only make mediocre sushi. It's hard to make sushi with no hands.
Excuse you, they stopped wearing a trenchcoat, that's clearly four hoodies eels
I'm sorry Ms Jackson
"This does not help your cause"
-Guy who hates your cause
This is what happened in the European Union due to uncontrollable mass immigration. Years later, it caused massive social issues and it forced the current establishment to actually respond and deal with the issue. In this case, the right was actually right. No pun intended. Also, take note that a left German party took a stance against mass immigration.
That one time when I saw a self-described "lifelong leftist" argue that standing in solidarity to trans people was detrimental to the LGBT cause (yes, they did include the T in their statement)
Your silence will only incriminate you further
if you truly are as right as you claim to be. Prove it.
@@TerrorByte69420 You can't to someone who criticizes in bad faith.
"Why don't you respond to criticism? Why don't you engage with me??"
"I've known you for 5 seconds, none of which I've enjoyed. I'm not taking homework from you. "
all criticism is le bad
@@kiwi_2_officialYeah you didn't watch the video
@@donaldbaird7849 i did tho
@@kiwi_2_official Keep going down the alt right rabbit hole, see how miserable that makes you eventually.
@@donaldbaird7849 i at the end, way off compass lol
but not miserable...
I'm sorry Ms Jackson! Ooh... I am four eels!
Never meant to make your daughter cry,
I am several fish and not a guy.
This is amazing. Well done
@@SmarkAngelit's at the end of the video 😅
Damn it you beat me to it
Where can I find a full version of this parody?
this is one of those comments that makes me want a reaction higher in praise than a thumbs up
The last 8 years of politics has happened largely because we decided to platform bad actors on their terms. It gave them a voice and community they had never had before.
Yep. Stuff that wouldn't have even gotten a debate in, say, 2012 was debated like it was an idea that merited debate at all. Used to be finding out your opponent admitted to being a nazi was pretty much a slam dunk, campaign over, may as well go move into your new office now. Really I blame headline news (not even just fox, all headline news.) They want more and more outrageous things to report and keep eyes glued to those screens, so... why not interview an avowed neo-nazi and in doing so normalize his genocidal ideas? Well, we're living in why not.
It's systemic. The algorithm prefers this way because of engagement. Capitalism without check!
@@EGadjo it's older than that, the climate change "debate", the stem cell "debate", etc
IKR
its blatantly obvious you are not four eels in a trenchcoat, you have to be at least five eels in a trenchcoat
Or... have we considered that he might be three baby seals in a trenchcoat?
Not even moray eels?!
Nice mothperson pfp. But is it in a trenchcoat?
CHUD GODS WON LGBT LOST
Ss13 player detected
Moff alert
Why don't you respond to praise?
Okay but fr, accepting compliments without deflecting does not come naturally to most people
The atheist equivalent of Catholic guilt?
@@timothymcleanI believe that's called imposter syndrome
Because I'm insecure and uncomfortable with the idea I am better than my negative self image tyvm
oh no, oh fuck my weakness
The greatest bait a bad faith argument always starts with, is wanting to be corrected.
Never engage with one once you notice how blatantly wrong it is
It mystifies me how any living, breathing human’s life can be so miserable that they are able to find enjoyment in trying to waste people’s time.
@@LostToaster- It can make them feel powerful, when they feel like they have no power in their real life.
It truly is the liberal kryptonite, the pathological, almost self-abusive fantasy that everyone wants to be a better person, and is secretly begging you to guide them there; and the right has edged all their blades with it. Every time a progressive online falls for "just engage me in the forum of public discourse and I will kneel to your superior ideology" another fascist anglerfish has won its dinner for the day.
This is where you use mockery and wit. Ignoring them actually emboldens them as much as trying to debate them. If you ignore them it reinforces their view that the left is "scared" of them.
These people can actually be easily bullied and embarrassed, they're thin skinned pseudointellectuals. If you shut them down and make them look like the childish pendants that they are then it makes them hesitant to do this again in the future.
The left used to be good at this in the 90s and 2000s. Now we are a little too into respectability. We don't always have to be nice. You can be good as a person and still mock and quip at the right.
These always feel like lose-lose, honestly. If you correct them, they get to waste your time while they dance around your counter-argument. If you ignore them, they'll continue spreading false information that potentially tricks someone who can't see through it into believing it's true.
"why don't you respond to criticism" and the criticism is just racism
or any ism, really...
CYOA of bigotry
Friend enemy distinction.
@@101-q6t hi nonce
Or if you’re a sexual minority they call you a pedophile.
"You're a racist for calling me a racist!"
-bad faith actors
I liked AOC's response to this: "Just like catcalling, I don't owe a response to unsolicited requests from men with bad intentions."
The third space that is the internet AKA easy access to targeted sexual harassment with even fewer people to stand up to the harassers, wowee being a woman on the internet sure sounds great.
🔥🔥
Them: *proceeds to argue that catcalling and having bad intentions aren't, in fact, bad*
requests?
@@spyrex9986 no
I've been seeing a lot of 'they keep saying Trump is undemocratic but they can never say what he did that's undemocratic' lately. It is so ridiculous that you just know that whatever you reply with, it won't be good enough to convince them.
I always get told that whatever links i post are "biased" and not worth listening to.
Same with J.K.Rowling. "She isn't a tr@nsph0be! List one tr@nsph0bic thing she said!"
Don't talk to these people, ever. Period.
which policy did democrats do that didnt INCREASE the harm happening to everyone who was not born a well off european loyalist? oh yeah. they are effectively the same party because they both destroy the lives of everyone who is not a well off european loyalist and continuously fund europes wealth conquests. even when it means stealing opium for them to turn into drugs with which to get as many americans addicted to as possible. then they will make it illegal to treat that addiction with anything but a drug made by the same people who caused the problem in the first place... european pharma companies.. yall cant even say a single sentence without it being loaded with hypocrisy..
@@keithsvenson568 it's either fake or taken out of context or biased or any number of other reasons why it doesn't count.
@@emusic4269 haha, good one.
My favorite thing about your trolls is how they basically demonstrate how correct you are about them and their predictable behaviors every time they show up here.
Does that help?
Nooo these fucking Nazis typed "braaaap" in my wholesome alt-right debunking video!!!
@@airisakura1119 ye.
They really can't help themselves
I mean, this is just rhetoric. People fall into the same patterns to defend and platform their beliefs.
edit: also like, if you watch Ian's interactions with the right, he falls into the same traps. Albeit, not as aggressively, but this stuff is common. If anything the rhetoric that these are the *playbook* of the alt-right is in of itself a rhetorical trick.
🎵Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime, so I watch Innuendo Studios on the company time!🎵
This is Ryan, from IT, please stop and get to work! lol
@@UShistorymatters one sec I'll just have a quick bathroom break
@@UShistorymatters why don't you respond to criticism, Ryan?
i get a penny, boss gets a buck, so i crank my hog in the company truck
I’m literally sitting on the job rn as I watch lmao
I'm a trans person whose social media pages routinely get stalked/brigaded by whichever rightoid group of the week finds my stuff and sends its followers after me. Speaking as someone who used to actually clap back, whether for debate reasons or petty reasons, it's still pretty much always better to just hit the block button. Many of them HAVE tried to hit me with the "what's the matter? You afraid to debate with differing opinions?" shtick, but they're never wanting a sincere good-faith discussion, they're wanting to be a bother. Same tactic that the likes of Ben Shapiro & Charlie Kirk use when they go on college campuses. Not to have actual debate, just to try to bait a reaction out of their targets so they have fodder for their weekly "conservative DESTROYS WOKE college kids with FACTS and LOGIC" slop
cobson won
This 10000%. They don't want a discussion, they want to point at you with their audience and have their laugh. Blocking them is the best way to take that away from them
Lord no they don't want a fair or well moderate debate they, as you said. Just want something to show their friends and act superior.
Block is best.
You find a group which supports you
Yeah, similar for me. I used to respond to people's questions and criticisms in UA-cam videos by trans creators, and they never actually pay attention to your points and evidence, they just want to attack. And if you leave it be, they'll try to bait you back by claiming that you not responding is a concession to their argument (I had someone @ me 2 months after I decided not to respond, thanking me for "admitting I was wrong" lmao). Basically, trans people are cool and based, bigots are stupid and bad-faith (I'm not AT ALL biased here).
Yeah, that's absolutely the best solution for almost everybody.
I engage (with permission) on behalf of someone else if I'm trying to tank the chud's attention and drain the fun out of it for them.
the immature psychology behind it all boils down to "if you're explaining, you're losing" and i can't imagine any explanation ever satisfying someone with that mindset.
Their ideology is literally dependent on the fact that they loudly misunderstand every important topic, and lots of unimportant ones too. They have a half dozen well worn techniques to avoid actual good faith engagement with an argument at any cost.
In short, these people aren't interested in progressing the debate, they just want to trip you up. Responding to people validates their opinion to an extent too.
Then they cut parts of it and use it against you after you explained everthing a few times simpler and simpler because they cant (dont want to) unterstand you. :D
Just think you're obssesed o algo
It really is the "gotcha journalism" version of debate
More schizo-ramble
Yeah, I’ve come to the realization that presenting good arguments is a fools errand And childish mockery is a much more appropriate response.
How dare UA-cam withhold this from me for a whole 15 seconds
15 MINUTES! god dammit
@@gnomeddev it's a ref to an unskippable preroll ad, I think
I'm not gonna pay google to skip them, but I will pay a VPN so I get the ads in Swiss German instead of any language I can understand
that's a really nifty way to say "first"
very in line with this video
if someone made this comment to a creator that you didn't like, you'd think they were very odd, or unhealthily parasocial.
but you like this creator, so you don't think about it.
New dumb meme just dropped. Already annoying 😂
"Why don't you make a video essay responding to my video essay responding to your video essay?"
*Said critical video "essay" is a nine-hour video in response to a two-hour video, most of it being aimless rambling or hyperbole.*
MauLer
if it truly is "aimless rambling or hyperbole" it should be easy to disprove, no?
@@TerrorByte69420 So you didn't actually watch this video.
@@TerrorByte69420 No, precisely BECAUSE it is aimless rambling. There is no cohesive argumentation or structure to argue against. At best, you will find instances of material to dissect. But why would you want to do that if it meant sitting through what is, ostensibly, several hours worth of superfluous, inchoate writing that only MIGHT have something of value to engage with?
@@tacoman422 if it's so wrong, you should be able to disprove it really quickly. No one is asking for a long video essay. Your avoidance seems to signal that you might be afraid of being proven wrong.
I mean, honestly, just see the old "Never Play Defense" one; These people don't want to finish a discussion or accept a response. They want to continually attack and question and neg until you give up. No argument or answer will ever be enough unless that answer is an unequivocal "You are right and I was wrong". They don't WANT you to have an answer for their criticism... so they just won't let you.
This gives me strong "Never Play Defense" parallels.
Makes sense as to why the character from that video is here.
Continuity! In my lefty youtube series? In this economy?
There is a *reason* they never play defense, yes. Because when you're in a bad faith argument, no good can come of it. The right just has an easier time at never play defense because their value system *values hypocrisy* and so they don't really care if they just leave your attack unaddressed and attack again. The left like, actually has strong moral compunctions against hypocrisy and lots of issues that are very important for them *to* defend (especially minority rights), so it's much easier to get them lured into playing defense when they should know better.
"What are we, millionaires?"@@RaiderRich2001
I really hate the whole "why don't you respond to criticism?", especially if they don't bother specifying what criticism the person asking the question is talking about. It's like you need to address every single criticism thrown you're way, no matter how valid or invalid it is, or else you look bad. It also feels somewhat disingenuous, like if there's one criticism not addressed, then it's used against them, typically as a means to discredit them and disregard what they say. That's not to say that all criticism against you and how you handle things should be ignored or disregarded, it's important and healthy to be self-reflective and at least somewhat critical of yourself, but once again, it feels like an otherwise neutral thing has been weaponized by bad-faith actors.
is this why dont you respond to criticism in the room with us right now
at least u think disregarding all criticism is bad, most people in this comment section seem to ignore the idea that maybe real criticism exists
@kiwi_2_official idk man, sounds to me like you don't know the difference between good faith arguments and bad faith arguments.
@@kiwi_2_officialfunny i havnt seen one example of that, yet ive seen you make that cleaim at least 4 times.
The irony of your "is the x in the room with us right now?" Quip you keep reposting is perfect.
being vague is a double trap, because at the same time if you ask "which one" oh boy, you've fucked yourself
@@raak4070 it’s a troll. ignore it and move on
There really comes a point where you just tell people to "f--k off".
Imagine being so bad at debating you have to make a video trying to justify why you don't respond to debunks
@@anotherperson2730 found one
@@anotherperson2730 touch grass. nobody cares about this shit but you
@@anotherperson2730 """debunks"""
@@anotherperson2730the genius is here everyone 😂
"I don't talk to children on the internet" is also an acceptable answer.
Legitimately this is the correct response. They're not trying to engage in good-faith debate, they are trying to make you look weak and stupid. The only response that works is to make THEM look weak and stupid. Mock them, make fun of them, condescend to them. You'll know it's working because they get *big* mad when you do it
Yeah no.
Ageism isn't acceptable.
A)Children aren't stupid. Your common sense view of how "ObViOus" it seems is irrelevant. You OWE it to treat them as intelligent human beings. Pseudo-progressivism is despicable.
B)You've already taken the bait.
Just don't respond. Simple as.
@@Nai-qk4vp what if I accept that children are likely smarter than me, but I simply find speaking to children to unenjoyable more often than it's not?
@@Nai-qk4vp Yeah but they're not actual children, they just get really mad about the comparison due to their own biases
may i suggest the Katsuhiro Harada special of "DON'T ASK ME FOR SHIT"
It's just another version of Brandolini's law. It takes a magnitude more of energy to clean up BS than it takes to spread it. My best answer is "Your criticism isn't valid. Prove to me why I should answer it";they hate that.
I tend to let my inner snark out. "That's so sweet, don't you just feel special now."
"Why haven't you told your parents that you're gay" type argument.
“When did you stop beating your spouse?” -type arguments.
because being gay is bad
the statistics are there for gays
And in both cases, "I don't want to" is a valid response.
"Wow, you're lying to them. You owe them that information, because they expected a normal child and they got a gay one, which is lesser. The least you could do is apologize to them, because it is your fault that you were born gay. If I was gay, which I am not because I am normal, I would tell them how ashamed I am for disappointing their unreasonable expectation, thus proving myself unworthy of their conditionably unconditional love. :) "
I've also found that one of the best ways to respond to a person who is continually on the attack - constantly asking you for justification - is to just... ask questions in return. Let them explain why what they say is so important to them. Let them explain why they are so upset and what facts they base it on. Their attack depends on you spending all the energy on justification. Because in those people's eyes, it will make them feel strong and make you look weak. Bc why would you be defending yourself so fiercely if you weren't just desperately making excuses?
"What theoretical level of evidence would you actually accept as convincing, or are you willing to admit that you'll never even consider anything showing the other side is right?"
fact - eurocentric culture has never benefitted anyone but well off european loyalists. because those are the only people it allows net benefit to happen to. everyone else is expected to produce hundreds of millions of times more value than they consume but european loyalists are allowed to consume infinite amounts of more value than they produce.... a mathematical and biological net loss to everyone who is not a well off european loyalist. and those who seek to perpetuate it are either too ashamed to admit or are oddly proud of the amount of innocent human life they are willing to torture to death for the entertainment and egos of rich european loyalists.unfortunately, those this culture has rewarded are already verified as having the capacity to excuse infinite amounts of harm. as long as its not happening to themselves or making them lose access to any of the luxuries they are currently addicted to.
who answers questions with questions? isn't it rude?
@@-tera-3345yep! I have used that, usually the attacker follows by more nonsensical attacks. Like “well you never see the other side” etc. It’s such an incredible waste. I’m fairly certain the only way to do it is to de-platform them. Here is where have had success. Say, for lack of a better argument you are 4 eels in a trench coat, and you have a great position. When responding I respond with “for those in the audience who have seen this comment, let me address it to you”. Bypass the person, because remember they just want others to join in. (Past episode) and by preventing that, at least for me, they kinda of stop,
And then youve platformed somebody who made a bunch of short quippy and wrong statements, while you didn't respond, and then everybody will think their psychotic fash opinions are worth lising to because they will only see that you didn't ever thoroughly debunk their claims. Claims that, had you debunked, they would pile more on in a neverending stream of bullshit and lies.
When people say this, if you see it fit to respond at all, you either say: "i have responded. It's out there, go find it. You aren't entitled to my time spent endlessly bickering with you until you feel satisfied with my answer when i have already spoken on the topic."
Or if you havent responded, nondescriptly and generally respond to the many people asking for criticism with something like the following:
"Hey, I have been getting a lot of people asking me about (x topic) and here is my only and final response."
Either way, NEVER engage somebody individually unless using them to speak to the crowd, never platform them or their criticism verbatim, never show that if you just accuse people over and over that you then become entitled to that persons platform.
People surviving on rhetorical tricks in intellectual discussions are the bane of my existence dude. Even the examples you gave pissed me off because I talked to this kind of MFer many times.
There's a reason "sophist" became an epithet in ancient Greece. Abusing rhetoric for soulless ends is a kind of evil.
@@nathansimons9881 Then we need to bring that term back into mainstream 21st century lexicon because it is EXHAUSTING that to an uninformed observer, the true manipulator in the debate comes off looking calm, rational, confident and moderate.
While you're there trying to temper your rage and frustration - which comes from a real place but it makes you "look crazy" - or blocking/non-responding which comes off as either conceding the point or coming off aloof.
it's the problem I always have with discourse on the Internet. everyone wants to be smarter than the creator, because they put the creator up on a pedestal (while simultaneously arguing that the creators built and occupied that pedestal all themselves) and by being superior to them, even just for one, glorious, gotcha moment, they gain some level of validity in the grand scheme of things. it's why even *responding* is usually a bad idea...
This - phrased differently - is the one that lead to me and my siblings completely breaking off contact with our parents.
On Black Friday of last year, my mom and my sister had a huge argument that was originally about "socialized medicine" (a topic that was kinda personal to me because mom had used me as an example, comparing me to Alfie Evans in an attempt to justify why socialized medicine was bad, with a complete misrepresentation of Alfie's parents' situation and how it related to the UK's medical system - since they were failed not by medicine but by immigration policies) but very quickly became about abortion. Over the course of this argument, Mom claimed:
- because I was on Medicaid and Social Security, I was not allowed to have an opinion on socialized medicine.
- my sister, who teaches public health, was unwittingly participating in the brainwashing of college students (despite being barely out of college herself)
- that abortion was merely a way to get out of the "consequences" of having sex.
- that she actually WOULD prefer my sister die if it would save a hypothetical fetus in her womb (this is something so heinous that my sister asked for, and got, direct confirmation that this is indeed what mom meant by her statement).
After that last one, my sister decided to storm out of the house, and then Dad decided to physically hold her by the shoulders to ask her to "please just listen to your mother". My sister, righteously angry, did stay for a few minutes before shrugging him off her and then returning to storming out.
In the aftermath, mom kept repeating that my sister *"didn't let [her] have a different opinion."* And it was Mom's complete lack of willingness to consider my sister's viewpoints, that caused the rest of us siblings to leave.
My parents are currently attempting to extend olive branches (Dad apologized for holding my sister in place with a "I apologize for my actions, because I realize in retrospect how bad they were, but I do not apologize for my intentions" kind of apology), but I personally believe that even if they are sincere, it's probably best for everyone's mental health if we don't take the olive branch until after November, considering what started this in the first place.
No hate like Christian love.
I would suggest not taking it until November 2064 personally.
@@lunaitc Still too early
The right hasn't acted in good faith in decades. Being naturally dismissive of their disingenuous "debate" is a win for everyone.
what about critique from the left?
@@lzestrara1518insane way to no true Scotsman this shit but okay
@@lzestrara1518i ain't reading all that, but OP is correct
@@lzestrara1518 People like the original commenter don't understand how they are inadvertently making the alt-right and other fringe groups more powerful
Lol shut up. "The right isn't a real thing" hurrdurr. Who is this goober?@@lzestrara1518
Debate is a skill entirely seperate from 'being correct'. It can help, but you can absolutely be entirely in the right and get out-argued by someone who's just better at arguing... or more willing to be dishonest and act in bad faith. Which is before even getting into the fact responding eloquently to 'JUSTIFY YOUR EXISTENCE' for the ten thousandth time is simply exhausting.
Conservatives are, as a rule, very eager and reasonably skilled at arguing in bad faith. They've had an awful lot of practice, and just because you aren't good at arguing doesn't actually mean your position is unfounded. Don't engage on the enemy's terms, it will only hurt you.
Conspiracy Theorists come to mind...
You fact-check them with peer reviewed science, and they dig their heels in even further.
Mossad killed Floyd and Biden used Microsoft’s new Fentanyl reactor to revive him as George Droyd. Wake Up Kuffar.
Absence of evidence is evidence of a cover-up
@@quinnholleman1547 To conspiracy theorists, everything is evidence of the conspiracy, *especially* anything that explicitly debunks the theory.
The thing about conspiracy theorists is that they don't trust anyone... except for the guy ok youtube rambling in his truck. Any evidence presented to them will be interpreted as an appeal to an authority they deem untrustworthy.
Pro tip: delete the comment so that they complain that you delete comments. Double engagement baybeeeeeee
I kinda enjoy when the creator pins the comment so their audience can laugh at the fascist clown, and it’s great engagement bait. 😂
Plus, it prevents a truly uninformed, good-faith person from stumbling across the bad faith criticism and getting turned off before they watch enough of the content to see that it was a bad faith criticism. I hope that was coherent enough to follow. 😅
“Why don’t you respond to criticism” is a classic trap question. I remember something simpler, but the same principle, from a Diary of a Wimpy Kid book.
“Are you ashamed that you pooped your pants today?”
It specifically said you could only answer “yes” or “no”, but it’s an intentionally leading question in general. It’s meant to imply something that refuting can’t really help, and no answer you can give is meant to be one where you look good, at least in the malicious eyes of the asker, who’ll cite your answer in its worst interpretation to discredit you.
This is an excellent example to draw attention between the parallel between alt right bad faith actors and children who are bullies asking questions in the exact same way because they are both emotionally in the same place.
Being on the alt right means having the emotional maturity and intelligence of a child and being obsessed with cruelty, the perfect identity for bullies who never want to grow up.
Have you stopped plotting treason?
I have never met a "moderate" that wasn't arguing in bad faith. That's a bad faith argument and I can break it down independently:
1) It's not a criticism and doesn't address any points
2) It's baiting a counterpoint to a criticism that was never made
3) Responding to it would not be responding to criticism
Therefore it is not worthy of a response.
A "moderate" is a conservative who has realized admitting that won't help them get laid.
@@Vohlfied "anyone left of me is a nazi"
@@Vohlfied The majority of "moderates" I've met cannot name a single left leaning idea they hold, it's just something like they don't believe that queer people should be killed, just shoved back into the closet
@Vohlfied in a conservative community, "moderate" can also be code for "I'm a fairly liberal person, but I am pretty sure I'm the only liberal in the room and I'd prefer not to get into it."
A moderate or Centrist is also completely different outside the US. For example, here in the UK even our Right Wing and Far Right parties at least pay lip service to our National Health Service.
So supporting universal healthcare that's free at the point of delivery is a pretty Centrist point. A similar situation around women's reproductive health care. It's only really the party that doesn't believe in evolution and a handful of serious regressives who disagree with it.
Then there's also the different types. For example, I'm politically on the Centre-Left. For social/individual rights I've very much on the left. As long as no one is being harmed do/be what/who you are.
But fiscally I'm firmly in the centre. The Left generally believes in social ownership of some to all business. I don't. I *do* however believe in strong regulation and oversight. So effectively regulated Capitalism. I also don't care about people being born into wealth, or the number of millionaires/billionaires there are. But again, they should be tightly regulated.
No-one should pay a lower equivalent tax rate as the poorest in society. If anyone is, then that group's taxes should be raised to bring them up to the actual equivalent. Finally taxes should be payable on any form of income if the threshold is reached.
Don't get a salary, but get stocks instead? The stocks are taxed as income. Take out a loan that's underwritten and repaid by the company? That's income.
And so on.
I know this is a super long post, but I get very frustrated when I see all Centrists accused of being the bad actors that a handful of Right Wingers trying to nudge the Overton window are. I'm pretty sure that you can spot the difference between the two, so please - feel free to call them out as rabid right wing zealots. (It's what I do, and also with the weird super-socialists or Captain Communists on the left.)
I hope this is helpful, and could even be called constructive criticism. 😉 (Don't worry though, I don't expect or demand a reply. I just like to be sure that the other side of the argument is available.) Sending good vibes and a banana 🍌 to anyone with the patience and stamina to read it.
Just got back to my annual replay of the Playbook. I didn't expect new ones.
Truly we are blessed.
^does not realise they are engaging with media in an unhealthy way.
Is rewatching media really that unhealthy? Just once a year? If that is the case, holiday music come December must be terrible for people
She’s coming… *sounds of Mariah Carey in the distance*
@@TheEvilCheesecakei think replaying videos is fine actually, you heard of like, revising? I mean ofc this isnt a school this is political commentary and analysis but rewatching analysis to make sure you understand it and to remind yourself of how it works is... fine? I dont see how this is unhealthy at all its fascinating and i myself like to rewatch this stuff as opposed to a lot of stuff i dont rewatch because i got the point fully and maybe its not as interesting to me
I get your point but thatd really only apply if it was like every week or smth definitely not annually
@@macslash5833 using this series as "comfort watching" is the sign that a person is not using it in a healthy way.
It’s frustrating knowing I’m smart enough to not to be an alt-right stooge but also not smart enough to tear down their bullshit in an argument :(
I would say it has nothing to do with being smart. This guy spends months of research EDUCATING himself to fight against it. But the reality is, that's the point. If enough people were smart enough to tear down their arguments they wouldn't be making them. Learning how to counter their stupidity isn't gonna help you because they'll just get even dumber or attack you where you're not educated enough to argue with them. And then you have to spend even more effort learning that angle and voila, by spending 10 seconds coming up with different bullshit, they've wasted hours, days, weeks, perhaps even months of your time
@@VitaeLibra Brandolini's Law in action.
Yeah like VitaeLibra says, don't argue with them,
1.)they want you to doubt yourself ,
2.) they are lonely & dont know how to engage w ppl that isnt confrontational.
3.) they are lonely BECAUSE not being a shithead requires empathy and patience for yourself & others and they don't have that
If you engage they've already won, because they are actively harmful and engaging with them is legitimatizing their existence.
Ask for evidence of their claims. That’s it.
I feel like a lot of people falling for this are teenagers who fancy themselves critical thinkers. I used to fall for the whole "They should just accept criticism, criticism is a good thing, that's how you improve" when I was a teenage viewer too, completely missing the fact that bad faith "criticism" that just serves to put down the other person in front of a salivating audience for entertainment is completely worthless when it comes to actual improvement and just drowns out the people who genuinely want to help.
The thing that made me realize I wasn't seeing the whole picture wasn't even anything political, it was petty asshole commentary channels overdoing their pettiness (e.g. specifically calling people with history of anorexia fat for literally no reason) and then acting all smug and taking credit for any and all improvements these people made in spite (and certainly not because) of the massive hate wave they just unleashed on them.
is the bad faith criticism the only criticism?
@@kiwi_2_official who said that?
Ok Boomer
@@kiwi_2_officialOoh
Just had this little thought experiment in my head. Comparing "Why don't you take criticism" with "Why don't you tip appropriately?". Like, from the get go, most people would quickly see that the second statement is overly broad and, especially to a stranger, wildly unknowable to the questioner. Maybe they have some specific anecdote (with evidence!) of one time you didn't tip someone. But that still wouldn't qualify as a trend to make a broad statement. Meanwhile, you producing a receipt that shows a proper tip would be waved off for the same reasons. But at the same time, loudly proclaiming every time you tipped someone would be utterly ridiculous and also just annoying for EVERYONE involved.
Short of a person who loudly champions not tipping, the accusation is frivolous and accusatory in a way that is unanswerable.
The appropriate response to "why don't you tip" is "your wage is your boss' responsibility, not mine, join a union."
@@jeffersonclippership2588 no, the system is the way the system is... not tipping makes you a legitimate asshole and you're screwing over a worker trying to survive.
don't go to places that have tipping if you can't afford it. it is not the time to stand on a soapbox about a bad system. that's just being a piece of shit.
you can be against the tipping system without personally fucking over anybody.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 No. That's shitty. Not tipping and saying that's on them is just you joining in on the labor exploitation explicitly.
@@hartthorn And you being guilted by capitalists into paying their employee's wages does the same. People in Europe got better labor protections and wages by standing up for themselves.
Most states specify that you have to pay your waitstaff the difference if they don't reach minimum wage in tips, so withholding tips doesn't actually hurt servers.
b u t d o y o u c o n d e m n h a m a s ? ? ?
"Okay hillbilly from North Carolina, she answered your question within the first sentence!" Sorry, that was me yelling at the TV.
I thought he was from Alabama?
Louisiana @@snowmonster42
do you?
@@jeanivanjohnson no because I will never condone a freedom fighter group
Especially when the people asking me if I do support much worse organizations
I always knew the eel allegations were true smh my head
If you are doing politics, before these three questions, you should ask yourself: Who am I trying to convince? And then change these question to: Does my intended audience know what [blank] is? Does my intended audience agree it is a valid question? How likely is it that they have already come across my answer elsewhere?
I don't think he is trying to convince anyone.
His target demographic is people that already agree with him, and he doesn't really make any arguments in favour of his positions.
@@FrogmanhatesQibli Well, in that case the task is to keep them convinced and the questions need to be asked about one's audience all the same.
@@FrogmanhatesQiblithats not the point of it? The point is to analyze common rhetorical strategies and understand the mindset that brings them to these strategies and then a method to counter the strategy or if there really isnt one then atleast know what a person is doing to decide whether an argument is held in bad faith
@@macslash5833 i know.
That's why i said he is not trying to convince anyone, because it's not the point of his videos.
Yeah, there was a time where I felt a lot of pressure to Argue My Case for hostile critics in the comments and then I started to realize they didn't want the truth, they wanted the fight. Now I toss off a dismissive reply to get them off my "recent comments" list, mute them, and let them argue with themselves in the shadow zone. Life is too short to let goobers waste your time.
yeah
"Why don't you respond to criticism?"
Because criticism doesn't require a response to act upon, and is entirely optional on whether or not you act on it.
Arguments may require a response, depending on the argument. But criticism is just advice, and advice is optional.
the optional: no
Criticism is advice, and no one ever regretted ignoring the advice of a youtube comment.
@@EGadjo yes they have
@@kiwi_2_official lol
@@kiwi_2_official no. no we havent
This reminds me of a TikTok video I saw recently where a conservative, very calmly, speaks to the camera and demands that liberals watching his video ask themselves "is your hatred of Trump worth losing friends and family?"
It spurred this whole conversation in his comments from conservatives talking about how "they just want to be understood" at like their nicest, and then all the other vitriol at their worst. I find it insane that you can still be a Trump voter now almost 10 years into this who sits back and says, "I don't know what he's doing that's making people mad, I think they're just blinded by a mean thing he said once." Like complete blinders, unable to comprehend, willful ignorance. And the cognitive dissonance it must take to then say that everyone else is being hateful or out of line and that they should stop criticizing the right so that you can have your friends and family back? Wild. Absolutely wild to me.
Exactly as Innuendo as observed here, usually, when I do address the criticism in question, the response I get is along the lines of "NOOOOO, NOT THAAAAAT WAY!" They want me to reply in the way they're expecting and wanting, and consider my response lacking when I "fail" to do that.
see what you need to do is address the criticism while also embarrassing yourself
yep
pre-programmed to respond, trip up and cry foul when you repsond around their little ''trap''
it's not about winning an argument, it's about humiliating their enemy in public
kids grow out of this when they are 12
Why Don't You Respond to Criticism?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Criticism being your voice is too damn smooth and that should be illegal.
When i clicked "Show more" on this comment I thought I was gonna get 10 facts about #BMW
This one is particularly insidious because even if you respond by calling them our for what they're doing, they will tell you you're over reacting over a simple and innocent question, as if you're some insane volatile person.
״why don’t you respond to me?”
Why don’t you ever have anything of worth to say?
my watch later playlist is so backed up that by the time i actually watch this it'll probably be like months after it comes out for everyone else
this doesn't get watch latered this gets watched
My brother in christ it's 7 minutes
You can remove it, not worth.
literallyyyyy
@@lessthangiocame here to say literally this
Mediocre sushi?! You give yourself too much credit, unless you are actually a bag of rice with those 4 eels in the trenchcoat.
... is a sentence I never thought I'd say, even in jest.
if this is eel we're talking about, the trenchcoat also must have eel sauce
@@waytoobiased I don't think sushi has eel sauce.
Also is that trenchcoat made of nori????
@@neoqwerty I'd think so, but you know, I didn't check. And now I thinknhe didn't say because of a lie of omission. Of course the best way to check would be for us all to hound him by comment that he never explains what the trenchcoat is made of in a bad faith effort to imply it isn't. Too bad he'll just end up seeing that as engagement.
5:00 sounds like something 4 eels in a trench coat would say 🧐
I remember a version of this with the people who argue for objective quality in stories, usually on the basis of logical inconsistencies.
I can try to meet them on their own terms and have an infinite back and forth, I can explain why doing that will be pointless because ultimately even things like plotholes are subjective, I can explain that trying to find a quality in art beyond our subjective experience is ultimately pointless and forgetting why we interact with art in the first place…
…and all you're gonna get back is "well unlike you, some people actually care about good writing."
By now we have all these same people complain about "wokeness".
I have also not stopped thinking about 4 eels since 2015
In real time, as I watched this, I found myself considering the topic of the next section each time, before it was even mentioned.
That’s an amazing sign of good, consistent writing. If your audience internalizes your writing voice, you’ve made something compelling.
Thank you, Ian.
"proving a negative is an impossible standard," as john oliver once put it
"Who are you again?" Is a great response to this because it puts them on the backfoot. It asks for credentials (a rando commentor wont have em), it highlights their entitlement and rudeness since theyre just some nobody, and it diminishes their clout bc again, theyre just some nobody trying to talk from a position of power they dont have. It also paints you as a person who was interrupted from your schedule. YOU'RE the busy person with actual business, THEYRE the nobody shouting from the comments.
If someone just came up to up or called your phone and said "why dont you respond to criticism" you would ask who tf they were. Works for these kinda comments.
You're claiming that you need authority in order to make a claim, Am i not allowed to say there wasn't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq even though i am not apart of the military or ever been to Iraq?
@@blick7445Difference is you're making an actual argument. There's substance to debate with. You might actually want to learn more. Someone doing what the example in this video doesn't
But there's another part... you're not entitled to a reply. Authority on the subject lends you credibility and makes you someone important enough to actually bother responding to. So while everyone is valid, not everyone is equally valid. If the person you're talking to has no way to verify whether you're just some rando who thinks they figured out something nobody else did despite knowing nothing about the subject, you're not entitled to a reply
You're doing that thing where every single person on the right thought/thinks their opinion is just as valid as Dr. Anthony Fauci. Even if one of them did actually have a point or just a genuine concern, they are not educated enough to deal with a freaking pandemic
@@blick7445 i'm always a bit mystified by these sorts of misinterpretations that make the misinterpretor sounds like they live a _comically_ miserable life, because the conflation being made just comes across as _concerning_ if you think about it for like five seconds
like, imagine actually trying to handle the modern world when you're someone who perceives "the ability to make a claim" and "the ability to have your claim _actually be acknowledged"_ as mutually inclusive. walking into anywhere with a bunch of ads would be _paralyzing,_ because every step of the way would bombard you with claims about so and so product and because they're being made, you _have_ to stop and fully consider 'em, right? god forbid someone try talking to you in the midst of that, because being distracted from whatever they're saying would be infringing their innate ability to make claims. and if you're in a conversation with multiple people, or the ads are _rotating?_
yeah that must be a life lived via anxiety attacks linked directly to anxiety attacks there, gov
@@blick7445 Citation needed, then. Your claim, therefore your job to prove that you aren't talking outta your ass.
Unfortunately it doesn't. They'll just say you're turning your nose up and appealing to authority. And authority can't be trusted (even though their side is the one with literally all of it)
Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. You'd make great sushi.
"Why don't you respond to criticism?"
Simple; I'm not obligated to engage with your bad-faith arguments, and I don't want to.
My favorite response will always be "you're not even worth my ADHD procrastination time"
That's a fancy way of saying "I have no arguments"
are these bad faith arguments in the room with us right now
@@kiwi_2_official There's one right now.
@@kiwi_2_officialWhy don't you respond to my criticism?
It's always a loaded question
It's always bad faith - they don't want to learn anything or change their minds. They're doing it solely to spread their message, muddy the waters and "win" for their "team."
Like any loaded or trick question, there *is* no right answer. It's a bear trap. And the best way to outwit a bear trap is to not step on it at all.
That Day of the Tentacle animation though. ::chef's kiss::
the fighting baseball american names as generic person names are never gonna get old
These four eels are well known for not responding to my criticism!
I have yet to hear an apology to miss Jackson from the four eels!!! They can't keep getting away with it
99% of leftists quit just one rhetorical bad-faith argument away from solving fascism foverer. Keep rolling boys!
When fascists advocate for their murderous ideology, they never stop to think that their preferred system of government might one day put *their* own heads on the chopping block. They never stop to think that someday their own ideology and their own cult would betray them.
Liberals: "I can change her"
LMFAO
@@GPantazis Fascists never seem to consider why their ideology is so toxic. They never seem to consider that their own ideology might betray them and that they could end up persecuted by their own fellow fascists. That’s why fascism is so dumb. It’s an ideology of purity and perfection that can never find anything sufficiently pure or perfect because what it seeks can never really exist.
Day of the tentacle? You're a man of taste
*Four eels of taste
"If you are incapable of discerning that your criticism has been addressed already, your judgement is likely a compromised one, and you should probably go back to basic reading comprehension before trying to put in your hat to debate"
I'm sorry Miss Jackson, I am four eels.
Next-level outro.
there are
FOUR lights
Yes! Thanks you! You have no idea how many times people like this come to my videos, or make video responses with "critisism" that 9 out 10 times is adressed in the video they are responding to.
Also, I think that the internet forgets that no one needs to respond to unsolicited criticism. Like, if you ask a friend to give you feedback on something you wrote, that's criticism you are looking for. If some stranger does the same without me asking them, I Will ignore them.
A lot of the comments in ARPB videos are the reactionary right going "Oh yeah? Well I'm the conservative from this video and I am about to prove the video is accurate!"
The amount of times I've seen comments on videos crying "Why don't you ever criticise Islam?" when the channel had in fact already done so
This is the same argument evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins said, when asked, "Why do you refuse to debate creationists?" He argued that even engaging with them, gave the appearance that their opinions were in any way "controversial" or worthy of debate, when in fact, they were so absurd, they should be dismissed at face value and laughed at.
Rare Dawkins W
and this is why "because you're a creepy wierdo" is a valid answer
Thank you. One of the criticisms I've had of your videos in the past, was that you just told us what the play was, without giving us tips on how to fix it. Now we have tips on what to do when this situation comes up 👍
Your videos are what got me thinking about my own conservative beliefs 6 years ago. Now I’m a card-holding radical antifa member and a trans gender.
Based, we love a good redemption arc 😊
Based
It's purely anecdotal, but the amounts of times i see "I was a conservative once, but now i'm a lefty......and trans" is kinda funny.
Definitely glad to have on the light side of the force, though
lmao dont 41%
It's bad faith. Setting boundaries around people who approach in bad faith is difficult, but necessary.
“Why don’t you respond to criticism?” “‘Cause y’all don’t know what criticism is.”
oh god. as a long time member of a certain leftwing streamer's community it feels like this video was made for us. legendary stun locks and being "one-guyed" for like an hour or more just to deal with a random person trying to pass as "just asking questions" is a meme for us. there's nothing wrong with addressing bad faith arguments in order to expose them, but sometimes you just have to let it go because they don't want to have a dialogue or even a debate.... they want to be the main character even if just for a couple of minutes (or hours).
Seems to me like the appropriate response to these bad faith actors is:
1. I don't owe you a response.
2. Your criticism is invalid.
3. I won't help spread your message.
End of response.
And honestly, if you aren't getting *any* response, you can assume the above *is* the response, but we're not going to waste our time repeating it to you.
"ERM chud I'm smarter and you're dumber lol" you literally show all the bad faith arguments you keep complaining about
This has the same feeling as the "Ship of Theseus" point you made. "Why don't you respond to criticism?" is simply an incomplete statement meant to stir the pot.
Also, you've gotten me to change my perspective a lot on America. I've fully indulged into Breadtube, and mostly abandoned my libertarian ways (I actually use deodorant, now.)
"Why don't you respond to criticism," is the slightly more evolved form of, "Concerns have been raised." It manufactures a public and their reaction. This isn't to say it's impossible to engage on this level, it's just that good faith discussions of this variety usually are specific in the exact criticisms or concerns. The bad faith actors will gesture broadly in an effort to put their opposition on the defensive.
No matter how much followers a random guy on internet has, they are still a random guy on internet. Unless something important has happened, you owe them nothing.
Number three got me thinking, this is something that also shows up on the more infighty parts of the left. This is exactly what happens when someone gets “cancelled” for dubious reasons (“oh, I heard on this podcast that they found a tape where somebody says their cousin knows (public figure) runs an abusive workplace”) and the focus is put on the fact that they’re not “addressing the criticism” of a hundred harassy Twitter accounts.
God, exactly
I was even hearing about the criticism of some specific person who was supposedly a pedophile, and a friend of mine who REALLY doesn't investigate this stuff as much as she should said "She made an apology about it on her account so she pretty much confirmed the stuff she's said"
That friend of mine clearly didn't actually read the apology, since what the person being questioned was ACTUALLY apologizing for was a poor sense of humour many years ago, and then she also added that using that narrative to insist she was a pedophile was in poor taste- but somehow this got twisted into her "admitting to grooming someone"
Even if you DO address things, you still lose by addressing them, because the very fact you addressed them supposedly means it's all true. There's no winning.
And then you also see people asking why so-and-so UA-camr hasn't ALSO addressed the situation on this random unrelated person yet, which leads to people going "uhhh I don't know anything about what happened but pedophilia's evil, yeah" like 6 hours after news of something came out- it actively encourages quick and uninformed takes on things
I haven't actually looked at the situation since then so God fucking knows, maybe there's actual decent proof by now, but my point is, the whole way people go about things in the early stage of a situation
@@Fluffkitscripts to be fair, 'cancelling' people has always been a conservative tactic, picked up by liberals, some of whom actually started to move left but haven't managed to break the habit
Ooh, and if you do reply to a critic personally? You’re targeting them for harassment.
The “I won’t be ignored!” part of the Linkin Park “Faint” music video as a reference was top notch lol
As Bannon so crudely phrased one of the best plays in the fascist-takeover playbook, this is a "flood the zone with shit" play.
I lost count of the amount of times I said "YES!" and "EXACTLY" and "THANK YOU" at the screen. Thanks for another fantastic vid
Can't even give a simple yes or no to "are you 4 eels in a trench coat", like bro it's a simple yes or no question smh my head, skull emoji x7
He’s not “four eels in a trenchcoat” because eels can’t speak in a human language. Eels certainly can’t create videos on UA-cam.
@@MelissaWickersham-k4o that's what _they_ want you to think
I heard Matt Rose screaming SKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJISKULLEMOJIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII in my head vividly thanks
4:40 unexpected face reveal 😮
Gotta say, I wasn't expecting the beard but I'm pleased by it
Is the vsauce guy
@@blackshard641 face has been revealed since at least Why Are You So Angry ep.2
@@LeBonkJordanYou can also see him dance if you sort by oldest.
"Why don't you respond to criticism?"
"I do"
It took me a moment, but I got it.... the outro music change up.
Hilarious.
The misuse of logical fallacy labels, is a cornerstone of right wing “debate.” It also adds an extra level of frustration due to the smug perception of their own intelligence they have as you attempt to explain they aren’t using words right, let alone the issues with their stance.
I read a book recently and it had a paragraph kind of dedicated to just “if you’re not willing to rumble with vulnerability then I won’t do that for you.”
"rumble with" is an interesting turn of phrase.
Can I ask what the book was?
Typical mistake from Ian. He should embrace his new eel identity. If they say he’s four eels, reply by saying he’s seven. Call them misinformed for not knowing how many eels you really are. Undermine them for not being able to count.
Legit though, if they are making an unreasonable argument, then you’re free to make an unreasonable response.
It's worth noting that from a political point of view the flip side of this is that any criticism of a conservative figure no matter how well supported is declared "trolling".
LET'S GOOOO 🔥🔥🔥
WE'RE GETTING FURTHER LEFT WITH THIS ONE 🗣️🗣️🗣️
LET'S FUKKIN GO ⬅⬅⬅
Here's a protip so that you don't do this sort of thing: The internet is not a debate club. If you wanna pick out "fallacies" in someone's "argument", most colleges and high schools will have a debate club, a student government, or a model UN you can join. Of course, the kind of person who typically engages in this kind of behavior doesn't actually want a real debate, because they are bad at it. They like the aesthetics of a debate. They don't want to hear a well-reasoned argument, they want to find a post made with 5 minutes of thought at most, then pick apart all the improper rhetoric used in it as if that proves anything about anything.
The frustrating part is that it's actually people on the right who never respond to any criticism
That outro joke made me laugh so hard at work i got headphone checked, and passed the charisma check.
First, foremost; thank you for making these. You're putting into succinct form a bunch of things that I have been trying to consolidate in my own head for years.
Second, this left me with a thought; if the real point is to *always* be able to constantly hang this false notion on people, is it fair to say there's not really a method to break it? Because, as was made pretty apparent, any "answer" to the critic or the criticism elicits a moving of the goalposts, what can really be done?
If the intent is to publically shame you refer to a time you did respond to that criticism then move on, like yeah theyll have their little tantrum about how its not the response i wanted but atp people should be able to see that the argument is done and they are continuing it on bad faith, hopefully anyway
It's almost like the point is to make it look like you're weak simply because you didn't respond in exactly the way they wanted you to, and the substance of what you say has absolutely no bearing on the result of any discussion.
I have a friend who has been harassed by the same group of people for YEARS.
Every single thing you have spoken about in this series has been thrown at her. Thank you for this. It has been really helpful to understand what has happened to her.